Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
GeneralCardiologyVisionDentistryPharmacyLaboratoryNutritionAlternative
Diseases and Disorders
AIDSAlzheimer'sArthritisAsthmaCancerBreast CancerDiabetesEpilepsyGlaucomaHepatitisHerpesLupusProstate BPHProstate CancerProstatitisSinusitisTinnitus

Medical Forum / Diseases and Disorders / AIDS / October 2004

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

"MORE women may die as a result of Dioxins then from 'AIDS' in America."

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
PaulKing - 10 Oct 2004 10:51 GMT
I found this article very interesting. It is amazing that all we hear about
is 'AIDS' but as this article demonstrates, MORE women may die as a result
of Dioxins then from 'AIDS' in America.
____________________________

A meeting of 40 scientists convened in Switzerland last May by the World
Health Organization concluded that dioxin is 2 to 10 times as toxic as it
had seemed in 1990,[3] and a group of German scientists concluded last
April that dioxin may be responsible for 12% of human cancers in
industrialized countries.[4]

If this estimate were correct, it would mean dioxin is responsible for
120,000 cancers each year in the U.S.
The cancer hazard from routine exposure to dioxin has recently been
estimated by a group of German scientists.[4]

They report that, for adults, the lifetime cancer hazard lies somewhere
between one per hundred and one per thousand for each picogram of dioxin
TEQ ingested per kilogram of body weight per day (pg/- kg/day) Since the
daily ingestion in the U.S. ranges from one to 10 pg/kg/day, we can
calculate that the cancer hazard from environmental exposure to dioxin
ranges between one per thousand and 100 per thousand.

The middle of this range would be 50 per thousand. Because the average
person's lifetime chance of getting cancer is now about 400 per thousand
(or four in 10), we can see that routine exposure to environmental dioxins
may be making a substantial (12%) contribution to the danger of cancer in
this country, if the German estimate holds true.

If it holds true, it qualifies as a public health disaster.
This new German estimate is at least 10 times as high as previous
estimates by U.S. government scientists (see REHW #390, #391).

Dioxin Poisoning

Dioxin is one of the most dangerous toxic chemicals known to man.
Disposable tampons are believed to contain dioxin, an unintentional
by-product of many industrial processes involving chlorine.  
Dioxin poses a cancer hazard for humans. It is unclear what, if any level
of dioxin
exposure is safe for humans.

Dioxin poisoning is less apparent than TSS, so the results are more
complicated and devious than TSS, which means that women may not be able
to tell that their tampons are making them ill or even killing them.  
You can feel safe knowing that our Natural Sea Sponge Tampons, certified
organic cotton tampons, pads and pantyliners, washable menstrual pads and
menstrual cups do not contain any harmful Dioxins or synthetic fibers
known to be linked to TSS.

The FDA has yet to test dioxin levels in feminine hygiene products, in
spite of mounting evidence of the chemical's carcinogenic and adverse
reproductive effects.

The International Agency for Research on Cancer in February 1997 announced
its findings that the most biologically potent of
dioxins--2,3,7,8-tetrachlorodibenzo-para-dioxin (TCDD)-- is carcinogenic
to humans and frequently found in wood pulp.

A 1994 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) study also concluded that
dioxin exposure, even at low levels, can result in a number of non-cancer
health effects in humans, including developmental and reproductive
effects, immune suppression, and disruption of regulatory hormones.

Other researchers suspect a link between dioxin exposure and
endometriosis.

After learning about the presence of dioxin in tampons last year, U.S.
Representative Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) introduced the "Women's Health and
Dioxin Act of 1996," which would require the National Institutes of Health
to determine if the levels of dioxin present in tampons pose health risks,
such as cervical cancer, to women.

This year, she will reintroduce the bill, expanding it to include sanitary
pads and assessment of the risk of breast and ovarian cancers and
endometriosis due to dioxin.

The FDA would be required to determine whether warning labels should be
placed on product packaging.
In 1990, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration estimated the incidence of
menstruation-related TSS to be 1 to 17 per 100,000 women. This means that
710 to 12, 410 women per year contracted the disease from 1990 to 1994.
However, the Centre for Disease Control in Atlanta estimates that only 10%
of all TSS cases are actually reported.

Therefore, the incidence of TSS would more likely be 7,100 to 124,100
women per year. Given this calculation and with a TSS case fatality rate
of 6 to 15%, somewhere between 43 and 7,446 women will die this year of
tampon-related TSS in the United States alone.
The rate is equal to, or higher than, women's deaths from AIDS. And Rely
tampons aren't around anymore; before the introduction of artificial
fibres, tampons were not linked to Toxic Shock Syndrome.

In the U.S., women between 11 and 60 years of age reported 216 cases of
menstrual TSS reported in 1993; 244 cases in 1994

The risk of TSS is higher for women under 30 years old; 60% of patients
are between 15 and 24 years of age
The fatality rate of TSS is 3% to 5%, but it is estimated that only 10% of
cases of TSS are reported, as many women suffer only flu-like symptoms

Absorbency enhancers in tampons can cause peeling of the mucous membrane,
vaginal dryness, ulcers, and lesions
Perfumes and fragrances in some tampons are reported to cause vaginal
irritation, allergic reactions, and disruptions of a woman's microbial
balance in her vagina.

