Regardless.. "safe" dose ?? How about UNACCEPTABLE !!!! Any chemical or additive that is not intended PURELY and SOLELY for human consumption should be BANNED .. and that would be almost ALL of them. What is WRONG w/you people that you think things like this should be allowable in our food products ?????

Our leaders have declared war on every man, woman, and child and this is just more proof. This is one of the most disturbing stories ever and if you dont take action now, then we are all truly finished. Clinically and legally insane criminals are in charge of the world and must be dealt with NOW. Quit being sheep...its time WE become the shephard.

In infants perchlorate blocks iodine to the thyroid gland.

This will not kill or sicken your baby, but will seriously inhibit proper brain development. It can make your baby clinically mentally retarded.

I know that "retarded" is not the PC term, but then I don't think it's too PC to dumb down people's babies. AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHY PERCHLORATE IS IN THERE.

Think about it. MSG, Fluoride, Mercury in the vaccines...... These DEVILS want a Nation/World of dimwits, easier to fool and control.

If they're talking about ammonium perchlorate, the one used in solid rocket fuel, it has a toxicity somewhere between Tylenol and table salt. While perchlorate interferes with the uptake of iodine to the thyroid, a quick Google search finds a study published in 1998 in Pharmacological Reviews that says perchlorate is not stored in the body, is not metabolized, and any effects of perchlorate on the thyroid are temporary and reversible. Also, the American Thyroid Association says that various levels of perchlorate exposure far above what is in water and food have been found not to be harmful (http://www.thyroid.org/professionals/publications/news/04_10_01_perchlorate.html).

Hey, I'm not advocating dumping it in our food, but I think people should understand that this isn't cyanide or dioxin we're talking about. It's more the equivalent of talking about how much chlorine can be in your water, or how many roach legs in your can of green beans. I'm kind of interested in this type of thing, because my father was a toxicologist.

eight bottles a day, seven days a week, is long term. I'd be pissed if it were my baby.

Debbie you are right on. An infant on formula is only eating formula.

It's a guess as to how many IQ points smarter these children would be if they were breast fed. (or at least not poisoned)

My guess would be that it is significant.

CSX - I'm glad you did some research. I guess some mild but permanent brain damage is just part of growing up in this new fangled world of ours.

"We need less government regulation! The government should not be telling chemical manufacturers what they can dump in our water supply!"

Why is this news? Considering the fact that I just fed my infant daughter a bottle of formula, I must say I am very interested. Did you not read the part about a chemical used to make rocket fuel found in formula? You're good with that?

Can we please, PLEASE, PLEASE, go to nature's way of feeding our new little ones?

Cow's milk is for baby cows and is made for building baby cow bodies. Human milk targets the human growth agenda first on the list, which is a rapidly-growing infant brain. For this purpose, human milk contains Taurine, found only in human milk.

It is the right temperature and is even individually produced for each child, literally. It also produces antibodies for the sicknesses going around, and Mum gives the antidote directly to baby. The nutrients found in colostrum prior to milk coming in are like pure gold and contain antibodies and resistance to disease which last a whole lifetime. Mother's milk is adjusting all the time, to the needs and age of baby's growing body.

Babies nurse beautifully to sleep, and are comforted when upset. You nurse baby in the night and go back to sleep without getting up. Baby can be in a cot that is connected to the side of your bed, or she/he can sleep next to the wall in your bed, or whatever feels comfortable. Skin contact alone, needed by mammals to thrive and prosper, is built into this simple equation of nurturing with the best.

In the 50's we were given formula and canned milk and we got rickets, allergies, ear infection, skin rashes and asthma. Formula still causes these things. You cannot listen to the formula companies which are out to make a buck. And we did not see our Mothers. Mother and baby both suffered. These relationships, which can be forged so easily early on, cannot be recovered so easily.

Rocket fuel, you name it....this is just the tip of the iceberg. These are not nutrients, these are not building the citizens of our future.
Thank You.

This is very disturbing. But not entirely surprizing.
We however should force our government to repeal almost every thing they have ever done in regards to food safety.
Our rivers are polluted with chemicals (from people throwing away prescriptions drugs in the toilet, pooping out undigested drugs they have taken, and all the other chemicals used for making our lives "better") so much that the fish are contaminated.

