By Pesticide Action Network

A new research study from the European Commission’s Joint Research Centre and two Dutch laboratories shows that 45% of Europe’s top soil contains glyphosate residues, demonstrating the over-reliance of the EU agricultural model on this harmful herbicide chemical. In contrast to what its manufactures purport, glyphosate persists in soils affecting not only soil fertility and crop quality, but also human and environmental health.

The -soon available online- research study by the Dutch University of Wageningen and Rikilt laboratories, jointly with the JRC, reveals that among 317 EU soil samples of arable land, 42% contained AMPA, the most toxic metabolite of glyphosate, while glyphosate was found in 21% of the soils; 18% of the samples had both. The study was conducted in six crop systems along 11 EU member states comprising soils under different geographical and climatic conditions.

A growing body of evidence shows that soil health is one of the main drivers of growing healthy crops that will resist to pest attacks. Glyphosate destroys soil health and leads to more pesticide uses.

Learn more: http://www.pan-europe.info/press-releases/2017/10/press-release-new-study-glyphosate-persists-and-european-top-soils-are

By Mark Blaxill

The first-ever, peer-review study has been published comparing total-health in vaccinated and unvaccinated children. Dr. Anthony Mawson led a research team that investigated the relationship between vaccination exposures and acute or chronic illnesses in home-schooled children.

The vaccinated children had a much higher rate of autism and ADHD, at a rate of 470% higher than those who received no shots.

Vaccinated children were also more vulnerable to allergies and eczema.

Unvaccinated children contract mild childhood diseases more frequently, but their vaccinated counterparts suffer pneumonia and ear infections more frequently.

The finding that vaccination introduces a significant risk for autism is devastating to the vaccine industry and, therefore, will be vigorously attacked.

Learn more here: http://www.ageofautism.com/2017/05/pilot-comparative-study-on-the-health-of-vaccinated-and-unvaccinated-6-12-year-old-us-children.html

Those Who Give Vaccines Should Know The Ingredients in Vaccines

By Marco Cáceres for The Vaccine Reaction

The chances are that if you ask most chefs about the ingredients they put into their favorite recipes, they will be able to list for you the name of every single ingredient and the corresponding amounts. That is what you would expect.

By the same token, you would expect most doctors, nurses, pharmacists and other medical workers who administer vaccines would be able to list for you every ingredient in vaccines, along with the corresponding amounts. That is what you should expect.

However, that is not necessarily the case.

Learn more a at http://www.thevaccinereaction.org/2017/10/those-who-give-vaccines-should-know-the-ingredients-in-vaccines/

By Carole Novielli

Experts interviewed in the controversial film, “Hush: the Documentary,” which investigates the effects of abortion on women, claim that women aren’t being told the truth about the link between abortion and breast cancer, despite studies that show the claim to be true.

Pro-choice film director Punam Kumar Gill went out of her way to speak with experts on both sides of the debate. “Of all the contested health care risks around abortion, the abortion breast cancer link was especially troubling to me,” she states. According to Gill, at the time the film was produced, there were only five states that required women to be told that there is an increased risk of breast cancer from abortion.

In her team’s attempt to hear all sides, Gill spoke with former abortionist David Grimes, described by her as a “renowned expert” on abortion in the film. Grimes denied a higher risk of breast cancer for women who have had abortions, comparing claims to the contrary to “an old dog that they keep on flogging.” By “they” he means pro-life experts who have published their own studies.

Grimes then claimed that (in his words) the “small group” that “holds these views” tend to “not be physicians” and not “understand what a woman goes through.” He then disdainfully claimed that the “common theme” among these experts is “religiosity.”

But Grimes apparently didn’t do his homework before making those remarks; as the film also showed, there are several highly credentialed experts who believe that an abortion-breast cancer link is evident.

One of those experts is Dr. Joel Brind, a professor of human biology and endocrinology who has studied the topic extensively. Dr. Brind acknowledged that it is his belief that abortion is not good for women or children, and that although women legally have a choice to have an abortion, the choice should be an informed one.

In his research, Brind reviewed 23 studies (a meta-analysis) and, as the film points out, found a “30 percent increased risk of breast cancer for women with abortion histories.” Dr. Brind, along with three other researchers, published these findings in the Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health in 1996.

Although the group of authors called for additional research on the link, the study concluded in part, “The results support the inclusion of induced abortion among significant independent risk factors for breast cancer, regardless of parity or timing of abortion relative to the first term pregnancy.”

But because Dr. Brind holds a pro-life view on abortion, his work has been largely discounted. “The major criticism against him was because he’s pro-life, his science is questionable, and his findings are part of an anti-abortion agenda to scare women,” the Hush film states.

