• Trouble logging in? Send us a message with your username and/or email address for help.
New posts

Tupelo Honey

Beach Lover
Nov 4, 2006
58
2
here
Here's an article about bio-accumulation, bio-concentration & bio-magnification.

This is why just a little spraying eventually is concentrated into a larger "issue," simply put, that we have years and years to figure out.

Excellent article! Especially this statement:

The sad truth is that when we introduce synthetic chemicals into our environment, it takes many years for us to ?discover? what really happens. This is not a scientific approach that benefits society, but a science that uses society for profit and experimentation.
 

organicmama

Beach Fanatic
Jul 31, 2006
1,639
338
WNC
wncfarmtotable.org
Excellent article! Especially this statement:

The sad truth is that when we introduce synthetic chemicals into our environment, it takes many years for us to ?discover? what really happens. This is not a scientific approach that benefits society, but a science that uses society for profit and experimentation.

Thanks!

All I keep thinking about are the studies that show bio-accumulation in mother's bodies of all these poisons and toxins. Some mainstream people then make the argument that formula is safer because of all these toxins in women's bodies that are then transferred to babies via mother's milk.

Well, my point in stating this is that if this crap ain't toxic when it's sprayed, then how the h*** does it suddenly become toxic in a woman's body??????? How is that justification made? Obviously, these "toxic cocktails" are extremely harmful to us and the unquestioning consumer just turns a deaf ear to everything else, except "Hey! What we are spraying on you is completely safe."

Ladies and gentlemen, we all make choices, either through logical reason or by default by not questioning the status quo. Who are you going to let make the choices for you, your body and your children? You can say that you don't really like the spraying but don't have another answer and shrug your shoulders or you can take the opportunity to find out what the alternatives are.

Skunky knows about MSDS data. Y'all need to look that up on each of these chemicals discussed, whether it is Dawn or not. You'd be suprised at what you are putting into your bodies daily.
 

Tupelo Honey

Beach Lover
Nov 4, 2006
58
2
here
Okay, so Indigo Jill's question is for everyone:

If we know that the pesticides being sprayed are toxic but we need an answer to the problem of mosquitoes and dogflies and the public simply isn't going to go for the "take care of it individually" answer, then what are our alternatives?

If we want to make a change in regards to this, we have to have an option that is viable to everyone, not just the pro-spraying side or the no-spraying side. The answer's in the middle somewhere.
Learning how other parts of the world ecologically handle pest control sounds like a game plan, plus educating/convincing others on how the ecosystem works and how spraying pesticides will inevitably affect them.



If martin and bat houses were used to control mosquitoes, it could possibly work like this:

Someone places the martin/bat houses in their own yard and reports the results. If successful, the results are reported in the newspapers to educate people to this alternative.

Then the local government can put these houses up in various public places (a park, the side of the road, etc.) Pre-made houses could be purchased in different sizes to fit all budgets.

The results are posted in the newspaper to report the success to residents and mosquito-ridden areas outside of SoWal.

Maybe SoWal could become an ecomodel on a global scale! :)

But I think if trucks/planes started spraying patchouli, the smell would definately make me keel over and die! LOL! ;-)
 

Tupelo Honey

Beach Lover
Nov 4, 2006
58
2
here
Thanks!

All I keep thinking about are the studies that show bio-accumulation in mother's bodies of all these poisons and toxins. Some mainstream people then make the argument that formula is safer because of all these toxins in women's bodies that are then transferred to babies via mother's milk.

Exactly. This is a good example of mainstream vs. alternative health solutions.

Formula is a quick-fix, but it does not address the root of the problem. Formula companies have to protect their business, so they keep those magazine/TV ads convincing others who are unaware of alternatives that formula is *the* solution. Doctors and hospitals also get a commission from pushing formula to new mothers in the hospital.

There is no harm in mother's milk. Her body produces antibodies which protect the baby from anything potentially harmful in her own milk in the first place.

So the formula example is a typical example of allopathic (mainstream) practice in action; however, more and more people are growing tired of mainstream practices. They are discovering that natural alternatives cost less, have no side effects, and do not involve an expensive doctor and health insurance run-around. It's just a matter of making people aware of alternative methods.

