10 Percent of China’s cooking oil could be ‘gutter oil’

by Michael Ravensthorpe

(NaturalNews) According to a short documentary produced by Radio Free Asia entitled “The Making of ‘Gutter Oil,'” the use of so-called “gutter oil” – illegal oil made from processed sewage and other waste matter – is rampant among China’s food establishments. In fact, the narrator admits that an estimated 10 percent of China’s cooking oil could be gutter oil purchased from the black market.

The documentary, which can be viewed here, begins with stomach-churning footage of a Chinese woman scooping waste from a city sewer into a container – a job she’s held for over a decade. Delighted with the yield, she and her male colleague carry the waste-filled container into their car. The waste is then transported to local processing plants where it is transformed into “cooking” oil with the aid of additives such as animal fat and bleach. Finally, the oil is transported to corrupt food establishments across the country and served to thousands of unsuspecting Chinese every week. Though most of it ends up in street food, it has also been found in restaurants, construction site kitchens, work canteens and even school cafeterias.

Gutter oil is highly toxic

Unsurprisingly, tests have confirmed that gutter oil contains numerous toxic chemicals including aflatoxins (carcinogenic compounds produced by certain molds) and PAH (polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon, a dangerous organic pollutant). Many of these compounds have been linked to serious diseases such as liver and stomach cancer, as well as developmental disabilities in newborn children.

More worrying still, gutter oil is indistinguishable from cooking oil in appearance and taste. As Feng Ping of the China Meat Research Center admits, “The illegal oil shows no difference in appearance and indicators after refining and purification because the law breakers are skillful at coping with the established standards.”

An ongoing problem

Unfortunately, gutter oil is not a new phenomenon in China. Back in 2011, Time Magazine reported that Chinese officials had commenced a six-month investigation into gutter oil that resulted in the arrest of 32 suspects and the seizure of 100 tons of illegal oil that they believed were being processed for resale. One year later, another crackdown occurred that resulted in 100 arrests and the closing of 13 processing plants across four provinces.

Despite these sporadic crackdowns, however, all evidence suggests that the gutter oil industry continues to thrive in the biggest Chinese cities due to its immense profit-making capacities. While there’s not much we can do about this national health issue from our Western vantage point, we can let China know what we think about its continued disregard for human life by boycotting its products.

Sources for this article include:




About the author:
Michael Ravensthorpe is an independent writer whose research interests include nutrition, alternative medicine, and bushcraft. He is the creator of the website Spiritfoods, through which he promotes the world’s healthiest foods


Merck betting $100 million on new China-based pharmaceutical factory

by PF Louis

(NaturalNews) A recent Rueters article covered Merck’s plan to invest $108 million for a pharmaceutical manufacturing plant to be up and running in China by 2017. This announcement is motivated partly by the anticipation of China’s annual sick-care spending to soar into the 1 trillion dollar range from 2011’s 357 billion dollar expense.

The other motivation is to ensure that Merck can get friendlier with the Chinese government, which thus far has not be as welcoming as most other affluent nations, especially in the land of the medically un-free United States.

There have been investigations by Chinese officials into the “business as usual” policies of international pharmaceutical companies that are tolerated in the USA. One such activity is bribing MDs and health administration officials, a large part of any drug company’s annual promotional and advertising expenses.

So far, Chinese officials have hit GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) the hardest. GSK is under investigation for funneling just under a half-billion dollars through travel agencies in order to bribe doctors and government officials. GSK has lost 61% of its China drug sales with this scandal.

Other international drug companies that do business in China are also being questioned. Sanofi lowered its 2013 profit guidelines based on China’s recent plunging sales. According to Reuters, many Chinese MDs are refusing to see drug company representatives (drug peddlers) to avoid getting snared in the Chinese government’s dragnet on drug company corruption.

Apparently, building a plant in China is a strategy for getting on friendlier terms with Chinese officials, who convict and even execute upper level executives in the food and drug industry for poisoning its citizens. Watch your step Merck execs!

