These three have come to the forefront of my attention because each of them is being effectively contested or banned by local, national, and/or international political bodies... meaning WE NOW HAVE THE POWER to join the movement to support a healthier environment right here in our local communities and to fight widespread corpoarate influenced corruption and assault.
Generally, the stance taken by industry, advertising, and government has been, “everything is safe until proven harmful.” What has been ignored and pushed under the rug at every opportuning is the precautionary principle—an international principle upheld by the U.N., though one that appears to have greater traction and precedent in being applied in Europe than in America or much of the rest of the world. Its high time we begin to err on the side of caution in regards to industial chemicals and new technology and say, “Not to be trusted until proven safe.”
Glyphosate
Monsanto (now owned by Bayer, the 150+ year old chemical and pharmaceutical company) has lost three court cases in a row and been ordered to pay upwards of $2 billion in damages and penalties for covering up research showing that glyphosate—the principal compound in Roundup—causes cancer. Specifically, Bayer-Monsanto is being sued by sufferers of non-Hodgekins Lymphoma. The company has proposed to settle 125,000 current lawsuits, PLUS ALL FUTURE LAWSUITS, for just over $10 billion (of which 1.5 billion would go to lawyers not involved in present litigations), which according to my calculations would leave a mere $50,000 to $60,000 (or likely less) for each person whose life has been destroyed by Monsanto’s negligence. The federal judge upon whose authority it depends is opposed to the settlement (and if you’ve suffered damage from Monsanto, I think you should be too).
“President of the Portuguese Medical Association, José Manuel Silva, is calling for a worldwide ban on Big Ag’s most used herbicide, glyphosate. With so many health concerns surrounding the chemical, its days are surely numbered.”
Find out what’s being done in your region:
For a long list of countries taking measures against glyphosate, followed by a long list of cities and counties in the U.S., go here.
Take action to inquire of your local officials whether there is any discussion of banning glyphosate in your area. Then join with other citizens to push the issue in your city or county.
5G and wireless radiation
There’s a race between the U.S. and China to be the first to deploy 5G, yet many local governments across the world are opposing 5G rollout based on health and privacy concerns. This new technology has never been tested for safety, and many studies on previous and current wireless technology show diverse and serious health effects. Some persons, including myself, see 5G rollout as potentially the greatest existential threat to life as we know it.
Growing concern has lead to opposition to the new technology around the globe.
The webpage linked below lists 54 governmental bodies, most in Europe and a fair number in the U.S, that have halted or impeded 5G rollout:
https://smombiegate.org/list-of-cities-towns-councils-and-countries-that-have-banned-5g/
The U.S. FCC wanted to push rapid, unfettered expansion of 5G networks, but importanly, the U.S. Court of Appeals overturned the measure:
16. USA District of Columbia August 9th 2019. The US Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit issued a decision substantially setting back the efforts of the Federal Communications Commission to expedite the deployment of 5G technology. https://ehtrust.org/federal-court-overturns-fcc-order…/…
France’s comprehensive 14 point law limiting wi-fi in schools, cell phone tower proliferation, etc., which passed in 2015, shows a lot of thought going into the effects of wireless radiation and how to be more conscious about it. This is very encouraging and, I would say, an example for all to follow.
In Australia, thanks to the work of neigborhood associations working in conjuncion with barrister Raymond Broomhall, thousands of 5G installations have been prevented or removed and a major 5G network has retreated. Learn about Broomhall’s sure-fire, step-by-step legal procedure here.
In the U.S., lawyer Andrew Campanelli is successfully defending citizens against cell tower and small cell invasion. Importantly, his website states...
Know Your Rights
Across the Country, wireless companies have been storming into local towns, counties and villages. Their attorneys routinely appear before Town Boards, Planning Boards and Zoning Boards, to "explain" that the wireless companies basically have the right to install Cell Towers wherever they may choose to do so.
Spewing references to the Telecommunications Act of 1996, they posit to local governments and their citizens that if local officials consider virtually any opposition raised by their citizens, it would violate the Telecommunications Act. If they sense that their application is likely to be denied, they often complete their presentations with thinly veiled threats of federal litigation.
