ACTOS is a brand name for the drug pioglitazone. It is prescribed to help regulate blood sugar in adult patients who suffer from Type 2 diabetes.

Health Canada reports in its advisory that Takeda is at the midway point of a ten year study which shows an increased rate of bladder cancer in people who use pioglitazone to control their type 2 diabetes. The risk appears to be highest in people who have taken the drug for the longest duration or at the highest dosages, but short term use has not been ruled out as a risk factor.

The safety assessment recommends that ACTOS should not be used in patients who have or have had bladder cancer. Any blood or red color in urine should be investigated before starting pioglitazone therapy. The patient should be assessed for risk factors related to bladder cancer, (these risks include age, smoking, family history of bladder cancer workplace exposure to chemicals and certain types of cancer treatments/radiation therapy).

In the United States, the ACTOS bladder cancer lawyers, Baum, Hedlund, Aristel & Goldman are representing a former employee of Takeda Pharmaceuticals, in awhistleblower lawsuit.  Dr. Helen Ge a medical doctor, who was employed in the company’s pharmacovigilance division to review adverse events and identify and evaluate potential safety signals for ACTOS,  asserts she had direct knowledge of the ACTOS bladder cancer risk  and according to the complaint she encountered resistance from her superiors when she tried to report bladder cancer as related to ACTOS.

Dr. Ge claims the she was directed by her supervisors to change her “related” assessment to unrelated. She also recollects reviewing Takeda’s adverse event data base for ACTOS, where there were more than 100 bladder cancers reported to the company, but only 72 were reported to the Federal Drug Administration, which she states is “a serious discrepancy.” Dr. Ge also states in her complaint that carcinogenesis (the process of initiating and promoting cancer), from ACTOS was discovered during the initial ACTOS animal studies.

In addition she alleges that Takeda failed to report all of the ACTOS related Congestive Heart Failure adverse events to the FDA. According to the complaint the company instructed its medical reviewers not to report hundreds of non-hospitalized or non-fatal Congestive Heart Failure cases as “serious” adverse events to the FDA. Dr. Ge estimates that Takeda failed to report several hundred Congestive Heart Failure events as serious between late 2007 and 2010.

Senior Partner at Baum Hedlund; Michael Baum outlined the case “We believe that the documents we obtain in discovery will show that the fraud Takeda committed, violated the False Claims Act and has caused tens of thousands of false claims to be made on federal and state health care programs, causing hundreds of millions of dollars in damages.”

Dr. Ge complained to her superiors that her medical assessments were being downgraded from “serious” to “non-serious” and as a result of this; the Congestive Heart Failure events were being under-reported to the FDA. Dr. Ge’s contract was terminated.

ACTOS bladder cancer lawyers, Baum, Hedlund, Aristel & Goldman have filed ACTOS bladder cancer lawsuits in state and federal courts against Takeda Pharmaceuticals accusing the drug company of illegally marketing ACTOS when it knew or should have known that it was linked to an elevated risk of bladder cancer.

Baum Hedlund attorney Cynthia Garber stated “Takeda had a responsibility to warn healthcare workers and patients of the risks of bladder cancer associated with Actos. Instead, they watched profits soar with tight lips.”

The lawsuit asserts that Takeda was negligent in its failure to inform prescribing Doctors, and the Public of the deadly risk in order to continue realizing huge profits from the sale of its diabetes drug. Some estimates say in 2008 the company netted profits from the sale of ACTOS amounting to $2.4 billion US.

The personal injury case (case no. 6:12:cv-709) joins similar federal Actos lawsuits which have been consolidated before U.S. District Judge Rebecca Doherty in the United States District Court for the Western District of Louisiana in Lafayette. It is estimated that Takeda may face thousands of similar personal injury and wrongful death Actos claims, based on the wide use of the drug.

