>> Breaking News: >> >> Mother may be forced to put child through chemotherapy >> >> Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:47 PM >> >> From:Health Freedom Alliance >> <mailto:email@example.com> >> >> Subject: Breaking News: Mother may be forced to put child through >> chemotherapy >> Date:Wed, 12 Sep 2007 17:46:27 +0000 >> >> September 12, 2007 >> >> Dear Health Freedom Fighters: >> >> There is a developing story from California that involves a mother >> with a 17 >> year old child who HAD melanoma. The mother, chose to go against her >> allopathic (conventional) doctor's orders (to have surgery and >> chemotherapy) - and instead try advanced natural medicine first - >> since she understood that supporting the body's ability to heal is >> more effective than destroying it as chemotherapy does. >> >> Not surprisingly this approach worked! This young man is now CANCER >> FREE!! However, the allopathic doctor is insisting that the child >> must have chemotheray as well as surgery, which the mother refuses to >> have her child undergo. >> Interestingly, doctor, the allopathic doctor's unnecessary treatments >> will be compensated by the insurer or state, while the holistic >> strategies that actually worked are not eligible for coverage. >> >> The Department of Child Services was called and her son was taken >> away from her and put in foster care. The DCS claimed she failed to >> properly care for her child. Note here: the advanced methods which >> worked are being defined as "child abuse" while the doctor's assault >> (which is what we call touching someone against their will) is >> supported by the power of the state. Is this Health Freedom? >> >> Next, the mother was put in jail for 5 days in maximum security and >> suffered injuries in the neck and arm from jailers. Her child is >> still in foster care, where he was forcibly vaccinated. Disgusted >> yet? It gets worse... >> >> ======================================== >> EarthPulse - Better sleep means better health >> http://www.healthfreedomalliance.com/ep.xp >> ======================================== >> >> The case is pending in Dependency Court in Orange County where the >> Judge is soon to rule whether her son will be ordered to have surgery >> and chemotherapy. >> >> This 17 year old near-adult does NOT want to undergo chemotherapy or >> surgery and was forcefully vaccinated while in state custody. We >> support this brave young man and his clear thinking mother in their >> struggle to preserve his freedom. In doing so, they are struggling to >> preserve ours. >> >> We will be reporting on the result of a court decision as it unfolds, >> perhaps as early as later today. The mother will also be sharing her >> story in a follow-up email shortly. At this moment, she has been >> barred by the court from discussing her case publicly. Not only is >> her son's Health Freedom under assault in this case, so is her >> Freedom of Speech. >> >> Please forward this email widely. If a Civil Rights Attorney would be >> willing to advise in this matter, please reply via email. >> >> The family is in desperate need of support and legal assistance. The >> Natural >> Solutions Foundation is taking this threat to our collective Health >> Freedom and our Freedom of Speech very seriously. The Foundation will >> continue to assist and are building a network of natural physicians, >> Constitutional lawyers and other experts to be ready to act as >> "amicus curiae" - Friends of the Court - in similar cases. If you can >> help us fund or staff our Health Freedom Posse, please reply via >> email. Remember that your donations key to these battles! >> http://www.healthfreedomusa.org/index.php?page_id=189 >> >> Dr. Laibow has pledged to interrupt her travels to be present for >> this hearing >> but, because this is a juvenile case, she and all other outsiders are >> barred >> from attending these proceedings. However, the minute the outcome is >> known we will inform you on this threat to our Health Freedom. Watch >> for the next email in this unfolding story. This may mean that you >> will get another email as early as later today. >> >> The Natural Solutions Foundation will be there for your freedoms and >> assisting this brave mother and son as they pursue legal redress for >> the assaults the State of California has made on their Health >> Freedom. >> >> Because this is a juvenile case we will not be permitted to attend >> hearings. >> However, we will know the outcome immediately following and will keep >> you >> informed on this threat to our Health Freedom. And we will be there >> for you when this brave mother and son pursue legal redress for this >> assault on their Health Freedom. >> >> >> We are all invested in this fight. Each of us will be effected by >> it's outcome. >> Each of us can make a difference! >> >> Thank you Freedom Fighters! >> >> Thomas Cowles II >> Media Director, Natural Solutions Foundation >> firstname.lastname@example.org
We're down to the last third of 30 Days to a Greener You, and from here on out, we'll take a look at various steps you can consider to move beyond the "low-hanging fruit." Keep in mind that greening your life doesn't have to involve big investments; at the same time, we all do make larger purchases, so keeping our environmental footprint in mind when shopping for bigger-ticket items is a natural next step in greening our lives.
If you're a homeowner or house renter, keeping the yard and garden healthy takes a lot of work, and various kinds of tools, particularly power tools, help ease that work load. If you're cranking up a gas-powered lawn mower, leaf blower or rotor tiller, though, all of your efforts to green your gardening may be offset by the pollution that tool is belching into the atmosphere: according to a 2001 Swedish study, small engines such as lawnmowers may contribute up to 5% of the US' total air pollution.
Fortunately, greener alternatives are available. Reel mowers (you know: the "old-fashioned" lawn mowers) use only human power, and are a perfect tool for a small yard. If you still need some power for a bigger yard, consider an electric mower (many of which are now cordless), or even a solar-powered mower (they're still a bit pricey, but what a way to impress the neighbors - and avoid any emissions).
Your Action for Today: Take a Look at Some New Tools
While you may not currently be in the market for a lawn mower, it's good know what's available. Take a look, and record what you think might work for you (and why) in your Green Journal.
Reel mowers are likely the greenest alternative - no fuel or batteries.
Solar-powered mowers have batteries that are charged by sunlight - Appropedia tells you how to build your own!
Electric mowers require plugging in at some point, so while they don't emit pollutants themselves, they're drawing electricity that may come from a dirty power source. Overall, they're slightly better than a gas-powered model.
And a tip for organic lawn care: leave the clippings on the lawn - they don't contribute to thatch growth, and do provide organic material for your lawn.
Look at what you're wearing... go ahead, look. What you see, whether made from cotton, wool, silk, rayon or leather, likely has a pretty hefty environmental impact. A recent report (in PDF) from the UK's Cambridge University notes that the clothes we wear represent large expenditures of energy, toxic chemicals (esp. fertilizers), and water (both in production and cleaning), and also create huge amounts of waste because of changing fashion trends. On average, every American throws away 68 pounds of fabric per year - that's over 10 million tons of waste annually.
Fortunately, greening your wardrobe doesn't have to mean buying all-new clothes (clearly, that's part of the problem). Rather, it involves choosing carefully when you do buy, and then lowering the use of energy and toxic chemicals when caring for them.
Your Action for Today: Take a Look at Your Wardrobe
Take a look at the clothes you own, and think about your normal buying patterns. Answer the following questions in your Green Journal.
Are you a "dedicated follower of fashion?" We all like to dress well, but constantly buying "the latest thing" contributes to an awful lot of waste. More timeless styles don't have to cleaned out every season.
Do you buy all of your clothes new? Used and vintage clothes can be inexpensive, and carry a much lighter footprint - think of them as "offsetting" the purchase of a new item. Clothing swaps are becoming popular social gatherings, and allow you to change up your wardrobe frequently without as heavy an environmental footprint. On the flip side, when you're done with an item of clothing that's still wearable, donate it - don't throw it away.
Do many of your clothes need dry cleaning? Traditional dry cleaning uses perchloroethylene (or "perc"), a highly toxic chemical. While some efforts are underway to change this, and some cleaners are adopting more eco-friendly practices, avoiding dry-clean only clothes prevents this dilemma altogether.
Do you ever use a clothesline? Drying is the most energy-intensive part of laundering clothes. Cut your electric or gas bill (as well as your carbon emissions) by using a clothesline. If you use a liquid fabric softener, dry the clothes for five minutes to activate the softener, and then remove them and put 'em on the line.
Are most of your clothes made from cotton? Traditionally-grown cotton needs lots of water and fertilizer; add the drying time and ironing needed to keep it looking good, and you've got a fabric with a massive environmental footprint. Organically-grown cotton is better, and much more available than in the past - Wal-Mart, in fact, is the biggest seller of the fabric. Synthetics that require little drying time and ironing are even greener. Fabrics like hemp and bamboo, while not yet as widely available as cotton, are catching on with designers... and they're much more eco-friendly.
Take the Plunge, Make a Pledge, and Get Into Energy Conservation!
On Day 3, you spent some time with the ENERGY STAR@Home interactive tool, and made some changes around your home. Hopefully, you're seeing how easy it is to cut your energy use, and even challenging yourself to find other ways to put a dent in your utility bills.
Of course, it's always easier to keep these kinds of commitments if you share them with others - that's part of the thinking behind the Green Living Journal. For seven years, the ENERGY STAR program has also offered an opportunity to make a public commitment to lowering your energy use: The ENERGY STAR "Change a Light, Change the World" campaign. It's a simple idea: you simply pledge to change one light bulb in your home to one that's ENERGY STAR-qualified. Then, of course, you do it!
If you want to get into this effort even more, take a look at the campaign's community page. See which states and organizations are leading the way in pledges, read success stories by participants (or submit your own), and listen to a podcast on the 2006 Change a Light Day event.
Your Action for Today: Take the Pledge
Take the pledge to change a bulb (and change the world), and do it! If you want to find out more about ENERGY STAR qualifications for lighting and fixtures, check out thesesections of The Green Life Guide.
Doesn't make a lot of sense, does it? Yet, we do this every day: we buy paper towels, napkins, plates, cups and tissues. We buy plastic cups and utensils. We use them once, and then we throw them in the trash. We also buy products in perfectly usable containers that we throw away when the product's gone. Is this convenient? Certainly! Is it green? Hardly.
Reusable Rocks! Recyclable Rolls!
We discussed recycling in Day 2, but reusable items are even greener: beyond the materials and energy used to create them, items we reuse only require a little soap and hot water to return to their useful state. We wash clothes and dishes regularly, so the inconvenience involved isn't life-changing; rather, it usually involves a few extra items in a dishwasher or laundry load.
Still, sometimes we will want the convenience of disposables, especially if we're going to be away from home, or are casually entertaining a large group of people. Occasionally choosing disposable items shouldn't send us into paroxysms of green guilt; it should, however, make us look at the products we do buy, and ensure that we're purchasing the greenest items available. Many paper items, for instance, come in varieties with post-consumer recycled content - that's a good place to start. Other convenience items are compostable - throw them into the backyard compost pile to turn them into soil nutrients for your lawn or garden (Note: some materials will require industrial-grade composting - check your local phone or business directory for services in your area).
Finally, many of the products you buy come in reusable containers. So, why not reuse them! You may find that you can buy refill quantities of soaps, cleaners and other household necessities.
Your Action for Today: Take a Look at Your Disposables
Take a look around your home, and notice the things you buy regularly that get thrown away. Paper towels? Plastic utensils? Liquid soap? Identify three items you regularly throw away that have non-disposable or greener (recycled, compostable) alternatives. Commit to buying those items in your Green Living journal. A good place to start looking: Green Options' "Tip(s) O' the Day".
? Bottled water costs hundreds or thousands of times more than tap water. Compare $0.002 per gallon for most tap water to a range of $0.89 to $8.26 per gallon for bottled waters.
? The Food and Drug Administration regulates only the 30 to 40 percent of bottled water sold across state lines.
? The Environmental Protection Agency requires up to several hundred water tests per month by utility companies while the FDA requires only one water test per week by bottling companies.
? Nearly 40 percent of bottled water is simply filtered or treated tap water.
? U.S. plastic bottle production requires more than 1.5 million barrels of oil annually, enough to fuel 100,000 cars.
? About 86 percent of the empty plastic water bottles in the United States land in the garbage instead of being recycled.
New Food & Water Watch Report Highlights Problems with Bottled Water
Washington, DC - Choosing tap water over bottled water is better for consumers' health, their pocketbooks, and the environment, according to a new report released today by Food & Water Watch. The report is being released on the heals of a San Francisco executive order banning the use of city funds for bottled water and a U.S. Conference of Mayors resolution to study problems with bottled water consumption.
In 2005, Americans spent $8.8 billion for almost 7.2 billion gallons of non-sparkling bottled water. Consumers drank even more in 2006, about 26 gallons per person. The bottled water industry spends billions on advertising that promises purity in a bottle while implying that tap water is somehow less safe, something that is simply not true, according to the report.
"Bottled water generally is no cleaner, or safer, or healthier than tap water. In fact, the federal government requires far more rigorous and frequent safety testing and monitoring of municipal drinking water," said Food & Water Watch Executive Director Wenonah Hauter. "Rather than buying into this myth of purity in a bottle, consumers should drink from the tap."
"Utilities all over the country spend millions of dollars to deliver clean, safe, affordable water right to the kitchen sink," said Susan Leal, San Francisco Public Utilities Commission General Manager. "Relying on bottles that use lots of energy to produce and are sometimes trucked or even flown thousands of miles and ultimately become a municipal solid waste problem just makes no sense," concluded Leal.
