New guidelines for the management of bone disease in all patients with multiple myeloma, issued by the International Myeloma Working Group, were published online May 20 in the Journal of Clinical Oncology.
"Bisphosphonates (zoledronic acid or pamidronate) should be considered in all myeloma patients receiving frontline antimyeloma therapy, regardless of the presence of osteolytic bone lesions on conventional radiography," said lead author Evangelos Terpos, MD, PhD, from the Department of Clinical Therapeutics at the University of Athens School of Medicine and the Alexandra General Hospital in Greece.
"Previously, the recommendation was only for patients who had myeloma-related bone disease," Dr. Terpos told Medscape Medical News. However, it is not clear whether bisphosphonates offer any advantage for patients with no evidence of bone disease on magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) or positron emission tomography/computed tomography (PET/CT), he explained.
Despite the introduction of novel agents that have led to improved survival, multiple myeloma is still an incurable plasma cell malignancy. At diagnosis, 70% to 80% of patients have osteolytic lesions, which increase the risk for skeletal-related events (pathologic fractures, spinal cord compression, or surgery or palliative radiotherapy to bone).
"I believe that the widespread implementation of these guidelines will help in the management of patients with myeloma and prevent skeletal-related events, improve quality of life, and reduce the cost of treatment," Dr. Terpos said.
The International Myeloma Working Group convened an interdisciplinary panel of clinical experts to develop practice guidelines for the management of multiple myeloma–related bone disease, after reviewing data published up to August 2012. Panel members assigned and approved levels of evidence and grades of recommendations. For situations lacking sufficient published evidence, the panel relied on expert consensus.
In these guidelines, the previous recommendations of various organizations for the use of bisphosphonates in patients with multiple myeloma have been updated.
"Zoledronic acid is preferred over oral clodronate in newly diagnosed myeloma patients because of its potential antimyeloma effects and survival benefits. Clodronate is currently not recommended, with specific exceptions," Dr. Terpos said.
Previous recommendations have supported bisphosphonate therapy for 2 years. "We suggest that zoledronic acid or pamidronate be continued in patients with active disease and, if discontinued in patients in complete remission or very good partial remission after antimyeloma therapy, be resumed after disease relapse."
"Zoledronic acid improves overall survival and reduces skeletal-related events better than clodronate in patients who received treatment for more than 2 years. Therefore, it should be given until disease progression in patients not in complete remission or very good partial remission and continued at relapse (grade B)," Dr. Terpos reported. "There is not similar evidence for pamidronate, but it can be continued in patients with active disease at the physician's discretion (grade D), and should be resumed after disease relapse (grade D)."
Free but must register to see original
Thursday, May 30, 2013
Illinois illegally seizes Bees Resistant to Monsanto’s Roundup; Kills remaining Queens
The Illinois Ag Dept. illegally seized privately owned bees from renowned naturalist, Terrence Ingram, without providing him with a search warrant and before the court hearing on the matter, reports Prairie Advocate News.
Behind the obvious violations of his Constitutional rights is Monsanto. Ingram was researching Roundup’s effects on bees, which he’s raised for 58 years. “They ruined 15 years of my research,” he told Prairie Advocate, by stealing most of his stock.
A certified letter from the Ag Dept.’s Apiary Inspection Supervisor, Steven D. Chard, stated:
“During a routine inspection of your honeybee colonies by … Inspectors Susan Kivikko and Eleanor Balson on October 23, 2011, the bacterial disease ‘American Foulbrood’ was detected in a number of colonies located behind your house…. Presence of the disease in some of your colonies was confirmed via test results from the USDA Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland that analyzed samples collected from your apiary….”
Ingram can prove his bees did not have foulbrood, and planned to do so at a hearing set in April, but the state seized his bees at the end of March. They have not returned them and no one at the Ag Dept. seems to know where his bees are.
The bees could have been destroyed, or they could have been turned over to Monsanto to ascertain why some of his bees are resistant to Roundup. Without the bees as evidence, Ingram simply cannot defend against the phony charges of foulbrood.
Worse, all his queens died after Kivikko and Balson “inspected” his property, outside of his presence and without a warrant.
Of note, Illinois beekeepers are going underground after Ingram’s experience and refuse to register their hives, in case the state tries to steal their private property on phony claims.
Link
Behind the obvious violations of his Constitutional rights is Monsanto. Ingram was researching Roundup’s effects on bees, which he’s raised for 58 years. “They ruined 15 years of my research,” he told Prairie Advocate, by stealing most of his stock.
A certified letter from the Ag Dept.’s Apiary Inspection Supervisor, Steven D. Chard, stated:
“During a routine inspection of your honeybee colonies by … Inspectors Susan Kivikko and Eleanor Balson on October 23, 2011, the bacterial disease ‘American Foulbrood’ was detected in a number of colonies located behind your house…. Presence of the disease in some of your colonies was confirmed via test results from the USDA Bee Research Laboratory in Beltsville, Maryland that analyzed samples collected from your apiary….”
The bees could have been destroyed, or they could have been turned over to Monsanto to ascertain why some of his bees are resistant to Roundup. Without the bees as evidence, Ingram simply cannot defend against the phony charges of foulbrood.
Worse, all his queens died after Kivikko and Balson “inspected” his property, outside of his presence and without a warrant.
Of note, Illinois beekeepers are going underground after Ingram’s experience and refuse to register their hives, in case the state tries to steal their private property on phony claims.
Link
Illegal Monsanto gene-altered wheat found growing in E. Oregon
PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) - Field workers at an Eastern Oregon wheat farm were clearing acres for the bare offseason when they came across a patch of wheat that didn't belong.
The workers sprayed it and sprayed it, but the wheat wouldn't die. Their confused boss grabbed a few stalks and sent it to a university lab in early May.
A few weeks later, Oregon State wheat scientists made a startling discovery: The wheat was genetically modified, in clear violation of U.S. law, although there's no evidence that modified wheat entered the marketplace.
They contacted federal authorities, who ran more tests and confirmed their discovery.
"It looked like regular wheat ," said Bob Zemetra, Oregon State's wheat breeder.
No genetically engineered wheat has been approved for U.S. farming. U.S. Department of Agriculture officials said the wheat is the same strain as a genetically modified wheat that was legally tested by seed giant Monsanto a decade ago but never approved. Monsanto stopped testing that product in Oregon and several other states in 2005.
How the modified wheat made it from a private company's testing grounds to the Eastern Oregon commercial wheat field is a question investigators are trying to unravel in a mystery that could have global implications on the wheat trade in the U.S. and abroad.
Many countries around the world will not accept imports of genetically modified foods, and the United States exports about half of its wheat crop. Zemetra said the presence of the modified crop shows the need for testing.
