Health & Fitness

The fact that the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention accepts millions of dollars in funding from drug companies and vaccine makers is no minor problem. It may in fact be at the very heart of why so many harmful and nonsensical health recommendations end up being pushed down our throats.

The CDC has long fostered the perception of independence by stating it does not accept funding from special interests. In disclaimers peppered throughout the CDC website¹ and in its publications, it says the agency “does not accept commercial support” and has “no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products.”

Several watchdog groups — including the U.S. Right to Know (USRTK), Public Citizen, Knowledge Ecology International, Liberty Coalition and the Project on Government Oversight — are now petitioning² the CDC to cease making these false disclaimers.³

CDC Gets Millions From Corporate Interests

In reality, the CDC does in fact accept millions of dollars each year from commercial interests through its government-chartered foundation, the CDC Foundation, which funnels those contributions to the CDC after deducting a fee.⁴

On the CDC Foundation’s website, you’ll find a long list⁵ of “corporate partners” that have provided the CDC with funding over the years. The petition also points out that the CDC media office states the agency “has, can and does accept commercial support,” which is a clear contradiction to its printed disclaimers. Furthermore:

“CDC even accepts earmarked money via the CDC Foundation, allowing manufacturers to fund studies or programs whose results would either expand their profits or reduce their liability exposure,” the petition states.⁶

“For example, the BMJ reported that ‘in 2012, Genentech earmarked $600,000 in donations to the CDC Foundation for CDC’s efforts to promote expanded testing and treatment of viral hepatitis. Genentech and its parent company, Roche, manufacture test kits and treatments for hepatitis C’ …

The CDC Foundation also accepted $1.7 million from the Central American sugar industry for studies on chronic kidney disease which have been criticized for being biased towards the sugar industry, by not asking the best questions.”

CDC Petitioned to Quit Making False Claims

According to the petition,⁷ the CDC accepted $79.6 million from drug companies and commercial manufacturers between 2014 and 2018 alone. Since its inception in 1995, the CDC Foundation has accepted $161 million from private corporations.

As reported by the Lown Institute,⁸ which aims to advance “a just and caring system for health to replace the current, failing model rooted in profit-driven, low-value care”:⁹

“Many of these contributions could be seen as conflicts of interest — for example, a $193,000 donation from Roche, the maker of antiviral drug Tamiflu, to fund a CDC flu prevention campaign.

Despite the significant funding the CDC receives from industry via its foundation, few were aware of these conflicts until Jeanne Lenzer called attention to the foundation in The BMJ¹⁰ a few years ago.

Recently, the CDC accepted $3.4 million from Pfizer for the prevention of Cryptococcal disease, $1 million from Merck & Co. pharmaceutical company for a program on preventing maternal mortality, and $750,000 from Biogen for a program on screening newborns for spinal muscular atrophy …”

The petition asks the CDC to stop publishing the false and misleading disclaimers, remove all previously published disclaimers from the CDC website and its publications, and to issue corrections, retroactively disclosing the agency’s financial relationships with industry.

“By issuing these false disclaimers, CDC is misleading health professionals, consumers and others both in the United States and around the world,” the petition states.¹¹

“This deception undermines CDC’s credibility and integrity. But the damage here is not merely to the CDC itself. CDC is a national and global leader on medical and public health matters. It is crucial for the CDC to lead by example on matters of ethics, and, at a minimum, to faithfully and truthfully disclose its conflicts of interest.”

Government-Chartered Foundations Gives Control to Industry

In a November 5, 2019, press release, Dr. Michael Carome, director of Public Citizen’s Health Research Group stated:¹²

“That the CDC accepts millions from corporations directly impacted by the agency’s public health programs is indefensible. So, the CDC instead has adopted the strategy of repeatedly denying that it accepts such payments.”

Gary Ruskin, co-director of USRTK added:¹³

“It’s time for the CDC to be truthful with health professionals and all Americans, and to stop denying that it takes corporate money. The CDC is violating the public trust by misleading us in this way.”

The CDC is supposed to be a public health watchdog. It has tremendous credibility within the medical community, and part of this credibility hinges on the idea that it’s free of industry bias and conflicts of interest.

By accepting money from drug companies and vaccine makers, one has to wonder whether that money might be having an impact on the agency’s health recommendations.

Again and again, investigations have shown that funding plays an enormous role in decision-making and in research outcomes. As noted by Shannon Brownlee, senior vice president for the Lown Institute, government-chartered foundations:¹⁴

“… exist at least in part because they allow industries to directly fund and thus control the work of agencies that are either supposed to regulate them, or conduct research that can help or hurt their business.”

Telltale Signs of Impropriety Abound

When you start to investigate, there’s no shortage of telltale signs suggesting the CDC isn’t nearly as independent as it claims to be. Some have already been noted in the CDC petition, but there are plenty of others as well.

