Agrichemicals and antibiotics in combination increase the evolution of antibiotic resistance
Bacteria may develop antibiotic resistance up to 100,000 times faster when they’re exposed to certain herbicides in the environment, particularly widely used herbicides like glyphosate (Roundup) and dicamba (Kamba)
It’s believed that other chemicals in the environment may also increase resistance in microbes, much like herbicides; however, regulatory agencies don’t regulate or test them for such effects — even among the 3,000 top-volume chemicals produced annually
Reducing the use of antibiotics may not be enough to stop this looming public health disaster — unless the use of herbicides and other chemicals that affect antibiotic resistance is also curbed
Antibiotic resistance is often pegged as a problem caused by the overuse of antibiotics — and this is a driving factor — but research suggests it may actually be only one piece to the puzzle. Environmental factors may be accelerating the rise of antibiotic resistance as well, particularly widely used herbicides like glyphosate (Roundup) and dicamba (Kamba).
Research from University of Canterbury researchers revealed that agrichemicals and antibiotics in combination increase the evolution of antibiotic resistance. In fact, bacteria may develop antibiotic resistance up to 100,000 times faster when they’re exposed to certain herbicides in the environment.1
“The combination of chemicals to which bacteria are exposed in the modern environment should be addressed alongside antibiotic use if we are to preserve antibiotics in the long term,” study author Jack Heinemann of the University of Canterbury, said in a news release.2
‘Like Trying to Put Out a Fire of Antibiotic Resistance With Gasoline’
The study found cases when exposure to herbicides made the antibiotics more toxic while at the same time increasing the antibiotic resistance. Heinemann explained why this is an alarming finding:
“We are inclined to think that when a drug or other chemical makes antibiotics more potent, that should be a good thing. But it also makes the antibiotic more effective at promoting resistance when the antibiotic is at lower concentrations, as we more often find in the environment … Such combinations can be like trying to put out the raging fire of antibiotic resistance with gasoline.”
The results suggest that herbicides enhance the ability of antibiotics to become antibiotic resistant and that such resistance may be acquired at rates much faster than those predicted in laboratory conditions. Previously, research by Heinemann and colleagues found that commonly used herbicides promote antibiotic resistance by priming pathogens to more readily become resistant to antibiotics.3
This includes Roundup (the actual formulation of Roundup, not just its active ingredient glyphosate in isolation), which was shown to increase the antibiotic-resistant prowess of E. coli and salmonella, along with dicamba and 2,4-D. Rodale News reported:4
“The way Roundup causes this effect is likely by causing the bacteria to turn on a set of genes that are normally off, [study author] Heinemann says. ‘These genes are for ‘pumps’ or ‘porins,’ proteins that pump out toxic compounds or reduce the rate at which they get inside of the bacteria …’
Once these genes are turned on by the herbicide, then the bacteria can also resist antibiotics. If bacteria were to encounter only the antibiotic, they would instead have been killed. In a sense, the herbicide is ‘immunizing’ the bacteria to the antibiotic … This change occurs at levels commonly used on farm field crops, lawns, gardens and parks.”
So NZ seems to be able to just bypass the manufacturer’s instructions. And we the public are supposed to just ignore these guidelines too & trust that all’s good? Where is the scientific data that says it’s now safe? The years long scientific testing of 1080 in water? I haven’t seen any. And what other regulations are they bypassing? I for one do not drink town supply water any more. I desisted long ago to avoid ingesting chlorine, the carcinogen they add to stop us getting sick from their sewage and industrial waste discharges put into the waterways. Those additions are called ‘sustainable development’ folks. They help keep corporate profits up & kick the proverbial pollution can down the road.
Below are the manufacturer’s instructions for 1080:
By Carol Sawyer
NO RESTRICTIONS ON 1080 BAITS BEING DROPPED DIRECTLY INTO RIVERS NOW
No buffer zones are required. A river can be any width… like the mighty Clutha in Otago, as it heads out of Lake Wanaka on its 338 km journey to the sea, or the beautiful, clear Burke River in South Westland, or the magnificent brown trout fishery, the Mataura River, (the latter two seen below) in Northern Southland.
Re the aerial 1080 drop on the Eyre Mountains, Northern Southland – On 25 October, 2018, I reported local farmer, Cara Metherell, as saying :
“I asked the Operations Manager ( David Priest of Vector Control Services) about the 3 metre waterway rule. He said some regional councils had different rules. Some were 3 metres, some were 2 metres, and some had none at all.
