Natural Communities Magazine A magazine devoted to the local natural wellness culture.

As a nutritionist who straddles conventional and complementary therapies, I attend numerous lectures, workshops, and conferences in both realms. I can generally tell you whether a gathering is one of conventional practitioners or complementary practitioners simply by seeing who’s drinking what!

Where conventional practitioners such as registered dietitians, nurses, and medical doctors are meeting, the familiar, brightly colored cans of diet soda, sweetened with the artificial sweetener aspartame, prominently dot the meeting-room landscape. Not so in a gathering of complementary practitioners such as naturopaths, “alternative” nutritionists and chiropractors. Bottled or filtered water is the rule here.

It’s an apt example of the conventional medical mindset butting heads with the philosophy of the health providers who are natural-living advocates. Aspartame, which goes by names such as Equal, NutraSweet, and Spoonful, is and has been the giant among artificial sweeteners for the twenty years it has been around. Almost any “diet” food out there, in addition to the diet sodas, will surely have aspartame in its ingredient list. Holistic practitioners tell their clients and patients to never use the stuff—that it’s literally poison. Conventional practitioners usually encourage its use. Many, perhaps most, of my dietician colleagues, for instance, consider aspartame, with zero calories, pivotal in weight-control programs. Their perspective is that it’s a safe replacement for high-calorie sugary foods that sabotage dieters’ best intentions.

“No, no, no!” shout an escalating number of health practitioners, professionals and laypeople. They point to ugly and debilitating side effects from the use of aspartame, including headaches, memory loss, slurred speech and vision problems. For years, these aspartame opponents were but small voices muffled by the incredibly loud sounds of money talking. Under the ownership of the giant international chemical company Monsanto, aspartame thoroughly trounced its competition by using an unstoppable combination of marketing brilliance and limitless spending—along with tactics characterized as morally and ethically corrupt.

One critic, David Rietz, denounces Monsanto for plying “agency [e.g. Food and Drug Administration, FDA] officials with gratuities and/or very favorable future employment, politicians with campaign funds/PAC money, non-profit foundations with endowments, scientists with research grants, and the media with lots of advertising dollars” all for the sake of defending its safety and, hence, its ironclad hold on the artificial sweetener market. Monsanto sold its aspartame ingredient business in 2001 to a number of buyers (including, by the way, MSD Capital, which is computer king Michael Dell’s investment firm).

The voices of dissent have grown louder with the advent of the internet. Rietz, for example, is the owner and master of one of thousands of “anti-aspartame” internet websites (www.dorway.com). Like so many other “anti-aspartame” crusaders, Rietz founded his website after years of battling debilitating health problems and finally regaining his health after discontinuing his use of the artificial sweetener. Examining why so many attest to aspartame’s role in scores of severe adverse reactions is beyond the scope of this article. But one thing is certain, despite what appears to be a concerted effort on the part of aspartame’s makers to negate the allegations of health problems, adverse reactions from aspartame are real.

This was eloquently borne out in 1996, when Ralph G. Walton, MD, professor and chairman of the Department of Psychiatry at Northeastern Ohio University’s College of Medicine, conducted an analysis of all the medical studies—164 of them at the time—dealing with human safety as it relates to the use of aspartame. The studies were separated into two categories: 74 of the studies were sponsored by the aspartame industry and 90 of them were non-industry-sponsored studies. Dr. Walton found that of the 74 studies sponsored by the aspartame industry, 100 percent of them claimed there were no health problems associated with aspartame use. Of the 90 studies that had no connections to industry, all but seven of them identified one or more problems with aspartame use. Interestingly, of the seven studies that did not find problems, the FDA had conducted six. Critics suggest that since a number of FDA officials eventually went to work for the aspartame industry, these six studies should be considered industry-sponsored research as well.

Knowing all this, if a person desperately wanted to lose weight and was prepared to risk the safety problems associated with aspartame, would it make sense to use this sugar substitute as an easy and effective tool for weight control?

Hardly! Dr. Walton, who has also studied the effects of aspartame, is emphatic when he tells me, “Probably one major contributor to obesity is the widespread use of diet products!” A chorus of non-conventional health professionals echoes his statement, which can just as well be read as a warning. The reasons are not simple; they involve complex biochemical reactions linked to hormones and brain chemicals.

Aspartame itself doesn’t have any calories, but basically, one of its ingredients, the amino acid phenylalanine, blocks production of serotonin, a nerve chemical that, among other activities, controls food cravings. As you might well imagine, a shortage of serotonin will make your brain and body scream for the foods that create more of this brain chemical—and those are the high-calorie, carbohydrate-rich snacks that can sabotage a dieter. Obviously, the more aspartame one ingests, the more heightened the effects. Simply put, aspartame appears to muddle the brain chemistry.

Nutritionist Susan Allen, RD, CCN, at Chicago’s Northwestern Center for Integrative Medicine, suspects that something additional is going on in many of her patients who have been using aspartame and other artificial sweeteners. Allen believes that when they consume them, the sweet taste of no-calorie sweeteners triggers their bodies to release insulin, even though there is no food to feed the cells. Normally, when we eat, the sugar in that food, which is derived from carbohydrates, is broken down into simple sugars, like glucose, which then enter the blood stream (we call it “blood sugar”).

We depend on insulin (secreted by the pancreas) to usher that blood sugar into our cells to supply energy and maintain normal blood sugar levels. The problem Allen sees is that an “insulin-sensitive” person who uses artificial sweeteners teases his or her body into thinking food is on its way, so insulin is released. But when the body discovers it was cheated out of food, it revolts by throwing a food-craving tantrum that can only be quelled by eating blood sugar food that will more than likely be high-calorie sugary snacks. “I point out to them how it doesn’t make sense… they’re trying to save themselves sugar but then they eat more foods that are going to raise their blood sugar anyway.”

Yet, the unabashed public acceptance of artificial sweeteners, namely aspartame, is fueled by the approval of a host of scientific and professional organizations, including the American Dietetic Association, American Heart Association, American Medical Association and the National Cancer Institute. Is it any wonder that some 200 million Americans use this ubiquitous product?

Rebecca Ephraim, RD, CCN is a Registered Dietitian and Certified Clinical Nutritionist with seventeen years in media and mass communications. She currently serves as anchor/producer for the Chicago National Public Radio (NPR) affiliate. See her website or email her at rebecca@consciouschoice.com.

The FDA has sent a warning letter to the Hain Celestial Group, instructing the natural and organic food producer to relabel certain products that contain the sweetener stevia. The letter concerned the Celestial Zingers To Go tea and drink mix products, which the FDA charges are being labeled and marketed as food products, even though an ingredient they contain — the stevia herb — has not been approved for use in foods in the United States.

Stevia, derived from a South American plant, has become popular as a sweetener because it has 300 times the sweetness of table sugar but almost no impact on blood glucose levels. Its taste is said to have a slower onset than that of sugar and to last longer.

Stevia has been approved for use in food and beverage products in a number of countries, including Brazil, Canada, China and Japan, but to date the FDA has only approved it as an ingredient in dietary supplements.

In response to the warning letter, Hain Celestial Group removed the term “iced tea mix” from all labels of the products in question, and made the words “herbal supplement” much more prominent.

In light of the increasing popularity of stevia and the fact that companies like Hain Celestial have apparently been trying to get around regulations of its use, the FDA said that it expects to soon receive a petition to approve the sweetener for use in foods. Reportedly, both the Coca-Cola Company and Cargill are interested in producing stevia-sweetened products, with Coca-Cola having filed 24 patent applications related to the sweetener.

But the FDA said that current information is not sufficient to prove stevia safe as an ingredient for food.

“Data and information necessary to support the safe use have been lacking,” the FDA’s letter to Hain Celestial read. “In fact, literature reports have raised safety concerns about the use of stevia, including concerns about control of blood sugar and the effects of reproductive, cardiovascular and renal systems.”

