212 CHEMICALS FOUND IN URINE AND BLOOD SAMPLES IN AMERICANS, BUT THERE ARE CURRENTLY OVER 8,000 KNOWN CHEMICALS THAT WE ARE EXPOSED TO HERE.
THE CDC CHOSE WHICH CHEMICALS TO LOOK FOR.
AND THEN THEY "POOLED" THE SAMPLES.
INDIVIDUAL TESTS WERE NOT DONE IN THOSE CHOSEN FOR THESE TESTS.
AND THE CDC HAS NOT ISSUED A REPORT ON INDIVIDUAL TESTING SINCE 2009.
"The National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals (National Exposure Report) is a series of ongoing assessments of the U.S. population's exposure to environmental chemicals using biomonitoring.
THE CDC CHOSE WHICH CHEMICALS TO LOOK FOR.
AND THEN THEY "POOLED" THE SAMPLES.
INDIVIDUAL TESTS WERE NOT DONE IN THOSE CHOSEN FOR THESE TESTS.
AND THE CDC HAS NOT ISSUED A REPORT ON INDIVIDUAL TESTING SINCE 2009.
"The National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals (National Exposure Report) is a series of ongoing assessments of the U.S. population's exposure to environmental chemicals using biomonitoring.
Biomonitoring is the direct assessment of people's exposure to chemicals by measuring the chemicals or their breakdown products (metabolites) in blood or urine.
For each chemical studied, scientists at CDC's Environmental Health Laboratory tested the blood or urine of people who took part in CDC's National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES), an ongoing study of the civilian, non-institutionalized U.S. population.
CDC's National Center for Health Statistics conducts NHANES.
By looking for chemicals in blood or urine, researchers are better able to determine how much exposure people have to those chemicals.
CDC's National Center for Health Statistics conducts NHANES.
By looking for chemicals in blood or urine, researchers are better able to determine how much exposure people have to those chemicals.
THEN WHY BOTHER?
WHAT USE IS THE REPORT WHEN IT LEAVES OUT SUCH INFORMATION? THE CDC DIRECTOR TOLD CONGRESS THESE 'REPORTS' ARE ISSUED EVERY TWO YEARS.
Statement by
Henry Falk, M.D., M.P.H.
Acting Director
National Center for Environmental Health
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
before
Committee on Environment and Public Works
Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental
United States Senate
Henry Falk, M.D., M.P.H.
Acting Director
National Center for Environmental Health
Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
before
Committee on Environment and Public Works
Subcommittee on Superfund, Toxics and Environmental
United States Senate
Thursday February 4, 2010
How CDC assesses the U.S. population’s exposure to chemicals:
How CDC assesses the U.S. population’s exposure to chemicals:
CDC’s Environmental Health Laboratory measures chemicals or their metabolites in blood and urine samples from participants in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). NHANES, which is conducted by CDC’s National Center for Health Statistics, involves a complete physical exam, a detailed questionnaire that collects more than 1,000 pieces of information, and the collection of blood and urine samples.
The survey, which is nationally representative of the U.S. population, has been conducted multiple times since the 1970s and became a continuous survey in 1999 with two-year survey cycles. With some exceptions, most urine measurements are done in participants ages 6 years and older, and most serum measurements are done in participants age 12 years and older.
Thus, the exposure information it provides on young children is limited, mostly due to the difficulty in obtaining large enough blood and urine samples from them. Currently blood levels of lead, cadmium, and mercury are measured in children aged 1 year and older, and cotinine, which is a marker for environmental tobacco smoke exposure, is measured in children aged 3 years and older.
CDC scientists publish significant biomonitoring findings from NHANES in peer-reviewed publications, and then CDC periodically publishes a summary report, the National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals.
The Fourth Exposure Report was released in December 2009, and summarizes blood and urine levels for 212 chemicals, including levels for 75 chemicals which had never before been measured in a representative sample of the U.S. population. Findings show evidence of widespread exposure in the U.S. population to some commonly-used commercial chemicals such as bisphenol-A (BPA), the perfluorinated compound known as PFOA, and a type of fire retardant known as BDE-47. The Fourth Exposure Report also notes continued progress in reducing children’s exposure to lead.
EVERY TWO YEARS?
NOPE!NOT ANY MORE!
