home / subscribe / donate / books / archives / search / links / feedback / events / faq
Special Double Issue Edition of Our Subscriber-Only Newsletter!
Hamas Chief on Israel’s Decline
Khaled Meshal talks to CounterPunch about Israel’s terrorism, Hamas’rockets and what Hamas will settle for. ALSO: What’s the body count from neoliberal terrorism in India? The largest wave of suicides in human history. India’s best journalist, P. Sainath, lays out the awful story. How did Harvard Law School behave in the McCarthy witch hunts? With sickening cowardice. Famed attorney Jonathan Lubell describes how the School tried to force him to testify and how the Harvard Law Review slammed the door in his face. What causes autism? Steven Higgs tracks the chemicals that may cause developmental disabilities. Alexander Cockburn honors one of England’s greatest environmental writers, the late Roger Deakin. Get your Legacy Edition today by subscribing online or calling 1-800-840-3683 Contributions to CounterPunch are tax-deductible. Click here to make a donation. If you find our site useful please: Subscribe Now! CounterPunch books and gear make great presents.
Order CounterPunch By Email For Only $35 a Year !
Note to Nation Readers:
For the Two Books for $30 Offer Call Us at 1-800-840-3683
|
Today's Stories January 9/11, 2009 George Ciccariello-Maher January 8, 2009 Jean Bricmont / Franklin Lamb Paul Craig Roberts Kevin Alexander Gray Chris Floyd Ewa Jasiewicz Steve Conn Harvey Wasserman Wayne S. Smith Linda Mamoun Adam Turl Chris Papaleonardos Website of the Day January 7, 2009 Saree Makdisi Franklin Lamb William Blum Belén Fernández Lawrence Davidson Allan Nairn Jonathan Cook Muhammad Idrees Ahmad Deepak Tripathi Cal Winslow Manuel Garcia, Jr. Dr. Hannah Safran Website of the Day January 6, 2009 Pam Martens Victoria Buch Neve Gordon Tami Sarfatti / Mike Whitney Alan Farago Gary Leupp Larry Everest Ron Jacobs David Macaray Stephanie Basile Stacey Warde Website of the Day January 5, 2009 Paul Craig Roberts Sousan Hammad Wajahat Ali Mats Svensson Jen Marlowe Muhammad Ali Khalidi Brian Cloughley Faheem Hussain William Cook Dr. Trudy Bond Christopher Ketcham Steve Early Dave Lindorff Website of the Day January 2 - 4, 2009 Alexander Cockburn Uri Avnery Jonathan Cook Paul Craig Roberts Brian Eno Ralph Nader Omar Barghouti Graham Usher P. Sainath Belén Fernández Deb Reich Gary Leupp Michael Yates Joanne Mariner Seth Sandronsky Cynthia McKinney Sonja Karkar Deepak Tripathi Robert Fantina John Ross Norm Kent Larry Portis Richard Rhames Dee C. Lubell David Yearsley Lorenzo Wolff Marc Catone Poets' Basement Website of the Weekend
January 1, 2008 Jennifer Loewenstein Oren Ben-Dor Wajahat Ali Saul Landau David Michael Green Website of the Day December 31, 2008 Pam Martens Neve Gordon / Ted Honderich Brian Cloughley Ron Jacobs Vijay Prashad Franklin Lamb Mike Whitney David Macaray Richard Thieme Mary Lynn Cramer Stephen Lendman Worthy Group of the Day December 30, 2008 Paul Craig Roberts Tariq Ali Robert Bryce Jonathan Cook Gary Leupp Dave Lindorff Brian McKenna John Walsh Ramzy Baroud Bob Sommer Worthy Activist of the Day
December 29, 2008 Jennifer Loewenstein Neve Gordon Joshua Frank George Salzman / Norman Solomon Ewa Jasiewicz Rob Larson Kenneth Libby Robert Weissman Elsa Johnson Nicola Nasser Belén Fernández Worthy Group of the Day December 26-28, 2008 Alexander Cockburn Dr Eyad Al Serraj Jeffrey St. Clair Bradley Simpson Ralph Nader Gary Leupp Ellen Cantarow Matt Landon David Macaray Patrick Bond Norm Kent Brian T. Ketcham Rannie Amiri Larry Portis Richard Rhames Stephen Lendman James L. Secor Ramzy Baroud Harold Pinter Cpt. Paul Watson Howard Lisnoff Michael Dee Steve Conn Poets' Basement Worthy Group of the Weekend December 25, 2008 Judy Gumbo Albert Rev. William E. Alberts Hannah Mermelstein Worthy Group of the Day December 24, 2008 Bill Quigley Saul Landau Sam Smith Brian Cloughley John Ross Eric Walberg Norm Kent Stephen Martin Worthy Group of the Day December 23, 2008 Michael Hudson Michael Yates Chuck Spinney Vijay Prashad Brian Horejsi David Macaray Neil Watkins / David Michael Green Worthy Group of the Day December 22, 2008 Pam Martens Gary Leupp Mike Whitney Karl Grossman Niall Meehan Steve Conn Uri