Rather Be Healthy

Women Beware: Most Feminine Hygiene Products Contain Toxic Ingredients

The issue of what kind of feminine hygiene products you use is rarely if ever discussed. Yet it’s clearly an important topic for every woman out there.

Your skin is the largest organ in your body, and also the thinnest. Less than 1/10th of an inch separates your body from potential toxins. Worse yet, your skin is highly permeable — especially the skin around your vaginal area, not to mention inside the vagina itself.

This is why attention needs to be paid to the ingredients used in tampons and sanitary pads.

Most items that come in constant contact with your skin will end up in your bloodstream and distributed throughout your body. This is why I’m so fond of saying “don’t put anything on your body that you wouldn’t eat if you had to.”

Putting chemicals on your skin may actually be worse than eating them. When you eat something, the enzymes in your saliva and stomach help to break it down and flush it out of your body.

However, when chemicals come in contact with your skin, they are absorbed straight into your bloodstream without filtering of any kind, going directly to your delicate organs. And once these chemicals find their way into your body, they tend to accumulate over time because you typically lack the necessary enzymes to break them down.

In my opinion, the realm of feminine hygiene can be likened to a “ticking time bomb.” Because when you consider your exposure over the course of a lifetime, it really adds up; the average American woman uses up to 16,800 tampons in her lifetime — or as many as 24,360 if she’s on estrogen replacement therapy.

And that’s just tampons… Many women use countless sanitary pads in place of, or in addition to tampons. When this same ‘average’ woman has a baby, she may also use maternity and nursing pads.

What’s Really in Those Sanitary Pads and Tampons?

In the featured article1, Andrea Donsky, founder of Naturally Savvy and co-author of Label Lessons: Your Guide to a Healthy Shopping Cart, reveals just how little we are allowed to know about the ingredients used in feminine hygiene products.

In fact, manufacturers of tampons and sanitary pads are not required to disclose the ingredients used because feminine hygiene products are considered “medical devices.”

When Andrea called Procter & Gamble directly to find out what’s in their Always Infinity pads, the only ingredients the service reps could give her were: foam and a patented ingredient called Infinicel2 — a highly absorbent material that can hold up to 10 times its weight.

In the above video, she demonstrates what happens when you burn an organic versus a conventional sanitary pad. The 100% organic cotton pad, made by Natracare, burns slow and clean, leaving virtually no sooty residue at all.

The Always Infinity pad on the other hand, with its mostly undisclosed ingredients, create lots of black smoke and thick residue — indications that the pad may contain dioxins, synthetic fibers and petrochemical additives.

In fact, according to her research, each conventional sanitary pad contains the equivalent of about four plastic bags! With everything we now know about the hazardous nature of plastic chemicals, this alone is cause for concern.

For example, plasticizing chemicals like BPA and BPS disrupt embryonic development and are linked to heart disease and cancer. Phthalates — which give paper tampon applicators that smooth feel and finish — are known to dysregulate gene expression, and DEHP may lead to multiple organ damage. Besides crude oil plastics, conventional sanitary pads can also contain a myriad of other potentially hazardous ingredients, such as odor neutralizers and fragrances. Synthetics and plastic also restrict the free flow of air and can trap heat and dampness, potentially promoting the growth of yeast and bacteria in your vaginal area.

The Price You Pay for ‘Clean’ White Tampons and Pads

Furthermore, to give tampons and pads that pristine, “clean” white look, the fibers used must be bleached. Chlorine is commonly used for this, which can create toxic dioxin and other disinfection-by-products (DBPs) such as trihalomethane. Studies show that dioxin collects in your fatty tissues, and according to a draft report by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), dioxin a serious public health threat that has no “safe” level of exposure! Published reports show that even low or trace levels of dioxins may be linked to:
•Abnormal tissue growth in the abdomen and reproductive organs
•Abnormal cell growth throughout the body
•Immune system suppression
•Hormonal and endocrine system disruption

Meanwhile, the FDA’s official stance regarding trace amounts of dioxins is that there are no expected health risks associated with trace amounts of dioxins in tampons… Naturally Savvy notes that 10 years ago, House Representative Carolyn Maloney introduced legislation that would have required research into the potential health risks of any ingredient used in feminine hygiene products, including endometriosis, cervical, ovary and breast cancers. Unfortunately, the legislation did not pass, and it does not appear that any such research has been done.

Could You Be Absorbing GMO’s Via Your Tampons?

Andrea discovered a number of shocking details about the potential hazards posed by tampons and sanitary pads during her research for the book, Label Lessons, such as3:
•Conventional tampons contain pesticides… Cotton crops make up just 2.4 percent of the world’s land, but each year a whopping $2 billion is spent on pesticides to spray this one crop.
•Tampons and pads with odor neutralizers and other artificial fragrances are nothing short of a chemical soup laced with artificial colors, polyester, adhesives, polyethylene (PET), polypropylene, and propylene glycol (PEG), contaminants linked to hormone disruption, cancer, birth defects, dryness, and infertility.
•Conventional tampons most probably contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). According the USDA, 94 percent of all the cotton planted in the US is genetically engineered.

As Andrea questions, is inserting a GMO tampon into your vagina several times every month any different than ingesting GMO food? For all we know it may be worse, considering the fact that your vaginal wall is highly permeable, allowing toxins direct access into your bloodstream — be it pesticide residue or a GMO protein.

Beware of Toxic Shock Syndrome

It’s important to remember that tampons can create a favorable environment for bacteria growth. Micro tears in the vaginal wall from tampons allow bacteria to enter and accumulate. One recognized risk from tampon use is Toxic Shock Syndrome (TSS), which may be caused by poisonous toxins from either Staphylococcus aureus (staph) or group A streptococcus (strep) bacteria. TSS can be a life-threatening condition, so it’s important to recognize the signs and symptoms. Should any of the following symptoms arise while using tampons during your period, make sure you seek medical help:

Sudden high fever

Vomiting

Diarrhea

Low blood pressure

Seizures

Rash on palms or soles of feet

Muscle aches

Redness of your eyes, mouth and/or throat

To minimize your risk of this potentially life-threatening condition:

Avoid super absorbent tampons – choose the lowest absorbency rate to handle your flow

Never leave a tampon inserted overnight; use overnight pads instead

When inserting a tampon, be extremely careful not to scratch your vaginal lining (avoid plastic applicators)

Alternate the use of tampons with sanitary napkins or mini-pads during your period

Change tampons at least every 4-6 hours

Do not use a tampon between periods

Safer Alternatives

Many of today’s feminine hygiene products are made primarily from rayon, vicose, and cellulose wood fluff pulp… not cotton — let alone organic cotton. Rayon and viscose present a potential danger in part because of their highly absorbent fibers. When used in tampons, these fibers can stick to your vaginal wall, and when you remove the tampon, the loosened fibers stay behind inside your body, thereby raising your risk of TSS.

Fortunately, there are safer alternatives, and since the FDA regulates tampon absorbency, all tampons on the market must meet the same absorption guidelines. According to Dr. Philip Tierno, a Clinical Professor of Microbiology and Pathology at NYU Medical Centre, 100 percent cotton tampons “consistently test under detectable levels for TSS toxins.” Based on her own research, Andrea recommends the following brands of tampons and sanitary pads listed below. I’ve also created an exclusive line of organic cotton feminine hygiene products, which you can find in my online store.
•Natracare
•Diva Cup
•Seventh Generation Chlorine Free Organic Cotton Tampons
•Glad Rags Organic Pads
•Organyc 100% Organic Cotton Tampons

Take Action: Ask for Full Disclosure

To push for full disclosure labelling, Naturally Savvy has created a petition asking Procter & Gamble to disclose the ingredients in their feminine hygiene products. You can sign their petition here.

“Disclosing what’s in the products they make that go in and on women’s bodies should not be optional, it should be mandatory!” she writes. “We need companies to be accountable for the products they manufacture. We need to know ahead of time how to avoid the rayon, pesticide residue, GMO cotton, dioxins, chemical toxins, petrochemicals, and plastic often found in conventional feminine hygiene products. We need to have full disclosure labelling on tampons and pads so, as women, we can make informed decisions when it comes to the products we buy.”

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

If you often give in to cravings for junk food, you’re not alone. We all do it sometimes, but those that manage it better will get and stay lean easier. My friend Chad has a great article below with some really powerful tips you can use to kill cravings. And I love the 6 foods he lists in #1…

4 Key Strategies for Killing Food Cravings
By Chad Tackett, CPT

When you’re constantly hungry, it makes choosing the right foods
at the right times really challenging.

Staying full and energized while eating fewer calories—that’s the
secret to long-term fat loss success.

Here are 4 key strategies for feeling satisfied after a healthy meal
and staying full longer. You’ll not only have a lot more energy, you’ll
crave (and eat) less later. . .

1. Eat your water. Yes, eat. Drinking water is great, and you should
throughout the day, but it doesn’t provide the same level of feeling
satisfied as when you eat foods high in water.

There is a separate mechanism in the brain that controls hunger and
thirst. If the food you eat contains water, it will stay in the stomach
longer while it’s being digested.

PLUS, foods high in water are naturally very low in calories – making
them ideal for fat loss.

Many fruits and vegetables contain 90 – 98 percent water! The
following are some of the most hydrating foods. . .

– Watermelon contains 92% water and electrolytes, such as
calcium, magnesium, potassium, and sodium – all of which
(positively) influence your metabolism!

– Grapefruit contains only 30 calories and is comprised of 90%
water!

– Cucumbers are 96% water and contain just 14 calories in an
entire cup!

– Cantaloupe is 89% water and contains only 27 calories per
1/2 cup!

– Strawberries contain just 23 calories per 1/2 cup and are made
up of approximately 92% water. Plus, strawberries rank as the
4th strongest antioxidant-rich fruit!

– Broccoli contains 90% water and anti-cancer nutrients that
help to detoxify the vast number of potential toxins that we
encounter each day. Plus, it’s a great source of fiber!

You may have noticed that these water-dense foods are all carbs.
Because they’re natural (and not processed), I’d suggest the portion
being about the size of your fist. So, a small grapefruit or a cup of
sliced strawberries, for example, would work well.

2. Fill up on fiber. Fiber is critical to fat loss in several ways: first,
fiber contains only 1.5 to 2.5 calories per gram, while other carbs
contain 4 calories per gram (fat contains 9 calories per gram).
Essentially, you can pile your plate with plenty of high-fiber foods
without worrying about caloric-overload.

In addition to being low-calorie, high-fiber foods are more filling.
Fiber is absorbed by our bodies more slowly than other foods,
which means we feel full longer.

Foods high in fiber are fruits and vegetables, beans, lentils, legumes,
and natural whole grains. Aim for at least 25-35 grams each day to
help reduce your caloric intake and keep you feeling full and
energized longer.

3. Include protein at every meal. A meal with carbs alone causes
blood sugar spikes and crashes, which leave you feeling tired, hungry,
and weak. Protein helps slow this from happening, so that the carbs
you eat aren’t converted to body fat, and allows for energy to be
released slowly.

Great protein sources are lean meats, fish, lowfat dairy, legumes,
and unprocessed soy products.

Your choice of protein should be approximately the size of your
palm. For example, a medium-sized chicken breast.

4. Don’t leave out healthy fat. Since fat is so calorie-dense, it’s
important that you eat it in moderation . . . BUT in small amounts,
it provides flavor and has a positive impact on slowing insulin
response, like protein.

My favorite healthy fat source are nuts and seeds because they
are also a great source of protein and fiber. Other excellent fat
sources are avocados, olives, and fatty fish (e.g., salmon).

The fat source you choose should be about the size of your
thumb. This is about 5 almonds for the average-sized woman
or 7 almonds for the average man.

*Putting this into Action*

Now that you know which foods keep you feeling full and
satisfied throughout the day, here are some great ideas that
combine them all together for one super fat-burning snack or
meal:

1. Stir in a little peanut butter (healthy fat) and protein powder
(protein) into oatmeal (fiber), topped with strawberries (water).

2. Dip cucumbers (water) in hummus (fiber and healthy fat) and
cottage cheese (protein).

3. Marinate broccoli (water and fiber) and boneless, skinless
chicken breast (protein) in a little olive oil (healthy fat) and
balsamic vinegar and wrap it in aluminum foil on the BBQ.

4. A bowl of Greek yogurt (protein) with pieces of watermelon
(water), topped with flaxseeds (fiber and healthy fat).

These meals will make you FEEL completely different.