FIRST REPORT WAS IN 2001.
SECOND REPORT WAS IN 2003, TWO YEARS AFTER FIRST REPORT.
THIRD REPORT WAS IN 2005, TWO YEARS AFTER SECOND REPORT.
FOURTH REPORT WAS IN 2009, FOUR YEARS AFTER THIRD REPORT.
THE 4th "REPORT" LEFT OUT DATA FROM 2003-2004 BECAUSE... IT WASN'T READY YET?
DATA WAS NOT READY FIVE TO SIX YEARS AFTER IT WAS COLLECTED?
NO FIFTH REPORT!
IT'S BEEN 6 YEARS SINCE THE LAST REPORT!
WHY HAVE THEY STOPPED "REPORTING"?
HAVE THEY ALSO STOPPED COLLECTING SAMPLES?
HOW CAN WE BE SURE?
HOW CAN THEY BE "PROTECTING AMERICANS" IF THEY ARE ONLY MONITORING 212 CHEMICALS OUT OF OVER 8,000 IN COMMON USE IN AMERICA?
WELL, IN 2014, THE GOOD OLD CDC ISSUED "UPDATED TABLES" FROM THOSE MISSING RESULTS FROM 6 YEARS AGO AND CLAIMED THEY USED "POOLED SAMPLES"...POOLED FROM WHEN, AND HOW AND WHERE DID THEY OBTAIN THESE POOLED SAMPLES?
"In the National Biomonitoring Program, the decision to pool samples before making chemical measurements has been driven by at least two factors: (1) The need to improve the sensitivity of the measurement; that is, the chemical concentrations are so low that a larger sample volume is necessary to achieve lower limits of detection and greater likelihood of detectable results; and (2) The need to reduce the number of samples analyzed, based on weighing the costs of the analysis against a low frequency of detectable results. "
HOLD ON RIGHT THERE!
HOW WOULD THEY KNOW HOW LOW THE FREQUENCY OF DETECTABLE RESULTS WOULD BE?
WHAT IF, CONTRARY TO THEIR "GUESSTIMATE", INDIVIDUAL LEVELS WERE SKY-HIGH?
WHAT PRICE DID THEY PUT ON HUMAN HEALTH?
COST OUTWEIGHS IMPORTANT ACTUAL RESULTS IN INDIVIDUALS WHO VOLUNTEERED TO BE TESTED?
NOW WE KNOW!
DID THEY REALLY COLLECT SAMPLES FROM A FEW THOUSAND PEOPLE EACH OF THOSE YEARS WHEN THEY ISSUED NO REPORTS?
"POOLED"...HOW MANY SAMPLES IN EACH "POOL"?
10, 100, 1000?
KNOWING THAT WOULD SURELY HELP US SEE HOW ACCURATE THEIR DATA MIGHT BE, YES?
"Although NHANES sampling weights can be incorporated to make pooled sample estimates representative of the non-institutionalized U.S. population, there are statistical estimation challenges.
[I'LL SAY! IT'S A VERY POOR WAY TO COLLECT VALID DATA!]
Measurements of these chemicals in individuals tend to have a log-normal distribution with central tendency best estimated using a geometric mean.
However, the measured value for a pooled sample is comparable to an arithmetic average of measurements in individuals.
Consequently, the pooled sample result is expected to be higher than the geometric mean of multiple individual results.
[AGAIN, HOW THE HELL COULD THEY ACCURATELY EVEN PREDICT HOW HIGH INDIVIDUAL TESTS WOULD BE?]
Another challenge is that direct calculation of the design effects required for ACCURATE standard error and confidence interval estimation IS NOT POSSIBLE because samples are pooled across the design cells of the original survey. For these reasons, data tables showing the pooled sample results present ONLY weighted arithmetic MEANS and UNADJUSTED standard ERRORS for each category.
[UNBELIEVABLE!]
Therefore, when the unadjusted standard error was more than 30% of the weighted arithmetic mean, this is noted with a double asterisk (**) and footnoted.
A complete list of the chemicals included in this Updated Tables is posted on the Report website: Chemicals in the Fourth Report: Updated Tables, February 2015. The Updated Tables, February 2015 provides updated tables for 184 chemicals from the publication of the Fourth Report and new tables for 76 chemicals."
