Sewage sludge (also known as ‘biosolids’) refers to the semi-solids left over from municipal waste water treatment. Current legal disposal options include incineration, landfill, and land application to agricultural land, rangeland, or forests.
The resources on this page provide a scientific overview of health impacts from land application. Risk assessment is complex because Sludge Contains Highly Varied Amounts of Organic Chemicals, Toxic Metals, Chemical Irritants, and Pathogens. Furthermore, the effects of their interactions, long-term build-up in soils, leaching into waterways, and uptake into crops and the food system have not been well-studied. Thus, little is known about the long-term human heath and Ecological Consequences of Sludge Application. There is, however, clear scientific documentation of the sometimes deadly Direct Human Health Consequences of Land Application. Furthermore, by bringing together and concentrating varied pathogens and antibiotics, Wastewater Treatment Selects Antibiotic Resistant Bacteria, a health problem worldwide.
The paucity of scientific research is not accidental. Journalists and researchers have chronicled how the EPA’s Conflicts of Interest and those of other institutions, including the NAS, USDA, municipalities, and universities, obstruct sludge research and further undermine risk assessment and regulation.
EPA’s Sludge Regulation fails to incorporate existing scientific information and to protect the public. Yet while many scientific experts recommend a total ban on sludge application to land, EPA and others continue to promote it. Sludge is sold to the public as nutrient-rich garden compost and portrayed to farmers as a valuable fertilizer.
Even ending land application, however, is only a partial solution. Alternatives, incineration and landfill, are also hazardous. Ensuring ecosystem and human health requires Reformulating the Problem with the explicit goal of preventing sludge formation. This will require organic wastes and industrial wastes be kept separate and treated at their source. …
An experimental Ebola drug, ZMapp, has cured all 18 of the laboratory monkeys infected with the deadly virus.
According to Reuters, these include those suffering the fever and hemorrhaging characteristics of the disease and had been hours from death.
Monkeys not treated until five days after infection also survived.
Reportedly, no other experimental Ebola therapy has shown such success in primates. Five days of infection in the animals has been said to be the equivalent of nine to 11 days after infection in humans. …
ZMapp has been described as a mix of three antibodies that bind to proteins on Ebola viruses and trigger the immune system to destroy them.
Since ebola is a product of the invisible empire’s bioweapons research conducted by south africa in the 1970′s (implausible deniability notwithstanding), this concoction should be public domain. It doesn’t sound difficult to manufacture.
Labor Day is an Orwellian holiday: US “leaders” psychopathically pretend to care about American labor while lying about a real unemployment rate of close to 25% (the so-called “official” rate excludes under-employed and discouraged workers).
Along with unemployment, Americans receive policy enabling oligarchs to “legally” hide $20 to $30 trillion in offshore tax havens in a rigged-casino economy designed for “peak inequality.” For comparison, $1 to $3 trillion ends global poverty forever, saving a million children’s lives every month from slow and gruesome death (here, here). And, as always, US “leaders” lie-begat Americans into unlawful Wars of Aggression (in comparison, 11 days of US war cost would pay for all tuition of US college students).
Americans could have full-employment and zero public deficits and debt with monetary and credit reform.
These solutions are obvious upon a few moments of your attention. See for yourself: …
… The Journal Environmental Science & Technology – published by the American Chemical Society – reported last year that airborne levels of radioactive cesium were raised by 100 to 1,000 times (what scientists describe as two to three “orders of magnitude“):
Before the FDNPP accident, average 137Cs levels were typically of 1 μBq m−3 in Central Europe and lower average values (<0.3 μBq m−3) were characteristic of northern, western and southern Europe.
During the passage of contaminated air masses from Fukushima, airborne 137Cs levels were globally enhanced by 2 to 3 orders of magnitude.
Indeed, even hot particles and nuclear core fragments from Fukushima were found to have traveled all the way to Europe.
The French government radiation agency – IRSN – released a video of Fukushima cesium hitting the West Coast of North America. EneNews displays a screenshot from the IRSN video, and quantifies the extreme cesium spikes:
- Cesium-137 levels in 2010: 0.000001 mBq/m³ of Cs-137 (blue writing)
- Cesium-137 levels in Mar. 2011: 1 to 10 mBq/m³ in Western U.S. (orange plume)
- Cs-137 levels increased 1,000,000 – 10,000,000 times after Fukushima
Radioactive cesium bioaccumulates in large fish and animals.