Baum Hedlund is representing plaintiffs Timothy Plaugher and his wife Peggy Ann Plaugher for the injuries Mr. Plaugher suffered as a result of taking the diabetes medication Actos, an “unreasonably dangerous and defective drug” according to the complaint. Mr. Plaugher developed bladder cancer after using the prescription drug to treat his Type-2 diabetes. The suit is seeking compensatory damages on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Plaugher.

According to the complaint, Takeda Pharmaceuticals knew or should have known that Actos use in humans increases the risk of developing bladder cancer. The suit alleges that for over a decade and to date, Takeda hid its knowledge that Actos was linked to a dangerous risk of bladder cancer and failed to completely disclose pre-clinical scientific studies that included animal evidence supporting this alarming connection. Takeda concealed this knowledge, the suit states, before applying for and obtaining approval for Actos. In fact, plaintiffs allege that Takeda has known since the early 2000’s that human clinical trials revealed a significant link between Actos and bladder cancer.

The lawsuit further alleges that Takeda willfully, wantonly and with malice withheld the knowledge of increased risk of cancer in Actos users and by doing so caused Mr. Plaugher to suffer severe and permanent personal injury, including; bladder cancer and related sequelae, pain and suffering, bodily impairment, mental anguish, diminished enjoyment of life as well as economic loss and other special damages.

“Takeda failed to properly warn plaintiffs of the very real and dangerous link between the use of Actos and bladder cancer,” stated the Plaughers’ attorney, Cynthia Garber, also an R.N. “The company had a responsibility to disclose this information to healthcare workers and patients. Instead of helping them, this prescription drug has led to disease and death. Takeda should be held accountable for their wrong-doing.”

Ms. Garber is also among the lawyers representing the families who recently filed three other Actos bladder cancer lawsuits in Los Angeles Superior Court (Case numbers BC476062/63/64).

Baum Hedlund is also representing the former medical reviewer for Takeda, the United States, and 22 states, in a whistleblower lawsuit (Case 1:10-cv-11043-FDS – U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts) alleging that Takeda failed to properly report all Actos related bladder cancer adverse events to the FDA.

Actos [pioglitazone] was approved in 1999 by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to treat Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus, the most common form of diabetes in the US.

On June 7, 2011, the Caisse nationale de l’assurance maladie published a paper in France which reported a statistically significant association between exposure to Actos and bladder cancer and that the risk increased with exposure longer than one year. Two days later, the European Medicine Agency suspended the use of Actos.

Soon after, Germany’s Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices suspended the use of the drug. Health Canada is currently undertaking a review of pioglitazone-containing drugs.

The FDA has not yet suspended Actos in the U.S. but on June 15, 2011 the FDA issued a Public Safety Announcement informing the public that use of the diabetes medication Actos (pioglitazone) for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. The agency also said that information about this risk will be added to Actos’ patient Medication Guide and to the Warnings and Precautions section of the label for pioglitazone-containing medicines. Additionally, the FDA recommended that healthcare professionals tell their diabetes patients diagnosed with bladder cancer to stop taking Actos or pioglitazone.

On July 12, 2011, Takeda issued a recall on Actos in France, but refused to issue a recall of Actos in the United States. This inaction, the lawsuit states, continues to subject American citizens to the significant risk of developing bladder cancer.

In later 2011, Bloomberg News reported that millions of patients switched from the controversial diabetes drug Avandia to Actos, after Avandia was linked to heart attacks and cardiovascular death. The sales of Actos rose from about $3 billion in 2006 to almost $5 billion last year. GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of Avandia, has paid more than $6 billion for legal costs tied to Avandia and other medicines.

About Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, P.C.

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman represents Actos bladder cancer patients across the country in cases against Takeda. The firm is also handling a former Takeda medical reviewer’s whistleblower lawsuit regarding Takeda’s failing to report adverse side events, including bladder cancer, related to Actos.

The team of lawyers working on the Actos bladder cancer cases have an in depth understanding of biomedical research, clinical trials, statistics, the pharmaceutical industry and marketing, as well as successful and effective discovery procedures and extensive work with experts on complicated scientific issues because of their years of experience related to Baum Hedlund’s past pharmaceutical litigation.