GUESS WHAT WAS NOT TESTED, OBVIOUSLY!
ROUNDUP, aka GLYPHOSATE!
ALSO KNOWN AS N-(Phosphonomethyl)glycine.
EVEN THOUGH IT IS ONE OF THE MOST WIDELY USED LAWN PRODUCTS IN AMERICA AND EVEN THOUGH AN MIT STUDY SUGGESTS HALF OF ALL AMERICAN CHILDREN MAY SUFFER FROM AUTISM BY THE YEAR 2050 BECAUSE OF GLYPHOSATE, THE CDC DID NOT TEST FOR THAT?
THAT'S CRIMINAL!
AND ON THE CDC WEBSITE, NO MENTION OF THE FINDINGS OF EUROPEAN AND THE U.N.'S W.H.O. STUDY ABOUT THE "PROBABLY CARCINOGENIC" STATUS OF ROUNDUP/GLYPHOSATE?
"SEARCH" FOR GLYPHOSATE AT CDC:
http://search.cdc.gov/search?query=glyphosate&utf8=%E2%9C%93&affiliate=cdc-main
FROM 2002:
NIOSHTIC-2 Publications Search - 20022756 - Farm family ...
"Pesticides were detected more often in the dust samples, especially in the farm homes. Chlorpyrifos, glyphosate, and 2,4-D were detected in ALL farm homes..."
Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) is a broad-spectrum systemic herbicide.
It degrades into Aminomethylphosphonic Acid, and Glufosinate.
BOTH OF THOSE SUBSTANCES HAVE REPEATEDLY SHOWN UP IN FRESHWATER SAMPLES BY THE USGS ALL OVER AMERICA.
SEE: http://pubs.usgs.gov/sir/2007/5122/pdf/SIR2007-5122.pdf
THE CDC DID TEST FOR 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid...MONSANTO'S "2,4-D" PESTICIDE.
http://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/2,4-DichlorophenoxyaceticAcid_BiomonitoringSummary.html
THAT 'REPORT' STATES:
"Human health effects from 2,4-D at low environmental doses or at biomonitored levels from low environmental exposures are unknown."
THAT 'REPORT' STATES:
"Human health effects from 2,4-D at low environmental doses or at biomonitored levels from low environmental exposures are unknown."
REALLY?
THEN WHY THIS:
" IARC considers the chlorophenoxyacetic acids group of chemicals as possibly carcinogenic to humans.
Epidemiological studies have reported associations of several types of cancer, such as soft tissue sarcoma and non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, with the exposure to chlorophenoxy herbicides as defoliants or contaminated herbicides. "
BUT CDC SAYS NO WORRIES IF THIS IS DETECTED IN URINE OR BLOOD???
I'M JUST NOT FEELING "PROTECTED" BY AN AGENCY THAT HAS BEEN FOUND TO MISHANDLE, MISLABEL AND MISSHIP LIVE VIRUSES AND BACTERIA...ANTHRAX, EBOLA, ENCEPHALITIS, ETC...AND CANNOT POST FACTUAL DATA ON 6-YEAR-OLD STUDIES, NOR PASS ON IMPORTANT STUDIES ABOUT MONSANTO'S GOOD OLD ROUNDUP.
This Updated Tables, February 2015, provides nationally representative biomonitoring data that became available since the publication of the Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals, 2009. This report includes data made available from NHANES survey periods 2005-2006, 2007-2008, 2009-2010, 2011-2012, and pooled samples using corrected NHANES sampling weights.
It also includes previous updates to the tables and provides new data for some metals, phthalates, and volatile organic compounds (VOCs)."
"CORRECTED"?CORRECTED FROM WHAT?
WHAT WAS WRONG WITH THE DATA THEY "CORRECTED"?
A LOOK AT "FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS" DOES NOT INCLUDE A SINGLE ONE ABOUT GLYPHOSATE.
THE ANSWERS ALSO SHOW OF WHAT LITTLE VALUE THE TESTING THEY ALLEGEDLY DID IS WORTH.
[QUESTIONS ARE IN RED.]
What chemicals are included in the National Exposure Report?
CDC developed the National Exposure Report to address critical information gaps in environmental health.