Consumer health advocate Mike Adams, a long-time supporter of stevia, disagrees. “The FDA has been stalling on stevia approval for well over a decade in order to protect the profits of aspartame,” Adams said. “Stevia is safely used around the world by hundreds of millions of consumers with absolutely no problems, while aspartame is tied to seizures, blindness, headaches and other serious neurological problems. The FDA once ordered the destruction of books containing stevia recipes. That’s how desperate this criminal organization is to protect the profit racket of aspartame,” Adams concluded.

http://www.naturalnews.com/022571.html

The FDA has issued a statement warning food manufacturers that the agency is concerned about the prevalence of products on the market that are breaking rules about sugar-free labeling and is prepared to take action to enforce federal rules.

At issue is the requirement that foods marketed as “sugar free” (including similar claims such as “zero sugar” or “sugarless”) that are not low in calories bear a disclaimer such as “not a low (or reduced) calorie food” or “not for weight control.” Federal rules require that such disclaimers be “prominently and conspicuously” displayed each time a sugar-free claim is used, and that they be printed in letters at least one-sixteenth of an inch high.

Foods that contain less than 0.5 grams of sugar per serving may be labeled as sugar free, but the agency maintains that consumers need further information to make healthy dietary choices. The guidance letter and the stated intent to crack down on false labeling are part of the agency’s effort to tackle the still-worsening epidemic of obesity in the United States.

Obesity is at an all-time high in the United States, which has the highest rates in the First World. The prevalence of the condition has doubled in adults since 1980, and more than 32 percent of adults are now considered obese. Among children, rates are also high and continue to increase.

The FDA has also taken more specific action, issuing a warning letter to Oberlander Bakery over its violation of sugar-free and cholesterol-free labeling rules. In addition to failing to label its Fresh Sugar Free cookies as “not a low calorie food,” Oberlander also illegitimately uses a “no cholesterol” statement.

Under federal regulations, only foods with no cholesterol that also contain 2 grams or less of saturated fat can be marked with such a label. The Oberlander cookies contain 2.5 grams of saturated fat.

www.newstarget.com

Seven years ago, the introduction of genetically modified (GM) sugar beets, along with other crops like potatoes and rice, was shelved at fears that consumers would not support their use. Sugar beets, which produce about half of the United States sugar (almost all of which is used domestically), are used in foods like candy, cereal, and baking products. The failure of the GM beet’s initial introduction was based on unwillingness from companies like Hershey and Kellogg to provoke consumer protests.

Now, the marketplace seems to have changed enough that such big sugar-buying companies are less hesitant to buy Monsanto’s “Roundup Ready” beet (which are tolerant of Roundup’s main ingredient, glyphosate). According to Kellogg spokeswoman Kris Charles, her company “would not have any issues” buying them because “most consumers are not concerned about biotech.”

“Basically, we have not run into resistance,” said American Crystal Sugar president David Berg of the switch. “We really think that consumer attitudes have come to accept food from biotechnology.” Most other companies, including Hershey and Mars, are refusing to comment on the subject, which has kept these developments quiet until recently.

Despite the corporate perception of public opinion on GM crops, organic advocates are disappointed that GM sugar beets have again become a possibility. “When I first saw this I said, ‘No, it can’t be,’” said Ronnie Cummins, national director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA). “I thought we had already dealt with this.” OCA has already begun its consumer campaign to get sugar buyers to reject GM beets again. “I don’t think companies like Hershey are going to want any more hassles than they already have,” said Cummins.

Issues with the crop center around environmental impact, like herbicide-resistant weeds (which have begun to appear in Roundup Ready corn and soybean fields) and threats to wildlife (see Daily News from 10/24/03 and 1/21/05). While the sugar derived from GM beets does not contain DNA or proteins, in areas where the beets are left in the ground for a winter, like California, they can produce seed that might spread to other fields. “We have to make sure we don’t cause ourselves more problems than we’re curing,” said Ben Goodwin, executive manager of the California Beet Growers Association. For more background on GM crops, visit our program page.

www.beyondpesticides.org

A new article in the New York Times calls attention to the pending controversy of unlabeled, under-tested, genetically engineered sugar being laced into breakfast cereals, chocolates, and a wide variety of non-organic processed foods and beverages next year. In September, OCA posted an alert to pressure major buyers of sugar beets to boycott Monsanto’s latest herbicide-resistant crop. The American Crystal company, the #1 white sugar provider in the U.S., along with Kellogg, have brazenly announced they will welcome the biotech sweetener in early 2008. The New York Times notes that American Crystal’s CEO responded to the deluge of consumer emails stemming from OCA’s alert in September by turning off his email. If American Crystal won’t listen, perhaps some of its major customers will. Please send a letter to Hershey’s, Mars, and Kellogg demanding they keep their sugar additives GE-free. And of course keep in mind that your only real protection against GE sugar or any Genetically Modified Organism is to buy organic.
Take action: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_7031.cfm

By Dr. Joseph Mercola
with Rachael Droege

You may already be familiar with the dangers of fructose that I’ve warned about in the past, but what you may not know is that high-fructose corn sweeteners that have been used to sweeten soft drinks and food since the 1970s are major contributors to the obesity epidemic in the United States.

The lead article of the April 2004 American Journal of Clinical Nutrition features this issue and the researchers say consumption of high-fructose corn sweeteners increased more than 1,000 percent between 1970 and 1990, far exceeding changes in intake of any other food or food group.

Food and beverage manufacturers began switching their sweeteners from sucrose (table sugar) to corn syrup in the 1970s when they discovered that high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) was not only cheaper to make, it was also much sweeter (processed fructose is nearly 20 times sweeter than table sugar), and this switch has drastically altered the American diet.

In 1966, sucrose made up 86 percent of sweeteners. Today, 55 percent of sweeteners used are made from corn. And while people ate no high-fructose corn syrup in 1966, they ate close to 63 pounds each in 2001.

HFCS, which is made from cornstarch, is now used to sweeten:

• Soft drinks
• Fruit juices
• Baked goods
• Canned fruits
• Dairy products
• Cookies
• Gum
• Jams and jellies

It contains similar amounts of both fructose and glucose, whereas sucrose is a larger sugar molecule that is metabolized in the intestine into glucose and fructose.

HFCS is the only caloric sweetener in U.S. soft drinks and over 60 percent of the calories in apple juice, which is used as a base for many fruit drinks, come from fructose. The primary source of HFCS in the American diet is soda and juice—about two-thirds of all fructose consumed in the United States is in beverages.

Researchers estimated that Americans eat 132 calories of HFCS while the top 20 percent of sweetener consumers eat over 300. And some, they say, eat as much as 700 calories per day of HFCS.

So what makes corn syrup such an unhealthy, fat-promoting product?

Fructose is Metabolized to Fat

The digestive and absorptive processes for glucose and fructose are different. Unlike glucose, which the body uses, when one consumes large amounts of fructose it is a relatively unregulated source of fuel for the liver to convert to fat and cholesterol. Fructose converts to fat more than any other sugar. It is also known to raise triglycerides significantly.

Most Fructose is Consumed as a Liquid

The fact that most fructose is consumed in a liquid form significantly magnifies its negative metabolic effects. The devastation it has on our biology would be significantly lessened if it were consumed in solid food, but as I mentioned above, most fructose is consumed in soft drinks and fruit juices.

Fructose Does Not Stimulate Insulin Secretion

In addition, unlike glucose, fructose does not stimulate insulin secretion or enhance leptin, a hormone thought to be involved in appetite regulation, production. Because insulin and leptin act as key signals in regulating how much food you eat and body weight, this suggests that dietary fructose may contribute to increased food intake and weight gain.

