Monsanto Diet Drink Poison Warning

`

ASPARTAME - MONSANTO DIET DRINK POISON
(Aspartame: also known as Aspartamine, NutraSweet ® , Equal ® , Spoonful ® )
Commonly found in diet drinks and other artificially sweetened "diet" foods.

Introduction: There are a number of people who have E-mailed us stating that the following article
is an “urban legend” (untrue) and have provided links to “acclaimed medical expert” websites. In
visiting these links, the pages provided little or no information substantiating their claims that the
following article by Nancy Markel is untrue.

It is our opinion that whether or not every small detail of the article is correct, the essence of the
article is relevant. The essence is that aspartame contains methanol (and methanol cannot be made
non-poisonous) which breaks down in the body. The methanol and its metabolic byproducts are
bound to have damaging effects on the human body if taken in consistently high doses. Those who
consume a lot of diet sodas or cook with Nutri-Sweet are the most likely to have the symptoms. And
while the symptom list she provides is quite extensive, remember that the symptoms of methanol
poisoning are also extensive.

WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE and the MULTIPLE SCLEROSIS FOUNDATION IS SUING
FDA FOR COLLUSION WITH MONSANTO!

Article written by Nancy Markle

I have spent several days lecturing at the WORLD ENVIRONMENTAL CONFERENCE on
ASPARTAME marketed as NutraSweet, Equal, and Spoonful ". In the keynote address by the
EPA, they announced that there was an epidemic of multiple sclerosis and systemic lupus, and they
did not understand what toxin was causing this to be rampant across the United States. I explained
that I was there to lecture on exactly that subject.

When the temperature of Aspartame exceeds 86 degrees F, the wood alcohol in ASPARTAME
coverts to formaldehyde and then to formic acid, which in turn causes metabolic acidosis. (Formic
acid is the poison found in the sting of fire ants).

The methanol toxicity mimics multiple sclerosis; thus people were being diagnosed with having
multiple sclerosis in error. The multiple sclerosis is not a death sentence, where methanol toxicity
is.

In the case of systemic lupus, we are finding it has become almost as rampant as multiple sclerosis,
especially Diet Coke and Diet Pepsi drinkers. Also, with methanol toxicity, the victims usually
drink three to four 12 oz. cans of these per day, some even more.

In the cases of systemic lupus, which is triggered by ASPARTAME, the victim usually does not
know that the aspartame is the culprit. The victim continues its use aggravating the lupus to such a

degree that sometimes it becomes life threatening. When we get people off the aspartame, those
with systemic lupus usually become asymptomatic. Unfortunately, we can not reverse this disease.

On the other hand, in the case of those diagnosed with Multiple Sclerosis, (when in reality, the
disease is methanol toxicity), most of the symptoms disappear. We have seen cases where their
vision has returned and even their hearing has returned. This also applies to cases of tinnitus.

During a lecture I said "If you are using ASPARTAME (NutraSweet, Equal, Spoonful, etc.) and
you suffer from fibromylagia symptoms, spasms, shooting pains, numbness in your legs,
cramps, vertigo, dizziness, headaches, tinnitus, joint pain, depression, anxiety attacks, slurred
speech, blurred vision, or memory loss

-- you probably have ASPARTAME DISEASE!"

People were jumping up during the lecture saying, "I've got this, is it reversible?" It is rampant. Some
of the speakers at my lecture even were suffering from these symptoms. In one lecture attended by
the Ambassador of Uganda, he told us that their sugar industry is adding aspartame! He continued by
saying that one of the industry leader's son could no longer walk - due in part by product usage!

We have a very serious problem. Even a stranger came up to Dr. Espisto (one of my speakers) and
myself and said, "Could you tell me why so many people seem to be coming down with MS?"
During a visit to a hospice, a nurse said that six of her friends, who were heavy Diet Coke addicts,
had all been diagnosed with MS. This is beyond coincidence. Here is the problem. There were
Congressional Hearings when aspartame was included in 100 different products. Since this initial
hearing, there have been two subsequent hearings, but to no avail. Nothing as been done.

The drug and chemical lobbies have very deep pockets. Now there are over 5,000 products
containing this chemical, and the PATENT HAS EXPIRED!!!!! At the time of this first hearing,
people were going blind. The methanol in the aspartame converts to formaldehyde in the retina of
the eye.

Formaldehyde is grouped in the same class of drugs as cyanide and arsenic-- DEADLY
POISONS!!!

Unfortunately, it just takes longer to quietly kill, but it is killing people and causing all kinds of
neurological problems.

Aspartame changes the brain's chemistry. It is the reason for severe seizures. This drug changes
the dopamine level in the brain. Imagine what this drug does to patients suffering from Parkinson's
Disease. This drug also causes Birth Defects.

There is absolutely no reason to take this product.

It is NOT A DIET PRODUCT!!!

The Congressional record said, "It makes you crave carbohydrates and will make you FAT". Dr.

Roberts stated that when he got patients off aspartame, their average weight loss was 19 pounds
per person. The formaldehyde stores in the fat cells, particularly in the hips and thighs.

Aspartame is especially deadly for diabetics.

All physicians know what wood alcohol will do to a diabetic. We find physicians that believe that
they have patients with retinopathy, when in fact, the condition is caused by the aspartame. The
aspartame keeps the blood sugar level out of control, causing many patients to go into a coma.

Unfortunately, many have died. People were telling us at the Conference of the American College
of Physicians, that they had relatives that switched from saccharin to an aspartame product and how
that relative had eventually gone into a coma. Their physicians could not get the blood sugar levels
under control. Thus, the patients suffered acute memory loss and eventually coma and death.

Memory loss is due to the fact that aspartic acid and phenylalanine are neurotoxic without the other
amino acids found in protein. Thus it goes past the blood brain barrier and deteriorates the neurons of
the brain. Dr. Russell Blaylock, neurosurgeon, said, "The ingredients stimulates the neurons of the
brain to death, causing brain damage of varying degrees.

Dr. Blaylock has written a book entitled "EXCITOTOXINS: THE TASTE THAT KILLS" Dr.
H.J. Roberts, diabetic specialist and world expert on aspartame poisoning, has also written a book
entitled "DEFENSE AGAINST ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE".

Dr. Roberts tells how aspartame poisoning is escalating Alzheimer's Disease, and indeed it is. As
the hospice nurse told me, women are being admitted at 30 years of age with Alzheimer's Disease.
Dr. Blaylock and Dr. Roberts will be writing a position paper with some case histories and will post
it on the Internet. According to the Conference of the American College of Physicians, "We are
talking about a plague of neurological diseases caused by this deadly poison".

Dr. Roberts realized what was happening when aspartame was first marketed. He said, "his diabetic
patients presented with memory loss, confusion, and severe vision loss". At the Conference of the
American College of Physicians, doctors admitted that they did not know this.

They had wondered why seizures were rampant (the phenylalanine in aspartame breaks down the
seizure threshold and depletes seretonin, which causes manic depression, panic attacks, rage and
violence).

Just before the Conference, I received a FAX from Norway, asking for a possible antidote for this
poison because they are experiencing so many problems in their country. This poison is now
available in 90 PLUS countries worldwide. Fortunately, we had speakers and ambassadors at the
Conference from different nations who have pledged their help. We ask that you help too.

Print this article out and warn everyone you know. Take anything that contains aspartame back to
the store. Take the "NO ASPARTAME TEST" and send us your case history.

I assure you that MONSANTO, the creator of aspartame, knows how deadly it is.

MONSANTO funds the American Diabetes Association, American Dietetic Association, Congress,
and the Conference of the American College of Physicians. The New York Times, on November 15,
1996, ran an article on how the American Dietetic Association takes money from the food industry to
endorse their products. Therefore, they can not criticize any additives or tell about their link to
MONSANTO.

How bad is this? We told a mother who had a child on NutraSweet to get the child off the product.
The child was having grand mal seizures every day. The mother called her physician, who called
the ADA, who told the doctor not to take the child off the NutraSweet.

We are still trying to convince the mother that the aspartame is causing the seizures. Every time we
get someone off of aspartame, the seizures stop.

If the baby dies, you know whose fault it is, and what we are up against. There are 92 documented
symptoms of aspartame, from coma to death. The majority of them are all neurological, because the
aspartame destroys the nervous system.

Aspartame Disease is partially the cause to what is behind some of the mystery of the Desert Storm
health problems. The burning tongue and other problems discussed in over 60 cases can be directly
related to the consumption of an aspartame product. Several thousand pallets of diet drinks were
shipped to the Desert Storm troops. (Remember heat can liberate the methanol from the aspartame at
86 degrees F). Diet drinks sat in the 120-degree F Arabian sun for weeks at a time on pallets. The
service men and women drank them all day long. All of their symptoms are identical to aspartame
poisoning.

Dr. Roberts says "consuming aspartame at the time of conception can cause birth defects". The
phenylalanine concentrates in the placenta, causing mental retardation, according to Dr. Louis Elsas,
Pediatrician Professor - Genetics, at Emory University in his testimony before Congress.

In the original lab tests, animals developed brain tumors (phenylalanine breaks down into DXP, a
brain tumor agent). When Dr. Espisto was lecturing on aspartame, one physician in the audience, a
neurosurgeon, said, "when they remove brain tumors, they have found high levels of aspartame in
them".

Stevia, a sweet food, NOT AN ADDITIVE, which helps in the metabolism of sugar (which would
be ideal for diabetics), has now been approved as a dietary supplement by the FDA. For years, the
FDA has outlawed this sweet food because of their loyalty to MONSANTO.

Organic Stevia
http://stevitastevia.com

If it says "SUGAR FREE" on the label-- DO NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT IT!!!!!!

Senator Howard Metzenbaum wrote a bill that would have warned all infants, pregnant mothers and
children of the dangers of aspartame. The bill would have also instituted independent studies on the
problems existing in the population (seizures, changes in brain chemistry, changes in neurological
and behavioral symptoms).

It was killed by the powerful drug and chemical lobbies, letting loose the hounds of disease and
death on an unsuspecting public.

Since the Conference of the American College of Physicians, we hope to have the help of some
world leaders. Again, please help us too. There are a lot of people out there who must be warned,
please let them know this information.

~

Comments Continued from the beginning:

My wife who is board certified in Internal Medicine as well as Ambulatory Care (Emergency
Medicine) and who is also a diabetics and geriatrics expert, occasionally sees patients who exhibit
the symptoms mentioned in the article. Often, stopping consumption of aspartame (most
frequently NutriSweet laden diet drinks) reduces or eliminates the symptoms. Some unfortunately
cannot be reversed, once the process begins.

