Order Robyn's newest book, Seeding Innovation: BUY IT NOW
Order Robyn's newest book, Seeding Innovation: BUY IT NOW
Menu

Health

Food dyes

US Food Companies Have Removed Food Dyes in the UK—Why Not Here?

, 1

Right now, there is a lot of discussion around the artificial ingredients in our food. A growing number of food companies are stepping up and dumping the junk.  One of the topics that continues to get attention is the science of food dyes. Do artificial colors contribute to hyperactivity in kids? Are food dyes responsible for ADHD? Is it the government’s job to take these dyes out of our kids’ foods or is it ours?

The fact of the matter is that you are going to get a different answer depending on who you ask. But given my background as a food industry analyst, I quickly learned that financial ties between doctors and the food and pharmaceutical corporations can play a pretty important role in what these doctors are willing to say.

So when people get heated up around the science of food dyes, I find myself asking the same questions: Who has funded the research? Is there a financial incentive involved to protect the status quo? And are doctors that are speaking out on this issue in any way affiliated as spokespersons for either the food or pharmaceutical companies that stand to benefit from the continued use of these food dyes in foods?

Since there are usually extensive financial ties between doctors and food and pharmaceutical corporations, it is often helpful to turn to the consumer marketplace and food companies themselves for answers because money talks.

And interestingly, Kraft, Coca Cola and Wal-Mart have already removed these artificial food colors and dyes from the products that they distribute in other countries. They’ve reformulated their product lines in other countries and no longer include these food dyes, and they did it in response to consumer demand and an extraordinary study called the Southampton Study.

The Southampton Study was unusual in that it not only tested an overall number of six dyes (three of them are used in the US (Red 40, Yellow 5, and Yellow 6) and the other three are used in the UK) but also the combination of two ingredients: tartrazine (yellow #5) and sodium benzoate. The study’s designers knew that a child very rarely has occasion to ingest just a synthetic color or just a preservative; rather, a child who is gobbling up multicolored candies is probably taking in several colors and at least one preservative.

What’s amazing is that in the U.K., the federal food safety agency actually funded the Southampton Study that led to even U.S. corporations eliminating synthetic colors and sodium benzoate from their U.K. products.

And in response, a whole host of companies, including the U.K. branches of Wal-Mart, Kraft, Coca Cola and the Mars candy company (who make M&Ms), have voluntarily removed artificial colors, the preservative sodium benzoate, and even aspartame from their products. Particularly those marketed to kids.

When I first learned about this in the spring of 2007, I was stunned. Our American companies had removed these harmful ingredients from their products overseas—but not here?

When I first learned this, I found the information discouraging. But then I realized that we aren’t asking our corporations to reinvent the wheel, we are simply asking for them to place the same products on our grocery store shelves that they are selling overseas.

Because Kraft, Coca Cola and Wal-mart are living proof that is possible for giant corporations to make and sell kid-friendly, family-friendly, and healthy processed foods so that we can give our kids some special treats—like the U.K. versions of Starburst and Skittles, for example—without necessarily exposing them to a chemical cocktail that might also give them brain tumors, or leukemia, or the symptoms of ADHD, as the Center for Science in the Public Interest recently highlighted in their report “Rainbow of Risks”.

And it is inspiring (once you get over the initial shock) to see how far the companies have gone and how quickly they acted to remove these dyes from kids’ foods in other countries.

Asda, for example, the U.K. branch of Wal-Mart acted just one week “after details were leaked to the UK press of a study by researchers at Southampton University. . . ” They didn’t even wait for the study to be published—that’s how concerned they were about public opinion.

In an article published by the Food and Drink Federation, a Web site that monitors food issues in Europe, Jess Halliday reported that “Asda [U.K. Wal-Mart] has pledged to remove any artificial colours or flavours from its 9,000 own label products, as well as aspartame, hydrogenated fat, and flavour enhancers such as monosodium glutamate.”

Wow. The Southampton study didn’t even mention those last three items. Why was the U.K. Wal-Mart rushing to make such healthy choices, when the U.S. Wal-Mart still offered the same old stuff? Wal-Mart had even been slapped by a lawsuit from the Ajinomoto, the company that now makes aspartame, which claimed that U.K. Wal-Mart’s publicizing of its aspartame-free products was a kind of defamation—all while U.S. Wal-Mart continued to use the sweetener.

Can you imagine how grateful parents in the UK must be when they read this? “[U.K. Wal-Mart] will also meet the Food Standards Agency’s salt-reduction targets–two years ahead of the 2010 deadline,” the article continued.

Isn’t that amazing? Over in the U.K., our American companies rushed to meet government standards two whole years before they even go into effect. It begs the question, why?

According to Asda/U.K. Wal-Mart food trading director Darren Blackhurt, “We know that our customers, particularly those that are mums and dads, are becoming more and more concerned about what’s in the food they buy.” Indeed, the article continues, “consumer awareness of nutrition and food quality in the UK has soared in the last few years. . . ” Accordingly, U.K. Wal-Mart was planning to spend 30 million pounds, or about $50 million, to reformulate its product line, adding that, “in the main, taste will be unaffected.”

Pretty stunning, right? Clearly learning about this remarkable decision is sure to leave a few American parents a little hyperactive. And if you look at the decision a little more closely, you will discover that Asda/Wal-Mart was far from the only British company to respond to the Southampton Study in such a dramatic way. According to the Food and Drink Federation in the U.K., several companies—whether British-based or British division of American corporations—had started offering their customers color- and additive-free processed foods.

“We are aware of the recent publication from the University of Southampton on selected artificial colours, and we will continue to follow the guidance of regulators on this issue.”—Coca- Cola Great Britain. And in fact, on May 27, 2008, the story broke that Coca Cola was removing sodium benzoate from its products—but only in the U.K.

