Podcasts about National Toxicology Program

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. recently said he plans to tell the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention to stop recommending fluoridation nationwide. Jessica Steier, DRPH, PMP, CEO of Unbiased Science and host of the Unbiased Science Podcast and Linda Birnbaum, scientist emeritus and former director of the National Institute for Environmental Health Sciences, as well as the National Toxicology Program and scholar in residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment at Duke University, parse fact from myth and what the science says about water fluoridation.

Are you wearing wireless ear buds right now? Your beloved wireless devices emit radiation that penetrates your body, creating biological changes scientists now link to serious health concerns. Environmental health expert Theodora Scarato reveals how the $30 million National Toxicology Program study found this radiation caused cancer in lab animals, mirroring concerning patterns in human cancer cases. Though the wireless industry's playbook bears striking similarities to Big Tobacco's tactics, we can still get a lot of information that can improve our health. Tune in to discover what might be happening inside your body with every call, text and download. LET'S TALK THE WALK! ***NEW*** Facebook Group for Our Community! Join here for support, motivation and fun! Wellness While Walking Facebook page Wellness While Walking on Instagram Wellness While Walking on Threads Wellness While Walking on Twitter Wellness While Walking website for show notes and other information wellnesswhilewalking@gmail.com RESOURCES AND SOURCES (some links may be affiliate links) THEODORA SCARATO ON WIRELESS AND OTHER ELECTROMAGNETIC FIELDS (EMFs) Theodora Scarato on LinkedIn Environmental Health Sciences (CHECK BACK SOON FOR EVEN MORE INFORMATION!) New Hampshire State Commission Report on 5G, Health and Environment   International Commission on the Biological Effects of Non-ionizing Electromagnetic Fields Harvard Research Report: Captured Agency: How the Federal Communications Commission Is Dominated by the Industries It Presumably Regulates Theodora on The Smart Human Podcast (“Cell Phone Radiation” Episode)   HOW TO RATE AND REVIEW WELLNESS WHILE WALKING How to Leave a Review on Apple Podcasts on Your iOS Device 1.   Open Apple Podcast App (purple app icon that says Podcasts). 2.   Go to the icons at the bottom of the screen and choose “search” 3.   Search for “Wellness While Walking” 4.   Click on the SHOW, not the episode. 5.   Scroll all the way down to “Ratings and Reviews” section 6.   Click on “Write a Review” (if you don't see that option, click on “See All” first) 7.   Then you will be able to rate the show on a five-star scale (5 is highest rating) and write a review! 8.   Thank you! I so appreciate this!   How to Leave a Review on Apple Podcasts on a Computer  1.   Visit Wellness While Walking page on Apple Podcasts in your web browser (search for Apple Podcasts or click here)  https://www.apple.com/apple-podcasts/ 2.   Click on “Listen on Apple Podcasts” or “Open the App” 3.   This will open Apple Podcasts and put in search bar at top left “Wellness While Walking” 4.   This should bring you to the show, not a particular episode – click on the show's artwork 5.   Scroll down until you see “Rating and Reviews” 6.   Click on “See All” all the way to the right, near the Ratings and Review Section and its bar chart 7.   To leave a written review, please click on “Write a Review” 8.   You'll be able to leave a review, along with a title for it, plus you'll be able to rate the show on the 5-star scale (with 5 being the highest rating) 9.   Thank you so very much!! OTHER APPS WHERE RATINGS OR REVIEWS ARE POSSIBLE Spotify Goodpods Overcast (if you star certain episodes, or every one, that will help others find the show)  Castbox Podcast Addict Podchaser Podbean   HOW TO SHARE WELLNESS WHILE WALKING Tell a friend or family member about Wellness While Walking, maybe while you're walking together or lamenting not feeling 100% Follow up with a quick text with more info, as noted below! (My favorite is pod.link/walking because it works with all the apps!) Screenshot a favorite episode playing on your phone and share to social media or to a friend via text or email! Wellness While Walking on Apple – click the up arrow to share with a friend via text or email, or share to social media Wellness While Walking on Spotify -- click the up arrow to share with a friend via text or email, or share to social media Use this universal link for any podcast app: pod.link/walking – give it to friends or share on social media Tell your pal about the Wellness While Walking website Thanks for listening and now for sharing! : )       DISCLAIMER Neither I nor many of my podcast guests are doctors or healthcare professionals of any kind, and nothing on this podcast or associated content should be considered medical advice. The information provided by Wellness While Walking Podcast and associated material, by Whole Life Workshop and by Bermuda Road Wellness LLC is for informational and entertainment purposes only. It is not intended to be a substitute for professional medical advice, diagnosis or treatment. Always seek the advice of your physician or other qualified health care provider with any questions you may have regarding a medical condition or treatment, and before undertaking a new health care regimen, including walking.     Thanks for listening to Wellness While Walking, a walking podcast and a "best podcast for walking"!

Ever since fluoridation became widespread in the 1950s, cavities in kids have fallen drastically. The effort is considered one of the ten greatest public health achievements of the 20th century. But it's also one of the most controversial. At really high doses, fluoride is toxic – it can calcify your ligaments and joints and even fuse your spine. It also potentially has impacts on our brains. There's a small but growing body of research suggesting that fluoride can inhibit intelligence in children. This is still unsettled and hotly debated science but, as host Nate Hegyi finds out, in our polarized and increasingly digital world… unsettled science can quickly become doctrine. Featuring Rene Najera, Philippe Grandjean and Mark HartzlerFor a transcript and full list of credits, go to outsideinradio.org. SUPPORTOutside/In is made possible with listener support. Click here to become a sustaining member of Outside/In. Follow Outside/In on Instagram or join our private discussion group on Facebook.LINKSThe CDC has a website that tells you how much fluoride is in your drinking water. Here's the reasoning behind the U.S. Public Health Service's recommended limit for artificially fluoridating water. The National Toxicology Program suggests that a child's IQ could be impacted if they or their pregnant mother ingests more than 1.5 ppm of fluoride in their water. Philippe Grandjean's peer-reviewed study suggests that the safe level of fluoride in water for pregnant women is much lower than what the U.S. Public Health Service recommends.The American Academy of Pediatrics and the American Dental Association have cast doubt on the National Toxicology Program's conclusions and say that the fluoride levels in U.S. waters are safe. A U.S. district court judge ordered the Environmental Protection Agency to take a second look at its limits for fluoride in the water, citing the National Toxicology Program's monograph. 

In this episode, Dr. Jessica Steier and Dr. Sarah Scheinman explore the complex and controversial topic of fluoride in public health. The scientists examine the recent National Toxicology Program report linking fluoride to potential cognitive impacts, discussing its historical significance and the ongoing debates about its use in water supplies. They delve into the nuanced considerations of fluoride's benefits and risks, addressing concerns about dental health, potential cognitive effects, and health equity. The conversation provides a balanced perspective on fluoride, highlighting the importance of scientific evidence in understanding its role in public health and dental care. All our sources from this episode are available at: https://www.unbiasedscipod.com/episodes/ (00:00) Introduction  (03:29) Understanding Fluoride: Definition and Function (06:19) Historical Context of Fluoride and Dental Health (09:21) Recent Controversies: NTP Report and IQ Concerns (12:13) Fluoride: Benefits vs. Risks (15:22) Health Equity and Access to Dental Care (18:30) Fluorosis: Understanding the Condition (21:06) IQ: What It Is and Its Measurement Challenges (24:20) The Connection Between Dental Health and Cognitive Function (27:20) Consequences of Removing Fluoride from Water (30:21) Hydroxyapatite as an Alternative to Fluoride (33:20) Final Thoughts: Conclusion on Fluoride Interested in advertising with us? Please reach out to advertising@airwavemedia.com, with “Unbiased Science” in the subject line. PLEASE NOTE: The discussion and information provided in this podcast are for general educational, scientific, and informational purposes only and are not intended as, and should not be treated as, medical or other professional advice for any particular individual or individuals. Every person and medical issue is different, and diagnosis and treatment requires consideration of specific facts often unique to the individual. As such, the information contained in this podcast should not be used as a substitute for consultation with and/or treatment by a doctor or other medical professional. If you are experiencing any medical issue or have any medical concern, you should consult with a doctor or other medical professional. Further, due to the inherent limitations of a podcast such as this as well as ongoing scientific developments, we do not guarantee the completeness or accuracy of the information or analysis provided in this podcast, although, of course we always endeavor to provide comprehensive information and analysis. In no event may Unbiased Science or any of the participants in this podcast be held liable to the listener or anyone else for any decision allegedly made or action allegedly taken or not taken allegedly in reliance on the discussion or information in this podcast or for any damages allegedly resulting from such reliance. The information provided herein do not represent the views of our employers. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

If you've ever questioned the safety of fluoride in drinking water, this episode is for you. The recent court ruling against the EPA on fluoride regulation is a game-changer, and we're breaking it down in simple terms.Today, I'm diving into the complicated issue of fluoride and making it accessible for everyone. From a brief history of fluoride use to the timeline of events leading to the EPA's court loss, we're covering it all. You'll learn why this chemical has been controversial for decades and how recent scientific evidence is changing the conversation.And let me tell you, this court case is monumental. It not only challenges long-held beliefs about fluoride safety but also opens the door for regulating other toxins in the future. I'll explain why this legal precedent is so exciting for those of us fighting for cleaner, safer environments.Check out my recommended fluoride-free toothpaste and water filtration systems on my Toxin Free Shopping Guide.In this episode, we're chatting about:A quick history of fluoride and its known health impactsThe myth of fluoride's effectiveness in preventing cavities when ingestedThe timeline of events leading to the EPA's court lossWhy the 2016 amendment to the Toxic Substances Control Act was crucialThe recent studies linking fluoride to neurodevelopmental effects and lower IQ in childrenHow the National Toxicology Program's report became the nail in the coffinWhy this court case is so significant for future toxin regulationTwo simple ways you can protect your family from fluoride exposure right nowWhether you're a long-time fluoride skeptic or just starting to question its safety, this episode will give you the information you need to make informed decisions for your family's health.If you enjoyed this week's episode, please: Leave a positive review or rating wherever you listen Shop toxin free products on my Toxin Free Shopping Guide Download your free 25 Toxins to Avoid Post a screenshot, share what you loved, and tag me on Instagram @wendy_toxinfreeish Want to ask me a question to get answered on the podcast? Leave me a voice message here.