Your mood and energy will stabilize. You won’t have that gnawing,
dissatisfied feeling anymore.

You’ll feel a lot more self-control when it comes to what you eat
and when you eat it.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Mike Geary
Certified Nutrition Specialist
Certified Personal Trainer

Revealing new data from the charity Cancer Research UK reports that a record number of women under the age of 50 are being diagnosed with breast cancer.

For the first time, more than 10,000 women under 50 were diagnosed with the disease in the UK, which translates to one out of every five women diagnosed with breast cancer.

The news comes on the heels of a JAMA study published earlier this year, which similarly found that the number of young women (aged 25-39) in the US being diagnosed with advanced breast cancer is also increasing.1

Typically, cancer is much more likely to develop as you get older. The non-profit BreastCancer.org even states:2

“ … the aging process is the biggest risk factor for breast cancer. That’s because the longer we live, there are more opportunities for genetic damage (mutations) in the body. And as we age, our bodies are less capable of repairing genetic damage.”

So why is it that so many younger women are now being struck by this potentially deadly disease?

What is Causing Breast Cancer in Young Women?

No one knows for sure, but it’s fairly safe to say that there are likely multiple contributors, many of them environmentally based. Cancer Research UK has singled out hormonal factors, such as having children later in life, having fewer children or taking birth control pills, as probable culprits, for instance.

This makes sense, as in 2002 one of the largest and best-designed studies of hormone replacement therapy was halted because women taking these synthetic hormones had such a higher risk of breast cancer (and heart attack, stroke and blood clots) that continuing forward with the study would have been unethical.

The news made headlines because millions of women were already taking these synthetic hormones, but fortunately it prompted many of them to quit. And what do you think happened a year after millions of women quit taking hormone replacement therapy? Incidence of breast cancer fell dramatically — by 7 percent!

What does this have to do with the Pill? Birth control pills contain the SAME type of synthetic hormones — estrogen and progestin — that were used in the ill-fated study!

Even women who aren’t taking birth control pills are exposed to synthetic hormones that have become increasingly widespread in recent years.

For instance, parabens are chemicals with estrogen-like properties, and estrogen is one of the hormones involved in the development of breast cancer. Parabens are widely used in personal care products like shampoo, lotion, deodorant, shaving gel and cosmetics.

These chemicals have been detected in breast cancer tissues at concentrations up to 1 million times higher than the estrogen (estradiol) levels naturally found in human breast tissue.3 Propylparaben, in particular, was found in the highest concentration in the underarm area (axilla), where underarm deodorants are most used and breast cancer prevalence is at its highest.

Clearly these chemicals are accumulating at alarmingly high concentrations, likely because of their widespread and persistent daily use. And exposure often begins as early as in the womb, the health effects of which are completely unknown.

Another Breast Cancer Risk Hiding in Your Milk …

Not only are children and young women inundated with hormone-mimicking chemicals in personal care products, but such potentially cancer-causing chemicals are also found in a dietary staple for many: milk.

RBGH, or recombinant bovine growth hormone, is a synthetic version of natural bovine somatotropin (BST), a hormone produced in cows’ pituitary glands. RBGH is the largest selling dairy animal drug in the US, where cows are injected with it to boost their milk production. But it is banned in Canada, Japan, Australia, New Zealand, and in the 27 countries of the European Union because of its dangers to human health.

RBGH milk contains increased levels of insulin growth factor-1 (IGF-1). IGF-1 regulates cell growth, cell division, and the ability of cancer cells to spread to your distant organs (invasiveness). In other words, IGF-1 has potent growth-stimulating effects in human breast tissue, especially

in the presence of estradiol (a form of estrogen). Growth factors such as IGF-1 are “catalysts” for the transformation of normal breast tissue into breast cancer tissue, and are critically involved in the aberrant growth of human breast cancer cells.

One study showed that premenopausal women with elevated IGF-1 levels had up to a seven-fold increase in breast cancer.4 And separate research showed women younger than age 35 who have elevated IGF-1 have more aggressive breast cancer.5

The breast tissues of female fetuses and infants are especially sensitive to hormonal influences and cancer-causing chemicals. Infants and children exposed to high IGF-1 early on may become “sensitized,” leading to health problems later in life, such as breast enlargement in infants and young children, and breast cancer in adult women. Yet, despite these elevated risks to children, few schools make rBGH-free or organic milk available, nor do most state governments under low-income food programs

Toxic Insults, Nutritional Deficiencies Behind Many Breast Cancer Cases

The primary causes of breast cancer — nutritional deficiencies, exposure to environmental toxicity, inflammation, estrogen dominance and the resultant breakdown in genetic integrity and immune surveillance – still manifest as disease primarily among those over 50. However, the toxic insults are now hitting younger generations, who are much more susceptible to their adverse health effects.

For instance, girls who receive radiation to the chest to treat childhood cancer have a high risk of developing breast cancer at a young age, according to research. Even those who received low doses of the common cancer treatment face an increased risk of breast cancer later, the scientists said.

Plus, in the US, women are still urged to get an annual mammogram starting at the age of 40, despite the fact that updated guidelines set forth by the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force in 2009 urge women to wait until the age of 50, and to only get bi-annual screening thereafter.

The primary hazard of mammography is ionizing radiation that may actually increase your cancer risk. According to a 2010 study,6 annual screening using digital or screen-film mammography on women aged 40–80 years is associated with an induced cancer incidence and fatal breast cancer rate of 20-25 cases per 100, 000. This means annual mammograms cause 20-25 cases of fatal cancer for every 100,000 women getting the test. And now with the “new and improved” 3D TOMOSYNTHESIS mammogram, women will be exposed to even more radiation.

Screening Ultrasound Catches Cancers Missed by Mammography

Many women are unaware that if they have dense breast tissue (40 to 50 percent of women), mammograms are basically useless for them. Dense breast tissue and cancer both appear white on an X-ray, making it nearly impossible for a radiologist to detect cancer in these women. It’s like trying to find a snowflake in a blizzard.

Some radiologists already provide density information to their patients, and encourage them to utilize other screening options like thermography, ultrasound and/or MRI. Recent research, in fact, revealed that for women with dense breasts, receiving a screening breast ultrasound after mammography detected an additional 3.4 cancer or high-risk lesions per 1,000 women screened.7

I believe it reasonable for a woman to trust that her radiologist is not withholding vital density information, however only California, Connecticut, New York, Virginia and Texas have passed laws making it mandatory for radiologists to inform their patients about this issue. Unfortunately, many have kept this potentially lifesaving data from women for decades, and our government agencies have failed to protect them from this unethical practice.

Top Breast Cancer Prevention Strategies

Cancer screening does NOT equate to cancer prevention, and although early detection is important, using a screening method that in and of itself increases your risk of developing cancer is simply not good medicine … Preventing breast cancer is far more important and powerful than simply trying to detect it after it has already formed, which is why I want to share my top tips on how to help prevent this disease in the first place.

In the largest review of research into lifestyle and breast cancer, the American Institute of Cancer Research estimated that about 40 percent of US breast cancer cases could be prevented if people made wiser lifestyle choices.8 I believe these estimates are far too low, and it is more likely that 75 percent to 90 percent of breast cancers could be avoided by strictly applying the recommendations below, which are the same for young women and older women alike.
•Avoid sugar, especially fructose. All forms of sugar are detrimental to health in general and promote cancer. Fructose, however, is clearly one of the most harmful and should be avoided as much as possible.
•Optimize your vitamin D. Vitamin D influences virtually every cell in your body and is one of nature’s most potent cancer fighters; recent research suggests maintaining your vitamin D levels may cut your cancer risk by 77 percent. Vitamin D is actually able to enter cancer cells and trigger apoptosis (programmed cell death). If you have cancer, your vitamin D level should be between 70 and 100 ng/ml.

Vitamin D works synergistically with every cancer treatment I’m aware of, with no adverse effects. I suggest you try watching my one-hour free lecture on vitamin D to learn more.

Remember that if you take oral vitamin D3 supplements, you also need to increase your vitamin K2 intake, as vitamin D increases the need for K2 to function properly. See my previous article What You Need to Know About Vitamin K2, D and Calcium for more information.

Please consider joining one of GrassrootsHealth’s D*Action’s vitamin D studies to stay on top of your vitamin D performance. For more information, see my previous article How Vitamin D Performance Testing Can Help You Optimize Your Health.
•Get plenty of natural vitamin A. There is evidence that vitamin A also plays a role in helping prevent breast cancer.9 It’s best to obtain it from vitamin A-rich foods, rather than a supplement. Your best sources are organic egg yolks, raw butter, raw whole milk, and beef or chicken liver.
•Lymphatic breast massage can help enhance your body’s natural ability to eliminate cancerous toxins. This can be applied by a licensed therapists, or you can implement self-lymphatic massage. It is also promotes self-nurturance.
•Avoid charring your meats. Charcoal or flame-broiled meat is linked with increased breast cancer risk. Acrylamide — a carcinogen created when starchy foods are baked, roasted or fried — has been found to increase breast cancer risk as well.
•Avoid unfermented soy products. Unfermented soy is high in plant estrogens, or phytoestrogens, also known as isoflavones. In some studies, soy appears to work in concert with human estrogen to increase breast cell proliferation, which increases the chances for mutations and cancerous cells. It is believed that fermentation actually transforms soy phytoestrogens like daidzin, glycitin and genistin to the more active phytogestrogenic compounds dadzein, glycitein and genistein. But, these phytoestrogens are adaptopgenic and can even block out endogenous estradiol and xenobiotic estrogens, reducing their harm as least in theory.
•Improve your insulin receptor sensitivity. The best way to do this is by avoiding sugar and grains and making sure you are exercising, especially with Peak Fitness.
•Maintain a healthy body weight. This will come naturally when you begin eating right for your nutritional type and exercising. It’s important to lose excess body fat because fat produces estrogen.
•Drink a half to whole quart of organic green vegetable juice daily. Please review my juicing instructions for more detailed information.
•Get plenty of high-quality animal-based omega-3 fats, such as krill oil. Omega-3 deficiency is a common underlying factor for cancer.
•Curcumin. This is the primary active ingredient in turmeric and in high concentrations, especially when combined with a phospholipid such as phosphatidyl choline or the black pepper compound piperine, can be very useful adjunct in the treatment of breast cancer. It shows immense therapeutic potential in preventing breast cancer metastasis.10 It’s important to know that curcumin is generally not absorbed that well, so I’ve provided several absorption tips here.
•Avoid drinking alcohol, or at least limit your alcoholic drinks to one per day.
•Breastfeed exclusively for up to six months. Research shows breastfeeding can reduce your breast cancer risk.
•Avoid wearing underwire bras. There is a good deal of data that metal underwire bras can heighten your breast cancer risk.
•Avoid electromagnetic fields as much as possible. Even electric blankets may increase your cancer risk.
•Avoid synthetic hormone replacement therapy. Breast cancer is an estrogen-related cancer, and according to a study published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, breast cancer rates for women dropped in tandem with decreased use of hormone replacement therapy. (As mentioned, there are similar risks for younger women who use oral contraceptives. Birth control pills, which are also comprised of synthetic hormones, have been linked to cervical and breast cancers.)

If you are experiencing excessive menopausal symptoms, you may want to consider bioidentical hormone replacement therapy instead, which uses hormones that are molecularly identical to the ones your body produces and do not wreak havoc on your system. This is a much safer alternative.
•Avoid BPA, phthalates and other xenoestrogens. These are estrogen-like compounds that have been linked to increased breast cancer risk
•Make sure you’re not iodine deficient, as there’s compelling evidence linking iodine deficiency with breast cancer. Dr. David Brownstein,11 author of the book Iodine: Why You Need It, Why You Can’t Live Without It, is a proponent of iodine for breast cancer. It actually has potent anticancer properties and has been shown to cause cell death in breast and thyroid cancer cells.

For more information, I recommend reading Dr. Brownstein’s book. I have been researching iodine for some time ever since I interviewed Dr. Brownstein as I do believe that the bulk of what he states is spot on. However, I am not at all convinced that his dosage recommendations are correct. I believe they are likely too high.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

As you’re probably aware of by now, there’s a war being waged against raw milk. While raw milk sales or distribution are legal in many US states, and progress has been made toward improving access, there’s strong opposition to this trend. Each victory is hard-won.

Criminal trials centering around raw milk are scheduled to take place in both Minnesota and Wisconsin this year, and a new bill threatens to make herdshare illegal in North Dakota1.

(A herdshare is a private agreement between a farmer and an individual in which the farmer is paid to take care of an animal, cow for example, that belongs to one or more people. You essentially pay a onetime purchase fee to “buy a share” of a farmer’s herd, which entitles you to the benefits of owning that cow, such as a certain amount of milk each week.)

On May 20, the trial of Wisconsin dairy farmer Vernon Hershberger began at the Sauk County Courthouse. Hershberger is charged with four criminal misdemeanors that could result in a jail sentence of up to 30 months, along with fines totaling more than $10,000.

As previously reported, Hershberger’s farm was targeted by the Wisconsin Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection (DATCP) for supplying a private buying club with raw milk and other fresh produce.

It’s important to realize that there’s much more at stake than what meets the eye here. As stated in the featured article by the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund2:

“DATCP has charged Hershberger with, among other things, operating a retail food establishment without a license. Hershberger repeatedly rejects this, citing that he provides foods only to paid members in a private buying club and is not subject to state food regulations.

“There is more at stake here than just a farmer and his few customers,” says Hershberger, “this is about the fundamental right of farmers and consumers to engage in peaceful, private, mutually consenting agreements for food, without additional oversight.

… “Hershberger, and other farmers around the country, are facing state or federal charges against them for providing fresh foods to wanting individuals. In recent months the FDA has conducted several long undercover sting operations and raids against peaceful farmers and buying clubs that have resulted in farms shutting down and consumers without access to the food they depend on.”

Each day, following the day’s hearings, which began on May 20 and is expected to go on for about a month, supporters are scheduled to gather at the Al Ringling Theater across the street from the Sauk County Courthouse where leaders in the food rights movement will hold live presentations and lectures.

Scheduled speakers include Virginia farmer Joel Salatin, Mountain Man show star Eustace Conway, and food rights organizer from Maine, Deborah Evans.

Raw Grass-Fed Milk is SAFER than Pasteurized, So Why the Persecution?

One of the most common excuses given for why farmers are raided, prosecuted, and shut down is that raw foods may be potentially harmful to human health. But to think that pasteurized milk is safer than raw milk from a healthy, grass-fed cow is simply not true.

And for those of you who have been lucky enough to try this illegal product as raw dairy milk, cheese, and yogurt – you know what an incredible difference there is in taste and texture. Tests have shown substantial nutritional benefits from raw milk as well, over the pasteurized and defatted products you typically find at your grocery store.

While the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) warns that raw milk can carry disease-causing bacteria, what they completely overlook is the fact that these bacteria are the result of industrial farming practices that lead to diseased animals, which may then in turn produce contaminated milk. They make no distinction whatsoever between disease-riddled factory farmed milk and the milk from clean, healthy, grass-fed cows.

The former MUST be pasteurized in order to be safe for consumption. The latter does not. You definitely avoid drinking any raw milk from a conventionally-raised feed-lot cow! But drinking raw milk produced by grass-fed cows from clean, well-run farms, on the other hand, is actually far LESS dangerous than drinking pasteurized milk. In fact, not only does raw milk contain good bacteria that are essential for a healthy digestive system, raw milk also offers protection against disease-causing bacteria.

CDC data3 shows there are about 412 confirmed cases of people getting ill from pasteurized milk each year, while only about 116 illnesses a year are linked to raw milk. And research by Dr. Ted Beals4, MD, featured in the summer 2011 issue of Wise Traditions, the quarterly journal of the Weston A. Price Foundation, shows that you are about 35,000 times more likely to get sick from other foods than you are from raw milk!

The science is equally clear on the above points, but that’s not why farmers like Hershberger are getting slapped with criminal charges. The larger issue at stake is the issue of food freedom—the right to sell, buy, and consume fresh food that hasn’t been produced by some multinational conglomerate.

Farmers have been getting a raw deal for some time now, as the dairy industry wants to keep a majority of the profits in their pockets. The local farmer to consumer model is not very beneficial to the big corporations, as they have brought the farmers share of many of these products down to less than 7 cents to the dollar in the retail market. Manufacturers, distributors and retailers are taking the majority of the profits from the farmer’s labor.

It’s really nothing more than Mafia strong arm tactics aimed at shutting down the competition. The reason why small-scale organic dairy farms are so threatening to the dairy industry is because they simply cannot produce safe raw milk in a confined animal feeding operation (CAFO). Cows raised under such conditions produce milk that must be pasteurized in order to be safe to drink, as the unnatural diet and environment dramatically alters the nutritional and bacterial composition of the milk.

Why are Farmers Being Jailed while Big Business Gets Off Scot Free?

Meanwhile, real criminal activities that place you and your family’s health at grave risk are being ignored, if not outright condoned, by the same agencies that are trying to jail small-scale farmers like Hershberger. For example, no less than 19 drug companies made AllBusiness.com’s Top 100 Corporate Criminals List for the 1990s. Their crimes included defrauding Medicare, Medicaid, and even the FDA; international price-setting; false claims; hiding serious problems with their drugs and, in one case (Ortho, a subsidiary of Johnson & Johnson), obstruction of justice and eight counts of persuading employees to destroy documents in a federal investigation.

Yet not a single person from any of those companies has seen the inside of a jail cell. Not even when Pfizer was ordered to pay $2.3 billion to resolve criminal and civil charges relating to the painkiller Bextra in 2009, or when GlaxoSmithKline was found guilty in the largest health fraud settlement in US history last year.

Why is it that a company, which is run by individuals, can harm and kill tens of thousands of people and get off paying fines that really amount to pocket change, while small farmers face serious jail time for selling healthful food to willing buyers? We simply must band together to support our local farmers against such injustice, and protect your own right to buy and eat whatever food you see fit for your family.

Join the Fight for Food Freedom

The fight over raw milk stands as a symbol of the much larger fight for food freedom. Who gets to decide what you eat? You? Or the FDA? If the FDA and state agencies are allowed to impose their view of “safe food” on consumers, raw milk won’t be the only thing lost—all food will be pasteurized, irradiated, and genetically engineered. The effort to reclaim our right to buy and consume raw milk is leading the way for everyone who wants to be able to obtain the food of their choice from the source of their choice. So please, get involved! I urge you to get involved with the following action plan to protect your right to choose your own foods:
1.Get informed: Visit www.farmtoconsumer.org or click here to sign up for action alerts.
2.Join the fight for your rights: The Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund (FTCLDF) is the only organization of its kind. This 501(c)(4) nonprofit organization provides a legal defense for farmers who are being pursued by the government for distributing foods directly to consumers. Your donations, although not tax deductible, will be used to support the litigation, legislative, and lobbying efforts of the FTCLDF. For a summary of FTCLDF’s activities in 2012, see this link.
3.Support your local farmers: Buy from local farmers, not the industry that is working with the government to take away your freedoms.

How to Identify a High-Quality Producer of Raw Milk

If you’re still unsure of where to find raw milk, you can locate a raw milk source near you at the Campaign for Real Milk Web site5. The Farm to Consumer Legal Defense Fund6 (which helps farmers that have been raided and/or charged with a crime, like Hershberger) also provides a state-by-state review of raw milk laws7.

Getting your raw milk from a local organic farm is one of the best ways to ensure you’re getting high quality milk. If you’re thinking about purchasing milk from a small farmer, it would be very wise to visit the farm in person. Look around and ask questions, such as:
1.Does the farmer and his family drink the milk themselves?
2.How long has he been producing raw milk?
3.Are the cows clean?
4.What conditions are the cows raised in?
5.Are there any obvious sanitation questions?

Additionally, look for the following general conditions. If a cow is covered in filth and manure, stinks, is wet and cold and doesn’t look particularly comfortable, that could be a warning sign that her milk is less than ideal for raw consumption, even if it’s from a small, local farm.

Low pathogenic bacteria count (ie does the farmer test his milk regularly for pathogens?)

The milk comes from cows raised naturally, in accordance with the seasons

The cows are not given antibiotics and growth hormones to increase milk production

The milk is quickly chilled after milking

The cows are mainly grass-fed

Cows are well cared for

Support Your Local Farmers

Hershberger is just one of many farmers who has been unreasonably harassed and victimized in the war against raw food. There are many other examples. And every year there seems to be one bill or another aimed at taking away your rights to feed your family with whatever foods you see fit. For example, right now a new bill threatens to make herdshare illegal in North Dakota8.

This fight is about much more than just raw milk. It’s a fight for the most fundamental of rights—the right of farmers and consumers to engage in private, mutually consenting agreements for food, without additional oversight. We’re not dealing with drugs here. We’re dealing with FOOD!

Yet while Big Pharma can sell hazardous goods without major repercussions, farmers can’t sell healthful food without being harassed! This must end. One of the best ways you can support this movement is to support your local farmers by buying their food. You can also help make inroads by supporting the Farm-to-Consumer Legal Defense Fund with a financial pledge.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Medical self-mutilation… a new fashion statement for the chronically stupid

Beyond merely inspiring women to cut off healthy breasts just because they carry the BRCA1 gene, Angelina Jolie also seems to be inspiring men to remove some of their own reproductive organs as well. According to an IBtimes article, a British man is the first person to have had his prostate gland surgically removed because he carries the BRCA2 “breast cancer” gene that’s related to the BRCA1 gene suddenly made famous by Angelina Jolie’s double mastectomy.

IBtimes reports, “Surgeons were initially reluctant, since the potential side effects of the operation include infertility, incontinence and sexual dysfunction.”

But what the hell, right? If cutting off healthy organs is trendy enough for Angelina Jolie, it’s gotta be trendy enough for everybody else… including men!

Medical self-mutilation… a new fashion statement for the chronically stupid
This new meme of medical self-mutilation is spreading fast, and surgeons are jumping on the bandwagon, realizing there’s a windfall of profits to be made from performing surgical procedures on people who don’t need surgery.

After all, the only reason surgery isn’t a much larger industry is because most surgeons limit their practice only to people who have a medical need for surgery. But why set an artificial limit? It’s so much more profitable to convince people to remove healthy organs… and what better way to make it trendy than to get Hollywood celebrities to talk it up?

Surgeons, too, are hyping the fear factor. Roger Kirby, the lead surgeon on this prostate cancer removal, reportedly told the Sunday Times, “…knowing you are a carrier [of the BRCA2 gene] is like having the sword of Damocles hanging over you. You are living in a state of constant fear. I am sure more male BRCA carriers will now follow suit [with surgical removal].”

Especially if more celebrities come out and promote these medical self-mutilation procedures as trendy and cool, of course.

Hey, I want to see Brad Pitt’s prostate gland stuffed into a glass tube and hanging around Angelina Jolie’s neck like she used to reportedly do with Billy Bob Thorton’s blood. That wouldn’t be weird, would it?

I think we should start a “Skin Removal Foundation” to have all the skin surgically removed from people who might someday have skin cancer… which includes everyone.

Or better yet, the “Young Women Breast Cancer Prevention Society” which chops off their breasts at age nine, before puberty really kicks in. Just tell your little girls how much you love them before the anesthesia kicks in. That’s what good mommies do, isn’t it?

And for the young boys, why stop at slicing off their foreskin at birth? Penis mutilation is just a warm-up for today’s insane medical monsters. Why not remove their colons at birth so that they never run the risk of dying from colon cancer? Why not cut off their testicles and make sure they never face the future possible risk of testicular cancer, too?

I know, it’s insane. Disgusting. Outrageous. And yet it’s happening right now thanks to women like Angelina Jolie who are publicizing and pushing this idea that women should have healthy breasts cut out of their bodies even though there is no rational medical justification for doing so.

You are your own boogeyman: Cut off anything that scares you
So now we’ve come to the end game of slash-and-burn medicine deployed across a sick, demented society: Having healthy organs isn’t good enough anymore. Now we have to cut out organs just because we have the fear of possible future disease — a fear that is utterly irrational and hyped up by the cancer industry itself. This fear is the adult medical version of the “Boogeyman” that children think is hiding under their beds at night.

Watch out, women, the breast cancer boogeyman is coming to get you! Better cut off the organs before they become diseased, and that way you can live in total peace with a “zen attitude” about life.

Never mind any discussion of how to live a healthy, cancer-free life while reducing your risk of cancer to nearly zero. It’s easy to accomplish with foods, superfoods, nutritional supplements, exercise and other simple lifestyle choices. But you don’t hear this offered anywhere in the media. Instead, it’s all about, “Cut it off!”

The new answer to disease: Cut out the organ that might be involved and call it a cure
Got a problem eating too much ice cream? Cut out your stomach! (Bariatric surgery)

Gallbladder suddenly hurting from your crappy junk food diet? Slice it out with a precision medical instrument! (A common medical procedure across the USA today)

Your brain working too fast? Sever your corpus callosum and disconnect! (Common psychiatric treatment)

Sweating too much? Have your sweat glands removed! (This is a very popular surgery in Taiwan and China.)

Never mind the risk of surgery and anesthesia, the nerve damage, the numb scar tissue, the ridiculous medical bills and the crippling side effects of going under the knife. None of these things are your concern. You need to be a Hollywood hipster like Jolie, and that can only be accomplished, dear reader, through scar tissue!

Call 1-800-CHOP-OFF today! (satire)
What are you waiting for? Call 1-800-CHOP-OFF today and discover the new, risk-free, worry-free YOU! Operators and surgeons are standing by with scalpels at the ready. No organ too large or too small! … Not even yours!

Call 1-800-CHOP-OFF now and be prepared to show your Obamacare policy number for a FREE consultation with our team of highly-experienced medical mutilators. Out top man has removed over 147 breasts so far, and he’s ready for more!

Coming soon in 2014: Drive-through double mastectomies performed by Walgreens! Drive in with worries, drive out with pure bliss, knowing your breasts will never kill you! Peace of mind is priceless, plus you’ll never have to breastfeed ever again!

Do-It-Yourself Medical Mutilation Arrives Soon
And coming in 2015: The “Organ Whacker Saw” Do-It-Yourself breast and prostate remover!

No body part is worth keeping around if it might kill you in your sleep, is it? Don’t live with the terrible burden of knowing there is a 1 in 1,000 chance of dying from a preventable disease that you aren’t preventing. Take care of the problem yourself — in seconds — with the new, FDA-approved “Organ Whacker Saw,” shown in the picture on the right.

The Organ Whacker Saw is Hollywood approved and it instantly whacks off breasts, testicles, ears, feet and hands. In “advanced mode” it can even be used to remove those pesky kidneys and prostate glands! Worried about your prostate? Toss your sex life out the window and whack your prostate! It’s gone! And so are your worries!

WARNING: The Organ Whacker Saw should never be used on anyone else due to the danger of personal injury. Only use it on yourself! Because that’s trendy. Read included instructions and safety warnings before using.

The Organ Whacker Saw will be available at Home Depot, Lowe’s and CVS Pharmacies everywhere. Ask for it by name: “I want the Organ Whacker Saw!” Don’t settle for cheap imitations made in China. Organ Whacker saw is made in the USA with American pride in every sharpened, precision instrument. It comes with a 48-volt rechargeable lithium-ion battery good for over 2,000 mutilations!

Self-mutilation has never been easier: Whack your organs off with the most trusted name in the industry: the Organ Whacker Saw!

(Reality check: If you think this satire has gone too far, just wait ten years and it will all become a reality. A decade ago, the idea that women would cut off their breasts when they had no breast cancer was considered medical lunacy. Now it’s trendy and cool.)

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Obesity is characterized not only by excess fat near the surface of your body, but also excess fat in and around your internal organs.

Sometimes excess fat accumulates in the liver and can lead to inflammation and scarring, which is a serious condition called nonalcoholic steatohepatitis (NASH). When your liver becomes fatty and scarred, it can no longer function normally. In its most severe form, this can progress to cirrhosis, liver failure and even death.

Although anyone can develop NASH, especially considering that fructose consumption is a primary cause,1 it’s most common in people who are overweight or obese, and its incidence has been rising along with rates of obesity in the last decade. So, if you have this disease, of course the very first step would be to limit total fructose to under 15 grams per day (including fruits).

With no known treatment – and often no symptoms until serious damage has occurred – this “silent” disease is one of the greatest obesity-related health risks; for the 63 million Americans currently at risk of NASH, there’s good news: increasing your intake of vitamin E may help significantly.

Vitamin E May Help Alleviate NASH Symptoms

Two new studies recently investigated the role of vitamin E, a powerful antioxidant you cannot live without, on NASH. The first tested the hypothesis that low levels of vitamin E may be linked to liver disease and indeed found that in mice bioengineered to have inadequate vitamin E levels there was increased oxidative stress, fat deposition and other signs of liver injury.2

When the mice were supplemented with vitamin E, the majority of NASH-related symptoms were relieved.

Likewise, a second study looking into the role of vitamin E on NASH showed that rats with the liver disease that were supplemented with both full spectrum d-mixed tocotrienols and alpha-tocopherol had multiple improvements compared to those supplemented with only alpha-tocopherol or mixed tocotrienols.3 Benefits included:
•Reduced triglyceride accumulation in the liver
•Decreased level of lipid peroxides
•Improved liver damage markers
•Inhibited liver fibrosis (scarring)

“This study shows us that taking both natural full spectrum tocotrienol complex and alpha-tocopherol together help to synergistically improve NASH and support healthy liver,” the researchers said.4

NASH is often a slow-growing disease than can take years or decades to progress. The process can stop and even spontaneously reverse, or it may progress with worsening scarring to cirrhosis. Once this occurs, the disease progression will continue on to liver failure and little can be done to stop it.

Supplementing with vitamin E, or increasing intake via your diet, may therefore be a crucial step that can help you halt the progression of this disease.

Along with losing weight if you’re overweight (which means following a healthy diet and exercising), and avoiding increased stresses on your liver, such as alcohol, excessive amounts of fructose and unnecessary medications, making sure you’re getting adequate vitamin E is a step anyone at risk of NASH should proactively take. The time to intervene is before permanent liver damage has a chance to occur.

Vitamin E May Boost the Health Benefits of Quitting Smoking

It’s not only your liver that stands to benefit from adequate intakes of vitamin E. Researchers recently revealed that the improvements in blood vessel function that occur when a smoker quits smoking may be boosted by taking a vitamin E supplement.5

Seven days after quitting, the former smokers had an increase in vascular function (the blood vessel’s ability to dilate) by an average of 2.8 percent. However, those who also took gamma-tocopherol vitamin E had an additional 1.5 percent improvement. This might not sound like much, however each 1 percent increase in vascular function is equivalent to a 13 percent reduction in the risk of developing heart disease later in life6 — so the additional 1.5 percent improvement is significant.

The former smokers who took the vitamin E supplement also had lower levels of inflammatory proteins that are linked to heart disease, which suggests the vitamin E may help smokers’ bodies to return to a healthy state sooner, and even potentially reverse some of the damage smoking caused.

While the most studied form of vitamin E is alpha tocopherol, the most abundant form found in your body, this research used gamma tocopherol, which is the most commonly occurring natural form of vitamin E in the US diet, found in foods such as walnuts and pecans. While natural alpha tocopherol has incredible antioxidant benefits and is important, it’s becoming increasingly clear that each of the eight members of the vitamin E family provide their own unique benefits, which is why choosing a supplement with mixed tocopherols and tocotrienols is so important.

Richard Bruno, the study’s lead author, explained:7

“We used the gamma tocopherol type in contrast to virtually all other vitamin E studies that use alpha tocopherol … Alpha tocopherol is the one that we know the most about. It is the form that we know is required for humans, but gamma tocopherol is the most abundant form. We used the gamma tocopherol form because not only does it have antioxidant activity, like alpha tocopherol, but recent evidence indicates that it also has effective ability to lower inflammation and also trap what we call reactive nitrogen species. These are chemicals generated in the body that can lead to damage to various proteins.”

Most Americans Need More Vitamin E Than Their Diets Provide

Your body likely needs more than the US Daily Value (DV) of 22 IU vitamin E daily, yet the average American diet supplies considerably less than even this amount. Renowned international researcher Dr. Evan Shute, a physician recognized for his 30-plus years of work with vitamin E, suggests average healthy women should have 400 IU a day, while men should have 600 IU daily. Even the National Institutes of Health states:8

“The diets of most Americans provide less than the recommended amounts of vitamin E.”

What are some of the best dietary sources of vitamin E?
•Nuts, such as hazelnuts, almonds, walnuts and pecans
•Legumes,
•Green vegetables, such as spinach and broccoli

Vegetable oils, including sunflower, safflower, corn and soybean oil, also contain vitamin E, however there are a number of reasons for avoiding these oils in your diet, including the facts that they will become rancid and oxidized when heated, and typically are made from genetically engineered crops. Breakfast cereals are also commonly fortified with vitamin E, but even the “healthy” low-sugar varieties will spike both blood sugar and insulin in your body, making them a poor choice nutritionally speaking. So there are actually relatively few healthful dietary sources of vitamin E, which is why a supplement may be necessary.

A Warning About Synthetic Vitamin E Supplements

If you do choose to take a vitamin E supplement, it is very important to avoid synthetic versions, which are listed as “dl-alpha-tocopherol” on labels. For starters, the natural form of vitamin E — listed as “d-alpha-tocopherol” – is more potent; 100 IU of natural vitamin E is equal to about 150 IU of the synthetic form.9

Further, as noted by GreenMedInfo, “synthetic dl-alpha tocopherol is a byproduct of a petrochemical-dependent manufacturing process and may have adverse endocrine-disrupting activities.”10 It is this synthetic form of vitamin E that has been linked to increased risks of prostate cancer, along with other ill effects such as a hemorrhagic stroke and pneumonia.11

Ideally, you’ll want to get the majority of the nutrients you need from your food, which means you have to eat whole, preferably organic foods—not processed foods fortified with synthetic vitamins and minerals. Then, depending on your health status, you should evaluate whether or not you might need to take a supplement such as natural vitamin E to help address a particular health problem or counter any particular deficiency in your diet. No matter what type of supplement you are considering, be sure you choose the most natural form, which will be closest to the form found in food, available.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

If you want to improve your nutrition and are itching to grow your own food, sprouts are an ideal choice.

Virtually all sprouted seeds and grains fall in the “superfood” category, and they’re really easy to grow, even if you don’t have a lot of space or an outdoor garden. But what about green grasses like wheatgrass?

Wheatgrass is grown from wheat seeds, and contains high amounts of chlorophyll. Most people juice it, but wheat grass is also available in supplement form.

My main objection to wheatgrass is I believe vegetable sprouts like sunflower, broccoli, and pea sprouts are far more beneficial as a food if you want to improve your nutrition. If you’re going to grow sprouts, I wouldn’t put wheatgrass at the top of the list.

As reported in the featured article by the Chicago Tribune:1

“Its health benefits and curative powers were promoted in the 1940s by Ann Wigmore, a Lithuanian immigrant to Boston and holistic health practitioner.

Wigmore believed humans could benefit by following the practice of dogs and cats by eating grass and regurgitating to feel better.

She developed the wheatgrass diet, a program which, in addition to consuming wheat grass juice, avoids all meats, dairy products and cooked foods, and focuses on ‘live’ foods such as sprouts, raw produce, nuts and seeds.

The diet and its many touted health and curative claims — detoxification of the body, controlling diabetes, prevention of bacterial infections, the common cold and fever; and protection against ailments like skin problems, gout and even cancer — took off and continues to be alive and well today.”

Potential Benefits of Wheatgrass

As you can see, Wigmore’s inspiration for eating wheatgrass is not really based on its nutritional content but rather the idea that humans might benefit in the same manner as some animals which, upon eating grass, vomit and thereby feel better.

Many alternative health practitioners believe in wheatgrass as being highly beneficial. The Hippocrates Health Institute,2 for example, has a long list of purported benefits of wheatgrass, including the following (for the full list, please see the HHI web site):
•Increases red blood-cell count; cleanses the blood, organs and gastrointestinal tract; simulates metabolism
•Stimulates your thyroid gland
•Reduces over-acidity in your blood and relieve peptic ulcers, ulcerative colitis, constipation, diarrhea, and other gastrointestinal complaints
•Detoxifies your liver and blood and chemically neutralizes environmental pollutants
•Its high chlorophyll content may help oxygenate your blood. Keeping a tray of live wheatgrass near your bed may also enhance the oxygen in the air and generate healthful negative ions to help improve your sleep
•May help reduce damaging effects of radiation, courtesy of the enzyme SOD—an anti-inflammatory compound

They also claim there are a number of health benefits you can reap simply from topical exposure, such as rubbing some juice onto your skin or adding wheatgrass to your bath.

“[Wheatgrass] can double your red blood cell count just by soaking in it. Renowned nutritionist Dr. Bernard Jensen found that no other blood builders are superior to green juices and wheatgrass. In his book ‘Health Magic Through Chlorophyll’

He mentions several cases where he was able to double the red blood cell count in a matter of days merely by having patients soak in a chlorophyll-water bath. Blood building results occur even more rapidly when patients drink green juices and wheatgrass regularly.”

Others, like Mother Nature Network,3 point out that there are no medical studies to support Dr. Jensen’s findings. According to Dr. Chris Reynolds,4 who goes by the moniker “Dr. Wheatgrass,” the benefits of wheatgrass are primarily biological, not nutritional.

“Reynolds argues that there is plenty of evidence to support wheatgrass extract’s role in supporting biological functions, including one preliminary study in the Journal of Experimental and Clinical Cancer Research,5 which suggests that fermented wheatgrass extract ‘exerts significant antitumor activity.’

The study concludes that the extract requires further evaluation as a candidate for clinical combination drug regimens,” Mother Nature Network writes.

Important Details to Know BEFORE You Use Wheat Grass

Wheatgrass contains large amounts of chlorophyll, and is thought to have a wide variety of health promoting properties; however these benefits are largely related to the quality of how it is grown. Like any food or supplement, quality is highly variable and if you chose to use it, this is important to pay attention to. It is far less expensive to grow your own, but more importantly you can typically grow a much higher quality grass.

Harvest time is crucial and that is typically around one week after you germinate the seeds at what is called the “jointing stage.” Some stores that sell wheat grass will harvest it once and then let it grow again for a second harvest Some also sell frozen wheat grass but this is far less effective than freshly harvested wheat grass.
Most wheat grass tastes very bitter Many believe that they need to grow it in direct sunlight but this actually contributes to the bitterness. Expose the grass only to indirect sunlight, and harvest it right at the jointing stage when it is at its sweetest.
One of the complications of growing wheat grass is that it is very easy to be contaminated with mold due to it’s tightly bound roots in moist soil. If this occurs, the mold can make you sick. Mold typically grows at the bottom of the wheat grass near the soil. Keeping a gentle breeze blowing, keeping the humidity low, and reducing the quantity of seed so the growth is less dense are three approaches to help limit this.

If you decide to use wheat grass you need to be very careful though, as excessive amounts of wheat grass can cause you to become very nauseous and catalyze a healing crisis that could make you very sick. It is also not a food but a detoxifying herb and should not be consumed every day for long periods of time.

It is not uncommon for people who drink wheatgrass juice daily for several months or years to develop an aversion to the taste, or even become nauseated by it. Since it is such a highly detoxifying medicinal herb that can cause cleanse or “Herxheimer” reactions, it’s a good idea to use wheatgrass juice judiciously. When first starting wheatgrass you should only use one ounce once or twice a day, gradually working up to two ounces.

The Benefits of Raw Juice

While I’m not convinced that wheatgrass is an ideal choice as a food, there’s no doubt that sprouts and green juice play a significant role in optimal nutrition. At the end of this article, I’ll review growing your own sprouts, but first, let’s look at juicing.

Virtually every health authority recommends that we get 6-8 servings of vegetables and fruits per day and very few of us actually get that. Juicing is an easy way to virtually guarantee that you will reach your daily target for vegetables. There are three main reasons why you will want to consider incorporating vegetable juicing into your optimal health program:
1.Juicing helps you absorb all the nutrients from the vegetables. This is important because most of us have impaired digestion as a result of making less-than-optimal food choices over many years. This limits your body’s ability to absorb all the nutrients from the vegetables. Juicing will help to “pre-digest” them for you, so you will receive most of the nutrition, rather than having it go down the toilet.
2.Juicing allows you to consume a healthier amount of vegetables in an efficient manner. If you are a carb type, you should eat one pound of raw vegetables per 50 pounds of body weight per day. Some people may find eating that many vegetables difficult, but it can be easily accomplished with a quick glass of vegetable juice.
3.You can add a wider variety of vegetables in your diet. Many people eat the same vegetable salads every day. This violates the principle of regular food rotation and increases your chance of developing an allergy to a certain food. But with juicing, you can juice a wide variety of vegetables that you may not normally enjoy eating whole.

Drinking your juice first thing in the morning can give you a natural energy boost without resorting to stimulants like coffee. Since the juice is already in an easily digestible form, it can help revitalize your energy levels within as little as 20 minutes. For more information about juicing, including detailed recommendations for the types of vegetables to use; different types of juicers, and other helpful tips, please see my three-part interview with Cherie Calbom, better known as The Juice Lady (Part 1, part 2, and part 3). Below, I give a quick overview of juicing, and how to find a juicer that doesn’t cost a fortune.

Sprouts—A DIY Superfood

Wheatgrass is not to be viewed as a food; it is a potent healing agent if used carefully and cautiously. There are other sprouts that fill the role of food very well. Sprouts are important to optimize your health, as they are an oft-ignored powerhouse of nutrition. They can contain up to 30 times the nutrition of organic vegetables grown in your own garden, and allow your body to extract more vitamins, minerals, amino acids and essential fats from the foods you eat.

During sprouting, minerals, such as calcium and magnesium, bind to protein, making them more bioavailable. Furthermore, both the quality of the protein and the fiber content of beans, nuts, seeds and grains improves when sprouted. The content of vitamins and essential fatty acids also increase dramatically during the sprouting process. While you can sprout a variety of different beans, nuts, seeds and grains, sprouts in general have the following beneficial attributes:
•Support for cell regeneration
•Powerful sources of antioxidants, minerals, vitamins and enzymes that protect against free radical damage
•Alkalinizing effect on your body, which is thought to protect against disease, including cancer (as many tumors are acidic)
•Abundantly rich in oxygen, which can also help protect against abnormal cell growth, viruses and bacteria that cannot survive in an oxygen-rich environment

My two favorites are pea and sunflower sprouts. They provide some of the highest quality protein you can eat. Sprouted sunflower seeds also contain plenty of iron and chlorophyll, the latter of which will help detoxify your blood and liver. Of the seeds, sunflower seeds are among the best in terms of overall nutritional value, and sprouting them will augment their nutrient content by as much as 300 to 1,200 percent! Similarly, sprouting peas will improve the bioavailability of zinc and magnesium.

Planting and Harvesting Sprouts at Home

I used to grow sprouts in Ball jars over 10 years ago but stopped doing that. I am strongly convinced that actually growing them in soil is far easier and produces far more nutritious and abundant food. It is also less time consuming. With Ball jars you need to rinse them several times a day to prevent mold growth. Trays also take up less space. I am now consuming one whole tray you see below every 2-3 days and to produce that much food with Ball jars I would need dozens of jars.

I am in the process of compiling more specific detailed videos for future articles but I thought I would whet your appetite and give you a preview with the photos below. For now you can get instructions on how to grow them by viewing a step-by-step guide at rawfoods-livingfoods.com.6 One of the important details that many fail to do is to cover the sprouting tray with a cover that not only puts the sprouts in darkness but has a heavy weight on it. The weight is necessary to produce a high quality sprout. It needs the exercise to simulate breaking through the soil.

About to plant wheat grass and sunflower seeds – 2 days after soaking

Wheat grass and sunflower seeds – 3 ½ days post germination

Sunflower seeds and pea sprouts – 3 days until ready for harvest

Sunflower seed sprouts and wheat Grass – ready to harvest

Sprouts are a perfect complement to fermented vegetables. My current salad consists of about half a pound of sunflower sprouts, four ounces of fermented vegetables, half a large red pepper, several tablespoon of raw organic butter, some red onion, a whole avocado and about three ounces of salmon or chicken. It is my primary meal. In the late afternoon, I typically only have macadamia nuts and home made coconut candy in addition to drinking 16-32 ounces of green vegetable juice. I break it up occasionally by going to a restaurant with friends.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Conventional medicine openly admits to confusion over BRCA1 gene

By now, I’m sure you’ve heard the news about Angelina Jolie testing positive for the BRCA1 gene mutation and the decision to remove her breasts. This decision has been touted as a brave and reasonable choice, considering the assumed high risk for breast cancer.

But, as an educated guess, I’ll bet Angelina Jolie has NOT been told the whole truth about the BRCA1 gene or her risk for getting breast cancer.

I say this respectfully – that if Angelina Jolie or any other woman wants to read the rest of this article (and has had 1 or 2 breasts removed due to the BRCA1 gene mutation) – you should be prepared to get very angry!

I want to make one thing perfectly clear. I will always respect the decision of any woman to care for her body – any way she sees fit. But, when a woman is asked to make life and death decisions with fraudulent, unscientific information, that’s when I take exception. In fact, I think, those healthcare professional giving out flawed data, to their patients, should go to jail.

Don’t remove your breasts until you read this “NCI disclaimer”…

Many of us have heard the conventional talking points that refer to an “87% higher risk for breast cancer” – if one tests positive for the BRCA1 gene mutation. But, I’m here to tell you, that this is a complete fabrication of the medical truth.

I’ll be honest – when I read this statement by the National Cancer Institute (NCI) – I nearly fell off my chair. Even if you test positive for the BRCA1 gene mutation – your risk of getting breast cancer may still be caused by other factors.

In other words, the BRCA1 gene may not really be the cause of breast cancer.

Read for yourself what the National Cancer Institute says about BRCA1 or BRCA2 gene mutations…

“It is important to note, however, that most research related to BRCA1 and BRCA2 has been done on large families with many individuals affected by cancer. Estimates of breast and ovarian cancer risk associated with BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations have been calculated from studies of these families. Because family members share a proportion of their genes and, often, their environment, it is possible that the large number of cancer cases seen in these families may be due in part to other genetic or environmental factors. Therefore, risk estimates that are based on families with many affected members may not accurately reflect the levels of risk for BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutation carriers in the general population. In addition, no data are available from long-term studies of the general population comparing cancer risk in women who have harmful BRCA1 or BRCA2 mutations with women who do not have such mutations. Therefore, the percentages given above are estimates that may change as more data become available.”

I hope you understand the magnitude of what you’ve just read. The NCI has openly admitted that your risk for breast cancer stems from a wide variety of “genetic or environmental factors”.

Simply put, the NCI really doesn’t know (scientifically) how much of any risk factor causes cancer – including the presence of a BRCA1 mutation.

If you have any doubt about what you just read … check it out yourself – at the National Cancer Institute website link: www.cancer.gov/cancertopics/factsheet/Risk/BRCA

How the conventional cancer industry profits from your ignorance

The cancer industry would like you to believe that you are a victim of your genes with very little power to control your own health.

Let’s be clear, we are not victims of our genes. Even conventional science admits that our environment is a major risk factor for developing cancer. Our lifestyle has everything to do with the health (and expression) of our genes.

In fact, the research is so strong that they will do everything in their power to suppress this information and focus on disseminating fraudulent propaganda that makes you feel helpless and disempowered.

They know if the truth came out they would be out of business.

If you’re looking for positive, self-empowering answers in dealing with cancer – be sure to join us for the NaturalNews Healing Summit – starting Mon. May 20.

One of the summit speakers, John Aspley, MD(E), ND, DC had this to say about our genes and cancer prevention:

“What folks need to know is that genes can only express what they are fed. If they are fed a polluted diet from a toxic immediate environment (milieu), they will express disease.”

“With proper diet and a detoxified milieu, genes will almost always express resilient, thriving cells, never cancerous cells. Unless we learn this, we will end-up amputating most body parts by the end of this century. My heart aches for Angelina, and I wish her the best.”

Discover natural ways to counter the BRCA1 mutation

Research published in The Journal of Cell Biology, from a team led by Susana Gonzalo, Ph.D., illustrates our ability to dramatically reduce the risk of breast cancer – even with a BRCA1 gene mutation, without the need for surgery.

The so called breakthrough of this study is something we already know – vitamin D plays a significant role in turning off a pathway that would cause an activation of the mutated BRCA1 gene.

In other words, vitamin D can provide a safe and cost-effective way to prevent cancer. But, vitamin D is not the only nutrient with cancer-fighting properties.

A study in the medical journal Cancer Epidemiology, Biomarkers & Prevention looked at the benefits of dietary selenium supplements for women who have mutations in the BRCA1 gene.

The study was conducted in Poland, specifically for people who have a high risk of cancer due to their family history or genetic tests. The researchers used women who had the mutation and a relative that did not have the BRCA1 mutation.

The researchers collected a blood sample from each pair of women to find out how the blood may be damaged in a way that could lead to cancer. These samples were exposed to a chemical, which can cause cell damage. This was done to see how much damage occurs in the cells of women with and without the BRAC1 mutation.

