Tuesday, October 21, 2008

Guess Who Funds High Fructose Corn Syrup Studies?

From Dr. Mercola

Guess Who Funds High Fructose Corn Syrup Studies?

corn syrup, root beer, soda ads hyping high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) have been hitting the airwaves as part of a major marketing campaign from the Corn Refiners Association.

Critics say HFCS contributes to weight gain and tricks your body into wanting to eat more. But the industry says it’s just fine, and argues that HFCS is the same as sugar.

To get that message out, the campaign relies on nutritional research. But funding for many of the major studies in question came from companies with a financial stake in the outcome.

Out of the six studies on the Corn Refiners Association’s Web site that “Confirm High Fructose Corn Syrup [is] No Different From Sugar,” three were sponsored by groups that stand to profit from research that promotes HFCS. Two were never published, so their funding sources are unclear. And one was sponsored by a Dutch foundation that represents the interests of the sugar industry.

Pepsi funded one study. So did a D.C. based lobbying group that gets their money from food, chemical and drug companies. And the American Beverage Association gave a grant for another.



It’s a widely known fact that when a study is sponsored by a company with financial interests in the outcome, the results rarely do anything but support the industry that funded the study..

In fact, CBS mentions a study by Children’s Hospital Boston that found when studies were sponsored exclusively by food or drinks companies, the results were four to eight times more likely to be favorable to the sponsoring company.

So when the Corn Refiners Association claims that their deceptive $20-30 million ad campaign promoting corn syrup is “based on nutritional research,” now you know just what type of biased research they are using.

Is Corn Syrup “the Same as Sugar”?

The Corn Refiners Association has launched TV commercials and a Web site that claim corn syrup is no worse for you than sugar. In one ad, a mother pours some type of bright red corn-syrup-rich juice from a plastic jug. In another, a woman feeds her boyfriend a popsicle.

In both ads, characters question the health risks of corn syrup, but neither is able to explain exactly why corn syrup is unhealthy, implying that corn syrup is actually not so bad after all.

To imply that artificial products containing corn syrup are in any way OK for your health is beyond a stretch. So let’s set the record straight. If anyone asks YOU why corn syrup is unhealthy, you can tell them:

• HFCS is metabolized to fat in your body far more rapidly than any other sugar, and, because most fructose is consumed in liquid form (soda), its negative metabolic effects are significantly magnified.

• Recent research, reported at the 2007 national meeting of the American Chemical Society, found new evidence that soft drinks sweetened with HFCS may contribute to the development of diabetes because it contains high levels of reactive compounds that have been shown to trigger cell and tissue damage that cause diabetes.

• HFCS is almost always made from genetically modified corn, which is fraught with its own well documented side effects and health concerns, such as increasing your risk of developing a food allergy to corn.

You can also let anyone who believes corn syrup is safe to eat know that there are over 35 years of hard empirical evidence that refined man-made fructose like HFCS metabolizes to triglycerides and adipose tissue, not blood glucose. The downside of this is that fructose does not stimulate your insulin secretion, nor enhance leptin production. (Leptin is a hormone thought to be involved in appetite regulation.)

Because insulin and leptin act as key signals in regulating how much food you eat, as well as your body weight, this suggests that dietary fructose may contribute to increased food intake and weight gain.

Additionally, fructose is also known to significantly raise your triglycerides and LDL (bad cholesterol). Triglycerides, the chemical form of fat found in foods and in your body, are not something you want in excess amounts.

Intense research over the past 40 years has confirmed that elevated blood levels of triglycerides, known as hypertriglyceridemia, puts you at an increased risk of heart disease.

How to Cut HFCS Out of Your Diet

If you are eating a healthy diet, a little bit of corn syrup here or there isn’t going to cause any catastrophes. However, most people are not eating corn syrup in moderation. In 2007, Americans consumed an average of 56 pounds of HFCS each, according to CBS! A large part of this was undoubtedly from soda, which is the number one source of calories in the United States.

So the first step for many people is to stop drinking soda, and this turbo tapping technique can help you to break free from a soda addiction.

I am HIGHLY confident that giving up soda would result in health improvements FAR more profound than if everyone stopped smoking. This is because drinking soda leads to elevated insulin levels, the foundation of nearly every chronic disease known to man -- cancer, heart disease, diabetes, aging, arthritis, osteoporosis, you name it, and you will find elevated insulin levels as a primary factor.