Devra Davis is the widely resepected research scientist who has been been calling attention to the dangers of EMF's for decades. As the founder of The Environmental Health Trust, she has sued the FCC for failing to update its safety standards since 1996. Her book "Disconnect: The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation" was published in 2010, barely three years after the launch of the first smartphone and it remains one of the most important books on the subject.  Now, Devra has updated Disconnect with over 100 pages of new updated information, based on new and updated research.  In this conversation, we talk about the book and what we can all do to best protect our families from the very threat represented by electromagnetic fields--the information carrying radio waves that power our digital devices. Here's the book:  https://www.amazon.com/Disconnect-scientists-solutions-safer-technology/dp/0988359189 Website:  https://ehtrust.org/ The continually updated EMF Guide from Tech Wellness:  https://techwellness.com/blogs/expertise/emf-meaning-expert-guide-what-is-effects-on-body EMF Protection Solutions from Tech Wellness:  https://techwellness.com/collections/best-emf-protection Here is the transcript of our conversation.  Be Well!     TWT24-DEVRA POD TRANSCRIPT AUGUST: [00:00:00] Hey there, welcome to Thriving with Technology, the science led podcast that's here to help you achieve mindful living in a digital world. And I'm your host. I'm August Brice from TechWellness. com. This show is designed to give you a practical approach on how to navigate the important tech toxins in our world. We have real life stories, experiences, and non fear based facts about cybersecurity and EMFs, your online privacy, [00:00:30] internet overuse. What leads to addiction, blue light on so much more. So thank you. Thanks for joining us and enjoy the show. We're happy you're joining us for a very special edition of thriving with technology today. August sits down with Dr. Debra Davis, one of the first and most respected educators and [00:01:00] researchers in the EMF space. And you could say in public health in general for our generation. In fact, if you can remember the days when smoking was allowed on airplanes, you have Dr. Davis to thank that that is just a very distant memory. Dr. Davis has authored more than 200 peer reviewed publications and written several important books on cancer, environmental pollution, and her newest, which is an update of a title first published in 2010, Disconnect, a scientist's solutions for safer [00:01:30] technology. Dr. Davis is the founder of the Environmental Health Trust, one of the leading forces in EMF research, education, and advocacy, working to reform the laws that govern our exposure to EMF. There's a lot of wisdom in this episode. You won't want to miss a minute. Here's August. Okay. Deborah Davis. Hello. Hello, August. What an honor. I cannot thank you enough for being with me today. I am so excited to [00:02:00] share the new book. I'm excited to talk about everything that's happened since the original Disconnect was published. And of course, everyone knows I'm a huge fan of the Environmental Health Trust. If you subscribe to my newsletter or if you're on my Instagram channel or Facebook, you know that I'm consistently. sharing links to the Environmental Health Trust because of the amazing work that they are doing. And they are led by Debra Davis. Thank you so much, [00:02:30] August. I really appreciate all that you're doing. Thank you. Well, we've both been in this space for so long. I first discovered that I was sensitive to EMF in about 1992. And I know that your first book was published in 2010, but I was following your work before then you were publishing, you were doing research. You've led so much important research. And you know, Debra, I see myself as the [00:03:00] reporter and the communicator, and I see you as the educator and the scientist and together getting this information out. Is wildly important and even more important today. I fully agree with you and I want to tell you, uh, I haven't been doing this alone. Uh, we've had an executive director, Theodora Scorato, and we're now bringing in, uh, three new people and reorganizing the Environmental Health Trust. Oh! I'm going to be stepping out as president, and [00:03:30] in my place will be Kent Chamberlain, who is professor and chairman emeritus of the Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer Sciences at the University of New Hampshire. And we will have a vice president for and general counsel, Joe Sandry, who is rather experienced with, um, Going toe to toe with the FCC and winning, as he helped us win our lawsuit that we can talk about in just a moment. Yes. And we'll have a new vice president for science and clinical affairs, who is a [00:04:00] diagnostic radiologist with three decades of experience as a senior radiologist and member of the American College of Radiology, Rob Brown. And we will of course have Theodora Scorato, who has been absolutely critical to what I've been doing over the past decade. She will become vice president for policy outreach and education. Uh, and we're going to have a great new expanded team, but I want to say it takes a [00:04:30] village. And August, you've been a really critical part of that village for us. Oh, thank you, Debra. Thank you. It's always my honor to tell people about the Environmental Health Trust and especially your work. And you know, we've had Theodora on the podcast before, but this is such a big deal because of the book and congratulations on the expansion. Of environmental health trust. I know all the people that you're talking about and to have someone who was really central in the industry now on your team.[00:05:00]  I can't wait to see what happens next. It can only be bigger, better, amazing. And so important for. Really the entire world. Thank you for doing this. Well, it's mutual August. It really is. Okay. So, you know, Debra, I have to tell everyone, and I explained this a little bit in the interview, but every time I get on a plane, I do think about you. And I think, wow, if Debra, Hadn't done what Debra does, I might be [00:05:30] sitting next to someone and not just worrying about the secondhand Wi Fi radiation, but also worrying about the secondhand smoke. Can you tell us a little bit about why that change, why there's no smoke in airplanes? Well, in 1983, I was a young executive director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology at the U. S. National Academy of Sciences. It's a And, uh, Senator Hayakawa from Hawaii wondered why he kept getting colds whenever he flew on [00:06:00] airplanes. Long flights. Many of your listeners may be shocked to know that smoking was allowed on airplanes. And he wondered about what that meant for his breathing. We, at the National Academy of Sciences, um, I organized a team, put together the first study that actually concluded that smoking was not a good idea for the plane. Thank you for listening. because it gummed up the electronics, by the way. And by the way, it also affected the respiratory [00:06:30] tract of flight attendants and anyone else. What I did personally, and I tell this in my, uh, second book, which was called the secret history of the war on cancer. I took a small machine that looked frankly, like a bomb onto the, onto a long transatlantic flight. And I went, in the smoking section and the non smoking section throughout the flight. By the end of the flight, I had a little congestion, as I have right now, [00:07:00] because I was able to show that by the end of the flight, even though there was a smoking section and a non smoking section, that the quality of the air in both sections was identical, that the level of ultra fine particulates, smaller, 50 times smaller than a human hair in the air was uniform, and that there was effectively no non smoking section. And this study then was replicated by the National Academy of Sciences, [00:07:30] and it took us a while to get the report published because the pressure from the tobacco industry. Was quite, uh, impressive and I should state people don't realize this, but at the time of the U. S. National Cancer Institute was working on developing a safe cigarette with over 10 million dollars of funding from the tobacco industry. I did not know that. There was a lot of close collaboration with the tobacco industry and [00:08:00] Harvard and Yale. They basically had funded major research programs at some of the top schools in the world. And they were regarded as a, and they were in fact serious in their support. In fact, in the disconnect book, I tell the story of how one scientist in Berlin, desperate for funding. Became a major researcher for the tobacco industry in Germany. And when [00:08:30] he first reported that he thought that tobacco might actually cause cancer, they said, Hey, we'd like to give you another project to work on. We don't think you need to work on that anymore. , and they gave in the redirect, they gave in the project. of studying cell phone radiation. And this was Franz Adelkofer. He studied cell phone radiation, a major multi laboratory, multi million dollar study for the European Union. And in 2002, he produced results. [00:09:00] Contrary to all of their expectations, including his own, he showed That cell phone radiation could in fact damage the brain cells in animals and could damage DNA. He showed that. Right. So that result was world changing except that the industry made the mistake of challenging him, uh, publicly. They tried to discredit him and because he was so prominent [00:09:30] and frankly had the resources to do this, he sued them. And just before he died. Uh, two years ago, German courts ruled that he had been correct and ordered all of the scientists and all of the industry claims that had criticized him to recant the And to stop their criticism of his results. Now, the U S national toxicology program has since confirmed what Adolf [00:10:00] Hofer showed, namely that cell phone radiation can damage DNA. DNA is in the nucleus of every living cell of every living thing, whether plant, insect, or animal. Mammals, and of course, humans, and our DNA can be damaged by cell phone radiation. Now that doesn't mean that we're all doomed, because the important thing for people to understand, and I know you know this, is that no matter how [00:10:30] much damage you may have incurred from exposures to cell phone radiation and to other things, like sunlight, for example, You can repair that damage through good nutrition and exercise and prayer and things that promote health and well being, and of course, avoiding and reducing exposures to the extent possible. Right. You're talking about our body's adaptive capacity, right? Indeed. [00:11:00] For, for, yes, we come up against a lot, however, we could do a lot better if we weren't up against this radiation, right? Indeed. Absolutely. Absolutely. No doubt about it. And you know, we have a community of about 200, 000 people and they're all in different stages of their journey. Some are on health journeys, some just want to have a healthy, happy family and do the right thing for their children. And so I. I really love to break it [00:11:30] down into bite size, non fear based solutions that we can give people, but I want you to help us understand, just like you just did, more about the research. Give us just a couple of the, of the big, important findings that you really want everyone to know about. Well, the first thing we need to understand is that every cell In the body and we have trillions of them has a membrane around it [00:12:00] and cell phone radiation has consistently been shown to weaken membranes, whether it's the membranes around are the neurons in our brain and the blood brain barrier. Or those affecting the membranes around, um, sperm. All of these cells are affected. And the effect can be subtle, uh, and it's not uniformly fatal, obviously not. It's the [00:12:30] long term cumulative effect that we have to be concerned about. That's, that's what we have to pay attention to. The cumulative effects of the combined exposures to many different things in the environment we cannot control. Uh, we need to know, we need to know That the weakening, the weakening of membranes means that it's more possible for other materials in the body, whether it's lead or [00:13:00] pesticides, we might be exposed to through the foods we eat. Uh, all of those things can get more deeply absorbed into a cell if the membranes are weaker. So overall, our bodies are being weakened when they are exposed to cell phone radiation. And we understand that it's the overall exposure, like sunlight, you can think of it, you can liken it to a sunburn. The more sun you get, the more likely you are to [00:13:30] get sunburned if you were sunburned before. And so the cumulative effect is very important. And I'm wondering if there's any research that can help us understand the difference between direct exposure, because we tell people, don't put it in your pocket, don't put it in your bra, try to keep it out of your hands. So that's direct exposure versus, versus the full body exposure, maybe from the phone, maybe from the Wi Fi. How do our bodies actually get affected by the [00:14:00] radiation in the environment versus up against the skin? All right. Well, first of all, sunlight is, is it interesting because you need 20 minutes a day of sunlight in order to make enough vitamin D, which is a very beneficial part component for us. So, unlike sunlight, where you need a little bit for your health, you do not need a little bit of radiation [00:14:30] for anything. All right. It's not, it has no known benefit. I want to be clear about that. Um, the good news I want to share is that colleagues of mine in Turkey, and I have produced several studies showing that omega 3 fatty acids. Melatonin, um, can help repair damage from radiation. And we've done this in studies in cell cultures where we take cell cultures of human cells and we add [00:15:00] to them a melatonin or basically a component of omega 3 fatty acids or fish oil. And then we expose them to cell phone radiation. And when the cells have melatonin in them, Or the omega 3 fatty acids, they get less damage than when they do not. So it's always important to understand that it's not, again, that we're doomed, but that we can repair, uh, repair that damage. [00:15:30] What happens with radiation are a number of processes, one of which is it leads to the formation of reactive oxygen species. And you can think of these kind of like Pac Man that go around gobbling up whatever it might be free and frankly destroying it. So you want to keep your reactive oxygen species to a low level and you want to make sure you consume antioxidants that will reduce them [00:16:00] and reduce the amount of damage, uh, that they can have. Within the system as well. It's important, particularly as, as you know, we've talked about this in my TEDx talk as well. We want to protect children because their skulls are thinner. Their brains contain more fluid, the more fluid in something, whether it's in your microwave oven or. In your breast, the more fluid something contains, the more it [00:16:30] absorbs microwave radiation. So I just want to backtrack for a second. When we talk about melatonin, omega threes, fatty acids, the things that you talked about a moment ago, you're not recommending that parents now give their kids melatonin. I think what you're saying is let's keep the healthy production intact. Absolutely. And let me be clear, let me be clear about that. Sleeping in the dark with [00:17:00] no electronics at all in the bedroom is important for everybody, but particularly for children, there actually is a device that they sell nowadays for infants where you put a cover over the crib. Mm-Hmm. , um, that allows them to be in total darkness. And baby in total darkness is when we naturally produce melatonin from the pineal gland. And melatonin is a natural hormone [00:17:30] that is an antioxidant. So it repairs damage that may have happened just as a consequence of being alive. Because we can't avoid all of the things in the world that can damage ourselves. But if we are healthy and we sleep in the dark. without any electronics in our bedrooms, uh, then we will make enough melatonin naturally. The same thing, it's best to get the cruciferous vegetables, broccoli, cauliflower, [00:18:00] etc., through, through your diet. It's best to get your omega 3 fatty acids through diet as well. Um, sometimes, however, uh, a supplement of melatonin at night can be very helpful, but those always should be Any decision about that should be made in consultation with pediatricians or doctors. A hundred percent. I agree that we need to really, even as adults, we need to regulate our melatonin intake if we're taking it [00:18:30] exogenously because, uh, you know, you're not positive of the formulation and some people are actually sensitive to melatonin. Melatonin supplements, and it can actually change their own melatonin production. So there's healthy, good, healthy living, so, so important. And part of good, healthy living is not just what we eat. It's also our EMF exposure and really regulating it. Correct. That's what I'm hearing from Debra. Yes, absolutely. Because, because honestly, you guys, the [00:19:00] effects can be devastating and Debra shares many stories. On the Environmental Health Trust website and in her new book, which you must read, Deverdew. Do those stories stick with you? Which stories in particular stick with you? Well, there's some, there's some sad stories that of a, of a young man named Justin whose parents did not understand the damaging effect of EMFs, and he was a gamer at a young age, and he slept in his room with his [00:19:30] dog. And his room was saturated, saturated with EMFs, and both he and his dog died of brain tumors. Very, very sad and unusual, and now the parents have become advocates so that other children will be spared that, that fate. Um, there's a young woman we lost this year, Tiffany, who developed a breast cancer when she was 21, right [00:20:00] under where she had stored her phone in her bra. proudly from the time she was 12 or 13. And the breast tumors developed right under where the antenna of the phone had radiated her breast. She died after almost a decade of repeated surgeries to try to spare her. But she was first diagnosed, unfortunately, with advanced disease because [00:20:30] nobody believed a 21 year old boop! cancer. That's an extraordinary, extraordinary. And she had no risk factors for the disease. She did not carry any of the genetic variants and put you at risk of the disease at all. So these are unfortunately warnings for the rest of us at the same time. I'm happy to report that there are some couples I've counseled. Who were having difficulty getting pregnant and in one case when [00:21:00] the fellows stopped carrying his two phones in two pockets, um, they were able to get pregnant within three months, but no one had ever told him that a phone in the pocket. Could damage his firm. And that therein lies the rub. That's the issue. You know, Canada, our largest trading partner and environmental health trust published this and our next door neighbor says that reducing EMF is part of their bio initiative 2030. [00:21:30] It's amazing. But meanwhile, our FDA, our FCC, uh, cell phone manufacturers tell us there's nothing to worry about. It's not a problem. It's all about stronger, faster signals. So Debra, what's wrong with us? We need to do a better job of what you're doing. You are, you are really leading the way here. We need every parent, every grandparent to demand the right to buy safer [00:22:00] products. There's no reason. Why routers should be on 24 7. Frankly, there's no reason we actually need Wi Fi in our homes for the most part. You can, as you and I are both wired with Ethernet cables, we are faster, we're safer from hacking, we're more secure, and it's healthier. So all of those things are a benefit and we need to do a better job of educating people. If you go to our     , which is ehtrust. [00:22:30] org, our website includes practical advice about safe tech at home and what you can do to make a safer home environment. And we're working with other Programs like TechSafe Schools, which I'm a scientific advisor to, and there's specific advice that we have on our website that is on theirs as well, how you can promote safer technology in schools. We know from a recent [00:23:00] fabulous book that has just been written, um, on the anxiety generation. Right, the anxious generation. Yes, the anxious generation. Thank you. We know that what that is doing to our children is depriving them of play. And when, when the moment you give a child a smartphone, you have ended their childhood. I agree. I'm absolutely writing about that right now. And you know, you know, Debra, the interesting thing is you couple that. You [00:23:30] layer on the electromagnetic fields and the physical damage that, you know, you look at the brains of children exposed to EMF and you look at the brains of children looking, looking at screens. Very similar. Uh. you know, findings of less gray matter and different places of hyperactivity. So we know that both of these things are working together to affect our children's brains. And I am always floored because, you know, [00:24:00] I carry a meter with me wherever I go. I determine where I'm sitting at a restaurant. I determine where I'm going to go for a walk. I have that meter get me into a low radiation zone. so that my body can operate at its fullest. So I'm shocked when I go by school still to this day, uh, and see that the radiation is the highest level in the community because they've, they've got the tower either right across the street from the school or on the school [00:24:30] property. They're making money from, you know, renting out a space for a cell phone tower. And plus every school is Completely run by wifi and kids are given their own laptops to use at school and then to take home. I mean, kids. I just, my body aches for children trying to survive in this soup of radiation. You're absolutely correct, and I [00:25:00] think that we can work together, uh, that's in fact what some of the new initiatives that we're going to be developing with the new team at Environmental Health Trust. We, in the, in the new edition of the book that we just released, Disconnect, A Scientist's Solutions for Safer Technology, we discuss the fact. The way antennas are located in our schools would be illegal in Israel and Switzerland. Yes, in other high tech [00:25:30] countries, it is against the law to have antennas directly on schools. And yet our schools, who are so desperate for money, Do not understand that they take the money for the antennas, but they're compromising the quality of the brains and bodies of the children as a result. So we've got to do, yes. Yes. To that point, I consult with moms and They, many of them have, you know, [00:26:00] they're torn because they don't want to be the nagging naysayer at their school. They understand there's a huge issue and I point them to the, some of the posters that you have and the documents that you have and the letters that you have. Can you give us just one or two examples of schools that have been successful and parents who have been successful in having a cell tower removed? Or relocated. Well, there are on our [00:26:30] website, there are many examples and they keep changing, you know, I mean, um, and unfortunately, um, it's a little bit like whack and old, um, Pittsfield, they, they successfully, um, have thought against, um, an antenna being constructed there. And there's efforts ongoing right now in, in Connecticut, it's in several school systems as well. And I think that what we did with our lawsuit, I want to take a moment and just [00:27:00] explain that we filed a lawsuit against the FCC, a little bit like David and Goliath. Yes. In which we said, look, Your standards for testing phones and all of these devices were set now 27 years ago, using 20th century technology for 21st, to evaluate 21st century technology. That makes no sense. That makes absolutely no sense. And so, in addition, we pointed out that there was growing [00:27:30] evidence of damaging effects on non human animals, namely pollinators. Without the honeybee, without the 2, 000 pollinating insects on which modern agriculture depends, we wouldn't have food production in around the world today. And there is growing evidence, the modeled three dimensional image of the honeybee body is affected by 5G and by all of the wireless radiation. And we know [00:28:00] that the worldwide, there's a decline. In honeybee and other pollinating insects. And we know that neonicotinoid pesticides are a cause of that, but wireless radiation is another cause of it. And we need to do a better job of understanding all of that. So in our lawsuit, we said, look, there's all of this data on effects on animals, on effects on children. And what are you doing about it? And the court ordered. the [00:28:30] FCC to go back and reconsider the science. The court said to the FCC, you have not considered all the record that we, Environmental Health Trust, and others have established. Now, it's more than two years since the court issued that decision. And the FCC has done nothing. So what we need is what you can help us with here is we're creating, we're filing, in fact, next week, we are [00:29:00] filing a demand that the FCC respond to the court orders because they have not. They've just ignored it because there's such an arrogant agency. They can ignore the fact that the court said, do this, fix it, stop using outdated technology to evaluate technology that is just being invented today. So why do you have to file again? Isn't the court, doesn't the court have power to do something on [00:29:30] its own? You know, I'm not a lawyer, and I don't know the answer to your question, it's a good question, um, but I think that the answer is this, the FCC is a huge agency, and they operate as an almost like a super constitutional, they basically ignore the law, and until they're going to be held accountable, nothing can happen. Wow. Uh, you know, there's a couple of things I want to, first of all, congratulations [00:30:00] on the victory. Stunning. Important. Victory. Uh, we're behind you. Anything that we can do? Are you looking for letters? Are you looking for just spreading the awareness that the lawsuit happened and that the FCC isn't addressing it? You know, I will ask the attorneys that are proceeding now, and in fact, our new general counsel, exactly what else could be supportive of what we're doing here, because I don't know, but I do know this. The only thing that's going to make a change is when we force the industry to [00:30:30] compete on safety. We want them to compete with giving us safer products. Let me give you just one example. If you have a router in your home, it should go to sleep. As the default mode, it should only be working when you need it. We do not need these signals beaming. 24 seven. There's no way. Yes, and Deborah, our, our most popular item is our Wi Fi kill switch. And we also sell the low power Wi Fi and we also sell a [00:31:00] Wi Fi Faraday box. All really good solutions to lowering the EMF of my favorite. It's just snap it off whenever you're not using it, totally unnecessary to have it spewing that radiation. And I have not looked, nor do I endorse specific products, but I know that there is one from a, a low wifi router from the Netherlands, I think. Yeah. And one made here in the United States. Oh, well, I'll take a look at that. Yes, we offer both. And I actually, the truth [00:31:30] is many people who buy the low EMF wifi that shuts off when it's not being used have issues because it powers some of their wireless things in their, their homes. Like there. They're, uh, security systems. So this, the other one is just low, low enough so that we're not spewing as much of that toxic energy, but so enough power to not turn off those important things in people's homes. Meanwhile. [00:32:00] I'm just like you. I'm all about hardwiring. We focus on creating low EMF sanctuaries because that's where we can control the energy in our homes. But I want to tell you right now that I have been speaking with Theodora about supplying the hardwiring to a school. I want to have a model school where we hardwire the school, we provide the, the, Adapters and dongles that we manufacture, the cabling that's EMF free that we [00:32:30] manufacture, that's grounded, um, and we can even, I know, I'm not even gonna say it, we're not gonna put any low Wi Fi routers in there, low power routers, we're not gonna have any routers, we're gonna be a completely wired school, and then we're gonna talk to people about how it feels and how it works. Well, that sounds like a great idea. We, Theodore and I have talked about this for some time. We've had some progress with a few schools, and then what usually happens is they bring in a new IT guy who doesn't [00:33:00] understand what we're trying to do, and then we have to go back all over again. So it's, it's, it's a constant struggle and I'm really, I'm really delighted that you've been on the case now for quite a while. Quite a while. Yes. Yes. We've been offering a hard, I think we offered our first adapter 10 years ago, uh, because, because I'm sensitive because this is my life. This is how I actually am required to live, to sleep in the canopy, you know, to have the paint. If [00:33:30] a, if a neighbor moves in, just the things that. That I have to do to feel good. And fortunately, I can feel these things instantly. And so I am so with you for people and, and I was so excited. You guys have to read the book to find out that there are options for safer phones that have even been discussed for 20, 30 years. Yes, yes. And, and the technology exists, the patents [00:34:00] already are there. We simply need what, what I call, we need girlcotts. A boycott means no. Okay? Boycott means we're not going to buy your wine if, if it's made by illegal, by people who are working without toilets and without healthcare. That's a boycott, right? A girl cot means we want the right to buy safer products. We wanna be able to buy safer things. We want our schools to be safer for our [00:34:30] children. That means no lead in the drinking water. That means wiring the systems so that they, we want our kids to be computer citizens, but we don't want them to be e zombies. Exactly. I love that. I'm for it. Let's do it. And, you know, we have to talk about this because you do, you sort of mention it in the book because people are looking for solutions. And since I've been in this space for so long, back in the nineties, seriously guys, people were [00:35:00] offering chips for your phones, shields, shielding cloths. I got my first shielding cloth in 2005. And interestingly, I, I. A girlfriend and I held it up against, we were about 15 feet from the microwave. Then we got closer and closer and closer to the microwave and then the microwave, it was just too much energy back on itself and we broke the microwave. This was at my office. So I have been experimenting with shielding, partial shielding for a very long time. You mention it and I just need to [00:35:30] know, do you use partial shielding or harmonizers or chips or any of the gadgets that have come along? calling themselves EMF protection. I generally do not use any of them because I think the safest policy is distance is your friend and turning things off, frankly. And I, I'm not in a position to evaluate whether they work as you know, very well. Some of them may work. Some of them may not. So I generally [00:36:00] try to reduce exposures, but with respect to a question you asked me before, I want to make sure we. We point this out in the new book as well. Several governments have banned Wi Fi for children, for young children. In France, it's banned in kindergarten, it's restricted, uh, in high schools. Cell phones are illegal. For children in elementary and middle middle schools in France in Cyprus. They've removed [00:36:30] Wi Fi from elementary classrooms. Belgium has banned cell phones for for for young children and Israel has also banned them in what in nursery schools and restricted it in in elementary schools and a number of other areas help French Polynesia has also. So there's a number of places around the world that. are moving toward to eliminate or reduce exposures and the European Parliament [00:37:00] a long time ago, I think it was 2011 called on the governments to take measures to reduce exposures, especially in the environment of children. So there's a huge worldwide call. Um, in Spain. I'm working now with people in Argentina. Um, in the United States, we have made some progress. Um, certainly the Maryland State Children's Environmental Health, um, Council issued advice and of course, you know, about the New Hampshire [00:37:30] Commission on 5G. And that is something that Kent Chamberlain, our new president, has played a major role with. And then, you've also, I'm sure, discussed what's going on in Petaluma. Yes. And I, I do want to say though, what you've just, all that information you gave us about other countries and maybe some of the things that we're doing in this country, these are simple, clear directives and solutions that are so easy to incorporate. It's easy to say off. [00:38:00] It's easy to say no for our children's sake. Wouldn't you agree? Uh, yes, absolutely. And there are some schools that have taken the steps to implement some of the things that you provide. I went on your website like special plugs so that the wireless antennas are off, except when the teacher decides that they might need to use them and they teach students to turn off the wireless on their devices so that the students devices themselves have them off. And there's [00:38:30] a list of schools on our website. of schools that have reduced or removed Wi Fi. And I don't, I'm not going to go through it, but some of them are Waldorf schools, of course. Of course. That's where, where we started at a Waldorf school. And, you know, I think that this is just great ammunition for parents who, who are interested and concerned, but not really exactly sure. How to be a, you know, low key activist, and they don't really want to be, they just want, like you said, they want a girlcott. [00:39:00] They just want the safer solution because they love their children and their families and they want to give everybody the best opportunity for health and well being. And one thing that's really important for everybody is to disconnect from all of these devices at least one hour before bedtime in any form of screen. That really is, is important. But the other thing I would, I would add is that distance is your friend. And when it comes to the laptops that are [00:39:30] assigned to children in schools, they don't call them laptops anymore. They call them tablets, Chromebooks. And the reason is they belong on tables. They do not belong on laps. They should not be held on the body. And that basic hygiene is so important. They should be wired. Yeah. Yes. A hundred percent. And I do, I do want to mention at this point that when it comes to putting a device on your lap and [00:40:00] putting a quote unquote shield underneath it, you must remember two things. One, that you're only shielding the area that you're covering. And if you look down, it's most likely the top of your legs. And then secondarily. Where is that energy going? I, I always, uh, use the metaphor of smoke because smoke doesn't get absorbed, neither does EMF radiation, it gets reflected. So where is it going? Is this radiation that's [00:40:30] coming from that thing on your lap? Is it going to your thyroid, to your brain, to your eyes? And If it's so, is that okay? I don't, I don't think so. I think that the really great solution, and that's easy if you must still have wifi, is to connect a keyboard, a wired keyboard. There's these little ports and all of the devices that you can connect and then push that away. Because distance is your friend. Yes. Push [00:41:00] that device away from you, get it further away from you. And of course your wired keyboard won't have radiation coming from it because it's wired. So anyway, yeah, I love these solutions. And I did want to get back to one question from your, your, uh, incredible research, direct exposure versus full body exposure. Do we know how our bodies intake this invisible smoke if you, if you will, for that comparison, It's [00:41:30] happening and it's, you know, an inch away from us and it's, you know, across the room from us or it's next to us. Is that different from it actually touching our bodies? Is there a big difference? Well, the answer is we don't know for sure, but use your common sense. You will be exposed. If you are getting general body exposure, [00:42:00] it's not a good thing. It should be avoided to the extent that you can. The direct exposure of something on your body is the one that you want to avoid first of all, but there is a cumulative effect over a lifetime that particularly for our children of thousands of hours of use and exposures as we are saturated in our general environment with many of these. And because of that fact, it's really important to reduce exposure whenever you [00:42:30] can. And so there are a number of Schools like the Castle Hill High School that have taken steps to do this, but you're asking a question that we don't have the answer to. So the precautionary principle, right? You got it. Bingo. Bingo. And we want to work with more and more parents like they have done in schools in Australia and all over the world. to explain that just like you would never dose your children with chemicals and [00:43:00] pesticides, you shouldn't be dosing them with an environment full of wireless radiation. And in addition to schools or separate from schools, how can we help make larger scale change? outside of our homes. People look and ask that question. And what's your, what's your number one go to for that answer? Do they go to city council meetings? Do they start a blog of their own? Do they tell their neighbor? What's, what's the most important thing [00:43:30] Uh, tactic we want people to get educated, motivated and activated. They get educated by looking at our website at trust on org by looking at what information you have developed, including. You have an incredible array of podcasts that I had not listened to all of them, but I know that all of the ones with Theodora are terrific and and and CeCe Doucette is also a [00:44:00] very knowledgeable educator as well. And so get educated. And then share the education with your neighbors and friends, then get motivated because once people come together, they can organize at the local level, you start out with your school boards and with your local town council and create zones where there is reduced exposure and we want to move toward no exposure. What I believe will be [00:44:30] the model, and this is my hope is just like we did with smoking. Longer would anybody dream of lighting a cigarette inside a school and smoking. And yet, 30, 40 years ago, that was okay. And teachers were allowed to take smoking breaks and had smoking rooms. That is no longer the case. I believe we will have zones with no Wi Fi radiation and that we will [00:45:00] start out with creating them again for children and then for everybody else. And there are some models of that around the world. In Cyprus, they have no Wi Fi in the intensive care units. For newborns, and that's a start. That's hospitals. As you know, our hospitals can be saturated hot beds. Absolutely. The same is true of airports. So I thought that we need to [00:45:30] start a move for low and no EMS zones. So that people like you can be more comfortable in public, you know. I agree. I think that, that we should share them on a website, you know, like Antenna Search. It's now Antenna Search. Sadly, sadly, it still works, but it's kind of a joke because they're everywhere. Whereas they're not an antenna. Where is there a safe zone? And I'll give people just a hint, you know, typography. does affect EMF. And so if you can find a [00:46:00] particularly low guarded area, like a ravine, you'll find that your EMF exposure is less. It's just physics. Um, so that's helpful, but I love that idea, Debra. I'll do anything to help push that forward. It's so important. We might start with that in August. We should revisit what we can do, but I think you start out with, we have to educate more people. That's why I took the time. to issue a new edition of the book. There's 100 pages of new material, including, [00:46:30] by the way, when the book was first published in 2010, I said that I thought cell phones might cause cancer. Since then, the National Toxicology Program, the Ramazzini Institute, and Thousands of other studies have been produced, all showing that cell phone radiation can damage DNA and increase the risk of cancer in animals, and now we have more and more evidence in humans. My position is this. [00:47:00] We study animals in order to predict effects in humans and try to prevent them from happening. We study animals to develop drugs and then use them and test them in people and continue to monitor them. If cell phones were drugs, They would be illegal because they've never been tested for safety before being used and now there's no monitoring and surveillance for effects of them. So we need to start doing a better job of monitoring [00:47:30] what's going on in our schools. Why do we have this dramatic increase in In thyroid cancer in young people, in colorectal cancer in young people, in other cancers in young, and I mean young people, under age 30, we have a fourfold increase in colorectal cancer. Since 2010, and I believe that the practice of keeping cell phones in the back pocket or in the, in the pocket is part of the reason why we have these unexplained [00:48:00] global epidemics Transcribed of cancers in people under the age of 30. Now, when I first wrote the book in 2010, I speculated about it. The new edition now says, look, what are we doing to our children and ourselves? The evidence has become even stronger than when I wrote the book now, 14 years ago. Yes, undeniable. And I think that that's why I'm happy to bring attention to it. That's why we took the time to write the book and the end of the book has a lot of [00:48:30] great material that Theodora has put together, practical advice about what you can do to digital device best practices so that you can reduce your exposures. So the military pilots, cancer study. Are you familiar with that? Yes. In that study, talking to your point about the incredible increase in colorectal cancer, in this study of military air crew and of ground crew, they found an [00:49:00] 87 percent higher rate of melanoma. Do you care to speculate as to why? There was an increase in melanoma in particular? Melanoma is a tough one because we know, of course, that sunlight is a factor. When you're flying in an airplane, you don't get a lot of sunlight. This could very well reflect the incredible increase in exposure that takes place in the cockpit to microwave radiation, and that has dramatically increased recently. [00:49:30] Um, we know that there are a number of different exposures that pilots get, including, by the way, to jet fuel on refueling, which often goes in the front of the plane as well, and they get the fumes, et cetera. I think that this is a worrisome finding that could very well reflect the combined effects. of the volatile exposures that they get to fuels. But the thing that has changed recently is not fuels, because [00:50:00] pilots have been flying airplanes with fuels almost a hundred years now. But the exposure to the wireless radiation inside that cockpit has just mushroomed, mushroomed. And obviously should be examined as a factor here. I absolutely think it could be important. And I do love that in phase B, they actually used the words, non ionizing radiation might be a link. They actually say that, [00:50:30] the military, the Pentagon study. So and then another thing I'm just curious if you had direction about with this particular study is I looked back and I saw that cockpits were outfitted with the millimeter wave antenna starting back before 2010. Right. And, and to me personally, it feels. like the millimeter wave is affecting our skin more. I mean, that's [00:51:00] an interesting point. That's a very interesting point. Let's talk about that. The millimeter wave does affect the skin more because it gets just a little bit into the skin, but the skin is our largest organ and turns out to have an immunological function that has not been widely appreciated. Think about this. You get sunlight, you send out inside and you feel better when you're out in the light. Okay. Everybody gets a certain feeling of relaxation. Yes. Right. Yes. That's [00:51:30] because that sunlight to your skin gives you a systemic effect of well being. And it is understood just a little bit of exposure into your skin has an effect throughout the body. So it's not that it only affects the skin, but it is true that the effect is primarily into the skin. We know that babies that are born with jaundice, that are a little bit yellow, we treat them by covering their eyes and exposing their little bodies [00:52:00] to blue light because that blue light takes the blood that's circulating into the surface of their skins and Creates vitamin D synthesis in the liver of these newborns from the blue light into the skin blue light in the skin affects the blood of those babies so that it forms dihydroxy vitamin D in the liver and has a systemic effect on those babies. So light just [00:52:30] getting a little bit into the skin of the newborn affects how much vitamin D they produce. And when they produce more vitamin D, it gets rid of the jaundice. So, we understand there's a correlation. A direct causal, not just correlation. We know that blue light in the skin of the newborn produces vitamin D in their bloodstream. So, the millimeter wave affecting the skin is affecting us holistically. [00:53:00] Correct. And the whole layering on of all these different frequencies, it's a, it's a hot button for me. Because my body just. freaks out with this even more so. And I think that I would like to encourage you to take a look at the work of Rina Bray. That's R I I N A B R A Y at the Toronto Women's Hospital. She, and of course you know, um, Sharon Goldberg. Sure. Yeah, because they [00:53:30] have been reported some success in helping people to modulate their response so that you can have less, less reaction to the EMFs and that's, I think, very important. You know, it costs a lot of money to be electro sensitive. Right? It does. I know. I know. You're fortunate. No, no. I understand. But think about all the people that don't know that they're having reactions to electromagnetic fields and being treated with psychoactive drugs [00:54:00] and, and other things. Exactly. I love that you brought that up. And it's, this is also my concern with the partial shielding is that they believe that they're doing something good and they're getting this. false sense of security and they're not doing anything actually to change exposure and sometimes they're increasing it. In fact, almost every demonstration I do, it's an increase. And I fully agree with you on that. That's why I say that I don't generally use any of these small little devices because they may reduce the amount coming out of the [00:54:30] back of the phone and then increase it every place else. Yeah. It's, there's so much to do. Anyway. Yep. Thank you. I cannot, I cannot tell you enough how much I appreciate this time. It's mutual. I want you to know that you really are a very critical part of what we need to do. And frankly, what we're hoping to do with the new team as the new team comes in place, and I'd like to introduce you to them. If you haven't interviewed Kent Chamberlain, uh, or Rob Brown, you will really enjoy talking with them as well [00:55:00] because they have their own. Takes on things. Kent has developed modeling of the brain to show absorption, uh, as it moves through the brain. And Rob, of course, is a diagnostic radiologist can go toe to toe and explain why the myth that the only effect of microwaves is heat is wrong. That's very important that people understand that. I would love to talk to Kent. I would love that. Debra, thank you so much. This has been a very enlightening conversation. [00:55:30] I'm so honored that you've been here and thank you for the continued work and congratulations to the Environmental Health Trust. Well, thank you. I really appreciate it. Thank you for listening to Thriving with Technology, the tech wellness podcast. We hope you'll look for Dr. Davis's new book, Disconnect, a scientist's solutions for safer technology. If you found the information here valuable, we ask that you please share it with your community because it's important for [00:56:00] everyone to understand the truth around EMF and not just the hype. Also, we sincerely appreciate every five star review because it helps us show up and spread the message more efficiently. Until next time then, be well.

Based on new research, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services' National Toxicology Program reached a draft conclusion that fluoride should be “presumed to be a cognitive neurodevelopmental hazard to humans."

This week on The Less Stressed Life Podcast, I am joined by the lovely August Brice of TechWellness. In this episode, August tells us how EMF (electromagnetic fields) affects our health and wellness. We talk about the research August has done and how to get the most bang for your buck when it comes to EMF protection devices. Get 15% OFF Digital Detox Collection with Code LESSSTRESSEDKEY TAKEAWAYS:My journey with the SomavedicWhat EMF Protection works - Chips & ShieldsHow to hardwire your internetNational Toxicology Study The findings of his research were most recently edified in 2018 by our government's own National Toxicology Program where links were found to cellphone radiation: Increased incidences of glioma, a rare, aggressive and highly malignant brain cancerIncreased incidence of schwannoma (a rare tumor of the nerve sheath) of the heartIncreases of these cancers were found in both sexes of rats, but reached statistical significance only in malesIncreased incidences of rare, proliferative changes in glial cells of the brain and in Schwann cells in the hears of bot sexes of rats while not a single unexposed control animal developed these precancerous changes.DNA damage was induced with both modulations of radiofrequency radiation (RFR) in both rats and mice (in the frontal lobe plus other tissues).ABOUT GUEST:August's passion is finding solutions for mindful living in our digital world. Her online platform, TechWellness.com is the only comprehensive online source that addresses all the challenges of our modern digital world - from EMF Radiation and effects of blue light, to Cyber security and mental wellbeing with tech. On top of her on-going research, August has built an Advisory Team consisting of world-renown experts in each area, who consult with Tech Wellness and review all major content on the site. All solutions are purchased and tested, never supplied by or sponsored by manufacturers to avoid any influence.WHERE TO FIND:Website: https://techwellness.com/ Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/techwellness/***WORK WITH CHRISTA***: https://www.christabiegler.com/fssWHERE TO FIND CHRISTA:Website: https://www.christabiegler.com/Instagram: @anti.inflammatory.nutritionistPodcast Instagram: @lessstressedlifeYouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@lessstressedlifeLeave a review, submit a questions for the podcast or take one of my quizzes here: https://www.christabiegler.com/linksEPISODE SPONSOR:A special thanks to Jigsaw Health for sponsoring this episode. Get a discount on any of their products! Use the code lessstressed10

A conclusive meta-analysis on fluoride from the National Toxicology Program was released this month as part of a lawsuit involving Fluoride Action Network and the EPA. The former is arguing to have fluoride removed from water supplies and listed as a toxic substance under the TSCA of 1976. Fluoride was first introduced into drinking water in 1945, based on limited associations that when present in water some people had less cavities. Mass fluoridation began in the 1960s. Since then it as been well documented that fluoride, and its many different varieties, usually mixed with metals, can only have associated and limited positive affects on teeth with kept under 0.7mg/liter of water. Despite this, the lowest EPA limit has been 2mg/L and even up to 4mg/L, though many areas in the us contain “fluoride levels at 4mg/L or higher,” according to the National Academies of Sciences Engineering and Medicine in 2006. The Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Register wrote In 2003 that “small amounts of fluoride help prevent tooth cavities, but high levels can harm your health.” The NASEM report concluded that “children exposed to the current maximum allowable connotation risk developing severe tooth enamel fluorosis…enamel loss, and pitting of the teeth.” Whether high or low, these doses are uncontrolled, usually over the EPA limit already, which is also just a recommendation, and have no consideration to fluoride exposure from other drinks, foods, drugs, etc., certainly blasting a person's daily intake to extremely high levels. Let us not forget that a lot of tooth decay is caused by diets saturated in processed foods and sugars too. A meta-analysis from 2012 further found that “children in high-fluoridated areas had significantly lower IQ scores than those who livd in low-fluoridated areas.” A JAMA Pediatrics article from 2019 found that “1-milligram higher daily intake of fluoride among pregnant women was associated with a 3.66 lower IQ score… in boys and girls.” However, the US Department of health can still claim in 2015 that fluoride can have “preventative benefits.” Yes, it can, “at 0.7mg/L,” and benefits that are only possible, not guaranteed. The accumulation of the substance naturally and artificially is more than cause for concern; it is cause for removing it from the water immediately where it is added by recommendation without knowledge or consent of the public. The US Federal government even acknowledged this in 2015 when the Department of Health and Human Services updated its recommendations that fluoride levels should never exceed 0.7mg/L. Even at so-called safe levels, it is not meant to be ingested!https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/sites/default/files/ntp/about_ntp/bsc/2023/fluoride/documents_provided_bsc_wg_031523.pdfhttps://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/cdc-experts-say-fluoridated-water-is-safe-contrary-to-rfk-jr-s-warnings/https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/fluoride-childrens-health-grandjean-choi/https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/doi/epdf/10.1289/ehp.1104912https://www.nationalacademies.org/news/2006/03/epa-standard-for-fluoride-in-drinking-water-is-not-protective-tooth-enamel-loss-bone-fractures-of-concern-at-high-levelshttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4547570/pdf/phr130000318.pdfhttps://www.cancer.org/content/dam/CRC/PDF/Public/7030.00.pdfhttps://wwwn.cdc.gov/TSP/ToxFAQs/ToxFAQsDetails.aspx?faqid=211&toxid=38https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/harvard-study-strong-link-between-fluoridated-water-and-bone-cancer-boyshttps://nap.nationalacademies.org/resource/11571/fluoride_brief_final.pdfhttps://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/hsph-in-the-news/federal-government-calls-for-lowering-fluoride-levels-in-drinking-water/https://www.ewg.org/news-insights/news-release/national-academy-calls-lowering-fluoride-limits-tap-waterhttps://www.nidcr.nih.gov/health-info/fluoride/the-story-of-fluoridation#:~:text=In%201945%2C%20Grand%20Rapids%20became,the%20Institute%27s%20inception%20in%201948.