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman has successfully represented clients harmed by medications in over 4,000 individual personal injury and wrongful death cases, in addition to representing consumers in multiple pharmaceutical class actions against major pharmaceutical companies such as Alpha Therapeutic, Armour Pharmaceutical Co., Baxter Health Care Corp, Bayer Corp., Dalkon Shield, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer.

Please visit Baum Hedlund’s web site, Actosbladdercancer.com, to learn more.

Consumers will hopefully have one less health worry when it comes to drinking soda that may expose them to toxic chemicals. The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI), a U.S. food watchdog group, said it found unsafe levels of the chemical in cans of Coca-Cola, Pepsi-Cola, Dr Pepper and Whole Foods Markets Inc’s 365 Cola. The cans were all taken from stores in the Washington, D.C. area, and some had levels of 4-MI near 140 micrograms in each 12-ounce can, the watchdog group said. The FDA’s limit for 4-MI in caramel coloring is 250 parts per million (ppm). The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said at the time it was reviewing the group’s petition but that it found no immediate concern to public safety. Coke, Pepsi and other cola manufacturers have suffered public scrutiny and content discussing cancer causing chemicals in cola drinks has since gone viral.

The companies have come under scrutiny that the manufacturing process of their namesake colas have high levels of a chemical linked to cancer in animals. The artificial brown coloring is made using sugars with ammonia and sulfites under high pressure and temperatures, which results in the chemical 4-methylimidazole (4-MEI) being produced. “Coke and Pepsi, with the acquiescence of the FDA, are needlessly exposing millions of Americans to a chemical that causes cancer,” said CSPI executive director Michael Jacobson. The companies have asked the supplier of caramel coloring in their colas to alter their manufacturing process to meet the requirements of a California ballot initiative aiming to limit people’s exposure to harmful chemicals. The change is meant to reduce the amount of a chemical called 4-methylimidazole, or 4-MI. The cancer causing chemical in soda was added to the list of carcinogens covered by California’s Safe Drinking Water and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986, also known as Proposition 65. The American Beverage Association has argued that California added 4-MEI to its list of carcinogens with no studies showing that it causes cancer in humans.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration said a person would have to drink “well over a thousand cans of soda a day to reach the doses administered in the studies that have shown links to cancer in rodents”.

Nina, owner of NinaRotz.com, is a freelance writer and blogger. Nina’s work has been published and linked on Associated Content, Yahoo! Shine, Yahoo! Voices, eHow, Live Strong, CNN, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, as well as various online magazines and blogs.

The whistleblower is Dr. Helen Ge, a medical doctor and former safety consultant to Takeda’s pharmacovigilance division. Dr. Ge worked to review adverse events and to identify and evaluate potential safety signals for the diabetes drug Actos, the only drug in the same class and competing with GlaxoSmithKline’s Avandia.

Dr. Ge had direct knowledge of the Actos bladder cancer risk and, according to the complaint, encountered resistance from her superiors when she tried to report bladder cancer as related to Actos. Takeda’s adverse event database for Actos held more than 100 bladder cancers reported to the company, but only 72 reported to the FDA, which Dr. Ge referred to as “a serious discrepancy.” Takeda, like other drug companies, is required to update the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s Adverse Event Reporting System.

Takeda Pharmaceutical Co. failed to give accurate reports to regulators about hundreds of congestive heart failure cases associated with its diabetes drug Actos, Dr. Ge claimed in a lawsuit. Additionally, the company failed to classify “non-hospitalized or non- fatal” congestive heart failure cases as serious from late 2007 to January 2010, and supervisors directed the whistleblower to change her “related” assessment to unrelated.

According to her complain, Dr. Ge complained to her superiors that her medical assessments were being downgraded from “serious” to “non-serious” and that, as a result of this, the Congestive Heart Failure events were being under-reported to the FDA. As a result of her complaint, her contract with Takeda was terminated.

