Harvard Study indicates the many physiological benefits of meditation. An eight week study conducted by Harvard researchers at Massachusetts General Hospital (MGH) determined that meditation literally rebuilds the brains grey matter in just eight weeks. It’s the very first study to document that meditation produces changes over time in the brain’s grey matter. (1)
Archive for July, 2015
Ruthless power and deleterious politics: from DDT to Roundup
by Evaggelos Vallianatos, Ph.D. former EPA analyst and author of hundreds of articles and several books, including ‘Poison Spring: The Secret History of Pollution and the EPA
Just as the chemical industry and its shills once proclaimed the safety of DDT, they are doing the same today with the herbicide glyphosate which has penetrated throughout the food chain, writes Evaggelos Vallianatos. And once again it is a toxic lie that threatens species, ecosystems and people. It’s time to demand a new kind of agriculture, and a future free of all pesticides.
PROTECT YOUR CHILDREN FROM EXPOSURE from to developmental neurotoxicants. Published Research on Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity including fluoride as one of six additional developmental neurotoxicants — manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated biphenyl ethers.
Neurobehavioural effects of developmental toxicity by Dr Philippe Grandjean, MD , Philip J Landrigan, MD
Neurodevelopmental disabilities, including autism, attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, dyslexia, and other cognitive impairments, affect millions of children worldwide, and some diagnoses seem to be increasing in frequency. Industrial chemicals that injure the developing brain are among the known causes for this rise in prevalence. In 2006, we did a systematic review and identified five industrial chemicals as developmental neurotoxicants: lead, methylmercury, polychlorinated biphenyls, arsenic, and toluene.
Since 2006, epidemiological studies have documented six additional developmental neurotoxicants—manganese, fluoride, chlorpyrifos, dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane, tetrachloroethylene, and the polybrominated diphenyl ethers. We postulate that even more neurotoxicants remain undiscovered. To control the pandemic of developmental neurotoxicity, we propose a global prevention strategy. Untested chemicals should not be presumed to be safe to brain development, and chemicals in existing use and all new chemicals must therefore be tested for developmental neurotoxicity. To coordinate these efforts and to accelerate translation of science into prevention, we propose the urgent formation of a new international clearinghouse. (more…)
The need for a global health ethic by Tony L Goldberg, Jonathan A Patz
Fortunately, the idea of health as an interconnected entity is taking root. The “one health” and “planetary health” concepts capture this trend by emphasising the links between human health, animal health, and the environment, in accord with the report of The Lancet Commission on Planetary Health. (more…)
Planetary health: a new science for exceptional action by Planetary health: a new science for exceptional action by Richard Horton, Selina Lo
What is planetary health? In the final report of The Lancet Commission on Planetary Health, it is defined it this way: “the achievement of the highest attainable standard of health, wellbeing, and equity worldwide through judicious attention to the human systems—political, economic, and social—that shape the future of humanity and the Earth’s natural systems that define the safe environmental limits within which humanity can flourish. Put simply, planetary health is the health of human civilisation and the state of the natural systems on which it depends”. (more…)
Governance for planetary health and sustainable development by Helen Clarke, administrator of the United Nations Development Program
The landmark report of the Lancet Commission on Planetary Health is a clear and compelling articulation of the inextricable link between human health and environmental change. The report explores an array of complex, interlinked elements of concern, from environmental tipping points to the impacts of invasive species and the importance of protected areas. The United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) recognises planetary health as critical to achieving sustainable development across the economic, social, and environmental spheres—this ethos underpins our Strategic Plan for 2014–17.2 (more…)
The Commission has previously ignored or dismissed many other findings from the independent scientific literature showing that Roundup and glyphosate cause endocrine disruption, damage to DNA, reproductive and developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity, and cancer, as well as birth defects. Many of these effects are found at very low doses, comparable to levels of pesticide residues found in food and the environment. This issue is of particular concern now that Monsanto and other producers of genetically modified seed are trying to get their glyphosate- tolerant crops approved for cultivation in Europe. If the EU Commission gives its approval, this will lead to a massive increase in the amount of glyphosate sprayed in the fields of EU member states, as has already happened in North and South America. Consequently, people’s exposure to glyphosate will increase. All these concerns could be addressed by an objective review of Roundup and glyphosate in line with the more stringent new EU pesticide regulation due to come into force in June 2011. Just such a review was due to take place in 2012. However, shortly after the Commission was notified of the latest research showing that glyphosate and Roundup cause birth defects, it quietly passed a directive delaying the review of glyphosate and 38 other dangerous pesticides until 2015. This delay is being challenged in a lawsuit brought against the Commission by Pesticides Action Network Europe and Greenpeace. Delaying the review of glyphosate until 2015 is serious enough. But in reality, the Commission’s slowness in preparing the new data requirements for the incoming regulation mean that glyphosate may well not be re-assessed in the light of up-to- date science until 2030. The beneficiary will be the pesticide industry; the victim will be public health.