Our veggies are grown using rain water which in turn is just as polluted and no one (in authority) thinks its bad for you.
Even if its "organic" dont you think that it still could be tainted with chemicals from rain water. Just because food growers don't want to deal with a little pests and product loss. The rain is polluted.

Instead lets put pesticides right on our salad. Smart. Until they stop growing vegetables and raising animals on the crap they feed them we will continue to have problems with people being sickened by the very food they depend on for life.

If other countries can grow food without pesticides why cant the U.S. We would live healthier lives.

Also wanted to note that we use Canola Oil (which the canadian government paid the U.S. FDA $50million to allow use of) Canola (known as rapeseed oil) was originally introduced as a industrial lubricant for machines and now is used in all sorts of food products and as a cooking oil. European nations outlawed it because of the bad effects it has had on animals and people.

PEOPLE WAKE UP - The govenment obviously is not the best authority on what is good for us. no matter how much they say they are - it is not true.
Ban the use of pesticides and additives. Using those only assures the food companies of earning a maximum profit for the least cost. It doesnt assure consumers of purchasing the best product for their money.  We shouldn't be fooled into buying substandard items like that.

DJ-867199, I know you're peed off. And maybe you will even lose a child to the cancer this formula will cause. However, YES, we need to let the free market work.

The parents that lose children by feeding this formula to their babies will stop buying this product and FORCE the producer to stop adding poison- or else they will go out of business.

Anything else will be socialism.

CSX321 (#1.4): Excellant comment!! You've the rare voice of reason. Thanks, Snake

psst - Hey Snake - read #69.1 and #74. #64 is wonderful as well. It's so - well - me!

:)

Snakedoctor: Thanks. It's disheartening to see how many paranoid nutcases there seem to be. Or at least people unwilling to think for themselves. I used to work in a biochem research lab and later for a chemical company, so it was fairly easy for me to look up the toxicity data. I wasn't kidding: ammonium perchlorate really is only a little more poisonous than table salt and a little less poisonous than Tylenol.

I remember back in the 70s when the big dioxin scares started, my dad (who was a toxicologist, as I mentioned) used to say that dioxin wasn't nearly as toxic and dangerous as it was made out to be in the press. I thought it was funny a few years ago when Ben and Jerry were railing against dioxin, then tests found that their own ice cream contains it in amounts far greater than EPA limits (as do many foods). http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/9612/Dioxin_scare_debunked_by_marketplace_reality.html

I suppose thats great to know that it is less poisonous than Tylenol?? Im sure that would be comforting to any mother that regularly gives their child a dose of acet with EVERY feeding. Breast is best. But for those who cant breast feed their babies should be paying close attention. SOME (gop) want less regulation and this is what comes from it. We want people to handle their businesses they way they want but dont want to deal with the consequences. Madoff and peanuts just to name a few.

I suppose thats great to know that it is less poisonous than Tylenol?? Im sure that would be comforting to any mother that regularly gives their child a dose of acet with EVERY feeding. Breast is best. But for those who cant breast feed their babies should be paying close attention. SOME (gop) want less regulation and this is what comes from it. We want people to handle their businesses they way they want but dont want to deal with the consequences. Madoff and peanuts just to name a few.

Well said. Be nice to see just how many differnet ways people are poisoned.

CSX321 (#1.17),wheresmybailout, & jbdaad,: This is a prime topic for the "paranoid nutcases". I do agree that the public should be provided with scientific/empirically derived information. We certainly need to have unbiased information so as to make informed decisions about our health. It's a shame our CDC, FDA and other "watchdog" agencies aren't more aggressive in providing such information in a "user friendly" format.

Now, I shall await my friend jbdaad to "set me straight". I haven't had my a*s kicked yet today, so come on jb. I've been missing your wise a*s. Regards, Snake

YouTube - Monty Python - Secret Service Dentists

And so are the Mangoes(lol) ; )

This is a prime topic for the "paranoid nutcases".

