SAFER WORLD  a private independent international internet information network www.safer-world.org/

33-12/17/2004

welcome ] address ] activ ] chemicals ] Countries ] disease ] literature ] topics ] newsletter ] speeches, articles ] Impressum/Disclaimer ] content ] search ]

search

international

home English


 

contact: info@safer-world.org

                         

international
home
higher site                         

 

TAKE ACTION

From:  The Safe Cosmetics Action Center. ( www.SafeCosmetics.org ) You can take action  online to urge U.S. companies to remove chemicals linked to cancer, birth  defects and other harms from the health and beauty products you use everyday: http://action.SafeCosmetics.org.

***

From P A N U P S Pesticide Action Network Updates Service

Stop EPA From Testing Pesticides on Children

December 1, 2004

Children's advocates were stunned in early November as the U.S Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced a new study of pesticide impacts on children that planned to offer money and camcorders to families for exposing their infants and toddlers to pesticides. After a chorus of opposition, EPA postponed, but didn't cancel the industry funded Children's Environmental Exposure Research Study (CHEERS) in Duval County, Florida. Sign our petition urging EPA to cancel the study, return the money, and give parents the facts about the serious health risks that pesticides pose to children.

The testing of pesticides on infants and children has clear ethical implications. Scientific evidence clearly suggests that children in homes where home and garden pesticides are used are more likely to develop serious diseases, including asthma and childhood cancers. A recent study reports children with early persistent asthma were 10 times more likely to have been exposed to herbicides and insecticides in their first year. Children under five who live in homes where pesticides are applied may face a risk of childhood leukemia 11 times greater than those who live where no pesticides are applied. Home use of insecticide foggers has been associated with a risk of brain tumors in children that is more than 10 times higher.

As more organophosphorus (OP) insecticides are being replaced with pyrethroids-many of which are endocrine disrupting compounds-new adverse effects are likely to surface. Exposure to neurotoxic pesticides, including OPs and pyrethroids, is suspected as a possible cause of learning disabilities such as Autism Spectrum Disorder and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder/Attention Deficit Disorder, conditions that have reached epidemic proportions in the U.S. While the epidemiological data are not in yet, animal models suggest there is reason for concern.

The CHEERS project was criticized for its offers of cash rewards and camcorders to families that regularly spray pesticides in their home. Although the website for the study promises, "EPA will not ask parents to apply pesticides in their home to be a part of this study" the offering of prizes may encourage families unaccustomed to using pesticides in the home to change their habits to become eligible. The clinics and hospitals selected as recruitment sites in Duvall County predominantly serve low-income communities and serve a greater proportion of African Americans than the rest of the county, thus the children from low income communities of color are likely to bear the greatest risks in this EPA-led study.

EPA plans to accept $2.1 million from the American Chemistry Council (ACC) to fund this ethically questionable study. Instead of allowing the pesticide industry to direct its research priorities, the agency should be doing all it can to prevent children's exposure to toxic pesticides. EPA should be informing parents of the risks of home pesticide use and promoting alternatives. Instead it has chosen collaboration with the industry that produces these chemicals to see how much exposure is "acceptable."

Sign our petition asking EPA to firmly and permanently back away from the CHEERS study, and begin speaking the truth to parents about pesticide risks. See the petition at, http://www.petitiononline.com/NoCheers/.

Sources: EPA CHEERS website: http://www.epa.gov/cheers; Buckley, J.D., L.L. Robinson, R. Swotinsky, et al. 1989, Occupational exposures of parents of children with acute nonlymphocytic leukemia: A report from the Children's Cancer Study Group, Cancer Research 49: 4030–37; Lowengart, R.A., J.M. Peters, C. Cicioni, et al. 1987. Childhood leukemia and parents' occupational and home exposures, Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 79(1): 39-46; Pogoda, J.M. and S. Preston-Martin. 1997. Household pesticides and risk of pediatric brain tumors, Environmental Health Perspectives, 105(11): 1214–20.

PANUPS is a weekly email news service providing resource guides and reporting on pesticide issues that don't always get coverage by the mainstream media. It's produced by Pesticide Action Network North America, a non-profit and non-governmental organization working to advance sustainable alternatives to pesticides worldwide.