But just kicking the bottle in favor of the tap is not enough, says Food & Water Watch. Our nation's public water and sewer infrastructure is old and in the coming years will need billions of dollars of investment to maintain and further improve treatment, storage, and distribution. Each year we fall more than $20 billion short of what is needed to maintain our public water and sewage systems.
"It's time for Congress to establish a clean water trust fund that would give communities the financial help they need to invest in healthy and safe drinking water for every American and for future generations," Hauter said.
The United States maintains trust funds for highways, airports, and social security. Providing a dedicated funding stream for national priorities is sound public policy, explained Bill Holman, former executive director of the Clean Water Management Trust Fund and former secretary of the N.C. Department of Environment and Natural Resources. "The North Carolina Clean Water Management Trust Fund has sparked innovative, community-based solutions to protect and restore water resources in North Carolina. A national clean water trust fund would provide similar benefits," said Holman.
Food & Water Watch is encouraging consumers to Take Back the Tap by choosing tap water over bottled water whenever possible and supporting increased funding for safe and affordable public tap water.
I love You Food, I Thank You Food, I Respect You Food - I love You Water, I Thank You Water, I Respect You Water - I love You Air, I Thank You Air, I Respect You Air.
Take Part in April 14 National Day of Action on Climate Change
The Organic Consumers Association's Planting Peace Campaign invites you to join the No War No Warming Coalition on April 14th when we go out with Step It Up to call on Congress to cut carbon 80% by 2050.
The US military, the single largest consumer of petroleum, and the war on Iraq, a country with massive oil reserves, are obvious targets for actions against global warming. The first thing Congress needs to do to reduce carbon emissions is to set a timetable for the withdrawal of the US military--and US oil companies--from Iraq.
For t hose of us whoâ€™ve been working for years to bring our troops home from Iraq, these are crucial weeks â€¦ now that both the U.S. House and Senate have passed legislation for withdrawal of combat troops by varying dates in 2008. We in the antiwar movement brought this aboutâ€”including our friends in the Congressional Progressive Caucus and coalitions like United for Peace & Justice.
But we canâ€™t relax. Both the House and Senate versions of the Iraq Supplemental Funding bill are flawed. The â€œdeadlinesï¿½? are to far off (a non-binding March 31, 2008 in the Senate; September 1, 2008, in the House) and far too softâ€”allowing thousands of U. S. troops to stay in Iraq for vaguely-defined â€œtrainingï¿½? and â€œanti-terrorismï¿½? missions. And they allocate yet another $100 billion toward the occupation.
The good news is that President Bush and the Republicans stand exposed as having no strategy except â€œstay the courseï¿½? and â€œthe situation in Iraq is imp roving.ï¿½? Bush gas repeatedly threatened to veto any bill with even weak time-lines. This puts him in conflict with the American public, which wants all troops home within a year, according to polls.
Letâ€™s force Bushâ€™s hand. Donâ€™t let Democrats in the House and Senate weaken the Supplemental further behind closed doors.
The Senate and House will be appointing a conference committee to write a compromise Iraq supplemental billâ€”which could be voted on as early as April 16. The antiwar movement must insist that what comes out of the conference committee is a compromise between what the House and Senate Passed, not a compromise with what Bush wants.
Our overriding demandâ€”in line with public sentiment expressed in Novemberâ€™s election and recent pollingâ€”remains that Congress should push for fully-funded, complete withdrawal within a year. Anything short of that is already a compromise. Thereâ€™s no room for further compromise with Bush!
T hatâ€™s our message to Congress, in public protests and in letters-to-the-editor. If Congress doesnâ€™t retreat and the President vetoes the bill, people will see that â€œBushâ€™s Veto Pen Kills Troops.ï¿½? Most Iraqis want U.S. troops out of their country; U.S. military force is no solution in Iraq.
Join Us in Action â€“ Organize a No War, No Warming Action at a Gas Station on April 14th!
On April 14th, tens of thousands of Americans will gather all across the country at meaningful, iconic places to call for action on climate change. The demand: Step it up Congress! Cut carbon 80% by 2050! We urge peace and justice groups to join this day of protest. Send the message â€œFight Climate Change, Not Wars for Oilï¿½? by organizing a protest at a local gas station. What better location to send a message about war, oil and the consequences of oil addiction than a gas station?