Distance is your best friend. That's a crucial piece of wellness wisdom from tech wellness expert August Brice. She joins host Amber Berger to explore the pervasive impact of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) emitted by our everyday tech devices, especially cell phones. She reveals the potential health risks associated with prolonged exposure to wireless EMFs, emphasizing the critical need to address this issue, especially for children. August shares her personal journey of developing electromagnetic sensitivity 25 years ago, leading her to extensive research in the pursuit of understanding and mitigating the health effects of technology. They discuss the three significant dangers associated with EMF exposure: cancer, infertility, and electromagnetic hypersensitivity. The episode provides actionable insights, offering listeners three immediate ways to reduce EMF exposure in their daily lives. Amber shares her efforts to protect her family, including using anti-EMF wraps on devices and reconsidering the use of AirPods. August advises on selecting safer cell phones, opting for those with lower SAR levels, and employing mindful practices such as using devices in airplane mode. She emphasizes the importance of making informed choices, particularly for children's first cell phones, suggesting alternatives like phones with only texting capabilities or those designed for minimal EMF exposure.They also discuss the significance of maintaining distance from wireless devices, promoting the use of wired connections for tasks like listening to music or taking calls. Practical tips for creating a sleep sanctuary are unveiled by minimizing EMF exposure in the bedroom. August recommends placing the phone at a distance, ensuring it is in true airplane mode, unplugging devices emitting electric EMF, and using analog clocks that don't emit blue light or EMF. Episode Highlights: -Health Effects of EMFs: The discussion explores how EMFs can negatively affect the human body, including concerns about cancer, infertility, and miscarriages. -Wireless Devices and EMFs: Any device powering wirelessly emits EMFs, which are invisible but potentially harmful. -Cigarette Analogy for EMF: A comparison is made using a cigarette analogy to illustrate how EMFs spread from their source. -Government Studies on EMFs: Mention of government studies, such as the National Toxicology Program, showing evidence of cancer due to exposure to cell phones in rats and mice. -Infertility Concerns: A significant focus is placed on the potential link between EMFs and infertility, with global fertility rates reportedly decreasing. -Natural vs. Manmade EMFs: The discussion differentiates between natural and manmade EMFs and highlights the body's potential "allergic reaction" to manmade energy. -Regulations in France: France's regulations on Specific Absorption Rate (SAR) levels for phones are discussed in comparison to the -U.S. SAR Levels and FCC: The FCC's relatively generous SAR levels for phones are mentioned, with concerns about the lack of regular testing once phones are on the market. -Parenting and EMF Concerns: Advice is given on choosing safe phones for children, suggesting simple texting phones to minimize Wi-Fi exposure. This episode is in partnership with Young Goose Skincare.Receive 10% off with promo code WELLDROP.THE WELL DROP - Be sure to leave a review and subscribe!Follow on Instagram @thewelldrop Produced by Haynow Media

Step into the 'Adams Archive' with Austin Adams, where we blend the controversial with the critically thought-provoking. This episode unveils the bizarre tactics of a Congressman, delves into leaked geopolitical strategy papers, and highlights the nationwide alert set for October 4th. But, our deep dive doesn't stop there. As 5G towers proliferate our landscapes, we delve into the pressing concerns surrounding this technological advancement. Is 5G merely a faster network, or is there more lurking beneath its high-frequency waves? Hear about the alarming studies, citizen testimonials, and Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s recent commentary on its potential health implications. With Austin at the helm, every episode promises meticulous research and unbiased conversation. Dive in, stay updated, and be part of the dialogue. Subscribe and enrich our collective conversation with your reviews and insights.   All links: Https://Linktr.ee/theaustinjadams Substack: Https://austinadams.substack.com   ----more---- Full Transcription    Atoms Archive. Hello, you beautiful people and welcome to the Adams archive. My name is Austin Adams, and thank you so much for listening today on today's episode. We are going to go deep into a topic that has been irking me for quite some time. And I'm sure it might irk you a little bit too, but we'll get to that in just a minute. The first thing that we're going to discuss today is going to be a Democratic congressman. Pulled a fire alarm to get out of doing his job. You heard right. That right there. You heard right that right there. A grown man in a position of power Elected nonetheless pulled a fire alarm to get out of doing his job. So Peter Doocy questions Kareen Jean Pierre quite A bit on this. It's pretty comical. Some people are laughing in the background during the white house press brief. Um, but pretty crazy stuff. So we'll, we'll touch on that first. The next thing we'll discuss is that there was a leaked us strategy document on Ukraine, which cites corruption as a real threat coming out of Politico. Could you imagine that? Could you imagine that corruption in Ukraine, which highlights on this article that Joe Biden's actually holding, holding Zelensky here? In his arm and whispering sweet nothings in his ears a lot of according to this picture. Um, so interesting stuff there. Then we'll move on to the next. which is that the Pentagon funded a study, speaking of Joe Biden, which warns that dementia is among us officials and poses a legitimate national security threat. So we'll read that together coming from the intercept. And then last but not least, we're going to talk about the October 4th. FEMA advisory, which is going to hit everybody's cell phones, everybody's TV and everybody's radio simultaneously at two 20 on October 4th. Now, if you're listening to this after that, which is. Potentially the most likely situation as this will come out on the third if you're listening to this after that don't worry What we're really discussing as a result of this because some there's some crazy theories about this October 4th thing Some people throw around the word like zombie. I don't know if I agree with that I don't spoiler alert but what I do think is a legitimate conversation to be had around this is the potential harm of massive Frequencies being put out nationally simultaneously and among different mediums and what that could mean for the general public so that that pulls us into a conversation about 5G 5G being a very hot topic when it comes to the well and then really not not getting enough conversation around it as it probably should, because there's been very little studies done on this stuff and its effects on people. And what has been done comes out from almost the 60s, but it's pretty wild. We're going to read into some of the articles, some of the discussions that have been had. Some of the concerns, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. just spoke about this on C SPAN, um, in a conversation with a potential voter, where he says that he's, um, actually representing a large group of people who were, uh, medically affected by 5G, so I, this isn't in the realm of craziness, guys. They put up these massive, huge, ugly... You've must have seen them. If you haven't, you need to open your eyes because they're everywhere, literally everywhere. Um, and we, we just don't, maybe we should be asking why, right? So we'll dive deep into that. And when I say deep, I'm saying deep. We're going to go there. So the longer you stick around, as always, the deeper we get. But first, I need you to go ahead and hit that subscribe button. If this is your first time here, I appreciate you from the bottom of my heart. So excited to have you here. Thank you so much. Hit that subscribe button because every single week, We have conversations just like this. So hit that subscribe button. If you're already subscribed, leave a five star review, right? Something nice. Tell me what you love about the podcast. Tell me your favorite episode. Give me your favorite recipe. I don't care, but write something nice. It helps me get up in the rankings. It's the best way that you can say thank you right now is just leaving a five star review. All right. There's not a lot that you can do to get some good karma today. This is a super easy one and I'm asking you pleading with you, subscribe, leave a five star review, write something nice helps me out, which means I can do this more for you guys. Alright, so thank you so much for listening. I appreciate it. Head over to the sub stack Austin Adams sub stack calm that just gives me your Email. So I can put out things like podcast companions and deep dives and all other awesome stuff, whether it's today or in the future. Um, on that note, I know I've been out for a couple of weeks, but I'm not going anywhere. All right. Life gets hectic. Sometimes I actually turned 30. Um, same time, got my purple belt in jujitsu, had some awesome things happen in other sections of my life that just kind of made all the craziness happen at once. Went backpacking with my wife for five, six days. Um, Pretty awesome stuff. But with that increased responsibility in those, some of those sectors of my life, my plan is to delegate and automate some of the things that I'm doing here for you guys. So I can put out even more content. So, um, look out for that and thank you for sticking around. All right. Without further ado, let's jump into it. The Adams archive. All right, let's jump into it. The very first thing that we're going to discuss today is that a democratic congressman named Jamal Bowman pulled a fire alarm simply because he didn't want to do his job. Now we'll see here in a second that Peter Doocy does a pretty good job of undressing Kareem Jean Pierre. Um, not in the way you're thinking, you dirty mind. Um, but in this conversation during a White House press briefing, he asked a simple question that ends up being pretty funny. But let's talk about this first because could you imagine that you have an important meeting coming up? Maybe even an important deadline, right? Your boss needs something on time, needs you to make a decision, he needs you to send you some documents, right? And instead of doing that thing that you're supposed to do for your job. You go out to the hallway, you find that shiny red box and you pull the fire alarm. Do you think that you would have your job? For very long. If every time you had a responsibility or a deadline to meet you pulled the fire alarm. No Every single one of us normal individuals would lose our job would lose our livelihood That's just absolute especially if you got caught red handed on Video just like this congressman here right now. Leave it to a Democrat to I don't know, find some baby way out of doing their actual job. And guess what? Guess what? One person stood up for him in this AOC. Could you imagine that? All right, so here is Peter Doocy discussing this with Kareem Jean Pierre asking her a question. Now, let's go ahead and watch this video. As always, you can hover head over to YouTube, or join the sub stack, it'll be added there. But head over to YouTube, subscribe there. And you can actually watch The videos with me on your screen, you can, uh, read the articles alongside me that I have up on the screen next to me, head over there, Austin, or the, I'm sorry, the Adams archive on YouTube, uh, subscribe and watch it with me. All right. Um, so here we go. Here's the video. Let's watch it to gather. Thank you, Corrine. When president by never tried to get out of a meeting. By pulling a fire alarm. Are you talking about something specifically? A Democratic member of Congress pulled a fire alarm around a series of boats. No fire. Is that appropriate? What I can tell you is, uh, I have not spoken to the President about this. Uh, and so, just not going to comment. I will leave it up to you. I know there's a House process moving forward right now. I'll leave it to the House. Okay, uh, since President Biden is so pro union, is he okay with 75, 000 healthcare workers possibly walking off the job this week? What I can tell you is that we've said this many times already this morning. So there was a, you hear all of the chuckles during the briefing of everybody in there realizing how Peter Doocy just tactfully slipped that in there. Um, pretty, pretty funny to see. And you see, it's so crazy to me that this woman's job is to answer questions. And I would say 90 percent of the time that she's asked a question, at least one that's not teed up for her by CNN. She doesn't answer it. Your entire job is to answer questions, right? It's like having a customer service. She's literally the customer service of The White House of the government. She's the only talking head that we have yet. Imagine if you called Ikea and you said, Hey, I think that you guys sent me the wrong part or the wrong instructions. I can't figure out how to put this thing together. I have no idea what I'm doing. It's very complicated. And also. You sent me an inflatable ducky instead of a dresser that I ordered. And they go, we understand, we understand that you're concerned about that. And I would love to answer that for you. However, at the very moment, I don't have access to the proper documents to answer that for you, and I wish you the best. Moving on. Next person. It's like, no, no. Your entire job is to answer questions. You should answer the questions. Especially when the people holding you accountable is the entire nation. Only, nobody seems to be holding these people accountable. Right, and that, that maybe is the bigger issue here. Alright, so that's a pretty funny one. Let's move on here. Because we have some longer stuff to get into. I have about 10 different articles on the FEMA situation in 5G and maybe 3 articles to get to before then. Um, but, the next article that we're going to talk about here comes from Politico. And it says that there is a leaked US strategy to On Ukraine, which was outlined saying that there's corruption as a legitimate threat. Could you imagine that? Ukraine? And corruption? No way! So Politico says, A report obtained by Politico details specific plans to reform Ukrainian institutions and warns Western support may hinge on cutting corruption. The Ukrainian, uh, President, um, Volodymyr Zelensky and President Joe Biden meet in the Oval Office for this picture where Joe Biden seems to be, I don't know, enacting some sort of corruption where he's got his arm around him, whispering in his ear, like He smells, uh, a 12 year old's perfume. Um, it says that the Biden administration officials are far more worried about corruption in Ukraine than they publicly admit. A confidential U. S. strategy document obtained by Politico suggests, it says the sensitive but unclassified version of the long term U. S. plan lays out numerous steps Washington is taking to help Kiev root out maleficence. and otherwise reform an array of Ukrainian sectors. It stresses that corruption could cause Western allies to abandon Ukrainians, a fight against Russia's invasion, and that Kiev cannot put off the anti graft effort. Perceptions of high level corruption, the confidential version of the document warns, could undermine the Ukrainian public's and foreign leaders confidence in the wartime government. That's starker than the analysis available in the little noticed public version of the 22 page document, which the Department of State, or the State Department, appears to have posted on its website with no fanfare about a month ago. The confidential version of the Integrated Country Strategy is about three times as long as and contains many more details about U. S. objectives in Ukraine. From privatizing its banks... to helping more schools teach English, to encouraging its military to adopt NATO protocols. Many goals are designed to reduce the corruption that, uh, bedevils the country. Bedevils? Well, that's a good word. Um, the quiet release of the strategy and the fact that the toughest language was left in the confidential version underscores the messaging challenge facing the Biden team. The administration wants to press Ukraine to cut graft, not least because U. S. dollars are at stake. But being too loud about the issue could embolden opponents of U. S. aid to Ukraine, many of them Republican lawmakers who are trying to block such assistance. Oh, no, don't send 40. trillion dollars to Ukraine, that would be terrible. Um, yeah, I agree. Um, any perception of weakened American support for Kiev could cause more European countries to think twice about their role. When it comes to the Ukrainians, there are some honest conversations happening behind the scenes, a US official familiar with Ukrainian policy said. Uh, Ukrainian graft has long been a concern of US officials all the way to Joe Biden. But the topic was Def, def, deemphasize, deemphasized? Wow, whoever is writing this article is, you're doing too much, bud. I promise you. You don't have to use the word deemphasized. Should there maybe be a hyphen there? It's deemphasized, right? It definitely seems like there should be a hyphen there. I'm just an idiot. Um, in the wake of Russia's February 2022 full scale invasion, which Biden has called a real life battle of democracy against autocracy. For months Biden's aide stuck to brief mentions of corruption. Yeah, because he is the very corruption that they're discussing here, right? There's like a guy on the front of this document with a mustache that looks very much like Hunter Biden with a blonde wig. Right? It's like, yeah, we know in walks, uh, you know, he has a Burisma, uh, logo on his shirt. It's like, yeah, no shit. There's corruption in Ukraine, but at least now we have some documentation to show that they're at least acknowledging that, which is far more than we can say about literally every other piece of gaslighting that has happened to us as the general public over the last, I don't know, four years. Anyways, let's read a little bit more of the article which says, uh, A State Department official speaking on behalf of the Department would not say if Washington had shared the longer version of the strategy with the Ukrainian government or whether a classified version exists. William Taylor, a former U. S. Ambassador to Ukraine, said many ordinary Ukrainians will likely welcome the strategy because they too are tired of endemic corruption in their country. It's all fine, as long as it doesn't get in the way of the assistance we provide them to win the war, he said. Yeah, only the entire reason for the assistance for the war is so that the corruption can siphon the money out of it. In walks Raytheon and Lockheed Martin, right, or Burisma, and all of the sudden are hundreds of billions of dollars Turns into 20 billion to actually fund the war and 85 billion to fund third party organizations Which bid quote unquote these contracts and then some type of politician funnels that money out, right? The reason that they're sending so much money into Ukraine I believe is because there's far less oversight into where that money is actually goes. There's very little accounting. There's very little oversight. Nobody's looking into that. Nobody has access to the books, at least not on the U. S. side of things, right? If we're sending that much money over there, we should have thorough accounting going on. We don't. Last time I checked, there was people saying that of every five weapons that were sent there, like four of them were unaccounted for going to. Ukrainian mobs and stuff like it's so crazy how much corruption is going on at any given time. And then let's jump into this one, which talks about the Pentagon funded a study. Imagine that the Pentagon funded the study warning that dementia among us officials. And it only took you three full years of having a president who couldn't finish a sentence or even knew the names of his own grandchildren to realize this, right? How crazy. So this comes from The Intercept, and it says that Senators Mitchell McConnell and Dianne Feinstein Who have access to top secret information recently had public health episodes. Yeah, one of those just darred So this article comes from September 12th from the intercept and it says as the national security workforce ages Dementia impacting US officials poses a threat to national security according to a First of its kind study by a Pentagon funded think tank. The report released the spring came as several prominent us officials trusted with some of the nation's most highly classified intelligence, experienced public lapses, stoking calls for resignations and debate about Washington's aging leadership. Right. It really is quite crazy. Like in, when Feinstein died Feinstein Feinstein, whatever, when she died, it was literally hours before that she, before she died. Hours before she died, she was rolled into the Senate and gave a vote on something as she rambled through her answer, only to be told to shut up by her handler next to her and the woman behind her so that she could just, just say, I, they said, which seems like a coerced vote to me. She was in the middle of explaining herself and giving her full answer at 90 years old. This woman 90. Giving her answer as to her vote and then before she can even finish it with her actual answer or her vote She's told by some 25 year old 30 year old guy next to her in a suit. No, no, no, just just say I don't don't stop talking Literally who elected that motherfucker, right? Who told him to tell her how to vote? Nobody, nobody besides the vested interests that are paying all of their salaries, right? And that's something that a lot of people don't realize. And I started to realize more recently is that when you have somebody who's a senator like that, underneath that individual, that face, that public facing individual, there's A hundred people that are operating under them as a business, right? You have, uh, people who are negotiating on behalf of them. You have people who are working with the lobbyists. You have people who are writing the bills and writing the responses and running the social medias and like under each individual in Congress or Senate that you see or the president, there's a hundred people getting a salary to make sure that person stays in their place. Right? Okay. So when you have somebody like Feinstein, you have a hundred people. Playing weekend at Bernie's trying to make sure that she doesn't die. And if she does, you can still wheel her into the Senate or to Congress, Senate and make a decision on a bill so they all get their bills paid at the end of the day. Right? And that's how it works. Like it's, it's not just one individual making these decisions. There's 50 people behind them who are influencing their decisions, who are writing their responses, right? How many, how many people do you see? Like maybe it's. Uh, Marjorie Taylor Greene, Matt Gaetz, uh, you know, how many people do you know that actually go in there? Maybe Cruz, Paul, uh, who else? Madison Cawthorn that actually went in there speaking their own words, right? If there's something if there's one thing that frustrates me more than anything at all about politics is how They've pulled back the curtain They don't even care that you know that they're not even speaking their own words anymore Which is literally their job. Their job is just to say things. That's their job Just, just, just to talk, but they can't even do that. They have teleprompters and talking points and bullet points in a, in a journal in front of them and, and prewritten social media posts. And like, dude, be a real person. There's no reason that we shouldn't be able to elect intelligent enough people with legitimate views that align with party lines or. the vested interests, even if you just want to allow the bullshit to happen, that they can't even at least be smart enough to speak by themselves without a written, a written speech in front of them without talking points without being told to shut up by the guy next to you and just say I, which is exactly 100 percent exactly what they did. Right? Literally 50 people playing weekend at Bernie's trying to get Feinstein to make a vote hours before she died of a Terminal illness, crazy, crazy, right? And that is legitimately politics, right? There's a great Frank Zappa quote, and you've probably heard me say it before. Let's see if we can find it. And what he says is that the illusion. Of freedom, Frank Zappa said the illusion of freedom will continue as long as it's profitable to continue the illusion at the point where the illusion becomes too expensive to maintain, they will just take down the scenery, they will pull back the curtains, they will move the tables and the chairs out of the way, and you will see the brick wall at the back. of the theater, right? That's the teleprompters sitting on either side of them while they look through these see through pieces of glass telling them exactly what to say like a robot. That's the talking points in front of Kareem Jean Pierre. That's that's the the the social media posts being posted on Biden's social media instead of Kamala's, right? There's They pulled back the curtains. They don't even care anymore whether you know or not that these aren't these words, they're words, these aren't their opinions, these aren't, they aren't anything that's of value, that's a real person. There's nothing but invested interests behind every single one of these politicians besides maybe a handful, maybe a handful, right? And what you see is those people get voted out almost immediately, right? Pushed out by more money. Because they didn't realize what a threat these people were. People like Madison Cawthorn, right? You've seen how much pushback Marjorie Taylor Greene has gotten. Trump's been literally indicted multiples of times over again in the last three hours. I don't know. Right? It's so crazy to see how much they've pulled back those curtains and shown you that politics is not real. Right? And that's what's so frustrating at times about this thing. So it's like, it's almost like arguing with AI. It like, it doesn't have a personality. It doesn't have a soul. I can't sit here and debate a legitimate politician or somebody who holds legitimate beliefs. Because all that's behind that is the brick wall. And behind the brick wall is the, the contractor who created it so that he could make profits off of building it. That's it. That's politics in a nutshell to me. It's, it's so frustrating and so many people have seen through it now. Right? So many people are fed up with it, with the election cycles, with the fact that their vote doesn't actually count, that they feel there's, you know, less and less value to what they're doing every single day when it's involving themselves with the biggest decisions in our children's lives. Right? It's so frustrating to know that you're literally screaming at that brick wall. And we can make change and we can wake up enough people and you're seeing this what people are coining as the Great Awakening. Right? You're seeing how many people are realizing that it's just a brick wall. Right? The illusion became too expensive to maintain. And now they've taken down the scenery. They don't care. They just pump money into marketing, right? And having some marketing background myself, if you didn't know, um, what, what you realize is that in a small company, right? When there's, when there's 10 to 20 people, when there's 20 to 50 people, when there's a small enough. Customer segment that you're going after, it's a lot about creative, right? It's a lot about, you know, at least that's what marketing people like to think. Is that like, maybe if I make it look really nice, if I come up with the right slogan, if the, if the workflow or the user experience is super clean, then people will, you know, people will buy our products. If the product looks nice and it has value to it, right. And you put those things together. A marketing mind thinks that there's true value to the way that you present something and there is, but what you realize when you get into a larger corporation. Is that it's not as much about when you, when you have 2000 customers. That you want to maintain loyalty from that all matters, but when you have 2 million, or let's say 300 million, or maybe a billion customers, I don't know, politics, right? Um, 81 million votes more than any other, right? When you have that amount of people that you're pushing, it's what you're really your job is when you're doing marketing at that level is, is you're looking to leverage and weaponize data. Right? What you, what you're looking to do is how much money can I throw at this vaccine? And if for every 600 I spend on marketing, when it comes back to us, because it goes through the insurance companies who make the, the healthcare companies that are, that are fun or pushing people to get these things done, we make 800 in profits per person or whatever the margins were. You keep putting 600 into it, right? And, and, and that's where you have to see where's the profit really lie. Right. And that's where people started to question the overall narrative is like, was that even profitable with how much marketing, how much lobbying, how much incentives there were for politicians and healthcare individuals and the Fauci's of the world, and like, was it really profitable when we saw, yeah, they made like. trillions of dollars. Um, so for sure it was profitable for the pharmaceutical companies, but, but people started to question, was it profitable in the sense of, of monetary value for the pharmaceutical companies? The answer is obviously yes, but for the politicians, the profit was in the power. Right. The profit was in the ability to pass legislation to allow them to push us closer towards totalitarianism and what you see oftentimes to when it comes to large, extremely large corporations like Facebook wasn't profitable. LinkedIn wasn't profitable. Um, a lot of these companies hinge their profitability on it. continued funding more than they do on the profit from the actual, uh, sell of sale, sale of goods or, or services. Right? So, so when, when you can make something profitable through the next seed rounds that you have of, of your startup by continuing to get investors like Facebook data or LinkedIn data or, or right, but you don't have to worry about. What is, how am I actually going to, uh, monetize my service? Right? Because as long as I can continue convincing people that I can get money. And a lot of times it's just through users like Facebook and LinkedIn did or Uber or whatever, right? Like there's some, some companies that still are not profitable. Like Facebook wasn't profitable until like 2016. Right? So, so when you have the company large enough, you're there, they're, their entire existence is dependent on. Words on convincing large scale investors that they're worth it because we'll figure out the profitability later, right? And so when people are looking at the politicians and segmenting that out from the pharmaceutical companies, yeah, maybe it was profitable for the pharmaceutical companies, but for the politicians, the profitability either came from a extension of power towards authoritarianism, but also B, which is that They need to get continued funding, right? As long as you're appeasing the black rocks or the vanguards or the, the state streets or the Larry Fink's or the Klaus Schwab's or the Rockefeller's or the Soros's or the right, as long as you're continuing to appease the large money of the world, that the people who own the real funding organizations like these, and you're getting that continued funding. Then you're fine. You don't have to be profitable. You don't have to make decisions and maybe profitable when it comes to being a politician is more about popularity, or you don't have to be popular with the people. You don't have to be, you don't have to have a profitable service, right? Popularity in this, in this case, as long as the funding continues to grow, because with enough funding, you can get anybody in office as Biden and the guy who wears sweatpants every day. There's my rant. They pulled back the curtains guys. Alright, so there's your initial articles. The next thing we're going to discuss. October 4th, 2023. A day that many people believe could lead to catastrophe. Now I'm going to tell you why. FEMA put out a bulletin and I'm going to read it directly from their website for you so we can get some context on this. Which I just pulled up for you so you can follow along. Um, and if you're not watching on YouTube, you can actually pull this up for yourself. It says FEMA and FCC plan nationwide emergency alert test for October 4th, 2023. Alright, there you go. Um, you can look it up and read along while you're, uh, just listening. Alright, so it's on the FEMA website, FEMA. gov. And it says release date was August 3rd of 2023, release number HQ23124. And it says, uh, FEMA in coordination with the Federal Communications Commission, the FCC, We'll conduct a nationwide test of the emergency alert system and the wireless emergency alerts. This fall, the national test will consist of two portions testing WEA and EAS capabilities, right? Emergency alert system and wireless emergency alerts. Both tests are scheduled to begin in approximately 2. 20 Eastern time on Wednesday, October 4th. All right, now again, if you're here right now and you're listening and it's past the fourth and we all happen to not be zombies, as some people are saying, and nothing happened, I hear you. All right, I'm not saying anything crazy is going to happen, but I do think that this sparks an interesting conversation. But there are people saying that there is going to be some crazy shit that will happen. And we'll talk about that too. But the main point of this conversation is going to drive into 5G. All right. So it says the national test will consist of two portions, testing WEA and EAS capabilities. The WEA portion of the test will be directed to all consumer cell phones. All. All consumer cell phones. Do you know how many cell phones that is? This will be the third nationwide test, but the second test to all cellular devices. This the history of man. Right? And you're not going to tell me that there's any reason for concern. The test message will display in either English or in Spanish, depending on the language settings in your wireless handset. The EAS portion of the test will send out to radios and televisions. This will be the seventh nationwide EAS test, right? So one other time in history, have they done an emergency alert like this? It says emergency matters and other managers and other stakeholders in preparation for this national test to minimize confusion and to maximize the public safety value of the test. says they are coordinating with EAS participants, wireless providers, and emergency managers. And other stakeholders in preparation, right? The purpose of the October 4th test is to ensure that the systems continue to be effective means of warning the public about emergencies, particularly those on a national level. What does that even mean? The purpose of the test is to ensure that systems continue to be effective means of warning the public. You're telling me that you're testing to see that if you send a nationwide emergency alert. Like the Amber alerts, you're just seeing if it's effective. Like, what about putting that in front of literally everybody in existence with a cell phone makes you think it wouldn't be effective? Why do you need to test that? Weird. It says, in case the October 4th test is postponed due to widespread severe weather or other significant events, the backup testing date is October 11th. Now that's pretty weird to me. Why would they expect there be, to be severe, tell me the last time there was severe enough widespread weather events. That you couldn't send out a national advisory radio waves in the air. How does that make any sense? All right. It says the WEA portion of the test will be initiated using FEMA's integrated public alert and warning systems, a centralized internet based system administered by FEMA that enables authorities to send automated authenticated emergency messages to the public through multiple communications networks. The WEA test will be administered via a code sent to cell phones. This year, the EAS message will be disseminated as a Common Alerting Protocol, CAP, message via the Integrated Public Alert Warning Systems Platform for Emergency Networks. All wireless phones should receive the message only once. The following can be expected beginning at approximately 220 cell phone towers will broadcast the test for approximately 30 minutes during this time, W. E. A. Compatible wireless phones that are switched on within range of an active cell tower and whose wireless provider participates in W. E. A. Should be capable of receiving the test message. Okay, so there's your criteria for this October 4th situation is that at 220 for 30 minutes long. Thank wireless phones that are switched on within range of an active cell tower and whose provider participates in WEA. For consumers, the message that appears on their phones will read, this is a test of the National Wireless Emergency Alert System. No action is needed. Phones with the main menu set to Spanish will display. Let me give this a shot for you. Esta es una pre UBA del Sistema Nacional de Alerta de Emergencia. No se necesita acción. That was pretty good. At least it sounded good. WA alerts are created and sent by authorized federal, state, local, tribal, and territorial government agencies through the PAWS, or IPAWS, to participating wireless providers. Okay. Important information about the EAS test, right? This is the one that will be on your TV and the radio. It says the EAS portion of the test is scheduled to last approximately one minute and will be conducted with the participation of radio and television broadcasters, cable systems, satellite radio and television providers, and wire line video providers. The test message... Uh, will be similar to the regular monthly EAS test message, uh, which is the public is already familiar. This will state this is a national test of the emergency alert system issued by the Federal Emergency Management System, or agency, covering the United States from 1420 to 1450 ET. This is only a test. No action is required. Bye. All right. So there you have it. Essentially, if you're within a cell phone towers range and your cell phone is turned on, then you will get this alert. Now there is something that you can do about this. You can go into the settings of your iPhone and turn off. Emergency alerts. I've already done this for things like the Amber alerts. I've already done this. I've already done this, but you should probably should too, because here's the thing, giving the government immediate access to your brain, right? The, the imagine this, if you had a chip implanted in your brain and you could immediately have the government put something into your eyes and flash something that says a message, would you want the government to have access to that? And if you could take two minutes out of your day, one time to turn off their ability to do that. Now it's like, Oh, what if there's an Amber Alert? Well, the likelihood that there's an Amber Alert in my area that I have the ability to help, like, like there was this great TikTok that somebody posted. It was like what they expect somebody to do if there's an Amber Alert. And it's like a bunch of people just run out of their houses and just get into random people's cars and go start searching around for the Amber Alert. It's like, what the hell am I going to do? Like, sorry, I'm not I'm not Like, you know, what was that guy's name? Uh, Inspector Gadget. Like, I'm not going to be very much help here. Right? Now, of course I would love to help and do what I can to help in that situation. But, the access to my immediate information stream for the government at any given time It's just not worth the 0, 00000 percent likelihood that I'm going to be able to be the guy solves an Amber alert. Right? So just turn that shit off. Problem solved. You won't have to deal with it. Go into your settings on your iPhone, turn off emergency alerts. That's it. All right. Um, but to me, this drives another conversation, right? Well, let's look at some of the conspiracy stuff here. Let's see what people are saying on conspiracy Reddit about this. Um, it's not actually conspiracy Reddit. I had to find a go a little bit deeper into the Dark abyss of the internet to find this but it says unveiling the October 4th 2023 blackout conspiracy FEMA's mysterious Tess says the date October 4th has caught the attention. This comes from some random website that you've never heard of C O O P W B which stands for co operation of worldwide broadcast I guess maybe it sounded, they tried to make it sound legit, although thumbnail picture kind of gives it away. It says the date of October 4th, 2023 has caught the attention of many Nietzsens. Is it supposed to be citizens? Rumors swirl about potential blackout conspiracy tied to a FEMA test. Claims suggest that the emergency alert system test on this day hides a nefarious purpose. With such a significant event taking place and conspiracy theories gaining traction, it's imperative to separate fact from fiction. For more information about this topic, you can visit The Reddit. That's legit. All right, so we've already read through the FEMA advisory. Let's watch some of these videos. Uh, here's a video by somebody on TikTok named activate your pineal gland. Responding to comment, 30 minutes is very suspicious. Why? This is in regards to the emergency alert system that's going to be tested on Wednesday, October 4th for everyone. At the alert will be accompanied by unique tone. and vibration. Let's talk about tones and vibrations. This here is a Syma 1000. This is the machine I use. It is the basis of an app and a website that I have called Symatones, and it plays five resonant frequencies through this vibrating speaker. So this is tones and vibration, just like the alert we were just talking about, and it's targeting different ailments or body parts to retune them back to a balanced and a harmonious energy body. See, our energy body's got all these different pathways, and if there's blockages, And whether it's the water because we're made of water or in the energy pathway, then what that does is it causes a physical ailment. The physical ailments can be retuned by different tunes and tones. Back to October 4th, what tones and vibrations do you think the governments gonna be playing for us? Hmm. All right. So I'll address that first. What she's saying is that there's actually vibrational medicine, um, and you look at things like ancient Chinese medicine, things like acupuncture, acupuncture, um, things like, uh, there's a lot of like traditional medicine that leverages vibrational frequencies and, uh, unblocking, you know, what she's speaking to, um, which has actually been scientifically proven more recently when they were looking into things like acupuncture, uh, talking about the, um, flow of the energy flows within our bodies, which I tend to be a decent believer of, you know, having, um, been a part of, you know, actually gone deeper into things like, you know, yoga and Kundalini yoga and, um, transcendental meditations and things like that, that I've dove into and discussed previously on this podcast. You can go find, uh, what was it? Uh, I did a good, a good podcast on that. If you're interested on it, go back and check it out. Um, just look for transcendental meditation. Um, But, um, I, I, science, science, you know, whatever that fucking means, um, the, the, the truth bears, uh, but they, they, for long denying traditional medicine, they've, there's been a lot of studies that have come out that have shown legitimacy, uh, to exactly what she's saying, right? You know, you want to get deeper into it. You want to go towards the Napoleon Hill things, um, is that everything's a frequency, right? Every, the only, every object is vibrating, um, and, and sound is a frequency and movement is, uh, it has a certain frequency and the, you know, everything is vibrating at a certain tone and, and by manipulating vibration, um, our words, our frequencies, right. Um, and, and all it is, is a, you know, vibration of your vocal cords. And with that, you can, you know, Take over countries essentially, right? And what she's saying is that it's also can be used for good reasons medicinally and potentially negative reasons medicinally. Uh, so let's, let's continue to see what she says about that. And why 30 minutes? The water in your body resonates to different sounds, tones, and vibrations it is surrounded with. And not only does it vibrate to that while it's hearing it, but it remembers it within five to seven minutes. Dr. Gerald Pollack on YouTube is a great resource for water. So while my device plays tones and vibrations that promote wellness, what's playing on October 4th? Good. Question. I did not see that part of that article. Um. Ahem. Very interesting. Uh, it says the airwaves and online platforms are buzzing. A myriad of speculations, skepticisms, and stories have emerged. Painting a murky picture. Understanding the context and the facts is crucial to discern the reality of the October 4th blackout conspiracy. Uh, yeah. And you're doing this literally against people's will. So, right, so where I have a problem with this is that you, you're Taking something that's never been done before, right? You're aligning the frequency of the nation, essentially, right? When you activate a singular event for all people at one time, right? I want you to go into a church. Right, religious or not, I want you to go into a church. I want you to go into a synagogue. I want you to go into a, I don't know, literally any religious institution and see what they do 60 percent of the time that they're in there. I'll give you a hint. Vibrations. It's a singing. It's a frequency. It's a it's a it's it's the alignment of multiple individuals in a singular area with the alignment of their consciousness through vibrational frequencies, right? If So when you go into a church, you just, you feel it right when everybody's singing and everybody's aligned and everybody's speaking to the same higher power, whatever that is, you can feel that energy. And it's not just the music, right? And music alone is extremely powerful. And obviously, you know, Hollywood and the elites of the world have have weaponized that. But you realize the positive effects of that. So when you are aligning the consciousness of an entire nation at a singular time, let's just talk about that until we get to 5G and radiation and that type of thing. But let's just say that the tone, the frequency, That all matters, right? It's not like the, and even if they were just testing this, even if that was the case, let's, let's, let's not attribute malice initially. Let's, let's not get into the tinfoil hat wearing conspiracies. Let's just say, even if you were going to, as far as to say, they're just testing, they're just testing a, Uh, just, just making sure that it works, right? Well, when we go back to silent weapons for quiet wars, probably the most impactful podcast that I've ever done, maybe next to the Chinese, um, the interview that I did with, uh, uh, Mr. Gerber. Where he talked about the organ harvesting of the Uyghur Muslims and the, uh, Falun Gong movement. Um, again, super impactful, but, but I would say that when you look at silent weapons for quiet wars, and we discussed shock testing, right? This is... Potentially the single largest data set that could be leveraged. Every single person with a cell phone. So essentially every household in America at a singular time is given the opportunity for these people to shock test something, right? Whether that be the frequency, what does this frequency have as an effect on the general public? Right? And you go look at the CIA documents, you know, going back to like MKUltra times, you know that they tested these things. They tested these things for, for. legitimately brainwashing people behind what what the Soviets were doing, mimicking what the Soviets were doing with the Nazi doctors that we we've took in from Operation Paperclip. And this is this shit's real guys. Like that's the craziest part about all this is like, you string all these things together. And it's like, Oh, you're a crazy conspiracy. It's like, No, bitch, go to the CIA website. Research operation, paperclip research, uh, MK ultra research, what, what their CIA has been doing and what, what people have been doing in, in our organizations, in our, in our public sphere, in our politics for a very long time. So no, all of this is real. And so if you can shock test the entire public at a singular time, essentially what shock testing is, is, is, is taking a, um, figuring out with a large enough data set. What does it take to cause, if you give this input, what is the output? Right? If I, I don't know. Uh, If like Burger King, right? Everybody drives past a Burger King or maybe you used to. I don't know if they still do it, but they're there. They literally have like a chimney on top of it and they have the smoke flowing that smells like Burger King. It's like they tested long enough to see that. Oh, maybe people will come in more often if we put the smell out. literally into the air surrounding our area. Um, that's a shock test, right? They had to test that theory and see if it worked and see if the percentages went up of people who bought in the areas that they did it. Right? So, so if you can shock test the general public, if we have this input, right, and maybe they're going to do different, if they were smart, they would use different data sets, right? Or different lists for this, right? They, they would go into it and they'd say, all right, for a fourth of the country, we're going to use. This frequency for a fourth of the country. We're going to use this frequency, a fourth of the country. We're going to use this frequency. And these different frequencies have different effects on the human psyche. And, and maybe we can weaponize this to either make people more docile, make them more agreeable, make them more likely to have X, Y, and Z. And then they shock test it, they run that experiment and then they take the results and then they analyze them with extremely large and accurate data sets, right? So again, we don't have to get into zombie apocalypses for them to be shock testing large data sets with potential weaponized or. Whatever word you want to use for the frequency testings that they're using, right? This is this is real. This is legitimate. Go go do some research, right? But I I do see some potential issues with this just at a surface level Then you want to get into actual 5g And that's a discussion that we'll get into here in just a moment because we're still on like the first article of this. Um, now this comes from another, uh, account, which says that on October 4th, the FEMA and FCC will conduct a nationwide test. Wouldn't this be the perfect opportunity for hackers to tell the truth of what's going on? The greatest hack ever. Hmm. Saying that they, if they can hack the, uh, What's being sent out and and say something different potentially another person said the spread of the conspiracy This is Richard Elliott says turn your phone off October 4th 2023 a to 220 for at least 30 minutes God only knows what kind of malware this corrupt government will be downloading to your phones if you leave them on during this test That's an interesting theory. And again, you look at things like Pegasus, right? Pegasus being the world's foremost spying software that can be easily downloaded to your phone. It used to be that they would send you a text message, they'd send you an email, and this is, again, readily available information. The Mossad is using it, the CIA, um, um, MI6, all of them use this software to spy on terrorists and domestic terrorists and people who, I don't know, go through, uh, the Capitol building, uh, on a museum tour guided by the police on a certain date in January, um, and people like you and me because of the Patriot Act and they can do whatever the fuck they want, right? So, um, Uh, it says FEMA's announcement. Um, but, sorry, let me finish that about Pegasus. Pegasus essentially allows them to look at your, every single thing on your phone, controlled at all times, turn on your, your camera when, and have it not notify you. Um, so they can watch you, they can listen in through your microphone, which they're probably doing to me right now. Uh, Um, but it, it can essentially just, it allows them to, to weaponize your phone for, for spying purposes. And then they've already had it shown, um, through Edward Snowden that that's what they were doing, right? They were absolutely weaponizing that against citizens with no really due process or warrants or any reason at all. And they actually found that People within the organizations were doing this to people in their own lives, right? Crushes or girlfriends or excuse me, exes, pretty crazy stuff. Um, so there's another theory. Uh, it says conspiracy theories and concerns. It says enter off grid secrets, a YouTuber amplifying the conspiracies volume. He questions the Potential health risks of simultaneous phone activations. Without scientific evidence, he surmises potential harm to humans, insects, birds, and bees due to radiation. His intrigue doesn't stop there. Using a Germantria calculator, Off Grid Secrets dives deep into the date's significance, finding links to, uh, findings link the date to various cryptic terms, further fueling speculations. As of October 4th, 2023, date, nearest conspiracy theories will undoubtedly persist. Yet a critical mindset and reliance on facts remain essential. Only time will unveil the truth behind the October 4th, 2023 blackout conspiracy. Um, interesting, right? So there's some of the conspiracies that have come out. I actually do have, I believe that guy's, uh, video embedded somewhere here. Um, but I do wanna take you back and let's, maybe I can take you to one of his videos. Maybe we're. Too deep into this to get there. Um, yeah, we might be a little too deep. I have too many 5G articles up. Uh, so in walks 5G. All right. Um, And so, so let's go into this. Do you recall, this was back in February 7th of 2022, so, um, I was operating my podcast at this time. You can very likely go back. I believe I actually did a whole podcast, one of the topics being about this specific national terrorism advisory bulletin from the Department of Homeland Security, uh, titled, so again, February 7th of 2022. And it said summary of terrorism threats to Homeland Security. And you go down to the additional details on that webpage directly on dhs. gov and it says key factors contributing to the current heightened threat environment include. All right now, if you just press control F and we go five G one of the things on the department of Homeland security's website. Terrorist advisory says domestic extremism or domestic extremists have also viewed attacks against us critical infrastructure as a means to create chaos and advance ideological goals and have recently aspired to disrupt us electrical and communications critical infrastructure, including by spreading false or misleading narratives about five g cellular and as technology. So if you spread false false meaning against the mainstream narrative of what the corporations who funded these individuals and put them in power want you to think, right, because we all know that the fact checkers mean nothing other than their narrative enforcers for corporations. If you even speak out against that, I am right now. Talking about how potentially this technology, which is, we have no clue as to what its effects are, and you say anything that's against what they want you to say or think about their technology, then you can be deemed a domestic, violent extremist, specifically for just having an opinion about the potential side effects of a technology that nobody knows the side effects of. Nobody. Nobody. I'm not claiming to know the side effects of this. Now, I'll present to you some evidence from some people who do, but I don't know. What I will tell you is, everywhere you look right now, there's a frickin 5G tower. I will tell you what I know, which is that when people go up to those towers and work on them, they wear large, white radiation suits. Like, E. T. style radiation suits to work on the 5G towers. I wonder why. What I will tell you is that there was articles coming out about how large swarms of bees, birds, and a bunch of other animals and insects were dying in the immediate vicinity of 5G cell towers. Allegedly, according to those articles. All right. What I will tell you is that Robert F. Kennedy jr, which we'll find out here in just a second is representing a group of individuals who say that they were negatively affected by 5g. And what I will tell you is that the same people who wanted you to believe that you should get the vaccine also, you know, not a vaccine. Understudied mRNA gene therapy, uh, also wants you to shut the hell up and not say anything about their ugly ass towers that are everywhere, right? And they're literally trying to hide these towers by making them look like trees. Really shitty, ugly trees, by the way. These towers are the most horrific looking eyesore of anything in the world today. They look terrible. You've seen them, you know exactly what I'm talking about. Um, and it's infuriating. I don't know about you, but my phone worked just fine before 5G came out. I don't know about you, but I still sit and shit loads forever, and no matter how many 5G towers they put around my house, or as I'm driving on the highway, my cell service still hasn't improved 1%. 1 percent in the last 5 to 10 years. Yet everywhere you look right now, they're putting up 5G towers. Why? That's the better question. What is the purpose of this? What am I gaining out of this? Or what are they gaining out of this? And of those one of one things that have happened like this, those, those mass communications that have happened, there's only one that's happened before now. How many occurred when 5G was in effect? That's another question. Alright, so, Department of Homeland Security, February 7th, 2022, released a bulletin saying that if you speak out against 5G, according to the Department of Homeland Security, you could potentially be a violent, extremist, domestic terrorist. On that note, let's talk about 5G. Uh, alright. Oh, I do also want to know that if you go back and you had to go back, and by back I mean to Wayback Machine and go to the CDC website because they scrubbed, the CDC scrubbed their website of this article that had preparedness 101, zombie apocalypse, and this was back in 2011. I don't know if you remember that, but the CDC actually gave out guidelines surrounding a zombie apocalypse. Now, it seems to be in the light of some satire. Right? And because they opened it up with, there's all kinds of emergencies out there that you can prepare for. Take a zombie apocalypse, for example. You may laugh now, but when it happens, you'll be happy you read this. And hey, maybe you'll even learn a thing or two about how to prepare for a real emergency. They talk about, and give legitimate guidelines for how to survive a zombie apocalypse. So again, I think the people saying that are silly. When it comes to this because there's like an in the you know, you go to the deep deep websites You go to like the the QAnon 4chan conspiracy websites, you know the things like You know one that I've seen before is what's it called? Before it's news. com. That's an interesting one if you want to go deep but You go there and you there's all these conversations about zombies apocalypse 5g You know all of that so Have fun kids, but if you want to go check this out, you have to go to Wayback Machine You have to find the article And maybe I can, I can link that for you in the, uh, in the sub stack. So, um, or, you know, I'll, I'll put it in my Instagram. So let me, let me give my plug here is, is that the CDC actually had a document released of how to prepare for a zombie apocalypse. They did that. All right. Um, so I'll include that. If you go to my Instagram, you can comment on there. Maybe I'll, if I can make that a clip, um, I'll have something on there where I can send it to you automatically through some automation. So, um, all right. So that's one thing. That's interesting. Here's another one, right? You want to let's let's get into the actual 5g conversation because I think this is important. This is something that I've been wanting to do for quite some time now. And this may go over a little bit and it's already, you know, almost 12 o'clock here. But hey, what do I got to lose besides Being considered a terrorist according to the Department of Homeland Security for talking about technology concerns drink to that So here goes a video of Robert F. Kennedy jr And he is discussing with a voter about how he's you know, she says he's a conspiracy theorist and all this stuff So let's go ahead and watch This video. You are definitely not in my book or any of my democratic family or friend book, a Democrat. Um, your conspiracy theories, they, they literally scare us. Um, we just came out of four years of, you know, full of Trump lies and his conspiracy theories in this country. You claim that you want to heal us as a nation and our divide. And this is not, I mean, the wifi causes cancer and 5g is. Is mass surveillance and, and chemicals in our water cause transgender and, and, and antidepressants cause school shootings. I, I'm so confused and so I'm looking for clarity from you today, Mr. Kennedy. Okay, uh, Sharon, thank you for the call. You laid out a lot of things. We'll let Mr. Kennedy respond. Yeah, Sharon, thanks for those questions. You say that I have conspiracy theories and, you know, you're labeling me anti vax, which I'm not. Or a conspiracy theorist, which I am not. Um, is one of the ways that the Democratic Party and their allied press have silenced me. I mean, you, um, you mention, for example, 5G and, and dismiss the fact that 5G causes cancer. But I'm representing now hundreds of, of, of, of men and women in this country who have gotten, uh, a glioblastoma. Uh, classic cell phone tumors, uh, from 5G, and there's, there are reams of scientific studies that show that that is happening. Um, you, you say that 5G is not used for surveillance. Is there really any American left? Who believes that the government is not, uh, spying on the American people. Wire Magazine. 5G smartphones cause cancer. Big Wireless doesn't want you to know. That's two thousand and sixteen. Back before they totally controlled all the media. The FDA black box warning on antidepressant suicide risk in young adults. Oh, that's from the NIH, National Institutes of Health, saying it's on the insert that it causes suicide and mass murder. But you heard her say, how dare you say that to R. L. K. Jr. Suicidality in children and adolescents being treated with antidepressant medications. FBA. gov. It's a fact. Like the U. N. said, oh, aspartame gives you cancer and heart attacks, but it's okay. And a present black box warning ten years later. So, I'm done talking about that. We just spent 45 minutes or more responding to that caller. Probably a real person, probably not just a seminar caller told to say it. And they just think we're scaring people. We're bad. So I just responded to him All right, so there's your daily dose of Alex Jones But nothing you said was wrong, right? Very very interesting articles that he just brought up and I have some of my own and some of my own videos here that we'll walk through together now one of the foremost experts on this is you know an experts I mean You know, a consistent person who was found doing seminars on the dangers of 5G is Dr. Barry Trower. Dr. Barry Trower being somebody who is a part of MI6 Intelligence, allegedly speaking out about 5G. And here's a portion of his seminar that he did in 2000 and... 21, um, called the Truth of five G and wifi, and you can find it on YouTube, uh, Dr. Barry Trower, T r o w E R, the truth about five G and wifi part one on YouTube. There's only 700 views here, but uh, I believe the original clip was taken down. So, um, here we go. This, I think, is the most shameful document ever to be published. It is by the World Health Organization. We pay them to protect us, and we trust them to protect us. In 1973, the World Health Organization had a conference in Warsaw. Biological effects and health hazards of microwave radiation, below thermal, Radiation, which is what you have on your cell phones. 350 pages, documenting harm to the ordinary person. 107 different chapters, chapter 40 deals with cancer, uh, I think 28 reproductive faults, but instead of telling the world, I don't know who made them make the decision, instead of telling the world it was stamped top secret, with a big red top secret stamp, it still is, and you still will not be told about this, they will not admit to it. The second most shameful document, I think, is this one. This was published between 1972 and 1976. The final part was 1976. It is from the U. S. Defense Intelligence Agency. And the document says, If the more advanced nations of the West, which is us, are strict, In the enforcement of exposure standards, there could be unfavorable effects on industrial output, industrial output is profit, and military function. In other words, what they wanted us to do was set a level of radiation for the NATO countries, set a level of radiation that would not be strict. Hence, we came in with the six minute thermal level that is still in place today and what councils are advised to adhere to. At that time, the World Health Organization, again, what they didn't tell you, on their website, or on their, what they had on these days, 80 percent of the published papers linked cancer to low level microwaves. And the others, you had neurological damage, birth defects. Uh, there, there was no secret among the decision makers then. And every so often, when a, generally when a new G comes out, a new, uh, one of the new makes of the cell phone, the International Commission for Non Ionizing Radiation Protection, they put out an addendum to their original report, which clears the way for whichever generation it is coming out. There's a new one coming out in a couple of days to clear the way for 5G. This is the original, or a copy of the original, uh, International Commission document. And it is of interest to decision makers, all decision makers, excuse me, because I think I'm not legally trained and I cannot understand people when they talk to me who are legally trained. But I will give you my interpretation of this. And this is for council decision makers and all other decision makers. They actually say in this that... Their recommendations are guidelines. They are not law. You do not have to adhere to them. They are guidelines. They say they only consider involving the heating of tissue. They go on to say, for example, Children, The elderly and some chronically ill people may have a lower tolerance for one or more forms of these microwaves than the rest of the population. They will be deemed sensitive. And then they say, on page 547 of this one, In practice, the critical steps in applying these general procedures may differ across the spectrum. Several steps in these procedures require scientific judgment, for example, on reviewing the scientific literature and determining an appropriate reduction factor. In other words, in my simple brain, if you are told that something is dangerous, as a decision maker, you have the authority to say, this says this level will cause this. I am instructed to reduce the level to a point that is deemed safe. You do not have somebody walk into your school or somewhere and say, Sign here, gov, these are radio waves. We've had

