Asbestos found in some Claire's makeup, FDA says

The FDA issued a warning

advising consumers against using certain makeup products from Claire's, as they could be contaminated with asbestos. The FDA said samples of the following products tested positive for tremolite asbestos:

o Claire's Eye Shadows - Batch No/Lot No: 08/17

o Claire's Compact Powder - Batch No/Lot No: 07/15

o Claire's Contour Palette - Batch No/Lot No: 04/17

The FDA sampled and had tested targeted cosmetic products following reports of contaminated cosmetics marketed by Claire's. Testing was conducted on behalf of FDA by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and AMA Analytical Services, Inc.

Asbestos is a naturally occurring mineral that is often found near talc, an ingredient in many cosmetic products. Asbestos, however, is a known carcinogen and its health risks are well-documented. During talc mining, if talc-mining sites are not selected carefully and steps are taken to purify the talc ore sufficiently, the talc may be contaminated with asbestos.

Consumers who have these batches/lots of Claire's Eye Shadow, Compact Powder, and Contour in their home should stop using them. Claire's has informed the FDA that it does not believe that affected products are still available for sale. The FDA is not aware of any adverse reactions associated with exposure to these Claire's products. Health care professionals and consumers are encouraged to report any adverse events potentially related to Claire's Eye Shadow, Compact Powder, and Contour Palette to FDA's MedWatch Adverse Event Reporting program by:

o Completing and submitting the report online at MedWatch Online Voluntary Reporting Form.

o Downloading and completing the form, then submitting it via fax at (800) FDA-0178

https://www.ktuu.com/content/news/506770002.html

Trump cancels reports on civilian deaths in US drone strikes

US President Donald Trump has revoked the executive order requiring public reports on civilian casualties in drone strikes carried out by the CIA, as well as US military.

The new executive order, issued Wednesday, revokes the reporting requirement introduced by President Barack Obama in July 2016. The action required the Director of National Intelligence to release an unclassified summary of US strikes against terrorists “outside areas of active hostilities” and assessments of non-combatant deaths caused by those strikes.

The Pentagon still has an obligation to report on civilian casualties caused by US military operations, as it is mandated by the National Defense Authorization Acts of 2018 and 2019, Trump’s executive order noted.

In a statement commenting on the decision, the White House National Security Council said that the order removes “superfluous reporting requirements” that “distract our intelligence professionals from their primary mission.”

Obama’s former NSC spokesman Ned Price was furious, however, arguing that the reporting requirement allowed the US to “counter disinformation from terrorist groups with facts about the effectiveness and precision of our operations.”

The targeted drone program was created during the George W Bush administration and flourished under President Barack Obama, who even acquired the title ‘King of Drones’ from anti-war activists. When Trump took the reins he was not quite eager to dismantle the legacy of his predecessor and further increased drone operations.

The Obama-era restrictions on drone use, however, have been loosened even further; in March 2017 Trump designated Yemen and Somalia as areas of “active hostilities.” Since 2013, a sign-off procedure with the White House was required for strikes in countries not deemed to be active war zones and now drones freely roamed these two countries.

The strikes are not exactly precise, as one in three deaths inflicted by them in Yemen were civilians, including children, AP reported in November last year. While military officials have repeatedly claimed that such operations are supposed to lower civilian casualties, the statistics of the killer UAVs usage tells another story. For example, in a shocking 2014 figure on Pakistan and Yemen, provided by the human rights group Reprieve, US drones killed an estimated 1,147 people while – repeatedly – trying to take out 41 men with links to terror groups. Several of them even managed to live through repeated “targeted” attacks which killed no one but civilians.

https://www.rt.com/usa/453188-drone-strikes-civilians-trump/

Full disclosure???? Maybe not!

Researchers: Hair dyes have a direct connection to breast cancer

Though dying their locks might seem like an absolute necessity for many women as they get older and the gray starts setting in, new research from Finland should give women everywhere pause, as it indicates that this apparently harmless beauty ritual could be linked to an elevated risk of breast cancer.

For her doctoral dissertation, researcher Sanna Heikkinen of the University of Helsinki and the Finnish Cancer Registry, examined self-reported information from 8,000 Finnish women with breast cancer and a further 20,000 controls. Heikkinen observed a 23 percent increase in breast cancer risk for those who dyed their hair on a regular basis.

Earlier research similarly found that women who regularly dye their hair are at increased risk of other cancers, including brain cancer, bladder cancer and leukemia. British scientists have also issued warnings in the past about the dangers of both home hair dye kits and professional dyes applied at hair salons.

