|
Post by Master Kim on Sept 25, 2014 23:07:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Sept 27, 2014 19:13:26 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Oct 8, 2014 16:02:25 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Oct 9, 2014 20:01:51 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Oct 9, 2014 22:43:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Oct 28, 2014 11:38:52 GMT -5
The Nine GE Crops on the Market in the U.S.: Corn Soybeans Canola Cotton Sugar Beets Alfalfa Hawaiian Papaya Zucchini Yellow Crookneck Squash (FlavrSavrTomatoes were the first genetically modified foods to come on the market, but are no longer cultivated today.) Three GE crops account for the vast majority of acres planted to GMOs around the world – corn, soybeans, and cotton. Five countries produce 90% of the world’s genetically engineered crops: Argentina, Brazil, Canada, India and the United States..... How Common Are Genetically Engineered Foods? - justlabelit.org/about-ge-foods/ge-crop-history/?2014TakePart=
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Oct 30, 2014 16:19:41 GMT -5
Milk intake and risk of mortality and fractures in women and men: cohort studiesAbstractObjective: To examine whether high milk consumption is associated with mortality and fractures in women and men. Design: Cohort studies. Setting: Three counties in central Sweden. Participants: Two large Swedish cohorts, one with 61 433 women (39-74 years at baseline 1987-90) and one with 45 339 men (45-79 years at baseline 1997), were administered food frequency questionnaires. The women responded to a second food frequency questionnaire in 1997. Main outcome measure: Multivariable survival models were applied to determine the association between milk consumption and time to mortality or fracture. Results: During a mean follow-up of 20.1 years, 15 541 women died and 17 252 had a fracture, of whom 4259 had a hip fracture. In the male cohort with a mean follow-up of 11.2 years, 10 112 men died and 5066 had a fracture, with 1166 hip fracture cases. In women the adjusted mortality hazard ratio for three or more glasses of milk a day compared with less than one glass a day was 1.93 (95% confidence interval 1.80 to 2.06). For every glass of milk, the adjusted hazard ratio of all cause mortality was 1.15 (1.13 to 1.17) in women and 1.03 (1.01 to 1.04) in men. For every glass of milk in women no reduction was observed in fracture risk with higher milk consumption for any fracture (1.02, 1.00 to 1.04) or for hip fracture (1.09, 1.05 to 1.13). The corresponding adjusted hazard ratios in men were 1.01 (0.99 to 1.03) and 1.03 (0.99 to 1.07). In subsamples of two additional cohorts, one in males and one in females, a positive association was seen between milk intake and both urine 8-iso-PGF2α (a biomarker of oxidative stress) and serum interleukin 6 (a main inflammatory biomarker). Conclusions: High milk intake was associated with higher mortality in one cohort of women and in another cohort of men, and with higher fracture incidence in women. Given the observational study designs with the inherent possibility of residual confounding and reverse causation phenomena, a cautious interpretation of the results is recommended..... Milk intake and risk of mortality and fractures in women and men: cohort studies - www.bmj.com/content/349/bmj.g6015
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Nov 3, 2014 22:35:04 GMT -5
McDonald's infamous pork sandwich is the latest menu item to have its origins revealed. When the compressed pork-slurry sandwich known as the McRib last appeared at drive-throughs across the county, a photo of the uncooked, unsauced meat popped up on social media and proceeded to gross a lot of people out. The sandwich has returned yet again, but this year, we’re dealing with a very different McDonald’s—one that’s rather desperate for you to understand just where your fast-food order came from and how it was made. So the billboards pronouncing the return of the McRib are illustrated with a pork-butchering diagram (subtext: This is real meat!), and the company is superseding some lousy cell-phone photo of the raw product with a high-gloss video showing the inside of the factory where the faux ribs are manufactured..... The McRib Is Back—and This Is How It’s Made - www.takepart.com/video/2014/11/03/how-mcrib-made?cmpid=foodinc-fb
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Nov 4, 2014 13:12:04 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Nov 12, 2014 19:25:46 GMT -5
This powerful film changed the way millions of Americans eat. Find out why. The Impact of 'Food, Inc.' Lives OnFood, Inc. revealed powerful truths about the American food supply, from the inhumane treatment of factory farmed animals to the dangers of GMOs. Been a while since you've seen the film? We've compiled some of the most shocking facts from the movie. Read them to remind yourself why choosing sustainable, ethical food is so important—then share the info with those you love. Click through the gallery to see 18 truths you'll never forget..... 18 Food, Inc.’ Facts Everyone Should Know - www.takepart.com/photos/food-inc-facts/the-impact-of-food-inc-lives-on-
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Nov 19, 2014 19:25:38 GMT -5
We're not Roundup Ready. It's time for A New Resistance!40 years ago, a chemical was born. It's in our food, water, air, soil, blood, urine and breast milk. Glyphosate. It is the key ingredient in "Roundup," a broad-spectrum weed killer developed by Monsanto. It has become the number one selling herbicide worldwide, due to the increase in the planting of Monsanto’s Roundup Ready Crops, which are genetically engineered to withstand multiple applications of the weed killer during the growth cycle. It is also used in residential gardens and neighborhood parks around the world. For 20 + years Monsanto has claimed that this proprietary weed killer is safe. But a host of recent studies have linked Roundup and glyphosate to an alarming number of diseases threatening animal and human health; including obesity, infertility, cancer, celiac disease, gluten intolerance, irritable bowel syndrome, autism and Alzheimer’s Disease. Also, we now understand that it is inside our bodies. More importantly, it is entering the bodies of our newborn children through breast milk. In July 2013, despite countless letters and documents submitted in protest, the Environmental Protection Agency raised the maximum allowable residues of glyphosate in our food (most likely to accommodate the levels already routinely detected) - up to 30 times higher. Now officials are attempting to raise the allowable chemical residue of glyphosate in many important food crops that we eat everyday, including vegetables such as carrots, sweet potatoes, flax and sunflower seeds. The current allowable levels are already many times higher than has been shown to destroy the gut bacteria of chickens… so what is it doing to us? It is time to investigate glyphosate’s impact on human health and the environment. It's time to stop raising the residue limits for a chemical that has potentially harmful effects on our health. It's time to stop the use of glyphosate altogether, unless and until peer-reviewed independent studies of glyphosate prove its use to be unquestionably safe..... We're not Roundup Ready. It's time for A New Resistance! -
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Nov 19, 2014 22:11:58 GMT -5
