America Poisoned > Clean Water and Food Supply > Needs Political Support and Populist Uprising


Link to End of the World POST


LINK TO outlaw pesticide use except in emergency cases

LINK TO nationalize the oil industry POST

The lesson of this century will be that economic efficiency can never take precedence over health, or the Devil will forever be the ruler of Earth and Man.  Many more will die by neglect of the truth, while those left will have the unfortunate privilege of learning very hard lessons.

Destabilization of the earth is a serious business.

The truth is that “efficiency” is a fake idea, an ideologically defined mask for pure greed driven selfishness, neglect and disregard of humanity.

Real efficiency would mean innovation and lifting the working poor out of their dire situation.


lead in china products, lip gloss, children’s toys etc — links videos

The Latest “Cosmos” Explains How Corporations Fund Science Denial












research diesel use

GOOGLE > FIND RESEARCH on LEAD causing violent aggression


Transcript of Neil Degrasse Tyson’s Documentary on the Lead Crisis and the Age of the Earth


Once there was a man who went searching for the true age of the earth.
In his struggles to discover it, he stumbled on a grave threat.

Throughout history, Lead has been used to make water and sewer pipes; roofing; cable coverings; type metal and other alloys; paints; wrappings for food, tobacco, and other products; and as an additive in gasoline.



Clean Air Act Link – Asian Gas Monster Link – Major Cities Suffering from Toxic Clouds Links

The Simpsons – “There’s your problem…”

In a NASA article titled “Airborne Pollutants Know No Borders” they warn, “Any substance introduced into the atmosphere has the potential to circle the Earth.”

Private Planes Still Contaminate Environment with Lead in Gasoline  in 2012  (Phase out Goal of 2018,

Aviation gasoline is a complex mixture of relatively volatile substances known as hydrocarbons, and tetra-ethyl-lead.

~167,000 piston-engine aircraft still spreading EXTREMELY TOXIC LEAD into public air-space – up til year 2018? 

It has been disproportionately affecting people living near the 20,000 airports where it’s used.

Aircraft operating on leaded aviation gasoline (avgas) used for: business and personal travel, freight shipment, agriculture sprays, aerial surveying, flight instruction, firefighting, law enforcement, and medical emergencies.

Higher lead engines allowed some aircraft to operate at increased speeds with more freight onboard, increasing both profitability and risk to public health.

The various grades of avgas are/were identified as:

low lead (LL) – with the highest lead content

very low lead (VLL) – with medium levels of lead

unleaded (UL) – which they had us believing couldn’t be used

The FAA claimed, in a 2013 report, that about 40% of piston engine aircraft are either approved or eligible to obtain approval to operate on unleaded automotive fuels.

The Friends of the Earth, on the other hand, claimed that 75% of piston engine aircraft could run on unleaded fuel.

Myths & Realities of Leaded Aviation Fuel
Final Report. Prepared by Center for Environmental Health. For Friends of the Earth.

Airports could choose to offer unleaded fuel as an alternative:  It costs less, and three-quarters of all piston-engine aircraft could begin using it immediately.  “There’s just a lack of will to actually make this available at airports,” Keever said. “If there’s no movement on the regulatory side, there’s absolutely no movement on the use side.”

A study published in 2011 found that kids who lived as far away as 1,000 meters had higher levels of lead.

An estimated 16 million people live within a kilometer of one of 20,000 airports that still use leaded avgas.

It was a 100% a free choice to keep emitting lead into the environment.  The EPA could have easily required businesses and individuals to only use those particular aircraft, and restrict the aircraft unable to run without lead.  

Instead they chose to allow continued use of leaded-only piston engines until at least 2018, 22 years after it was fully banned in automobiles.

Corporations and the government have been reluctant to assure us a speedy shift away from lead, so the phasing out of lead has taken far too long.  An immense amount of damage has been done, and the amount of good will shown has been very small.  The lack of good will could have been encouraged by the poison itself.

Government and industry colluded together to decide that the continued use of ALL low-altitude lead-using piston-engine aircraft is far more important to them than the public need for a non-toxic environment.   Rather than respect the wishes of the public and the scientific community, they chose to continue wreckless endangerment of human health.

They chose to continue the use of offending technologies, and to promote the development of new gasoline products, rather than taking immediate action to require businesses to fly automotive-fueled aircraft.

They have forced environmentalists, and effected populations, to wait decades for the full phasing out of the lead crisis.

The industry wasn’t willing to sacrifice even a little efficiency for public safety.  Apparently for business to show good will toward the health of vulnerable populations, a miracle would be required.

Low Altitude Piston Engine Aircraft emit – Lead, CO2, etc

High Altitude Turbine Engine Aircraft emit – CO2, etc

Family Guy “They are ants.”


EPA / FAA Attitude Toward Lead Emissions –> an irresponsibly unbalanced mix of carelessness and concern, siding with business rather than public health.

FAA is more concerned about the technical operating efficiency of engines than they are concerned about the health of human beings and their safety.  People have a right to be free from chronic poisoning immediately, not when it’s convenient for business.

Tetra-Ethyl Lead was patented in the 1920s.  Capitalism still loves lead, despite its catastrophic toxicity to the human brain and life in general.  It’s one of many good measures of the sociopathy of capitalists, and the irresponsibility of government and industry in collusion.  The appearance of responsibility is important to them.

Quick Timeline of Lead Crisis

1920 – Patented for widespread use

1950s and 1960s – widespread public awareness of the catastrophe – cite first scientific evidence of lead dangers ???

1970s – ???

1985 – The EPA announced a total ban on leaded gasoline by 1988.