Beneath the friendly faces of pharmaceutical manufacturers

The Reuters article portrays Merck and other drug companies as mostly helpful, though a bit dicey with their marketing techniques. One statement has a quote from a Merck official claiming that they need to be in China to help handle their surge of diabetes and thyroid and heart diseases. How altruistic, NOT!

They simply see the dollar signs from a burgeoning, affluent society that has increasingly turned its back on its own traditional Chinese medicine to get those quick fixes promoted by Western medicine. Perhaps it’s a demand of their increasingly busier lives.

The godfathers who run the Medical Mafia are in and of the pharmaceutical industry. If not actually a functioning part of it, then they rush through government agency revolving doors to further corrupt those groups in Big Pharma’s financial favor.

And the revolving door spins both ways, welcoming former CDC, FDA and other cooperative officials into high level, lucrative positions with Big Pharma companies. For example, the former CDC director and queen of vaccine and swine flu disinformation, Julie Gerberding, has been director of Merck’s vaccine unit since 2010.

Drug companies create hit lists against doctors and writers who investigate their products unfavorably. An Australian attorney representing a Vioxx class action suit against Merck read their interoffice memos in the courtroom: “We may need to seek them out and destroy them where they live.” The memos also mentioned “neutralizing or discrediting” those who spoke out against them.

Merck manufactured Vioxx and kept it on the market even as the death toll from it mounted. And they are the principal source of the MMR vaccine, which is ranked second among the most dangerous vaccines, their toxic “solution” for minor diseases, measles, mumps and rubella.

Merck also manufactures the highly hazardous and unnecessary HPV vaccine Gardasil. As teenage girls and young women drop dead or are permanently disabled from HPV vaccinations, Merck continues lobbying various state governments to create favorable legislation for enforcing inoculations among students.

Merck’s history and intentions are murky at best.

Sources for this article include:







Cell phone radiation breast cancer link – New study raises grave concerns

by Lloyd Burrell

(NaturalNews) A new study raises concerns of a possible association between cell phone radiation exposure and breast cancer in young women.

The research team, led by Dr. Lisa Bailey, a former president of the American Cancer Society’s California Division and one of California’s top breast surgeons, studied four young women – aged from 21 to 39 years old – with multifocal invasive breast cancer.

The researchers observed that all the patients developed tumors in areas of their breasts next to where they carried their cell phones, often for up to 10 hours per day, for several years. None of the patients had a family history of breast cancer. They all tested negative for BRCA1 and BRCA2 – breast cancer genes linked to about one-half of breast cancer cases – and they had no other known breast cancer risks.

Imaging of the young girls’ breasts revealed a clustering of multiple tumor foci in the part of the breast directly under where their cell phones touched their body.

Tiffany Frantz, one of the young girls involved in the study, said that she had no idea of the risks involved. “I put my cellphone right in my bra,” said Miss Frantz in a TV interview that also won an Emmy. However, her mother Traci Frantz immediately made the connection right after Tiffany developed breast cancer at age 21. “We never took it seriously until after she was diagnosed.” Her tumors were exactly where her cellphone had been kept in her bra for about six years. No one ever told us that this was a very bad idea.” said Traci Frantz. Surgeons had to remove Tiffany’s left breast. Her family had no genetic or other risk factors.

Dangers of other EMF exposures

Cell phones emit a form of electromagnetic field (EMF) called radio frequency radiation. This radiation exposure has previously been linked to brain tumors, cancer, cardiovascular disease, depression and other serious illnesses.

Studies show that other EMF exposures from similar, supposedly harmless, everyday appliances and devices can also be dangerous. The recently published “BioInitiative Report 2012” concluded, “there is sufficient evidence from in vitro and animal studies, from human biomarker studies, from occupational and light-at-night studies, and a single longitudinal study with appropriate collection of urine samples to conclude that high MF (magnetic field) exposure may be a risk factor for breast cancer.” The report’s authors went on to say that “there is rather strong evidence from case-control studies that longterm, high occupational exposure (over 10 milliGauss) to ELF (Extremely low frequency) magnetic fields is a risk factor for breast cancer.”

EMF safety standards outdated

Currently, the main international guidance comes from the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection. These guidelines offered no protection for Traci Frantz and others who unknowingly put their health at risk by carrying their cell phone in close proximity to their body.