"We'll need to develop or implement a method for testing some of the grain to see for the first year or two," Zemetra said.
An Oregon State wheat scientist and a graduate student did the first tests and discovered the likely presence of a gene that made the wheat resistant to herbicide.
The genetically-modified wheat grew on land that was supposed to be rotated, said Mark Flowers, Cereal Specialist at Oregon State University Extension. The field was in an off-year and in May 2013, it was supposed to be fallow and bare. Workers expected to kill off the few rogue plants that poked out of the ground.
But those plants resistant to the herbicide caught their attention.
"That's when this was noticed," Flowers said. "Some of the wheat did not die."
USDA officials declined to speculate whether the modified seeds blew into the field from a testing site or if they were somehow planted or taken there, and they would not identify the farmer or the farm's location.
The discovery also could have implications for organic companies, which by law cannot use genetically engineered ingredients in foods. Organic farmers have frequently expressed concern that genetically modified seed will blow into organic farms and contaminate their products.
U.S. consumers have shown increasing interest in avoiding genetically modified foods. There has been little evidence to show that modified foods are less safe than their conventional counterparts, but several state legislatures are considering bills that would require them to be labeled so consumers know what they are eating.
While most of the corn and soybeans grown in the United States are already modified, the country's wheat crop is not.
The tests confirmed that the plants were a strain developed by Monsanto to resist its Roundup Ready herbicides and were tested between 1998 and 2005. At the time Monsanto had applied to USDA for permission to develop the engineered wheat, but the company later pulled its application.
The Agriculture Department said that during that seven-year period, it authorized more than 100 field tests with the same glyphosate-resistant wheat variety. Tests were conducted in in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington and Wyoming.
During that testing and application process, the Food and Drug Administration reviewed the variety found in Oregon and said it was as safe as conventional varieties of wheat.
In a statement issued Wednesday, Monsanto noted that this is the first report since its program was discontinued.
"While USDA's results are unexpected, there is considerable reason to believe that the presence of the Roundup Ready trait in wheat, if determined to be valid, is very limited," the company said.
USDA officials confirmed they have received no other reports of discoveries of genetically modified wheat. Michael Firko of the Agriculture Department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and Acting Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Michael T. Scuse said they have already been in touch with international trading partners to try and assuage any concerns.
"Hopefully our trading partners will be understanding that this is not a food or feed safety issue," Scuse said.
LINK
The workers sprayed it and sprayed it, but the wheat wouldn't die. Their confused boss grabbed a few stalks and sent it to a university lab in early May.
A few weeks later, Oregon State wheat scientists made a startling discovery: The wheat was genetically modified, in clear violation of U.S. law, although there's no evidence that modified wheat entered the marketplace.
They contacted federal authorities, who ran more tests and confirmed their discovery.
"It looked like regular wheat ," said Bob Zemetra, Oregon State's wheat breeder.
How the modified wheat made it from a private company's testing grounds to the Eastern Oregon commercial wheat field is a question investigators are trying to unravel in a mystery that could have global implications on the wheat trade in the U.S. and abroad.
Many countries around the world will not accept imports of genetically modified foods, and the United States exports about half of its wheat crop. Zemetra said the presence of the modified crop shows the need for testing.
"We'll need to develop or implement a method for testing some of the grain to see for the first year or two," Zemetra said.
An Oregon State wheat scientist and a graduate student did the first tests and discovered the likely presence of a gene that made the wheat resistant to herbicide.
The genetically-modified wheat grew on land that was supposed to be rotated, said Mark Flowers, Cereal Specialist at Oregon State University Extension. The field was in an off-year and in May 2013, it was supposed to be fallow and bare. Workers expected to kill off the few rogue plants that poked out of the ground.
But those plants resistant to the herbicide caught their attention.
"That's when this was noticed," Flowers said. "Some of the wheat did not die."
USDA officials declined to speculate whether the modified seeds blew into the field from a testing site or if they were somehow planted or taken there, and they would not identify the farmer or the farm's location.
The discovery also could have implications for organic companies, which by law cannot use genetically engineered ingredients in foods. Organic farmers have frequently expressed concern that genetically modified seed will blow into organic farms and contaminate their products.
U.S. consumers have shown increasing interest in avoiding genetically modified foods. There has been little evidence to show that modified foods are less safe than their conventional counterparts, but several state legislatures are considering bills that would require them to be labeled so consumers know what they are eating.
While most of the corn and soybeans grown in the United States are already modified, the country's wheat crop is not.
The tests confirmed that the plants were a strain developed by Monsanto to resist its Roundup Ready herbicides and were tested between 1998 and 2005. At the time Monsanto had applied to USDA for permission to develop the engineered wheat, but the company later pulled its application.
The Agriculture Department said that during that seven-year period, it authorized more than 100 field tests with the same glyphosate-resistant wheat variety. Tests were conducted in in Arizona, California, Colorado, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Kansas, Minnesota, Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, Oregon, South Dakota, Washington and Wyoming.
During that testing and application process, the Food and Drug Administration reviewed the variety found in Oregon and said it was as safe as conventional varieties of wheat.
In a statement issued Wednesday, Monsanto noted that this is the first report since its program was discontinued.
"While USDA's results are unexpected, there is considerable reason to believe that the presence of the Roundup Ready trait in wheat, if determined to be valid, is very limited," the company said.
USDA officials confirmed they have received no other reports of discoveries of genetically modified wheat. Michael Firko of the Agriculture Department's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service and Acting Deputy Secretary of Agriculture Michael T. Scuse said they have already been in touch with international trading partners to try and assuage any concerns.
"Hopefully our trading partners will be understanding that this is not a food or feed safety issue," Scuse said.
LINK
Wednesday, May 29, 2013
Monsanto hires infamous mercenary firm Blackwater to track activists around the world
(NaturalNews) Remember the private mercenary army Blackwater that caused such a stir in Iraq during an unprovoked attack in 2007?
Apparently, Monsanto and the controversial security firm are in bed together, described by blogger Randy Ananda as "a death-tech firm weds a hit squad." At this point, you might be wondering what in the world the GM seed giant needs with the services of a 'shadow army'? It appears as though the corporation found it necessary to contract with Blackwater in order to collect intelligence on anti-Monsanto activists as well infiltrate their ranks.