Mainstream magazines and media will not be a source of alternative information because they must protect the money-making big businesses that keep us sick and dependent on doctors and medications. That's how they make their money!

The good news is that the alternative health movement is gaining momentum even as we speak.

Well, my point in stating this is that if this crap ain't toxic when it's sprayed, then how the h*** does it suddenly become toxic in a woman's body??????? How is that justification made? Obviously, these "toxic cocktails" are extremely harmful to us and the unquestioning consumer just turns a deaf ear to everything else, except "Hey! What we are spraying on you is completely safe."

This is where people must read the fine-print in FDA reports. After reading some of them (the HPV vaccine disclaimers, for example) I no longer place faith in them.

Again, big profits are protected by the FDA such as pharmaceutical companies, food processors, mass agriculture, and mass-produced consumer items. They are in jeopardy because alternative methods of diet and medicine are challenging them right now.
 

Mango

SoWal Insider
Apr 7, 2006
9,709
1,360
New York/ Santa Rosa Beach
Here is an article about dog flies and control with many references.
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/IG/IG13300.pdf


As I stated in an earlier post, this was a major problem dependent on the wind conditions in Long Beach Island New Jersey were we vacation in summer, and they installed fly traps and it drastically reduced the fly population. It was quite evident in a beach community called Holgate (part of LBI) that we used to call Helsgate because it was near a tidal marsh and you couldn't get out of your car without being attacked by flies. Now we see very few.
The traps look like boxes. I am not sure exactly how they work, but apparently the USDA has a brochure called "How to Control House and Stable Flies (Dog Flies) without Using Pesticides" and the above article also has many references to articles about these traps.

https://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9502&L=dairynew&P=392

This is an excerpt of the USDA brochure. I have yet to find that one on-line yet.
 

organicmama

Beach Fanatic
Jul 31, 2006
1,639
338
WNC
wncfarmtotable.org
Thanks for the info! I am going to read them later tonight, after the family's in bed.

There are options out there. I am just tired of people saying that the only answer is mass spraying of poisons.

Here is an article about dog flies and control with many references.
http://edis.ifas.ufl.edu/pdffiles/IG/IG13300.pdf


As I stated in an earlier post, this was a major problem dependent on the wind conditions in Long Beach Island New Jersey were we vacation in summer, and they installed fly traps and it drastically reduced the fly population. It was quite evident in a beach community called Holgate (part of LBI) that we used to call Helsgate because it was near a tidal marsh and you couldn't get out of your car without being attacked by flies. Now we see very few.
The traps look like boxes. I am not sure exactly how they work, but apparently the USDA has a brochure called "How to Control House and Stable Flies (Dog Flies) without Using Pesticides" and the above article also has many references to articles about these traps.

https://listserv.umd.edu/cgi-bin/wa?A2=ind9502&L=dairynew&P=392

This is an excerpt of the USDA brochure. I have yet to find that one on-line yet.
 

organicmama

Beach Fanatic
Jul 31, 2006
1,639
338
WNC
wncfarmtotable.org
I totally agree with everything you said. Sadly, we're also taught to be brainwashed by those who profit from long-term illness, Standard American Diet, extreme consumerism (buying stuff just because), etc.

OT... If people would teach their children about the birds and the bees in a responsible manner, instead of an extreme version of not discussing sexuality (for mainly religious reasons) in the home but then allowing/having the mainstream media teaching them through music, TV, advertising... we wouldn't need an HPV vaccination.

Exactly. This is a good example of mainstream vs. alternative health solutions.

Formula is a quick-fix, but it does not address the root of the problem. Formula companies have to protect their business, so they keep those magazine/TV ads convincing others who are unaware of alternatives that formula is *the* solution. Doctors and hospitals also get a commission from pushing formula to new mothers in the hospital.

There is no harm in mother's milk. Her body produces antibodies which protect the baby from anything potentially harmful in her own milk in the first place.

So the formula example is a typical example of allopathic (mainstream) practice in action; however, more and more people are growing tired of mainstream practices. They are discovering that natural alternatives cost less, have no side effects, and do not involve an expensive doctor and health insurance run-around. It's just a matter of making people aware of alternative methods.