In this episode I have a distinguished guest, Dr Devra David , to talk about her work in wireless technology and cell phones and how those devices are truly affecting our children (and us adults). She is no stranger to seeing the industry's powerful influence on policy makers; but will not stop sharing truth and science and raising awareness about our wireless tech. She does so with books, lectures and though The Environmental Health Trust website. This episode is brought to you by Namawell, the Best cold press juicers on the planet with the revolutionary J2 being the most amazing Bulk juicing champion. To get your Nama juicer at a discount, use code CHANTAL10 for 10% off! www.namawell.comTo join my Inner circle www.liveleanhealth.com/inner-circleAbout Devra Lee Davis, Ph.D. MPHFounder and President of Environmental Health TrustDr. Devra Davis is founder and President of Environmental Health Trust, a scientific think tank that publishes research and educates policymakers and the public on environmental health hazards. She is currently Visiting Professor of Medicine at The Hebrew University Hadassah Medical School, Jerusalem, Israel, and Ondokuz Mayis University Medical School, Samsun, Turkey. Davis was Founding Director, Center for Environmental Oncology and the  University of Pittsburgh Cancer Institute and founding director of the Board on Environmental Studies and Toxicology of the U.S. National Research Council, National Academy of Sciences. Davis was Senior Advisor to the Assistant Secretary for Health in the Department of Health and Human Services and appointed to the US Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board by President Clinton.  She served on the Board of Scientific Counselors of the U.S. National Toxicology Program  and various advisory committees to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. She was part of the team of Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change scientists awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007 with the Honorable Al Gore as she was lead author on research assessing climate mitigation policies. She has also authored more than 200 peer reviewed publications in books and journals ranging from the Lancet and Journal of the American Medical Association. Her three popular books include When Smoke Ran Like Water: Tales of Environmental Deception and the Battle Against Pollution,  Disconnect:The Truth About Cell Phone Radiation, What the Industry Is Doing to Hide It, and How to Protect Your Family and the Secret History of the War on Cancer.Davis testified in the 2009 Senate hearings on cell phone radiation (CSPAN link), has published numerous studies on the health effects of non-ionizing electromagnetic radiation, and organized numerous national and international scientific conferences on the issue. EHT's scientific publications were submitted to the FCC record and EHT submitted thousands of pages of evidence to the FCC in the years leading up to the court's decision Learn how to protect yourself from cell phones and wireless devices radiations: https://ehtrust.org/educate-yourself/10-things-you-can-do-to-reduce-the-cancer-risk-from-cell-phones/  Follow the EHTrust on You Tube https://www.youtube.com/user/watchehtrust Instagram https://www.instagram.com/ehtrust/ Twitter https://twitter.com/saferphones Facebook https://www.facebook.com/EHTrust 

Key Takeaways:  Cancer Briefly Defined  What Is a Tumor  Cancer Cells VS Normal Cells  Cells becoming Cancerous  Cause of Gene Mutations  Common Cancer Risk Factors  BELIEVE IT ---Cancer is preventable  Ways to Lower Your Risk  The Importance of Weight Management  A Closer Look at Inflammation   The Gut Health Connection  Amp Up Your Diet  Cut the Booze   Quit Smoking   Get Moving  The Value in Slumber  Manage Stress  Episode Summary:  I am passionate about sharing this topic with people who are eager to ensure they reach and sustain optimal health! According to a study conducted in 2008 by M.D Anderson Cancer Center researchers, 90-95% of all cancer cases are due to lifestyle and environmental factors.  As quick definition of Cancer refers to a group of related diseases where some of the body's cells become abnormal, begin to unceasingly divide, and eventually enter into surrounding tissues.    This can start almost anywhere within the body. The abnormal cells that would have otherwise died off, survive, multiply, and initiate the growth of tumors.   My hope is this YOUNGER podcast episode will exceed your expectations and help you feel well equipped with the knowledge, resources, and tools to arm you and your loved ones from cancer!  Guest Bio:   Dr. Robyn Benson is a Doctor of Oriental Medicine (DOM) who brings an innovative and game-changing approach to today's health care. Robyn offers the most advanced and cutting-edge therapies, procedures, and products designed to renew, restore, and revive health called A.R.T.: Amplified Regenerative Therapies.  Dr. Benson, author, speaker, and self-care and Regenerative Medicine* expert, is known by many to be THE health detective with life-changing solutions! She has been the owner and founder of the Santa Fe Soul Center for Optimal Health (now Regenerative Medicine) for close to two decades.  For almost 30 years, Dr. Benson has applied her considerable knowledge of acupuncture, platelet-rich plasma (PRP) therapy, herbs, IV therapies, and her love for healthy travel to help patients resolve acute and chronic health challenges and to achieve optimal and sustainable health without the use of pharmaceuticals or surgery.  Resources for a Younger Lifestyle -   Additional YOUNGER podcast episodes: https://robynbenson.com/podcasts/    Episode #88 - OutSmart Cancer® with Dr. Nalini Chilkov   Episode #80 - The Truth About Inflammation with Dr. Robyn Benson  Episode #55 - Eliminate Cancer Permanently! with Nathan Crane  Episode #39 - Take Control of your DNA with Dr. J Dunn  Episode #20 - Your Gut, Your Health, Your Wealth with Vincent Pedre, MD  Episode #2 - Your Food, Your Health, Your Wealth with Terry Wahls, MD  Additional resources used to assemble this episode for you:  http://wcrf.org/int/research-we-fund/our-cancer-prevention-recommendations   https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/understanding/what-is-cancer#drivers-of-cancer   https://www.healio.com/hematology-oncology/news/online/%7Ba2bb4a67-dfab-41fe-8cf1-5536bf1c1655%7D/what-is-a-tumor   https://www.verywell.com/cancer-cells-vs-normal-cells-2248794   https://www.mayoclinic.org/diseases-conditions/cancer/symptoms-causes/syc-20370588   http://thenatpath.com/blog/cancer-preventable-research-says-yes/   https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/obesity/obesity-fact-sheet   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24132111   https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24302613   https://theconversation.com/how-our-gut-bacteria-affect-cancer-risk-and-response-to-treatment-75699   https://www.health.harvard.edu/cancer/cancer-and-diet-whats-the-connection   http://drhyman.com/blog/2015/08/07/5-strategies-to-prevent-and-treat-cancer/   https://link.springer.com/article/10.2165/00007256-200838040-00002   http://europepmc.org/abstract/med/14600545   https://www.cancercenter.com/community/newsletter/article/researchers-are-studying-the-link-between-sleep-and-cancer/   Quotes:  “There is no safe level of tobacco use.”  “Based on extensive research, there is strong scientific evidence connecting drinking alcohol with several types of cancer. According to the National Toxicology Program of the US Department of Health and Human Services, alcohol is listed as a known human carcinogen.”  “According to the National Cancer Institute, obesity is one of the major risk factors for cancer.” 

The parent company of failed Silicon Valley Bank is seeking chapter 11 bankruptcy protection. Fluoride can reduce intelligence, according to a suppressed government report. The National Toxicology Program meta analysis reviewing fluoride neurotoxicity was finally made public on Wednesday. Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.) on Thursday accused President Joe Biden of dodging meetings on the endangered social security program. Meanwhile, Republicans want to ensure that CCP-affiliated companies don't benefit from any measures taken to protect Silicon Valley Bank. ⭕️Watch in-depth videos based on Truth & Tradition at Epoch TV

Years of peer-reviewed studies on the dangers of human exposure to fluoride should be enough to prove it isn't a conspiracy. Activist and investigative journalist, Derrick Broze, describes the nearly decade long legal battle between multiple watchdog groups and the EPA to release the National Toxicology Program's review that could blow the lid off serious dangers of fluoride toxicity in U.S. drinking water.