Here are a few action ideas:
â€¢ Stage a die-in at the p umps â€¢ Put up crosses or cardboard tombstones with the names of the dead â€¢ Lock yourself to a pump â€¢ Call Congress and the President from the gas station â€¢ Leaflet motorists â€¢ Ride bicycles around the gas station chanting â€œBikes not bombs!ï¿½? â€¢ Put up signs â€¢ Chalk the driveways â€¢ Stage a mock blood and oil spills (oil: molasses and water; blood: thinned tomato paste) â€¢ March from a gas station to a nearby recruiting station or vice-versa â€¢ March from a gas station to a Congresspersonâ€™s home or office
There are already over 1,200 protests planned for April 14th. Letâ€™s get the peace and justice movement involved in this great day of action!
No War No Warming can provide you with posters you can download and use at your protests, e ducational flyers you can hand out to passersby, and a template press release you can use to get local media coverage. Just let us know youâ€™re organizing an action by posting event details to http://www.NoWarNoWarming.org or emailing your protest information to email@example.com.
About 30 percent to 40 percent of all cancers are related to our lifestyle choices, including the foods we eat, how much exercise we get and how well we watch our weight. Are you making the right choices? Here's a quiz based on a report on cancer prevention from the American Institute for Cancer Research.
1. Exercise helps prevent colon cancer. True or false?
2. A plant-based diet of vegetables, fruits, whole grains and beans seems to decrease colorectal cancer risk. True or false?
3. A diet high in red meat, processed meat and fat in- creases colorectal cancer risk. True or false?
4. Fiber may reduce the colon's exposure to cancer-causing substances by moving wastes out quickly. True or false?
5. Vitamin supplements help prevent cancer. True or false?
6. A diet high in salt has no effect on cancer risk. True or false?
7. Overweight and obesity has no effect on cancer risk. True or false?
8. Grilled foods cause cancer. True or false?
9. Green tea may have anti-cancer benefits. True or false?
10. All berries, particularly strawberries and raspberries, are especially rich in a substance called ellagic acid, which has shown the ability to prevent cancers of the skin, bladder, lung, esophagus and breast in laboratory studies. True or false?
Answers: 1) T. Exercise speeds the movement of food through the intestine and decreases bile and acid secretion. 2) T; 3) T; 4) T; 5) F; 6) F. Diets containing a large amount of salted fish (such as those in Asian countries) increase the risk of stomach cancer. 7) F. Research shows that obesity is not only a risk for diabetes and heart disease but also for several types of cancers. 8) T. Research shows that exposing meats to direct flame, smoke and intense heat can cause the formation of carcinogens. 9) T. In laboratory studies, green tea has been shown to slow or completely prevent cancer development in colon, liver, breast and prostate cells. 10) T. This phytochemical acts as an antioxidant; it helps the body deactivate specific carcinogens, and it helps slow the reproduction of cancer cells.
Source: American Institute for Cancer Research, www.aicr.org
WHY I DON'T WEAR WOOL: TAKE A HARD LOOK AT HOW SHEEP ARE TREATED DOWN UNDER by Amy Elizabeth (www.citizen-times.com)
March 21 - As I write this, I'm warding off the winter chill with a cotton turtleneck, a polyester fleece pullover, polyester long underwear, cotton corduroys and acrylic socks. But not so much as a stitch of wool. Why not? Because I don't buy wool. For ethical reasons.
Most people look at you funny when you say you don't wear wool. "Oh, you're allergic, right?" Nope. "Hate the dry-cleaning?" Yes, but that's not the only reason. "It's too heavy? Smells funny? Takes too long to dry?" Yes, yes and yes, but still no cigar.
When you confess that your primary reason for forgoing fleece is for the benefit of the sheep, foreheads start to pucker. Most people envision a sheep farm to be something like Farmer Hoggett's in the movie "Babe," sans the talking pig, of course. You know, rolling hills, perky sheep dogs, cozy barns, that sort of thing. While bucolic, blissful farms like this may still exist somewhere in James Herriot's Yorkshire, that's not where most of the wool we buy comes from.
Chances are, no matter where you live, your wool comes from the land down under. With 120 million sheep, Australia is the world's largest producer of Merino wool (the kind used for most clothing). Flocks usually consist of thousands of sheep, so it's impossible for farmers to treat them with the tender loving care Farmer Hoggett and his talented pig would provide.