Mainstream magazines and media will not be a source of alternative information because they must protect the money-making big businesses that keep us sick and dependent on doctors and medications. That's how they make their money!

The good news is that the alternative health movement is gaining momentum even as we speak.



This is where people must read the fine-print in FDA reports. After reading some of them (the HPV vaccine disclaimers, for example) I no longer place faith in them.

Again, big profits are protected by the FDA such as pharmaceutical companies, food processors, mass agriculture, and mass-produced consumer items. They are in jeopardy because alternative methods of diet and medicine are challenging them right now.
 

30A Skunkape

Skunky
Jan 18, 2006
10,286
2,312
53
Backatown Seagrove
This is a great forum topic:clap_1:
Organic mama, you bring up some interesting and important concepts about pesticides and other chemicals making their way into the ecosystem and doing harm. However, not all substances are capable of grabbing a solid hold in the foodchain and lingering. We recognize this risk with DDT, DDD and other inorganics like elemental mercury and lead. Luckily, we live in one of the cleanest and environmentally astute countries on the planet and we are pretty good at avoiding the introduction of such toxins into the ecosystem. I am no chemist, but do understand most of the concepts of concentration, degradation, half lives, etc, and really do not think the stuff being sprayed in SOWAL or anywhere else pose a threat to entering the ecosystem and accumulating like DDT (as is illustrated in the article). I can understand frustration with not wanting to breathe the stuff, but let me make a few observations on why I think we can all relax a little regarding getting poisoned. First, I have logged many, many hours in hospitals and emergency rooms...I have never, ever seen a case of organophosphate poisoning or any other acute toxic reaction to poisons and other chemicals commonly applied to the environment. Furthermore, I would LOVE to compare the bell curve of human life expectancy over the last 70 years (a big shift to the right) compared to the bell curve of application of pesticides and herbicides (also a big shift to the right) during the same time. It would stand to figure that if there was really some sort of cause and effect that came from environmental exposure to commercial chemicals, you would see a shift in the life expectancy curve to the left ( or at least a more modest rightward shift) concurrent with the righward shift of mass use of chemical applications to the environment.

Furthermore, 'organic' farming is not without risks of its own...natural fertilizers (and you know what they use) have the potential to harbor coliform bacteria that can make consumers sick from consumption and also taint rivers and wells with fecal runoff....gross and dangerous!

Finally, a quick comment regarding the evils of allopathic cures versus 'natural remedies';I can't think of ANY industry as poorly regulated as the natural remedy market. Essentially, as long as they put a statement on the label that they do not promise to 'diagnose or cure' any condition as well as 'these satements have not been evaluated by the FDA' , they can bottle and sell just about anything. Go on and look in your medicine cabinet, all the bottles are labeled as such. I will contend until the day I die that there is nothing 'safe' about some herbal remedy whose source, purity, manufacture, content, efficacy and understanding of long term implications of use are not regulated by anyone other than the manufacturer. Yet, the 'herbs' are 'natural', ergo safer. That makes zero sense to me. :dunno:
 

organicmama

Beach Fanatic
Jul 31, 2006
1,639
338
WNC
wncfarmtotable.org
This is a great forum topic:clap_1:
Organic mama, you bring up some interesting and important concepts about pesticides and other chemicals making their way into the ecosystem and doing harm. However, not all substances are capable of grabbing a solid hold in the foodchain and lingering. We recognize this risk with DDT, DDD and other inorganics like elemental mercury and lead. Luckily, we live in one of the cleanest and environmentally astute countries on the planet and we are pretty good at avoiding the introduction of such toxins into the ecosystem. I am no chemist, but do understand most of the concepts of concentration, degradation, half lives, etc, and really do not think the stuff being sprayed in SOWAL or anywhere else pose a threat to entering the ecosystem and accumulating like DDT (as is illustrated in the article). I can understand frustration with not wanting to breathe the stuff, but let me make a few observations on why I think we can all relax a little regarding getting poisoned. First, I have logged many, many hours in hospitals and emergency rooms...I have never, ever seen a case of organophosphate poisoning or any other acute toxic reaction to poisons and other chemicals commonly applied to the environment. Furthermore, I would LOVE to compare the bell curve of human life expectancy over the last 70 years (a big shift to the right) compared to the bell curve of application of pesticides and herbicides (also a big shift to the right) during the same time. It would stand to figure that if there was really some sort of cause and effect that came from environmental exposure to commercial chemicals, you would see a shift in the life expectancy curve to the left ( or at least a more modest rightward shift) concurrent with the righward shift of mass use of chemical applications to the environment.

