Komputer for Alle 1998 #6/1998 CD 6 (Gul).iso/web/ffa/wwwenv~1.org/arrs/digest/news33~1.htm/text0009.txt

Text File | 1998-04-02 | 97.6 KB | 2,247 lines

Human clones could follow soon, pioneering scientists warn

Reuter Information Service

LONDON (Mar 6, 1997 10:37 a.m. EST) - The scientists who created Dolly
the sheep, the world's first adult clone, said Thursday the developments
could be applied to human cloning soon, and there should be
international laws preventing such work.

"If you really wanted to do it it could be done," said Ian Wilmut, the
chief scientist at Scotland's Roslin Institute where the sheep
experiment was carried out.

News that a sheep had been cloned using a cell from an adult sheep
shocked the world and prompted a flurry of soul-searching about whether
the technology was morally acceptable.

This week U.S. President Bill Clinton banned federal funding of cloning
and German Research Minister Juergen Ruettgers called for a worldwide
ban on cloning human beings.

Danish scientists trying to produce cloned cattle said on Wednesday they
were halting experiments pending a full debate.

The scientists behind the technique, developed at the Roslin Institute
and PPL Therapeutics Plc, told British parliamentarians on Thursday work
with human eggs would be "distressing" and "offensive."

Wilmut said that if scientists were prepared to take the "distressing"
step of working with 1,000 human eggs, the size of the experiment that
produced the sheep breakthrough, "you might expect to make significant
progress in one or two years."

But he added: "It is the unanimous view of the group within the
institute and within the company that we would find this sort of work
with human embryos offensive.

"We could see no clinical reason why you would wish to make a copy of a
person and we are pleased that it is already illegal in this country so
we would support wholeheartedly the idea of (international) prohibition
in as effective a way as possible."

Wilmut's testimony went directly against Ruth Deech of the Human
Fertilisation and Embryology Authority, which regulates fertility
research, who said on Wednesday she could see circumstances under which
cloning people would be desirable.

She told the same committee that, for example, people at risk of having
a baby with certain rare genetic disorders could instead be cloned,
leaving the baby free of the defect.

Deech said there was no need for a blanket prohibition on human cloning
but perhaps the law needed "tweaking" to make sure experiments were
properly controlled.

But the scientists from PPL and the Roslin Institute defended their work
with animals, saying it held out the prospect of cheaper food and new
remedies for genetic diseases.

The Roslin and PPL researchers say cloning is a natural outgrowth of
their research into animal breeding and the production of medicines from
animal blood and milk.
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 09:59:32 -0800
>From: Andrew Gach <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Catching Emus
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Officer perfects art of lassoing emus in Texas

The Christian Science Monitor

(Mar 6, 1997 09:55 a.m. EST) -- As the livestock officer in Liberty
County, Texas, John "Bubba" Abshier has been called to round up
thousands of stray critters. He's roped cattle on the railroad
tracks, horses on the freeway, and even a pair of wild hogs meddling in
a chicken coop.

But last summer, Abshier got a call he'll never forget.

"Bubba, you better come on down here," Deputy Sheriff John Haines told
him. "There's a lady with a giant bird in her yard, and it just stomped
her dachshund."

That bird, it turned out, was a full-grown emu, and it took Abshier and
Deputy Haines several hours to rope the six-foot, 120-pound fowl, tie it
down, and load it onto a trailer. In the process, Abshier recalls, the
bird managed to punt him about 15 feet.

"I didn't know the first thing about catching an emu," he says, "but I
learned right quick."

Indeed, Abshier's had plenty of practice lately. Ever since the breeder
market for emus collapsedlast year in the middle of a severe drought,
some ranchers here and across Texas have apparently decided to set their
birds loose rather than continue to feed them.

Emus are known to wander the range in their native Australia, but
Abshier says the farm-raised variety have little chance of surviving
wild in Liberty County, northeast of Houston. Food is scarce,
he says, and the birds are easy prey for bobcats, coyotes, and
motorists. Most of the emus Abshierhas caught don't have much meat left
on their breastbones.

"They're domesticated animals," he says. "They're kept in close quarters
and they get hand-fed. It's irresponsible to dump them. It makes me
mad."

According to Pierce Allman, director of the American Emu Association in
Dallas, there are about 1 million emus in the United States, mostly in
the South and West. Although he insists the number of abandoned birds is
small, he acknowledges that the problem is most serious in Texas.

Back in the mid-1980s, when Americans first started avoiding beef for
health reasons, Allman explains, many ranchers here began buying emus,
along with their distant cousins - ostriches and rheas - in hopes that
their lean red meat would win back some of the consumers who'd switched
to poultry. In addition, some people who didn't know anything about
livestock started scooping up birds in hopes of making a fast buck. At
the peak, he says, breeding pairs of these spindly legged birds,
classified as ratites, fetched as much as $45,000.

But the buying and breeding spree soon backfired. Slaughter facilities
failed to keep pace, and supermarkets were slow to make room for the
expensive meat. Today, breeding pairs won't fetch more than $3,500 - and
one bird can be bought for as little as $75.

Emu and rhea breeders fared the worst. Unlike ostriches, which are
popular entrees in Europe and enjoy a ready market for their leather,
emus and rheas produce far less meat and don't offer much else to
consumers. Although Allman says byproducts like emu jerky and emu oil
show great promise, their introduction into mainstream markets is still
years away.

Harold Dudley, an emu rancher in Kaufman, Texas, bought several birds
three years ago to keep busy when he retired. After three years of
building pens and fences, incubating the avocado-sized eggs, and
struggling to administer shots, he's looking for a buyer. "It wore me
out," he says. "If there had been a ready market, it might have been
different."

Although the vast majority of the nation's 6,000 emu ranchers are either
sticking with it, turning their birds out to pasture until the market
rebounds, or selling them, the number of emus left to lope across the
Texas countryside seems to be increasing.

Charles Sexton, a biologist at the Valconies Canyonlands National
Wildlife Refuge near Austin, says he's been spotting emus strutting
through the hills with greater frequency.

Abshier, at least, is ready for them. A stocky man with bright blue eyes
and an iron grip, he has been riding and roping as long as he can
remember. Whenever Abshier gets a call, day or night, he loads his
horse, Sally, into his trailer, orders his two best yellow cur dogs into
his pickup truck, and rolls out.

Roping an emu, he says, is a little different from catching a bull. "You
gotta rope 'em fast," he says. "Emus have real good peripheral vision,
and they can hear that rope swinging, so you gotta come around quick. If
they get going, they'll outrun a horse."

Once he's roped the bird, he says, he lets the loop slip down until it
covers the bird's stubby wings, at which point they usually stop running
and squat down.

Loading the bird into a trailer is another matter. To keep the birds
from pecking and kicking, Abshier says, he plops a cotton glove over
their heads. Since emus are too heavy to carry, he'll straddle the birds
from behind, grab their wings and walk them to the trailer. "It's kind
of like pushin' a wheelbarrow," he says. Since last summer, Abshier has
caught and penned 16 of the birds.

It wasn't always so easy, though. On one occasion, Abshier roped a rhea
around the neck, which only made the bird fight harder, nearly
strangling itself. After trying to subdue it for an hour, he says,
Deputy Sheriff David King took a desperate approach he won't soon
repeat.

"He Tarzaned it," Abshier says, describing Deputy King's wild, but
ultimately successful, flying tackle. "He spent the rest of the day
pulling dewberry stickers out of his pants."
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 18:11:15 +0000
>From: [e-mail] (Jonathan Owen)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Controversial dog fur 'factory' closed down
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


>Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 17:56:16
>To: [e-mail],environews,Intl.Herald Tribune,Overseas Media
>From: Jonathan Owen <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Controversial dog fur 'factory' closed down
>
>>
>>World Society for the Protection of Animals
>>2, Langley Lane, London SW8 1TJ
>>Tel: [phone]   Fax: [phone]
      >>PRESS RELEASE7th March 1997
>>
>>MAYOR CLOSES CONTROVERSIAL DOG FUR FACTORY
>>
>>A recent decision by the Mayor of Kiev, Aleksandr Omelchenko, to close the
cityÆs controversial dog ærecycling plantÆ (known as æbudkaÆ) has been
welcomed by animal welfarists, including the World Society for the
Protection of Animals (WSPA).  The government-run dog pound had been used as
a fur factory, with thousands of dogs being cruelly killed and then skinned
for their fur each year.   However, the complex is to be transformed into an
animal shelter which will be managed by WSPAÆs member society, the Kiev
Animal Protection Society-SOS.
>>
>>The closure of this facility follows a long running campaign by WSPA to
stop local government officials from carrying out an inhumane ækill and
recycleÆ policy on unwanted dogs.   The Mayor of Kiev has ordered an
investigation into those responsible for the skinning and selling of dog fur.
>>
>>Dragan Nastic, WSPA Regional Manager for Europe, said " We are working
with the authorities to introduce modern humane stray control methods which
will bring Kiev into line with other European cities and serve as an example
to towns throughout the Ukraine. ô
>>
>>WSPA is also helping to fund the building of a new shelter for unwanted
dogs on the outskirts of Kiev and WSPA Advisory Directors John Gripper and
Sheelagh Graham are currently meeting with government authorities to discuss
how they can introduce humane ways of dealing with stray dogs.
>>
>>-ends-
    >>.....cont/
>>
>>-2-
>>
>>╖ Broadcast quality beta footage and photographs are available.
>>╖ For further information, please contact:
>>
>>Jonathan Owen, WSPA Press Officer: T.0171 793 0540 F.0171 793 0208
>>
>>WSPA Advisory Directors John Gripper and Sheelagh Graham may be contacted
c/o Zoe Stamper on T/F.00 380 4426 44608
>>
>>Kiev Animal Protection Society-SOS   T/F. 00 33 450 40 1603
>>
>>
>>EDITORSÆ NOTES
>>
>>1. Uncontrolled breeding and human neglect has resulted in a stray dog
population explosion in Central and Eastern Europe.  WSPA's 'Pet Respect'
campaign encourages responsible pet ownership and promotes the neutering and
registration of all companion animals.
>>
>>2. In Ukraine, as throughout the former Soviet Union, stray animals are
dealt with at recycling workshops known as 'budkas', run by the local
government.
>>
>>3. It is estimated that there are at least 1/2 billion dogs in the world.
(Based upon WHO/WSPA estimates.)
>>
>>4. There are approximately 28 million dogs and 25 million cats in western
Europe. (PFMA 1993)
>>
>>5. A female dog and its offspring can produce 67,000 puppies in six years;
a female cat and its offspring can produce 420,000 kittens in seven years.
>>
>>6. WSPA, working with the WHO, has produced a stray dog programme which is
being considered as a blueprint for all member countries of the Council of
Europe.
>>
>>
>

Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 10:07:31 -0800
>From: Andrew Gach <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Bill would ban human cloning
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Congressman introduces bill that would ban human cloning

Copyright ⌐ 1997 N.Y. Times News Service

WASHINGTON (Mar 6, 1997 00:13 a.m. EST) -- A House Republican on
Wednesday introduced legislation to ban the cloning of humans and to ban
federal funding for such experiments, proposals generally discouraged by
several scientists who heard about them at a congressional hearing on
cloning.