~ Co-presented by The New School at Commonweal and the Collaborative for Health and Environment ~ The harm to human health from chemical exposures is now recognized as a global crisis on par with climate change and biodiversity loss. Effectively addressing this challenge means adopting new approaches that recognize the complexity of systems with multi-disciplinary approaches, prioritize precaution and prevention, and address disproportionate impacts and environmental injustices. Join Host Steve Heilig for a conversation with Dr. Linda Birnbaum and Dr. Ami Zota, two innovative leaders in efforts to promote environmental health and justice in the United States. Dr. Linda Birnbaum Linda is the former Director of the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program. She was granted Scientist Emeritus Status at NIH when she retired and is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment, Duke University. As NIEHS director, Dr. Birnbaum oversaw research grants and shared the results of cutting edge environmental health research with the public and policy makers. She also met with communities to better understand environmental health concerns and disparities. Throughout her career, Dr. Birnbaum has been particularly effective at bringing forward the mounting scientific evidence of harm of exposures to certain chemicals that are now ubiquitous in our products and environment. Her discussion of the current science has helped to shift our understanding of exposures to include the dangers of chronic low dose exposures and the long term effects of early lifetime exposures. Dr. Ami Zota Ami is a population health scientist with expertise in environmental health, environmental justice, and maternal and reproductive health. Her research focuses on understanding social and structural determinants of environmental exposures and their consequent impacts to women's health outcomes across the life course. Her long-term goal is to help secure environmental justice and health equity among systematically marginalized populations by advancing scientific inquiry, training next generation leaders, increasing public engagement with science, and supporting community-led solutions for structural change. Dr. Zota is the founding director of the Agents of Change in Environmental Justice program which seeks to foster more diverse, equitable and inclusive leaders in environmental and climate justice, training early career scientists from systematically marginalized backgrounds in science communication, storytelling, community engagement, and policy translation. Dr. Zota received CHE's “20 Pioneers Under 40 in Environmental Public Health” award in 2018. Host Steve Heilig Steve is a longtime senior research associate with Commonweal, a co-founder of the Commonweal Collaborative for Health and Environment, a host of dialogues for the New School, and in other programs originating at or founded at Commonweal. Trained at five University of California campuses in public health, medical ethics, addiction medicine, economics, environmental sciences, and other disciplines, his other work includes positions at the San Francisco Medical Society, California Pacific Medical Center, and as co-editor of the Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics. He has served on many nonprofit boards and appointed commissions, and is a trained hospice worker. He is a widely published essayist and book and music critic for the San Francisco Chronicle, Huffington Post, and many other publications. Find out more about The New School at Commonweal on our website: tns.commonweal.org. And like/follow our YouTube and Soundcloud channels for more great podcasts.

Join us for another episode of Ms Information where Mindi and Nora welcome Dr. Linda Birnbaum, the former Director of the NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program!

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

“Is this true that we test for fewer than 100 chemicals in water, but in fact, there are thousands that go untested?”“There are thousands just like there are in air, just like there are in food. We sometimes compartmentalize too much. We forget, but what is food? Food is made up of chemicals. And I think we need to be broader in our understanding because, for example, we all have on us and within us our Microbiomes and we think about the GI bacteria and we now know that if people are obese they have very different microbial content in their gut compared to people who are not obese. And we know that a baby born by C-section section has a different position than a baby born vaginally. And we know that these things have impacts. We know that many of the bacteria have the ability for example to metabolize the contaminants as well as things in our food. And we know that you can have a different response depending upon what people are eating.”Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a scientist emeritus and former director of the National institute of Environmental Health Sciences and of the National Toxicology Program. She is also a Scholar in Residence at the Nicholas School of the Environment of Duke University, and an adjunct full professor at Duke, University of North Carolina, and Yale University School of Public Health. She is the author of more than 1000 peer reviewed articles, book chapters, and reports. She is a member of the National Academy of Medicine, has multiple honorary doctorates and awards. Best of all, now that she is retired after 40 years of government. · sph.unc.edu/adv_profile/linda-birnbaum-phd/ · www.niehs.nih.gov· www.oneplanetpodcast.org · www.creativeprocess.info

Dr. Linda Birnbaum is a "rock star" in the world of environmental health, a groundbreaking scientist who has devoted her career to studying the potential health impacts of toxic chemicals. We learn about Dr. Birnbaum's interest in science and notable accomplishments beginning at an early age, and trace her path of education and early career. Dr. Birnbaum narrates her 40-year career as a leading scientist at the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, National Toxicology Program, and Environmental Protection Agency, culminating in her serving as Director of NIEHS and the NTP. She discusses her work studying classes of chemicals including PCBs, dioxins, brominated flame retardants and PFAS.

Genetic Engineering and Society Center GES Colloquium - Tuesdays 12-1PM (via Zoom) NC State University | http://go.ncsu.edu/ges-colloquium GES Mediasite - See videos, full abstracts, speaker bios, and slides https://go.ncsu.edu/ges-mediasite Twitter - https://twitter.com/GESCenterNCSU Hazard Communication Dr. David M. Berube, Professor of Science & Technology Communication, NC State Website Hazard Communication refers to communication to a limited group of stakeholders and involves three variables: hazard data, dosage data, and exposure data. Abstract This presentation tries to separate data sets associated with Hazard Communication from those associated with Risk Communication. Since Risk Communication is a social construct, it involves public understanding of science while Hazard Communication generally does not. Hazard Communication occurs between field experts while Risk Communication include experts and inexperts. Experts share biases with the public in some cases but not in others. For example, innumeracy and probability neglect tends to be associated with inexpert audiences. This paper will be presented to the National Toxicology Program for which I serve as a member of their Board of Scientific Counselors. Related links: Cognitive and Human Factors in Expert Decision Making: Six Fallacies and the Eight Sources of BiasDror, I. E. (2020). Anal. Chem. 92. 7998-8004 Cognitive Errors and Diagnostic Mistakes: A Case-Based Guide to Critical Thinking in MedicineHoward, J. (2019). Basel, Switzerland: Springer International Publishing AG. Speaker Bio Dr. David M. Berube (NYU 1990) is a Research Professor and a GES Fellow at North Carolina State University (NCSU) in science/technology communication. He teaches graduate seminars in risk, fear, disaster, and climate change science communication. He received over $20 million in grants over the last two decades studying science communication, especially intuitive toxicology. He wrote Nano-Hype (2006), edited another on Pandemic Communication and Resilience and is writing a book on Lessons We Should Have Learned from Zika. He is the director of the Public Communication of Science & Technology project and social science director of the Research Triangle Nanotechnology Network involving NCSU, Duke and UNC. He authored some White Papers on social media and risk. He is a member of the Society of Toxicology and Special Government Employee for the Board of Scientific Counselors for the National Toxicology Program. GES Center - Integrating scientific knowledge & diverse public values in shaping the futures of biotechnology. Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

No, 5G does not cause COVID. But that doesn't negate the existence of true, scientific concerns with this technology (and previous generations of wireless radiation). In fact, a major multimillion dollar study by the National Toxicology Program found that wireless radiation caused certain tumors. Since, then the World Health Organization has recognized 1-10% of individuals as electrohypersensitive, meaning they show blatantly adverse negative effects from these frequencies.This episode is a chapter of my book Return to Human, where I outline the true scientific concerns with wireless technology, how it impacts our physiology, and how to mitigate the effects using nutrition and other lifestyle habits.––––––––––––––––––––––––––Environmental Health Trust: https://ehtrust.org/––––––––––––––––––––––––––Get 10% OFF site-wide from Hu Kitchen foods! Use code JORGEhttps://livedamnwell.com/recommends/hu-kitchen-full-site/

This brief episode is about the sun and skin care. A description of UV rays and their effects on skin will be discussed. Also, some myths surrounding the skin and the sun will be debunked. My sources include the American Cancer Society, the National Toxicology Program and the International Agency for Research on Cancer. --- This episode is sponsored by · Anchor: The easiest way to make a podcast. https://anchor.fm/app --- Send in a voice message: https://anchor.fm/tinatalksesthetics/message

Curcumin: modulator of key molecular signaling pathways in hormone-independent breast cancer Monash University Malaysia, August 10, 2021 According to news reporting originating from Selangor, Malaysia,  research stated, “Breast cancer is the most frequently diagnosed cancer and the leading cause of cancer death among women worldwide.” Our news correspondents obtained a quote from the research from Monash University Malaysia: “Despite the overall successes in breast cancer therapy, hormone-independent HER2 negative breast cancer, also known as triple negative breast cancer (TNBC), lacking estrogens and progesterone receptors and with an excessive expression of human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 (HER2), along with the hormone-independent HER2 positive subtype, still remain major challenges in breast cancer treatment. Due to their poor prognoses, aggressive phenotype, and highly metastasis features, new alternative therapies have become an urgent clinical need. One of the most noteworthy phytochemicals, curcumin, has attracted enormous attention as a promising drug candidate in breast cancer prevention and treatment due to its multi-targeting effect. Curcumin interrupts major stages of tumorigenesis including cell proliferation, survival, angiogenesis, and metastasis in hormone-independent breast cancer through the modulation of multiple signaling pathways. The current review has highlighted the anticancer activity of curcumin in hormone-independent breast cancer via focusing on its impact on key signaling pathways including the PI3K/Akt/mTOR pathway, JAK/STAT pathway, MAPK pathway, NF-qB pathway, p53 pathway, and Wnt/b-catenin, as well as apoptotic and cell cycle pathways.” According to the news reporters, the research concluded: “Besides, its therapeutic implications in clinical trials are here presented.”     Ultrasound remotely triggers immune cells to attack tumors in mice without toxic side effects University of California San Diego, August 11, 2021   Bioengineers at the University of California San Diego have developed a cancer immunotherapy that pairs ultrasound with cancer-killing immune cells to destroy malignant tumors while sparing normal tissue. The new experimental therapy significantly slowed down the growth of solid cancerous tumors in mice. The team, led by the labs of UC San Diego bioengineering professor Peter Yingxiao Wang and bioengineering professor emeritus Shu Chien, detailed their work in a paper published Aug. 12 in Nature Biomedical Engineering. The work addresses a longstanding problem in the field of cancer immunotherapy: how to make chimeric antigen receptor (CAR) T-cell therapy safe and effective at treating solid tumors.   CAR T-cell therapy is a promising new approach to treat cancer. It involves collecting a patient's T cells and genetically engineering them to express special receptors, called CAR, on their surface that recognize specific antigens on cancer cells. The resulting CAR T cells are then infused back into the patient to find and attack cells that have the cancer antigens on their surface. This therapy has worked well for the treatment of some blood cancers and lymphoma, but not against solid tumors. That's because many of the target antigens on these tumors are also expressed on normal tissues and organs. This can cause toxic side effects that can kills cells—these effects are known as on-target, off-tumor toxicity. “CAR T cells are so potent that they may also attack normal tissues that are expressing the target antigens at low levels,” said first author Yiqian (Shirley) Wu, a project scientist in Wang's lab. “The problem with standard CAR T cells is that they are always on—they are always expressing the CAR protein, so you cannot control their activation,” explained Wu. To combat this issue, the team took standard CAR T cells and re-engineered them so that they only express the CAR protein when ultrasound energy is applied. This allowed the researchers to choose where and when the genes of CAR T cells get switched on. “We use ultrasound to successfully control CAR T cells directly in vivo for cancer immunotherapy,” said Wang, who is a faculty member of the Institute of Engineering in Medicine and the Center for Nano-ImmunoEngineering, both at UC San Diego. What's exciting about the use of ultrasound, noted Wang, is that it can penetrate tens of centimeters beneath the skin, so this type of therapy has the potential to non-invasively treat tumors that are buried deep inside the body. The team's approach involves injecting the re-engineered CAR T cells into tumors in mice and then placing a small ultrasound transducer on an area of the skin that's on top of the tumor to activate the CAR T cells. The transducer uses what's called focused ultrasound beams to focus or concentrate short pulses of ultrasound energy at the tumor. This causes the tumor to heat up moderately—in this case, to a temperature of 43 degrees Celsius (109 degrees Fahrenheit)—without affecting the surrounding tissue. The CAR T cells in this study are equipped with a gene that produces the CAR protein only when exposed to heat. As a result, the CAR T cells only switch on where ultrasound is applied. The researchers put their CAR T cells to the test against standard CAR T cells. In mice that were treated with the new CAR T cells, only the tumors that were exposed to ultrasound were attacked, while other tissues in the body were left alone. But in mice that were treated with the standard CAR T cells, all tumors and tissue expressing the target antigen were attacked. “This shows our CAR T-cell therapy is not only effective, but also safer,” said Wu. “It has minimal on-target, off-tumor side effects.” The work is still in the early stages. The team will be performing more preclinical tests and toxicity studies before it can reach clinical trials.     Lycopene ameliorates diabetic osteoporosis via anti-inflammatory, antioxidation  Shaanxi University of Technology (China), August 10, 2021 According to news originating from Shaanxi University of Technology research stated, “Diabetic osteoporosis (DOP) is one of the complications of diabetes, with high morbidity, and high disability rate. Here, we established a diabetic rat model and administered lycopene to observe its effect on DOP.” Our news editors obtained a quote from the research from Shaanxi University of Technology: “Our results showed that ten weeks lycopene treatment lowered blood glucose, improved diabetic induced polydipsia, overeating and body weight loss. Lycopene treatment also enhanced bone mineral density, restored bone mechanical and bone Micro-CT parameters of diabetic rats. Subsequently, lycopene decreased serum inflammatory cytokines levels and increased serum anti-oxidant indicators levels. Moreover, lycopene reduced the number of bone marrow adipocytes, and osteoclasts numbers of diabetic rats. The serum bone turnover markers levels were down-regulated after lycopene treatment. Meanwhile, the bone and serum OPG, RUNX 2 expression levels were up-regulated by lycopene in diabetic rats, and the OPG/RANKL ratio was also up-regulated.” According to the news editors, the research concluded: “This study showed that lycopene could ameliorate diabetic induced bone loss via anti-inflammatory, anti-oxidation, and increasing OPG/RANKL ratio in diabetic rats. Lycopene could be used for nutritional intervention in patients with diabetic osteoporosis.”     Research shows just 8 weeks of meditation studies can make your brain quicker Birmingham University (UK), August 12, 2021 Researchers at Binghamton University scanned students' brains before and after eight weeks of meditation training. Credit: Binghamton University Millions of people around the world seek mental clarity through meditation, most of them following or inspired by the centuries-old practices of Buddhism. Anecdotally, those who meditate say it helps to calm their minds, recenter their thoughts and cut through the "noise" to show what really matters. Scientifically, though, showing the effects of meditation on the human brainhave proved to be tricky. A new study from Binghamton University's Thomas J. Watson College of Engineering and Applied Science tracked how practicing meditation for just a couple of months changed the brain patterns of 10 students in the University's Scholars Program. The seed for the research came from a casual chat between Assistant Professor Weiying Dai and lecturer George Weinschenk, MA '01, Ph.D. '07, both from the Department of Computer Science. Weinschenk is a longtime meditation practitioner whose wife worked as an administrator at the Namgyal Monastery in Ithaca, which is the North American seat of the Dalai Lama's personal monastery. "I developed very close friendships with several of the monks," he said. "We would hang out together, and I even received instruction from some of the Dalai Lama's teachers. I took classes there, I read a lot and I earned a three-year certificate in Buddhist studies." Dai has studied brain mapping and biomedical image processing, and while earning her Ph.D. at the University of Pittsburgh, she tracked Alzheimer's disease patients using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans. "I'm interested in brain research to see how our brains are really functioning and how all different kinds of disease affect our brain," she said. "I really have zero medical training, but I pick up all this knowledge or background from reading the literature and talking with the experts." The two faculty members had neighboring offices and shared a conversation one day about their backgrounds. Weinschenk mentioned that he had been asked to teach a semester-long class for the Scholars Program on meditation. "I told Weiying, 'Yeah, meditation really can have a transformative effect on the brain,'" Weinschenk said. "She was a little skeptical, especially about whether such a short amount of time spent learning how to meditate, whether that would make any difference. She suggested we might be able to quantify such a thing with modern technology." For the fall 2017 semester, Dai secured grant funding, and their collaboration began. Near the beginning of the semester, she took the participants to Cornell University for MRI scans of their brains. Weinschenk taught students how to meditate, told them to practice five times a week for 10 or 15 minutes, and asked them to keep a journal record of their practice. (The syllabus also included other lessons about the cultural transmissions of meditation and its applications for wellness.) "Binghamton University Scholars are high achievers who want to do the things they are assigned and do well on them, so they didn't require much prompting to maintain a regular meditation routine," he said. "To guarantee objective reporting, they would relate their experiences directly to Weiying about how frequently they practiced." The results, recently published in the journal Scientific Reports, show that meditation training led to faster switching between the brain's two general states of consciousness. One is called the default mode network, which is active when the brain is at wakeful rest and not focused on the outside world, such as during daydreaming and mind-wandering. The other is the dorsal attention network, which engages for attention-demanding tasks. The findings of the study demonstrate that meditation can enhance the brain connection among and within these two brain networks, indicating the effect of meditation on fast switching between the mind wandering and focusing its attention as well as maintaining attention once in the attentive state. "Tibetans have a term for that ease of switching between states—they call it mental pliancy, an ability that allows you to shape and mold your mind," Weinschenk said. "They also consider the goal of concentration one of the fundamental principles of self-growth." Dai and Weinschenk are still parsing through the data taken from the 2017 MRI scans, so they have yet to test other Scholars Program students. Because Alzheimer's disease and autism could be caused by problems with the dorsal attention network, Dai is making plans for future research that could use meditation to mitigate those problems. "I'm thinking about an elderly study, because this population was young students," she said. "I want to get a healthy elderly group, and then another group with early Alzheimer's disease or mild cognitive impairment. I want to see whether the changes in the brain from meditation can enhance cognitive performance. I'm writing the proposal and trying to attract the funds in that direction." Though once skeptical about the subject, "I'm pretty convinced about the scientific basis of meditation after doing this study," she added. "Maybe I'll just go to George's class when he teaches it so that I can benefit, too!"   Study shows how food preservatives may disrupt human hormones and promote obesity Cedars-Sinai Medicine Institute, August 9, 2021  Can chemicals that are added to breakfast cereals and other everyday products make you obese? Growing evidence from animal experiments suggests the answer may be "yes." But confirming these findings in humans has faced formidable obstacles - until now. A study published in Nature Communications details how Cedars-Sinai investigators developed a novel platform and protocol for testing the effects of chemicals known as endocrine disruptors on humans. The three chemicals tested in this study are abundant in modern life. Butylhydroxytoluene (BHT) is an antioxidant commonly added to breakfast cereals and other foods to protect nutrients and keep fats from turning rancid; perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is a polymer found in some cookware, carpeting and other products; and tributyltin (TBT) is a compound in paints that can make its way into water and accumulate in seafood. The investigators used hormone-producing tissues grown from human stem cells to demonstrate how chronic exposure to these chemicals can interfere with signals sent from the digestive system to the brain that let people know when they are "full" during meals. When this signaling system breaks down, people often may continue eating, causing them to gain weight. "We discovered that each of these chemicals damaged hormones that communicate between the gut and the brain," said Dhruv Sareen, PhD, assistant professor of Biomedical Sciences and director of the Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Core Facility at the Cedars-Sinai Board of Governors Regenerative Medicine Institute. "When we tested the three together, the combined stress was more robust." Of the three chemicals tested, BHT produced some of the strongest detrimental effects, Sareen said. While other scientists have shown these compounds can disrupt hormone systems in laboratory animals, the new study is the first to use human pluripotent stem cells and tissues to document how the compounds may disrupt hormones that are critical to gut-to-brain signaling and preventing obesity in people, Sareen said. "This is a landmark study that substantially improves our understanding of how endocrine disruptors may damage human hormonal systems and contribute to the obesity epidemic in the U.S.," said Clive Svendsen, PhD, director of the institute and the Kerry and Simone Vickar Family Foundation Distinguished Chair in Regenerative Medicine. More than one-third of U.S. adults are considered to be obese, according to federal statistics. The new testing system developed for the study has the potential to provide a much-needed, safe and cost-effective method that can be used to evaluate the health effects of thousands of existing and new chemicals in the environment, the investigators say. For their experiments, Sareen and his team first obtained blood samples from adults, and then, by introducing reprogramming genes, converted the cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. Then, using these stem cells, the investigators grew human epithelium tissue, which lines the gut, and neuronal tissues of the brain's hypothalamus region, which regulates appetite and metabolism. The investigators then exposed the tissues to BHT, PFOA and TBT, one by one and also in combination, and observed what happened inside the cells. They found that the chemicals disrupted networks that prepare signaling hormones to maintain their structure and be transported out of the cells, thus making them ineffective. The chemicals also damaged mitochondria - cellular structures that convert food and oxygen into energy and drive the body's metabolism. Because the chemical damage occurred in early-stage "young" cells, the findings suggest that a defective hormone system potentially could impact a pregnant mother as well as her fetus in the womb, Sareen said. While other scientists have found, in animal studies, that effects of endocrine disruptors can be passed down to future generations, this process has not been proved to occur in humans, he explained. More than 80,000 chemicals are registered for use in the U.S. in everyday items such as foods, personal care products, household cleaners and lawn-care products, according to the National Toxicology Program of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. While the program states on its website that relatively few chemicals are thought to pose a significant risk to human health, it also states: "We do not know the effects of many of these chemicals on our health." Cost and ethical issues, including the health risk of exposing human subjects to possibly harmful substances, are among the barriers to testing the safety of many chemicals. As a result, numerous widely used compounds remain unevaluated in humans for their health effects, especially to the hormone system. "By testing these chemicals on actual human tissues in the lab, we potentially could make these evaluations easier to conduct and more cost-effective," Sareen said.   Social activities help dementia patients stay sharp, avoid depression University of Sheffield (UK), August 12, 2021 Approximately 6 million people in the U.S. are suffering from dementia, as well 50 million people worldwide. There is currently no cure for the degenerative condition and medical treatments often have side effects such as vomiting, loss of appetite, and muscle pains. Now, researchers say patients can greatly benefit from a type of treatment that doesn't come with such downsides and helps their brain avoid additional decline. A new study suggests that mixing with other people helps dementia patients stay sharp and fend off depression. Scientists say the type of treatment known as “cognitive stimulation” could make living with dementia easier for hundreds of thousands of people. “Dementia is one of the biggest global challenges that we face,” says senior author Dr. Claudia von Bastian, of the University of Sheffield, in a statement. “Our research highlights that cognitive stimulation can be a safe, relatively cheap, and accessible treatment to help reduce some of the core symptoms of dementia and may even alleviate symptoms of depression.” The researchers analyzed the use of cognitive stimulation as an effective treatment for people with dementia. They found that getting patients involved in social and group activities helped combat depression and boost global cognition. Global cognition refers to five types of brain function: attention, memory, verbal fluency, language, and awareness. “It's great that governments now recognize the importance for people to live well with dementia. We've seen far more energy and resources put into developing initiatives to support this, such as cognitive stimulation, which is now used widely across the world,” notes co-author Dr. Ben Hicks, of Brighton and Sussex Medical School. “We still need to learn more about the key ingredients of cognitive stimulation which lead to these benefits and how they influence the progression of dementia. However, the absence of negative side-effects and the low costs of this treatment means the benefits are clear,” adds Dr. von Bastian. More research is needed to determine whether cognitive stimulation and other non-pharmaceutical treatments could help the growing number of people who suffer fromdementia.    “Our research is the first to comprehensively interrogate the evidence base for its effectiveness, using the most up-to-date statistical techniques. While early signs are positive, there's an urgent need to improve the rigor of evaluative research and better assess the long-term benefits of cognitive stimulation. People with dementia need effective treatments, and, as a research community, this is what we must deliver,” added Dr. Hicks.     Resveratrol supplementation improves arterial stiffness in type 2 diabetics Toho University (Japan), August 18 2021 A randomized, double-blind study reported on in the International Heart journal found improvements in arterial stiffness and oxidative stress among type 2 diabetics who were supplemented with resveratrol. The trial included 50 diabetic men and women who received 100 milligrams resveratrol or a placebo daily for 12 weeks. Cardio-ankle vascular index (CAVI, a novel diagnostic measure of arterial stiffness that is a marker of atherosclerosis) and blood pressure were assessed at the beginning and end of the study, in addition to blood assessments of oxidative stress and other factors. At the end of the study, subjects who received resveratrol had significantly lower blood pressure, less oxidative stress and decreased arterial stiffness in comparison with values obtained at the beginning of the study.  Participants who received a placebo experienced no significant changes in these areas. “The primary finding in the present study was that oral supplementation of resveratrol for 12 weeks decreased CAVI in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus,” authors Haruki Imamura, MD, and colleagues at Toho University Sakura Medical Center in Japan write. “Many previous studies have demonstrated increased CAVI in atherosclerotic diseases such as acute coronary syndrome and stroke, and these reports indicate that CAVI reflects organic atherosclerosis.” They suggest that a reduction in oxidative stress may be one mechanism involved in the improvement in arterial stiffness observed in this study among participants who received resveratrol. Improved endothelial function via increased nitric oxide production may be another mechanism.

You're likely part of the 4.88 billion mobile phone users worldwide. Today, 2.52 billion more mobile connections exist than there are people worldwide making cell phones making the fastest-growing human-made technological phenomenon ever. So, what's the problem with all of this wireless radiation besides the fact that the World Health Organization classifies RF (radio frequency) radiation from cell phones as a Group 2B carcinogen; possibly carcinogenic to humans? A 10-year study by the National Toxicology Program of mice and rats exposed to radiofrequency radiation from cell phones, found: DNA damage in some of the animal groups tested, children were the most vulnerable to cancer risk due to their skull thickness and developing brains and increased rates of cancer were found in male rats exposed to cell phone radiation. In this episode, a former engineer and founder of SafeSleeve, Carey Subel, shares technology for EMF protection that is certified in an FCC laboratory. We leave you with some simple ways to reduce your radiation exposure and protect yourself and your loved ones (and a special discount code for listeners).

On this edition of Green Street, Patti and Doug talk with Dr. Ron Melnick, senior scientist at the National Toxicology Program and designer of the blockbuster study that found “clear evidence” of cancer from exposure to radiofrequency radiation. For this and other Green Street shows, visit our website www.GreenStreetRadio.com or follow us on Spotify.

Heart palpitations, migraines, muscle pain, brain cancer, cognitive difficulties…The list of side effects from wireless technology radiation goes on and on. Yet, unfortunately, 5G antennas continue to pop up all over the globe, and are already installed in almost every major city in the U.S. Tune in to learn: How wireless technology and radiation may be contributing to the significant increase in cases of early-onset Alzheimer's, ADHD, and cancer over the past 10-15 years What system in the body is first affected by wireless technology and radiation, and why How to limit your exposure to the harmful effects of wireless technology What important distinction exists between 5G wireless technology, and modulation (i.e. the way information is carried over wireless carrier waves) Returning guest, Dafna Tachover, tells listeners everything they need to know about how and why their health is at risk, and what's being done about it. She explains the science behind how wireless technology—and especially the rollout of 5G across the globe—is creating sickness at unprecedented speeds, with very few people even knowing it. Tachover receives countless emails from families who suffer a range of detrimental and sometimes even debilitating symptoms within days of 5G antennas being installed and activated in their neighborhoods. With over 800,000 of these antennas slated for activation over the next 10 years, a major public health crisis is in our midst, and the worst part is that the truth is being actively hidden from the public, leaving people to wonder why they and their children are getting sick. The allowed level of radiation you can be exposed to is now quintillions above the level of radiation that exists naturally in the environment, and has been increased millions of times over the last 30 years. As a result, our bodies are struggling to adapt, and failing to do so. She explains the $30 million National Toxicology Program's study funded by the FDA and the information since revealed and hidden from the public, the status of your right to file an ADA claim in response to falling ill as a result of this technology, the lawsuit filed just over a month ago against a draconian law commonly referred to as OTARD (Over the Air Receiving Devices), a report written by prominent scientist, Dr. Christopher Portier, which links radiation from wireless tech to brain cancer, why it's particularly dangerous to live in apartment complexes, steps people can take to protect themselves as much as possible, and so much more. It's no exaggeration to say that the information in this podcast could be a matter of life and death for many. Learn more at the following links: https://mdsafetech.org/ https://www.5gcrisis.com/ https://childrenshealthdefense.org/?s=radiation&post_type=defender. Episode also available on Apple Podcasts: apple.co/30PvU9C

Art Calenge, founder and CEO of protective clothing company Lambs, joins me to talk about the dangers of EMFs, the truth about 5G, and the 4 simple things YOU can do today to start protecting yourself and your family from wireless radiation. Full transcript and show notes: drgundry.com/art-calenge

Salve, rapaziada! Estamos de volta para a temporada de 2020.2. E, para abrir os caminhos, trazemos um episódio caótico. Onde tínhamos um tema como fio condutor, mas a bancada e os servidores, durante a gravação, não deixaram que ele fosse seguido. Mas, ainda sim, tem algumas informações e notícias relevantes! Referências [1] https://www.gov.uk/government/news/state-of-the-art-robot-seeks-out-chemical-agents (robôs do Reino Unido); [2] https://corporate.mcdonalds.com/corpmcd/our-purpose-and-impact/our-planet/packaging-and-waste.html/asdf (nota do Mc Donalds); [3] U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2018. Basic information on PFAS. Updated 6 December 2018. https://www.epa.gov/pfas/basic-information-pfas; [4] Susmann HP, Schaider LA, Rodgers KM, Rudel RA. 2019. Dietary habits related to food packaging and population exposure to PFAS. Environ Health Perspect 127(10):107003, PMID: 31596611, https://doi.org/10.1289/EHP4092; [5] National Toxicology Program. 2020. Immunotoxicity associated with exposure to perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) or perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS). Updated 24 January 2020. https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/pubhealth/hat/noms/pfoa/index.html; [6] Brendel S, Fetter E, Staude C, Vierke L, Biegel-Engler A. 2018. Short-chain perfluoroalkyl acids: environmental concerns and a regulatory strategy under REACH. Environ Sci Eur 30(1):9, PMID: 29527446, https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-018-0134-4; [7] Olsen GW, Chang SC, Noker PE, Gorman GS, Ehresman DJ, Lieder PH, et al. 2009. A comparison of the pharmacokinetics of perfluorobutanesulfonate (PFBS) in rats, monkeys, and humans. Toxicology 256(1–2):65–74, PMID: 19059455, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2008.11.008; [8] Russell MH, Nilsson H, Buck RC. 2013. Elimination kinetics of perfluorohexanoic acid in humans and comparison with mouse, rat and monkey. Chemosphere 93(10):2419–2425, PMID: 24050716, https://doi.org/10.1016/j. chemosphere.2013.08.060. 7. Cordner A, De La Rosa VY, S

Human health and environmental health are inextricably linked. We are negatively impacted by the same pollutants that harm other organisms, and we all live in a sea of synthetic chemicals that are part of our food supply, personal care products, the built environment, and just about every aspect of our lives. With us to gain a better understanding of the history of environmental health, especially the impact of pollutants on human health, is Linda Birnbaum. Linda received a B.A. in biology from the University of Rochester in 1967, and M.S. and Ph.D. degrees in microbiology from the University of Illinois in 1969 and 1972. She held various research and administrative positions in academia and government before taking on the directorships of the US National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences and the National Toxicology Program in 2009. She retired from these directorships in 2019. Linda has published over 600 scientific articles, and is the recipient of numerous awards related to public health.

