10 Foods Banned in Other Countries but Allowed in the US

 

By Dr. Mercola

Americans are slowly waking up to the sad fact that much of the food sold in the US is far inferior to the same foods sold in other nations. In fact, many of the foods you eat are BANNED in other countries.

Here, I’ll review 10 American foods that are banned elsewhere, which were featured in a recent MSN article.1

Seeing how the overall health of Americans is so much lower than other industrialized countries, you can’t help but wonder whether toxic foods such as these might play a role in our skyrocketing disease rates.

#1: Farm-Raised Salmon

If you want to maximize health benefits from fish, you want to steer clear of farmed fish, particularly farmed salmon fed dangerous chemicals. Wild salmon gets its bright pinkish-red color from natural carotenoids in their diet. Farmed salmon, on the other hand, are raised on a wholly unnatural diet of grains (including genetically engineered varieties), plus a concoction of antibiotics and other drugs and chemicals not shown to be safe for humans.

This diet leaves the fish with unappetizing grayish flesh so to compensate, they’re fed synthetic astaxanthin made from petrochemicals, which has not been approved for human consumption and has well known toxicities. According to the featured article, some studies suggest it can potentially damage your eyesight. More details are available in yesterday’s article.

Where it’s banned: Australia and New Zealand

How can you tell whether a salmon is wild or farm-raised? The flesh of wild sockeye salmon is bright red, courtesy of its natural astaxanthin content. It’s also very lean, so the fat marks, those white stripes you see in the meat, are very thin. If the fish is pale pink with wide fat marks, the salmon is farmed.

Avoid Atlantic salmon, as typically salmon labeled “Atlantic Salmon” currently comes from fish farms. The two designations you want to look for are: “Alaskan salmon,” and “sockeye salmon,” as Alaskan sockeye is not allowed to be farmed. Please realize that the vast majority of all salmon sold in restaurants is farm raised.

So canned salmon labeled “Alaskan Salmon” is a good bet, and if you find sockeye salmon, it’s bound to be wild. Again, you can tell sockeye salmon from other salmon by its color; its flesh is bright red opposed to pink, courtesy of its superior astaxanthin content. Sockeye salmon actually has one of the highest concentrations of astaxanthin of any food.

#2: Genetically Engineered Papaya

Most Hawaiian papaya is now genetically engineered to be resistant to ringspot virus. Mounting research now shows that animals fed genetically engineered foods, such as corn and soy, suffer a wide range of maladies, including intestinal damage, multiple-organ damage, massive tumors, birth defects, premature death, and near complete sterility by the third generation of offspring. Unfortunately, the gigantic human lab experiment is only about 10 years old, so we are likely decades away from tabulating the human casualties.

Where it’s banned: The European Union

Unfortunately, it’s clear that the US government is not in a position to make reasonable and responsible decisions related to genetically engineered foods at this point, when you consider the fact that the Obama administration has placed former Monsanto attorney and Vice President, Michael Taylor, in charge of US food safety, and serious conflicts of interest even reign supreme within the US Supreme Court! That’s right. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas is also a former Monsanto attorney, but refuses to acknowledge any conflict of interest.

#3: Ractopamine-Tainted Meat

The beta agonist drug ractopamine (a repartitioning agent that increases protein synthesis) was recruited for livestock use when researchers found that the drug, used in asthma, made mice more muscular. This reduces the overall fat content of the meat. Ractopamine is currently used in about 45 percent of US pigs, 30 percent of ration-fed cattle, and an unknown percentage of turkeys are pumped full of this drug in the days leading up to slaughter. Up to 20 percent of ractopamine remains in the meat you buy from the supermarket, according to veterinarian Michael W. Fox.

Since 1998, more than 1,700 people have been “poisoned” from eating pigs fed the drug, and ractopamine is banned from use in food animals in no less than 160 different countries due to its harmful health effects! Effective February 11, 2013, Russia issued a ban on US meat imports, slated to last until the US agrees to certify that the meat is ractopamine-free. At present, the US does not even test for the presence of this drug in meats sold. In animals, ractopamine is linked to reductions in reproductive function, increase of mastitis in dairy herds, and increased death and disability. It’s also known to affect the human cardiovascular system, and is thought to be responsible for hyperactivity, and may cause chromosomal abnormalities and behavioral changes.

Where it’s banned: 160 countries across Europe, Russia, mainland China and Republic of China (Taiwan)

#4: Flame Retardant Drinks

If you live in the US and drink Mountain Dew and some other citrus-flavored sodas and sports drinks, then you are also getting a dose of a synthetic chemical called brominated vegetable oil (BVO), which was originally patented by chemical companies as a flame retardant.

BVO has been shown to bioaccumulate in human tissue and breast milk, and animal studies have found it causes reproductive and behavioral problems in large doses. Bromine is a central nervous system depressant, and a common endocrine disruptor. It’s part of the halide family, a group of elements that includes fluorine, chlorine and iodine. When ingested, bromine competes for the same receptors that are used to capture iodine. This can lead to iodine deficiency, which can have a very detrimental impact on your health. Bromine toxicity can manifest as skin rashes, acne, loss of appetite, fatigue, and cardiac arrhythmias. According to the featured article:

“The FDA has flip-flopped on BVO’s safety originally classifying it as ‘generally recognized as safe’ but reversing that call now defining it as an ‘interim food additive’ a category reserved for possibly questionable substances used in food.”