Aside from soda, corn syrup is also in many processed foods and fruit juices, so to avoid it completely you need to focus your diet on whole foods. And if you do purchase any processed foods, make sure you read the label … and put it back on the shelf if it lists high fructose corn syrup as an ingredient.

Friday, October 10, 2008

Food Irradiation--- What is the FDA hiding?

From centerforfoodsafety.org

Food Irradiation

What if the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) proposed a rule that would intentionally hide information you rely on to make decisions about what to feed yourself and your family? Or if FDA proposed changing food labeling information to something the agency knows would be misleading to consumers?

Well, FDA has announced just such a rule to weaken labeling of irradiated foods.

Currently, irradiated food must be labeled as "Treated with irradiation" or "Treated by radiation" and must display the irradiated "radura" symbol. But now, in yet another attempt to appease industry at the expense of the public, the FDA has proposed a new rule that would allow irradiated food to be marketed in some cases without any labeling at all. In other cases, the rule would allow the terms "electronically pasteurized" or "cold pasteurized" to replace the use of "irradiated" on labels. These terms are not used by scientists, but rather are designed to fool consumers about what's been done to their food.

What is Food Irradiation?


Food irradiation uses high-energy Gamma rays, electron beams, or X-rays (all of which are millions of times more powerful than standard medical X-rays) to break apart the bacteria and insects that can hide in meat, grains, and other foods. Radiation can do strange things to food, by creating substances called "unique radiolytic products." These irradiation byproducts include a variety of mutagens - substances that can cause gene mutations, polyploidy (an abnormal condition in which cells contain more than two sets of chromosomes), chromosome aberrations (often associated with cancerous cells), and dominant lethal mutations (a change in a cell that prevents it from reproducing) in human cells. Making matters worse, many mutagens are also carcinogens.

Research also shows that irradiation forms volatile toxic chemicals such as benzene and toluene, chemicals known or suspected to cause cancer and birth defects. Irradiation also causes stunted growth in lab animals fed irradiated foods. An important 2001 study linked colon tumor promotion in lab rats to 2-alkylcyclobutanones (2-ACB's), a new chemical compound found only in irradiated foods. The FDA has never tested the safety of these byproducts. Irradiation has also been shown to cause the low-level production of furans (similar to cancer-causing dioxins) in fruit juice.

Food Safety Concerns

In addition to the proposed weakening of the labeling requirements for irradiated food, FDA's rule would also severely limit them by requiring companies to label irradiated food only when the radiation treatment causes a 'material change' to the product. Examples include changes to the taste, texture, smell or shelf life of a food. Published research on irradiated foods reveals that irradiation does change, and can actually ruin, the flavor, odor, appearance, and texture of food. Such research repeatedly finds that irradiated foods smell rotten, metallic, bloody, burnt, grassy, and generally off. The taste has been described as like sulfur, singed hair, burnt feathers, burnt oil, and rancid fat. Beyond the obvious yuck factor, serious questions remain as to whether irradiated foods are safe to eat.

Irradiation Destroys the Vitamin Content of Foods


Irradiated foods can lose from 2-95% of their vitamins. For example, irradiation can destroy up to 80% of the vitamin A in eggs, up to 95% of the vitamin A and lutein in green beans, up to 50% of the vitamin A and lutein in broccoli, and 40% of the beta-carotene in orange juice. Irradiation also doubles the amount of trans fats in beef.

Despite 50 years of research, food scientists still do not fully understand how these changes take place. Much of the ongoing research, in fact, is focused on devising new ways to hide these changes, rather than addressing the cause of the changes themselves.

Irradiation is Not the Solution to Food-Borne Illness

Using recent food-contamination scandals as a springboard, irradiation has been touted as the solution to food-borne illness in everything from spinach to deli meats. But a good, hard look at the systemic food and agricultural problems that cause these tragic outbreaks in the first place has yet to be undertaken by government agencies.

Masks the Unsanitary Condition of Factory Farms

Irradiation is an after the fact "solution" that does nothing to address the unsanitary conditions of factory farms, and actually creates a disincentive for producers and handlers to take preventative steps in production in handling. The longer shelf life created by irradiation (affording longer shipping distances) also provides greater opportunity for post-treatment contamination via shipping, handling, etc. Additionally, irradiation does not work to stop toxins produced by some bacteria (like botulism); viruses, like foot and mouth disease or hepatitis, are resistant to the irradiation doses used in food; and prions (thought to be the cause of BSE, or Mad Cow disease) are resistant as well.