In this episode, Dr Fiorella Belpoggi, Head of Research at the Ramazzini Institute and Director of the Cesare Maltoni Cancer Research Centre, discusses the findings of their large scale animal study which investigated the effects of wireless radiation on cancer. The lecture is titled “Carcinogenic effect of base station environmental emission? ––The Latest Results of in vivo Studies”. The lecture was given at the 3rd International Forum of Protection from Electromagnetic Environmental Pollution in Krakow Poland in 2018. The government of Krakow Poland not only measures the radiofrequency radiation but also hosts expert forums inviting scientists worldwide to present on electromagnetic radiation. In this talk, Dr. Belpoggi shares that chronic exposure to low levels of wireless radiation caused cancers in the rats. The most shocking of her findings was that the tumors found in the exposed rats mirror the findings from the multimillion dollar NTP study from the United States, further solidifying the findings of both studies. Both studies - done far apart - found the same types of tumors. These tumor types found in the animal studies are also the same tumor types found in people who use cell phones for a decade, which is why several scientists have published research documenting how these studies prove wireless radiation is a human carcinogen. Dr. Belpoggi and her team have conducted and published numerous studies on the short – and long-term effects of various agents These include: food additives, solvents, packaging plastics, pesticides, hormones, endocrine disruptors, gamma radiation, electromagnetic fields from power lines (ELFEMF), and radio base stations (RFR/MW). In 1992 she was nominated as a Fellow of the Collegium Ramazzini and currently serves as a member of the Executive Council. Dr. Belpoggi has authored more than 100 publications and is an Invited Lecturer of Industrial and Environmental Carcinogenesis at various schools of public health and universities. She represented the Ramazzini Institute on the Faculty Council of Veterinary Sciences at the University of Padova and works with European agencies, as well as the United States National Toxicology Program. It's important to remember that radiofrequency radiation––which comes from cell phones, WiFi, and other wireless devices––is often touted as being undeniably safe. However, the National Toxicology Program study (the NTP study), The Ramazzini Institute research, and hundreds of other studies demonstrate otherwise.

In this episode, Dr. Ronald Melnick presents on cell phone radiation and cancer, presenting the findings of the National Toxicology Program animal study on cell phone radiation. Dr. Melnick was the Senior Toxicologist in the National Toxicology Program (NTP) at the National Institute of Health Sciences for 28 years. He led the design of this 30 million dollar NTP study which was carefully controlled for radiation exposures. The animals lived in underground bunkers to ensure they were not exposed to cell tower radiation. The scientists found cell phone radiation led to clear evidence of cancer, DNA damage and heart damage. Although the FDA asked for large scale studies, now the FDA itself states that they do not accept the findings. As a result, Dr. Melnick and many other scientists have written extensively about how important the findings are debunking the many unfounded criticisms circulating in the media. In fact, Dr. Lennart Hardell and Dr. Michael Carlberg as well as EHT scientists have published numerous reviews concluding that “there is clear evidence that RF radiation is a human carcinogen.

Lipoic acid supplements help some obese but otherwise healthy people lose weight Oregon State University, August 12, 2020   A compound given as a dietary supplement to overweight but otherwise healthy people in a clinical trial caused many of the patients to slim down, research by Oregon State University and Oregon Health & Science University showed.  The research, published in the Journal of Nutrition, analyzed the effects of 24 weeks of daily, 600-milligram doses of lipoic acid supplements on 31 people, with a similarly sized control group receiving a placebo. "The data clearly showed a loss in body weight and body fat in people taking lipoic acid supplements," said Balz Frei, director emeritus of OSU's Linus Pauling Institute and one of the scientists on the study. "Particularly in women and in the heaviest participants." Produced by both plants and animals, lipoic acid sets up shop in cells' mitochondria, where it's normally attached to proteins involved in energy and amino acid metabolism. A specialized, medium-chain fatty acid, it's unique in having two sulfur atoms at one end of the chain, allowing for the transfer of electrons from other sources. The body generally produces enough lipoic acid to supply the enzymes whose proper function requires it. When taken as a dietary supplement, lipoic acid displays additional properties that might be unrelated to the function in the mitochondria. They include the stimulation of glucose metabolism, antioxidant defenses and anti-inflammatory responses - making it a possible complementary treatment for people with diabetes, heart disease and age-related cognitive decline. "Scientists have been researching the potential health benefits of lipoic acid supplements for decades, including how it might enhance healthy aging and mitigate cardiovascular disease," said Alexander Michels, another Linus Pauling Institute scientist involved with the study. "In both rodent models and small-scale human clinical trials, researchers at the LPI have demonstrated the beneficial effects of lipoic acid on oxidative stress, lipid metabolism and circadian rhythm." The OSU/OHSU project addressed two issues commonly ignored by previous human trials, said Tory Hagen, a professor of biochemistry and biophysics in the OSU College of Science and the study's corresponding author. "Many existing clinical studies using lipoic acid have focused on volunteers with pre-existing conditions like diabetes, making it difficult to determine if lipoic acid supplements simply act as a disease treatment or have other beneficial health effects," said Hagen, principal investigator and Helen P. Rumbel Professor for Healthy Aging Research at the institute. "Another issue is the formulation of the supplement. Many previous studies have used the S form of lipoic acid, which is a product of industrial synthesis and not found in nature. We only used the R form of lipoic acid - the form found in the body naturally." Contrary to what was expected by the researchers, decreased levels of triglycerides - a type of fat, or lipid, found in the blood - were not seen in all the participants taking lipoic acid.  "The effect of lipoic acid supplements on blood lipids was limited," said Gerd Bobe, another LPI scientist who collaborated on the study. "But people who lost weight on lipoic acid also reduced their blood triglyceride levels - that effect was clear."  Other effects of the lipoic acid supplements were measurable as well. "By the end of the study, some markers of inflammation declined," Hagen said. "The findings also suggest that lipoic acid supplementation provides a mild reduction in oxidative stress. It is not a perfect panacea, but our results show that lipoic acid supplements can be beneficial." Identifying which patients will benefit the most from lipoic acid supplementation, and how much they need, is important for both clinical and economic reasons, he added. "Lipoic acid supplements are often quite expensive," he said. "So understanding how we can maximize benefits with smaller amounts of the supplement is something we are interested in pursuing."   Meditation-relaxation therapy may offer escape from the terror of sleep paralysis Cambridge University, August 12, 2020   Sleep paralysis - a condition thought to explain a number of mysterious experiences including alleged cases of alien abduction and demonic night-time visits - could be treated using a technique of meditation-relaxation, suggests a pilot study published today. Sleep paralysis is a state involving paralysis of the skeletal muscles that occurs at the onset of sleep or just before waking. While temporarily immobilised, the individual is acutely aware of their surroundings. People who experience the phenomenon often report being terrorised by dangerous bedroom intruders, often reaching for supernatural explanations such as ghosts, demons and even alien abduction. Unsurprisingly, it can be a terrifying experience. As many as one in five people experiences sleep paralysis, which may be triggered by sleep deprivation, and is more frequent in psychiatric conditions like post-traumatic stress disorder. It is also common in narcolepsy, a sleep disorder involving excessive daytime sleepiness and sudden loss of muscle control.  Despite the condition being known about for some time, to date there are no empirically-based treatments or published clinical trials for the condition.  Today, in the journal Frontiers in Neurology, a team of researchers report a pilot study of meditation-relaxation therapy involving 10 patients with narcolepsy, all of whom experience sleep paralysis. The therapy was originally developed by Dr Baland Jalal from the Department of Psychiatry, University of Cambridge. The current study was led by Dr Jalal and conducted in collaboration with Dr Giuseppe Plazzi's group at the Department of Biomedical and Neuromotor Sciences, University of Bologna/IRCCS Istituto delle Scienze Neurologiche di Bologna, Italy. The therapy teaches patients to follow four steps during an episode:   1. Reappraisal of the meaning of the attack - reminding themselves that the experience is common, benign, and temporary, and that the hallucinations are a typical by-product of dreaming 2. Psychological and emotional distancing - reminding themselves that there is no reason to be afraid or worried and that fear and worry will only make the episode worse  3. Inward focused-attention meditation - focusing their attention inward on an emotionally-involving, positive object (such as a memory of a loved one or event, a hymn/prayer, God) 4. Muscle relaxation - relaxing their muscles, avoiding controlling their breathing and under no circumstances attempting to move   Participants were instructed to keep a daily journal for four weeks to assess sleep paralysis occurrence, duration and emotions. Overall, among the 10 patients, two-thirds of cases (66%) reported hallucinations, often upon awakening from sleep (51%), and less frequently upon falling asleep (14%) as rated during the first four weeks. After the four weeks, six participants completed mood/anxiety questionnaires and were taught the therapy techniques and instructed to rehearse these during ordinary wakefulness, twice a week for 15 min. The treatment lasted eight weeks.  In the first four weeks of the study, participants in the meditation-relaxation group experienced sleep paralysis on average 14 times over 11 days. The reported disturbance caused by their sleep paralysis hallucinations was 7.3 (rated on a ten-point scale with higher scores indicating greater severity).  In the final month of the therapy, the number of days with sleep paralysis fell to 5.5 (down 50%) and the total number of episodes fell to 6.5 (down 54%). There was also a notable tendency towards reductions in the disturbance caused by hallucinations with ratings dropping from 7.3 to 4.8. A control group of four participants followed the same procedure, except participants engaged in deep breathing instead of the therapy - taking slow deep breaths, while repeatedly counting from one to ten.  In the control group, the number of days with sleep paralysis (4.3 per month at the start) was unchanged, as well as their total number of episodes (4.5 per month initially). The disturbance caused by hallucinations was likewise unchanged (rated 4 during the first four weeks). "Although our study only involved a small number of patients, we can be cautiously optimistic of its success," said Dr Jalal. "Meditation-relaxation therapy led to a dramatic fall in the number of times patients experienced sleep paralysis, and when they did, they tended to find the notoriously terrorising hallucinations less disturbing. Experiencing less of something as disturbing as sleep paralysis is a step in the right direction." If the researchers are able to replicate their findings in a larger number of people - including those from the general population, not affected by narcolepsy - then this could offer a relatively simple treatment that could be delivered online or via a smartphone to help patients cope with the condition. "I know first-hand how terrifying sleep paralysis can be, having experienced it many times myself," said Dr Jalal. "But for some people, the fear that it can instil in them can be extremely unpleasant, and going to bed, which should be a relaxing experience, can become fraught with terror. This is what motivated me to devise this intervention."   Why walking to work may be better for you than a casual stroll Study finds people walk faster, report being healthier, when they walk with a purpose Ohio State University, August 12, 2020   Walking with a purpose - especially walking to get to work - makes people walk faster and consider themselves to be healthier, a new study has found.  The study, published online earlier this month in the Journal of Transport and Health, found that walking for different reasons yielded different levels of self-rated health. People who walked primarily to places like work and the grocery store from their homes, for example, reported better health than people who walked mostly for leisure. "We found that walking for utilitarian purposes significantly improves your health, and that those types of walking trips are easier to bring into your daily routine," said Gulsah Akar, an associate professor of city and regional planning in The Ohio State University Knowlton School of Architecture. "So, basically, both as city planners and as people, we should try to take the advantage of this as much as possible." The study used data from the 2017 National Household Travel Survey, a U.S. dataset collected from April 2016 to May 2017.  The researchers analyzed self-reported health assessments from 125,885 adults between the ages of 18 and 64. Those adults reported the number of minutes they spent walking for different purposes - from home to work, from home to shopping, from home to recreation activities and walking trips that did not start at their homes.  And, the survey respondents ranked how healthy they were on a scale of 1 to 5. The dataset the researchers analyzed included more than 500,000 trips. The researchers - Akar and Ohio State doctoral student Gilsu Pae - found that walking for any duration, for any purpose, increased how healthy a person felt.  But they also found that an additional 10 minutes of walking per trip from home for work-based trips - say, from a person's house to the bus stop 10 minutes away - increased that person's odds of having a higher health score by 6 percent compared with people who walk for other reasons. People who walked from home for reasons not connected to work, shopping or recreation were 3 percent more likely to have a higher health score. And, the researchers found, people who walked for work walked faster - on average, about 2.7 miles per hour - than people who walked for other reasons. People who walked for recreational purposes - say, an after-dinner stroll - walked, on average, about 2.55 miles per hour.  The researchers also found that walking trips that begin at home are generally longer than walking trips that begin somewhere else. The team found that 64 percent of home-based walking trips last at least 10 minutes, while 50 percent of trips that begin elsewhere are at least that long. Akar has studied the ways people travel for years, and said she was surprised to see that walking for different purposes led to a difference in how healthy people believed they were. "I was thinking the differences would not be that significant, that walking is walking, and all forms of walking are helpful," she said. "And that is true, but walking for some purposes has significantly greater effect on our health than others." Akar said the findings suggest that building activity into parts of a day that are otherwise sedentary - commuting by foot instead of by car, for example - can make a person feel healthier. "That means going to a gym or a recreation center aren't the only ways to exercise," Akar said. "It's an opportunity to put active minutes into our daily schedules in an easy way."   Eating raw organic fruits and veggies helps boost your gut health Graz University of Technology (Austria), August 12, 2020    A study published in the journal Frontiers in Microbiology found that consuming organic produce promotes gut microbiome diversity. Birgit Wassermann, the first author of the study and a researcher at the Graz University of Technology in Austria, explained that consuming raw fruits and vegetables is key to maintaining a diverse microbial community, which is essential for a healthy gut microbiome and a strong immune system. But these foods don't need to just be raw, they should also be organically produced. In their study, Wassermann and her colleagues found that while the production method didn't affect the abundance of microbes found in the different tissues of apples, the microbes present in organically produced apples were more diverse than those harbored by conventionally produced ones. Wassermann and her team chose to study apples because they are popular worldwide. In 2018 alone, about 83 million apples were grown, and production continues to grow today. Organic vs conventional Using genetic analysis and fluorescence microscopy, the researchers found that both conventional apples and organic apples had roughly the same amount of total bacteria (about 100 million per apple). While different parts of the fruit contained distinct microbial communities, apple pulp and seeds had the largest bacterial colonies. Apple peels were surprisingly less colonized. The researchers also found that organic apples had a more diverse bacterial population than conventionally grown apples. Additionally, organic apples contained beneficial bacteria, such as the common probiotic, Lactobacillus. On the other hand, conventional apples had a greater chance of containing potentially pathogenic bacteria like Escherichia and Shigella, both of which are linked to food poisoning symptoms like cramps and diarrhea. According to Wassermann, the very diverse microbiome of organically grown apples can help fight human pathogens by outcompeting them. She explained that the microbial pool that organic apple trees are exposed to tends to be more diverse and more balanced, and this helps promote their health by bolstering their resistance to pathogens. (Related: Exploring the ”gut-heart” connection: Can heart failure be treated by boosting gut microbiota health?) The difference between “organic” and “conventional” fruits According to the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), organic is a label for foods that are grown in accordance with certain federal guidelines. These guidelines include factors like soil additives, pesticide use and how animals are raised. On the other hand, conventional refers to modern, industrial agriculture that uses chemical fertilizers, pesticides and genetically modified organisms (GMOs). Research suggests that organic produce has a similar nutritional profile to conventional produce, but the former helps reduce your exposure to pesticides and harmful bacteria. When buying produce, consider other health factors like chronic conditions or pregnancy. To narrow down your search, start by learning about the fruits and vegetables that are more likely to be exposed to different kinds of pesticides.     Smiling can trick your mind into being more positive, study finds University of South Australia, August 11, 2020   From Sinatra to Katy Perry, celebrities have long sung about the power of a smile—how it picks you up, changes your outlook, and generally makes you feel better. But is it all smoke and mirrors, or is there a scientific backing to the claim? Groundbreaking research from the University of South Australia confirms that the act of smiling can trick your mind into being more positive, simply by moving your facial muscles. With the world in crisis amid COVID-19, and alarming rises of anxiety and depression in Australia and around the world, the findings could not be more timely. The study, published in Experimental Psychology, evaluated the impact of a covert smile on perception of face and body expressions. In both scenarios, a smile was induced by participants holding a pen between their teeth, forcing their facial muscles to replicate the movement of a smile. The research found that facial muscular activity not only alters the recognition of facial expressions but also body expressions, with both generating more positive emotions. Lead researcher and human and artificial cognition expert, UniSA's Dr. Fernando Marmolejo-Ramos says the finding has important insights for mental health. "When your muscles say you're happy, you're more likely to see the world around you in a positive way," Dr. Marmolejo-Ramos says. "In our research we found that when you forcefully practice smiling, it stimulates the amygdala—the emotional center of the brain—which releases neurotransmitters to encourage an emotionally positive state. For mental health, this has interesting implications. If we can trick the brain into perceiving stimuli as 'happy', then we can potentially use this mechanism to help boost mental health." The study replicated findings from the "covert" smile experiment by evaluating how people interpret a range of facial expressions (spanning frowns to smiles) using the pen-in-teeth mechanism; it then extended this using point-light motion images (spanning sad walking videos to happy walking videos) as the visual stimuli. Dr. Marmolejo-Ramos says there is a strong link between action and perception. "In a nutshell, perceptual and motor systems are intertwined when we emotionally process stimuli," Dr. Marmolejo-Ramos says. "A 'fake it 'til you make it' approach could have more credit than we expect."   Coriander is a potent weapon against antibiotic resistant bacteria University of Beira Interior (Portugal) August 10, 2020         The problem of antibiotic resistant bacteria has been deemed a public health crisis, with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) reporting that invasive MRSA – or methicillin-resistant S. aureus – infections affect 80,000 people globally a year, and claim over 11,000 lives. But, what the CDC will never tell you is how coriander can potentially save lives. Researchers in Portugal now say that that the oil from coriander – a common kitchen spice – is quite toxic to a wide range of harmful bacteria, leading to hopes that it may be enlisted in the fight against MRSA and other pathogens. Researchers at University of Beira Interior used flow cytometry to study the effects of coriander oil on 12 different disease-causing types of bacteria, including E. coli, Salmonella, B. cereus and MRSA. In the study, published in Journal of Medical Microbiology, the oil significantly inhibited bacterial growth – especially that of MRSA and E. coli. Researchers found that the coriander oil worked by damaging the membrane around the bacterial cell, interfering with vital functions such as respiration and eventually causing cell death. Linalool, a terpenoid responsible for coriander's pleasant scent, is the main constituent, but the coriander oil outperformed linalool alone – showing that interactions between the components in coriander oil made it even more bactericidal. Finally, the team found that coriander tended to perform better on Gram-negative bacteria such as E. coli and salmonella – as it could more easily disrupt their cell membranes. Lead researcher Dr. Fernanda Domingues noted that using coriander in foods could help prevent bacterial spoilage and food-borne illnesses, and possibly function as a natural alternative to pharmaceutical antibiotics. The team called for further study to explore practical applications and delivery systems. Coriander, scientifically known as Coriandrum sativum L. and also called cilantro and Chinese parsley, is an herb used in Mediterranean, Asian, Indian and Mexican cuisine, where it lends its spicy, bracing flavor to chutneys, pickles, sauces and salads. A staple of folk and herbal medicine, coriander has pain-relieving, antioxidant, anti-inflammatory and antimicrobial effects. The seeds have even been used for their mild relaxant, anxiety-easing and mood-elevating properties, and the diluted essential oil has been used to treat topical skin infections. For this study, researchers used essential oil of coriander, but other research on coriander's antimicrobial qualities has used other forms, such as freeze-dried powder. Coriander essential oil is one of the most widely-used in the world, and is already in use as a food additive. The need to develop safe, non-chemical preservatives – and the need to find natural solutions for antibiotic resistant bacteria – mean that studies on natural, herbal substances such as coriander are a “research hotspot.” Coriander has impressed researchers with its antimicrobial properties, and additional studies attest to that fact. In a study published in International Journal of Food Nutrition and Safety, researchers found that a water extract of coriander had a very strong inhibitory effect on E. coli and B.subtilis. Many serotypes of E.coli can cause illness, and B. subtilis, while not a disease-causing pathogen, can contaminate food, and cause potatoes to rot. Researchers found that the coriander extract worked best to inhibit bacteria when it was prepared in a concentration of 10 percent, with a pH of 6 and a salt concentration of 2 percent. And, a 2015 study published in Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition showed that coriander seed oil exhibited antimicrobial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria – along with some yeasts and fungi. Researchers expressed their belief in the successful development of a food preservation strategy featuring coriander oil. MRSA continues to threaten lives, while food-borne illnesses affect up to 30 percent of the population of developed countries – yearly. The CDC reports that a type of infection called STEC – Shiga toxin-producing E. coli – strikes a whopping 265,000 people every year in the United States alone, causing symptoms of severe stomach cramps, vomiting and diarrhea. And, finally, coriander seed oil – non-toxic, non-chemical, and packed with beneficial flavonoids – may very well be the food preservative and antibacterial agent of the future.     Exercise can improve mental health McGill University (Quebec), August 10, ,2020 One in four men in the world suffer from mental health issues. More men than women die from mental health issues. Dr. Farhan Khawajawho holds a Ph.D in Neuroscience from Mcgill University has said that regular fitness routines can help reduce the number of people whosuffer from long term mental health issues and can save lives. Dr. Farhan Khawaja has launched a campaign to make men aware of how important regular fitness is to their mental health and well-being. The fitness experts have said regular exercise can help deal with stress and reduce mental health problems. According to a recent report, more than 450 million people in the world suffer from mental health issues. In the UK more than 16 million people suffer from stress and mental health problems, in the USA that figure stands at 46.6 million. The World Health Organization has said that one in four men suffer from mental health problems and men are more likely than women to lose their life to this rising killer disease. Dr. Farah Khawaja who has called for more to be done to help men who suffer from stress and depression, and mental health problems want more men to turn to exercise to beat this rising problem. "Exercise and going to the gym and running in the park is not just about losing weight, it can also help with people's well-being. Regular fitness can be a very highly effective way of dealing with stress, anxiety, and depression. It is the perfect way to help a person to fight the negative feelings they have," explained Dr. Farhan Khawaja. In 2019, 6507 deaths were recorded due to suicide, in the USA 129 people take their own life due to mental health problems. Those figures show the importance of why more needs to be done according to Dr. Farhan Khawaja. It is not just Dr. Farhan Khawaja who has said that regular exercise can help fight depression, stress, and anxiety, scientists have also written many reports on the subject. They have said they have found through studies that exercise can reduce the levels of tension a person may feel and can help elevate and stabilize mood, improve sleep patterns, and improve a person's self-esteem. According to one scientist report, even five minutes of aerobic exercise can have a positive impact on someone suffering from anxiety and stress. "We want to see more people exercise. They don't have to join an expensive gym; they can do exercise in the home or at the park. Through regular exercise it can help boost a person's overall mood and well-being," explained Dr. Farhan Khawaja. Dr. Farhan Khawajabelieves that if more people spent just ten minutes a day exercising, it could help reduce the number of people who suffer from stress.     Study shows how food preservatives may disrupt human hormones and promote obesity Cedars-Sinai  Medicine Institute, August 9, 2020    Can chemicals that are added to breakfast cereals and other everyday products make you obese? Growing evidence from animal experiments suggests the answer may be "yes." But confirming these findings in humans has faced formidable obstacles - until now. A new study published today in Nature Communications details how Cedars-Sinai investigators developed a novel platform and protocol for testing the effects of chemicals known as endocrine disruptors on humans. The three chemicals tested in this study are abundant in modern life. Butylhydroxytoluene (BHT) is an antioxidant commonly added to breakfast cereals and other foods to protect nutrients and keep fats from turning rancid; perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) is a polymer found in some cookware, carpeting and other products; and tributyltin (TBT) is a compound in paints that can make its way into water and accumulate in seafood. The investigators used hormone-producing tissues grown from human stem cells to demonstrate how chronic exposure to these chemicals can interfere with signals sent from the digestive system to the brain that let people know when they are "full" during meals. When this signaling system breaks down, people often may continue eating, causing them to gain weight. "We discovered that each of these chemicals damaged hormones that communicate between the gut and the brain," said Dhruv Sareen, PhD, assistant professor of Biomedical Sciences and director of the Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Core Facility at the Cedars-Sinai Board of Governors Regenerative Medicine Institute. "When we tested the three together, the combined stress was more robust." Of the three chemicals tested, BHT produced some of the strongest detrimental effects, Sareen said. While other scientists have shown these compounds can disrupt hormone systems in laboratory animals, the new study is the first to use human pluripotent stem cells and tissues to document how the compounds may disrupt hormones that are critical to gut-to-brain signaling and preventing obesity in people, Sareen said. "This is a landmark study that substantially improves our understanding of how endocrine disruptors may damage human hormonal systems and contribute to the obesity epidemic in the U.S.," said Clive Svendsen, PhD, director of the institute and the Kerry and Simone Vickar Family Foundation Distinguished Chair in Regenerative Medicine. More than one-third of U.S. adults are considered to be obese, according to federal statistics. The new testing system developed for the study has the potential to provide a much-needed, safe and cost-effective method that can be used to evaluate the health effects of thousands of existing and new chemicals in the environment, the investigators say. For their experiments, Sareen and his team first obtained blood samples from adults, and then, by introducing reprogramming genes, converted the cells into induced pluripotent stem cells. Then, using these stem cells, the investigators grew human epithelium tissue, which lines the gut, and neuronal tissues of the brain's hypothalamus region, which regulates appetite and metabolism. The investigators then exposed the tissues to BHT, PFOA and TBT, one by one and also in combination, and observed what happened inside the cells. They found that the chemicals disrupted networks that prepare signaling hormones to maintain their structure and be transported out of the cells, thus making them ineffective. The chemicals also damaged mitochondria - cellular structures that convert food and oxygen into energy and drive the body's metabolism. Because the chemical damage occurred in early-stage "young" cells, the findings suggest that a defective hormone system potentially could impact a pregnant mother as well as her fetus in the womb, Sareen said. While other scientists have found, in animal studies, that effects of endocrine disruptors can be passed down to future generations, this process has not been proved to occur in humans, he explained. More than 80,000 chemicals are registered for use in the U.S. in everyday items such as foods, personal care products, household cleaners and lawn-care products, according to the National Toxicology Program of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. While the program states on its website that relatively few chemicals are thought to pose a significant risk to human health, it also states: "We do not know the effects of many of these chemicals on our health." Cost and ethical issues, including the health risk of exposing human subjects to possibly harmful substances, are among the barriers to testing the safety of many chemicals. As a result, numerous widely used compounds remain unevaluated in humans for their health effects, especially to the hormone system. "By testing these chemicals on actual human tissues in the lab, we potentially could make these evaluations easier to conduct and more cost-effective," Sareen said.