The Success seminars have a variety of prominent speakers on a wide range of subject; one seminar
included President and First Lady Bush (Sr.). A prominent physician speaking at the one I attended
in ’95, made the comment that Aspartame is “#1 cause of complaints to the U.S. Food and Drug
Administration (FDA).”

We've received lots of interesting E-mail accounts from others who've read that article. Here are a
few samples [I removed the authors' names]”

==================================

Subject: Article by Nancy Markle re: Aspartame

My name is D.C. from Silver Lake N.Y. I read the e-mail article regarding Aspartame by Nancy
Markle approximately 2 weeks ago. It was forwarded to me by my sister who knew that I was
experiencing problems with my eyes. I regularly used 3-6 packets of Equal sweetener in my coffee
on a daily basis for years! That with other "diet" products.

On September 8th, 1998, I experienced a sudden loss of vision in my right eye where only "colorful
blurs" could be seen. After extensive testing including MRI, head x-rays, and vision testing of all
sorts, the doctors told me they could not figure out what was wrong and recommended that I just
replace the lens in my eye glasses to accommodate my new prescription.

I did just that.

After reading the article on Aspartame, I immediately discontinued its use. After 5 days, I started
feeling better and Praise the Lord, my eyesight started to CLEAR UP! I put the old lens back into
my glasses on May 1, 1999 because the "new" lens clouded my vision and I could see better without
my glasses. Coincidence? I think not.

Thank you for sharing this valued article. I have forwarded it to everyone I know and have given
copies to friends without e-mail.

God Bless you all! D.C.

======================================

Subject: Help Please

In last 2 years I have been diagnosed with "Lupus like" diseases as follows: Polymyalgia-
Fibromyalgia- Diabetes- Rheumatoid Arthritis with visual problems. I now have to wear glasses
due to not being able focus; also no treatments are effective thus far.

I drank about 6-10 diet drinks a day and have for about 20 years, my drink of choice was Diet Coke
!!!!!!

The doctor checks me for Lupus frequently, because when I first got sick, first symptom was
butterfly rash on face, but all tests are negative this far. My sediment rate run very high. Is there a
test for toxicity from NutraSweet? Please contact me either way. My doctor says diseases are
progressing rapidly.

==================================

Some thoughts about the medical establishment:

I grew up in medical doctor’s family, with 3 of 4 siblings following my father into a medically
related field. The medical community surrounded me. My wife is a practicing doctor. And in
general we have high respect for the medical field. However, as she was going through her medical
training at one of the top medical schools in the USA, she was told that half of what she would be
taught over the next 4 years would later be found to be inaccurate, they just didn’t know which half.
In other words, there is a necessity for a sharp doctor to be flexible to accept new discoveries that
replace old ones (that’s why they call it the “practice” of medicine”). Several “truths” that have been
debunked since she went through medical school were that the brain and heart are static; they don’t
change or heal. Now of course we know that the heart can repair if given the right environment.
Further that the brain is not static, but ever changing (neuroplasticity). Even though ADD, dyslexic
children are often treated with psychotropics such as Ritalin or Adderall, the National Institutes of
Health (NIH), after a detailed study concluded that they don’t help academic performance long
term at all!

Neural-Cognitive Therapy is much more effective as far as academics are concerned. My wife was
taught by some of her wise associates that if something didn't make sense, to "follow the money or

the power" to find out why a medical concept, product or medication was being backed by certain
authorities.

So while truth may be absolute, knowledge of the truth may be ever changing.

~
DIRTY SECRETS of the Food Processing Industry
http://scribd.com/doc/48259922

~

`

`

Racketeering charges have been filed against Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld,
Monsanto, NutraSweet Co., the American Diabetes Association and Dr Robert Moser for
distributing toxic aspartame, in a class action representing many plaintiffs, filed in the US District Court for the
Northern District of California seeking $350 million in damages.

The suit charges the defendants with manufacturing and marketing a deadly neurotoxin unfit for
human consumption, while they assured the pubic that aspartame (also known as NutraSweet/Equal)

contaminated products are safe and healthful, even for children and pregnant women. Present US
Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is mentioned throughout the lawsuit.

As evidence, an explosive affidavit from a former translator for the GD Searle company - the
developer of aspartame - was made recently public and revealed the following.

For 16 years, the Food and Drug Administration denied approval of aspartame because of
compelling evidence of its contributing to brain tumours and other serious disabilities.

Donald Rumsfeld left President Ford's administration as Chief of Staff to become the CEO of
aspartame-producer GD Searle Co. in 1981. Shortly after, Rumsfeld became the CEO, and the day
after President Reagan took office, aspartame was quickly approved by FDA Commissioner Arthur
Hayes over the objections of the FDA's Public Board of Inquiry. Hayes had been recently appointed
by the Reagan Administration. Shortly after aspartame's approval by the FDA, Hayes joined
NutraSweet's public relations firm under a 10-year contract at $1,000 a day.

In January 1977, the FDA wrote a 33-page letter to US Justice Department Attorney Sam Skinner:
"We request that your office convene a Grand Jury investigation into apparent violations of the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act." Skinner allowed the Statute of Limitations to run. Three
FDA Commissioners and eight other officers and Skinner took jobs in the aspartame industry shortly
after it was approved.

The FDA once listed 92 adverse reactions from 10,000 consumer complaints and would send the
list to all inquirers. In 1996 the FDA stopped taking complaints and now denies the existence of the
report. Seizures, blindness, sexual dysfunction, obesity, testicular, mammary and brain tumours
and death, plus dozens of other dread diseases named in the suit, arise from the consumption of
this neurotoxin.

Defendant Moser, past CEO of NutraSweet, is cited for misrepresenting facts to public and
commercial users with full knowledge of the deceptions. Aspartame/Nutrasweet is sold to Bayer,
Con Agra Foods, Dannon, Smucker, Kellogg, Wrigley, PepsiCo, Kraft Foods (Crystal Light),
Conopco (Slim-Fast), Coke, Pfizer, Wal-Mart and Wyeth (to name a few), who use it in some of
their products, including children's vitamins. These entities are named in other suits now in
Californian courts.

Defendant American Diabetes Association is meant to care for diabetics. A 35-year ADA member,
diabetic specialist HJ Roberts, MD, FACP, discovered aspartame can precipitate or aggravate
diabetes and its complications, or simulate the complications (especially neuropathy and
retinopathy).

His report, intended for the Annual Scientific Meeting of the ADA, was rejected for presentation -
and even publication of the abstract - but was later published in another medical journal.

`
The Bush Administration could be called the Monsanto Cabinet, per Robert Cohen,
author of “Milk, The Deadly Poison” which details the horrid politics behind the contamination of

our nation's milk and beef supply with bovine growth hormone.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was president of Searle Pharmaceuticals, a company owned
by Monsanto. Rumsfeld was also the Secretary of Defense under President Ford.

Rumsfeld is believed to have earned around US$12 million from the sale of Searle to Monsanto.

Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly received $10,000 for his senatorial campaign from
Monsanto in the mid 90s. Ashcroft's contribution from Monsanto was five times that of any other
congressional hopeful. Ashcroft, and Sr. Bush Supreme Court appointee Clarence Thomas were
instrumental in gaining Food and Drug Administation (FDA) approval for Monsanto's
controversial artificial sweetener aspartame, which has been linked to over 200 ailments that
include Alzheimer's disease, juvenile diabetes, depression, epileptic seizures, blindness, memory
loss, excitability, weight gain, multiple sclerosis and lupus (The Idaho Observer, November,
2000).

Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman was on the board of directors of Calgene Pharmaceutical,
another company currently owned by Monsanto.

Secretary of Health Tommy Thompson is the fourth member of the Bush cabinet to have direct ties
to Monsanto. The former governor of Wisconsin designated his state as a “biotech zone” for the use
of Monsanto's bovine growth hormone even though dairy farmers in his state opposed the
designation by a 9-1 ratio. Thompson reportedly received $50,000 from biotech companies during
his election campaign.

Bovine growth hormone, which does increase the productivity of dairy cows, has also been linked
to many health problems in children and adults (The Idaho Observer, November, 2000) and
makes cows sick.

Bovine growth hormone has been outlawed in most countries, but not the U.S.

And as Cohen points out, another player in the Monsanto-studded Cabinet is Rep. Richard Pombo,
who will head the Agriculture Subcommittee on Dairy, Livestock and Poultry. Pombo is also a
Monsanto boy, having taken campaign money from it while stalling a 1994 bill to make labeling
mandatory for milk or milk products containing Bovine Growth Hormones. Pombo helped kill the
bill in committee.

Monsanto also holds the patent on the “terminator gene” which prevents plants from producing
viable seed so that farmers, and therefore, people will be dependent upon the multinational
corporation for their food supply.

Monsanto has proven to be one of the most greedy, ruthless and environmentally irreverent
corporations in world history.

One cannot serve the interests of Monsanto and serve the interests of people at the same time.

