When Michelle Obama created an organic vegetable garden on the White House lawn earlier this year, the move was greeted with positive headlines and excitement among the food advocacy community. Here, we thought, was a First Lady who understood the importance of locally grown, whole and organic foods in her family's diet.
Unfortunately, something happened on the way to the realization of the First Lady's good intentions. Recently the National Park Service discovered that the White House lawn, where the garden was planted, contains highly elevated levels of lead -- 93 parts per million. It's enough lead for anyone planning to have children pick vegetables in that garden or eat produce from it to reconsider their plans: lead is highly toxic to children's developing organs and brain functions -- however, it's below the 400 ppm the EPA suggests is a threat to human health.
What caused this alarming contamination of the White House lawn? Some news outlets speculated that residue from lead paint might have caused the toxicity. However an article running on Mother Jones online has a more probable explanation. During the 1990s, the Clintons agreed to have the South Lawn of the White House "fertilized" with ComPRO, a commercially available "compost made from a nearby wastewater plant's solid effluent, a.k.a. sewage sludge."
So, the White House lawn became a highly visible example of a little-known, widely conducted practice, "land application." This means disposing of sewage sludge by spraying it over public lands, including parks, and also on an untold number of acres of farmland where our food is grown. Sadly, it's completely legal under current, grossly inadequate EPA rules.
Apparently, the spreading of sewage sludge at the White House was a public relations ploy by the Environmental Protection Agency and, no doubt, the sludge industry to convince the public that using sludge in gardens and farms is as safe as using normal compost. The promotion didn't stop there; as part of its PR effort, EPA offered a $150,000 prize to the winner of a contest to re-brand sludge with a more benign sounding name. The chosen euphemism?: "biosolid". It's a term the agency and the industry consistently use to hide the reality of what sludge is.
So what is sludge, really? A stinking, sticky, dark-grey to black paste, it's everything homeowners, hospitals and industries put down their toilets and drains. Every material-turned-waste that our society produces (including prescription drugs and the sweepings of slaughterhouses), and that wastewater treatment plants are capable of removing from sewage, becomes sludge. The end product is a concentrated mass of heavy metals and carcinogenic, teratogenic, and hormone-disrupting chemicals, replete with antibiotic-resistant bacteria. There are some 80,000 to 90,000 industrial chemicals, including a host of dioxin-like deadly substances, which are allowed to be present in sludge under current EPA rules. What's worse, there's no way of knowing which toxic chemicals and heavy metals are entering the wastewater stream at any given time or in what concentrations. Sludge is always an unknown quantity, and therefore, assessing whether sludge is safe to use for growing food, is -- in practice -- impossible.
Farmers who care about what they grow know this, and -- despite the best efforts of government and the sludge industry -- growing food in sewage sludge is prohibited under the federal organic regulations. Still, sludge is still widely used as a cheap alternative to fertilizer, and unless you're buying organic produce, it's impossible to know if the food you eat was grown in it.
Remarkably, the EPA creators of the sludge program claim they didn't anticipate any health problems to be associated with spraying sludge near people's homes or on their food. They assumed that natural conditions would disperse the toxins, and that bad bacteria would die as they naturally do in rich, aerobic soil and in compost. But sewage sludge is not soil; no matter how you treat it, it will never have the characteristics, either physical or biological, that make good soil and good compost so effective at killing human pathogens. It's toxic, and it lays there for years, still toxic.
So when people living or working in the vicinity of sludged fields and when diary cows and other farm animals grazing on sludged land have gotten sick from heavy metal, chemical or pathogen based maladies, the EPA has either ignored, denied or, in some cases, even fraudulently covered it up. However it's getting harder for the agency to ignore the toll of sludged land as we see increasing reports in adjacent communities of elevated levels of cancer or deaths believed to be related to sludge exposure. In some areas where sludge has been heavily used, whole families are evincing the same symptoms: sores in their nasal passages, chronic staph infections, crippling headaches and sinus troubles. Yet -- despite the mounting evidence -- EPA wants to continue to promote sludge as a benign alternative to fertilizer.
The Obamas may be the newest sludge victims. Certainly Michelle Obama's hopes of having a truly organic garden and healthy vegetables for her own children and other children who visit the White House have been dashed. The impact on their lives is symbolic; it's not just the Obamas under threat, it's all of us. Municipalities around the country have jumped on the bandwagon to sell their "biosolids" to sludge companies, a convenient solution to profitably rid themselves of hazardous waste. Over the last several years, we have all become unwilling guinea pigs, testing the safety of foods raised on sewage-sludged land. We're also unknowing guinea pigs, since none of this produce is labeled to show how it was grown.