Don't believe their hype. As an individual, a civic association, or a local government, you have rights. (emphasis added)
Researcher and mother, Lena Pu, has also developed her own legal strategy for opposing wireless radiation. Her focus is especially wi-fi in schools and she is very concerned about a present move to clandestinely install 60 Ghz chips as a part of new wi-fi routers in schools, which could have disastrous results far above the already harmful industrial-grade wi-fi systems currently in place.
“Don’t buy a new cellphone with a 60 Ghz chip in it!” she also warns (paraphrase). She states that 60 Ghz radiation disturbs oxygen molecules, making them unsuited for being carried by the blood. (Hypoxia ring a bell, anyone?)
For an overview of the concerns about 5G and what can be done, watch the panel of experts in the 5G Summit video below... and/or contact me.
Here’s a link to a page where you can join 5G Summit participants in taking action to contact your state representatives. The pre-written letters speak for themselves. Please take the time to complete this fully-automated action.
Fluoride in public water systems
Flouride is a toxic waste product that is used in rat poison, toothpaste, and dentistry... converting a hazardous waste liablity into an additional income for industrial polluters—specifically, the phosphate fertilizer, aluminum, copper, and iron industries.
“Many are surprised to learn that unlike the pharmaceutical grade fluoride in their toothpaste, the fluoride in their water is an untreated industrial waste product, one that contains trace elements of arsenic and lead. Without the phosphate industry’s effluent, water fluoridation would be prohibitively expensive. And without fluoridation, the phosphate industry would be stuck with an expensive waste disposal problem.“
Excerpt from history article:
For a more detailed historical and scientific review, see this paper...
Image: 2009 map of water flouridation around the world
“It’s worth noting that Japan and 97% of western Europe do not fluoridate their water, and in the U.S., more Americans drink fluoridated water than in the rest of the world combined.”—Dr. Mercola
Fuoride in drinking water is currently under serious review in U.S. court due to a lawsuit brought against the EPA by the Flouride Action Network (FAN) and others. Originally included were 50 studies (now 65) linking flouride exposure to lowered IQ. Other studies have shown damage in many other areas of health. The EPA’s defense was flimsy and revealed that they were not even disposed or able to assess the concerns.
The federal judge in charge of the case favored those opposing fluoridation...
The landmark federal trial pitting FAN and others against the US EPA over water fluoridation came to a dramatic turning point Wednesday, June 17. FAN has argued that fluoride’s ability to impact the development of both the fetal and infant brain posed an unacceptable risk to millions of Americans (and others) drinking fluoridated public water supplies. The dramatic moment came when, after both sides had completed their summary statements, the federal judge surprised everyone by recognizing the key plank in the plaintiffs’ case and undermining the key argument in the EPA’s case.
The judge said:
So much has changed since the petition was filed…two significant series of studies – respective cohort studies – which everybody agrees is the best methodology. Everybody agrees that these were rigorous studies and everybody agrees that these studies would be part of the best available scientific evidence.
The EPA appears to have applied a standard of causation, which from my read of TSCA is not accurate. It’s not a proper allocation. It’s not the proper standard.
...
The ending of the trial was unexpected as the judge asked the two parties to work out an agreement. The judge suggested various scenarios ... and he will hold a briefing with the two sides on August 6. This will be online and the public will be able to watch. We will post the zoom details online here closer to the time.
—Excerpted from the Flouride Action Network website
http://fluoridealert.org/issues/tsca-fluoride-trial/
Like so many other sacrileges commited by industry and corrupt government and pushed onto the public through industry funded propaganda and deception, there is no excuse for such an assault on the health and dignity of the populace—including and especially on yet unborn infants.
If your city or community is using fluoride in its water, you can join the movement to bring attention to your local officials of the problems with flouridation and petition them not to wait for EPA orders to take positive action. Please check out FAN’s website (flouridealert.org), and contact me if you would like personal support in your efforts.
