Showing posts with label Nutrition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Nutrition. Show all posts

August 11, 2011

Hexane Soy

Here is another reason why we should only eat organic. Some of the so-called "natural" or "healthy" foods we think we are consuming are just the opposite. Soy is a controversial food as well, so I will be posting more articles about this as well. Thanks for reading. Amber 

Hexane Soy- click here to visit the articles website.

November 28th, 2010
The prohibition of hexane in the processing of organic foods, contrasting with its widespread use in non-organic veggie burgers, meat alternatives, nutrition bars and other “natural” foods, is a perfect example of the importance of the organic label.
A “natural” nutrition bar and a certified organic nutrition bar may look nearly identical to a consumer, other than price, but a behind-the-scenes examination of how they were manufactured, focusing on the soy protein ingredients, reveals the importance of purchasing certified organic food.
Organic foods provide a government-regulated, third-party-certified refuge from foods produced and processed with toxins and potentially dangerous chemicals. Federal standards for organic foods are created and enforced by the United States Department of Agriculture, and prohibit the use of synthetic inputs that threaten the environment and/or human health, including hexane.
Hexane is a byproduct of gasoline refining. It is a neurotoxin and a hazardous air pollutant. Soybean processors use it as a solvent—a cheap and efficient way of extracting oil from soybeans, a necessary step to making most conventional soy oil and protein ingredients. Whole soybeans are literally bathed in hexane to separate the soybeans’ oil from protein.
To assist consumers, and wholesale buyers, in making informed purchasing decisions and supporting the companies that have committed to hexane-free soy ingredients, The Cornucopia Institute has developed the report “Banned in Organics” along with the “Guide to Choosing Non-Hexane Meat Alternatives” and the “Guide to Choosing Non-Hexane Nutrition Bars.”
Sustainable Food on Change.org, based on our report, started a petition to Get Neurotoxins Out of Clif Bars, read about it and sign it here.

July 8, 2011

Dinner With a Pesti-Side Order

Came across this short article today on the Seventh Generation website. This is why I try really hard to buy all organic. If you know where to shop, it's really does not cost any more than buying conventional. Anyway, isn't your health worth it? (That post to come...) Thanks for reading!
~Amber




Put non-organic fruits and veggies on the table and you could wind up with a plate full of pesticides, according to a new report from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Agricultural Marketing Service Pesticide Data Program (do not under any circumstances try to say that with your mouth full). The agency's latest annual study on pesticide residues in food finds that there are significant differences in levels found in conventionally-grown, chemically treated produce compared with levels in organic varieties.
Many people don't believe that there's much distinction between organic and non-organic foods, so when differences are uncovered, it's important to take note. In this case, the research found many kinds of pesticide residue that range from chlorpyrifos on cilantro to pentachloroaniline on potatoes.
Organic foods studied had only the occasional trace element of chemicals -- unwanted visitors that came from elsewhere in the environment. When detected, these slight levels represent an infinitely small health concern compared with the levels found in conventional crops raised in a chemical soup.
You can read the report (warning: you'll need a herculean attention span) or just take the Organic Trade Association's word for what it says. Either way, once again, we're left with a lesson worth chewing on: that we'd all be wise to go organic.

Posted by
the Inkslinger


July 2, 2011

GM Crops and Monsanto

Check out these articles from Greenpeace. This is just a small example why we should all be eating organic foods whenever possible! Thank you for reading!

Herbicide tolerance and GM crops
Why the world should be Ready to Round Up glyphosate


Publication - June 30, 2011
The widespread and increasingly intensive use of glyphosate in association with the use of GM (genetically modified) crops poses further risks to the environment and human health. Glyphosate is the active ingredient in many herbicides sold throughout the world, including the well-known formulation, Roundup. Glyphosate-based herbicides are used widely for weed control because they are non-selective; glyphosate kills all vegetation.
GM crops specifically engineered to be tolerant to glyphosate are known as 'Roundup Ready' (RR). These RR varieties allow farmers to spray the herbicide over the top of the growing crop, killing virtually all weeds without affecting the crop. The use of glyphosate on GM RR crops such as soy, maize and cotton has increased dramatically in North and South America, where they are predominantly grown.

GM crops are marketed by the US agrochemical giant Monsanto, and are associated with its own formulation of glyphosate herbicide, Roundup. Monsanto's sales pitch to farmers promised, and still does, reduced labour and financial savings by simplifying and reducing the costs of weed control. The reality is turning out to be different, with increasing health, biodiversity and environmental concerns and the development of weed resistance. Given the problems that are now evident, no new GM glyphosate-tolerant crops should be authorised. In broader terms, GM herbicide-tolerant crops have been developed for an industrial farming model. They are therefore intrinsically linked to unsustainable farming practices that damage the basic natural resources food production is based upon, and their cultivation should be banned.