“Takeda’s motivation to fraudulently report and under-report the serious adverse events was driven by an economic desire to falsely enhance Actos’s safety profile and to increase sales,” Ge said. Takeda wanted to push that Actos was safer than GlaxoSmithKline Plc (GSK)’s Avandia diabetes drug, and that the company downplayed data suggesting a link between Actos and bladder cancer, according to the complaint.

In 2007, the FDA ordered Takeda and Glaxo to place its strongest warning on the labeling of their drugs about the risk of congestive heart failure, a condition that occurs when the heart doesn’t adequately pump blood. Avandia has since has been severely restricted in the U.S. Ge sued under the False Claims Act in 2010, and the suit was recently unsealed. The Justice Department decided not to intervene in the suit, after reviewing the claim, but the plaintiff hopes that additional evidence will be enough to persuade federal regulators to take a second look.

Nina, owner of NinaRotz.com, is a freelance writer and blogger. Nina’s work has been published and linked on Associated Content, Yahoo! Shine, Yahoo! Voices, eHow, Live Strong, CNN, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, as well as various online magazines and blogs.

When the original Kindle made its debut in 2007, Amazon set book prices at $9.99 to attract readers to the digital format. The traditional book-selling model allows retailers such as Barnes and Noble to buy books at wholesale prices from publishers and then set their own prices. At the time, publishers were unhappy with Amazon’s model of pricing e-books at about $9.99, lower rate than the cost of many paper books. Publishers Weekly reported that “Amazon had been asking for a steeper wholesale discount on books,” putting pressure on publishers to change their terms for e-books to be more favorable toward Amazon. Then Apple entered the e-book market with its revolutionary iPad tablet. Apple allowed publishers to dictate prices and split the proceeds. Apple commanded 30 percent of sales, and publishers collected the remainder. Publishers used Apple’s format to negotiate the terms of their deal with Amazon.

Today, the nation’s biggest book publishers decide how much a consumer will pay for an e-book through both Apple and Amazon, with prices ranging from $12.99 to $14.99. Federal regulators charge Apple and the publishers with purposefully conspiring to raise e-book prices on Apple’s popular mobile devices. The Justice Department’s threat to sue is real, reports the Wall Street Journal. The publishers argue that Apple’s business model introduced more competition by preventing Amazon from monopolizing the e-book market.

The digital book market continues to show growth. According to an estimate by Yankee Group, e-book markets can expect U.S. consumers to buy 381 million e-books by next year, four times what they bought in 2010.

Any regulatory limits on Apple’s digital book pricing could benefit the consumer, however, if it allowed Amazon to offer lower prices for e-books again. Consumers could go back to enjoying anywhere from $2 to $5 savings per e-book, perhaps further encouraging the growth of the digital media market. It is unclear if any legal action would have an impact on Apple’s finances. A majority of Apple’s revenue comes from the sale of mobile devices such as the iPhone and iPad, and not from the music, books and apps content sold on company’s iBookstore.

Nina, owner of NinaRotz.com, is a freelance writer and blogger. Nina’s work has been published and linked on Associated Content, Yahoo! Shine, Yahoo! Voices, eHow, Live Strong, CNN, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, as well as various online magazines and blogs.

Jiali Han and teammates wrote in the Journal of Clinical Oncology, “We investigated whether frequency of tanning bed use during high school/college and at ages 25 to 36 years were associated with a risk of basal cell carcinoma, squamous cell carcinoma and melanoma.”
“Our data provide evidence for a dose-response relationship between tanning bed use and the risk of skin cancers, especially basal cell carcinoma, and the association is stronger for patients with a younger age at exposure,” said Han.
During the study, of the 730,000 women, just 349 received melanoma diagnosis, the deadliest form of skin cancer, and 5,500 received basal cell carcinoma diagnosis. Women in the study who used tanning beds at least four times per year between high school and age 35 were 15 percent more likely to develop basal cell carcinoma than non-users of tanning beds. The research found similar risks tied to melanoma and squamous cell carcinoma, a skin cancer that, like basal cell, has a high cure rate.
The findings also suggested that there might be a higher risk the earlier an individual starts tanning. Women who had used tanning beds at least seven times a year during high school and college were 73 percent more likely than non-users to receive a basal cell carcinoma diagnosis, said Han. Han’s team wrote that the study supports the idea of warning the public about future use of tanning beds and boost the argument for restrictions on salons.
Limiting exposure to a few trips to the tanning salon each year reduces the risk of skin cancer. Alternatives such as sunless tanning lotions and sprays have no known skin cancer risks. Protective eyewear use while tanning helps protect eyes from ultraviolet light damage to cornea and retina. A number of countries around the world have banned minors from using tanning beds. Some U.S. states restrict minors from using indoor tanning devices, or require a parental approval. Last year, California became the first U.S. state to ban anyone under 18-years-old from using indoor tanning beds in salons.

