Death of the Lakes: The Spreading of Toxic and Infectious Wastes and Disease

http://wholefoodusa.wordpress.com/2...of-toxic-and-infectious-wastes-and-disease-2/

Death of the Lakes: The Spreading of Toxic and Infectious Wastes and Disease

Posted on August 22, 2010 by Augie| 6 Comments
<!-- .entry-meta --> <script type="text/javascript" src="http://s0.wp.com/wp-content/plugins/adverts/adsense.js?m=1268755324g&1"></script> Death of the Lakes: The Spreading of Toxic and Infectious Wastes and Disease

Ohio’s Love Canal: Toxic Pollution Dumping on a Scale of BP-Gulf Spill
By David Michael

Human illnesses and animal deaths have occurred recently from neurotoxins secreted by a heavy slime of blue and green algae floating on Ohio’s largest lake—Grand Lake St. Mary’s (Grand Lake) in Auglaize and Mercer Counties. This is a lake that has been deteriorating for decades, but especially so in the past 10 years as factory farms have sprung up all over the area, and more are being built.
A high concentration of factory farms and the application of composted manure from CAFO (confined animal feeding operations) manure and sewage treatment sludge (humanure, now called biosolids—a mixture of concentrated human excrement and industrial discharges) is spreading toxic and infectious substances on farmlands close by and in the watershed. CAFOs in the watershed area account for 3 million chickens; while sewage sludge spreading is permitted on 8800 Ohio farmlands—several close to the edge of Grand Lake.
Pollutants discharging into the lake also include fertilizer runoff (phosphorus, potassium and nitrogen (PKN) as well as some pesticides and herbicides—as is commonly known. But there is far more to the story, including heavy metals (like lead, arsenic and chromium), pharmaceuticals, neurotoxins, cancer-causers, viruses, bacteria—and just about every known chemical (60,000 some) known to man and being placed on the farmlands.
EPA and state officials know about this—as does USDA, and their partners in the big food and big agriculture corporations. Yet the smaller farmers are being accused for causing the mess, and homeowners too—while the CAFOs and spreading of sludge are being expanded rapidly though state and federally funded “green” programs and contracted out to a few individuals.

This and other similar situations occurring all around the US are coming to a head and, in sum, may be a far greater impact than the BP Gulf oil spill. The polluted farmlands may never be recovered without being excavated.
This news video on the situation does not feature a CAFO but rather a small 250-head farm using a natural treatment system as an example of the problem, rather than a superfarm. The big farms have gates and security procedures.

</p> Make no mistake, there are increased deaths and illnesses for animals and humans living near CAFOs or lands where human waste is spread, which is well-documented. So far at the Lake, a 43-year old man may be neurologically impaired for life after washing the scum off his dog before the dog died from exposure. The man spent five days in the hospital and is now home hoping to recover. Two other dogs have died from exposure as well as innumerable fish.

The Data: High Levels of Toxins

Both CAFO wastes and sewage sludge contains these types of contaminants and EPA data shows many of these are extremely high levels.
Polychlorinated Biphenyls (PCBs);
Chlorinated pesticides — DDT, dieldrin, aldrin, endrin, chlordane, heptachlor, lindane, mirex, kepone, 2,4,5-T, 2,4-D;
Chlorinated compounds such as dioxins;
Polynuclear aromatic hydrocarbons;
Heavy metals — arsenic, cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury;
Bacteria, viruses, protozoa, parasitic worms, fungi; and
Miscellaneous — asbestos, petroleum products, industrial solvents