For example, in 2016, Barbara Bowman, Ph.D., director of the CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, quickly resigned after it was revealed she aided a Coca-Cola representative in efforts to get World Health Organization officials to relax WHO’s sugar limits.

I wrote about this in “CDC Executive Resigns After Being Caught Colluding with Coca-Cola to Salvage Soda Market.” Shortly thereafter, CDC director Dr. Brenda Fitzgerald was found to have received funding from Coca-Cola for her anti-obesity campaign, which had a near-exclusive focus on exercise, not the impact of soda and sugary junk food. This was reported in “Public Health Agency Sued for Coke Collusion.”

CDC Promotes Drug Industry Agenda

In a November 4, 2019, article¹⁵ in Eye on Annapolis, Josh Mazer discusses how the CDC is funding state health programs aimed at implementing mandatory HPV vaccinations:

“The Maryland Prevention and Health Promotion Agency (PHPA) has received millions … as part of an effort to require public schools to force children to get the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccination.

Those funds came in the form of grants from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The CDC maintains a nonprofit foundation that gets enormous amounts of money from Big Pharma — including Merck, the company that produces Gardasil, the HPV vaccine. At the very least, Maryland’s acceptance of those funds has the appearance of impropriety …

During a PHPA-hosted ‘HPV symposium’ attended by state pediatric practices and Maryland Department of Health staffers in March 2018 … the featured speaker — Dr. Alix Casler — encouraged attendees to offer free dinners, bottles of wine, and ‘Quality Doctor Incentives $’ sales bonuses to get Maryland physicians on board with the HPV vaccine-pushing program …

Casler offered a $5,000 cash payment to pediatric practices that achieve targeted HPV vaccine sales goals … Casler is a paid spokesperson for Merck … 

In 2016, the Maryland Partnership for Prevention — which lists the Maryland Department of Health as its top member — accepted $70,000 from the Association of Immunization Managers (AIM).

AIM’s top ‘Corporate Alliance Members’ are Merck, Pfizer, Sanofi Pasteur and Seqirus. That same year, legislation was introduced in Maryland to mandate the shot … Despite the deaths and the ongoing health-safety questions related to the HPV vaccine, Maryland PHPA has continued using our schools to push Merck’s product.”

CDC Front Group Lobbies for Mandatory Vaccinations

Mazer’s observations are unlikely to be coincidental, as the CDC is a primary contributor to the National Association of County and City Health Officials (NACCHO), which lobbies for mandatory vaccinations and the elimination of personal belief exemptions to vaccination nationwide.¹⁶ As such, the CDC is actively using industry donations to promote a for-profit industry agenda.

It should be clear by now that the justifications given for why personal belief exemptions need to be abolished are nothing but a ploy to make money off mandatory vaccines.

In recent times, the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine has been the target vaccine used to ban vaccine exemptions, under the pretense that measles is a lethal disease that needs to be eradicated. However, as predicted, it didn’t take long before other, completely unnecessary vaccines were tacked on to the mandated vaccines list.

As just one egregious example, a bill introduced in New York (S298/A2912) now seeks to require children to receive the HPV vaccine — one of the most dangerous and unnecessary vaccines ever made — in order to attend public school or day care. 

There are hundreds of vaccines in the pipeline for children and adults, and once vaccine exemptions are eliminated in your state, you can expect many more to be mandated.

At that point, you’ll have no way of opting out of any of them. Measles was really just the Trojan Horse used to eliminate vaccine exemptions and strengthen mandatory vaccination laws. As noted by Children’s Health Defense in a June 6, 2019 article:¹⁷

“ACIP’s industry-beholden membership roster reads like a ‘who’s who’ of the individuals and organizations who spearhead the nation’s vaccine business … The agency’s involvement with vaccine manufacturers also extends to patents, licensing agreements and collaboration on projects to develop new vaccines.

In fact, the CDC and the National Institutes of Health (NIH) profit handsomely from their ownership or co-ownership with private sector partners of vaccine-related patents.

An early 2017 analysis of Google Patents results¹⁸ showed that the CDC held 56 patents pertaining to various aspects of vaccine development, manufacturing, delivery and adjuvants.

By May 2019, the search terms ‘Centers for Disease Control and Prevention vaccines’ retrieved 143 results in the Google Patents search engine,¹⁹ and a separate legal website displayed 10 screens worth of CDC patents,²⁰ both vaccine- and non-vaccine-related.

The author of the 2017 analysis suggests that the large number of patents held by the CDC ‘deserves an in-depth review to determine exactly what current financial relationships with vaccine makers now exist and what…current impact those revenue streams are likely having on vaccine safety positions’ …

Some of the key technologies underlying the development of the HPV vaccines Gardasil and Cervarix emerged from research patented by the NIH’s National Cancer Institute (NCI), which then licensed the technology to Merck, MedImmune and GlaxoSmithKline. By 2009, HPV licensing had become NIH’s top generator of royalty revenues.”

