Foods, Health and Disease, Uncategorized

This Snack Food is Causing Cancer

doritos

Popular Snack Chips May Be Linked to Cancer and Other Diseases

 

Deadly processed foods are very addictive.  Americans currently spend about 90% of their food income buying processed junk like popular Doritos. Doritos are statistically listed as the most popular chips worldwide. Why are Doritos so bad? Take a look at the ingredients.

 

Doritos Ingredients:

 

Whole corn, vegetable oil (corn, soybean, and/or sunflower oil), salt, cheddar cheese (milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes), maltodextrin, wheat flour, whey, monosodium glutamate, buttermilk solids, romano cheese (part skim cow’s milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes), whey protein concentrate, onion powder, partially hydrogenated soybean and cottonseed oil, corn flour, disodium phosphate, lactose, natural and artificial flavor, dextrose, tomato powder, spices, lactic acid, artificial color (including Yellow 6, Yellow 5, Red 40), citric acid, sugar, garlic powder, red and green bell pepper powder, sodium caseinate, disodium inosinate, disodium guanylate, nonfat milk solids, whey protein isolate, corn syrup solids.

 

Whole Corn:

 

Genetically modified foods (especially corn) contain toxic chemicals and pesticides that can wreak havoc on your digestive system over time and tax your organs of elimination such as liver, kidneys, bladder, lymphatic system.

 

According to the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT):

 

“Several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GMO food including infertility, immune problems, accelerated aging, faulty insulin regulation, and changes in major organs and the gastrointestinal system.”

 

Vegetable Oil:

 

Most vegetable oils are genetically modified. Almost 90 % of canola and corn oil in America is GMO. Soy, corn, safflower and canola  oils are dangerous to cook with as they contain very high amounts of Omega-6. Omega-6 is only beneficial for our bodies if the ratio of Omega-6 and Omega-3 is 3 to 1.  Omega-3 sources include fatty fish and cod liver oil. As a nation, we do not consume enough of these. The current ratio in America is at 50:1.   Our culture is way to indulged in processed pre-packaged food, so adding foods cooked with vegetable oil make matters even worse.

Cheddar Cheese (milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes): Pasteurized cow’s milk on an industrial commercial level is loaded with unhealthy components such growth hormone and GMOs.  Doritos contain hormones that lead to breast cancer.

 

Yellow #6:

 

Can cause cancer, hyperactivity, allergic reactions, diarrhea, vomiting, nettle rash, migraines and swelling of the skin.

 

Yellow #5:

 

Can cause allergic reactions, hyperactivity, cancer.

 

Red #40:

 

Damages DNA, causes swelling around the mouth, hives, hyperactivity in children and cancer.

 

Maltodextrin:

 

Maltodextrin is a commercial sweetener made from cornstarch. Almost all the maltodextrin used in health foods, vitamins, and supplements are derived from genetically modified corn. Abdominal bloating and flatulence can be experienced; other problems relating to digestion can also become a problem such as constipation and diarrhea.

 

Citric Acid:

 

Citric acid is used as both a flavor enhancer and a preservative ingredient. Citric acid has been known to irritate the digestive system , causing heartburn and damage to the mucous membrane of the stomach. According to a few European studies, citric acid could be responsible for promoting tooth decay as well.

 

Corn Syrup Solids:

 

This is precisely the ingredient that is contributing to the obesity in the United States. Fructose can disturb your metabolism, elevate blood pressure and triglycerides, cause weight gain, heart disease and liver damage, and even deplete your body of vitamins and minerals.

 

Other Flavors:

 

Buttermilk, Romano cheese (part skim cow’s milk, cheese cultures, salt, enzymes), whey protein concentrate, onion powder, corn flour, natural and artificial flavors, dextrose, tomato powder, lactose, spices, wheat flour, salt, lactic acid, citric acid, sugar, garlic powder, skim milk, whey protein isolate, corn syrup solids, red and green bell pepper powder, sodium caseinate, disodium inosinate, disodium guanylate. All these ingredients can cause serious chronic diseases and are the norm for processed snacks.

 

Doritos also contain acrylamides — toxic substances formed when carbohydrates are cooked a high temperature. Acrylamides are linked to cancer and other serious diseases. One study shows that eating acrylamides increases the risk of kidney cancer by 59 percent

 

Remember, you are what you eat. The choice is yours!

 

Health and Wellness Associates

Archived

312-972-WELL

 

HealthWellnessAssociates@gmail.com

https://www.facebook.com/HealthAndWellnessAssociates/

 

 

Foods, Health and Disease, Uncategorized

100 Percent Natural Cereal, Stuffed with Nasty Carcinogens.

cereal

 

100 Percent Natural’ Cereal, Stuffed With Nasty Carcinogens?

 

Voluntary ‘Smart Label’ Preempts State and Consumer Rights

 

According to the Grocery Manufacturers Association (GMA), 80 percent of the foods on your grocery store’s shelves contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs).1  These foods are also most likely to be contaminated with toxic pesticide residues.

 

Just last month, the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) sued Post Holdings, Inc., for falsely marketing Shredded Wheat cereal as “100 percent natural” and “made with nothing but goodness,” after independent testing found it contained glyphosate2 — hardly what health-conscious consumers would expect.

 

Alas, while Americans are getting savvier when it comes to making healthier food choices, and recent polling shows that 9 out of 10 Americans want to know if their food is genetically engineered (GE),3 big business has successfully usurped power, and politicians have by and large abandoned their constituents.

 

State and Consumer Rights under Attack Yet Again

 

Senate negotiators have now made a deal4 to create a national labeling standard for GMOs using voluntary “Smart Labels” (so-called QR codes5) rather than clear labeling — a deal that goes against the 88 percent of Americans who have said NO to being forced to use a smartphone app to find this important information.

 

The new bill, S. 2609, would amend the Agricultural Marketing Act of 1946 with a national bioengineered food disclosure standard.6,7 As noted in a June 23 newsletter by the Organic Consumers Association (OCA):

 

“It’s hard to know which is worse. The corporations that profit from poisoning your food and water. Or the politicians who will happily sell you down the river for a few campaign contributions.

 

Today, our ‘leaders’ in the U.S. Senate proudly announced that they’ve ‘reached a deal’ on a federal GMO labeling bill.

 

No matter how they spin it — and they will spin it — this ‘compromise’ is nothing more than a handout to Monsanto, an industry-brokered deal intended to legally sanction the right of corporations to deceive you, the consumer.”

 

Andrew Kimbrell, executive director of the Center for Food Safety (CFS) has called the bill a “blow to  the food movement and America’s right to know,” adding it is “in many ways worse than prior iterations of the DARK Act that were defeated — it is a blank check for biotech.”8

 

Roberts-Stabenow Deal Tramples Your Rights to Save Biotech Industry

 

Senate Agriculture Chairman Pat Roberts and ranking Democrat Debbie Stabenow have spent months secretly negotiating this deal which will nullify Vermont’s GMO labeling requirement (which officially went into effect July 1) after the fact.

 

The legislation would also bar any other state from enacting GMO labeling requirements that differ from the national standard, and delays the disclosure requirement another two years — three years for smaller food companies. As reported by AgriPulse:9

 

“Under the legislation, most food companies would have the option of disclosing GMO ingredients through either a digital smartphone code, the industry’s preference, or through an on-package symbol or language that the Agriculture Department would approve.

 

The code would be accompanied by: ‘Scan here for more food information.’ Small companies would have the option of putting a phone number or website URL on labels instead of the digital code…

 

Roberts said the disclosure system would protect biotech products from being denigrated by opponents. ‘We saved agricultural biotechnology,’ said Roberts.”

 

Legislation Redefines Bioengineering to Exempt Most GMOs

 

What’s worse, the new legislation changes the very definition of bioengineering. The newest biotech methods, such as gene editing technology, would be exempt from the disclosure standards.

 

Indeed, the definition of “bioengineered” is so narrow it actually ends up excluding many, if not most, GE products currently on the market. Folks, this is about as crazy as it gets, and it’s a double insult to every American who has fought so hard for GMO transparency and honesty.

 

In an email, Michael Hansen, Ph.D., a senior staff scientist for Consumers Union, notes: 10

 

“Since the mutant EPSPS gene (conferring glyphosate resistance) is found in nature in Agrobacterium sp. strain CP4, and most of the Cry proteins … are found in Bacillus thuringiensis, a narrow reading of this definition would not include the Roundup Ready crops nor the vast bulk of Bt crops.

 

It would only include those crops that have hybrid Cry proteins (which don’t occur in nature).

 

The bill realizes that this definition of ‘bioengineering’ is significantly different than the definition that Food and Drug Administration (FDA) uses … since there is a section that says the definition only applies to this bill…

 

Another loophole is that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) will get to suggest the level of GE content that will trigger labeling, e.g. set a tolerance or threshold…

 

Indeed, the bill seems to realize that the various exemptions are extensive, since another part of the bill says that just because a food is not required to be labeled as ‘bioengineered’ it cannot be labeled as ‘non-GMO’ … So, this means that the non-GMO project labels will still exist.'”

 

Even the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has criticized the bill. In its technical comments, the FDA notes that the way GMOs are redefined, it may be difficult for any GMO to qualify for labeling!

 

Moreover, the bill gives the USDA sole authority over GMO claims on food, which would normally fall under the FDA’s jurisdiction. Unfortunately, it appears this bill is more or less a done deal already, in large part due to the Organic Trade Association11 (OTA) selling out.

 

OTA, a Mere Pawn of the GMA?

 

Sadly, it appears the OTA is little more than a pawn of the GMA, as big junk food have gobbled up smaller organic companies. The OTA is using the same inaccurate talking points as Big Food when talking about how good this bill is, when in reality the OTA has sold out and abandoned the organic food movement.

 

According to the OTA, 12 the Roberts-Stabenow bill “covers thousands more products than Vermont’s GMO labeling law and other state initiatives.” This simply isn’t true. The reality is that this bill would label FEWER products, as it doesn’t cover all the GMOs covered by Vermont’s law and other labeling initiatives.

 

As just discussed, most GMOs on the market — as much as 99 percent — could potentially be exempt from labeling under this bill! Moreover, since there’s no enforcement, the labeling requirements are hardly more than a voluntary suggestion.

 

How did the OTA become so misguided? In short, large multinational food companies have bought up many popular organic brands and have effectively infiltrated and in large part taken over the OTA.13

 

The companies that convinced the OTA to support the DARK Act and its current iteration are non-organic junk food brands that happen to own organic brands. Their main concern is NOT protecting organics however. They’re exploiting the organic market niche, but the real money is still in selling their inexpensive GMO wares.

 

Who really owns the organic brands you trust and love? Check out the Cornucopia Institute’s “Who Owns Organic” graphic.14 you may be surprised.

 

Take J.M. Smuckers Company, for example. With annual revenue of about $8 billion, Smuckers is best known for their sugary condiments and unhealthy “food-like substances” sold under the Dunkin’ Donuts, Pillsbury, Jif and Crisco brands.

 

Alas, Smuckers also owns RW Knudsen and Santa Cruz juices, and Smuckers’ employee Kim Dietz is on the OTA Board of Directors.15

 

If you think this makes Smuckers a pro-organic company, you’d be wrong. Smuckers spent $640,000 to oppose GMO laws in Oregon and Colorado, and $550,000 to oppose labeling in California.

 

In total, Smuckers has spent $1.19 million to defeat GMO labeling. They may have employees on the OTA board — and when it lobbies Congress, Smuckers can represent itself as an OTA member16 — but their corporate behavior is anything but pro-organic.

 

It lobbied to pass the DARK Act, using a firm that also represents the GMA, 17 and evidence suggests Smuckers has manipulated the OTA for years. Not only does Smuckers use GE ingredients in their foods, according to the OCA,18 “the President of the Board of Directors of the OTA, Julia Sabin, VP/GM of Smucker Natural individually profits from Smucker selling GE foods.”

 

What OTA and ‘Big Food’ Members Gain by Undermining Transparency

 

The sad fact is, the OTA does NOT speak for a majority of the truly organic food producers in the U.S. and does not represent the organic community’s interests. What’s worse, it appears the OTA purposely undermined transparency in order to protect the organic niche.

 

Mandatory disclosure of GMOs would actually eliminate a key advantage that organic conveys. As I’ve repeatedly mentioned, one of the key reasons for eating USDA 100 percent organic is to avoid unlabeled GMOs. If GMOs must be disclosed, Big Organic loses that selling point. So, crazy as it may seem, anti-transparency actually benefits organics. Moreover, the bill would also allow organic companies to make non-GMO claims on their products.

 

Loopholes Abound in Roberts-Stabenow ‘Smart Label’ Deal

 

Other details of the agreement include the following, which offer the food industry plenty of leeway when it comes too accurately and honestly disclosing GMOs: 19

 

“Very small” food manufacturers and all restaurants would be exempt from GMO disclosure rules

Meat and dairy products from animals fed with GMO grains would be exempt from any disclosure requirement

Food products where meat, poultry or egg is the main ingredient, such as pizza for example, would be exempt even if it contains GMOs like high-fructose corn syrup from GE corn or, say, GE soybean or canola oil

The USDA would have no authority to require recalls of products that don’t comply with the labeling requirements

There would be no federal penalties for violations, although states would be allowed to impose fines for violations under state consumer protection rules

People Don’t Use QR Codes, Which Is Exactly Why Industry Wants Them

 

QR stands for Quick Response, and the code can be scanned and read by smartphones and other QR readers.20 the code brings you to a product website that provides various details about the product. But these so-called “Smart Labels” hardly improve access to information.

 

A mere 16 percent of poll respondents say they’ve ever scanned a QR code to get information about a product,21,22 and to expect shoppers to scan and read an entire website for each and every product in their cart in order to determine whether or not they contain GMOs is beyond ludicrous.

 

Besides the fact that it’s simply not a workable method, it’s just plain wrong since everyone has a right to know what’s in the food. You shouldn’t have to own a smartphone to obtain this information. As previously noted by Lisa Archer, food and technology program director at Friends of the Earth:

 

“GMO labeling via QR code technology is unworkable, threatens privacy and is discriminatory since more than a third of Americans, many of which are low-income or live in rural areas with poor internet access, don’t own smartphones.”

 

Jean Halloran, director of food policy initiatives for Consumers Union, the policy and advocacy division of Consumer Reports, issued a similar statement in response to the Roberts-Stabenow bill: 23

 

“This deal is unacceptable to the 9 out of 10 Americans who support mandatory GMO labeling. Consumers deserve to know what’s in their food and to be able to make informed decisions. They have been clear that they want straightforward GMO labels that they can read and understand at a quick glance when shopping.

 

This law would instead allow GMO disclosure to be done through scan able codes, phone numbers or websites — making it difficult, if not impossible for the average consumer to find out what they want to know as they try to decide which kind of cereal or snack to buy.

 

While we appreciate efforts by Senator Stabenow and others to seek a better bill than the one passed by the House last summer, this deal does not meet consumer needs. QR codes, 1-800 numbers or websites aren’t a solution. The new Senate bill is just another way to allow companies to keep consumers in the dark — especially the one-third of Americans who don’t own a smartphone and those in rural areas without reliable broadband service.”

 

Vow to Boycott Foods Bearing QR Codes

 

It should be crystal clear to everyone that by being time-consuming and cumbersome (and in some cases impossible) to use, food makers know the QR codes will help them hide the presence of GMOs in their products, and this is precisely why I propose a new strategic campaign: boycott all products bearing QR codes. The proposed legislation would allow companies to divulge the presence of GMOs in their product using one of three ways:24

 

Text on the package (although the exact and now-familiar terms “GMO,” “genetically modified” or “biotechnology” are not necessarily going to be required. The USDA would determine the language)

A symbol (to be determined by the USDA)

A QR code (or for smaller food companies, a website address or 1-800 number)

If a company refuses to clearly label their product as containing GMOs via text or symbol, and opts for a Smart Label instead, I believe it’s safe to assume it’s because it has something to hide. They’re just trying to prevent as many people as possible from finding out the truth right away by not putting clear text or a GMO symbol on their product.

 

Why play along? If they want to be coy and opaque, strike back where it hurts — their bottom line. Don’t waste valuable time searching for the information they want to hide. Instead, just don’t buy the product!

 

 

Food Industry Group Has ILLEGALLY Lobbied to Remove Consumer and State Rights

 

The GMA is an industry group made up of a conglomeration of the biggest junk food producers on the planet, and this organization, which I dubbed the “Most Evil Organization on the Planet” in 2014, is a key player in this GMO labeling drama. The companies represented by the GMA are largely responsible for the massive obesity epidemic that spreads sickness and disease, yet they refuse to take responsibility and amend their ways.

 

Instead, they’ve spent hundreds of millions of dollars to deny your right to know important facts about the food you eat and remove state rights, while further corrupting Congress through massive lobbying “donations.”25

 

A little known fact is that the GMA actually owns the “Smart Label” trademark that Congress has accepted as a so-called “compromise” to on-package GMO labeling, and that’s another reason why I believe the Smart Label mark is the mark of those with something to hide.26

 

The GMA’s 300-plus members include chemical technology companies, GE seed and food and beverage companies. Monsanto, Dow, Coca-Cola and General Mills are just some of the heavy-hitters in this powerful industry group, which has showed no qualms about doing whatever it takes to protect the interest of its members.

 

This includes deceptive and outright illegal tactics to take away consumer and state rights. For example, in March, the GMA was found GUILTY of perpetrating an $11 million money laundering scheme during Washington’s 2013 GMO labeling initiative. The aim was to hide the identities of the members contributing to the campaign, in order to shield them from consumer backlash.27

 

How can the GMA and its members possibly be trusted to do the right thing? Let’s not forget that doing the right thing is absolutely critical here, because we’re talking about companies that (are supposed to) provide nourishing sustenance to you and your family. If honesty is important in any business, it would surely be the food business!

 

Yet in just three years, from 2013 through 2015, the food industry spent nearly $200 million on anti-labeling campaigns. If you bought any processed food at all in the last few years, you have undoubtedly supported their efforts to pull the wool over your eyes because the list of traitor companies is long indeed, and contains many of the most widely bought brands in the U.S. Isn’t it time to stop paying these companies to lie to you and deceive you?

 

 

Encourage Your Favorite Brands to Shun ‘GMA’s Verified Ring of Deception’

 

My suggestion? When you see the QR code or so-called Smart Label on a food product, pass it by. Products bearing the GMA’s Smart Label mark are in all likelihood filled with pesticides and/or GMO ingredients. Don’t waste your time searching through their website, which may or may not contain the information you’re looking for. If they insist on wasting your time and making your shopping difficult, why reward them with a purchase?

 

If you think this sounds like a challenge, I beg you to reconsider and to take the wide view. What’s your health, and the health of your family, worth to you? Remember, each and every time you shop, you actively support one type of food system or another. Will you financially support a corrupt, toxic and unsustainable food system, or a healthy, regenerative one? There are many options available besides big-brand processed foods that are part of the “GMA’s verified ring of deception.” You can:

 

Shop at local farms and farmers markets

Only buy products marked either “USDA 100 percent Organic” (which by law cannot contain GMOs), “100 percent Grass-Fed,” or “Non-GMO Verified”

If you have a smartphone and you don’t mind using it, download the OCA’s Buycott app to quickly and easily identify the thousands of proprietary brands belonging to GMA members, so you can avoid them, as well as identify the names of ethical brands that deserve your patronage

Last but not least, encourage good companies to reject QR codes and to be transparent and clear with their labeling. This will eventually ensure that all GMO foods can easily be identified by the GMA’s “verified ring of deception” mark that is the Smart Label.

 

Campbell’s, Mars, Kellogg’s, ConAgra and General Mills all vowed to voluntarily comply with Vermont’s GMO labeling law by labeling all of their foods sold across the U.S. Will their plans change if the current “compromise” gets passed by the Senate? That remains to be seen, but if you like these companies, I would encourage you to reach out to them and ask them to remain steadfast in their promise.

What You Need to Know About GMOs

 

Genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or genetically “engineered” (GE) foods, are live organisms whose genetic components have been artificially manipulated in a laboratory setting through creating unstable combinations of plant, animal, bacteria and even viral genes that do not occur in nature or through traditional crossbreeding methods.

 

GMO proponents claim that genetic engineering is “safe and beneficial,” and that it advances the agricultural industry. They also say that GMOs help ensure the global food supply and sustainability. But is there any truth to these claims? I believe not. For years, I’ve stated the belief that GMOs pose one of the greatest threats to life on the planet. Genetic engineering is NOT the safe and beneficial technology that it is touted to be.

 

The FDA cleared the way for GE (Genetically Engineered) Atlantic salmon to be farmed for human consumption. Thanks to added language in the federal spending bill, the product will require special labeling so at least consumers will have the ability to identify the GE salmon in stores. However, it’s imperative ALL GE foods be labeled, which is currently still being denied.

 

The FDA is threatening the existence of our food supply. We have to start taking action now. I urge you to share this article with friends and family. If we act together, we can make a difference and put an end to the absurdity.

 

Boycott Smart Labels Today

 

When you see the QR code or so-called Smart Label on a food product, pass it by. Products bearing the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association’s (GMA) Smart Label mark are in all likelihood filled with pesticides and/or GMO ingredients.

 

The GMA’s 300-plus members include chemical technology companies, GE seed and food and beverage companies. Monsanto, Dow and Coca-Cola are just some of the heavy-hitters in this powerful industry group, which has showed no qualms about doing whatever it takes to protect the interest of its members.

 

Don’t waste your time searching through their website, which may or may not contain the information you’re looking for. If they insist on wasting your time and making your shopping difficult, why reward them with a purchase? A little known fact is that the GMA actually owns the “Smart Label” trademark that Congress has accepted as a so-called “compromise” to on-package GMO labeling, and that’s another reason why I believe the Smart Label mark is the mark of those with something to hide such as Monsanto.

Will you financially support a corrupt, toxic and unsustainable food system, or a healthy, regenerative one? There are many options available besides big-brand processed foods that are part of the “GMA’s verified ring of deception.” You can:

 

Shop at local farms and farmers markets

Only buy products marked either “USDA 100 percent Organic” (which by law cannot contain GMOs), “100 percent Grass-Fed,” or “Non-GMO Verified”

If you have a smartphone and you don’t mind using it, download the OCA’s Buycott app to quickly and easily identify the thousands of proprietary brands belonging to GMA members, so you can avoid them, as well as identify the names of ethical brands that deserve your patronage

Last but not least, encourage good companies to reject QR codes and to be transparent and clear with their labeling. This will eventually ensure that all GMO foods can easily be identified by the GMA’s “verified ring of deception” mark that is the Smart Label.

 

Campbell’s, Mars, Kellogg’s, ConAgra and General Mills all vowed to voluntarily comply with Vermont’s GMO labeling law by labeling all of their foods sold across the U.S. Will their plans change if the current “compromise” gets passed by the Senate? That remains to be seen, but if you like these companies, I would encourage you to reach out to them and ask them to remain steadfast in their promise.

 

Non-GMO Food Resources by Country

 

If you are searching for non-GMO foods, here is a list of trusted sites you can visit.

 

Organic Food Directory (Australia)

Eat Wild (Canada)

Organic Explorer (New Zealand)

Eat Well Guide (United States & Canada)

Farm Match (United States)

Local Harvest (United States)

Weston A. Price Foundation (United States)

 

 

If you have any questions please call us:

 

Health and Wellness Associates

Archived :JM

312-972-WELL

 

Lifestyle

Natural Insect Repellent that works better than DEET

lemoneucalyptus

Natural Insect Repellent that works better than DEET

Biting insects can put a damper on your summer

fun, not to mention potentially transmit diseases like Lyme disease and West

Nile Virus. The majority of US adults (75 percent) said they are actually more concerned about such diseases than

they are about potentially dangerous chemicals in insect repellent.1

Still, most

people also told Consumer

Reports that safety is important when choosing an insect repellent, and only

one-third believe products on the market are safe for adults (and only 23

percent considered them safe for kids).

Concern is well-justified, as DEET

(N,N-diethyl-meta-toluamide) is used in hundreds of products, in concentrations

of up to an astounding 100 percent. DEET has been shown to harm brain and

nervous system function.

Children are

particularly at risk for subtle neurological changes because their skin more

readily absorbs chemicals in the environment, and chemicals exert more potent

effects on their developing nervous systems.

DEET is not your only option for insect

repellent, fortunately, and Consumer Reports tests have recently revealed

natural alternatives that may be even more effective

without the harsh side effects.

Picaridin and

Lemon Eucalyptus Beat DEET for Repelling Insects

Consumer

Reports recruited volunteers to test out spray-on repellents made of DEET, oil

of lemon eucalyptus, picaridin, a chemical called IR3535, and products made

with natural plant oils. After the repellents were applied and allowed to sit

for 30 minutes, the volunteers reached into a cage containing (disease-free)

mosquitoes or ticks.

Two products

emerged on top and were able to keep mosquitoes and ticks away for at least

seven hours: products that contained 20 percent picaridin or 30 percent oil of

lemon eucalyptus. Picaridin resembles the natural compound piperine, an

essential oil in black pepper.

However, picaridin is not a natural compound;

it’s produced synthetically in the lab. According to the Environmental Working

Group (EWG), picaridin does not carry the same neurotoxicity concerns at DEET,

although it has not been tested much over the long term. They report:2

“Overall, EWG’s

assessment is that Picaridin is a good DEET alternative with many of the same

advantages and without the same disadvantages.”

Lemon

Eucalyptus Is a ‘Biopesticide’ Repellent

Oil

of lemon eucalyptus comes from the gum eucalyptus tree, but it is

p-menthane-3,8-diol (PMD), its synthetic version with pesticidal properties,

that is used as an insect repellent. While the term “PMD” is often used

interchangeably with lemon eucalyptus oil, know that it is different from the

“pure” unrefined oil, which is typically used in making fragrances.

The pure oil is

not registered with the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as an insect

repellant. PMD or the refined version, on the other hand, has a long history of

use but only recently became important as a commercial repellent.

In 2000, the

EPA registered oil of lemon eucalyptus or PMD as a “biopesticide repellent,”

meaning it is derived from natural materials. Both lemon eucalyptus oil and

picaridin are not actual repellents,

but insteadmost likely work by masking the environmental cues that mosquitoes

use to locate their target.

Side effects of

both picaridin and lemon eucalyptus include potential skin or eye irritation,

and the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) states that picaridin should not

be used on children under age 3. Urvashi Rangan, PhD, executive director of

Consumer Reports’ Food Safety and Sustainability Center, said:

“They are not

side-effect-free, but ‘those problems are much less severe than deet…’ Still,

all repellents should be used sparingly and only for the time you need

them—especially on children and older people.”

Why

DEET-Containing Repellents Are Better Off Avoided

About 30

percent of Americans use DEET every year, but you should know that this

chemical – though generally effective in keeping away insects – can have deadly

repercussions. From 1961 to 2002, the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease

Registry reports eight deaths related to DEET exposure.

Three of these resulted from deliberate

ingestion, but five of them occurred following DEET exposure to the skin in

adults and children.3 Psychological effects have

also been reported including altered mental state, auditory hallucinations, and

severe agitation.

In children, the most frequently reported

symptoms of DEET toxicity reported to poison control centers were lethargy,

headaches, tremors, involuntary movements, seizures, and convulsions. Further,

in a study of more than 140 National Park Service employees, 25 percent

reported health effects they attributed to DEET, including:4

Rashes

Skin or mucous membrane

irritation

Transient numb or

burning lips

Dizziness

Disorientation

Difficulty

concentrating

Headache

Nausea

In addition, Duke University Medical Center

pharmacologist Mohamed Abou-Donia spent 30 years researching

the effects of pesticides. He discovered that prolonged exposure to DEET can

impair cell function in parts of your brain — demonstrated in the lab by death

and behavioral changes in rats with frequent or prolonged DEET use. Other

potential side effects DEET exposure include:

Memory loss

Headache

Muscle weakness and

fatigue

Shortness of breath

Muscle and joint pain

Tremors

Another

potentially harmful chemical found in many bug sprays is permethrin. This

chemical is a member of the synthetic pyrethroid family, all of which are

neurotoxins.

The EPA has even deemed this chemical

carcinogenic, capable of causing lung tumors, liver tumors, immune system

problems, and chromosomal abnormalities. Permethrin is also damaging to the

environment, and it is particularly toxic to bees and aquatic life. It should

also be noted that permethrin is highly toxic to cats.5

Non-Chemical

Options to Keep Bugs Away from Your Barbecue

Consumer

Reports also tested three non-chemical options for keeping pests away from a

simulated backyard barbecue: a citronella candle, a portable diffuser with

essential oils, or an oscillating pedestal fan set at its highest speed.

While neither the candle nor the diffuser showed much promise, the fan worked

well, cutting mosquito landings by 45 percent to 65 percent among those sitting

near the fan.

Similar results were found from the Consumer

Reports survey, which found 45 percent of people who used fans to keep insects

away reported them as “especially helpful” (compared to 31 percent of those who

used candles).6

Naturally, the

best way to avoid mosquito bites is to prevent coming into contact with them in

the first place. You can avoid insect bites by staying inside between dusk and

dawn, which is when they are most active.

Mosquitoes are also thicker in shrubby areas and

near standing water. The American Mosquito Control Association (AMCA)

recommends the “Three Ds” of protection to prevent mosquito breeding on your

property:7

  • Drain – Mosquitoes require water in which to breed, so

    carefully drain any and all sources of standing water around your house and

    yard, including pet bowls, gutters, garbage and recycling bins, spare tires,

    bird baths, etc.

  • Dress – Wear light colored, loose fitting

    clothing—long sleeved shirts and long pants, hats, and socks

  • Defend – While the AMCA recommends

    using commercial repellents, I highly recommend avoiding most chemical

    repellents for the reasons already discussed; try some of the natural

    alternatives instead, when necessary

Bat houses are another option since bats are

voracious consumers of insects, especially mosquitoes. For more on buying a bat

house or constructing one yourself, visit the Organization for Bat

Conservation.8 Planting marigolds around

your yard also works as a bug repellent because the flowers give off a fragrance

that bugs dislike.

Enjoy the

Outdoors with These Additional Natural Repellent Options

Body temperature and skin chemicals like lactic

acid attract mosquitoes, which explains why you’re more likely to be “eaten

alive” when you’re sweaty, such as during or after exercise, so trying to stay

as cool and dry as you can may help to some degree. Some experts also recommend

supplementing

with one vitamin B1 tablet a day from April through October, and

then adding 100 mg of B1 to a B100 Complex daily during the mosquito season to

make

you less attractive to mosquitoes. Regularly

consuming

garlic may also help protect against mosquito bites, as may thefollowing natural insect repellants:

  • Cinnamon leaf oil

    (one study found it was more effective at killing mosquitoes than DEET9)

  • Clear liquid vanilla extract mixed with olive oil
  • Wash with citronella soap, and then put 100% pure

    citronella essential

    oil on your skin. Java Citronella is considered the highest qualitycitronella on the market

  • Catnip oil (according to one study, this oil is

    10 times more effective than DEET10)

Another option is to use the safe solution I have

formulated to repel mosquitoes, fleas, chiggers, ticks, and other biting

insects. It’s a

natural

insect spray with a combination of citronella,

lemongrass

oil,

peppermint

oil, and vanillin, which is a dynamite blend of natural plant

extracts. In fact, an independent study showed my bug spray to be more

effective than a product containing 100 percent DEET. And it’s safe for you,

your children, and your pets.

You can also try using lemon eucalyptus oil to make a homemade insect

repellent. Here is a recipe from Backpacking Spirit to try out:11

“Make your own

mosquito repellent consisted of around 10% lemon eucalyptus oil. If you are

using the essential (‘pure’) oil, note that it does not mix with water and will

therefore require a carrier oil, such as hazel, vodka, or olive oil.

Procedure:

  • Obtain an

    appropriately sized bottle for travel; a 100 to 200 ml bottle will be a good

    choice. You may also go for a bottle that has a spritzer nozzle for easy

    application.

  • Choose your

    carrier oil

  • Use a measuring

    jug for more precise measurements.

  • Think 10%

    essential oil. If you are using a 100 ml bottle, mix 90 ml of your chosen

    liquid and 10 ml of lemon eucalyptus oil. If you are using a 200 ml bottle, mix

    180 ml of liquid and 20 ml of essential oil.

  • Shake the

    bottle thoroughly before use.

  • Spritz onto

    skin and rub in.”

Health and Wellness Associates

312-972-WELL

Archived Article

Health and Disease

What Happens to Your Body When You Smoke

cigarettersmoking

What Happens to Your Body When You Smoke

According to statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), nearly 18 out of every 100 U.S. adults aged 18 years or older (17.8 percent) smoke cigarettes today. This means an estimated 42.1 million adults in the United States are cigarette smokers. Even more stunning; on average, smoking causes 480,000 deaths per year in the country, which is roughly 1,300 deaths per day.1 It is expected that eight million people will die in 2030 if the current smoking rate continues.

Background of Cigarette Smoking

Smoking is said to stimulate pleasing and enjoyable emotions, and smokers claim that it helps boost their mood, alleviates minor depression and small fits of anger, improves concentration and short-term memory, and can also provide a modest sense of well-being. This is because cigarettes contain the addictive substance nicotine that stimulates dopamine in the brain, which is responsible for the “pleasurable sensations.”

However, the more you smoke, the more your nerve cells become immune to the pleasure brought on by smoking. As a result, smokers tend to increase their intake of nicotine to get that desirable feeling from smoking.2

Despite the “pleasure” that one gets from puffing a cigarette, remember this: smoking comes with devastating health effects.

If you think smoking an e-cig makes a difference, it doesn’t. Researchers actually found that a brand of e-cigarette contains more than 10 times the level of carcinogen contained in a regular cigarette. Formaldehyde and acetaldehyde, both harmful toxins, were also found in the vapor produced by several types of e-cigarettes.

Remember while smoking makes you feel good for a period of time, it slowly kills your body, and is the LEADING preventable cause of death in the US.3

What Are the Side Effects of Smoking Cigarettes?

Smoking harms your body and may cause permanent damage to your health. If you’re still not convinced about its dangers, take a look at some of smoking’s side effects.

Short-Term Effects

Smokers tend to have smelly clothes and hair, bad breath, and yellow or brown teeth stains. Your physical appearance can also suffer as smoking can lead to premature wrinkles, gum and tooth loss, and sudden weight change. Stomach ulcers and weakened immune system are also possible smoking side effects you might experience.4

For young people, there is a high probability that they will continue smoking into adulthood. As a result, it will impair their lung function and growth. Teens who smoke are also 22 times more likely to use cocaine.

According to a new Australian study, female smokers may experience worse menstrual cramps than those who don’t. It is likely to happen as the amount of oxygen that travels to the uterus decreases when you smoke. Researchers say that women who started to smoke at the tender age of 13 have a 59 percent risk of having painful menstruation, while those who started to smoke at age 14 or 15 have 50 percent risk of experiencing it.5

Long-Term Effects

Many people don’t begin to feel the severe side effects of smoking until years later. Once you begin to feel the symptoms, you know damage has already been done. Some damaging side effects of smoking cigarettes include:

  • Cardiovascular health problems. Smoking poses a great danger to your heart and blood vessels. It damages the structure of your heart and the way your blood vessels work.6 Smoking increases your risk of having a heart disease by two to four times, as it causes the blood vessels in your heart to thicken and grow thinner. It makes your heart beat faster, your blood pressure rise, and causes your blood to clot. When a clot blocks the blood flow to your heart, it cannot get enough oxygen, which damages a part of your heart’s muscle or even kills it.

People who smoke have a higher risk of atherosclerosis, a disease where the plaque liquids build in the arteries. As time progresses, it will cause your arteries to harden and narrow, which will limit the flow of the oxygen-filled blood to other parts of your body.

Smoking may also lead to coronary heart disease (CHD) once the plaque liquids build up in the coronary arteries. It can lead to chest pain, heart attack, heart failure, arrhythmias, or death.

Another side effect of smoking cigarettes is Peripheral Arterial Disease (P.A.D.), which happens when plaque liquids build up to the blood vessels that deliver blood to the head, organs, and limbs. Smokers who have diabetes and take birth control pills are at greater risk of having serious ailments to the heart and blood vessels. 7

  • Increased risk of stroke. Smokers have a two to four times increased risk of having a stroke than non-smokers. It happens when a clot blocks the blood from your brain or when an artery around or in your brain explodes.8
  • Respiratory problems. Our lungs are equipped with a layer of internal mucus that serves as a protective shield for foreign materials that we inhale, by wiping off these contaminants with small hairs called cilia. But with smokers, cilia cannot function properly as these tiny hairs work rather slowly. As a result, you cannot cough, sneeze, or swallow to get these toxins out of your body.9

Smoking can trigger or make an asthma attack worse.10 It may also cause Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD), which includes emphysema and chronic bronchitis. In emphysema, the air sacs in your lungs eventually lose their elasticity and start to worsen. Chronic bronchitis happens when there is a swelling in the linings of your lungs and it constrains your breathing.11

  • Pregnancy complications. Pregnant women who smoke have a higher risk of preterm (early) delivery, miscarriage, or stillbirth. They may encounter Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS), ectopic pregnancy, and orofacial clefts for the newborns. Women also have a great tendency of having weaker bones after menopause.12
  • Reproductive health function. Men who smoke may encounter erectile dysfunction, poor sperm quality, and sperm defects. For women, smoking may cause reduced fertility.13
  • Cigarettes contain over 7,000 chemicals, some of which can cause cancer. These include formaldehyde, benzene, polonium 210, and vinyl chloride.14 Even worse, smoking can cause various kinds of cancers anywhere in your body, not just in your lungs, such as: 15
Bladder Blood (acute myeloid leukemia) Cervix
Colon and rectum (colorectal) Esophagus Kidney and ureter
Larynx Liver Oropharynx
Pancreas Stomach Trachea, bronchus, and lung

Radioactive Chemical Found in Fertilizers Leads to Lung Cancer

Did you know that your body also accumulates harmful radioactive chemicals from cigarettes? These dangerous elements come from the pesticides used on tobacco fields. While it is true that smoking cigarettes can cause cancer, there is a more specific substance that is the root cause of cancer among smokers. Tobacco fields typically use calcium phosphate fertilizers, which contain polonium-210. When polonium-210 decays, it releases alpha particles that can damage human cells they come into contact with.

Research suggests that main lung damage comes from the radiation emitted by these fertilizers.16,17,18 It also showed that polonium, specifically, causes cancer in laboratory animals.19 Moreover, according to a study in 200920 the radiation that you get from smoking 1 ½ cigarette packs is tantamount to 300 chest x-ray films per year.

A 2011 report from Nicotine and Tobacco Research21 also revealed there are internal documents stating that the tobacco industry have recognized the danger brought by these radioactive chemicals. According to these papers, acid wash was found to be an effective solution in removing polonium-210 from the tobacco leaves, but the industry avoided using it as it would lessen the pleasurable effect of nicotine to smokers.

The tobacco industry will certainly not be your number one motivator in stopping you from smoking, even if they know that this may lead to your death. It is now your decision to throw away your smoking habit for good and choose a healthier lifestyle, which can add more years to your life.

What Happens When a Smoker Quits

The process of quitting requires determination and patience as it will affect you both physically and mentally, so be prepared for its withdrawal period. But nonetheless, it will greatly benefit in many ways even just minutes after quitting.

Tips on How to Quit Smoking

People who have been addicted to smoking for a long time still have hope in turning over a new leaf. I suggest that you practice these prevention techniques to help you quit smoking:22

  • Choose a Quit Day. Pick a day that is not stressful for you so that you can prepare yourself. It can be your birthday, your anniversary, or even just the first day of the month.
  • Don’t Quit Alone. Telling someone about your decision to quit can give an enormous support when you feel alone in your battle to quit.
  • Know Your Nicotine Replacement Options. Nicotine Replacement Therapy (NRT) can be a great help in quitting smoking as it can help you overcome the withdrawal symptoms. It is considered safe for all smokers except for pregnant women and people with heart disease.23

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved five forms of nicotine replacement therapy (patch, gum, nasal spray, inhalers, and lozenges) for those who are attempting to quit. But it is still best to ask a medical professional about which form of NRT is most suitable for you.24

  • Get Smart About Your Smoking. Keeping a journal can help you track the situations that helped you up or pushed you down in your attempt to quit smoking, so you can determine how you can deal with them without reaching for a cigarette.
  • Identify Your Triggers. Make a list of all the things that you have done in the past that involves smoking. Before your quit day, prepare yourself on how you will deal with these things.
  • Change the What, Where, When and How You Smoke. Altering you habits – the time and places where you used to smoke – can help you during your attempt to quit.
  • Spring Clean. Wash and throw away everything that reminds you of smoking.
  • Get Support. It is great if you can get help from communities of former smokers or a clinic that specializes in helping those who want quit.
  • Quit Day and Beyond. You have to adjust your behavior to identify what triggers you to smoke.
  • If You’re Going to Do It, Do It! Commitment is key to be successful in your attempt to quit. It will certainly be hard but it is worth it.

Quitting smoking may be hard, but I advise you to do it as early as now. I really believe that having a healthy, smoke-free lifestyle will not only benefit you but your family as well.

Health and Wellness Associates

312-972-WELL

Archived Article

Foods

Stuffed Cabbage

stuffedcabbage

Many of us have had these and we need to keep eating them.  They are filled with many many of the nutrients that we have lost with “quick” foods.  For the men in your family, use canned whole tomatoes in your sauce, that is what is best for them.  You also might want to skip the honey, especially if you have children.

Savory Stuffed Cabbage Rolls

Adapted from The Green Thumb Cookbook, page 63

1 medium head cabbage

1 pound ground beef

1/2 cup chopped onion

3 T uncooked brown rice

2 T chopped fresh parsley (2 t dried)

2 t salt

1/2 t pepper

1 egg

1 3/4 cups plain tomato sauce

1 cup canned tomato chunks

2 T honey

1/2 cup grated Colby cheese, optional

Put the head of cabbage in a pot. Cover with water. Remove the cabbage and bring the water to a boil. Turn off the heat. Submerge the whole head of cabbage in the boiling water and cover. Let sit for 15-20 minutes.

Meanwhile, brown the beef and onion. Turn off the heat. Add the rice, parsley, salt, pepper, and egg.

When the cabbage is done “cooking”, remove it from the water onto a cookie sheet with sides (to catch any remaining water). Very carefully, remove 12 leaves. Cut the thickest part of center rib out of each leaf, about 1 or 2 inches. There will be a little V in the middle of each leave. Divide the meat filling between the leaves and roll up jelly roll fashion, but tucking in the ends so the filling stays put. Place the rolls in a deep casserole dish.

Pour the tomato sauce, tomato chunks, and honey over the rolls. Cover and bake at 350 for about an hour and a half. Remove the lid, sprinkle with cheese, and bake another 5 minutes or until cheese is melted. Let set a few minutes before serving.

Serves: 4 – 6

Diets and Weight Loss, Foods, Health and Disease

When in doubt, throw it out!

aspsweetener

This was just sent today, in response to the article on sweeteners sent out yesterday.  It is being sent out in its entirety.

FDA Answers Petition To Ban
Aspartame After 14 Years

By Dr. Betty Martini,D.Hum.
10-31-14

When I first saw their report on Google from Law360 there were only two paragraphs. Later the rest of the release was added on google news and I realized FDA was actually responding to my 2002 petition for the toxic sweetener to be banned. FDA mentions also Dr. K. Stoller’s petition but omitted the vital fact that Stoller is an M.D.

I appreciate Law360 for revealing FDA’s long delayed answer to my petition. FDA apparently doesn’t want to communicate directly to me because I have their records and can expose their coverup.  They won’t even answer a FOIA request from 2010. By law a citizen’s petition for ban must be answered in 180 days. FDA had told me they had more important things to do.  The imminent health hazard amendment in 2007 that is suppose to be answered in a week or ten days was ignored.

I just wrote a long and detailed report answering what I had read from Law360 showing FDA’s many lies:  http://www.rense.com/general96/fda.html Now having read the rest mentioning my petition this is part two. Some of their additional absurd remarks need to be explained. Basically they have denied the petition saying aspartame doesn’t cause cancer because they know it’s against the Delaney Amendment to approve something that does. In the first part I quoted Dr. Adrian Gross, FDA’s lead scientist and toxicologist, who clearly stated aspartame causes cancer. FDA lies about this to protect the poison producers, letting the public sicken and die. In 2009 I received a call from FDA’s Michael Delaney upset that I had added the imminent health hazard amendment. He made everything clear when he said: “We have to depopulate!”  

On five acres in Elberton, Georgia stand the Georgia Guidestones which display Ten Guides to an “Age of Reason.” The first is: “Maintain Earth’s population at 500 million” a call to kill 93% of the eight billion humans now on Earth. Apparently FDA is in agreement.

It is tragic aspartame is addictive.  The methyl-ester immediately becomes free methyl alcohol when consumed and is classified as a narcotic causing methanol poisoning. This affects the dopamine system of the brain creating addiction.  A waitress told me: “if there are two groups, one drinking Coke and the other drinking Diet Coke, the Diet Coke group will drink three times as much.” 

Aspartame is a neurotoxic drug that damages the mitochondria, powerhouse of the cell, and interacts with drugs and vaccines.  These facts are laid out in the 1,000 page medical text Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic by the late illustrious H. J. Roberts, M.D., www.sunsentpress.com


Now read the whole short release, and below it, I will answer what I had not read.

FDA Rejects Ban On Diet Soda Sweetener Aspartame

Share us on: By Jeff Overley
Law360, New York (October 27, 2014, 6:58 PM ET) — The U.S.
Food and Drug Administration
has rejected calls to ban low-calorie sweetener aspartame, finding no evidence that the widely used diet soda additive causes cancer.
In responses released Friday, the FDA shot down two citizen petitions that urged regulators to recall the ingredient and to revoke a regulation that allows its use in food. Aspartame is sold under the brand name NutraSweet, is a component of coffee sweetener Equal and is commonly used in popular soft drinks, including Diet Coke.

One of the FDA’s responses addressed a petition originally lodged in 2002 by Georgia-based Mission Possible World Health International, a group focused in large part on the purported dangers of aspartame consumption. That petition attracted more than 1,000 public comments, although most have not been published by the FDA.

According to the FDA, the petition blamed incidences of brain tumors and seizures on aspartame but failed to back up its allegations with concrete data.

The anecdotal accounts of adverse effects of aspartame cited in the citizen petition are not supported by scientific evidence, FDA officials said.

Regulators at times suggested that the concerns are nothing new, writing that some of the alleged health risks were raised roughly 30 years ago and addressed in detail at the time.

Over the past decade, almost 200 adverse events tied to aspartame have been reported to the FDA, but there is little reason to give much credence to those supposed side effects, according to Fridays response.

FDA has not identified any causal link between aspartame consumption and the reported adverse events, and does not know of an established mechanism that would explain how aspartame is associated with the reported adverse events, the agency said.

One of the petitions specific concerns was that consuming aspartame results in harmful production of methanol, but the FDA said that such production is small compared to methanol that results from eating perfectly safe foods, such as apples and pears.

In any event, data reviewed by the FDA shows that methanol in aspartame or in fruits and juices does not accumulate in the body and is easily metabolized by the body’s metabolic capacities, Fridays response said.

A second response posted Friday was directed at petitioner K. Paul Stoller, who in 2009 requested revocation of the aspartame regulation. Much of the response discussed a study conducted by an aspartame-focused group called the European Ramazzini Foundation, with the FDA saying that it has not been able to access full study data and that the studys integrity appears to have been compromised.

Despite your many assertions, you have not identified any scientific data or other information that would cause the agency to alter its conclusions about the safety of aspartame, the FDA wrote to Stoller.

Although aspartame has been used abundantly around the world for many years, lingering worries about its safety have forced companies that use the artificial sweetener to constantly defend the ingredient. The Coca-Cola Co., through its Beverage Institute for Health & Wellness, promotes aspartame as helpful to dieters and calls the additive “one of the most thoroughly studied food ingredients in the world.”

Still, concerns have presented a business opportunity for some corporations, including Israel-based SodaStream International Ltd. Some of the company’s do-it-yourself soda syrups include labeling that prominently says, No aspartame.

–Editing by Philip Shea.
________________________________________________


Martini continues:  The release says: ” According to the FDA, the petition blamed incidences of brain tumors and seizures on aspartame but failed to back up its allegations with concrete data.”  First of all, it was the FDA themselves who revoked the petition for approval based on the brain tumor  issue and the fact it had caused brain tumors and brain cancer in original Searle studies.  Go to my web site and read the entire 50 pages where the FDA discusses their own concern about aspartame causing brain tumors: 
http://www.mpwhi.com/main.htm Scroll down to the banners. Secondly, one of the reasons the FDA tried to have G. D. Searle indicted for fraud was that as the rats developed brain tumors they would excise the tumors, put the rats back in the study and when they died they would resurrect them on paper.  Thirdly, why would anyone not think aspartame triggers brain tumors when the molecule breaks down to diketopiperazine, a brain tumor agent?

Actually in the original report I wrote about this release, URL above, I went into other studies and reports on the subject in detail.  Having taken the cases for over 20 years from those who suffered aspartame brain tumors I have never forgotten the case of a young 28 year attorney Kelli Motluck who had a head full of aspartame brain tumors who also discussed with me many other aspartame users she knew who had brain tumors.  G. D. Searle sold to Monsanto in 1985 and was the owner at the time Kelli called me.  In her last conversation she said to me, “I want to live, I want to live, I want to live, but if I die promise me you will tell the world Monsanto murdered me.”  After her death I lectured in the UK in 2000 and in the lecture to the Green Party and press I did this.

Neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D., author of ‘Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills’
says about aspartame and brain tumors on page 212 – 213:

“It is interesting to note that the first experiments done to test the safety of aspartame before its final approval in l981 disclosed a high incidence of brain tumors in the animals fed NutraSweet. In fact, this study was done by the manufacturer of NutraSweet, G. D. Searle. In this study 320 rats were fed aspartame and 120 rats were fed a normal diet and used as controls. The study lasted two years. At the end of the study twelve of the aspartame fed rats had developed brain tumors (astrocytomas), while none of the control rats had. This represented a 3.75% incidence of brain tumors in the rats fed aspartame, which was twenty-five times higher than the incidence of spontaneous brain tumors developing in rats (0.15%). ”

“The study divided the rats into those exposed to low doses of aspartame and those exposed to a high dose. In the low dose group five of the rats developed brain tumors for and incidence of 3.13%. In the high dose group, seven developed brain tumors (4.38%). This indicates a dose related incidence of brain tumors. The higher the dose of aspartame, the more brain tumors were induced. ”

“When Dr. John Olney pointed out these findings to the FDA “Aspartame Board of Inquiry” he was told that the high incidence of tumors was the result of spontaneous development of brain tumors in rats. That is, that some rats develop brain tumors naturally, just as humans do. Dr. Olney is a trained neuropathologist as well as a neuroscientist. He reviewed the incidence of spontaneously occurring brain tumors in rats and found that out of seven studies using a total of 59,000 rats and only 0,08% developed brain tumors – the aspartame fed rats had a forty-seven fold higher incidence. But to be fair, he even accepted G. D. Searle’s references for spontaneously developing brain tumors in rats and arrives at a figure of 0.15%. This was still a twenty-five fold higher incidence in the aspartame fed rats than in the controls. ”

“It was then observed that when brain tumors develop spontaneously in rats, the rate at which they appear begins to accelerate after two years of age, exactly when the Searle’s study ended. Importantly, brain tumors are extremely rare before age one and one-half in the rat. So in truth the incidence of spontaneously occurring brain tumors would be even less than cited above. Yet, the aspartame fed rats developed two tumors by sixty weeks of age and five tumors by seventy weeks.”

“In a collective study of 41,000 rats no tumors were seen to occur before sixty weeks and only one by seventy weeks. The fact that 320 aspartame fed rats developed six brain tumors by seventy-six weeks indicates an “incredible and unprecedented” occurrence. Within the final twenty-eight weeks of the study six more brain tumors occurred in the aspartame fed group. Dr. Olney notes that “one must assume that many more (brain tumors) would have occurred after 104 weeks. ”

“It became obvious that the G. D. Searle Company was trying desperately to protect their potential billion dollar plus money maker. They claimed that more brain tumors were found because they searched the pathological slides so diligently. But, they searched just as diligently in the control rats and found none. Besides, neuropathologists examining the slides later stated that the tumors were large enough to be seen with the naked eye. ”

“Because of the criticism submitted by Dr. Olney, the G. D. Searle company conducted a second study which was designed to be more comprehensive. Instead of a two-year study, this would span the entire lifetime of the rats, from intrauterine life to death. The results of this study can only be characterized as bizarre. This time they reported five brain tumors in 120 control rats (an incidence of 3.13%) and four brain tumors in 120 control rats (an incidence of 3.33%). While this was designed to show that aspartame was not the cause of the brain tumors, if accepted, the study would indicate that both groups had a brain tumor incidence thirty times higher than the known rate of spontaneous brain tumor occurrence in rats.”

“But the story gets even more interesting, Dr. Olney hypothesized that one possible cause of the tumor induction was a by-product of aspartame metabolism called diketopiperazine (DKP). When nitrosated by the gut it produces a compound closely resembling a powerful brain tumor causing chemical – N-nitrosourea. ”

“The G. D. Searle company conducted a separate study to test the carcinogenicity of diketopiperazine (DKP). The results of this study were not submitted to the FDA until after aspartame had already been approved for general use by the American population. This study was not a lifetime study but rather a 115 week study which consisted of feeding rats their normal feed mixed with DKP. There were 114 control animals and 216 that supposedly ate the DKP. (Not all of the animals were even examined for tumors.) There were two brain tumors in the controls (1.62% incidence) and three (1.52% in the DKP groups. But strangely enough, the incidence of brain tumors found in both groups were sixteen times higher than would be expected from spontaneous occurring tumors. That did not make sense.”

“So how can we explain these strange findings? It is instructive at this point to know that in l975 the drug enforcement division of the Bureau of Foods investigated the G. D. Searle company as part of an investigation of “apparent irregularities in data collection and reporting practices.” The director of the FDA at that time stated that they found “sloppy” laboratory techniques and “clerical errors, mixed-up animals, animals not getting the drugs they were supposed to get, pathological specimens lost because of improper handling, and a variety of other errors, (which) even if innocent, all conspire to obscure positive findings and produce falsely negative results.”

“The drug enforcement division carried out a study under the care of agent Jerome Bressler concerning Searle’s laboratory practices and data manipulation (known as the Bressler Report  He found that the feed used to test DKP had been improperly mixed so that the animals would receive only small doses of the chemical to be tested. (I have seen a photograph of the feed mix and can attest to the “sloppy” method used.) The commissioner also charged G. D. Searle company with “failure to maintain control and experimental animals on separate racks and failure to mark animals to ensure against mix-ups between experiments (animals fed aspartame and DKP) and controls.” This vital and telling report was buried in a file cabinet, never to be acted on by the FDA.”

“Such poor techniques would explain why both control animals and those eating aspartame had exceptionally high brain tumor rates, since they, most likely, were both eating the aspartame feed. What is ironic is that the FDA would accept studies from a company with an obvious heavy financial interest in having aspartame approved. But even more amazing is that they would depend on the same company to provide studies that they, FDA, knew beforehand were highly questionable and possibly fraudulent upon which they would make such an important public safety decision.”

“Thus far, no independent studies have been done to examine this vital issue. As a neurosurgeon I see the devastating effects a brain tumor has, not only on its victim, but on the victim’s family as well. To think that there is even a reasonable doubt that aspartame can induce brain tumors in the American population is frightening. And to think that the FDA has lulled them into a false sense of security is a monumental crime.” (end of quotes from book)

Searle’s shenanigans and fraud were so bad because they couldn’t prove aspartame safe they needed help to coverup the issue so on August 4, l976 they met with the FDA and convinced them to allow them to hire a private agency, University Associated for Education in Pathology (UAREP). As described by Florence Graves (l984, page s5500 of Congressional Record l985a):

“The pathologists were specifically told that they were not to make a judgment about aspartame’s safety or to look at the designs of the tests. Why did the FDA choose to have pathologists conduct an investigation when even some FDA officials acknowledged at the time that UAREP had a limited task which would only partially shed light on the validity of Searle’s testing? The answer is not clear.”

In other words, UAREP was sworn to silence, and how much did they get to be quiet? They received a half a million dollars!!!

Searle was intent on getting aspartame approved. They had invested 19.7 million dollars in an incomplete production facility and 9.2 million dollars in aspartame inventory. On Dec 8, l975, stockholders filed a class action lawsuit alleging that G. D. Searle had concealed information from the public regarding the nature and quality of animal research at G. D. Searle in violation of the Securities and Exchange Act (Farber l989, page 48).

Aspartame also triggered mammary, uterine, ovarian, pancreatic, testicular and thyroid tumors just for starters, not just brain tumors. There were also pituitary adenomas.

On the seizure issue.  It is hard to believe that the FDA would even have the audacity to suggest there is not sufficient evidence.,  Searle’s own study,  52 week oral toxicity on 7 infant monkeys, showed that 5 had grand mal seizures and 1 died.,  Enter the twilight zone.  This study was used as pivotal in the approval of aspartame to show safety.  Here is that study in full: http://www.dorway.com/raoreport.pdf Also, in 1986 the Community Nutrition Institute with Attorney James Turner filed a petition to ban aspartame because so many people were having seizures and going blind from the methanol. Cynthia Mueggenborg wrote me that she was invited to attend the National Consumer Conference by the head of a department at OSU in January of 1986.  She said there she heard a representative of the FDA tell 3000 people that FDA was pulling aspartame from human usage as it caused seizures and blindness.  So here is the admission of the FDA themselves.  The reason it wasn’t banned at that time as it was taken to the Supreme Court in Chicago.  I was told someone got to the judge but I think that even today that judge should be made to explain why he refused to allow aspartame to be banned.  It’s common knowledge, for instance, that methanol blinds.  Remember prohibition?

Evidence of the whole situation of aspartame triggering seizures was sent to FDA by Mark Gold of the Aspartame Toxicity Center,.
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dailys/03/Jan03/012203/02P-0317_emc-000198.txt This report is so indepth he even goes through industry’s studies showing what they did in an attempt to deny the issue.  In the Rowen Study notice it was a one day study.  Monsanto was so afraid someone would have a seizure they gave 16 of the 18 subjects anti-seizure medication and didn’t tell anyone!

In 1996 my husband’s Michigan cousin, Mary Lee, visited us on the way to Florida with the news: “William Reed is dying, having 6 or 8 seizures a day and his physician has not been able to stop them.”  I asked if he was using NutraSweet/Aspartame/Equal and was suffering from MS symptoms, going blind, losing his memory and having headaches.  He was.

I told her to call and tell him to stop the aspartame immediately. She said: “He may already be dead.”  It was almost comical to hear her say, “William, Betty says you don’t have to die, get off aspartame.”


When she returned from Florida Mary Lee said William had abstained from  aspartame and the seizures had stopped.  When she was leaving she stood in the door and said, “Betty, do you realize if I had not stopped in Atlanta William would be dead.”  This shows you the importance of warning by all people.  Because of the lies of the FDA, trade organizations receiving funding from the manufacturers and front groups people don’t associate their aspartame diseases and symptoms with the product., So they just keep dying like William would have had not we gotten him the information.

One June 19, 1997 Dr. Timothy K. Dickinson of the Allegan Medical Clinic wrote:  “William Reed is a 48 year old male with diabetes mellitus type I, on insulin.  I have been involved, as his family physician, with his care since 1990.  In September of 1995 he began describing episodes of generalized uncontrolled shaking, lasting up to 30 seconds.  He would afterward feel good, and at times, euphoric.  They would often be preceded by periorbital aching.  He initially interpreted these to reflect a hyperglycemic state, and nothing abnormal showed up on his exam.  At a follkow up visit in October, they were still occurring, lasting less than one minute, with mild tremoring, again preceded by the retrobulbar aching, especially on the left.  While I was with the patient in the room at that visit, and he was on the exam table, I witnessed one of these episodes, which I described as being generalized clonus.  He was able to tell me seconds before it started that it was going to happen.  He did not talk through it.  It lasted approximately 10-15 seconds, cleared for about the same period of time and occurred again.  During this time, he tended to hyperextend or arch his back on the table.  He seemed to be weak, but not postictal afterwards,  It was within the next 6 weeks that a family member came to understand that NutraSweet could cause problems of this nature, and within two days of him discontinuing all Nutrasweet use, the seizures stopped and he has none since that time.  He has also had far fewer headaches since then,  He was able to resume driving, which he had ceased, because of his fear of these episodes occurring while on the road.” —

Eighteen years have passed since Mary Lee said William Reed was about to die, and he is still alive. 

Some years ago I worked with an allergist and the way they find out the culprit causing problems to the patient is called the “add back system”. They keep removing products from the patient’s diet until the problem stops.  Then they add back the product and if the symptoms return they know they have found what caused the problem   They don’t call it anecdotal – they call proof.

After taking aspartame seizures cases for over 20 years I could write a book on the cases. Robin Goodwin’s wife in the Falkland Islands developed an aspartame brain tumor and had to be air lifted to England. His daughter suffered seizures for 18 years.  On reading one of my articles he had his daughter abstain.  She has never had another seizure. Robin knew how hard it would be to get aspartame banned because of the power and influence of industry, so he wrote a letter to all the 3,000 or 4,000 Falkland islanders warning them, and had the information published.  We thank Robin Goodwin, activist extraordinaire, for saving the lives of the people of an island nation.

It should also be noted that when Dr. Richard Wurtman of MIT decided to do studies on aspartame and seizures he was threatened by the VP of Searle that if he did his research funds would be rejected.  They were. Read about it in the UPI investigation by Gregory Gordon:  http://www.mpwhi.com/main.htm Scroll down to banners.  Notice ILSI was set up, a research funds front group.  MIT now gets research funds but Dr. Wurtman now refuses to speak out about aspartame.  At one time he reported to have over 200 cases of aspartame triggered seizures which he said was enough to remove it from the market.

The FDA Rejection news release says:  “The anecdotal accounts of adverse effects of aspartame cited in the citizen petition are not supported by scientific evidence,”

This statement is laughable! 

Dr. H. J. Roberts in Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic said: “Aspartame disease no longer can be ignored as incidental anecdotal reactions.  This sobering assertion has been validated by personal observations, those of other physicians, the FDA data, mounting epidemiologic evidence, and a host of experimental studies.   — The clinical features are often severe – especially headache, convulsions, impaired vision, dizziness, confusion, profound memory loss, refractory fatigue, intense depression, gross changes in personality or behavior, eating disorders, loss of diabetes control, and the aggravation or simulation of diabetic complications.”

Page 39:  “But the medical profession has a tendency to discard out of hand, and disparagingly, ‘anecdotal’ information.  Digitalis, morphine, quinine, atropine, and the like are chemical derivatives that stem from anecdotal folklore remedies.  After all, one anecdote may be a fable, but 1,000 anecdotes can be a biography… A vital function of the medical profession is to sift anecdotes and submit them, if possible, to scientific evaluation.  But it all starts as anecdote.”  Dr. Charles Harris (1987)  

So what do you do with millions of anecdotes?  Go to the Internet and read them all day.  I picked this one as an example:

 “Aspartame and seizures

Submitted by sydlee06 on Thu, 2007-07-26 23:10

“My daughter started having very hard to control seizures in Nov 06, it was continually getting worse. She had to be admitted to the hospital 3 times in March, the last time she was admitted I had read an article about aspartame and seizures and stopped allowing it in her diet. My husband is diabetic, so we used to have quite a few aspartame sweetened things in the home, ie: pudding, jello, lemonade, etc..

“She has not had a single seizure since stopping aspartame in her diet. Not one, and she previously had 3 to 27 tonic clonic daily and almost constant partial and absence seizures daily. Her neuro did not say much about it when I told her about it, but as for me that is proof enough. Not to mention that my migraines are almost non existent since I quit drinking diet soda. I wish it would get taken of the market, because now in a fight against obesity schools are even using it in lunches. Which means my daughter can not ever eat school lunches”

Also, Dr. H. J. Roberts and I attended the Conference of the American College of Physicians at the World Congress Center in Atlanta, Georgia many years ago. We went to several workshops, especially neurological. One professor said “Can anyone tell me even if its off the wall why people everywhere are having seizures for no reason?” Dr. Roberts insisted I explain and I told him about aspartame. He seemed surprised. Another physician raised his hand and said, “Professor, I’m afraid she is right., I’m not only a physician but a pilot and have a friend who flies commercially and has seizures. We’re going to have to report him.,” Mission Possible also has an Aviation Division, and on http://www.mpwhi.com you can read Dr. Russell Blaylock’s excellent Aspartame Pilot Alert. I started Mission Possible Aviation when Cliff Evans crashed his plane on aspartame. He came to Atlanta to ask me to help the pilots. I’ve gone so far as to visit the Air Force base in New Mexico when industry got to “Flying Safety” and they retracted their warning on aspartame. I couldn’t let Air Force pilots believe the retraction and one called to thank me and said he would get the info all over the base. FAA told me that because the FDA approved this toxin they couldn’t legally do anything but on the side they warn pilots.

The FDA Rejects Ban release also says:

“Regulators at times suggested that the concerns are nothing new, writing that some of the alleged health risks were raised 30 years ago and addressed in detail at the time.”  The wrong word was used, not addressed but ignored.

The cover-ups by government agencies is incredible.  In November 1984 the CDC reviewed 213 of 592 cases of aspartame complaints.  Some of the reported symptoms included aggressive behavior, disorientation, hyperactivity, extreme numbness, excitability, memory loss, loss of depth perception, liver impairment, cardiac arrest, seizures, suicidal tendencies, severe mood swings and death. The CDC recommended future investigations of aspartame investigate the neurological and behavioral problems and focus on symptoms such as headaches, mood alterations and behavioral chances. So how was this CDC report covered up?  The CDC had Frederick L. Trowbridge add an executive summary to the report which conflicts with the investigation.   He even said “Currently available information, based on data with limitations as described in the report, indicated a wide variety of complaints that are generally of a mild nature.”  Frankly, I’ve never seen a mild case of  such things as cardiac arrest and grand mal eizures and death!  Next, CDC did not put the real investigation on their web site, simply the summary which contradicted the report where it still remains today.  Check it out.  In the aspartame documentary, “Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World” you will see me holding up the real investigation and we have it on my web site of www.mpwhi.com and www.dorway.com

Next the release says:  “FDA has not identified any causal link between aspartame consumption and the reported adverse events and does not know of an established mechanism that would explain how aspartame is associated with the reported adverse events,”

After 30 years they don’t think physicians and researchers have documented the mechanisms?!  FDA has Dr. Roberts encyclopedic medical text. “Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic” which in discussing the diseases triggered or precipitated by aspartame list the mechanisms. It not only precipitates diabetes but simulates and aggravates diabetic retinopathy and neuropathy, destroys the optic nerve, causes diabetics to go into convulsions and interacts with insulin.  The free methyl alcohol causes them to lose limbs. 

Dr. Roberts was a diabetic specialist, once named The Best Doctor in the United States by the medical publication, Practice 84. On page 542 of his text the headline says:  “Mechanisms of Aspartame’s Diabetogenic Potential”.  Dr. Roberts even sent one to the European Food Safety Authority.  Would we even begin to believe the FDA has none of the medical books giving these mechanisms which are now known the world over, as well as all the independent scientific peer reviewed studies?

The release: “One of the petition’s specific concerns was that consuming aspartame results in harmful production of methanol, but the FDA said that such production is small compared to methanol that results from eating perfectly safe foods, such as apples and pears. In any event, data reviewed by the FDA shows that “methanol in aspartame or in fruits and juices – does not accumulate in the body and is easily metabolized by the body’s metabolic capacities,”

FDA knows well that the single carbon methanol in fruit is always accompanied by ethanol, the classic antidote to methanol poisoning that takes it safely out of the body. Thus the classic first aid for methanol poisoning is to administer whisky, ethanol, ethyl alcohol. Furthermore in nature methanol binds to pectin.,  Dr. Ralph Walton has repeatedly written about it.  Now Dr. Woodrow Monte has written a book about the methanol in aspartame, “While Science Sleeps: A Sweetener Kills”, www.whilesciencesleeps.com

The National Health Federation recently published my article about this, “Rotgut Aspartame: Methanol Mania”: http://www.thenhf.com/rotgut-aspartame-methanol-mania-by-dr-betty-martini/     Also see my report to FDA on www.mpwhi.com on a banner, “FDA Violates Data Quality Act”  on the issue.  The Trocho Study has shown that the formaldehyde converted from the free methyl alcohol embalms living tissue and damages DNA., http://www.mpwhi.com/aspartame_and_preembalming.htm

Another FDA claim in their release: “In the past decade, almost 200 adverse events tied to aspartame have been reported to the FDA, but there is little reason to give much credence to those supposed side effects, according to Friday’s response.” 

In1985 FDA published a list of 92 reactions to aspartame including blindness, and sexual dysfunction from 10,000 volunteered consumer complaints. They deny it now and have removed that report but access www.mpwhi.com and at the top of the page you will see the FDA’s report of 92 symptoms from 4 types of seizures to coma and death.

How many complaints FDA really received we will never know.  In Congressional hearings and we have them on web you will notice it was reported that the FDA was so swamped with aspartame complaints they were referring them to the AIDS Hotline.  Dr. David Kessler once said only 1% report adverse reactions to the FDA.  He also said that in 1996 they would grant blanket approval of aspartame if the complaints went down.  I figured they would probably stop taking complaints to stop them from going up and they did.  Call after call from consumers told me the FDA refused to take their aspartame complaint and said they were no longer taking them.  That was expected but how do you make existing complaints go down.  They did, check out the 1996 report on web.  Dr. H. J. Roberts called me absolutely furious at the way the FDA arrived at this reduction.  He said he had a letter that stated they had to change their bookkeeping system and in order to do this they had to throw away hundreds of aspartame complaints. 

The original manufacturer, G. D. Searle, actually released in congressional hearings secret trade information which stated aspartame could not be used for everything: http://www.mpwhi.com/trade_secret_information_on_aspartame.htm  The FDA themselves said in the beginning you couldn’t heat aspartame which is why they originally only approved it in dry form.  However, I fail to see how its not heated when you put Equal in a hot cup of coffee.  Then in 1993 they approved it for baking!

For years I forwarded aspartame complaints to the FDA but they never added them to their records.  I finally realized FDA will always protect aspartame to the bitter end. FDA works for the poison makers. Many of the drugs they approve are later removed and the TV is full of advertising by legal firms suing drug makers. It’s all about money! With that kind of money the drug makers make they can buy all the bureaucrats they need to sell their poisons.

FDA claims aspartame is the most tested product in history.  It definitely is.  They couldn’t keep the animals alive or show safety and they kept testing, but aspartame was never proven safe.  Then independent researchers the world over began research on aspartame and showing the disasters it brings to us. The internet swarms with physician’s research reports and the tragic stories of the victims of this cruel commercial campaign against a world population.

Dr. Ralph Walton did research for 60 Minutes showing that almost 100% of independent scientific peer reviewed studies showing the problems aspartame triggers., He did his own study on aspartame even using a lower ADI. When the administrator of the hospital lost his vision in one eye and other complaints the institution stopped the study. He is now doing a study on birth defects. Dr. James Bowen wrote the FDA over two decades ago telling them aspartame is mass poisoning of the US and over 70 countries of the world. Now its over 100. He wrote in “Aspartame Murders Infants” that aspartame violates Title 18 of the domestic genocide law: http://www.rense.com/general/asp.htm He is a victim himself suffering from ALS.

As to what to use a safe sweetener has been made, “Just Like Sugar” http://www.justlikesugarinc.com Dr. Russell Blaylock wrote in the Blaylock Wellness Report: “Finally a safe sweetener”. The public must read labels and do research rather than accept lies of the FDA. They have approved several toxic sweeteners that have been proven to cause cancer and other problems. Never, never forget the words of Dr. M. Alemany who did the Trocho Study: “Aspartame will murder 200 million people.”  

In the immortal words of Dr. H. J. Roberts: “When in doubt throw it out.”

Help make this report go viral, save a life today.

Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum, Founder
Mission Possible World Health International (warning the world off aspartame)
9270 River Club Parkway
Duluth, Georgia 30097
770 242-2599
bettym19@mindspring.com
www.mpwhi.com

Diets and Weight Loss, Health and Disease

Are Microwaves Healthy for you?

microwave

Microwaves are a source of electromagnetic energy (a form of nonionizing form of radiation) electronically generated. When penetrating the aliments, they trigger an inner rotation of the water molecules inside the food. This rotation triggers a friction between the molecules and the result is a rapid growth in temperature.

Microwaves use super-fast particles to literally radiate the contents of water inside food and bring it to boil. Not only has microwave use been linked to causing infertility in men, but it also denatures many of the essential proteins in the food making them virtually indigestible. Most animals will only consume food in its natural, unprocessed state, but humans actually go out of their way to render food nutritionally worthless before eating it. Think about all the prepackaged and processed foods we purchase and consume annually. It’s no wonder the state of our health is in dire straits. Microwave ovens work physically, biochemically and physiologically, producing ions and various free radicals, which destroy viruses and bacteria, but not toxins and microtoxins. The experts have concluded that food cooked in microwaves loses between 60% and 90% of its vital energy and, at the same time, the structural disintegration processes accelerates. Also, the nutrient substances are altered, leading to digestive diseases. These microwaves can increase both the number of cancerous cells in blood and the number of stomach and intestinal cancerous cells. Microwaves leaking radiation is a serious issue. Serious enough for the FDA to set legal limits on the leakage permitted by every microwave manufacturer. However, the only way to completely eliminate the radiation dangers associated with microwaves is not to use one. Microwave radiation has been known to cause cataracts, birth defects, cancer and other serious illnesses.

Because of these causes the microwave ovens were banned in the Soviet Union in 1976. Soviet scientists found that the microwave exposure decreases the ability of some vitamins to by absorbed by the human body, dramatically accelerates the structural disintegration of all foods and reduces the metabolic stress of the alkaloids, glycosides and galactoses.

In 1991, the Swiss Doctor Hans Ulrich Hertel made a study that demonstrated that cooking or heating food presents much greater risks for health than the traditionally cooked food. He found that people who ate microwave prepared food recorded losses in the hemoglobines and lymphoites.

In 2003, a Spanish governmental study elaborated in Murcia demonstrated that the vegetables and fruits cooked in a microwave lost a percentage of 97% of the substances that contribute to reducing the incidence of coronary heart diseases. In Dr. Lita Lee’s book, Health Effects of Microwave Radiation — Microwave Ovens, and in the March and September 1991 issues of Earthletter, she stated that every microwave oven leaks electro-magnetic radiation, harms food, and converts substances cooked in it to dangerous organ-toxic and carcinogenic products. In Comparative Study of Food Prepared Conventionally and in the Microwave Oven, published by Raum & Zelt in 1992, at 3(2): 43, it states: “Artificially produced microwaves, including those in ovens, are produced from alternating current and force a billion or more polarity reversals per second in every food molecule they hit. Production of unnatural molecules is inevitable. Naturally occurring amino acids have been observed to undergo isomeric changes (changes in shape morphing) as well as transformation into toxic forms, under the impact of microwaves produced in ovens.” There are no atoms, molecules or cells of any organic system able to withstand such a violent, destructive power for any extended period of time, not even in the low energy range of milliwatts. Microwaves quickly destroy the delicate molecules of vitamins and phytonutrients (plant medicines) naturally found in foods. One study showed that microwaving vegetables destroys up to 97% of the nutritional content (vitamins and other plant-based nutrients that prevent disease, boost immune function and enhance health). Dr. Hertel was the first scientist to conceive and carry out a quality clinical study on the effects microwaved nutrients have on the blood and physiology of the human body. His small but well controlled study showed the degenerative force produced in microwave ovens and the food processed in them. The scientific conclusion showed that microwave cooking changed the nutrients in the food; and, changes took place in the participants’ blood that could cause deterioration in the human system. Hertel’s scientific study was done along with Dr. Bernard H. Blanc of the Swiss Federal Institute of Technology and the University Institute for Biochemistry.