"Tampon users were demonstrated to be 18 times more likely to develop
menstrual TSS as non-users", Infectious Diseases in Obstetrics &
Gynaecology, 1993, Gilles R.G. Monif
"of [Toxic Shock] cases occurring in menstruating women, up to 99% were
using vaginal tampons", Obstetrics and Gynaecologic Infectious Disease,
1994, James McGregor and James Todd, (Chapter 21 - Toxic Shock Syndrome)

"Vaginal inflammation can result from rayon fibres from tampons becoming
embedded in vaginal walls", Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, 1980
Tampons made chiefly of rayon have some levels of dioxin.  

"Rayon tampons amplify the growth of the Toxic Shock Syndrome bacteria
TSST-1" American Society for Microbiology Journal, May 1994, Dr. Philip
Tierno of NYU Medical Center

Dioxin levels once thought acceptable are now reported to adversely affect
the reproductive and immune systems, "A Health Assessment Document for
Dioxin", published by the Environmental Protection Agency, 1996

"Cotton tampons offer no protective advantage over cotton/rayon tampons
with regard to protection from TSS" Journal of Infectious Diseases,
October 1995 (study by Dept. of Microbiology, University of Minnesota
GMCarter - 11 Oct 2004 12:47 GMT
>I found this article very interesting. It is amazing that all we hear about
>is 'AIDS' but as this article demonstrates, MORE women may die as a result
>of Dioxins then from 'AIDS' in America.

So why not go off and fight the dioxin problem? Forget about AIDS.

Do something constructive with your life.

        George M. Carter
PaulKing - 11 Oct 2004 20:37 GMT
Because we cannot allow such a lie to succeed. If we can be manipulated by
means of media induced fears (weapons of mass destruction/home
invasions/AIDS) we will become slaves.

Religion did it for centuries and now has be updated into pseudo science.

'AIDS' is tyranny.

That's why it must be vanquished.
Jim Jones - 11 Oct 2004 22:07 GMT
"PaulKing" <aimulti@aimultimedia.com> wrote...
> Because we cannot allow such a lie to succeed. If we can be manipulated by
> means of media induced fears (weapons of mass destruction/home
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> That's why it must be vanquished.

I've been called a kook many times in the past, but you win the prize for
biggest kook of all time.  Actually, there was one kook worse then you,
a troll from hell called 'alexplore' who haunted the mental health groups
a few years ago.

I like to rant about AIDS, but I rant about what I see as an utter lack
of concern among homosexual men, the group most disproportionately
affected by the virus (in the U.S.).  I'm not quite sure what's going
through their brains, but it is either denial - denial that AIDS exists
or that it is not very contagious or that it is no more an inconvenience
than a mild cold or that they just don't give a damn or any or all of
these things.  It can't be for lack of education, I was just a kid when
the first cases were diagnosed in 1981 and still a kid when the media
described most graphically what caused it and how it was transmitted
and how to prevent it.  Yet despite this, my generation and the
generations that followed up to present continued to engage in the
high-risk, unprotected, and wildly promiscuous sex and the number of
new HIV infections continued to soar and still is.

I really have a hard time feeling sorry for people with AIDS, especially
for my fellow homosexual males who have been highly targeted for
education efforts on how to prevent transmission.  There simply is NO
excuse, you really have to be an illiterate retard living under a rock
for the last 20 years to NOT know how HIV is spread and how to protect
yourself.  Naturally, the activists will whine that lack of education
IS the problem, and that the government needs to double, triple, or 10x
the trillions of dollars it is already spending.  And while I have a
hard time believing anyone will be seduced by your bizarre arguments
(I'm still not sure: either HIV doesn't exist or it is harmless and/or
that being hit by meteors kills more people thus it isn't a problem
or whatever), the high-risk people who may be reading this group really
don't need any disinformation like your flooding their drug-addled
brains.
PaulKing - 12 Oct 2004 09:49 GMT
I see what you mean about 'ranting' about 'AIDS'

You really do. You are free to believe whatever nonsense you wish but
don't fool yourself into thinking you are being rational.

You are just a rude 'blind' believer closed to all evidence and logic that
does not fit with your narrow prejudiced perspective (using the word in a
very loose way).

You are a fool and a rude one at that.

Paul
GMCarter - 12 Oct 2004 10:58 GMT
lol
>You are a fool and a rude one at that.

What's funny is if someone gets pissed off at you and tells you to go
f.ck yourself, you'll squeal and scream about how abusive and rude
they are...meanwhile, you routinely call people stupid, morons.

Eh. But then I routinely call you an a.shole too!

So who is the pot and who the kettle!

Paul, you really truly are a f.cking fool.

        George M. Carter
PaulKing - 12 Oct 2004 23:09 GMT
"Paul, you really truly are a f.cking fool."

I may 'f.ck' (I'm not impotent like you) but I'm not fool enough to
believe blindly in some wonder virus that can do most anything.

After years of 'f.cking', free of toxic condoms, I am not fool enough to
think I have some non syndrome and poison myself to death with AZT.

You Sir, are the fool on this board.
 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.