EPA data shows high levels of known toxic compounds in these sludge “fertilizers” and are provided in a 2009 report on 74 sewage treatment plants. It shows high levels of contaminants including Arsenic (49 ppm, parts per million), Mercury (8.3 ppm), Aluminum (57,000 ppm=6%). Fluoride (234 ppm). EPA limits on Arsenic is 75 ppm (an additive in chicken feed) and Cadmium, 85 ppm. These are the maximum levels detected on a dry-weight basis. These are so high the wastes would be classified as a hazardous waste requiring treatment– but not is it used as soil amendments.
Pharmaceuticals (Ciprofloxcine, 50 ppm—Fluoxentine 3.1 ppm (this is Prozac)—Ibupropen (119 ppm), triclocarban (44 ppm). Levels of the tricloscan , the anti-bacterial compound in hand soap, was 133 ppm. These are maximum levels on a dry-weight basis.
In addition, CAFO manure lagoons overflow into ditches at times and are affecting groundwaters., some of which feed ditches and streams. These lagoons are laden with antibiotic-resistant superbugs, virus and other bacteria multiplying rapidly during composting and field applications and many persist for a month to a year.
Spreading CAFO and sewage wastes are increasing rapidly. Federal and state funds are being used to generate a small amount of electricity from the sludge by the way of new bioreactors. This makes the sludge and its contaminants. These are called “green, clean energy programs”. The pathogenic biology of the wastes from CAFOs are not much different than those from sewage treatment plants, sans pharmaceuticals, synthetic organics. Chicken CAFOs use arsenic compounds as antibiotics in the feed, so high Arsenic levels in the manure are either spread, but has been also blended in the feed of the factory dairy cows or hogs.
Now that Grand Lake is in crisis, the Ohio governor and several state caretaker agencies are scrambling in an effort to clean up the toxic brew and circumvent a worsening health epidemic. The State has not mentioned CAFOs as being a source, only agriculture in general. But small farms are being singled out in other areas. For instance, in Lancaster PA, small Amish farmers are being targeted as a cause of the deterioration of the Chesapeake Bay 180 miles to the South. Home septic tanks and lawns (which only account for an estimated 2% of the problem) are being blamed as well. The lake’s remarkable degradation is not a result of small farming operations and suggestions to the contrary are ridiculous.
Jim Bynam wrote the Scandal of Sewage Sludge, where he states:
The Major Sources

Egg factories with 100,000 to 250,000 hens in huge, enclosed buildings account for 3 million egg-laying hens (3,000 animal units) in the watershed of Grand Lake. There are many more in the 25,000 to 100,000 range that do not require a CAFO permit. There may be more than 6 million hens in the the area. The map below shows the appalling extent of the most concentrated factory farms in Ohio and probably the entire US. These are only the EPA-“permitted” farms -CAFOs– with 1000 animal units or more (equivalent to 1000 cows/steers or 100,000 hens). See the heavy concentration of CAFOs in the western part of the state map and then zoom in to see the Lake. http://wwwapp.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/gis/cafo/http://wwwapp.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/gis/cafo/
The map below shows the EPA-approved land areas for the application of what is now termed Biosolids, an Orwellian-like term for human sewage treatment sludge, so named when the public did not like the humanure term. You will need to select Mercer County to view the map of the Grand Lake area. http://wwwapp.epa.ohio.gov/dsw/gis/sludge/index.php
David Kirby, author of the new book Animal Factory, recently investigated Grand Lake, and penned the piece for Huffington Post, The High Price of Cheap Meat: A Lake Dies in Ohio, said this:
David Michael is an environmental specialist and has spent his 35-year professional career in Ohio in all phases of industrial environmental controls. David is also a food health and safety advocate for naturally, unprocessed food– fresh from the farm.
Part 2 will cover more on the environmental and public health dangers and we will have information by an inside EPA whistleblower Hugh Kaufman. Part 3 will cover the reported and documented health problems, lawsuits, and the federal/state/corporate politics behind these developments at the Lake and throughout the U.S. It will show what actions can be taken and a simple solution.
One organization maintains a website on the sludge spreading issue is http://sewagesludgeactionnetwork.com/ and encourage folks to sign a petition.

The Price of Cheap Meat: A Lake Dies in Ohio



http://www.huffingtonpost.com/david-kirby/the-price-of-cheap-meat-a_b_635599.html


Grand Lake St. Marys -- Ohio's largest inland body of water and a treasured recreational area -- is dying. And if you barbecued some supermarket pork over the holiday weekend, you helped contribute to this disaster, however indirectly.
The lake's 13,000 acres of water surrounded by parkland, cabins and campgrounds, is one of the leading summertime attractions in the area, which brings in some $216 million in tourist spending each year, $160 million directly from the lake, (not to mention 2,600 jobs). Now, many visitors are shunning the place like an oil-stained Alabama beach. Swimming and waterskiing are discouraged, and even boating might be a health risk.
The main problem is phosporous and other nutrients, mostly from farms, including the 15 or so animal factory farms in the lake's watershed, and nutrients from the megatons of fertilizer applied on taxpayer-subsidized corn and soybean fields. Those products then become cheap feed that keeps the factory farms humming, Big Box prices low, and summertime barbequers happy.