Protest Monsanto, stalked by Blackwater
Notorious for the Iraqi Nisour Square Massacre, Blackwater "created a web of more than 30 shell companies or subsidiaries in part to obtain millions of dollars in American government contracts after the security company came under intense criticism for reckless conduct in Iraq," reports the New York Times. One of these subsidiaries became Total Intelligence, the company contracted by Monsanto between 2008-2010 to collect intelligence on activists rallying against GMO crops and other Monsanto activities. Journalist Jeremy Scahill states in The Nation:
"... entities closely linked to the private security firm Blackwater have provided intelligence, training and security services to US and foreign governments as well as several multinational corporations, including Monsanto, Chevron, the Walt Disney Company, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines and banking giants Deutsche Bank and Barclays, according to documents obtained by The Nation. Blackwater's work for corporations and government agencies was contracted using two companies owned by Blackwater's owner and founder, Erik Prince: Total Intelligence Solutions and the Terrorism Research Center (TRC). Prince is listed as the chairman of both companies in internal company documents, which show how the web of companies functions as a highly coordinated operation."
A spokesperson representing Monsanto admits the company hired Total Intelligence for information "... about the activities of groups or individuals that could pose a risk to company personnel or operations around the world which were developed by monitoring local media reports and other publicly available information. The subject matter ranged from information regarding terrorist incidents in Asia or kidnappings in Central America to scanning the content of activist blogs and websites."
However, what the spokesperson fails to address is that according to documents secured by Scahill, Monsanto was willing to pay a sizable sum (up to $500,000) for Blackwater agents to infiltrate anti-Monsanto organizations.
As the plot continues to thicken regarding Monsanto's tactics of domination, Ananda aptly notes:
"... Monsanto, by hiring a mercenary army and former CIA field agents, is deadly serious about protecting its deadly products. Yet, this contract further discredits the company. The public can now paint an even bleaker picture of the firm that brought us Agent Orange, PCBs, rBST, DDT, aspartame and, now, hit men."
Apparently, Monsanto and the controversial security firm are in bed together, described by blogger Randy Ananda as "a death-tech firm weds a hit squad." At this point, you might be wondering what in the world the GM seed giant needs with the services of a 'shadow army'? It appears as though the corporation found it necessary to contract with Blackwater in order to collect intelligence on anti-Monsanto activists as well infiltrate their ranks.
Protest Monsanto, stalked by Blackwater
Notorious for the Iraqi Nisour Square Massacre, Blackwater "created a web of more than 30 shell companies or subsidiaries in part to obtain millions of dollars in American government contracts after the security company came under intense criticism for reckless conduct in Iraq," reports the New York Times. One of these subsidiaries became Total Intelligence, the company contracted by Monsanto between 2008-2010 to collect intelligence on activists rallying against GMO crops and other Monsanto activities. Journalist Jeremy Scahill states in The Nation:
"... entities closely linked to the private security firm Blackwater have provided intelligence, training and security services to US and foreign governments as well as several multinational corporations, including Monsanto, Chevron, the Walt Disney Company, Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines and banking giants Deutsche Bank and Barclays, according to documents obtained by The Nation. Blackwater's work for corporations and government agencies was contracted using two companies owned by Blackwater's owner and founder, Erik Prince: Total Intelligence Solutions and the Terrorism Research Center (TRC). Prince is listed as the chairman of both companies in internal company documents, which show how the web of companies functions as a highly coordinated operation."
A spokesperson representing Monsanto admits the company hired Total Intelligence for information "... about the activities of groups or individuals that could pose a risk to company personnel or operations around the world which were developed by monitoring local media reports and other publicly available information. The subject matter ranged from information regarding terrorist incidents in Asia or kidnappings in Central America to scanning the content of activist blogs and websites."
However, what the spokesperson fails to address is that according to documents secured by Scahill, Monsanto was willing to pay a sizable sum (up to $500,000) for Blackwater agents to infiltrate anti-Monsanto organizations.
As the plot continues to thicken regarding Monsanto's tactics of domination, Ananda aptly notes:
"... Monsanto, by hiring a mercenary army and former CIA field agents, is deadly serious about protecting its deadly products. Yet, this contract further discredits the company. The public can now paint an even bleaker picture of the firm that brought us Agent Orange, PCBs, rBST, DDT, aspartame and, now, hit men."
Significantly Improved Survival Rates for Stem Cell Transplant Recipients
Survival rates have increased significantly among patients who received blood stem cell transplants from both related and unrelated donors, according to a study published in the Journal of Clinical Oncology today. The study authors attribute the increase to several factors, including advances in HLA tissue typing, better supportive care and earlier referral for transplantation.
Jump to this Exciting Story!
Jump to this Exciting Story!
Tuesday, May 28, 2013
Extensive List of Politicians Paid Off by Evil Monsanto
Democrat, Republican, it doesn’t matter. As long as you can help Monsanto slide its icy tentacles into the food chain, then there’s some financial tip available to you. Thankfully, many such ties can be exposed through some data digging, and thanks to diligent readers who send comprehensive news tips and other researchers out there, we now have an extensive list of politicians getting paid cold hard cash from GMO juggernaut Monsanto.
Keep in mind these are the figures we know, which means that behind the scenes expect these numbers to multiply extensively. But what is most amazing is that these politicians just don’t care that you know they’re receiving thousands of dollars from Monsanto! They sweep it under the carpet, but they are openly taking money from this corporation that has been caught running ‘slave-like’ rings and disregarding public health. We’re talking about a corporation that primarily aided in the creation of Agent Orange — the Vietnam-era chemical weapon that killed over 400,000 people and led to 500,000 plus birth defects.
Looking at these figures, over $260,000 was openly pumped into the House, and $122,000 was pumped into the Senate. And again, this is openly. I’m speculating, but I would imagine the real number to easily be in the millions. Can you imagine how much they must pay these politicians to shoot down GMO labeling bills that 90 plus percent of the entire country wants?
Monsanto paid Senator Roy Blunt to ‘help write’ the Monsanto Protection Act that grants Monsanto immunity from federal courts? Roy’s cash payment is not included in this list, however RT reports he received $64,250 towards his campaign from the company. Surely they expected nothing in return.
Scumbag List Here
Veterans exposed to Agent Orange have an increased risk of aggressive prostate cancer
Men with exposure should consider screening
The majority of prostate cancer is slow-growing in nature; a patient diagnosed in his 60s or 70s with a less-aggressive form is more likely to die of something else.
But the researchers say their findings are prompting them to advise men with a history of Agent Orange exposure to talk to their physicians and strongly consider prostate cancer screening.
FREE HEALTH EXAM
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Agent Orange Registry health exam is a free, comprehensive physical exam that helps veterans assess possible long-term problems that may be related to Agent Orange exposure during their military service. Go to tinyurl.com/agent-orange-registry for information on eligibility and how to contact local VA Environmental Health Coordinators.
More Here
The majority of prostate cancer is slow-growing in nature; a patient diagnosed in his 60s or 70s with a less-aggressive form is more likely to die of something else.
But the researchers say their findings are prompting them to advise men with a history of Agent Orange exposure to talk to their physicians and strongly consider prostate cancer screening.