What can you do about this? Buying certified organic produce raised under rules that forbid this practice is a safe start. Next, let's urge the EPA to place a permanent ban on "land application" of sewage sludge; our foods should never be grown in hazardous waste. And in the best spirit of NIMBY, the Obamas, after removing that contaminated soil from their lawn, should be the first family to push the EPA to halt the sludging of our public lands and farmlands.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZqELnfuOxQ
http://www.americanheart.org/presenter.jhtml?identifier=3033101
TAGS: affection, infection, effector, non-specific, Modern anthropometry and biometrics, Kinanthropometry, Cardiorespiratory fitness, Blood alcohol content, Permille, average salinity 35‰,
Birth and death rates, Table of physico-chemical constants, Avogadro constant, Micromole, Blood Lead Level, Lead poisoning, torr, Avoirdupois, dry ton (tonne), Wet ton (tonne)
It is 10:24pm CST and if I do much more typing I am bound to make a mistake.
Now a $9.00 soil test, as well as a little bit of green understanding seem out of their reach. How hard is it to google "organic gardening". I have my soil tested every other year by our extension office so I can add the right nutrients. I can get the test for free from my farm supply elevator if I buy my product there. (things like lime, potash, Ag-manure)
Doesn't this scare you when they now want to "run" healthcare instead of reforming it? They can't run a simple garden!
When I read about the garden replacing lawn, red flags went off simply because pesticides are used on lawns, as are usually chemical fertilizers. If this is supposed to be anything like an "organic" garden, there is a process that has to be gone through so that the site can be certified organic. In California it takes about 2 years, and it has lots of requirements, none of which would be met by the WH site.
So why weren't the comprehensive soil tests done?
This can be a PR nightmare for the Obamas. Someone should have stopped MO from putting in the garden until they knew what was in the soil.
It appears the type used on the WH lawn was co-composted sewage sludge (CCSS).
Lead isn't the only heavy metal present in CCSS. Worse, the proces of wastewater treatment also concentrates potentially disease-causing organisms (viruses and bacteria), as well as highly toxic chemicals from industrial facilities.
I don't know the laws in that region, but in many states an approved use of the sludge is for ornamental landscaping, such as lawns. It was a big mistake putting in a garden in an area that had been repeatedly doused with CCSS.
It was also a mistake to put a garden in a lawn without doing soil tests. Certainly pesticides were used on the lawn, which is another reason to not use that soil for a garden.
It is unclear why CCSS was used on the lawn in the first place. CCSS has a high C:N ratio, making nitrogen less available, and in "grass" crops (lawn, wheat, alfalfa) there is actually less growth.
The concentrations in the soil is not the defining factor for how much ends up in the crop that is grown. Studies have not been able to make consistent correlations between the amount of heavy metals (either together or individual metals) in the soil and the amount that ended up in the crop.
Lead is only one of the heavy metals they should test for. Studies have shown that applications of CCSS increases copper, nickle and zinc in the plants grown.
http://obamafoodorama.blogspot.com/2009/06/white-house-kitchen-garden-as-media.html
They are in no danger, the soil is normal.
As a supporter of the eating local movement, I'm truly disappointed that the White House garden will not serve to be an example to Americans of how wonderful it is to eat things out of our own backyard. I'm sure that they are more than disappointed by this turn of events.
A farm in order to be certified organic must be managed organically for seven years prior to certification. This includes the even the water applied to the garden (White House has city water?)
For those that think "organic" means chemical free, here is a link to the The National List of Allowed and Prohibited Substances
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5068682&acct=nopgeninfo
also link to main USDA site regarding organic farming. There are many links to follow from there.
http://afsic.nal.usda.gov/nal_display/index.php?tax_level=1&info_center=2&tax_subject=296
Bon appetite. Wash you food where ever it comes from, even your own garden (that should go without saying).
"Caveat emptor"
The City of Los Angeles failed slurry sealing. An asphalt like seal placed on roads every 5 years, it's a huge pork belly scam. The black road top raised the ambient air temperature 5 degrees It's highly toxic to marine life and causes accelerated tumor growth . The idea for slurry seal came from a road work convention in the Midwest. The Midwest has a history of pouring oil on roads to curtail dust. They also have a tragic history of poisoning land and people with this practice. LA Street Maintenance hired third party and illegal alien workers to spread slurry seal, but used their propriety blend the workers got from waste at the Chevron plant, plastic and chemical companies in the South Bay. The slurry seal content changed daily depending on the waste products. It also contained benzene. The run off continues to poison the Pacific Ocean.
If each of us were responsible for our own waste and used composting toilets, we could actually recycle this abundant organic matter in a healthy way.
This has been proven in China especially the practice of using human waste in rice paddies. Almost every flu virus comes from this situation.
When using composted cow manure, for example, there is significant genetic separation and almost nothing is transmitted from cattle to human. This is why sustainable farming includes livestock.