Fructose Has no Enzymes, Vitamins or Minerals

Fructose has no enzymes, vitamins or minerals so it takes micronutrients from the body while it assimilates itself for use. However, eating a small piece of whole fruit, which contains natural fructose, is not likely to be a problem for most people because fresh fruits contain the enzymes, vitamins and minerals that are needed for the fructose to assimilate in the body.

Corn is a Grain, Not a Vegetable

Contrary to common belief, corn is a grain, not a vegetable, and is definitely not fit as a dietary staple and mainstay, primarily because it contains high amounts of sugar. When early Native Americans changed their diet to one based mostly on corn, they had increased rates of the following:

• Anemia
• Dental cavities
• Osteoarthritis
• Bone infections and other bone problems

Corn is Everywhere in the American Diet

Corn, and usually highly processed corn, has become a staple ingredient of the American diet. Cheap corn is truly the building block of the ”fast-food nation,” as Michael Pollan writes in a New York Times article.

Not only is it in HFCS, but animals raised for meat are often fed corn and other grains. Most meat in supermarkets comes from grain-fed animals. On the contrary, grain-free meats not only provide a better balance of omega fats, but also the animals are healthier and more humanely raised, and the risk of acquiring an infection from a healthy animal is very remote.

What You Can Do

Genetic factors clearly play an important role in the development of obesity. However, the rapidity with which the current epidemic of obesity has hit the United States and the rest of the world makes diet and lifestyle a more likely explanation.

So the answer is plain and simple. If you want to lose weight stop drinking soda and processed fruit juices that are sweetened with about eight teaspoons of fructose per serving. I have made many difficult recommendations to patients in their quest to achieve health, but one of the simplest is to stop drinking soda. There is never any reason to drink it and it is one of the easiest foods to give up. Switch to pure water as your beverage of choice and you will be well on your way to better health.

www.mercola.com

The average American eats 142 pounds of sugar a year, or about 2.5 pounds each week.

That’s a 23 percent increase over the last 25 years, and it is a major cause of the currently soaring rates of obesity and diabetes.

Dr. David Ludwig, who treats childhood obesity at Boston Children’s Hospital, says that one of the problems is the fact that the average convenience store is a nutritional disaster area.

Ludwig says that highly processed carbohydrates and refined sugars are causing hormonal changes that “drive hunger, cause overeating, and increase the risk of diabetes and heart disease.”

Sugar in some form is present in nearly every packaged product in a grocery store, including spaghetti sauce, salad dressing, peanut butter, mayonnaise and ketchup.

CBS News June 17, 2007

Dr. Mercola’s Comment:

If you haven’t read my recent article, Finally Science Confirms the Secret Key to Weight Loss, I would encourage you to do so, as it documents recent studies that support the insulin connection to weight loss and maintaining optimal weight.

Due to deceptive nutritional labels and general lack of knowledge of where the hidden sugars are, Americans are eating far more sugar than they know. When searching for sugar, you must also keep a vigilant eye out for high fructose corn syrup and those dangerous artificial sweeteners. These are included in a wide variety of foods that you might not normally suspect.

When consumed in the massive quantities, sugars cause hormonal changes that lead to overeating. And don’t forget, carbohydrates found in processed foods, such as white bread and rice, break down to glucose and affect your body in the same way as refined sugar does.

Any meal or snack high in carbohydrates or sugars generates a rapid rise in blood glucose. To adjust for this rise, your pancreas secretes the hormone insulin into your bloodstream, which lowers your glucose (sugar) level. Insulin is, though, essentially a storage hormone, which is used to store the excess calories from carbohydrates in the form of fat.

Insulin, stimulated by the excess carbohydrates in overabundant consumption of grains, starches and sweets, is responsible for all those bulging stomachs and fat rolls in thighs and chins.

Even worse, high insulin levels suppress two other important hormones — glucagons and growth hormones — that are responsible for burning fat and sugar and promoting muscle development, respectively. So insulin from excess carbohydrates promotes fat, and then wards off the body’s ability to lose that fat.

Excess weight and obesity lead to heart disease and a wide variety of other diseases. But the ill effects of grains and sugars does not end there. They suppress the immune system, contributing to allergies, and they are responsible for a host of digestive disorders. They contribute to depression, and their excess consumption is, in fact, associated with many of the chronic diseases in our nation, such as cancer and diabetes.

If you’re still not convinced that life can be twice as sweet without sugar, take a look at these 76 ways sugar can ruin your health.

www.mercola.com

I can’t think of one single smooth or clever way to introduce the shear and utter importance of the following nutritional concepts. Marketing and PR in this country, and society as a whole, have done an incredibly awesome job of convincing consumers like you and I that this “Age of Processed Food & Pharmaceuticals” we are currently in, is harmless to us. We have been brainwashed by a lifetime-long onslaught of propaganda. This propaganda, which programs us from birth on, reaches us via TV, magazines, radio, billboards, internet, movies, etc. By using techniques that dehumanize, generalize, emotionally charge, stall, distract, maximize, minimize, and LIE; these giant corporations make millions, billions, and trillions of dollars annually, and they do it quite effortlessly.

We as the “general public” are at an unbelievable disadvantage. Millions of dollars are spent to research the most efficient and scientific methods of “trickery” to use on us all! This includes research on taste, color, economic class, racial/ethnic ties, sex appeal, perception…you get the idea. How can we compete? Unfortunately, many simply believe that since an MD on TV said a product is healthy, or safe, or harmless…that it must indeed be. As you might expect, this could not be further from the truth.

We must be made aware of the fact that there is little money to be made in the use of natural remedies; regardless of how beneficial they are. Why would industry and conventional medicine subscribe to such a notion? After all, they generate over a trillion dollars annually (the most profitable in America), by prescribing drugs and diagnostic and surgical techniques! If we learned how to take care of ourselves, there would be no money for them to make!

So one might ask, “Why aren’t doctors more interested or knowledgeable about nutrition?” The answers here are simple. The average medical school provides only a handful of hours in nutritional education. Medical doctors are trained to “treat,” not to “prevent,” and thus focus only on the “medical model” not wellness. This is because there is a reduction in liability of risk when “usual and customary” procedures are followed. But perhaps the ultimate reason - Insurance doesn’t cover nutritional guidance. So the story of their education goes:
 Anatomy—->Physiology—->Pharmacology.

The purpose of this article is simply the advancement of truth. The reality of the current health situation of this country is not a good one; we are “on the fence and teetering.” Disease and sickness are running rampant, and the processed food and pharmaceutical industries have much to do with it. The only people with the power enough to change knowledge and perception for the betterment of all, are ourselves of course. In the following pages some of the most common food products to be avoided at all costs will be the topic of discussion. If we all can manage to reduce and eliminate these from our lives, we will all be one step closer to a happier, healthier existence, as well as beating those corporate monsters at their own game.

1. Sugar

It’s no mystery, sugar, particularly refined sugar, is bad for you. What you may not be aware of is just how bad it truly is. Some government officials have even stepped up and proclaimed that if they’d known decades ago just how terribly damaging sugar was to our health (it has been labeled by some experts to be as addictive and destructive as heroin), that the substance would have been treated and regulated as if it were a controlled substance!

Within the body, sugar creates drastic spikes in insulin. High levels of insulin promotes fat storage, as well as the prevention of fat being burned as fuel. Over time, these chronic high levels of insulin promote insulin resistance (IR) because the body is trying to protect itself from the toxic effects of high insulin. Now, what’s the problem with IR? The problem is that insulin’s primary function was never to solely control blood sugar. Controlling blood sugar is now simply a primary trivial side effect of insulin, due to our society’s obsession with carbohydrates. More importantly, insulin is in charge of the storage of nutrients such as protein, magnesium, vitamins, etc.; as well as functioning as an anabolic hormone - a muscle builder! (This is, of course, so key, as muscle is the key to an increase in the metabolism, as well as fat burning.) The point is, when one develops IR, that individual is ultimately becoming resistant to all of the other life-sustaining functions of insulin (just a few of which were listed above). Hence, the chronic diseases of aging may be soon to follow (I.E. cardiovascular disease, osteoporosis, obesity, diabetes, cancer). It is also important to note that a pregnant woman who has eaten herself into IR will pass it on to her child.