`
BiblePlus
http://bibleplus.org/health/ms_lupus.htm

DVD: Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World; director: Cori Brackett
http://www.worldcat.org/oclc/74846448

DVD: Sweet Remedy: The World Reacts to an Adulterated Food Supply; directors: JT Waldron

`

`
Organic Diabetic Sweetener - Stevia
http://www.stevitastevia.com

book: The World According to Monsanto; by Marie-Monique Robin
http://www.librarything.com/work/5155236
http://books.google.com/books?id=7RqYQwAACAAJ
DVD: The World According to Monsanto

book: The Last Farmer: How One Man Took on Monsanto to Save the Future of Food; by John
Park
http://books.google.com/books?id=L1aHQAAACAAJ

book: Fast Food Nation; by Eric Schlosser
http://books.google.com/books?id=Z_IO20TJBN8C

dvd: Fast Food Nation; director: Richard Linklater

dvd: Foodmatters; director: James Colquhoun

book: Empty Harvest; by Bernard Jensen
http://books.google.com/books?id=Fp7eN8Ghg60C

book: Fatal Harvest: The Tragedy Of Industrial Agriculture; Andrew Kimbrell
http://books.google.com/books?id=plTcVDph_SQC

book: Fateful Harvest: The True Story of a Small Town, a Global Industry, and a Toxic Secret;
by Duff Wilson
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fateful_Harvest
http://www.safefoodandfertilizer.org/index.html

book: Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills; by Russell L Blaylock

http://books.google.com/books?id=gav_LL7olqQC

book: The Truth About Caffeine; by Marina Kushner
http://books.google.com/books?id=_xkjQaPrDxkC

book: The Truth About Coffee; by Marina Kushner
http://books.google.com/books?id=0lh1PgAACAAJ

book: Silent Spring; by Rachel Carson
http://books.google.com/books?id=HeR1l0V0r54C

dvd: Food Inc; director: Robert Kenner
http://www.foodincmovie.com
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food,_Inc.
http://www.scribd.com/doc/43528259

dvd: King Corn; director: Aaron Woolf
http://www.kingcorn.net
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_Corn_%28film%29
http://www.sustainabletable.org/features/articles/kingcorn/

book: Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry Lies About the Safety of the Genetically
Engineered Foods You're Eating
http://books.google.com/books?id=ltpSPgAACAAJ
http://www.seedsofdeception.com
http://www.responsibletechnology.org

book: Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods; by
Jeffrey Smith
http://gmwatch.org
http://www.scribd.com/doc/41584887
http://books.google.com/books?id=EctxAAAACAAJ

dvd: Food Fight; director: Chris Taylor
http://www.foodfightthedoc.com

dvd: Ingredients; producer: Brian Kimmel
http://www.ingredientsfilm.com
http://www.facebook.com/notes.php?id=101225708412&notes_tab=app_2347471856

book: Animal Factory: The Looming Threat of Industrial Pig, Dairy, and Poultry Farms to
Humans; by David Kirby
http://books.google.com/books?id=VQ9sXDyYN64C

dvd: The Future of Food; by Deborah Koons Garcia
http://www.thefutureoffood.com

book: Disconnect: The Truth about Cell Phone Radiation; by Devra Davis
http://www.environmentalhealthtrust.org
http://books.google.com/books?id=x671QwAACAAJ

dvd: Super Size Me; director: Morgan Spurlock

book: Don't Eat This Book: Fast Food and the Supersizing of America; by Morgan Spurlock
http://books.google.com/books?id=LLLuAAAAMAAJ

dvd: Killer at Large, Why obesity is America's greatest threat; director: Steven Greenstreet
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Killer-at-Large-Why-Obesity-Is-Americas-Greatest-
Threat/109343939089227

book: We Don't Die We Kill Ourselves: Our Foods Are Killing Us!; by Roger L De Haan
http://books.google.com/books?id=jGlPAAAACAAJ

book: Politically Incorrect Nutrition; by Michael Barbee

http://books.google.com/books?id=KTGzxKdJ7hYC

book: The ADHD Fraud: Children are dying from ADHD Drugs; by Fred A. Baughman
http://www.adhdfraud.org
http://www.ritalindeath.com
http://www.feingold.org
http://books.google.com/books?id=3R4XCP1Dwi8C

book: Living Downstream: A Scientist's Personal Investigation of Cancer and the
Environment; by Sandra Steingraber
http://books.google.com/books?id=SNLEbFK2_B0C

book: The Fluoride Deception; by Christopher Bryson
http://books.google.com/books?id=q3v_JgjZ6fsC
http://www2.fluoridealert.org
http://www.lovethetruth.com/truth_about_fluoride.htm
http://www.gatesofhorn.com/blog/the_fluoride_cover_up
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fluoride_poisoning

book: The Case Against Fluoride: How Hazardous Waste Ended Up in Our Drinking Water; by
Paul Connett
http://books.google.com/books?id=DEqDaoNTo2IC

book: The Devil's Poison: How fluoride is Killing You; by Dean Murphy
http://books.google.com/books?id=YXKjNwAACAAJ

book: Fluoride: Drinking Ourselves to Death; by Barry Groves
http://books.google.com/books?id=CvpFAAAAYAAJ

book: Fluoride: The Freedom Fight; by H.C. Moolenburgh
http://books.google.com/books?id=rblpAAAAMAAJ

book: The Fluoride Question: Panacea or Poison; by Anne-Lise Gotzsche
http://books.google.com/books?id=RP1pAAAAMAAJ

~

MONSANTO MEN in the USA Government
`
The Bush administration's could be called the Monsanto Cabinet, per Robert Cohen, author of
“Milk, The Deadly Poison” which details the horrid politics behind the contamination of our
nation's milk and beef supply with bovine growth hormone.

Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld was president of Searle Pharmaceuticals, a company owned
by Monsanto. Rumsfeld was also the Secretary of Defense under President Ford.

Rumsfeld is believed to have earned around US$12 million from the sale of Searle to Monsanto.

Attorney General John Ashcroft reportedly received $10,000 for his senatorial campaign from
Monsanto in the mid 90s. Ashcroft's contribution from Monsanto was five times that of any other
congressional hopeful. Ashcroft, and Sr. Bush Supreme Court appointee Clarence Thomas were
instrumental in gaining Food and Drug Administation (FDA) approval for Monsanto's
controversial artificial sweetener aspartame, which has been linked to over 200 ailments that
include Alzheimer's disease, juvenile diabetes, depression, epileptic seizures, blindness, memory
loss, excitability, weight gain, multiple sclerosis and lupus (The Idaho Observer, November,
2000).

Secretary of Agriculture Ann Veneman was on the board of directors of Calgene Pharmaceutical,
another company currently owned by Monsanto.

Secretary of Health Tommy Thompson is the fourth member of the Bush cabinet to have direct ties
to Monsanto. The former governor of Wisconsin designated his state as a “biotech zone” for the use
of Monsanto's bovine growth hormone even though dairy farmers in his state opposed the
designation by a 9-1 ratio. Thompson reportedly received $50,000 from biotech companies during
his election campaign.

Bovine growth hormone, which does increase the productivity of dairy cows, has also been linked
to many health problems in children and adults (The Idaho Observer, November, 2000) and
makes cows sick.

Bovine growth hormone has been outlawed in most countries, but not the U.S.

And as Cohen points out, another player in the Monsanto-studded Cabinet is Rep. Richard Pombo,
who will head the Agriculture Subcommittee on Dairy, Livestock and Poultry. Pombo is also a
Monsanto boy, having taken campaign money from it while stalling a 1994 bill to make labeling
mandatory for milk or milk products containing Bovine Growth Hormones. Pombo helped kill the

bill in committee.

Monsanto also holds the patent on the “terminator gene” which prevents plants from producing
viable seed so that farmers, and therefore, people will be dependent upon the multinational
corporation for their food supply.

Monsanto has proven to be one of the most greedy, ruthless and environmentally irreverent
corporations in world history.

One cannot serve the interests of Monsanto and serve the interests of people at the same time.

~

Racketeering charges have been filed against Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, Monsanto,
NutraSweet Co., the American Diabetes Association and Dr Robert Moser for distributing toxic
aspartame, in a class action representing many plaintiffs, filed in the US District Court for the
Northern District of California seeking $350 million in damages.

The suit charges the defendants with manufacturing and marketing a deadly neurotoxin unfit for
human consumption, while they assured the pubic that aspartame (also known as NutraSweet/Equal)
contaminated products are safe and healthful, even for children and pregnant women. Present US
Secretary of Defense, Donald Rumsfeld, is mentioned throughout the lawsuit.

As evidence, an explosive affidavit from a former translator for the GD Searle company - the
developer of aspartame - was made recently public and revealed the following.

For 16 years, the Food and Drug Administration denied approval of aspartame because of
compelling evidence of its contributing to brain tumours and other serious disabilities.

Donald Rumsfeld left President Ford's administration as Chief of Staff to become the CEO of
aspartame-producer GD Searle Co. in 1981. Shortly after, Rumsfeld became the CEO, and the day
after President Reagan took office, aspartame was quickly approved by FDA Commissioner Arthur
Hayes over the objections of the FDA's Public Board of Inquiry. Hayes had been recently appointed
by the Reagan Administration. Shortly after aspartame's approval by the FDA, Hayes joined
NutraSweet's public relations firm under a 10-year contract at $1,000 a day.

In January 1977, the FDA wrote a 33-page letter to US Justice Department Attorney Sam Skinner:
"We request that your office convene a Grand Jury investigation into apparent violations of the
Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act." Skinner allowed the Statute of Limitations to run. Three
FDA Commissioners and eight other officers and Skinner took jobs in the aspartame industry shortly
after it was approved.

The FDA once listed 92 adverse reactions from 10,000 consumer complaints and would send the
list to all inquirers. In 1996 the FDA stopped taking complaints and now denies the existence of the
report. Seizures, blindness, sexual dysfunction, obesity, testicular, mammary and brain tumours
and death, plus dozens of other dread diseases named in the suit, arise from the consumption of

this neurotoxin.

Defendant Moser, past CEO of NutraSweet, is cited for misrepresenting facts to public and
commercial users with full knowledge of the deceptions. Aspartame/Nutrasweet is sold to Bayer,
Con Agra Foods, Dannon, Smucker, Kellogg, Wrigley, PepsiCo, Kraft Foods (Crystal Light),
Conopco (Slim-Fast), Coke, Pfizer, Wal-Mart and Wyeth (to name a few), who use it in some of
their products, including children's vitamins. These entities are named in other suits now in
Californian courts.

Defendant American Diabetes Association is meant to care for diabetics. A 35-year ADA member,
diabetic specialist HJ Roberts, MD, FACP, discovered aspartame can precipitate or aggravate
diabetes and its complications, or simulate the complications (especially neuropathy and
retinopathy).

His report, intended for the Annual Scientific Meeting of the ADA, was rejected for presentation -
and even publication of the abstract - but was later published in another medical journal.

~

MONSANTO Genetically Engineered Food: How DANGEROUS to children?
`
Listing of the flaws and of the suppressed information regarding Genetically Engineered Food
(GM). Listing of the Alternative Farming Methods that will eliminate Global Hunger.

~

Report from: Korea-Japan Joint Resolution Against GM Wheat

To: Wheat Farmers and Traders of the USA and Canada:

We, consolidated consumers of wheat products and organic farmers of Korea and Japan, are strongly
against GM wheat that contains not only Roundup-Ready herbicide-resistant protein but also
antibiotics and the virus protein CaMV, all of them having potential of harming human health
and causing irreversible damage to the whole of nature, of which we are part.

We will never eat even one piece of such grain, nor will we allow one bit to reach our lands. Please
stop using GM wheat and keep using conventional non-GM wheat, the variety that we have accepted
and enjoyed. If any news that GM wheat is commercially grown reaches us, we win launch a
massive rally to replace wheat with staple rice for any purpose of grain use.