“Kraft Foods UK has no products aimed at children that contain the ingredients highlighted in the FSA [Southampton] study. . . . [W]ith our recent Lunchables reformulation in the UK, we reduced fat and salt, as well as removed artificial colours and flavours. Without compromising quality, taste and food safety, we will continue to see where we can make changes and still meet consumer expectations.”—Kraft Foods UK 

“We know that artificial colours are of concern to consumers, which is why, in 2006, Mars began a programme to remove them from our products. . . in November 2007, Starburst Chews became free from all artificial colours. . . . in December 2007, Skittles were made free from all the artificial colours highlighted in a landmark study by Southampton University. . . We have already removed four colours mentioned in the Southampton study from Peanut and Choco M&M’s, and are in the process of removing the final one so they too will be free from these artificials during 2008.”—Mars UK

“Nestlé UK does not manufacture children’s products that contain any of the additives investigated by the FSA [Southampton] research. . . . and from September 2007, the UK’s favourite kids’ chocolate brand—Milky Bar—is to be made with all natural ingredients.”—Nestlé UK

“We are committed to replacing all artificial colours in our sweets. We note the Southampton University findings, but we had begun this process already because we are continually listening to our customers.” —UK Cadbury Chocolate division

Every time I read over those quotes, I find them absolutely stunning. Why are companies that operate in the U.K.—including our very own U.S. companies—so eager to take out the artificial colors there and so completely reluctant to do so here? Why are they willing to spend the money to reformulate their products there while refusing even to consider such a change-over here?

Maybe the answer can be found in a BBC report on Asda/U.K. Wal-Mart, “Explaining its decision to halt the use of artificial colours and flavours, Asda said it was acting because ‘mums and dads are becoming more and more concerned about what’s in the food they buy.’” An Asda/U.K. Wal-Mart press release elaborates: “Reformulation was hard work, but it was a labour of love.” Well, why can’t they perform that same labor of love over here? Is it too much to ask for what they have overseas?

After all, we’re not asking them to reinvent the wheel—they’ve already removed these ingredients from their products elsewhere. So why can’t our children get the same protection? Why can’t they serve up the same products to us?

Today it is estimated that 50% of Hispanic and African-American children will develop diabetes, that 1 in 90 boys has autism, and that 1 in 4 children has asthma. The Journal of Pediatrics reported that from 2002-2005, there was a 103% increase in diabetes medication for children, a 47% increase in asthma medication, a 41% increase in ADHD medication and a 15% increase in high cholesterol medicine.

And while the science may be disputed, depending on who is funding the study, as to whether commonly used food dyes such as Yellow 5, Red 40 and 6 others made from petroleum pose a “rainbow of risks” that include hyperactivity in children, cancer (in animal studies), and allergic reactions, because of the problem of hyperactivity, the Center for Science in the Public Interest petitioned the Food and Drug Administration to ban the use of these dyes given that the British government and European Union have taken actions that are virtually ending their use of dyes throughout Europe.

Is it too much to ask for the same value to be placed on the lives of the American kids in their cost-benefit analyses that has been placed on the lives of kids in the UK?

As a proud American, it seems to me that our duty as moms and dads and concerned citizens is pretty clear. We have to get this information out there so that our government and our corporations listen to us, the way that governments and corporations in Europe, Australia, the U.K., Japan, and other developed countries listen to their citizens.

Because while our children may only represent 30% of our population, they are 100% of our future.

Perhaps it’s time that we value them like our country depends on it.

 

allergies

United States of Allergies? Why Moving Here Increases Your Risk

, 3

A study in the Journal of the American Medical Association, says yes, living in the United States increases your risk of allergic disease “significantly.”

“Living in the US raises risk of allergies,” says the headline.

According to the research, living in the United States for a decade or more may raise the risk of some allergies, reports the Journal of the American Medical Association.

“These data indicate that duration of residence in the United States is a previously unrecognized factor in the epidemiology of atopic disease,” it said.

In other words, the longer you live here, the more likely you are to develop some kind of allergy, asthma, eczema or other related condition.

Food allergies have been skyrocketing in the United States in the last fifteen years. Not only has the CDC reported a 265% increase in the rates of hospitalizations related to food allergic reactions in a ten year period, but the sales of EpiPens, a life-saving medical device for those with food allergies, has also seen record sales growth according to the New York Times.

So what’s going on?

The study aimed to find out. Allergies reported in the survey included asthma, eczema, hay fever, and food allergies.

“Children born outside the United States had significantly lower prevalence of any allergic diseases (20.3%) than those born in the United States (34.5%),” said the study led by Jonathan Silverberg of St. Luke’s-Roosevelt Hospital Center in New York.

Let’s restate that:

Children born in the US have more than a 1 in 3 chance of having allergic diseases like food allergies, asthma or eczema, while kids born in other countries around the world had a “significantly lower prevalence” of 1 in 5.

Children born in the US have more than a 1 in 3 chance of having allergic diseases like food allergies, asthma or eczema, while kids born in other countries around the world had a “significantly lower prevalence” of 1 in 5.

On top of that, “foreign-born Americans develop increased risk for allergic disease with prolonged residence in the United States,” it said.

In other words, if you move here, your chances of developing any one or more of these allergic diseases increase.

The study went so far as to say that children born outside of the US who moved here showed “significantly” higher odds of developing these diseases.

What’s driving this? Is it really Purel and intense handwashing? And the hygiene hypothesis?

And are we allergic to food? Or what’s been done to it?

Because genetics don’t change that quickly. What does? Food, the environment, external triggers.

“These data indicate that duration of residence in the United States is a previously unrecognized factor in the epidemiology of atopic disease,” it said.

This presents a risk not only to these children, but also to our economy, as the financial burden of these conditions and their associated health care costs impact not only families but also our country, our military and our productivity.

So what is triggering this escalating, US allergy epidemic?

According to Reuters report on the study and Dr. Ruchi Gupta, who studies allergies at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine in Chicago but wasn’t involved in the new research, “This is definitely something we see clinically and we’re trying to better understand, what is it in our environment that’s increasing the risk of allergic disease?”

“Food allergies have increased tremendously,” she told Reuters Health. “We do see people who come from other countries don’t tend to have it.”

As discussed in a previous column, allergic reactions occur you’re your body perceives something to be a threat. They can also be a symptom of a hypersensitive immune system – our bodies armed and ready to launch an attack againstany perceived threat.

A growing number of doctors are also suggesting that food allergies might be a symptom that something is wrong with our food system. In other words, in light of the sudden explosion in food allergies: are we suddenly allergic to food? Or what’s been done to it?

