August 2018 – Page 5 – Toms Blog on Life

August 27, 2018

8 Health Dangers of Canola Oil: Not the Healthy Oil You’ve Been Led to Believe

dangers-of-canola-oil

Canola oil has practically taken over as the food processing industry’s oil of choice. Whether it’s mayonnaise, chips, salad dressings and other snack foods, canola oil is usually the first, second or third ingredient on the list. Unfortunately, the health dangers of canola oil are far beyond what we’ve been led to believe.

So if there aren’t any actual health reasons to use it, why would it be so widely utilized throughout the processed food industry? As with most reasons certain ingredients are used over others – the price. Canola oil is extremely inexpensive to grow and harvest. Being a genetically modified food, insects won’t go near canola oil, making it incredibly easy to grow.

Canola oil was first created in the early 1970s as a natural oil, but in 1995, Monsanto created a genetically modified version of canola oil. By 2009, over 90 percent of the Canadian canola oil crop was genetically engineered (1).

What is Canola Oil?
Canola oil comes from a descendant of the rapeseed plant, a member of the Brassica genus, along with some of our favourite vegetables like kale, broccoli, cauliflower and cabbage. Rapeseed oil was put on the market for human consumption in the 1950s, but not many people wanted to consume it due to its strong flavour and off-putting colour.

Scientists at the time began to discover that erucic acid, one of the major fatty acid components of the oil (over 50%), was damaging to heart tissue. Meanwhile, olive oil started being marketed as the next big thing in health. So what did marketers do for rapeseed oil? Give it a makeover of course! After some selective breeding and careful marketing, rapeseed oil was now low in erucic acid, high in oleic acid (just like heart-healthy olive oil), high in omega-3 fats and also neutral tasting. The name rapeseed was replaced with canola (the term can from canada, and ola for oil) (2).

While canola oil has been marketed as a health-food oil, low in saturated fats and a source of omega-3 fatty acids, it is very far from that. Canola oil is not only genetically modified, but it is highly processed and refined, both of which contribute to major health problems in the body.

8 Health Dangers of Canola Oil
Canola oil isn’t the healthy oil you’ve been led to believe. There are so many dangers of canola oil, that anyone in their right mind would stay away from it. Here are just a few reasons why canola oil should never set foot in your home again.

1. Canola Oil is Hydrogenated Oil
All oils, unless they’re “cold-pressed” or “extra-virgin” are refined. This process includes caustic refining, bleaching, and degumming – all which involve high temperatures or chemicals that are damaging to the human body. Last but not least comes the deodorization process. Because canola oil is high in omega-3 fatty acids, it becomes easily rancid and foul-smelling when subjected to oxygen and high temperatures. The standard deodorization process removes a large portion of the omega-3 fatty acids by turning them into trans-fatty acids (3).

If you’re consuming any vegetable oils that are oxidized from heat and light in processing, you are also exposing your body tissues to oxidized or rancid products. This contributes to degenerative diseases and chronic inflammation.

2. Genetically Modified Product
Almost all canola oil is produced from genetically modified crops. More than 90% of all canola oil is produced from genetically engineered crops. While genetic modification was successful at lowering the erucic acid content, it also increased the amount of oleic acid.

Oleic acid has been linked to a number of health concerns such as:
– Retarded growth (banned in infant formulas)
– Abnormalities in blood platelets
– Damage from free radicals
– Increased risk of developing certain cancer types

Genetically engineered foods also pose some very serious health concerns like allergic reactions, immuno-suppression, toxicity, and loss of nutrition through the foods we eat (4).

3. Increased Risk of Developing Cancer
Canola oil is extremely unstable under heat, light and pressure, which causes oxidation and releases free radicals inside the body. When canola oil is heated (aka. when we cook with it), it produces high levels of butadiene, benzene, acrolein, formaldehyde and other nasty compounds. These chemical compounds, combined with increased free radicals create the perfect environment for cancer growth.

Researchers have found that cancer cells feed on the oleic acid in canola oil. The acid causes the cancer cells to become stronger and maintain malignancy (5). Additional research has also shown that oleic acid promotes tumour progressions (6).