Australian sheep are basically on their own. They get rounded up and tossed into the sheep dip every once in a while, but mostly, it's just them, the kangaroos and the, uh-oh, dingoes.
When the shepherd does "tend" to them, lambs have their tails amputated without anesthetic. Little boy lambs are particularly blue because they are castrated without painkillers. Ouch. Shearing isn't a walk in the park, either, since it is automated and done at lightning speed to accommodate such huge numbers of animals. Protruding sheep parts accidentally get lopped off. Shades of Lorena Bobbitt, if you catch my drift.
The Australians mainly raise Merino sheep because their wrinkly skin produces more wool per animal. Trouble is, the wrinkles collect urine and moisture, which attracts flies, which lay eggs, which hatch into maggots, and ... you get the picture. So the colonists came up with an ingenious (or egregious - you be the judge) solution: They slice a chunk of skin off the lamb's rear end in order to create a massive scar that pulls the skin tighter, reducing wrinkles. Yes, it's just as gruesome as you're imagining, and the wounds often become infested with flies before they heal. But, hey, if it was good enough for grandpa, it's good enough for me, mate.
The worst is still to come for these fuzzy denizens of the outback. Once sheep become old or unproductive, they are shipped to slaughter. In Australia, this usually means being herded onto trucks and transported huge distances overland to the coast, where they are loaded onto ships bound for the Middle East.
The ships are huge - up to 14 tiers high - with up to 125,000 sheep packed like sardines into each one.
The journey can take several weeks; many sheep die of sickness, trampling or starvation when they are unable to reach the food trough.
Why not just kill the sheep in Australia and ship the meat to the Middle East? Because Middle Eastern consumers want flesh that has been butchered ritually, which means no prior stunning. The sheep's throats are slit while they are fully conscious.
So that's why I boycott wool. And you know what? I manage to keep quite warm and toasty without it. No matter what the wool industry may say, nothing keeps you warmer than polyester fleece. It's lightweight and water repellent, two things wool is not.
Throw on a layer of Gore-Tex and you're ready for a kayak trip down the Nantahala in February - or even just a stroll around the grounds at Biltmore. Your body will stay plenty warm without wool, but warmest of all may be your heart.
Amy Elizabeth has a degree in cultural anthropology from the University of Colorado. She lives in Morganton.
According to wiki; "A
classic staple of science
fiction and superhero
is matter composed
subatomic particles that
have mostly exactly the
same properties (mass,
intrinsic angular mo...
Beginning in the 1950s,
American and Soviet
scientists engaged in a
dangerous race to see who
could build and detonate
the world's largest bomb.
In the Soviet Union,
Andrei Sakharov was the
architect of this
According to the movie,
According to NIRS;
"Marine life in all
forms, from endangered
manatees and sea turtles
to essential microscopic
organisms, is being
harmed and killed by
systems, used to remove
waste heat at nuclear
3/18/11: "The source term
provided to NARAC was:
(1) 25% of the total fuel
in unit 2 (SFP) released
to the atmosphere, (2)
50% of the total spent
fuel from unit 3 (SFP)
was released to the
atmosphere, and (3) 100%
of the total spent fuel
The world is green where
the trolls dwellThe
forest is deep where the
trolls dwellWhere the
trolls dwell is peace and
calmFar away from human
ill and harmThe trolls'
home is a peaceful placeA
pleasant placeFar from
the grey human worldMany
I had seen some great
beautyBut it hadn’t
been much on my mindMere
beauty didn’t much
move meCute was not
enough to catch my eyeI
could appreciate it but I
itUntil I saw her that
morningIn her long dress
as black as the ...
Every nuclear reactor
is a military industrial
complex stocked up with
1300 weapons of mass
destruction that if
released for ANY reason,
can wipe out all life on
the planet, from just ONE
nuclear reactor. If a
Carrington Event happens,
ect.org A nuclear
workers at Fukushima to
cover their dosimeters
with lead to lower
official levels of
radiation would be
workers to work longer
hours inside the plant.
Event Presented by
the Green Party of Sonoma
An Evening withGreen
Party Candidate for
GovernorLuis J. Rodriguez
will be collected for the
Andy Lopez family)
It took one month after
3 reactors melted down
and multiple spent fuel
pools caught on fire and
dried out to raise the
Fukushima mega disaster
rating to 7, despite the
nuclear plant operators
knowing within hours that
3 reactors had melted