The U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs Agent Orange Registry health exam is a free, comprehensive physical exam that helps veterans assess possible long-term problems that may be related to Agent Orange exposure during their military service. Go to tinyurl.com/agent-orange-registry for information on eligibility and how to contact local VA Environmental Health Coordinators.
More Here
From Agent Orange to Pesticides and Genetically Engineered Crops. Why Not to Trust Monsanto
The Monsanto Corporation is among the largest pesticide and biotechnical corporations in the world today.
Their products are used in most sectors of agriculture, public land upkeep, landscaping/gardening and can be found in most markets across the United States. Monsanto is a multi-billion dollar company with a diverse product base and is among the largest producers of genetically engineered crops.
As a company, Monsanto promises to be the creator of new, safer, pesticides as well as stronger bio-engineered crops. Unfortunately, the reality of what Monsanto will deliver to the world is likely very different from what they promise, or what we, as a society, desire.
Monsanto has produced many products, from new types of pesticide to genetically engineered crops, and has been the center of several severe controversies. In numerous cases, the Monsanto Corporation produced and marketed products which they knew to be potentially toxic, yet they still sold them in order to reap a profit. While not illegal, largely due to Monsanto’s massive lobbying efforts aimed at reducing safety standards (Monsanto Spent $6.3 million dollars in lobbying during the 2011 fiscal year alone – Follow this link for more information on Monsanto’s lobbying), the sale of toxic chemicals for a corporate profit is both highly immoral and very relevant to those in society who wish to assess the use of Monsanto products. Put plainly: Monsanto’s history of selling poison, labeled as a useful product, casts doubt on whether any product that they sell should be trusted.
During its early years, Monsanto produced PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyl) to be used in various industrial applications. PCBs, while very stable and good at acting as a liquid insulator, are extremely toxic to virtually all forms of life – they are carcinogenic, highly toxic, and corrosive upon contact with skin or mucus membranes. Even as evidence mounted of the toxicity of PCBs, Monsanto continued to produce them until they were forced to stop when the government banned all domestic production of PCBs in 1977.
The Monsanto Corporation has a long and sometimes unfortunate history of creating new and powerful pesticides. The infamous “Agent Orange”, used in Vietnam to destroy jungles, and the powerful pesticide DDT were two of the primary pesticides produced by Monsanto during its early years. While Agent Orange and DDT are now outlawed due to the massive damage they cause human life as well as the environment, Monsanto continued producing them for as long as the law allowed. The gigantic costs to human health and to the environment caused by the sale of Monsanto pesticides, even once they were deemed too dangerous to use, resulted in many ruined lives and destroyed ecosystems for society, but huge profits for Monsanto.
Currently, Monsanto is the producer of “Roundup”, a powerful and supposedly safe agricultural pesticide that has been the most common wide-spectrum herbicide for the past several decades. The major active ingredient in Roundup is a glyphosate salt, which makes it highly toxic for most common types of weeds. For added effectiveness, Monsanto has marketed a brand of “Roundup Ready” genetically engineered plants, which are immune to glyphosate salt poisoning, and allow for the use of pesticides during the growing process.
While not as dangerous as “agent orange” or DDT, there are several serious problems associated with glyphosate pesticide use. Glyphosate pesticides have the potential to breed “super-weeds”, in the same way that antibiotics breed “super-germs”. The pesticide kills all but the strongest pests, leaving the hardiest members of the population to repopulate the area. Eventually, once the weaker pests are culled from the gene pool, “super-weeds” are all that remain; at this point, modern pesticides will become nearly useless and far stronger (and more toxic) ones will need to be employed.
In addition to their potential to create super-weeds, some studies link glyphosate pesticides to damage to human cells, particularly in fetuses. Glyphosate is considered relatively safe by the FDA (Toxic Class III), but studies have shown that it can be damaging to embryonic and placental cells even if very dilute formulations. The potential danger glyphosate poses to fetuses is particularly worrying when one considers the wide use of the pesticide and the low concentrations necessary to cause harm. In addition to harming certain types of cells in the human body, glyphosate pesticide additives (Ex. the “inactive” ingredients of Roundup) have been shown to accumulate and cause genetic damage on lab rats. While the pesticide additive must be applied in large dosages for it to cause such damage, this raises questions about whether such damage is possible in other mammals, like humans.
A large portion of Monsanto’s business is currently in the field of “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs) This simply means that they alter the genetic structures of crops in order to hopefully make them more resistant to disease, easier to grow, higher yield, or less susceptible to predation by pests. Unfortunately, GMOs are often plagued by unintended consequences and side effects of genetic modification, which make them risky for human consumption. Monsanto has been embroiled in several serious controversies surrounding the safety of their GMO products – namely GE corn and recombinant bovine growth hormone – yet they have consistently continued to sell their goods.
Just recently, a study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences seems to indicate a link between the consumption of Monsanto genetically engineered corn and organ damage in the liver and kidneys. This damage is consistent with the genetically engineered pesticide utilized by the corn, and seems to refute Monsanto’s claim that the pesticide will degrade long before it is consumed. Despite evidence that Monsanto’s GM corn may cause organ damage in its consumers, they have refused to recall their products. The refusal to recall their potentially toxic corn, in combination with their history of damaging their consumers for a profit, sheds considerable doubt upon their care for the health of those who consume their goods.
The doubts surrounding the safety of Monsanto’s genetically engineered corn are particularly important considering the fact that high fructose corn syrup is a staple ingredient in most processed foods. Monsanto GE “roundup Ready” corn is a primary source for most American high fructose corn syrup, thus any potential harm caused by this corn would likely be enormous.
Monsanto’s corporate behavior, both historically and currently, demonstrates a prioritization of profits over the safety of their consumers. It is evident that Monsanto will sell products, regardless of whether they may be toxic, for as long as they are legally able to sell them.
Not only does Monsanto have a pattern of selling toxic goods, but they lobby to prevent these goods from becoming illegal even after determining their toxicity, thus compounding the harm that they cause society. Monsanto spends millions of dollars a year in lobbying and is a very prolific user of the Washington DC “revolving door” (industry professionals becoming regulators and vice versa).
Some Monsanto goods may be exactly what they are marketed as – clean and safe agricultural goods – but, given their history of selling dangerous goods, there is little reason for the public to trust in their products. The Monsanto Corporation has proven numerous times that it will sell poison for a personal profit, regardless of the harm which their products inflict upon society. In the absence of regulators sanctioning Monsanto for its negligence, it is up to the public to stand up to Monsanto and call them out for their bad acts.
The next time you hear the name Monsanto in relation to a good which you are thinking of buying, please reconsider your purchase. It is entirely possible that the food is safe, or even of higher quality than other food. But there is also the very real likelihood that this food will damage your body. Why gamble with your or your family’s health when there are so many other alternatives to the potentially toxic goods of Monsanto?