With the amount of free radicals released in canola oil after cooking, it’s no wonder this oil is a trigger for cancer growth. Free radicals are highly reactive chemicals that play a major role in cancerous cell mutation (7).

4. Contributes To Heart Disease
While genetic modification has lowered erucic acid levels in canola oil, it is still a major source of the acid. Erucic acid is a fatty acid that has been associated with heart damage, specifically Keshan disease, a disease that creates fibrotic lesions of the heart. Studies have shown that in areas where people are prone to Keshan, erucic acid levels are higher, and selenium levels are lower (8).

Partially hydrogenated oils like canola are also known for causing high levels of inflammation in the body, as well as calcification of the arteries. Both inflammation and calcification are major risk factors for coronary heart disease (9).

5. Interferes with Healthy Brain Function
A new study out of the Lewis Katz School of Medicine at Temple University and published in the journal Scientific Reports has linked canola oil with a decrease in memory and learning indicative of Alzheimer’s disease – the most common form of dementia (10). The study found that the brains of canola-oil treated mice had higher amounts of amyloid plaques as well as diminished contact between brain neurons.

Canola oil, being an inflammatory food, contributes to poor brain function. Chronic inflammation, as you might already know, is detrimental to the body. It attacks healthy cells, blood vessels and tissues instead of protecting them. It can shut down energy production in brain cells and slow down the firing of neurons, contributing to ADHD, anxiety, brain fog, depression, memory loss and Alzheimer’s (11).

6. Hypertension and Strokes
Studies have found that rapeseed oil and some other vegetable oils shortens the life span of stroke-prone and hypertensive animal subjects. One study discovered that rats bred to have high blood pressure and proneness to stroke died sooner when fed canola oil as the sole source of fat. On the flip side, rats fed the non-canola oil-based diets lived longer (12).

Another study published in Toxicology Letters looked at the effects of canola oil on blood coagulation time, or how long it took blood to clot in stroke-prone animal subjects. The study found that there was a “canola oil-induced shortening of blood coagulation time and increased fragility in [red blood cell membranes],” which may trigger strokes in animal subjects who are stroke-prone (13).

7. Kidney and Liver Problems
Being a genetically modified food product, canola oil takes a toll on our liver and kidneys.

A 2011 review of 19 different studies that involved mammals being fed genetically modified soy and corn for a period of 90 days, found that GMO foods can disrupt kidney and liver function. The review, published in Environmental Sciences Europe, stated that in the trials mentioned, kidney function was reduced by 43.5%, while liver function was reduced by 30.8%.

If you want your detox organs to work properly, avoid canola oil, and other GM products.

8. May Hamper Normal Growth in Children
Erucic acid in canola oil was the main reason canola oil was banned from use in infant formula. The erucic acid in canola oil is harmful to infants, due to an inability to properly break it down. While the FDA previously made canola oil illegal for use in baby formula, that isn’t the case anymore. As of a few years ago, canola oil made it to the generally recognized as safe list (14), meaning that infant formula companies can use all the canola oil they want in their formula.

Best Oils to Substitute for Canola Oil
So which oils can you use? It depends on what you’re using it for!

1. Coconut Oil
Coconut oil is best when it is cold-pressed and virgin. Try your best to avoid refined coconut oil. Coconut oil has a high heat threshold, meaning it doesn’t turn into trans-fatty acids when heated. Coconut oil contains medium-chain fatty acids, too, which support a healthy nervous system, and also encourage fat loss.

2. Olive Oil
While I would never personally cook with olive oil (it is a very delicate oil), using it on salads and other non-cooking applications is a great option. Look for an organic extra-virgin or cold-pressed olive oil that’s available in dark-coloured glass. Some fake olive oils are mixed with cheaper, GMO vegetable oils, so always make sure it is GMO-free and organic.

3. Avocado Oil
Avocado oil has a high smoke point like coconut oil, so it can safely be cooked with at high temperatures. Alternatively, you can also use this oil in its raw form on salads and the like.