At that hearing, the director of the National Institutes of Health, Dr.
Harold Varmus, said that although he found human cloning offensive, he
could see rare cases in which it might be acceptable, like those
involving infertile couples.

But Varmus predicted that human cloning would probably never occur on a
large scale, essentially because sex and diversity are "the staples of
life" for humans.

The proposed bans were introduced by Rep. Vernon Ehlers of Michigan, a
research physicist, who said that if Congress did not ban human cloning
immediately, it might later take the undesirable step of banning all
cloning. As a scientist, he said, he wanted to make sure that research
on animal cloning could proceed as unrestricted as possible.

At the hearing, Ehlers said he opposed human cloning on moral, ethical
and religious grounds, adding later in an interview: "What if in the
cloning process you produce someone with two heads and three arms?" he
said. "Are you simply going to euthanize and dispose of that person? The
answer is no. We're talking about human life."

On Tuesday, President Clinton temporarily banned the use of federal
money for research on cloning people and asked for a voluntary
moratorium on the part of researchers supported by private money.

There is no evidence now that anyone in the United States is doing such
work.

Ehlers described his legislation at the first congressional hearing on
cloning since Scottish scientists announced late last month that they
had cloned a sheep, and Oregon scientists subsequently revealed that
they had cloned two rhesus monkeys. Sen.r Bill Frist, R-Tenn., and a
medical doctor, plans hearings next week that are to include testimony
from Ian Wilmut, the researcher who cloned the sheep.

Though much of Wednesday's hearing was devoted to the general topic of
cloning and the medical advances that animal cloning could produce, the
notion of human cloning seemed to capture more imaginations.

Varmus said that although he generally found human cloning "offensive
and not scientifically necessary," it might be acceptable in some cases.

"Maybe there are some situations in which we would find it ethical," he
said in an interview after the hearing, suggesting that an infant could
be cloned from the bone marrow of an infertile man while the woman
provided the egg.

But he said that he found people's preoccupation with reproducing their
own genes a little puzzling and that he would prefer to deal with
infertility "the old-fashioned way" -- by adoption. "I'm not a genetic
determinist," he said.

He added: "How do we define reproductive rights? What is government's
role? Where does privacy begin and end? These are issues that are
extremely complex. And there will never be human cloning on a large
scale. Sex and diversity are good. The staples of life."

Still, he and others gave a thumbs down to Ehlers' proposed bans.

Varmus worried that Ehlers' ban on human cloning would be too
restrictive and unnecessary; anyone who wanted to do such research, he
said, could simply move offshore.

>From beyond the hearing, held by Rep. Constance Morella, the Maryland
Republican whose district includes the National Institutes of Health,
came more pronounced opposition to any bans.

Dr. Ward Cassells, chief of cardiology at the University of Texas
Medical School and director of basic research at the Texas Heart
Institute, said in a telephone interview that the proposed bans
were based on emotional reactions that have been "inappropriately
clothed in religious language."

He also predicted that the current condemnation of human cloning would
turn into approval once infertile couples started seeking it. Human
cloning might be possible in the not too distant future, he said. "A
couple or a single woman will step up to the plate and volunteer," he
said. "That's all it will take."
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 10:29:47 -0800
>From: Andrew Gach <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Vivisectors worried about funding
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Experts say fear of human cloning could hamper other research

The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (Mar 6, 1997 09:25 a.m. EST) -- The director of the National
Institutes of Health and other experts say a "rush to legislate" against
human cloning research may shackle other biological and genetic studies
that could save lives in medicine and produce more food on the farm.

The statement at a House committee hearing came after Rep. Vernon J.
Ehlers, R-Mich., announced he was introducing two bills on cloning --
one to ban federal funding of human cloning research and another that
would make it unlawful for anyone in the United States to engage in such
research.

Ehlers, a physicist, said the action would put legislative teeth into an
executive ban on federal funding of human embryo research that was
announced Tuesday by President Clinton. The president urged
privately funded labs to also refrain from human cloning experiments.

New laws are needed, Ehlers said, because "it is important for us to
draw the boundary."

Witnesses before the House Science technology subcommittee, led by Dr.
Harold Varmus, director of the National Institutes of Health, warned
that unless laws are drawn carefully, they could cripple research that
could be of great value to medicine and to agriculture.

Concern over human cloning was prompted by the recent announcement that
a Scottish researcher had cloned a sheep, named Dolly, from udder cells
removed from an adult ewe. Shortly afterward, scientists at the Oregon
Primate Research Center announced that two rhesus monkeys had been
cloned from embryo cells.

Ehlers said these developments have captured the interest of the
American public and there is worry that cloning could be misused.
Introducing legislation now, he said, could head off a groundswell of
public distaste that could lead to a ban of all genetic research.

Varmus said he also was opposed to human cloning research, but he urged
Ehlers and Congress to pause before passing a law. "Maybe there are some
situations in which we would find it ethical," he said.

"Unless a bill puts a very tight fence around that which Congress wants
to forbid, it could cut off research toward a wanted goal," Varmus said.

He said he believes Clinton's action on cloning "was intended to give us
a period of deliberation," and he urged Congress to wait until a
presidential group, the National Bioethics Advisory Commission, makes
its report in 90 days.

Dr. Caird E. Rexroad Jr. of the Agriculture Department said his agency's
scientists have been cloning farm animals using genes from embryos since
1986. The USDA is developing gene transfer techniques that will produce
animals that are low in fat and resistant to disease.

James A. Geraghty, president of Genzyme Transgenics Corp., said his
company was using cloning techniques to make animals whose organs could
be used for human transplantation. Genetically altered cows or goats, he
said, could produce milk that contains drugs for the treatment of human
disease.

Dr. M. Susan Smith, director of the Oregon Primate Research Center, said
her researchers hope to use cloning techniques to produce a group of
identical monkeys that could be used to test drugs.

"Genetically identical monkeys would revolutionize the use of nonhuman
primates in biomedical research," Smith said.

===================================================================

If you want to E-mail your senators and representative to express your
feelings about cloning, you'll find their E-mail addresses at web site
http://www.viet.net/Community/congress.html

Andy
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 14:54:00 -0500 (EST)
>From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: RFI-Iditarod/PHC
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Someone recently posted information on Prarie Home Companion's promotion of
Iditarod.  If I am not mistaken, it was a rebroadcast from last year.  Can
someone please send me the information, including contact information for
Garrison Keilor and PHC.

thanks


Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 15:03:58 -0500 (EST)
>From: Franklin Wade <[e-mail]>
To: Ar-News <[e-mail]>
Subject: ALF strikes DC Miller's Furs - twice!
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII

Once is never enough....
     ALF strikes DC Miller's Furs twice in one week.

Manny Miller, owner of Miller's Furs in Washington DC, knows what it
is like to be visited by the ALF, but this is the first time he got
hit twice in one week.

March 1 - Early morning - DC Miller's Furs
* The store was paint bombed.

March 5 - Late Evening - DC Miller's Furs
* Etching cream was used to decorate "FUR HURTS" on one of the windows.
* A road-kill deer that was "extremely" bloody was placed in front of
  the doors.

Compassion Over Killing activists frequently hold protests at Miller's
Furs.  We certainly appreciate any help we can get to stop Manny-boy.

Someone has to stop the killers, ALF is trashing Miller's.
_____________________________________________________________________
[e-mail]                                   Franklin D. Wade
        United Poultry Concerns - www.envirolink.org/arrs/upc
        Compassion Over Killing - www.envirolink.org/arrs/cok




Date: Thu, 6 Mar 97 14:19:56 -0500
>From: Karin Zupko <ma.neavs.com![e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (RFI )-Biotech products
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

For obvious reasons, I am trying to update our library on issues
surrounding genetic engineering.  I am looking for some good articles
on the health risks associated with biotechnology products (like
pharmaceutical products from transgenic articles).  I have lots of
material on xenotransplants, including the excellent critique of
xenotransplantation by the Medical Research Modernization Committee.

If anyone has suggestions for articles, please e-mail me.   If you
can send anything, the address is:

Karin Zupko
NEAVS
333 Washington St., Suite 850
Boston, MA  02108-5100

Thank you very much.
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 14:20:20 -0500
>From: David Rolsky <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail], Joolie M Geldner <[e-mail]>
Subject: [US] Update on Freeman Wicklind.  Jailed Activist in Mpls, MN
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

March 6, 1996

MINNEAPOLIS, Minnesota

        Freeman Wicklund, who sentenced to 90 days in jail yesterday for
disorderly conduct and trespassing, is currently being held at the Hennepin
County Detention Center.

        He is refusing to cooperate with the authorities beyond giving his
name and address.  The authorities have responded by threatening additional
charges should he continue with his non-cooperation.

        In addition, this is delaying his transport to the Plymouth Adult
Corrections Facility.


People interested in supporting Freeman are encouraged to call or write the
following people.

Freeman Wicklund c/o
Plymouth Adult Corrections Facility
1145 Shenandoah Lane
Plymouth, MN  55447
Phone #:  [phone]
Fax #:    [phone]

Please note that Freeman is currently at the Hennepin Detention Center.  The
status of his transportation to the Plymouth facility is currently unknown.

The sentencing judge:

Judge Joan Lancaster
c/o Juvenile Court
Juvenile Justice Center
626 South 6th Street
Minneapolis, MN  55415-1573
Phone #:  [phone]
 Fax #:  [phone]


The prosecuting attorney:

ATTN: Sandra Anderson
City Attorney's Office
300 Metropolitan Center
333 South 7th St.
Minneapolis, MN  55402-2453
Phone #:  [phone]
Fax #:    [phone]

Freeman's current location as of 1:00 PM, March 6.

Hennepin County Detention Center
350 South 5th Street
Room 36
Minneapolis, MN  55415
Phone #:  [phone]
(no fax #)


If you'd like more information please feel free to email me.
David Rolsky, Composer at large
http://www.tc.umn.edu/nlhome/g037/rolsk001/

Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 13:54:24 -0800 (PST)
>From: Mike Markarian <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail]
Subject: Montana Continues Killing Yellowstone Bison
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

IMMEDIATE ACTION NEEDED!!!

MONTANA CONTINUES KILLING YELLOWSTONE BISON

The state of Montana has already killed more than 1,000 Yellowstone bison
this winter and the slaughter continues. Attempting to shift blame to
certain federal agencies, Montana officials have argued that they are simply
protecting the state's "brucellosis-free" status which the USDA has
threatened to revoke. The Governor of Montana also criticized the National
Park Service for its management of bison, insisting erroneously that its
policy of natural regulation is responsible for the crisis which currently
exists.

Montana must take responsibility for the continued slaughter of bison for
numerous reasons. First, Montana has refused to adopt emergency contingency
measures proposed by USDA and the Park Service which would allow for more
tolerance of bison on public and private lands during the remainder of this
season. Despite these proposals from federal agencies, the Montana
Department of Livestock is charging full steam ahead with its killing
operation. Second, Montana has never challenged the authority of USDA to
revoke its brucellosis-free status merely on the presence of potentially
exposed or infected bison in its state. USDA has no legal jurisdiction over
wildlife. And third, Montana benefits from the revenue generated by winter
visitors to Yellowstone, many of whom choose to take snowmobile tours
through the Park to observe bison. Unfortunately, the grooming of snowmobile
trails in the Park to accommodate these users also facilitates bison
emigration from the Park. When the bison exit the Park using these
energy-efficient travel routes, most are met either with a bullet or a trap.
This senseless killing must stop immediately.

PLEASE CONTACT THE FOLLOWING INDIVIDUALS:

The Honorable Marc Racicot
Governor of Montana
State Capitol
Helena, MT 59620
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Mr. Laurence Petersen, Executive Officer and
Dr. Clarence Siroky, State Veterinarian
Montana Department of Livestock
P.O. Box 202001
Helena, MT 59620
Phone: [phone]
Fax: [phone]

Tell them:

1. The killing of bison must stop immediately. It is hypocritical to claim
that Montana wants to ensure the integrity of Yellowstone bison when their
actions have already jeopardized the same.

2. The time has come to stand up to the baseless threats of USDA and to
adopt sensible risk management strategies for dealing with bison migrating
in Montana rather than calling out the killing squad whenever a bison steps
hoof over the Park boundary.

3. You're not going to visit Montana until the state has called off its
bison hit squad.

Thank you for your help! For more information please contact The Fund for
Animals at <[e-mail]> or our Rocky Mountain office at (307)
859-8840.

Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 17:30:29 -0500 (EST)
>From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Murat Tiger Trainer & Old Indiana Park Deaths
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Wed night I posted two different articles from the Indianapolis STAR.  One
was an interview with a big cat trainer for the Murat Shrine Circus, and the
other was a story about fourteen animals dying at a defunct amusement park.

This afternoon the reporter who did the interview with the big cat trainer
contacted me.  She said that the trainer was taking two of the tigers from
the amusement park back to Fla for "rehabilitation".

Whatever that may mean.

Nix
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 17:57:42 -0500
>From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail], [e-mail]
Subject: HungerStrike Support/Anti Fur Mobilization in NY State-Full Text
Message-ID: <v01540b00af429dc1a3e3@[204.141.117.145]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

When last sent, the second half of this message was cut off.  Below is the
full text
>I am writing to inform you of a grave situation.  Four young animal rights
>activists are currently participating in a desperate and heroic campaign
>on behalf of fur-bearing animals.  Jeff Watkins, a leading activist  with
>Animal Defense League -Syracuse, considered by many to be one of the
>strongest grassroots groups in the country, is currently serving a seven
>month jail term for nonviolent actions in defense of animals in a city
>notorious for human and civil rights abuses, particulalrly of animal
>rights activists.   He is joined by Nicole Rogers (serving a 38 day
>sentence) and Chris Tarbell (serving a 12 day sentence) of Syracuse and
>Tony Wong, a juvenile serving a sentence of indefinite length in Indiana,
>all imprisoner for nonviolent animal rights actions.  Tony is on a 24 hour
>suicide watch as a result of his strike and has been stripped to his
>underwear.  Following the lead of British animal rights activist Barry
>Horne, who engaged in a hunger strike to stop his nation's moral and
>financial support of animal research, the four are engaging in a fast unto
>death until three demands are met concerning concerning fur-bearing
>animals.
>
>
>Their Demands:
>
>1. A federal ban on the leghold trap. Two members of  the House are going
>to be introducing a bill to ban the leghold trap,  Representatives  Nita
>Lowrey from NY, and Chris Shays from CT,  but the hunting/trapping lobby
>is providing fierce opposition.
>2. The US Trade Office must stop challenging the EU Wild Fur Ban.  The
>European Union (England, France, Finland, and like 11 other countries)
>passed a law years ago that said no wild caught fur could be imported in
>to the EU from nations that hadn't banned the leghold trap.  With the
>exception of Holland, the EU hasn't put the law into effect yet because
>the 3 dominant trapping nations, the US, Canada, and Russia kept
>threatening to file a GATT challenge in front of the World Trade
>Organization.
>
>GATT is the General Agreement on Trade and Tariff.  If the EU lost they
>would have to pay a fine.  Canada and Russia are now trying to work out a
>compromise as implementation of the ban is now scheduled for the spring.
>The US is taking a pro trap position, and the activists demand that the
>USDdrop opposition to the ban, and agree to not file a GATT challenge.
>
>
>3.The third demand is the the State of NY stop contemplating a beaver
>butchery bill.  Snare traps, metal nooses that choke animals to death, are
>illegal approximately 13 states including NY.  Assemblyman Michael Bragman
>from Syracuse keeps introducing a bill to legalize underwater snares to
>drown beaver with.  He also wants to extend the trap check limit to 72
>hours.  Jeff and company are demanding that this bill be canned for good.
>
>  All of these actvists are prepared to die rather than stop their
>hungerstrikes.
>
>
>  It is vital that we mobilize around their heroic action and not let the
>die .  Not only would this be tragic in and of itself, but in addition,
>the animals would lose three of their most powerful advocates.
>
>These brave, young, warriors have provided us the impetus to launch a
>major national campaign.  Historically, while the animal right movement
>has been highly effective at getting media, we have been less adapt at
>acheiving real political change.  With this campaign that will change.  It
>is time for all animal advocates to unite, from the most moderate to the
>most radical, large national groups and tiny grassroots groups.   We've
>all heard a thousand times that animal rights garners more letters to
>Congresspeople than any other political issue.  It is time to show that
>there is strenth behind those sentiments, that we don't only wield pens,
>but also a powerful punch.  This is an issue where we can expect broad
>public support, which we shoild utilize fully.  With proper organizing and
>outreach there is no reason we can't draw the sort of numbers that early
>anti-vivisection rallies drew in the early '80s.
>
>
>
>Okay we'd better start planning for Jeff and company.
>
>In New York State, let's focus primarily on the beaver snare bill.
>
>JP Goodwin, executive director of the Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade,
>has suggested a statewide mobilization to Syracuse for a rally this Sunday
>at Michael Bragman's office.  Can we do it on this short notice or should
>we wait until the following weekend? Time is of the essence.  Please
>respond FAST so we can plan.
>
>Our targets are legislators and the DEC, who are basically, in conjuction
>with "sportsmen's groups"  behind initiatives like this.  The most
>important part of pro-wildlife work is discrediting the wildlife
>management agencies. We have to realize that Bloody Michael Bragman
>doesn't operate in a vacuum.  I would suggest: disruptions of New York
>State Conservation Council meetings, occupations of bill suporters
>offices, lobbying meetings with legislators on the fence, particularly
>downstate, where legislators are less influenced by hunters, press
>conferences, candlelight vigils at all of the above places  While it's not
>required, we could do this all statewide asthe Coalition to Abolish the
>Fur Trade (CAFT).  CAFT is a network of grassroots groups similar to the
>Coalition To Protect Canada Geese: autonomous, actively networking
>grassroots groups working with the expert assistance and strategy of JP
>Goodwin.  A press release for indiviudal action we could put something
>like "the protest, organized by Animal Defense League (or whoever), part
>of the Coalition to Abolish the Fur Trade..." The advantage to this is
>that we take utilize CAFT's reputation as a heavy-hitter, increasing our
>chance of national media coverage.    CAFT has already prepared a flyer on
>the Watkins hunger strike.  I suggest we tryto unite militants and
>traditionally tacticaly moderate groups on this issue, since there is a
>role for everyone to play.  It would  be great if  the Fund for Animals,
>HSUS. the ASPCA, and Friends of Animals joined the campaign. Also the New
>York State Coalition for Animals.would make a great addition to this
>campaign
>
>
>New York City is  especially vital, because this is where we find the
>greatest chance of finding allies in the legislative arena, and half of
>the state's population is in NYC, giving the city major legislative power.
>
>
>To discuss this issue further,  please post to the list, email me at
>[e-mail] or call me at [phone].
>
>Adam Weissman
>Student Abolitionist League/ Coalition to Abolish theFur Trade-NYC
>
>
>PS I think we can use this fur hat think as a tip of the iceberg issue to
>point out the game agencies' agenda, so let's tie it in.  Details follow.
>
>
>NEW MUSKRAT HATS RAISE FUROR
>Albany (AP) 3/2/97
>
>The state's environmental conservation officers are getting new winter
>hats, but
>an animal-rights activist isn't wild about the material - muskrat fur. The
>heads of the
>275 fish-and-game officers were measured a few weeks ago for the hats, which
>the state is buying at $34 apiece from a Canadian company. The hat is
>actually cut from cloth with a brim of muskrat fur. Total cost: $9,350.
>
>"It's a practical thing - a winter hat. Stetson's just don't cut it in
>wintertime in
>New York state," he said. The DEC chose the muskrat hat over several other
>types of fur hats. "We looked at the beaver because it's the state animal,
>but muskrat was an affordable option,: Sheffer said.
>
>The new fashion statement by New York's men and women in green gets a
>thumbs down from Marion Stark, a registered lobbyist in Albany for the
>Fund for Animals. "The public feels the DEC's job is to protect animals, not
>to kill them for their fur," Stark said. "The animials really suffer
>terribly in the
>traps. It's unnecessary and cruel." The Canadian company Crown Cap Ltd.
>was chosen to make the hats after a competitive bidding process.
>
>END
>
>To contact Bloody Beaver Butcher Michael Bragman:
>
>
>Michael Bragman
>8285 Thompson Rd.
>Clay, NY 13039
>
>home ph: 315/699-8388
>work ph: 315/452-1044
>work fax: [phone]
>
>work address: 305 S. Main St., N. Syracuse, NY 13212
>
>
>(Note: A national edition of this post will appear shortly, whith the same
>beginning, but a very different ednding so please read the whole thing.)
>


Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 18:12:16 -0500
>From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Crossposting (Admin Note)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

This has been happening quite a bit lately...just thought I'd post a
reminder........

Please do not "crosspost" when posting to AR-News!

While crossposting is often frowned upon on many lists, on AR-News it can
lead to a "degradation" of the "news" concept.  Crossposting to other lists
and/or individuals when posting to AR-News may be convenient for the
poster, but may later cause problems for AR-News.  Many people quickly go
for the reply option and, depending on software, may "default" through
options asking "reply to all?" or "reply to all recipients?"--this is one
cause of comments/discussion/chat interfering with the "news" of AR-News.
Not everyone has unlimited access or time to the internet, therefore many
people subscribe to a "news" list for news, not discussion.  Please
remember this when posting to AR-News.
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:02:23 -0500 (EST)
>From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail], [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail], [e-mail],
        [e-mail]
Subject: Re: [US] Update on Freeman Wicklind. Jailed Activist in Mpls, MN
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

Freeman has now been transferred to the Plymouth Adult Correction Facility,
but is to be held in lockdown for a week, presumably because he is
hungerstriking.  Please
keep calling.

Anne
Animal Rights America
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 18:29:02 -0700
>From: [e-mail] (Peter  M. Ligotti)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Press Release -- Keeping Genetically Engineered Food Out of the Organic Market
Message-ID: <v01540b0daf451c35008c@[206.250.112.214]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

The attached press release and press invitation has been sent
to 200 press agencies.

URGENT:  please note that the time and place of the press
conference have been changed to Friday, March 7, 11:00 am,
Anaheim Marriott Hotel, Los Angeles Room (lower level)
Los Angeles, U.S.A.

This was changed due to feedback from the press
requesting more notice.

Please forward this press release and invitation
to the your press contacts.


NEWS RELEASE                       FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Organic Industry Leaders Warn Biotech Industry: KEEP OUT! --
Newly-Formed National Coalition Cites Deep Concerns In Letter
to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman

(MARCH 5) - A newly-formed national coalition of organic food
industry producers, scientists, and consumer activist groups
this week will send a strong message to U.S. Secretary of
Agriculture Dan Glickman and the biotech industry:
"Keep genetically engineered organisms (GEOs) out of the
organic market."

The coalition launches a high profile campaign to ban all
GEOs from the organic market at a time when the biotech industry
is splicing human genes into pigs, fish genes into tomatoes,
and insect, viral, and bacterial DNA into foods on
grocery stores shelves.

The campaign will be launched simultaneously this week
on both coasts in the U.S. and includes:

1. A letter signed by 28 top organizations within the
organic foods industry to Secretary of Agriculture
Dan Glickman, urging the Secretary to uphold the
National Organic Standard Board's (NOSB)
September 1996 resolution to categorically ban
all genetically engineered organisms from the organic
market.

2. A national news conference on Friday, March 7, 11:00 a.m.
at the Anaheim Marriott, Los Angeles Room, during the
Natural Foods Expo in Anaheim, California.
(The Expo will be attended by an estimated 25,000
manufacturers and retailers.)

3. A nationwide drive to collect one million
signatures from consumers who are opposed to GEOs in
the organic market, to be presented during the
International Codex Committee on Food Labeling in
Ottawa, Canada, April 14-18. (This Codex committee
determines the status of international food
labeling laws, including whether genetically
engineered foods must be labeled.)

"Contrary to biotech advertising and the official
USDA position, genetic engineering is not harmless.
It is a radical new technology that poses
serious risks to our health and environment," said
John Fagan, Ph.D., a Cornell-trained molecular biologist
who gained international recognition when he returned $1.5
million in NIH grants because his research could have been
used for harmful genetic engineering applications.
Dr. Fagan is a leader of the new coalition.

"Many scientists believe that the genetic manipulation
of the food supply could set off a chain reaction throughout
the entire ecosystem, upsetting the delicate balance in nature
for generations to come. Unlike chemical or nuclear
contamination, genetic pollution cannot be cleaned up
or contained. The effects of genetic mistakes are
irretrievable and irreversible," Fagan said.

Current FDA policy does not require any long-term
safety testing on genetically engineered foods.

"There have been no human feeding studies done on
genetically engineered foods. And the FDA, by its own
admission, doesn't have a complete record of
information on these foods," said Laura Ticciati,
executive director of the American Campaign to
Ban Genetically Engineered Foods.

"Despite incidents of illness, allergic reactions,
and death, and increasing warnings from scientists and physicians,
these foods are sitting on our grocery store shelves unlabeled.
Right now the only non-genetically engineered food source
available to the consumer is the organic market. But
the integrity of the organic market is
in jeopardy," Ticciati said.

The following organic industry leaders signed the letter
to U.S. Agriculture Secretary Dan Glickman, calling for a
ban on genetically engineered food in
the organic market.

John Hagelin, Director
Institute of Science, Technology and
Public Policy

John Ardrey, Michael Potter
Eden Foods Inc.

James A. Riddle, Organic Inspector Independent
Organic Inspectors Association

Fred and Annie Kirschenmann
Farm Verified Organic

Professor Phil Bereano
Washington State Biotechnology Action Council

Doreen Stabinsky, Ph.D.
Council for Responsible Genetics

Richard W. Stewart
Chief Executive Officer
Frontier Cooperative Herbs

Kingsley Brooks, Chairman
Natural Law Party

Theresa Carbrey, Education Director, New Pioneer Co-op

Neil Carman, Ph.D.
Clean Air Program Director
Lone Star Chapter, Sierra Club

Ronnie Cummins
Pure Food Campaign

Eileen Danneman
National Coalition of Organized Women

Thomas B. Harding, Jr. President
Organic Crop Improvement Association International

Joan Dye Gussow Emeritus Professor
Teachers College, Columbia University
Just Food, NYC

Jeffrey Hollender
Seventh Generation

Judith Kew, Renu Namjoshi, Lynn Powell, Mary Pritchard
Texas Consumers for Safe Food

Jerry DeWitt, Coordinator
State Sustainable Agriculture
Iowa State University

Steve Druker
Alliance for Biotechnology

John Kinsman, President
Faily Farm Defenders

Rodney Leonard
Community Nutrition Institute

Hildy Nelson
Animal Alliance

John Fagan, Ph.D.
Professor of Molecular Biology,
Maharishi University of Managment

Laura Ticciati
Executive Director Mothers for Natural Law

David Vetter OCIA
Grain Place Foods, Inc.

Craig Winters Chairman of the Board
Citizens for Health

Charles Walters
N.O.R.M.

Margaret Wittenburg, Pamela Boyar
Whole Foods Market

Susan Futrell
Director of Marketing  and Sales  Blooming Prairie Coop

Judy DeRuvo
Mintaka Mountain Farms, Austin, TX


CONTACT: BOB ROTH, 515-472-2477, 515-469-9372

Press Invitation

Organic Industry Leaders Unite Against
Genetically Engineered Foods during
Natural Foods Expo

- NEWS CONFERENCE in ANAHEIM -
Friday, March 7 * 11:00 AM
Anaheim Marriott Hotel, Los Angeles Room (Lower Level)

The cloning of a sheep and a monkey has generated
considerable debate in the press and public. However,
a less graphic, but far more controversial and
potentially dangerous development is taking place:
the wholesale manipulation of the world's food supply
by a handful of biotech industries. Only one
market remains free of genetically engineered
organisms-organic foods. But now that market is in
jeopardy. For the first time, a national coalition of
organic food industry leaders, scientists, and
consumer groups have united together to preserve
the safety and purity of the organic market.
Representatives of the coalition are holding
this news conference during the
Natural Foods Expo to explain what
they are doing and why.

Panelists

Michael Potter
President and CEO, Eden Foods
National organic foods manufacturer

Jeffrey Hollender
President and CEO, Seventh Generation
Nation's leading manufacturer of green consumer products

Annie Kirschemann Board of Directors, Farm Verified
Organic Nationwide private organic certifiers

Susan Haeger
Executive Director, Citizens for Health
National grassroots citizens health activist group

Laura Ticciati
Executive Director, American Campaign to Ban Genetically
Engineered Foods Non-profit educational organization
leading a public awareness campaign on
dangers of genetically engineered foods

John Fagan, Ph.D.
Cornell-trained molecular biologist who gained
international recognition when he returned $1.5 million
in NIH grants because his research could have been
used for harmful genetic engineering applications.
Dr. Fagan is the chairman of the Department of
Molecular Biology at Maharishi
University of Management

CONTACT: BOB ROTH, 515-472-2477, 515-469-9372


>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>


Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 21:24:43 -0500
>From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Part of New York City quarantined for beetle
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Mercury Center web page:
----------------------------------------------
Posted at 6:05 p.m. PST Thursday, March 6, 1997

Part of New York City quarantined for beetle

Reuters

WASHINGTON -- A tree no longer grows in Brooklyn.