Links Here
Their products are used in most sectors of agriculture, public land upkeep, landscaping/gardening and can be found in most markets across the United States. Monsanto is a multi-billion dollar company with a diverse product base and is among the largest producers of genetically engineered crops.
As a company, Monsanto promises to be the creator of new, safer, pesticides as well as stronger bio-engineered crops. Unfortunately, the reality of what Monsanto will deliver to the world is likely very different from what they promise, or what we, as a society, desire.
Monsanto has produced many products, from new types of pesticide to genetically engineered crops, and has been the center of several severe controversies. In numerous cases, the Monsanto Corporation produced and marketed products which they knew to be potentially toxic, yet they still sold them in order to reap a profit. While not illegal, largely due to Monsanto’s massive lobbying efforts aimed at reducing safety standards (Monsanto Spent $6.3 million dollars in lobbying during the 2011 fiscal year alone – Follow this link for more information on Monsanto’s lobbying), the sale of toxic chemicals for a corporate profit is both highly immoral and very relevant to those in society who wish to assess the use of Monsanto products. Put plainly: Monsanto’s history of selling poison, labeled as a useful product, casts doubt on whether any product that they sell should be trusted.
During its early years, Monsanto produced PCBs (Polychlorinated biphenyl) to be used in various industrial applications. PCBs, while very stable and good at acting as a liquid insulator, are extremely toxic to virtually all forms of life – they are carcinogenic, highly toxic, and corrosive upon contact with skin or mucus membranes. Even as evidence mounted of the toxicity of PCBs, Monsanto continued to produce them until they were forced to stop when the government banned all domestic production of PCBs in 1977.
The Monsanto Corporation has a long and sometimes unfortunate history of creating new and powerful pesticides. The infamous “Agent Orange”, used in Vietnam to destroy jungles, and the powerful pesticide DDT were two of the primary pesticides produced by Monsanto during its early years. While Agent Orange and DDT are now outlawed due to the massive damage they cause human life as well as the environment, Monsanto continued producing them for as long as the law allowed. The gigantic costs to human health and to the environment caused by the sale of Monsanto pesticides, even once they were deemed too dangerous to use, resulted in many ruined lives and destroyed ecosystems for society, but huge profits for Monsanto.
Currently, Monsanto is the producer of “Roundup”, a powerful and supposedly safe agricultural pesticide that has been the most common wide-spectrum herbicide for the past several decades. The major active ingredient in Roundup is a glyphosate salt, which makes it highly toxic for most common types of weeds. For added effectiveness, Monsanto has marketed a brand of “Roundup Ready” genetically engineered plants, which are immune to glyphosate salt poisoning, and allow for the use of pesticides during the growing process.
While not as dangerous as “agent orange” or DDT, there are several serious problems associated with glyphosate pesticide use. Glyphosate pesticides have the potential to breed “super-weeds”, in the same way that antibiotics breed “super-germs”. The pesticide kills all but the strongest pests, leaving the hardiest members of the population to repopulate the area. Eventually, once the weaker pests are culled from the gene pool, “super-weeds” are all that remain; at this point, modern pesticides will become nearly useless and far stronger (and more toxic) ones will need to be employed.
In addition to their potential to create super-weeds, some studies link glyphosate pesticides to damage to human cells, particularly in fetuses. Glyphosate is considered relatively safe by the FDA (Toxic Class III), but studies have shown that it can be damaging to embryonic and placental cells even if very dilute formulations. The potential danger glyphosate poses to fetuses is particularly worrying when one considers the wide use of the pesticide and the low concentrations necessary to cause harm. In addition to harming certain types of cells in the human body, glyphosate pesticide additives (Ex. the “inactive” ingredients of Roundup) have been shown to accumulate and cause genetic damage on lab rats. While the pesticide additive must be applied in large dosages for it to cause such damage, this raises questions about whether such damage is possible in other mammals, like humans.
A large portion of Monsanto’s business is currently in the field of “genetically modified organisms” (GMOs) This simply means that they alter the genetic structures of crops in order to hopefully make them more resistant to disease, easier to grow, higher yield, or less susceptible to predation by pests. Unfortunately, GMOs are often plagued by unintended consequences and side effects of genetic modification, which make them risky for human consumption. Monsanto has been embroiled in several serious controversies surrounding the safety of their GMO products – namely GE corn and recombinant bovine growth hormone – yet they have consistently continued to sell their goods.
Just recently, a study published in the International Journal of Biological Sciences seems to indicate a link between the consumption of Monsanto genetically engineered corn and organ damage in the liver and kidneys. This damage is consistent with the genetically engineered pesticide utilized by the corn, and seems to refute Monsanto’s claim that the pesticide will degrade long before it is consumed. Despite evidence that Monsanto’s GM corn may cause organ damage in its consumers, they have refused to recall their products. The refusal to recall their potentially toxic corn, in combination with their history of damaging their consumers for a profit, sheds considerable doubt upon their care for the health of those who consume their goods.
The doubts surrounding the safety of Monsanto’s genetically engineered corn are particularly important considering the fact that high fructose corn syrup is a staple ingredient in most processed foods. Monsanto GE “roundup Ready” corn is a primary source for most American high fructose corn syrup, thus any potential harm caused by this corn would likely be enormous.
Monsanto’s corporate behavior, both historically and currently, demonstrates a prioritization of profits over the safety of their consumers. It is evident that Monsanto will sell products, regardless of whether they may be toxic, for as long as they are legally able to sell them.
Not only does Monsanto have a pattern of selling toxic goods, but they lobby to prevent these goods from becoming illegal even after determining their toxicity, thus compounding the harm that they cause society. Monsanto spends millions of dollars a year in lobbying and is a very prolific user of the Washington DC “revolving door” (industry professionals becoming regulators and vice versa).
Some Monsanto goods may be exactly what they are marketed as – clean and safe agricultural goods – but, given their history of selling dangerous goods, there is little reason for the public to trust in their products. The Monsanto Corporation has proven numerous times that it will sell poison for a personal profit, regardless of the harm which their products inflict upon society. In the absence of regulators sanctioning Monsanto for its negligence, it is up to the public to stand up to Monsanto and call them out for their bad acts.
The next time you hear the name Monsanto in relation to a good which you are thinking of buying, please reconsider your purchase. It is entirely possible that the food is safe, or even of higher quality than other food. But there is also the very real likelihood that this food will damage your body. Why gamble with your or your family’s health when there are so many other alternatives to the potentially toxic goods of Monsanto?
Links Here
Monday, May 27, 2013
Stroke Victims Recovering After Stem Cell Therapy
Five stroke victims have shown signs of recovery following pioneering stem cell therapy.