Sugar has many other damaging effects. Sugar suppresses the immune system, and research has shown that just one teaspoon of sugar can suppress the immune system for up to 4 hours! Imagine the devastating effects on the health and development of children when taking into consideration that the average 12 ounce can of soda has 17 teaspoons of sugar! Coke itself has 41 grams of sugar per can. Sugar’s dark resume goes on and on… (1)

• Sugar can upset the body’s mineral balance.
• Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, concentration difficulties, and crankiness, (ADD).
• Sugar can cause drowsiness, and decreased activity.
• Sugar can adversely affect children’s school grades.
• Sugar can produce a significant rise in triglycerides.
• Sugar can weaken eyesight.
• Sugar can produce an acidic stomach.
• Sugar can speed the aging process, causing wrinkles and grey hair.
• Sugar increases the risk of coronary heart disease.
• Sugar can lead to alcoholism.
• Sugar contributes to a weakened defense against bacterial infection.
• Sugar can cause kidney damage.
• Sugar can reduce helpful high density cholesterol (HDL’s).
• Sugar can elevate harmful cholesterol (LDL’s).
• Sugar interferes with absorption of calcium.
• Sugar may lead to breast cancer, as well as cancer of the ovaries, prostate, rectum, and colon.
• Sugar encourages the overgrowth of candida albicans fungus in the digestive tract.

2. Flour & Processed Carbs

Processed flours are similar to refined sugars in their negative effects on the body and are absolutely nothing like nature intended. Because of this, they are something to completely avoid, reason being as follows. A wheat grain kernel has three layers: the outer bran where most of the fiber is, the middle endosperm where the starch (carbs) is, and the inner germ where the many nutrients and essential fatty acids are found. In order for a wheat grain to be healthy for consumption, all three of these components must be in tact. This is where the nightmare of processing comes into the picture. Where as flour originally was milled with stone keeping these three vital components together, today’s methods are seriously inferior. Today’s industry’s high-speed steel roller mills eject the germ and bran - the most nutritious part of the grain - leaving nothing but the starch, essentially nothing but sugar. What’s worse, even whole wheat flour is compromised by the high temperatures of these mills reaching 400 degrees Fahrenheit destroying the vital nutrients and rendering them useless.

It is important to keep in mind that our ancestors ate grains in their whole, unprocessed state. Nature’s carbs (I.E. sugars, grains, etc.) come from whole food sources and therefore were naturally linked with their corresponding vitamins, minerals, enzymes, proteins, fats, and fibers. These components are the body’s health-building and digestion-regulating elements. Refined carbs (I.E. sugar, breakfast cereal, pasta, breads, chips, crackers, soda, juice, candy, etc.) are devoid of these essential elements to vitality. Thus, consumption of these “empty” or “negative” calories requires the body to give up its own stores of vitamins, minerals, and enzymes for proper metabolization. Essentially, you’re left with nothing but starch - sugar.

3. Grains

The “Paleolithic Concept” is an item to consider concerning grain consumption. According to Crayhon, because the human genome has changed relatively little in the past 40,000 years since the appearance of behaviorally modern humans, our nutritional requirements remain almost identical to those requirements which were originally selected for stone age humans living before the advent of agriculture.(11) In terms of evolution, since the organized farming and nurturing of grains is thought to have began as few as 10,000 years ago, this has created a situation where our “digestive machinery” simply hasn’t had enough time to “evolve” to be able to process them safely and efficiently.

Grains contain phytic acid. In the digestive tract, phytic acid joins with calcium, iron, magnesium, copper, and zinc; and thus blocks their absorption. Hence, grains are essentially mineral blockers. Research has also shown some whole grains to contain enzyme inhibitors that can interfere with digestion as well. It is for this reason that grains must be soaked or sprouted before eating them. Sprouting is a process that neutralizes phytates and enzyme inhibitors, in essence beginning the digestive process before consumption, so that all the nutrients are more available to the body. Below, Fallon explains the sprouting process.(13)

Fill a mason jar one-third of the way with any grain or seed. Add filtered water to the top of the jar and screw on the top with its screen insert. Allow the seeds to soak overnight and pour off the water. Rinse the seeds well - you can do this without removing the top. Invert the jar and let sit at an angle so it can drain, and to allow air to circulate. These seeds should be rinsed every few hours, or at least twice a day. In one to four days the sprouts will be ready. Move the sprouts to another container and move them to the refrigerator.

An allergic reaction to the protein Gluten (a protein found in many popular grains such as wheat), is called Gluten Sensitivity (GS) and/or Celiac Disease (CD). GS and CD have been found to be at the root of a proportion of cases of cancer, auto-immune disorders, neurological and psychiatric conditions, and liver disease, as well as being associated with back pain and chronic fatigue. The implication is that the heavily wheat-based western diet (i.e. bread, cereals, pastries, pastas, etc.), is actually making millions of people ill! It is estimated that in the American public, 1.8 million adults and some 300,000 children have undiagnosed CD. (NOTE: These are considered to be low estimates.) The immune reaction to Gluten that damages the gut in CD can also cause problems almost anywhere else in the body. Signs of GS and CD are:

• Upper respiratory tract problems: allergies, etc.
• Symptoms of nutrient malabsorbtion: anemia, fatigue,
  osteoporosis, etc.
• Bowel complaints: diarrhea, constipation, bloating, etc.
• Autoimmune problems: rheumatoid arthritis, bursitis, etc.
• Behavior problems: depression, ADD, etc.

4. Soy

Soy got its beginning as an industrial waste product. To put it simply, after multi-million dollar figures spent on advertising and intense lobbying to the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), about 74 percent of US consumers now believe soy products are healthy.(26) Another brilliant example of the effects of PR and marketing on the public’s perception of healthy eating! From an evolutionary standpoint, soy was originally only consumed by a few cultures. These cultures consumed it in conservative quantities with specific techniques for preparation. Now however, it’s being pushed as the “next best thing.”

The reality of the situation is that soy has been strongly linked to thyroid disorders, kidney stones, weakened immune systems, and powerful food allergies. Soy has been found to contain phytates and enzyme inhibitors such as those found in unsprouted grains, as well as haemagglutin which causes red blood cells to clump together and inhibits oxygen uptake and growth. But perhaps the most dangerous of soy’s downfalls is that it contains high levels of phytoestrogens (the plant form of estrogen) that can indeed mimic the effects of actual human female estrogen! This has been linked to increased risk of breast cancer. Research has shown just two glasses of soy milk a day for one month are enough of this chemical to change a woman’s menstrual cycle. Feeding soy to infants is even more devastating. It has been found that infants fed exclusively on soy formula are ingesting FIVE birth control pills, worth of estrogen daily!

To top it all off, soybeans, like most non-organic agriculture, are grown for the numbers; massive quantities must be grown to make a profit. This means the heavy use of pesticides, herbicides, and quite often, genetically modified (GM) plants (the effects of which we will only know in the future).

Research has shown that sprouted forms of soy such as tempeh, miso, natto, and soybean sprouts are the only forms that can be consumed with some health benefits. This means avoiding all processed forms—soy milk, soy burgers, soy ice cream, soy cheese, and all of the other trendy junk foods!

5. Protein Supplements

Whey protein (bars, powders, shakes, etc.), like soy, was originally an industrial waste product. Its processing involves extremely high temperatures, which render the product nutritionally void. The vitamins, minerals, and any other nutrients added back in are synthetic and potentially toxic. In essence it’s dead. Exposure to this processed “food product,” just as previously noted with flour and processed carbs, forces the body to tap into its own reserves of vitamins, minerals, and enzymes just to process and eliminate what your body perceives as “garbage.” Whey can also seriously dehydrate its consumers as the average powder form of this product will absorb many times its own weight in water. To get your protein - Eat Real Meat!