Apparently the rules were changed so that it would be the same for every region. They changed it to none ( no restrictions ).
There are no rules about the size of the river they can drop it into now apparently.”
See Ban 1080’s press release on the removal of restrictions:
For further articles on 1080 use the ‘categories’ drop down box at the left of the news page. Check out the 1080 pages at the main menu, particularly the sub tab, ‘suspected 1080 poisoning cases’. Educate yourself on the risks & protect your children.
Finally, remember what the retired MD Charlie Baycroft said recently …‘if you die from 1080 poisoning, nobody will know because the Ministry of Health is bullying NZ Doctors into not testing for 1080′.
Barrie Trower is a former Royal Navy microwave weapons expert and former cold-war captured spy debriefer for the UK Intelligence Services. Mr Trower is a conscionable whistle-blower who lectures around the world on the hidden dangers from microwave weapons and every-day microwave technologies such as mobile-phones and WiFi. He covers the escalating child cancers we don’t hear about. A must watch.
Research reveals that a vaccinated individual not only can become infected with measles, but can also spread it to others who are also vaccinated against it –doubly disproving that the administration of multiple doses of MMR vaccine is “97% effective,” as widely claimed.
One of the fundamental errors in thinking about measles vaccine effectiveness is that receipt of measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine equates to bona fide immunity against measles virus. Indeed, it is commonly claimed by health organizations like the CDC that receiving two doses of the MMR vaccine is “97 percent effective in preventing measles,” despite a voluminous body of contradictory evidence from epidemiology and clinical experience.
This erroneous thinking has led the public, media and government alike to attribute the origin of measles outbreaks, such as the one reported at Disney in 2015 (and which lead to the passing of SB277 that year, stripping vaccine exemptions for all but medical reasons in California), to the non-vaccinated, even though 18% of the measles cases occurred in those who had been vaccinated against it — hardly the vaccine’s two-dose claimed “97% effectiveness.” The vaccine’s obvious fallibility is also indicated by the fact that that the CDC now requires two doses.
Our mission is to ensure the environment and communities are safe from harmful electro-magnetic radiation.
To realise our mission, we seek to:
1. Educate to empower the people in all areas of EMR – health, legal and environmental.
2. Educate the population on the possible harm from EMR, to facilitate informed consent.
3.Use legal means to ensure decision makers are personally liable for harm, fear and damage caused to people and the environment. Establish legal recourse for future situations arising from EMR that are currently unknown.
4. Support the seeking of financial compensation for health and economic consequences of EMR and EMR infrastructure.
5.Ensure that a correctly structured and continuously improving Australian Standard is in place that considers all independent peer reviewed scientific research relevant to EMR research, and that governments and industry adopt world’s best practice which applies the precautionary principle.
6.Ensure the country maintains radiation free zones where the community requires it to be so, or to do otherwise might cause human and environmental harm.
7.A moratorium on 5G until the science is better understood and any risk of harm to environment and humans, be it possible/suspected or proven, be eliminated before 5G is established/rolled out.
8.Research alternate technologies.
The Story So Far
In a nut shell, a Telco wants to place a tower in Wilson’s creek, Byron Shire.
What we uncovered (after we reached out to lawyers, doctors and scientists from around the world) is that at best Electromagnetic Radiation (EMR) is a class 2B potential carcinogen (as listed by the World Health Organisation), and at worst a definite carcinogen and toxic to all life.
In fact EMR is a classified pollutant (electro-smog).
According to the Australian Bureau of Statistics; the #1 illness that kills children is brain cancer and the #1 cancer killer of adults under 40 is brain cancer (AIHW).
Medical professionals have identified health impacts from EMR exposure as the next global pandemic.
Many Australians suffer from EMR hypersensitivity symptoms (a recognised illness with identifiable biomarkers).
Government and industry are forcing telco towers upon communities that do not want them.
Liability caused from harm by EMR to environment, health and safety (EHS) is an uninsurable risk and understood to be a contributory factor in Telcos listing harm from EMR to EHS as a material risk (the highest possible risk) in their annual reports to shareholders…and yet consumers are not made overtly aware by industry,
Regulators take no action and neither does Government. In fact they plan to blanket the planet in 5G microwave radiation (the Internet of Things).
According to the lawyers it is possible that community is being assaulted with a recognised pollutant and possible carcinogen on a 24 x 7 basis against their consent for convenience and profit.