GES Colloquium - Tuesdays 12-1PM, Poe 202, NC State University GES Mediasite - Video w/slides https://go.ncsu.edu/ges-mediasite More info at http://go.ncsu.edu/ges-colloquium | Twitter -https://twitter.com/GESCenterNCSU Are you interested in pursuing a career in risk science? If so, tune in to hear from 5 panelists who represent a range of careers in various aspects of risk. Each of the panelists give a 5-minute lightning presentation on their backgrounds in risk science and areas of expertise in risk: assessment, communication, governance, and management. This will be followed by a facilitated discussion and Q&A session. Moderator: Khara Grieger – Senior Research Scholar, GES Center, NC State Panelists: Jennifer Kuzma – Goodnight-NC GSK Foundation Distinguished Professor, SPIA, and Co-Director, GES Center, NC State David Berube – Professor, Communication, and Director of PCOST, NC State Chris Cummings – Assistant Professor of Strategic Communication, Wee Kim Wee School of Communication and Information, Nanyang Technological University, Singapore Amy Wang – Health Scientist, National Toxicology Program, National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences Paul Price – Exposure Scientist, National Exposure Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Khara Grieger is a Senior Research Scholar in GES, specializing in risk assessment, risk governance, and decision support for emerging technologies. She is also leading an initiative to grow the field of risk science in the Research Triangle Park (RTP) area through funding provided by the Society for Risk Analysis (SRA). This symposium will be co-sponsored by the RTP chapter of SRA. Find out more at https://ges-center-lectures-ncsu.pinecast.co

In this episode we speak with Desiree Jaworski about the potential impact of 5G Technology on our health. Desiree Jaworski is Executive Director of the Center for Safer Wireless, a national nonprofit whose mission is to enhance public understanding of wireless technology and to recommend products to help mitigate the biological impact from wireless technology. She has researched, written and lectured on the topic of wireless radiation extensively. She has advocated for protective public policy regarding wireless technology at the Federal, State and Local level. Her expertise has been featured in many local and national television reports, newspaper articles and documentaries regarding her work raising awareness on smart meters, wireless technology, 5G and the findings of the National Toxicology Program. Recently, she was on the Dr. Oz television show. She directs the Center’s public outreach programs, which include movie screenings, scientific forums and presentations. Learning Points: • Testicular Cancer: Talk to Your Son • What is 5G Techology? • What is its impact on the environment and our health? • How do we protect ourselves from the radiation emitted from these small cells? Social Media: Website: www.centerforsaferwireless.us Email: djaworski@centerforsaferwireless.us

The beauty industry isn’t so beautiful. Last week we covered the first 6 toxic ingredients to avoid in your skincare products. This week we tackle the remaining 6. How many products in your cabinets contain these ingredients? Please listen in - educate yourself for your health and peace of mind.   Featured Product Clean Sourced Collagens Features five collagen types from four different sources! Contains eight grams of protein per serving Help reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles Helps ease joint stiffness and discomfort Formulated with vitamin C, horsetail extract, and zinc for maximum absorption Odorless, flavorless formula easily mixes into water, juice, or smoothies   * * *   Why Skincare Impacts Your Health Skin is the biggest organ on your body. Skin absorbs everything that we put on it. Skincare is one of the most lucrative industries in the world.   “Fake Skincare” In March of 2019, the Environmental Working Group, the EWG, reported that US regulation of chemicals and contaminants in cosmetics is falling behind the rest of the world. More than 40 nations, ranging from major industrialized economies like the United Kingdom and Germany, to developing states like Cambodia and Vietnam, have enacted regulations specifically targeting the safety and ingredients of cosmetics and personal care products. Some of these nations have restricted or completely banned more than 1,400 chemicals from cosmetic products. By contrast, the US Food and Drug Administration has banned or restricted only 9 chemicals for safety reasons. This is one of the most under-regulated industries but one of the most lucrative industries in the United States.   Why Do Regulations Matter? The Environmental Working Group (EWG) They curate the Skin Deep database of ingredients used in personal care products and their safety concerns on human health. Biggest advocates for clean ingredients in your products. If your skincare product is backed by the EWG, it means they’ve done their homework, they’ve taken the time to look at clean ingredients. The EWG has a scale that rates products from 1 to 5 as far as cleanliness and safety.     Top 12 Ingredients to Avoid & Why Ingredient: DEA COMPOUNDS (DIETHANOLAMINE) Typically Found In: DEA and DEA compounds are used to make cosmetics creamy or sudsy. Why You Should Avoid: These cause mild skin and eye irritation. Exposure to high doses of these chemicals has caused liver cancers and pre-cancerous changes in skin and thyroid. DEA is also possible hormone disruptor, has shown limited evidence of carcinogenicity and depletes the body of choline needed for fetal brain development.   Ingredient: FRAGRANCE/PARFUM Typically Found In: Apart from being used in perfumes and deodorants, they are used in nearly every type of personal-care product. Of the thousands of chemicals used in fragrances, most have not been tested for toxicity, alone or in combination. Over 3000 chemicals are used to manufacture synthetic fragrances. Why You Should Avoid:  These are often unlisted ingredients that are irritants and can trigger allergies, migraines, and asthma symptoms. The catchall term “fragrance” may mask phthalates, which act as endocrine disruptors and may cause obesity and reproductive and developmental harm. In laboratory experiments, individual fragrance ingredients have been associated with cancer and neurotoxicity. Federal law doesn’t require companies to list on product labels any of the chemicals in their fragrance mixture. Recent research from Environmental Working Group and the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics found an average of 14 chemicals in 17 name-brand fragrance products, none of them listed on the label.    Ingredient: PEG COMPOUNDS (POLYETHYLENE GLYCOLS) Typically Found In: Scrubs, body wash, makeup, toothpaste PEGs are widely used in cosmetics as thickeners, solvents, softeners, and moisture-carriers and hence used for products requiring a cream base and also in laxatives. Why You Should Avoid: Those tiny plastic beads in face or lip scrubs and exfoliating washes are made from polyethylene (used because they’re gentler on the skin than natural exfoliators like walnut shells). These synthetic chemicals are frequently contaminated with 1,4-dioxane, which the U.S. government considers a probable human carcinogen and which readily penetrates the skin. Polyethylene has been noted as a skin irritant and should never be used on broken skin. Polyethylene beads in scrubs and body washes also are not filtered by our sewage systems, meaning they can collect pollutants and travel into waterways, where they’re consumed by fish and marine animals.   Ingredient: PETROLATUM Typically Found In: Petrolatum, also known as petroleum jelly, is used in industry to lubricate machinery – so what is it doing to our bodies? Petrolatum has been used for years to lock in moisture, heal chapped lips, soothe noses raw from sniffles, and protect against diaper rash, as well as to treat cuts and burns. It is an ingredient in one out of every 14 cosmetic products on any given shelf, which includes 15 percent of lipsticks and 40 percent of baby products. So what’s the big deal? Why You Should Avoid: Scarily enough, petroleum byproduct has been found in breast tumors, strongly suggesting it is a breast-cancer-promoting substance. It also suffocates the skin, blocking oxygen absorption and aggravating acne. Petrolatum locks in moisture, yes – but does not allow moisture to be absorbed from the atmosphere. In short, our body gets accustomed to petrolatum’s barrier and slowly become less and less efficient at its own detoxifying and moisturizing processes.   Ingredient: TRICLOSAN Typically Found In: Triclosan is used mainly in antiperspirants/deodorants, cleansers, and hand sanitizers as a preservative and an anti-bacterial agent. Also used in laundry detergent, facial tissues, and antiseptics for wounds. Triclosan is classified as a pesticide. Why You Should Avoid: Triclosan was all the rage as antibacterial products became ubiquitous in the 1990s. But…it can pass through skin and can affect the body’s hormone systems—especially thyroid hormones, which regulate metabolism—and may disrupt normal breast development. Widespread use of triclosan may also contribute to bacterial resistance to antimicrobial agents. It acts like estrogen in the body and has high rates of skin allergy. (High toxicity concern.) The Canadian Medical Association has called for a ban on antibacterial consumer products, such as those containing triclosan. Even the FDA agrees that there is no health benefit to humans who use triclosan, and in 2013 ruled that manufacturers using it had to demonstrate that there were no long-term detrimental effects. We personally use naturally antibacterial and antiseptic agents like tea tree oil.   Ingredient: SILOXANES  Siloxanes are a group of chemicals that are, as the name suggests, derived from silicone. Typically Found In: Cyclomethicone and ingredients ending in “siloxane” make hair products dry quickly and deodorant creams slide on easily. They are also used extensively in moisturizers and facial treatments to soften and smoothen and in medical implants. Why You Should Avoid: The risks associated with siloxanes are far too many. Siloxanes are known endocrine disruptors that interfere with human hormone function, and could even possibly impair fertility. Research has shown that they not only cause uterine tumors, but can also skew the functioning of neurotransmitters in the nervous system. On top of that, siloxanes resist degradation and therefore pose harm to aquatic life and wildlife.   Ingredient: PHTHALATES (DIBUTYL PHTHALATE) Typically Found In: nail polish and other nail products, perfume, makeup remover, hairspray, deodorant Why You Should Avoid: Phthalates are sneaky endocrine disruptors, which means they mimic the body’s hormones, therefore throwing the entire endocrine system off balance. They cause both hormonal and neurological damage, and in the case of pregnant women, may also cause major birth defects. The worst part? You will rarely find the word “phthalates” on a label. Some products do market themselves as phthalate-free, but what about the other slew of synthetics on our department store’s beauty shelf? You can identify phthalates by their abbreviated chemical components: DBP (di-n-butyl phthalate), DEP (diethyl phthalate), DMP (dimethyl phthalate), DEHP (di-2-ethylhexyl), and BzBP (benzylbutyl phthalate).   Ingredient: SULPHATES (SODIUM LAURATE, LAURYL SULPHATE OR SLS) Typically Found In: Primarily used as a foaming agent or detergent to be found in shampoos, facial cleansers, mouthwash, toothpaste, bubble bath products, household and utensil cleaning detergents. Why You Should Avoid: Depending on the manufacturing process, Sodium laureth sulfate may be contaminated with ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane. Both contaminants may cause cancer. Also, ethylene oxide may harm the nervous system and interfere with human development, and 1,4-dioxane is persistent. In other words, it doesn’t easily degrade and can remain in the environment long after it is rinsed down the shower drain. SLS has been shown to cause or contribute to: skin irritation, canker sores, disruptions of skin’s natural oil balance and eye damage. It is also widely believed to be a major contributor to acne (especially cystic acne) around the mouth and chin.   Ingredient: PARABENS (METHYL-, ETHYL-, PROPYL-, BUTYL-, ISOBUTYL-) Typically Found In: A common and very cheap cosmetic preservative, the second most common skincare ingredient. Found in: makeup, moisturizer, shaving gel, shampoo, personal lubricant and spray tan products Why You Should Avoid: Synthetic parabens are toxic in large or cumulative quantities, as the body stores parabens in many tissue types. They can cause allergic reactions, skin rashes and irritation. Parabens have been shown to mimic estrogen which disrupts normal hormone function. Exposure to external estrogen’s have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer and increase cell abnormalities. There should be no excuse for your skincare products to still have Parabens. The FDA acknowledges several studies linking parabens, which mimic estrogen, to breast cancer, skin cancer and decreased sperm count, but has not ruled that it is harmful. According to the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Products, longer chain parabens like propyl and butyl paraben and their branched counterparts, isopropyl and isobutylparabens, may disrupt the endocrine system and cause reproductive and developmental disorders. Look for ingredients with the suffix “-paraben” as well—paraben-free products will be labeled as such.   Ingredient: FORMALDEHYDE Typically Found In: These are primarily preservatives commonly found in cosmetics. It is also found in baby bath soap, nail polish, eyelash adhesive and hair dyes. Look for: DMDM hydantoin, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, methenamine, quaternium-15, and sodium hydroxymethylglycinate. These ingredients slowly and continuously release small amounts of formaldehyde. Why You Should Avoid: Short-term health impacts include irritation to the eyes, nose and throat, and many studies show it causes allergic skin reactions and skin rashes. In fact, it was awarded 2105 Contact Allergen of the Year by American Contact Dermatitis Society. Long term, Formaldehyde has a long list of adverse health effects, including immune-system toxicity, respiratory irritation and cancer in humans. Formaldehyde is a recognized human carcinogen.   Ingredient: BHA AND BHT (BUTYLATED HYDROXYANISOLE AND BUTYLATED HYDROXYTOLUENE) Typically Found In: Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) and butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) are closely related chemicals – preservatives commonly used in cosmetics, personal care products (mainly shampoos, perfumes, deodorants, body lotions), and even food and food packaging. Why You Should Avoid: The National Toxicology Program classifies butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” It can cause skin depigmentation. In animal studies, BHA produces liver damage and causes stomach cancers such as papillomas and carcinomas and interferes with normal reproductive system development and thyroid hormone levels. The European Union considers it unsafe in fragrance. Opt for a BHA and phthalate-free perfume.   Ingredient: COAL-TAR DYES  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a group of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil and gasoline. Typically Found In: Found in: hair dyes, lipstick, cosmetic, shampoo Why You Should Avoid: Phenylenediamine, used in hair dyes, has been found to be carcinogenic in laboratory tests conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and National Toxicology Program. Coal tar is recognized as a human carcinogen and the main concern are their potential as carcinogens. As well, colors may be contaminated with low levels of heavy metals and some contain aluminum (a neurotoxin). This is of particular concern when used in cosmetics that may be ingested, like lipstick.   * * *   Deeper Dive Resources   The Environmental Working Group https://www.ewg.org/   EWG’s Skin Deep Cosmetics Database https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/   Global Regulatory Lists of Banned or Restricted Cosmetic Ingredients and Positive Lists https://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/Cosmetics/Regulatory_Lists_of_Cosmetic_Ingredients_Banned_Cosmetic_Ingredients,_Restricted_Cosmetic_Ingredients_and_Positive_Lists.html   Prohibited & Restricted Ingredients in Cosmetics (FDA) https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/prohibited-restricted-ingredients-cosmetics   DEA Compounds https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/diethanolamine   Fragrances in Cosmetics https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/fragrances-cosmetics   Phthalates https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html   Campaign for Safe Cosmetics http://www.safecosmetics.org/   PEG Compounds https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4505343/   1,4-Dioxane https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/ffrro_factsheet_contaminant_14-dioxane_january2014_final.pdf   Petrolatum http://www.safecosmetics.org/get-the-facts/chemicals-of-concern/petrolatum/   Triclosan https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/expert-answers/triclosan/faq-20057861   FDA Ruling on Triclosan https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-issues-final-rule-safety-and-effectiveness-antibacterial-soaps   Siloxanes https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4884743/

“EMF stands for electromagnetic fields. All living creatures need the Earth’s EMFs in order to navigate, digest food, reproduce and more. Human-made EMFs emitted by electronic technologies can interfere with and harm living creatures’ basic functioning.” ---> Subscribe for new podcast episode Email Notifications HERE Katie Singer’s book, An Electronic Silent Spring “focuses on how mobile phones and Wi-Fi affect children and how wireless technologies can interfere with medical implants like insulin pumps, cardiac pacemakers and deep brain stimulators.” “An Electronic Silent Spring also offers an extensive solutions section for policy makers, telecom and utility companies, schools, civic groups and individuals who want emf solutions and protection for emf.” Katie’s websites: http://www.electronicsilentspring.com/ https://www.ourweb.tech >>>>> Questions about this episode?  Want to share a comment or a topic for a future episode?  You can send me (Abe) an email using this online message form: Click Here Other links/references: THE BIOINITIATIVE REPORT 2012 - A Rationale for Biologically-based Public Exposure Standards for Electromagnetic Fields (ELF and RF) https://bioinitiative.org/   BEES, BIRDS AND MANKIND Destroying Nature by ‘Electrosmog’ - Ulrich Warnke https://ecfsapi.fcc.gov/file/7521097894.pdf   Sebastopol, CA: Consider The Plights of Those Living At An Attractive and Well-Managed Affordable Housing Project — 250 to 500 feet from a Macro Cell Tower https://scientists4wiredtech.com/sebastopol/   Electromagnetic Radiation Safety - Joel M. Moskowitz, Ph.D.  https://www.saferemr.com/   National Toxicology Program releases final reports on rat and mouse studies of radio frequency radiation like that used in 2G and 3G cell phone technologies https://www.niehs.nih.gov/news/newsroom/releases/2018/november1/index.cfm   National Toxicology Program: Cell Phone Radio Frequency Radiation https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/whatwestudy/topics/cellphones/index.html   For more than 35 years, Microwave News has been reporting on the potential health and environmental impacts of electromagnetic fields and radiation. We are widely recognized as a fair and objective source of information on this controversial subject. https://microwavenews.com/about-us _________   Genuinely Useful podcast is sponsored by Magical Egypt (go to to this podcast’s Episode 13 with Chance Gardner, released Nov 8, 2018)   You can Save 15% on Magical Egypt with Coupon Code "genuse" Own Both Magical Egypt Series 1 and 2   ___________   You can listen and/or buy the podcast’s music and support the show by visiting Bandcamp. This episode’s featured original sounds  Bandcamp -> “Walking Across the Bridge” ---> Hear All of the Podcast's Featured Music HERE See Episode Webpage  https://genuinelyuseful.com/podcast-ep24-katie-singer   Episode Artwork Photo credit: Dylan Ferreira https://unsplash.com/photos/r5kVYabcx48   ========+++========   HELP SPREAD THE WORD!   I’d love it if you could please share Genuinely Useful podcast on twitter and facebook:   https://twitter.com/genuinelyuseful   https://www.facebook.com/genuinelyuseful   If you enjoy this podcast, tap on over to Apple Podcasts and kindly leave me a rating, write a review, and subscribe! Thank you so much! Links to Share Genuinely Useful podcast:   Click here to share on Apple Podcasts [iOS]   Click here to share on Overcast [iOS]   Click here to share on Spotify   Click here to share on Google Podcasts [Android   Click here to share on Stitcher [iOS and Android]   Genuinely Useful Podcast Home Page https://genuinelyuseful.com/podcast Contact: genuinelyuseful@gmail.com   Thanks for being here -Abe

The beauty industry isn’t so beautiful. Last week we covered the first 6 toxic ingredients to avoid in your skincare products. This week we tackle the remaining 6. How many products in your cabinets contain these ingredients? Please listen in - educate yourself for your health and peace of mind.   Featured Product Clean Sourced Collagens Features five collagen types from four different sources! Contains eight grams of protein per serving Help reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles Helps ease joint stiffness and discomfort Formulated with vitamin C, horsetail extract, and zinc for maximum absorption Odorless, flavorless formula easily mixes into water, juice, or smoothies   * * *   Why Skincare Impacts Your Health Skin is the biggest organ on your body. Skin absorbs everything that we put on it. Skincare is one of the most lucrative industries in the world.   “Fake Skincare” In March of 2019, the Environmental Working Group, the EWG, reported that US regulation of chemicals and contaminants in cosmetics is falling behind the rest of the world. More than 40 nations, ranging from major industrialized economies like the United Kingdom and Germany, to developing states like Cambodia and Vietnam, have enacted regulations specifically targeting the safety and ingredients of cosmetics and personal care products. Some of these nations have restricted or completely banned more than 1,400 chemicals from cosmetic products. By contrast, the US Food and Drug Administration has banned or restricted only 9 chemicals for safety reasons. This is one of the most under-regulated industries but one of the most lucrative industries in the United States.   Why Do Regulations Matter? The Environmental Working Group (EWG) They curate the Skin Deep database of ingredients used in personal care products and their safety concerns on human health. Biggest advocates for clean ingredients in your products. If your skincare product is backed by the EWG, it means they’ve done their homework, they’ve taken the time to look at clean ingredients. The EWG has a scale that rates products from 1 to 5 as far as cleanliness and safety.     Top 12 Ingredients to Avoid & Why Ingredient: DEA COMPOUNDS (DIETHANOLAMINE) Typically Found In: DEA and DEA compounds are used to make cosmetics creamy or sudsy. Why You Should Avoid: These cause mild skin and eye irritation. Exposure to high doses of these chemicals has caused liver cancers and pre-cancerous changes in skin and thyroid. DEA is also possible hormone disruptor, has shown limited evidence of carcinogenicity and depletes the body of choline needed for fetal brain development.   Ingredient: FRAGRANCE/PARFUM Typically Found In: Apart from being used in perfumes and deodorants, they are used in nearly every type of personal-care product. Of the thousands of chemicals used in fragrances, most have not been tested for toxicity, alone or in combination. Over 3000 chemicals are used to manufacture synthetic fragrances. Why You Should Avoid:  These are often unlisted ingredients that are irritants and can trigger allergies, migraines, and asthma symptoms. The catchall term “fragrance” may mask phthalates, which act as endocrine disruptors and may cause obesity and reproductive and developmental harm. In laboratory experiments, individual fragrance ingredients have been associated with cancer and neurotoxicity. Federal law doesn’t require companies to list on product labels any of the chemicals in their fragrance mixture. Recent research from Environmental Working Group and the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics found an average of 14 chemicals in 17 name-brand fragrance products, none of them listed on the label.    Ingredient: PEG COMPOUNDS (POLYETHYLENE GLYCOLS) Typically Found In: Scrubs, body wash, makeup, toothpaste PEGs are widely used in cosmetics as thickeners, solvents, softeners, and moisture-carriers and hence used for products requiring a cream base and also in laxatives. Why You Should Avoid: Those tiny plastic beads in face or lip scrubs and exfoliating washes are made from polyethylene (used because they’re gentler on the skin than natural exfoliators like walnut shells). These synthetic chemicals are frequently contaminated with 1,4-dioxane, which the U.S. government considers a probable human carcinogen and which readily penetrates the skin. Polyethylene has been noted as a skin irritant and should never be used on broken skin. Polyethylene beads in scrubs and body washes also are not filtered by our sewage systems, meaning they can collect pollutants and travel into waterways, where they’re consumed by fish and marine animals.   Ingredient: PETROLATUM Typically Found In: Petrolatum, also known as petroleum jelly, is used in industry to lubricate machinery – so what is it doing to our bodies? Petrolatum has been used for years to lock in moisture, heal chapped lips, soothe noses raw from sniffles, and protect against diaper rash, as well as to treat cuts and burns. It is an ingredient in one out of every 14 cosmetic products on any given shelf, which includes 15 percent of lipsticks and 40 percent of baby products. So what’s the big deal? Why You Should Avoid: Scarily enough, petroleum byproduct has been found in breast tumors, strongly suggesting it is a breast-cancer-promoting substance. It also suffocates the skin, blocking oxygen absorption and aggravating acne. Petrolatum locks in moisture, yes – but does not allow moisture to be absorbed from the atmosphere. In short, our body gets accustomed to petrolatum’s barrier and slowly become less and less efficient at its own detoxifying and moisturizing processes.   Ingredient: TRICLOSAN Typically Found In: Triclosan is used mainly in antiperspirants/deodorants, cleansers, and hand sanitizers as a preservative and an anti-bacterial agent. Also used in laundry detergent, facial tissues, and antiseptics for wounds. Triclosan is classified as a pesticide. Why You Should Avoid: Triclosan was all the rage as antibacterial products became ubiquitous in the 1990s. But…it can pass through skin and can affect the body’s hormone systems—especially thyroid hormones, which regulate metabolism—and may disrupt normal breast development. Widespread use of triclosan may also contribute to bacterial resistance to antimicrobial agents. It acts like estrogen in the body and has high rates of skin allergy. (High toxicity concern.) The Canadian Medical Association has called for a ban on antibacterial consumer products, such as those containing triclosan. Even the FDA agrees that there is no health benefit to humans who use triclosan, and in 2013 ruled that manufacturers using it had to demonstrate that there were no long-term detrimental effects. We personally use naturally antibacterial and antiseptic agents like tea tree oil.   Ingredient: SILOXANES  Siloxanes are a group of chemicals that are, as the name suggests, derived from silicone. Typically Found In: Cyclomethicone and ingredients ending in “siloxane” make hair products dry quickly and deodorant creams slide on easily. They are also used extensively in moisturizers and facial treatments to soften and smoothen and in medical implants. Why You Should Avoid: The risks associated with siloxanes are far too many. Siloxanes are known endocrine disruptors that interfere with human hormone function, and could even possibly impair fertility. Research has shown that they not only cause uterine tumors, but can also skew the functioning of neurotransmitters in the nervous system. On top of that, siloxanes resist degradation and therefore pose harm to aquatic life and wildlife.   Ingredient: PHTHALATES (DIBUTYL PHTHALATE) Typically Found In: nail polish and other nail products, perfume, makeup remover, hairspray, deodorant Why You Should Avoid: Phthalates are sneaky endocrine disruptors, which means they mimic the body’s hormones, therefore throwing the entire endocrine system off balance. They cause both hormonal and neurological damage, and in the case of pregnant women, may also cause major birth defects. The worst part? You will rarely find the word “phthalates” on a label. Some products do market themselves as phthalate-free, but what about the other slew of synthetics on our department store’s beauty shelf? You can identify phthalates by their abbreviated chemical components: DBP (di-n-butyl phthalate), DEP (diethyl phthalate), DMP (dimethyl phthalate), DEHP (di-2-ethylhexyl), and BzBP (benzylbutyl phthalate).   Ingredient: SULPHATES (SODIUM LAURATE, LAURYL SULPHATE OR SLS) Typically Found In: Primarily used as a foaming agent or detergent to be found in shampoos, facial cleansers, mouthwash, toothpaste, bubble bath products, household and utensil cleaning detergents. Why You Should Avoid: Depending on the manufacturing process, Sodium laureth sulfate may be contaminated with ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane. Both contaminants may cause cancer. Also, ethylene oxide may harm the nervous system and interfere with human development, and 1,4-dioxane is persistent. In other words, it doesn’t easily degrade and can remain in the environment long after it is rinsed down the shower drain. SLS has been shown to cause or contribute to: skin irritation, canker sores, disruptions of skin’s natural oil balance and eye damage. It is also widely believed to be a major contributor to acne (especially cystic acne) around the mouth and chin.   Ingredient: PARABENS (METHYL-, ETHYL-, PROPYL-, BUTYL-, ISOBUTYL-) Typically Found In: A common and very cheap cosmetic preservative, the second most common skincare ingredient. Found in: makeup, moisturizer, shaving gel, shampoo, personal lubricant and spray tan products Why You Should Avoid: Synthetic parabens are toxic in large or cumulative quantities, as the body stores parabens in many tissue types. They can cause allergic reactions, skin rashes and irritation. Parabens have been shown to mimic estrogen which disrupts normal hormone function. Exposure to external estrogen’s have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer and increase cell abnormalities. There should be no excuse for your skincare products to still have Parabens. The FDA acknowledges several studies linking parabens, which mimic estrogen, to breast cancer, skin cancer and decreased sperm count, but has not ruled that it is harmful. According to the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Products, longer chain parabens like propyl and butyl paraben and their branched counterparts, isopropyl and isobutylparabens, may disrupt the endocrine system and cause reproductive and developmental disorders. Look for ingredients with the suffix “-paraben” as well—paraben-free products will be labeled as such.   Ingredient: FORMALDEHYDE Typically Found In: These are primarily preservatives commonly found in cosmetics. It is also found in baby bath soap, nail polish, eyelash adhesive and hair dyes. Look for: DMDM hydantoin, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, methenamine, quaternium-15, and sodium hydroxymethylglycinate. These ingredients slowly and continuously release small amounts of formaldehyde. Why You Should Avoid: Short-term health impacts include irritation to the eyes, nose and throat, and many studies show it causes allergic skin reactions and skin rashes. In fact, it was awarded 2105 Contact Allergen of the Year by American Contact Dermatitis Society. Long term, Formaldehyde has a long list of adverse health effects, including immune-system toxicity, respiratory irritation and cancer in humans. Formaldehyde is a recognized human carcinogen.   Ingredient: BHA AND BHT (BUTYLATED HYDROXYANISOLE AND BUTYLATED HYDROXYTOLUENE) Typically Found In: Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) and butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) are closely related chemicals – preservatives commonly used in cosmetics, personal care products (mainly shampoos, perfumes, deodorants, body lotions), and even food and food packaging. Why You Should Avoid: The National Toxicology Program classifies butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” It can cause skin depigmentation. In animal studies, BHA produces liver damage and causes stomach cancers such as papillomas and carcinomas and interferes with normal reproductive system development and thyroid hormone levels. The European Union considers it unsafe in fragrance. Opt for a BHA and phthalate-free perfume.   Ingredient: COAL-TAR DYES  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a group of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil and gasoline. Typically Found In: Found in: hair dyes, lipstick, cosmetic, shampoo Why You Should Avoid: Phenylenediamine, used in hair dyes, has been found to be carcinogenic in laboratory tests conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and National Toxicology Program. Coal tar is recognized as a human carcinogen and the main concern are their potential as carcinogens. As well, colors may be contaminated with low levels of heavy metals and some contain aluminum (a neurotoxin). This is of particular concern when used in cosmetics that may be ingested, like lipstick.   * * *   Deeper Dive Resources   The Environmental Working Group https://www.ewg.org/   EWG’s Skin Deep Cosmetics Database https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/   Global Regulatory Lists of Banned or Restricted Cosmetic Ingredients and Positive Lists https://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/Cosmetics/Regulatory_Lists_of_Cosmetic_Ingredients_Banned_Cosmetic_Ingredients,_Restricted_Cosmetic_Ingredients_and_Positive_Lists.html   Prohibited & Restricted Ingredients in Cosmetics (FDA) https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/prohibited-restricted-ingredients-cosmetics   DEA Compounds https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/diethanolamine   Fragrances in Cosmetics https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/fragrances-cosmetics   Phthalates https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html   Campaign for Safe Cosmetics http://www.safecosmetics.org/   PEG Compounds https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4505343/   1,4-Dioxane https://www.epa.gov/sites/production/files/2014-03/documents/ffrro_factsheet_contaminant_14-dioxane_january2014_final.pdf   Petrolatum http://www.safecosmetics.org/get-the-facts/chemicals-of-concern/petrolatum/   Triclosan https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-lifestyle/adult-health/expert-answers/triclosan/faq-20057861   FDA Ruling on Triclosan https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-issues-final-rule-safety-and-effectiveness-antibacterial-soaps   Siloxanes https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4884743/