Children’s Health Defense goes on to cite an in-depth investigation by Mark Blaxill, published in Age of Autism, in which he notes that:²¹

“Gardasil is perhaps the leading example of a new form of unconstrained government self-dealing, in arrangements whereby [HHS] can transfer technology to pharmaceutical partners, [and] simultaneously both approve and protect their partners’ technology licenses while also taking a cut of the profits.”

Your Help Is Needed!

To help push for greater transparency, please contact the U.S. Department of Health & Human Services today at scheduling@hhs.gov and let them know that you demand the CDC:

1. Cease publication of disclaimers that CDC has “no financial interests or other relationships with the manufacturers of commercial products” and that it “does not accept commercial support.”
2. Remove all such disclaimers from the CDC website, including the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR).
3. Add corrections to all MMWR articles bearing these disclaimers, explaining that the disclaimers were incorrect and have been removed.
4. Retroactively disclose, in any MMWR article bearing the disclaimers, any corporate contributions to the CDC or CDC Foundation that are relevant to the MMWR article.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<<

As noted by Lown Institute, disclosing existing conflicts of interests is an important first step in the creation of a “clearer separation between government agencies meant to serve the public interest and industry companies,” but it shouldn’t end there. We also need to abolish the loophole that allowed this hidden industry influence to take root in the first place — the government-chartered foundations.

“We need to question why these foundations exist and push for more public funding of these agencies, rather than force public health agencies to rely on industry funding for their programs and compromise their independence,” Lown Institute writes.²²

from Articles https://ift.tt/35gdWMl
via IFTTT

The Maine Board of Dental Practice may be engaging in antitrust violations, according to a petition filed with the Federal Trade Commission by three nonprofit groups — Consumers for Dental Choice, Organic Consumers Association and Mercury Policy Project. At issue is what the complaint calls two competitive factions that have divided modern day dentists: those who use mercury and those who do not.

"The differences are so distinct," the petition notes, "that they can be classified into competitive submarkets." But the complaint alleges that the Maine Board of Dental Practice "is indisputably on one side — working to keep public funds going to that faction of dentists and not enforcing distribution of the Maine amalgam fact sheet, as required by law."¹

State Dental Board Accused of Breaking Mercury Laws

State law requires that dentists who use amalgam, or mercury, fillings (also known, misleadingly, as "silver" fillings) give patients a fact sheet approved by the state, which is intended to explain "advantages or disadvantages" of the use of mercury, mercury amalgams and other materials used for dental fillings.²

The Maine fact sheet was created because dentists using amalgams were referring to them as silver fillings, a misleading statement that was putting patients at risk. According to the petition, only 11% of dentists tell their patients that amalgam contains mercury.

Further, African-American patients are three times less likely to be told that amalgam contains mercury, as are patients making under $50,000 a year.³ According to the petition:⁴

"Aware that dentists are concealing amalgam's mercury from patients — and/or calling them silver fillings — the Maine Legislature enacted a statute applicable only to the amalgam-users, instructing the Director of Health to write a fact sheet about amalgam's contents, risks, and alternatives, and directing that the dentists still using amalgam give it to patients and post it on the wall of the clinic."

The petition alleges, however, that the Maine dental board is engaging in a variety of actions to evade enforcing this requirement. In a news release, it's stated:⁵

"For example, the dental board advises dentists that compliance with the mandate is optional (although it is required), and the board held a secret vote to ally with the Maine Dental Association to defeat a state law that would shift MaineCare to mercury-free dentistry.

The dental board has proposed a rule regarding disclosure, but it fails even to mention the Maine fact sheet law or the official fact sheet … "

The petition sums up, "The board continues its combinations to keep the public uninformed, the fact sheet law unenforced, and the amalgam-using dentists shielded from the statutory mandate to post the state-prescribed fact sheet and to give to patients and parents/guardians."⁶

Maine Dental Board 'Not Above the Law'

The petition asks the FTC to investigate the Maine Board of Dental Practice to reveal whether they're enforcing and adhering to the law — and suggests that if not, the state's governor should appoint a new dental board. As noted by Katherine Paul of the Organic Consumers Association, "The Maine Dental Board is not above the law."⁷

Charlie Brown of Consumers for Dental Choice, a former antitrust law specialist, further explained, "The behavior of the Maine Dental Board raises serious antitrust questions because the board is protecting the income of the pro-mercury dentists. This board must redirect its loyalty from protecting sales of amalgam to protecting Maine's families and consumers."⁸

It's essential for people to be aware of the true make up of "silver" fillings, as they are approximately 50% mercury. Mercury is a toxic heavy metal, one that can cause harmful effects to your nervous, digestive, respiratory and immune systems. It's known to damage both the kidneys and the lungs in humans.