1990 – In amendments to the Clean Air Act, lead was banned from on-road gasoline. The measures did not take strict effect immediately, giving gasoline companies almost six more years to phase out lead if they chose to wait. 

1996 – Public assumes complete phase has occurred.

2006 – NASCAR joins the phase out.

2018 – Low altitude piston-engine aircraft may join the phase out.

20?? – Lead in water pipe infrastructure, still no commitment to a solution.

Viewing the history of the lead crisis from the widest possible perspective is important, and will always be important.


Ethanol was already known as a widely available, inexpensive, low toxicity octane booster, but TEL was promoted because it was uniquely profitable to the patent holders.

Innospec, based in Colorado, is claiming to be the last firm still making TEL in the United States.

In the United States alone, there are more than 30 companies still participating in sales and distribution of leaded gasoline.  Those companies were sued by environmental groups–> in year (2014?) .

As of 2013, TEL was apparently being produced illegally by several companies in China.

The only other countries that still allow the use of leaded aviation fuel are Afghanistan, Algeria, Iraq, Myanmar, North Korea, and Yemen.






look for a link to NEVIN 1994 study —- google it

The following has been condensed from a longer article called, “Lead:  America’s Real Criminal Element” – Mother Jones

In 1994, Rick Nevin was a consultant working for the US Department of Housing and Urban Development on the costs and benefits of removing lead paint from old houses. This has been a topic of intense study because of the growing body of research linking lead exposure in small children with a whole raft of complications later in life, including lower IQ, hyperactivity, behavioral problems, and learning disabilities.

High Correlation between Lead Emissions and Crime Rates

Lead emissions from tailpipes rose steadily from the early ’40s through the early ’70s, nearly quadrupling over that period.

Crime rates rose dramatically in the ’60s through the ’80s, and then began dropping steadily starting in the early ’90s.

Rick Nevin’s findings indicated that gasoline-lead may explain as much as 90 percent of the rise and fall of violent crime over the past half century.

Young people who ingested high levels of lead in the ’40s and ’50s really were more likely to become violent criminals in the ’60s, ’70s, and ’80s.

Rick Nevin’s paper was almost completely ignored.  He was an economist, not a criminologist, and his paper was published in Environmental Research in 1994.

In the late 1990s, Jessica Wolpaw Reyes was a graduate student at Harvard searching for a dissertation topic that eventually became a study she published in 2007 as a public health policy professor at Amherst University in (…). “I learned about lead because I was pregnant and living in old housing in Harvard Square,” she said.  She wanted to find out whether lead exposure actually caused increases in crime.

The answer, it turned out, involved “several months of cold calling” to find lead emissions data at the state level.  During the ’70s and ’80s, some new EPA rules reduced the amount of leaded gasoline emitted into public air-space.  Reyes discovered that the reduction wasn’t uniform.  The use of leaded gasoline began to vary widely among different states at that time.

In states where consumption of leaded gasoline declined slowly, crime declined slowly. Where it declined quickly, crime declined quickly.

Studies Listed by the National Bureau of Economic Research

2007  The Impact of Childhood Lead Exposure on Crime.  Environmental Policy as Social Policy.  By Jessica Reyes

2014  Lead Exposure and Behavior: Effects on Antisocial and Risky Behavior among Children and Adolescents.  By Jessica Reyes

2010  Lead and Mortality.  By multiple authors.

In 2007, Rick Nevin published a new paper looking at crime trends around the world.  (what journal?) This way, he could make sure the correlation he had found between lead exposure and upward trends in crime was no coincidence.

Nevin collected lead data and crime data for Australia and found a close match. Ditto for Canada. And Great Britain and Finland and France and Italy and New Zealand and West Germany. Every time, the two curves fit each other astonishingly well.

When asked if he ever found a country that didn’t fit the theory, he replied “No.  Not one.”

Lead levels now vary dramatically from one neighborhood to the next- and the poorest neighborhoods tend to be the worst hit.

At blood-lead levels still common today, other recent studies link the lead crisis with increased chance of developing attention deficit/hyperactivity disorder.

In 2016, Tulane University researcher Howard Mielke published a paper with demographer Sammy Zahran on the correlation of lead and crime at the city level.  They studied six US cities that had both good crime data and good lead data going back to the ’50s, and they found a good fit in every single one.  In fact, Mielke has even studied lead concentrations at the neighborhood level in New Orleans and shared his maps with the local police.  “When they overlay them with crime maps,” he told me, “they realize they match up.”

We now have studies at the international level, the national level, the state level, the city level, and even the individual level. Groups of children have been followed from the womb to adulthood.  Higher childhood blood lead levels are very consistently associated with higher adult arrest rates for violent crimes.

Neurological research is demonstrating that lead’s toxic effects are even more appalling and more permanent than we expected.  It turns out that childhood lead exposure at nearly any level can seriously and permanently reduce IQ.  Even very low blood lead levels are now known to cause serious damage. The EPA now says flatly that there is “no demonstrated safe concentration of lead in blood,” and it turns out that even levels under 10 μg/dL (micrograms per deciliter) can reduce IQ by as much as seven points.  They estimate that many millions of children nationwide have lead levels above 5 μg/dL.

Lead has been found to cause cell death in the brain.  It has been found to block the healthy flow of calcium ions in cerebral tissue, causing physical damage to the developing brain that persists into adulthood.

A team of researchers at the University of Cincinnati has been following a group of 300 children for more than 30 years and recently performed a series of MRI scans that highlighted the neurological differences between subjects who had high and low exposure to lead during early childhood.

High childhood exposure damages a part of the brain linked to aggression control.