Where it’s banned: Europe and Japan

#5: Processed Foods Containing Artificial Food Colors and Dyes

More than 3,000 food additives — preservatives, flavorings, colors and other ingredients — are added to US foods, including infant foods and foods targeted to young children. Meanwhile, many of these are banned in other countries, based on research showing toxicity and hazardous health effects, especially with respect to adverse effects on children’s behavior. For example, as reported in the featured article:

“Boxed Mac & Cheese, cheddar flavored crackers, Jell-O and many kids’ cereals contain red 40, yellow 5, yellow 6 and/or blue 2, the most popularly-used dyes in the United States. Research has shown this rainbow of additives can cause behavioral problems as well as cancer, birth defects and other health problems in laboratory animals. Red 40 and yellow 6 are also suspected of causing an allergy-like hypersensitivity reaction in children. The Center for Science in the Public Interest reports that some dyes are also “contaminated with known carcinogens.”

In countries where these food colors and dyes are banned, food companies like Kraft employ natural colorants instead, such as paprika extract, beetroot, and annatto. The food blogger and activist Vani Hari, better known as “Food Babe,” recently launched a Change.org petition2 asking Kraft to remove artificial dyes from American Mac & Cheese to protect American children from the well-known dangers of these dyes.

Where it’s banned: Norway and Austria. In 2009, the British government advised companies to stop using food dyes by the end of that year. The European Union also requires a warning notice on most foods containing dyes.

#6: Arsenic-Laced Chicken

Arsenic-based drugs are approved for use in animal feed in the US because they make animals grow quicker and make the meat appear pinker (i.e. “fresher”). The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has stated these products are safe because they contain organic arsenic, which is less toxic than the other inorganic form, which is a known carcinogen.

The problem is, scientific reports surfaced stating that the organic arsenic could transform into inorganic arsenic, which has been found in elevated levels in supermarket chickens. The inorganic arsenic also contaminates manure where it can eventually migrate into drinking water and may also be causing heightened arsenic levels in US rice.

In 2011, Pfizer announced it would voluntarily stop marketing its arsenic-based feed additive Roxarsone, but there are still several others on the market. Several environmental groups have filed a lawsuit against the FDA calling for their removal from the market. In the European Union, meanwhile, arsenic-based compounds have never been approved as safe for animal feed.

Where it’s banned: The European Union

#7: Bread with Potassium Bromate

You might not be aware of this, but nearly every time you eat bread in a restaurant or consume a hamburger or hotdog bun you are consuming bromide, as it is commonly used in flours. The use of potassium bromate as an additive to commercial breads and baked goods has been a huge contributor to bromide overload in Western cultures.

Bromated flour is “enriched” with potassium bromate. Commercial baking companies claim it makes the dough more elastic and better able to stand up to bread hooks. However, Pepperidge Farm and other successful companies manage to use only unbromated flour without any of these so-called “structural problems.” Studies have linked potassium bromate to kidney and nervous system damage, thyroid problems, gastrointestinal discomfort, and cancer. The International Agency for Research on Cancer classifies potassium bromate as a possible carcinogen.

Where it’s banned: Canada, China and the EU

#8: Olestra/Olean

Olestra, aka Olean, created by Procter & Gamble, is a calorie- and cholesterol-free fat substitute used in fat-free snacks like chips and French fries. Three years ago, Time Magazine3 named it one of the worst 50 inventions ever, but that hasn’t stopped food companies from using it to satisfy people’s mistaken belief that a fat-free snack is a healthier snack. According to the featured article:

“Not only did a 2011 study from Purdue University conclude rats fed potato chips made with Olean gained weight, there have been several reports of adverse intestinal reactions to the fake fat including diarrhea, cramps and leaky bowels. And because it interferes with the absorption of fat soluble vitamins such as A, D, E and K, the FDA requires these vitamins be added to any product made with Olean or olestra.”

Where it’s banned: The UK and Canada

#9: Preservatives BHA and BHT

BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) are commonly used preservatives that can be found in breakfast cereal, nut mixes, chewing gum, butter spread, meat, dehydrated potatoes, and beer, just to name a few. BHA is known to cause cancer in rats, and may be a cancer-causing agent in humans as well. In fact, according to the US Department of Health and Human Services, National Toxicology Program’s 2011 Report on Carcinogens, BHA “is reasonably anticipated to be a human carcinogen.” It may also trigger allergic reactions and hyperactivity, while BHT can cause organ system toxicity.

Where it’s banned: The UK doesn’t allow BHA in infant foods. BHA and BHT are also banned in parts of the European Union and Japan.

#10: Milk and Dairy Products Laced with rBGH

Recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH) is the largest selling dairy animal drug in America. RBGH is a synthetic version of natural bovine somatotropin (BST), a hormone produced in cows’ pituitary glands. Monsanto developed the recombinant version from genetically engineered E. coli bacteria and markets it under the brand name “Posilac.”

It’s injected into cows to increase milk production, but it is banned in at least 30 other nations because of its dangers to human health, which include an increased risk for colorectal, prostate, and breast cancer by promoting conversion of normal tissue cells into cancerous ones. Non-organic dairy farms frequently have rBGH-injected cows that suffer at least 16 different adverse health conditions, including very high rates of mastitis that contaminate milk with pus and antibiotics.

“According to the American Cancer Society, the increased use of antibiotics to treat this type of rBGH-induced inflammation ‘does promote the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, but the extent to which these are transmitted to humans is unclear,'” the featured article states.

Many have tried to inform the public of the risks of using this hormone in dairy cows, but their attempts have been met with overwhelming opposition by the powerful dairy and pharmaceutical industries, and their government liaisons. In 1997, two Fox-affiliate investigative journalists, Jane Akre and Steve Wilson, attempted to air a program exposing the truth about the dangers of rBGH. Lawyers for Monsanto, a major advertiser with the Florida network, sent letters promising “dire consequences” if the story aired.