The World Health Organization notes that health effects from mercury exposure include tremors, impaired vision and hearing, emotional instability, paralysis, insomnia and developmental deficits during fetal development.⁹

Mercury exposure has also been linked to attention deficit and developmental delays during childhood, with WHO noting, "[M]ercury may have no threshold below which some adverse effects do not occur."¹⁰ In other words, even very small doses of mercury may be harmful. It's for this reason that, in 2018, the European Union banned the use of amalgam for children under 15 as well as for pregnant or nursing women.

Will FDA Finally End Amalgam for Children?

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is a sluggard when it comes to acting against mercury dental fillings. The 28-nation European Union stepped up in 2018 and eliminated dental mercury for pregnant women, breastfeeding women and children under age 15.

So, Charlie Brown launched a campaign in 2018 to bring the European Union's example across the Atlantic. As Brown stated in an interview with me:

"The European Union, more than a year ago, ended amalgam for children under 15, and for pregnant and breastfeeding women. They required each member state — and there are 28 countries in the EU as of right now — to come up with a plan to go further.

We are saying to FDA, 'Why are you lagging so far behind Europe? Why won't you pay attention to the very treaty that the United States not only signed but was the first country in the world to ratify?'

As I said, the heat is building. We think we're going to move, but they still have been way too close to the pro-mercury dentists. There's no question. That's the ADA. The ADA, however, doesn't have the same clout they used to have because its own members are walking away.

Its own members are saying, 'Why should I use amalgam just because you want me to? I don't want to. My patients don't want to. I don't want to get people in my office sick.'"

I now have breaking news from Washington that could change things at FDA. Brown and his capable team had a series of meetings with FDA in 2018 and 2019.

Then — to his real credit — director of the Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Jeff Shuren, assembled a panel of science advisers to convene and consider whether the science merits a new FDA policy on amalgam. Those hearings were held on November 13 and 14, 2019. Brown brought incredibly talented and diverse public speakers to testify, including:

Dr. Mark A. Mitchell, co-chair of the Commission on Environmental Health of the National Medical Association	Eric Uram of Chicago Declaration to End Use of Mercury in Dentistry
Reuben Warren, director of the National Center for Bioethics at Tuskegee University (known historically as "the black Harvard")	Karen Howard of the Organic and Natural Health Association
Sharon Lewis of Connecticut Coalition for Environmental Justice	Kristie Trousdale, deputy director of Children's Environmental Health Network
Rochelle Diver of the International Indian Treaty Council	Jacquelynn Hawthorne, Los Angeles commissioner
Mary Starrett, Yamhill County, Oregon, commissioner

The science committee, by consensus, called on FDA to end its silence on amalgam, and to start getting information about amalgam's risks to American patients, especially to vulnerable populations. But we have witnessed two decades of FDA inaction on amalgam, and a big question looms: Will FDA ignore even its own scientific bodies?

Send Your Message to the FDA Today!

I urge you to take a moment to send your message to FDA. Call on the agency to listen to its own scientists and, this time, take action. You may comment now by clicking this button.

>>>>> Click Here <<<<<

FDA must now decide what information to give directly to patients and parents, because so many pro-mercury dentists have not leveled with patients, or don't read enough to know what to say. Please choose from these questions, and then write your comment to the FDA!

• Did your dentist tell you about amalgam's mercury before implanting mercury fillings in your teeth or a family member's teeth?
• Was amalgam deceptively marketed to you as "silver fillings"?
• Should FDA issue "direct-to-patient labeling" on amalgam to make sure accurate information about its mercury content and risks reaches patients?
• At the least, FDA must tell patients that amalgam is 50% mercury and that nontoxic alternatives are available.
• FDA should tell everyone that countries around the world, including next-door Canada, are either recommending against amalgam for children and pregnant women — or outright banning it for them.

Minamata Convention Impetus for Action Against Amalgam

In an intense three-year campaign (2010 through 2013), the global umbrella founded by Consumers for Dental Choice, the World Alliance for Mercury-Free Dentistry, succeeded in securing a strong amalgam plan in that treaty. The Minamata Convention on Mercury entered into legal force in 2017, triggering conferences of the parties to implement it worldwide.

At the first Conference of the Parties of the Minamata Convention, held in Geneva last October, Brown challenged the world to equal or exceed the new amalgam policy of the EU, launching the "Make Dental Amalgam History" campaign.

Brown concluded his speech with these stirring words to an audience of delegates from well over 100 nations: "Your nation should end amalgam use for children, because the children of your nation are equally important to the children of Europe." The worldwide campaign to end amalgam for children — as a springboard to ending its use entirely — continues.

American Association of Dental Boards Operates Within ADA

The American Dental Association (ADA) is among those who have long defended the use of mercury fillings. Not coincidently, they also hold two amalgam patents.¹¹

The ADA Foundation, which "provides grants, scholarships, awards, and facilitated in-kind product donations to programs that are in alignment with the organization's efforts to advance oral health, expand access to dental care, and drive game-changing research," is located in Chicago¹² — in the same building as the American Association of Dental Boards.¹³

The American Association of Dental Boards is a national association that heads up the individual state dental boards. Its mission is to "serve as a resource by providing a national forum for exchange, development and dissemination of information to assist dental regulatory boards with their obligation to protect the public."¹⁴ What's more, the American Association of Dental Boards states:¹⁵

"Membership is comprised of boards of dentistry, specialty boards (recognized by the American Dental Association), present and past members of those boards, board administrators, board attorneys, and dental and dental hygiene educators."