Documents reveal how poultry firms systematically feed antibiotics to flocksPervasive use fuels concerns about impact on human health, emergence of resistant superbugs Major U.S. poultry firms are administering antibiotics to their flocks far more pervasively than regulators realize, posing a potential risk to human health. Internal records examined by Reuters reveal that some of the nation’s largest poultry producers routinely feed chickens an array of antibiotics – not just when sickness strikes, but as a standard practice over most of the birds’ lives. In every instance of antibiotic use identified by Reuters, the doses were at the low levels that scientists say are especially conducive to the growth of so-called superbugs, bacteria that gain resistance to conventional medicines used to treat people. Some of the antibiotics belong to categories considered medically important to humans. The internal documents contain details on how five major companies - Tyson Foods, Pilgrim’s Pride, Perdue Farms, George’s and Koch Foods - medicate some of their flocks. The documented evidence of routine use of antibiotics for long durations was “astonishing,” said Donald Kennedy, a former U.S. Food and Drug Administration commissioner. Kennedy, president emeritus of Stanford University, said such widespread use of the drugs for extended periods can create a “systematic source of antibiotic resistance” in bacteria, the risks of which are not fully understood. “This could be an even larger piece of the antibiotic-resistance problem than I had thought,” Kennedy said..... Documents reveal how poultry firms systematically feed antibiotics to flocks - www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/farmaceuticals-the-drugs-fed-to-farm-animals-and-the-risks-posed-to-humans/
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Dec 1, 2014 17:10:55 GMT -5
Why Drinking Milk Is Rocket Fuel For Cancer
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Dec 26, 2014 10:59:25 GMT -5
Nightmare on Elm Street’s Dinner Table. Thank you, Monsanto! - drrimatruthreports.com/gm-files-horrifying-new-disease-contains-identical-material-to-gm-food/Just in case you thought it was fine to eat Genetically Modified foods (better identified as “FrankenFoods”), along comes a study which makes it clear that you are eating this make believe non-food at your own peril and, worse yet, you are feeding it to your kids at their peril as well. It is important to note that Codex Alimentarius, which sets standards for the international trade of food, permits genetically modified foods and makes no effort to limit, control or eliminate them. In fact, the US has been trying for years to prevent the labeling of GM foods and seed in international trade to emulate its domestic policy which prohibits any label indication that foods contain GM ingredients, as 75-80% of all foods sold in the US do. Now it appears that the increasingly prevalent nightmare of a disease called “Morgellon’s Disease” may be a result of GM crops and food. Morgellon’s Disease was first described when a woman’s 3 year old son developed rashes and intensely itchy sores which produced weird multicolor fibers emerging from his skin. She put up a website about the condition in 2001 and named it “Morgellons Disease” after a 17th century report of a similar affliction. As it always does, the allopathic community of Western, drug-oriented physicians labeled sufferers as delusional. As a physician, I have a great deal of difficulty explaining how a delusion can produce colored fibers which protrude from the skin and continue to grow in a petri dish. Be that as it may, the multicolored fibers produced by the “delusion” have been analyzed and we now know that Morgellon’s Disease is no longer rare, nor is it mysterious any longer. A study of the fibers shows that they contain DNA from both a fungus and a bacterium which are used in the commercial preparation of genetically modified foods and non-food crops (such as cotton). The fibers themselves are primarily cellulose, which the human body cannot breakdown or manufacture. So GM technology apparently has, like Professor Frankenstein, found a way to animate the non living. These fibers twist and twine, grow and divide. In short, living beneath the skin of people, they form parasitic lesions out of what should be non-living material but which, through the horror of genetic modification, has taken on the characteristics of a living thing. The symptoms are so unbearable that a number of people suffering from the disorder have committed suicide rather than deal with the unbearable pain, constant feeling of something very much like an insect crawling without stop beneath the skin and unbearable itching any longer. Of course, it is possible to speculate that the attitude of most physicians that the condition is a mental aberration rather than a physical one may not have helped these poor souls to cope with their affliction.....
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Dec 29, 2014 21:06:44 GMT -5
50 HARMFUL EFFECTS OF GENETICALLY MODIFIED (GM) FOODS In a sentence - www.raw-wisdom.com/50harmful. This article outlines the many harmful effects of GM or genetically-modified foods (known also as genetically-engineered foods) and representng lab-created GMOs or genetically-modified organisms. We are confronted with what is undoubtedly the single most potent technology the world has ever known - more powerful even than atomic energy. Yet it is being released throughout our environment and deployed with superficial or no risk assessments - as if no one needs to worry an iota about its unparalleled powers to harm life as we know it - and for all future generations. IntroductionWhat is called "biotechnology" is a vital issue that impacts all of us. Largely between 1997 and 1999, genetically modified (GM) food ingredients suddenly appeared in 2/3rds of all US processed foods. This food alteration was fueled by a single Supreme Court ruling. It allowed, for the first time, the patenting of life forms for commercialization. Since then thousands of applications for experimental genetically-modified (GM) organisms, including quite bizarre GMOs, have been filed with the US Patent Office alone, and many more abroad. Furthermore an economic war broke out to own equity in firms that legally claimed such patent rights or the means to control not only genetically modified organisms but vast reaches of human food supplies. This has been the behind-the-scenes and key factor for some of the largest and rapid agri-chemical firm mergers in history. The merger of Pioneer Hi-Bed and Dupont (1997), Novartis AG and AstraZeneca PLC (2000), plus Dow's merger with Rohm and Haas (2001) are three prominent examples, Few consumers are aware this has been going on and is ever continuing. Yet if you recently ate soya sauce in a Chinese restaurant, munched popcorn in a movie theatre, or indulged in an occasional candy bar - you've undoubtedly ingested this new type of food. You may have, at the time, known exactly how much salt, fat and carbohydrates were in each of these foods because regulations mandate their labeling for dietary purposes. But you would not know if the bulk of these foods, and literally every cell had been genetically altered! In just those three years, as much as 1/4th of all American agricultural lands or 70-80 million acres were quickly converted to raise genetically-modified (GM) food and crops. And in the race to increase GM crop production verses organics, the former is winning. For details, see our article Who is Winning The Race Between GM Global and Organic Crop Production?.....