I personally feel there is one exception to the livestock manure as fertilizer rule. Hogs are too close to humans genetically and their waste should not be used on food for human consumption.
Yes the toxic chemicals are bad, but human waste is toxic to use without them.
Human waste most certainly should be returned to the earth for fertilizer after composting, in proper proportions.
It makes me wonder, if the scientists can blow it on something relatively straightforward, like testing the sludge, what about the global warming scare (or the 70s global cooling scare)?
The maximum safe human blood level for lead established by the CDC (ug/dL) is 60. Whoops, that was in 1965. Then it was dropped to 40 in 1970. Then it was dropped to 30 in 1979. Then it was dropped to 25 in 1985. Then it was dropped to 10 in 1991, where it remains today. According to many studies, that number is still too high, and can cause IQ impairment in children. Get the picture?
Now, let's look at lead levels in soil, which is the second most common source of poisoning for children after lead paint. What is a safe level? Depends on what state you live in. In Minnesota, for example, the White House garden at 97 ppm, is just about at the level of being considered toxic in that state (100 ppm). At 100 ppm, a child ingesting just two teaspoons of soil per week would end up with a toxic blood level. Kids planting and harvesting in that soil might easily end up ingesting that amount.
Which plants absorb the most lead from the soil? Leafy vegetables, which seems to fit the White House garden profile.
Moving on to sludge as a fertilizer, the only word that comes to mind is: insane.
Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
http://obamafoodorama.blogspot.com/2009/06/white-house-kitchen-garden-as-media.html
Most normal soil is at about the level the Obama's is at. People would have to EAT the soil to actually get that kind of dangerous exposure. And 93 (not 97) parts per million in the White House lawn is normal as background levels.
I was alarmed myself when I read this misleading article. Their soil is just fine.
Here is what the University of Minnesota, Cornell and UCLA have to say on the matter.
http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/horticulture/DG2543.html . In particular, see the section "Residential Bare Soil Standards."
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/April03/lowlead.kids.ssl.html
http://www.ioe.ucla.edu/reportcard/article.asp?parentid=3772
Regarding the eating of soil, I can only speculate you do not have children. That is exactly what they do, either intentionally or unintentionally, by putting dirt-coated hands in their mouth.
Would you believe that there is yet another and potentially even more horrific story that also involves fertilizer and a toxic waste masquerading as a healthy additive, and is also endorsed by government agencies?
It is called water fluoridation. The chemicals used to fluoridate water, primarily fluorosilicic acid (FSA) and sodium silicofluoride (silicofluorides), are untested industrial waste products from the phosphate fertilizer industry. Here is an even more bizarre link to the White House debacle. FSA is a corrosive acid which has been linked to higher blood lead levels in children! A study from the University of North Carolina found that FSA can - in combination with chlorinated compounds - leach lead from brass joints in water pipes.
Silicofluoeides are neurotoxins that are used to make rat poison. They are known carcinogens and can cause brain, thyroid gland, bone and kidney diseases.
For more information on this issue, go to http://www.fluoridealert.org/ and watch the thirty minute video.
As a research scientist, I have studied the effects of toxic halides such as fluoride, as well as natural detoxification strategies. Ask your librarian for a copy of "The Wellness Project," designed by Nature, and researched by me.
Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
You've put the info out now; you just can't put back on your lab coat and go back to work. Help her
make this a successful open demonstration on organic farming on a small scale. How to correct the missteps and turn them in to success. That's would be an even greater lesson for the kids.
PEACE
My hope, and it is only a hope, is that grass-roots communities such as HuffPo can make a difference. That by providing an open forum, alternative views can be brought to the attention of those open-minded folks in a position to effect change. That they will begin to question the "conventional wisdom" proffered by those with a hidden agenda that is now much less hidden - financial profit at the expense of the health of the populace.
My success so far in trying to suggest alternative approaches to societal ills, based on a return to nature, feels somewhat akin to whistling in the wind. Donating books, conducting free lectures, self funding university research, and acting as a commentator on several websites is as far as I have gotten. The reward is the positive feedback from those who share similar views, have experimented with a return to nature, and have achieved positive results.
However, Michelle is very enterprising, and she will find a solution (no pun intended)
for next year. I have total faith in her.
Now that we have this issue in the news, more people will pay attention and maybe
we can put these sludge folks out of business.
This will, ultimately, lead to more creativity and new laws.
http://www.extension.umn.edu/distribution/horticulture/DG2543.html . In particular, see the section "Residential Bare Soil Standards."
http://www.news.cornell.edu/releases/April03/lowlead.kids.ssl.html
http://www.ioe.ucla.edu/reportcard/article.asp?parentid=3772
Roy Mankovitz, Director
http://www.MontecitoWellness.com
If you think you can read minds, I suggest you become a professional poker player. That kind of skill would come in handy.