The case was already made by MSNBC (that little green button?) If you have or can make a better one, by all means please do so. All due respect of course. ; )

jbdaad (#1.22): Re: "The case was already made by MSNBC (that little green button?) If you have or can make a better one, by all means please do so. All due respect of course. ; )".

Thanks, but CSX321 has already done so. There is no need for redundancy.

http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/9612/Dioxin_scare_debunked_by_marketplace_reality.html

Based on our testing, a single serving of Ben & Jerry's contains about 2,285 times more dioxin than an 8-ounce "serving" of gasoline refinery wastewater at the permitted level.

So this report is saying that An 8 ounce serving of Gasoline waste water is safe?

Thanks for pointing out this report Snake.

CSX321 Friend request sent.

john-:

Once the monster is created it just gets bigger and bigger and bigger.

you can add one of the largest and most intrusive bureacracies in US history to that list ie: "homeland (in)security". (thanks for that one GW).

The problem is drawing the line between intelligent, meaningful and useful regulations, and burdensome, "power to the pencil-pusher" bureaucratic nightmares that almost every government department usually ends up slowly turning in to. it always starts out well-intentioned, but then the bureaucrats get the taste of power, and start to think 'hey! I can get this "fixed" and I should be in charge of this', etc.

then the whole thing ends up running amok.

So this report is saying that An 8 ounce serving of Gasoline waste water is safe?

actually, the report says a couple of things.

1) modern instrumentation can detect ludicrously minute amounts of almost any substance, right down to a few molecules in some cases. (14 parts per trillion? dioxin)

2) the wastewater from the refinery had far less dioxin than b&j ice cream, so it was "safer" as far as dioxin was concerned, since I don't know what else was in the water, or how it was processed, I can't really say how safe it was to drink. but it is possible that the water could very well have had nearly all the contaminants removed. The discharge requirements are rather strict for regulated substances these days, and no company wants to deal with the resulting fines and legal proceedings that come with a violation.

I worked in the environmental testing business on the retail side of the oil companies for several years, and the large corporations are absolutely determined to follow every applicable rule to the letter, no matter the cost. they have been burned too many times.

the thing that they want far more than lax regulations, is to have stable regulations so they can adapt to the rules as they are. the biggest problem in California was that the various state, regional and local agencies would keep changing the rules. how can any business plan to operate in such an environment?

the result is that the vast majority of the "mom and pop" gas stations have been put out of business by rules that require them to keep investing anywhere from $10,000 to $250,000 every five years or so to keep up with the ever-changing air, water, waste, fire, etc. environmental regulations.

in Los Angeles county, now, if a gas station has to change a $45 drain valve in the bucket that catches the minor spills from the delivery truck, they are required to get a $950 permit from the local enforcement agency.

danwill

the result is that the vast majority of the "mom and pop" gas stations have been put out of business by rules that require them to keep investing anywhere from $10,000 to $250,000 every five years or so to keep up with the ever-changing air, water, waste, fire, etc. environmental regulations

That has happened in the State I live in. To the tune of a lot of pssible businesses not even bothering. You practically have to have another business just to keep up with all the paper work and Piggy backing going on. Living high on the hog our Government.

Some time ago when I was taking spirulina from a source using growing ponds on the Colorado river near the California border I read the Colorado river had been tested positive for rocket fuel from a defense plant in Colorado. I changed brands to Pacifica and got to thinking about all the irrigation in California that depends on this river system. When will we clean up these toxic hazards?????

Even worse...in our city we just found out that our drinking water is loaded with hydrogen and they won't do anything about it!! And hydrogen is a much more flammable fuel!!

C'mon. Google it. It is misleading to label it as "rocket fuel" in our drinking water and baby formula. The editors of the story (whom I assume wrote the headline) are being amateurish in their desire to get attention.

Even worse...in our city we just found out that our drinking water is loaded with hydrogen and they won't do anything about it!! And hydrogen is a much more flammable fuel!

what about all the dihydrogen monoxide that is found in our drinking supply?

if inhaled, it can cause death in five minutes!, it promotes corrosion!, it has been found in every cancer known to man! ther are many other little known facts that should be known!

yet we allow tons of it to enter our drainage and waste water, and even drinking water systems every day!

google "dihydrogen monoxide"!