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Dec 29, 2014 21:20:11 GMT -5
Stunning Corn Comparison: GMO versus NON GMO - www.momsacrossamerica.com/stunning_corn_comparison_gmo_versus_non_gmoThe claims that "There is no difference between GMO corn and NON Gmo corn" are false. Yesterday while on a playdate at the lake, Vince from De Dell Seed Company, Canada's only NON GMO corn seed company called me to support the march and Americans finding out about GMOs. He emailed me this stunning report, clearly showing the nutritional value difference between GMO corn and NON GMO corn. I was floored. And at the same time, not totally surprised because Glyphosate draws out the vital nutrients of living things and GMO corn is covered with it. The important thing to note in these deficiencies is that these are exactly the deficiencies in a human being that lead to susceptibility to sickness, disorders and cancer. People who have osteoporosis are low in calcium and magnesium, people who have cancer are low in maganese. The list goes on and on. GMO Corn has 14 ppm of Calcium and NON GMO corn has 6130 ppm. 437 X more. GMO corn has 2 ppm of Magnesium and NON GMO corn has 113ppm. 56 X more. GMO corn has 2 ppm of Manganese and NON GMO corn has 14ppm. 7X more. Look at the levels of Formaldehyde and Glyphosate IN the corn! The EPA standards for Glyphosate in water in America is .7ppm. European Tests showed organ damage to animals at .1ppb (.0001ppm) of Glyphosate in water. Our water levels allow glyphosate 7,000X higher than what has been shown to be toxic in animals. This corn has 13 ppm! 130,000 times higher than what is toxic in water!* In a study that Dr. Huber reported, on Elizabeth Dougherty's Talk Radio, .97 ppm of formeldehyde showed to be toxic in ingestion to animals. This corn has 200X that! That is why the animals , given a choice will not eat it at all, they can smell the formeldehyde! Please share this report with your legislature, farmers, news editors, school district food services and Moms. We will no longer be feeding our children food with nutritional deficiencies, foreign proteins, toxins, sprayed with Glyphosate, or injected with pesticides. Nor will we be fed their lies of safety!
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jan 15, 2015 18:14:54 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Feb 14, 2015 17:16:10 GMT -5
Pennsylvania Researchers Discover Glyphosate Herbicide in Honey and Soy Sauce - sustainablepulse.com/2015/02/12/pennsylvania-researchers-discover-glyphosate-herbicide-honey-soy-sauce/#.VNzBWy71YZxResearchers from Abraxis LLC and Boston University have further confirmed that the world’s most used herbicide – glyphosate – is widespread in food products around the globe. The researchers tested honey, pancake and corn syrup, soy sauce, soy milk and tofu purchased in the Philadelphia, US metropolitan area. Samples of honey (sixty nine), pancake and corn syrup (twenty six), soy sauce (twenty eight), soy milk (eleven), and tofu (twenty) purchased in the Philadelphia, US metropolitan area in 2014 were analyzed for glyphosate residue using ELISA testing. The minimum limit of quantification (LOQ) of the method were determined for honey, pancake syrup, and corn syrup to be 15 ppb; soy sauce, soy milk, and tofu 75 ppb. This means that even if the results were negative for some products they could have also contained glyphosate at levels under the minimum limit. Glyphosate residues above the minimum limit of quantification were not found in pancake and corn syrup, soy milk, and tofu. However, the most shocking results were found in honey: Of the sixty-nine honey samples analyzed, forty-one samples, or fifty-nine percent (59%), had glyphosate concentrations above the method LOQ (15 ppb), with a concentration range between 17 and 163 ppb and a mean of 64 ppb. Even more surprisingly five of the eleven organic honey samples, or forty-five percent (45%), contained glyphosate concentrations above the method LOQ, with a range of 26 to 93 ppb and a mean of 50 ppb. Of the fifty-eight non-organic honey samples, thirty-six samples, or sixty-two percent (62%), contained glyphosate concentrations above the method LOQ, with a range of 17 to 163 ppb and a mean of 66 ppb. Sustainable Pulse Director Henry Rowlands reacted Thursday to the published results; “This sad news shows just how widespread glyphosate is in our food. With the increase in GM crops being cultivated worldwide it is becoming increasingly difficult to avoid. If you ask anyone if they feel there should be ‘allowed’ levels of toxic chemicals such as glyphosate in their bodies the answer will of course always be ‘No’. It is a fact that the scientific and regulatory process cannot evidence ‘safe’ levels for these chemicals.” In addition to comparison of production method (organic vs. conventional), the honey results were evaluated according to pollen source and by country of origin, grouped by GMO usage (prohibited, limited, or permitted). The results showed that honey from countries that permit GM crops contained far more glyphosate than honey from countries which limit or prohibit the cultivation of GM crops, with the levels in the U.S. by far the highest. Glyphosate concentrations above the method LOQ (75 ppb) were also found in ten of the twenty-eight soy sauce samples evaluated (36%), with a concentration range between 88 and 564 ppb and a mean of 242 ppb; all organic soy sauce samples tested were below the method LOQ. Glyphosate has also been found in American women’s breast milk and Kellogg’s Froot Loops in recent tests. All of this research raises red flags that the FDA have ignored. Despite testing for hundreds of pesticides in food commodities, the USDA does not test for glyphosate residues. Why would the USDA not test for residues of the most widely used herbicide in the world?
