This is from the Blaylock Report. It is his tip of the week.
Your entire family’s safety is at risk every time you shop for food. From salmonella in chickens, to deadly contaminants in food grown in China, to pesticides and other chemicals used on fruits and vegetables grown south of the border, foods sold in grocery stores across America are harboring dangerous chemicals and bacteria.
However, few people are aware of the dangers and expect government agencies such as the Food and Drug Administration to protect them. (For information on the dangers found in many imported foods as well as those produced in the U.S.You can take steps to reduce your risk of food poisoning:
Consider growing your own vegetables and fruits. They can be grown in your yard or in hydroponic gardens indoors. Using hydroponics would allow you to grow produce in the winter. Likewise, natural insect control is vital, using insects such as ladybugs. You also can use other biological control systems.
Buy locally grown foods. Talk to farmers and ask about pesticide and herbicide use. Organic farms are popping up all over the place, and have been growing at a rate of 15 percent a year with no end in sight.
Buy organically fed and free-range meats. But don’t expect even organic meats to free you automatically from the fear of mad-cow disease. Unfortunately, the government prevents cattle ranches from testing their cattle for the disease.
Wash all vegetables and fruits. To wash your vegetables properly, fill a 2-gallon pot with purified water (filtered) and add two caps of vegetable wash such as Fit Fruit & Vegetable Wash. For information on how to wash and store vegetables and fruits safely, go here
When buying organic produce, make sure that it looks healthy. Plants with spots and bruises are not safe to eat. Sick plants infected with molds, viruses, and bacteria secrete powerful toxic substances to protect themselves, and they are very toxic to people.
Avoid injected meats and poultry. You may have noticed that most whole birds and many hams have a carefully worded label that says they were injected with either gluten, natural flavors, or hydrolyzed protein extracts. In essence, this is a glutamate mixture much like MSG. And like MSG, it is toxic to your body, especially the brain.
Wash your poultry well. It also is important to wash whole birds before you cook them. Many are covered in chemicals and bacteria contamination. Just hold the bird under the water and scrub the skin with a vegetable brush. All foods should be washed thoroughly before cooking.
Cook all meats completely, even steaks. Most animals, especially cattle and chickens, are infected with carcinogenic viruses and there is compelling evidence that humans can develop cancer from these viruses. Several studies have shown that slaughterhouse workers and those who butcher meat have significantly higher rates of lymphomas and leukemias than the general population. These are the same cancers found in cattle and chickens.
Showing posts with label FDA. Show all posts
Showing posts with label FDA. Show all posts
Friday, May 1, 2009
Which Food Additives Are Safe? Which Aren't?
Which Food Additives Are Safe? Which Aren’t?Nutrition Action Healthletter Revisits “Chemical Cuisine,” the Classic A-to-Z Guide
WASHINGTON—Would you like some butylated hydroxytoluene with that?
If a waiter offered you some BHT in a restaurant, you’d probably decline. Yet that chemical is one of scores of hard-to-pronounce additives that routinely show up in the fine print on packaged foods’ ingredients lists. Is BHT safe? For the record, food manufacturers use it to keep oils from going rancid, but animal studies differ on whether in promotes or prevents cancer. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, publisher of Nutrition Action Healthletter, says it warrants caution. Nutrition Action’s revised “Chemical Cuisine,” its classic guide to food additives, is the cover story in the May issue.
“Just because an additive is artificial doesn’t necessarily mean it’s unsafe,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, who began researching food additives in 1971. “That said, the Food and Drug Administration hasn’t done nearly enough to police the preservatives, dyes, emulsifiers, stabilizers, thickeners, sweeteners and other chemicals many of us eat every day.”
Chemical Cuisine ranks additives as “safe,” “cut back,” “caution,” “certain people should avoid,” and “everyone should avoid.” Some additives that fall in the latter category include:
• Acesulfame potassium, Aspartame, Saccharin. Those artificial sweeteners are either unsafe or poorly tested. The only artificial sweetener to get a “safe” grade is sucralose (Splenda).
• Partially hydrogenated oil. This is one artificial food ingredient that CSPI has asked the FDA to get out of the food supply, since its trans fat component is a potent cause of heart disease and possibly other health problems. Yet Burger King and many other restaurants still deep fry with it; many manufacturers of frozen foods par fry with it; and some manufacturers, restaurant chains, and bakeries still use it in pie crusts, pastries, and other foods.