8 Health Dangers of Canola Oil: Not the Healthy Oil You’ve Been Led to Believe

https://livelovefruit.com/8-health-dangers-of-canola-oil/

Virus Linked to Obesity

Facebook/Google+/WorldTruth/Trooth/Blog/Pinterest
THE MYSTERIOUS VIRUS THAT COULD CAUSE OBESITY

Randy was scratched by a rooster and straight away, his eating pattern changed. So did his weight. The researchers acknowledge that the rooster scratch may have been the start of Randy’s infection. But they are cautious—the transmissibility of the Ad-36 virus from chickens to humans has never directly been studied.

https://www.wired.com/2016/12/mysterious-virus-cause-obesity/

Coconut Oil Is Bad?

August 26, 2018

Destructive Mechanism That Blocks the Brain from Knowing When to Stop Eating Identified

mmp2-leptin-overeating

I would be very interested to know what fats the mice were fed as this goes completely against the ketogenic diet.

I also find it interesting that the focus in the article is on how to find a drug that will solve it rather than what can we do to alter our diet and lifestyle to preent the problem. – Tom

Summary: Researchers report mice fed a high fat diet produce an enzyme called MMP-2, which results in leptin being blocked from binding to its receptors. This, they report, prevents neurons from signaling that the stomach is full. The study suggests blocking MMP-2 may help people with obesity to lose weight.

An international team of researchers has uncovered a destructive mechanism at the molecular level that causes a well-known phenomenon associated with obesity, called leptin resistance.

They found that mice fed a high-fat diet produce an enzyme named MMP-2 that clips receptors for the hormone leptin from the surface of neuronal cells in the hypothalamus. This blocks leptin from binding to its receptors. This in turn keeps the neurons from signaling that your stomach is full and you should stop eating.

This is the first time that a destructive molecular mechanism has been observed and described.

https://neurosciencenews.com/leptin-obesity-overeating-9739/

August 26, 2018

Tech Shielding

August 26, 2018

Dagerously Awesome Level Of Freedom

Love it!

August 26, 2018

We Have Turned Childhood Into A Mental Disorder. And It’s Ruining Our Kids

Adderall

According to a report, there has been a dramatic rise in children misusing and overdosing on ADHD medications. I happened to see that report a day after I read another study revealing an increased risk for obesity and diabetes in kids who take ADHD meds. This is not to be confused with the recent research showing that ADHD drugs could be linked to brittle bones. These must all be added, of course, to the cacophony of already known side effects, including insomnia, irritability, decreased appetite, depression, and suicidal thoughts.

Maybe this is why a majority of kids diagnosed with ADHD wind up developing other mental illnesses as they grow older. Pharmaceutical companies cite that latter detail as proof of the biological basis of ADHD. I think it is much easier to see it as proof of the pharmacological basis for the mysterious rise in mental illnesses across America. Drug companies and the psychiatric industry have so far gotten almost 20 percent of the country onto psychiatric drugs. Many of these drugs cause suicidal thoughts, anxiety, and depression. Meanwhile, a lot of Americans are having suicidal thoughts, anxiety, and depression. One need not be a detective to notice a potential causal relationship here.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/31864/walsh-adhd-matt-walsh

August 24, 2018

Thought For The Day – Who Packed Your Chute?

From Larry Meredith:

I saw this years ago, and it’s a great story!! Very well worth the time to read and share!

Charles Plumb was a US Navy jet pilot in Vietnam. After 75 combat missions, his plane was destroyed by a surface-to-air missile. Plumb
ejected and parachuted into enemy hands. He was captured and spent 6 years in a communist Vietnamese prison. He survived the ordeal and now lectures on lessons learned from that experience!

One day, when Plumb and his wife were sitting in a restaurant, a man at another table came up and said, ‘ You’re Plumb! You flew jet fighters in Vietnam from the aircraft carrier Kitty Hawk. You were shot down!

‘How in the world did you know that?’ asked Plumb.

‘I packed your parachute,’ the man replied.

Plumb gasped in surprise and gratitude.

The man pumped his hand and said, ‘I guess it worked!’