But the American Association of Dental Boards, whose role is to protect the public and regulate dentistry, is housed inside the offices of the American Dental Association; they even operate together on the same telephone lines. What a massive conflict of interest! Brown also brought this conflict of interest to the attention of the FTC.

It explains a lot of why dental boards have been so cozy with the ADA, helping protect the mercury secret and keep it from American parents and consumers. The continued use of mercury in dental fillings, and the lack of transparency in disclosing the toxic truth about amalgam's contents to consumers, is just another outcome of this conflicted relationship.

Michael Bender of the Mercury Policy Project stated in a news release, "Consumers must be told that amalgam is mainly mercury, but also that there are nonmercury alternatives available that work just as well or better."¹⁶

Mercury-Free Alternatives Are Readily Available

One of the most popular alternatives to amalgam is resin composite, which is made of a type of plastic reinforced with powdered glass. It's already common throughout the U.S. and the rest of the developed world, offering notable improvements over amalgam, as, according to Consumers for Dental Choice, it:¹⁷

Unfortunately, many private dental insurance companies do not cover mercury-free fillings for all teeth, so be sure to read the fine print if you're considering a new plan.

Choose a Mercury-Free Dentist

If your current dentist is still using mercury in his or her practice — even if they also offer mercury-free options — seek out a dentist that offers only mercury-free fillings for all patients. And, be sure to inform your dentist about the reason you're transferring. One place to look is on the website of Consumers for Dental Choice: www.toxicteeth.org: (scroll down the home page, and click "Find a mercury-free dentist"

For those of you who have mercury fillings, I recommend seeking advice from a qualified health professional about whether to have them removed. If the answer is yes, then go ONLY to a competent biological dentist who follows professional protocols for amalgam removal. Do not, however, remove fillings while pregnant, as this will expose you to increased mercury vapors.

from Articles https://ift.tt/33VEked
via IFTTT

Trees are one of nature’s greatest gifts, one that could be harnessed to strategically reduce air pollution in some of the most problematic spaces, such as near factories, industrial sites, roadways and power plants. In fact, nature-based solutions can compete with technology to reduce toxic air emissions across the U.S., according to research published in the journal Environmental Science & Technology.¹

What’s intriguing is that existing natural areas, including forest, grassland and shrubland vegetation, are already responsible for mitigating a significant portion of U.S. air emissions, according to the study, which suggests that restoring natural land cover where possible could be a key strategy to improving air quality.

Restoring Nature Near Factories Could Reduce Air Pollution

Using data on annual emissions in U.S. counties and existing land cover, researchers from The Ohio State University revealed that restoring natural areas to county-level average canopy cover could reduce air pollution by an average of 27%. Further, in 75% of the counties, nature-based solutions ended up being less expensive than technological interventions such as smokestack scrubbers in mitigating pollution.²

Lead study author Bhavik Bakshi, professor of chemical and biomolecular engineering at The Ohio State University, said in a news release:³

“ The fact is that traditionally, especially as engineers, we don’t think about nature; we just focus on putting technology into everything … And so, one key finding is that we need to start looking at nature and learning from it and respecting it. There are win-win opportunities if we do — opportunities that are potentially cheaper and better environmentally.”

In instances of combating air pollution from agriculture, dust emissions, power generation, metal processing, certain manufacturing plants and on-road emissions, ecosystems are less expensive than technologies. Only in the case of emissions from industrial boilers and some cases of manufacturing did pollution-control technologies win out.

Maintaining current levels of vegetation as well as restoring vegetation cover in industrial areas could help reduce some of the most common types of air pollutants, including sulfur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter. Further, while the study didn’t look into how well different types of plants “scrubbed” the air, it’s likely that certain plant species could be more effective than others.⁴

Both urban and rural areas stand to benefit from ecosystem-based approaches to combating air pollution. “This suggests that even though vegetation cannot fully negate the impact of emissions at all times, policies encouraging ecosystems as control measures in addition to technological solutions may promote large investments in ecological restoration and provide several societal benefits,” the study noted.⁵

Health Hazards of Air Pollution

By mitigating air pollution, trees and other plants could save lives across the globe, as contaminated air is a leading cause of death.

Research published in The Lancet revealed that 9 million premature deaths were caused by pollution in 2015, which is 16% of deaths worldwide — “three times more deaths than from AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria combined, and 15 times more than from all wars and other forms of violence,” the researchers wrote.⁶

Among the pollution-related deaths, the majority — 6.5 million — were caused by airborne contaminants.⁷ A World Health Organization (WHO) report also found that 93% of children live in areas with air pollution at levels above WHO guidelines.⁸

Further, more than 1 in 4 deaths among children under 5 years is related to environmental risks, including air pollution. In 2016, ambient (outside) and household air pollution contributed to respiratory tract infections that led to 543,000 deaths in children under 5.