Factory farms, in addition to their insatiable demand for subsidized feed, also generate thousands of tons of animal waste each year, far more than the surrounding land can absorb. The manure -- in this part of Ohio, most factory farms are either pork, or "layer" (egg) operations -- is sometimes liquefied and sprayed from giant sprinklers that spew brownish-yellow water onto cropland which -- too often -- runs off into streams and ditches that feed into rivers and lakes, including Grand Lake St. Marys.

The Ohio Farm Bureau insists that most of the farms in the area are "family farms," which is true -- the majority of farms in the area not factory farms, and do no generate anywhere near the amount of nutrients that industrialized operations create. And besides, even massive factory farms (officially known as Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, or CAFOs) are usually owned by families, although they don't typically own the animals. They contract out to large corporations, sharecropper style, to raise them. The contractor is left with the problem of disposing of so much manure, not the company.
For years, nutrient levels in Grand Lake St. Marys have been rising. But only in the last three years have they gotten dangerously high, fueling algae blooms that strangulate fish, smother the water in a putrid green-and-turquoise foam, clog boat engines, foul the air with rancid odors, and emit toxins that can cause permanent health problems in people.

"We have a crisis situation," Ohio Governor Ted Strickland (D) said in a letter Friday to EPA Administrator Lisa Jackson and, tellingly, USDA Secretary Tom Vislack. "The economic viability of this region is ultimately linked to the health of this natural resource. We have reached a tipping point where the degraded nature of the lake is causing significant loss to local businesses and the total livelihood of the region."
In April 2009, levels of a toxin called microcystin were found to be extremely elevated, and the state issued a warning for people to "minimize contact" and avoid ingestion of the lake water.

And just two weeks ago, "the lake water turned a dark green color and became covered in a thick blue green scum," Strickland said, adding that state testing has also detected the presence of harmful bacteria and their associated toxins, one that attacks the liver and another that causes nerve damage.
Strickland asked the Feds for immediate environmental and economic assistance and, given the EPA's aggressive stance against farm runoff since Obama took office, his SOS will likely get some attention.

It is not logical to blame most of this mess on smaller, more sustainably run farms where animals are not packed in by the hundreds or thousands, and where there's enough land to adequately absorb the waste, thus reducing the chance of nutrient runoff.
Besides, small farms have graced this area for generations on end, and the lake did not become a Petri dish for liver toxins until now. Something has changed, and that something -- in my opinion -- is factory farming and its excess manure. And local people know it.
Local residents "say stricter regulations are needed on large farms," the Associated Press reported, "limiting when they can apply manure to their fields and how close they can plant to streams."

When I was researching my book Animal Factory - The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy and Poultry Farms to Humans and the Environment - I came across this same situation wherever CAFOs had invaded: the tidewater area of North Carolina, the mega-dairy region of Yakima Valley, WA, or the "poultry belt" of Arkansas (whose big chicken growers like Tyson have been sued by the Oklahoma Attorney General for allowing nutrients from poultry waste to cross the border and pollute lakes and rivers).

In each case, once pristine waters had been spoiled after the CAFOs showed up.
I also spent time in western and northwestern Ohio, where property and small business owners are growing increasingly alarmed by the number of CAFOs that have been moving into the area. And I witnessed the Maumee River, choked with agricultural nutrients, which empties into Lake Erie, site of a massive and growing "dead zone."

The lake was the color of cappuccino, and there were warning signs about dangerous bacteria in the water. And yet, families with small children were still splashing around in the murky, foamy liquid.
I wondered if they knew that factory farming upriver was contributing to this slow death of a great lake, and if they knew that their barbequed chicken, egg salad sandwiches and pork sausages were likely produced at factory farms that leach nutrients into waterways that belong to the public.
We all contribute to factory farming every time we reach for the cheapest meat, milk and eggs at the supermarket. That bacon you had for breakfast might have come from a CAFO in the Lake St. Marys area -- or else fed on discount corn grown within the watershed.
Even if you are a strict vegan, your tax dollars still go to sustain this unsustainable system. So unless you are out there actively lobbying to kill taxpayer subsidies in the Farm Bill, don't think you get completely off the hook, either.

Which brings us back to the devastated economy of Grand Lake St. Marys - already buffeted by post-industrial job losses - and its desperate and rightfully angry people.