The Fourth Report builds on information contained in the First, Second, and Third Reports.
The Fourth Report includes data on the U.S. population's exposure to 212 chemicals.
The Fourth Report includes data on the U.S. population's exposure to 212 chemicals.
Seventy five of these chemicals are measured for the first time.
These new chemicals are in the following groups:
These new chemicals are in the following groups:
- acrylamide and glycidamide adducts
- arsenic species and metabolites
- environmental phenols, including bisphenol A and triclosan
- perchlorate
- perfluorinated chemicals
- polybrominated diphenyl ethers
- volatile organic compounds
- additions to chemical groups previously measured
A full listing of the chemicals included in the Fourth Report is available athttp://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/pdf/NER_Chemical_List.pdf.
[SEE THE FULL LIST, PLEASE. IF YOU FIND GLYPHOSATE BY ANY NAME, PLEASE LET ME KNOW!]
What time periods does the Fourth Report cover?
The Fourth Report presents data obtained during the following survey periods 1999–2000, and 2001–2002 and 2003–2004.
What chemicals are measured in the 2003–2004 data but are not included in the Fourth Report?
Several groups of non-persistent pesticides that were reported for 1999–2002.
Their 2003–2004 data are not yet ready.
The Fourth Report contains the 1999–2002 data for these chemicals.
In addition, some new pesticides are being measured in the 2003–2004 data but are also not yet ready, including: Five additional specific organophosphorus insecticide metabolites, one pyrethroid metabolite, seven fungicides or metabolites, four atrazine metabolites, two herbicides, four plasma herbicides, twenty two substituted urea herbicides.
Data for some polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) metabolites are not included in the Fourth Report because improvements in analytical methods have found uncertainties in the measurements.
For a full explanation of the PAHs excluded, please see Appendix C of the Fourth Report.
For a full explanation of the PAHs excluded, please see Appendix C of the Fourth Report.
For information about how chemicals were chosen for inclusion in the Fourth Report, please see "How did CDC decide which chemicals to include in the Fourth Report?"
What chemicals are being measured for the first time in the Fourth Report?
The new chemicals that have been added to this release of the Report can be found athttp://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/pdf/NER_Chemical_List.pdf.
How was the release date for the Fourth Report determined?
The release date for the Fourth Report is set as the soonest possible date after laboratory analyses are completed and after government scientists and independent peer reviewers finish review of the Report content.
As the Report expands to study an ever increasing number of chemicals, scientists require additional time for developing methods to analyze certain chemicals, and the number of chemicals means that the time required to ensure quality review of results also increases.
Each successive edition of the National Exposure Report has included additional chemicals. The current release presents data on 212 chemicals, compared to just 27 for the First Report in 2001.
CDC has taken action to provide new data on chemicals as the laboratory results for these chemicals become available, not waiting on the Report release.
For many of the chemicals, CDC publishes biomonitoring exposure information for the U.S. population in peer-reviewed publications very soon after they are completed.
These articles (or links to the articles) are available at http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/.
This website is the best one-stop source for CDC's most recent biomonitoring exposure information.
For many of the chemicals, CDC publishes biomonitoring exposure information for the U.S. population in peer-reviewed publications very soon after they are completed.
These articles (or links to the articles) are available at http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/.
This website is the best one-stop source for CDC's most recent biomonitoring exposure information.
Does CDC update information on U.S. population exposure between releases of the National Exposure Report?
For MANY of the chemicals, CDC publishes biomonitoring exposure information for the U.S. population in peer-reviewed publications very soon after they are completed—that is, not waiting for a new National Exposure Report.
These articles (or links to the articles) are available at http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/.
However, for many environmental chemicals, threshold levels are not known and more research is needed to assess health risks associated with the blood or urine levels of these chemicals documented in the Fourth Report.
WHAT?
SURELY THEY'RE JOKING!
THRESHOLD LEVELS ARE NOT KNOWN BUT THE FDA, EPA, ET AL, ALLOWED THESE CHEMICALS TO BE USED WITHOUT TESTING FOR THRESHOLD LEVELS?
ISN'T THAT LIKE PLAYING 'RUSSIAN ROULETTE'?
IS THAT WHY ROUNDUP WASN'T TESTED, "NO KNOWN THRESHOLD LEVEL"?