The U.S. Agriculture Department said Thursday it
was quarantining parts of the New York City
boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens because of an
infestation of the Asian longhorned beetle and
would cut down trees invaded by the pest.

The beetle, native to China, Japan and Korea, bores
into healthy hardwood trees to feed on living tree
tissue during the fall and winter and then emerges
through a dime-sized hole in the spring. Department
officials suspect it came to the United States by
ship.

``This pest is highly destructive to trees,''
Alfred Elder, a top official at the department's
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service said in
a statement. ``If it moves into the hardwood
forests of the northeastern United States or
Canada, it could be a serious blow to nursery and
forest products industries in those areas.''

State officials working with the department will
chop down the infested trees. The U.S. Forest
Service has offered $500,000 to help replace them.

The federal quarantine restricts the interstate
movement of firewood, logs, green lumber, tree
stumps, roots and branches and the debris of maple,
horse chesnut, apple, chinaberry, mulberry, poplar
and cherry trees, among others.

New York has already set a state quarantine.

Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 21:56:03 -0500
>From: allen schubert <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (US) Iditarod...another dog dies
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

from Mercury Center web page:
--------------------------------------------
Posted at 6:38 p.m. PST Thursday, March 6, 1997

Iditarod: Three ex-champs lead; another dog dies

OPHIR, Alaska (AP) -- Three former champions held
the top three spots and officials announced the
death of a third dog Thursday as the Iditarod Trail
sled dog race neared the halfway point.

Jeff King of Denali Park, Doug Swingley of Lincoln,
Mont., and Martin Buser of Big Lake were within an
hour of one another and in that order approaching
the town of Iditarod, halfway through the
1,100-mile race from Anchorage to Nome. All three
had finished the mandatory 24-hour rest.

Joe Redington of Knik, the 80-year-old described as
``the father of the Iditarod,'' pulled into McGrath
Thursday morning with a dead dog in his sled.

Race officials and the Iditarod's veterinary staff
found no outward cause of death. Redington will
remain in McGrath until a report on the dog is
completed.

News of the third animal death came a day after
Iditarod veterinarians were trying to determine
what killed a dog belonging to Wayne Curtis of
Wasilla.

Curtis was running 44th when he brought the animal
to the Nikolai checkpoint early Wednesday.

On Monday, a dog in the team of Anchorage musher
Bill Bass died shortly after leaving the Skwentna
checkpoint.

Ten teams were reported running between Ophir and
Iditarod by the middle of the morning. The leaders
moved through an immense and virtually uninhabited
stretch of Alaska, about the size of Indiana.

During the early 1900's, the vast region of hills,
swamps, lakes and mountains was swarming with tens
of thousands of gold miners, but it's generally
empty of people today.

Race officials said that stretch of trail continues
to be hard and fast under temperatures that dropped
to around zero overnight.

John Baker of Kotzebue was running fourth, about
three hours behind the leaders. Fourth was Tim
Osmar of Kasilof. Then came Dee Dee Jonrowe of
Willow, Ramy Brooks of Fairbanks, Charlie Boulding
of Nenana, Bill Cotter of Nenana and Vern Halter of
Willow.

The first musher into Iditarod will get $3,000 in
gold and a trophy.

The three former title-holders have been playing
leader leapfrog through much of the race. But
Buser, a two-time winner, said it was still too
early to predict the outcome.

``Things will shake out by the Yukon,'' Buser said.
``If there's punchy trail, we'll wait a bit longer.
The trail will dictate what we do in the way of
strategy.''

Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:07:56 -0800 (PST)
>From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Meat report cover up - part 1
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>From The Electronic Telegraph - Friday, March 7th, 1997

Ministers in clash over abattoir safety fiasco
By George Jones, David Brown and Auslan Cramb

                  GOVERNMENT denials of a cover-up over a damning report on
hygiene standards in Britain's abattoirs were undermined last night  when
leading figures in the meat industry, health experts and the Scottish Office
said they had not been alerted to its findings last year.

                  Douglas Hogg, the Agriculture Minister, was increasingly
isolated after the Government was accused of putting lives at risk by
ordering the toning down of the report - which warned abattoirs were a
breeding ground for E coli, salmonella and BSE - and then suppressing it.
There was a further setback for Mr Hogg when he clashed with Michael
Forsyth, the Scottish Secretary, who was "incandescent" over the handling of
the report.

                  A picture of confusion, buck-passing and incompetence
emerged yesterday as the Government tried to extricate itself from the
latest in a series of damaging scares about food safety. During angry
exchanges in the Commons, John Major denied that the Government
had suppressed the report drawn up by the Meat Hygiene Service more than a
year ago.

                  A leaked copy of the draft report warned that carcasses
were being contaminated with faecal matter and urine from slaughtered
animals which could allow meat to be contaminated from the E coli organism,
which has killed at least 20 people through food poisoning.

                  It also found that spinal cords were not always being
removed from carcasses, which meant potentially BSE-infected matter could
have been added to animal feed. It made 81 recommendations for better
practice in abattoirs.

                  Mr Hogg, on crutches after breaking his foot falling down
stairs,
attempted to defend his department's handling of the report. He said it was
an an "internal working document to be used by the Meat Hygiene Service. So
it was not formally published."

                  But at Westminster, opposition MPs reacted with
incredulity when Mr Major claimed it had not been given to ministers despite
its highly
critical assessment of hygiene standards in abattoirs. "There are huge
numbers of working documents of this sort every year. If they all came to
ministers for them to read, nothing else would be done at all," argued Mr Major.

                  Mr Blair said that was an "extraordinary" explanation.
"Whether a
report is shown to ministers should depend on its seriousness," he
said. "Just when will someone in this Government take responsibility for the
proper, competent administration of our affairs?" asked Mr Blair.

                  In a speech in Inverness today Mr Blair will announce that
the setting up of an independent Food Standards Agency will be a Labour
manifesto commitment. Mr Major accused the Labour leader of
"raising scares" about the meat industry when the problems revealed by the
report were being tackled. "There is no question of the report being
suppressed," he said.

                  But the Government assurances that there was no cover-up
were challenged on several fronts last night. Prof Sir Hugh Pennington,
chairman of the expert group looking into last year's Lanarkshire E coli
outbreak in which 18 people died, said the failure to alert his group to its
existence could delay the publication of its own report, due out this month.

                  A Downing Street spokesman countered the professor's
claims by saying that Ann Foster, one of Sir Hugh's team, was a member of the
MHS ownership board and would have known about the report. She later denied
any knowledge of the report, although she said she was aware that all
slaughterhouses had been assessed.

                  In the Commons Mr Hogg said the report had been "made
available to all concerned" including the Scottish Office - which ordered an
investigation into the Lanarkshire E coli outbreak. However, the Scottish
Office said that that it was also unaware of the report and received a copy
for the first time yesterday.

                  Meanwhile, the Meat and Livestock Commission, the
statutory agency that promotes British beef, lamb and pork, said last night
that it had not seen the report on abattoirs until yesterday.

                  Mr Hogg also dismissed MPs' protests that they had not
been alerted to the report. He said the annual report of the Meat Hygiene
Service
placed in the Commons library shortly before the summer recess said
there had been a "review" of abattoirs - and MPs should have realised from
that there would be a report and phoned up and asked for it.

                  Mr Hogg embarked on a determined attempt to undermine the
credibility of Bill Swann, the author of the original 54-page report on the
inspections of abattoirs across the country in 1995. Mr Swann,  now
assistant chief veterinary officer at the RSPCA, said his team had  been
told to tone down the paper, and that its publication had then been delayed
and its circulation restricted to members of the MHS's industry forum.

                  The report was originally due for publication last March -
at the time when the Government announced it had received scientific evidence
linking BSE in cattle with a new strain of CJD in humans. He said: "I was
told that it was not a good thing to release this type of document, giving
the industry a battering, with BSE around."

                  But Mr Hogg told MPs that Mr Swann's professional
colleagues found his draft report unsatisfactory. "They wanted him to change it
because it did not reflect their views in carrying out the assessment. He
decided not to do that. At that point they commissioned another expert to do
the report on red meat. The report that emerged and was subsequently
circulated to the industry represents the majority view of the veterinary
experts," said Mr Hogg.

Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:08:00 -0800 (PST)
>From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Meat report cover up - part 2
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>From The Electronic Telegraph - Friday, March 7th, 1997

The watered-down report that no-one remembers seeing
David Graves traces the origins of the elusive report and tensions behind
its drafting

                  BILL Swann first became aware of the Meat Hygiene Service's
intended review of abattoir hygiene practice and animal welfare standards
when he saw an advertisement for inspectors in the Veterinary Record in
early 1995.

                  The review was due to start in April of that year to
coincide with the launch of the MHS as the new national meat hygiene standards
agency and Mr Swann, an experienced veterinary surgeon, was appointed a
regional inspector on a 12-month contract. He was told that the intention
was to publish the results of the review with the first MHS annual report on
March 31 last year, when the Government was susbequently engulfed in the BSE
crisis.

                  Mr Swann, who had sold his veterinary hospital in
Derbyshire, had previously been working for the Isle of Man government. In
all, 12
two-man teams, each comprising a vet and a meat inspector, were
appointed by the MHS to visit abattoirs in England, Wales and Scotland. Some
of the unannounced visits took place as early as 4.30am and Mr Swann claimed
teams were soon recording chronic lapses of hygiene.

                  The inspections were completed earlier than had been
anticipated and by December 1995 the six full-time inspectors compiled a
draft report of their conclusions, which was edited by Mr Swann. The
54-page draft was handed personally by Mr Swann to Peter Soul, then acting
head of operations for the MHS, at the agency's head office in York.

                  The draft was circulated for review within the Ministry of
Agriculture,  which was normal procedure. Mr Swann said yesterday he did not
know who read it, although he assumed it would have been circulated
within the ministry's veterinary section.

                  The ministry said it believed it was not seen by Keith
Meldrum, the chief veterinary officer, because it was regarded as a working
document. "It was certainly not seen by a minister," said a spokesman.

                  When Mr Swann met Mr Soul the following month to discuss
the draft he was surprised by the MHS official's response. "Peter said it was
quite a critical report when one of the objectives had been to provide
recommendations and give advice. We were asked to look at it again to give
it a more positive emphasis," he said.