I know this question will not make me popular around the lake, but I do wonder how many residents there enjoyed some nice, juicy, barbequed pork ribs on the Fourth of July that were on special down at the discount center.
Like I said, we are all responsible for factory farm pollution, even those who suffer most from its excesses.


David Kirby is author of "Animal Factory - The Looming Threat of Industrial Pork, Dairy and Poultry Operations to Humans and the Environment" (St. Martin's Press).

http://www.sfbg.com/2010/03/23/shit-show


Shit show



news@sfbg.com
GREEN CITY Food safety groups complain that the San Francisco Public Utilities Commission has until recently been dumping its crap in the backyards and gardens of any residents who unwittingly asked for it.
The city calls this crap "biosolids compost," and for Mayor Gavin Newsom and the SFPUC, it seemed like a green dream come true. But it turns out that putting processed human excrement into people's vegetable gardens might not be the elegant — if somewhat gross — reuse strategy it once seemed to be.



The SFPUC has been giving away compost made of human waste for years, but recently stopped due to health concerns


The vexing sewage sludge left over after treatment and separation of the city's wastewater was being treated, combined with woodchips and paper waste, and labeled compost so it could, according to the SFPUC's Web site, "provide essential plant nutrients, improve soil structure, enhance moisture retention, and reduce soil erosion." Not bad for the ultimate human waste product.
The problem, say groups including the Center for Food Safety and Organic Consumers Association, is that the SFPUC's compost contains a host of other toxins and hazardous materials not necessarily originating with what the city's granola-munching denizens flush down the toilet. In fact, a January 2009 Environmental Protection Agency study of sewage sludge from 74 treatment plants found, in nearly every sample, "28 metals, four polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, two semi-volatiles, 11 flame retardants, 72 pharmaceuticals, and 25 steroids and hormones." Yikes.
"You name it, it's in there," John Mayer, said spokesperson for the Organic Consumers Association. The compost "is hazardous waste, and it's absurd to claim that it's safe to consume. No matter what the sludge processing industry claims, it is by definition dangerous." The EPA report would certainly seem to support Mayer's claim, except that it expressly stops short of doing just that, stating that the results "do not imply that the concentrations for any [substance] are of particular concern to EPA."
Then again, it was the EPA that started promoting the use of biosolid compost in the first place, back in 1978. The only safety thresholds the agency sets for biosolids compost concern nine heavy metals and the elimination of pathogens — none of the flame retardants, steroids, semi-volatiles, and carcinogens found in their study — a standard that has remained largely unchanged for a decade.
But that's only part of the story, because as it turns out, San Francisco's sewage sludge isn't that contaminated compared to the shit generated in other regions. "We found in our tests that it's really low for all the emerging pollutants," SFPUC spokesperson Tyron Jue told us, citing data listed on its Web site indicating that testing goes beyond what the EPA requires, and even beyond more stringent European Union standards. Jue even said that the SFPUC's biosolids compost has "metal limits lower than in a daily vitamin, and lower or comparable to store-bought compost."
Yet Paige Tomaselli of the Center for Food Safety understands the data differently. "San Francisco may test above and beyond the national standards. They may think their testing is green. But the truth of the matter is that that the compost they're giving away is not generated here in San Francisco."


Indeed, the sewage sludge the SFPUC tested is not the same stuff it was handing out for three years as "organic biosolids compost." After the organic food industry complained, the utility recently dropped the "organic" designation, offering the admittedly sheepish defense that the label was meant to imply "carbon-rich," a definition that would make, among nearly everything else, the Guardian you hold in your hands organic.


Jue told us that the utility spends over $3 million annually on its biosolids program, $500,000 of which last year went to contracts with Synagro, "the largest recycler of organic residuals in the United States," according to its Web site. The compost in the SFPUC's giveaways came from the corporation's Central Valley Composting Facility in Merced County, where it was mixed with sludge from at least eight other counties, including municipalities whose safety requirements are nowhere near as stringent as San Francisco's.
"The vast majority [of sludge] comes from Fresno," Tomaselli said, adding that the SFPUC continues to cite its own numbers, "completely ignoring the fact that this sewage sludge comes from a city with agricultural and industrial toxins that may be going into the waste stream."
Many of those toxins remain in the "compost" San Franciscans have been applying to their tomato plants. "You can cook it all day," Mayer told us. "Those things aren't going anywhere."
Both OCA and CFS say that, given such a broad avenue by which toxic material could enter the SFPUC's compost, the SFPUC is violating San Francisco's environmental standards. For example, the opening chapter of the Environment Code for the City and County of San Francisco explicitly states that all members of the city's government should employ the "precautionary principle" in conducting its affairs, requiring the city to err on the side of caution in environmental policy.


One sentence in particular would seem to address biosolids and the 2009 EPA study specifically: "Any gaps in scientific data uncovered by the examination of alternatives will provide a guidepost for future research, but will not prevent the city from taking protective action." And in the case of so-called biosolids, protective action would seem to call for keeping this shit away from food.


Hugh Kaufman, a senior policy analyst at the EPA and founder of the Superfund program, flatly stated to us over the phone that "there's no scientific consensus that this stuff is safe. They test less than 1 percent of the stuff that has been tested to be in it."
The health effects of even that 1 percent can be alarming. Of the nine heavy metals the EPA tests for, chromium is a known carcinogen and mercury can cause permanent nervous system and kidney damage. But if that stuff doesn't kill you, prolonged exposure to low levels of arsenic, another heavy metal, "can cause a discoloration of the skin and the appearance of small corns or warts," according to the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration Web site.
Considering that Kaufman works in the Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (as apposed to the Office of Water that oversees biosolids), we asked him how and why his own employer is encouraging the land application of something so potentially hazardous.


"I think it's very similar to the reason why the government doesn't ban naked credit-default swaps. You've got a situation here where the cheapest way to dispose of the sludge is land application," he said. By giving away the sludge as compost, as San Francisco has been doing, "you can transfer liability from the government to the public where the stuff is ultimately dumped. There is tremendous economic pressure to keep the ball rolling in the same direction."


A February 2008 ruling of 11th Circuit Court of Appeals would seem to bear this out. The case involved the McElmurrays, a family of farmers that allowed the city of Augusta, Ga., to apply biosolids on their land from 1979 to 1990. The sludge eventually poisoned their crops and even the cows who fed on them.


Citing Augusta's lack of disclosure about the noxious effects of the sludge, the McElmurrays sought compensation subsidies under a 2002 Farm Bill, going first to the county, then the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Farm Service Agency, a state-level agency. After a number of back-and-forth denials and delays, the matter was appealed to the national USDA, which then sought the EPA's advice for their ruling.


The court found that the series of opinions the EPA subsequently issued were unrelated to the case before the USDA and were nevertheless based on Augusta's faulty land application data. "In short," the ruling's conclusion states, "it appears that the only persons to consider [the McElmurrays'] applications ended up ruling in their favor.... The USDA's decision to accept a contrary decision, based on no review of the applications by the EPA, was arbitrary and capricious. The conclusions of the EPA were not based on substantial evidence."


As for SFPUC's biosolids giveaway, "They wanted a program that would green-wash this dangerous substance," Mayer told us. "And they participated in this ruse for the benefit of Synagro. Even the mayor got pulled in."
Tony Winnicker, the spokesperson for the SFPUC before becoming Newsom's press secretary in January, told us the idea behind the program was a good one. "The spirit behind this is right, in terms of reuse and sustainability," he said. "This was one of the PUC's environmental initiatives from the beginning, and the mayor supports the agency's efforts at environmental sustainability."
But Winnicker said he was not aware that San Francisco's well-tested biosolids were being mixed with those of other areas, and that Newsom would defer to SFPUC experts on how to handle the situation.
"I have no doubt that they tell people it's biosolids compost," CFS's Paige Tomaselli told us. But she echoed the 11th Circuit court's findings when she added, "On the other hand, I don't think people know what that entails."
This could be why SFPUC recently suspended the compost giveaways. "We're reevaluating," Jue told us. "What we're trying to do is take a step back. We're always looking at all the new information presented in front of us." As for the utility's record of disclosure, "We've always been very transparent with everyone coming to pick up compost. This is bringing awareness to an issue people don't want to think about. [Sewage] doesn't disappear. We have to think about it."


So what's to be done? Newsom has pushed San Francisco to the national forefront in sustainability and generating zero waste. Unfortunately, "they're part of the wrong side of the sludge game," said EPA's Kaufman. "Is it possible to manage it better? Yes. Is there a black box to spin gold out of hay? No. Can one be invented in the future? Maybe."