Lead exposure degrades both the formation and structure of the myelin sheath, and when this happens, says Kim Dietrich, one of the leaders of the imaging studies, “neurons are not communicating effectively.” Put simply, the network connections within the brain become both slower and less coordinated.

High exposure to lead during childhood was linked to a permanent loss of gray matter in the prefrontal cortex—a part of the brain associated with aggression control as well as what psychologists and neuroscientists call “executive functions” … emotional regulation, impulse control, attention, verbal reasoning, and mental flexibility.

Kim Cecil, another member of the Cincinnati team, says that lead affects precisely the areas of the brain “that make us most human.”

For children, like the ones in the Cincinnati study, who are from very poor families with enough problems already, lead exposure is making their lives an impossible struggle. This is a primary reason that replacing our country’s water distribution infrastructure is an urgent moral imperative, one currently overlooked by our seriously irresponsible leadership. The poor communities effected by the crisis are not the ones able to make the political effort to persuade those in charge to help out.

Also note, today’s political leadership are the offspring of people who had more lead in their systems than any human population ever had in history. In the next hundred years, the intelligence of humanity should increase by an extreme degree compared to the people you’re living with today. After the inundation of thousands of shoreline cities, and the clean water source destruction, and the coming mega disasters caused by the carelessness and ill willed competition of the brain-impaired 20th century culture, what remains of the earth’s population will be much smarter, more capable, cooperative, and patient. That is, if even our basic human-ness survives the planet’s fast approaching monstrous transformation. It’s up in the air.

It is extremely unfortunate that we aren’t acting coherently enough, scientifically and democratically, to save the earth’s ecosystems, and the level of civilization that many are lucky enough to be enjoying. The harmony and stability of life itself has been violently disrupted by combustion-based(engines mostly) technology, far beyond most of our so-called leaders’ ability to imagine.

Why has the LEAD -> CRIME connection been almost completely ignored in the criminology community?

Rick Nevin calls it “exasperating” that crime researchers haven’t seriously engaged with the LEAD crisis.

Jessica Reyes told me that although the public health community was interested in her paper, criminologists haven’t had the brain for it.

None of the criminology experts I contacted showed any interest in the lead hypothesis at all.


LEAD’s Connection to violence is the ultimate finding in forensics in all of history …

FORENSICS = scientific tests and techniques used in connection with the detection of crime.

Forensic Science

The word forensic comes from the Latin term forensis, meaning “of or before the forum.” The history of the term originates from Roman times, during which a criminal charge meant presenting the case before a group of public individuals in the forum.

Both the person accused of the crime and the accuser would give speeches based on their sides of the story. The case would be decided in favor of the individual with the best argument and delivery. – Shorter Oxford Dictionary 2007

An public advocate is someone who provides advocacy support to people who need it.

Advocacy is an action taken by an individual or group which aims to influence decisions within social, economic, political and governmental processes.

Is this (statement below) even true of Ancient Greece, or is this a projection of our current ideal?

The Ancient Greeks organized group exercises and contests for speakers, philosophers, and debaters. In this practice, they recognized these valuable abilities as central to the health of public democracy and advocacy of ideas relevant to creating an ideal society.

(in what year?) These activities acquired the title “forensics,” derived from the Latin term for ensis and closely related to forum. – rewrite this sentence

LOOK UP THE ETYMOLOGY on etymonline …

The training of this skill of public advocacy, including the illustrative demonstration of relevant evidences, possibilities, choices, attitudes and outcomes, has found one of its important applications in the fields of criminology and law.

The term “forensic” has become strongly associated with the investigative science of legal evidence in prosecution and defense in criminal cases.

LEAD’s Connection to violence is the ultimate finding in forensics in all of history …

Public Advocacy in the General Interest of Health and Well-Being of Vulnerable Poor Communities –> still needed in this case of the LEAD crisis. The case of mass toxification to the point of insanity, dehumanization and mega-death. That’s where we’re at. The continuum of human life and its offspring have not yet satisfactorily recovered, and we aren’t sure to what extent even the rich populations are still affected by past exposure.

Public Interest = Common Good and Care for the Well-Being of All

The welfare or well-being of the general public; in relevance to, in the interest of the general population, the commonwealth.


Economist Lok Sang Ho in his Public Policy and the Public Interest (published 2011) argues that the public interest must be assessed impartially and, therefore, defines the public interest as the “ex ante welfare of the individual.”  As opposed to ex-post, which would amount to testing on humans through the marketplace, and then ignoring the results for expediency of profit, as in the case of current pesticide practices.

Latin ex ‘from, out of’ + ante ‘before’ = before the fact -> beforehand -> before the event

“Public interest law” is a term that became widely adopted in the United States during and after the social turmoil of the 1960s. It built upon a tradition exemplified by Louis Brandeis, who before becoming a U.S. Supreme Court justice incorporated advocacy for the interests of the general public into his legal practice. In a celebrated 1905 speech, Brandeis decried the legal profession, complaining that “able lawyers have to a large extent allowed themselves to become adjuncts of great corporations and have neglected their obligation to use their powers for the protection of the people.”

the ethic of “fighting for the little guy”—that is, representing the underrepresented and vulnerable segments of society

Civil rights, civil liberties, women’s rights, consumer protections, public health safety, and mitigation and prevention of environmental devastation

Instead of representing powerful economic interests, the truly wise choose to be advocates for otherwise underrepresented individuals. A significant current in public interest focus is recognizing the need to provide legal support to those living in poverty. – 2013, FAA using cagey language to avoid appearance of carelessness or ill intent in condoning the wreckless negligence of ignoring “externalities”

All forms of lead are toxic if inhaled or ingested.  Lead can affect human health in several ways, including effects on the nervous system, red blood cells and cardiovascular and immune systems.  Infants and young children are especially sensitive to even low levels of lead, which may contribute to behavioral and learning problems and lower IQ. Children have increased sensitivity due to their developing nervous systems. 