Back issues of PANUPS are available online at: http://www.panna.org/resources/panups.html
To comment, send an email to: panna@panna.org
To subscribe, send a blank email to: PANUPS-subscribe@topica.email-publisher.com
Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA) Email: panna@panna.org  Web: http://www.panna.org

*** 

WORLD~WIDE TOXIC INJURY PROCLAMATION

http://www.mcsbeaconofhope.com/proc2005.html 

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

CHEMICAL - ARSENIC

From Deborah  Barrie:  Arsenic articles and news

Arsenic sequestration by ferric iron plaque on cattail roots. NK Blute, DJ Brabander, HF Hemond, SR Sutton, MG Newville, and ML Rivers. Environ Sci Technol, 2004; 38(22): 6074-7.  http://highwire.stanford.edu/cgi/medline/pmid;15573609

Arsenic removal from groundwater by a newly developed adsorbent. H Takanashi, A Tanaka, T Nakajima, and A Ohki. Water Sci Technol, 2004; 50(8): 23-32.  http://highwire.stanford.edu/cgi/medline/pmid;15566183

Contamination of Water Sources. Press Information Bureau, Government of India, Rajya Sabha, December 07, 2004 http://pib.nic.in/release/release.asp?relid=5392

Testing innovative ways to treat arsenic-contaminated water Medical News Today, 8 Dec 2004 http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/medicalnews.php?newsid=17479

Deborah Elaine Barrie, deborahbarrie@hotmail.com  http://www.noccawood.ca

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

CHEMICALS - EU  (Only a few URLs)

Public health- Risk Assessment: Scientific Committee on Consumer Products:- Questions:

"Request for a scientific opinion: the potential skin sensitisation risks associated with the release of 2-mercaprobenzothiazole (MBT) from natural rubber soothers, teats and consumer products" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_014.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Submission II on Benzoic acid, its salts and esters" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_015.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety review of Triclocarban (N-(4-chlorophenyl)-N?-(3,4-dichlorophenyl)urea) for other uses than as a preservative" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_016.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety evaluation of Ethyl lauroyl arginate HCl for its use in cosmetic products" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_017.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Tea Tree oil" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_018.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety evaluation of parabens (4-Hydroxybenzoic acid, its salts and esters)" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_019.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety evaluation of Octamethylcyclotetrasiloxane (D4) (CAS No. 556-67-2) ? INCI name CYCLOMETHICONE" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_020.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety assessment of Bishydroxyethyl biscetyl malonamide (Questamide H)" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_021.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety evaluation of hydrogen peroxide in tooth whitening products" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_022.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Safety evaluation of GLYOXAL (CAS No 107-22-2)" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_023.pdf

"Request for a scientific opinion: Scientific opinion of the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment on the maximum concentration of fluorine compounds in children?s toothpastes" http://europa.eu.int/comm/health/ph_risk/committees/04_sccp/docs/sccp_q_024.pdf

*

 Food Safety - GM Food & Feed - Questions & Answers

Question and Answers on the Regulation of GMOs in the EU http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/food/biotechnology/gmfood/qanda_en.htm

***

From BEUC, The European Consumer's Organization
Air fresheners & REACH - Foul-smelling whiff from air fresheners!, PR/023/2004 2004-11-22
 

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

CHEMICALS - PESTICIDES 

From P A N U P S Pesticide Action Network Updates Service

U.S. Muscles Montreal Protocol on MB Limits

December 10, 2004. U.S. methyl bromide (MB) consumption will increase in 2005, despite provisions added to the Montreal Protocol in 1997 to eliminate production and use of the fumigant in industrial nations by 2005. On November 29, 2004, in Prague, the 16th Conference of Parties to the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer approved the U.S. government’s request to increase exemptions for continued use of MB in so-called "critical uses." The exemption will increase the nation's consumption of this cancer causing and ozone-depleting chemical to 37% of the 1991 baseline level, or about 9,400 tons in 2005. That is more than the total amount used by all U.S. agricultural and other users in 2003.  ... Sources: NRDC Fact Sheets, USDA Proposed Rules for "Official Quarantine Use, and Actual Data on Methyl Bromide Use in the U.S."; Non-chemical Alternatives to Methyl Bromide, Excerpts from Technical Literature, PANNA, Agricultural Pesticide Use May Be Associated With Increased Risk of Prostate Cancer, National Cancer Institute, Cancer.gov, http://www.nci.nih.gov/newscenter/pressreleases/AgricultureHealthStudy.