Stem cells were injected directly into damaged areas of stroke victims’ brains in a trial at a Glasgow hospital.
The initial results, being presented at the European stroke conference in London tomorrow, show brain function has improved for five of the nine subjects.
Scientists say this shows the pioneering treatment may ‘kick-start’ the body’s repair process or even turn into the relevant tissue.
Professor Keith Muir said: ‘We remain pleased and encouraged by the data.’
Stroke is the third largest cause of death and the single largest cause of adult disability in the developed world.
Dr Clare Walton, a neuroscientist at the Stroke Association, said: ‘When a stroke strikes, the brain is starved of oxygen and, as a result, brain cells in the affected area die.
‘The use of stem cells is a promising technique which could help to reverse some of the disabling effects of stroke.
JUMP
Stem cells were injected directly into damaged areas of stroke victims’ brains in a trial at a Glasgow hospital.
The initial results, being presented at the European stroke conference in London tomorrow, show brain function has improved for five of the nine subjects.
Scientists say this shows the pioneering treatment may ‘kick-start’ the body’s repair process or even turn into the relevant tissue.
Professor Keith Muir said: ‘We remain pleased and encouraged by the data.’
Stroke is the third largest cause of death and the single largest cause of adult disability in the developed world.
Dr Clare Walton, a neuroscientist at the Stroke Association, said: ‘When a stroke strikes, the brain is starved of oxygen and, as a result, brain cells in the affected area die.
‘The use of stem cells is a promising technique which could help to reverse some of the disabling effects of stroke.
JUMP
Almost 3 Weeks in PCB..... Hanging with my Gal Pals!
It's been a fun, fun month. Dear Dominic tolerated my beach bumming for weeks. Firstly, dear Cajun friend of 20+ years visited.... Vickie. We had a blast. Spent alot of time on the beach, across the street at our hangout, and treated ourselves to a couple of broiled lobster tails each. Heavenly! (reminder to self: NEVER EVER take Vickie shopping again. *shuddering*)
A few days after Vickie headed home, my gals from Tennessee blew into town....there were 10 total. Flying and driving in and out for the week. We had big fun.
The water was great, as was the company!
Tuesday, May 7, 2013
Can Stem Cells Help Those With Arthritis?
Stems cells taken from just a few grams of body fat are a promising weapon against the crippling effects of osteoarthritis.
For the past two decades, knee, hip or other joint replacements have been the standard treatment for the deterioration of joint cartilage and the underlying bone.
But artificial joints only last about 15 years and are difficult to repair once they fail.
Stem cell injections may offer a new type of therapy by either stopping the degenerative process or by regenerating the damaged cartilage, said pioneering researcher Dr. Farshid Guilak, a professor of orthopedic surgery and director of orthopedic research at Duke University.
Guilak, one of the first researchers to grow cartilage from fat, explains why stem cells are a bright light in osteoarthritis research and why widespread clinical use is still years away. Below is an edited transcript of the interview.
Interview Here
Monday, May 6, 2013
What is the "Monsanto Protection Act" and why are environmentalists so upset about it?
More than 90 percent of U.S.-grown corn, soybeans, cotton, sugar beets and canola are derived from seeds genetically engineered by Monsanto and other companies to resist pests. Some safe food advocates believe that, instead of reducing the use of pesticides and herbicides, GE seeds are having the opposite effect in what has become a race to keep faster and faster developing superweeds and superbugs at bay. Photo courtesy of iStockPhoto Photo: Contributed Photo
Dear EarthTalk: What is the "Monsanto Protection Act" and why are environmentalists so upset about it? -- Rita Redstone, Milwaukee
The so-called Monsanto Protection Act is actually a provision (officially known as Section 735) within a recently passed Congressional spending bill, H.R. 933, which exempts biotech companies from litigation in regard to the making, selling and distribution of genetically engineered seeds and plants.
President Barack Obama signed the bill and its controversial rider into law in March 2013 much to the dismay of environmentalists. It means that Monsanto and other companies that supply the majority of the nation's crop seeds can continue to produce GE products regardless of any potential court orders stating otherwise. Opponents of GE foods believe that giving such companies a free reign over the production of such potentially dangerous organisms regardless of judicial challenge is a bad idea -- especially given how little we still know about the biological and ecological implications of widespread use of GE crops.
Today more than 90 percent of the corn, soybeans, cotton, sugar beets and canola planted in the U.S. is derived from seeds genetically engineered by Monsanto and other companies to resist pests and thus increase yields. Aviva Shen of the ThinkProgress blog reported that, instead of reducing farmers' use of toxic pesticides and herbicides, GE seeds are having the opposite effect in what has become a race to keep faster and faster developing "superweeds" and "superbugs" at bay. With Congress and the White House refusing to regulate GE crops, the court system has remained a last line of defense for those fighting the widespread adoption of genetic engineering -- until now, that is, thanks to H.R. 933.
Monsanto isn't the only seed company heavy into genetic engineering, but it is the biggest and most well-known and spends millions of dollars each year on lobbyists to keep it that way. Critics point out that the company has spent decades stacking government agencies with its executives and directors. "Monsanto's board members have worked for the EPA, advised the U.S. Department of Agriculture and served on President Obama's Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations," reported the group Food & Water Watch. "The prevalence of Monsanto's directors in these highly influential positions begs a closer look at how they're able to push the pro-GE agenda within the government and influence public opinion."
"The judicial review process is an essential element of U.S law and serves as a vital check on any federal agency decision that may negatively impact human health, the environment or livelihoods," reported Food Democracy Now! "Yet this provision seeks an end-run around such judicial review by preemptively deciding that industry can set its own conditions to continue to sell biotech seeds, even if a court may find them to have been wrongfully approved."
Another concern of safe food advocates now is getting the government to require food makers to list GE ingredients clearly on product labels so consumers can make informed choices accordingly. "Not only is (GE) labeling a reasonable and common sense solution to the continued controversy that corporations like Monsanto, DuPont and Dow Chemical have created by subverting our basic democratic rights," added Food Democracy Now!, "but it is a basic right that citizens in 62 other countries around the world already enjoy, including Europe, Russia, China, India, South Africa and Saudi Arabia."
LINK
Dear EarthTalk: What is the "Monsanto Protection Act" and why are environmentalists so upset about it? -- Rita Redstone, Milwaukee
The so-called Monsanto Protection Act is actually a provision (officially known as Section 735) within a recently passed Congressional spending bill, H.R. 933, which exempts biotech companies from litigation in regard to the making, selling and distribution of genetically engineered seeds and plants.