Contributes to Consolidation of the Agriculture Industry and the Globalization of Food

American food processing companies see the use of irradiation as a potential means of boosting profits. In fact, the motivation for expanding irradiation to additional categories of food may be less about getting rid of disease-causing organisms, and more about increasing market share in international trade. Irradiation can dramatically increase the shelf life of food. This gives corporations more flexibility in marketing and transportation, making it easier for large companies to move some operations to countries with lower labor costs and lower sanitary and safety standards. As in many other "outsourced" industries, American workers, farmers and ranchers, could lose their jobs. In other words, food irradiation supports globalization at its worst, where concerns over long-term health risks carry less weight than the lure of expanded markets. Additionally, since irradiation has become a tool for the globalization of U.S. food production, food irradiation procedures are modeled for large, centralized operations. This furthers the consolidation of "Big Ag" companies and contributes to the destruction of small U.S. family farms - further degrading the security and diversity of our food supply.

Your Right to Know: FDA, Consumers, and the Labeling Lie


Labeling irradiated foods as "pasteurized" is simply untruthful and misleading. Pasteurization involves heating liquids for the purpose of destroying harmful bacteria and other pathogens, and has been used safely for decades. Using high-energy gamma rays, electron beams, or X-rays on foods - is a completely different process than pasteurization.

In fact, FDA's own research found that the proposed change would confuse consumers, stating "Research indicates that many consumers regard substitute terms for irradiation to be misleading." Consumer data has repeatedly shown that consumers recognize and prefer the current labeling requirements of irradiated food. In 2001, FDA conducted focus groups of consumers on this issue. Consumers participating unanimously rejected replacing the term irradiation with pasteurization and reacted with phrases such as, "sneaky," "deceptive," "misleading," and "trying to fool us." Allowing the marketing of irradiated food without any labeling is equally misleading.

Thursday, October 2, 2008

What's Wrong With the Flu Shot

WHAT'S WRONG WITH THE FLU SHOT?

EVERYTHING IS WRONG WITH THE FLU SHOT


By Dr. Richard Schulze



First, Experts say it doesn't work!

"There is no evidence that any influenza vaccine thus far developed is effective in preventing or mitigating any attack of influenza. The producers of these vaccines know that they are worthless, but they go on selling them anyway." Dr. J. Anthony Morris (former Chief Vaccine Control Officer at the FDA.)



Let's look at the facts...

The flu shot has never been proven to be effective. Many experts worldwide now agree that it has never worked and that the rise and fall of all disease, especially influenza, is based on our immune system's antibody response and self-education process and not because of medical meddling.



The main reason many experts believe influenza vaccines don't work is because of a natural scientific phenomenon called Antigenic Shift and Drift. Darwin may not have been right with his Theory of Evolution and my great, great-grandmother may not have been a chimp but his theory proves very valid when it comes to viruses. Viruses do evolve, they change from one form to another. So every year, actually every few weeks, the old virus has become a very new virus.



Even the federal government's Center for Disease Control states that "Influenza (flu) seasons are unpredictable. Although epidemics of flu happen in most years, the beginning, severity, and length of the'Epidemic can vary widely from year to year. Before a season begins, it is not possible to accurately predict the features of any season.'



The simple reason it's impossible to predict the coming influenza seasons virus is because it is impossible to predict the future, Even if one got lucky and guessed right, the next influenza virus is never just one virus. All influenza viruses are a blend of many different strains and many different types of virus. So the odds of you finding one particular grain of sand in all the beaches in California are far better than any medical doctor guessing next year's viral cocktail. Next years, even next week's, virus will be a totally new, different mutated blend of multiple influenza viruses. And remember, even that new blend of virus is constantly in a state of flux. Here it is again, Antigenic Shift and Drift



So every year pharmaceutical companies make the flu vaccine based on . . . LAST YEAR'S INFLUENZA. Even though throughout history no influenza epidemic virus blend has ever repeated itself ever, or has ever been the same. In fact if you made one today to protect you from the exact virus that is spreading right now, by the time it was produced and used the virus would have already shifted and drifted many times and mutated into a completely different virus. Even the pharmaceutical manufacturers admit that this is a serious problem, but also "places serious doubts on the effectiveness of the influenza vaccine."