Someone with food allergies has an immune system that perceives a food protein to be “foreign”, unidentifiable. And it launches an inflammatory response to drive out that foreign invader.

Today, we have new, foreign proteins that have never existed in our food supply that have been genetically engineered into our food. These proteins are so new that they have been patented by the United States Patent and Trademark Office and never before existed up until their introduction in the late 1990s and early 2000s.

Now correlation is not causation, but the concern over the unknown health impacts of these new proteins in the food supply is in part what led 64 countries around the world to label genetically engineered foods when they were first introduced fifteen years ago and 27 countries to flat out ban them.

According to Science Daily:

“Genetically engineered crops are created by inserting a protein from a different organism into the original crop’s genome. This is usually done to create a plant that is more resistant to insects or diseases.

“The Food and Agriculture Organization within the World Health Organization has a structured approach to determining whether genetically engineered foods cause allergies, according to Venu Gangur, MSU assistant professor of food science and human nutrition, who also is a faculty member in the National Food Safety and Toxicology Center. “But it has a major flaw. A critical question in that process asks, ‘Does the protein cause an allergic reaction in animals?’ The problem is that there has been no good animal model available to test this.”

It’s food for thought.

We don’t have labels on these genetically engineered foods in the US, at least not yet. Bipartisan legislation was recently introduced, and efforts have been made to urge the FDA to take action so that American consumers can enjoy the same freedoms enjoyed by consumers in over 60 countries around the world (including all of the member states of the European Union, Australia, Japan, the UK, Russia, China and India) and have access to whether or not their food and the foods they are feeding their families contain these genetically engineered ingredients.

Do we really want out slogan to be: Come to America, but don’t forget your asthma enhalers and EpiPens? We could quickly earn the title of the United States of Allergic Disease.

We are so much more than that.

And while you can currently look for “Non-GMO” or “USDA Organic” foods which by law are not allowed to be produced with these new proteins, clean food is a right that should be afforded to all Americans, not just those who can afford to opt out and purchase foods labeled “non-GMO” or “USDA Organic”.

With mounting scientific evidence pointing to the role that our increasingly re-engineered food supply, hopped up on additives, artificial dyes, artificial growth hormones and genetically engineered ingredients hardwired to be routinely doused with chemicals (all added since we were kids), is having on the health of our children, it’s time to clean up our food and label genetically engineered ingredients for the health of our families and the health of our country.

Photo by Mojpe (Pixabay)

cb15c2ab36b92733658d3f7b_640_pizza

Pizza: 9 Things You Need to Know

2

It’s National Pizza Day. Just a few weeks ago, the Washington Post ran an article on our complete adoration of the stuff.

1. We eat 100 acres a day of pizza.

2. That translates into 3 billion pizzas a year or….

3. 23 pounds of it for every American.

Frozen pizza marketSeriously, who knew?

We love the stuff in our house.

But as I dug into that research, I learned something new.

A new study in the journal Pediatrics finds many pre-packaged kids’ meals contain too much salt. We know better now. This isn’t 1984. So what is up?

The researchers looked at the nutrition content of more than 1,000 infant and toddler foods and drinks.

The not-so-good news, 72% of toddler dinners were high in sodium content. The majority of snacks, desserts and juice drinks for both infants and toddlers were found to be heavy on salt.

So why so much salt in our food?

4. Salt is the cheapest ingredient after water

5. Salt holds water, increasing pack weight

6. Salt masks bad flavors from cheap other inputs.

salt in pizzaThe American Heart Association has highlighted pizza as a top sodium offender, in their “Salty Six” for Kids. On top of that, according to the CDC, pizza is the #1 sodium source for children/adolescents age 2-19.

So how much salt are they using and how much do we actually need?

Fact is we all need some sodium… but only about 500-600mg/day ( which is just 1/4 teaspoon of salt), but the actual consumption is 7X times that minimum: 3600 mg/day. In other words, we are getting an entire week’s worth of salt every single day.

The researchers recommend parents and caregivers carefully check labels for sodium and added sugar. They say reducing excessive amounts of these ingredients from birth to 24 months can lead to better health for children now and as they grow.

The health impacts of sodium overconsumption go far beyond high blood pressure. Broad health impact: heart attack, stomach cancer, stroke risk, brain function and dementia, osteoporosis and bone fracture.

I had no idea. It seemed like kind of an older person’s problem. I knew to worry about it for my parents, for high blood pressure and risk of stroke (both run in the family), but I didn’t realize it was such a big issue for kids.

I used to think that the toppings would be the biggest sources of sodium in a pizza. I was wrong.

7. 90% of all the sodium in typical pizza comes from the crust and cheese.

8. Crust is usually about 50%

9. Cheese 40%.

It makes sense, it’s a preservative, but does cheese really have to be so jacked up on it? And what can we do?

Increased risk of heart disease and stroke are fairly well-known problems from consuming too much sodium… but I never knew that kids were at risk. Pizza is everywhere, and no one wants to be “that mom” who is constantly saying “no.” There are enough eating issues already.

And as if it couldn’t get any worse for kids, the Chicago Tribune just ran an unbelievable article about kids getting kidney stones because of diets too high in fat and sodium. Some hospitals, like the Children’s Hospital of Pittsburgh at UPENN Medical Center have even created special programs to diagnose and treat it. This used to be something that older people got. Not anymore.

Most kids should only consume 1500-2200 mg of sodium a day, though most are getting well over 3,000. (Source: What we eat in America, National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2009-10, Pediatrics).

I looked at a few of the leading pizza companies out there, like Pizza Hut, Papa Johns, Dominos, and almost all of them had much more sodium in a typical 2-slice meal that maximum recommended by the CDC on a per meal basis (some 2-slices of pizza had more sodium that a child/adolescent or adult should have in a whole day!). Many frozen pizzas and the pizza our kids eat in school that I found data on also has a lot of sodium.

Where does all this lead?

As of 2013, one in six kids age 8-17 has high blood pressure, up from one in twenty just 11 years ago. (Source: Sodium Intake and Blood Pressure Among U.S. Children and Adolescents, Journal Pediatrics, September 17, 2012).

So what can we do? Pizza is everywhere.

I am a big fan of better food. But we also love pizza.