President Barack Obama signed the bill and its controversial rider into law in March 2013 much to the dismay of environmentalists. It means that Monsanto and other companies that supply the majority of the nation's crop seeds can continue to produce GE products regardless of any potential court orders stating otherwise. Opponents of GE foods believe that giving such companies a free reign over the production of such potentially dangerous organisms regardless of judicial challenge is a bad idea -- especially given how little we still know about the biological and ecological implications of widespread use of GE crops.
Today more than 90 percent of the corn, soybeans, cotton, sugar beets and canola planted in the U.S. is derived from seeds genetically engineered by Monsanto and other companies to resist pests and thus increase yields. Aviva Shen of the ThinkProgress blog reported that, instead of reducing farmers' use of toxic pesticides and herbicides, GE seeds are having the opposite effect in what has become a race to keep faster and faster developing "superweeds" and "superbugs" at bay. With Congress and the White House refusing to regulate GE crops, the court system has remained a last line of defense for those fighting the widespread adoption of genetic engineering -- until now, that is, thanks to H.R. 933.
Monsanto isn't the only seed company heavy into genetic engineering, but it is the biggest and most well-known and spends millions of dollars each year on lobbyists to keep it that way. Critics point out that the company has spent decades stacking government agencies with its executives and directors. "Monsanto's board members have worked for the EPA, advised the U.S. Department of Agriculture and served on President Obama's Advisory Committee for Trade Policy and Negotiations," reported the group Food & Water Watch. "The prevalence of Monsanto's directors in these highly influential positions begs a closer look at how they're able to push the pro-GE agenda within the government and influence public opinion."
"The judicial review process is an essential element of U.S law and serves as a vital check on any federal agency decision that may negatively impact human health, the environment or livelihoods," reported Food Democracy Now! "Yet this provision seeks an end-run around such judicial review by preemptively deciding that industry can set its own conditions to continue to sell biotech seeds, even if a court may find them to have been wrongfully approved."
Another concern of safe food advocates now is getting the government to require food makers to list GE ingredients clearly on product labels so consumers can make informed choices accordingly. "Not only is (GE) labeling a reasonable and common sense solution to the continued controversy that corporations like Monsanto, DuPont and Dow Chemical have created by subverting our basic democratic rights," added Food Democracy Now!, "but it is a basic right that citizens in 62 other countries around the world already enjoy, including Europe, Russia, China, India, South Africa and Saudi Arabia."
LINK
POSSIBLE TREATMENT FOR SERIOUS BLOOD CANCER MULTIPLE MYELOMA
A cure for the confounding condition multiple myeloma may have been found.
A single antibody could be the key to treating multiple myeloma, or cancer of the blood, currently without cure or long-term treatment.
“We tested the antibody in various ways, including on tumour cells from myeloma patients that have been transplanted into mice. The tests showed that the antibody is able to destroy myeloma cells”, explains Markus Hansson, a researcher at Lund University in Sweden.
JUMP- Exciting News!!!!
Saturday, May 4, 2013
Why Baby Carrots Are Killing You
It may shock you that baby carrots do not come out of the ground that way. There is no little baby carrot garden where these are harvested. Manufactured baby carrots are a result of taking all the broken and “ugly” big carrots they can’t put in the package, grinding them all up, processing them into the “baby” carrots and giving them a bath in chlorine to give them a bright happy orange color. There are also “Cut & Peel” baby carrots that are whittled
into a miniature form.
If you look on the package it doesn’t say “Chlorine”, because it was added as part of manufacturing and not added as an ingredient…why is that?
Packaged foods contains lots of chemicals both in the ingredients and in the manufacturing process. The tricky part is chemicals added as part of the manufacturing process are not considered to be an ingredient therefore does not have to be listed on the food label. So there is no way to tell what else is hiding in that box or package.
As defined by the EPA, Chlorine is a pesticide. Its purpose is to kill living organisms. So it would make sense that when you ingest chlorine, it kills some parts of our body like the healthy bacteria in your gut and intestinal flora for instance. Chlorine is a highly toxic, yellow-green gas most heavily used in chemical agents like household cleaners and can be found in the air near industrial areas especially around paper processing plants. Exposure to Chlorine has been linked to health problems such as sore throat, coughing, eye and skin irritation, rapid breathing, narrowing of the bronchi, wheezing, blue coloring of the skin, accumulation of fluid in the lungs, pain in the lung region, severe eye and skin burns, lung collapse, a type of asthma known as Reactive Airways Dysfunction Syndrome (RADS).
Chlorine is also added to the public water supply. So not only are you drinking it, but you are absorbing it through the largest organ in your body, your skin. In fact, 2/3 of human absorption of chlorine is from inhaling the steam in the form of chloroform and fast absorption through your open pores in the warm shower or bath. The inhalation of chloroform is a suspected cause of asthma and bronchitis, especially in children… which has increased 300% in the last two decades. Other health risks associated with chloroform is cancer, potential reproductive damage, birth defects, dizziness, fatigue, headache, liver and kidney damage. Chloroform is also found in the air and in food, like baby carrots.
Conclusion: Stick to organically grown whole carrots. They are really easy to find as you can buy them at your local farmers market or grocery store. Wash them and cut them into sticks for your childs lunch box. Carrots are an excellent snack that we enjoy all the time. Enjoy!
LINK
Friday, May 3, 2013
Veterans' Diseases Associated with Agent Orange
VA assumes that certain diseases can be related to a Veteran’s qualifying military service. We call these "presumptive diseases."
VA has recognized certain cancers and other health problems as presumptive diseases associated with exposure to Agent Orange or other herbicides during military service. Veterans and their survivors may be eligible for disability compensation or survivors' benefits for these diseases.
*AL Amyloidosis
A rare disease caused when an abnormal protein, amyloid, enters tissues or organs
*Chronic B-cell Leukemias
A type of cancer which affects white blood cells
*Chloracne (or similar acneform disease)
A skin condition that occurs soon after exposure to chemicals and looks like common forms of acne seen in teenagers. Under VA's rating regulations, it must be at least 10 percent disabling within one year of exposure to herbicides.
*Diabetes Mellitus Type 2
A disease characterized by high blood sugar levels resulting from the body’s inability to respond properly to the hormone insulin
*Hodgkin’s Disease
A malignant lymphoma (cancer) characterized by progressive enlargement of the lymph nodes, liver, and spleen, and by progressive anemia
*Ischemic Heart Disease
A disease characterized by a reduced supply of blood to the heart, that leads to chest pain
*Multiple Myeloma
A cancer of plasma cells, a type of white blood cell in bone marrow
*Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
A group of cancers that affect the lymph glands and other lymphatic tissue
*Parkinson’s Disease
A progressive disorder of the nervous system that affects muscle movement
*Peripheral Neuropathy, Acute and Subacute
A nervous system condition that causes numbness, tingling, and motor weakness. Currently, it must be at least 10 percent disabling within one year of herbicide exposure and resolve within two years. VA proposed on Aug. 10, 2012, to replace "acute and subacute" with "early-onset" and eliminate the requirement that symptoms resolve within two years.
