We need to reverse the damage that has already been done, NOT increase the toxicity of our environment. stock out
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Apparently the 50,000 messages Food & Water Watch supporters sent back in March wasn't enough to keep the EPA from caving in to nuclear industry pressure. Now, the EPA is moving forward with a guidance to increase the amount of radiation allowed in your drinking water.
It's not just a slight increase they're proposing. We're talking the equivalent of 250 chest x-rays a year!
The EPA quietly dropped the news on this so-called "protective action guidance" earlier this week, hoping we'd miss it. Not a chance. We've only got a short window of opportunity to make a big impact. Send a message to President Obama and the EPA — do NOT increase limits on radiation allowed in my drinking water.
Right now, if a disaster were to strike — like a fracking truck spilling radioactive wastewater near your water, or even a nuclear disaster like Fukushima — we would be protected by the clear Safe Drinking Water Act limits already in place. But the EPA wants to drastically increase that limit up to a few years after immediate response to an emergency.¹
This new proposal would force people to get the radiation equivalent of chest x-rays 5 days a week, 50 weeks a year for up to 4 years — with no informed consent — just from drinking water. Unacceptable.
There's a reason that limits were imposed in the first place — high levels of radiation are dangerous. There is no justification for exposing people to high levels of radiation, emergency or not. For the EPA to consider higher amounts is not only irresponsible, it's dangerous.
Nobody should have to consume highly radioactive water, no matter the emergency.
The nuclear industry has been lobbying to increase this limit for a long time. A similar proposal first came to light at the end of the Bush administration, and somehow it's resurfaced in the last eight years. And this proposal is even higher than what was first proposed! When the Obama administration initially floated the proposal back in March, Food & Water Watch jumped on it, and nearly 50,000 of you did the same, urging the administration to not consider this proposal. And yet, here we are again.
Frankly this industry giveaway is perplexing. Maybe we weren't loud enough last time. So let's turn up the volume.
The EPA is asking for public comments from you. Submit your public comment to the EPA today to withdraw the proposed increase in radiation levels.
Our drinking water is way too valuable for this administration-approved nuclear industry free pass.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
stock here: besides some activism, we should also be taking direct action to protect ourselves.
There are reverse osmosis systems, usually with 3 total filters, which are pretty inexpensive, like $150 (plus installation) and a handy person can easily do the install. Just make sure all the small parts and control valves are installed and installed where they should be and facing the right flow direction.
That said I am not recommending the product shown here, because I have nothing to add from personal experience. But the discussion in the comments is worthy to read. stock out
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
https://consciousnourishment.org/2015/03/06/finally-truly-pure-water-at-an-affordable-cost-review-of-pure-effect-ultra-uc-water-filter/
Diana Paez
Hi Jason,
Here is Pure Effects Response to your concerns:
Yes, he has valid points, in response:
1. The NSF Certifications are not done by our company, but by our suppliers of various parts and media we use in the system. Your reader is right, unfortunately, NSF makes it prohibitively expensive for small businesses like ours to get NSF Certification (costs over $40,000), and thus, helps keep the competition low for their main customers, mainstream companies like PUR, BRITA, etc. So we found a work around, and that is to ensure what we use in our system has already been NSF and/or WQA Certified by our suppliers.
The Fluorsorb Media is NSF61 Certified, Our Catalytic Carbons are NSF61 & 42, the Heavy Metal Reduction Media (KFD55) is NSF 42 certified. The filter housings are BPA and Phthalate-Free food-grade and are NSF Certified for pressure testing and material safety. All metal parts are lead-free.
2. Apart from doing consistent in-house testing with our own equipment (much cheaper than sending to lab every time), we still did independent lab analysis to eliminate bias, as such, I’ve attached testing we’ve done of 2 of the most difficult contaminants to remove, e.g. Fluoride, Chloramine, and Uranium.
a. Fluoride was removed over 75%, which is quite exceptional when you are working with low fluoride concentrations to begin with (fluoride becomes more and more difficult to remove as the in-fluent concentrations get low, there is a certain scientific phenomenon that occurs), and nevertheless, at 0.73ppm our system got it down to 0.18ppm, a 75.3% reduction. (See in-fluent and effluent report attached).
b. Chloramine was removed over 99% for at least 1000 gallons with our system, see report here:
http://www.pureeffectfilters.com/Chloramine_ULTRA.pdf
c. Radioactive Uranium was removed over 99%, see report here:
http://www.pureeffectfilters.com/Uranium_Removal.pdf
I hope this helps, let me know if you or your readers have any further questions. Thank you.
Kind Regards,
Igor Milevskiy
Manager
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They have a good article on "liver cleanse" too
https://consciousnourishment.org/2013/09/26/why-clean-your-liver-how-to-10-liver-cleansing-foods/
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And keeping an eye on the ever increasing toxity of the environment that we live in, lets review Monsanto as the poster boy for all that is bad
"Saving the world," and other lies
Monsanto's public relations story about genetically modified organisms (GMOs) are largely based on five concepts.1. GMOs are needed to feed the world.
2. GMOs have been thoroughly tested and proven safe.
3. GMOs increase yield.
4. GMOs reduce the use of agricultural chemicals.
5. GMOs can be contained, and therefore coexist with non-GM crops.
All five are pure myths -- blatant falsehoods about the nature and benefit of this infant technology. The experience of former Monsanto employee Kirk Azevedo helps expose the first two lies, and provides some insight into the nature of the people working at the company.
In 1996, Monsanto recruited young Kirk Azevedo to sell their genetically engineered cotton. Azevedo accepted their offer not because of the pay increase, but due to the writings of Monsanto CEO Robert Shapiro. Shapiro had painted a picture of feeding the world and cleaning up the environment with his company's new technology. When he visited Monsanto's St. Louis headquarters for new employee training, Azevedo shared his enthusiasm for Shapiro's vision during a meeting. When the session ended, a company vice president pulled him aside and set him straight. "Wait a second," he told Azevedo. "What Robert Shapiro says is one thing. But what we do is something else. We are here to make money. He is the front man who tells a story. We don't even understand what he is saying." Azevedo realized he was working for "just another profit-oriented company," and all the glowing words about helping the planet were just a front.
The synergistic effects of all the various poisons around us are finally manifesting.. Fuku was just the tipper. We do need to eat clean food and drink clean water and breathe clean air.. where are the GMO saviors for those ACTUAL problems?? oh yeah they will GMO us next.
ReplyDeleteYa I believe that Fuku by itself is not, was not, and ELE. But in the overall toxic environment that corporate greed, over-population, Government largess, the NWO, and overall increase in sociopathy....were pretty much screwed as a human race, and we are taking down most species with us.
DeleteHoly Hanie, the EPA is slipping us another Mickey. When I heard this song I thought of America, at this point it's the world, the song is about abandon love. We need to invent a care button!
ReplyDeletehttps://youtu.be/NdXrIAmbLj0
Maybe some Nuremberg type trials would them think twice.
DeleteYessir, that can happen! We're not done, we will understand a new science, 'The Balance'
Deletehttp://www.globalresearch.ca/war-crimes-tribunal-finds-bush-and-blair-guilty/5478367