Plumb assured him, ‘It sure did. If your chute hadn’t worked, I wouldn’t be here today.’

Plumb couldn’t sleep that night, thinking about that man. Plumb says, ‘I kept wondering what he had looked like in a Navy uniform: a white hat; a bib in the back; and bell-bottom trousers. I wonder how many times I might have seen him and not even said ‘Good
morning, how are you?’ or anything because, you see, I was a fighter pilot and he was just a sailor.’ Plumb thought of the many hours the sailor had spent at a long wooden table in the bowels of the ship, carefully weaving the shrouds and folding the silks of each chute, holding in his hands each time the fate of someone he didn’t know.

Now, Plumb asks his audience, ‘Who’s packing your parachute?’ Everyone has someone who provides what they need to make it through the day. He also points out that he needed many kinds of parachutes when his plane was shot down over enemy territory – he needed his physical parachute, his mental parachute, his emotional parachute, and his spiritual parachute. He called on all these supports before reaching safety.

Sometimes in the daily challenges that life gives us, we miss what isreally important. We may fail to say hello, please, or thank you, congratulate someone onsomething wonderful that has happened to them, give a compliment, or just do something nice for no reason.
As you go through this week, this month, this year, recognize people who pack your parachutes.

I am sending you this as my way of thanking you for your part in packing my parachute. And I hope you will send it on to those who have helped pack yours! Sometimes, we wonder why friends keep forwarding jokes to us without writing a word. Maybe this could explain it! When you are very busy, but still want to keep in touch, guess what you do – you forward jokes. And to let you know that you are still remembered, you are still important, you are still loved, you are still cared for, guess what you get? A forwarded joke. So, my friend, next time when you get a joke, don’t think that you’ve been sent just another forwarded joke, but that you’ve been thought of today and your friend on the other end of your computer wanted to send you a smile, just helping you pack your parachute.

August 22, 2018

Former ANZ director: no solution to Australian banking problems without Glass-Steagall structural separation

The former director of ANZ Bank and chairman of Woolworths John Dahlsen has intervened in the banking turmoil in Australia to denounce the Australian Prudential Regulation Authority (APRA) and call for structural separation of the banks “following the principle of the US Glass-Steagall Act”.

Mr Dahlsen expressed his views in a column in the 21 August Australian Financial Review, “APRA’s incestuous rule comes at too high a price”, which is an edited version of an article he has written for the IPA Review, the publication of free market think tank the Institute of Public Affairs, of which he was formerly on the board.

“APRA is among the least accountable federal agencies”, the former chair of the ANZ Bank board’s audit and risk committee wrote of the bank supervisor.

“There is an incestuous relationship between APRA and the banks. There is no separation of influence and nearly all senior staff are ex-bankers, so you are unlikely to get any independent and innovative thought.”

Mr Dahlsen is a longstanding critic of APRA’s risk models and risk-weighting of lending, which has incentivised the banks to concentrate their lending on mortgages at the expense of the rest of the economy. Mortgages account for more than 60 per cent of the lending of each of Australia’s Big Four banks—a far greater concentration on mortgages than any other banks in the world—which has inflated a world record housing bubble that will inevitably crash the banks and the economy when it bursts.

“APRA’s use of the secrecy provisions in its governing legislation prevents an informed market, and it uses this massive information imbalance to maintain the fictions that risk is a science, that everything is quantifiable and that all material required by APRA is intelligently reviewed”, he explained.

“It is simply not possible for APRA to intelligently review the vast amount of data it demands from the banks. The risk-based models used by banks and regulators must be externally reviewed as a matter of urgency.” (Emphasis added.)

Structural separation

After calling for a revised mandate for APRA to reform its function and effectiveness, Mr Dahlsen turned to a more fundamental and far-reaching reform—structural separation.

He wrote: “Problems in banking will not be solved until the structure is changed, which means more than merely reshuffling responsibilities around the existing club of regulatory institutions.”