The only validity for manufacturing and using the Influenza Vaccines is financial, as trillions of dollars are being made on vaccine manufacture and usage.



Secondly, the statistics prove it doesn't work!

So regardless which experts are right no matter what they say, the statistics speak for themselves. A few decades ago less than 100,000 people were hospitalized with the flu. Last year it doubled to over 200,000. A few decades ago less than 20,000 people a year died from the flu. Last year it was over 40,000, doubled again. In the last 20 years the American population has only increased about 25%, but hospitalizations and deaths from influenza have increased 100%. You tell me, is the flu shot working?



What we absolutely do know about the flu vaccine is that it has killed, maimed and made a lot of people sick, I still remember the federal government's swine flu vaccination program when, for the first time ever, the government tried to give every American the swine flu influenza vaccine. When the fear, panic, bureaucracy, medical folly and pharmaceutical scandal cleared, 25 times more people died from the swine flu influenza vaccine than actually died from the swine flu, and thousands were seriously injured with numerous neurological and immune diseases. Worse yet, many medical experts today now believe that the influenza vaccine actually attacks and weakens your immune system and makes you even MORE susceptible to getting infected with influenza.



Now, in case you are still not sure, let's look at a few of the flu shot's ingredients.





Third, the flu shot ingredients are toxic chemical poisons!



Ethyl Glycol Automobile Anti-Freeze

Carbolic Acid A toxic caustic poison

Formaldehyde Embalming Fluid, causes cancer Causes Alzheimer's Disease, seizures and cancer

Mercury Extremely toxic heavy metal, kills brain and immune cells



If you had five consecutive flu shots in any decade your chance of getting Alzheimer's Disease is TEN TIMES HIGHER. This is partially due to the mercury and aluminum that is in every flu shot (and most childhood shots) that builds up in the brain and causes cognitive dysfunction and disease. This is partially why the rate of Alzheimer's Disease is skyrocketing.



And I haven't even touched on the blend of numerous deadly viruses and infected animal tissue that is in the vaccine.



The mercury alone is a great reason why not to get one. Mercury is a heavy metal and even minimal exposure to it kills brain and nerve cells. It is deadly poisonous. Knowingly infecting any amount of mercury into the human body is insane. I would gladly inject heroin into myself long before I would inject any flu vaccine. At least heroin is made from an herb, the poppy.



There has been much research done over the last decade linking the mercury in childhood vaccinations to childhood brain and nerve diseases, First off we know that there has never been one single case of autism in children before mercury laden childhood vaccinations were used. This fact alone points a very suspicious finger at mercury poisoning from vaccines. In fact the first known epidemic of cerebral palsy was in 1950 in Minimata Bay, Japan and it was discovered to be caused by a vinyl plastics company that dumped mercury into the bay.



But fearing multi-billion dollar, maybe even trillion dollar class action lawsuits, medical and pharmaceutical groups have declared that the preservative Thimerosal in vaccines is very safe, even though Thimerosal is 49% Mercury! The pharmaceutical vaccine manufacturers have stated that there is "no credible evidence" showing any link between the mercury in the vaccines and autism. But in case there is, they have further stated that "the well defined risk of influenza outweighs the theoretical risk of mercury."



So the medical and drug cartels have declared injecting mercury safe, but at the exact same time every one of them is currently scurrying to remove mercury from all childhood vaccines. Why? What do they know that they are not telling us. If it's safe, why remove it? Regardless, no attempt is being made to remove it from the influenza vaccine.



One thing we know for sure is that mercury kills the brain and nerves, so I don't think this is a good idea for children, or adults. As I age, I need all the brain and nerve cells that I've got)



And even if the mercury, anti-freeze and animal pus doesn't scare you, you probably won't even be able to buy a flu shot on the black market anyway, because this year half of the influenza vaccine, some 50 million doses, has been banned from being used, because... they are contaminated, because they are toxic.



FINALLY...

Look, everyone, including me, agrees that the influenza epidemic that rages across America every year is dangerous, even deadly. But the key to protecting yourself is not by injecting virus strains grown on infected pus-laden animal tissue mixed with powerful toxic chemicals into your body, That's a great way to make yourself sick.



Friends, God doesn't want you to be sick that is why we have an immune system. So the simple and natural key to preventing the flu is to build a strong and powerful immune system.