6. Hydrogenated, Trans and Man-Made Fats

Yet again, the largely popular margarines, shortenings and hydrogenated “health” products widely available today represent the power and success of PR and marketing over what should be common sense. These man-made fats are literally everywhere. You can find them in virtually all wrapped, boxed or bagged processed foods such as crackers, cookies, pastries, diet/nutrition/and energy bars, etc. Start reading labels, and you’ll be in for a shock.

When hydrogenation occurs to a fatty acid chain, the actual molecular structure of the fat changes to something rarely found in nature: the “trans” fat. This is bad news for you and me as most of these man-made “fake” fats are extremely toxic to the body. The problem is that your body cannot tell the difference between these fake fats and the real thing, so it ingests them as though they were the real thing. Because of the molecular reconfiguration of the fake fat molecule, these trans fats wreak havoc and disrupt normal metabolic activity in the cell.

Research has also shown that some partially-hydrogenated fats made from vegetable oils actually prevent utilization of essential fatty acids which, in turn, can cause a host of problems including sexual dysfunction, increased blood cholesterol, and paralysis to the immune system. Consumption of hydrogenated fats is also strongly correlated with the development of cancers, atherosclerosis, diabetes, obesity, low birth weight in babies, birth defects, decreased visual acuity, sterility, difficulty in lactation, and bone and connective tissue problems.

Olestra

Olestra, or what many of you may know by its marketed name “Olean,” is the latest craze in the fat-fearer’s world. This man-made fat was recently rejected in Canada, leaving the US as the only country in the entire world where it is allowed. Olestra/Olean, a product of Procter & Gamble, is added to chip and snack products by many companies. If you were to view Olestra under a microscope, you would observe that its molecular make-up is closer to that of plastic than of food. This is a danger. Problems associated with even minimal consumption of Olestra/Olean (as little as one ounce at a time!) include decreased absorption and blood levels of fat soluble vitamins such as vitamin E as well as carotenoids and significant increases in GI (gastrointestinal) symptoms (i.e., diarrhea, loose stools, etc.) as well as dehydration. These can, in turn, contribute to increased risk of cancer, stroke, and heart disease.

Genuine saturated fats, particularly those from organically fed free-range animal proteins, are essential to health and development and should not be feared. Saturated fat plays a role in cell membrane integrity and maintenance of bone integrity as well as the maintenance of heart, liver and immune system health—just to name a few.

7. Processed/Refined Salt

Most of the bad rap which salt receives is due to its processing. Typical refined table salt is highly processed, utilizing various chemicals and extremely high temperatures which strip it of all the valuable trace minerals naturally occurring in sea salt. Salt refiners use chemicals, including aluminum compounds, to dry the salt. Once processed, the natural iodine which has been destroyed and is no longer present must be replaced and is done so with potassium iodide—a potentially toxic form of iodine. Bleaching agents are also used to give the appearance of purity. What’s left is not salt at all but merely sodium-chloride, an empty by-product of the original.

Naturally occurring unrefined sea salt is somewhat moist and grey in color. This vital compound contains up to 14% of nearly 80 trace minerals vital to life, as well as naturally occurring iodine. [You can get quality sea salt at your local co-op.]

8. Processed Milk and Dairy

Simply put, what we have been told about the milk and dairy on our shelves is wrong. Worse yet, it’s causing health problems. Pasteurization is a good thing, right? Wrong. The modern milking machine and stainless steel tank, along with efficient packaging and distribution, make pasteurization totally unnecessary for the purposes of sanitation (13). Pasteurization is not even a sure bet to cleanliness. If one were to research all of the past decade’s salmonella outbreaks from milk, it would be discovered that they all came from pasteurized milk. This is because pasteurization destroys all of the positive bacteria and helpful organisms which protect it against pathogens, leaving it defenseless!

Pasteurization exposes milk to very high temperatures. This exposure renders the milk’s amino acids, vitamins, calcium, and many other minerals/trace minerals virtually useless and unavailable to the body. There is now also evidence that the heating process alters the milk sugar (lactose) making it more available to the body, suggesting the strong link between avid processed milk drinkers and diabetes.

Finally, pasteurization destroys all of milk’s natural enzymes. These enzymes were there originally to help the body assimilate all of the vitamins, minerals and nutrients previously mentioned, including calcium. This is the reason why you can drink all the processed milk you want and not only still develop osteoporosis but perhaps encourage it.

Homogenization is no help either. This is the process which forces fat particles through tiny strainers under great pressure so as to make them small enough that they remain suspended, and thus, do not rise to the top. Because homogenized fats are much more susceptible to rancidity and oxidation, they have recently been linked to heart disease. Homogenization has also been found to cause incomplete protein digestion in the small intestine, leading to milk allergy and intolerance.

The same can be said for virtually all processed dairy products (i.e., cheese, yogurt, butter, cream, etc.). Many of them are packed with other chemicals such as emulsifiers, extenders, phosphates, and hydrogenated oils and should be completely avoided as well. If you eat dairy, eat it organic and/or raw or not at all.

9. Additives and Flavor Enhancers

Look at the labels of the processed foods in your home (i.e., boxed, bagged, canned, pouched, etc.). How many of the ingredients can you pronounce, let alone comprehend their function and the repercussions of consuming them? We should certainly not be so trustworthy with our health and well-being by simply putting blind trust into the hands of food companies. After all, it’s not really food, hence the term “food product.”

Interestingly, some scientists working for these food product companies have identified 51 different elements that must be present in any given form of food to satisfy the appetite center of our brains. Knowing this, scientists employed by major food companies not only selectively remove one or many of these items, but will also purposefully add things like salt and sugar, which are known to stimulate the appetite (5). This gives a whole new meaning and level of understanding to the phrase, “Betcha’ can’t eat just one!”

Aspartame

The FDA’s approval of this chemical has been labeled by experts as troubling at best; and, unfortunately, the public is dealing with the repercussions. Aspartame breaks down into wood-alcohol (methanol), which is essentially embalming fluid, at just over 100 degrees in the human body. “Diet” products (i.e., Nutra-sweet, Equal, sodas, chewing gums, diet drinks, sugar free snacks/drinks, diet foods, supplement bars/powders, etc.) containing the chemical sweetener aspartame can have multiple neurotoxic, metabolic, allergenic and carcinogenic effects (35). Some of these are: the initiation or aggravation of diabetes mellitus, hypoglycemia, convulsions, headache, depression, other psychiatric states, hyperthyroidism, hypertension, arthritis, the simulation of multiple sclerosis, Alzheimer’s disease, lupus erythematosus and carpal tunnel syndrome—to name only a few. This stuff is no joke. Also, “diet” sodas containing aspartame have recently been found to cause weight gain in many individuals due to the fact that this chemical’s powerful effects on the brain alter communication with the liver, ultimately causing potentially serious blood sugar problems.

Monosodium Glutamate (MSG)

This chemical can be found in products with powerful flavors (i.e., chips, crackers, snack foods, spices, etc.). Like aspartame, MSG is a powerful neural toxin. This is evidenced as far back as 1966. It is estimated that at least 25% of the population have serious reactions to MSG consumption. Some of these reactions may include severe neurotoxicity, seizures and brain lesions.

Splenda

Splenda, or Sucralose, may be one of man’s worst inventions to date (next to aspartame). Splenda is a man-made combination of sugar and chlorine, otherwise know as a Chlorocarbon. Chlorocarbons have long been known for causing organ, genetic and reproductive damage and up to 40% shrinkage of the thymus, a gland that is the very foundation of our immune system. Sucralose also causes swelling of the liver and kidneys and calcification of the kidneys (19).