The experienced banker is convinced that a Glass-Steagall separation would be beneficial to shareholders, and therefore advocates for banks to do it voluntarily. He acknowledged, however, the political momentum in Australia for legislation to forcibly break up the banks, which some banks would require. “With barriers removed it is possible that banks and the investment market will move to unlock shareholder value in structural separation, following the principle of the US Glass-Steagall Act, which kept commercial and retail banking separate”, he wrote.

“Voluntary demergers would threaten the gravy train of ‘coupon clipping’ for fee extraction, but enforced separation in Australia seems inevitable, and the mere threat of it could prompt demergers.

“The alternative of further complex regulation is frightening. Complex regulation (such as Dodd-Frank) never works because of the extreme difficulty of interpretation and enforcement. Simple regulation is simply better.”

(Dodd-Frank is the 848-page US banking legislation that Barack Obama enacted in 2010 after the global financial crisis, instead of restoring the simple Glass-Steagall separation, a 37-page law, which had protected Americans from systemic banking crises for almost 70 years, but which his Wall Street sponsors such as Goldman Sachs desperately opposed.)

John Dahlsen has added his voice to the chorus of calls for a full structural separation of Australia’s banks. The Citizens Electoral Council has led a campaign for Glass-Steagall in Australia since 2009. The late former prime minister Malcolm Fraser called for Glass-Steagall in a submission to the 2014 Financial System Inquiry. Leading National Party politicians Senator John Williams, and the Member for New England Barnaby Joyce, responded to the April hearings of the banking royal commission by calling for the banks to be broken up. On 25 June 2018 the Member for Kennedy Bob Katter moved, and the Member for Denison Andrew Wilkie seconded, the introduction into Parliament of the Banking System Reform (Separation of Banks) Bill 2018, which is based on the US Glass-Steagall Act. The Greens have long said they opposed the vertical integration that the royal commission has shown enables the banks to fleece and gouge their customers, and on 9 August they detailed a policy for a full, Glass-Steagall-style structural separation of the banks. The former Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) chairman Allan Fels endorsed the Greens’ policy, emphasising the importance of ending both vertical integration and so-called horizontal integration which enables the government’s guarantee of deposits to flow through to risky investment banking and trading activities.

Liberal-National Coalition politicians especially should take note of Mr Dahlsen’s views, which contradict their government’s reasons for opposing Glass-Steagall. The Treasury has claimed that “Australia’s banks already exhibit a high degree of structural separation”, while the Member for Goldstein, Tim Wilson, a former policy director at the IPA, repeats to constituents that he won’t support the Separation of Banks bill because “Mr Katter’s legislation is designed for American conditions, not Australian conditions.”

Now an experienced Australian banker, who shares the Coalition’s and Tim Wilson’s preference for free market policies, has identified a structural separation of the banks based on the Glass-Steagall Act as precisely what is needed to solve the undeniable problems in Australia’s banking system.

Will the government pay attention? Will they respond to the truth being exposed at the royal commission, and the wise advice of John Dahlsen, or will they, as they did for years leading up to the royal commission, continue to protect the conflicts of interest, dangerous speculation, and outright criminality in Australia’s banks?

Join the campaign to pass banking separation!

Forward this release to your local MP and as many Senators as you can. (You can find the Senators from your state by clicking on this link, and clicking on your state under the heading State/Territory on the right-hand side.)

Include a message, or call their offices, asking for confirmation that they received the email, and for a written response.

Share this message widely on email and social media.

August 22, 2018

Is Capitalism Killing Us?

by Paul Craig Roberts

Ecological economists, such as Herman E. Daly, stress that as the external costs of pollution and resource exhaustion are not included in Gross Domestic Product, we do not know whether an increase in GDP is a gain or a loss.

External costs are huge and growing larger. Historically, manufacturing and industrial corporations, corporate farming, city sewer systems, and other culprits have passed the costs of their activities onto the environment and third parties. Recently, there has been a spate of reports with many centering on Monsanto’s Roundup, whose principle ingredient, glyphosate, is believed to be a carcinogen.

