How many must feel, stuck on the Western medicine hamster wheel of pill after pill after pill …
Western medicine is Rockefeller medicine – all the way.
Western medicine has some good points, for sure, and is great in an emergency, but it’s high time people realized that today’s mainstream medicine (western medicine or allopathy), with its focus on drugs, radiation and surgery, is at its foundation a Rockefeller creation. The Rockefellers, of course, are one of the most rich and powerful families of the elite black nobility. Behind their spurious facade of philanthropy, they are power-hungry tyrants intent on owning the entire world, and depopulating it through eugenics-based programs like forced sterilization, water fluoridation, abortions and vaccinations. They have either majorly or fully created (and still dominate) the United Nations, the World Health Organization, the Council on Foreign Relations, the Trilateral Commission, Planned Parenthood and many, many other organizations that either rule the world or influence culture to a large extent.
Despite the dominance of western medicine nowadays, even just 100 years ago the situation was very different, so it’s worthwhile casting our minds back to how the we got to this place. How did western medicine and the giant conglomerate of multinational pharmaceutical corporations (“Big Pharma”) become the mainstream medical system in the US and other first world nations? And what alternatives are there?
Let’s go back in time to the late 1800s. John D. Rockefeller, a man quoted to have said “competition is sin”, is the head of the Rockefeller family and has just become very rich through extracting oil from the ground. Now he is looking for ways to capitalize even further with his oil, and he comes across the idea of using coal tar – a petroleum derivative – to make substances that affect the human mind, body and nervous system. These are called drugs, and they are excellent at masking or stopping symptoms, but overall do not cure the underlying cause of a disease.
Like other elite leaders of the New World Order who fit the description of an “evil genius” – those high on intellect and low on compassion – Rockefeller used his oil money to buy out part of the massive German pharmaceutical cartel, I.G. Farben. This was the very same cartel that would later assist Hitler to implement his eugenics-based vision of a New World Order founded on racial supremacy, by manufacturing chemicals and poisons for war. With the control of drug manufacturing under his wings, Rockefeller then embarked on a decidedly wicked plan – wicked from the point of view of a free and healthy humanity, but brilliant from a business perspective.
Destroying any Competition to Western Medicine
Rockefeller saw that there were many types of doctors and healing modalities in existence at that time, from chiropractry to naturopathy to homeopathy to holistic medicine to herbal medicine and more. He wanted to eliminate the competitors of western medicine (the only modality which would propose drugs and radiation as treatment, thus enriching Rockefeller who owned the means to produce these treatments), so he hired a man called Abraham Flexner to submit a report to Congress in 1910. This report “concluded” that there were too many doctors and medical schools in America, and that all the natural healing modalities which had existed for hundreds or thousands of years were unscientific quackery. It called for the standardization of medical education, whereby only the allopathic-based AMA be allowed to grant medical school licenses in the US.
Sadly, Congress acted upon the conclusions and made them law. Incredibly, allopathy became the standard mainstream modality, even though its 3 main methods of treatment in the 1800s had been blood-letting, surgery and the injection of toxic heavy metals like lead and mercury to supposedly displace disease! It should be noted that hemp was also demonized and criminalized not long after this, not because there is anything dangerous about it, but because it was a huge threat (as both medicine and fuel) to the Rockefeller drug and oil industries, respectively.
The Rockefeller and Carnegie Tax-Exempt Foundations for “Efficient” Philanthropy
The story doesn’t stop there. Rockefeller and another elite leader Carnegie used their tax-exempt Foundations, from 1913 on, to offer huge grants to the best medical schools all over America – on the proviso that only an allopathic-based curriculum be taught, and that some of their agents be allowed to sit on the Board of Directors. They called this “efficient” philanthropy, which, when through the Orwellian translation unit, means they wanted a return on their investment. They systematically dismantled the curricula of these schools by removing any mention of the natural healing power of herbs and plants, or of the importance of diet to health. The result is a system which to this day churns out doctors who are, almost always, utterly clueless about nutrition and disregard the idea that what you eat can actually heal or hurt you.
A couple of decades after this, another law was passed that further entrenched western medicine in America. The Hill-Burton Act of 1946 gave hospitals grants for construction and modernization, on the condition they provide free healthcare to anyone in need, without discrimination of any kind. Although there were good sides to this, the downside was that once people had become dependent on this system for their healthcare needs – especially those on pharmaceutical pills which need to be taken day after day without end – the system switched into a paid system, and the Rockefellers found themselves with new lifelong customers.