Nina, owner of NinaRotz.com, is a freelance writer and blogger. Nina’s work has been published and linked on Associated Content, Yahoo! Shine, Yahoo! Voices, eHow, Live Strong, CNN, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, as well as various online magazines and blogs.

The two men were a crew on their way to film mining sites in the nearby area for an upcoming documentary. They were staying at the Kumarina Roadhouse and Tavern, near Meekatharra. The men had been staying at the Tavern for the previous three days and were booked for an additional three weeks to complete the survey and film project. The survey was under way at the time of the crash. The Australian Maritime Authority was dispatched to the scene where the three men were pronounced dead at the scene and the fourth was flown to a nearby station, and then later taken by helicopter to Perth for further examination.

DeGruy and Wight were both collaborators with James Cameron on several deep-sea documentaries. Degruy won several Emmys and British Academy of Film and Television Awards over the past 30 years, and worked on films that include the Blue Planet series and Last Mysteries of the Titanic. DeGruy also hosted deep-sea film production for PBS, BBC and National Geographic. Along with the television and movie projects, he was also an event speaker and interviewer. He is survived by his wife and two children.

Wight produced dozens of films over the past 20 years, as well as popular documentaries that include Ghosts of the Abyss and Expedition: Bismarck and Last Mysteries of the Titanic. Wight worked with Cameron to co-produce the film Sanctum 3D which was a box office smash in Australia in 2010. Wight is survived by his wife and son.

National Geographic released a statement saying “They died doing exactly what they loved most, heading out to sea on a new and personally challenging expedition…They were passionate storytellers who lived by the explorer’s code of humour, empathy, optimism, and courage. Their deaths are a tremendous loss for the world of underwater exploration, conservation and film-making.”

The Australian Transport Safety Bureau (ATSB) has assigned a team of investigators to the crash, as the cause of the crash is yet to be determined.  Aviation safety advocate and pilot of 21 years Ron Goldman of Baum Hedlund law released as statement:

 ”It is particularly distressing to hear of yet another fatal R-44 crash. The alarming frequency of Robinson Helicopter crashes suggests to me a serious, and systemic, disregard for good engineering practices and procedures, and compromises that endanger the lives of all who fly in these machines. “

There have been several helicopter crashes over the past few years in Australia, including a crash in South Australia that killed three ABC employees in August, and a separate crash that killed Jillian Jenyns, a 48-year-old Kimberly pastoralist in July.

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE :

<img class="alignleft

wp-image-2855″ style=”border-image: initial; border-width: 3px; border-color: black; border-style: solid;” title=”actos” src=”http://www.salient-news.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/actos.jpg” alt=”" width=”210″ height=”210″ />Los Angeles, California, December 29, 2011 – - Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, P.C. (www.baumhedlundlaw.com) has filed three lawsuits today against Japanese-based Takeda Pharmaceuticals and its subsidiaries on behalf of three California residents and their spouses alleging the diabetes drug Actos caused their bladder cancer.

The 12-count complaints seek compensatory damages on behalf of Gerard Aina and his wife Joyce of Ventura County (BC476063), John Loos and his wife Bibiana of San Bernardino County (BC476062), and Andrea Neubo and her husband Jeffrey of Orange County (BC476064).