• Potassium bromate. This chemical strengthens dough, and most of it breaks down harmlessly. But bromate itself does cause cancer in animals, and isn’t worth the small risk it poses to humans. Many bakers have stopped using bromated flour.
An example of an additive that “certain people should avoid” is:
• Mycoprotein. Fortunately, this substance—a vat-grown fungus—is only in the Quorn line of meat substitutes. Several percent of people who eat it will experience nausea, severe vomiting, or dangerous anaphylactic reactions. (If you are one of them, report your symptoms here.) Despite CSPI’s warnings, FDA refuses to take it off the market or require labeling.
CSPI says these food additives are safe:
• Maltodextrin. This thickening agent and sweetener is made from starch. You might find it in canned fruit, salad dressings, and instant puddings.
• Sodium Carboxymethyl-Cellulose. This thickening and stabilizing agent prevents sugar from crystallizing and is used in ice cream, beer, pie fillings, icings, diet foods, and candy. Studies indicate it is safe.
• Thiamin Mononitrate. Scary name, perfectly safe ingredient. It’s a form of vitamin B-1 used to fortify cereals and flour.
• Sucralose. Don’t believe the manufacturer’s claim that this sweetener is “natural” or “tastes like sugar since it’s made from sugar.” But also don’t believe the Internet conspiracy theories that it’s toxic; it appears to be safe. Used as a tabletop sweetener (Splenda) and in some baked goods, frozen desserts, and diet soft drinks. Unfortunately, it’s often used with acesulfame.
Jacobson says that while it’s important to pay attention to the presence of many of these food additives, one shouldn’t fetishize them at the expense of several ingredients whose presence we take for granted in foods, namely sugar—in both its naturally occurring forms and in high-fructose corn syrup—and salt.
“Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and high blood pressure are such problems in this country in part because Americans are eating way much more sugar and salt than our bodies can handle,” said Jacobson. “They’re both perfectly ‘natural’ ingredients but everyone should cut back.”
CSPI’s web site has an expanded version of Chemical Cuisine. Introductory subscriptions to Nutrition Action, which has more than 900,000 subscribers in North America, and Canada, are $10 ($15 in Canada).
WASHINGTON—Would you like some butylated hydroxytoluene with that?
If a waiter offered you some BHT in a restaurant, you’d probably decline. Yet that chemical is one of scores of hard-to-pronounce additives that routinely show up in the fine print on packaged foods’ ingredients lists. Is BHT safe? For the record, food manufacturers use it to keep oils from going rancid, but animal studies differ on whether in promotes or prevents cancer. The Center for Science in the Public Interest, publisher of Nutrition Action Healthletter, says it warrants caution. Nutrition Action’s revised “Chemical Cuisine,” its classic guide to food additives, is the cover story in the May issue.
“Just because an additive is artificial doesn’t necessarily mean it’s unsafe,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson, who began researching food additives in 1971. “That said, the Food and Drug Administration hasn’t done nearly enough to police the preservatives, dyes, emulsifiers, stabilizers, thickeners, sweeteners and other chemicals many of us eat every day.”
Chemical Cuisine ranks additives as “safe,” “cut back,” “caution,” “certain people should avoid,” and “everyone should avoid.” Some additives that fall in the latter category include:
• Acesulfame potassium, Aspartame, Saccharin. Those artificial sweeteners are either unsafe or poorly tested. The only artificial sweetener to get a “safe” grade is sucralose (Splenda).
• Partially hydrogenated oil. This is one artificial food ingredient that CSPI has asked the FDA to get out of the food supply, since its trans fat component is a potent cause of heart disease and possibly other health problems. Yet Burger King and many other restaurants still deep fry with it; many manufacturers of frozen foods par fry with it; and some manufacturers, restaurant chains, and bakeries still use it in pie crusts, pastries, and other foods.
• Potassium bromate. This chemical strengthens dough, and most of it breaks down harmlessly. But bromate itself does cause cancer in animals, and isn’t worth the small risk it poses to humans. Many bakers have stopped using bromated flour.
An example of an additive that “certain people should avoid” is:
• Mycoprotein. Fortunately, this substance—a vat-grown fungus—is only in the Quorn line of meat substitutes. Several percent of people who eat it will experience nausea, severe vomiting, or dangerous anaphylactic reactions. (If you are one of them, report your symptoms here.) Despite CSPI’s warnings, FDA refuses to take it off the market or require labeling.
CSPI says these food additives are safe:
• Maltodextrin. This thickening agent and sweetener is made from starch. You might find it in canned fruit, salad dressings, and instant puddings.
• Sodium Carboxymethyl-Cellulose. This thickening and stabilizing agent prevents sugar from crystallizing and is used in ice cream, beer, pie fillings, icings, diet foods, and candy. Studies indicate it is safe.
• Thiamin Mononitrate. Scary name, perfectly safe ingredient. It’s a form of vitamin B-1 used to fortify cereals and flour.
• Sucralose. Don’t believe the manufacturer’s claim that this sweetener is “natural” or “tastes like sugar since it’s made from sugar.” But also don’t believe the Internet conspiracy theories that it’s toxic; it appears to be safe. Used as a tabletop sweetener (Splenda) and in some baked goods, frozen desserts, and diet soft drinks. Unfortunately, it’s often used with acesulfame.
Jacobson says that while it’s important to pay attention to the presence of many of these food additives, one shouldn’t fetishize them at the expense of several ingredients whose presence we take for granted in foods, namely sugar—in both its naturally occurring forms and in high-fructose corn syrup—and salt.
“Obesity, diabetes, heart disease, stroke, and high blood pressure are such problems in this country in part because Americans are eating way much more sugar and salt than our bodies can handle,” said Jacobson. “They’re both perfectly ‘natural’ ingredients but everyone should cut back.”
CSPI’s web site has an expanded version of Chemical Cuisine. Introductory subscriptions to Nutrition Action, which has more than 900,000 subscribers in North America, and Canada, are $10 ($15 in Canada).
Eggs. Omega-3 Claims Are Bogus
The information below comes from the CSPI. I subsribe to their Nutrition Action Healthletter and for $12/year, you receive 12 magazines with loads of information on nutrition and the foods that you should avoid. I found this article on eggs fascinating as I was spending nearly $4.00/dozen of eggs to give my children the very best. Stop wasting your money on bogus claims!
Egg Producers Deceive Consumers, Violate Law with Bogus Omega-3 ClaimsFDA should enforce its own rules, according to CSPI
WASHINGTON—Consumers who shell out more money for eggs boasting of omega-3 content and promoting heart health should know that those claims are not all they’re cracked up to be, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI).
Today CSPI urged the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop seven egg producers from implying that their eggs can reduce the risk of heart disease. In fact, says CSPI, egg producers should not be making heart-healthy claims, because the FDA specifically prohibits such claims on eggs and other foods high in cholesterol or saturated fat.
“Egg producers have used the omega-3 buzz word to bilk health-conscious consumers—and so far they’ve gotten away with it,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA should start enforcing its own rules, instead of letting companies hoodwink shoppers with a myriad of misleading and downright inaccurate claims on labels, ads, and Web sites.”
Egg producers take advantage of consumers’ limited knowledge of the different types of omega-3s. While the FDA permits claims for a possible reduced risk of heart disease linked to two kinds of omega-3s, DHA and EPA, the agency does not allow such claims for other omega-3s. CSPI commissioned a lab test that found that less than half of the advertised 350 mg of omega-3s in a Land O Lakes egg came from EPA and DHA. Yet, omega-3 eggs generally cost twice as much as regular eggs.
“The most beneficial omega-3 fatty acids come from fish, fish oil, and algae,” said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Heller. “Even if eggs had the ‘right’ kind of omega-3s, they still contain significant levels of saturated fat and cholesterol, which increase the risk of heart disease.”
Even the eggs with the most DHA and EPA contain no more of those omega-3s than the amount in one and a half teaspoons of salmon, the richest source of omega-3s, according to CSPI.
Products named in the CSPI complaint include:
• Land O Lakes claims that “omega-3 All-Natural Eggs” are a “good source of heart-healthy nutrition” despite the fact that FDA has not defined the term “good source” for omega-3s and that the eggs contain too much saturated fat and cholesterol to meet FDA’s definition of healthy.
• Eggland’s Best uses unapproved nutrient content claims for omega-3s on its carton and on its Web site. In addition, the company claims that its eggs have 25 percent less saturated fat than regular eggs. But that difference is less than half a gram—an amount that the FDA considers trivial for purposes of nutrition labeling.
• Safeway Specialty 3 Eggs misleadingly boasts “100 mg of omega-3s” even though the FDA has not set standards for such omega-3 claims. In addition, the principal source of omega-3s in the hens’ diets is likely not a source that may be associated with heart benefits.
• Gold Circle Farms claims that its eggs contain “450 mg of omega-3s.” The claims are based on two eggs even though the official FDA serving size for eggs is one egg.
• The Country Hen illegally claims “the difference is an egg that is simply healthy” even though the product does not meet regulatory requirements for “healthy,” and also makes its claims based on two eggs.
• Full Spectrum Farms boasts that its product has “30 mg” of unspecified omega-3s even though one ordinary egg, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, contains 37 mg of omega-3s, 20 mg of which are DHA and EPA.
• Giving Nature asserts that the company feeds its hens flax seed which “has been known to hold high levels of DHA omega-3.” But, according to the Flax Council of Canada and others, the omega-3s that FDA considers healthful (DHA and EPA) are not found in plants such as flax seed.
Egg Producers Deceive Consumers, Violate Law with Bogus Omega-3 ClaimsFDA should enforce its own rules, according to CSPI
WASHINGTON—Consumers who shell out more money for eggs boasting of omega-3 content and promoting heart health should know that those claims are not all they’re cracked up to be, according to the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI).
Today CSPI urged the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to stop seven egg producers from implying that their eggs can reduce the risk of heart disease. In fact, says CSPI, egg producers should not be making heart-healthy claims, because the FDA specifically prohibits such claims on eggs and other foods high in cholesterol or saturated fat.
“Egg producers have used the omega-3 buzz word to bilk health-conscious consumers—and so far they’ve gotten away with it,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “The FDA should start enforcing its own rules, instead of letting companies hoodwink shoppers with a myriad of misleading and downright inaccurate claims on labels, ads, and Web sites.”
Egg producers take advantage of consumers’ limited knowledge of the different types of omega-3s. While the FDA permits claims for a possible reduced risk of heart disease linked to two kinds of omega-3s, DHA and EPA, the agency does not allow such claims for other omega-3s. CSPI commissioned a lab test that found that less than half of the advertised 350 mg of omega-3s in a Land O Lakes egg came from EPA and DHA. Yet, omega-3 eggs generally cost twice as much as regular eggs.
“The most beneficial omega-3 fatty acids come from fish, fish oil, and algae,” said CSPI senior staff attorney Ilene Heller. “Even if eggs had the ‘right’ kind of omega-3s, they still contain significant levels of saturated fat and cholesterol, which increase the risk of heart disease.”
Even the eggs with the most DHA and EPA contain no more of those omega-3s than the amount in one and a half teaspoons of salmon, the richest source of omega-3s, according to CSPI.
Products named in the CSPI complaint include:
• Land O Lakes claims that “omega-3 All-Natural Eggs” are a “good source of heart-healthy nutrition” despite the fact that FDA has not defined the term “good source” for omega-3s and that the eggs contain too much saturated fat and cholesterol to meet FDA’s definition of healthy.
• Eggland’s Best uses unapproved nutrient content claims for omega-3s on its carton and on its Web site. In addition, the company claims that its eggs have 25 percent less saturated fat than regular eggs. But that difference is less than half a gram—an amount that the FDA considers trivial for purposes of nutrition labeling.
• Safeway Specialty 3 Eggs misleadingly boasts “100 mg of omega-3s” even though the FDA has not set standards for such omega-3 claims. In addition, the principal source of omega-3s in the hens’ diets is likely not a source that may be associated with heart benefits.
• Gold Circle Farms claims that its eggs contain “450 mg of omega-3s.” The claims are based on two eggs even though the official FDA serving size for eggs is one egg.
• The Country Hen illegally claims “the difference is an egg that is simply healthy” even though the product does not meet regulatory requirements for “healthy,” and also makes its claims based on two eggs.
• Full Spectrum Farms boasts that its product has “30 mg” of unspecified omega-3s even though one ordinary egg, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, contains 37 mg of omega-3s, 20 mg of which are DHA and EPA.
• Giving Nature asserts that the company feeds its hens flax seed which “has been known to hold high levels of DHA omega-3.” But, according to the Flax Council of Canada and others, the omega-3s that FDA considers healthful (DHA and EPA) are not found in plants such as flax seed.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)