But, what isn’t mentioned by critics of Brind’s conclusions on the abortion-breast cancer link is that one of Brind’s co-researchers is pro-choice. Brind says he was unaware of this fact until after the research was published because when they did the research, “their personal views on the subject of abortion never came up,” he explained.

Brind told Gill that author Vernon M. Chinchilli only disclosed his pro-choice views on abortion after the study was complete. Brind explained, “We did all this work together. Hours and hours of working together in studying the data and comparing notes and talking about it, and you know what? Whether he or I or anyone else in the group was pro-life or pro-choice – it never came up.”

“This is about science. This is about the effect on women and whether or not abortion increases the risk of breast cancer. Period,” he added.

Please view the entire article here https://www.liveaction.org/news/experts-address-link-abortion-breast-cancer-powerful-documentary-film/ and watch Hush: the Documentary

Studies Show Pertussis Vaccine Doesn’t Work

More than 94 percent of kindergarten children have had four to five pertussis-containing vaccines, yet despite high vaccine coverage since the late 1980s, statistics show that reported cases of whooping cough have been rising for decades.

A recent scientific review has concluded the less toxic acellular whooping cough vaccine licensed in the U.S. for infants in 1996 does not work as expected, and confirms the continued spread of the disease among vaccinated populations.

Learn more: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/10/10/pertussis-vaccine-whooping-cough-reemergence.aspx?utm

Time For A Flu Vaccine? Fugetaboutit!

By Dr.Brownstein’s

Another Study Showing Influenza Vaccine Failure

The flu and cold season is upon us. I have already seen numerous patients suffering with upper respiratory illnesses and even weathered my first bout. The CDC and the Powers-That-Be would have you believe that you should receive the influenza vaccine on a yearly basis. They claim that the flu vaccine can save thousands of lives. Of course, I have written to you many times that there is not a single study that has ever supported the claim that the flu vaccine saves any lives. In fact, the history of the flu vaccine shows clearly that it fails nearly all who take it.

Learn more: http://healthimpactnews.com/2017/dr-brownstein-another-study-showing-influenza-vaccine-failure-flu-vaccine-fails-98-of-people-who-receive-it/

By Russel Davis

“Globally, animals receive almost three times as many antibiotics than people, although much of this use is not medically necessary, and many new strains of antibiotic-resistant infections are now common in people after originating in our livestock.”

A recent study published in Science revealed that antimicrobial use in animals raised for human consumption is projected to increase by 52 percent and reach 200,000 tonnes by 2030. Health experts have also cautioned that higher antimicrobial-use may signal the development of new strains of antibiotic-resistant infections, unless regulations are put in place to stem the practice.

A team of researchers at the ETH Zürich, the University of Cambridge, and the Princeton University pooled publicly available data from 37 countries to carry out the study. According to the research team, large quantities of antimicrobials are now being used in modern animal farming to prevent diseases and promote growth. (Related: 70 Percent of antibiotics used on animals slaughtered for food.)

Learn more: https://www.naturalnews.com/2017-10-09-more-superbugs-on-the-way-antibiotic-use-in-animals-for-human-consumption-expected-to-double.html

By Dr. Mercola

Members in the European Parliament (MEPs) announced that Monsanto officials would no longer be able to meet MEPs, attend committee meetings or even use “digital resources” in Brussels or Strasbourg parliament premises,  banning them from parliament.

The blow came after the biotech giant refused to attend a hearing organized by environment and agriculture committees over allegations that Monsanto engaged in regulatory interference, by influencing studies into the safety of glyphosate, the active ingredient in their Roundup herbicide.

The Guardian quoted Green party president Philippe Lamberts, who stated, “Those who ignore the rules of democracy also lose their rights as a lobbyist in the European parliament … U.S. corporations must also accept the democratic control function of the parliament. Monsanto cannot escape this.” This is one of the harshest examples yet in terms of a large government body not allowing Monsanto lobbyists to talk to its members going forward.

In the U.S., Monsanto has significant influence on government agencies, but even in the U.K., which was originally more resistant to Monsanto’s genetically modified organisms (GMOs), the company has made a lot of headway in changing their image. That being said, European Commission leaders met in March 2016 to vote on whether to renew a 15-year license for glyphosate, which was set to expire in June that year.

The decision was tabled amid mounting opposition, as more than 180,000 Europeans signed a petition calling for glyphosate to be banned outright. Ultimately, more than 2 million signatures were collected against relicensing the chemical. In June 2016, however, the European Commission granted an 18-month extension to glyphosate while they continued the review. A ruling is expected by the end of 2017, which means the lobby ban could not have come at a more inopportune time for Monsanto.

Learn more: https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2017/10/10/biotech-company-banned-from-parliament.aspx?utm