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Feb 28, 2015 20:53:00 GMT -5
Study: Milk may not be very good for bones or the body - www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2014/10/31/study-milk-may-not-be-very-good-for-bones-or-the-body/The Washington Post 10/31/2014 by Abby Phillip is a general assignment national reporter for the Washington Post. She can be reached at abby.phillip@washpost.com. On Twitter: @abbydphillip Milk is often touted as one of nature's most perfect foods -- and for good reason. It contains many essential nutrients and in particular, the high calcium content has been touted as crucial for good bone health when fortified with vitamin D, as it is in the United States. But a new study from researchers in Uppsala University in Sweden suggests that consuming more milk could actually be associated with higher mortality and bone fractures in women and higher mortality in men. “I've looked at fractures during the last 25 years. I've been puzzled by the question because there has again and again been a tendency of a higher risk of fracture with a higher intake of milk,” said the study's lead author Karl Michaelsson, a professor at Uppsala University. The study, published in the British Medical Journal, utilized data from two large, long-term Swedish studies of adult men and women, which asked about their dietary habits -- how much and what types of milk and dairy products they consumed. Women who consumed three or more glasses of milk a day had a higher risk of fracture and a higher risk of death. Men who drank three or more glasses of milk a day had a slightly higher risk of death -- mostly associated with cardiovascular death -- compared to those who drank less than one glass a day. And there was no reduced risk of fracture as milk consumption increased. Michaelsson's team also analyzed data from the two studies about the levels of a biological marker of stress in some of the participants. In both men and women, the amount of milk they consumed was also associated with higher levels of a biological stress marker -- oxidative stress -- which has been associated with aging, cancer and cardiovascular disease. Other studies have observed a similar -- and seemingly paradoxical -- relationship between the consumption of calcium-rich milk and bone fractures. Meta-analysis studies in 2007 and 2011 found that there was no association between hip fractures risk and milk consumption. But why milk consumption might be associated with mortality is a much more difficult question to answer. Notably, the association between fractures or mortality and dairy consumption was not seen with derivatives of milk, such as cheese, yogurt, sour milk, and other fermented products. In fact, in Michaelsson's analysis, each serving of cheese or fermented milk products reduced rates of mortality and hip fractures by 10-15 percent. According to Michaelsson, the results suggest that more research is needed to understand whether a specific component of milk -- a sugar called D-galactose-- might play a role in his findings. D-galactose is known to induce aging in animals, and is linked to increased oxidative stress and inflammation. “With fermented cheese the level of galactose is very low. It’s not as high as it is in milk,” Michaelsson said. “Yogurt also has the probiotic effect of bacteria.” The study is just the latest in a long string of evidence calling into question the health benefits of one of the most popular beverages nature has to offer. In addition to questions about the benefits of milk consumption for preventing hip fractures and preserving bone density, recent research has linked dairy to ailments, such as acne. Not to mention that about 65 percent of the world can’t digest the lactose found in generous quantities in milk -- and to a lesser extent in certain cheeses and yogurts -- after infancy. Recently, Americans -- and indeed much of the world -- have been coming down from their milk high for some time. Since the 1970s, milk consumption in the United States has dropped from about 1.5 cups a day to about 0.8 cups a day today. In some cases, Americans have replaced the drink at lunch and dinner with sugary drinks, such as juices and sodas. But also bottled water and sports drinks are now competing for their attention. But consumers are also now choosing plant-based “milk” products, such as soy, almond, and coconut milks. With evidence of health benefits of milk eroding with each passing year, some physicians have called into question government recommendations that most adults and adolescents consume up to three cups of milk a day. In children, encouraging milk consumption through the National School Lunch Program often takes the form of sugar-sweetened chocolate milk, which has sugar content similar to soda, points out David Ludwig, a Harvard professor of nutrition. In a 2013 paper Ludwig co-wrote, he suggested that there is not enough scientific evidence to support federal milk consumption recommendations. And in fact, he added, there is more evidence that humans -- who only recently began consuming milk with the domestication of large animals -- don’t need it at all. “Until very very recently, from an evolutionary perspective, humans would have consumed no milk products at all and would have consumed calcium from other sources,” Ludwig said. “Populations that drink no milk at all have perfectly fine bones. “Which isn’t to say that milk is necessarily unhelpful, we just lack a good evidence base for the recommendation that we consume such high levels of it.” Milk, by design, encourages rapid growth in animals through the naturally occurring presence of hormones, which Ludwig suggests could be deleterious to humans over the course of their life span. “In some situations growth is a good thing, but in others it's not,” Ludwig explained. “To be experiencing life-long over-stimulation of growth pathways could in theory increase risk for cancer.” Despite these concerns, there is still insufficient, definitive clinical evidence to make recommendations about whether people should continue to consume milk, Michaelsson noted. Still, he's aware that his research casts doubt on the benefits of long-held beliefs about milk. “This is how we expand our knowledge,” Michaelsson said. “But I'm fully aware that many aren't keen to hear these results.”
