The Human Right To NO PESTICIDE POISONING!
The 'legal' right to freely enforce pesticide applications (without fear of prosecution and charges of negligence and disability discrimination) is currently being stitched up globally, and particularly and perversely in Western nations under the political influence of Big-Pharma. These legal dynamics demonstrate "rot within a political system" (Aulich 2006) and clearly describe the closing stages of a corrupt and technology-obsessed civilization that puts the convenience of pesticides ahead of its literal future.
What Do We Really Want?
Note: "Most tragically, suffering, illness and disease surround us today in a way we would not have imagined a half century ago. We have banished some diseases only to have them replaced by a grumbling yet profound toxicity which is stripping our children of their rightful future" (Donohoe, 1998:38).
Also: "...pesticides are strongly linked to birth defects... science will not solve this problem for us. Isn't it time to consider a human rights approach, an ethical challenge to the poisoners?... The old science-based strategy has failed us. Perhaps a new, precautionary path can get us where we need to go. The precautionary principle says, 'When an activity raises threats of harm to human health or the environment, precautionary measures should be taken even if some cause and effect relationships are not fully established scientifically' " (Montague, 2001).
"Now the Lymphoma Foundation of America has pulled together and summarized in a 49-page booklet all the available studies of the relationship between lymphoma and pesticides. It is an impressive piece of work by Susan Osburn, who directed the project, and a scientific review panel of 12 physicians and lymphoma researchers. The booklet summarizes 99 studies of humans and one study of pet dogs (see REHN #250) in relation to pesticide exposures. Of the 99 human studies, 75 indicate a connection between exposure to pesticides and lymphomas... The Lymphoma Foundation's booklet lists 12 ways that most of us are routinely exposed to pesticides in our daily lives even if we use no pesticides in our homes: routine spraying of apartments, condos, offices (and the associated lawns), public buildings and public spaces (parks, green spaces alongside highways, power line rights of way), and in motels, hotels, and restaurants... We might well ask, where did these corporations get permission to violate our well-established human right to personal security? And why do we allow these toxic trespasses into our bodies to occur without our informed consent? In other words, we might begin to view pesticide exposures not as a scientific question, but mainly as a question of morals and ethics, a question of human rights... Pesticide exposures seem to give rise to Parkinson's (REHN #635) - a horrible degenerative disease of the nervous system. Pesticide exposures diminish children's memory, physical stamina, coordination, and [the] ability to carry out simple tasks like drawing a stick figure of a human being. (See REHN #648.) Pesticide exposures seem to make children more aggressive. Pesticide exposures seem to contribute to the epidemic of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) that has swept through U.S. children in recent years (See REHN #678.)" (Montague 2001).
My Son & I Poisoned: All Associated With My Legal Case Bankrupted
My son (at age 8) and I were both poisoned (me severely) when we had two pesticide treatments forced on us by the New South Wales Department of Housing (see: http://poisoningandlegalaction.com.au). I, the pesticide injury victim, was blamed wholly by Housing's Barrister in my trial for our poisoning, and yet I had warned Housing and the pesticide company 8 times not to spray because of my chemical-sensitive asthmatic condition! See: http://www.indiegogo.com/poisoned-people.
Further, and in tune with the above heading's theme of the expanded negative impacts that bleed out from litigation, my nephew (who funded my legal action) has been bankrupted by the never-ending legal and medical report fees that 9 years of legal action demanded. See: http://indiegogo.com/the-good-samaritan. My son's psychological health has been devastated by his poisoning at such a young age, and my physical and mental health have been utterly ruined.
All this because companies and authorities obscenely demand the fascist right to willfully expose you, the paying public, to toxic chemicals regardless of the toxicity of the chemical substance and regardless of your personal health or age.
Think about renting for a moment: aren't you also paying your landlord to be reasonably protected in your rental accommodation?
What Do We Need To Do?
We, the people, need to demonstrate true character and tell our politicians that we fiercely object to the present corruption of our legal and political systems in their protection of authorities and government departments from claims of negligence. We want fairness in the assessment of such claims, and we want our basic Human Rights back.
The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, signed by the U.S. in 1948, says (Article 3), "Everyone has the right to life, liberty, and security of person." Article 4, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution obligates the federal government to protect the citizenry against "domestic violence" which arguably includes modern forms of personal physiological invasion (domestic violence) such as toxic assault/injury and chemical trespass. See
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/Constitution/article04/, or http://www.usconstitution.net/const.html#A4Sec4.
The Paris Appeal
"We call upon national decision-makers, European Authorities, international organizations, and specifically the United Nations Organization (UNO), to take the following measures:
Measure # 1
Banning all products that are certainly or probably carcinogenic, mutagenic or reprotoxic (CMRs) for human beings, as specified by competent international scientific authorities and organizations, and therefore applying to these products the principle of substitution; exceptionally, whenever implementation of this principle is not feasible and the use of the product concerned is considered unavoidable, limiting its use to a minimum with particularly stringent measures of fixed quotas,
Measure # 2
Applying the precautionary principle to all chemicals that, regardless of toxicity characteristics specified in Measure # 1 (refer to §9 and §13), and because they are persistent, bioaccumulative, toxic (PBT) or very persistent and very bioaccumulative (vPvB), constitute an allegedly serious and/or irreversible danger for human and/or animal health, and more generally the environment, without waiting for the definite proof of an epidemiological link, so as to anticipate and avoid serious and/or irreversible sanitary or ecological damage,
Measure # 3
Promoting the adoption of toxicological standards or international thresholds to protect people, based on the assessment of risks for the most vulnerable, i.e. mostly children and the embryo.
Measure # 4
With respect to the precautionary principle, adopting programs with scheduled deadlines and targets in precise figures so as to achieve elimination or strictly regulated reduction in polluting substances emissions and in the utilization of marketed chemicals, such as pesticides, modeling the reduction in use implemented in Sweden, Denmark or Norway..." (IDEA, 2006).
What Do We Really Want? Health & Perpetuity!
We want our children to be safe from the transnational chemical giants-sponsored, anti-Duty of Care, anti-Precautionary Principle, unexamined and utterly irresponsible, CRIMINAL and worldwide love-affair with toxic and reproductive capacity (fertility)-destroying chemicals. We want this Extinction Level Event stopped! Think this statement is too crazy? Note:
"We're monitoring our own extinction" (Prof. Stuart Hill, University of Western Sydney 1999, pers. comm.).
"Hundreds of thousands of people are dying around the world each year from
the effects of the use, or misuse, of pesticides" (Konradsen, et al., 2003).
A "study showed there was approximately [a] 2-fold greater risk of having a
stillbirth if the mother lived within 1 mile from an agricultural area which used organophosphate - pyrethroid16 - carbamate - or chlorinated pesticides" (Sinclair & Pressinger, no date, citing Bell, et al., 2001).
"§9. Whereas, regarding toxicology, a number of these substances or chemicals are hormone-disrupting chemicals (endocrine disrupters), that can be carcinogenic, mutagenic or toxic for reproduction (CMRs) for human beings, and therefore susceptible to induce cancers, congenital malformations and/or infertility; whereas some of these substances or products can be, among other effects, allergenic resulting in chronic respiratory diseases, such as asthma; whereas some are neurotoxic chemicals, leading to degenerative diseases of the central nervous system in adult[s]... and to intellectual impairment in children; whereas some are immunotoxic, leading to immunodeficiency, particularly in children, causing infections, especially viral infections; whereas pesticides are deliberately spread in large amounts in the environment, while a great number are toxic… for animals and/or human beings and for the environment...
§10. Whereas children are the most vulnerable and exposed to contamination by these pollutants…
§11. Whereas these polluting substances or products can induce diseases in children population, such as those listed in §9; whereas one out of seven children in Europe suffers from asthma, whereas asthma is made worse by city and home pollution; whereas incidence in pediatric cancers has been on the rise for the last 20 years in some industrialized countries; and whereas these considerations all lead to the fact that Children are now in serious danger..." (IDEA 2006).
Pesticides promote cancer, foetal death, miscarriages, and premature births
(NCAP, 1999:3; Bonn, 2005; Cox, 2004).
"Doctors at a weekend conference in Winnipeg say there is a disturbing trend when it comes to the rising rate of certain cancers. They say pesticides are to blame for the increase - especially in childhood cancers" (Sinclair & Pressinger, no date, citing Winnipeg CBC News - June 7, 2004.
WE ARE KILLING OFF OUR OWN CHILDREN! Most CERTAINLY, we humans are engineering the dumbest Extinction Level Event in the long history of this Planet!
Aulich, S. [Graduate of the Lazarski School of Commerce and Law in Warsaw (Master of Laws) and the George Washington University Law School (LL.M.)] 2006 [online]. THE CORROSION OF THE AMERICAN CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM, in The Europen Courier, September 23, 2006. Source: http://europeancourier.org/CriminalJustice_9_23_06.htm; accessed: 25th April 2010.
Bell, et.al (Bell, E.M., Hertz-Picciotto, I., & Beaumont, J.J., Department of Epidemiology, School of Public Health, University of North Carolina National Cancer Institute, Bethesda, Maryland) 2001, 'Fetal Deaths Linked to Living Close to Agricultural Pesticide Use During Weeks 3-8 of Pregnancy', http://www.chem?tox.com.pesticides (original source: Epidemiology, 12(2), March 2001); accessed: 16 July 2008.
Bonn, D. (Dorothy) 2005, 'Roundup Revelation: Weed Killer Adjuvants May Boost Toxicity', http://www.ehponline.org/docs/2005/113-6/ss.html; accessed: 14 Sept. 2009.
Cox, C. 1993, 'Biotechnology and Agricultural Pesticide Use: An Interaction Between Genes and Poisons', Journal of Pesticide Reform, Vol. 13, No. 3 (Fall), NCAP, PO Box 1393, Eugene, OR 97440, USA.
Donohoe, M. 1998, Killing Us Softly, Chemical Injury and Chemical Sensitivity 1.2 (internet Creative Commons release 2008),
http://web.mac.com/doctormark/DoctorMark/KUS.html; accessed: 13/12/2008.
IDEA (Irish Doctors Environmental Association) 2006, THE PARIS APPEAL: International Declaration on Diseases Due to Chemical Pollution,
www.ideaireland.org; accessed: 10th October 2007.
Konradsen, F., van der Hoek., W., Cole, D.C., Hutchinson, G., Daisley, H., Singh, S., & Eddleston, M. 2003, 'Reducing acute poisoning in developing countries—options for restricting the availability of pesticides', Toxicology 192 (2003) 249-261.
Montague, P. (National Writers Union) 2001, '#726 - Science, Precaution and Pesticides, 06-Jun-2001', in http://www.rachel.org/en/node/5340; accessed: 16 July 2008. Reference  cited: Susan Osburn, RESEARCH REPORT: DO PESTICIDES CAUSE LYMPHOMA? Available by U.S. mail from Lymphoma Foundation of America, P.O. Box 15335, Chevy Chase, MD 20825. Tel. (202) 223-6181. ISBN 0-9705127-0-8. Available at: http://www.lymphomahelp.org/docs/research/researchreport/rr_2000.pdf.
NCAP (Northwest Coalition for Alternatives to Pesticides) 1999, 'Landscaping Nature's Way: Using Natural Landscaping To Reduce Herbicide Use', Journal of Pesticide Reform, Vol.19, No. 4, PO Box 1393, Eugene, Oregon 97440 USA.
Sinclair, W. (M.D.; Board Certified Immunology) & Pressinger, R. (M.Ed.) no date, Home and Lawn Pesticides More Dangerous than Previously Believed, http://www.chem-tox.com.pesticides, accessed: 17 July 2008.
Murray Thompson (BAppSci Environmental Health 1998, University of Western Sydney)
Poisoned People A website for those poisoned by toxic chemicals -- particularly pesticides -- or those who wish to avoid pesticide poisoning.
Poisoning And Legal Action A website showing what forces you are up against when you take legal action against a government department after they forced two pesticide treatments on you and ruined your health.
Indiegogo.com Campaign 1 A website where you can help me and my son fight against a legal decision that does not protect people from chemical poisoning.
Causes.com Campaign 1 A website addressing the need for funding for our Appeal to reverse a Supreme Court decision allowing companies and governments to freely splash around pesticides.
Change.org Campaign 1 A website about: With Western legal systems constantly doing deals with well-moneyed poisoners, commercial and government interests are being unethically and unprofessionally favored in legal decisions.