And your wife is not breastfeeding ( which is the BEST, HEALTHIEST, SAFEST and NATURAL way to nourish an infant ) ... WHY ???????

What the hell is it to you?? Not all women can successfully breastfeed their children.

Hello concerned parent, I totally agree, please, please, please for the love of Christ, talk to your wife. Show her this article. I will be praying for changed minds and hearts in this matter. Only you can make this difference in your childs life. As you can see, we are in trouble right now because of the governments neglect concerning the American people.

It is not my business and I am not speaking personally to you.

Breast feeding your children will make them Smarter and Healthier. 100% truthful statement.

Women who do not breast feed are more likely to get breast cancer later. 100% truthful statement.

While breast feeding is acknowledged to be the best way, some women can not breast feed or have adopted children. Recent studies have shown that breast fed children are not necessarily healthier or smarter than non-breastfed children. Every situation is different so leave this poor guy alone. I have an adopted 6 month old who is on formula because I could not breast feed him. I too am upset that they will not reveal which formula this has been found in, although it sounds like it isn't enough to really do harm. At least no more than everything else in our environment.

gemini618 - a little research, or living in the real world, will show you that not all women are able to breast feed. My wife was only able to breast feed our son for a couple of weeks before she started drying up. While there are obvious benefits, hadenough is incorrect in his statement that breast feeding your children will make them Smarter and Healthier. There are too many outside factors into that statement for cause and effect.

If the chemical is in our water supply, it's in your breast milk.

Hey John...why don't you get yourself a new shpeel...or just shut up. This has NOTHING to do with the President of the United States.

since i posted after you, i'm sure you won't scroll back down and re-read everything..and i'm sure mine will get lost..or over powered by defenders of this brand users that have had no problems and healthy kids etc...but

I think this knowledge has been around for some time. 4-5 years ago...my sister in law got a got from her brother...who works in D.C. for the FDA. Called her out of the blue, and told her not to use Enfamil brand formula. Said he obviously couldn't go into the specific details (and risk his job), but that it would likely be pulled from the shelves..and never was. We both at the time had formula fed babies, and thankfully were not using that brand.

Specifically he said, Good Start was the best, and Similac would be his next best choice. He did not talk about store labels..only those three. He is a real 'brainy', type person, and NEVER calls people, and certainly not to share news like that. To say the least we have never used that formula, and I have since shared this with people who are in complete denial, or slam me (ex: yahoo answers, new parents asking for formula advice). I did attempt to breastfeed, but my son was allergic to my milk..not judging those who do or don't breast feed, but I had no choice in it. It's a personal decision for every parent to judge what is best for them.

I believe without question, the brand they are referring to is Enfamil. I have no concrete proof, but I trust this guy as an extended part of MY family, who thought it was important enough to call and ask that we spread the word.

I get really tired of reading articles such as this and then reading about how every woman should breast feed that it's the only way, blah, blah, blah. Well, some women can't! And there are cases in which they can't! I didn't (couldn't) breastfeed either one of my kids. Both are smart, funny, and healthy! So quit with the preaching!

This is horrible. There should not be any trace of anything other than formula in that powder. I agree they should disclose which brand it is. I have to agree with LS on this whole breastfeeding debate thing. I have three children ages 11, 9, and 2 and they were all formula fed. They are healthy and smart. I do not even care to explain why I did not breastfeed my children. They never had any sleeping issues and it was not too much for me to get up and feed them for the first few weeks that they did not sleep through the night. Trust me I am sure there are some, let's just say "not so smart" children out there that may have been breastfed.

i bet john has a point

michele-574435

This has NOTHING to do with the President of the United States.

Actually, I think it does.

greg-1013795

i bet john has a point

I almost over looked the point because of the way it was presented. The president does have a strong position in setting the tone of U.S. policy.

Friend request sent.