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Mar 1, 2015 19:14:28 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Apr 9, 2015 17:37:24 GMT -5
French researchers reveal the shocking truth about GM corn - hsionline.com/2014/07/14/hidden-poison/It’s like an evil monster that was let loose. And no one can get it back into its cage. The “Dr. Frankenstein” that created this genetically modified monster, Monsanto, is doing everything it can to keep you from finding out how dangerous it is. But this news is so important it just can’t be kept quiet. So when scientists in France were recently able to republish a shocking study they had done — one the industry tried to suppress — it was a big victory. A victory for the researchers and for us. Because the truth is that Monsanto’s GM corn is slowly but surely killing us. I smell a rat Two years ago French scientists published an alarming study. They discovered that rats eating Monsanto’s GM corn, the kind made to survive after being sprayed with its Roundup pesticide, suffered serious health effects. Things like severe organ damage and deadly tumors. And guess where they got the idea to do the study in the first place? Right out of Monsanto’s own research! Monsanto’s very own studies had found signs of toxicity in rats when they ate GM corn. But those studies were stopped after just 90 days! Unbelievably that’s all the testing that Monsanto did. The French team got hold of Monsanto’s data. They decided to repeat the studies, only now for two years. They wanted to see if those signs of toxicity developed into something more serious. And they sure did — big time. The rats died. And they died from giant cancerous tumors and damage to their livers and kidneys. The French researchers said that “serious diseases like organ damage and tumors take time to develop and become obvious.” Just testing the rats for 90 days was “too short” a time. But here’s where things started to smell like a rat — a great big genetically modified Monsanto rat. Last year, the journal where this study was published formally retracted it. This is unheard of in a scientific publication unless plagiarism or fraud is involved. But those French researchers just finally got that study republished in an open-source online journal. Now everyone will be able to learn just how dangerous this corn is. You see, you get a tiny dose of Roundup every time you eat GM corn. And corn is in a whole lot of food products. It’s used as a filler in processed food, in oils and even in soda — think high fructose corn syrup. Once you start looking at ingredients you’ll be shocked at how much corn you’re actually eating and drinking. Now, you’re only getting a tiny bit of Roundup residue, but a little bit goes a long way. That’s because Roundup can disrupt your hormones. And as Laura Vandenberg, a professor of environmental health sciences at the University of Maryland explains, it only takes the slightest change in our hormones to cause permanent damage. “Hormones act in the parts-per-billion” or trillion level, she said. “That’s like a drop of water in an Olympic-sized swimming pool.” The Roundup gets inside, and stays inside, of GM crops because it’s a “systemic” pesticide. And that’s exactly how it’s meant to work. The good news is that organic corn is still real — and not sprayed with Roundup. And lately, more and more companies, even big ones like General Mills, Kellogg’s and even Walmart have been hopping on the organic bandwagon with more and more products. And an easy way to avoid not just corn, but other GM foods as well, is with the non-GMO shopping guide put out by The Institute for Responsible Technology. Buying GMO-free foods is a way to tell Monsanto that you’re not a lab rat. And you won’t be part of its big experiment to see how many trillions it can make before everyone realizes what a big mistake it was to let its mad scientists take control of our food supply. You can download the shopping guide here. Sources: “Roundup herbicide linked to tumors, organ damage” Leah Zerbe, June 23, 2014, Rodale News, rodalenews.com “French scientists revive assault on pesticide, GM corn” Richard Ingham and Celine Serrat, June 24, 2014, Yahoo news, news.yahoo.com “New study: GMO sweet corn rare in U.S. supermarkets” Press release, Friends of the Earth, November 14, 2013, enewspf.com
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on May 19, 2015 17:30:54 GMT -5
McDonald's Destroyed the Gut Bacteria of a College Kid in 10 Days - www.yahoo.com/food/mcdonalds-destroyed-the-gut-bacteria-of-a-college-118784365977.htmlIt’s common knowledge that fast food isn’t exactly healthy, but just how unhealthy is it? According to Tim Spector, a professor of genetic epidemiology at King’s College London, it is devastating to a human’s gut bacteria. He writes in The Conversation, that eating that type of highly processed food can wreak total havoc on the healthy bacteria in a person’s digestive system. Spector wanted to find out just how bad McDonald’s is for gut bacteria for his upcoming book The Diet Myth. More: Study Says Fast Food Has Remained Consistently Unhealthy for Two DecadesSpector had his son, a student at the University of Aberystwyth, eat only McDonald’s for 10 days straight. Tom was allowed to eat Big Macs, chicken nuggets, fries, and Coca-Cola. Throughout the experiment, Tom sent his stool samples out to be analyzed by different labs. Tom notes that he felt fine for the first three days, but he started to slowly go “downhill.” He became lethargic and after a week, his friends said he had taken on a “strange grey” color. More: Con Artist Makes $4 Million Selling Fake In-N-Out Franchises in the Middle EastAs for the lab results, they were shocking. Spector writes that Tom’s gut bacteria were “devastated.” Over the 10 days, Tom lost nearly 1,400 types of bacteria species, or nearly 40 percent of his total variety. Even after two weeks of returning to a normal diet, the microbes in his gut did not recover. Spector notes that “the loss of [gut bacteria] diversity is a universal signal of ill health.” He adds that humans rely on the bacteria “to produce much of our essential nutrients and vitamins.” More: Penn Jillette’s Big Dumb American Crush on Howard Johnson’sMore: Watch Anthony Bourdain Extol the Virtues of In-N-Out Burger
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on May 19, 2015 17:48:38 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on May 30, 2015 17:28:55 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jun 2, 2015 20:33:32 GMT -5