Under the Clean Air Act (year?), the EPA has the authority (in consultation with the FAA, who work closely with gasoline companies and industry) to regulate emissions from aircraft.

At present, there are no regulations that apply to emissions from aircraft that use leaded fuel.

First and foremost, the use of leaded fuels is an technical efficiency issue, because without the additive TEL, the octane levels would be too low for some engines.

No operationally feasible, efficient replacement for leaded fuel has yet been found to meet the needs of these aircraft.

As a result, the additive TEL has not been banned from avgas.

Aircraft manufacturers, the oil industry, and the FAA are working together to manage public perception.

Profit or “economic cost” is taking priority over human health hazards.  It’s a conscious choice to allow lead pollution to continue.  To strictly use different technology would be a nuisance to businesses and rich individuals.

Externalities are costs imposed on others.  Profit seekers are often morally negligent and forgo taking responsibility for the widespread negative effects of their activity.

Section 910 of the 2012 FAA Modernization and Reform Act establishes an unleaded aviation gasoline R&D program with deliverable requirements for an R&D plan and report.

FAA then sponsored an Aviation Rule-making Committee involving the EPA, the oil industry and aircraft manufacturers, who developed the process, cost estimate, and time line to replace existing leaded aviation fuels with unleaded solutions. 

The final report and recommendations, known as the Unleaded Avgas Transition (UAT) Committee Final Report was published on February 17, 2012.  The report is available to the public at:


The goal:  to identify an unleaded fuel by 2018 that could be used by aircraft currently operating on leaded avgas.

The FAA asked the world’s fuel producers on June 10, 2013 to submit proposals for fuel options that would help the general aviation industry make a transition to an unleaded fuel.

By Sept. 1, 2014, the FAA will select up to 10 suppliers to participate in phase one laboratory testing.

Over the five years between 2013 and 2018, the FAA will ask fuel producers to submit 100 gallons of fuel for phase one testing and 10,000 gallons of fuel for phase two testing.


IATA statement on carbon emissions:

We are working to reduce emissions through improved fuel efficiency.  (emission filtering and other technology improvements)

We have committed to stop our increase of emissions starting from 2020.  And a 50% reduction of emissions by 2050, compared to 2005.

At the IATA annual meeting in 2007 I laid out a
vision for the industry to build a zero emission commercial aircraft within the next 50 years.

– Giovanni Bisignani, CEO of IATA

Unfortunately, Giovanni’s commitments will not be enough to save the planet from calamitous destruction.

Comprehensive research shows that despite anticipated efficiency innovations to aircraft technology, there is no end in sight – even many decades out – to rapid increase in CO2 emissions from air travel.  in the European Union, greenhouse gas emissions from aviation increased by 87% between 1990 and 2006.

Unless extreme regulatory constraints are put in place, the growth in aviation’s carbon emissions will result, by 2050, in the sector’s yearly emissions amounting to the totality of the so-called “annual global CO2 emissions budget” which are fantasy numbers dreamed up by bureaucrats attempting to offset public fear which is sure to transform into intense rage as our planet gives way to chaos.

The only neutral level of carbon emissions is zero.  There are powerful global influences which would like everyone to accept the unacceptable.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency made a weak move, in June 2015, to start the process of regulating carbon emissions from the nation’s fleet of commercial aircraft, a long-desired objective of environmental groups.

The EPA also gave a notice that it is considering regulations on aircraft engines.

But rather than moving ahead on its own, the agency plans to continue to work with the United Nations’ ICAO International Civil Aviation Organization, which is expected to create its own global rules in early 2016.  (check on that)

This weak effort by the EPA is long overdue.  Environmental groups, including the Center for Biological Diversity and Earthjustice, petitioned for it in 2007, and then sued over it in 2010.

This apparent deferral to an international body has environmental groups very worried.

The FAA projects that U.S. airlines’ consumption of fuel will grow 49 percent from 2010 to 2035, with a corresponding increase in emissions.

“Passing the buck to an international organization that’s virtually run by the airline industry won’t protect our planet from these rapidly growing emissions,” said Vera Pardee, an attorney for the Center for Biological Diversity.

“Typically what ICAO does is a very weak standard,” adds Margo Oge, former director of the EPA’s Office of Transportation and Air Quality

America will have to take responsibility on a collective level, something we have a very bad record on.

The EPA suggested that it could go further than the ICAO standards do.

“Once an international standard is finalized by ICAO, member states are then required to adopt standards that are of at least equivalent stringency to those set by ICAO,” the agency noted.

Continued pressure by environmental activist groups and scientific organizations will be required to prevent massive destruction of society in the next few decades.

Some jobs fuck people up irredeemably, and social pressure somehow causes them to just keep doing it. 

Adult Blood Lead Epidemiology & Surveillance (started in 1987) is a government program focusing on statistics from laboratory-reported adult blood lead levels.

From 1987 to 2013, NIOSH provided funding that resulted in the expansion of the ABLES program from 4 to 41 states. However, federal funding for State ABLES programs was discontinued in September 2013. In August 2015, funding to support adult BLL surveillance was resumed but at a reduced amount compared to the pre-2013 funding level.

As of December 2015, only 28 states collaborate with NIOSH to conduct adult BLL surveillance.

Blood lead levels above 25 μg/dL in adults are caused by their jobs. This level of lead exposure occurs mainly in the battery manufacturing, lead and zinc ore mining, and painting and paper hanging industries.

The U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Lead Standards require workers to be removed from lead exposure when BLLs are equal or greater than 50 µg/dL (construction industry) or 60 µg/dL (general industry) and allow workers to return to work when the BLL is below 40 µg/dL.


– google image search


We are all exposed to small amounts of lead from before birth (from our mother’s blood through
the placenta) and every day of our lives after birth from pollution in the air, water, soil, and home
environment.  If we also are exposed to lead on the job, the risk of health damage increases.
Studies in the Journal of Epidemiology in 2007 and in a follow up study in 2009, showed that
lead levels in bone, rather than blood, are an even more accurate indicator of mortality.
This is because lead structure is somewhat similar to calcium structure, and therefore blocks calcium activity that the body needs.
“Doctors” used to consider blood lead levels up to 10 μg/dL to be “normal”
In the 1970s, it was estimated (by NHANES II) that the national average blood lead level
was about 16 ug/dL, and even higher if you lived in a city.
1 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  10 ppb (parts per billion)
2 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  20 ppb (parts per billion)
3 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  30 ppb (parts per billion)
4 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  40 ppb (parts per billion)
5 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  50 ppb (parts per billion)
6 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  60 ppb (parts per billion)
7 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  70 ppb (parts per billion)
8 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  80 ppb (parts per billion)
9 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  90 ppb (parts per billion)
10 ug/dL (micrograms per deciliter) =  100 ppb (parts per billion)
A study has shown a significant risk of mortality in adults associated even with rather low lead
levels.  The study reported in the Journal of the American Heart Association, 2006, was the Third
National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey Mortality Follow-Up Study.
It involved 13,946 adults whose blood lead levels were collected and measured between 1988 and 1994.
When researchers studied those who died by December 31, 2000, they found that death from any
cause, cardiovascular disease, heart attack and stroke increased progressively at higher lead levels.
Compared to participants with blood lead below 1.9 μg/dL, participants with blood lead between
3.6 μg/dL and 10 μg/dL had:
 a 25% higher risk of death from any cause;
 a 55% higher risk of death from cardiovascular diseases;
 an 89% higher risk of death from heart attack; and
 a 250% higher risk of death from stroke.
There has been a long-term effort in the United States to reduce exposure to lead in the environment.  Business fights in the opposite direction, and almost always gets their end of the “deal.”  Political capitalists will likely prevent our bloodstreams from ever being clean.  But critical progress has been made, very slowly over the last many decades.
Blood lead levels in 63,890 participants of the National Health Nutrition and Examination Survey 1999-2014
Measured biannually in this study, the decreasing trend was significant.  The sample may or may not be rationally taken to be representative of the whole country.  In other words, their averages may not be fully “generalize-able.”  This study, published in 2016, roughly estimates the “national average” to be anywhere from 1 ug/dL to several ug/dL, 4.5 being the CDC’s advised emergency action level for children.
The national average blood lead level is not zero, and with current policies, will never be zero.
It is important to note that the national average is very hard to estimate, and it’s relevance for personal clarification and immediate utility is limited because particular localities are always hit much harder than others.  And general corrective actions are always delayed and blocked by business interests.
Even low levels of lead in blood have been shown to affect IQ, ability to pay attention, and academic achievement.  And there is no known way of correcting the effects.

EPA Gives Flint $100 Million… But There’s A Catch

<iframe width=”560″ height=”315″ src=”” frameborder=”0″ allowfullscreen></iframe>

During EPA’s localized testing procedures:  If the lead level measured is above an arbitrary standard forcefully negotiated by biased industry, the water utilities are then ordered by the EPA to add chemicals to the water, intending to reduce corrosion and therefore leaching.  The phosphate chemicals added, of course, have unintended consequences as well.  America’s lack of interest in scientific innovation may kill us all.

Lead Poisoning Is WAY Worse Than We Thought

EPA has set the maximum contaminant level goal for lead in drinking water at ZERO because lead is a toxic metal that can be harmful to human health even at low exposure levels. Lead is persistent, and it can bioaccumulate in the body over time.

Lead was also widely used for soldering plumbing metals together, until 1988.

Bronze and Brass pipe-connectors (faucets, fixtures, etc) are multiple metal alloys which also contain a percentage of lead.  The highest level of lead used in manufacturing brass was previously 18%, then moved down to 8% for drinking water, and then move down again to comply with the current standard.  But remember, no actions are being taken to replace old infrastructure.

In 1986 Congress Amended the Safe Drinking Water Act, prohibiting the use of pipes, solder or flux that were not “lead-free” in public water systems or plumbing in facilities providing water for human consumption. At the time “lead-free” was defined as solder and flux with no more than 0.2% lead and pipes with no more than 8%.

In 1996 Congress further amended the Safe Drinking Water Act, requiring plumbing fittings and fixtures (endpoint devices) to be in compliance with “voluntary lead leaching standards.”  The amendments also prohibited the introduction into commerce of any pipe, pipe or plumbing fitting or fixture that is not ‘lead-free.”

In 2011 Congress passed the Reduction of Lead in Drinking Water Act (RLDWA) revising the definition of “lead-free” by lowering the maximum lead content of the wetted surfaces of plumbing products (such as pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings and fixtures) from 8% to a weighted average of 0.25%).

This means that any homes built before 2011 still have 8% lead pipes.

The rules do not require any existing lead-containing infrastructure to be replaced.

The RLDWA also eliminated the requirement that “lead-free” products be in compliance with the “voluntary standards” established in SDWA 1417(e) for leaching of lead from new plumbing fittings and fixtures.

Seems like very tricky wording, possibly allowing for the negation of the law altogether …  They seem to have eliminated the requirement and instated the requirement at the same time, while continuing to use the term “voluntary.”

Use of the word “voluntary” rather than compulsory or mandatory is VERY SUSPICIOUS.  Why would they use the word “required” and “voluntary” simultaneously?

What does “voluntary standards” really mean?  Apparently it means there are no consequences for noncompliance.  The law is a recommendation to the industry, rather than a strictly binding and enforced stricture.  It could also mean there will be no oversight.

Many people in the plumbing industry expect the standard to be widely used; once a manufacturer certifies its products and wins the right to use the seal — the letters NSF in a circle — its competitors will want do to the same.

Barry Commoner, a biologist and environmental health expert at Queens College, said of the NSF: “They work for industry. They’re no experts on lead.”  – NYT 1994

NSF International, The Public Health and Safety Company™ or National Sanitation (not science) Foundation, is a not-for-profit, non-governmental organization.  Serving manufacturers operating in 80 countries, NSF was founded in 1944 and is headquartered in Ann Arbor, MI USA.

It has taken so long to make any improvement in our mass poisoning situation because manufacturers fight as hard as they can for the cheapest option, regardless of the damage it causes.  And political capitalists always prefer the easy way, rather than making moral decisions.  They are not capable of complex thought for some reason…

EPA bows to industry and this international sanitation foundation.  It seems that no authorities are making the necessary effort to secure  public safety for good.  They should be taking more responsibility for public health to fully prevent of mass poisoning, rather than making deals and compromising our children’s full potential.  EPA is also staffed by biased individuals from the offending industries.

State and local jurisdictions may legislate additional limitations and requirements regarding the use or sale of pipes, pipe connectors / plumbing fittings, fixtures, and faucets that contain lead.  (which locality has the safest laws?)

The new exemptions created in the RLDWA allow for certain pipes, fittings and fixtures to be sold with no limit to the amount of lead they contain.

The 2011 RLDWA also created exemptions in SDWA Section 1417 from the prohibitions on the use or introduction into commerce of “pipes, pipe fittings, plumbing fittings or fixtures, including backflow preventers, that are used for services (classified as non-potable) such as clothes-washing machines, eyewash devices, emergency drench showers, farm irrigation, outdoor watering, manufacturing, industrial processing, sump pumps, indoor fire suppression sprinklers, or any other uses where the water is not intended for drinking” (SDWA 1417(a)(4)(A)).

Also exempt are “bath-tub fillers, shower valves, fill valves, “water distribution main gate valves” that are 2 inches in diameter or largertoilets, bidets, urinals, flushometer valves, service saddles” (SDWA 1417(a)(4)(B)).  (What about shower and bath-tub pipes?)

The Community Fire Safety Act of 2013 further amended the SDWA Section 1417 to include fire hydrants in the list of exemptions.

EPA is not aware of any potable use for these specific products.

EPA solicits comments on all aspects of the proposed approach set forth above.

Are they playing dumb on purpose?

These exemptions allow dangerous levels of lead to continue flowing into the planet’s water cycle, leaving our aquifers vulnerable.

One step forward, one step back.

Many government websites are claiming that Lead Oxide (inorganically bound lead) cannot pass through the skin.

This is the basis of the exemptions.  This is wrong.

The EPA website states:  Bathing and showering in lead-contaminated water should be safe for you and your children, even if the water contains lead over EPA’s action level.  Human skin does not absorb lead in water.

This has been shown to be wrong, and the EPA is not taking notice.

Skin absorption of inorganic lead (PbO) and use of skin cleansers.

OBJECTIVE:  The aim of this study was to investigate the percutaneous penetration of lead oxide (PbO) powder and the effect of rapid skin decontamination with two different soaps.

We confirm that PbO can pass through the skin.

Our results indicate that it is necessary to prevent skin contamination from occurring because a short contact can increase skin content and penetration even if quickly followed by washing.  This study demonstrated that PbO powder can pass through the skin and that skin decontamination done after 30 minutes of exposure did not decrease skin absorption, stressing the need to prevent skin contact.

As a result of the exemptions created by the RLDWA, there will be plumbing products in the marketplace that are not required to meet the definition of lead free in section 1417(d) of the SDWA. Therefore, without appropriate labeling, there is a risk that non-lead free products will be inadvertently used in potable water applications or re-introduced into commerce for potable applications.  Proper labeling will be required to prevent mistakes.

The central question remains… What type of material is nontoxic enough to be used for piping our drinking water?  This seems to be un-discussed.  Very strange.

Americans Are Being Priced Out Of Water Affordability, Millions Could Lose Service


Is California’s Drought Part of a Global Water Crisis?

Discovery News Short Clip – “How much of America is in a drought?”  2013

America’s 18,000 Golf Courses Are Devastating the Environment and Wasting Limited Water Resources

Environmentalists and “People who don’t want brain cancer” are fighting with golf course developers.

After a seven-year battle in Mount Kisco New York, in 2004, residents of the upscale suburb recently forced billionaire Donald Trump to back off a proposed golf course construction that they said would pollute the town’s only water supply with pesticides and fertilizers.

In drought-plagued Nevada, just south of Reno, conflict is brewing between local property owners and a pricey golf club
that has purchased senior water rights and is sucking up the available supply to keep its course in tournament condition.

Golf is big business now, contributing more than $49 billion a year in a closed loop at the top end of the economy.

In the United States, golf courses cover more than 2.7 million acres, more than 4200 square miles (many being built on top of native american land, preventing historical preservation and learning that should take place) and they soak up nearly 4 billion gallons of water daily, the Worldwatch Institute estimates, a think tank monitoring global environmental trends.