A good rule of thumb is, “If you can’t pronounce the ingredient’s name, and/or you’ve no idea what it is, don’t eat it.”

10. Tap Water

Tap water, depending on where you live, may contain any number of countless toxins. The two most prolific are fluoride and chlorine.
 
Fluoride

Research has distinctly shown that more people suffer from fluoride poisoning every year than any other form of poisoning! The popular understanding is that fluoride was added to tap water for its claimed benefits for teeth. The fact of the matter is, tooth decay is caused by a systemic problem concerning internal body chemistry, not a superficial one as believed by many. Teeth decay because the body’s ideal ratio of calcium to phosphorus in the blood becomes skewed. This is primarily caused by the consumption of refined carbs and sugar. This is important to be aware of because it exposes how useless a topical solution such as fluoride truly is to tooth decay.

Fluoride accumulates in bones, making them more susceptible to fracture, as well as accumulating in the pineal gland, which could lower the production of melatonin. Recent research has discovered a possible link between fluoride and arthritis as well as hypothyroidism. Fluoride has also been found to increase the uptake of aluminum into the brain as well as inhibiting antibodies from forming in the blood. This essentially confuses the immune system and can lead to tumor development. To top it all off, this chemical has also been found to damage the dental enamel of children!

From an ethical standpoint, fluoridating the water supply is essentially forcing a universal medication on the public with absolutely no informed consent from that public. As Dr. Peter Mansfield stated, “No physician in his right senses would prescribe for a person he has never met, whose medical history he does not know, a substance which is intended to create bodily change, with the advice: ‘Take as much as you like, but you will take it for the rest of your life because some children suffer from tooth decay.’ It is a preposterous notion.”

Chlorine

Drinking chlorinated water is like waging a war on the inside of your body every day. It has been placed in water to kill any unwanted organisms. But once it enters the body, how does the chlorine know what organisms are bad and should be killed and which organisms are good and should be left alone? The answer, of course, is that it does not. This is a problem as chlorine destroys the positive bacteria in the human gut, disrupting the delicate balance between the positive and negative bacteria that is so vital to many life-sustaining and health-giving processes. Chlorine has also been shown to drastically increase one’s risk to several different types of cancer as well as serious birth defects.

To avoid the harmful effects of fluoride and chlorine, a reverse osmosis filtration system is the ticket. At minimum, experts recommend some sort of carbon filter system (i.e., PuR). Another fine solution is to purchase high quality bottled waters such as Fiji and Evian.

11. Caffeine

If coffee were introduced to the FDA today as a drug, it would not receive approval. It is best to avoid everything that contains caffeine including coffee, sodas, tea, decongestants, energy/fat-burning pills, aspirin, diuretics and chocolate. This is because research has shown that caffeine severely disrupts the delicate blood sugar regulation mechanism within the body (i.e., adrenals, liver and pancreas). It also has a serious diuretic (dehydrating) effect on the body. This can lead to chronic fatigue, depression, allergies, behavioral issues, insomnia, dizziness, cancer, bone loss, mental disorders and birth defects.

12. Alcohol

Alcohol is a simple sugar, negative and empty in any other nutrients. When ingested, it places incredible stress on the detoxification system of the body (i.e., liver, etc.). Alcohol, particularly red wine, is one of the primary causes of gastrointestinal (GI) inflammation. GI inflammation leads to “leaky gut” syndrome, allowing toxic substances to pass into the body’s tissues. This, in turn, can result in the development of the chronic diseases of aging (i.e., heart disease, diabetes, arthritis, cancer, low back and joint pain, etc.). If that’s not enough, alcohol, particularly when consumed near or at meal times, serves as a blocking agent, prohibiting the absorption of several vitamins and minerals (7). So, when one stops to consider that 90% of all disease begins in the colon, this puts a new meaning to the word “moderation.”

13. Irradiated Food (i.e., “Cold Pasteurization”)

“Let’s say I invited you over for turkey dinner and told you that before cooking the meal I’d be using my new food sanitizer. My new sanitizer happens to deliver 450,000 RADS of radiation, which is about 150 million times more radiation than the standard chest X-ray. The radiation source will be cobalt (Co-60) or possibly caesium (Cs-137), the remains of spent military nuclear fuel. And if you get too close to my new machine, you could get one hell of a tan. Now, how excited would you be about tasting my turkey?” (Taken from “How to Eat, Move and Be Healthy!” (7; Paul Chek)

Sounds insane, does it not? It is, and yet it’s a reality. The US government has decided once again to volunteer its public for a grand science experiment, this time involving nuclear waste. The use of this waste, according to the US Department of Energy (DOE), provides a convenient method of reducing disposal costs of spent nuclear fuels from the civilian and military sectors by providing a commercial market for them.

Posted on the health web site, www.Mercola.com, Dr. Joseph Mercola lists these top 10 reasons for opposing food irradiation:

1. In legalizing food irradiation, the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) did not determine a level of radiation to which food can be exposed and still be safe for human consumption, which federal law requires.
2. In legalizing food irradiation, the FDA relied on laboratory research that did not meet modern scientific protocols, which federal law requires.
3. Research dating to the 1950s has revealed a wide range of problems in animals that ate irradiated food, including premature death, a rare form of cancer, reproductive dysfunction, chromosomal abnormalities, liver damage, low weight gain and vitamin deficiencies.
4. Irradiation masks and encourages filthy conditions in slaughterhouses and food processing plants. Irradiation can kill most bacteria in food, but it does nothing to remove the feces, urine, pus and vomit that often contaminate beef, pork, chicken and other meat. Irradiation will not kill the pathogen that causes mad cow disease.
5. Irradiation destroys vitamins, essential fatty acids and other nutrients in food - sometimes significantly. The process destroys 80 percent of vitamin A in eggs, but the FDA nonetheless legalized irradiation of these products.
6. Irradiation can change the flavor, odor and texture of food - sometimes disgustingly so. Pork can turn red, beef can smell like a wet dog, fruit and vegetables can become mushy and eggs can lose their color, become runny and ruin recipes.
7. Irradiation disrupts the chemical composition of everything in its path, not just harmful bacteria, which the food industry often asserts. Scores of new chemicals called “radiolytic products” are formed by irradiation - chemicals that do not naturally occur in food and that the FDA has never studied for safety.
8. The World Health Organization (WHO) did not follow its own recommendation to study the toxicity of radiolytic products formed in high-dose irradiated food before proposing in November 2000 that the international irradiation dose limit - equal to 330 million chest X-rays - be removed.
9. Soon, some irradiation plants may use cesium-137, a highly radioactive waste material left over from the production of nuclear weapons. This material is dangerous and unstable. In 1988, a cesium-137 leak near Atlanta led to a $30 million, taxpayer-funded cleanup.
10. Because it increases the shelf life of food and is used in large centralized facilities, irradiation encourages globalization and consolidation of the food production, distribution and retailing industries. These trends have already forced multitudes of family farmers and ranchers out of business, reduced the diversity of products in the marketplace, disrupted local economies in developing nations and put American farmers and ranchers at a great economic disadvantage.

It would be very wise to make sure you’re not consuming irradiated foods by asking store/restaurant managers and owners if they sell or use them.

“The bottom line is that irradiation will not make food cleaner. It merely masks unhygienic slaughtering and processing practices, while corrupting nutritional integrity.” - Dr. Joseph Mercola

14. Genetically Modified/Engineered (GM/GE) Food

The PR smoke screen surrounding GM foods was to claim that they are necessary to grow more food and to end world hunger, when the reality is that GM foods actually have lower yields per acre than natural crops. The grand design comes into focus when you do the research and realize that almost all GM foods have been created by the sellers of herbicides and pesticides so that those plants can withstand greater amounts of herbicides and pesticides(31,33), hence creating a better market for them!

One of the big problems with this very powerful technology is that the mechanisms by which it works or doesn’t work are not even understood by the scientists themselves!(7) Unfortunately, the enormous financial upside of producing GM/GE foods seems to be the primary motivation, rather than “ending world hunger” as these companies’ hired PR firms would claim. Hence, the rush and lack of proper and adequate research.

In 1999, Dr. Arpad Pusztia conducted a famous study on GM/GE potatoes. After disclosing the hazards of consuming these foods to the press, the government immediately cut his funding, and he was promptly fired.

A few of the many dangers of GM/GE foods include:

1. The production of toxins and poisons as a result of switching and splicing genes to create and affect too many variables to account for.
2. The creation of powerful food allergies (some possibly fatal) created by the genes of unknown allergens (such as nuts) being bound to otherwise harmless foods.
3. Food quality is often times very low in health-giving nutrients.
4. The chances of antibiotic resistance increases exponentially due to the intentional splicing of genes of certain foods with ARMs (Antibiotic Resistant Markers).
5. There is also a correlating increase in pesticide and herbicide (poisons) use and residues, because GM/GE plants are developed to be able to tolerate higher doses of them.

Several other risks related to these foods are: genetic pollution from GM/GE crops via rain, wind, birds and insect pollinators; a decrease in soil microorganisms, needed insects and fertility; the creation of new “super weeds,” “super pests,” viruses and bacteria; socioeconomic hazards to small farm operations losing out to the monstrous corporations; and ethical concerns with the development and mistreatment of GM/GE animal species.

“If you look at the simple principle of genetic modification it spells ecological disaster. There are no ways of quantifying the risks…. The solution is simply to ban the use of genetic modification in food.” - Dr. Harash Narang, microbiologist and senior research associate at the University of Leeds

15. Microwaved Food

An Oklahoma lawsuit in 1991 involved a woman who had hip surgery. She died from this surgery, and it was later blamed on the blood transfusion she received. It was found that the blood had been warmed in a microwave. This altered the blood’s properties, turning it toxic and therefore killing the woman.

In 1992, the famous scientist Dr. Hans Hertel was convicted by the Swiss government for “interfering with commerce” when he published his research on the many dangers of microwaves. The creation of this ridiculous charge was heavily influenced by the “Swiss Association of Dealers for Electro-Apparatuses for Households and Industry.” Not until 1998 was the decision reversed, being declared a “violation of Hertel’s rights.”

Stemming from Hertel’s important research, Wayne and Newell have summarized the top 10 reasons to avoid the use - and even ownership - of microwave ovens:(40)

1. Continually eating food processed from a microwave oven causes long term or permanent brain damage by “shorting out” electrical impulses in the brain (de-polarizing or de-magnetizing the brain tissue).
2. The human body cannot metabolize (break down) the unknown by-products created in microwaved food.
3. Male and female hormone production is shut down and/or altered by continually eating microwaved foods.
4. The effects of microwaved food by-products are residual (long term or permanent) within the human body.
5. Minerals, vitamins, and nutrients of all microwaved food is reduced or altered so that the human body gets little or no benefit, or the human body absorbs altered compounds that cannot be broken down.
6. The minerals in vegetables are altered into cancerous free radicals when cooked in microwave ovens.
7. Microwaved foods cause stomach and intestinal cancerous growths (tumors). This may explain the rapidly increased rate of colon cancer in America.
8. The prolonged eating of microwaved foods causes cancerous cells to increase in human blood.
9. Continual ingestion of microwaved food causes immune system deficiencies through lymph gland and blood serum alterations.
10. Eating microwaved food causes loss of memory, concentration, emotional instability and a decrease of intelligence.

16. Nitrates & Nitrites

These two additives are used in cured meats like bacon, ham, beef jerky, salami, luncheon meats, sausages, bologna, frankfurters, meat spreads and smoked fish. Both of these cancer causing chemicals are added to improve color and taste. Research has shown that children who consistently eat foods containing these poisons have a ten times higher than normal risk of developing leukemia. If you’re buying and consuming these highly processed “meats,” it would be wise to read their labels and avoid these two toxins.

17. Non-Organic Food

Certified organic produce combined with free range, grass fed, certified organic animal meats are ideal in implementing any plan for health and vitality. By law, certified organic food may not contain any added chemicals (i.e., herbicides, pesticides, fungicides, flavor enhancers, additives, irradiation, genetic modification/engineering, hydrogenation, preservatives or any other toxins). Foods labeled as “organically grown” should be avoided. This means that the land used to grow these crops is currently going through a three year detoxification period required by law - in order to eventually be labeled legally as certified organic. Do not be fooled by the “natural” labeling on many foods. This means nothing, as all of the above listed poisons can and will be present in foods labeled this way.

However, it may not be realistic for some to switch to a 100% organic diet (i.e., financially, logistically, etc.). Yet, it is realistic to make an attempt at incorporating at least a few organic foods into a weekly regimen. This will up the demand for organic food and create more opportunities for other producers. Organic food/farming is not only superior in its health benefits for humans, it is also superior in its health benefits for the environment! Organic farming replenishes and purifies the land, rather than depleting and polluting it as conventional methods do. This is very important because there are now more than 10,000 chemical toxins (such as those listed above) put on our non-organic foods today! These toxins cause every type of ailment and complication in the human body that one could fathom. Many of these are getting blamed on chance, genetics or circumstances “out of our control,” so as to negate the ultimate responsibility of the producers of these toxins and place it onto the victim.

Conclusion

If all of this seems confusing, the next time you take a trip to the supermarket, preferably an organic one, remember: If it wasn’t living and growing 10,000 years ago, don’t eat it! If you can’t pronounce it, don’t eat it! If you have no idea what it actually is, don’t eat it! If it was never actually alive, don’t eat it! If it has been cooked or processed beyond recognition, don’t eat it!

Whole foods are the key to health. There are no “pasta trees” or “Snack Wells cows” in the world. It’s very simple. We all must learn to be more critical of incoming information from so-called nutrition experts. We all must take the responsibility of learning more about our earthly vehicle - the body - much more seriously. We all must learn how to shop as well as cook. Be healthy.

By Noah Hittner, BS, CHEK-NLC, PES, RTS, CPT

References & Recommended Reading:

1. Alive: Canadian Journal of Health and Nutrition. June 2001.
2. Appleton, N. PhD. “78 Ways Sugar Can Ruin Your Health.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
3. Batmanghelidj, PhD. (1997). Your Body’s Many Cries for Water.
4. Brasco, J. Md. “Low Grain and Carbohydrate Diets Treat Hypoglycemia, Heart Disease, Diabetes, Cancer, and Nearly ALL Chronic Illness.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
5. Chek, P. (2002). Under the Veil of Deception. C.H.E.K Institute.
6. Chek, P. Optimal Health and Fitness Through Practical Nutrition and Lifestyle Coaching. NLC-Level II certification course manual, A C.H.E.K Institute Publication and Production, 2003.
7. Chek, P. (2004). How to Eat, Move and Be Healthy! C.H.E.K Institute.
8. Chek, P. “Your Are What You Eat.” (Parts 1-3) Personal Training on the Net. Online. www.ptonthenet.com, Internet. 2003.
9. Cohen, (1998). Milk, The Deadly Poison.
10. Connett, Paul PhD. “The Absurdities of Water Fluoridation.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
11. Crayhon, R. MS.“The Paleolithic Diet and Its Modern Implications.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
12. Cummins, R. “Hazards of Genetically Engineered foods and Crops: Why We Need A Global Moratorium.” Motion Magazine. Aug. 29, 1999.
13. Fallon, S. (2001) Nourishing Traditions.
14. Flatten Your Abs Forever by Paul Chek. Video Cassette. C.H.E.K Institute, 2000.
15. Food Irradiation: An FDA Report. FDA Papers, Oct. 1968.
16. The Guardian. “Dangerous Grains.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
17. Hittner, N. “Sleep, Water, & Food - Three Books To Make You Smarter Than Your Doctor!” Personal Training on the Net. Online. www.ptonthenet.com, Internet. 2003.
18. Hittner, N. “Want Abs?” (Parts 1 & 2) Personal Training on the Net. Online. www.ptonthenet.com, Internet. 2003.
19. Hull, Dr. J. “12 Questions You Need to have Answered Before You Eat Splenda.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2004.
20. International Journal of Radiation Biology, 1970; 18: 201-216.
21. Journal of Nutrition, 1959; 69: 18-21.
22. Journal of Nutrition 1997; 127: 1636S-1645S.
23. The Lancet, Volume 353 29, May 1999.
24. Mercola, Dr. J. “Canada Rejects Olestra, leaving the USA the Only One ‘Holding the Bag.’” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
25. Mercola, Dr. J. “Lower Your Grains & Lower your Insulin Levels! A Novel Way To Treat Hypoglycemia.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
26. Mercola, Dr. J. “Soy: Is it Healthy, or is it Harmful?” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2004.
27. Mercola, Dr. J. (2003). The No Grains Diet.
28. Mercola, Dr. J. “What You Never Expected to Hear About Water Fluoridation.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2003.
29. Mercola, Dr. J.; Droege, R. “Do You Microwave Your Food? You’re Zapping Away Nutrients and Risking Your Health.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2004.
30. Online: Public Citizen, www.citizen.org
31. O’Shea, Dr. T. “The Doors Of Perception: Why Americans Will Believe Almost Anything.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
32. Price, W.A.(1997). Nutrition and Physical Degeneration. 6th Ed.
33. Rampton, S., & Stauber, J. (2002). Trust Us, We’re Experts!
34. Rivera, R. & Deutche, RD (1998). Your Hidden Food Allergies are Making You Fat.
35. Roberts, H.J. MD.“Aspartame Disease: An FDA Approved Epidemic.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2004.
36. Rosedale, R. MD.“Insulin and Its Metabolic Effects.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
37. Ross, J. (2000). The Diet Cure.
38. Thiessen, Dr. D. “The Awful Truth About Eating Grains.” Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.
39. US Department of Health and Human Services, Food and Drug Administration. Olestra: final rule. Federal Register. January 30, 1996; 61:3152-3154
40. Wayne, A; Newell, L. “The Hidden Hazards of Microwave Cooking.” Online. www.ecclesia.org, Internet. 2000.
41. Wiley, TS; Formby, PhD. (2000). Lights Out.
42. Williams, R. J.(1998). Biochemical Individuality. 2nd Ed.
43. Wolcott, W; Fahey, T. (2000). The Metabolic Typing Diet.
44. Wolcott, W. “To Succeed at Any Diet, You Must Know Your Metabolic Type.” (Parts 1 &2) Online. www.mercola.com, Internet. 2002.

© Copyright Noah Hittner 2004 All rights reserved

Nutritionally based doctors have known for a long time that sugar can adversely affect health. Medical researchers know it plays a role in diabetes and obesity, and even speeds the rate of cancer growth.   But did you know it actually could suppress the immune system? Sugar, that wonderfully delicious substance, can do so much to harm our health.
As we enter the flu season I question whether it really is more accurately described as the sugar season. The fall flu season gets a roaring sendoff with Halloween and the pounds of sugar consumed by children and adults. Just about the time the Halloween sugar buzz is over comes Thanksgiving followed by the next four weeks devoted to Christmas cookies and treats. The next sugar holiday is Valentines with Easter thereafter.
Just how much sugar do we consume?
Annual per capita sugar consumption (USDA Statistics)

• 10 pounds per person per year in 1821
• 120 pounds per person per year in 1970
• 150 pounds per person per year in 1994
• 170 pounds per person per year in 1997

It follows that consumers of sugar spend increasing amounts to acquire it.  According to the April 2003 Financial Times, two billion dollars would be spent on Easter candy that spring.
By ‘sugar’ I do not mean just the white, granulated stuff we serve from a bowl on the table; this is sucrose. The term sugar applies to glucose, fructose (fruit sugar), maltose (grain sugar), and honey (a mixture of glucose, fructose, sucrose and dextrin).

One of the primary concerns over the high sugar level in modern diets is mainly its contribution to malnutrition by replacing more essential nutrients. Although that is reason for concern, there is more to the story.
Infectious disease, namely disease caused by viruses and bacteria, were the biggest killers in the early twentieth century. These were primarily eliminated by better sanitation, housing, and clean water supplies. Antibiotics, the 1960s “miracle drug”, were given prophylactically in hopes of conquering infectious diseases.  But over the last half of the twentieth century, we have seen an increase in previously “conquered” diseases, such as tuberculosis, meningitis, influenza and even the common cold.
In the constant fight against outside invading organisms, our bodies have a highly sophisticated and effective defense mechanism - our immune system. A major portion of this system is a type of the white blood cell called neutrophils, which circulate in the blood stream and mop up any bacteria or other foreign bodies they encounter. This process is called phagocytosis (f`agga si tosis).  While phagocytosis is an energy-requiring mechanism needing an adequate supply of the blood sugar, glucose, or too much glucose, has a significant inhibiting effect on neutrophils’ ability to ingest and kill off invading bacteria. (1) (2) (3)
The measure of how many organisms one leukocyte can eat in an hour is called the leukocytic index (LI). It is a simple measure: If a leukocyte eats 10 organisms in an hour, its leukocytic index is 10.
When the LI is high, less bacteria/virus are available to potentially lead to active infection.  Conversely, when the LI is low, more unfriendly micro-organisms mean greater chances for an individual to become sick.  It can be detrimental to our health, therefore, if neutrophil activity is compromised.  But this is exactly what happens when too much carbohydrate, and too much sugar in particular, is consumed.
Test results
In a 1973 study, following an overnight fast, phagocytic activity and leukocytic index (LI) were recorded in a group of subjects, who then consumed 100 grams of a specific carbohydrate (a sugar or starch). Results show that all forms of carbohydrate - starch as well as sugars - reduced the neutrophils’ effectiveness to destroy bacteria and other micro-organisms. (2)
This study was confirmed in 1976 by Ringsdorf, et al. (3) They tested the effect of sugar (sucrose) by giving their subjects 24 ounces of sugar sweetened cola. In this test the leukocytic index of all their subjects was reduced by 50%. In other words, the ability of their disease-fighting blood cells was reduced by half.
With fall’s cooler temps, consumers are reminded by the media to be diligent to wash their hands and avoid contact with people and inanimate objects to avoid catching the inevitable “bugs”.  I question whether “bugs” are lurking about to take advantage of poor, unsuspecting individuals who failed to adequately wash their hands.
Rather, I challenge the reader to consider that by over consumption of sugar, we have suppressed our immune systems so that they cannot adequately defend against invading organisms.  The next time you want to give your immune system a boost and reduce your chances of experiencing cold or flu, avoid the sweets.
Dr. Gregory Peterson, DC, DABCI, FIAMA, FIACA, CCST
Founded the Center for Natural Medicine in Winona, MN.

1. Cohn ZA, Morse SI. Functional and metabolic properties of polymorphonuclear leucocytes. 1. Observations on the requirements and consequences of particle ingestion. J Exptl Med 1960; 111: 667
2. Sanchez A, et al. Role of sugars in human neutrophilic phagocytosis. Am J Clin Nutr 1973; 26: 1180-84
3. Ringsdorf WM jr, Cheraskin E and Ramsey RR jr. Sucrose, Neutrophilic Phagocytosis, and Resistance to Disease. Dent Surv 1976; 52 (12): 46-48
4. Ely, John T. A., “Glycemic Modulation of Tumor Tolerance”, The Journal of Orthomolecular Medicine 1996; Vol 11(1): 23-34.