In some areas of the world, like New Delhi, India, polluted air has reached crisis levels, with officials warning residents to stay indoors and handing out face masks to children. The air is so polluted due to agriculture and transportation that it causes burning eyes and a thick fog that makes visibility difficult.⁹

“Over the past days,” The Atlantic reported in November 2019, “[air pollution] levels in New Delhi have exceeded 10 times what the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency deems safe. (The idea that any level is ‘safe’ is disputed, as even very low levels have been found to cause disease.) The effect is lethal, in India and beyond.”¹⁰

While industry can certainly contribute to dangerous levels of air pollution, many are surprised to learn that the No. 1 cause of air pollution in much of the U.S., China, Russia and Europe is linked to farming and fertilizer — specifically to the nitrogen component of fertilizer used to supposedly enrich the soil and grow bigger crops.

In fact, research published in the journal Geophysical Research Letters demonstrated that in certain densely populated areas, emissions from farming far outweigh other sources of particulate matter air pollution.¹¹

So, when considering the best types of plants to combat pollution, it’s important to understand that clearing grasslands and other natural spaces to plant monocrops is part of the problem — not part of the solution.

Planting 1.2 Trillion Trees Could Save the Earth

Planting 1.2 trillion trees could be the answer to saving the Earth and would be capable of storing so much carbon dioxide (CO2) that they would cancel out a decade’s worth of human-made CO2 emissions.¹²

The findings come from the work of ecologist Thomas Crowther and colleagues at Swiss university ETH Zurich, who also revealed that there’s room for an additional 1.2 trillion trees on the planet. Writing in the journal Science, Crowther and colleagues explained:¹³

“We mapped the global potential tree coverage to show that 4.4 billion hectares of canopy cover could exist under the current climate.

Excluding existing trees and agricultural and urban areas, we found that there is room for an extra 0.9 billion hectares of canopy cover, which could store 205 gigatonnes of carbon in areas that would naturally support woodlands and forests. This highlights global tree restoration as one of the most effective carbon drawdown solutions to date.”

Currently, the Earth is home to 3 trillion trees, which is seven times more than previously believed. “There’s 400 gigatons [of carbon] now, in the 3 trillion trees, and if you were to scale that up by another trillion trees that’s in the order of hundreds of gigatons captured from the atmosphere — at least 10 years of anthropogenic emissions completely wiped out,” Crowther told the Independent.¹⁴

The United Nations responded to the findings, changing their Billion Tree Campaign to the Trillion Tree Campaign, which states, “Global reforestation could capture 25 percent of global annual carbon emissions and create wealth in the global south.”

More than 13.6 billion trees have already been planted as part of the campaign,¹⁵ which tracks not only where trees have been planted, but also where forests currently exist and where forests could be restored. The Trillion Tree Campaign states that there is actually space for up to 600 billion mature trees on the planet, without taking space away from agricultural land.

However, since some planted trees won’t survive, the target is to plant at least 1 trillion trees to reach the 600 billion mature tree goal. “Additionally, we must protect the 170 billion trees in imminent risk of destruction. They are crucial carbon storages and essential ecosystems to protect biodiversity,” they state.¹⁶

Worldwide, communities have been coming together to encourage reforestation. In Kenya, 51 million trees have been planted since the late 1970s, largely at the hands of local, rural women.

Likewise, in Colombia, more than 54,000 trees have been planted in 32 communities since 2016, and each area has its own local tree nursery. Pakistan is also committed to the Billion Tree Tsunami, with plans to reforest more than 860,000 acres of deforested land.¹⁷

The Root Brain and the Intelligence of Trees

Amidst the growing realization that plant life may be key to undoing some of the harm man-made pollutants have done to the Earth is the acknowledgement that plants are not benign objects but rather living beings.

An extensive underground network connects plants by their roots, serving as a complex interplant communication system or “plant Internet,” if you will. One organism is responsible for this amazing biochemical highway: a type of fungus called mycorrhizae.

Suzanne Simard, a professor in the Department of Forest & Conservation at the University of British Columbia, is among those who have revealed that this mycorrhizae network connects trees to each other in mind-blowing ways, such that trees might be viewed as beings with a capacity for intelligence, decision-making, learning and memory.

Speaking to Nautilus, Simard expanded on the root brain hypothesis first suggested by Charles and Francis Darwin:¹⁸

“Behind a growing root tip is a bunch of differentiating cells. Darwin thought those cells determined where roots would grow and forage. He thought the behavior of a plant was basically governed by what happened in those cells.