A public health organization, the Environmental Working Group, recently reported that its tests found glyphosate in all but 2 of 45 children’s breakfast foods including granola, oats and snack bars made by Quaker, Kellogg and General Mills. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2018/aug/16/weedkiller-cereal-monsanto-roundup-childrens-food

In Brazil tests have discovered that 83% of mothers’ breast milk contains glyphosate. https://www.telesurtv.net/english/news/Brazil-Poisonous-Agrotoxin-Found-Over-80-of-Breast-Milk-Samples-in-Urucui-20180809-0008.html

The Munich Environmental Institute reported that 14 of the most widely selling German beers contain glyphosate. https://sustainablepulse.com/2016/02/25/german-beer-industry-in-shock-over-probable-carcinogen-glyphosate-contamination/#.W3XKtC-ZOGQ

Glyphosate has been found in Mexican farmers’ urine and in Mexican ground water. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5486281/

Scientific American has reported that even Roundup’s “inert ingredients can kill human cells, particularly embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells.”
https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/weed-whacking-herbicide-p/

A German toxicologist has accused the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment and the European Food Safety Authority of scientific fraud for accepting a Monsanto-led glyphosate Task Force conclusion that glyphosate is not a carcinogen. https://gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/17307-german-toxicologist-accuses-eu-authorities-of-scientific-fraud-over-glyphosate-link-with-cancer

Controversy about these findings comes from the fact that industry-funded scientists report no link between glyphosate and cancer, whereas independent scientists do. This is hardly surprising as an industry-funded scientist has no independence and is unlikely to conclude the opposite of what he is hired to conclude.

There is also controversy about what level of contamination is necessary for products adulterated with glyphosate to be classified as dangerous. It does seem to be the case that the concentrations rise with use and time. Sooner or later the concentration becomes sufficient to do the damage.

For this article, the point is that if glyphosate is carcinogenic, the cost of the lost lives and medical expenses are not borne by Monsanto/Bayer. If these costs were not external to Monsanto, that is, if the corporation had to bear these costs, the cost of the product would not be economical to use. Its advantages would be out-weighed by the costs.

It is very difficult to find the truth, because politicians and regulatory authorities are susceptible to bribes and to doing favors for their business friends. In Brazil, lawmakers are actually trying to deregulate pesticide use and to ban the sale of organic food in supermarkets. https://gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18409-brazilian-lawmakers-seek-to-deregulate-pesticide-use-ban-sale-of-organic-food-in-supermarkets

In the case of glyphosate, the tide might be turning against Monsanto/Bayer. The California Supreme Court upheld the state’s authority to add the herbicide glyphosate to its Proposition 65 list of carcinogens. https://gmwatch.org/en/news/latest-news/18411-monsanto-loses-another-court-case-over-glyphosate-weedkiller

Last week in San Francisco jurors awarded a former school groundkeeper $289 million in damages for cancer caused by Roundup. Little doubt that Monsanto will appeal and the case will be tied up in court until the groundkeeper is dead. But it is a precedent and indicates that jurors are beginning to distrust hired science. There are approximately 1,000 similar cases pending. https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/10/health/monsanto-johnson-trial-verdict/index.html

What is important to keep in mind is that if Roundup is a carcinogen, it is just one product of one company. This provides an idea of how extensive external costs can be. Indeed, glyphosate’s deletarious effects go far beyond those covered in this article. https://www.thcfarmer.com/community/threads/expert-gmos-to-blame-for-problems-in-plants-animals.39442/
GMO feeds are also taking a toll on livestock. http://educate-yourself.org/cn/Mike-McNeil-Whats-Killing-the-Cows-Day8-24July2018-55mins.mp3

Now consider the adverse effects on air, water, and land resources of chemical agriculture. Florida is suffering algae blooms from chemical fertilizer runoff from farmland, and the sugar industry has done a good job of destroying Lake Okeechobee. https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article216329745.html

Fertilizer runoffs cause blue-green algae blooms that kill marine life and are hazzardous to humans. Currently the water in Florida’s St. Lucie River is 10 times too toxic to touch. https://weather.com/science/environment/news/2018-08-10-florida-algae-bloom-st-lucie-microcystin