The radioactive half life of cesium 137 is usually 30 years. But scientists at the Savannah River National Laboratory say that the cesium at Chernobyl will persist in the environment between 5 and 10 times longer – between 180 and 320 years. …
It was not even a year ago when we were bombarded with messaging that Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is a Supreme Evil and Grave Threat, and that military action against his regime was both a moral and strategic imperative. The standard cast of “liberal interventionists” – Tony Blair, Anne-Marie Slaughter, Nicholas Kristof and Samantha Power - issued stirring sermons on the duties of war against Assad. Secretary of State John Kerry actually compared Assad to (guess who?) Hitler, instructing the nation that “this is our Munich moment.” Striking Assad, he argued, “is a matter of national security. It’s a matter of the credibility of the United States of America. It’s a matter of upholding the interests of our allies and friends in the region.”
U.S. military action against the Assad regime was thwarted only by overwhelming American public opinion which opposed it and by a resounding rejection by the UK Parliament of Prime Minister David Cameron’s desire to assume the usual subservient British role in support of American wars.
Now the Obama administration and American political class is celebrating the one-year anniversary of the failed “Bomb Assad!” campaign by starting a new campaign to bomb those fighting against Assad – the very same side the U.S. has been arming over the last two years.
It’s as though the U.S. knew for certain all along that it wanted to fight in the war in Syria, and just needed a little time to figure out on which side it would fight. It switched sides virtually on a dime, and the standard Pentagon courtiers of the U.S. media and war-cheering foreign policy elites are dutifully following suit, mindlessly depicting ISIS as an unprecedented combination of military might and well-armed and well-funded savagery (where did they get those arms and funds?). Something very similar happened in Libya: the U.S. spent a decade insisting that a Global War on Terror – complete with full-scale dismantling of basic liberties and political values – was necessary to fight against the Unique Threat of Al Qaeda and “Jihadists”, only to then fight on the same side as them, and arming and empowering them. …
Two birds with one stone etc…
Jim Willie joined TFMetalsReport this weekend for a special holiday podcast. In this excellent report from the Hat Trick Letter editor, Willie discusses:
This week’s announcement by Gazprom that they will begin accepting payment in rubles and yuan
The escalation of US and EU sanctions against Russia and how they are failing/backfiring
Willie explains the US’ motives for provoking Russia via Ukraine: To entice Russia to prematurely move to place the Ruble into a reserve currency status, and ultimately, to blame Putin/Russia for the coming US dollar collapse!
The growing isolation of the US as a economic superpower
The eventual emergence of a new global currency regime & collapse of the dollar
9/11 Commission Chairs, Congressmen and Intelligence Officers All Call for Declassification …
I have an idea. Let’s go on pretending that we still live in a democracy! As long as they get to keep on the velvet glove we get to keep going to the movies and watching tv and buying cheap stuff at walmart. Let’s pretend that we don’t know that elements of the federal government were involved in 9/11. Let’s wait around and see if the people who are really in control of washington and the media allow their treason, mass murder and financial crimes to be exposed and prosecuted. They just need a little more time to start WWIII or do another terrorist or biowarfare attack so the sheep stampede into whatever hell they’ve prepared for us.
As long as we keep our end of the “bargain” they’ll let us stay in the matrix a little while longer, at least until the dollar is worthless. Then it’s the IMF and the military to the rescue! Yay! We can all eat mud pies and bullets until we just fade away, just like what has happened in every other country under bankster occupation.
Slightly more than one American household with children in every 25 is surviving on less than $2 per day of income from all sources. One quarter of that 4.3% (that’s 1% of all Americans with children) receive less than $1.25 per day. One third (that’s about 1.33% of all Americans) receive between $1.25 and $2. Another third of that 4.3% receive enough government benefits to be living on between $1.25 and $2 a day. A tiny 0.1% of that 4.3% are even surviving somehow on “Negative income & benefits.”
On 26 August 2014, the co-authors of a Brookings Institution paper published a chart of those findings (reproduced here below, courtesy of the Brookings Institution) that looks like it might be some painting at the Museum of Modern Art, though what it refers to isn’t nearly so pretty, and is actually quite miserable:
These findings were originally published in the June 2013 Social Science Review, but have not yet been reported in the mainstream press. That study’s co-authors are H. Luke Shaefer of the University of Michigan, and Kathryn Endin of Harvard. The study was posted online by its funding organization, the National Poverty Center.