                  "We did, but in truth there was very little we could
alter. We took out the odd adjective but we could not change the general
thrust of the
report. It would have damaged our professional integrity to have done so."

                  The draft report was resubmitted to Mr Soul at the end of
January last year. Mr Swann claimed he was told by the acting head of operations
that the report "could not be published in the form it had been submitted".
He said he did not know what had happened to the report, although it was not
published as planned last March. Mr Soul's office yesterday referred calls
to the ministry.

                  In his statement to the Commons, Douglas Hogg, the
Agriculture Minister, said Mr Swann's first draft of the report had been
regarded as "rather unsatisfactory and not fully reflecting the views of
others who had taken part in the review".

                  The minister said Mr Swann had been asked to "recast his
contribution" but had been unwilling to do so and a section on red meat was
redrafted by another senior member of MHS staff. Mr Hogg said the final
report reflected the "majority judgment of the professional veterinary staff
who carried out the review". He said suggestions that important
recommendations in the report had not been acted upon were "untrue".

                  Last June the amended report was issued for comment to the
Meat Hygiene Service industry forum - representatives of the meat and
poultry industry, including the National Farmers' Union - and was made
available to the public on request from last August.

                  "There was never an attempt at any kind of a cover-up," said a
ministry spokesman. He insisted that that any examples of "bad practice"
discovered by the inspectors would have been dealt with immediately "well
before the draft report was even written".

                  Mr Swann said he had never seen a copy of the amended
report so he had no idea how much it differed from the original draft. In March
last year he became assistant chief veterinary officer of the RSPCA after
failing to become head of operations for the MHS himself. Mr Soul was
appointed permanently to the post.

                  Despite the ministry's insistence that the amended report
had been made publicly available both the European Commission in Brussels
and Prof Sir Hugh Pennington, chairman of the expert group investigating the
Lanarkshire outbreak of E coli food poisoning, said they had not been sent a
copy. The professor said he was a "bit annoyed to say the least".

                  The Meat and Livestock Commission, the agency which
promotes British produce at home and abroad, said last night that it had not
seen the report until Wednesday morning. This admission from the
body which is drawing up plans for a re-structuring of the entire British
slaughterhouse industry called into question just how widely the report has
been circulated. "We have asked around and we cannot find any of our
officials who has seen it until now," a spokesman said.


Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:08:03 -0800 (PST)
>From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Meat report cover up - part 3
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"


>From The Electronic Telegraph - Friday, March 7th, 1997


Hygiene fears threaten abattoirs with ruin

David Brown assesses the impact of the controversy on a struggling industry


                  THE row over hygiene in abattoirs has shaken an industry
already  facing economic ruin brought about by plunging profit margins and
huge over-capacity.

                  Plants which invested millions to comply with EU health
and hygiene standards are among those poised to shut within a year under a
ú70 million "slimming down" plan now being discussed by the industry.

                  The Meat Hygiene Service report blames most problems on
abattoirs where, to cut costs, speed has been put before quality. Much of
the pressure for this has come not from profit-seeking but from the wish
to avoid bankruptcy.

                  The Meat and Livestock Commission estimates that out of 469
licensed abattoirs in Britain - there are another nine in Northern
Ireland - up to 30 major plants will have to close by the end of the year,
costing about 2,000 jobs. These are among the most modern in Britain.

                  The best abattoirs are running on profit margins of no
more than two per cent, a derisory figure in view of the investment
involved. Average
plants are operating on profits of one per cent and others are making
losses.

                  Martin Palmer, head of abattoir industry strategy at the
MLC, said
yesterday: "We have a major structural problem in the industry. The plan is
to fund the cuts with a levy on the surviving abattoir operators.
Originally, farmers were reluctant to accept the possible closure of their
local slaughterhouse, but they are coming to see that something has to be
done. It's a bit like hearing your local shop is closing. You have to know
that there is an alternative elsewhere."

                  Abattoirs are a vital part of Britain's ú10.2 billion meat
industry. In a  "normal" year they kill about 3.3 million cattle, 19.4
million sheep and
14.4 million pigs, but confidence in meat safety, severely damaged by
the BSE beef crisis, has hit demand and profits. This year, as the
emergency BSE cull lessens, abattoirs will be fighting among themselves for
animals to kill. By the end of the year they will also face higher charges
for destroying offal.

                  Before BSE controls, this was sought after - and paid for - by
rendering plants for conversion into animal food and tallow. The
Government is subsidising renderers to the tune of ú118 million to
process the waste but this is expected to end in months.

                  John Dawkins, who operates a major abattoir in
Warwickshire, said:  "The public will get totally the wrong impression from
this E coli
controversy. We don't accept cattle that are too dirty. They are sent
back to the farm.

                  "We have regular inspections from the Meat Hygiene Service
and we pay ú15,000 a month - ú180,000 in meat inspection charges to ensure
the meat we sell is safe."

                  Abattoir companies blame the Government for much of the
industry's problems. They point to the fact that since the first of them
began to adapt the higher specification EU export standards more than 20
 years ago, too many others were encouraged follow. Many slaughterhouses
that did not modernise were allowed to stay in
business.

                  David Maunder, a director of Lloyd Maunder, an abattoir
and meat processing company employing 800 people at Willand, Devon,
criticised the Government for yielding to pressure from farmers and
other critics and negotiating "derogations" which allowing some
abattoirs to avoid upgrading their plants to EU standards.

                  Of the 469 British plants, 224 have upgraded to EU export
standard, 200 are exempted, because they normally slaughter no more than
1,000 cattle a year. The remaining 45 are still operating under
"temporary derogations" to the EU standards which they should have
 implemented, originally by 1991, later put back to 1993. The result was
over-capacity.

                  He said it was unlikely that abattoirs would start washing
cattle and sheep before killing them. "Washing livestock was tried in New
Zealand but it was found that the bacterial counts in those carcases was
higher than in the unwashed ones.

                  "It is true, in the natural way of things, that animals
can have traces of excrement on them when they are slaughtered. The main
safeguard is the skill of the slaughterman as he prepares the carcase to
ensure that none of this contaminates the meat."

                  It was "difficult to deny", he said, that low profit
margins and the drive for productivity by slaughtermen was leading to
contamination of meat in some plants.

Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:08:09 -0800 (PST)
>From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Doomed bees' buzz-word is 'quack'
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>From The Electronic Telegraph - Friday, March 7th, 1997

Doomed bees' buzz-word is 'quack'
By Robert Uhlig

                  BEES can quack and elephants' "rumbling stomachs" are a
form of communication, scientists have discovered.

                  Beekeepers have known for some time that the first new
queen bee strides around a hive and pipes soon after hatching.

                  Now, Prof Axel Michelsen at the University of Odense in
Denmark has discovered that the unhatched queens "quack" from their cells in
response to the queen's piping.

                  To capture a recording of the barely audible quacks, a
vibrometer was placed in the brood comb, where all the unhatched cells are.

                  "It doesn't really make sense," said David Pye, emeritus
professor of  zoology at Queen Mary and Westfield College at the University
of London. "The chorus of quacking noises from the cells attracts the queen
who then kills the other unborn queens."

                  Next week Prof Pye will play tapes of bee quacks and
elephant moans at the Linnean Society at Burlington House to launch Science
Week.
                  The facts behind elephant rumbling were discovered by Dr Bill
Lanbauer, research director at Pittsburgh Zoo.

                  "It's long been known that some animals use sounds that
are too high for us to hear, but elephants use infrasonic tones, two to three
octaves below what we can hear," he said.

                  Many people claimed they could hear an elephant's stomach
rumble if  they were standing next to it, but the noise they heard was the
vibration of their inner parts as they produced vocal infrasound from
within.

Date: Thu, 6 Mar 1997 20:08:07 -0800 (PST)
>From: David J Knowles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: [UK] Meat report cover up - part 4
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

>From The Electronic Telegraph - Friday, March 7th, 1997

How the wording changed
By Robert Shrimsley, Chief Political Correspondent

                  THE degree to which the draft report on hygiene standards
in Britain's abattoirs had been bowdlerised can best be seen by looking at
the difference in the two sections on animal hygiene.

                  It devotes 10 pages to "dressing hygiene", discussing in
sometimes stomach-churning detail the risks and recommendations. But the
final report reduces those 10 pages to one page and just nine
paragraphs.

                  Crucially, while the E coli virus is mentioned in the
draft, it is excluded from the final version of the report. On the risk
posed by dirty
carcasses, paragraph 7.17 on Page 19 of the draft stated: "Major
faecal contamination on the carcass, due to poor dressing practices,
is a serious cause for concern.

                  "Dirty animals arriving at the abattoir are a cause of further
contamination. Organisms, such as Escherichia coli 0157 and
salmonella can be introduced into the plant on the skins of dirty
livestock." However, by the time the final report appeared, this had been
reduced to: "The inspection teams were particularly concerned with carcass
contamination from the skin and from gastro-intestinal contents."

                  The final version of the report makes no mention of other
concerns. These worries included the washing of offal in "static tubs of
water", and the fact that the "spinal cord was not fully removed from all
bovine carcases", and that "bones containing spinal cord may be
processed into animal feed, providing a possible source of infection to
cattle".

Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 20:42:40 -0800
>From: Andrew Gach <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: FWD: The Grassroots Forest Appropriations Initiative (FY 98)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

TO:       All Forest Activists
FROM:     Steve Holmer
DATE:     March 5, 1997

SUBJECT:  Reminder to Sign-On Grassroots Appropriations
          Initiative

     Thanks to everyone who has already signed-on to the grassroots
appropriations initiative.  There was a typo in the version sent out
before: the Forest Service actually lost $234 million in 1995, not
$134 million, according the White House Council on Economic
Advisors.  In addition, the Government Accounting Office testified this
week that the agency cannot account for how they spent $215 million in
1995.  A corrected copy of the grassroots appropriations initiative is
enclosed.  To sign-on, please contact Steve Holmer at 202/789-2844
ext. 291 or email [e-mail]  We will continue to use the
Initiative
to educate Members of Congress throughout the appropriations process.

Hill Receptive to the Initiative
     WAFC and visiting grassroots activists held meetings this week
with a number of House and Senate offices and in general, our agenda
on appropriations is being very well received.  These positive responses
should encourage us to aggressively communicate with legislators about
these budget issues.