Despite decades of evidence about the dangers of rBGH, the FDA still maintains it’s safe for human consumption and ignores scientific evidence to the contrary. In 1999, the United Nations Safety Agency ruled unanimously not to endorse or set safety standards for rBGH milk, which has effectively resulted in an international ban on US milk.4 The Cancer Prevention Coalition, trying for years to get the use of rBGH by the dairy industry banned, resubmitted a petition to FDA Commissioner Margaret Hamburg, MD, in January 2010.5 Although the FDA stubbornly sticks to its position that milk from rBGH-treated cows is no different than milk from untreated cows, this is just plain false and is not supported by science. The only way to avoid rBGH is to look for products labeled as “rBGH-free” or “No rBGH.”

Where it’s banned: Australia, New Zealand, Israel, EU and Canada

Take Control of Your Health with REAL Food

There are many other examples where the US federal regulatory agencies have sold out to industry at the expense of your health, while other countries have chosen to embrace the precautionary principle in order to protect their citizens. If you want to avoid these questionable foods and other potentially harmful ingredients permitted in the US food supply, then ditching processed foods entirely is your best option. About 90 percent of the money Americans spend on food is spent on processed foods, so there is massive room for improvement in this area for most people.

Next, you’ll want to swap out your regular meat sources to organic, grass-fed/pasture-raised versions of beef and poultry. The same goes for dairy products and animal by-products such as eggs.

Swapping your processed-food diet for one that focuses on fresh whole foods is a necessity if you value your health. For a step-by-step guide to make this a reality in your own life, whether you live in the US or elsewhere, simply follow the advice in my optimized nutrition plan, starting with the beginner plan first.

Advertisements
Published in: on July 18, 2013 at 7:28 am  Comments (1)  
Tags: , , ,

The Real Hidden Cost of Round Up

By Matt Agorist, REALfarmacy.com

Glyphosate, the active ingredient in Monsanto’s  Round-Up, is attracting a lot of negative attention these days, this attention  is not without merit. Within the past 6 months alone, there have literally been  dozens of studies published illustrating the hazardous impact glyphosate is  having on the environment. From earthworms to humans, this herbicide, once  considered safe, is proving to be quite the silent killer.

Just two months ago a study was published in the  scientific journal Entropy linking glyphosate to a range of health problems such  as Parkinson’s, infertility, and cancer. The study revealed that glyphosate  enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and  environmental toxins. Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests  slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the  body.

This month, yet another study has been published  implicating glyphosate in the induction of human breast cancer cell growth via  estrogen receptors. The findings in this study name glyphosate as an endocrine  disruptor that fuels estrogenic activity leading to the proliferation of breast  cancer cells. The results indicated that “low and environmentally relevant  concentrations” were enough to produce these detrimental effects.

One may think that simply not using Round-up or  any of its glyphosate containing equivalents would exempt them from these  dangers. However, here is the true cause for concern; last month a study was  published proving that there is indeed “widespread export to surface waters”  from runoff of nearby farms. Also, just last week, a study was done that tested  for glyphosate in urine samples from individuals in 18 different countries. Over  40% of these individuals had traces of glyphosate in the urine. If farmers that  spray glyphosate on a daily basis were the subjects of this test, the results  would not be so startling. However, the test subjects were specifically selected  on the basis that they had never handled or been exposed to glyphosate  before this test.

So what can we do to try and keep Round-Up out  of our bodies? We can eat organic for starters. We can grow our own food. We can  use alternative, nontoxic, weed  control at home  such as vinegar. The glyphosate leviathan that is, Monsanto, is not this  unbeatable machine. It has a crucial weakness, unsustainability as well as a  dependency on government regulations. We cannot do much about the special favors  granted throughout the corporatocracy, but what we can do is build a new model.  A model of sustainability, preservation, and ethics. Once the majority sees this  new model and all of its efficiencies, Monsanto becomes obsolete.

Read more at http://www.realfarmacy.com/cancer-infertility-parkinsons-and-death-the-hidden-costs-of-round-up/#5af0VdJrT6gxE1VX.99

Lab Grown Meat Hits the Grill This Month!

Meet ‘Schmeat’: Lab-grown meat hits the grill this month

Backers hope event will boost funding to commercialize ‘schmeat’

CBC News

Posted: Jun  6, 2013   3:28 PM ET

Last Updated:  Jun  7, 2013   9:34 AM ET

Read 356 comments356

Maastricht University physiologist Mark Post is expected to grill a patty of lab-grown meat that has taken two years and €250,000 ($338,000) to produce. Maastricht University physiologist Mark Post is expected to grill a patty of lab-grown meat that has taken two years and €250,000 ($338,000) to produce. (iStock)
 
 

Shmeat: The first in-vitro hamburger27:30

 

Shmeat: The first in-vitro hamburger27:30

   
Facebook
 
19K
   
Twitter
 
800
   
Share
 
20K
   
Email
 

A hamburger patty made from lab-grown meat — or “schmeat” — is expected to be unveiled and grilled later this month at an event in London that is highly anticipated by animal rights activists and other backers.

“The vision for this burger is really to attract support, to attract funding,” said social sciences researcher Neil Stephens in an interview with CBC’s The Current host Anna Maria Tremonti. “And I’m sure it will because it’s a very enticing idea for many people.”

Stephens, a professor at Cardiff University in Wales, has been studying the ethical and cultural issues around in vitro meat and has interviewed all the key scientific figures in the field.

‘In vitro meat provides a way for people to be able to eat ethically, while still kind of getting that meat fix.’—Lindsay Rajt, PETA

Among them is Mark Post, a physiologist at Maastricht University in the Netherlands, who grew the meat for the upcoming burger unveiling in his lab. The development of the 140-gram patty has taken two years and cost €250,000 ($338,000). Stephens said the funding needed to scale up the process to something commercially viable is one of the biggest obstacles right now on the journey of in vitro meat from the lab and the supermarket.