Kaufman found quite a bit of potential in the city's successful green-bin composting. "San Francisco collects biodegradable waste material, good waste material, that can make very good compost," he noted. "It's not made from industrial waste; it's made from real organic material. That's not what the giveaway compost is made from. If San Francisco had taken what homeowners had put in for recycling and composted that and given that away, that would be fantastic."


It would certainly have been better than the shit it has been giving away.

Just not able to read through all this right now but an excellent example of why we need to rid ourselves of pesticides!!

http://www.naturalnews.com/029585_water_pollution_drugs.html

If you use pharmaceuticals, you are polluting the water

Friday, August 27, 2010 by: David Gutierrez, staff writer

NaturalNews) Any personal use of pharmaceutical products can lead to dangerous water pollution, even if drugs or cosmetics are applied only to the skin, researchers have found.

Researchers have known for several years that after a person ingests a drug, their body may excrete residues of the chemical that remain biologically active. Thus, internal drug use, combined with improper disposal of unused drug stores, has been blamed for residues of everything from antibiotics to painkillers to hormones found in municipal and natural water supplies across the country. Because drugs are specifically designed to produce biological effects at very low concentrations, this pollution is considered a major threat to human and environmental health.

Now a study conducted by researchers from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Touro University in Henderson, Nev., and presented at the American Chemical Society annual meeting in San Francisco has shown that the shower and washing machine may be even more potent sources of pharmaceutical pollution than the toilet.

"We've long assumed that the active ingredients from medications enter the environment as a result of their excretion via urine and feces," study co-author Ilene Ruhoy said. "However, for the first time, we have identified potential alternative routes for the entry into the environment by way of bathing, showering and laundering."

"These routes may be important for certain APIs found in medications that are applied ... to the skin," she said. "They include creams, lotions, ointments, gels and skin patches."

The researchers reviewed hundreds of studies analyzing the body's use and metabolism of drugs, and concluded that drugs including acne medicine, antimicrobials, narcotics and steroids are entering the water system by being washed directly from people's skin in baths and showers. In addition, many medications dissolve in sweat and wash off the body into people's clothing, only to enter the water system when those clothes are laundered.

It is the first study to show a link between bathing or laundering and pharmaceutical pollution.

In contrast to ingested drugs, which are broken down by the liver and kidneys and then released in less-potent form, drugs that wash off the human body enter the water completely unmodified.

"Topical [active pharmaceuticals] from bathing and showering ... are released unmetabolized and intact, in their full-strength form," Ruhoy said. "Therefore, their potential as a source of pharmaceutical residues in the environment is increased."

Ruhoy advised consumers to do their part to reduce pharmaceutical pollution by always following directions exactly, not applying more of a topical drug thinking that if a little is good, more must be better." She suggested that doctors always prescribe the minimum effective dose for the shortest possible time. Researchers should work on developing drugs that can be absorbed more quickly and thoroughly, leaving little or no residue behind on the skin.

"We need to be more aware of how our use of pharmaceuticals can have unwanted environmental effects," Ruhoy said. "Identifying the major pathways in which APIs enter the environment is an important step toward the goal of minimizing their environmental impact."

The EPA further encourages consumers to always properly dispose of all medications, carefully reading the information on drug labels and accompanying documentation, and taking advantage of drug take-back or hazardous waste disposal programs where they live. In areas without take-back or household collection programs, state or local waste management authorities should be able to provide guidelines for disposal of pharmaceutical products.

Protecting water from household pollution need not end with pharmaceuticals. The EPA advises that consumers use non-toxic household cleaners and other chemicals wherever possible, and limit pesticide and other toxin use. Leftover chemicals should never be disposed of by flushing.

Sources for this story include: http://www.businessweek.com/lifesty... http://www.themedguru.com/20100326/... http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933... http://www.wateronline.com/article.... ; http://www.epa.gov/ppcp/faq.html. <!-- END ARTICLE BLOCK-->
Articles Related to This Article:

• Psychiatric Drugs: Chemical Warfare on Humans - interview with Robert Whitaker

• The great direct-to-consumer prescription drug advertising con: how patients and doctors alike are easily influenced to demand dangerous drugs

• The raw (and ugly) truth about the war on drugs

• The FDA Exposed: An Interview With Dr. David Graham, the Vioxx Whistleblower

• 28 Senators vote to maintain Big Pharma monopoly over U.S. consumers; Republicans oppose free trade for medicine

• The ADHD Scam and the Mass Drugging of Schoolchildren (Transcript)