*

US Blocks Phase Out of Lindane in North America

October 7, 2004 Last week, U.S. representatives parted company with Canada and Mexico and announced plans to allow continued use of the pesticide lindane that persists in air and water and has been found at high levels in the Artic. Canada plans to eliminate agricultural uses of lindane by the end of 2004 and Mexico plans a full phase out of agricultural, veterinary and pharmaceutical uses of the pesticide. Representatives from the three countries met in Montreal, Canada September 28-30, 2004 to draft a North American Regional Action Plan (NARAP) for lindane through the Commission for Environmental Cooperation of North America established by the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA).

*

PIC Lists 14 New Chemicals

September 27, 2004 The 74 countries that signed and ratified the Rotterdam Convention on Prior Informed Consent (PIC treaty) added 14 of 15 proposed new chemicals to the treaty's international "watch" list. An early warning system for sharing information on banned and severely restricted pesticides and other chemicals, the PIC treaty held its first official Conference of Parties on September 20th in Geneva. The meeting was marred by controversy when Canada and Russia blocked the chrysotile form of asbestos from being added to the list.

Back issues of PANUPS are available online at: http://www.panna.org/resources/panups.html
To comment, send an email to: panna@panna.org
To subscribe, send a blank email to:  PANUPS-subscribe@topica.email-publisher.com
Pesticide Action Network North America (PANNA), 49 Powell St., Suite 500, San Francisco, CA 94102 USA, Email: panna@panna.org
Web: http://www.panna.org

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

ELECTRO-MAGNETICAL FIELDS 

 From ISIS,  The Institute of Science in Society 

28/09/04

Mobile Phones & Brain Damage
Rats exposed to mobile phones for two hours showed brain damages that persisted 50 days later. But current exposure standards are still highly inadequate to protect the public.  Dr. Mae-Wan Ho  reports

Mobile phones "the largest human biologic experiment"

Researchers found "highly significant" evidence for damages to brain cells in rats exposed for 2 hrs to microwaves from mobile phones; and these damages were still seen 50 days after the exposure.

One quarter of the world's population is now exposing themselves to microwaves from hand-held mobile phones. The research team in Lundt University, Sweden, led by Leif Salford, referred to this as "the largest human biologic experiment ever". They point out that soon, microwaves will be emitted by an abundance of other appliances in the `cordless' office and in the home.

Most researchers have concentrated on the question of whether radiofrequency electromagnetic fields can induce or promote cancer, but the evidence appears conflicting.

Box

Sir William Stewart hit out at mobile phones lobby but exposure limits still highly inadequate

In his keynote address to a Children with Leukemia conference in September 2004,

Sir William Stewart, who chaired an enquiry that resulted in the Stewart Report on Mobile Phones and Health in 2000, hit out at the mobile phones lobby for reporting that, "Stewart report says there are no adverse health effect for mobile phones". He said there are biological effects below the current exposure guidelines, and people can vary in their susceptibility. He had warned that children may be more susceptible, and should limit their use of mobile phones.

In his speech, he also said, "Don't ignore non-peer reviewed findings." These have to be carefully independently confirmed, and have to be put to the public "simply and clearly". Not only the results reporting impacts of mobile phones on health need to be independently confirmed, but also negative findings of no impacts. At the moment, there is a bias towards accepting negative findings without question.