There may be trade practices, criminal, terrorism and even constitutional (e.g. the Crown not protecting its subjects) implications.
Legal action to force change is on the horizon.
Once industry are required to overtly inform the general public of the possible harm and provide methods for the public to minimise that harm, people will have a choice – informed consent.
They will also seek refuge in many cases, so we also need to protect our black (light) spots.
We’ve seen change with Asbestos (banned) and the tobacco industry (informed consent)…change is possible when community unites.
Read further at the ‘Take Action’ page at the main menu
Over all, this item featuring a Year 10 Science book & its fairly ho hum description of the toxicity of 1080, appears to be normalizing the use of poisons.
Dr Meriel Watts says about 1080 poison:
“1080 is classed by the World Health Organisation as an Extremely Hazardous pesticide (Class 1a WHO). You may not be aware that as such it falls within the category of Highly Hazardous Pesticides for which the Food and Agriculture Organisation of the United Nations (FAO) is seeking a global phase out.
There is no antidote for 1080. Poisoned by it, you have no hope of being saved. However, our esteemed authorities in higher places have seen fit to describe it to our children as not very dangerous to humans. Wherever you stand on the use of 1080, be it for or against, I would still call such a description of an acutely toxic poison for your children’s information, highly irresponsible.
THIS IS WHAT OUR YEAR 10 NEW ZEALAND SCHOOL PUPILS ARE BEING TAUGHT!
This is from Science Plus, Book 2, Year 10. Why is the government allowed to teach our children lies?
Read the data on 1080 straight from the manufacturer’s info:
HAZARD IDENTIFIERS: Priority Identifiers – Danger. Deadly Poison. Keep out of reach of
children. Ecotoxic. Secondary Identifiers – Acutely toxic. May be fatal if swallowed,
inhaled or absorbed through the skin. Repeated oral exposure may
cause reproductive or developmental damage. When handling open
containers or baits, wear protective equipment as indicated below.
Toxic to terrestrial vertebrates. Take measures to reduce the risk of nontarget
animals being exposed to the toxin either through eating baits or
by scavenging the carcasses of poisoned animals. Harmful to aquatic
organisms. Manage bait application rates carefully and comply with any
restrictions imposed on placing baits over or near waterways. Avoid
pollution of any water supply with pellets or used container.
0.04% – 0.1% 6.1C (Packaging Group III)
0.15% – 0.2% 6.1B (Packaging Group II) GENERAL REQUIREMENTS:
Deadly Poison. Subject to tracking requirements for individual packs.
Available for purchase and use only by holders of Controlled
Substances Licenses. This substance must be under the control of an
Approved Handler for Class 6 and Class 9 Hazardous substances at all
times unless being transported by a transport operator with a Dangerous
Goods License endorsement. SOURCE: Orillion Safety Data Sheet
1080 is NOT a natural substance.. it is a synthetic poison, a World Health Organisation Class 1A ecotoxin, banned in most countries. It is extremely dangerous to humans. One standard teaspoon of pure 1080 poison can kill 100 grown men. One 1080 bait (0.15% pure poison) can kill a child.
Over all, the use of poisons appears to be becoming very normalized. Videos like this below certainly illustrate that.
I read an article yesterday by Geoff Booth, a Kiwi and a B.Sc. who worked for a long time in pest eradication using poisons including 1080 & with DoC, so is very knowledgeable in the use of 1080. He said the US manufacturers are dismayed at the way we in NZ use 1080, in a totally opposite way to the labelled recommendations, ie it is ‘chucked around in a veritable lollie scramble in the bush from helicopters’.
Those of us who have lived more than 50 years on the planet know that there was little mention of poison in our childhoods. If you personally think it’s fine for our kids, you need to read Dr Meriel Watts’ book, Poisoning Our Future: Children and Pesticides.
“Poisoning Our Future: Children and Pesticides” The book details the scientific evidence for the insidious effects of pesticides on children and calls on government institutions to adopt a more precautionary approach to better protect human health and the environment.
Toxic chemicals such as pesticides pollute our surroundings – from the food we eat, the water we drink, and the air we breathe in our homes, farms, communities, at schools and work and even our own bodies. Children are exposed to these pesticides and are very much vulnerable to the negative health effects of these harmful chemicals. Yet, governments and industry overlook these impacts on children’s health despite the availability of safer alternatives to pesticides.