The plaintiffs allege that Takeda Pharmaceuticals knew or should have known that Actos use in humans would cause bladder cancer and that Takeda possessed pre-clinical scientific studies, including animal evidence, which signaled that bladder cancer risk needed to be further tested; all prior to Takeda applying for and obtaining approval for Actos. In fact, plaintiffs allege that Takeda has known since the early 2000’s that human clinical trials revealed Actos causes bladder cancer.

The lawsuits, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, also allege that for over 10 years and to date, Takeda concealed and failed to completely disclose its knowledge that Actos was associated with or could cause bladder cancer or its knowledge that it had failed to fully study and test regarding that risk.

“Diabetes patients take medication to improve their health, not make it worse,” stated the families’ attorney, Cynthia Garber, also an R.N. “The company should have warned healthcare workers and patients of the risks of bladder cancer associated with Actos. Takeda should be held accountable for their wrong-doing.”

A handful of U.S. District judges will likely decide in early January as to where the Actos bladder cancer cases filed in federal courts will be consolidated. The first meeting concerning coordinating the discovery and litigation on the Actos cases was held on December 1, 2011 in Savannah, Georgia before the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation (JPML).

Another hearing is scheduled in Los Angeles at Central Civil West Courthouse, Los Angeles Superior Court on January 4, 2012 before the Judicial Council Coordination Proceeding (JCCP) to coordinate and consolidate the Actos bladder cancer cases filed in California state courts.

We estimate that hundreds of cases have been filed and that this number could reach thousands based on the wide use of the drug.

Actos [pioglitazone] received U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approval in 1999 to treat Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus and the plaintiffs all allege personal injury caused by the drug, including; bladder cancer and related sequelae, pain and suffering, bodily impairment, mental anguish, diminished enjoyment of life as well as economic loss and other special damages.

Drug watchdogs around the world have recently reviewed the use of Actos. In France on June 7, 2011 the Caisse nationale de l’assurance maladie published a report which concluded that there is a statistically significant association between exposure to Actos and bladder cancer and that the risk increased with exposure longer than one year.

Two days later the European Medicine Agency suspended the use of Actos. This was followed by Germany’s Federal Institute for Drugs and Medical Devices suspending the use of the drug. Health Canada is currently undertaking a review of the drug.

The FDA has not yet suspended Actos in the U.S. but on June 15, 2011 the FDA issued a Public Safety Announcement informing the public that use of the diabetes medication Actos (pioglitazone) for more than one year may be associated with an increased risk of bladder cancer. It further stated that information about this risk will added to the Warnings and Precautions section of the label for pioglitazone-containing medicines. The patient Medication Guide for these medicines will also be revised to include information on the risk of bladder cancer. The FDA also recommended that healthcare professionals tell their diabetes patients diagnosed with bladder cancer to stop taking Actos or pioglitazone.

Earlier this month, Bloomberg News reported that millions of people switched from the controversial diabetes drug Avandia to Actos, after Avandia was linked to heart attacks and cardiovascular death. The sales of Actos rose from about $3 billion in 2006 to almost $5 billion last year. GlaxoSmithKline, manufacturers of Avandia, has paid more than $6 billion for legal costs tied to Avandia and other medicines.

About Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman, P.C.

Baum, Hedlund, Aristei & Goldman has successfully represented clients harmed by medications in over 4,000 individual personal injury and wrongful death cases, in addition to representing consumers in multiple pharmaceutical class actions against major pharmaceutical companies such as Alpha Therapeutic, Armour Pharmaceutical Co., Baxter Health Care Corp, Bayer Corp., Dalkon Shield, Eli Lilly, GlaxoSmithKline, and Pfizer.

Our team of lawyers working on the Actos bladder cancer cases have an in depth understanding of biomedical research, clinical trials, statistics, the pharmaceutical industry and marketing, as well as successful and effective discovery procedures and extensive work with experts on complicated scientific issues because of their years of experience related to Baum Hedlund’s past pharmaceutical litigation.