Robbie, I understand your worry, I breastfed my little girl, but supplemented with formula because she was soooo hungry all the time I could not keep up. Once I used up the can of Enfamil that was given to me at the hospital (which had many ingredients that I did not recognize), I sought out an organic formula. It wasnt more expensive, for one, and my kid liked it a lot more. One obvious characteristic of the organic versus the major name brand was the organic stuff had a tendency to be clumpier, didnt "flow" off the scoop, and took more shaking to mix it. So they are adding unnatural things to the non-organic formula so that it will not clump. I figured a little more shaking was worth the effort. I do hope you are not using straight tap water.

looselucy

So they are adding unnatural things to the non-organic formula so that it will not clump

A lot of products heave this. The accumulation in any one household or community could be toxic to say the least. Not to mention the effects of further accumulation in water.

"Traces of rocket fuel has been found on powered baby formula"......

What keeps it powdered?

What keeps it powdered?

this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2K0cEX9ex3U

(Perchlorate factory in Henderson Nevada 1988)

original footage

Don't doubt it's rocket fuel, read my previous entry.

Vijay - right, and what organization did the study on whom????

What the f*** is a safe dose of rocket fuel for adults??

TOXICITY DATA

ORL-RAT LD50:4200 MG/KG GISAAA 28(8),8,1963

ORL-MUS LD50:1900 MG/KG GISAAA 28(8),8,1963

ORL-RBT LD50:1900 MG/KG GISAAA 28(8),8,1963

ORL-GPG LD50:3310 MG/KG GISAAA 28(8),8,1963

From the manufacturer supplied Material safety data sheet

ld50 means the dosage that kills 50% of the exposed rats, the rate is given in milligrams per kilogram. so that means that a 100 kilo person would have to eat 4,200 milligrams times 100 kilograms =420 grams, or about a pound of the stuff to have a 50/50 chance of dying immediately. (but the data is for animals, not people)

actually orl rat= oral exposure for rats, orl rbt= oral exposure for rabbit, orl gpg= oral exposure for guinea pig, orl mus= oral exposure for mouse

no low-dose or chronic exposure data is given, disposal is basically listed as "mix with water, throw down drain" (slight exageration, but not much)

http://www.palomar.edu/ehs/Chemistry%20MSDS/AMMONIUM%20PERCHLORATE.pdf

Now with that wonderful green glow you have always wanted!(tm)

This story is simply irresponsible. There just isn't enough information to warrant outrage.

Just keep in mind that everything you eat, your baby eats too. Everything.

it won't kill your baby, Just dumb them down a little

That maybe true but I don't believe that was my point.

They have been warned. Repeatedly.

a KSLA news investigationFrom an article Posted By nearing hereConcerns About Chemtrails Given Fresh Impetus (w/ videos)

Remember this title?

Traces of a chemical used in rocket fuel were found in samples of powdered baby formula, and could exceed what's considered a safe dose for adults, a government study found.

Health Effects | Mercury | US EPA

... health effects are from mercury ... mercury levels below a level associated with possible health effects. More recent data from the CDC ...

For fetuses, infants, and children, the primary health effect of methylmercury is impaired neurological development. Methylmercury exposure in the womb, which can result from a mother's consumption of fish and shellfish that contain methylmercury, can adversely affect a baby's growing brain and nervous system. Impacts on cognitive thinking, memory, attention, language, and fine motor and visual spatial skills have been seen in children exposed to methylmercury in the womb. Recent human biological monitoring by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in 1999 and 2000 (PDF) (3 pp., 42 KB, About PDF) shows that most people have blood mercury levels below a level associated with possible health effects. More recent data from the CDC support this general finding.

Autism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Autism is a brain development disorder characterized by impaired social interaction and communication, and by restricted and repetitive behavior. These signs all begin before a child is three years old. [2] The autism spectrum disorders (ASD) also include related conditions such as Asperger syndrome that have milder signs and symptoms.

Milano | Recent Events: A ROOF OVER OUR HEADS: How Will New York Save ...

The Center for New York City Affairs presents: FROM THE MARGINS TO THE MAINSTREAM: Responding to Rising Rates of Autism. A Developmental Disabilities Watch forum

LOL, good one.