The work I and others have been doing — looking at kinship in plants, how they recognize each other and communicate — involves the roots. Except now we know more than Darwin did; we know that all plants, except for a small handful of families, are mycorrhizal: The behavior of their roots is governed by symbiosis.

It’s not just those cells at a plant root’s tip, but their interaction with fungus, that determines a root’s behavior. Darwin was onto something. He just didn’t have the full picture. And I’ve come to think that root systems and the mycorrhizal networks that link those systems are designed like neural networks, and behave like neural networks, and a neural network is the seeding of intelligence in our brains.”

Among some of Simard’s and colleagues’ fascinating work is evidence that old trees recognize their own seedlings and change their behavior to provide them advantages. “A parent tree will even kill off its own offspring if they’re not in a good place to grow,” Simard explained.¹⁹ She points out that while such ideas may seem wild, ancient peoples also expressed them:²⁰

“I f you go back to and listen to some of the early teachings of the Coast Salish and the indigenous people along the western coast of North America, they knew that [trees can be connected by fungal networks and communicate] already. It’s in the writings and in the oral history.

The idea of the mother tree has long been there. The fungal networks, the below-ground networks that keep the whole forest healthy and alive, that’s also there.

That these plants interact and communicate with each other, that’s all there. They used to call the trees the tree people. The strawberries were the strawberry people. Western science shut that down for a while and now we’re getting back to it.”

Everyone Can Help Plant Trees

One of the simplest ways to get involved in supporting the environment and reconnecting to nature is by planting trees. Even if you live in a region where you can’t plant trees, or in an apartment with no backyard, you can donate or gift trees to be planted.

Every tree makes a difference, and if you’re feeling competitive, the Trillion Tree Campaign website has a tool for you to set a tree-planting goal and keep track of your target.

The Campaign suggests everybody should plant at least 150 trees, with those those in wealthy countries setting a higher target of 1,000. Mercola.com, in partnership with Trees for the Future, is also getting involved and has planted over 200,000 trees to date.

from Articles https://ift.tt/2r2YYdQ
via IFTTT

From a meditation headband to the best sports watch, and everything in between, here are the latest and greatest gadgets to gift your tech guru.

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/340Awse

A new study reveals a huge number of Aussies experience mental illness caused by their workplaces, with some industries more likely to make people sick.

from Health | body+soul https://ift.tt/2Xr29YK

Scientists have developed a new machine learning algorithm (AI) that could transform the way we monitor major infrastructure - such as dams and bridges.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2ptuTDJ

New research shows that a particular subclass of low-density lipoproteins (LDL) is a much better predictor of potential heart attacks than the mere presence of LDL.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2CVncJD

Maryanne Osborne, 48, was a dedicated fitness fanatic until a shock diagnosis changed her life.

from Fitness | body+soul https://ift.tt/2qdIYFX

Advertising budgets and strategies used by beer companies appear to influence underage drinking, according to new research. The findings show that the amount of money spent on advertising strongly predicted the percentage of teens who had heard of, preferred and tried different beer brands.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2r1zH3I

The phenomenon of helicopter parenting most often occurs in middle- to upper-class families where stakes are high for parents to be able to show off their children's success. Her research, which focuses on young adults 18- to 24- years-old, indicates that high helicopter parenting leads to 'low mastery, self-regulation and social competence.'

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2NWH6du

Children born to women on HIV therapy containing the drug efavirenz were 2 to 2.5 times more likely to have microcephaly, or small head size, compared to children born to women on regimens of other antiretroviral drugs, according to a new analysis. The children with microcephaly also had a higher risk for developmental delays, compared to children with normal head size.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Xqhrgn

In learning new tasks, neuron networks in the brain of mice become more refined and selective. Charting changes in neural activity can help inform the design of better computational models for understanding decision making and cognition.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2OmwK5H

Cannabidiol (CBD) oil and other products containing CBD are being touted as a natural, organic remedy for a wide range of women’s health concerns. Sellers of these products make many claims: CBD has calming effects on sleep, mood, and anxiety; eases hot flashes and improves bone density by balancing hormonal changes of menopause; and has anti-inflammatory properties that clear skin, cure acne, and calm rosacea. It’s promoted for PMS symptoms like bloating and mood swings. And CBD-infused lubricants claim to boost arousal and enjoyment of sex. So, how much of this is true?

First, what is CBD?

CBD is a major ingredient in cannabis plants (like hemp and marijuana). It comes in different strengths and forms, often as CBD oil, but also in pills and powders. It can be absorbed through the skin, ingested, or inhaled. (Vaping it, however, may not be safe, as this blog post and web page from the CDC explain.)

Unlike marijuana, pure CBD products don’t make you feel high. A different ingredient in marijuana called THC makes people feel high.

Does CBD have proven benefits?

So far, there’s not much evidence on the medical benefits of CBD, partly because laws on marijuana made it difficult to study. Until we learn more, it’s wise to keep in mind that few high-quality studies have been done.

• In 2018 the FDA approved a drug derived from CBD to treat rare forms of childhood epilepsy. This medication was shown in randomized clinical trials to reduce the frequency of seizures (see here and here).
• A few studies have found CBD may improve anxiety, but the studies were small and of poor quality (see here and here).
• Some laboratory research on human cells suggests CBD may have anti-inflammatory effects on oil-secreting glands in the skin. This might have implications for acne and other inflammatory skin disorders, but further research is needed to confirm this. And while CBD in skin products is unlikely to harm you, most dermatologists agree that there are more effective and better-studied medications and treatments for acne and inflammatory skin disorders.

Other potential benefits of CBD aren’t clear. No high-quality research shows that CBD improves sex drive, decreases pain, treats depression or mood disorders, decreases PMS symptoms like bloating and cramps, or relieves symptoms of menopause like hot flashes. This may change as more studies are done, but for now, the jury is out.

Are CBD products safe?

The short answer is this: pure CBD seems to be safe for most people. However, we don’t have rigorous studies and long-term data to prove whether or not a wide range of CBD products are safe for everyone. For example, there is no evidence to suggest that CBD is safe during pregnancy or breastfeeding, or for people who are immunocompromised.

Because CBD products aren’t regulated by the FDA in the way that drugs are, there is huge variation in quality and, quite possibly, safety. In 2017–2018, counterfeit CBD oil was found that contained synthetic cannabinoids and led to a poisoning outbreak in Utah.

Testing shows purity and dosage can be unreliable in many products. One study found less than a third of the products tested had the amount of CBD shown on the label. Another study of 84 CBD products bought online showed that more than a quarter of the products contained less CBD than stated. In addition, THC (the component that can make you feel high) was found in 18 products.

Does CBD cause side effects?

CBD can cause side effects like dry mouth, diarrhea, reduced appetite, and drowsiness. Additionally, it can interact with certain medicines, such as blood thinners and antiseizure drugs. If you would like to start using CBD products, it’s best to first talk to your doctor.

The takeaway

There are a lot of extravagant product claims out there about the benefits of CBD for women, but little high-quality research supports them. CBD oil and other CBD products aren’t well regulated. It’s possible what you are buying is counterfeit or contaminated. Before using CBD — especially if you plan to vape or ingest it — first talk with your doctor or healthcare provider to learn whether it could be safe and helpful for you.

The post Why are women using CBD products — and do they work? appeared first on Harvard Health Blog.

from Harvard Health Blog https://ift.tt/2QtYisH

Stigma and safety fears have made daily dose tapering of opioid prescriptions more common. New research, however, shows tapering can occur at rates as much as six times higher than recommended, putting patients at risk of withdrawal, uncontrolled pain or mental health crises.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/32R5HEY

How quickly you spend your savings in retirement may have as much or more to do with your personality than whether you have a lot of debt or want to leave an inheritance.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Qx7AnI

Twice-yearly injections of an experimental cholesterol-lowering drug, inclisiran, were effective at reducing low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, often called bad cholesterol, in patients already taking the maximum dose of statin drugs.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2NWMqNX

Researchers found that a single, low-dose ketamine infusion was relatively free of side effects for patients with treatment-resistant depression. Widespread off-label use of intravenous subanesthetic-dose ketamine has raised concerns about side effects, especially given its history as a drug of abuse. The most common short-term side effect of the rapid-acting treatment was 'feeling strange or loopy.'

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/33XPE9R

New research shows that ramping up one of the body's waste disposal system, called autophagy, helps heal the blood vessels of diabetics.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2Xz7Ggh

Progeria is a very rare disease that affects about one in 18 million children and results in premature aging and death in adolescence from complications of cardiovascular disease. In a study on mice and human cells, researchers have identified how antisense oligonucleotide therapies could be used as a new possible treatment option for the disease.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2OlirhX

The largest-ever clinical trial of a medication for pediatric cardiology patients found that an oral drug significantly improved exercise capacity in adolescent patients with severe, congenital single-ventricle heart defects. A study leader says the physiologic benefits represent a milestone in the care of those who have undergone the Fontan procedure, a palliative operation for single-ventricle disease.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2CV3Xjm

Researchers from the Intermountain Healthcare Heart Institute in Salt Lake City have identified new mutations in a gene commonly associated with non-ischemic dilated cardiomyopathy (NIDC), a disease that weakens the heart muscle, making it more difficult to adequately circulate blood to meet the body's needs.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/37q7cgW

A research team identified 87 patients who were part of the Intermountain INSPIRE Registry and had developed prostate cancer. These patients were also tested for plasma levels of docosahexaenoic acid (DHA) and eicosapentaenoic acid (EPA), which are two common omega-3 fatty acids.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/33Z73yT

A new study shows that the elementary school a child attends has almost no influence on their desire to progress to higher education -- as factors including parental aspirations, academic support from their mother and having a desk to work on are much more important.

from Top Health News -- ScienceDaily https://ift.tt/2CW9GW4