The sport’s soaring popularity has enlarged its ecological area of effect, also producing criminal human catastrophe, loss of life.

The golf courses use pesticides and fertilizers that become lethal pollution in our drinking water supply.

A 1994 review of death certificates for 618 golf course superintendents by
researchers at the University of Iowa’s College of Medicine found an
unusually high numbers of deaths from certain cancers, including brain
cancer and non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

The results were similar to other studies that have found an elevated risk
for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma among farm workers and pesticide applicators.

During the several decades, there has been an explosion of new golf courses for the pleasure of old semi-rich lazy people.  The
United States is now the home of nearly 18,000 golf courses, more than half the world’s 35,000 golf courses, all populated by lame-brained selfish ass-monkeys.  You might assume from this situation that people like golf.  That would be incorrect.  Some people choose to play golf.  They don’t “like golf.”

18,000 divided by 50 = YOUR STATE IS EFFECTED TOO

Some environmental groups have filed lawsuits, forcing a few localities to limit use of chemicals.

But nowhere nearly enough.

Please notice that deaths are being swept under the rug, so that people can play a game.

It’s not clear that newer pesticides are safer since it takes years of use before a chemical’s health effects become apparent.

Apparently the only legal way to test if a pesticide is toxic to humans is to let it flow into the water supply for a few years…

Is that indeed the plan of the administrators and developers?

There seems to be no coherent plan other than malignant egoism, myopic selfish insanity, and the prevention of good will from actualization.  Mass poisoning seems to be reinforcing bad decision-making in powerful positions.

The people surrounding golf courses may have the moral right to march onto the greens and destroy the golf courses by force.  Might I remind you that golf courses are pretty fragile places.  Very easy to ruin.  And for a good angry mob, could be pretty fun.

Let me remind golf fans that people don’t actually like golf.

In the West, where many communities are coping with droughts of historic proportions, golf courses have been scrambling to secure senior water rights. In particularly dry conditions, that means “junior” water users may have little or no access to clean water.

(research the system of junior and senior water rights in America … )

After a new golf club acquired senior water rights, the water levels in the stream that runs by Steve Gildesgard’s home, close to Reno Nevada, dropped so low that the fish population disappeared.

Ground-water tables have also declined; and as a result, the filters he has installed on his well and water-heater no longer keep out sediment, rust and salt.  “I turned off the ice maker because I don’t like orange ice cubes,” said Steve, a construction engineer. “We’re all going to go thirsty while the rich people up there are playing golf.”

Water scarcity induced by golf is not a tolerable situation.

We may have to collectively decide to sabotage golf.

It’s really not that hard to imagine.  It would be an easy game to actively destroy.

People really don’t care about golf.  I’m serious.  They don’t.

Droughts will continue to get worse throughout the rest of this century.

It’s best we choose to sabotage golf right now.

Mr. Show – GloboChem, The Friendly Chemical Corporation  (maybe re-cut higher quality clip)

Trump Has Spent More Time Golfing Than Attending Intelligence Briefings

World Water Shortage vs Golf Course Consumption

A World Without Water

CUT SOME SHORT CLIPS – KEY POINTS FROM DOCUMENTARY, and also transcribe them … note water activist and research organization names here also

Wealthy Californians Outraged at Water Limits


… newer more deadly pesticides

… waste water use instead of clean water use

… propaganda campaign and governmental lobbying

The content of grey-water is highly variable based on location.  The safety of re-using untreated or partially treated grey-water has been the subject of some limited studies.  In one study, linked below, some micropollutants including benzene were found in grey-water in significant concentrations, but most pollutants were found in low concentrations.





Environmental Institute For Golf (a front group for the GCSAA, no safety research)


Their website is full of desparately self-serving half-truths and lies.

Such as…

“The growing use of “effluent” on golf courses is why golf is increasingly being recognized for its industry-wide environmental efforts.”

This unregulated and increasingly dangerous “golf course industry” is attempting to convince everyone, including themselves, that their mistakes are being corrected.  They are not correcting anything.


The American golf group is another example of people “thinking they’re responsible” or “attempting to appear responsible” and even “attempting to act responsible” but actually in reality, “NOT BEING RESPONSIBLE.

The philosophy of Capitalism is to forgo taking responsibility.  To them, that’s wisdom.  Evasion.


LOGICAL CONCLUSION:  We, as a civilization, have not achieved the technological capability to seamlessly geo-engineer the landscape for sustainable golf course construction.  We lack the ability to build these places without destroying lives and the environment with poisonous chemicals.

If we do not lack the technical ability to fix these problems… then rich people are choosing to do the damage by willful neglect.  In either case, there should be immediate closing of all golf courses which are effecting surrounding communities.

It seems that golf course managers are too brain-damaged by their own practices to fix the problem.  This is a deadly hazard to certain localities all over the country.  The game will have to go down.


So far 1/18,000 of golf courses in America have committed to being fully organic.  This will have to proceed as a trend or residences will continue to be poisoned.  Water scarcity is a separate and comparably offensive issue.

ONE OUT OF EIGHTEEN THOUSAND. CHECK!  17,999 golf courses to go!  Wait for the Countdown!

The End of the World is likely to arrive quicker than the “greening” of golf courses.

Golf riots may break out in the future.

One half-day educational program is all the assurance that we have from the “Golf Community” of their possible repentance.