Ending GMOs Now - www.i-sis.org.uk/Ending_GMOs_Now.phpISIS (Institute of Science In Society) Report 21/04/15 Global rejection sent Monsanto profits plummeting, farmers abandoning GM crops in record numbers, reclassification of glyphosate as probable carcinogen triggering fresh calls for bans and restrictions; GMOs failing old and new, while organic and non-GMO markets continue booming; the days of GMOs are numbered, let’s hasten the demise Dr Mae-Wan HoPlease circulate widely and repost, but you must give the URL of the original and preserve all the links back to articles on our website. If you find this report useful, please support ISIS by subscribing to our magazine Science in Society, and encourage your friends to do so. Or have a look at the ISIS bookstore for other publications Sign the petition to ban glyphosate here: secure.avaaz.org/en/monsanto_dont_silence_science_loc/The year 2015 is auspicious. It started with oil prices plunging to a five year low, sparking a downsizing wave in an industry desperate to rid itself of stranded assets as burgeoning renewable energies are making oil redundant and civil society grassroots movements are winning major campaigns to divest mega-investments from fossil fuels and leave oil in the ground (see [1] Age of Oil Ending? SiS 65). Simultaneously, a remarkable conjunction of events is boding ill for GMOs (genetically modified organisms). There is superb synergy between the end of oil and the end of the heavily oil-dependent GMO monoculture for a truly sustainable world under climate change, which we made clear in a comprehensive report [2] Food Futures Now -Organic -Sustainable -Fossil Fuel Free published in 2008. So let’s read the signs, and do our best to hasten the end of GMOs. Mass rejection of US GM corn exports and record losses GMO labelling fight reaches national level in the US Non-GMO and organic produce continue steep growth trajectory US farmers turn non GMO & organic in record numbers, GM traits fail, and Monsanto profits plummet Top selling herbicide reclassified a probable human carcinogen Reaction in USA, top GM producer in the world Reactions from second largest GM producer Brazil Reactions in third largest GM producer Argentina New GM crops failing dismally GMO myths thoroughly exposed To conclude For more detailed, Ending GMOs Now - www.i-sis.org.uk/Ending_GMOs_Now.php
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jun 2, 2015 21:32:13 GMT -5
Coca-Cola and PepsiCo Agree to Remove Flame Retardant Chemical from Their Products - articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2015/04/22/soda-flame-retardant-bvo.aspx?e_cid=20150422Z2_DNL_NB_art_1&utm_source=dnl&utm_medium=email&utm_content=art1&utm_campaign=20150422Z2_DNL_NB&et_cid=DM72996&et_rid=924551299April 22, 2015 By Dr. Mercola Bowing to public pressure, Coca-Cola and PepsiCo have both agreed to remove brominated vegetable oil (BVO) from all of their beverages in the near future. BVO was first patented as a flame retardant, but has also been added to many American sodas for decades. The problem is recent research shows that bromine builds up in your body, and in breast milk. BVO has resulted in some soda-drinkers requiring medical attention for skin lesions, memory loss, and nerve problems related to bromine overexposure, which is why Europe and Japan have banned this chemical from their food and beverages. Public pressure to remove BVO was suddenly fueled by a 2012 petition with more than 20,000 supporters, initiated by then-15-year-old girl Sarah Kavanagh who wanted chemicals removed from sports drinks like Gatorade.1 This is a great reminder about what a powerful force consumer pressure can be. If a 15-year-old girl can push through a petition with this much consequence, consider what YOU can do by voting with your pocket book, each and every day! Out with BVO—In with Franken-RosinsCoca-Cola vowed to remove BVO from its drinks by the end of 2014, but at present, it still appears to be included in some of Coca-Cola's products,2 specifically Fanta Orange, Fanta Orange Zero, and Fresca Original Citrus. PepsiCo removed BVO from Gatorade in 2013 and, following Coco-Cola’s May 5, 2014 announcement, said it would be dropping the chemical from the rest of its products, although it did not give a time frame.3 Coca-Cola says they add BVO to improve the stability of soft drinks, especially those with citrus flavorings. According to the San Diego Reader, “Without BVO, your favorite lemony-limy soda would look like the Gulf of Alaska in the wake of the Exxon-Valdez.4 Both Coca-Cola and Pepsi companies deny that their decisions to remove BVO are in any way health-related. Coca-Cola says it plans to replace BVO with sucrose acetate isobutyrate (SAIB) and glycerol ester of rosin (GEGR and GEWR). The safety of these additives is debatable, as very few studies exist. Gum rosins received a negative safety rating by the European Food Safety Authority.5 Meanwhile, Germany and other countries have found safer, more natural substitutes for BVO. For example, food chemist Walter Vetter at Germany's University of Hohenheim suggests American soda makers could easily replace BVO with hydrocolloids, which are used in many European sodas. Hydrocolloids are natural agents that achieve similar results, minus the health risks.6 It isn't clear why American beverage manufacturers are unwilling to swap out BVO for something like a hydrocolloid, but I would guess that their unwillingness to change most likely has something to do the cost. Coca-Cola and PepsiCo Are Not the Only Beverage Companies Adding BVOBrominated vegetable oil (BVO) is vegetable oil, derived from corn or soy and bonded with the element bromine. It's added to beverages as an emulsifier, to prevent the flavorings from separating and floating to the surface. According to Scientific American,7 the numerous bromine atoms in BVO weigh down the citrus flavoring so that it mixes with sugar water, or in the case of flame retardants, slows down chemical reactions that cause a fire (the effectiveness of which is debatable, by the way). Brominated flame retardants have lately undergone intense scrutiny, because research has shown that they are building up in people's bodies, including women's breast milk, around the world. Coca-Cola and Pepsi aren't the only beverages that contain this potentially hazardous ingredient, though.BVO is added to about 10 percent of all sodas sold in the US, as well as many energy and sports drinks and fruit drinks, including but not limited to the following brands: Diet Mountain Dew, Mountain Dew, Fanta Orange, Sunkist Pineapple, Gatorade Thirst Quencher Orange, Fresca Original Citrus, Powerade Fruit Punch and Strawberry Lemonade, Fresca Original Citrus, Crush Orange Soda, Safeway Grapefruit Diet Soda, Diet Sundrop, Squirt, Many Amp Energy Drinks, Great Value Sports Drinks, Wegmans Fruit Punch, Safeway Tom Collins Mix Beyond Soda, There Are Several Other Sources of BromineBVO is not the only source of bromine exposure you should be concerned about. You can be exposed to other forms from a variety of sources and products, from brominated flour to your asthma medication: Pesticides(specifically