I appreciate the value of innovation and technology to make food we eat healthier. But how are we supposed to do better, if we don’t know any better? Food companies have to come clean. There has never been a better opportunity than now.

A quick look at this chart shows you who the big offenders are in the frozen and fast food categories. Choose wisely if you are eating these brands, or make your own with english muffins, spaghetti sauce and some grated cheese.

We can solve this.

I have been at many industry events and trade shows, seen and tasted some great alternatives to regular salt and the high sodium it contains. Solutions exist so that our food taste great but without doing us harm.

What can you do to take care of your kids? Read labels on packages, ask for nutritional information when you eat out and ‘vote’ with your purchases… for healthier food. Importantly let the management of Domino’s, Pizza Hut, and even Costco know… that you want them to please hold the salt. They are listening. Our kids may only represent 30% of the population, but they are 100% of our future.

#rethinkfood

Sources:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/to-your-health/wp/2015/01/20/we-eat-100-acres-of-pizza-a-day-in-the-u-s/

http://www.cdc.gov/salt/pdfs/children_sodium.pdf

http://www.heart.org/HEARTORG/GettingHealthy/NutritionCenter/HealthyEating/The-Salty-Six-for-Kids-Infographic_UCM_469565_SubHomePage.jsp

gmos and the tobacco lobby strategy

GMOs and Safety Concerns

, 0

The end of 2014 was a flurry of activity for the movement to label genetically engineered ingredients (GMOs) in our food.

The ballot initiative to label GMOs in Oregon lost by just over 800 votes, and thousands of votes were thrown out. In D.C., a hearing was held to address a piece of legislation that calls for voluntary labeling of GMOs and allows for GMOs to be used in foods labeled “natural.”More

7007556498_4eb8b4fbcf_b_organic-food

Why Organic Food Is a Lot More than Just a Fad or Trend

, 0

The reason that I do what I do is because I believe that clean and safe food should be affordable to all families.

This isn’t lifestyles of the rich and famous or some hippie thing. It is a fundamental human rights issue. Kroger gets it. Seventy percent of their shoppers are choosing organic or natural every time they enter the store. Wal Mart gets it: they are launching a private label organic line. Annie’s gets it, WhiteWave, Chipotle: just check out their share prices. They know that this shift in consumer demand is not a fad. It is not a trend. Cancer, autism, life threatening food allergies, Alzheimer’s, Parkinson’s are not fads or trends either. These conditions don’t care if we are Republican or Democrat or where we sit on the socioeconomic ladder. When these conditions and diseases hit our families, our hearts hurt the same way.

And when they hit, more and more families are cleaning out their pantries. Doctors at M.D. Anderson Cancer Center call it “the doorknob syndrome.” A patient has been diagnosed, is sitting in their office, hearing about the procedures and treatments that are going to be done, and as they turn to leave, with their hands on the doorknob, they turn back into the office, toward the doctor and ask: “Is there something I could be doing differently with my diet?”

The cancer doctors that have shared these stories with me call is “the doorknob syndrome” because of how often they have seen it. “We need to upstream this information, they also say.” Yes, we do.

I recently received this email from a dad of three who lost his health and then got it back. This is why I do what I do, as it has everything to do with how our families hold together and our country.

“Hello Robyn, It feels a bit strange for me to call you Robyn since we have never met however I have seen quite a lot of you in my living room so there is a familiarity there. My name is Joe and I am 52 years old. I have been a medic for the USNR, NYC*EMS, and a Volunteer Ambulance Corps in Commack Long Island. I have also been a computer geek since High School and an advertising sales representative. I play the guitar, piano and Bass and write music. I am a man of faith and hope to have my Pastoral Credentials shortly.

Most importantly I am a husband of 25 years to the most fantastic woman God ever blessed this earth with and together we have three fantastic kids. Our house even had a white picket fence on it at one point. Much of this picture changed drastically in 2009. My right knee was giving me problems. Not too much of a shock old high school football injury, which over the years I had had about seven prior surgeries on. I had been told that eventually I will need a new one, so when I was getting the pain I pretty much knew I had torn a cartilage again and needed a snip and sew. I was living in PA and my old knees surgeon was no longer practicing so I choose a new physician.

My new doctor, not knowing all the particulars of my knee, and the type of surgeon he is, didn’t jump right to the knife but had me go for some blood work and tests. These turned into more blood work and tests and then re-testing. I was frustrated! I’m out of work on short term disability, waiting for a half hour knee surgery that I have had three times before, because he is not happy with my blood work? It didn’t make sense. But I trusted him, and after the third set of blood tests I received a call from him. This call came directly from the Doctor, not his PA or a nurse, the doctor, this is generally not good. It turned out that one of my blood tests showed positive for Lupus. It turned out that I did not have Lupus, but after my knee surgery I was having a lot of shoulder pain, which everyone was attributing to my using the crutches and cane. I was assured that after I was off the crutches the pain would subside. But it actually became worse, it got to a point where I could not lift my hands over my head. I began to have lower back pain, pain in my hands a feet, my hips and was taking Ibuprophen and other NSAIDS like they were M&M’s.

This lead down a rather long road of further testing, steroid’s and three rheumatologists. I was diagnosed with Ankylosing spondylitis, with Fibromyalgia. There is no cure for AS and although there are quite a few drugs to treat it none of them worked for me. My Rheumatologist has tried all of the following in conjunction with pain medications and prednisone (at my highest I was taking 22mg a day): 1. Methotrexate 2. Remacaid 3. Humira 4. Voltaren 5. Celebrex 6. Cimbalta 7. Embrel

It got to a point where one morning standing in my kitchen dressed and ready for work my wife Mary looked at me and asked; “If a child jumped out in front of the car would you be able to react fast enough to avoid hitting that child?”. It was then I realized that I was no longer safe and needed to stop working. My condition worsened, and I developed side effects to some of the medications that were almost worse than the disease itself. At my worst point this was my daily medication regimine: • Prednisone 22mg • Celebrex • Remicaid (once a month) • Cimbalta 60mg • Oxycodone 7.5-325 (4x a day) or Hydrocodon 7.5 750 (4 x per day) • Tradzodone 50mg or Zolpidem Tartrate 10mg or Cyclobenzaprine 5mg (to help me sleep) • Fentanyl 100 MCG/Hour time release • leflunomide 10mg • Folic Acid 400mcg • Vitamin D3 3000iu I was a walking zombie and in truth don’t remember a whole lot from that time frame.