One possible explanation for the elevated risk is that certain chemicals in the hair dye react with other pollutants in the air to form tumors when used on a continuous basis.

A landmark study back in 2000, by researchers from the University of Southern California, and published in the International Journal of Cancer, found that women who dye their hair on a monthly basis double their risk of getting bladder cancer. They also found that the risk continues to increase with prolonged use, and that hairdressers who work with hair dyes professionally face an even higher risk.

These shock findings prompted an immediate review by The European Commission, the body responsible for drafting legislation for the European Union. The results of that review led to the Commission withdrawing support for hair coloring products in Europe. The Commission stated at the time that there was insufficient evidence proving the safety of hair dyes. While recognizing that a robust study confirming their safety would take years, they felt it was imperative to protect consumers in the interim by advising against the use of these products. They particularly expressed concern about the long-term effects of a chemical called para-Phenylenediamine, or PPD, which is commonly used in hair dyes.

https://www.naturalnews.com/2019-03-06-hair-dyes-linked-to-breast-cancer.html

Another Judge Ruled Trump’s Crackdown On Sanctuary Cities To Be Illegal

A California judge ruled President Donald Trump cannot withhold federal funds from jurisdictions that harbor illegal aliens, the latest in a string of court defeats against the administration’s effort to crack down on sanctuary cities.

Judge William Orrick III — an Obama-appointed judge serving on the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California — ruled Monday that the Department of State cannot withhold federal law enforcement grants from “sanctuary” jurisdictions without an act of Congress. The case was brought forward by the state of California and the county and city of San Francisco, all of which stood to lose over $30 million in funding from the federal government, according to The Washington Post.

“Congress knows how to grant broad discretionary authority but did not do so here,” Orrick stated in his ruling, the San Francisco Chronicle reported, adding that neither the president nor the Department of Justice can mandate state and local governments to reform their policies to qualify for federal funding.

Orrick’s decision marks what is at least the 10th court ruling against the Trump administration’s fight to withhold grants from jurisdictions that refuse to help federal law enforcement officials track down and catch illegal immigrants, i.e. sanctuary cities. The losses also include rulings from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 9th, 7th and 3rd circuits.

https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/06/judge-trump-sanctuary-cities/

>>5543268

Wouldn't surprise me it was already proven fetal tissue is in food additives

>>5543268

41 mins wow

Baker are you a Jew?

‘Racially profiled’ British student interrogated by Israeli embassy at UK campus

Israel’s Ambassador to the UK, Mark Regev, rose to notoriety with his ruthless and unapologetic defence of Israeli war-crimes in Gaza. His talent for suppressing truth and taking on the rising tide of anti-Israeli sentiments earned him a position in the UK, long seen by Tel Aviv as the global centre of pro-Palestinian activism. The Australian-born diplomat, who moved to Israel in 1982, places a premium on speaking at university campuses and has stoked controversy wherever he goes. The latest saw pro-Palestinian student activists being harassed and interrogated by his security staff who are accused of supressing free speech and behaving like thuggish enforcers.

The showdown between Regev’s security guards and British students took place at the University of Leicester last week. A group of student activists from the Palestine Society decided to exercise their democratic right to protest and express disdain over the university’s decision to host such a polarising figure.

The students organised a walk out, prepared questions for the ambassador and had a rally just outside the event to make clear to Regev that he was not welcome at the university campus. The students said that with his track record of denying war crimes, sharing platforms with fascists, and trivialising the deaths of Palestinian women and children, they felt compelled to take issue with his invitation.

Despite giving assurances that they had planned a peaceful protest, Regev’s security team displayed extreme hostility towards the students. Hamza, who was one of the protestors, described his ordeal to MEMO. He said he was called out five minutes into the event by Regev’s security personnel who interrogated him. He suspects that he was being “racially profiled” citing the fact that they knew his name. They ordered him not to protest but he said he “stood his ground” and tried to calm their concerns saying that the protest was peaceful and that they would walk out as soon as Regev started to speak, without uttering a word.

He was then approached by the university security and asked to leave again. Hamza claims he was “pressured to comply”. As he was escorted out he faced security personnel and police officers. Feeling “intimidated and anxious”, he asked a student union representative to accompany him. He was forced to hand over the placards, despite insisting that his intentions were to merely protest peacefully.

https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20190305-racially-profiled-british-student-interrogated-by-israeli-embassy-at-uk-campus/