methyl bromide, used mainly on strawberries, predominantly in California) Baked goods and flour: potassium bromate is added to many as a "dough conditioner Drugs such as Atrovent Inhaler, Atrovent Nasal Spray, Pro-Banthine (for ulcers), and anesthesia agents Plastics, like those used to make computers and some polyethylene beverage bottles Flame retardants used in fabrics, carpets, upholstery, mattresses, and children's products Swimming pools and hot tubs: many use bromine-based treatments Bromine Can Do Significant Damage to Your ThyroidBromines are endocrine disruptors, and part of the halide family, a group of elements that also includes fluorine, chlorine, and iodine. Studies suggest that BVO can build up in human tissues, and animal studies have linked large doses to reproductive and behavioral issues. One characteristic of bromine that makes it detrimental to your health is that it competes for the same receptors your body uses to capture iodine. If you are exposed to a lot of bromine, your body will not hold on to iodine, which is needed by every tissue, including your thyroid gland. Iodine is crucial for proper thyroid function. Without iodine, your thyroid gland would be completely unable to produce thyroid hormone. Thirteen million Americans are estimated to have hypothyroidism, but the actual number is probably higher. Some experts claim that 10 to 40 percent of Americans have suboptimal thyroid function. If you are one of those with suboptimal thyroid, your thyroid gland itself may not be the problem. You may instead be suffering from iodine deficiency brought on by inadequate consumption of iodine-rich foods and/or excessive bromine exposure, which ends up blocking your iodine uptake. This problem appears in conventional blood tests as a glandular problem, but is actually a problem of nutrition and/or toxicity. The Risks of Bromine Reach Well Beyond Your ThyroidThe buildup of bromine in your body can result in iodine deficiency and bromine toxicity that can manifest a variety of serious health problems over time, including the following: Increased cancer risk: Iodine deficiency can increase your risk for cancers of the thyroid gland, breast, ovary, and prostate as a result of "bromide dominance" Infertility: One animal study found that rats receiving one percent BVO in their feed suffered impaired fertility, and at two percent, they became completely infertile15 Psychological/psychiatric problems: Because bromine is a central nervous system depressant, it can produce acute paranoia, psychosis, and other types of mental illness. In an audio interview, physician Jorge Flechas reported that between 1920 and 1960, at least 20 percent of all hospital admissions for "acute paranoid schizophrenia" were a result of common bromine exposure Skin rashes and lesions (bromoderma tuberosum): Severe acne, folliculitis, papules, pustules, and other skin eruptions Miscellaneous other problems: Fatigue, anorexia, abdominal pain, metallic taste, and cardiac arrhythmias (triggered by iodine depletion) Scientific American cites two case studies that illustrate how bromine toxicity can threaten your health. In 1997, emergency room doctors at University of California, Davis, reported a patient with severe bromine intoxication from drinking two to four liters of orange soda every day. He developed headaches, fatigue, ataxia (loss of muscle coordination), and memory loss. Then in 2003, a 63-year-old Ohio man developed ulcers on his swollen hands after drinking eight liters of Red Ruby Squirt every day for several months. The man was diagnosed with bromoderma, a rare skin hypersensitivity to bromine exposure. The patient quit drinking the brominated soft drink and months later recovered. Government and Industry Claim BVO Is 'Safe Enough'The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) permitted the use of BVO on an interim basis—meaning, temporary approval pending additional study—way back in 1970.22 This effectively means they did not feel there was enough evidence to support the designation of GRAS (Generally Regarded as Safe) without further scientific investigation. But four decades is not temporary! Yes, 44 years later, those studies have not been done and BVO is STILL on the "interim" list. Why? It boils down to one more example of how FDA favors policies that protect big industry at the expense of public health. According to the FDA, changing the status of BVO would be costly and is "not a public health priority" at this time. Other food additives that are in similar FDA limbo include saccharin, mannitol, and acrylonitrile. You are swimming in a sea of chemicals that are essentially untested—well, you and your children ARE the test subjects...23 In 1977, FDA established what it considered to be a safe limit for BVO in beverages—15 parts per million. But some scientists say that limit is based on thin data that is several decades old and should be revised.24,25 Toxicity testing has changed significantly over the past few decades. It is now possible to observe neurodevelopmental, hormonal, and reproductive changes across multiple generations of laboratory animals, not possible decades ago. Why Ditching Soda Should Be a Crucial Step in Your Health PlanThere are many reasons to banish soda from your diet, beyond BVO. Soda and other sweetened commercial beverages have essentially no nutritional benefits, but are loaded with other chemical additives and high amounts of refined sugar, typically in the form of high fructose corn syrup—or even worse, artificial sweeteners. The average 12-ounce can of soda contains 40 grams of sugar, at least half of which is fructose, so one can of soda alone exceeds your daily recommended allotment of fructose (15 grams/day) if you're insulin resistant, which about 80 percent of Americans are. Excess sugar has been unequivocally linked to diabetes, cardiovascular disease, liver disease, and many other serious health problems, so the less sugar you consume, the better. In order to break free, you may need to address the emotional component of your food cravings using tools such as Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). You can even tap along with Julie in the guided EFT video above. Be sure to check out our Turbo Tapping article, which is an extremely effective and simple tool to squelch your soda addiction quickly and painlessly. The most effective way to eliminate sugar cravings for good is to teach your body to use fat for fuel. Ditching carbs and adding healthy fat is a key component of this, which I discuss in my optimized nutrition plan. Intermittent fasting can also help your body make the transition from burning sugar to burning fat as its primary source of fuel. As for beverages, remember that nothing beats pure water when it comes to serving your body's needs for fluids. If you really feel the urge for a carbonated