We sincerely wish you would take our voice into consideration when you make the choice of
whether to go with GM wheat or conventional non-GM wheat.
--The Coalition of Farmers and Consumers against GM Food in Japan

A two-year-old Japanese study has now made it into an English translation. This document from the
Health Ministry of Japan ought to rattle a few cages and cause Cheney-Stokes palpitations in the

breasts of scientists, both the perpetrators of fraud and the dupes who bought into the fiction being
purveyed as science.

In the Japanese report MONSANTO's dangerous logic may take this one-two punch without
distress, but literate farmers will recoil if they pause to follow the trail Japanese scientists have
marked with iron-clad clarity.

Briefly, the desire to harvest more bins and bushels has prompted scientists to install a toxin into the
bean itself via the agency of genetic engineering. With systemic resistance in tow, low-input
cultivation and cropping could be simplified. To achieve this goal, MONSANTO created a soybean
mutant resistant to their bestseller, the organophosphate Roundup. Glyphosate is the effective
ingredient in Roundup.

The resistant strains developed seriously hampered enzymatic activity of ESPS (5-
enolpyruvylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase) The technical nature of the development does not need
to detain us. Suffice it to say that one of the enzymes works to synthesize the aromatic amino acids
tyrosine, phenylalanine and tryptophan, for which reason the soybean failed to thrive.

GENETIC ENGINEERING

Genetic engineering was the rage at the time of the initial experiments. The idea was to breed unlike
species at the molecular level, this technology having developed in the wake of Watson and Crick's
modeling of DNA in 1953.

The company scientists found a microorganism in glyphosate factory sewage. It was a soil bacterium
capable of synthesizing aromatic amino acids in the presence of glyphosate. The resultant product
was quite different from nature's blueprint. It took a powerful protein from a cauliflower virus to
make the gene insert perform. Additionally, a signal peptide carries the necessary protein to the locus
of the enzyme. These few notes are necessarily an aside, perhaps a bow to the ingenious craft of the
engineer. But the mix of genes from several unrelated plants assumes understanding of a natural
system so complex that no computer in the world could handle even a fraction of the information
contained within a blade of grass.

The genetically modified soybean has never existed in nature. It appropriated the genetic material of
the bean and tampered with it in defiance of natural evolution. The Japanese study tells us that "239
(17.51 percent) nucleotides out of 1,365 total were manually converted into different bases . . . in
order for the protein synthetic machinery of the soybean cell to decipher the bacterial gene across the
species barrier."

All this is interesting, a bit esoteric, and possibly a broadside designed to confuse the grower and
hand off convincing evidence that Norman Borlaug is right, the world has to have genetic
engineering and greater profits for the brilliant redesigners of nature.

The Japanese paper said, "It is with good reason that genetically modified plants are called
Frankenstein plants in Europe."

ARE THEY SAFE?

According to the FDA, modified beans are as safe as those designed by natural evolution. Are they?

For field tests, soybeans were grown without herbicides. The Roundup Ready soybean is usually
sprayed with Roundup. "It was a surprise to find that both the genetically modified soybean 40-3-2
strain and the parent strain, A5403, used for field tests were not sprayed with Roundup herbicide in
their cultivation. What MONSANTO has produced with Roundup application was a minimal
amount, enough to test glyphosate residues in the harvested forage. Several tons of soybeans used in
safety assessments were not produced with Roundup. The reason is not stated in the documents."

Based on such data, the Japanese study asserts, it is not possible to assess the safety of soybeans that
human beings and animals consume on the premise that glyphosate is missing, this when the toxin is
used to inhibit plant enzyme ESPS and its effects on other metabolic pathways.

One conclusion flows logically from the facts.

Test results based on a product other than the one that is marketed are worthless.

The protein analyzed was from E. coli, not from RR soybeans. The protein expressed in the
bioengineered product does not have the same amino acid sequence as the soil bacterium from which
the gene was harvested. There is the matter of "post-transnational modification after expression," the
Japanese study said. In short, the whole procedure can run amok.

Apparently it has, as on-scene sow breeding experiences in Iowa have revealed. The Japanese study
noted that "amino acid sequence" was not determined.

"What MONSANTO has sequenced was only 15 amino acids from N-terminal of the protein that
was expressed in E. coli. The rest of the sequence was an assumption from the nucleotide sequence
of the bacterial DNA. They determined only 33 percent of an expected total of 455 amino acids that
the protein is not of soybean."

Further: "The real sequence of CP4ESPS protein in the soybean we are eating is still unknown."

Further: "Acute toxicity tests on rats are also carried out by the protein expressed in E. coli." What
MONSANTO says in the application document is that extracting large amounts of CP4ESPS protein
from soybeans is difficult.

The Japanese find this a poor excuse. The paper goes on to define the proper procedure. The papers
filed with the U.S. government stand accused of conjectural science, science converted to the needs
of a corporation that apparently sees science as malleable.

"The experiments described are fundamentally invalid," the report concludes. Yet the business of
genetic engineering was loaded into American agriculture with hardly a single reference to the

American constituency that the government was obligated to consult.

ANIMAL TESTS

There were animal tests using cows, chickens, rats, catfish and quail. All seem to have been
inadequate. Toasted soybeans were fed to only 10 rats in each group for 28 days. Cross-generation or
chronic toxicity was not measured by such a limited scope.

Even so, weight and welfare of kidneys, liver, etc., exhibited differences. Short-term tests of
untoasted soybeans did not exhibit a difference between GMOs and natural, and this became a peg
on which hangs the claim of "no difference." The statistical differences were evident just the same,
the Japanese say, but were ignored:

Even with these far-from-satisfactory experiments, the data for body and organ weight of liver,
kidney and testicles show obvious differences in the male rats between both groups, wild strain
A5403 and bio-engineered strain 40-3-2 soybean.

The groups fed raw soybeans showed no difference, but the male group fed toasted soybean 40-3-2
exhibited 6.7 percent lower body weight than the A5403-fed group and 13 percent less than the
group fed commercial feed mix at the end of test period of 28 days. Although this difference is
described as statistically significant in the data sheet, the conclusion ignores these results and states
that "no statistical significance is observed."

The experiments are far from satisfactory in terms of both the samples and the statistical method
used. Our group transcribed all raw data and redid the statistical analysis using the Turkey multiple
method. The result again showed the apparent growth obstacle for body and kidney weight in male
rats fed with toasted 40-3-2 soybean. We wondered why there is no such difference in the female rats
group. The answer to this question seemed to be the amount of feed intake: where males took 25 to
30 grams/day, female rats took only 18 to 20grams/day (approximately 70 percent of male intake). It
is highly possible that female rats would also show significant growth difference if the experiment
were conducted on a much larger scale and with a longer feeding period.

TOASTING, ETC.

Much of this report has been abstracted in depth to make it readable for the average farmer. The
conclusion needs no explanation, for it speaks with damning finality:

We found a highly intentional misinterpretation in ignoring obvious differences between the
A5403 and 40-3-2 hybrids in the documents. Raw soybeans showed no difference in the analysis
between genes modified 30-4-2 and non-modified A5403 soybeans. Difference is observed in toasted
soybeans. Besides such main components as water, protein, fat, fiber and ash, trypsin-inhibitor, lectin
and urease, which are called harmful physiologically, active substances as feed are detected in the
analysis. Urease is used as an indicator of protein denaturation by heat treatment.

Obvious differences appeared after toasting at actual feed processing conditions (108 C for 30
minutes). While the concentrations of total protein and potassium were not changed, the
concentrations of trypsin-inhibitor, urease and lectin are significantly higher in the toasted
glyphosate-tolerant bean 30-4-2 compared to that of the A5403 normal bean.

These physiologically active substances remained active even after heat treatment in the genetically
modified soybean, whereas those of the herbicide-sensitive normal bean were easily denatured and
inactivated. The high activity of these elements does not usually satisfy as feed.

This result prompted MONSANTO to claim that "the modified soybeans were not toasted
sufficiently in the experiment," and they returned and asked for retreatment of the sample by the
Texas A&M laboratory that processed the beans. MONSANTO ordered the condition of retoast at
220 C for 25minutes, which is considerably higher than normal processing of 100 C for 10 minutes.
Retoasting, however, further widened the difference in activity between the two strains. The hybrid
61-67-1, another genetically modified soybean inserted with bacterial CP4EPSPS, showed a high
heat-resistant property.

Scientists would usually conclude in such a case that there was substantial difference between the
two types, but MONSANTO concluded that the second toasting was still not enough.

In the end, they toasted twice further and finally got the result they wanted, i.e., all proteins were
denatured and inactivated. With this result, they concluded that genetically modified and non-
modified soybeans have equivalent properties.

No protein can withstand repeated heat treatment and stay active. This is a common knowledge of
protein chemistry. The results at normal feed-processing conditions is required - no more, no less.
MONSANTO based their conclusions on the presumption that "they can't be different" and their
economic need that "they shouldn't be different." Their translation of the experiment is based on a
desired-outcome attitude and not at all scientific. The English-language report did not show analysis
data of the third and fourth heat treatments, but the summary report in Japanesehas a graph, as if
there were data, showing the final loss of activity, stating, "The data from insufficient heat treatments
is not adopted" and "No substantial difference observed." If one reviews only the summary volume
in Japanese and does not look into the English data, one would be ushered to the conclusion "safe."

However, we found in the first and the second analyses data a fact indicative of regular heat
treatment. Granulated soybean, when heated, loses weight as water and other volatile components
evaporate, and as a result, relative concentration of non-volatile substance such as total protein and
ash increases. The data shows clearly that the modified 40-3-6 and 61-67-1 and the non-modified
A5403 have gone through same level of heat treatment. The decrease of water content also certifies
this fact.

MONSANTO concluded that the residual herbicide in a crop increases, therefore the safety standard
should be slackened. Adopting the Roundup-tolerant soybean would increase the herbicide
concentration in the soybean plants and seeds, because the herbicide is directly sprayed on the plant
by post-emergence application before harvest. MONSANTO studied in detail the results of changing
factors such as spraying times, the concentration of the active ingredient, glyphosate, the duration of

harvest after spraying, and growing locations.

The data show clearly that the concentration of glyphosate and AMPA (a degraded metabolite of
glyphosate) in forage and hay increase greatly by post-emergence application of the herbicide
compared to that of conventional pre-emergence application, although the residual concentration in
the plant differed from place to place.