Conventional meat raises environmental, ethical concerns

Isha Datar is among those who hope the London burger event will lead to larger amounts of funding for the development of in vitro meat.

Datar is the executive director of New Harvest, a non-profit organization that raises awareness about alternatives to conventionally produced meat, and provides some funding and support to researchers in the field.

Anna Maria Tremonti, host of The Current, discussed the issues surrounding in vitro meat with Neil Stephens of Cardiff University, Isha Datar of New Harvest and Lindsay Rajt of PETA.Anna Maria Tremonti, host of The Current, discussed the issues surrounding in vitro meat with Neil Stephens of Cardiff University, Isha Datar of New Harvest and Lindsay Rajt of PETA. (CBC)

“Meat as we know it today is very environmentally unfriendly,” she told The Current.

Datar noted that a large proportion of agricultural land is used to grow feed for livestock rather than food for people. “In terms of food security, that’s not the greatest way to go.” She added that livestock are also breeding grounds for disease epidemics such as various influenza strains.

Among the supporters of in vitro meat is the group People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, which has just extended its deadline for a contest to produce in vitro chicken meat. Researchers now have until the end of the year to claim the $1-million prize for being the first to bring in vitro chicken meat to market.

Lindsay Rajt, PETA’s associate director of campaigns, said, “In vitro meat provides a way for people to be able to eat ethically, while still kind of getting that meat fix.”

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals hopes a commercial process for making in vitro chicken meat could potentially save billions of animals each year 'from abuse on factory farms and ultimately slaughter.'
People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals hopes a commercial process for making in vitro chicken meat could potentially save billions of animals each year ‘from abuse on factory farms and ultimately slaughter.’ (Mel Evans/Associated Press)

The cells needed to produce in vitro meat can be harvested without harming any animals, she said, and a commercial process for producing such meat could potentially save billions of animals each year “from abuse on factory farms and ultimately slaughter.”

At the moment, however, even Post is far from making that happen.

“This burger that’s going to be launched in London is really a proof of concept, which shows just … that something physically can be done,” said Datar.

So far, she said, Post has taken cells from the necks of cows and grown very tiny quantities in petri dishes, repeating the procedure “thousands of times” to generate enough for a hamburger patty.

A brew pub for meat?

Datar envisions a future where techniques for growing in vitro meat are so advanced that it “could happen in an appliance in our own home” or in a bioreactor at a restaurant.

“Perhaps … it’s something like a brew pub and they’re brewing an in-house meat,” she said. “And we perceive that as being artisanal and unique and exciting.”

Michael Noble, head chef and owner of Calgary’s Notable restaurant, has a different perception of in vitro meat.

“I don’t get it and it scares the heck out me,” said Noble, whose restaurant specializes in gourmet burgers and aged Alberta beef.

He’s also skeptical about how lab-grown meat would taste.

“There’s absolutely no way that you can recreate the flavour of what Mother Nature and the universe creates for us in the lab,” he told The Current. “There’s no way.”

Post admits that no one knows how the conditions of culturing the meat will affect the taste or even where the taste of meat comes from.

And even if it tastes like meat, that doesn’t necessarily mean the general public will view it as meat.

Stephens said that issue is fundamental to whether in vitro meat will be able to replace conventional meat, and isn’t something scientists have the power to define or control.

“It’s something that everyone else across the world, food companies and consumers, are involved in deciding.”

Cholesterol or Inflammation: Which is More Detrimental for Your Heart?

This was a very interesting article to me because when my husband had his triple bypass surgery, the doctor said one of the factors that could have caused this was Inflammation. Thank you, Cherie Calbom -The Juice Lady.

More people are telling me that their cholesterol numbers are too high for their age when they’re only around 180 to 190. This used to be considered very good. And as a person ages it used to be that the number went up to something around 220. Now the number has gone down to somewhere between 160 and 170. This is very suspect considering the facts. It’s time to know the truth about cholesterol.

Some time ago I wrote an article on fats and oils where I discussed the cholesterol myth. Heart surgeon Dwight Lundell, MD confirmed that information. He states, “the recommendations regarding lowering cholesterol are no longer scientifically or morally defensible. The discovery a few years ago that inflammation in the artery wall is the real cause of heart disease is slowly leading to a paradigm shift in how heart disease and other chronic ailments will be treated.”

He adds that the long-established dietary recommendations of the no-fat or low-fat diet have created epidemics of heart disease, obesity, and diabetes, the consequences of which dwarf any historical plague in terms of mortality, human suffering and dire economic consequences.

Though 25 percent of the population takes expensive statin medications and despite the fact we have reduced the fat content of our diets, more Americans will die this year of heart disease than ever before. And statistics show that as many people die of heart disease that have low cholesterol as those that have high cholesterol. We need to ask why we keep using this protocol when it isn’t working.

Inflammation–The True Cause of Heart Disease

Simply stated, without inflammation being present in the body, there is no way that cholesterol will accumulate in the walls of the blood vessels and cause heart disease and strokes.  Without inflammation, cholesterol will move freely throughout the body as nature intended. It is inflammation that causes cholesterol to become trapped and collect in blood vessels.

Inflammation is your body’s natural defense response to a foreign invaders such as a bacteria, toxins or viruses.  The cycle of inflammation protects your body from these bacterial and viral invaders.  However, if you chronically expose your body to injury by toxins or foods the human body was never designed to process, chronic inflammation occurs. Chronic inflammation is as harmful as acute inflammation is beneficial.