beverage, try sparkling mineral water with a squirt of lime or lemon juice, or sweetened with stevia or Luo Han, both of which are safe natural sweeteners. If you struggle with high blood pressure, high cholesterol, diabetes or extra weight, then you have insulin sensitivity issues and would likely benefit from avoiding ALL sweeteners. Sweetened beverages, whether sweetened by fructose, another form of sugar, or artificial sweeteners, are among the worst culprits in the fight against obesity and related health problems. Ditching ALL of these types of beverages can go a long way toward reducing your risk for chronic health problems and weight gain, not to mention your exposure to potentially dangerous chemical additives like BVO. What Are GMOs?GMOs are a product of genetic engineering, meaning their genetic makeup has been altered to induce a variety of “unique” traits to crops, such as making them drought-resistant or giving them “more nutrients.” GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I've stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be. Help Support GMO LabelingThe Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA)—Monsanto’s Evil Twin—is pulling out all the stops to keep you in the dark about what’s in your food. For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial control over American agriculture. For example, Monsanto has made many claims that glyphosate in Roundup is harmless to animals and humans. However, recently the World Health Organization (WHO) had their research team test glyphosate and have labeled it a probable carcinogen. Public opinion around the biotech industry's contamination of our food supply and destruction of our environment has reached the tipping point. We're fighting back. That's why I was the first to push for GMO labeling. I donated a significant sum to the first ballot initiative in California in 2012, which inspired others to donate to the campaign as well. We technically "lost the vote, but we are winning the war, as these labeling initiatives have raised a considerable amount of public awareness. The insanity has gone far enough, which is why I encourage you to boycott every single product owned by members of the GMA, including natural and organic brands. More than 80 percent of our support comes from individual consumers like you, who understand that real change comes from the grassroots. Recently, Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan) has reintroduced a bill (HR 1599) that would preempt states' rights to enact GMO labeling laws. This bill would create a federal government program to oversee guidelines for voluntary labeling of products that do not contain GMOs. It would specifically prohibit Congress or individual states from requiring mandatory labeling of GMO foods or ingredients. It would also allow food manufacturers to use the word "natural" on products that contain GMOs. TAKE ACTION NOW! Your local representatives need to hear from you! Please contact them today by CLICKING HERE. Thankfully, we have organizations like the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) to fight back against these junk food manufacturers, pesticide producers, and corporate giants.
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jul 13, 2015 9:53:22 GMT -5
GMO Food is Poison! Learn the Truth Watch - Fed Up [Full Documentary] 57 min 58 sec
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jul 21, 2015 18:35:44 GMT -5
Unlabeled GMO Potatoes Have Landed on Store Shelves; 6 Steps to Avoid Them - www.naturalblaze.com/2015/07/unlabeled-gmo-potatoes-have-landed-on.htmlTuesday, July 14, 2015 What a bag of the new GMO potatoes looks like as spotted in a New Orleans grocery store. PHOTO: GMO Free USA/Facebook Who really wants the new genetically modified potato in their shopping cart, anyway? Certainly not the consumers, who have been flocking away from Monsanto and other companies’ GMOs like the plague, buying organic food at a clip not seen years. And it’s certainly not the potato farmers, either: the National Potato Council itself even admitted that the new GMO potatoes from the company J.R. Simplot could cause financial losses in the billions for American farmers. “(There is) concern about the potential for GMO technology to disrupt potato exports valued at more than $1.6 billion,” Potato Council CEO John Keeling admitted in July 2014. He also said there needs to be clear labeling of the GMO potatoes, something that has not happened. But now, the genetically modified spuds that no one wanted have been found on store shelves, unlabeled and dangerously untested. Here’s what you must know to avoid them. Six Steps to Avoid the New GMO Potato Here’s how to identify the potatoes at the grocery store so you can avoid them: Check and see if the bag says “reduced bruising” in the top right corner Make sure the bag doesn’t say “fewer black spots” in the top right corner The bag in this case was labeled “White Russet Potatoes” The GMO potatoes will have a link to the J.R. Simplot website Buy Organic Potatoes whenever possible Consider buying Red Russet or other types of potatoes instead GMO potatoes were originally halted in Europe after a team of 30 researchers on a budget of 2 million euros in 1998 found serious potential health risks in genetically modified potatoes. But now a similar potato has landed on United States grocery store shelves, backed by the potato company J.R. Simplot. As noted in this post from the Facebook page GMO Free USA, customers have been spotting the GMO potatoes on grocery store shelves in New Orleans, LA (see picture above). Not Good Enough for McDonald’s (But Just Fine For You)As noted in this article from the website Natural Society, a petition of over 100,000 people to stop the potatoes, which even McDonald’s has rejected, was ignored by the USDA. The Simplot company says the potatoes help to reduce the amount of acrylamide (a carcinogen) when cooked. But few know the true effects of the GMO potatoes themselves on human health since there has been no long-term testing. Already Food & Water Watch has slammed the potatoes, saying, saying the “USDA has inexplicably failed to undertake the legally required rigorous and overarching analysis of the GE crops’ impacts or reasonably foreseeable consequences.” If that sounds like a cause for concern, you’re not alone. If you’d like to voice your opinion on these unlabeled GMO potatoes you can do so on the Simplot Facebook page by clicking here. You can also use the tips above to avoid the GMO potatoes for now, and do your best to support organic farmers every day so we can get these unwanted, dangerously untested GMOs out of our food supply.
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jul 22, 2015 19:11:21 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by Master Kim on Jul 23, 2015 20:05:29 GMT -5
|
|