This report, produced by Greenpeace together with GM Freeze, shows why rigorous assessment of the safety of glyphosate to plant, humans and animals is of great importance, and why an urgent reassessment of the health impacts of glyphosate and its related products must now take place.

Download Herbicide-tolerance in GM crops.

Monsanto's 7 Deadly Sins

Publication - March 10, 2008
Apart from the scientific, environmental and health concerns around the growing and consumption of GE crops, agro-chemical companies like Monsanto conceal the truth about the benefits to farmers and consumers. Here we will deconstruct Monsanto’s ‘pledge’ to the world – we have revealed the truth behind seven statements from Monsanto’s own website.
Num. pages: 4
Download document

June 30, 2011

Dairy: 6 Reasons You Should Avoid It at All Costs

Came across this article and thought it was a good one. 
Thanks for reading!


Mark Hyman, MD

Mark Hyman, MD

Posted: May 1, 2010 05:44 PM



Got milk?
These days, it seems like almost everybody does. Celebrities, athletes, and even former president Clinton's head of Health and Human Services, Donna Shalala, are all proud to wear the white "milk mustache." After all, everyone knows that you need milk to be healthy ...
Dairy is nature's perfect food -- but only if you're a calf.
If that sounds shocking to you, it's because very few people are willing to tell the truth about dairy. In fact, criticizing milk in America is like taking on motherhood, apple pie, or baseball. But that's just what I'm about to do.
Based on the research and my experience practicing medicine, I typically advise most of my patients to avoid dairy products completely. I like ice cream just as much as the next person, but as a scientist I have to look honestly at what we know. In today's blog I will explore many of the documented ill-effects of dairy, and give you six reasons you should avoid dairy at all costs.
The Reason I Have Problems with the USDA Food Pyramid
I'm aware that my advice to avoid dairy flies in the face of the new, "up-to-date" food pyramid from the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The USDA's pyramid recommends drinking 3 glasses of milk a day. What's wrong with that? Well, for one thing, it's not a recommendation that's based on strict science.
Some of the "experts" who helped create the pyramid actually work for the dairy industry, which makes the US Department of agriculture's recommendations reflect industry interests, not science or our best interests.
In fact, Walter Willet, M.D., Ph.D -- the second-most-cited scientist in all of clinical medicine and the head of nutrition at Harvard's School of Public Health -- is one of the pyramid's most vocal critics. He's even called its guidelines "udderly ridiculous." That's not something a Harvard scientist says lightly.
But Dr. Willett is right. The pyramid just isn't based on key scientific findings about health. In a moment we will take a look at some of the pyramid's recommendations and why I disagree with them.
But before I dissect why the current food pyramid is harmful to your health, I want to offer a bit of hope. I recently attended a medical conference put on by Harvard Medical School and the Culinary Institute of America called Healthy Kitchens, Healthy Lives and met Eric Rimm, who works closely with Walter Willett at Harvard School of Public Health and is a member of the 2010 USDA Dietary Guidelines for Americans Committee.
I asked him if he felt that science not industry would be shaping the new guidelines and he said there was now only one scientist with industry ties on the new panel and he was objective and agreeable to make changes when presented the data. I am anxious to see how the science matches policy but feel a ray of hope that for the first time in the history of our dietary guidelines we will see science predominate, not industry interests and that the language will be direct, clear and simple to understand for all Americans. The guidelines from the early 1990's promoting the consumption of 6-11 servings of bread and cereals daily led to the pasta, carb, sugar generation and led to the largest epidemic of obesity in the history of our species.
Let's hope the new guidelines for 2010 will guide us toward greater health, not an increasing burden of obesity, diabetes and chronic disease. The USDA food policy guidelines form the basis of the school lunch program and it has contributed to a tripling of obesity in children. Let's hope we can serve up a different lunch menu for our children and our nation.
The simple idea that science should become policy is unfortunately one that has found little traction in Washington. But that seems to be shifting a little now.
Now back to why the last government guidelines from 2005 are harmful to your health!
1. Consume a variety of foods within and among the basic food groups while staying within your body's energy needs.
Sounds sensible -- but which food groups? If you choose dairy, meat, fats, and carbohydrates, the "perfect" meal could be a cheeseburger, milkshake, and fries with ketchup (potatoes and tomatoes are the two top vegetables consumed in America). Generic advice like that is pretty meaningless and potentially harmful.
2. Control your caloric intake to manage body weight.