A recent health survey carried out in La Gora, Mucia, Spain, nearly two 900/1800Mhz mobile phone base stations showed statistically association between the measured electric field and a number of symptoms, especially depressive tendency, fatigue, sleeping disorder, difficulty in concentration and cardiovascular problems, and also loss of memory, visual disorder and dizziness. It confirms the findings of several earlier published studies. On the basis of this work, D. Oberfeld Gerd of the Public Health Department of Salzburg, Austria, is advising a reduction of exposure levels to no more than 1 microWatt/m2. The current exposure limit set by the International Commission on Non-Ionizing Radiation Protection (ICNIRP) Guidelines is 10 W/m2, or 10 million times that recommended.

Sir William now chairs the National Radiological Protection Board (NRPB), which is being merged into the Health Agency. The NRPB is due to publish advice to the government that the ICNIRP standards - already shown to be highly inadequate - should be adopted for the UK. As the NRPB's own report admits, the standards are "intended to prevent adverse effects due to excessive whole- and partial-body heating", totally ignoring non- thermal effects, which are increasingly documented in many laboratories all over the world.

Mobile phones undermine the blood-brain barrier

Lundt and colleagues have been studying the effects of 915MHz radio frequency (RF) electromagnetic fields (EMFs) in rats since 1988. "In a series of more than 1,600 animals, we have proven that subthermal power densities from both pulse- modulated and continuous RF EMFs - including those from ...mobile phones - have the potency to significantly open the blood-brain barrier such that the animal's own albumin passes out of the bloodstream into the brain tissue and accumulates in the neurons and glial cells surrounding the capillaries."

These results have been duplicated in at least two other laboratories. One group showed that the animals' own albumin injected into the brain of rats led to damage of the neurons at the site of injection when the concentration of albumin in the injected solution is at least 25% of that in the blood.

Brain damage persists 50 days after exposure

In a study published in June 2003, Salford and colleagues exposed rats to RF EMF in special transverse electromagnetic transmission line chambers (TEM-cells) designed by scaling down previously constructed cells at the National Bureau of Standards. These cells generate uniform EMF s for standard measurements. A mobile phone with a programmable power output was connected via a coaxial cable to the TEM-cell; and no voice modulation was applied. The TEM-cell is enclosed in a wooden box (15x15x15 cm) that supports the outer conduction and central plate. The outer conductor is made of brass net and is attached to the inner walls of the box. The centre plate, or septum, is made of aluminium. The TEM cells were placed in a temperature-controlled room, where room air is circulated through holes in the wooden box.

The rats were placed in plastic trays (12x12x7cm) to avoid contact with the central plate and outer conductor. Thirty-two male and female Fisher 344 rats 12-26 weeks old and weighing 282 + 91 gm were divided into four groups of eight rats each. Three experimental groups of rats were exposed to peak power densities of 0.24, 2.4 and 24 W/m2, resulting in average whole-body SARs (specific absorption rates) of 2mW/kg, 20 mW/kg and 200 mW/kg respectively. The fourth (control) group of rats was simultaneously kept for 2 hr in non-activated TEM-cells. The animals in each exposure group were allowed to survive for about 50 days after exposure and carefully observed daily for neurologic and behavioural abnormalities.

At the end of the period, the brains were removed and sectioned and stained.

The exposed rat brain showed multiple spots of albumin leaking out from the blood vessels. On high power, dark, dead neurons can be seen interspersed with the living ones. There is an apparent dose-response relationship between the level of exposure and the number of dead neurons found.

Previous studies by the same group showed that albumin leakage into the brain occurs within hours after exposure in about 40% of the animals. But in the present study, there is still albumin leakage after 50 days. This suggests that there might have been a "vicious circle" started by the initial leakage, leading to long lasting effects.

Teenagers most affected

The researchers pointed out that 12-26 week old rats are comparable in age to human teenagers, the most frequent users of mobile phones. This level of damage to the nerve cells is worrying, as "it may result in reduced brain reserve capacity". In other words, the teenagers' brains may age prematurely. A study by retail analysts Mintel found that up to 80% of 11 to 14 year-olds have a mobile phone in the United Kingdom.

There is now evidence that a wide range of frequencies in the electromagnetic spectrum can have biological effects from DNA damage in brain cells to childhood leukemia (see "Eelectromgnetic fields, leukaemia & DNA damage", this series).