Mary decided that we needed to make a change in our diet. All the drugs I was on were so caustic and taxing my liver that she was going to get rid of everything she could to make it easier for my system. Now Mary was a coupon queen. She was one of those people that would go to the store, buy a cart full of stuff and they would owe her money. She began by taking everything that was highly processed out of my diet. The effect was very noticeable, I was able to sleep and stopped taking the medications for sleep. She then went further and removing all high fructose corn syrup, and MSG and went almost completely organic. The net effect is I am off ALL but one of my medications. I still take prednisone but I am down to 9mg per day. We have since gone all non-processed and organic.

We drink grass fed non-hormone raw milk, get our eggs locally (I am even thinking about raising my own chickens). We purchase our beef a half a cow at a time and it is pasture raised grass fed.

Our prayer life and faith have also played a huge roll. I am virtually pain free, have not used a cane in over a year and am selling my powered wheel chair. We have lost over 80 pounds collectively while eating and drinking full fat healthy foods. When I visited my regular doctor and she noticed the weight loss she asked what I was doing so I told her eating whole fat milk, cream half and half and gone non-processed etc. She scheduled a cholesterol blood work. My cholesterol was not only well within the norms it was lower than the previous test!

Robyn, you are one of the people that Mary found when she started her research on how to better take care of me. You are making a huge difference, my family has their Dad back and I can actually function and hope to one day reenter the work force.

Never stop, never give in. You are spot on and making a difference! Have a blessed day!”

Photo by Tim Psych

Photo by Michigan Municipal League (MML)

crop dusting

MIT Study Questions Monsanto’s Safety Claims for RoundUp

, 0

According to Reuters News, a report released out of MIT suggests that heavy use of the world’s most popular herbicide, Roundup, could be linked to a range of health problems and diseases, including Parkinson’s, infertility and cancers.

The peer-reviewed report, published last week, said evidence indicates that residues of “glyphosate,” the chief ingredient in Roundup weed killer, which is sprayed over millions of acres of crops, has been found in food.

Many Americans are more  familiar with RoundUp than we realize. It is a weed killer, used on lawns and gardens, with precautionary measures taken by parents to keep it locked in cabinets and out of the reach of children.  What most Americans don’t realize is that this chemical is routinely used on the foods we eat, most notably corn and soy.

It is now so widely used in modern agriculture that a recent article about glyphosate, the chief ingredient found in RoundUp, from the global news organization, Reuters, highlighted that these chemicals are part of an enormous market, with world annual sales totaling $14 billion, with more than $5 billion of that spent in the US alone.

But what are they doing to us?  Especially given their pervasive use on the foods we eat?

Well, MIT aimed to find out.

According to the report, authored by Stephanie Seneff, a research scientist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the research suggests that the RoundUp residue now found on our food enhance the damaging effects of other food-borne chemical residues and toxins in the environment to disrupt normal body functions and induce disease,

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

We “have hit upon something very important that needs to be taken seriously and further investigated,” Seneff said.

MIT is not alone in their concern.

In the mid 1990s, using a new technology, our soy was genetically engineered with new organisms to make it able to withstand increasing doses of weed killer, chemicals and glyphosate.  The  business model makes perfect sense.  It enhances profitability of the chemical companies by enabling the increased sale of their chemical treatments and weed killers.

But according to the work of Professor Miguel A. Altieri of the University of California, Berkeley who had looked into unforeseen risks that might be associated with genetically engineered crops and these chemicals being sprayed on them:

“Exactly how much glyphosate is present in the seeds of corn or soybeans (genetically engineered to withstand this chemical) is not known, as grain products are not included in conventional market surveys for pesticide residues.  The fact that this and other herbicides are known to accumulate in fruits…raises questions about food safety, especially now that million pounds of this herbicide, ($5 billion worth) are used annually in the United States alone. Even in the absence of immediate (acute) effects, it might take 40 years for a potential carcinogen to act in enough people for it to be detected as a cause.  Moreover, research has shown that glyphosate seems to act in a similar fashion to antibiotics by altering soil biology rendering bean plants more vulnerable to disease”.

In other words, it might take a generation for these effects to show up.  In light of the escalating rates of infertility, pediatric cancer and inflammatory bowel diseases, it begs the question: since the introduction of this new technology in the 1990s, is that happening now?

So why are we using a chemical that is too dangerous to store under our kitchen sinks in the reach of children on the foods we feed our families?

Monsanto is the developer of both Roundup weed killer (an “herbicide”) and a suite of crops that are genetically altered to withstand being sprayed with it.  These genetically engineered crops, introduced into our food in the 1990s and 2000s, have the unique ability to withstand increasing doses of the weed killer and are known as “RoundUp Ready”.  In other words, it helps them sell more chemicals.

Since the introduction of these genetically engineered crops, Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) data reveals that between 2001- and 2007, as much as 185 million pounds of glyphosate was used by U.S. farmers, double the amount used six years ago.

So in the past, where we may have been getting a sprinkling of this chemical on our food crops prior to the introduction of RoundUp Ready crops, with the recent introduction of genetically engineered foods, designed to withstand this signature product, the doses are at unprecedented levels.

So what is this product doing to us?

Glyphosate, found in RoundUp, is the world’s most popular herbicide and is designed to kill pests and insects, anything but the genetically engineered “Roundup Ready” plants, such as genetically engineered corn, soy, beet, cottonseed and canola.

These genetically engineered crops , including genetically engineered corn, genetically engineered soybeans, genetically engineered canola and genetically engineered sugarbeets, are planted on millions of acres in the United States annually and widely and generously in the US food supply, particularly processed foods, without labels.

When these crops were first introduced in the late 1990s and early 2000s, it was conjectured that farmers would like them because they could spray Roundup weed killer directly on the crops to kill weeds in the fields without harming the crops.  And they did.  But about three planting cycles in, it appears that Mother Nature has Monsanto figured out and it is now reported that over half of the farmers using these products are experiencing a resistance to the chemical company’s signature product and suffering from what are known as “superweeds” in their fields.