The bitter truth is that, in general, when you go to your Western doctor, you are seen as a potential market for the medical factory’s products. For Big Pharma, there is no financial incentive to heal you, because a patient cured is a customer lost. Even if you are not sick, Big Pharma is still targeting you, trying to convince you that you are ill (e.g. with psychiatry’s ridiculous list offictitious diseases, many of them fake) so that you will try its latest pill. Pregnant women who go to the doctor are treated like this, and peddled intravenous fluid bags, fetal monitors, ultrasound (radiation for a vulnerable baby), a host of drugs, the totally unnecessary episiotomy, and – to top it all off – the Caesarean delivery!
Bio-Piracy: The Business Model of Western Medicine’s Big Pharma Cartel
Remember, all these synthetic drugs are isolates. Many are derived from plant compounds, but because Nature cannot be patented and sold, Big Pharma has no interest in natural cures. What they do instead is engage inbio-piracy – research natural compounds, copy them (or modify them slightly) in a lab, then try to steal and patent them. If they get a patent, they then market their pill as a wonder drug while simultaneously (through fake scientific research) suppress and criticize the original plant as being worthless, so you won’t go to the source of the cure. Ironically, guess what type of medicine John D. Rockefeller used and the British Royal Family still uses? Homeopathy!
Modern western medicine seems to have lost the supposed point of its existence: healing people. In his revealing book “Confessions of a Medical Heretic“, Dr. Robert Mendolsohn quotes an article entitled “Cleveland’s Marvelous Medical Factory” which boasted of the Cleveland Clinic’s “accomplishments last year: 2,980 open-heart operations, 1.3 million laboratory tests, 73,320 electrocardiograms, 7,770 full-body x-ray scans, 24,368 surgical procedures.” Seems fancy, yet none of these procedures has been proven to have anything to do with maintaining or restoring health. When people get screened for a disease, they are being subjected to dangerous radiation (more money for the Rockefellers) which harms tissue and can end up causing the exact disease it is supposed to be protecting against – as happens daily with the mammogram scam, designed to drum up new breast cancer clients.
Rockefeller Philanthropy is Social Control
The Rockefellers and other elites use philanthropy as a tool for control. It’s social engineering with a nice PR sheen. A free lunch is not really free, whether private (Rockefeller-style western medicine) or public/governmental (Obama-style socialized medicine), because even if you get something at no cost, you are required to give up your data and your privacy. They want you dependent on their system – then they’ll raise the rates once you’re trapped.
This is big business – and it’s also a big killer. Dr. Barbara Starfield published a study in the year 2000 that found that there were 225,000 iatrogenic (allopathic doctor caused) deaths in the US every year. However, this was only counting direct deaths; when you factor in all indirect deaths, as Dr. Gary Null did in 2011 in his report Death by Medicine, the figure is closer to 784,000 per year! That’s 7.8 million people dead from western medicine every 10 years!
Null concluded: “It is evident that the American medical system is the leading cause of death and injury in the United States …”
Whenever a lot of people die in a staged false flag attack (like 3000 people on 9/11) or in a staged mind control shooting (like 50 or so people) we hear all about it on the media. Yet between 616 and 2147 Americans are dying every day from Rockefeller Western medicine, and we don’t hear a thing!
Natural Solutions that Surpass Rockefeller-Created Western Medicine
At this point let us turn from the problem to the solutions – and fortunately there are many. The famous ancient Greek physician Hippocrates wrote:
Nature heals. The doctor’s task consists in strengthening the natural healing powers, to direct them, and especially not to interfere with them.
The immune system is your number one defense against any disease – not a vaccine. Most natural medicine is designed to treat the body holistically, not to “cure” one disease only to have it transform and mutate into another ailment. When you takes plants and herbs as medicine, you normally take the whole food, not an isolate, because it is based on a holistic understanding. Likewise, Traditional Chinese Medicine defines all disease as stagnation and treats sickness as an imbalance to be brought back into balance. What is the point of transferring an imbalance in one area into an imbalance in another area? None, unless you are trying to profit off disease like Big Pharma. It is not real healing.
There are so many natural cures and remedies out there, if you take the time to look. Two examples among thousands are turmeric which will do more for your blood pressure and diabetes than any drug can, and apricot kernels (rich in laetrile which selectively kills cancer cells and leaves healthy ones intact) which will handle cancer better than chemotherapy. The Gerson Therapy has also healed thousands of “terminal” cancer patients who were told by doctors of western medicine, “there’s nothing more we can do for you.”
Western medicine has its place as a system you may want to use in a critical emergency, but for general conditions, there are so many better alternatives. Time to start exploring them!
Want to keep informed on the latest and greatest news and analysis on the New World Order, Natural Health, Sovereignty and more? Sign up for free blog updates!
Makia Freeman is the editor of The Freedom Articles and senior researcher at ToolsForFreedom.com, writing on many aspects of the the global conspiracy, from vaccines to Zionism to false flag operations and more, and also including info on natural health, sovereignty and higher consciousness.
In response, global health authorities are starting to sound a little giddy. “We believe that the world is on the verge of an efficacious Ebola vaccine,” said Marie Paule Kieny, the World Health Organization’s (WHO) assistant director-general for health systems and innovation (and an author on the study). “It could be a game changer.”
She’s right: this is wonderful news, and a great testament to human ingenuity. A genetically engineered hybrid of the benign vesicular stomatitis virus and the Zaire strain of Ebola, together called rVSV-ZEBOV, was tested in a multi-site clinical trial conducted amid a massive aid response in Guinea, one of the poorest countries in Africa. The scientific and logistical acrobatics required to pull this off boggle the mind.
Yet, for three reasons, we cannot know if the vaccine really worked, or how well. Those reasons are the lack of placebo comparison, the way the investigators diagnosed vaccine failure and the possibility of statistical flukes.
Reason #1: There was no placebo to test the vaccine against
In response to the challenging ethics of Ebola vaccine research, investigators studying rVSV-ZEBOV opted not for the standard placebo-controlled trial with which most vaccines are tested but instead for an innovative approach called “ring-vaccination.”
In the clinical trial, the investigators drew a “ring” of vaccination around people with known exposures to Ebola. Groups of people who were exposed to a person with Ebola virus disease, or to someone who had been in contact with someone else with Ebola virus disease, were invited to participate in the study. Researchers recruited 7,651 people who fit that profile and randomized them to receive immediate vaccination with rVSV-ZEBOV or vaccination that was delayed by 21 days.
Afterwards, investigators followed all study participants for several weeks to see if they developed Ebola virus disease. In the immediate vaccination groups, no one developed Ebola virus disease more than 10 days after vaccination, whereas 16 patients in the delayed vaccination group did. Because the number of cases of Ebola virus disease was so much lower (ie, zero) in the immediate vaccination group, the investigators concluded the vaccine was 100% effective.
This conclusion was reasonable, but it also could be wrong. Without a placebo comparison, it’s easy to get fooled. Perhaps people with deferred vaccination were more likely to engage in risky Ebola exposures, or those who developed Ebola virus disease in the immediate vaccination group were less likely to stay in study follow-up. The investigators did as good a job as possible to avoid these problems, but without a placebo arm in the study, we just cannot be sure.
Reason #2: The definition of vaccine failure isn’t failsafe
No cases of Ebola developed in the immediate vaccination group 10 days after vaccine was given. But nine cases of Ebola developed in the immediate vaccination group within 10 days of vaccination. Since the incubation period for Ebola virus disease is typically longer than 10 days, the investigators concluded that the nine cases of Ebola virus disease that developed within 10 days of getting the vaccine resulted from pre-vaccine exposure.
Again, this was a defensible conclusion, but it could also be wrong. Sometimes Ebola develops in less than 10 days, which means some or all of the nine people in the immediate vaccination group could have been infected with Ebola after being vaccinated. That means sometimes the vaccine may have failed to provide protection against Ebola, and we do not know exactly how often.
Dr Arun Gupta, Regional Coordinator of International Baby Food Action Network (IBFAN) Asia, and Member, Prime Minister’s Council on India’s Nutrition Challenges, shares valuable insights on the importance of breastfeeding in improving maternal and infant health indices in the country, in an interaction with Lakshmipriya Nair
How important is breastfeeding in maternal and child health?
Dr Arun Gupta
Breastfeeding is too important as far as mother and child health is concerned. A baby who is breastfed within one hour has 2.6 times lesser chance of newborn infection and deaths during this period. Exclusive breastfeeding during the first six months reduces diarrhoea, respiratory infections, and undernutrition making it the number one intervention for child health and survival. Exclusive breastfeeding also reduces risk of hospitalisation in diarrhea and pneumonia cases. There is concrete evidence that breastfeeding also provides protection against obesity, and adult diseases such as diabetes, hypertension, and malignancies. For mothers, breastfeeding provides protection against ovarian and breast cancer. Exclusive breastfeeding is important for birth spacing too.