Furthermore, 'organic' farming is not without risks of its own...natural fertilizers (and you know what they use) have the potential to harbor coliform bacteria that can make consumers sick from consumption and also taint rivers and wells with fecal runoff....gross and dangerous!

Finally, a quick comment regarding the evils of allopathic cures versus 'natural remedies';I can't think of ANY industry as poorly regulated as the natural remedy market. Essentially, as long as they put a statement on the label that they do not promise to 'diagnose or cure' any condition as well as 'these satements have not been evaluated by the FDA' , they can bottle and sell just about anything. Go on and look in your medicine cabinet, all the bottles are labeled as such. I will contend until the day I die that there is nothing 'safe' about some herbal remedy whose source, purity, manufacture, content, efficacy and understanding of long term implications of use are not regulated by anyone other than the manufacturer. Yet, the 'herbs' are 'natural', ergo safer. That makes zero sense to me. :dunno:

Skunky, what about the illnesses that we have no idea how they started? This could be a whole other thread in regards to this, but there are a ton of illnesses that medical schools DO NOT study at this point and therefore there isn't any "cure" from modern medicine. PLUS, the real tests that find the answers to many people's health issues are NOT paid for by insurance companies, which means that individuals have to CHOOSE to pay out of pocket or simply accept the limited scope of normal allopathic medicine. Most people cannot afford these tests and simply throw up their hands in frustration and have to deal with whatever their insurance companies will pay for & nothing else.

Please know that I am not against allopathic medicine. I believe there are really good and viable things that allopathic medicine does... especially when it comes to emergency situations, when a life needs to be saved immediately. Which is something that you obviously have experience with in the emergency room. I do feel that allopathic medicine really falls short in disease prevention and in long-term care. A childhood friend of mine was an ER doctor in NYC for a long time and we have had long, fun conversations about this.

Question, if allopathic medicine is so safe, then why is something as harmful as corticosteriods and the like handed out like candy when the situation is deemed unknown and at a point where MDs usually throw up there hands at figuring out situations? Why is it used in situations where it actually drives the cause deeper into the body to where it surfaces as another issue altogether and the patient has to take a grocery list of medicines just to combat the side effects of the steroid? I, personally, have studied the hell out of corticosteriods (and all its "cousins") because of my husband's "unknown" (as deemed in allopathic medicine) illness.

Sadly, alternative medicine is written off most of the time, while allopathic medicine is regarded as safe when it's not such a cut & dry statement. I do not agree with any herb being stripped down to active constituents because then you take away many of the natural "safety nets" and, in essence, it becomes not much more than a pharmaceutical (aka neutraceutical). I also feel that people should educate themselves on whatever they are considering taking, whether it's allopathic or holistic. That goes back to my statement about making choices: One can either make an informed or uninformed decision. Either way, it's a decision. You can either go with the flow and choose whatever everyone is doing or you can educate yourself and do things in a safe & educated manner, no matter what the subject or issue is.

I am quoting an article from a mainstream magazine called "Toddler" that we picked up last week in our pediatrician's office. The article is about what foods one should buy if they are considering lowering pesticide exposure for themselves and their children:

"Although eating organic foods does indeed promote environmental health, perhaps the best argument for going organic is your child's age and size. Toddlers taken in two to four times more food per pound of body weight than the average adult; thus, they have the potential to ingest more pesticides per pound of body weight as well. 'When a 20-pound toddler eats an apple, he gets six times the relative pesticide dose of a 120-pound adult,' explains Alan Greene, M.D., a pediatrician and assistant clinical professor, Division of General Pediatrics, Lucile, Packard Children's Hospital at Stanford University School of Medicine.
Research has shown that eating organic foods can limit that exposure. In one study, children in Seattle, age 2-4 years, were monitored as they ate different types of diets. While eating the organic foods, the children's urine samples showed nondetectable levels of pesticides commonly used in U.S. agricultural production. Once the children ate conventional food (i.e., non-organic) again, the concentration of pesticides increased substantially in their urine.
Yet to be answered by the scientific community, however, is how serious a health risk ingesting pesticides or antibiotic and hormone-laden meat and dairy products really is. In the absence of solid evidence, experts recommend that you err on the side of caution, especially since we don't know how pesticides affect developing brains and bodies. 'If you have a choice between ingesting toxins or not, it makes sense to choose not to, maintains Somers.'"

Okay, so the point is, we really don't know. You can't say something is safe because you don't have an answer. AND why the hell is the scientific community going to do the tests when the ones that would probably fund the tests would not want the real results exposed? For instance, Monsanto (AKA Roundup, a simple, common product) doesn't want you to know what their chemicals do. Nor do they have the best interests of any consumer, especially in developing countries, at heart. They are too busy developing plants that won't produce seeds so that farmers have to keep buying more seed each year.

And, yes, this is a very interesting thread. :D
 
Last edited:

30A Skunkape

Skunky
Jan 18, 2006
10,286
2,312
53
Backatown Seagrove
OM-I never said we have all the answers about pathology, cause and effect, etc. Just out of curiousity, what are some of the idiopathic conditions you are talking about?

Sorry to hear about docs throwing steroids at your hubby, but to be fair, I know nothing of his history (and please-DO NOT POST IT HERE!:D )and there are some vexing autoimmune disorders where steroids are not the wrong answer even if a diagnosis is not clinched. With that said, I know of nobody who routinely hands out steroids for no good reason.

I don't think alternative medicine is as discounted as you might think. Interventions not taught in western medical schools are embraced, as long as they make some physiological sense, are not dangerous and have demonstrated efficacy. Unfortunately, there are way too many hucksters out there looking to make a buck by cashing in on the hopes and fears of sick people. Quackery is a spade I will call out whenever I see it in the name of beneficence.

I agree with you regarding allopathic's shortcomings as far as preventative medicine goes. You will be happy to know that this is a concept that is being stressed in med schools and residency programs at present, and the fruits will be obvious a few years down the road. Personally, I feel preventative care is a keystone to good health. Please know that I have nagged more than one member of SOWAL into going in and getting checkups. One of the things that turns me off of working in the ER is there is little meaningful opportunity to establish long term healthcare relationships-it is almost exclusively reactionary (and for others such as adrenaline junkies, that is great and they would slit their wrists in primary care):cool:

The pediatric pesticide study has been around for some time now, and as it states, nobody knows what, if any, import there is with the results. Of course, given the choice between feeding a kid pesticide treated versus non-treated is a non-brainer if it is an option, but I think my original point was simply pointing out that an organically grown bunch of grapes that is crawling with E. coli is a worse option than 'conventional' grapes. But let me just say that no matter what, parents who get their kids to lay off the french fries and chicken nuggets in favor of fruits and veggies in the formative years will have healthier kids in the long run any way you look at it:cool:

I am not sure who is and who isn't testing their products (Monsanto) in other countries, but in our country companies that market stuff like roundup have to have done comprehensive testing and the results are available to the public....here for example http://www.mindfully.org/Pesticide/Monsanto-Roundup-MSDS-Docs.htm

I don't know what they are doing to their seeds!:rotfl:

And since you brought up developing countries, let me pitch this ethical question at you (and understand that I do not claim to know the correct answer):Some countries in malarial stricken Africa are flirting with the idea of restarting the use of DDT, which in a vacuum is an excellent agent to fight malaria;do you think it is ethically correct for the United States and other first world countries to threaten economic aid withdrawl to said countries if they use DDT? DDT will result in the saving of thousands of lives yearly with probable untoward environmental impact...what do you think our policy toward the African nations be?:scratch:
 
New posts


Sign Up for SoWal Newsletter