According to Pesticide Action Network Aoteoroa New Zealand author, Dr Meriel Watts, “Children are not little adults. The activities they do make them more prone to accumulate pesticides in their bodies; and their developing bodies make them more prone to the negative effects of toxic chemicals such as pesticides. Yet government regulatory processes and tests do not look into these effects,” according to Dr Meriel Watts, author of the book. Tests used to approve use of pesticides do not look into endocrine disruption which can impact the physical, intellectual and behavioural development of the foetus and young child. The effects can include ADHD and autism and even conditions like obesity and breast cancer that can show up later in life in what is now referred to as the “foetal origins of adult disease”. Some childhood cancers like leukaemia have been linked to the exposure of parents to pesticides. Highly hazardous pesticides also damage the developing immune, nervous and reproductive systems.
If you’ve been reading our articles for a while you’d be aware of photographs featuring children with their parents finding baits all over walking tracks. Here is one from the South Island recently posted by Carol Sawyer. You can read the full article here.
For further articles on 1080 use the ‘categories’ drop down box at the left of the news page. Check out the 1080 pages at the main menu, particularly the sub tab, ‘suspected 1080 poisoning cases’. Educate yourself on the risks & protect your children. Read them the data safety sheets in a child friendly manner. Discuss the risks & caution them never to touch the 1080 baits.
Finally, remember what the retired MD Charlie Baycroft said recently … ‘if you die from 1080 poisoning, nobody will know because the Ministry of Health is bullying NZ Doctors into not testing for 1080′.
A week after writing this, a Facebook post describes a child in the family announcing “they had someone from DOC come into school and give a big talk about conservation and the need for 1080”. Better to get proactive then parents & have a chat with your child’s school about your preferences around what they learn on the poison topic.
To say that the HPV vaccine is controversial would be a serious understatement. A number of experts have spoken out against the vaccine since its release, and studies have revealed serious problems. Children and teenagers have died or been permanently disabled following HPV vaccination, yet it remains on the market.
A number of experts have spoken out against the HPV vaccine since its release. An eight-month investigation revealed shocking flaws in Merck’s clinical trial design, which effectively prevented assessment of safety
Many of the side effects experienced during the vaccine trial were simply recorded as “medical history,” and were not treated as adverse events; serious adverse events arising outside of a two-week period post-vaccination were marked down as “medical history”
More than 80 million girls, young women and boys have received the HPV vaccine, and many have paid an extraordinarily high price, coming down with nervous system disorders, chronic fatigue and autoimmune diseases
According to Merck’s own research, if you have been exposed to HPV strains 16 or 18 prior and then get vaccinated, you may increase your risk of precancerous lesions by 44.6 percent
HPV infection is spread through sexual contact and research has demonstrated that using condoms can reduce risk of HPV infection by 70 percent, which is far more effective than the HPV vaccine
“It is astounding that no−one has done any research on the effects of sub−lethal doses of 1080 episodic exposures on developing human and non−human brains, given the fact, that 1080 is a known brain or central nervous system toxin!” Dr Peter Scanlon
The article from mainstream in 2009 mentioned in the headline, rolls out the usual statements of ‘the benefits outweigh the risks’ or ‘there’s little evidence 1080 could harm pregnant women’, without producing a shred of data to prove these claims to the public. That could be because there really aren’t any according to the late Dr Peter Scanlon who asked the pertinent questions on 1080 research, or rather the lack thereof, quote:
“Where are the cancer causing or carcinogenicity studies? … there aren’t any;
Where are the reproductive studies, particularly focusing on female eggs? … there aren’t any;
Where are the developmental studies, early exposure to brain, immune system? … there aren’t any;
Where are the long term chronic exposure studies looking at mitochondrial DNA content and mutation rates? there aren’t any.
There’s a lot of doubts about this substance, it’s dangerous.”
Hear Dr Scanlon speak on the need for regulatory bodies to look at those age groups that are most vulnerable to chemical environmental exposure which can affect them in those growing periods. The periods he says when there are critical windows of much harm being done in the womb, foetuses, embryos, newborns and how exposure here in this early time of life, can lead to great harm & susceptibility to disease years or decades later. Watch the GrafBoys’ video below. Dr Scanlon speaks in the first half of the video.
So the midwives’ precautionary warnings to their patients were well founded.
Further read Dr Scanlon’s letter of submission cautioning about the potential risks from 1080 to the unborn (my emphases added) and also the risks to food & water:
Dr Peter Scanlon,
2 Bremworth Ave,
Dear Select Committee members,
I would suggest that you request scientifically referenced answers to some important
questions in relation to the human safety of aerial 1080 (or sodium
monofluoracetate/SMFA) drops in New Zealand or invoke the precautionary principle
until such information is provided. With respect to potential human health risks the
ERMA process was inadequate and often based on outdated and simplistic 19th and mid−
20th century level science involving animal studies that will not predict human risk,
particularly in the most vulnerable populations. Any 19th or earlier century scientist
could tell you what dose of 1080 would likely kill or be acutely toxic to human or non−
human creatures. However no one can tell me or you for that matter, what sub−lethal dose will not have long−term negative health effects on the developing brain, immune, dental, endocrine and reproductive systems in embryos, newborns and young children using late 20th and early 21st century methods to access harm, especially changes to gene expression that may lead to disease later in life.
Early developmental exposures may lead to life−long problems and some may be analogous to the “leaky home” phenomena, where problems only manifest with time, hence long−term developmental studies are needed to exclude this possibility. I alerted ERMA of the 2007 International Conference on Fetal Programming and Developmental Toxicity which produced a very important statement (The Faroes Statement) for regulatory bodies to incorporate specific testing for early life environmental chemical exposures for risk assessment which was ignored. Could you please provide an impartial answer to a question posed by Independent MP Gordon Copeland in 2008 ” Does 1080 pose a risk to the health of unborn children?”
A concerned Maori woman contacted me and presented to the Waitangi Tribunal evidence for the Whanganui Inquiry last year her concerns that 1080 may have been implicated in causing a cluster of miscarriages, stillbirths and congenital malformations to the children of pregnant Maori women following aerial drops and raised the question of bowel cancer in some adult Maori being possibly linked to environmental 1080 exposures through contaminated food and water sources.
The current scientific gaps which the ERMA 2007 reassessment failed to address and assumptions based on outdated or poorly studied science for human risk considerations cannot exclude the possibility of 1080 having such adverse health effects in Whanganui or other NZ rural communities. The current medical system cannot easily investigate such concerns. In following an ERMA directive, recent NZ studies have found maximal levels of 1080 in puha & watercress to contain, respectively 15 and 63 parts per billion, and on the basis of these figures it has been calculated that a 70kg person would have to eat 9.3 tonnes of affected puha & 22 tonnes of affected watercress to have a 50% chance of dying from 1080 poisoning. Sadly that gives absolutely no safety reassurances for the many pregnant women or those with chronic medical conditions such as kidney, heart or liver disease, who enjoy such kai, or the common practice of Maori parents who mix mashed puha or watercress with pumpkin or kumara for the feeding of their infants. Non−toxic, low dose 1080 will not pose a risk for healthy adults but the current environmental food & water risks are in the ballpark levels that could especially harm our youngest & most vulnerable children. What 1080 amount will not affect their growing bodies, especially their developing brains? What level may cause a miscarriage?
It is astounding that no−one has done any research on the effects of sub−lethal doses of
1080 episodic exposures on developing human and non−human brains, given the fact, that 1080 is a known brain or central nervous system toxin! And the brain function is
intimately connected with immune and endocrine function. One Pirongia mother has
raised this issue of developmental delay and other health issues in her children from
possible low level water contamination during pregnancy in a well written ERMA
submission. The studies for which the Ministry of Health based their provisional maximal acceptable levels of 1080 for drinking water ( 3.5 parts per billion) did not include neurotoxicity data, nor does Natalia Forunda’s University of Otago’s 2007 PhD
recommended level of 0.6 ( zero point six) parts per billion. I believe if developmental
data, including fetal & young infant brain data were included, given the extreme
vulnerability of this age group, that a much lower Maximal Acceptable Value for
drinking water would be mandated. The limits of reported testing for 1080 is 0.1 ( zero
point one) part per billion, so if one looked at the most vulnerable human groups, unborn and young children, levels under this, which the current test would record as zero, could still pose a human health risk. No aerial drops should occur near drinking water until this risk has been excluded and long−term neuro−developmental (i.e. behavior & brain function), immune, metabolic and reproductive outcomes for early life exposures have been scientifically accessed.
The finding of naturally occurring levels of SMFA being present in drinking tea at higher
levels than the provisional maximal acceptable values for potable water, hence implying
safety, is irrelevant for early unborn exposures. Some recent studies have linked tea−
consumption during pregnancy to increased risks of brain tumours, leukaemia, dental
fluorosis in the child as well as an increased risk of pre−eclampsia in the mother.
Laboratory eel studies have shown 1080 levels of 17.4 parts per billion for those eels that
consumed contaminated possum muscle and 30.6 parts per billion that ate contaminated
possum gut. 1080 is slowly metabolized in eels. Are eels contaminating the food chain?
Will NIWA provide 1080 contaminant monitoring for local consumers of 1080 levels in
eels after aerial drops and also measure other possible contaminants such as heavy
metals, pesticide residues and toxins in them, that may have negative additive human
The ERMA scientific advisors decided that no studies were needed to be done to see if
1080 causes cancer on the basis that 1080 did not cause DNA mutations usi3ng
traditional types of screening tests which are now being questioned in the cancer
literature for their usefulness in predicting cancer risk given the rapid advances in the past few years in studying non−mutagenic causes of cancer. For instance, one of the energy−producing enzymes that 1080 inactivates, aconitase, has recently be found to have a role in regulating and protecting mitochondrial DNA from mutating. 1080 affects the sausage shaped cellular structures called mitochondria. Human cells contain 2 sources of DNA, namely nuclear and mitochondrial DNA. The possible effect of 1080 causing mitochondrial DNA mutations has simply not been accessed. Another enzyme that 1080 interferes with also has been linked with a certain type of cancer. Also, sub−lethal effects of 1080 impairing energy production needs to researched as defects in mitochondrial functioning has been recently found to play an important role in the initiation and/or progression of various types of cancer, including colorectal cancer Having recently met the daughter of one of the early 1080 aerial operation users and discovered her father died ” too early” with Bowel Cancer− the lack of any carcinogenicity studies in light of recent developments is simply inexcusable. Furthermore, damage to mitochondrial DNA has recently been shown to be involved in causing common diseases besides cancer such as heart disease, obesity & degenerative brain disorders, including dementia. Long−term studies on those working with this chemical or any individual with chronic medical conditions such as kidney impairment, diabetes, liver disease or heart disease that consumes possible 1080 contaminated foods should be accessed for progressive mitochondrial toxicity and for effects on mitochondrial DNA. The 1080 chronic intoxication study of an occupationally exposed rabbiter −exposed over 10 years, was published in the NZ Medical Journal in 1977, and was ignored by ERMA mainly because the Christchurch doctors who trustingly sent a urine specimen to a certain Forest Research Institute scientist to measure the 1080 contained in it, who gave them a 1080 measurement in writing, later denied that he had in fact measured 1080. The more recent Sept 2009 NZ Medical Journal research on 1080 assessment of occupational exposures by Beasley and colleagues failed to even acknowledge or learn from this former paper yet they did admit how little they know about 1080 interactions with the human body. It was the similar structural toxicity appearances in the liver and kidney cells from the rabbiter’s specimen’s to morphological or structural states in 1080 experimental animals that lead Parkin and colleagues, to consider 1080 as the most likely cause of toxicity. They used electron microscopy performed on kidney biopsies taken from the rabbiter which showed changes that most likely represented degenerating mitochondria, hence the need to look for evidence of mitochondrial pathology such as tissue biopsies, or look for changes in mitochondrial DNA levels using techniques as have been used for monitoring HIV drug−induced mitochondrial toxicity, or check for mitochondrial DNA mutations and not just focus on 1080 level measurements. The reason New Zealand Medical Officers of Health report no concerns with 1080 is that they have failed to do the appropriate diagnostic investigations just mentioned, and the following adage applies to them−”If you don’t know what to look for, then you probably won’t find it”. 30 yrs later we still have no decent chronic toxicity human data or really understand the human kinetics of this chemical in healthy adults, let alone those with any concurrent chronic illnesses and most significantly Beasley and colleagues failed to do any measures of mitochondrial toxicity from this mitochondrial interfering toxin, hence we are none the wiser about its safety.
Given the “scientific ignorance” of those who proclaim human safety when doing aerial
drops near water supplies in the West Coast, Whanganui, Coromandel, Levin, Hutt
Valley and other regions of New Zealand and the real lack of safety data, especially for
NZ’s most vulnerable human populations, our unborn, young and old and those with
chronic illnesses, one really must question whether it is ethical to use such a poorly
studied chemical from a human health risk perspective. The native flora & fauna are
replaceable. TB ridden cows are replaceable but the future health of our children & our
most vulnerable is not.