Avnery Corey D. B. Walker David Swanson Worthy Group of the Day December 19 - 21, 2008 Alexander Cockburn Jeffrey St. Clair Paul Craig Roberts Patrick Cockburn Felice Pace Diane Farsetta George Ciccariello-Maher Eric Bergoust Marjorie Cohn Stan Cox Michael Donnelly Robert Weissman Ralph Nader Alan Farago Sam Smith Timothy G. Hermach Seth Sandronsky Rannie Amiri David Yearsley Martha Rosenberg Dave Lindorff Christopher Brauchli Missy Beattie Richard Rhames Stephen Martin Paul Krassner Lorenzo Wolff Poets' Basement Worthy Group of the Weekend December 18, 2008 Phillip Doe Ronnie Cummins Jesse Sharkey Saul Landau Peter Morici Dave Lindorff Panos Petrou Jeff Cohen / Worthy Group of the Day December 17, 2008 Peter Lee Conn Hallinan Mike Whitney Jeff Halper Alan Farago Peter Morici Norm Kent Col. Douglas MacGregor Margaret Kimberley Ron Jacobs Worthy Group of the Day December 16, 2008 Vicente Navarro Patrick Cockburn Thomas Michael Power Jason Hribal Farzana Versey Wajahat Ali / Mats Svensson Paul Fitzgerald / David Macaray Howard Lisnoff Worthy Group of the Day December 15, 2008 Andy Worthington Franklin Lamb Karl Grossman Brian Cloughley Mary Lynn Cramer Steve Early Thomas Christie Ken Paff Niranjan Ramakrishnan Dave Lindorff Alan Farago Worthy Group of the Day December 12 / 14, 2008 Alexander Cockburn Michael Hudson / David Price Jeffrey St. Clair Frank Barat John Ross Binoy Kampmark David Macaray Ralph Nader Eamonn Fingleton Lawrence Velvel Behzad Yaghmaian Sam Husseini Tom Barry Howard Lisnoff Laura Carlsen Raj Patel Ron Jacobs Paul Watson David Yearsley Lorenzo Wolff Kim Nicolini Susie Day Poets' Basement Worthy Group of the Weekend December 11, 2008 Patrick Cockburn P. Sainath Vicken Cheterian Ray McGovern Dedrick Muhammad Lee Sustar Peter Morici Ayesha Ijaz Khan George Wuerthner Christopher Brauchli Worthy Group of the Day December 10, 2008 Ismael Hossein-Zadeh Mary Lynn Cramer Manuel Garcia, Jr. Joshua Frank Steve Conn Lee Sustar Glen Ford Stephen Lendman Nadia Hijab Dave Lindorff Website of the Day December 9, 2008 Mike Whitney Fawzia Afzal-Khan Ghada Karmi Dave Lindorff Steve Breyman Lee Sustar / Rev. William E. Alberts Martha Rosenberg Sam Husseini David Macaray Website of the Day December 8, 2008 Steve Early Michael Hudson Patrick Cockburn Diane Farsetta Paul Craig Roberts Daniel Gross Saul Landau Harvey Wasserman Mike Ferner Norman Solomon David Michael Green Website of the Day
December 5 / 7, 2008 Alexander Cockburn Brian Cloughley Paul Craig Roberts Liaquat Ali Khan Farzana Versey Peter Lee Peter Morici Ralph Nader / Yinon Cohen / Wajahat Ali Johnny Barber Alan Farago Jeremy Scahill Mike Whitney Ranjit Hoskote Carl Finamore Marjorie Cohn Norm Kent Missy Beattie Binoy Kampmark David Macaray Nancy Stohlman Ron Jacobs David Yearsley Lorenzo Wolff Poets' Basement Website of the Weekend December 4, 2008 Ece Temelkuran Ralph Nader Harry Browne Eamonn Fingleton Conn Hallinan Mike Whitney Stewart J. Lawrence Paul Fitzgerald / Karyn Strickler Jennifer Matsui Website of the Day December 3, 2008 Andrew Cockburn Sheldon Rampton Robert Weissman Yifat Susskind William Blum Alan Singer David Macaray Martha Rosenberg Mats Svensson Website of the Day December 2, 2008 Jeremy Scahill Paul Craig Roberts Ayesha Ijaz Khan Sarah Anderson / William Blum John Ross Dave Lindorff Nicola Nasser Steve Conn Robert Bryce Website of the Day December 1, 2008 Patrick Cockburn Damien Millet / Vijay Prashad Deepak Tripathi Joshua Frank P. Sainath Alan Farago Binoy Kampmark Chris Genovali David Michael Green Stephen Martin Website of the Day November 28-30, 2008 Alexander Cockburn Mike Whitney Ted Honderich Tom Kerr Mike Ely David Yearsley Deepak Tripathi Sonja Karkar Ramzy Baroud Robert Weitzel Robert Roth Carlos Fierro David Macaray David Rosen James Cockcroft Stan Cox Steve Conn Stephen Martin Richard Rhames Kim Nicolini Lorenzo Wolff Poets' Basement
|