Old Growth, Roadless Area and Riparian Protection Gaining
Support
     In testimony before the Senate Energy and Natural Resources
Committee Chief of the Forest Service Michael Dombeck stated, "The
unfortunate reality is that many people presently do not trust us to do
the right thing.  Until we rebuild that trust and strengthen those
relationships, it is simply common sense that we avoid riparian, old
growth, and roadless areas."  We hope to translate this statement into
tangible policy to keep logging out of these critical areas.

Sen. Craig's Workshops Underway
     Sen. Larry Craig's (R-ID) workshops to discuss his
100-page draft rewrite of all forest management laws have revealed that
there is little consensus on the problems facing our forests or how to
solve them.

     The Government Accounting Office (GAO) failed to support
Sen. Craig's finding that the environmental laws and public processes
need to be changed to achieve better forest management.  Instead, the
GAO reported that the real problem is that the agency lacks
accountability and has consistently failed to obey laws and regulations
governing their activities.  GAO recommended that before any changes
were made to the laws and regulations, the purpose of the National
Forests needed to be better defined to help resolve conflicts that occur
when management activities conflict with environmental constraints or
other values of the forest, such as fishing.

The Grassroots Forest Appropriations Initiative (FY 98)

The Timber Logging Rider clearly demonstrated the Forest Service's
lack of accountability:  healthy, green forests were logged as "salvage
sales," water quality was endangered in the name of "forest health,"
and no record exists that even a dime from any of the salvage sales
sold under the Rider made its way to the U.S. Treasury.  As a result of
the failure of the Forest Service to protect the full range of forest
values in the National Forests under their management, both the
ecological integrity of our forests and the well being of federal
taxpayers were sacrificed.

We urge the 105th Congress to take the following steps to restore the
accountability of the Forest Service and protect the interests of both
taxpayers and our natural environment:

1.  Prohibit new roadbuilding on the National Forests by ending
any appropriation for new roads and by prohibiting the use of
purchaser road credits to build new roads.  The elimination of
purchaser road credits in the President's budget is a good first step.

2.  Prohibit logging and road-building on unstable and potentially
unstable national forest land.   Recent landslides in the West have
demonstrated the "hidden costs" to public safety and the environment of
subsidized logging and road building on steep, unstable slopes.

3.  Restore accountability by reforming or abolishing off-budget
funds.  There is a growing consensus that the various off-budget funds
-- the Knudsen-Vandenburg (KV), Brush Disposal and Salvage Funds --
must be either reformed or abolished.  The Green Scissors Coalition
urges abolishing the Salvage Fund and the Clinton Administration
proposes new limits on this fund in the 1998 budget.  The
Administration has also proposed the creation of a new fund for
ecosystem restoration called the Forest Ecosystem Restoration and
Maintenance Fund (FERM).  While we support the intent of the new
FERM fund, as currently envisioned it would only perpetuate the same
perverse incentive to log that plague the other funds.  Instead, we
support the Administration's request for $30 million of appropriated
funds for restoration activities and urge Congress to appropriate
necessary funds for restoration rather than creating another off-budget
fund.

4.  End money-losing timber sales.  The annual report of the White
House Council of Economic Advisors shows that the Forest Service
spent $234 million more than it collected in timber receipts in 1995.
"Generally, the Forest Service subsidizes timber extraction from public
lands by collecting less timber sale revenues than it spends on timber
program costs," the report says.  According to the Government
Accounting Office (GAO) the timber sale program lost nearly $1 billion
from 1992-1994.  For the sake of both the environment and the
taxpayer, it is time to end subsidized logging on the National Forests.
--=====================_857620084==_
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Steve Holmer
Campaign Coordinator
Western Ancient Forest Campaign
1101 14th St. NW #1400
Washington, D.C. 20005
202/789-2844 ext. 291
202/682-1943 fax
[e-mail]
Date: Thu, 06 Mar 1997 20:55:32 -0800
>From: Andrew Gach <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Immune System Toxins Maim People & Wildlife
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

=======================Electronic Edition========================
.                                                               .
.           RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY #536           .
.                      ---March 6, 1997---                      .
.                          HEADLINES:                           .
.                     IMMUNE SYSTEM TOXINS                      .
.                          ==========                           .
.               Environmental Research Foundation               .
.              P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD  21403              .
.      Fax [phone]; Internet: [e-mail]       .
.                          ==========                           .
.  Back issues available by E-mail; to get instructions, send   .
.   E-mail to [e-mail] with the single word HELP   .
.    in the message; back issues also available via ftp from    .
.    ftp.std.com/periodicals/rachel and from gopher.std.com     .
.            and from http://www.monitor.net/rachel/            .
. Subscribe: send E-mail to [e-mail] .
.  with the single word SUBSCRIBE in the message.  It's free.   .
=================================================================

IMMUNE SYSTEM TOXINS

In 1987, about 45% of Americans were living with one or more
chronic conditions (a term that includes chronic diseases and
impairments).  In 1935, the proportion was 22%, so chronic
conditions have approximately doubled during the last 60 years.
The majority of people with chronic conditions are not disabled,
nor are they elderly.  In fact, one out of every four children in
the U.S. (25%) now lives with a chronic condition.[1]

Chronic conditions can often be "managed" (helping people to live
with the condition), but they usually cannot be cured.  The cost
of chronic conditions in 1990 was estimated to be $659 billion
--nearly three quarters of all U.S. health care costs.  (To get
this huge number into perspective, it may help to know that the
entire U.S. military budget is $250 billion per year.)

Perhaps it is time we looked seriously at prevention as an
approach to chronic conditions.

Humans and other vertebrates (animals with a backbone) come
equipped with a complicated "immune system" which PREVENTS
diseases that might be caused by pathogens (bacteria, viruses,
fungi, and parasites) or cancerous cells.  We are constantly
exposed to hundreds of pathogens in daily life, but our immune
system recognizes them as dangerous and swiftly isolates them and
removes them from our bodies.  The immune system is a built-in
disease-prevention mechanism that works hard to keep us healthy
so long as we keep our immune system healthy.

If the immune system is damaged in certain ways, it can allow
pathogens to overwhelm our defenses and make us sick.  Under
other circumstances (which are poorly understood), the immune
system goes haywire and attacks its host, causing major damage of
a different kind, known as "autoimmune" diseases.  These
"autoimmune" diseases include insulin-dependent diabetes,
multiple sclerosis, lupus erythematosus, schleroderma, rheumatoid
arthritis, and about a dozen others.[2]  In these diseases, the
immune system attacks and breaks down the host organism, causing
prolonged misery and death.

A third class of immune disorders is "hypersensitivity
reactions," or allergic reactions, such as asthma, hay fever
(allergic rhinitis), and food allergies (to milk, egg whites,
peanuts, fish, soy and other foods), some of which may be minor,
others of which may be fatal.

As early as 1984, the U.S. National Toxicology Program [NTP]
(within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services)
observed that chemical damage to the immune system could result
in "hypersensitivity or allergy" to specific chemicals or to
chemicals in general.  NTP said damage to the immune system can
have far-reaching consequences for an individual, leaving him or
her vulnerable to attack by bacteria and viruses, at heightened
risk of cancer, and even predisposed to develop AIDS.[3]

Unfortunately, during the past 50 years, corporations have been
permitted to release more and more industrial chemicals and
consumer products that damage the immune systems of birds,
amphibians, reptiles, fish, and mammals, including humans.  The
immune system itself has only been fully recognized since the
1950s, and it wasn't until the 1970s that all the major
components and activities of the immune system were identified.
Many of these are not well understood even today.[2]

Partly as a result of this ignorance, public health authorities
have still not established consistent criteria for measuring
damage to the immune system,[4] which of course allows corporate
polluters a lot of "wiggle room" when they are asked to stop
releasing --or to clean up past releases of --immunotoxic
chemicals such as PCBs, cadmium (see REHW #179), and mercury
(REHW #462).  (PCBs are a class of industrial chemicals outlawed
in the U.S. in 1976 because of their dangerous properties.
Unfortunately, large quantities of them persist in the
environment to this day, affecting wildlife and humans.[5])

A new study of immunotoxic chemicals affecting mammals appeared
earlier this year in ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY, a
publication of the American Chemical Society.[6]  Since 1987,
large numbers of dolphins, seals, and sea turtles have been
killed by disease in the Atlantic Ocean, the Gulf of Mexico, the
North Sea, and the Mediterranean.  (See REHW #399.)

In this new study, researchers examined carcasses of bottlenose
dolphins found dead on Atlantic and Gulf coast beaches in
Florida, 1989-1994.  They found elevated levels of tin, a toxic
metal that has been used for the past 40 years to paint the
bottoms of boats and ships to prevent the growth of barnacles and
slime.  (The specific tin compounds are tributyl tin, dibutyl
tin, and monobutyl tin, together called organotin compounds.
Tributyl tin is added to paint to prevent growth of organisms on
ships' bottoms; it slowly degrades into the other two compounds.)
The tin found in bottlenose dolphins was compared to the tin
found in spotted dolphins, and pygmy sperm whales, which spend
their lives far offshore.  The bottlenose dolphins had higher
levels of tin, presumably because they spend their lives close to
shore, where anti-fouling paint from boats and ships has
contaminated bottom sediments and local food chains.

The researchers conclude that the tin compounds --which are well
established immunotoxins --combined with PCBs and the pesticide
DDT, which are also found at high levels in dolphins and which
are also well-established immunotoxins --together may have
deprived the dolphins of their main defense against disease,
their immune systems.  They then succumbed to bacteria and
viruses that they had previously been able to live with.