Though few people deliberately expose themselves repeatedly to foods or other substances that are known to cause injury to the body, with the exception of smoking, many people do this by simply following the recommended mainstream diet that is low in animal fat and high in polyunsaturated fats and refined carbohydrates. This causes repeated injury to our blood vessels and creates chronic inflammation leading to heart disease, stroke, diabetes and obesity.

The biggest culprits of chronic inflammation include an overload of simple, highly processed carbohydrates (sugar, flour and all the products made from them) and the excess consumption of omega-6 vegetable oils that include soybean, corn safflower, and sunflower that are found in many processed foods, salad dressings, mayonnaise, fried foods, and snack foods. Also, smoking causes inflammation and injury to blood vessels

Dr. Lundell says, “Take a moment to visualize rubbing a stiff brush repeatedly over soft skin until it becomes quite red and nearly bleeding.  If you kept this up several times a day, every day for years, what do you think would happen? If you could tolerate the pain, you would have a bleeding, swollen, infected area that became worse with each repeated injury. This is a good way to visualize the inflammatory process that could be going on in your body right now.”

Dr. Lundell adds, “Regardless of where the inflammatory process occurs, externally or internally, it is the same. I have peered inside thousands upon thousands of arteries. A diseased artery looks as if someone took a brush and scrubbed repeatedly against its wall. [This happens because] several times a day, every day, the foods we eat create small injuries compounding into more injuries, causing the body to respond continuously and appropriately with inflammation.”

Foods loaded with sugars, simple carbohydrates that turn to sugar easily, and foods processed with omega-6 oils for long shelf life have been the mainstay of the American diet for six decades. These foods have been slowly poisoning everyone by creating an inflammatory condition. How does eating a simple sweet roll, a dish of pasta, or a bowl of ice cream create a cascade of inflammation to injure your arteries and make you sick?

Blood sugar is controlled in a very narrow range. Extra sugar molecules attach to a variety of proteins that injure the blood vessel wall. This repeated injury to the blood vessel wall sets off inflammation. When you spike your blood sugar level several times a day, every day, it is exactly like taking sandpaper to the inside of your delicate blood vessels.

While you may not be able to see it, or feel it, the damage is still occurring. Dr. Lundell said he saw it in over 5,000 surgical patients spanning 25 years of practice, who all shared one common denominator — inflammation in their arteries.

When you look at sweet rolls, donuts, or commercially baked cookies, those innocent looking goodies not only contains sugars, they are baked in one of the many omega-6 oils such as soybean, corn, sunflower, or safflower oil. Chips and fries are soaked in omega-6 oil; processed foods are manufactured with omega-6 oils for longer shelf life. While omega-6’s are essential –they are part of every cell membrane controlling what goes in and out of the cell — they should be in their whole state as found in seeds or vegetables and must be in the correct balance of 3:1 omega-6 and omega-3 fats.

If the balance shifts by consuming excessive amounts of omega-6, the cell membrane produces chemicals called cytokines that directly cause inflammation. The American diet has a significant imbalance of these two fats. The ratio of imbalance ranges from 15:1 to as high as 30:1 in favor of omega-6. That’s a tremendous amount of cytokines causing inflammation.

There is no escaping the fact that the more we consume prepared and processed foods, the more we trip the inflammation switch little by little each day. The human body cannot process, nor was it designed to consume, foods packed with sugars and soaked in omega-6 oils.

What can you do to turn off inflammation in your body? Eat whole foods in their natural state. Choose only carbohydrates that are complex such as fruits and vegetables. Juice every day and include ginger root–an anti-inflammatory ingredient. Omit sugar and all sweets; use only stevia as a sweetener. And, use only virgin, organic coconut oil, olive oil or butter from grass-fed beef.

Animal fats contain less than 20 percent omega-6 and are much less likely to cause inflammation than the supposedly healthy oils labelled polyunsaturated. The “science” that saturated fat alone causes heart disease doesn’t exist. The science that saturated fat raises blood cholesterol is also very weak. “Since we now know that cholesterol is not the cause of heart disease, the concern about saturated fat is even more absurd today,” says Dr. Lundell.

The cholesterol theory that led to the no-fat, low-fat recommendations in turn created the very foods now causing an epidemic of inflammation. Mainstream medicine made a terrible mistake when it advised people to avoid saturated fat in favor of foods high in omega-6 fats. We now have an epidemic of arterial inflammation leading to heart disease, obesity, and other silent killers. By eliminating inflammatory foods, juicing fresh vegetables and including ginger root, and adding essential nutrients from fresh unprocessed food, you will reverse years of damage in your arteries and throughout your body from consuming the typical American diet.

Greek Yogurt Produces Toxic Waste

Whey Too Much: Greek Yogurt’s Dark Side

Greek yogurt is a booming $2 billion a year industry — and it’s producing millions of pounds of waste that industry insiders are scrambling to figure out what to do with.

By Justin Elliott on May 22, 2013

Twice a day, seven days a week, a tractor trailer carrying 8,000 gallons of watery, cloudy slop rolls past the bucolic countryside, finally arriving at Neil Rejman’s dairy farm in upstate New York. The trucks are coming from the Chobani plant two hours east of Rejman’s Sunnyside Farms, and they’re hauling a distinctive byproduct of the Greek yogurt making process—acid whey.

For every three or four ounces of milk, Chobani and other companies can produce only one ounce of creamy Greek yogurt. The rest becomes acid whey. It’s a thin, runny waste product that can’t simply be dumped. Not only would that be illegal, but whey decomposition is toxic to the natural environment, robbing oxygen from streams and rivers. That could turn a waterway into what one expert calls a “dead sea,” destroying aquatic life over potentially large areas. Spills of cheese whey, a cousin of Greek yogurt whey, have killed tens of thousands of fish around the country in recent years.

