By Linda on Apr 24, 2010 in Linda's Tips | comments(0)
A note to my readers from Linda…..
I thought you might be interested in this alert from the Organic Consumers Association (November 13, 2009):
A major reason why consumers shop for products that are certified organic is to avoid the hazardous and unlabeled Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), toxic chemicals, and now the most recent, and likely most dangerous hi-tech poison of them all: nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is now a multi-billion dollar Frankenstein monster industry churning out a vast menu of untested and unlabeled products containing tiny nanoparticles including non-organic vitamin supplements, food packaging, processed food, cosmetics and sunscreens.
Over the objections of the OCA and thousands of our members, on November 5, 2009, the National Organic Standards Board decided to table a recommendation to prohibit nanotechnology in organic. The NOSB member who fills the scientist slot, Katrina Heinze of General Mills, delayed the process by insisting that the Board consider a compromise position that wouldn’t exclude nanotechnology from organic altogether, but would classify it as a “synthetic” that could be petitioned for use in specific instances. Please write to the NOSB and tell them to ban untested, unlabeled and hazardous nanotechnology products and ingredients in organic.
Nanotechnology is inherently dangerous. Mounting scientific evidence indicates that nanomaterials produce dangerous “free radicals” which can destroy or mutate DNA and can cause damage to the liver and kidneys. Nanotech particles not only injure and kill lab animals–they can kill you as well.
Please click the link below to tell the USDA that you want the National Organic Standards Board to take a strong stand against the use of nanotechnology in organic.
Click on this URL to take action now
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/utr/2/?a=13948781&i=1234&c=&u=capwiz.com%2Fgrassrootsnetroots%2Fissues%2Falert%2F%3Falertid%3D13948781
If your email program does not recognize the URL as a link,
copy the entire URL and paste it into your Web browser.
By Linda on Apr 24, 2010 in Food | comments(0)
A note to my readers from Linda…..
I thought you might be interested in this alert from the Organic Consumers Association (November 13, 2009):
A major reason why consumers shop for products that are certified organic is to avoid the hazardous and unlabeled Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs), toxic chemicals, and now the most recent, and likely most dangerous hi-tech poison of them all: nanotechnology. Nanotechnology is now a multi-billion dollar Frankenstein monster industry churning out a vast menu of untested and unlabeled products containing tiny nanoparticles including non-organic vitamin supplements, food packaging, processed food, cosmetics and sunscreens.
Over the objections of the OCA and thousands of our members, on November 5, 2009, the National Organic Standards Board decided to table a recommendation to prohibit nanotechnology in organic. The NOSB member who fills the scientist slot, Katrina Heinze of General Mills, delayed the process by insisting that the Board consider a compromise position that wouldn’t exclude nanotechnology from organic altogether, but would classify it as a “synthetic” that could be petitioned for use in specific instances. Please write to the NOSB and tell them to ban untested, unlabeled and hazardous nanotechnology products and ingredients in organic.
Nanotechnology is inherently dangerous. Mounting scientific evidence indicates that nanomaterials produce dangerous “free radicals” which can destroy or mutate DNA and can cause damage to the liver and kidneys. Nanotech particles not only injure and kill lab animals–they can kill you as well.
Please click the link below to tell the USDA that you want the National Organic Standards Board to take a strong stand against the use of nanotechnology in organic.
Click on this URL to take action now
http://capwiz.com/grassrootsnetroots/utr/2/?a=13948781&i=1234&c=&u=capwiz.com%2Fgrassrootsnetroots%2Fissues%2Falert%2F%3Falertid%3D13948781
If your email program does not recognize the URL as a link,
copy the entire URL and paste it into your Web browser.
By Linda on Apr 22, 2010 in Interesting Stories | comments(0)
Dear Lyme friend,
On September 21, 2009, President Obama outlined his innovation strategy in
a speech in Troy, N.Y., after touring the technology classrooms of Hudson
Valley Community College.
“From biotechnology to nanotechnology, from the development of new forms
of energy to research into treatments of ancient diseases, there is so
much potential to change our world and improve our lives,” Obama said.
I feel that it is very irresponsible for the President to promote
nanotechnology when there are serious concerns about its safety and there
is virtually no regulation of the industry.
Last December, a report by the National Research Council found serious
gaps in the government’s plan for determining if nanomaterials pose a risk
and called for an effective national plan for identifying and managing
potential risks.
In a March 2009 commentary, a Lloyd’s of London analyst drew parallels
between the global financial meltdown and risks from nanomaterials. The
financial collapse reflected “blithe acceptance of complex products that
many didn’t understand.” With regard to nanomaterials, he commented that
“the importance of getting to grips with and quantifying complex sources
of risk has never been more obvious.”
I understand the EPA is considering taking a more precautionary approach
to nanomaterials. In the mean time, all consumers can do is try to avoid
them, especially the many nanotech foods and cosmetics. The problem is
that they are not labeled.
That is why I am happy to hear that the United States Department of
Agriculture’s National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) is considering an
official ban on nanotechnology in organic.
I am writing to the NOSB in support of the ban on nanotechnology. If they
pass it, I hope that you will ensure that the USDA’s National Organic
Program acts quickly to enforce it.
Sincerely,
Linda Heming