It was not only the unknown impact of environmental and crop disruption that caused countries around the world to exercise precaution around the use of these chemicals, it was also the uncertainty of the long-term impact that these crops and the chemical products applied to them would have on both the environment, soil, a developing fetus or human health that resulted in their use being banned in 27 countries around the world and labeled in 64 more.

In light of the study out of MIT, this precautionary measure seems well-founded, as with the approval of every new RoundUp Ready crop, there is a 2-5 times increase in the amount of glyphosate that is applied.

And while that may help drive profitability for the chemical industry, there are social costs: lost yields in food production and any health care costs that may be associated with the harm that these chemicals might cause.

The authors of the MIT report are concerned that RoundUp, for which these genetically engineered crops are named, and the chemical used in it, glyphosate, are contributing to diseases as far-ranging as inflammatory bowel disease, cancer, infertility, cystic fibrosis, cancer, Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease, going so far as to suggest that it “…may be the most biologically disruptive chemical in our environment.”

According to Green Med:

“The researchers identified the inhibition and/or disruption of cytochrome P450 (CYP) enzymes as a hitherto overlooked mechanism of toxicity associated with glyphosate exposure in mammals.

CYP enzymes are essential for detoxifying xenobiotic chemicals from the body. Glyphosate therefore enhances the damaging effects of other food borne chemical residues and environmental toxins.  The researchers also showed how interference with CYP enzymes acts synergistically with disruption of the biosynthesis of aromatic amino acids by gut bacteria (e.g. tryptophan), as well as impairment in serum sulfate transport, a critical biological system for cellular detoxification (e.g. transulfuration pathway which detoxifies metals).”

In working with plant biologists, I have learned that glyphosate kills weeds by turning off key enzymes that produce defense mechanisms for plants.  It essentially targets and destroys their immune systems by chelating, stripping, micronutrients like magnesium, copper and zinc from the plant.  As a result, there are fewer of these key micronutrients in the plants and in our food supply.

This effect, according to the researchers, can contribute to causing or worsening “…most of the diseases and conditions associated with a Western diet which include gastrointestinal disorders, obesity, diabetes, heart disease, depression, autism, infertility, cancer and Alzheimer’s disease.”

This isn’t the first time we’ve heard this.  It picks up on a previous Reuter’s article that was titled “Cancer Cause or Crop Aid?”

In Canada, the Canadian tolerable levels for glyphosate are 58 times lower that those in the US and that European tolerance levels are even lower as a precautionary measure to protect vulnerable subsets of the population, like pregnant women and children.  Plant biologists share that the levels of glyphosate now found in the US food supply have been clinically shown to be toxic, citing its effects on human placental, kidney, liver and testicular cells.

So what will it take to address this in the United States?  The EPA has promised to look into it in 2015.  But that’s two years of babies being born and two more years of escalating pediatric cancer rates in the US.  We already spend more on health care costs and disease management than any other country on the planet, according the the Office of Economic Co-operation and Development.

Unlike previous researchers, this is not a report from an anti-GMO activist, nor is it a report from the organic industry, this is a scientific research paper from one of our nation’s leading academic institutions led by a woman who is courageously highlighting that the potential toxicity of one of the world’s most widely used chemicals on our food supply is far greater than was previously considered.

Scientists and researchers who have spoken out on the dangers of these products are often attacked.  This situation is no different, as Monsanto’s website in a “Featured Article: goes so far as to call MIT’s research “Another Bogus ‘Study.’”

We still do not label genetically engineered foods in the United States, foods that have literally been given this product’s name and are hardwired to withstand increasing doses of it, foods that were introduced as recently as the late 1990s and early 2000s into our food supply.

If the jury is still out on them, as evidenced by the MIT study, shouldn’t we at the very least be labeling them?

In light of the escalating rates of pediatric cancers, autism and other conditions impacting our children, the American Academy of Pediatrics is recommending a new policy, too, as seen on their website which states:

“The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that chemical management policy in the United States be revised to protect children and pregnant women and to better protect other populations.”

The reasons for this concern are not unfounded.  The American children have earned the title of “Generation Rx.” The Centers for Disease Control now reports that cancer is the leading cause of death by disease in children under the age of 15.  And oncologists and leading experts in the field of cancer are calling for new treatment models, worried that the increasing costs of cancer is going to put an unprecedented strain on our health care system.

So what is a parent to do?

According to Investor Place, an investment research site that tracks the stock price of Monsanto and the impact that news like this would have on its share price, “a spokesman for Monsanto says that glyphosate is a proven safe ingredient and is less damaging than other widely used chemicals.”

It must be how our grandmothers felt when told that cigarettes didn’t cause cancer either.

While this type of corporate marketing and positioning may be in the best interest of shareholders, industry funded research often merits further independent investigation.

The question of labeling genetically engineered foods is not just an academic debate, it is increasingly  an ethical one.  And while the industry will claim that this is a concern afforded to the wealthy, that these crops are needed to feed the world, mounting scientific evidence is proving that with no long term human health data, other than what we are witnessing ourselves in the health of the American children, labels represent a precautionary measure, afforded to parents in 64 countries around the world who are able to walk into a grocery store and choose if they want to feed their children foods that contain genetically engineered ingredients.

As evidence and controversy grows, highlighting the toxicity of these products increasingly used on our food supply in the US, labels afford American eaters the same rights afforded to eaters around the world.  Cancer doesn’t care what side of the aisle we are on or what our income is, and the costs of diseases being born by our families, our corporations and our economy have the potential to destroy our competitiveness in the global marketplace.

A label and the knowledge that comes with it would go a long way to protecting the health of our country.

Learn how you can protect the health of your children and family from genetically engineered products and the chemicals upon which they are dependent to grow at www.justlabelit.org and at The Pesticide Action Network.

Resource: Samsel A, Seneff S. Glyphosate’s Suppression of Cytochrome P450 Enzymes and Amino Acid Biosynthesis by the Gut Microbiome: Pathways to Modern Diseases. Entropy. 2013; 15(4):1416-1463.

