Link Between Pesticides and ADHD in Children

Meanwhile …

The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has officially weighed in on feeding children an organic diet just in time for the vote on Prop 37, California’s GMO labeling initiative. According to AAP, “there is currently no direct evidence that consuming an organic diet leads to improved health or lower risk of disease.”

In the report “Organic Foods: Health and Environmental Advantages and Disadvantages” released Monday afternoon, the AAP admits that organic foods contain less pesticides, but the organization goes on to say, “Current evidence does not support any meaningful nutritional benefits or deficits from eating organic compared with conventionally grown foods.”

No meaningful benefits? From eating less pesticide?

Indeed, USA Today quoted Joel Forman, co-author of the report and an associate professor of pediatrics at Mount Sinai Hospital, as saying, “The report does cite lower pesticides in organic produce and potentially lower risk of exposure to drug-resistant bacteria, but the needed long-term studies do not yet exist to show that eating pesticide-free food makes people healthier.”  …

Western central banks very secretive about gold

It’s strange what you encounter when you try to take a serious look at the gold policy of central banks and their agents, the bullion banks.

Some observers, including the Gold Anti-Trust Action Committee (GATA), estimate that Western central banks have on hand nowhere near as much gold as they claim. These observers suspect that much Western central bank gold has been sold or leased largely surreptitiously to restrain the gold price over the last two decades.

Here is the explanation provided to me in an interview by the Canadian financial analyst and fund manager Marshall Auerback when I asked: Do you think that the Western central banks and the International Monetary Fund really have in their vaults the gold they say they have?

Marshall Auerback: “In a strict accounting sense they might, but it might be irrelevant. I suspect that the central banks have not been selling much gold over the past few years since the inception of the Washington Agreement on Gold, but I think they have still been leasing considerable amounts into the gold market. From a flow standpoint, it’s irrelevant whether the gold is sold or lent, as it still appears as supply in the market.

“So the key question becomes: Can the leased gold be recovered by the central banks? The work of GATA and others such as Bob Landis and Reg Howe suggests that the gold cannot be recovered. In effect you have a ‘prison of the shorts’ situation, whereby the gold that has been lent out and melted down to become, say, part of some Indian bride’s dowry will not be coming back into the market.

“Ultimately, I think, the central banks will ratify this in an accounting sense by reclassifying the leased gold as sold, so from a stock standpoint, that will validate GATA’s argument that there is far less gold being held by the central banks than is commonly believed.” [1]

Moreover, major news organizations avoid the gold market manipulation issue although it might seem to be a godsend for them — the Financial Times, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, Reuters, Bloomberg News, the Associated Press, etc. They seem reluctant to put to central banks any pointed questions about gold.

On August 13 GATA Secretary/Treasurer Chris Powell published a list of gold-related questions that financial journalists could put to central banks …

Kucinich on US-Sponsored Terror

WASHINGTON, D.C. (October 24, 2012) – Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) today released the following statement opposing the codification and the streamlining of the United States’ “Kill Matrix” which determines when and where the United States uses drones to conduct targeted killings. Kucinich added, “state-sponsored murder has killed so many people that it is becoming routine, bureaucratized and pathological.”

See the video here.

“A recent Washington Post article contains an unsettling confirmation of what many of us have feared for years; the United States is establishing state-sponsored murder as a permanent condition of foreign policy.

“Three hundred fifty drone strikes by the U.S. have killed as many as 3,378 people including as many as 885 civilians, including women and children. Our drone strikes create sympathy for our enemies among the populations we bomb. Numerous academic reports have detailed that our policies are counterproductive and lead to increased radicalization.

“Yet, according to The Washington Post “targeted killing is now so routine that the Obama administration has spent much of the past year codifying and streamlining the process that sustains it.”

“According to these officials, the government expects to keep adding names to the kill list, now called a ‘disposition matrix.’ The Kill Matrix will continue at least another decade. The institutionalization of the kill/capture list should concern us all. This program has been created and expanded absent any oversight from Congress.  With the Kill Matrix the ultimate decision to kill rests in the hands of a single individual: the President of the United States.

“Let’s take a moment to reflect. Targeted killing under international law is legal only under very narrow circumstances. Significant questions remain as to whether or not the U.S. is conducting these strikes in accordance with the law.  Thus far, the evidence says otherwise. We have killed thousands of people. We have evidence that this policy creates new U.S. enemies, and our government wants to make this program permanent. We continue to kill ‘top leaders.’ How many times have we killed ‘Al Qaeda’s number 2?’ Will we keep killing until everyone who disagrees with us is dead?

“This short-sighted policy has been likened to mowing the grass. As soon as you stop cutting the grass down, it comes right back. Nations aren’t made of grass. They are made of people.  Innocent civilians are being killed.  We are not solving our problems or making the world safer. We are simply staining our own global image, undermining our ethical place to lead and descending into moral depravity.”

Thimerosal INEFFECTIVE as a Vaccine Preservative

Despite the fact that there were never proper studies done to evaluate the potential toxicity of thimerosal prior to marketing, there is ample evidence provided by federal agencies and independent scientists that spans the last 70 years which documents that thimerosal is not an effective or safe vaccine preservative. In a study published in the Journal of the American Medical Association in 1948 titled “The bacteriostatic and bactericidal actions of some mercurial compounds on hemolytic streptococci,” the authors vigorously argued that thimerosal was ineffective as a “disinfectant, germicide and antiseptic.” In the review of the literature in this paper, the authors cited eight studies from 1928, 1935, 1937, 1938,

and 1944 all of which drew similar conclusions.5

In 1975, the FDA convened a panel of experts which included the lead author of the 1948 paper cited above to evaluate mercury-containing over-the-counter (OTC) products. The panel issued its reports in 1980 and in 1982. The FDA issued a report of the panel’s findings in the Federal Register where they concluded that “some mercury-containing preparations are not effective and others are not safe and effective for OTC topical

antimicrobial use. 6 A bacteriostatic action that is capable of being reversed by contact with body fluids and other organic matter does not constitute an effective topical antimicrobial action…” Most of the literature reviewed addressed mercury’s lack of antibacterial properties. One study reviewed published in 1970 titled, “Three thousand years of mercury. A plea for abandonment of a dangerous, unproven therapy,” addressed

mercury’s lack of effectiveness regarding anti-fungal properties. 7
With respect to thimerosal in particular, the panel found evidence from 1950 which

concluded that “thimerosal was no better than water in protecting mice from potential fatal

streptococcal infections.”8 Additionally, citing a 1935 study, the panel reported that thimerosal was “35.3 times more toxic for embryonic chick heart tissue than for

Staphylococcus aureus.”9 The panel concluded that “thimerosal was not safe for OTC topical use because of its potential for cell damage if applied to broken skin and its allergy potential. It is not effective as a topical antimicrobial because its bacteriostatic action can be reversed.” However, it wasn’t until 1998 that the FDA issued its final report banning the use of thimerosal in topical OTC products because they were not “safe and


There are also several recent reports of thimerosal’s failure as a preservative. Clusters of disease from Group A streptococcus infections were traced back to multi-dose vials of diphtheria toxoid, pertussis, and tetanus toxoid (DPT) vaccine which were contaminated

after being opened. 11 Additionally, in 2004, a Chiron plant that manufactured Fluvirin

was forced to close because its vaccine was contaminated with Serratia marcescens.12 This vaccine used thimerosal as a preservative in its product. This plant closure created shortages in the vaccine supply and caused concern among providers and patients. In this case and others, thimerosal failed to prevent bacterial growth. …