Red tides can occur naturally, but fertilizer runoffs fuel their growth and their persistance. Moreover, pollution’s contributions to higher temperatures also contribute to red tides, as does draining wetlands for real estate development, which results in water moving quickly without natural filtration. https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/aug/13/florida-gulf-coast-red-tide-toxic-algae-bloom-killing-florida-wildlife?utm_source=esp&utm_medium=Email&utm_campaign=GU+Today+USA+-+Collections+2017&utm_term=283418&subid=1480231&CMP=GT_US_collection

http://www.wafb.com/story/38850029/graphic-red-tide-off-fl-gulf-coast-kills-marine-life

As water conditions deteriorated and algae blooms proliferated, Florida’s response was to cutback its water monitoring program: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/local/environment/article215993665.html

When we consider these extensive external costs of corporate farming, clearly the values attributed to sugar and farm products in the Gross Domestic Product are excessive. The prices paid by consumers are much too low and the profits enjoyed by corporate agriculture are far too high, because they do not include the costs of the massive marine deaths, the lost tourist business, and the human illnesses caused by the algae tides that depend on chemical fertilizer runoff.

In this article I have barely scratched the surface of the problem of external costs. Michigan has learned that its tap water is not safe. Chemicals used for decades on military bases and in the manufacture of thousands of consumer items are in the water supply. https://www.cnn.com/2018/08/16/health/tap-water-crisis-toxic-michigan-pfoa-pfas/index.html

As an exercise, pick any business and think about the external costs of that business. Take, for example, the US corporations that offshored Americans’ jobs to Asia. The corporatons’ profits rose, but the federal, state, and local tax bases declined. The payroll tax base for Social Security and Medicaid declined, putting these important foundations of US social and political stability into danger. The tax base for school teachers’ and other government employees’ pensions declined. If the corporations that moved the jobs abroad had to absorb these costs, they would have no profits. In other words, a few people gained by shoving enormous costs on everyone else.

Or consider something simple like a pet store. All the pet store owners and customers who sold and purchased colorful 18 to 24 inch pythons, boa constrictors, and anacondas gave no thought to the massive size these snakes would be, and neither did the regulatory agencies that permitted their import. Faced with a creature capable of devouring the family pet and children and suffocating the life out of large strong adults, the snakes were dumped into the Everglades where they have devastated the natural fauna and now are too numerous to be controlled. The external costs easily exceed many times the total price of all such snakes sold by pet stores.

Ecological economists stress that capitalism works in an “empty economy,” where the pressure of humans on natural resources is slight. But capitalism doesn’t work in a “full economy” where natural resources are on the point of exhaustion. The external costs associated with economic growth as measured by GDP can be more costly than the value of the output.

A strong case can be made that this is the situation we currently face. The disappearance of species, the appearance of toxins in food, beverages, water, mothers’ breast milk, air, land, desperate attempts to secure energy from fracking which destroys groundwater and causes earthquakes, and so forth are signs of a hard-pressed planet. When we get right down to it, all of the profits that capitalism has generated over the centuries are probably due to capitalists not having to cover the full cost of their production. They passed the cost on to the environment and to third parties and pocketed the savings as profit.

Update: Herman Daly notes that last year the British medical journal, Lancet, estimated the annual cost of pollution was about 6 % of the global economy whereas the annual global economic growth rate was about 2 percent, with the difference being about a 4% annual decline in wellbeing, not a 2 percent rise. In other words, we could already be in the situation where economic growth is uneconomical. See https://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2017-10-19/study-world-pollution-deadlier-than-wars-disasters-hunger

August 21, 2018

Study: Weed killer found in oat cereal and granola bars

Breakfast_With_A_Dose_Of_Roundup

A video well worth watching. Unfortunately the closing remark from the talking head, stating the long-term effects are unknown is a complete sham as we know the short term effects are deadly! Glyphosate even in concentrations as low as 5 parts per billion (ppb) causes health issues in rats so 1,000 ppb? It is an outrageous lie to calim that level is safe.

http://www.ktvu.com/news/study-weed-killer-found-in-oat-cereal-and-granola-bars

August 21, 2018