For the second phase of this study, researchers gave a selenium supplement that provided 276 micrograms of selenium per day, for the duration of one to three months. Then, they had new blood samples taken after the women had taken the dietary selenium supplements.

Can you guess what happened next?

In the first part of the study, without the supplements, researchers found that the cells from the blood samples of women with a BRCA1 gene mutation sustained significantly more damage – when exposed to the test chemical – compared to the women without the mutation.

They found that cells from women with a BRCA1 gene mutation had an average of 0.58 damaged areas or breaks per cell as compared with 0.39 breaks per cell in the cells from women without a BRAC1 mutation. This showed that the women with the mutation were more susceptible to a type of damage that could lead to cancer.

The women in the study with the BRCA1 mutation also had low levels of selenium before receiving the selenium supplement. After one to three months, these women nearly doubled their level of selenium and the researchers found an average of only 0.40 breaks in the genetic material per cell, nearly the same as the women without the BRAC1 mutation.

Bottom line – selenium supplementation has been shown to virtually eliminate the cancer threat posed by the BRCA1 mutation.

In addition, researchers have discovered that omega-3 fatty acids are able to modify the BRCA1 gene in a positive way and showed poor quality polyunsaturated fatty acids have no effect – at all.

What a shocker – vitamin D, selenium and healthy fats are powerful ways to prevent breast cancer or any other type of cancer for that matter. Doesn’t this sound better than spending thousands of dollars on genetic tests and performing radical (disfiguring) surgery?

Maybe Angelina Jolie can add these facts to her corporately-controlled, talking points. I’m not against conventional medicine – I merely want women (and men) to be given all that facts about cancer prevention.

Save your breasts by making informed decisions and taking better care of yourself

Pick up a copy of the New Cancer Solutions CD set and empower yourself with natural, highly-effective ways to prevent, even reverse cancer.

The (3) CD set includes the following discussions:

The Consciousness of Cancer – The Health Ranger, Mike Adams
Mike Adams, the founder and editor of NaturalNews.com presents, “The Consciousness of Cancer” – a new way of looking at cancer.

The Compassionate Oncologist – James Forsythe, M.D., H.M.D
James W. Forsythe, M.D., H.M.D., has long been considered one of the most respected physicians in the United States. Dr. Forsythe graduated with honors from UC Berkeley and earned his medical degree at UCSF. This presentation reveals a NEW way of caring for cancer patients with an amazing success rate. You’ll learn about the most important cancer test available today; Dr. Forsythe’s 3-week cancer treatment program plus much more!

Stop Making Cancer – Thomas Lodi, MD(H)
Thomas Lodi, MD(H) completed his medical degree in 1985 from the University of Hawaii. This program will help you understand cancer – like you’ve never heard before. Discover the best ways to stop making cancer; eliminate cancer cells without harming the body and effectively strengthen the immune system – our ultimate defense against cancer. As Dr. Lodi says, the “bioterrain is everything”. This show will teach you how to prevent disease from the inside out.

Life Over Cancer – Keith I. Block, M.D.
Keith Block, M.D. is an internationally recognized expert in integrative oncology. Referred to by many as the “father of integrative oncology”, Dr. Block has published more than 75 scientific papers and his model of individualized integrative oncology continues to set the standard for the practice of comprehensive cancer care in the United States. This presentation goes way beyond “early detection” and teaches you about the best diet, supplement and exercise routines to promote optimal health.

Six Pillars of Health – Richard Linchitz, M.D.
Dr. Richard Linchitz graduated with honors from Cornell University Medical College, and completed his residency at the famed University of California, San Francisco, Moffit Hospital. In 1998, after being diagnosed with lung cancer, Dr. Linchitz changed everything about his life, career and overall perspective about medicine. Killing cancer cells is not enough – learn about detoxification, stress reduction techniques, hormone balancing plus much more! Dr. Linchitz believes his 6-step program is the best way to stay healthy – always!

The Regeneration Effect – John Apsley, MD(E), ND, DC
Dr. John Apsley is a physician and researcher who for the past 30 years has specialized in the rehabilitation and reversal of chronic degenerative illnesses through accelerated tissue repair and cellular regeneration. Dr. Apsley teaches cancer patients about “The Regeneration Effect – Curing versus Controlling Advanced Cancer”. There’s a NEW chemistry of cancer remedies – find out about the latest advances in cancer testing; non-toxic cancer treatments plus scientifically proven ways to prevent cancer. The power is in your hands to get healthy today.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

The more we learn about genetically engineered (GE) foods, the clearer the dangers become. I’ve warned you of the potential dangers of GE foods for many years now, as I was convinced that the artificial combining of plants with genes from wildly different kingdoms is bound to cause problems.

As the years roll on, such suspicions are becoming increasingly validated. In recent weeks, we’ve not only learned that GE corn is in no way comparable to natural corn in terms of nutrition, we’re also discovering the ramifications of dousing our crops with large amounts of glyphosate — the active ingredient in Monsanto’s broad-spectrum herbicide Roundup.

GE crops are far more contaminated with glyphosate than conventional crops, courtesy of the fact that they’re engineered to withstand extremely high levels of Roundup without perishing along with the weed.

A new peer-reviewed report authored by Anthony Samsel, a retired science consultant, and a long time contributor to the Mercola.com Vital Votes Forum and Dr. Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) has fortunately received quite a bit of mainstream media attention.

Their findings, along with the development of another breed of “gene silencing” crops, makes the need for labeling all the more urgent, and the advice to buy certified organic all the more valid.

How Glyphosate Worsens Modern Diseases

While Monsanto insists that Roundup is safe and “minimally toxic” to humans, Samsel and Seneff’s research tells a different story altogether. Their report, published in the journal Entropy,1 argues that glyphosate residues, found in most commonly consumed foods in the Western diet courtesy of GE sugar, corn, soy and wheat, “enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and toxins in the environment to disrupt normal body functions and induce disease.” According to the authors:

“Negative impact on the body is insidious and manifests slowly over time as inflammation damages cellular systems throughout the body.”

The main finding of the report is that glyphosate inhibits cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes, a large and diverse group of enzymes that catalyze the oxidation of organic substances. This, the authors state, is “an overlooked component of its toxicity to mammals.”

One of the functions of CYP enzymes is to detoxify xenobiotics—chemical compounds found in a living organism that are not normally produced or consumed by the organism in question. By limiting the ability of these enzymes to detoxify foreign chemical compounds, glyphosate enhances the damaging effects of those chemicals and environmental toxins you may be exposed to.

Dr. Stephanie Seneff has been conducting research at MIT for over three decades. She also has an undergraduate degree in biology from MIT and a minor in food and nutrition, and I have previously interviewed her about her groundbreaking insights into the critical importance of sulfur in human health. Not surprisingly, this latest research also touches on sulfur, and how it is affected by glyphosate from food.

“Here, we show how interference with CYP enzymes acts synergistically with disruption of the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids by gut bacteria, as well as impairment in serum sulfate transport,” the authors write.

“Consequences are most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet, which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.

We explain the documented effects of glyphosate and its ability to induce disease, and we show that glyphosate is the ‘textbook example’ of exogenous semiotic entropy: the disruption of homeostasis by environmental toxins.”

The Link Between Your Gut and the Toxicity of Glyphosate

The impact of gut bacteria on your health is becoming increasingly more well-understood and widely known. And here, we see how your gut bacteria once again play a crucial role in explaining why and how glyphosate causes health problems in both animals and humans. The authors explain:

“Glyphosate’s claimed mechanism of action in plants is the disruption of the shikimate pathway, which is involved with the synthesis of the essential aromatic amino acids, phenylalanine, tyrosine, and tryptophan. The currently accepted dogma is that glyphosate is not harmful to humans or to any mammals because the shikimate pathway is absent in all animals.

However, this pathway is present in gut bacteria, which play an important and heretofore largely overlooked role in human physiology through an integrated biosemiotic relationship with the human host. In addition to aiding digestion, the gut microbiota synthesize vitamins, detoxify xenobiotics, and participitate in immune system homeostasis and gastrointestinal tract permeability. Furthermore, dietary factors modulate the microbial composition of the gut.”

As noted in the report, incidences of inflammatory bowel diseases and food allergies have substantially increased over the past decade. According to a recent CDC survey, one in 20 children now suffer from food allergies2 — a 50 percent increase from the late 1990’s. Incidence of eczema and other skin allergies have risen by 69 percent and now affect one in eight kids. Samsel and Seneff argue it is reasonable to suspect that glyphosate’s impact on gut bacteria may be contributing to these diseases and conditions. They point out that:

“…Our systematic search of the literature has led us to the realization that many of the health problems that appear to be associated with a Western diet could be explained by biological disruptions that have already been attributed to glyphosate.

These include digestive issues, obesity, autism, Alzheimer’s disease, depression, Parkinson’s disease, liver diseases, and cancer, among others. While many other environmental toxins obviously also contribute to these diseases and conditions, we believe that glyphosate may be the most significant environmental toxin, mainly because it is pervasive and it is often handled carelessly due to its perceived nontoxicity.

…[T]he recent alarming increase in all of these health issues can be traced back to a combination of gut dysbiosis, impaired sulfate transport, and suppression of the activity of the various members of the cytochrome P450 (CYP) family of enzymes.”

Former Navy Scientist Exposes Health Hazards of Glyphosate

Former US Navy staff scientist Dr. Nancy Swanson has a Ph.D. in physics, holds five US patents and has authored more than 30 scientific papers and two books on women in science. Ten years ago, she became seriously ill, and in her journey to regain her health she turned to organic foods. Not surprisingly (for those in the know) her symptoms dramatically improved. This prompted her to start investigating genetically engineered foods.

She has meticulously collected statistics on glyphosate usage and various diseases and conditions, including autism. A more perfect match-up between the rise in glyphosate usage and incidence of autism is hard to imagine… To access her published articles and reports, please visit Sustainable Pulse,3 a European website dedicated to exposing the hazards of genetically engineered foods.

According to Dr. Swanson:4

“Prevalence and incidence data show correlations between diseases of the organs and the increase in Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) in the food supply, along with the increase in glyphosate-based herbicide applications. More and more studies have revealed carcinogenic and endocrine disrupting effects of Roundup at lower doses than those authorized for residues found in Genetically Modified Organisms.”

“The endocrine disrupting properties of glyphosate can lead to reproductive problems: infertility, miscarriage, birth defects, and sexual development. Fetuses, infants and children are especially susceptible because they are continually experiencing growth and hormonal changes. For optimal growth and development, it is crucial that their hormonal system is functioning properly.

The endocrine disrupting properties also lead to neurological disorders (learning disabilities (LD), attention deficit hyperactive disorder (ADHD), autism, dementia, Alzheimer’s, schizophrenia and bipolar disorder). Those most susceptible are children and the elderly.”

Warning! EPA Raises Limits for Allowable Glyphosate Residues

Amazingly, just as more independent reports are emerging confirming the health hazards of glyphosate and GMOs, the Environmental Protection Agency5 (EPA) is proposing to RAISE the allowed residue limits of glyphosate in food and feed crops! As reported by GM Watch 6:

“The allowed level in teff animal feed will be 100 parts per million (ppm); and in oilseed crops, 40 ppm. Allowed levels in some fruits and vegetables eaten by humans will also rise.”

Root and tuber vegetables, with the exception of sugar, will get one of the largest boosts, with allowable residue limits being raised from 0.2 ppm to 6.0 ppm. The new level for sweet potatoes will be 3 ppm.

“As a comparison, malformations in frog and chicken embryos were documented7 by Prof Andres Carrasco’s team at 2.03 ppm glyphosate, when injected into the embryos,” GM Watch writes.

Yet despite all the evidence, the EPA rule states:

“EPA concludes that there is a reasonable certainty that no harm will result to the general population or to infants and children from aggregate exposure to glyphosate residues.”
Monsanto has in fact petitioned and received approvals for increases in residue levels for several crops. Why? Because the weeds are getting increasingly resistant, requiring farmers to increase the amount of Roundup they have to spray just to keep up with the superweeds created by the excessive use of the chemical in the first place…
The Rise of Superweeds

A recent article in Nature Magazine8 addressed some of the environmental and societal concerns associated with genetically engineered crops. One of them is the rise in crop-destroying superweeds, as weeds develop resistance to glyphosate. This was yet another possibility that was initially pooh-pooh’d by Monsanto. However, truth has a way of eventually becoming self evident, and now glyphosate resistance is becoming so obvious the facts are hardly disguisable. According to the article:

“As late as 2004, the company was publicizing a multi-year study suggesting that rotating crops and chemicals does not help to avert resistance. When applied at Monsanto’s recommended doses, glyphosate killed weeds effectively, and ‘we know that dead weeds will not become resistant,’ said Rick Cole, now Monsanto’s technical lead of weed management, in a trade-journal advertisement at the time.