SINCE VERY, VERY FEW OF US HAVE ACCESS TO TESTING LABS, HOW THE HELL DO WE KNOW WHAT'S SAFE AND AT WHAT LEVELS THINGS BECOME UNSAFE?
CRYSTAL BALLS, FLIP A COIN, GUESS?
SURELY THEY'RE JOKING!
THRESHOLD LEVELS ARE NOT KNOWN BUT THE FDA, EPA, ET AL, ALLOWED THESE CHEMICALS TO BE USED WITHOUT TESTING FOR THRESHOLD LEVELS?
ISN'T THAT LIKE PLAYING 'RUSSIAN ROULETTE'?
IS THAT WHY ROUNDUP WASN'T TESTED, "NO KNOWN THRESHOLD LEVEL"?
SINCE VERY, VERY FEW OF US HAVE ACCESS TO TESTING LABS, HOW THE HELL DO WE KNOW WHAT'S SAFE AND AT WHAT LEVELS THINGS BECOME UNSAFE?
CRYSTAL BALLS, FLIP A COIN, GUESS?
How can people find out what their levels are?
Can their doctors perform these tests?
If not, can people send samples to CDC or some other laboratory to be tested?
For most of the chemicals listed in the Fourth Report, analyses are not readily available in commercial clinical laboratories. A physician may be able to test people's blood or urine for a few chemicals that have known health consequences, such as lead or mercury.
If necessary, physicians can refer people for further evaluation to a medical specialist, such as a medical toxicologist or a physician who specializes in occupational and environmental medicine.
CDC does NOT perform laboratory tests at the request of individuals.
CDC does perform biomonitoring in 1) population groups being investigated by public health authorities for possible adverse health effects resulting from chemical exposure; 2) populations in public health surveys, such as NHANES; and 3) research studies of environmental chemical exposures.
How did CDC decide which chemicals to include in the Fourth Report?
There are over 80,000 chemicals used in industry and commerce and there are several thousand high production volume chemicals. This means many chemicals have the potential to enter people's bodies.
The Environmental Health Laboratory at CDC has extensive experience with public health evaluations in which biomonitoring was used for assessment of human chemical exposures; these chemicals have been included in the National Exposure Reports.
CDC has also solicited suggestions for candidate chemicals from the public and other government agencies.
Chemicals included in the National Exposure Reports have been selected based on: scientific data that suggested exposure in the U.S. population; the seriousness of health effects known or thought to result from some levels of exposure; the need to assess the efficacy of public health actions to reduce exposure to a chemical; the availability of an analytical method that is accurate, precise, sensitive, specific, and rapid; the availability of adequate blood or urine samples from the NHANES survey; and the analytical cost to perform the analysis. More information is available at http://www.cdc.gov/exposurereport/.
What methods did CDC use to analyze these chemicals? Where can I find more information about these chemicals?
To measure these chemicals or their metabolites in blood and urine, CDC's Environmental Health Laboratory used advanced analytical techniques, such as isotope dilution mass spectrometry, inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry, and graphite furnace atomic absorption spectrometry. You can find information on the specific methods used in Appendix C of the Fourth Report.
For additional information about these chemicals, visit http://www.cdc.gov/biomonitoring/chemical_factsheets.html.
Why doesn't the Fourth Report include data on the states or local communities that are included in the survey?
NHANES is a national survey, not a regional or state-based survey, and thus is designed for survey findings to reflect the nation rather than individual counties or states.
Producing accurate estimates at the state or local level would have required a much bigger and much different sample and would have limited CDC's ability to collect national data.
Producing accurate estimates at the state or local level would have required a much bigger and much different sample and would have limited CDC's ability to collect national data.
[WHAT? THAT LAST STATEMENT IS TOO ILLOGICAL FOR WORDS!
WHY HIDE WHERE THE SAMPLES WERE COLLECTED IF YOU KNOW WHERE THEY WERE COLLECTED?
WHY NOT JUST LIST THAT?]
The Fourth Report includes data for Mexican Americans, non-Hispanic blacks, and non-Hispanic whites but not for other races or ethnic groups. Why?
No population group is excluded from participation in NHANES.