This article can be found on the I-SIS website at http://www.i-sis.org.uk/MPABD.php 

Sources for this article are posted on ISIS members' website :   http://www.i-sis.org.uk/full/MPABDFull.php  
 
If you like this original article from the Institute of Science in Society, and would like to continue receiving articles of this calibre, please consider making a donation or purchase on our website. ISIS is an independent, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to providing critical public information on cutting edge science, and to promoting social accountability and ecological sustainability in science.If you would prefer to receive future mailings as plain text please let us know.

The Institute of Science in Society, PO Box 32097, London NW1 OXR

General Enquiries sam@i-sis.org.uk - Website/Mailing List press-release@i-sis.org.uk - ISIS Director m.w.ho@i-sis.org.uk 
Material in this email may be reproduced in any form without permission, on condition that it is accredited accordingly and contains a link to http://www.i-sis.org.uk/

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

LAW 

Canada Moves Closer to Being a Smokefree Country
To win smokefree air where you live, go to http://www.smokefree.net/alerts.php

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

MEDIA

Peace Media E-magazine  ( www.peacejournalism.com )  is currently looking for freelance writers who are interested in writing articles dealing with various topics. Peace Media E-magazine welcomes editorial submissions from freelance writers. Varieties of writing styles are invited. More under http://peacejournalism.com/submittingArticles.asp 

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

RACHEL'S ENVIRONMENT & HEALTH NEWS

From Peter Montague, December 2004

Dear Rachel's Reader,

The chemical industry is mounting a major campaign against the precautionary principle. They have hired two attack-dog public relations firms, Nichols-Dezenhall, and Wirthlin WorldWide, to discredit precaution in the minds of the public. They started laying the ground work for this campaign four years ago, and now they are ramping up their attack. (For some eye-popping documentation, see http://www.rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=492 and http://www.rachel.org/library/getfile.cfm?ID=493.)

They have developed a consistent "party line" that they are repeating at conferences, at public hearings, and in the media. They use consistent down-home language to make precaution seem foolish, unnecessary and dangerous.

They have developed a series of stories that they tell to illustrate why precaution is a bad idea. Their favorite story is the one in which the Peruvian government hears that chlorine is dangerous. The Peruvians act on this knowledge -- they take "precautionary action" and stop chlorinating their water supply -- which causes several thousand deaths from cholera.

I heard this story told almost two years face by a professor at Stanford University, and the same story told this summer by a professor at Rutgers, the state university of New Jersey. Neither of these esteemed scholars checked their facts before telling the story. If they had, they'd have found out the story was bogus and untrue -- a piece of fiction intended to scare people away from the precautionary principle.

Now the anti-precaution campaign is gaining traction. Letters to the editor have begun to appear in newspaper across the country. In the most recent issues of Rachel's we analyzed some anti-precaution nonsense planted in the New York Times Nov. 21.

Their plan is simple: they are attacking the precautionary principle itself as unnecessary and extremist; they are attacking the advocates of precaution as extremists and uninformed Chicken Littles; and they are claiming that "risk assessment" is totally precautionary. Not long ago, I heard a representative of the American Chemistry Council (formerly, the Chemical Manufacturers Association) tell an audience of 200 people that the chemical industry doesn't need the precautionary principle because it is already fully precautionary.

So we've got our work cut out for us:

** We've got to debunk risk assessment and show how it has caused enormous harm to human health and the environment;

** We've got to catalog how the precautionary principle is being used by sensible people around the country and, indeed, around the world;

** We've got to develop common-sense, plain-language arguments of our own so people can write their own letters to the editor advocating precaution.

** We've got to continue to expose what the chemical industry is up to.

As you know, that about sums up what we do here at Rachel's.

But we need your help to keep doing this work, fighting for precaution. We've got to pay the light bill, keep the computers whirring, and pay our small, hard-working staff. Can you help us with a donation?

To support our Rachel's work on the precautionary principle, please fill out the form below or make a contribution online at http://www.rachel.org (click on the "Donate Now" button in the upper right corner of the screen). Donate Now is a secure service provided by Groundspring.org.

Yours sincerely, Peter Montague, Editor

Comment Ingrid Scherrmann: For me Peter Montague is one of the best authors of the world to educate people about environemantal and health news. I hope very much that  www.rachel.org can do his work also in the future.

