A toxic history lesson

In the early 1940's there were informecials for the pesdicide DDT. It claimed to be completely safe to use around the home, even around childrent. They later found, of course, that it was not. We may have not learned from this mistake. Lead is another example of a toxic chemical thought to be safe but later found to have many health complications. Now is the question of what we are doing TODAY that we may find harmful later on. This article (http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/06/01/backpack.cord.blood/index.html )
Explains many many chemicals we are exposed to and that children have in their blood even before they are born.

It doesn't really surprise me all of the chemicals that are out there. There is no way we can keep creating the things we are with out some sort of side affects. I have done research on pestisides on crops and hormones in animals. We don't think that us eating plants and animals that have chemicals on and in them will hurt us, but how can they not? Another big thing is GMO's (genetically modified organisms). They literally take apart the genes of the plant and mutate it to create something that is more convienient for us. They are finding that this can actually change humans genetic make-up and is creating many new diseases and allergies. I think that things like this will be one of the things we look back on that we thought was totally safe and then realize, after the fact of our genes being muated, that it wasn't safe after all. I feel like things should definatly be more deeply researched before it is put out for consumption to avoid this continuous cycle.


http://www.cnn.com/2010/HEALTH/06/03/ddt.toxic.america/index.html

Video of 1940's infomercial: http://cnn.com/video/?/video/health/2010/06/03/gupta.toxic.childhood.promo.cnn

Document says number of attempted attacks on U.S. is at all-time high

Following the attempted car bombing in times square the department of homeland security is saying that the rate of attacks on america has been more frequent then all of the attacks in one year. A memo that has been sent to different law enforcement groups says that there will be attacks at an "increased frequency", with little to no warning. The previous attacks were hard to suspect because the men lived in the U.S for long periods of time and used common products that would not lead to suspicion. They also left for only short periods of time for training overseas.

This is obviously very alarming. I'm not sure what can be done about this because the attacks are smaller(not any less serious, however) which makes them harder to figure out because they are easier to cover up. I hope that they can get to the root of the attacks or figure who is doing it and where the training is happening. It is even more scary that some of these people have been U.S citizens for quite some time. It makes me feel less safe and more sceptical of people.


http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/26/terrorism.document/index.html?npt=NP1

Lawyer questions police version of raid that killed girl

A 7-year old girl was accidentally killed in a police rade. Apparently the police raided the wrong house. This happend in Detroit. The police claim that they were searching for a person who recently shot a high school student, and that they did find the suspect in the house the the 7-year old was killed. However, people argueing against the police claim that he was not in the same house, but that he was in an apartment next to the house and that he surrendered himself.

I feel that this should never happen. No matter if the guy was in the same house or not. If he did shoot the highschooler what is going to be solved by going into the house and shooting by the police? They should have maybe knocked on the door, asked if the person was there, and if the people took out their own gun or were trying to result to violence they should have warned them, and if their lives were in danger shoot. But in no way should the 7 year old have been killed that had nothing to do with the case.

http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/05/16/michigan.police.child/index.html

video: http://cnn.com/video/?/video/us/2010/05/17/bts.child.killed.wdiv

Kids' test answers on race brings mother to tears

There is a new cnn pilot study testing kids on their opinion on race. The study showed that white children show more of a bias then black children. Meaning the the white children related their own skin town to good qualities more so then blacks who sometimes think that white skin tone are better. The researchers would show the children a paper will many children ranging from very light skined to very dark skined. They then asked questions suchas, "who is the nice child?". The children would usually point to their own skin color and vis versa when asked who is the mean child. The study included all different types of children from all different types of background. Overall, the study found that parents of white children discuss race with them less then black childrens parents.

I find this very interesting, and also sad. The children clearly are not getting talked to about race or are getting bad information . I feel that this may be an issue that most parents don't really think to discuss. I also think that the media plays a big role in this. The country as a whole seems to be getting better about black and white equality, but there is still underlying biases. I feel like white skin is portreyed as "prettier". This study is good because it bring attention to the issue and helps parents understand that this is something that should be discussed, and not just assumed.

video of study: http://cnn.com/video/?/video/bestoftv/2010/05/17/ac360.doll.study.cnn

link to article : http://www.cnn.com/2010/US/05/18/doll.study.parents/index.html?npt=NP1