Other common agents and environmental contaminants known to harm
the immune system include:

** Ultraviolet light from the sun --the kind of light that is
increasing in the northern latitudes of the Earth because
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) have damaged the planet's protective
ozone shield 10 to 30 miles in the sky. (See REHW #246, #441.)
Ultraviolet sunlight striking the inhabited portions of the
planet has increased 5% to 10% in recent years.  In sum, we are
now all taking a bath in a moderately immunotoxic agent.[7]

** Dioxin and PCBs.  As mentioned above, PCBs are a class of
industrial chemicals now outlawed in the U.S., but still present
in many parts of the environment at toxic levels.  Dioxins are a
class of chemicals created as unwanted byproducts of
incineration, metal smelting, and the manufacture of many
pesticides.  Dioxins and PCBs are carcinogenic and powerfully
immunotoxic in many animals, including humans.  (The
International Agency for Research on Cancer [IARC] --part of the
World Health Organization --announced February 14, 1997, that the
most potent dioxin, 2,3,7,8-TCDD, is a now considered a Class 1
carcinogen, meaning a "known human carcinogen.")[8]

** Agent orange --the chemical used by the U.S. in Vietnam to
defoliate the jungle, damages the immune system.  Furthermore,
Vietnam veterans have an above-average likelihood of being struck
by diabetes --a serious immune system disease. (REHW #463.)  In
the general population in the U.S., the incidence (occurrence) of
diabetes doubled between 1964 and 1981.[9]  It is worth noting
that Agent orange is composed of two pesticides, 2,4,5-T and
2,4-D.  Though 2,4,5-T was banned in the U.S. in the early 1980s
for fear of birth defects, 2,4-D is still most the popular
herbicide used to kill broad-leaf weeds, such as dandelions, in
lawns today.  After people spray 2,4-D on their lawn, it is
carried indoors on the family dog and on children's feet.  Once
indoors, it contaminates rugs and carpets and persists for a very
long time. (REHW #436)

** Many pesticides damage the immune system. In 1996, a study of
pesticides and the immune system, published by the World
Resources Institute (WRI), examined a growing body of literature
from around the world, showing that many common pesticides
degrade the immune systems of wildlife, and humans.[10]

WRI examined studies of all major classes of pesticides
--organochlorines such as DDT, organophosphates such as
malathion, and carbamates such as aldicarb.  All three classes
were immunotoxic.

** Living near a toxic dump damages the immune system in some
people, though these effects have been rarely studied. (REHW #272)

** Exposure to fibers of asbestos and fiber glass damages the
immune system. (REHW #444.)  These effects may be more common
than, and perhaps more important than, cancer caused by exposure
to such fibers, but have been largely ignored in favor of cancer
studies.

** Organochlorine chemicals, including those known as "endocrine
disrupters," damage the immune system.  The endocrine (hormone)
system strongly influences the immune system, so chemicals that
mimic hormones may disrupt immune functions.[11]  In addition,
common chlorine-containing chemicals such as perchloroethylene
(dry cleaning fluid), trichlorethylene (a common industrial
solvent), and chloroform (created in drinking water when it is
chlorinated to kill germs) can damage the immune system. (REHW
#279, #365, #399)

Since 1970, the U.S. has spent 98% of its health dollars trying
to cure diseases, and only 2% trying to prevent them.[12]  During
this same period, many diseases connected to the immune system
such as asthma (REHW #218, #374) and diabetes have increased
dramatically, and deaths from infectious diseases (not including
AIDS) have increased 22%. (REHW #528)  These seem to be strong
indications that immune disorders are increasing.  Perhaps all
these immunotoxins are having a cumulative effect.

The U.S. government does not seem prepared to cope with these
problems. To prevent damage to the immune system would require
strong action to curb the release of immunotoxic chemicals into
the environment. This would require a government that is
independent of, and stronger than, the corporations releasing the
chemicals.  At present we do not have anything close to that kind
of government.
                                                --Peter Montague
                (National Writers Union, UAW Local 1981/AFL-CIO)

===============
[1] Catherine Hoffman and others, "Persons With Chronic
Conditions," JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN MEDICAL ASSOCIATION Vol.
276, No. 18 (November 13, 1996), pgs. 1473-1479. The data
describe the non-institutionalized population.

[2] William R. Clark, AT WAR WITHIN; THE DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD OF
IMMUNITY (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995).  Clark lists
autoimmune diseases on pg. 123.

[3] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public Health
Service, National Toxicology Program, FISCAL YEAR 1984 ANNUAL
PLAN (Research Triangle, N.C.: National Toxicology Program [P.O.
Box 12233, Research Triangle Park, NC 27709], 1984), pg. 157.

[4] Anna Fan, Robert Howd, and Brian Davis, "Risk Assessment of
Environmental Chemicals," ANNUAL REVIEW OF PHARMACOLOGY AND
TOXICOLOGY Vol. 35 (1995), pgs. 341-368.

[5]  See, for example, Andrew C. Revkin, "New Studies Show PCB's
[sic] Persist in Hudson, and Are Entering Air," NEW YORK TIMES
February 22, 1997, pg. A1.

[6] K. Kannan and others, "Elevated Accumulation of Tributyltin
and Its Breakdown Products in Bottlenose Dolphins (TURSIOPS
TRUNCATUS) Found Stranded along the U.S. Atlantic and Gulf
Coasts," ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY [ES&T] Vol. 31, No. 1
(1997), pgs. 296-301.

[7] And see A.J. McMichael and others, editors, CLIMATE CHANGE
AND HUMAN HEALTH (Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization,
1996), Chapter 8, especially pages 167-170.

[8] According to the press statement, the new IARC finding on
dioxin will be published in Volume 69 of IARC MONOGRAPHS ON THE
EVALUATION OF CARCINOGENIC RISKS TO HUMANS.  The IARC can be
contacted at: IARC, 150 Cours Albert Thomas, 69372 Lyon, France.

[9] National Diabetes Data Group, DIABETES IN AMERICA [NIH
Publication No. 85-1468] (no place of publication [Bethesda,
Md.?]: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Public
Health Service, National Institutes of Health, National Institute
of Arthritis, Diabetes, and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, August
1985), Table 2, pgs. VI-4, VI-5.

[10] Robert Repetto and Sanjay S. Baliga, PESTICIDES AND THE
IMMUNE SYSTEM: THE PUBLIC HEALTH RISKS (Washington, D.C.: World
Resources Institute, 1996).  Available for $14.95 from WRI
Publications, P.O. Box 4852, Hampden Station, Baltimore, MD
21211. Telephone: [phone], or [phone].  Fax: (410)
516-6998.  E-mail: [e-mail].

[11] William R. Clark, AT WAR WITHIN; THE DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD OF
IMMUNITY (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), Chapter 8.
See also: Phyllis B. Blair and others, "Disease Patterns and
Antibody Responses to Viral Antigens in Women Exposed IN UTERO to
Diethylstilbestrol," in Theo Colborn and Coralie Clement,
editors, CHEMICALLY-INDUCED ALTERATIONS IN SEXUAL AND FUNCTIONAL
DEVELOPMENT: THE WILDLIFE/HUMAN CONNECTION [Advances in Modern
Environmental Toxicology Vol. XXI] (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton
Scientific Publishing Co., 1992), pgs. 283-288.  And, in the same
volume, see Phyllis B. Blair, "Immunologic Studies of Women
Exposed IN UTERO to Diethylstilbestrol," pgs. 289-294.

[12] Speech by Gilbert Omenn, Dean, School of Public Health and
Community Medicine, University of Washington, given at the
meeting of Grantmakers in Health, Fort Lauderdale, Florida,
February 27, 1997.

Descriptor terms:  chronic diseases; immune system; children;
health care costs; prevension; diabetes; multiple schlerosis;
lupus erythematosus; schleroderma; rheumatoid arthritis;
arthritis; hypersensitivity reactions; allergies; national
toxicology program; cancer; bacteria; viruses; fungi; parasites;
corporations; dolphins; marine mammals; gulf of mexico; atlantic
ocean; tributyltin; tin; pcbs; ddt; uvb; ultraviolet radiation;
cfcs; chlorofluorocarbons; dioxin; carcinogens; iarc;
international agency for research on cancer; world health
organization; who; agent orange; vietnam veterans; 2,4,5-t;
2-4,d; herbicides; perticides; world resources institute; wri;
toxic dumps; landfilling; asbestos; fiberglass; endocrine
disrupters; endocrine system; perchloroethylene;
trichloroethylene; chloroform; asthma; infectious diseases;

################################################################
                             NOTICE
Environmental Research Foundation provides this electronic
version of RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH WEEKLY free of charge
even though it costs our organization considerable time and money
to produce it. We would like to continue to provide this service
free. You could help by making a tax-deductible contribution
(anything you can afford, whether $5.00 or $500.00). Please send
your tax-deductible contribution to: Environmental Research
Foundation, P.O. Box 5036, Annapolis, MD 21403-7036. Please do
not send credit card information via E-mail. For further
information about making tax-deductible contributions to E.R.F.
by credit card please phone us toll free at 1-888-2RACHEL.
                                        --Peter Montague, Editor



</pre>
                            <!-- END OF PAGE CONTENT -->

    </TD>


    <TD width=50 align=center>

    </TD>
</TR>

                            <!-- THE BOTTOM TOOLBAR -->

<TR>

    <TD colspan=3 align=center fontsize=2>
    <a href="../SUB~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/sub.html">ARRS Tools</a>  |
<a href="../NEWSPA~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/newspage.html">News</a>  |
<a href="../ORGS~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Orgs.html">Orgs</a>  |
<a href="../SEARCH~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/search.html">Search</a>  |
<a href="../SUPPOR~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Support.html">Support</a>  |
<a href="../ABOUT/INDEX.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/about">About the ARRS</a>  |
<a href="mailto:[e-mail]">Contact ARRS</a>
    </TD>
</TR>


                                <!-- END OF MAIN -->

</TABLE></center>




        <!-- THE UNDERWRITERS -->

<table border=0 width=100%>
    <tr><td>

<center>    <hr width=285>
<Font Size=1>THIS SITE UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY:</FONT>
<BR>


<a href="../../../tppmsgs/msgs9.htm#981" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/cgi-bin/show_support.pl?id=t889237342&sec=sbn_bottom&url=http%3a//www.go-organic.com/" target=_top><img src="../../SUPPORT/BANNERS/CROSS-~1/GO-ORG~1.GIF" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/support/banners/cross-promotion/go-organic.gif" border=0 alt="Go Organic"></a>


<hr width=285>

    <br><font size=2>
    <b>The views and opinions expressed within this page are not
necessarily those of the <br>EnviroLink Network nor the Underwriters.  The views
are those of the authors of the work.</b></font>
    </center>
    </td></tr>

</table>

</BODY>

</HTML>