The largest value of the combined glyphosate and AMPA was 40.187 ppm in forage, considerably
higher than the U.S. safety standard at the time of application to FDA and USDA (1994) of 15 ppm
in forage and hay. The maximum combined concentration of glyphosate and AMPA in soybean seed
was 13.178 ppm, less than the 20 ppm U.S. standard at that time. The concentration of residual
glyphosate increased in accordance with the application, from two to three times. As a result,
cultivating Roundup ready soybeans may sometimes violate U.S. safety standards

We found a surprising statement in the document to address this problem. In its conclusion,
MONSANTO says that "The maximum combined glyphosate and AMPA residue level of
approximately 40 ppm in soybean forage resulting from these new uses exceeds the currently
established tolerance of 15 ppm. Therefore, an increase in the combined glyphosate and AMPA
tolerance for residues in soybean forage will be requested." They know very well that adoption of an
herbicide-tolerant crop took precedence over safety standards. In fact, the U.S. tolerance standard of
combined glyphosate and AMPA in soybean forage was changed to 100 ppm after they approved the
genetically engineered soybean.

As for the Japanese government, they revised the safety standard of combined glyphosate and
AMPA in soybean seed from 6 ppm to 20 ppm in April 2000 at the request of the U.S. government.
Japan could thus import soybeans from the United States without violation of the law.

Thus, MONSANTO, in their rush to verify safety, patchworked the results of experiments and
analyses that are as full of holes as an incomplete puzzle. Their product was asserted safe through
manipulation of experimental results.

Even more troubling, rather than trying to meet legal safety standards, they requested - and were
granted - the revision of these standards to fit their needs

We have managed to find facts showing inadequate and incomplete safety assessment in the
application document by MONSANTO, even though our work was limited and took place under
difficult conditions. The process of genetic recombination and the results of other animal
experiments remain uninspected by us.

TEST OF REASON

The matter of genetically modified canola is being tested in Canada's high court. The U.S. courts
have handed down incredible decisions, most of which carry out a reversal as greatly denounced as
the Dred Scott ruling. For now it is up to the American farmer to shun GMOs. The Japanese seem to
have taken the position that they want to see what happens to a generation of Americans before they

rush to judgment.

The original paper cited, abstracted, and quoted above is titled "Fraudulent Conclusion: Facts
Found by Inspection of the Safety Assessment of GM Roundup Tolerant Soybean, MONSANTO's
Dangerous Logic as Seen in the Application Documents Submitted to the Health Ministry of Japan."
The credit line reads, Masaharu Kawata, Assistant Professor, School of Science, Nagoya University,
Japan. A subtitle says, "What Is Herbicide-Resistant Soybean by MONSANTO?"

CONCLUSION:

MONSANTO Genetically Engineered Food is VERY DANGEROUS.

Stop the Monsanto BUTCHERS from KILLING your CHILDREN and GRANDCHILDREN.

~

School Food is Dangerous

Dear John,

Is anybody doing anything to change the food in schools? It’s terrible. Last week I took my 8-year-
old to a school picnic. It was a lovely day, but they served bologna and cheese sandwiches on white
bread, with mayonnaise. Plus cookies and ice cream. And, of course, enormous plastic jugs of Coke.
In class, pupils earn credits for good behavior, which they can use to get candy and Cokes. Help!

Frieda

Dear Frieda,

My, oh my. That is a shame. Maybe you and your child could wear one of the T-shirts to school that
says “If you love me, don’t feed me junk food.”

I wish these parents and teachers and administrators could understand what they are doing to the
precious children in their care.

Fortunately, there are some people trying to change things. The chairperson of the Senate Agriculture
Committee, Senator Tom Harkin, has proposed that the government subsidize the cost of giving
away fruit and vegetables in school cafeterias as an alternative to candy and snacks that are sold in
vending machines.

Los Angeles Unified School District, which has 748,000 students on its 677 campuses, prohibits
carbonated drink sales at elementary schools. And recently, the board of the nation’s second-largest
school district extended the ban, effective January, 2004, to also include the district’s approximately
200 middle and high schools.

The Board voted unanimously for this step, despite the vehement opposition of the National Soft
Drink Association.

Up until now, most Los Angeles Unified Schools have relied on soda sales to fund student activities
such as sports and field trips. Sodas sold in vending machines and student stores have generated an
annual average profit of $39,000 per high school.

Wouldn’t it make far more sense to fund our schools adequately in the first place, so they don’t have
to sell soft drinks and other junk food to cover their costs?

Change is painfully slow, but it is starting. In 2001, Berkeley, California, schools went all organic.

In 2002, the Oakland school district banned vending machines, candy, soda pop and other junk food
from its campuses. In the fall of 2002, Palo Alto (California) Unified School District went all
organic.

I know it’s frustrating seeing the junk kids all-too-often eat in schools.

But here’s a recent report about how things can indeed change, written by Jon Rappaport, titled:

A Miracle In Wisconsin

In Appleton, Wisconsin, a revolution has occurred.

It’s taken place in the Central Alternative High School.

The kids now behave. The hallways aren’t frantic. Even the teachers are happy.

The school used to be out of control.

Kids packed weapons.

Discipline problems swamped the principal’s office.

But not since 1997.

What happened?

Did they line every inch of space with cops? Did they spray valium gas in the classrooms? Did they
install metal detectors in the bathrooms? Did they build holding cells in the gym?

Afraid not.

In 1997, a private group called Natural Ovens began installing a healthy lunch program.

Huh?

Fast-food burgers, fries, and burritos gave way to fresh salad and whole grain bread.

Fresh fruits were added to the menu.

Good drinking water arrived. Vending machines were removed.

As reported in a newsletter called Pure Facts, “Grades are up, truancy is no longer a problem,
arguments are rare, and teachers are able to spend their time teaching.”

Principal LuAnn Coenen, who files annual reports with the state of Wisconsin, has turned in some
staggering figures since 1997.

Drop-outs? Students expelled? Students discovered to be using drugs? Carrying weapons?
Committing suicide?

Every category has come up ZERO. Every year.

Mary Bruyette, a teacher, states, “I don’t have to deal with daily discipline issues…I don’t have
disruptions in class or the difficulties with student behavior I experienced before we started the food
program.”

One student asserted, “Now that I can concentrate I think it’s easier to get along with people.

What a concept---eating healthier food increases concentration.

Principal Coenen sums it up:

I can’t buy the argument that it’s too costly for schools to provide good nutrition for their
students.

I found that one cost will reduce another.

I don’t have the vandalism. I don’t have the litter. I don’t have the need for high security.

At a nearby middle school, the new food program is catching on. A teacher there, Dennis Abram,
reports, “I’ve taught here almost 30 years. I see the kids this year as calmer, easier to talk to. They
just seem more rational.

I had thought about retiring this year and basically I’ve decided to teach another year---I’m having
too much fun!”

~

Monsanto's Agent Orange - DEAD BABIES & DEAD VETERANS
`
THE ISSUE THAT WON'T GO AWAY

`
The enduring presence of Agent Orange is just one terrible legacy of Vietnam's ill-fated war.

The USA used the toxic defoliant to unmask guerrilla fighters by stripping forest cover.

But children are still being born with terrible deformities.

Families are denied compensation from the USA.

The USA denies responsibility.

Stop the baby killers

Note, some of the above companies (or their subsidiaries) produce drugs, toxic chemical, herbicides,
insecticides and fertilizer.

Most chemicals are made from fossil fuels.

First, they poisons you with their Chemicals. Then, they will help you with their drugs for an
exorbitant price.

~

AGENT ORANGE SIDE EFFECTS
The potentially deadly Agent Orange side effects recognized by the Veteran Affairs include:

• Prostate Cancer
• Respiratory Cancers
• Multiple Myeloma
• Type II Diabetes
• Hodgkin’s Disease
• Non-Hodgkin’s Lymphoma
• Soft Tissue Sarcoma
• Chloracne
• Porphyria Cutanea Tarda
• Peripheral Neuropathy
• Spinal Bifidia in Vietnam veteran children exposed to Agent Orange

AGENT ORANGE BIRTH DEFECTS

Birth defects were found to occur in Vietnam veterans that were exposed to Agent Orange.
The birth defects included Spinal Bifidia and Peripheral Transient Neuropathy, and have continued
to affect third generations.

"TCDD (dioxin) has been shown to be extremely toxic to a number of
animal species. Mortality does not occur immediately.it appears that
the animals' environment suddenly becomes toxic to them."

~

CASARETT AND DOULL'S TOXICOLOGY, 1996

From 1962 to 1970, the US military sprayed 72 million liters of
herbicides, mostly Agent Orange, in Vietnam. Over one million
Vietnamese were exposed to the spraying, as well as over 100,000
Americans and allied troops. Dr. James Clary, a scientist at the
Chemical Weapons Branch, Eglin Air Force Base, who designed the
herbicide spray tank and wrote a 1979 report on Operation Ranch Hand
(the name of the spraying program), told Senator Daschle in 1988,

"When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the
1960s, we were aware of the potential for damage due to dioxin
contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the 'military'
formulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the 'civilian'
version due to the lower cost and speed of manufacture. However,
because the material was to be used on the 'enemy,' none of us were
overly concerned. We never considered a scenario in which our own
personnel would become contaminated with the herbicide."

quoted by Admiral Elmo R. Zumwalt, 1990

WHAT DID WE KNOW ABOUT DIOXIN, AND WHEN DID WE KNOW IT?

The first reported industrial dioxin poisoning occurred in Nitro, West
Virginia in 1949. The exposed workers complained of rash, nausea,
headaches, muscle aches, fatigue and emotional instability. A 1953
accident elsewhere resulted in peripheral neuropathies.

A 1969 report commissioned by the USDA found Agent Orange showed a
"significant potential to increase birth defects." The same year, the
NIH confirmed that it caused malformations and stillbirths in mice. In
1970, the US Surgeon General warned it might be hazardous to "our
health." The same day, the Secretaries of the Departments of
Agriculture, the Interior, and HEW jointly announced the suspension of
its use around lakes, recreation areas, homes and crops intended for
human consumption. DOD simultaneously announced its suspension of all
uses of Agent Orange.

When dioxin contaminated material spread on a Missouri farm in 1971,

hundreds of birds, 11 cats, 4 dogs and 43 horses died.

In 1978 the EPA suspended spraying Agent Orange in national forests,
due to increases in miscarriages in women living near forests that had
been sprayed.

A 1979 study published in the JAMA by Bogen et al looked at 78 Vietnam
veterans who reported Agent Orange exposures. Eighty percent reported
extreme fatigue. Over 60% had peripheral neuropathies, 73% had
depression, and 8% had attempted suicide. Forty-five per cent reported
violent rages. Sudden lapses of memory were seen in 21%.