Titled, “Rising Extreme Poverty in the United States and the Response of Federal Means-Tested Transfer Programs,” the researchers reported that there has been “an increase in the prevalence of extreme poverty among U.S. households with children between 1996 and 2011.” Furthermore, “The prevalence of extreme poverty has risen sharply since 1996, particularly among those most impacted by the 1996 welfare reform,” which was signed into law by President Bill Clinton and which embodied numerous elements of President Ronald Reagan’s views on poverty. It “replaced a need-based entitlement program, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC), with a more restrictive federal block grant program called Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF).” The authors explain as follows the $2/day cutoff they’re focusing on:
The measure of “extreme poverty” used here is based on one of the World Bank’s key indicators of global poverty: $2 per person, per day. Tellingly, the World Bank does not release official estimates for the United States for this metric because it is meant to capture poverty based on “the standards of the poorest countries.” … Living below this metric is widely considered to be a marker of extreme destitution, which is assumed to be very uncommon among wealthy nations. …
All just a terrible mistake…. economics is SO very complicated, they just haven’t figured it out yet. But give them a few more years and it won’t matter.
What’s the scariest boogieman out there? CANCER! Billions, perhaps trillions have been collected from the faithful to be ostensibly spent to find a “cure” yet there still is none in sight. It seems to be an inevitable death sentence that we all shudder to think of. Yet – is it really? Did any of the big cancer foundations ever think to study the effects of sugar on the body? Well, the research has been done and the results are now in: sugar causes cancer.
Make no mistake, friends, the medical industry is a business and cancer is big business. There are beaucoup bucks in cancer. Every cancer treatment yields huge dividends. If researchers had wanted a cure, they would have simply read the books I did when I was twenty years old – 45 years ago. And the story I will tell you now, seals the deal – that the cancer industry does not want to find a cure, This incident is from my personal experience…
I once worked with an oncologist, professor at a state university medical school. He wrote articles about his research and it was my job to make the articles letter perfect for submission to medical journals. When I asked him to tell me in layperson’s terms about his research, he described what I had read in a book several years before: Laetrile, Nature’s Answer to Cancer. I told him what he was doing was going to work and he asked me how I knew.
I said, “Because what you are describing is Laetrile.”
We had been walking on a busy beach – it was the first warm day in spring – and when I said the word Laetrile, he stopped and stood like a statue in the sand, eyes wide open and raised to the sky, unfocused. His mouth was open, but not a sound came from him. I just watched. Finally he spoke.
“They’ll destroy me,” he said. “They’ll destroy me.”
“Who?” I asked.
It took him a long while to finally respond and when he did, he turned his face to the ground and said, “The AMA. The AMA will destroy me.”
That sounded pretty serious, so I just kept quiet and we began walking again. Then he told me the story about his early career as a medical doctor and researcher. He was working at the National Institutes of Health, the NIH, in the Washington, DC area and was assigned to a committee that was to evaluate a new cure for cancer – Laetrile, discovered by two German doctors, a father-son team, the Drs. Krebs.
The entire NIH study consisted of this:
All the researchers were gathered around a table and the chairman of the committee entered the room. In the center of the table was a small bowl of powder, Laetrile. The chairman licked his finger and put it in the powder, then tasted it. He immediately spat it out. “That’s cyanide!” he exclaimed. And that was the extent of the study. Laetrile was immediately outlawed in our fair country.
Millions upon millions of Americans have died since, of cancer and our rank in health in the world is 37th due to it. Other countries that have a “handle” on cancer, are not too proud or stubborn to use Laetrile as one of their primary tools to prevent and treat tumors and cancers – and they rank among the top five countries in health.
My own mother had cancer. She went along with the modern American approach of slash, poison and burn. It “killed” her cancer but it also killed her. She died in her husband’s arms.
The article linked below tells you how to prevent cancer. Why flirt with pain and suffering and a medical industry that is not really dedicated to optimal health? Read this article, “Research Reveals How Sugar Causes Cancer.”
Then ask yourself, “Can I let go of sugar for the sake of my health?” I hope you will vote for yourself. There are many other ways to get a sweet hit without sugar. Go buy a big bag of your favorite fruits (organic is not only healthier; it also tastes better) and take a walk through the honey and date section of your local health food store. You don’t have to give up goodness, just leave processed sugar behind. Read labels – these words indicate sugar: “Sugar, sucrose, beet sugar, sugar, fructose, corn syrup…”
If you suck on some fresh, raw sugar can stalk or eat a fresh, raw, delicious grated beet, or fresh, juicy peaches, you will be ok… but processed sugars should certainly never show up on your grocery list – or mine. Do your own research on the Internet – find alternatives to a major cause of cancer.
Good book: Sugar Blues by William Dufty.