The scale of the problem—or opportunity, depending on who you ask—is daunting. The $2 billion Greek yogurt market has become one of the biggest success stories in food over the past few years and total yogurt production in New York nearly tripled between 2007 and 2013. New plants continue to open all over the country. The Northeast alone, led by New York, produced more than 150 million gallons of acid whey last year, according to one estimate.

And as the nation’s hunger grows for strained yogurt, which produces more byproduct than traditional varieties, the issue of its acid runoff becomes more pressing. Greek yogurt companies, food scientists, and state government officials are scrambling not just to figure out uses for whey, but how to make a profit off of it.

A cow munches on feed mixed with acid whey.

A cow munches on feed mixed with acid whey.

Chobani is so desperate to get rid of the whey, they pay farmers to take it off their hands.

Rejman, a blonde-haired 37-year-old, and third-generation dairy farmer with a Cornell animal science degree, started accepting the stuff a few years ago after a Chobani representative called him out of the blue.

Rejman’s workers take the shipments and try to find uses for the whey: mix it with silage to feed to the farm’s 3,300 cows; combine it with manure in a giant pit for fertilizer; and even convert some into biogas to make electricity.

‘How do you handle all the whey without screwing up the environment?’

But it’s not so easy to integrate acid whey into the workings of the farm. The silage Rejman feeds his cows, for example, can only soak up so much before becoming unmanageable slop — “like dropping water on your pizza,” he says. It’s also sort of like feeding your cows candy bars — they like it, but shouldn’t eat too much or it upsets their digestive system. It’s a problem that Rejman admits defies easy solutions. “How do you handle all the whey without screwing up the environment?”

The root of the whey problem is the very process that gives Greek yogurt its high protein content and lush mouthfeel.

Unlike traditional yogurt, Greek yogurt is strained after cultures have been added to milk. In home kitchens, this can be done with a cloth. Greek yogurt companies still throw around the term “strained,” but in reality industrial operations typically remove the whey with mechanical separators that use centrifugal force.

The resulting whey is roughly as acidic as orange juice. It’s almost entirely made up of water, but scientists studying the whey say it contains five to eight percent other materials: mostly lactose, or milk sugar; some minerals; and a very small amount of proteins.

Greek yogurt companies trying to keep up with exploding consumer demand in the last few years didn’t have a good plan to deal with the ocean of whey they were producing. Now they’re racing to find solutions, all the while keeping mum about the results, if there are any: the yogurt industry is highly secretive and competitive.

There are no industry-wide statistics on where all the whey is going, but a typical option is paying to have it hauled to farms near the yogurt factories. There, it is often mixed into feed or fertilizer. Chobani, for example, says more than 70 percent of its whey ends up as a supplement for livestock feed.

But there is another possible consumer — babies.

“Because the Greek yogurt production grew so rapidly, no one really had the time to step back and look at the other viable options,” says Dave Barbano, a dairy scientist at Cornell.

State and industry officials reached out to Barbano last year following the first-ever Yogurt Summit, convened by New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo.

Barbano, who specializes in filtration methods for separation and recovery of protein, has his sights set on the tiny amount of protein in acid whey. He believes it might be usable as an infant formula ingredient. But first Barbano has to figure out how to extract the protein in a cost-effective way, and his research is just getting underway.

The concept is roughly modeled on the success that cheese-makers have had selling products derived from their own byproduct — sweet whey. Sweet whey is more valuable and easier to handle than acid whey, as it has a lot more protein, and is easier to dry because it isn’t as acidic as Greek yogurt whey. Cheese-makers have developed a lucrative business selling whey protein for use in body-building supplements and as a food ingredient. And Greek yogurt makers are eager to follow suit.

“There are a lot of people coming in and out of New York state looking at whether this is a good opportunity for investment,” Barbano says.

While Barbano focuses on proteins, researchers in Wisconsin are studying how to extract whey’s dominant ingredient: sugar.

Scientists at the Center for Dairy Research at the University of Wisconsin, Madison, have been experimenting for nearly a year on how to get edible-grade lactose out of acid whey. Such lactose is valuable as an ingredient in things like icing and as a browning agent in bread. “It’s kind of like oil refining: from crude oil you get gas and diesel and other products,” says Dean Sommer, a food technologist at the center. “This is the same concept. You figure out what’s in there and how to grab it and get value out of it.”

Sommer wouldn’t describe the filtration process to extract lactose because the industry-financed research is proprietary. But he believes some third-party companies are now considering building plants to convert acid whey into lactose.

Neil Rejman, an Upstate New York dairy farmer, stands before a lagoon of manure mixed with acid whey. This slurry will be turned in to energy by a machine called an 'anaerobic digester.'

Neil Rejman, an Upstate New York dairy farmer, stands before a lagoon of manure mixed with acid whey. This slurry has passed through a system called an ‘anaerobic digester,’ which converted some of it into electricity.

Meanwhile, back at Rejman’s farm in Scipio Center, N.Y., they’re converting the lactose into methane that can generate electricity.

When the whey arrives from Chobani, some of it is mixed with the vast quantity of manure the farm produces daily. From the manure pit, the light brown soup (basically a river of shit) flows into a 16-foot-deep underground concrete tank known as an anaerobic digester. An innocent looking expanse of cement in a big, green field dotted with dandelions, there’s a lot going on inside, where a fetid mix of manure and whey percolate.

The material is heated up and kept in the tank for about 20 days, during which time bacteria break up the organic material — the lactose, in the case of whey — and release gases, including methane. The gas is fed into generators that produce electricity to power the farm and to sell to the local utility for use elsewhere.

But the setup, which Rejman and his brother had installed five years ago, required a big capital investment that would be out of reach for small farms. It cost $4.5 million, $1 million of which the Rejmans got back through a state subsidy.

Rejman's anaerobic digester.

Rejman’s anaerobic digester.

They primarily built the digester for what Rejman calls “odor control” for their neighbors, as digested manure smells much less than the raw stuff (“You ever take a shit in the toilet and leave it in there?” Rejman asks, by way of explanation.) The whey is an afterthought. In any case, just 20 of New York’s the state’s 5,200 dairy farms have an operating digester, according to Curt Gooch, a waste management engineer at Cornell.

And if any of the big yogurt companies have come up with a better whey solution, they’re being cagey about it. “We are currently exploring other options for our whey, but nothing we are ready to discuss at this time,” says Chobani spokeswoman Lindsay Kos. Dannon spokesman Michael Neuwirth says the company is looking at the nutritional possibilities of whey, but “we don’t have any plans to announce at this point.”

Home Greek yogurt makers have experimented with using whey in baking and pickling. But no one expects a bread or pickle factory to be able to absorb tens of millions of gallons of it.

Meanwhile, the tidal wave of acid whey is not slowing down. As one producer said at New York’s Yogurt Summit: “If we can figure out how to handle acid whey, we’ll become a hero.”

Is Popcorn Giving You Heart Disease?

Prevention Magazine had this article about popcorn. It is very interesting especially when you read what can be causing this. Another one of those things of us trying to stay Healthy in an Unhealthy world!

 

Is popcorn giving you heart  disease?

By Holland Taylor

Published May 12, 2013

Prevention Magazine

  • Popcorn for the movies.jpg
     

Oh, great. Just when you were starting to get a handle on your BPA exposure,  scientists uncover a new one you should worry about. 

It’s called perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA)—a chemical found in things like  nonstick cookware, food wrappers, furniture, and even raincoats—and it’s been  linked to cardiovascular disease, according to a new study. 

The kicker? A full 98 percent of us have PFOA in our bloodstreams. (Protect  your body’s most important muscle with these tips to Strengthen Your Heart in 30  Days.)

Researchers from West Virginia University (WVU) School of Public Health,  Morgantown, looked at the health data of 1,200 Americans and compared their PFOA  serum levels with the incidence of heart disease. The results: The greater the  amounts of PFOA in the bloodstream, the greater the risk of cardiovascular  disease—regardless of factors like age, race, smoking, BMI, diabetes, and even  hypertension. While previous research has linked PFOA to cardiovascular disease  in animals, this is the first to look at PFOA’s heart effect on humans.

Scary? You bet. But more research needs to be done to determine the specific  relationship between PFOA and cardiovascular disease. 

“We can’t yet be certain that PFOA causes heart disease,” says lead study  author Dr. Anoop Shankar, chair of the department of epidemiology in the WVU  School of Public Health. “The two could be related in another way, like people  with cardiovascular disease tending to retain more PFOA in their blood.”  (Minimize your exposure to harsh chemicals with these 19 Bizarre Home Remedies That Really  Work.)

Still, PFOA’s track record isn’t exactly reassuring. Health watchdogs like  the Environmental Working Group—which annually puts out the Dirty Dozen Foods You Should Eat  Organic—cite  research that suggests PFOA may be a human carcinogen, and previous research has  linked the chemical to chronic kidney disease and high cholesterol in children  and adolescents. It’s also a significant source of global chemical emissions—so  much so that the EPA partnered with major manufacturers like DuPont and 3M to  form the 2010/2015 PFOA Stewardship Program, which plans to eliminate PFOAs from  the manufacturers’ products by 2015.

Until then, you can minimize your exposure to the chemical by steering clear  of two of the biggest sources: nonstick cookware and packaged foods like  microwave popcorn. According to the FDA, many popcorn bags contain especially  high levels of PFOAs. (Popcorn addict? Avoid chemicals, calories, and sodium  with these tips to prepare the perfect bowl of  popcorn at home.)

Read more:  http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/05/12/is-popcorn-giving-heart-disease/?intcmp=HPBucket#ixzz2T5B8MHFQ

Healthy Water Drinks for Your Body

 

 

 I found this recipes on Facebook and as soon as I sent it to my family, my daughter in law Kristen send me an email that she had already made it. My 3 little grand daughters had already drank 2 pitchers of it. Sounds like it is a winner for hot summer months. Let me know if you make it and which one is your favorite.

 

 

Farmacology   Organics

 

SPRING CLEANSE ~   YOUR BODY ~ Yes another post abut water lol. But if you really want to   cleanse then DRINK, DRINK, DRINK. Here are 8 home made vitamin water recipes   to help you keep the water flowing!
 
  As a rule, you should try to avoid as much as possible industrial food and   beverages
 
  1) The classical : lemon/cucumber:
  … Mix in a pitcher: 10 cups of water + 1 cucumber and a lemon, thinly   sliced + 1/4 cup fresh finely chopped basil leaf + 1/3 of finely chopped   fresh mint leaves. Leave in the refrigerator overnight before serving.
 
  2) The granite : Strawberry/Lime or Raspberry/Lime
  Mix in a pitcher : 10 cups of water + 6 strawberries / 0r Raspberries and one   thinly sliced lime + 12 finely chopped fresh mint leaves. Leave in the   refrigerator overnight before serving.
 
  3) The digestive : Fennel/citrus
  First: infuse 1 to 3 grams of dried and crushed fennel in 150 ml of boiling   water for 5-10 minutes. Allow to cool.
  Mix in a pitcher: 10 cups of water + lemon juice (put the leftover lemon in   the mix) + a small thinly sliced orange + 12 fresh chopped mint leaves + the   infusion of fennel seeds. Leave in refrigerator overnight before serving.
 