Weekend Edition You Are What Your Grandmother AteCan Chemicals be Regulated?By PETER MONTAGUE In the past 20 years, four new discoveries have completely changed our understanding of chemical hazards. 1. Many chemicals can interfere with the hormone system Beginning roughly 80 years ago, scientific studies started showing that some chemicals can interfere with growth, development, and behavior of animals, including humans. For 50 years these studies were generally ignored. Then during the 1980s, dozens of new studies -- often done in the Great Lakes region -- showed that male fish were being feminized, that female gulls were pairing up to sit on nests together... and so on. There were other effects as well, but the sex- related changes caught people's attention first. In 1991 Theo Colborn pulled together a meeting at the Wingspread Conference Center in Racine, Wisconsin, which issued a consensus statement, "Chemically Induced Alterations in Sexual Development: The Wildlife/Human Connection." Subsequently Colborn and others published the popular book, Our Stolen Future. Since that time, a flood of new studies have confirmed and reconfirmed that many industrial chemicals can interfere with the chemical signaling systems that coordinate all the biological activities that a living thing requires -- beginning at conception and ceasing only with death. (See Rachel's #263, #264, and #365.) And the changes are not just sex-related -- the central nervous system is strongly affected, as is the immune system. "Endocrine disrupting" chemicals are all-purpose poisons. With this new understanding of endocrine-disrupting chemicals, we have also learned that...
Thus this new understanding of toxicity has falsified Paracelsus's 450-year-old maxim, "The dose makes the poison." Today we know that often the timing makes the poison and that sometimes less is worse. (See Rachel's #754.) As you might imagine, this new understanding has greatly complicated the task of toxicity testing. 2. Chemical exposures in the womb can "program" a fetus for life Scientists studying cell-signal-disrupting chemicals discovered "fetal programming" -- that the lifelong development of a human can sometimes be permanently determined by chemical exposures in the womb, including chronic diseases that may only become apparent in middle age (cancer, adult-onset asthma, diabetes, etc.) (See Rachel's #343, #447, and #909, among others. Of course this applies to non-human mammals as well.) This, too, has greatly complicated the task of toxicity testing. 3. "You are what your grandmother ate." In recent years, an entirely new theory of genetic inheritance -- called epigenetics -- has become widely (if not yet universally) accepted. Epigenetics tells us that environmental influences on cells can be inherited even though the structure of the cell's DNA has not been fundamentally altered. A generation ago, such a concept was considered heresy, unthinkable really. This new knowledge means that environmental influences are far more important than anyone understood previously. (One popular expression of this understanding is, "You are what your grandmother ate.") (See Rachel's #876.) Many scientists believe that epigenetic changes contribute importantly to fetal programming and to the initiation of cancers and other chronic diseases that only become apparent years or decades later. Ask yourself, how can you rapidly test a chemical to see if it will cause a chronic disease years in the future? 4. The "cocktail" effect Many studies now show that exposure to "insignificant" doses of several chemicals can combine to produce significant effects. In other words, simultaneous exposure to very "low" doses of several chemicals can cause biological effects that none of the chemicals alone could cause. British toxicologist Andreas Kortenkamp calls this the "something from nothing" effect. And U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) scientist Earl Gray calls this phenomenon "the new math -- zero plus zero equals something." Initially scientists assumed that only chemicals acting by a particular biological mechanism could combine to produce an effect. But more recently, experiments have shown that chemicals acting by a variety of biological mechanisms can combine to produce a single effect. When we are exposed to a mixture of chemicals, "Every mixture component contributes to the effect, no matter how small," says Andreas Kortenkamp. These four new understandings of chemicals make chemical regulation a daunting task, to put it mildly. First you need to know the potency of each single chemical, which biological tissues it affects in what ways, and whether a population will be exposed to other chemicals that affect the same tissues. Then you must test groups of chemicals in combinations at low doses and high doses, and several doses in between. Then you need to determine whether the creature being studied (rat, bird, human, or whatever) is affected by this combination of chemicals at one particular stage of life and not at other stages. For example in the case of humans we know that, during gestation in the womb, exposure during one particular week may produces effects not seen when exposure occurs during a different week. Now consider the actual environment in which exposures to humans are presently occurring. Here is the opening paragraph from an article in New Scientist magazine in late 2007: "Today, and every day, you can expect to be exposed to some 75,000 artificial chemicals. All day long you will be breathing them in, absorbing them through your skin and swallowing them in your food. Throughout the night they will seep out of carpets, pillows and curtains, and drift into your lungs. Living in this chemical soup is an inescapable side effect of 21st-century living. The question is: is it doing us any harm? "There are good reasons to think that it might be. Not because of the action of any one chemical but because of the way the effects of different components combine once they are inside the body." Taken together, these new understandings of toxicity make thorough premarket chemical testing not merely difficult, but impossible. The steps required are far too cumbersome, complex, and -- most importantly -- expensive. Thorough testing is not going to happen. Scientists (or advocates) who says it is are kidding us (or themselves). Not convinced? Suppose we wanted to test just 1000 chemicals in unique combinations of 5 chemicals. Then we'd have to test 8,250,291,250,200 (yes, 8 trillion) unique groups of chemicals.[1] If we assume we could test a million combinations each year (a wildly optimistic assumption), then it would take us 8,000 years to complete the task. And we are presently putting 700 new chemicals into commercial channels each year. No, chemicals are not going to be thoroughly tested before being marketed, especially not in combination with other chemicals already on the market. These new understandings of chemical toxicity will eventually drive almost everyone to the conclusion that broad screening principles must be applied before individual chemical tests -- thus requiring us to far go beyond even the European Union's new chemicals policies. The Swedish Natural Step principles would seem to be the place to start in designing a truly adequate and protective chemicals policy, but few in the U.S. are there yet. (See Rachel's #667-668.) I don't want to be too gloomy, but I notice that most chemical policy activists are not mentioning the real problem with chemical regulation: the regulators are routinely captured by the corporations they regulate. This is at least as true under Democrats as it is under Republicans. To their credit, chemicals policy activists have petitioned the Obama administration for a well-though-out list of regulatory reforms. However in their "Letter of Principles for Toxic Chemical Regulatory Reform" (which I signed) to the Obama transition team, there is no mention -- zero -- of how to make regulations actually work. The letter spells out a vast array of requirements that could protect the public a little better from industrial poisons. But ideas for creating human regulatory agencies or departments that are independent of big money? Complete silence. Former 30-year EPA employee William Sanjour in 1992 told us why regulatory agencies fail. We could probably all gain by carefully re- reading his essay, "Why EPA is Like It Is, and What Can Be Done About It." (5 Mbytes PDF). Chemical regulation is not a primarily a technical problem. It is primarily a human problem of money and political power. Many of us like to pretend that it's not, but pretending -- and hoping -- won't change what we're up against. Peter Montague is editor of Rachel's Democracy and Health News.
|
Now Available from CounterPunch Books! Waiting for
Lightning
|