Can breastfeeding play a role in meeting the MDG goals?
Certainly breastfeeding can play a role, if coverage is scaled up to 90 per cent or more for three indicators: early initiation of breastfeeding within one hour, exclusive breastfeeding for the first six months and adequate and appropriate complementary feeding with continued breastfeeding for two years or beyond.
As much as 22 per cent newborn mortality can be cut down for example if all mothers were enabled to breastfeed within an hour of birth. Further breastfeeding exclusively reduces diarrhea mortality by 10 times and pneumonia mortality by 15 times in children 6-23 months of age. More recent evidence points on that breastfeeding also leads to higher earning capacity later in life through increasing IQ, educational attainment with increasing breastfeeding duration
As per WHO statistics, India lags behind in breastfeeding. Why is it so?
Recent World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative (WBTi), policy assessment has revealed that India lacks a clear policy, plan of action and budget for interventions on breastfeeding. Lack of coordinated response reduces the priority it needs. There are several policy areas needing urgent attention such as maternity protection, enforcing the law to protect breastfeeding from aggressive promotion of baby foods, health system support to women and breastfeeding during disasters etc. to mention a few. Breastfeeding rates can go up only if we invest in policy and programmes.
What are the major challenges to tackle?
Aggressive promotion of baby foods through the health systems pushes mothers to adopt artificial feeding. Lack of maternity protection measures for majority of women especially in the unorganised sector and in the private sector who have to combine work and breastfeeding is a major challenge. Health system being unsupportive to mothers at time of birth or later to ensure exclusivity of breastfeeding pushes women to adopt unwanted harmful practices. Confusing messages from several quarters in the absence of state interventions and lack of proper information on risks of formula feeding makes good feeding choices a huge challenge.
What are the steps to better our breastfeeding stats?
Government of India should ‘move’ the existing national committee on breastfeeding and develop a plan of action for five years at least with assured funding. Policy and programmes should be reviewed every three years. Some one should review the plan every six months. Data on three indicators of breastfeeding should be reviewed annually from every State; if US can do it, why can’t we? The most recent Government of India’s Rapid Survey of Children data shows mere 44 per cent mothers are able to breastfeed within one hour. Is it not a gross failure of our health system support towards mothers, a system, which claims that 78 per cent mothers deliver in institutions. Exclusive breastfeeding rate at 64 per cent is an improvement from NFHS 3 data but complementary feeding rate at 50 per cent is a fall from NFHS-3. What we need to do is rapidly scale up coverage of these three indicators to nearly universal. Who is looking at these?
How does BPNI work with the government and other agencies like UNICEF?
The Breastfeeding Promotion Network of India (BPNI) was founded in 1991, to protect promote and support breastfeeding in India. It works with government and UNICEF like agencies through advocacy. BPNI carries out an India assessment of policy and programmes every three years using World Breastfeeding Trends Initiative (WBTi) tools, in line with Global Strategy for infant and young child feeding. BPNI has also developed a world-class four-in-one skill-training programme for health workers that combines all kinds of skills required on breastfeeding counselling or growth monitoring. BPNI advocates for such training to be mainstreamed. BPNI also helps in monitoring the law enacted for regulating the marketing of baby foods and feeding bottles. BPNI advocates for sustainable solutions to child malnutrition through comprehensive food based approaches not through market product based ad hoc solutions. BPNI has a clear ethical policy on conflict of interest for its own funding and does not accept funds from the companies manufacturing baby foods, feeding bottles etc., and from organisations/ industry having conflict of interest. BPNI raises conflict of interest concerns in policy and programmes at all levels.
Study conducted by central govt and WHO finds 76 per cent of 1,000 cases in Pune region affected with the disease after getting only first dose of vaccine.
A study carried out by the central government and World Health Organisation (WHO) in Pune region, has found that despite having a coverage rate of about 90 per cent, measles is prevalent and continues to affect infants. The coverage rate in Pune is around 90 per cent for the first dose of the vaccine, though the study found around 1,000 cases where measles were suspected, of which 76 per cent were confirmed.
The estimates by WHO claimed that almost 35 per cent of global deaths due to measles were reported in 2011 in India. Considering the death toll, the government committed itself to eliminating measles by the year 2020. "Taking this into account and to find the measles vaccine efficacy for children who were vaccinated with the first dose, this study was conducted in Pune region," said Dr AP Narula, surveillance medical officer, WHO.
"Over 1,000 suspected cases were reported from Pune region, including Haveli, Khed and Shirur. Of them, 76 per cent were confirmed cases and of these 76 per cent, 95 per cent were less then 15 years of age which shows that measles can also affect older children," he added.