The other day I lit a fart and ended up two blocks away. Now I know why.

That really did make me LOL.

A lot to be found albeit rather...odoriferously...in discharges. ; )

My older sister is like they her and her two year old daughter almost died because they both got an intestinal parasite from drinking tap water.

Do some research on what's found in bottled water. You would be shocked! I used to be a bottled water fanatic--then I realized I was just wasting my money. Our tap is just as good as whats being bottled.

We have a Well in our place in the Country and my water there taste much better then the water in the City. We have the water tested and have never encounter a problem, I like the well water so much that we decided the next home we buy when we retire must have a new Well :)

TTatorOfSuburbia, I hope they are both okay now. That's awful. I have heard of people dying from that too.

-in-TEXAS, Oh great, I bet if I read up on bottled water, I'd find it bad too.

Still I'm going to stick with my purified water.

Linda7777, We have no well. You are lucky to have fresh tasting, clean water. I'm jelous. : P

What made me stop drinking tap water was this; http://www.familiesagainstcancer.org/?id=91 . I lived in a cancer cluster area.

Thanks Cacti I really feel safer somewhat having a well and I advice everyone who could to get one put in, I like not being attached to a city will who controls your water rate, I want to be as self sufficient as possible :)

True. Bottled water has been found to not be so safe. But the tap water where I live does not taste right so I choose not to drink it, I prefer bottled. I am not sure that anything we eat is really contaminate free anymore.

since i posted after you, i'm sure you won't scroll back down and re-read everything..and i'm sure mine will get lost..or over powered by defenders of this brand users that have had no problems and healthy kids etc...but

I think this knowledge has been around for some time. 4-5 years ago...my sister in law got a got from her brother...who works in D.C. for the FDA. Called her out of the blue, and told her not to use Enfamil brand formula. Said he obviously couldn't go into the specific details (and risk his job), but that it would likely be pulled from the shelves..and never was. We both at the time had formula fed babies, and thankfully were not using that brand.

Specifically he said, Good Start was the best, and Similac would be his next best choice. He did not talk about store labels..only those three. He is a real 'brainy', type person, and NEVER calls people, and certainly not to share news like that. To say the least we have never used that formula, and I have since shared this with people who are in complete denial, or slam me (ex: yahoo answers, new parents asking for formula advice). I did attempt to breastfeed, but my son was allergic to my milk..not judging those who do or don't breast feed, but I had no choice in it. It's a personal decision for every parent to judge what is best for them.

I believe without question, the brand they are referring to is Enfamil. I have no concrete proof, but I trust this guy as an extended part of MY family, who thought it was important enough to call and ask that we spread the word.

I agree, I think we should start sending e-mails to all our senators and congress-persons to ban "Dihydrogen Monoxide" from all food products. If it corrode metal, just think what it could do to your insides. It would be much better to replace it with Ethyl Alcohol. One ninety pure grain would be a good start. Jim Beam and Jack Daniels works quiet well as a substitute for that nasty old "Dihydrogen Monoxide."

Amen!

I want to know, but I want to know more.

I'm gonna say D all of the above. But with the way to government is good luck getting a case.

I breastfeed my son, but I also drink water. Stands a good chance that I'll pass the jet fuel onto my son thru breastmilk... come on people, don't you have any REAL news to report on?

I hate when people put moms down for not breastfeeding. as above posts stated, sometimes its not possible for mom, or for baby. Moms shouldn't be condemed for taking care of their child to the best of their ability. LAY OFF!

Wow you're a great mom....really??? You're going to make Mom's that don't breastfeed feel guilty. I enjoyed nursing, but some don't. Get over yourself. We should have chemical free food sources readily available. THAT is the issue here, nobody cares what you did.

Thank you Mom-1007984 I have had the guilts over not breastfeeding my babies since my oldest was a couple days old and I couldn't get her to latch on. I decided it wasn't right for me but still felt guilty and still do. Thank you for sticking up for us moms who didn't/couldn't breastfeed. I think we all just want what's best for our babies.

Momoftwo, do not feel guilty. I have three children that I did not breastfeed and I do not have any guilt whatsoever...

i agree!