R. Derache writes in his book Toxicology and Safety of Foods, (published by Tec/Doc/Apria in 1986):
”According to Hayes (1975) and Recht (1980), a full four million different chemical substances have been extracted or synthesized, among which 60,000 are currently in use, including 4,000 as drugs, 2,500 as dietary additives, and 1,500 as pesticides, the remainder being used as industrial and farming chemical compounds as well as in consumer goods.
Instances of short-term poisoning of plants, ground life, ”domestic” insects, game, and water life are manifold and have been given comprehensive coverage.
Long-term effects are more surreptitious and give greater cause for concern, as we are about to show.
It is believed that some three million tons of DDT and eight million tons of polychlorinated biphenyls have been dumped in the environment.
Enduring effects are rated as following: the half-life of DDT in water lasts ten years and that of dieldrine twenty years. In the soil, half-life timespan is greatly extended (forty years for DDT). Metabolically, DDT (0.2 ppm) and PCBs (10 ppm) have been sampled in the fat of antarctic wildlife.
As to the build-up of those chemicals, whether in specific individuals or all the way down the food chain, it has been asserted that earthworms can concentrate soil DDT fourteen-fold while oysters will concentrate 10 to 70,000 times sea water DDT. In man, who comes last in the food chain, concentration is in no way marginal: 2 ppm of DDT in the fat cells of an average European, and 13.5 ppm in the average American.
In addition to ecotoxic hazards, there is a risk of imbalance, with biological units being destabilized and new chemical-resistant pest breeding, which makes diseases, (viroses, bacterioses, etc...), the more insidious, which merely compounds existing headaches.
Once body-unfriendly chemicals have entered the body, they are most commonly breathed out or voided in feces, or the waters. Alternatively, and quite typically, they are first metabolized in the liver, although breakdown usually yields substances of lesser toxicity. Intermediary metabolites may occur that prove more reactive and more toxic than the initial chemical (cf Parathion, Paraoxon). These may be stored for varying periods of time before being released back into particular organs or body fat, for instance, which preferentially concentrates organic chloride pesticides.
A number of insecticides, be they organic chlorides or phosphates or carbamates, in addition to their primary toxic effects, further affect cell metabolic processes by their impact on crucial enzymes like oxyesterases, dehydrogenases, carboxylases, and so on.
Many pesticides induce multiple-function microsomic monooxygenases (M.F.O.) and, consequently, those molecules warrant close attention. In 1965, FALK showed that liver cells constantly called upon to release enzymes for the breakdown of pesticides turned irretrievably hyperplasic. It was further hypothesized that such hyperplasia laid the groundwork for nodules, which adverts to the primary stage of liver cancer.”
Karen Vago writes in Protégez votre corps on the subject of toxicity of pesticides:
excerpted and translated by © 2004 www.healingcancernaturally.com
Copyright Notice
Epidemiological research re the toxicity of pesticides is difficult. Various observations however point to a connection between certain types of cancer and the frequent contact with pesticides, for instance among farm workers. Workers commissioned with the spraying of HCH and Aldrin in Mexico and other Central American countries as well as in the former German Democratic Republic displayed a clear increase in the incidence of gastro-intestinal cancer. Additionally, with various occupations, a connection could be established between contact with such substances and the occurrence of diseases such as leukemia, lymphoma, prostate cancer, melanoma, stomach cancer and multiple myelomas.
She cites these relevant observations: Between 1929 (when pesticides and other noxious organic agents were introduced) and 1979, sperm counts have decreased from 90 million spermatozoa to 60 million, with the fertility rate showing a similar reduction. All tested sperm samples were found to contain pesticide residues.
Observations of persons who had accidentally come into contact with organophosphoric compounds as well as animal experiments* showed concurrent changes in behaviour and electroencephalograms (EEG: a graphical record of electrical brain activity produced by an electroencephalograph).
An anecdotal case story illustrating the possibly major importance of avoiding nonorganic fruits and vegetables
I recently (July 2006) heard of someone who developed colon cancer after living in Thailand for a number of years, where a major part of his diet consisted of pesticide- and otherwise toxin-laden tropical fruit (and vegetables). This slim and previously radiantly healthy man had been a vegetarian for 34 years starting at age 20 and prior to his Thailand experience had mostly been living on organic food.
A report on the quality of fruits and veggies in Thailand found at hawaiianorganicgrowingguide.com/Thailand/foodmostfrightening.pd f summarizes and confirms the dangers inherent in eating nonorganic produce in these terms: “In short, the more one eats fruits and vegetables (grown in that country), the greater one’s risk of cancer.”
Dr. Johanna Budwig on pesticides in combination with a lack of esssential fats:
Interestingly. Dr. Budwig whose oil-protein health protocol appears to offer a good anti-cancer diet, observes the following: "In addition to the lack of vital (esssential) bio-logical fats and the ingestion of extremely dangerous fats, the following items are unbio-logical and to be rejected: all insecticides, many medications, the polluted air brought on by industrial activities... and most preservatives used in our food today. In fact, one could draw up an entire list of additional factors which negatively affect the organism, with their detrimental effects being more pronounced when there is a lack of 'essential fats'."
*Incidentally, in my eyes one of the great sins both against humanity and animals: Animal experiments are as useless and dangerous for humans as they are cruel to animals (e.g. thalidomide was tested safe on rats while penicillin would have never been allowed for human consumption had it initially been tested on guinea pigs or hamsters, since it kills those species). For a good summary re “Does animal testing help human medicine?” see for instance www.saav.org.za/FAQs.htm, and for thalidomide www.health.org.nz. Dr Irwin D Bross PhD writes, “There is no good factual evidence to show that the use of animals in cancer research has led to the prevention or cure of a single human cancer.” Full quote of Dr Bross and others under On Cancer Research
There are better alternatives that do not involve cruelty to animals and give much more reliable results for humans (such as tests performed on human cell cultures). These humane and solely reliable test methods just need to be implemented, and if a sufficiently large part of the public calls for them, they will be applied - to everyone’s benefit! Please consider joining this call!
No comments:
Post a Comment