This week we dive into the murky ingredients in your skincare products. Many of these are hormone disrupters and known carcinogens. Since our skin is our largest organ and we're all about limiting toxicity in our lives this episode was a MUST. Tune in this week to learn how to be a savvy skincare shopper!   Featured Product Clean Sourced Collagens Features five collagen types from four different sources! Contains eight grams of protein per serving Help reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles Helps ease joint stiffness and discomfort Formulated with vitamin C, horsetail extract, and zinc for maximum absorption Odorless, flavorless formula easily mixes into water, juice, or smoothies   * * *   Why Skincare Impacts Your Health Skin is the biggest organ on your body. Skin absorbs everything that we put on it. Skincare is one of the most lucrative industries in the world.   “Fake Skincare” In March of 2019, the Environmental Working Group, the EWG, reported that US regulation of chemicals and contaminants in cosmetics is falling behind the rest of the world. More than 40 nations, ranging from major industrialized economies like the United Kingdom and Germany, to developing states like Cambodia and Vietnam, have enacted regulations specifically targeting the safety and ingredients of cosmetics and personal care products. Some of these nations have restricted or completely banned more than 1,400 chemicals from cosmetic products. By contrast, the US Food and Drug Administration has banned or restricted only 9 chemicals for safety reasons. This is one of the most under-regulated industries but one of the most lucrative industries in the United States.   Why Do Regulations Matter? The Environmental Working Group (EWG) They curate the Skin Deep database of ingredients used in personal care products and their safety concerns on human health. Biggest advocates for clean ingredients in your products. If your skincare product is backed by the EWG, it means they’ve done their homework, they’ve taken the time to look at clean ingredients. The EWG has a scale that rates products from 1 to 5 as far as cleanliness and safety.     Top 12 Ingredients to Avoid & Why – The First 6! Ingredient: PHTHALATES (DIBUTYL PHTHALATE) Typically Found In: nail polish and other nail products, perfume, makeup remover, hairspray, deodorant Why You Should Avoid: Phthalates are sneaky endocrine disruptors, which means they mimic the body’s hormones, therefore throwing the entire endocrine system off balance. They cause both hormonal and neurological damage, and in the case of pregnant women, may also cause major birth defects. The worst part? You will rarely find the word “phthalates” on a label. Some products do market themselves as phthalate-free, but what about the other slew of synthetics on our department store’s beauty shelf? You can identify phthalates by their abbreviated chemical components: DBP (di-n-butyl phthalate), DEP (diethyl phthalate), DMP (dimethyl phthalate), DEHP (di-2-ethylhexyl), and BzBP (benzylbutyl phthalate).   Ingredient: SULPHATES (SODIUM LAURATE, LAURYL SULPHATE OR SLS) Typically Found In: Primarily used as a foaming agent or detergent to be found in shampoos, facial cleansers, mouthwash, toothpaste, bubble bath products, household and utensil cleaning detergents. Why You Should Avoid: Depending on the manufacturing process, Sodium laureth sulfate may be contaminated with ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane. Both contaminants may cause cancer. Also, ethylene oxide may harm the nervous system and interfere with human development, and 1,4-dioxane is persistent. In other words, it doesn’t easily degrade and can remain in the environment long after it is rinsed down the shower drain. SLS has been shown to cause or contribute to: skin irritation, canker sores, disruptions of skin’s natural oil balance and eye damage. It is also widely believed to be a major contributor to acne (especially cystic acne) around the mouth and chin.   Ingredient: PARABENS (METHYL-, ETHYL-, PROPYL-, BUTYL-, ISOBUTYL-) Typically Found In: A common and very cheap cosmetic preservative, the second most common skincare ingredient. Found in: makeup, moisturizer, shaving gel, shampoo, personal lubricant and spray tan products Why You Should Avoid: Synthetic parabens are toxic in large or cumulative quantities, as the body stores parabens in many tissue types. They can cause allergic reactions, skin rashes and irritation. Parabens have been shown to mimic estrogen which disrupts normal hormone function. Exposure to external estrogen’s have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer and increase cell abnormalities. There should be no excuse for your skincare products to still have Parabens. The FDA acknowledges several studies linking parabens, which mimic estrogen, to breast cancer, skin cancer and decreased sperm count, but has not ruled that it is harmful. According to the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Products, longer chain parabens like propyl and butyl paraben and their branched counterparts, isopropyl and isobutylparabens, may disrupt the endocrine system and cause reproductive and developmental disorders. Look for ingredients with the suffix “-paraben” as well—paraben-free products will be labeled as such.   Ingredient: FORMALDEHYDE Typically Found In: These are primarily preservatives commonly found in cosmetics. It is also found in baby bath soap, nail polish, eyelash adhesive and hair dyes. Look for: DMDM hydantoin, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, methenamine, quaternium-15, and sodium hydroxymethylglycinate. These ingredients slowly and continuously release small amounts of formaldehyde. Why You Should Avoid: Short-term health impacts include irritation to the eyes, nose and throat, and many studies show it causes allergic skin reactions and skin rashes. In fact, it was awarded 2105 Contact Allergen of the Year by American Contact Dermatitis Society. Long term, Formaldehyde has a long list of adverse health effects, including immune-system toxicity, respiratory irritation and cancer in humans. Formaldehyde is a recognized human carcinogen.   Ingredient: BHA AND BHT (BUTYLATED HYDROXYANISOLE AND BUTYLATED HYDROXYTOLUENE) Typically Found In: Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) and butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) are closely related chemicals – preservatives commonly used in cosmetics, personal care products (mainly shampoos, perfumes, deodorants, body lotions), and even food and food packaging. Why You Should Avoid: The National Toxicology Program classifies butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” It can cause skin depigmentation. In animal studies, BHA produces liver damage and causes stomach cancers such as papillomas and carcinomas and interferes with normal reproductive system development and thyroid hormone levels. The European Union considers it unsafe in fragrance. Opt for a BHA and phthalate-free perfume.   Ingredient: COAL-TAR DYES  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a group of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil and gasoline. Typically Found In: Found in: hair dyes, lipstick, cosmetic, shampoo Why You Should Avoid: Phenylenediamine, used in hair dyes, has been found to be carcinogenic in laboratory tests conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and National Toxicology Program. Coal tar is recognized as a human carcinogen and the main concern are their potential as carcinogens. As well, colors may be contaminated with low levels of heavy metals and some contain aluminum (a neurotoxin). This is of particular concern when used in cosmetics that may be ingested, like lipstick.   * * *   Deeper Dive Resources   The Environmental Working Group https://www.ewg.org/   EWG’s Skin Deep Cosmetics Database https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/   Global Regulatory Lists of Banned or Restricted Cosmetic Ingredients and Positive Lists https://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/Cosmetics/Regulatory_Lists_of_Cosmetic_Ingredients_Banned_Cosmetic_Ingredients,_Restricted_Cosmetic_Ingredients_and_Positive_Lists.html   Prohibited & Restricted Ingredients in Cosmetics (FDA) https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/prohibited-restricted-ingredients-cosmetics   Phthalates https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html   Sulfates https://www.healthline.com/health/beauty-skin-care/sulfates   Parabens https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/parabens-cosmetics   Formaldehyde https://www.ewg.org/research/exposing-cosmetics-cover/formaldehyde-releasers   Formaldehyde: 2015 Contact Allergen of the Year https://journals.lww.com/dermatitis/Fulltext/2015/01000/Formaldehyde.2.aspx   BHA/BHT https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/ingredient/700741/BHT/   BHA/BHT (National Toxicology Program) https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/butylatedhydroxyanisole.pdf   Coal Tar Dyes http://www.safecosmetics.org/get-the-facts/chemicals-of-concern/coal-tar/   Coal Tar Dyes (National Cancer Institute) https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances/coal-tar   Coal Tar Dyes (National Toxicology Program) https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/coaltars.pdf

This week we dive into the murky ingredients in your skincare products. Many of these are hormone disrupters and known carcinogens. Since our skin is our largest organ and we're all about limiting toxicity in our lives this episode was a MUST. Tune in this week to learn how to be a savvy skincare shopper!   Featured Product Clean Sourced Collagens Features five collagen types from four different sources! Contains eight grams of protein per serving Help reduce the appearance of fine lines and wrinkles Helps ease joint stiffness and discomfort Formulated with vitamin C, horsetail extract, and zinc for maximum absorption Odorless, flavorless formula easily mixes into water, juice, or smoothies   * * *   Why Skincare Impacts Your Health Skin is the biggest organ on your body. Skin absorbs everything that we put on it. Skincare is one of the most lucrative industries in the world.   “Fake Skincare” In March of 2019, the Environmental Working Group, the EWG, reported that US regulation of chemicals and contaminants in cosmetics is falling behind the rest of the world. More than 40 nations, ranging from major industrialized economies like the United Kingdom and Germany, to developing states like Cambodia and Vietnam, have enacted regulations specifically targeting the safety and ingredients of cosmetics and personal care products. Some of these nations have restricted or completely banned more than 1,400 chemicals from cosmetic products. By contrast, the US Food and Drug Administration has banned or restricted only 9 chemicals for safety reasons. This is one of the most under-regulated industries but one of the most lucrative industries in the United States.   Why Do Regulations Matter? The Environmental Working Group (EWG) They curate the Skin Deep database of ingredients used in personal care products and their safety concerns on human health. Biggest advocates for clean ingredients in your products. If your skincare product is backed by the EWG, it means they’ve done their homework, they’ve taken the time to look at clean ingredients. The EWG has a scale that rates products from 1 to 5 as far as cleanliness and safety.     Top 12 Ingredients to Avoid & Why – The First 6! Ingredient: PHTHALATES (DIBUTYL PHTHALATE) Typically Found In: nail polish and other nail products, perfume, makeup remover, hairspray, deodorant Why You Should Avoid: Phthalates are sneaky endocrine disruptors, which means they mimic the body’s hormones, therefore throwing the entire endocrine system off balance. They cause both hormonal and neurological damage, and in the case of pregnant women, may also cause major birth defects. The worst part? You will rarely find the word “phthalates” on a label. Some products do market themselves as phthalate-free, but what about the other slew of synthetics on our department store’s beauty shelf? You can identify phthalates by their abbreviated chemical components: DBP (di-n-butyl phthalate), DEP (diethyl phthalate), DMP (dimethyl phthalate), DEHP (di-2-ethylhexyl), and BzBP (benzylbutyl phthalate).   Ingredient: SULPHATES (SODIUM LAURATE, LAURYL SULPHATE OR SLS) Typically Found In: Primarily used as a foaming agent or detergent to be found in shampoos, facial cleansers, mouthwash, toothpaste, bubble bath products, household and utensil cleaning detergents. Why You Should Avoid: Depending on the manufacturing process, Sodium laureth sulfate may be contaminated with ethylene oxide and 1,4-dioxane. Both contaminants may cause cancer. Also, ethylene oxide may harm the nervous system and interfere with human development, and 1,4-dioxane is persistent. In other words, it doesn’t easily degrade and can remain in the environment long after it is rinsed down the shower drain. SLS has been shown to cause or contribute to: skin irritation, canker sores, disruptions of skin’s natural oil balance and eye damage. It is also widely believed to be a major contributor to acne (especially cystic acne) around the mouth and chin.   Ingredient: PARABENS (METHYL-, ETHYL-, PROPYL-, BUTYL-, ISOBUTYL-) Typically Found In: A common and very cheap cosmetic preservative, the second most common skincare ingredient. Found in: makeup, moisturizer, shaving gel, shampoo, personal lubricant and spray tan products Why You Should Avoid: Synthetic parabens are toxic in large or cumulative quantities, as the body stores parabens in many tissue types. They can cause allergic reactions, skin rashes and irritation. Parabens have been shown to mimic estrogen which disrupts normal hormone function. Exposure to external estrogen’s have been shown to increase the risk of breast cancer and increase cell abnormalities. There should be no excuse for your skincare products to still have Parabens. The FDA acknowledges several studies linking parabens, which mimic estrogen, to breast cancer, skin cancer and decreased sperm count, but has not ruled that it is harmful. According to the European Commission’s Scientific Committee on Consumer Products, longer chain parabens like propyl and butyl paraben and their branched counterparts, isopropyl and isobutylparabens, may disrupt the endocrine system and cause reproductive and developmental disorders. Look for ingredients with the suffix “-paraben” as well—paraben-free products will be labeled as such.   Ingredient: FORMALDEHYDE Typically Found In: These are primarily preservatives commonly found in cosmetics. It is also found in baby bath soap, nail polish, eyelash adhesive and hair dyes. Look for: DMDM hydantoin, diazolidinyl urea, imidazolidinyl urea, methenamine, quaternium-15, and sodium hydroxymethylglycinate. These ingredients slowly and continuously release small amounts of formaldehyde. Why You Should Avoid: Short-term health impacts include irritation to the eyes, nose and throat, and many studies show it causes allergic skin reactions and skin rashes. In fact, it was awarded 2105 Contact Allergen of the Year by American Contact Dermatitis Society. Long term, Formaldehyde has a long list of adverse health effects, including immune-system toxicity, respiratory irritation and cancer in humans. Formaldehyde is a recognized human carcinogen.   Ingredient: BHA AND BHT (BUTYLATED HYDROXYANISOLE AND BUTYLATED HYDROXYTOLUENE) Typically Found In: Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) and butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) are closely related chemicals – preservatives commonly used in cosmetics, personal care products (mainly shampoos, perfumes, deodorants, body lotions), and even food and food packaging. Why You Should Avoid: The National Toxicology Program classifies butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA) as “reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” It can cause skin depigmentation. In animal studies, BHA produces liver damage and causes stomach cancers such as papillomas and carcinomas and interferes with normal reproductive system development and thyroid hormone levels. The European Union considers it unsafe in fragrance. Opt for a BHA and phthalate-free perfume.   Ingredient: COAL-TAR DYES  Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are a group of chemicals that occur naturally in coal, crude oil and gasoline. Typically Found In: Found in: hair dyes, lipstick, cosmetic, shampoo Why You Should Avoid: Phenylenediamine, used in hair dyes, has been found to be carcinogenic in laboratory tests conducted by the U.S. National Cancer Institute and National Toxicology Program. Coal tar is recognized as a human carcinogen and the main concern are their potential as carcinogens. As well, colors may be contaminated with low levels of heavy metals and some contain aluminum (a neurotoxin). This is of particular concern when used in cosmetics that may be ingested, like lipstick.   * * *   Deeper Dive Resources   The Environmental Working Group https://www.ewg.org/   EWG’s Skin Deep Cosmetics Database https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/   Global Regulatory Lists of Banned or Restricted Cosmetic Ingredients and Positive Lists https://www.chemsafetypro.com/Topics/Cosmetics/Regulatory_Lists_of_Cosmetic_Ingredients_Banned_Cosmetic_Ingredients,_Restricted_Cosmetic_Ingredients_and_Positive_Lists.html   Prohibited & Restricted Ingredients in Cosmetics (FDA) https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetics-laws-regulations/prohibited-restricted-ingredients-cosmetics   Phthalates https://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/Phthalates_FactSheet.html   Sulfates https://www.healthline.com/health/beauty-skin-care/sulfates   Parabens https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosmetic-ingredients/parabens-cosmetics   Formaldehyde https://www.ewg.org/research/exposing-cosmetics-cover/formaldehyde-releasers   Formaldehyde: 2015 Contact Allergen of the Year https://journals.lww.com/dermatitis/Fulltext/2015/01000/Formaldehyde.2.aspx   BHA/BHT https://www.ewg.org/skindeep/ingredient/700741/BHT/   BHA/BHT (National Toxicology Program) https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/butylatedhydroxyanisole.pdf   Coal Tar Dyes http://www.safecosmetics.org/get-the-facts/chemicals-of-concern/coal-tar/   Coal Tar Dyes (National Cancer Institute) https://www.cancer.gov/about-cancer/causes-prevention/risk/substances/coal-tar   Coal Tar Dyes (National Toxicology Program) https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/ntp/roc/content/profiles/coaltars.pdf

In this podcast, Editorial Board member Elizabeth McInnes invites author Janardhan Kyathanahalli to discuss the article "Do GISTs Occur in Rats and Mice? Immunohistochemical Characterization of Gastrointestinal Tumors Diagnosed as Smooth Muscle Tumors in The National Toxicology Program" featured in the July 2019 issue of Toxicologic Pathology. Click here to read the article

Dr. Dori Germolec is a biologist studying how the chemicals in our environment affect the immune system, including toxic or carcinogenic effects of molds and dietary supplements. From bisphenols and flame retardants to arsenic in the drinking water and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, we are all exposed to a mixture of different compounds on a daily basis. Dr. Germolec’s research as part of the National Toxicology Program informs agencies like the EPA and FDA about the potential hazards of environmental toxins so that chemicals and substances can be properly regulated to keep people safe and healthy, both at home and in the workplace. Dori Germolec, Ph.D., leads the Systems Toxicology Group of the NIH's National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) National Toxicology Program (NTP). Learn more at: https://www.niehs.nih.gov/research/atniehs/labs/tob/systems/index.cfm

According to a report by the National Toxicology Program ,  exposure to cell phone radio frequency radiation can be harmful. Dr. Erik Peper, professor at the Institute for holistic health studies at San Francisco State University explains why it's not a good idea to put your phone in your pocket or your bra – or even keep it close to your ear.

Co-founders of SafeSleeve, Cary Subel and Alaey Kumar are both industrial engineers from Cal Poly. SafeSleeve is a manufacturer of radiation blocking laptop and phone cases and accessories. Their distribution includes major retailers in the U.S, on Amazon, walmart.com, jet.com along with SafeSleeve’s website and distributors in Europe, Australia, and Singapore. What started with a laptop and one cell phone (iPhone) case, has expanded into cases for nearly all mobile devices as the company boasts more than 100 products and is expanding to screen protectors and car mounts. SafeSleeve’s revenue more than doubled and sales are at about 3,000 units per month, up from 500 two years ago. SafeSleeve’s products have reached more than 40 countries, and they are looking to expand to the Middle East.  Here’s a glimpse of what you’ll learn: [1:12] Jeremy introduces his guests, Carey Subel & Alaey Kumar. [2:30] What are the scientific findings around cell phone radiation? [8:15] Cell phones actually have warnings to keep them off of your body. [10:15] Alaey talks about how the idea for the SafeSleeve came about. [13:30] How long did it take to get the product dialed in and crowdfunded? [18:00] Lessons learned from crowdfunding a product. [21:20] What made the guys expand their line of products? [27:00] How has the product evolved over the years? [30:30] The sales process and getting the product out there. [33:00] Apps the guys like to use from Shopify. [36:30] Cary and Alaey talk about their childhood. [40:10] What are the future plans for SafeSleeve? [42:30] Low moments in business. [45:15] A significant milestone worth celebrating. [49:45] Alaey shares a low moment and a high moment on his journey. [51:30] Unique challenges of running a business as co-founders and business partners. In this episode… Did you know that the very thing that most people wake up to in the morning could be killing them? It’s true! Cell phones, tablets, and other electronic devices emit harmful radiation that we don’t even think about. On this episode of Inspired Insider, you’ll hear from Cary Subel and Alaey Kumar as they explain how SafeSleeve is providing affordable solutions for this silent killer. In their conversation with Jeremy, the guys open up about how they got the business started, what the product development process was like, challenges they’ve faced, plans for the future, and much more! Don’t miss a minute of this powerful and engaging episode featuring Cary and Aley from SafeSleeve! If you found out that you were unknowingly exposing you and your loved ones to the constant risk of cancer, wouldn’t you do something about it? For too long the public has turned a blind eye to rumors and warnings about the dangerous use of electronic devices and the health hazards they can cause. Now, we have the latest news on this subject from the National Toxicology Program that determined the effects in rats and mice from exposure to radio-frequency (RF) radiation from cell phones. Researchers found increased rates of cancer in male rats exposed to cell phone radiation. Providing a viable solution, SafeSleeve developed an FCC accredited lab tested shielding technology that can block over 99% of RF and 92% of ELF radiation. You really never know where inspiration and creativity will lead you. One minute you might be daydreaming or just mindlessly thinking of something one of your parents said and the next you could be starting a business around that idea. Does that sound crazy? It’s not! That is exactly what happened for Cary and Alaey when they came up with the idea for SafeSleeve. The guys had a friend who’s dad was a neurologist and would constantly remind them that they shouldn’t keep their electronic devices close to their body. With that idea knocking around in their head, they went to see if there were any solutions on the marketplace to address this very serious concern. When they couldn’t find any good solutions, they decided to take matters into their own hands. What can you learn from Cary and Alaey’s story? Finding the right idea to build a business off of is one thing, turning that idea into a marketable product is a whole different process entirely. Cary and Alaey knew that they wanted to bring the public a solution to harmful radio-frequency radiation but they had no idea where to start. Setting out on the journey, the guys had to cast a wide net contacting supplier after supplier until they found the right one that they could trust. Once they connected with the right supplier, the guys were confident that their concept would resonate with the public. When you build an organization from the ground up, in many ways it's like raising a child. Once that child is old enough to be away from its parents, you’ve got to find a responsible individual who you can trust them with. The same is true when it comes to a startup! Bringing on that first team member can be as nerve wrecking as finding the right babysitter. Thankfully, Cary and Alaey struck gold when they made their first hire and brought someone on who could take over the operations side of the business without missing a beat. What role will be your company’s next hire? Resources Mentioned on this episode SafeSleeve Use discount code: Rise25 for 25% off of your order. SafeSleeve on Facebook SafeSleeve on Instagram Shopify Kickstarter SkuVault Intro Music by Kidd Russell

Join host, Greg Carlwood, of The Higherside Chats podcast, as he talks... with guest, Susan Clark. While we distract ourselves with Facebook or mindless television and damage our health with nutrient deficient foods the elite have been carefully crafting a full spectrum attack. Indeed, a war is raging and we find ourselves in a fight for our lives as an eco-genocide aims to depopulate the planet by depleting us of nourishment and bathing us in harmful radio-microwave frequency rays known to do damage down to microscopic levels. Fortunately, today's guest, Susan Clark, has dedicated years studying radio-frequency radiation bio-effects during her time spent as a research assistant for Harvard Medical School, and today, she joins The Higherside to help us understand these ongoing project against the people. 3:30 Kicking things off, Greg and Susan begin by discussing her work as a research assistant at Harvard's medical school, the vast array of published papers and medical studies Countway Library afforded her, and the endless paper trail that led her to researching radio-frequency radiation bio-effects. As Susan explains, there has been extensive research conducted studying radio-frequency radiation bio-effects, to the tune of 25,000 and dating as far back as the late 1920's, in an effort to weaponize this technology. Clark also describes how this technology disrupts our natural biological chemistry, known in Eastern philosophy as Ch'i or qi. 14:42 Clark discusses the belief held by ancient Eastern mystics that our natural energy levels or power, are slowly being depleted by the abundance of unnatural radiation signals. She also elaborates on how size of life radiation in it's cosmic form is easily absorbed by water in the atmosphere, rendering it utterly harmless and mostly nonexistent to us on Earth. Greg and Susan also tackle the looming nationwide installation of the 5G network and the inevitable bio-effects that will wreak havoc. 22:45 Greg and Susan discuss the subtle encroachment of radio frequency waves, and how this has led to a false sense of security regarding devices such as cell phones, WiFi routers, and cell towers. Clark explains the gradual psychological adjustments we make to these seemingly harmless symptoms, our reliance on aids such as caffeine to jump start ourselves, and our dismissal of cognitive impairment as "senior moments". Susan details the shift in mentality towards a more idiopathic perspective, causing us to look inward and instead of focus of the bombardment of exterior influences damaging our health and well-being. 31:00 Greg and Susan consider the results of the National Toxicology Program's $25 million study on the bio-effects of radio-frequency radiation exposure and the somewhat unsurprising links found to cancer. 40:00 Greg and Susan pivot to talking about the weaponization of these radio-frequencies. With public health science papers using terminology such as "harvesting", one has to wonder, what exactly is up their sleeve? Clark details the multitude of ways the elite proceed to rake up the body count, while going unnoticed, including capitalizing on natural catastrophes such as the most recent hurricane spree. A few valuable resources from the interview:   Susan Clark on "Sage of Quay": https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hSdOU_qcSBE Bill Gates' 2010 Ted Talk "Innovation to Zero" where he mentions population reduction: https://www.ted.com/talks/bill_gates/transcript National Toxicology Program study on the bio-effects of radio-frequency radiation exposure: https://ntp.niehs.nih.gov/results/areas/cellphones/ FiveThirtyEight's "We Still Don't Know How Many People Died Because of Katrina": https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/we-still-dont-know-how-many-people-died-because-of-katrina/ Want to hear more THC?   Become a plus member and gain access to the additional hour as well as the THC forums at: http://www.thehighersidechatsplus.

Initial studies from the U.S. National Toxicology Program indicate that black cohosh extract -- widely marketed to treat women's health issues -- is genotoxic.

Initial studies from the U.S. National Toxicology Program indicate that black cohosh extract -- widely marketed to treat women's health issues -- is genotoxic.

Arsenic is a problem in communities around the world, from Bangladesh to New Hampshire. It’s one of the environmental chemicals the National Toxicology Program explored at a recent workshop as possibly contributing to the worldwide rise in diabetes. In this podcast, Ana Navas-Acien talks about a new review by investigators at that workshop, who summarize the evidence for a link between arsenic exposure and diabetes. Visit the podcast webpage to download the full transcript of this podcast.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer, the National Toxicology Program, and the Environmental Protection Agency all declared asbestos a known human carcinogen decades ago. Yet U.S. imports of crude chrysotile asbestos fibers rose by 235% between 2009 and 2010, and use is also on the rise in many industrializing, developing countries. Richard Lemen tells host Ashley Ahearn what's driving this growth and how asbestos is currently used worldwide. Visit the podcast webpage to download a full transcript of this podcast.

In honor of its fiftieth anniversary the Society of Toxicology teamed up with the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, the National Toxicology Program, and Environmental Health Perspectives to produce a poster celebrating some of the foremost "benchmarks" of the field. In this podcast Peter Goering tells host Ashley Ahearn how he and other members of the evaluation group chose from centuries' worth of accomplishments to select the people and events that best illustrate the promise and achievements of toxicology. Visit the podcast webpage to download a full transcript of this podcast. 

The global population is undergoing sweeping changes that are shifting the balance toward an older and more urbanized population that experiences more chronic disease and a greater gap between rich and poor. In this podcast, Kenneth Olden tells what these changes mean in terms of public health challenges and how he believes we must prepare to meet these challenges. Olden was director of the NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program from 1991 to 2005. He served as NIEHS director emeritus and continued his research activities at the institute until 2008, when he left to help establish a new school of public health at the Hunter College campus of the City University of New York. Visit the podcast webpage to download a full transcript of this podcast. 

In January 2009 Linda Birnbaum took the reins as the new director of NIEHS and the National Toxicology Program. In this podcast, Birnbaum shares her thoughts on the challenges facing the NIEHS and how she sees the institute meeting those challenges. Prior to her appointment as NIEHS/NTP director, Birnbaum was director of the Experimental Toxicology Division of the National Health and Environmental Effects Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. Visit the podcast webpage to download a full transcript of this podcast. 

Bisphenol A, a common compound found in many plastics, has been listed as a toxic substance in Canada but is still deemed safe in the U.S.