"Besides this, the infection was found mainly in those who had only one dose of vaccination at nine months of age. This shows the importance of the second dose of measles that can increase the vaccine efficacy and improve the child's immunity in fighting the infection," Narula further stated.
"The incidence rate of measles is more than 250 per million persons a year and nearly half the cases were affected due to outbreaks. Through this surveillance, we noticed that the high incidence of measles and the frequent outbreaks were in infants covered in the vaccination programme. This made it evident that a single dose of measles vaccine is not sufficient for children already suffering from auto-immune disorders or are weak. To prevent further outbreaks, parents should be urged to vaccinate their children against measles twice as many tend to miss the second dose," said Dr RM Kumbhar, state immunisation officer, Government of India, who was also part of the study.
"Through this study, we also found that of the remaining non-measles cases, most were rubella infection. We have urged the government to include this in the national immunisation programme. The suggestion is still under consideration and chances of the launch of a rubella vaccine will be announced early next year," Kumbhar added.
"Besides this, the study helped us in strengthening our surveillance programme, which is essential in implementing and evaluating measles immunisation strategies across the state and is helping us in monitoring the progress towards measles eradication in the city as well as the state, said Kumbhar.
» Measles vaccine efficacy is around 85 per cent, which means only that many children can develop immunity against measles
» There are 15 per cent chances that children might fail to develop the immune response and thus get infected due to measles after a single dose of vaccination
» An infant, who has already suffered from measles, has a higher chance of succumbing to diseases such as pneumonia, other infections within the first three years of his/her life as measles is known to directly affect a child's immunity
NEW DELHI: Several public health groups and civil society organisations have expressed concern over government's plans to introduce cervical cancer vaccine in the universal immunisation programme.
In a communication to Health Minister JP Nadda, they urged the ministry to drop the plan to include human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccine, used against cervical cancer, highlighting lack of enough clinical trials of the vaccines on Indian population and concerns about their safety and efficacy.
"We are extremely concerned about the long-term safety and efficacy of the HPV vaccines—Gardasil and Cervarix—and strongly feel that it would lead to serious adverse effects for its recipients. The Supreme Court is hearing the writ petitions that have raised important questions regarding the vaccine's safety and efficacy as well as its relevance and priority as a public health measure in India," said the memorandum sent to Nadda, signed by almost 70 representatives of leading public health groups and women's groups, health researchers and health and women's rights activists.
It emphasized on the lack of adequate evidence of the safety and efficacy of HPV vaccine in the Indian context and that there is a lot unknown about the vaccine, including whether a repeat dose is required and how long the vaccine might protect from HPV infection. "There is no conclusive evidence which suggests that the vaccine will protect girls from acquiring HPV and developing cervical cancer later in their lives. These vaccines have not been in use for long enough to know the level of protection they will offer to young women when they are actually exposed to the risk of HPV infection," the memorandum said.
Public health organisations like Jan Swasthya Abhiyan and Sama alleged these vaccines were hurriedly licensed in India on the basis of grossly insufficient research. "A number of girls experienced side effects and at least 7 died post vaccination," the letter said.
The representation suggested that instead of spending resources on this vaccine, the government must strengthen health services including screening for cervical cancer and large-scale awareness programmes on HPV, cervical cancer, methods of preventing transmission of sexually transmitted infections, and the need for screening.
The furor on Capitol Hill over Planned Parenthood has stoked a debateabout the use of tissue from aborted fetuses in medical research, but U.S. scientists have been using such cells for decades to develop vaccines and seek treatments for a host of ailments, from vision loss and neurological disorders to cancer and AIDS.
Anti-abortion activists set off the uproar by releasing undercover videos of Planned Parenthood officials that raised questions of whether the organization was profiting from the sale of fetal tissue. Planned Parenthood has denied making any profit and said it charges fees solely to cover its costs.
University laboratories that buy such cells strongly defend their research, saying tissue that would otherwise be thrown out has played a vital role in lifesaving medical advances and holds great potential for further breakthroughs.
Fetal cells are considered ideal because they divide rapidly, adapt to new environments easily and are less susceptible to rejection than adult cells when transplanted.
“If researchers are unable to work with fetal tissue, there is a huge list of diseases for which researchers would move much more slowly, rather than quickly, to find their cause and how they can be cured,” Stanford University spokeswoman Lisa Lapin said in an email.