A 1981 study by Pazderova et al. found one half of 80 exposed workers
had metabolic disturbances, 23% peripheral neuropathies, and the
majority, psychiatric changes, primarily depression and fatigue.

In 1979, 47 railroad workers were exposed to PCBs including dioxin in
Missouri when cleaning up a spillage from a damaged tank car that had
been filled with these chemicals. All were followed medically for six
years. Their initial complaints included fatigue and muscle aches. Two
committed suicide. Careful evaluations at Rush-Presbyterian Hospital,
in Chicago, confirmed peripheral neuropathies (in 96%), depression
(69%), tremors (78%), abnormal fatigue (91%), and muscle aches or
cramp (51%). Half had cognitive problems, including problems with
attention and concentration (50%) and slowed reaction times.

These studies are all consistent with each other, and describe a very
significant, multi-system illness affecting all parts of the nervous
system, and causing fatigue and muscle aches. Some of the studies
documented additional organ dysfunction. This syndrome could be very
disabling.

WHAT DID IT TAKE TO FORGET WHAT WE KNEW?

By 1983, 9170 veterans had filed claims for disabilities that they said were caused by Agent Orange.
The VA denied compensation to 7709, saying that a facial rash was the only disease associated with
exposure.

Congress passed the Veterans' Dioxin and Radiation Exposure Compensation Standards Act of 1984
in response. It required the VA to appoint a 'Veterans' Advisory Committee on Environmental
Hazards' to review the literature on dioxin and submit recommendations to the head of the VA.

According to Admiral Elmo Zumwalt, "The VA.directly contradicted its own established practice,
promulgating instead the more stringent requirement that compensation depends on establishing a
cause and effect relationship," improperly denying the bulk of the claims.

Four groups of impartial scientists were asked by Zumwalt to review the Advisory Committee
transcripts. Their comments are telling, and include the following:

"The work of the Advisory Committee.has little or no scientific merit."

"an inadequate process is being used to evaluate scientific publications for use in public policy."

"less than objective."

Unfortunately, the flawed scientific reviews didn't end with the VA committee. The CDC was
brought in to add weight to the bogus analysis of dioxin's effects. After 4 years and $63 million in
federal funds, CDC concluded that an Agent Orange study could not be done based on military
records, and furthermore concluded, without data, that veterans were never exposed to harmful doses
of Agent Orange!

When the CDC's protocols were examined, however, it was found that three changes had been made
to its study in 1985, in an apparent attempt to dilute any negative effect that might be found.
Congress learned in 1986 that administration officials, not scientists, had forestalled CDC research
on the effects of dioxin.

In 1990, Senator Daschle disclosed additional political interference in the Air Force's Ranch Hand
study of Agent Orange effects. A 1984 draft report's conclusion was substantially altered, and the
study was described as "reassuring."

The Ranch Hand study is still ongoing, despite new allegations of fraudulent methodologies coming
to light every few years. It will cost taxpayers over $100 million.

Monsanto, a manufacturer of Agent Orange, was happy to duplicate the methods of federally funded
studies. By omitting five deaths in the exposed group and putting four exposed workers in the control
group, they were able to hide a 65% higher death rate in the workers exposed at the Nitro plant.
Another study of workers exposed in 1953 at a BASF plant was also shown to be falsified, as all the
data had been supplied by the BASF company.

Thanks to the efforts of Admiral Zumwalt, who as the commanding Navy Admiral in Vietnam was
responsible for some of the spraying, and whose son died from lymphoma, probably as a result of
dioxin exposure, many more illnesses were finally linked to Agent Orange, and have been made
service-connectable over the past decade.

But Zumwalt did not succeed at clearing the air regarding dioxin's actual toxicity, nor did he stop
further scientific shenanigans carried out by government and industry to hide the toxic effects of
other products, especially those to which our servicemen and women are exposed.

In April 2000, the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences tried to release a report
listing dioxin as a carcinogen, but it was blocked by a lawsuit filed by an industry group. NIEHS had
tried to list dioxin as a carcinogen in 1991, but was not allowed to do so then. John Bucher, deputy

director of the NIEHS, says, "Dioxin tends to increase the likelihood of all types of cancers" while
industry representatives continue to claim there is insufficient evidence to link dioxin to health
problems.

Ellen Silbergeld, a University of Maryland toxicologist, responded, "I think the public should be mad
as hell about the [dioxin review] process and the way it's been abused."

AGENT ORANGE: 2002

US and Vietnamese government scientists and international experts met last week in Hanoi to
discuss the effects of the "last significant ghost" of the Vietnam War: Agent Orange.

Vietnam wants US help performing research and obtaining compensation. It blames Agent Orange
for tens of thousands of birth defects. The US and Vietnam did sign an agreement during the meeting
to carry out joint research studies. But US ambassador Raymond Burghardt noted that developing
research studies "that are definitive and address the underlying causes of disease in Vietnam" will be
a "difficult task."

Reporting on the conference, Reuters pointed out, "Observers say conclusive research could have
far-reaching and expensive consequences in terms of compensation claims for the US and Agent
Orange makers, Dow Chemical and Monsanto."

However, the US seems to think it has an ace in the hole. The US embassy made clear, at the time of
the conference, that "US-Vietnam relations were normalized in 1995 after Vietnam dropped claims
of war reparations/compensation. At the time of normalization, neither compensation nor reparations
were granted or contemplated for the future."

And, anyway, the US government has a fallback position. "Washington argues there is no hard
evidence showing the defoliant caused specific illness," Reuters reported last week. And US
government scientists chimed in that any linkages to birth defects "would take many more years to
prove."

The well-documented story of dioxin and scientific perfidy provide a guidepost for how to assess
government-sponsored research, advisory committees, and regulatory decisions that impact on the
health effects of toxic exposures, especially when the government may be liable for damages.

"Those Who Cannot Remember the Past Are Condemned to Repeat It"

--George Santayana

RECOMMENDED READING

Zumwalt ER. Report to the Secretary of the Department of Veterans'
Affairs on the association between adverse health effects and exposure

to Agent Orange. DVA Report, 1990.

Echobichon DJ. Toxic Effects of Pesticides, in Casarett and Doull's
Toxicology. Klaassen CD ed, McGraw-Hill, NY. 1996.

Klawans HL et al. Neurologic problems following exposure to TCDD,
dioxin. In Neurotoxins and their pharmacological implications, ed.
Jenner P, 1987. Raven Press, NY.

Welch, Craig. Dioxin debate growing hotter. Seattle Times May 29, 2000

Agent Orange help needed now, Vietnam Red Cross says. Reuters, March
5, 2002.

~

Agent Orange Dangers
The most toxic dioxin was used in Agent Orange, the herbicide developed for military use. An April
2003 study performed by Columbia University sought to re-examine military records of the Vietnam
War. What the study found was that about 21 million gallons of herbicides were sprayed from 1961-
1971, adding up to 1.84 million gallons.

This figure was 10% greater than previously believed, and over half of the herbicides sprayed were
Agent Orange. Deadly illnesses associated to Agent Orange was not acknowledged by the Pentagon
until years after Vietnam veterans were exposed to the dangerous herbicide. Laboratory studies
performed in 1969 found that birth defects was linked to Agent Orange exposure, however the use of
the herbicide was not discontinued until two years later, exposing 2.4 million Vietnam veterans to it,
in addition to 5 million acres of forest with the majority of them still unrestored to date.

According to the VA site, Agent Orange was sprayed from 1965 to April 1970. According to the
president of Vietnam Veterans of Central Florida, “When it was being sprayed you knew it. It was
everywhere, for people who were on the ground, you could actually see it on their skin,” (Orlando
Sentinel, 6/9/03). Dow, Monsanto, Diamond Shamrock Corporation, Hercules Inc., Uniroyal inc., T-
H Agricultural & Nutrition Company, and Thompson Chemical Corporation all produced Agent
Orange for military use and were included in the Agent Orange settlement.

The Department of Veterans Affairs announced in 2003 that the link to chronic lymphocytic
leukemia to Agent Orange exposed Vietnam veterans is so strong that benefits would automatically
be given to any new diagnoses of it. There are as many as 1,000 new patients for chronic
lymphocytic leukemia alone expected amongst Vietnam veterans. Since many of the diseases
associated to Agent Orange exposure can take 20-30 years to develop, thousands of Vietnam
veterans may have been excluded from the Agent Orange settlement in 1985.

In 1993, the National Academy of Sciences issued a report linking Agent Orange to multiple
myeloma and other conditions. As more Agent Orange studies were performed more illnesses were

linked to the herbicide. The VA has listed prostate cancer, respiratory cancers, multiple myeloma,
type II diabetes, Hodgkin’s disease, non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma, soft tissue sarcoma, chloracne,
porphyria cutanea tarda, peripheral neuropathy, and spinal bifidia in children of veterans exposed to
Agent Orange as side effects of the herbicide.

The recent Supreme Court issuance of Vietnam veterans to seek compensation from chemical
manufacturers will allow the ability for justice to be given to victims unjustly exempted from the
Agent Orange settlement. For years, Vietnam veterans have been unable to collect any damages
despite the deadly illnesses suffered. Despite the lapse of time that has unfolded since the end of the
Vietnam War, illnesses are still being diagnosed and Vietnam veterans that have served their
country have been denied rights.

~
Monsanto Keeps Up Attack on Seed Saving Farmers
`
As if U.S. farmers weren't in enough trouble, now the "seed police" are after them. Monsanto, the
world leader in genetically modified grains, is pursuing fines and jail sentences for farmers who use
their seed in noncontractual ways-such as saving it and sowing it the next season. The Center for
Food Safety has released an investigative review of Monsanto's use of U.S. patent law to crack down
on farmers. Monsanto has filed 90 lawsuits against U.S. farmers in 25 states that involve 147 farmers
and 39 small businesses or farm companies, according to the report.

*500: The number of U.S. farmers under investigation annually by Monsanto.

*$10 million: Monsanto's annual budget (plus 75 staff) devoted to investigating and prosecuting U.S.
farmers.

*$15,253,602: The total recorded judgments granted to Monsanto for farmer
lawsuits.

*$3,052,800: The largest recorded judgment in favor of Monsanto as a result of a farmer lawsuit.

*8 months: The prison sentence given to a Tennessee farmer convicted of violating an agreement
with Monsanto.

Sources: "Monsanto vs. U.S. Farmers 2005" (The Center for Food Safety); The Associated Press.
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/pubs/CFSMOnsantovsFarmerReport1.13.05.pdf

~

The Story of Agent Orange
`
PART 1

It is the war that will not end. It is the war that continues to stalk and claim its victims decades after
the last shots were fired. It is the war of rainbow herbicides, Agents Orange, Blue, White, Purple,
Green and Pink.