The study,9 published in 2007, was criticized by scientists for using plots so small that the chances of resistance developing were very low, no matter what the practice.

Glyphosate-resistant weeds have now been found in 18 countries worldwide, with significant impacts in Brazil, Australia, Argentina and Paraguay… And Monsanto has changed its stance on glyphosate use, now recommending that farmers use a mix of chemical products and ploughing. But the company stops short of acknowledging a role in creating the problem…

Source: Ian Heap, International Survey of Herbicide Resistant Weeds www.weedscience.org/graphs/soagraph.aspx (2013)

To offer farmers new weed-control strategies, Monsanto and other biotechnology companies, such as Dow AgroSciences, based in Indianapolis, Indiana, are developing new herbicide-resistant crops that work with different chemicals, which they expect to commercialize within a few years.”

What the author fails to mention is that some of these new herbicide-resistant crops are being designed to withstand chemicals that could be even more destructive, both environmentally and with regards to human health—especially in light of Samsel and Seneff’s new research.

For example, Dow AgroSciences has developed a new generation of genetically modified (GM) crops — soybeans, corn and cotton — designed to resist a major ingredient in Agent Orange, the herbicide called 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid (2,4-D).

The use of 2,4-D is not new; it’s actually one of the most widely used herbicides in the world. What is new is that farmers will now “carpet bomb” staple food crops like soy and corn with this chemical at a previously unprecedented scale—just the way glyphosate has been indiscriminately applied as a result of Roundup Ready crops. In fact, if 2,4-D resistant crops receive approval and eventually come to replace Monsanto’s failing Roundup-resistant crops as Dow intends, it is likely that billions of pounds will be needed, on top of the already insane levels of Roundup being used (1.6 billion lbs were used in 2007 in the US alone).

Gene Transfer Hazards, and the Latest ‘Gene Silencing’ Crops

Nature Magazine also discusses the spread of transgenes to wild crops. Mexico in particular has reported the spread of GE corn despite the fact that GE crops are not approved for commercial planting in Mexico. It is believed that the transgenes originated in corn imported from the US, and that local farmers may have planted some of the corn originally purchased for consumption, not realizing they were genetically engineered.

Cross-breeding between native and GE varieties may have allowed for the continued spread of transgenic DNA. Sadly, once present, it’s virtually impossible to get rid of these transgenes, which means that native species may eventually be eliminated entirely—a fate that cuts deep into the heart of the Mexican people, where corn is considered sacred.

Latest Breed of GE Crops Can Silence Your Genes… What Then?

Australia’s Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organization (CSIRO) has developed a type of genetically engineered (GE) wheat that may silence human genes, which could have truly disastrous health consequences.

Last year, University of Canterbury Professor Jack Heinemann released results from genetic research he conducted on the wheat, which unequivocally showed that molecules created in the wheat, intended to silence wheat genes to change its carbohydrate content, can match human genes and potentially silence them. Heinemann’s research revealed over 770 pages of potential matches between two genes in the GE wheat and the human genome. Over a dozen matches were “extensive and identical and sufficient to cause silencing in experimental systems,” he said.

Experts warned that eating this GE wheat could lead to significant changes in the way glucose and carbohydrates are stored in the human body, which could be potentially deadly for children and lead to serious illness in adults. Yet despite the seriousness of these findings, regulators are ignoring and dismissing such warnings. According to the Institute of Science in Society,10 the Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) has approved at least five such GE food products already.

Rather than using in vitro DNA modification (which is how Roundup Ready and Bt crops are created), this new breed of genetically engineered crops use a wholly different approach. In vitro DNA modification results in the creation of a new protein, but this new breed is designed to change their RNA content, thereby regulating gene expression within the plant. RNA is one of three major macromolecules, like DNA. Double-stranded RNA (dsRNA) is responsible for regulating more than one-third of human genes. By engineering the plant to produce dsRNA, the plant can be “instructed” to silence specific genes—within itself, and potentially within your body…

A Global Experiment Based on Faulty Assumptions is Bound to Take its Toll…

It is assumed that both DNA and RNA are broken down in your gut when you consume them in GE food, which is why they both have GRAS status (Generally Regarded as Safe). However, experiments dating back to the early 1990’s have contradicted this assumption.11 According to Dr. Mae Wan-Ho12 (for references, see the original article):

“There have been many publications documenting the ability of DNA to survive digestion in the gut and to pass into the bloodstream whenever investigations were carried out with sufficiently sensitive detection methods. DsRNA in particular, is much more stable than single stranded RNA. DsRNA produced in genetically modified plants survive intact after passing through the gut of insects and worms feeding on the plants.

Also, oral exposure of insect pests to dsRNA was effective in inducing RNA interference. Worms can even absorb dsRNA suspended in liquid through their skin, and when taken in, the dsRNA can circulate throughout the body and alter gene expression in the animal. In some cases the dsRNA taken up is further multiplied or induces a secondary reaction resulting in more and different secondary dsRNA with unpredictable targets. Thus, not only are dsRNA mechanisms universal to all plants and animals, there is already experimental evidence that they can act across kingdoms.”

Dr. Mae Wan-Ho also points out research from China, which has demonstrated that dsRNAs can survive digestion and be taken up via the gastrointestinal tract, and that microRNA (miRNA) from food can circulate in the human blood stream and have the potential to turn off human genes.

“The data also indicated that some dsRNAs from plants are found more frequently than predicted from their level of expression in plants; in other words, there may be a selective retention or uptake of some miRNA molecules,” she writes.

Most Consumers Still Unaware of GMO Risks

The biotech industry, led by Monsanto, is increasing their propaganda efforts to reshape their public image, and sway your opinion against the need to label genetically engineered foods. As The Atlantic recently reported.13

“Given its opposition to the labeling of GM foods… it seems clear that Monsanto wants you to close your eyes, open your mouth, and swallow.”

Indeed, many consumers are still in the dark about the very real risks that GE crops pose, both to the environment and human health. This is precisely what the biotech industry wants, even as increasing research demonstrates the many dangers associated with GE foods. For example, one recent study found that rats fed a type of genetically engineered corn that is prevalent in the US food supply for two years developed massive mammary tumors, kidney and liver damage, and other serious health problems. This was at dietary amounts of about 10 percent. Does 10 percent or more of your diet consist of genetically engineered ingredients? If processed foods form the basis of your diet, then you’re likely consuming FAR MORE genetically modified organisms (GMOs) than that…

Unfortunately, you can’t know for sure how many items in your fridge and pantry might contain GMO since the US does not require genetically engineered foods to be labeled. With the emergence of “gene silencing” crops and the latest findings from Samsel and Seneff, the need for labeling couldn’t possibly be greater.

Keep Fighting for Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November, by a very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over. The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington, where the people’s initiative 522, “The People’s Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act,” will require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. As stated on LabelitWA.org:

“Calorie and nutritional information were not always required on food labels. But since 1990 it has been required and most consumers use this information every day. Country-of-origin labeling wasn’t required until 2002. The trans fat content of foods didn’t have to be labeled until 2006. Now, all of these labeling requirements are accepted as important for consumers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also says we must know with labeling if our orange juice is from fresh oranges or frozen concentrate.

Doesn’t it make sense that genetically engineered foods containing experimental viral, bacterial, insect, plant or animal genes should be labeled, too? Genetically engineered foods do not have to be tested for safety before entering the market. No long-term human feeding studies have been done. The research we have is raising serious questions about the impact to human health and the environment.

I-522 provides the transparency people deserve. I-522 will not raise costs to consumers or food producers. It simply would add more information to food labels, which manufacturers change routinely anyway, all the time. I-522 does not impose any significant cost on our state. It does not require the state to conduct label surveillance, or to initiate or pursue enforcement. The state may choose to do so, as a policy choice, but I-522 was written to avoid raising costs to the state or consumers.”

Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin simply because we didn’t have the funds to counter the massive ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and other major food companies. Let’s not allow Monsanto and its allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state you live in.
•No matter where you live in the United States, please donate money to these labeling efforts through the Organic Consumers Fund.
•If you live in Washington State, please sign the I-522 petition. You can also volunteer to help gather signatures across the state.
•For timely updates on issues relating to these and other labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
•Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the Washington initiative.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.

Optimal health is one of my passions and nutrition is one of the best tools I know of on how to achieve it. But the key to getting healthy organic vegetables, of course, is the health of the soil in which it’s grown.

Research scientist Dr. Elaine Ingham1 is internationally recognized as an expert on the benefits of sustainable soil science.

She was formerly an associate professor at Oregon State University and well on her way to full-tenure professorship when her research on genetically modified organisms (GMOs) led to her being forced to resign.

The biotech industry, led by Monsanto, funds a large part of the budget for Oregon State University, and her findings were not welcome as it threatened the University’s funding.

Dr. Ingham went on to develop a company called Soil Foodweb Inc., which helps farmers and gardeners understand the health of their soil. The company analyzes soil samples and also helps develop a composting plan that is specifically targeted for the plants you’re seeking to grow.

She’s also the chief research scientist at Rodale Institute which I plan on personally visiting in the near future. I’ll provide you with some video of that visit afterwards.

One of my new passions is to understand, at the deepest levels, how to achieve high performance agriculture by grilling the leading experts in the world, then digesting the information and sharing it with you in easy to understand and apply bits.

Helping Farmers and Gardeners Take Back Control of Their Soil Health

Just how is plant growth affected by the health of the soil? The key lies in having the right helper organisms; beneficial species of bacteria, fungi, protozoa, beneficial nematodes (not the weedfeeders), microarthropods, and earthworms—all of which contribute to plant growth in a number of different ways.

“If we get a problem like around the root systems, around the surfaces, above ground – the seed, the leaves, or the branches of the plant – these organisms will prevent diseases from being able to even find the plant,” she explains. “The pests won’t locate the plant. So, disease suppression, pest suppression, and all of those things are part of what the life in the soil does for your plant.”

Nutrient cycling is another major issue. According to Dr. Ingham, there’s no soil on Earth that lacks the nutrients to grow a plant. She believes the concept that your soil is deficient and needs added phosphorous or nitrogen etc in order to grow plants is flawed, and largely orchestrated by the chemical companies, because it’s based on looking at the soluble, inorganic nutrients that are partly present in your soil.

But the real nutrition your plants require actually is derived from microorganisms in the soil. These organisms take the mineral material that’s in your soil and convert it into a plant-available form. Without these bioorganisms, your plants cannot get the nutrients they need. So what you need is not more chemical soil additives, what you need is the proper balance of beneficial soil organisms. According to Dr. Ingham:

“It’s very necessary to have these organisms. They will supply your plant with precisely the right balances of all the nutrients as the plant requires. When you start to realize that one of the major roles and functions of life in the soil is to provide nutrients to the plants in the proper forms, then we don’t need inorganic fertilizers. We certainly don’t have to have genetically engineered plants or to utilize inorganic fertilizers if we get this proper biology back in the soil.

If we balance the proper biology, we select against the growth of weeds, so the whole issue with herbicides is done away with. We don’t need the herbicides if we can get the proper life back into the soil and select for the growth of the plants that we want to grow and against the growth of the weedy species.”

The Science of Ideal Microbial Balance for Plants

The science of establishing the ideal microbes for a specific plant is already well-established. Reference material on how to identify what those ideal bacterial, fungal, protozoan, nematode, and microarthropod communities are can be found in Dr. Inham’s books, which include:
•10 Steps to Gardening with Nature
•Soil Biology Primer (co-authored with Andrew R. Moldenke and Clive A. Edwards)
•The Field Guide for Actively Aerated Compost Tea (AACT)
•Compost Tea Quality: Light Microscope Methods
•The Compost Tea Brewing Manual

The first book, 10 Steps to Gardening with Nature, reviews many of these soil communities and explains the mechanisms behind how these life forms in the soil benefit your plants. You can also find valuable information and resources on the Rodale Institute’s website.2 Once you’ve identified the optimal communities of soil organism, you can then modify your compost to correct any imbalances. For example:

“Woody materials – saw dust, paper, cardboard, wood chips, and dry ground leaves that fell from the trees at the end of the growing season – are going to grow fungi. You choose whether you need more fungal or more bacterial. And then design your recipe for your compost according to what is missing in your soil, so you can put back in what is not there,” she explains.

Most people don’t realize that trees, shrubs and perennials require healthy levels of fungi rather than bacteria in the soil to optimize their health. The materials she described above can help create the environment to grow them. Also directly inoculating the soil with fungal cultures can accelerate the root colonization by the beneficial fungi.

Interestingly enough, you can use a starter culture to boost the fermentation and generation of beneficial bacteria, much in the same way you can boost the probiotics in your fermented vegetables. For compost, this strategy is used if you want to compost very rapidly. In that case, you can use a starter to inoculate the specific sets of organisms that you need to encourage in that compost. For optimal physical health, you need plant foods to contain the full set of nutrients that allows the plant to grow in a healthy fashion, because that’s the proper balance of nutrients for us human beings as well.

“When we look at a lot of the GMO plant material, and when we look at conventionally grown plant material, they may be extremely high one nutrient, but lacking in many, many others,” she says.

“We’ve done some studies of that in New Zealand, looking at facial eczema in dairy cows. We were able to cure all of the animals from that facial eczema, because it was a nutritional deficiency that was causing it. It wasn’t really a disease; it wasn’t an illness. It was a nutrient deficiency in the grass… If the food that you’re eating doesn’t contain the proper set of nutrients, you are not going to be healthy. You’ve got to get those nutrients in the proper balances back into the food you’re eating.”

Hybridization and Genetic Engineering are Two Very Different Animals

Many advocates for genetically engineered foods insist that “genetic engineering” has been done for centuries in the form of hybridization; so we’re really just using higher technology to achieve the same thing faster. This is a fatally flawed argument, as these two techniques are profoundly different and do not produce the same result. In normal breeding techniques, you never go outside of that species. You simply cannot breed one species with another species, such as a plant with an insect, for example.

“By definition, when we’re doing normal genetic manipulation using breeding methods, it’s all going to be done within the normal, natural restrictions of reproductive abilities of organisms. You can’t go outside of the species.”

Through modern genetic engineering techniques, they are mixing genetic material from entirely different kingdoms of organisms. There is absolutely nothing natural or normal about this process, and there’s nothing natural or normal about the end product that results from such cross-species manipulation. To even achieve this feat, genetic material must be blasted into the genetic material of the organism being altered with a high-powered gun.

Now, if you inject this unique genetic sequence into any random place on the DNA, most of the time the organism will not live. But on rare occasions, after the sequence has been blasted into countless cells, the organism may survive and begin to express the inserted trait. At that point, multiple different protein changes will occur, yet no one knows exactly which proteins were altered, how they were modified, or what metabolic processes are going to be disrupted because that new genetic material.

“When you look at GMOs, you have to understand each specific genetic engineering event. It’s hard to make a simple statement about the effect of all GMOs, because each one is a very specific mechanism,” Dr. Ingham says.

“When we’re really trying to understand each and every different kind of engineered organism, the effects are going to be mediated a little bit differently. But pretty much across the board, we don’t know exactly what’s going to happen with any engineered event, because we have not studied what happens when that GMO plant is subjected to extremes of weather or extremes of climate, for example. That, to me, is one area of major concern with every GMO that has been produced.”

How Bt and Roundup Ready Plants Threaten Plant, Animal and Human Health

Take the genetically engineered Bt plants, for example. In these plants, a specific genetic material for a single toxin protein has been separated from the bacteria (Bacillus thuringiensis, or Bt) and placed into the genetic material of a plant, such as corn, soybean, and potatoes. Other Bt plants are also in the pipeline. According to Dr. Ingham, there’s very clear evidence of harm in animals that consume Bt plant material. They end up with severe ulceration, starting in the digestive system.

“We saw massive damage to the liver and to many of the internal organs in the body of those animals when we went to compare the Bt plant material fed to those animals versus non-Bt plant material fed to a herd that started out exactly the same. We’re seeing very clear effects,” she says.

Unfortunately, and tellingly, virtually none of this research is being done in the US because no one is willing to fund it, and patent laws effectively prevent independent safety research on patented seeds. However, research done overseas, in Australia and elsewhere, clearly show genetically engineered feed is causing severe health problems in animals. Yet there are no human studies to evaluate the health effects of eating foods that contain a protein toxin in every single cell…

“What’s the effect on human beings? We can show you what the effect is on animals. And it makes you really wonder if all the digestive problems we have right now might not be due to the fact that so much of the American public is ingesting this toxic protein,” she says.

Another genetically engineered type of plant is Roundup Ready plants, in which the plant material has been engineered to be resistant to glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup. With the advent of Roundup Ready plants, farmers have had to dramatically increase the amount of glyphosate used. The reason for this is because when you apply Roundup to the soil in massive quantities, it causes a significant reduction in all of the beneficial organisms in the soil.

According to Dr. Ingham, Roundup causes “a massive balloon” of bacteria in the soils, because glyphosate is a bacterial food. This bacterial overgrowth then takes up all the soluble inorganic nutrients that are present in the soil, leaving the plants stressed through lack of nutrition. To combat this, farmers apply more fertilizers to keep the plants alive, and before you know it, a truly vicious circle has been created.

“Every single genetically engineered plant has to be really examined very carefully for the effect that it has on the whole ecosystem – on the soil, animal health, and human health. We just don’t have the studies. They weren’t done. They weren’t required,” Dr. Ingham says.

Disasters in the Making, and One That was Averted…

The research that cut Dr. Ingham’s career with Oregon State University short related to a particular genetically engineered (GE) bacterium that grows in soil. The USDA and EPA had not yet tested it. Instead, all of the test organisms they were using were non-soil organisms. When Dr. Ingham and her colleague placed that GE bacterium into the root systems of plants, and compared it against the parent plant that had no GE bacteria in the soil, they found that the GE Klebsiella planticola caused total death to all plants that they put into the system. They were within just TWO WEEKS of that genetically engineered organism being released outside when Dr. Ingham presented her data at a United Nations meeting, which prevented outdoor plantings. Still, the USDA didn’t want to believe the results and questioned the methodology.

“The results from that testing clearly shows that the genetically engineered organisms can be of a great deal of risk, higher than the parent organism,” she says. “We need to do a much better job of testing these genetically engineered versions of plants, microorganisms, or whatever we’re talking about. They need to be better tested. And that the regulatory language ‘genetically engineered organisms are of no greater risk than the parent’ is clearly incorrect. It’s invalid. We need to go back and think better of a valid regulatory statement by the USDA.”

Unfortunately, as I’ve discussed so many times before, the USDA-APHIS, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service, has a revolving door going straight to the industry.

“For those who really want to look at that history, go talk to the folks at the Edmonds Institute out of Washington State, because they very well documented how much turnaround there is,” Dr. Ingham says.

“You come from the industry. You’re on the USDA panel, promoting every company that you came from in, and then you go back to that company. The US public needs to wake up and pay attention to what’s really controlling the regulations on these genetically engineered organisms. The regulatory literature is not scientifically valid. We need to stop that rotating door into the regulatory agencies, so that people coming from the industry are not writing the regulatory language. “

According to Dr. Ingham, Roundup Ready crops are already a disaster in the making, as the chemical removes nutrients from the soil, effectively “starving” the plants of the nutrients they need to thrive. Eating such plants is bound to have a detrimental health effect. Worse than Roundup Ready crops are probably Bt crops, as the research clearly shows how the Bt toxin in these plants are harming the digestive systems of pigs, cows, horses, and other livestock.

“If it’s causing that kind of damage to their digestive system, what’s it doing to human beings?” Dr. Ingham says. “It’s got to be causing the same type of damage. But we know nothing about it, because we don’t know when we’re actually eating a genetically engineered material that has those toxins in it.”

A Three-Step Self-Help Plan to Avoid Genetically Engineered Foods

Unfortunately, Americans have been prevented from making their own choices in this matter. The biotech industry has successfully thwarted any and all attempts at labeling GE foods in the US, so what can you do to protect yourself and your family from them? Dr. Ingham offers the following three suggestions:
1.Choose organic food. This is a must if you want to stop supporting the likes of Monsanto with your hard-earned dollars. Also, genetically engineered seeds and materials are not allowed in organic farming and food production, so at present it’s the only way to ensure you’re not accidentally buying something with GE ingredients.

Beware that the label “natural” or “all-natural” has absolutely NO meaning when it comes to GMO’s. There are no regulations preventing “natural” products from containing genetically engineered ingredients, so the natural label is not in any way interchangeable with the organic label.
2.Support GMO labeling campaigns. “You really want to know whether you’re eating potatoes that have a protein toxin in every cell of that potato that you’re eating,” she says.
3.Improve the soil in your garden and grow your own vegetables. This is my new passion so shortly I will be creating many helpful interviews with leading experts in the field on high performance agriculture to teach you simple strategies on how to easily do this in your home or local garden.

REMEMBER, ‘There is No Such Thing as a Safe GMO’

According to Dr. Ingham, due to the way genetic plant engineering is currently done, there’s really is no such thing as a safe GMO. It appears plant geneticists have no understanding of what they’re doing to the system as a whole. They believe they can tinker with one small aspect of agriculture, the seed, and it won’t affect anything else. This is foolish in the extreme.

“We need to go back to a less environmentally damaging way of doing agriculture. We need to get off the chemical addiction and return to putting the proper biology back into the soil,” she says.

Optimizing the soil with high performance agriculture techniques is a simple inexpensive and practical alternative to reliance on bioengineering, GMO crops and reliance on dangerous herbicides. The key to global climate change, to better nutrition in our plants, to human nutrition, and to human health is recognizing that we have destroyed the life in our agricultural soils. As modern agricultural techniques flourished, we failed to address its overall impact, and we’ve not fully understood the damage these techniques cause—until now.

“In the last 30 years, we have started to recognize and to understand what the damage is and how to easily – very easily – fix this. It’s not going to take billions of dollars to remedy the problems that we have with our soils. Erosion, cementation and water quality could be brought back very rapidly if we could just put the proper biology back in the soil.”

A lot of the work Dr. Ingham has done on GMO’s is available from the Edmonds Institute in Washington State. You may contact Beth Burrows as the institute to get those materials. For more information on proper soil treatments, see the Rodale Institute’s web site, or pick up one of Dr. Ingham’s books that I listed earlier. The book 10 Steps to Gardening with Nature by Dr. Ingham and Carole Ann Rollins is a good place to start. Another book that I recently read and thoroughly enjoyed, especially the last part, is Jeff Lowenfels’ book, Teaming with Microbes. There are many more details you need to know that are not presented in the book but it is a good start for some foundational concepts.

Keep Fighting for Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods

While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November, by a very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over. The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington, where the people’s initiative 522, “The People’s Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act,” will require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. As stated on LabelitWA.org:

“Calorie and nutritional information were not always required on food labels. But since 1990 it has been required and most consumers use this information every day. Country-of-origin labeling wasn’t required until 2002. The trans fat content of foods didn’t have to be labeled until 2006. Now, all of these labeling requirements are accepted as important for consumers. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) also says we must know with labeling if our orange juice is from fresh oranges or frozen concentrate.

Doesn’t it make sense that genetically engineered foods containing experimental viral, bacterial, insect, plant or animal genes should be labeled, too? Genetically engineered foods do not have to be tested for safety before entering the market. No long-term human feeding studies have been done. The research we have is raising serious questions about the impact to human health and the environment.

I-522 provides the transparency people deserve. I-522 will not raise costs to consumers or food producers. It simply would add more information to food labels, which manufacturers change routinely anyway, all the time. I-522 does not impose any significant cost on our state. It does not require the state to conduct label surveillance, or to initiate or pursue enforcement. The state may choose to do so, as a policy choice, but I-522 was written to avoid raising costs to the state or consumers.”

Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin simply because we didn’t have the funds to counter the massive ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and other major food companies. Let’s not allow Monsanto and its allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can, regardless of what state you live in.
•No matter where you live in the United States, please donate money to these labeling efforts through the Organic Consumers Fund.
•If you live in Washington State, please sign the I-522 petition. You can also volunteer to help gather signatures across the state.
•For timely updates on issues relating to these and other labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
•Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the Washington initiative.

If you like what you read, please consider donating to help support my blog, even as little as $5 will help.