***

November 25, 2004 Living within Limits # 805

November 11, 2004 Precautionary Mister Rogers, Part 3* # 8ß4

October 28, 2004 Precautionary Mister Rogers, Part 2* # 803

October 14, 2004 Precautionary Mister Rogers, Part 1* # 802

September 30, 2004 The chemical wars, Final Part # 801
by Peter Montague
Continuing: The current system of environmental regulation considers new chemicals and new technologies "innocent until proven guilty." As a result, the public must "prove harm" before alternatives will be considered. Such a system requires large-scale harm to occur (to humans and ecosystems) before anyone is asked to change their destructive behavior
To start your own free subscription to Rachel's, send a blank Email to: join-rachel@gselist.org

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

SCIENCE 

Karl-Rainer Fabig
Multiple chemical sensitivity seen from physiological and genetic properties of human populations affected by chemical stress
The presentation was given  at  the second day of the “Workshop of the Thematic Network SUSTAINABILITY STRATEGY”  (www.sustainability-strategy.net ) "From sustainability science to sustainability governance Proposals for an improvement of European sustainability strategy elaboration and implementation"    which was held from  01.-03.12.2004 in Roskilde and Copenhavn. http://www.safer-world.org/e/disease/MCS/fabig.htm
Or as a pdf-file when you send me an email  to   info@safer-world.org  
 
 ***

Pregnant Women: Solvent Exposure Hurts Baby Kids Show Language, Attention, Dexterity, Hyperactivity Problems By Jeanie Lerche Davis WebMD Medical News Reviewed By Charlotte Grayson, MD on Monday, October 04, 2004

by Week Get Parenting & Pregnancy News in Your Inbox

Oct. 4, 2004 -- Women working in nail salons, dry cleaning establishments, medical laboratories, and manufacturing plants listen up: Pregnant women who have on-the-job exposure to chemical solvents used with these types of jobs are putting their fetus' brain development at risk, new research shows. SOURCE: Laslo-Baker, D. Archives of Pediatric and Adolescent Medicine, October 2004; vol 158: pp 956-961. http://webcenter.health.webmd.netscape.com/content/article/94/103062.htm 

***

The December issue of Environmental Health Perspectives :  http://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/docs/2004/112-17/toc.html

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

SPEECH 

Ingrid  Scherrmann MCS (Multiple Chemical Sensitivity):  Challenges for patients, medicine, politics and society

Speech at 14. November 2002, MCS, 1. Fachdialog, Diplomatische Akademie Wien Organizer: seibersdorf  research & Bundesministerium  für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft (Ministry for agriculture, forestry, environment and water supply
http://peacejournalism.com/ReadArticle.asp?ArticleID=493
You get the ppt as a pdf-file (in English) from the speech when you send an email to info@safer-world.org
 
Original in German:  Ingrid Scherrmann Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS): Herausforderungen für Patient, Medizin, Politik und Gesellschaft. Rede beim 1. Fachdialog zu MCS in Wien. (14. 11. 2002), veranstaltet  vom Bundesministerium für Land- und Forstwirtschaft, Umwelt und Wasserwirtschaft, von Seibersdorf Research, und mit Unterstützung der AGU (AerztInnen für eine gesunde Umwelt), veroeffentlicht unter . www.safer-world.org/d/Scherrmann/skript/herausforderungen.htm 

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

end of newslettter /English/33
Fair use notice This site contains copyrighted material the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of environmental, political, human rights, economic, democracy, scientific, and social justice issues, etc. We believe this constitutes a 'fair use' of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information go to: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/17/107.shtml.
 
Ingrid Scherrmann
Fuchsfeldstr. 50, D-88416 Ochsenhausen, phone: + 49 7352 940529, fax: + 49 7352 4392
email: info@safer-world.org , Scherrmann@t-online.de Scherrmann@safer-world.org   web: www.safer-world.org
SAFER WORLD is a private independent international internet-network for a safer and healthy environment.

Copyright© 1998-2008   SAFER WORLD. All rights reserved