Nor do these guidelines protect individuals from high magnetic field exposures in the home and workplace. The existing exposure limit for magnetic fields is 904 mG in the US – some 90 times higher than the levels at which independent studies have observed adverse biological effects!

Even cell phone manufacturers suggest that users keep their cell phone at least one-half inch or more away from any body part. But these recommendations, lost in the small print in user manuals, are not heeded.

Current safety limits can no longer be said to be protective of public health, and they should be replaced.

Sources for this article include:





About the author:
Lloyd Burrell is the author of a new ebook entitled “How To Beat Electrical Sensitivity” which offers a solution to the growing number of people whose health is being compromised by exposure to wireless and similar technologies, see www.electricsense.com/3-free-chapters.html

Since falling prey to a violent reaction to his cell phone in 2002 he has spent the last 10 years researching the effects of electromagnetic fields (EMFs) on health. He now offers a complete solution on how to live a healthy life in our increasingly electromagnetic world.

You can download his free EMF Health Report and subscribe to his newsletter by visiting his website http://www.electricsense.com/. You can also follow him on Facebook , Twitter, Youtube and .

Lloyd Burrell is the author of a new ebook entitled “Ho

30,000 more people freed from water fluoridation after Australian town rejects poison

30,000 more people freed from water fluoridation after Australian town rejects poison

by Jonathan Benson, staff writer

(NaturalNews) An outstanding ban on artificial water fluoridation has been upheld in the Australian coastal town of Byron Bay, located in New South Wales, following a heated encounter among local residents, scientists, dentists and city officials. The Fluoride Action Network reports that the Byron Shire Council ultimately ended up voting five-to-three to uphold the fluoride ban, relying on modern science which shows that fluoridation is both harmful and ineffective.

A group of fluoride-truth activists showed up to the recent meeting, which threatened to undo the ban, and made their voices heard about the outdated practice. Reports indicate that a large crowd, which included many local residents, showed up waving large signs and banners that said things like “We, the people of the Byron Bay Shire, strongly object to having our water poisoned with FLUORIDE!!!” Others brought letters signed by local doctors opposing the practice and delivered them directly to city officials.

“If Health NSW are truly concerned about dental health and not just fluoride, then they should support us in other ways to achieve better outcomes,” stated Byron Mayor Simon Richardson, who received resounding applause for his defense of health freedom.

On the opposing end, in support of fluoridation, were the usual suspects, including government health officials and those with a vested interest in poisoning the water supply with fluoride. Many of these individuals offered the same tired arguments about poor children with bad teeth allegedly needing all those fluoride chemicals in the water to protect against cavities, while at the same time ignoring the scientifically proven dangers of fluoride.

Byron council stands with science, opposes toxic water fluoridation

But the pro-fluoride lobby lost the fight, thanks to the majority of the Byron city council that listened to the will of the people and rejected the pro-fluoride proposal. With the exception of a few stubborn sticklers, the council decided that it is simply not appropriate to forcibly medicate the public with chemicals derived from the waste of phosphate and fertilizer production, which have repeatedly been shown to lower IQ levels and cause hormone problems.

“We the undersigned are medical practitioners and health professionals who have concerns about the efficacy and safety of water fluoridation,” read the official letter presented to the council in opposition to fluoride. It is “imprudent to initiate further fluoridation of public water supplies until such time as modern data can either substantiate or refute the alleged benefits and the safety or otherwise is established.”

Additionally, the money that otherwise would have been spent on fluoridation can now be used for programs that have actually been scientifically shown to help promote dental health, such as prenatal and postnatal education and free dental clinics. Fluoridation, on the other hand, continues to be a leading cause of some of the very conditions that its proponents say it helps prevent, including dental fluorosis, tooth decay and bone loss.

“Ninety-five percent of the world’s population doesn’t fluoridate their water,” added Merilyn Haines, a local resident opposed to water fluoridation who showed up at the meeting. “It’s an aberration what we do in Australia. It’s an American idea from the 1940s. Surely science has changed.”

Sources for this article include: