Archive for the ‘Food Supply & Resources’ Category

from http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=13701

Global Research, May 22, 2009
US Association of Physicians calls for Moratorium on GMO Foods

 The American Academy of Environmental Medicine (AAEM) has just issued a call for an immediate moratorium on Genetically Manipulated (GMO) Foods.

In a just-released position paper on GMO foods, the AAEM states that ‘GM foods pose a serious health risk’ and calls for a moratorium on GMO foods. Citing several animal studies, the AAEM concludes ‘there is more than a casual association between GMO foods and adverse health effects’ and that ‘GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health.’ The report is a devastating blow to the multibillion dollar international agribusiness industry, most especially to Monsanto Corporation, the world’s leading purveyor of GMO seeds and related herbicides.

 In a press release dated May 19, the American Academy of Environmental Medicine, which describes itself as ‘an international association of physicians and other professionals dedicated to addressing the clinical aspects of environmental health,’ called immediately for the following emergency measures to be taken regarding human consumption of GMO foods:

   * A moratorium on GMO food; implementation of immediate long term safety testing and labelling of GMO food.

    * Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community and the public to avoid GMO foods.

    * Physicians to consider the role of GMO foods in their patients’ disease processes.

    * More independent long term scientific studies to begin gathering data to investigate the role of GMO foods on human health.

 The AAEM chairperson, Dr Amy Dean notes that ‘Multiple animal studies have shown that GM foods cause damage to various organ systems in the body. With this mounting evidence, it is imperative to have a moratorium on GM foods for the safety of our patients’ and the public’s health.’ The President of the AAEM, Dr Jennifer Armstrong stressed that ‘Physicians are probably seeing the effects in their patients, but need to know how to ask the right questions. The most common foods in North America which are consumed that are GMO are corn, soy, canola, and cottonseed oil.’ The AAEM’s position paper on Genetically Modified foods can be found at http:aaemonline.org.

 The paper further states that Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) technology ‘abrogates natural reproductive processes, selection occurs at the single cell level, the procedure is highly mutagenic and routinely breeches genera barriers, and the technique has only been used commercially for 10 years.’

The AAEM paper further states, ‘several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signalling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system.’

They add, ‘There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation as defined by Hill’s Criteria in the areas of strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility. The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.’

 GMO is toxic

The AAEM paper should give grounds for official rethinking of the current quasi laissez faire regulatory stance to GMO in which the solemn word of the GMO seed companies such as Monsanto is regarded as scientifically valid proof of safety. The AAEM study is worth citing in detail in this regard:

‘Specificity of the association of GM foods and specific disease processes is also supported. Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation.  Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging and possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). Changes in the kidney, pancreas and spleen have also been documented. A recent 2008 study links GM corn with infertility, showing a significant decrease in offspring over time and significantly lower litter weight in mice fed GM corn. This study also found that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GM corn. These are genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signalling, cholesterol synthesis, and insulin regulation. Studies also show intestinal damage in animals fed GM foods, including proliferative cell growth and disruption of the intestinal immune system. ‘

The AAEM study also reviewed the biotechnology industry claims that GMO foods can feed the world through production of higher crop yields. It cited contrary evidence that the opposite appeared to be true, namely that over time GMO harvest yields were lower than conventional yields and required over time, more not less, highly toxic herbicidal chemicals such as glyphosate. The report noted, ‘The several thousand field trials over the last 20 years for genes aimed at increasing operational or intrinsic yield (of crops) indicate a significant undertaking. Yet none of these field trials have resulted in increased yield in commercialized major food/feed crops, with the exception of Bt corn.’ However, the slight yield gain for Bt corn they report was ‘largely due to traditional breeding improvements,’ and not to GMO.

They conclude that because GMO foods ‘pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health and are without benefit, the AAEM believes that it is imperative to adopt the precautionary principle, which is one of the main regulatory tools of the European Union environmental and health policy and serves as a foundation for several international agreements. The most commonly used definition is from the 1992 Rio Declaration that states: ‘In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.’

Under intense public pressure, the German Minister of Agriculture recently issued a prohibition of planting for Monsanto MON810 GMO corn. Unfortunately, two weeks later she permitted planting of GMO potato seeds. Amflora, a genetically modified potato manufactured by chemicals giant BASF (a joint venture GMO partner of Monsanto), was declared by the German Ministry as posing ‘no danger for human health or the environment,’ The Ministry cited ‘in-depth examination’ and talks with scientific and economic experts as basis for the reckless decision.

The publication of the sensational critique of GMO by the American Academy of Environmental Medicine has been greeted with stone silence by most major US media and international press.

 GMO politics

 As I describe in great detail in my book, Seeds of Destruction: The Hidden Agenda of Genetic Manipulation, , GMO was released on the general public in the early 1990’s in the USA under an executive decision by then President George Herbert Walker Bush, reportedly following closed door meetings with leading Monsanto executives. President Bush mandated that there should be no special health and safety tests done by any US Government agency before releasing GMO for food consumption. It came to be known as the Doctrine of Substantial Equivalence.

 The US Government, on urging of Monsanto and the GMO lobby, further decided that labelling of a food product as ‘GMO free’ should be prohibited, using the vaguely formulated and entirely unscientific ‘doctrine’ proclaimed by President Bush in 1992, namely that GMO plants and non-GMO or ordinary plants were ‘substantially equivalent’ and hence needed no special testing before being released to the public.

 That Substantial Equivalence Doctrine, despite the fact that it directly contradicts the demand of the GMO companies for exclusive patent rights to their GMO seeds as being ‘unique’ and different from ordinary seeds, enabled Monsanto, Dow Chemicals, DuPont and other GMO patent holders to proliferate their products with no control. Most Americans naively believe that the Government Food and Drug Administration and US Department of Agriculture are there to make certain industrial food products are confirmed fully safe for human and for animal consumption before licensing.

 That de facto prohibition on labelling GMO foods has meant that most Americans have no idea how much of their daily diet from store-bought Corn Flakes to soybeans to corn and additives in every food on the supermarket shelf contained GMO contamination.

 Coincident with the mass introduction of GMO into the human and animal diet in the United States beginning the end of the 1990’s, there have been reported epidemic levels of allergic outbreaks in humans, strange diseases and numerous other health issues. The fact it is forbidden by Federal law to label GMO products means most health professionals are not even aware there might be any connection to a GMO diet for millions of Americans. The US population, since the 1992 ruling of President Bush—a ruling reaffirmed by presidents Clinton, George W. Bush and now by Barack Obama and his pro-GMO Secretary of Agriculture, Tom Vilsack—has been in effect treated as human guinea pigs in mass experimentation for substances never independently proven in long-term (ten years or longer) studies to be safe.    

It remains to be seen if the scientific critique of the AAEM is given the attention it warrants.



Read Full Post »

Okay… you really have to laugh at the irony of this one !! ~ CO Silverado

from:  http://www.opednews.com/populum/linkframe.php?linkid=87328

Posted: 04/09/09 04:20 PM [ET]
Michelle Obama planted an organic garden to promote fruits and vegetables as part of a healthy diet, but some chemical companies are worried it may plant a seed of doubt in consumers’ minds about conventionally grown crops.“Fresh foods grown conventionally are wholesome and flavorful yet more economical,” the Mid America CropLife Association (MACA) wrote the first lady last month a few days after she and fifth-graders from a local elementary school planted the White House Kitchen Garden.

The garden is designed to produce fresh fruits and vegetables for the first family and White House staff and guests. The garden itself doesn’t give the group heartburn. The letter also congratulates the first lady “on recognizing the importance of agriculture to America!”

But MACA, which represents agribusinesses like Monsanto, Dow AgroSciences and DuPont Crop Protection, is rather less thrilled about the fact that no chemicals will be used to grow the crops. The group is worried that the decision may give consumers the wrong impression about conventionally grown food.

“We live in a very different world than that of our grandparents. Americans are juggling jobs with the needs of children and aging parents,” the letter states. “The time needed to tend a garden is not there for the majority of our citizens, certainly not a garden of sufficient productivity to supply much of a family’s year-round food needs.”

The blog La Vida Locavore posted the letter last month.

Although pesticides or chemical fertilizers won’t be used on the White House garden, Camille Johnston, spokeswoman for the first lady, said Mrs. Obama wanted to plant the garden to promote the eating of fruits and vegetables as part of a healthy diet.

MACA members just want a little love pointed their way: “As you go about planning and planting the White House garden, we respectfully encourage you to recognize the role conventional agriculture plays in the U.S. in feeding the ever-increasing population, contributing to the U.S. economy and providing a safe and economical food supply.”

Read Full Post »

from http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G4FotV4ZKQ8

Read Full Post »


Read Full Post »

from http://www.borntoexplore.org/mercury_poisoning_and_adhd.htm
Mercury has been contaminating our environment for years.  The two largest sources of mercury in the environment are coal-fired power plants and municipal waste incinerators which burn consumer products containing mercury (like some of the toys found in Rice Krispies).  Mercury is a metallic element that cannot be broken down by any method, and it is unusual for a metal because it is liquid at room temperature and evaporates very quickly when heated.   Mercury escapes readily up the smokestack and is spread widely by winds before it falls to earth.  There, it is bioconcentrated in the fatty tissue of animals, just like PCBs and DDT.  This is especially true in fish that are higher up in the food chain, like tuna or swordfish.  Most states in the U.S. have inland fish advisories because of widespread mercury contamination.    The contamination of tuna is particularly worrisome because some people eat a lot of it.
Mercury is a well-known neurological poison that causes all the symptoms of ADHD, such as hyperactivity and poor concentration.  Ironically, fish oil contains essential fatty acids that are crucial for proper brain function — deficiencies of omega-3 fatty acids have been linked with ADHD.  Yet, in a catch-22, an increase in fish consumption may lead to brain damage from mercury poisoning.
What you can do: Children and women who may become pregnant or who are nursing should be very careful about what types and how much fish they eat.  Consumer Reports recommends no more than 3 oz of tuna per week, based on US EPA assessments.  Because of influence by the tuna industry, the U.S. Federal Government has been slow to publish tuna advisories, with the very first advisory made in the spring of 2004.  That advisory recommends no more than 6 oz of tuna per week. Bear in mind that the official advisory is based on a political compromise between science and the tuna industry.  I’d go with the Consumer Reports recommendation of 3 oz.  They also recommend that children and pregnant women not eat Albacore at all, because it has higher levels of mercury.
If you routinely eat locally caught freshwater fish, contact your regional or state environmental protection agency to find out how safe the fish in your area are to eat, but most states in the US have some kind of advisory out.   The concentration of mercury varies quite a bit by species, so that top predator species like bass will have higher levels of mercury than sunfish.  Oily fish tends to have more mercury than other species, because the mercury binds to the oil, yet the oil is what makes fish otherwise very healthy to eat. Sardines and farm-raised salmon are oily fish that have lower levels of mercury and are safer to eat.   The fatty acids found in fish oil are very healthy, so keep eating fish, just be sure to eat the right kinds! 
Other types of fish to avoid: king mackeral, shark, swordfish and tilefish.
Consumer Reports lists alternatives to tuna that have lower levels of mercury.  I’ll list these in increasing order of mercury:  clams, oysters, pickerel, shrimp, whiting, salmon, tilapia, sardines, freshwater trout, anchovies, catfish, flounder, mullet, scallops, sole, blue/king/snow crab, pollock, American shad, squid, and whitefish.  Fish sticks and typical fish sandwiches are OK.
Kellogg’s Rice Krispies, Now with Mercury!
rice krispies box back.jpg (108199 bytes)The frustrating aspect of mercury poisoning is the flippant attitude by U.S. corporations about the use of mercury, even as government agencies try to eliminate the use of it.   A case in point is Kelloggs, which in 2004 has been putting mercury-containing toys in each box of Rice Krispies.  I only know this because my home state of Connecticut recently required all consumer products containing mercury to be labeled.  Connecticut has some of the highest fallout rates of mercury in the nation, partly because most of our waste is incinerated.   The official goal in Connecticut is to eliminate the use of mercury in household products.  

mercury warning.bmp (169254 bytes)