Again, that sounds good, but as I wrote in my book UltraMetabolism, even the best-trained nutritionists and dietitians can't come close to correctly estimating their own caloric intake in a day. Also consider this: Is it okay to consume all of your calories from cola or ice cream as long as you stay within my caloric needs? Of course not. So this is more useless advice.
3. Increase intake of fruits and vegetables, whole grains, and nonfat or low-fat milk products.
Well, fruits, veggies, and whole grains are great. Milk -- not so much. I'll get back to that in a minute.
4. Choose carbohydrates wisely.
Who could argue with that? But how do they define "wisely"? The real advice here should be to cut down sugar intake from 185 pounds per person per year (what we currently consume) to less than a pound, avoid flour products (except as a treat), and stick to whole-food carbohydrates like vegetables, fruit, whole grains, beans, nuts, and seeds.
5. Choose to prepare food with little salt.
That's not bad advice. But it doesn't make sense if most of what you eat is packaged or processed foods that you don't actually prepare. For most Americans who eat half of their meals outside their homes, this isn't helpful. A better recommendation would be to avoid packaged, processed, canned, prepared, and fast foods (unless you know exactly how they are made).
6. If you drink alcoholic beverages, do so in moderation.
Sounds good -- but if you're usually drinking two bottles of wine a night, then one seems like moderation! I think a better suggestion is to limit your alcohol consumption to half a drink a day or 3 glasses a week (the amount that seems to have the most health benefit).
7. Don't eat unsafe foods.
Of course you shouldn't leave your egg salad out in the hot sun or toss your salad with hands that just handled raw chicken coated with salmonella. But the food pyramid guidelines don't mention pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, or genetically modified foods, despite scientific evidence of their harm. Shame on the USDA!
You can see now why I have big problems with the food pyramid! Its guidelines try to sound sensible -- while still protecting the interests of the food industry, the agriculture industry, and all of the lobbyists paying for the elections of the Congress. That way everybody's happy ...
But I'm not, and you shouldn't be either. The public just isn't served by this watered down, confusing, and useless pyramid. The next guidelines, I hope will be better, especially with independent scientists like Eric Rimm involved. Worse, some of the recommendations are downright harmful --like the one to drink more milk and dairy products.
The Truth about Dairy
According to Dr. Willett, who has done many studies and reviewed the research on this topic, there are many reasons to pass up milk, including:
1. Milk doesn't reduce fractures.(i) Contrary to popular belief, eating dairy products has never been shown to reduce fracture risk. In fact, according to the Nurses' Health Study dairy may increase risk of fractures by 50 percent!
2. Less dairy, better bones. Countries with lowest rates of dairy and calcium consumption (like those in Africa and Asia) have the lowest rates of osteoporosis.
3. Calcium isn't as bone-protective as we thought.(ii) Studies of calcium supplementation have shown no benefit in reducing fracture risk. Vitamin D appears to be much more important than calcium in preventing fractures.
4. Calcium may raise cancer risk. Research shows that higher intakes of both calcium and dairy products may increase a man's risk of prostate cancer by 30 to 50 percent.(iii) Plus, dairy consumption increases the body's level of insulin-like growth factor-1 (IGF-1) -- a known cancer promoter.
5. Calcium has benefits that dairy doesn't. Calcium supplements, but not dairy products, may reduce the risk of colon cancer.(iv)
6. Not everyone can stomach dairy.(v) About 75 percent of the world's population is genetically unable to properly digest milk and other dairy products -- a problem called lactose intolerance.
Based on such findings, Dr. Willet has come to some important conclusions:
• Everybody needs calcium -- but probably not as much as our government's recommended daily allowance (RDA) and calcium from diet, including greens and beans is better utilized by the body with less risk than calcium supplements.
• Calcium probably doesn't prevent broken bones. Few people in this country are likely to reduce their fracture risk by getting more calcium.
• Men may not want to take calcium supplements. Supplements of calcium and vitamin D may be reasonable for women.
• Dairy may be unhealthy. Advocating dairy consumption may have negative effects on health.
If all that isn't enough to swear you off milk, there are a few other scientific findings worth noting. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently asked the UDSA to look into the scientific basis of the claims made in the "milk mustache" ads. Their panel of scientists stated the truth clearly:
• Milk doesn't benefit sports performance.
• There's no evidence that dairy is good for your bones or prevents osteoporosis -- in fact, the animal protein it contains may help cause bone loss!
• Dairy is linked to prostate cancer.
• It's full of saturated fat and is linked to heart disease.
• Dairy causes digestive problems for the 75 percent of people with lactose intolerance.
• Dairy aggravates irritable bowel syndrome.
Simply put, the FTC asked the dairy industry, "Got Proof?" -- and the answer was NO!
Plus, dairy may contribute to even more health problems, like:
• Allergies (vi)
• Sinus problems
• Ear infections
• Type 1 diabetes (vii)
• Chronic constipation (viii)
• Anemia (in children)
Due to these concerns, many have begun to consider raw milk an alternative. But that isn't really a healthy form of dairy either ...
Yes, raw, whole, organic milk eliminates concerns like pesticides, hormones, antibiotics, and the effects of homogenization and pasteurization -- but to me, these benefits don't outweigh dairy's potential risks.
From an evolutionary point of view, milk is a strange food for humans. Until 10,000 years ago we didn't domesticate animals and weren't able to drink milk (unless some brave hunter-gather milked a wild tiger or buffalo!).
If you don't believe that, consider this: The majority of humans naturally stop producing significant amounts of lactase - the enzyme needed to properly metabolize lactose, the sugar in milk -- sometime between the ages of two and five. In fact, for most mammals, the normal condition is to stop producing the enzymes needed to properly digest and metabolize milk after they have been weaned.
Our bodies just weren't made to digest milk on a regular basis. Instead, most scientists agree that it's better for us to get calcium, potassium, protein, and fats from other food sources, like whole plant foods -- vegetables, fruits, beans, whole grains, nuts, seeds, and seaweed.
So here is my advice for dealing with dairy.
6 Tips for Dealing with Dairy
• Take your Cow for a Walk. It will do you much more good than drinking milk.
• Don't rely on dairy for healthy bones. If you want healthy bones, get plenty of exercise and supplement with 2,000 IU of vitamin D daily.
• Get your calcium from food. These include dark green leafy vegetables, sesame tahini, sea vegetables, and sardines or salmon with the bones.
• Try giving up all dairy. That means eliminate milk, cheese, yogurt, and ice cream for two weeks and see if you feel better. You should notice improvements with your sinuses, post-nasal drip, headachesirritable bowel syndrome, energy, and weight. Then start eating dairy again and see how you feel. If you feel worse, you should try to give it up for life.
• If you can tolerate dairy, use only raw, organic dairy products. I suggest focusing on fermented products like unsweetened yogurt and kefir, occasionally.
• If you have to feed your child formula from milk, don't worry. The milk in infant formula is hydrolyzed or broken down and easier to digest (although it can still cause allergies). Once your child is a year old, switch him or her to real food and almond milk.
Still got milk? I hope not! Remember, dairy is not crucial for good health. I encourage you to go dairy-free and see what it does for you.
Now I'd like to hear from you ...
Do you agree or disagree that dairy is bad for you?
Have you experienced any problems consuming dairy?
What changes -- for better or worse -- have you experienced if you've tried eliminating dairy?
Please let me know your thoughts by leaving a comment below...
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Feskanich D, Willett WC, Stampfer MJ, Colditz GA. Milk, dietary calcium, and bone fractures in women: a 12-year prospective study. Am J Public Health. 1997 Jun;87(6):992-7.
(ii) Feskanich D, Willett WC, Colditz GA. Calcium, vitamin D, milk consumption, and hip fractures: a prospective study among postmenopausal women. Am J Clin Nutr. 2003 Feb;77(2):504-11.
(iii) Tseng M, Breslow RA, Graubard BI, Ziegler RG. Dairy, calcium, and vitamin D intakes and prostate cancer risk in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Epidemiologic Follow-up Study cohort. Am J Clin Nutr. 2005 May;81(5):1147-54.
(iv) Huncharek M, Muscat J, Kupelnick B. Colorectal cancer risk and dietary intake of calcium, vitamin D, and dairy products: a meta-analysis of 26,335 cases from 60 observational studies. Nutr Cancer. 2009;61(1):47-69.
(v) Brannon PM, Carpenter TO, Fernandez JR, Gilsanz V, Gould JB, Hall KE, Hui SL, Lupton JR, Mennella J, Miller NJ, Osganian SK, Sellmeyer DE, Suchy FJ, Wolf MA. NIH Consensus Development Conference Statement: Lactose Intolerance and Health. NIH Consens State Sci Statements. 2010 Feb 24;27(2).
(vi) Bartley J, McGlashan SR. Does milk increase mucus production? Med Hypotheses. 2010 Apr;74(4):732-4.
(vii) Luopajärvi K, Savilahti E, Virtanen SM, Ilonen J, Knip M, Akerblom HK, Vaarala O. Enhanced levels of cow's milk antibodies in infancy in children who develop type 1 diabetes later in childhood. Pediatr Diabetes. 2008 Oct;9(5):434-41.
(viii) El-Hodhod MA, Younis NT, Zaitoun YA, Daoud SD. Cow's milk allergy related pediatric constipation: Appropriate time of milk tolerance. Pediatr Allergy Immunol. 2009 Jun 25.
Mark Hyman, M.D. practicing physician and founder of The UltraWellness Center is a pioneer in functional medicine. Dr. Hyman is now sharing the 7 ways to tap into your body's natural ability to heal itself. You can follow him on Twitter, connect with him on LinkedIn, watch his videos on Youtube and become a fan on Facebook.