  4) The antiOX : Blackberry/Sage
  Note that a part from the berries, sage leafs is the herb that has the   highest antioxidant content.
  Mix in a pitcher : 10 cups of water + 1 cup of blackberries that have been   very slightly crushed + 3-4 sage leaves. Leave in refrigerator overnight   before serving.
 
  5) WATERmelon : watermelon/Rosemary
  Mix in a pitcher : 10 cups of water + 1 cup of watermelon cut into cubes + 2   rosemary stems. Leave in refrigerator overnight before serving.
 
  6) The exotic : Pineapple/Mint
  Mix in a pitcher : 10 cups of water + 1 cup of pineapple cut into cubes + 12   fresh mint leaves finely chopped. Leave in the refrigerator overnight before   serving.
 
  7) The traditional : Appel/cinnamon
  Mix in a pitcher : 10 cups of water + 1 cup of apple cut into cubes + 2   cinnamon sticks + 2 teaspoon of ground cinnamon. Leave in the refrigerator   overnight before serving.
 
  8.) The zingibir : Ginger/tea
  In advance: heat 1 teaspoon of ginger in two cups of tea, let it cool down.
 
  Mix in a pitcher: 10 cups of water with two cups of the ginger tea + 4-5   pieces of fresh ginger cut into cubes. Leave in the refrigerator overnight   before serving.

Forks Over Knifes Pumpkin Pie Squares

Forks Over Knifes Pumpkin Pie Squares

I just received this recipe from Forks Over Knifes and can not wait to try it. It looks delicious. Let me know your thoughts if you do make it.

Pumpkin Pie Squares

By Cathy Fisher | Posted on March 27, 2013

These pumpkin squares are easier to make than pumpkin pie and they are firm enough to be eaten as finger food. They are great by themselves, or add a bit of Macadamia-Vanilla Frosting for a little “Happy Holidays.”
adobe pdf icon Pumpkin Pie Squares

Pumpkin Pie Squares
Makes 9 to 16 squares (depending on how small you cut them)

Ingredients
•10 medjool dates, pitted and diced (about 1 cup diced)
•3⁄4 cup water
•1 ½ cups rolled oats, ground into flour (see notes below)
•2 teaspoons pumpkin pie spice (or see notes below)
•1 15 ounce can cooked pumpkin (not pumpkin pie mix), (or one and a half cups cooked, pureed pumpkin; see notes below)
•1 teaspoon vanilla extract
•½ cup non-dairy milk of your choice

Instructions:
Place the 10 pitted and diced dates into a small bowl with the 3⁄4 cup of water and soak for at least 15 minutes.

Place the flour and Pumpkin Pie spice in a large bowl. In a blender, blend the soaked dates, the date soak water, the vanilla, and the non-dairy milk until smooth (1-2 minutes). Pour this into the bowl of flour/spices, and also add the pumpkin, and mix with a wooden spoon until all the dry ingredients are incorporated.

Scrape batter into an 8×8-inch baking pan that is lined with parchment paper (or use a non-stick silicone baking pan). Cook for 25-30 minutes at 375ºF. (If you see a light browning and some cracks on the top, these are good indications that it’s done.) Let cool at least 10-15 minutes before cutting and serving. Optional: Finish with Macadamia-Vanilla Frosting (recipe below) just before serving, or top with a light dusting of grated macadamia or other nuts (using a rotary cheese grater). Storing in the refrigerator overnight will firm up these squares, then you can pack them in a lunch or as a snack.

Preparation: 15 minutes
Cooking time: 30 minutes

Macadamia-Vanilla Frosting
Makes about 1 cup

This frosting has a somewhat maple flavor to it. You can use it right after making it, or if you want to use a cake decorating tip (like in the top photo), put the frosting in the refrigerator for 30 minutes first.

Ingredients:
•½ cup Macadamia nuts soaked in ½ cup of water for 15-30 minute
•6 Medjool dates, pitted and diced, soaked in ½ cup of water for 15-30 minutes
•1 teaspoon vanilla extract

Instructions:
Drain the soak water off of the nuts and discard it. In a blender, blend all of the ingredients (nuts, dates with their soak water, and vanilla) until smooth and even in color. Add a little more water as needed to keep the blender moving if it gets too thick.

Chef’s Notes:

Using fresh pumpkin: If you want to use fresh pumpkin instead of canned, cut the pumpkin in half lengthwise, remove all the seeds and stringy fibers, and then place cut-side down in a baking pan. Bake at 350ºF for approximately 45 minutes to 1 hour (depending on size) or until easily pierced with a knife. Scoop out the pumpkin flesh, and puree in a food processor until smooth. If you want to extract the excess liquid (this will result in a firmer dessert), line a regular kitchen strainer with cheesecloth and strain the liquid off the pumpkin puree. I have also scooped the pureed pumpkin into the center of a large piece of cheesecloth, tied it off at the top, and hung it up to drain over a bowl for a couple hours. Cool the puree before using.

Pumpkin pie spice substitution: If you do not have pumpkin pie spice on hand, you can substitute with 1 ½ teaspoons cinnamon, ½ teaspoon nutmeg, 1/8 teaspoon clove; or a close approximation.

Oat flour: You can easily grind rolled oats into flour by using any blender; high-speed blenders produce the finest flour, but any blender will do. (A food processor is least effective.)

Pans: I use an 8×8-inch Pyrex pan here, but you can also use a lined pie or cake pan, and then cut the pieces to look like pumpkin pie slices.

Texture: For a firmer texture without refrigerating overnight, only use 1/2 cup of the date soak water (instead of 3⁄4 cup).