” I nga wa o mua” − The past informs the present. ” Foresight should be sought as hindsight is dearly bought”
Dr Peter Scanlon (Accident & Medical Practitioner)
M.B.ChB.. B.H B., P.G.DipCEM.. B.Sc.. F. AMPA
Download a PDF of this information on a two page EHT Factsheet on 5G and Health.The factsheet is hyperlinked (blue text) to research and sources. It is a great resource for policymakers.
Nationwide, communities are being told by wireless companies that it is necessary to build “small cell” wireless facilities in neighborhoods ons street lights and utility poles in order to offer 5G, a new technology that will connect the Internet of Things (IoT). At the local, state, and federal level, new legislation and new zoning aim to streamline the installation of these 5G “small cell” antennas in public rights-of-way.
1. 5G “small cell antennas are to be placed in neighborhoods everywhere.
Sides of buildings
2. The radiation from small cells is not small.
Wireless antennas emit microwaves — non-ionizing radiofrequency radiation — and essentially function as cell towers. Each installation can have over a thousand antennas that are transmitting simultaneously. Examples of how small cells are not small include:
They increase electromagnetic radiation near homes.
They have refrigerator-sized (and larger) equipment cabinets.
Property values drop after a cell tower is built near homes.
Taller and wider poles are needed for the antennas.
Fixtures weigh hundreds of pounds.
NO. Small cell installations are not the size of pizza boxes.
Each installation has antennas on the top and electronics cabinets at the bottom. The electronics are housed in metal boxes – called “street furniture” by industry to make it sound warm and cozy. These cabinets can be larger than a refrigerator, so large people could fit into them. In addition, there will be various radio units, a smart meter, and potentially unseemly wires.
Note: remember people, this has been in court (big thanks to Sue Grey, lawyer) and DoC’s lawyers asked the judge for their scientist to NOT be cross examined. How dodgy is that? And the drop isgoing ahead. No surprizes there. See the Court approval here.
The news here below is from Carol Sawyer.
IMMEDIATE PRESS RELEASE*
THE INCREDIBLE LETTER BELOW HAS BEEN PREPARED BY DOCTORS WHO ARE CONCERNED ABOUT 1080 POISON BEING DEPOSITED IN DRINKING WATER
Open letter to the Government, Friday, 21st September 2018.
As doctors, we are extremely concerned about the health risk of depositing poisoned bait over 22,500 hectares of the Hunua water catchment area. Specifically, we are concerned about Sodium Fluoroacetate (SMFA / 1080), a known deadly poison which is known to cause sub-lethal effects on reproduction and is classified as a teratogen, having potential to contaminate the Auckland water supply.
There is no effective antidote for 1080 poisoning in humans.
We are extremely concerned that public officials are not adopting a far more precautionary approach to the safety of the Auckland water catchment, especially when the effects of 1080, a highly soluble poison, is not quantifiably able to be tested on how it affects the health of humans.
Studies show that 1080 affects the reproductive organs, the cardiac system, and respiratory system in mammals. There is no safe minimal level known and water testing and sampling after aerial 1080 application cannot prudently protect the public from risk of exposure from this poison.
As doctors, we are responsible for the health of individuals and communities. Therefore, we ask the government to immediately stop the usage of sodium fluoroacetate which has potential to contaminate the New Zealand water supply.
Dr Ulrich Doering MBChB, Dipl O+G, FRNZCGP
Dr Roger Leitch MBChB, FRNZCGP
Dr Mogens Poppe FRNZCGP FRACGP
Dr Janine Budden MBChB, FRNZCGP
Dr Caroline Wheeler MBChB
Dr Ron Goedeke
Dr Tessa Jones MBChB, Dipl Obs, FRNZCGP, FACNEM, FAARM
Dr. Charles M. Baycroft BSc; MD. FRNZCGP, Dip MSM, QBE.
Dr Donald Palmer MBChB, Dipl O+G, FRNZCGP
Dr Jocelyn Lydford MD
Dr Kamal Karl MBBS, FRNZCGP, FACNEM, FNZCAM, FACCS
Dr Avani Karl
Dr Rick Coleman MB ChB, Dip Obst, FRNZCGP
Dr Helen Proctor
Dr Richard Drexel
Dr Tim Ewer, MB ChB, MMedSci, MRCP, FRACP, FRNZCGP, Dip Occ Med