*Porphyria Cutanea Tarda
A disorder characterized by liver dysfunction and by thinning and blistering of the skin in sun-exposed areas. Under VA's rating regulations, it must be at least 10 percent disabling within one year of exposure to herbicides.
*Prostate Cancer
Cancer of the prostate; one of the most common cancers among men
*Respiratory Cancers (includes lung cancer)
Cancers of the lung, larynx, trachea, and bronchus
*Soft Tissue Sarcomas (other than osteosarcoma, chondrosarcoma, Kaposi’s sarcoma, or mesothelioma)
A group of different types of cancers in body tissues such as muscle, fat, blood and lymph vessels, and connective tissues
*Children with Birth Defects: VA presumes certain birth defects in children of Vietnam and Korea Veterans associated with Veterans' qualifying military service.
*Veterans with Lou Gehrig's Disease: VA presumes Lou Gehrig's Disease (amyotrophic lateral sclerosis or ALS) diagnosed in all Veterans who had 90 days or more continuous active military service is related to their service, although ALS is not related to Agent Orange exposure.
LINK
Promising New Agents for Multiple Myeloma
Drug development for this type of bone marrow cancer has been gaining momentum, with two new proteasome inhibitor approvals in the last year alone and a number of new treatments in late-stage pipeline
Multiple myeloma (also known as myeloma or plasma cell myeloma) is a type of bone marrow cancer. Plasma cells found in the bone marrow divide uncontrollably and form tumours that can destroy bones (leading to bone pain) and damage the kidneys. In addition, there is an increased risk of infection as the cancerous plasma cells overcrowd healthy plasma cells preventing the normal production of blood cells, and therefore antibodies, required for immunity.
Multiple myeloma is a disease of the elderly, with the median age at diagnosis of 69 years, and it is more common in men than women. While it is a relatively rare cancer, it is one of the more common haematological malignancies and the economic costs associated with multiple myeloma are among the highest.
Treatment is complex and therapy choices depend on patient age, severity of symptoms and whether or not he will undergo stem cell transplantation. Treatment modalities include chemotherapy and immunosuppression, transplantation, radiation therapy, and adjunct therapies (eg bisphosphonates for bone complications or surgery to treat or prevent bone fractures).
While significant developments have been made in the treatment of multiple myeloma during the past 10 years, the disease remains incurable. But with the approval within the past year of two new drugs (pomalidomide and carfilzomib) and several novel agents at phase III development, it appears that drug development for multiple myeloma continues to gain momentum
JUMP
Multiple myeloma (also known as myeloma or plasma cell myeloma) is a type of bone marrow cancer. Plasma cells found in the bone marrow divide uncontrollably and form tumours that can destroy bones (leading to bone pain) and damage the kidneys. In addition, there is an increased risk of infection as the cancerous plasma cells overcrowd healthy plasma cells preventing the normal production of blood cells, and therefore antibodies, required for immunity.
Multiple myeloma is a disease of the elderly, with the median age at diagnosis of 69 years, and it is more common in men than women. While it is a relatively rare cancer, it is one of the more common haematological malignancies and the economic costs associated with multiple myeloma are among the highest.
Treatment is complex and therapy choices depend on patient age, severity of symptoms and whether or not he will undergo stem cell transplantation. Treatment modalities include chemotherapy and immunosuppression, transplantation, radiation therapy, and adjunct therapies (eg bisphosphonates for bone complications or surgery to treat or prevent bone fractures).
While significant developments have been made in the treatment of multiple myeloma during the past 10 years, the disease remains incurable. But with the approval within the past year of two new drugs (pomalidomide and carfilzomib) and several novel agents at phase III development, it appears that drug development for multiple myeloma continues to gain momentum
JUMP
Thursday, May 2, 2013
"Agent Orange corn" and Herbicide Spark Concern
There's a main ingredient in Agent Orange called 2,4-D, and it's one of the latest toxic chemicals being pushed as an herbicide by Dow Chemical, CREDO Action reports. As the U.S. Food & Drug Administration decides whether to approve genetically modified corn that will be resistant to the chemical, the Environmental Protection Agency is considering stepping forward to restrict use of 2,4-D.
Agent Orange was used by the U.S. military as a defoliant during the Vietnam War, and was responsible for the deaths or injuries of an estimated 400,000 Vietnamese people during that time. Now one of its major ingredients - 2,4-D - is marketed by Dow Chemical to be used on fields by farmers.
Perhaps just as worrying is Dow's marketing of special modified "2,4-D-resistant corn." Nicknamed "Agent Orange corn," the genetically modified corn was created by Dow AgroScience, a division of Dow Chemical. It is engineered to be impervious to 2,4-D, but environmental activists and critics are not convinced of its safety.
Aside from the concerns many have over GM crops, there is even more outrage over the use of 2,4-D as a weed-killer. It is considered by the International Agency for Research on Cancer to be carcinogenic to humans. 2,4-D has been linked to cancer, reproductive issues, hormone disruption, and Parkinson's disease. It is banned entirely in parts of Canada and Europe.
This development may prove particularly infuriating for activists, in that it harkens back to a similar move by the Monsanto biotech corporation. Monsanto's "Roundup" herbicide was so toxic to plants that Monsanto, too, had to produce genetically modified "Roundup Ready" seeds that could withstand the effects of the poison. Now, though, weeds are becoming resistant to Roundup, which in turn requires the use of stronger herbicides like the dangerous 2,4-D.
The use of 2,4-D has been drawing ire on all fronts; not simply from environmentalists: Vietnam Veterans of America recently wrote to President Obama, urging that the U.S. Department of Agriculture perform a thorough investigation of how the herbicide might harm people's health (the administration has so far failed to conduct any such study).
Many farmers, too, are disgusted with the chemical.
Lowell, Ind., farmer Jody Herr was concerned when he found his tomato fields deformed by the weed-killer, which he believes wafted over to his property from farms almost two miles away.
"The leaves had curled and the plants were kind of twisting, rather than growing straight," Herr remarked. He expressed displeasure at the idea that "Agent Orange corn" was on the verge of receiving regulatory approval.
Herr and a grassroots group of activists, and vegetable canners Seneca Foods - together called The Save Our Crops Coalition - have filed petitions with the government seeking a delay in the corn's approval. They noted that, while not opposed to biotechnology altogether, they feared that crops not immune to 2,4-D would be accidentally exposed to the toxin as it drifted and wound up on the property of an unsuspecting farmer, like Herr.
CREDO Action is asking activists to submit public comments expressing their concerns, and to implore the EPA to heavily consider prohibiting the use of the herbicide.
LINK
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