Photo by chaunceydavis818

real food

Diet, Food Addiction and the Power of Real Food

, 0

When I first spoke out about genetically engineered ingredients, artificial dyes and additives now used in our food, it was in 2006.

A lot of people didn’t want to hear that our food system could be such a mess, but I could not unlearn what I had learned and kept talking.

Were we allergic to food or what’s been done to it? Are food cravings a function of not having the right nutrition? What would happen if we had a food system full of nutrition instead of additives? Would we still see the soaring rates of allergies, autism, cancer and other conditions impacting the lives of the people that we love?

My voice shook, but I kept talking. Our team grew, and today, I am contacted by people around the world who have been touched by the work. It has become a fuel that inspires this mission.

Today, I received an email quite unlike any that has come before, and it speaks to just how powerful clean food and real nutrition can be, not only in our own lives, but in the lives that we touch.

Diet is a lot like religion, it is not going to be one size fits all. But clean food, food that hasn’t been contaminated with artificial ingredients that didn’t exist a generation ago, makes sense if we truly are to have life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

Meet Shannon, an extraordinary testament to the power of real food.

Dear Robyn,

Thank you so much for giving people like me a chance to not only share my story but thank you for your work in this important area of our human development. I’ve been wanting to write to you the past year, after I first saw your TedTalk, but never had time to write down my story.

Recently, I had reason to take time to do just that, when a mom in my support group (for what, I’ll detail in a moment) wrote that she was chronically exhausted and didn’t know how the rest of us get through our day and that “even five Red Bulls” couldn’t help her keep up. Once I read that, I knew I had to take time to share my path with her with the hope that I might be able to reach her.

Some backstory: I turn 42 next month, am married, and have two daughters: an 11 year old (Lily) and a 6 year old (Ally.) We have two adorable puppies and live in suburban California. We own our own theatrical production company, producing events and live theatre throughout the West Coast with plans for our Off-Broadway premiere this winter.

Probably reads like a regular ole’ family but of course, what family is regular? Our second daughter was born with severe brain damage after a completely normal pregnancy. A lack of in-utero oxygen cause Ally’s brain damage, but we don’t know what caused the lack of oxygen. She is 100% non-ambulatory, non-communicative, g-tube fed, and dependent on others for everything. My story about Ally is what I’m usually asked to blog or talk about: telling others about our birth story, sharing how I get up and live each day in the face of such struggle, yada yada yada. 😉

But now, after a year of enlightenment about our country’s food options, I’m eager to share my story about how, in just one year, I went from lost and barely able to function, to found and happy and inspired. Last March I went to my OB (who knew my birth story and was aware of my then five years with a brain injured child). I wrote her a long letter explaining how I was just in terrible shape. I was exhausted, moody, depressed, short tempered, overweight (I was 5′ 2″ and 170lbs.) I also told her that although I was probably a candidate for the Anti-depressants Poster Child, I really wanted to explore other options before making the choice to start drug therapy. She listened. And then handed me a scrip anyway stating my neuro-inhibitors simply weren’t firing and that the drug would help me feel better. I asked when I could come off the drug. She said, “well, never.”

I left and sat in the car for an hour crying on the phone to my mom. I just didn’t want to take the drug. I’ve never considered myself a health nut but have always had an instinct that told me chemicals weren’t my solution. At that point I was resigned to thinking I’d be exhausted and angry forever. A week later, while in the hospital with our little one for a 72 minute-long seizure, I saw one of those infommercials for a juicer. It talked about how great they are for all sorts of ailments. I thought, I could do that, and there’s no way my family gets enough veggies. (I’ll note here that I was NOT a cook. My idea of cooking was a box of mac and cheese and some frozen broccoli. When asked what I’m making for dinner, my answer was usually “reservations.” We ate out A LOT. Like, sometimes two meals a day with breakfast consisting of a bowl of dry cereal.) So, I bought the Ninja 5000 or whatever it was called and started eating smoothies and juices; not exclusively, just here and there like for breakfast.

A month later I caught that PBS special with Dr. Amen talking about the Omnivore diet and how the body and mind reacts to food. It was quite illuminating and another dose of awareness for me. I didn’t buy their DVDs or books, but I made some other small changes to my diet like limiting dairy, knocking off sodas, and increasing my veg portions.

Now, once you start posting comments on your facebook page with words like “smoothies”, “healthy”, and “green”, like-minded posts start showing up your feed. Suddenly, I was seeing images with graphs and reports about aspartame poisoning and unclean food and GMOs. Again, very enlightening and enough to compel me to stop drinking diet soda and, quite a bit more shocking, convince my very diet Coke-addicted husband to do the same.

But the real kicker for me happened late 2013 when someone on Facebook shared a TedTalk by Robyn O’Brien. That’s when I woke up. You were saying everything I was thinking about what I was putting into my body, and shining a light on the amazing crisis in our country with regard to syndromes and diseases that are very likely being brought on by the massive amounts of processed foods we eat on a regular basis.

In March 2013 my list of daily complaints included those already stated above about chronic fatigue, mood swings, and depression (all of which I readily chalked up to “life with a brain injured child”) as well as constipation, gas, reflux, headaches, back pain, tired eyes, skin sensitivity, crummy looking hair, red blotches on my face and other cosmetic gripes, and the worst PMS a person could have. I could not keep from dozing off during therapy sessions with my daughter. I felt whooped by the middle of the day. I felt like even a good night’s sleep did nothing – I woke up exhausted. I thought I was eating well but never lost the extra weight I was carrying. And once a month I turned into an even more unrecognizable person because of such severe PMS.

Today, in March of 2014, I can tell you with sincerity that ALL of those symptoms are gone. Today, I have energy and lots of it, especially considering what I deal with on a daily basis. I am even tempered, far better at managing stress, and do not lash out at others anymore like I used to. (My 11 yr old sure noticed that change!) Gastro issues? Gone. Skin, hair and nails? Strong and clear. Weight? Lost 15lbs in three months. Headaches, back pain, neck pain? All gone. And most of those changes happened within less than a month of my finding this miracle cure. To the mom in my support group I wrote, “Now it probably sounds like I’m about to sell you some magic pill or tell you to join an online cult. Nope. The beauty of this miracle is that it is 100% attainable without any drugs or quick fixes or brain washing.