This never-ending legacy of the war in Vietnam has created among many veterans and their families
deep feelings of mistrust of the U.S. government for its lack of honesty in studying the effects of the
rainbow herbicides, particularly Agent Orange, and its conscious effort to cover up information and
rig test results with which it does not agree.

STUDY CANCELED

On August 2, 1990, two veteran's groups filed suit in U.S. District Court in Washington, D.C.,
charging that federal scientists canceled an Agent Orange study mandated by Congress in 1979
because of pressure from the White House.

The four year, $43 million study was canceled, according to the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)
in Atlanta, because it could not accurately determine which veterans were exposed to the herbicide
used to destroy vegetation in Vietnam.

The American Legion, Vietnam Veterans of America and other veteran's groups are charging a
massive government cover-up on the issue of herbicide exposure because of the hundreds of millions
of dollars in health care and disability claims that would have to be paid.

The results of the scientific studies are rigged, claim many veterans, to exonerate the government
which conducted the spraying and the chemical companies which produced the herbicides. Until
there is a true study of the effects of Agent Orange, say the veterans - a study devoid of government
interference and political considerations, the war of the rainbow herbicides will go on.

Charges of a White House cover-up have been substantiated by a report from the House Government
Operations Committee. That report, released August 9, 1990, charges that officials in the Reagan
administration purposely "controlled and obstructed" a federal Agent Orange study in 1987 because
it did not want to admit government liability in cases involving the toxic herbicides.

Government and industry cover-ups on Agent Orange are nothing new, though. They have been
going on since before the herbicide was introduced in the jungles of Vietnam in the early 1960s.

PLANTS GIVEN CANCER

Agent Orange had its genesis as a defoliant in an obscure laboratory at the University of Chicago
during World War II. Working on experimental plant growth at the time, Professor E.J. Kraus,
chairman of the school's botany department, discovered that he could regulate the growth of plants
through the infusion of various hormones. Among the discoveries he made was that certain broadleaf
vegetation could be killed by causing the plants to experience sudden, uncontrolled growth. It was
similar to giving the plants cancer by introducing specific chemicals. In some instances, deterioration

of the vegetation was noticed within 24-48 hours of the introduction of the chemicals.

Kraus found that heavy doses of the chemical 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D) could induce
these growth spurts. Thinking this discovery might be of some use in the war effort, Kraus contacted
the War Department. Army scientists tested the plant hormones but found no use for them before the
end of the war.

Civilian scientists, however, found Kraus' plant hormones to be of use in everyday life after the war.
Chemical sprays that included 2,4-D were put on the market for use in controlling weeds in yards,
along roads and railroad rights of way.

ARMY EXPERIMENTS WITH DEADLY DEFOLIANTS

The Army continued to experiment with 2,4-D during the 1950s and late in the decade found a potent
combination of chemicals which quickly found its way into the Army's chemical arsenal.

Army scientists found that by mixing 2,4-D and 2,4,5-trichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4,5-T) and
spraying it on plants, there would be an almost immediate negative effect on the foliage. What they
didn't realize, or chose to ignore, was that 2,4,5-T contained dioxin, a useless by-product of herbicide
production. It would be twenty more years until concern was raised about dioxin, a chemical the
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) would later call "one of the most perplexing and potentially
dangerous" known to man.

According to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "The toxicity of dioxin renders it capable of killing some
species of newborn mammals and fish at levels of five parts per trillion (or one ounce in six million
tons). Less than two millionths of an ounce will kill a mouse. Its toxic properties are enhanced by the
fact that it can pass into the body through all major routes of entry, including the skin (by direct
contact), the lungs (by inhaling dust, fumes or vapors), or through the mouth. Entry through any of
these routes contributes to the total body burden. Dioxin is so toxic, according to the encyclopedia,
because of this: "Contained in cell membranes are protein molecules, called receptors, that normally
function to move substances into the cell. Dioxin avidly binds to these receptors and, as a result, is
rapidly transported into the cytoplasm and nucleus of the cell, where it causes changes in cellular
procession."

After minimal experimentation in 1961, a variety of chemical agents was shipped to Vietnam to aid
in anti-guerilla efforts. The chemicals were to be used to destroy food sources and eliminate foliage
that concealed enemy troop movements.

RAINBOW HERBICIDES

The various chemicals were labeled by color-coded stripes on the barrels, an arsenal of herbicides
known by the colors of the rainbow, including Agent Blue (which contained arsenic), Agent White,
Agent Purple, and the lethal combination of 2,4-D and 2,4,5-T, Agent Orange.

On January 13, 1962, three U.S. Air Force C-123s left Tan Son Nhut airfield to begin Operation
Hades (later called Operation Ranch Hand), the defoliation of portions of South Vietnam's heavily
forested countryside in which Viet Cong guerrillas could easily hide. By September, 1962, the
spraying program had intensified, despite an early lack of success, as U.S. officials targeted the Ca
Mau Peninsula, a scene of heavy communist activity. Ranch Hand aircraft sprayed more than 9,000
acres of mangrove forests there, defoliating approximately 95 percent of the targeted area. That
mission was deemed a success and full approval was given for continuation of Operation Ranch
Hand as the U.S. stepped up its involvement in Vietnam.

SIX TO TWENTY-FIVE TIMES STRONGER THAN RECOMMENDED

Over the next nine years, an estimated 12 million gallons of Agent Orange were sprayed throughout
Vietnam. The U.S. military command in Vietnam insisted publicly the defoliation program was
militarily successful and had little adverse impact on the economy of the villagers who came into
contact with it.

Although the herbicides were widely used in the United States, they usually were heavily diluted
with water or oil. In Vietnam, military applications were sprayed at the rate of three gallons per acre
and contained approximately 12 pounds of 2,4-D and 13.8 pounds of 2,3,5-T.

The military sprayed herbicides in Vietnam six to 25 times the rate suggested by the manufacturer.

In 1962, 15,000 gallons of herbicide were sprayed throughout Vietnam. The following year that
amount nearly quadrupled, as 59,000 gallons of chemicals were poured into the forests and streams.
The amounts increased significantly after that: 175,000 gallons in 1964, 621,000 gallons in 1965 and
2.28 million gallons in 1966.

The pilots who flew these missions became so proficient at their jobs that it would take only a few
minutes after reaching their target areas to dump their 1,000-gallon loads before turning for home.
Flying over portions of South Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia that had been sprayed, the pilots could
see the effects of their work. Many of them adopted a grim fatalism about the job. Over the door of
the ready room for Ranch Hand pilots at Tan Son Nhut Airport near Saigon hung this sign: "Only
You Can Prevent Forests."

MAKERS KNEW OF DANGER TO HUMANS

Unknown to the tens of thousands of American soldiers and Vietnamese civilians who were living,
eating and bathing in a virtual omnipresent mist of the rainbow herbicides, the makers of these
chemicals were well aware of their long-term toxic effects, but sought to suppress the information
from the government and the public, fearing negative backlash.

Of particular concern to the chemical companies was Agent Orange, which contained dioxin.
Publicly, the chemical companies said dioxin occurred naturally in the environment and was not
harmful to humans.

Privately, they knew otherwise.

A February 22, 1965 Dow Chemical Corporation internal memorandum provided a summary of a
meeting in which 13 executives discussed the potential hazards of dioxin in 2,4,5-T. Following that
meeting, Dow officials decided to meet with other makers of the chemical and formulate a stance on
Agent Orange and dioxin.

In March 1965, Dow official V.K. Rowe convened a meeting of executives of Monsanto, Hooker
Chemical, which operated the Love Canal dump, Diamond Alkali, the forerunner of Diamond-
Shamrock, and the Hercules Powder Co., which later became Hercules, Inc.

According to documents uncovered only years later, the purpose of this meeting was "to discuss the
toxicological problems caused by the presence of certain highly toxic impurities" in samples of 2,4,5-
T. The primary "highly toxic impurity" was 2,3,7,8 TCDD, one of 75 dioxin compounds.

CONCERN OVER DIOXINS KEPT QUIET

Three months later, Rowe sent a memo to Ross Mulholland, a manager with Dow in Canada,
informing him that dioxin "is exceptionally toxic, it has a tremendous potential for producing
chloracne (a skin disorder similar to acne) and systemic injury." Rowe ordered Mulholland in a
postscript to the letter that "Under no circumstances may this letter be reproduced, shown or sent to
anyone outside of Dow." Among those in attendance at one of the meetings of chemical company
officials was John Frawley, a toxicologist for Hercules, Inc. In an internal memorandum for Hercules
officials, Frawley wrote in 1965 that Dow was concerned the government might learn of a Dow
study showing that dioxin caused severe liver damage in rabbits. Dow was concerned, according to
Frawley, that "the whole industry will suffer." Frawley said he came away from the meeting with the
feeling that "Dow was extremely frightened that this situation might explode" and lead to
government restrictions.

The concern over dioxins was kept quiet and largely out of the public view. The U.S. government
and the chemical companies presented a united front on the issue of defoliation, claiming it was
militarily necessary to deprive the Viet Cong of hiding places and food sources and that it caused no
adverse economic or health effects to those who came into contact with the rainbow herbicides,
particularly Agent Orange.

AIR FORCE KNEW OF HEALTH DANGER

But, scientists involved in Operation Ranch Hand and documents uncovered recently in the National
Archives present a somewhat different picture. There are strong indications that not only were
military officials aware as early as 1967 of the limited effectiveness of chemical defoliation, they
knew of potential long-term health risks of frequent spraying and sought to keep that information
from the public by managing news reports.

Dr. James Clary was an Air Force scientist in Vietnam who helped write the history of Operation
Ranch Hand. Clary says the Air Force knew Agent Orange was far more hazardous to the health of
humans than anyone would admit at the time.

"When we (military scientists) initiated the herbicide program in the 1960s," Clary wrote in a 1988
letter to a member of Congress investigating Agent Orange, "we were aware of the potential for
damage due to dioxin contamination in the herbicide. We were even aware that the `military'
formulation had a higher dioxin concentration than the `civilian' version, due to the lower cost and
speed of manufacture. However, because the material was to be used on the `enemy,' none of us were
overly concerned. We never considered a scenario in which our own personnel would become
contaminated with the herbicide. And, if we had, we would have expected our own government to
give assistance to veterans so contaminated."

MILITARY DOWNPLAYS USE OF HERBICIDES

Aware of the concern over the use of herbicides in Vietnam, particularly the use of Agent Orange,
the U.S. Military Assistance Command, Vietnam (MACV), attempted to put the proper public
relations spin on information concerning Operation Ranch Hand by announcing a "revision" in its
policy on the use of herbicides.

It was not so much a revision of the policy as it was an appearance of a revision of the policy as it
was an appearance of revision, as is evident in a memorandum signed by Gen. R.W. Komer, deputy
to Gen. William Westmoreland for civil operations and RD support (CORDS).

"The purpose of this exercise would be to meet criticisms of excessive use of defoliants by clarifying
that they will no longer be used in large areas, while in reality not restricting our use of defoliants
(since they are not now normally used in this area anyway). In addition, there would be an escape
clause . . . which would permit the use of defoliants even in the prohibited area provided that a strong
case could be made to MACV/JGS.

"Appearing to restrict the use of defoliants in this manner would (a) help meet US and Vietnamese
criticism of these operations; (b) increase peasant confidence so that they would grow more rice; (c)
be of psywar (psychological warfare) value by suggesting that large areas were sufficiently pacified
by now that large scale defoliants use was no longer necessary."

But the idea that the spraying of herbicides could be confined to a limited area as suggested in this
memo was known to be futile as early as 1962.

MIST DRIFT

One of the first defoliation efforts of Operation Ranch Hand was near a rubber plantation in January,
1962.

According to an unsigned U.S. Army memorandum dated January 24, 1966, titled "Use of

Herbicides in Vietnam," studies showed that within a week of spraying, the trees in the plantation
"showed considerable leaf fall."

"The injury to the young rubber trees occurred even though the plantation was located some 500
yards away and upwind of the target at the time of the spray delivery."

The memo went on to say that "vapors of the chemical were strong enough in concentration to cause
this injury to the rubber." These vapors, "appear to come from `mist drift' or from vaporization either
in the atmosphere or after the spray has settled on the vegetation."

The issue of "mist drift" continued to plague the defoliation program. How far would it drift? How
fast? Wind speed and direction were of major concerns in answering these questions. Yet, there were
other questions, many of which could not be answered.

What happened in humid weather?

How quickly did the chemicals diffuse in the atmosphere or were they carried into the clouds and
dropped dozens of miles away? How long would the rainbow herbicides linger in the air or on the
ground once they were sprayed?

A November 8, 1967 memorandum from Eugene M. Locke, deputy U.S. ambassador in Saigon, once
again addressed the problem of "mist drift" and "significant damage" to rubber plantations from
spraying earlier in the year.

According to Locke, "the herbicide damage resulted from a navigational error; some trees in another
plantation had been defoliated deliberately in order to enhance the security of a U.S. military camp.
The bulk of the herbicide damage must be attributed, however, to the drift of herbicide through the
atmosphere. This drift occurs (a) after the spray is released from the aircraft and before it reaches the
ground, and/or (b) when herbicide that has already reached the ground vaporizes during the heat of
the day, is carried aloft, then moved by surface winds and eventually deposited elsewhere.

"There is a lack of agreement within the Mission regarding the distances over which the two kinds of
drift can occur. When properly released (as required at 150 feet above the target, with winds of no
more than 10 mph blowing away from nearby plantations) herbicide spray should fall with
reasonable accuracy upon its intended target. The range of drift of vaporized herbicide, however, has
not been scientifically established at the present time. In recognition of this phenomenon and to
minimize it, current procedures require that missions may be flown only during inversion conditions,
i.e., when the temperature on the land and in the atmosphere produces downward currents of air.
Estimates within the Mission of vaporized herbicide drift range from only negligible drift to
distances of up to 10 kilometers and more."

Ten kilometers and more. More than six miles. In essence, troops operating more than six miles from
defoliation operations could find themselves, their water and their food doused with chemical agents,
including dioxin-laced Agent Orange. And they wouldn't even know it.

More than four months later, on March 23, 1968, Gen. A.R. Brownfield, then Army Chief of Staff,

sent a message to all senior U.S. advisors in the four Corps Tactical Zones (CTZ) of Vietnam.

Brownfield ordered that "helicopter spray operations will not be conducted when ground
temperatures are greater that 85 (degrees) Fahrenheit and wind speed in excess of 10 mph."

But the concern was not for any troops operating in the areas of spraying, as was evident in the
memo, but for the rubber plantations. The message ordered that "a buffer distance of at least two (2)
kilometers from active rubber plantation must be maintained." No such considerations were given for
the troops operating in the area.

PROJECT PINK ROSE

One of the U.S. government's worst planned and executed efforts to use herbicides was a secret
operation known as "Project Pink Rose."

According to a recently declassified report on "Project Pink Rose," the operation had its genesis in
September 1965 when the Joint Chiefs of Staff received a recommendation from the Commander in
Chief Pacific "to develop a capability to destroy by fire large areas of forest and jungle growth in
Southeast Asia."

On March 11, 1966, a test operation known as "Hot Tip" was documented at Chu Pong mountain
near Pleiku when 15 B-52s dropped incendiaries on a defoliated area. According to the declassified
memo, "results were inconclusive but sufficient fire did develop to indicate that this technique might
be operationally functional."

What neither the government nor the chemical companies told anyone was that burning dioxins
significantly increases the toxicity of the dioxins. So, not only was the government introducing
cancer causing chemicals into the war, it was increasing their toxicity by burning them.

Nevertheless, "Project Pink Rose" continued.

In November, 1966, three free strike target areas were selected: one in War Zone D and two in War
Zone C. Each target was a box seven kilometers square. The target areas were double and triple
canopy jungle. The areas were heavily prepped with defoliants, the government dumping 255,000
gallons on the test sites.

The three sites were bombed individually, one on January 18, 1967, another January 28, 1967 and
the last on April 4, 1967. According to the memo, "the order and dates of strikes were changed to
properly phase Pink Rose operations with concurrent ground operations."

Which means that U.S. and Vietnamese troops were living and fighting in these test sites on which
255,000 gallons of cancer causing defoliants had been dumped.

The results of "Project Pink Rose" were less than favorable.

According to the memo, "The Pink Rose technique is ineffective as a means of removing the forest
crown canopy."

The conclusion: "Further testing of the Pink Rose technique in South Vietnam under the existing
concept be terminated."

DEFOLIANTS DUMPED ON PEOPLE AND INTO WATER SUPPLIES

In addition to the planned dumps of herbicides, accidental and intentional dumps of defoliants over
populated areas and into the water supplies was not unusual, according to government documents.

A memorandum for the record dated October 31, 1967, and signed by Col. W.T. Moseley, chief of
MACV's Chemical Operations Division, reported an emergency dump of herbicide far from the
intended target.

At approximately 1120 hours, October 29, 1967, aircraft #576 made an emergency dump of
herbicide in Long Khanh Province due to failure of one engine and loss of power in the other.
Approximately 1,000 gallons of herbicide WHITE were dumped from an altitude of 2,500 feet.

No mention was made of wind speed or direction, but chemicals dropped from that height had the
potential to drift a long way.

Another memorandum for the record, this one dated January 8, 1968 and signed by Col. John Moran,
chief Chemical Operations Division of MACV, also reported an emergency dump of herbicide, this
time into a major river near Saigon.

"At approximately 1015 hours, January 6, 1968, aircraft #633 made an emergency dump over the
Dong Nai River approximately 15 kilometers east of Saigon when the aircraft experienced severe
engine vibration and loss of power. Approximately 1,000 gallons of herbicide ORANGE were
dumped from an altitude of 3,500 feet."

CHEMICAL COMPANY EMPLOYEES DEVELOP SKIN PROBLEMS

The chemical companies continued to insist that the herbicides in general, and Agent Orange in
particular, had no adverse effects on humans. This despite Dow's concerns about human exposure to
Agent Orange expressed internally in 1965 but hidden from the government. And this despite
evidence at the plants producing Agent Orange that workers exposed to it suffered unusual health
problems.

The Diamond Alkali Co. in Newark, New Jersey, was one of the major producers of Agent Orange
for the government. Spurred by Pentagon officials to make their production schedules to "help the
war effort," patriotic employees at Diamond Alkali eagerly sought to fill their quotas.

But some of Diamond Alkali's employees began suffering what were described as "painful and

disfiguring" skin diseases, according to the doctor who treated more than 50 of the employees in the
early and mid 1960s.

"They (the employees) were aware of what was going on," said Dr. Roger Brodkin, head of
dermatology at the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey.

"No one worried much about the skin disease because everyone was determined to make production
schedules."

Brodkin said he alerted state health officials of the problem, but got little response.

"They came out, all of them, said Brodkin. "They looked around and they said, `Ah hah,' and left.
Nothing was done."

Brodkin later discovered that many of Diamond Alkali's employees involved in the manufacture of
Agent Orange were suffering a variety of ailments.

"We discovered that not only were these people getting skin disease, but they were also showing
some indication of liver damage," he said.

It was not until 1983 that the state of New Jersey got around to testing the soil around the plant. It
found hazardous levels of dioxin.

New Jersey Gov. Thomas Kean urged residents living within 300 yards of the plant to move.

It was not until 1968 that scientists began raising some concerns about the use of the rainbow
herbicides in Vietnam.

STATE DEPARTMENT EXONERATES CHEMICAL COMPANIES

Part of their concern came following a November 1967 study by Yale University botany Professor
Arthur Galston. Galston did some experiments with Agent Orange and other herbicides to determine
whether they were dangerous to humans and animals. Galston was unable to come to any definite
conclusions on Agent Orange, but advised that continued use of it might "be harmful" and have
unforeseen consequences.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) in the summer of 1968 sent a
letter to the Secretaries of State and Defense urging a study to determine the ecological effects of
herbicide spraying in Vietnam.

That letter prompted a cable from Secretary of State Dean Rusk to the U.S. Embassy in Saigon. The
cable, dated August 26, 1968, sought additional information but informed embassy officials of the
tactic State was going to take in its reply to the AAAS.

"The Department of State's proposed reply notes that the limited investigations of the ecological

Monsanto Diet Drink Poison Warning

Monsanto Diet Drink Poison Warning

Empfohlen

Empfohlen

Weitere ähnliche Inhalte

Ähnlich wie Monsanto Diet Drink Poison Warning

Ähnlich wie Monsanto Diet Drink Poison Warning (8)

Mehr von P6P

Mehr von P6P (20)

Kürzlich hochgeladen

Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)

Monsanto Diet Drink Poison Warning