(check back to see if  the golf lobby’s self-education courses are more numerous, or non-existent, in the future)

In some areas of the U.S., golf course superintendents are facing regulatory pressure to reduce fertilizer, chemical and water inputs. In addition, there is increasing interest in alternatives to traditional products, such as composts and biorational fungicides, with a lower perceived environmental impact. This seminar will challenge participants to critically evaluate their current fairway management practices and think beyond conventional theories on inputs. Attendees will walk away with a fresh perspective on natural and organic turf management. This program will help turf managers to think critically about current fairway management and evaluate options for changes … to have a better understanding of various organic products in the marketplace and what to expect (or not expect) from their use … And to communicate to decision makers the value proposition of possibly incorporating organics into their turf management programs.



Modern Agriculture and the Environment: Proceedings of an International Conference, held in Rehovot, Israel, October 1994

… check from later convening of such conferences


Health effects of pesticides may be acute or delayed in those who are exposed.  A 2007 systematic review found that “most studies on non-Hodgkin lymphoma and leukemia showed positive associations with pesticide exposure.”  Strong evidence also exists for other negative outcomes from pesticide exposure including neurological problems, birth defects, fetal death, and neurodevelopmental disorder.

According to The Stockholm Convention on Persistent Organic Pollutants, 9 of the 12 most dangerous and persistent chemicals are pesticides.

Detectable levels of 50 different pesticides were found in the blood of a representative sample of the U.S. population.

link cited study …

Concerns regarding conflict of interest in the base of research have been raised.  A number of researchers involved with pesticides have been found to have undisclosed ties to the industry.

link …

Polyfluoroalkyl chemicals (PFCs) have been used since the 1950s in numerous commercial applications. Exposure of the general U.S. population to PFCs is widespread.

We detected PFOS, PFOA, PFHxS, and PFNA in > 98% of the samples.

A man-made compound that didn’t exist a century ago, C8 is in the blood of 99.7 percent of Americans, according to a 2007 analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control, as well as in newborn human babies, breast milk, and umbilical cord blood. A growing group of scientists have been tracking the chemical’s spread through the environment, documenting its presence in a wide range of wildlife, including Loggerhead sea turtles, bottlenose dolphins, harbor seals, caribou, walruses, bald eagles, lions, tigers, arctic birds, and polar bears. Although DuPont no longer uses C8, fully removing the chemical from all the bodies of water and bloodstreams it pollutes is now impossible. And, because it is so chemically stable — in fact, as far as scientists can determine, it never breaks down — C8 is expected to remain on the planet forever.

Looking Back At DuPont’s History of Poisoning Entire Cities with C8

After Legal Pressure, DuPont Replaces One Poison with Another


Disastrous Water Infrastructure In America (move this stuff up above the golf course stuff, next to the Ring of Fire water access cut off warning)

Leaking water pipes can allow potentially harmful contaminants into our drinking water, new research has shown.  The study, by engineers at the University of Sheffield, is the first to prove conclusively that contaminants can enter pipes through leaks and be transported through the pipe network.

The research, funded by the Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council, used a purpose-built test facility in UK to conduct the studies.

Professor Boxall says: “Previous studies have shown that material around contain harmful contaminants, including viruses and bacteria from faeces, so anything sucked into the network through a leak is going to include things we don’t want to be drinking.”

It is uncertain how often dynamic pressures are low enough to cause contaminants to enter our as internationally, water distribution networks are not monitored at sufficient frequency.

The limited studies of operational networks to date, mainly in the US, have shown that these pressure drops do regularly take place.

Researcher Dr Richard Collins says: “Our research shows that contaminants that enter through a leaking pipe could be reaching consumers’ taps, and although this will be at very low concentrations, it would fail the safety tests if detected. We also believe that microorganisms, including pathogens, which enter the network in this way could attach to the inner surface of the pipe and multiply.”

Improvement efforts have been deemed unprofitable in the United States.  Capitalism is not the correct way of looking at hazards to human health.

Read more at:



add links and quotes

add links and quotes

The government’s attitude toward poor areas effected by poisoned water coming from lead pipes is “It costs money, so you fix it.”  It’s both public infrastructure and residential infrastructure.

Indiana’s Toxic WASTELAND: Water, Air And Soil Poisoned

Michigan’s Water Wars: Nestlé Pumps Millions of Gallons for Free While Flint Pays for Poisoned Water


Special Report: Lead poisons children in L.A. neighborhoods rich and poor

LA Water More Dangerous Than Flint



Why are people so stupid?  Probably a combination of capitalism-induced myopia, personal impatience and coerced mental dependency, deterministic social ideology, shallow materialistic values, straight-up poisoning and lack of realistic food and health education. And no time and resources to study seriously on their own.

People don’t trust society at all.  Why should they?


Radioactive Water Coming To Your Sink?

Crony Corporate Democrats Silent on Standing Rock Brutality!


Hydraulic Fractruring FRACKING .. find WATER POISONING FACTS

Avoid Anything With Sodium Benzoate

Common Preservatives — Sodium Benzoate+ Citric/Ascorbic Acid Combination = Benzene

Common Sweeteners —

Common Additives —

Poisonous Pesticides in Fruits and Vegetables and Processed Packaged Items without Organic Label

LIST CLEAN FIFTEEN THAT ARE OKAY TO BUY NON-ORGANIC — then look at possible reasons to buy organic anyway.  LESS NUTRITIONAL CONTENT if grown in non-organically approved soil, what else?

LIST DIRTY DOZEN, actually more than a dozen, list all … google search for info about known effects of ingesting pesticides from fruits and vegetables

Share Everywhere

You may also like...

0 thoughts on “America Poisoned > Clean Water and Food Supply > Needs Political Support and Populist Uprising”

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Post Slides

Text Widget Experiment

Text can go here...Button