From 2011 through 2014 alone, 97 research institutions — mostly universities and hospitals — received a total of $280 million in federal grants for fetal tissue research from the National Institutes of Health. A few institutions have consistently gotten large shares of that money, including Yale, the University of California and Massachusetts General Hospital, which is affiliated with Harvard.
The U.S. government prohibits the sale of fetal tissue for profit and requires separation between researchers and the women who donate fetuses. Some schools go further, requiring written consent from donors.
Many major universities declined to make scientists available for interviews about their fetal tissue work, saying they fear for the researchers’ safety because the issue is so highly charged. The Planned Parenthood uproar led to a failed attempt by Republicans to strip the organization of federal funding.
U.S. scientists have been using such cells for decades to develop vaccines and seek treatments for a host of ailments, from vision loss and neurological disorders to cancer and AIDS.Researchers use fetal tissue to understand cell biology and human development. Others use it to look for treatments for AIDS. Research on spinal cord injuries and eyesight-robbing macular degeneration involves transplanting fetal cells into patients. European researchers recently began putting fetal tissue into patients’ brains to try to treat Parkinson’s, a strategy that previously had mixed results.
Some scientists are looking for alternatives to fetal tissue, such as using adult cells that have been “reprogrammed” to their earlier forms. But those techniques are still being refined, and some fields are likely to remain reliant on fetal tissue, such as the study of fetal development.
Vaccines have been one of the chief public benefits of fetal tissue research. Vaccines for hepatitis A, German measles, chickenpox and rabies, for example, were developed using cell lines grown from tissue from two elective abortions, one in England and one in Sweden, that were performed in the 1960s.
Because of its high prescription rate—the U.S. alone dispensed 76.9 million metformin prescriptions in 2014—it’s not surprising that the drug is abundant in the environment. Metformin was present in every water sample Kümmerer’s team tested, including tap water, at concentrations exceeding environmental safety levels proposed by an international Rhine River Basin agency by 50 percent. When publishing the results in 2014, Kümmerer and his coauthors concluded that the drug is likely “distributed over a large fraction of the world’s potable water sources and oceans.”1
Ecologists have long recognized that pharmaceuticals, both unmetabolized drugs like metformin and others that break down into various metabolites, are polluting the environment, but researchers have traditionally focused on just two classes: antibiotics and endocrine-disrupting compounds such as the birth control hormone estradiol. Antibiotics in the environment promote antibiotic resistance in a range of bacterial species, and endocrine disruptors are known to affect development and reproduction in animals.
Metformin was not thought to have either of those effects on animals. But in lab experiments conducted earlier this year, Klaper’s team discovered that male minnows exposed to metformin at concentrations comparable to those of wastewater treatment plants produce proteins typically found only in female fish, develop feminized gonads, weigh less, and have fewer offspring.3 The antidiabetic is now one of a growing list of drugs that researchers are realizing pose major ecological problems.
“All [pharmaceuticals], by design, are meant to elicit a biological response,” says the US Geological Survey’sDana Kolpin, chief of the organization’s Emerging Contaminants Project. “We need to know what the environmental consequences are.”
Like so-called “legacy” pollutants that have been banned in many countries, including polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and DDT, pharmaceuticals can persist for years, even decades. Pharmaceuticals are designed to maintain their strength and quality on the long route from manufacturer to pharmacy to medicine cabinet, and even sometimes inside the human body. That same stability, unfortunately, prevents many pharmaceuticals from degrading in the environment.
And within that chemical concoction, drugs interact with one another, with bacteria, and with basic environmental elements such as water. Chemical and biological reactions can result in a host of transformation products—new chemicals with new properties. Some bacteria break down metformin, for example, yielding a metabolite called guanylurea, which is also bioactive and stable in the environment. Similarly, the antidepressant enlafaxine (trade name Effexor) degrades into desvenlafaxine (Pristiq), another antidepressant. Such metabolites can sometimes be more toxic than their parent compounds.
“Degradation expands that universe of potential chemicals exponentially,” says Kolpin.
Your birth control pill is affecting more than just your body.
Flushed down toilets, poured down sinks and excreted in urine, a chemical component in the pill wafts into sewage systems and ends up in various waterways where it collects in fairly heavy doses. That's where fish soak it up.
A recent survey by the U.S. Geological Survey found that fish exposed to a synthetic hormone called 17a-ethinylestradiol, or EE2, produced offspring that struggled to fertilize eggs. The grandchildren of the originally exposed fish suffered a 30 percent decrease in their fertilization rate. The authors mulled the impact of what they discovered and decided it wasn't good.