However, sample sizes for some groups are too small for reliable estimates to be calculated. To produce reliable statistics for Mexican Americans and non-Hispanic blacks, the survey selects larger numbers of these two groups. The survey is not designed to select larger numbers for all groups.
Why doesn't the Fourth Report include data on all age groups?
NHANES examines people of all ages; however, the age groups may be limited for some chemicals based on criteria such as availability of blood or urine or the COST of the testing.
[A COMPLETELY ILLOGICAL STATEMENT!
IT COSTS JUST AS MUCH TO TEST A 4 YEAR-OLD AS IT DOES TO TEST AN 80 YEAR-OLD AND THEY DO SELECT WHOM THEY TEST!]
IT COSTS JUST AS MUCH TO TEST A 4 YEAR-OLD AS IT DOES TO TEST AN 80 YEAR-OLD AND THEY DO SELECT WHOM THEY TEST!]
What is NHANES?
NHANES is a unique survey conducted by CDC's National Center for Health Statistics. NHANES collects data on the health of people living in the United States through interviews, direct physical examinations, and laboratory tests. For more information about NHANES, please visit http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes/about_nhanes.htm.
THE AUTISM AND GLYPHOSATE LINK
FOR THOSE OF YOU WITH CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN, THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
FOR THOSE OF YOU WITH CHILDREN OR GRANDCHILDREN, THIS IS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT.
"A national health problem is starting to occur and very few people are presently aware of this problem. We need to find the root cause.
The autism rate has risen from 1 in 10,000 in 1970 to 1 in 68 in early 2014. It is predicted that the rate will be 50% for children born in the year ~2032, if the root cause is not fixed and the trend continues. Our world will be different if this trend is not reversed. Increased awareness does not explain the rise. Kidney disease, certain cancers, alzheimers, diabetes, intestinal infections, etc are also rising at very similar rates.
A preliminary estimated cost saving of 622,476 million dollars per year in exploding health care cost could be saved; if we could reverse this trend back to the 1980 levels of health problems assuming we are just 50% successful. It is assumed that other health issues, such as those caused by Aspartame, are not solved.
The projected cost savings is 1.21 times that of the 2014 defense budget or ~$5,350 per family potential yearly cost savings in health care, including medicare and “Obamacare”. Increased priority should be placed on reducing U S health care cost and solving these health problems.
Recently discovered evidence is that glyphosate, the active ingredient in our most popular herbicide, has been found to harm laboratory rats,
it adversely affects our beneficial gut bacteria, and it depletes our bodies of important minerals.
Correlation of the rise in autism rate to the increased use of glyphosate is almost perfect (99.7 percent). Glyphosate is almost certainly the root cause of the alarming rise in autism. The case against glyphosate is now very strong based on science instead of an emotional argument.
Up to 80% of the food eaten today, in the US, is now Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) derived.
One of the main goals in developing GMO crops is to allow them to tolerate glyphosate, which would kill both weeds and non-GMO crops.Most GMO foods are sprayed with glyphosate, which gets inside our foods and is almost impossible to wash or scrape off completely.
Four pounds of herbicides are applied each year for every person in the U. S. – Some is eaten in our foods.
64 other countries now label GMO foods, so consumers have a choice.
Please help with efforts to reverse this terrible health trend. A US legislative bill to label glyphosate, a toxin, that is in our foods should be introduced.
More importantly, we need to find the path back to safe agricultural methods. Please help initiate government research funds aimed at finding ways to grow crops sustainably and economically without the use of toxic chemicals.
Jack Wilson Jr
Palm Beach Gardens, Fl
Dr Stephanie SeneffWinchester, Mass
(Jack is chief engineer for an aerospace firm, has successfully conducted numerous root cause investigations, & holds 31 patents and Stephanie is a Senior Research Scientist at MIT).
Palm Beach Gardens, Fl
Dr Stephanie SeneffWinchester, Mass
(Jack is chief engineer for an aerospace firm, has successfully conducted numerous root cause investigations, & holds 31 patents and Stephanie is a Senior Research Scientist at MIT).
IT ISN'T JUST CHEMICALS.
THE CDC ALSO MONITORS RADIONUCLIDES IN HUMAN URINE AND BLOOD.
HOW GOOD A JOB IT DOES IS SPECULATIVE AT BEST.
z
No comments:
Post a Comment