Pavilion, Wyoming located about 230 miles northeast of Salt Lake city is a small community surrounded by a natural gas well field, (up to 150 wells), owned and operated by Alberta based Encana Corporation. Encana uses hydraulic fracturing or “Fracking”, a controversial technology employed to recover and enhance natural gas​ and oil production from deep shale deposits in the ground.

Responding to years of ongoing complaints from Pavilion residents about the water quality of their private drinking water wells, the EPA started working with state, local authorities and Encana three years ago. The EPA drilled two deep water monitoring test wells and began to test and assess the quality of the residents drinking water and to identify potential sources of contamination.

On December 8th after two years of testing, the EPA released a preliminary draft report indicating that ground water in the Pavilion aquifer contains methane, benzene, other petroleum hydrocarbons and other chemical compounds, likely associated with these type(s) of gas production practices.

The EPA said its announcement is the first step in a process of opening up its findings for review by the public and other scientists. “EPA’s highest priority remains ensuring that Pavilion residents have access to safe drinking water,” said Jim Martin, EPA regional administrator in Denver. “We look forward to having these findings in the draft report informed by a transparent and public review process.” – “We will continue to work cooperatively with the State, Tribes, Encana and the community to secure long-term drinking water solutions.

This year the US House of Representatives investigative report on the chemicals used in hydraulic fracturing shows that of the 750 compounds in hydraulic fracturing products, “more than 650 of these products contained chemicals that are known or possible human carcinogens, regulated under the Safe Drinking Water Act, or listed as hazardous air pollutants.” (Wiki)

In another study in 2011, titled “Natural Gas Operations from a Public Health Perspective” and published in Human and Ecological Risk Assessment: An International Journal identified 632 chemicals used in natural gas operations. Only 353 of these are well-described in the scientific literature; and of these, more than 75% could affect skin, eyes, respiratory and gastrointestinal systems; roughly 40-50% could affect the brain and nervous, immune and cardiovascular systems and the kidneys; 37% could affect the endocrine system; and 25% were carcinogens and mutagens. The study indicated possible long-term health effects that might not appear immediately. The study recommended full disclosure of all products used, along with extensive air and water monitoring near natural gas operations; it also recommended that fracking’s exemption from regulation under the US Safe Drinking Water Act be rescinded. (Wiki)

“In Wyoming, EPA is recognizing what experts — along with families in fracking communities across the country — have known for some time,” Kate Sinding, an attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council in New York City, said in an e-mail Thursday. “Fracking poses serious threats to safe drinking water.”

2010 Weather: record temperatures sparked devastating forest fires across Siberia, areas of Pakistan and India experienced unprecedented flooding.

 2011 Weather: large areas of China are suffering from intense drought, the continuing flood crisis in Thailand. In the U.S. the Mississippi and Missouri Rivers experienced record-breaking flooding, the severe ongoing drought in Texas and neighboring states, Hurricane Irene battering the east coast and now the freak snowstorm in the North East on the weekend. The dollar figure for damage in these disasters is in the billions.

The draft copy of the IPCC report says global warming will generate more frequent similar weather extremes of this type, with the severity of the impacts leaving some regions more vulnerable than others.

Some conclusions of the report are:

• It is “virtually certain” 99-100 per cent that the frequency and magnitude of daily temperature extremes will increase over the 21st century on a global scale
• It is “very likely” (90-100 per cent certainty) that the length, frequency and or intensity of warm spells, including heat waves, will increase over most land areas
• Peak temperatures are “likely” (66-100 per cent certainty) to increase, compared with the late 20th century, up to 3C by 2050, and 5C by 2100
• Heavy rain and snowfall is likely to increase over the next century over many regions, especially in the tropics and at high latitudes
• Droughts will likely intensify in other areas, notably the Mediterranean region, central Europe, North America, northeastern Brazil and southern Africa.

The overall picture that emerges is of increased volatility and frequency of dangerous weather, leading to a sharply rising risk for large numbers of people in coming decades.