My answer to your original question, ‘how do you do it?’ is simple: the overabundance of processed foods and absence of whole foods in my diet was absolutely responsible for everything that ailed me, especially feeling exhausted.

I didn’t make the change overnight but over the course of a few months I started to change the way I ate. I started to really understand how food is used by the body and I also learned how what most of us consider to be food isn’t really what the body needs and craves.”

For me, food was an addiction. I know we use that phrase a lot but I’m convinced there really are foods with addictive properties that make the body think it wants more of it. Once I stopped eating those foods, my body calmed and I was able to hear its demands. Once I met the demands, the cravings for pasta and rice and pizza and cereal stopped. Completely. Those were ALL of my go to “foods.” Now, I don’t see them as food at all because there is nothing nutritional in them at all. For me, those items are just something to have in the same way you’d have a glass of wine. You wouldn’t substitute wine for water and call it hydration. That’s how I feel now about processed grains.

It’s hard to summarize all of what I’ve learned but here are some high points:

  • My 41 year old body (and come to think of it, my body at ages 25-40) is not able to process processed foods. If I eat them, I have immediate physical and emotional changes, none of which are pleasurable. Once I started eating real, clean, whole food my body thanked me for it in multiple ways that make getting through the day entirely manageable now.
  • My body seemed to constantly cry out for something – and because I didn’t know what it was, I fed it more bread and pasta and cereal and sweets. It was really saying, “I want the nutrition you’re not giving me and I’m going to keep triggering your craving button until you put the RIGHT food in me.”
  • I was incapable of losing weight while eating fake food. Once I started eating all whole food, the weight fell off.
  • My kids have caught bad colds numerous times in the past year that I did NOT catch, even though I would usually succumb to everything those cute little petri dishes brought home. And the one cold I did catch over the summer followed a weekend of pizza eating when I “fell off the wagon.”
  • I also noticed an IMMEDIATE change in my neuro-typical child and husband when I started serving them real food. (Yes! I cook everything now!) They aren’t fully on my band wagon because change is very hard but even the reduction of processed foods and the increase of whole vegetables and fruits made a huge and noticeable in their behavior and gastro health.

I could on and on but for me the miracle was in finding whole food (meaning, making sure that two/thirds of every meal I eat is comprised of real fruits and/or vegetables with the other third a whole protein like chicken, turkey, beef, fish, or quinoa), and avoiding all processed foods whenever possible.

This isn’t a diet, this isn’t a fad. Yes, you can label it an edited “paleo diet” or “omnivore diet” but to me, it’s more than that: it’s about realizing that our country is failing us by repeatedly assaulting us with a barrage of marketing for products sold by corporations telling us what to eat.

Is weight loss a nice byproduct? Of course. But what’s far more exciting to me is remembering what life felt like before and realizing I don’t ever have to feel that way again.

Over the past year, I’ve advocated switching to an all-clean food intake plan to those in my circle and am met with varying levels of interest or denial.

I get it: it’s entirely daunting because it probably seems like you’ll be depriving yourself. And assuredly: if someone had told 2013 Shannon that she would no longer eat pasta, pizza, rice or cereal, she’d have laughed in your face.

But here I am. Happier, healthier, well rested, energetic, and able to take on the day without chemicals of any kind, particularly an anti-depressant, all while running my own very busy and demanding business with two new puppies and two children, one of whom has severe special needs.

So there’s my story. Thank you for reading it.

Please consider me part of your “team”; one who is actively researching, gently proselytizing, and doing all I can to make sure in maybe just one or generations from now, people will say things to each other like, “Can you believe we used to poison our people like that with processed foods??? I know, right!? I can’t believe we EVER put things like that in our body.

Diet is a lot like religion. It’s not one size fits all, but sometimes little changes can make a big impact. Do what you can, where you are with what you have. Find a doctor that understands the power of real food. Together, we will build a smarter, safer food system so that when our children and grandchildren ask us, “What did you do when you learned how contaminated the food supply got?” We will be able to say, “We fixed it.”

Photo by WILLPOWER STUDIOS

buns

Do Your Buns Contain Yoga Mat

, 0

If you had no idea that there is yoga mat material in your hamburger bun, you’re not alone.

We sure didn’t. Every time we drive past a Subway, one of the kids will bring it up.

Azodicarbonamide is a chemical used “in the production of foamed plastics.” It’s used to make sneaker soles and gym mats.

In the United States, it is also used in our food, as a food additive and flour bleaching agent.

This “ingredient” is most often found in breads, boxed noodle mixes, and packaged baked goods.

So why in the world are we using it in our food?

Back in our grandmothers’ days, bread would go stale within a day or two and grow mold by the end of the week. Not fun but natural. In order to address this concern for food retailers, the industry began adding this foaming agent in order to extend the shelf life of bread and preserve it—to pump it up and plump it up in order to keep it fresh and enhance profitability.

Around the world, most countries wait about a week for flour to whiten on its own, but the American food processors prefer to use this chemical to bleach the flour here because time is money.

The United States is one of the only developed countries in the world that allows something used in shoes and gym mats to also be used in sandwiches. You can get up to 15 years in prison and be fined nearly half a million dollars for using this chemical in Singapore. It is banned as a food additive and in food packaging in the United Kingdom whose “Health and Safety Executive” considers it a “respiratory sensitizer.” Europe and Australia ban the use of this chemical, azodicarbonamide, too, because it has been linked to asthma and other allergic reactions, as cited by the World Health Organization.

But not here. So are we allergic to wheat or what is being done to it?

In the last twenty years, we have seen an epidemic increase in allergies, asthma, ADHD and autism, including a:

  • 400% increase in food allergies
  • 300% increase in asthma, with a 56% increase in asthma deaths

It’s time to rethink food, rethink the role of the FDA in light of its shrinking budget and capacity to regulate our food system, and to require that independent scientific studies be conducted, not only for the health of our children, but also for the sake of our increasingly burdened health care system and the toll that the chronic rates of diseases and their escalating costs are having on the health of our economy.

Additional information is available from the World Health Organization as well as azodicarbonamide’s classification as an “asthmagen” by the Health and Safety Executive’s office.

Photo by jeffreyw

Load More