12 Enumerated Effects of Microwaves 1. A breakdown of the human “life-energy field” in those who were exposed to microwave ovens while in operation, with side-effects to the human energy field of increasingly longer duration;

  1. A degeneration of the cellular voltage parallels during the process of using the apparatus, especially in the blood and lymphatic areas;
  2. A degeneration and destabilization of the external energy activated potentials of food utilization within the processes of human metabolism;
  3. A degeneration and destabilization of internal cellular membrane potentials while transferring catabolic [metabolic breakdown] processes into the blood serum from the digestive process;
  4. Degeneration and circuit breakdowns of electrical nerve impulses within the junction potentials of the cerebrum [the front portion of the brain where thought and higher functions reside];
  5. A degeneration and breakdown of nerve electrical circuits and loss of energy field symmetry in the neuroplexuses [nerve centers] both in the front and the rear of the central and autonomic nervous systems;
  6. Loss of balance and circuiting of the bioelectric strengths within the ascending reticular activating system [the system which controls the function of consciousness];
  7. A long term cumulative loss of vital energies within humans, animals and plants that were located within a 500-meter radius of the operational equipment;
  8. Long lasting residual effects of magnetic “deposits” were located throughout the nervous system and lymphatic system;
  9. A destabilization and interruption in the production of hormones and maintenance of hormonal balance in males and females;
  10. Markedly higher levels of brainwave disturbance in the alpha, theta, and delta wave signal patterns of persons exposed to microwave emission fields, and;
  11. Because of this brainwave disturbance, negative psychological effects were noted, including loss of memory, loss of ability to concentrate, suppressed emotional threshold, deceleration of intellective processes, and interruptive sleep episodes in a statistically higher percentage of individuals subjected to continual range emissive field effects of microwave apparatus, either in cooking apparatus or in transmission stations.

Take a look around you at every person that still uses a microwave. The largest majority are unhealthy and overweight. The more you use the microwave, the worse your nutritional state gets, and the more likely you are to be diagnosed with various diseases and put on pharmaceuticals which, of course, will create other health problems that lead to a grand spiraling nosedive of health. Of all the natural substances — which are polar — the oxygen of water molecules reacts most sensitively. This is how microwave cooking heat is generated — friction from this violence in water molecules. Structures of molecules are torn apart, molecules are forcefully deformed, called structural isomerism, and thus become impaired in quality. This is contrary to conventional heating of food where heat transfers convectionally from without to within. Cooking by microwaves begins within the cells and molecules where water is present and where the energy is transformed into frictional heat. The following is a summary of the Russian investigations published by the Atlantis Raising Educational Center in Portland, Oregon: – Microwaving prepared meats sufficiently to insure sanitary ingestion caused formation of d-Nitrosodienthanolamines, a well-known carcinogen. – Microwaving milk and cereal grains converted some of their amino acids into carcinogens. – Thawing frozen fruits converted their glucoside and galactoside containing fractions into carcinogenic substances. – Extremely short exposure of raw, cooked or frozen vegetables converted their plant alkaloids into carcinogens. – Carcinogenic free radicals were formed in microwaved plants, especially root vegetables. Russian researchers also reported a marked acceleration of structural degradation leading to a decreased food value of 60 to 90% in all foods tested. Among the changes observed were: – Deceased bio-availability of vitamin B complex, vitamin C, vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropics factors in all food tested. – Various kinds of damaged to many plant substances, such as alkaloids, glucosides, galactosides and nitrilosides. According to Dr. Lee, changes are observed in the blood chemistries and the rates of certain diseases among consumers of microwaved foods. The symptoms above can easily be caused by the observations shown below. The following is a sample of these changes:

a.. Lymphatic disorders were observed, leading to decreased ability to prevent certain types of cancers. b.. An increased rate of cancer cell formation was observed in the blood. c.. Increased rates of stomach and intestinal cancers were observed. d.. Higher rates of digestive disorders and a gradual breakdown of the systems of elimination were observed.

Decrease in Food Value Microwave exposure caused significant decreases in the nutritive value of all foods researched. The following are the most important findings:

  1. A decrease in the bioavailability [capability of the body to utilize the nutriment] of B-complex vitamins, Vitamin C, Vitamin E, essential minerals and lipotropics in all foods;
  2. A loss of 60-90% of the vital energy field content of all tested foods;
  3. A reduction in the metabolic behavior and integration process capability of alkaloids [organic nitrogen based elements], glucosides and galactosides, and nitrilosides;
  4. A destruction of the nutritive value of nucleoproteins in meats; 5. A marked acceleration of structural disintegration in all foods. How Do You Heat Your Food The Healthy Way This is kind of a misnomer because there is truthfully, with perhaps the exception of dehydration, no way to heat food and maintain its structural and nutritional value. However, gently heating food in a cast iron pan over the stove may be the healthiest alternative to nuking it. This is the old fashioned way and it never failed our ancestors. Toss that microwave and strive to consume at least half of your diet from raw foods, that is a huge step in the right direction to maintain their nutritional value. My mother always used to tell me that if food comes from a package, or has to be heated to be eaten, there’s a good a chance it’s low in nutrition. She was right for the most part, so keep that in mind when venturing the aisles at the grocery.
  5. Sources: eutimes.net hungerforhealth.com
  6. Marco Torres
Foods

The Allium Family

oniongarlic

The Allium family of vegetables includes onions, garlic, leeks, chives, shallots, and scallions. Epidemiological studies have found that increased consumption of Allium vegetables is associated with decreased risk of several cancers. For example, one large European study found striking risk reductions in the participants who consumed the greatest quantities of onions or garlic for oral, esophageal, colorectal, laryngeal, breast, ovarian, and prostate cancers. A fifty-five to eighty percent reduction of almost all major cancers. Amazing!1

Anti-cancer effects of onions and garlic Allium vegetables are rich in cancer-fighting organosulfur compounds, which are produced when the cell walls of the vegetables are broken down by chopping, crushing, or chewing. These compounds are thought to be mostly responsible for the cancer-protective effects of Allium vegetables. In scientific studies, organosulfur compounds prevent the development of cancers by detoxifying carcinogens and halting cancer cell growth. These garlic and onion phytochemicals are also anti-angiogenic, which means that they can prevent tumors from obtaining a blood supply to fuel their growth.2 In studies of breast cancer cells, garlic and onion phytochemicals have caused cell death or halted cell division, preventing the cancer cells from multiplying.3-5

Onions, garlic, and their family members also contain flavonoids and phenols. White onions are not as rich in these antioxidant compounds as yellow and red, and shallots are especially high in polyphenol levels. Red onions are particularly rich in anthocyanins (also abundant in berries) and quercetin.6 Flavonoids such as quercetin can contribute to preventing damaged cells from advancing to cancer, and also have anti-inflammatory effects that may contribute to cancer prevention.7-1

Fighting Heart Disease

Consuming onions and garlic also might help you prevent heart disease. Onions are rich in natural chemicals called flavonoids, which can protect you from heart disease, says Vegetarian Nutrition.info., and onions also might reduce your risk of blood clots, which can lead to heart attacks and other forms of heart disease. Garlic might also decrease your risk of blood clots, help keep your arteries flexible and help reduce your blood pressure, the Linus Pauling Institute reports.

Onions and the other vegetables of the Allium family can be added to any and every vegetable dish for great flavor and anti-cancer benefits. Remember that they must be eaten raw and chewed well or chopped finely before cooking to initiate the chemical reaction that forms the protective sulfur compounds. When you cut onions and your eyes begin to tear, they are creating the anti-cancer sulfur compounds.

Adding Onions and Garlic to Your Diet

Allium vegetables such as onions and garlic are the richest food sources of healthy sulfur compounds, which recommends eating them regularly to obtain their full health benefits, rather than taking supplements that might contain widely varying amounts of the healthy compounds. Onions and garlic have complementary tastes, so you might eat them together in the same meals. You can also add onions to stir fry dishes and use them to flavor soups, salads and dips. The Linus Pauling Institute recommends eating garlic cloves raw, or crushing or chopping garlic cloves before cooking them to help them retain their beneficial compounds during the cooking process.

How to cut an onion to maximize anti-cancer compounds and minimize eye irritation:

  • Make sure that the onion is cold before you cut it. Even putting the onion in the freezer for 5 minutes is sufficient.
  • You can use a fan to blow the gaseous compounds away from you if you like.
  • Cut the end of the root off with the root facing away from you, preserving as much of the onion adjacent to the root as possible. The root is the part of the onion with the highest concentration of these anti-cancer compounds.
  • Make sure to then cut or chop the onion finely, slice thinly, or put it in a food processor before adding to your soup, salad, or vegetable dish to maximize the production of sulfur compounds.

References 1. Galeone C, Pelucchi C, Levi F, et al. Onion and garlic use and human cancer. Am J Clin Nutr 2006;84:1027-1032. 2. Powolny A, Singh S. Multitargeted prevention and therapy of cancer by diallyl trisulfide and related Allium vegetable-derived organosulfur compounds. Cancer Lett 2008;269:305-314. 3. Modem S, Dicarlo SE, Reddy TR. Fresh Garlic Extract Induces Growth Arrest and Morphological Differentiation of MCF7 Breast Cancer Cells. Genes Cancer 2012;3:177-186. 4. Na HK, Kim EH, Choi MA, et al. Diallyl trisulfide induces apoptosis in human breast cancer cells through ROS-mediated activation of JNK and AP-1. Biochem Pharmacol 2012. 5. Malki A, El-Saadani M, Sultan AS. Garlic constituent diallyl trisulfide induced apoptosis in MCF7 human breast cancer cells. Cancer Biol Ther 2009;8:2175-2185. 6. Slimestad R, Fossen T, Vagen IM. Onions: a source of unique dietary flavonoids. J Agric Food Chem 2007;55:10067-10080. 7. Ravasco P, Aranha MM, Borralho PM, et al. Colorectal cancer: can nutrients modulate NF-kappaB and apoptosis? Clin Nutr 2010;29:42-46. 8. Miyamoto S, Yasui Y, Ohigashi H, et al. Dietary flavonoids suppress azoxymethane-induced colonic preneoplastic lesions in male C57BL/KsJ-db/db mice. Chem Biol Interact 2010;183:276-283. 9. Shan BE, Wang MX, Li RQ. Quercetin inhibit human SW480 colon cancer growth in association with inhibition of cyclin D1 and survivin expression through Wnt/beta-catenin signaling pathway. Cancer Invest 2009;27:604-612. 10. Pierini R, Gee JM, Belshaw NJ, et al. Flavonoids and intestinal cancers. Br J Nutr 2008;99 E Suppl 1:ES53-59.