Thanks to Kelloggs, I now have three cheezy Spiderman toys which I’m not supposed to throw away in the trash. Instead I’m supposed to save them until my town has a household hazardous waste day, which is once a year.  I can’t even take the batteries out of the toys (the mercury is contained in the batteries), because the access screws have a triangular head.  So I have to save the toys in their entirety.   Then, my town has to pay for the disposal of these toys. Mercury cannot be recycled from batteries.  mercury toy.bmp (2153166 bytes)Therefore, the batteries, and the whole toy really, must be secured in a hazardous waste landfill for all eternity.  This is all for something I didn’t even want and didn’t realize I was buying — I thought I was buying CEREAL, not mercury-containing toys!   Plus, there will be extra mercury in our environment because I know perfectly well that most of these toys will end up in the trash incinerator, and the mercury will go right up the stack. 
kelloggs warning.jpg (13988 bytes)
So why did Kellogg’s use mercury-containing batteries, anyway?  Because they last a really long time, which is obviously really critical in a disposable toy for young children who get bored with each toy after about 20 minutes.    Button batteries containing mercury are understandable for hearing-aides (which is what they’re mostly used for) or even watches, but disposable toys?  How frivolous can you get?  There are button batteries out there without mercury. C’mon Kelloggs!  Use some common sense and get some ethics. 
I emailed Kelloggs about this and they dismissed my complaint (below) and continued to ship thousands of boxes containing these toys to Connecticut and everywhere else.
merc-spiderman toy.jpg (79300 bytes)Dear Ms. Gallagher:
Thank you for contacting our company.
Responding to your concerns, may I assure you that the Spider-man 2 (TM) Spidey-Signal toy is approved for children of all ages and does not present a hazard to your family or a food quality concern to your product. The statement “Battery in toy contains mercury, dispose of properly,” has been included to comply with State of Connecticut legislation regarding all products containing mercury and Connecticut’s battery disposal legislation. The button cell battery in this toy is typical of retail batteries sold in many toy products. For more information on the State of Connecticut labeling and disposal requirements, visit http://www.dep.state.ct.us/wst/mercury/mercury.htm
I hope this will respond to your concerns and reassure you of our good faith in this regard.
We appreciate your interest in our promotions and products.
Consumer Specialist
Consumer Affairs Department
Kellogg North America
Battle Creek, MI 49016-1986


I’m not the only one who took offense at Kellogg’s:

Connecticut Attorney General’s Office

Press Release

Attorney General Asks Kellogg Company To Immediately
Remove Spider-Man Toy From Cereal Boxes

June 30, 2004

Attorney General Richard Blumenthal today sent a letter to Kellogg Company, urging them to immediately stop selling cereal boxes that include a Spider-Man toy that contains batteries with mercury. Even in small amounts, mercury is toxic and poses a significant health and environmental hazard.
The Spider-Man toy – dubbed “Spidey-Signal” – can be wrapped around a child’s wrist, and projects a web-shaped light. And the toy comes with the ominous warning: “Battery in toy contains mercury, dispose of properly.” The battery is not easily removable and not replaceable. The toy recently debuted in specially marked Kellogg’s cereal boxes, including Frosted Flakes and Rice Krispies, in anticipation of today’s Spider-Man 2 movie premiere.
Connecticut’s Mercury Reduction Act and the Child Protection Act establish a clear public policy against the use of mercury and other hazardous substances in children’s toys. Kellogg’s use of mercury batteries in cereal boxes may constitute a violation of unfair or deceptive trade practices under state law. Blumenthal also urges any supermarket, or other business that sells these products, to immediately remove products containing these toys from shelves.
“No healthy breakfast begins with mercury,” Blumenthal said. “Clear, common sense law in Connecticut bans mercury from most consumer products – and all children’s toys – because it is so highly toxic. The health risks are real and immediate, particularly to children, if the batteries are damaged or dismantled, or disposed of improperly.”
“Mercury dangers cannot be sugarcoated. Mercury-free batteries are easily available. Kellogg should remove all cereal boxes containing toys with mercury batteries from store shelves immediately. If it fails to stop selling this product, we will take prompt action. We will inform the stores of their legal obligations and seek their cooperation.”
Click here to read the Letter to the Kellogg Company

Read Full Post »

from http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/270101

South African farmers suffered millions of dollars in lost income when 82,000 hectares of genetically-manipulated corn (maize) failed to produce hardly any seeds.The plants look lush and healthy from the outside. Monsanto has offered compensation.

Monsanto blames the failure of the three varieties of corn planted on these farms, in three South African provinces,on alleged ‘underfertilisation processes in the laboratory”. Some 280 of the 1,000 farmers who planted the three varieties of Monsanto corn this year, have reported extensive seedless corn problems.

Urgent investigation demanded
However environmental activitist Marian Mayet, director of the Africa-centre for biosecurity in Johannesburg, demands an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban on all GM-foods, blaming the crop failure on Monsanto’s genetically-manipulated technology.

Willem Pelser, journalist of the Afrikaans Sunday paper Rapport, writes from Nelspruit that Monsanto has immediately offered the farmers compensation in three provinces – North West, Free State and Mpumalanga. The damage-estimates are being undertaken right now by the local farmers’ cooperative, Grain-SA. Monsanto claims that ‘less than 25%’ of three different corn varieties were ‘insufficiently fertilised in the laboratory’.

80% crop failure
However Mayet says Monsanto was grossly understating the problem.According to her own information, some farms have suffered up to 80% crop failures. The centre is strongly opposed to GM-food and biologically-manipulated technology in general.

“Monsanto says they just made a mistake in the laboratory, however we say that biotechnology is a failure.You cannot make a ‘mistake’ with three different varieties of corn.’

Demands urgent government investigation:
“We have been warning against GM-technology for years, we have been warning Monsanto that there will be problems,’ said Mayet. She calls for an urgent government investigation and an immediate ban on all GM-foods in South Africa.

Of the 1,000 South African farmers who planted Monsanto’s GM-maize this year, 280 suffered extensive crop failure, writes Rapport.

Monsanto’s local spokeswoman Magda du Toit said the ‘company is engaged in establishing the exact extent of the damage on the farms’. She did not want to speculate on the extent of the financial losses suffered right now.

Managing director of Monsanto in Africa, Kobus Lindeque, said however that ‘less than 25% of the Monsanto-seeded farms are involved in the loss’. He says there will be ‘a review of the seed-production methods of the three varieties involved in the failure, and we will made the necessary adjustments.’

He denied that the problem was caused in any way by ‘bio-technology’. Instead, there had been ‘insufficient fertilisation during the seed-production process’.

And Grain-SA’s Nico Hawkins says they ‘are still support GM-technology; ‘We will support any technology which will improve production.’ see

He also they were ‘satisfied with Monsanto’s handling of the case,’ and said Grain-SA was ‘closely involved in the claims-adjustment methodology’ between the farmers and Monsanto.

Farmers told Rapport that Monsanto was ‘bending over backwards to try and accommodate them in solving the problem.

“It’s a very good gesture to immediately offer to compensate the farmers for losses they suffered,’ said Kobus van Coller, one of the Free State farmers who discovered that his maize cobs were practically seedless this week.

“One can’t see from the outside whether a plant is unseeded. One must open up the cob leaves to establish the problem,’ he said. The seedless cobs show no sign of disease or any kind of fungus. They just have very few seeds, often none at all.

The South African supermarket-chain Woolworths already banned GM-foods from its shelves in 2000. However South African farmers have been producing GM-corn for years: they were among the first countries other than the United States to start using the Monsanto products.

The South African government does not require any labelling of GM-foods. Corn is the main staple food for South Africa’s 48-million people.

The three maize varieties which failed to produce seeds were designed with a built-in resistance to weed-killers, and manipulated to increase yields per hectare, Rapport writes.

Read Full Post »

from http://articles.mercola.com//sites/articles/archive/2009/04/04/Corn-is-Making-the-US-Unhealthy.aspx

Pundit George Will has joined the ranks of those who have noticed that the U.S. government’s treatment of corn is wrecking the health of Americans.

Ever since Nixon, government policy has been to sell large quantities of calories as cheaply as possible — especially calories coming from corn. Now, a quarter of the 45,000 items in the average supermarket contain processed corn, often in the form of high-fructose corn syrup.

The result?

Rates of chronic diseases like cancer and Type 2 diabetes are much higher today than they were in 1900. Type 2 diabetes is a $100 billion a year consequence of, among other things, obesity related to a corn-based diet. Four of the top 10 causes of American deaths — coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke and cancer – have well-established links to diet as well.

Making matters worse, by now you may have seen “crystalline fructose” as an ingredient in beverages.

If you’ve been wondering what it was, it turns out that crystalline fructose “is produced by allowing the fructose to crystallize from a fructose-enriched corn syrup.” This information is from the sugar producers themselves. So, it is made from corn syrup, and not only corn syrup, but “fructose enriched” corn syrup. Sounds like another name for high fructose corn syrup.

Fructose and glucose are metabolized differently in the body. Glucose is metabolized in every cell in the body, but all fructose must be metabolized in the liver. When a diet includes a large amount of fructose, then it creates a fatty liver, and even cirrhosis. Crystalline Fructose contains a 99.5 percent minimum of fructose assay, which is an even higher percentage of fructose than regular HFCS!

Another ingredient of crystalline fructose is arsenic. Additional chemical compounds that make up crystalline fructose are heavy metals, lead, and chloride.


  Smokinchoices March 10, 2009
  Cleaner Plate Club May 23, 2008
  The Fit Shack March 28, 2007

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

As I’ve stated on numerous occasions already, the number one source of calories in the United States is high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS). I find that so amazing, it bears repeating. The average American consumes about 12 teaspoons of it every day, though the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy (IATP) estimates that teens and other “high consumers” may consume 80 percent more than that.

Most of this is consumed in the form of sodas, but that’s not the only source of HFCS. This dangerous sweetener is also in many processed foods and fruit juices, so to avoid it you really must focus your diet on whole foods and, if you do purchase packaged foods, become an avid label reader. 

And now, you’ll need to put yet another item on your list to look for — a new version for HFCS: crystalline fructose, which is even worse for your health than HFCS. 

I didn’t think it was possible, but they’ve managed to do it.

How High Fructose Can Destroy Your Health 

George Will is absolutely right when he says that high fructose corn syrup is wrecking the health of Americans.

Until the 1970s, most sugar was sucrose derived from sugar beets or sugar cane. But sugar from corn, especially high fructose corn syrup, is now more popular because it is much less expensive to produce.

It also contains nearly twice the fructose of the sugars that came before it.

Research has clearly linked it to the rise in obesity and metabolic syndrome, as it is metabolized to fat in your body far more rapidly than any other sugar. Adding insult to injury, because most fructose is consumed in liquid form, its negative metabolic effects are significantly magnified.

Just like other sugars it disrupts your insulin levels, and elevated insulin levels are going to  increase your risk of nearly every chronic disease known to man, including:
Heart disease
Premature aging
Arthritis and osteoporosis

You name it, and you will find elevated insulin levels as a primary factor.

There’s also new evidence that HFCS in particular increases your triglyceride levels and LDL (bad) cholesterol levels. It also harms organs like your liver and pancreas, leading to bone loss, anemia, and heart problems, just to name a few.

Says Dr. Andrew Weil:

“Your body doesn’t handle large amounts of fructose well. You can maintain life with intravenous glucose, but not with intravenous fructose; severe derangement of liver function results. There’s also evidence that a high intake of fructose elevates levels of circulating fats (serum triglycerides), increasing the risk of heart disease. I never use fructose in my home.”

I avoid HFCS like the plague as well, and if you care about your health, so would you.

If you haven’t yet read the amazing scientific analysis on fructose in one of my favorite nutritional journals, I would strongly encourage you to do so as it will open your eyes to some of the major problems with this sweetener.

What Could be Worse than High Fructose Corn Syrup?

Enter “crystalline fructose,” a high-octane variety of HFCS.

Whereas regular HFCS contains 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose, crystalline fructose is at minimum 99 percent fructose, which could only mean that all the health problems associated with fructose may be even more pronounced with this product.

In addition to that, crystalline fructose may also contains arsenic, lead, chloride and heavy metals — a laundry list of things you want to avoid at all cost. Especially if you have children, as all of these contaminants can impact your child’s development and long-term health.

(Regular HFCS has also recently been shown to be widely contaminated with mercury, another heavy metal that carries significant health risks, especially for children. In one study, almost half of tested samples of commercial HFCS contained mercury. It was also found in nearly a third of 55 popular brand-name food and beverage products where HFCS is the first- or second-highest labeled ingredient.)

Don’t be Deceived by Healthy-Sounding Drinks

One popular product containing crystalline fructose is Vitaminwater. Folks, please do not make the mistake of believing Vitaminwater is a healthy product simply because it has “vitamin” and “water” on the label.

According to the Cleaner Plate article linked above, many people report feeling less than stellar after drinking Vitaminwater, citing after-effects like headaches, stomachaches, and most frequently, diarrhea.

Your best bet for your primary fluid replacement is just pure, fresh water. Your body does not need anything added to the water to make it any “healthier” than it already is.

Remember, the food industry spends about $40 billion a year on advertising, with the intention of brainwashing you to believe that junk food is somehow good for you and your kids. And the beverage industry is part of that pack.

The more informed you are and the smarter you shop, the healthier you and your family will be.

Related Links:

  Fructose is No Answer For a Sweetener
  Why High-Fructose Corn Syrup Causes Insulin Resistance

  Beware of New Media Brainwashing About High Fructose Corn Syrup

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »