Diabetis linked to soda consumption

Over 130,000 cases of diabetes now linked to soda consumption, HFCS

by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger, NaturalNews Editor

(NaturalNews) For years, advocates of natural health have been hammering away at the message that soda causes diabetes and obesity. The soda industry, meanwhile, has remained in denial mode, mirroring the ridiculous position of the tobacco industry that “nicotine is not addictive.” Soda doesn’t cause diabetes, the industry claims, and it’s perfectly safe to consume in essentially unlimited quantities.

The Corn Refiners Association has joined the denial with its own spin campaign that seeks to convince people High-Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) is totally natural and completely harmless. HFCS is, of course, the primary sweetener used in sodas and soft drinks.

Now comes new research presented at the American Heart Association’s Cardiovascular Disease Epidemiology and Prevention annual conference in San Francisco. This new research reveals that over the last decade, soda consumption has conservatively caused:

• 130,000 new cases of diabetes
• 14,000 new cases of heart disease
• 50,000 more “life years” with heart disease over the last decade

“The finding suggests that any kind of policy that reduces consumption might have a dramatic health benefit,” said senior study author Dr. Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo (associate professor of medicine at the University of California, San Francisco).

The American Beverage Association, meanwhile, says this study hasn’t been published in a peer-reviewed medical journal yet and therefore it doesn’t count. Soda consumption doesn’t cause diabetes or heart disease, they claim, because “…both heart disease and diabetes are complex conditions with no single cause and no single solution.”

It’s silly logic, of course: Diabetes obviously has a cause. It’s not some spontaneous disease that appears out of nowhere. And when you go looking for the cause, you obviously have to look at dietary factors since diabetes is a disease related to the consumption and metabolism of dietary sugars. Once you do that, sodas immediately raise a red flag because they’re liquid sugar in a highly-concentrated form that does not exist naturally in nature.

HFCS doesn’t grow on trees, in other words. Nature provides sugars locked into insoluble fibers that slow digestion and lower the effective glycemic index of sugars that are consumed. In nature, sugars are always combined with minerals, too, and many of those minerals help prevent diabetes and heart disease. But High-Fructose Corn Syrup is stripped of virtually all those minerals. It contains no fiber and no healing phytonutrients that you might encounter in plants. As a result, HFCS — sometimes dubbed “liquid Satan” — might be called a dietary poison that causes disease while contributing to nutritional deficiencies that accelerate disease.

Bone loss
Interestingly, this new study did not look at loss of bone density, which is another side effect of drinking soda. Due to the extremely high acidity of the HFCS sweetener combined with the phosphoric acid used in sodas, people who drink sodas often lose bone minerals and end up being diagnosed with osteoporosis (even at a relatively young age).

Other people end up with kidney stones due to all these minerals passing through the kidneys and contributing to the built up of mineral deposits there. Long-term soda consumers may even suffer from pancreatic cancer due to the extreme stress placed on the pancreas following the consumption of liquid sugars.

In all, soda consumption is linked to at least six serious diseases:

#1) Diabetes
#2) Obesity
#3) Heart disease
#4) Cancer
#5) Osteoporosis
#6) Kidney stones

That’s why taxing sodas is more than merely a way to raise money through soda sales; it’s also a way to dramatically reduce the cost of treating these diseases. It’s no surprise that several U.S. states are now starting to seriously consider slapping new taxes on sodas and other “junk” beverages.

That’s not the way I would prefer to see the situation handled, actually. The better option, in my view, would be to ban all soda advertising by effectively stripping Free Speech rights from corporations. Such rights belong only to individuals, not multi-billion-dollar corporations. Corporations whose products physically harm the health of the population at large should not be allowed to openly advertise and promote those products to the public. They can still sell them, they just can’t advertise them.

This is the real solution to the problem: Take away the advertising of sodas and consumer consumption immediately plummets. It’s all the advertising that keeps the soft drink sales machine churning out disease and suffering in the name of corporate profits. Soda companies, of course, will argue that they have a Free Speech right to advertise their products even if they do promote disease. That’s an argument to be taken up by the U.S. Supreme Court, of course. But let there be no mistake about it: The continued tolerance of soda advertising is creating a nation of diabetes, obesity and heart disease.

There will be a price to be paid for all this, and I fear it will be a price far beyond what society is able to pay. To raise a nation on sodas and processed foods is to ultimately doom that nation because failed health will ultimately lead to a failed nation. You cannot built a healthy nation upon the backs of a diseased population, and thanks to the soda companies and junk food companies, the United States of America is now a nation of diseased, diabetic, obese consumers who continue to poison themselves every single day with the dangerous chemicals found in heavily advertised food, beverage and personal care products.

If I were the health advisor for a country, I would outright ban all advertising of harmful consumer products (foods, beverages, personal care, cleaning products, etc.), and in their place I’d run public service announcements teaching people about nutrition, disease prevention, vitamin D and commonsense self-care. Within one generation, that nation would be the healthiest in the world, with the lowest rates of disease and affordable health care coverage for all.

The junk food and soda companies, of course, would go broke, and the economy would rearrange itself to open up new jobs in healthier and more productive industries rather than the “disease industries” that dominate America today.

Sugary beverages, you see, aren’t just a disease upon those who regularly consume them; they are a disease upon the very nation that threatens its economy and compromises its future.

Sources for this story include:

http://www.businessweek.com/lifesty…

Serious birth defects linked to the agricultural chemical atrazine

Serious birth defects linked to the agricultural chemical atrazine

by S. L. Baker, features writer

(NaturalNews) Gastroschisis is a birth defect in which the intestines,
and sometimes other organs, develop outside the fetal abdomen and poke
out through an opening in the abdominal wall. Long considered a rare
occurrence, gastroschisis has mysteriously been on the rise over the
last three decades. In fact, the incidence of the defect has soared,
increasing two to four times in the last 30 years. But why?

Researchers think they’ve found the answer. The culprit behind the
suffering of babies born with this condition appears to be the
agricultural chemical atrazine. That’s the conclusion of a study just
presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Maternal-Fetal
Medicine (SMFM) held in Chicago.

Researchers at the University of Washington in Seattle were alerted to
a higher than normal number of cases in of the birth defect in babies
born in eastern Washington. So they began investigating to see if the
increased incidence was due to some kind of environmental exposure in
that area.

“Our state has about two times the national average number of cases of
gastroschisis,” Dr. Sarah Waller, one of the study’s authors, said in
a statement to the media. “The life expectancy for fetuses with this
diagnosis is better than 90 percent; however it requires delivery at a
tertiary care center with immediate neonatal intervention which often
separates families and can cause serious financial and emotional
stress.”

The condition can lead to poor function of the bowel after delivery
and potential long term feeding problems. Bottom line: babies with
this birth defect must undergo the trauma of surgery right after
birth. And while most survive, some babies with gastroschisis have
significant damage to the bowel due to direct contact between the
intestine and amniotic fluid or because the intestine was twisted.
These infants may develop a condition known as “short gut” which can
lead to stunted growth and a host of feeding and other problems.

For the new study, Dr. Waller and her research team went to work
investigating all cases of live born infants with gastroschisis during
the period between 1987 and 2006. They matched birth certificates with
databases from the U.S. Geological Survey that revealed where
agricultural spraying took place and what chemicals were used. It
turns out the chemicals atrazine, nitrates, and 2, 4
dichlorophenoxyacetic acid were heavily sprayed in the area.

Of the 805 cases and 3,616 controls in the study, gastroschisis
developed far more frequently among babies whose mothers lived less
than 25 km from the site of high surface water that was specifically
contaminated with one of the chemicals — atrazine. What’s more, the
risk of gastroschisis was found to especially rise in babies of women
who conceived in the spring, from March through May. Those are the
months when use of the chemical is the most prevalent.

The problem with atrazine

According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), atrazine is
applied to crops (especially corn, sorghum, and sugarcane) before and
after planting to control broadleaf and grassy weeds. It is used most
heavily in the Midwest on agricultural crops but it is also applied to
residential lawns, particularly in Florida and the Southeast.

Problems linked to atrazine have been in the news previously. Earlier
research showed it causes sexual abnormalities in frogs and the
chemical has also been linked to prostate cancer in workers at an
atrazine manufacturing plant.

So why is it still widely used? Unfortunately, the EPA has done little
to address the mounting evidence that atrazine is harmful to humans as
well as animals. Last fall the agency announced it was going to start
a new assessment of the chemical in 2010 that could take months to
years to complete. In the meantime, tons of atrazine will continue to
be sprayed on crops and lawns — and mothers and their unborn babies
will continue to be exposed to this chemical now linked to a serious
and potentially deadly birth defects.

For more information:

http://www.nlm.nih.gov/medlineplus/…

http://www.nrdc.org/health/pesticid…

http://www.epa.gov/opp00001/reregis…

Low Vitamin D Levels Raises Blood Pressure

Low Vitamin D Levels Raises Blood Pressure

by David Gutierrez, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Vitamin D deficiency may triple a person’s risk of high blood pressure, according to a study conducted by researchers from the University of Michigan School of Public Health and presented at a meeting of the American Heart Association in Chicago.

“Our results indicate that early vitamin D deficiency may increase the long-term risk of high blood pressure in women at mid-life,” researcher Flojaune Griffin said.

The researchers recruited 559 white women from Tecumseh, Michigan, who were between 24 and 44 years old when the study began in 1992. The participants’ vitamin D blood levels were measured at the beginning of the study and once a year after that for 15 years.

At the beginning of the study, 5.5 percent of the women who were deficient in vitamin D suffered from high blood pressure, compared with only 2.8 percent of the women who had sufficient levels of the vitamin. At the end of the study in 2007, 10 percent of the women in the deficiency group had high blood pressure, compared with only 3.7 percent in the “sufficient” group.

“This is preliminary data so we can’t say with certainty that low vitamin D levels are directly linked to high blood pressure,” Griffin said. “But this may be another example of how what you do early in life impacts your health years later.”

Vitamin D is known to play a crucial role in producing strong bones and teeth. New research increasingly suggests that it also helps regulate the immune system and protect against cancer, autoimmune disorders and heart disease.

The body naturally produces vitamin D upon exposure to sunlight. A number of factors have led to widespread deficiency, however, especially at latitudes far from the equator. These factors include less time spent outside and overuse of sunscreen. Dark-skinned people living at extreme latitudes are also especially vulnerable, as their bodies produce less vitamin D from the same amount of sun than those of lighter-skinned people.

Sources for this story include: http://www.reuters.com; http://www.medicinenet.com.

REFRAINING FROM SHUBUHAAT (DOUBTFUL ELEMENTS)

REFRAINING FROM SHUBUHAAT (DOUBTFUL ELEMENTS)

Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) said: “Verily Halaal is clear and verily Haraam is clear. Between these two (classes) there are doubtful affairs and I will give you an example of that. Allah has protected a certain area and the protected area of Allah is His prohibitions. Whoever pastures near this ’himaa’ (protected area) will be close to violating it and whoever mixes with doubtful elements will be close to lose.” [Refer to Abu Da’ud -chapter no.3 relating to refraining from ’Shubuhaat’, hadith no.33132]

There are thus three primary classes of goods and activities.

1. Permitted
2. Prohibited
3. Doubtful

Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) warns us against the third class. If it is indeed prohibited then the person who abstains from it, saves himself from Haraam. If it is truly Halaal, then he will obtain a reward since he did not venture into it because of doubt and also because Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) encouraged us to abstain from the doubtful aspects which could be prohibited.

This principle can also apply in those things, the permissibility of which the jurists differ upon.

Once recognition is obtained through learning, ignorance is not excuse for perpetrating the prohibited.

Those who are led by their courage to enter doubtful transactions will eventually become accustomed to it and often expose themselves to danger through risks. Their daringness thus makes them deserve the resultant losses, harms and punishments.

Muslims should therefore not only refrain from selling the’ Haraam – prohibited’ commodities like idols, pornography, liquor etc, but also abstain from doubtful aspects. We should not purchase from people whose wares are from doubtful origin, eg. if there exists the possibility of the goods being stolen.

The above Hadith is authentic as it is narrated by Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmizi, Nasaa’e and ibn Majah.

The Hadith is narrated by Nu’man bin Bashir in two different ways. The
second narration is followed by the wording “Between the two (classes) are “mushtabahaat” – doubtful elements which are not recognised by many people. So the person who abstains from “shubuhaat” protects his “Deen -religion” and the person who engages in “shubuhaat” will enter into the Haraam.

The protection of one’s Deen is highly important so that he strives to the ultimate to save himself from “Jahannam” -hell while recognising that the loss of his “Deen” will imbue a person with evil attributes of the “Kuffaar” -disbelievers. The protection of one’s honour will be the means for people to trust him and to be willing to deal with him. Destroying one’s honour can thus also lead to material loss due to people’s unwillingness to deal with him.

Once Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) refused to carry on eating the food that he tasted after being inspired that it was not obtained in a suitable way. It happened that he was invited with some of his Sahabah to a lady’s place. She obtained a sheep from a woman who gave it to her without the permission of her husband who owned it. Rasulullah (Sallallaahu Alayhi Wasallam) requested that the food be given to the prisoners instead. [Refer to Abu Da’ud Hadith 3316, chapter no 3 relating to abstention from Shubuhaat"].

This is a lesson that one should also abstain from taking any item without the consent of the actual owner since his refusal can cause a problem not only socially, but also if the item taken is already utilised and is irreplaceable. One cannot also be certain whether the owner of an article has contracted to sell or agreed to lend the article to any other person.

Therefore, even a home should not be occupied without a prior rental agreement with the actual owner.

Living within the rules of Allah will protect us from all forms of shame.
Source: Jamiatul Ulama KZN
From: samuslims.co.za
Tel: 082 5786 251
Fax: 086 58444 23
P.O.Box 19370
Dormeton
4015

WOMEN GOING TO WALIMAHS

WOMEN GOING TO WALIMAHS

Q. Why does The Majlis say that it is not permissible for women to attend Walimahs when there are Hadith to prove that women used to participate in Walimahs during the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)?
A. If you are a freelancer or like the roaming holy cows of India, i.e. you do not follow any Math-hab, then we have no discussion with you. But if you are a Muqallid of one of the Four Math-habs, then understand well that neither we nor any one on earth today is an Imaam of Ijtihaad. We do not make istimbaat (logically deduct) masaa-il from the Qur’aan and Hadith. There are all types of Ahaadith. Formulating the masaa-il was the sacred function of the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen of the Khairul Quroon epoch. That era has ended about 12 centuries ago. The limit of our knowledge is the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. We do not transgress and gatecrash into a domain for which we are not qualified. When we say that Walimahs and attending the Musaajid and lectures are not permissible for women, then we are proclaiming nothing but the Shariah of Islam which developed from the Qur’aan and the Sunnah. You are not qualified in this field nor do you have the right to attempt abrogation of the Shariah with your understanding of the Hadith.

Talaaq given during haidh

TALAAQ GIVEN WHEN WIFE WAS IN HAIDH, WHEN SHOULD IDDAT BEGIN

Q. A man issued Talaaq to his wife while she was in the state of haidh. From when will her iddat begin?
A. The iddat begins immediately. In other words all the rules which the woman has to observe during iddat commence immediately the Talaaq is given. However, the three haidhs of the iddat will be calculated from the next haidh, not the haidh in which the divorce took effect.

New Warning About Everyday Poison Linked to Alzheimer’s, ADHD, and Autism

New Warning About Everyday Poison Linked to Alzheimer’s, ADHD, and Autism

Posted by Dr. Mercola | March 20 2010

Dr. David Ayoub is a radiologist and a physician, and has become a specialist on the additives and preservatives used in vaccines. He was a presenter at the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Conference in Washington D.C. last year.

Here he discusses the practice of using aluminum as an adjuvant, and why he believes aluminum may be far more toxic than thimerosal in vaccines.

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Dr. Ayoub was, as many of you are, very concerned about mercury (thimerosal) in vaccines for a number of years, and attended a number of autism conferences that featured physicians who were highlighting the dangers of mercury.

However, a few personal encounters heightened his interest in another toxic metal frequently used in vaccines, namely aluminum.

Parents of autistic children kept pointing out the fact that their children’s heavy metal toxicity profiles showed high amounts of aluminum, and they wanted to know what that meant.

Secondly, a well respected nutritionist who deals with industrial aluminum toxicity showed him toxicity profiles of middle school children who had ADHD. In his estimate, 90 percent of the children in one particular school had developed ADHD during the course of a single year, and their toxicity profiles showed massive amounts of aluminum.

In addition, he did a pilot study with Dr. Usman, who treats autism with biomedicine, and when he evaluated the aluminum burden of these autistic children, he found that high percentage of them also had very high aluminum burdens.

All of these events led him to look deeper into the aluminum issue, which we discuss at length in this interview.

Why is Aluminum Used in Vaccines?
Mercury (thimerosal) exposure has declined significantly since it was eliminated from the single-dose vials of most childhood vaccines, yet autism rates have continued to skyrocket. This has led many to assume that mercury isn’t a problem, and anyone questioning the safety of vaccines is considered to be a hysterical wingnut.

However, while mercury use has decreased, the use of aluminum additives has increased!

Aluminum, like any other adjuvant, is added to the vaccine in order to boost the host’s immune response to the antigen. The antigen is what your body responds to and makes antibodies against (the virus being injected). By boosting your body’s immune response, the vaccine manufacturer can use a smaller amount of antigen, which makes production less expensive.

Interestingly enough, according to Dr. Ayoub, even our modern medical literature admits that how this happens exactly is still a mystery. And it’s not a consistent finding. He mentions a couple of studies on the more recent HPV vaccine, which found that the aluminum adjuvant had no effect at all on the immune response…

So, although aluminum is frequently added to vaccines for this particular purpose, no one knows with any degree of confidence that it actually makes a more effective vaccine.

Is Aluminum a Heavy Metal?
Aluminum is by many considered to be a heavy metal. However, based on the Periodic Table, it’s just shy of a heavy metal. So it’s called a “light metal.”

But regardless of its precise classification, aluminum is in the metal grouping, and it’s a common compound.

You will find aluminum in the earth’s crust, and in air, soil and water. However, although aluminum is a common, “natural” substance, it’s important to realize that it has absolutely no biological role inside your body.

In fact, we already know that aluminum is a poison.

Which Vaccines Contain Aluminum?
Many vaccines contain aluminum, including:

Hepatitis A
Hepatitis B
DTaP (diphtheria, tetanus, pertussis)
Hib vaccine
Pneumococcal vaccine
Gardasil (HPV vaccine)
This is NOT an all-inclusive list, however. Your best bet is to read through the package insert of each vaccine in question.

You can find a comprehensive list of approved vaccines on the FDA’s website, with links to each package insert.

The amount of aluminum in each vaccine will vary. However, according to Dr. Ayoub, it’s important to realize that the toxicity is not entirely dependent on dose, but also on how it’s distributed in your body.

For example, a small dose released rapidly from the injection site into your body can cause a rapid rise in blood aluminum levels. So a small dose released quickly may be much more toxic than a large dose that ends up staying longer in the tissue at the injection site.

The variables of personal differences and differences in how the injection is given are too numerous to count, and they may play a role in how toxic a shot ends up being once injected into your body.

How Much Aluminum is Your Child Getting Through Vaccines?
Dr. Ayoub has identified one vaccine in particular as being one of the absolute worst in terms of aluminum content – Pediatrix. It’s a combination vaccine, which contains 850 mcg of elemental aluminum.

The average aluminum content per vaccine ranges between 200 to 400 mcg. Others contain less, such as Prevnar, which has 125 mcg of aluminum.

Adding to the problem, however, is the fact that many children end up receiving multiple vaccines at a time. In effect, children are getting concentrations of aluminum that are 10 to 20 times higher than mercury.

Based on the number of vaccines given, children today are receiving 17 shots that contain aluminum, compared to four vaccines in the 1970s into the mid-80s. According to Dr. Ayoub’s calculations, the milligram dose of aluminum received has more than doubled in that time.

This can have significant implications, as aluminum is not only toxic in and of itself, but it also impairs your body’s ability to excrete mercury, and it impairs glutathione synthesis. As a consequence, aluminum will make whatever amount of mercury you have in your system even more toxic.

Remember, you and your children are exposed to mercury from other sources as well, not just vaccines. Fish and amalgam dental fillings are two major sources of mercury exposure as well.

Problems with the Legal Limits on Aluminum
In the U.S., the FDA sets the guidelines for what and how much aluminum is allowed in vaccines. According to the FDA, the maximum amount of allowable elemental aluminum is 850 mcg per vaccine.

Clearly, it makes a major difference if this amount is injected into a small infant or an adult, but the FDA makes no distinction to that effect.

In fact, when Dr. Ayoub dug deeper into the FDA regulations on aluminum, he discovered that the limitation of 850 mcg per vaccine is based on the effectiveness of the adjuvant role of aluminum and has nothing to do with limitations based on safety whatsoever!

Shocking?

Yes! But not surprising, at this point.

However, it may be wise to keep this fact in mind, as those who argue that the amounts of aluminum in vaccines is a “legally safe dose” are really just citing a regulatory guideline that is based solely on the efficacy of the vaccine, and NOT based on any safety data whatsoever.

Learn More About the Health Implications of Aluminum!
I strongly urge you to listen to the interview with Dr. Ayoub in its entirely to learn more about the dangers of this common vaccine adjuvant. Clearly, aluminum stands poised to take over mercury as one of the worst offenders against health.

Also, the articles listed below will give you more information about the potentially devastating health effects of this dangerous toxin.

Related Links:
Mercury In Vaccines Was Replaced With Something Even MORE Toxic

Mercury isn’t the Only Toxic Item in Vaccines

Five Common Toxic Metals to Avoid, and Where You’ll Find Them

Much of the Food Industry Runs on Bribes

Much of the Food Industry Runs on Bribes

Posted by Dr. Mercola | March 20 2010

Robert Watson, a top ingredient buyer for Kraft Foods, needed $20,000 to pay his taxes. So he called a broker for a California tomato processor that for years had been paying him bribes to get its products into Kraft’s plants.

Days later, federal agents descended on Kraft’s offices near Chicago and confronted Mr. Watson. He admitted his role in a bribery scheme that has laid bare a startling vein of corruption in the food industry.

Since the scheme also involved millions of pounds of tomato products with high levels of mold or other defects, the case has raised serious questions about how well food manufacturers safeguard the quality of their ingredients.

Over the last 14 months, Mr. Watson and three other purchasing managers, at Frito-Lay, Safeway and B&G Foods, have pleaded guilty to taking bribes. Five people connected to one of the nation’s largest tomato processors, SK Foods, have also admitted taking part in the scheme.

SK Foods shipped its customers millions of pounds of bulk tomato paste and puree that fell short of basic quality standards, with falsified documentation to mask the problems. Often that meant mold counts so high the sale should have been prohibited under federal law.

Sources:
New York Times February 24, 2010

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

The bribery and racketeering scheme going on between key players at major food companies has been labeled an “anomaly,” but it is likely far from an isolated case

This is not only an issue of corrupt business practices; it’s one that threatens the safety of the food on your family’s dinner table.

Among the latest allegations are charges that SK Foods, which is now bankrupt but was formerly one of the largest tomato processors in the U.S., was shipping tomatoes with high mold counts and other defects, then falsifying documentation to show that the shipments met federal mold limits.

Like other players in big business, those running the food industry are out to make a profit, and often this comes at the expense of your health.

Toxic Food Additives Approved by Bribes and Manipulation
The underhanded dealings allegedly going on between SK Foods and individuals at Kraft Foods reminds me of two other very prominent examples of manipulation among the food industry.

Once you become familiar with what’s really going on behind the scenes, even at the regulatory level, stories like this will no longer shock you.

First, take aspartame, the most controversial food additive in history. Its approval for use in food was the most contested in FDA history. In the end, the artificial sweetener was approved, not on scientific grounds, but rather because of strong political and financial pressure. After all, aspartame was previously listed by the Pentagon as a biochemical warfare agent!

It’s hard to believe such a chemical would be allowed into the food supply, but it was, and it has been wreaking silent havoc with people’s health for the past 30 years.

You can read the entire history of fraud and deception here, but to put in a nutshell the evidence that showed aspartame was harmful was ignored or falsified, and it was pushed through the FDA’s approval process by a select few who stood to benefit handsomely from its profits.

Likewise, Monsanto’s genetically engineered bovine growth hormone (rbGH/rbST), which has been banned in Canada, Europe, Japan, Australia and New Zealand because of cancer risks and other health concerns, was approved in the United States under similarly disturbing circumstances.

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) didn’t even require that rBGH be adequately tested before allowing it on the market. Normally, a standard test of new biochemically produced products and animal drugs requires 24 months of testing with several hundred rats. But rBGH was tested for only 90 days on 30 rats.

Canadian government officials, meanwhile, were not buying it. Reports allege that Monsanto had tried to bribe them with offers of $1 million to $2 million to gain approval for rBGH (Monsanto officials say those funds were for “research”), but they declined!

And it’s not just rBGH that’s the problem … that genetically modified foods have been allowed to infiltrate the market at all is another lesson in the corruption of the food industry.

Major Problems Threatening the U.S. Food System
These issues go far beyond a few underhanded bribery schemes and shipments of moldy tomato products. The very food we depend on to survive is slowly being degraded, devalued, and de-humanized by giant corporations.

Gone are the days when farmers grew food naturally without the use of industrial factory techniques, Nowadays, with the exception of the small but growing movement of organic and sustainable farmers, it may surprise you to learn that farming — once the symbol of all that’s natural and wholesome — creates some of the worst pollution in the United States.

Further, the food crops currently subsidized are corn, wheat, soy and rice. Growing little else but corn and soy means we end up with a fast food diet. In essence, these commodity programs are subsidies for the creation of junk and fast food, not REAL food that could have a positive impact on public health.

The average American is now 10 pounds overweight, which translates into $250 billion in added yearly health care costs, not to mention a shorter lifespan.

But in addition to producing little else but fast food, this type of monoculture is also very dependent on fossil fuels.

As Michael Pollan, author of In Defense of Food and The Omnivore’s Dilemma, has stated, we’re actually eating oil — we just don’t know it. Because when you grow one type of crop almost exclusively, you deplete the soil, which means you have to use more fertilizer, which is made from fossil fuel. Monocultures also invite more pests, which need to be treated with ever increasing amounts of pesticides – also made from fossil fuel.

Cheap food is actually incredibly expensive once everything is added up, including stratospheric health care costs, continued dependence on fossil fuels, and the destruction of the earth as a whole.

Stay Informed to Find Healthier Food
There are still safe food options out there, but it does take a bit of digging to find them. Your local grocery store is generally NOT going to be the best source for healthy, fresh food.

So, short of starting your own sustainable farm (which you can do on a small-scale in your own backyard), you can find safe food options by supporting sustainable agriculture movements in your area.

Make it a point to only buy food from a source you know and trust, one that uses safe and non-toxic farming methods. You’ll receive nutritious food from a source that you can trust, and you’ll be supporting the honest work of a real family farm instead of an agri-business corporation.

Further, knowledge truly is power, and the more people become informed, the faster it will prompt real change to come about. Several wonderful movies that will give you an excellent overview of the problems with modern agriculture, which I highly recommend you watch and share with your friends and family, are:

Food, Inc.
The Future of Food
Food Matters
Fast Food Nation
The World According To Monsanto
Cornography

FDA’s Mercury Ruling Defies ALL Scientific Reasoning

FDA’s Mercury Ruling Defies ALL Scientific Reasoning Posted by Dr. Mercola | August 22 2009 | 81,374 views Email this to a friend Share this article Next Article

In the video above I speak with Charles Brown, legal counsel for the Consumers for Dental Choice, which is a nonprofit corporation whose purpose is to educate the public about the health and environmental dangers of mercury fillings, and to ensure more effective government oversight on amalgam. Charles discusses the processes he’s been undertaking for the last 10 years to get dangerous mercury fillings removed from the market, and brings you up to speed on where we are today with the FDA’s most recent, atrocious ruling.

The U.S. FDA has issued a final regulation classifying dental amalgam without calling for stringent precautions for pregnant women and children — even though last June a court settlement filed by the Consumers for Dental Choice required the FDA to withdraw claims of mercury amalgam’s safety from its Web site and issue an advisory indicating:

“Dental amalgams contain mercury, which may have neurotoxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses.”

Instead, the FDA has classified the fillings as class II devices, meaning the agency is claiming that they are completely harmless. This stands in direct contradiction of the conclusions of the FDA’s own panel of scientific experts, and the findings of the International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology (IAOMT).

In fact, mercury dental fillings contribute 2 to 3 times as much mercury to the human body as all dietary and environmental sources combined. IAOMT is urging the FDA to change the ruling, ban dental amalgam from commerce and issue a mandatory recall on the product.

Charles Brown says:

“FDA broke its contract and broke its word that it would put warnings for children and unborn children for neurological damage. Bowing to the dental products industry, FDA for the first time in its history pulled a warning about neurological harm to children.”

“This contemptuous attitude toward children and the unborn will not go unanswered,” said Brown. “We will see FDA in court.”

Vapors from dental mercury go into the human body. Due to mercury waste, amalgam is also increasingly targeted by environmentalists. Amalgam has also become controversial because the middle-class has largely moved to non-toxic alternatives while the poor, minorities, and institutional recipients, such as soldiers and prisoners, still get mercury amalgam.

Sources:
Medical News Today July 29, 2009

International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology Press Release (PDF)

International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology Position Paper on Dental Amalgam (PDF)

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

The Food and Drug Administration’s new regulation on mercury amalgam fillings is a disaster for consumers — and a bonanza for those companies still selling, and those dentists still placing, this primitive 19th-century device.

FDA’s rule, published August 4, says there will be no warnings to patients, not even young women and parents of young children, that the mercury from the amalgam fillings is a reproductive toxin and a neurotoxin.

FDA even gives the amalgam industry the green light to sell and place amalgam without disclosing to consumers that the fillings are mainly mercury, even though the agency is aware of the industry’s long-time deceptive practice of marketing amalgam as “silver fillings.”

As a further step to conceal the mercury and its risks, the FDA even pulled from its website a warning that dental mercury can cause neurological damage to children and fetuses — despite signing a contract in 2008 with Consumers for Dental Choice, a nonprofit corporation whose purpose is to educate the public about the health and environmental dangers of mercury fillings, and to ensure more effective government oversight on amalgam.

Every scientist in the world knows that mercury is a virulent neurotoxin that can kill unborn children and cause permanent neurological harm to a child’s developing brain. But the FDA doesn’t want patients to know any of this.

Stung by consumer reaction to its new amalgam rule, the FDA immediately added a warning to its website stating:

“High levels of mercury vapor exposure are associated with adverse effects in the brain and the kidneys.”

But they failed to take the more important step of having the warning issued to dental patients and especially parents. The small change also still allows the nation’s #1 distributor of mercury amalgam, Henry Schein Inc., untrammeled rights to market amalgam for everyone, even pregnant women, without even disclosing the mercury to patients.

The FDA’s Web site also still fails to inform consumers that young children and unborn children are especially susceptible to the effects of mercury. The FDA does not want parents to know about this danger to children even though it admits that this information is true (buried deep in the labeling intended for dentists in the new rule’s special controls, the agency writes that “The developing neurological systems in fetuses and young children may be more sensitive to the neurotoxic effects of mercury vapor”).

With the FDA already conceding that it made a mistake by not posting the risks of mercury on its website, speaking up against this outrageous rule might get results.

Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein is the FDA official in charge of the amalgam rulemaking. The corporate big-shots have his e-mail address, and so should you — it’s JMSharf1@fda.hhs.gov . Or call him at 301.796-5000. Not speaking up now means the poisoning of another generation of American children.

Why is the FDA Ignoring Its Own Scientists’ Recommendations?

The FDA’s new ruling is in direct contradiction to the conclusions of their own 2006 Joint Panel of FDA scientific experts, as well as the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology Scientific Advisory Board members who reviewed the same papers.

The ruling is even contradictory to the FDA’s own advisories that pregnant women should limit their intake of certain fish due to mercury content. Well, as IAOMT reports, mercury dental fillings contribute two to three times as much mercury to the human body than do dietary and environmental sources combined.

Well, eating contaminated seafood will expose you to about 2.3 micrograms of mercury a day, a single dental amalgam filling releases as much as 15 micrograms of mercury per day!

It appears the FDA has sided with big business once again, as its ruling will ensure Americans’ continue using and buying amalgam fillings … but at what expense to their health?

As Charles Brown, National Counsel for advocacy group Consumers for Dental Choice, stated:

“FDA remains alone in the world in failing to protect children and pregnant women from mercury fillings. Since 1996, Canadian dentists have been told not to put mercury amalgam in children or pregnant women. Since 1998, British dentists have been told the same for pregnant women. Norway and Sweden have banned amalgam altogether.

Regrettably, this rule should have meant the end of two-tiered dentistry: mercury for the poor and choice for the rest. Instead the FDA has failed to carry out its mission of protecting the public health.”

Now’s the Time to Look Out for Your Own Health

The FDA has gone back on their word and is now ruling dental amalgam as safe. What this means is that it’s up to you to make sure you do not have this toxic metal implanted into your, or your child’s, mouth.

It’s an ironic fact that the metallic mercury used by dentists to manufacture dental amalgam is shipped as a hazardous material to the dental office. Any amalgam leftover is also treated as hazardous and requires special precautions to dispose of.

Yet you can have those same toxic fillings put into your mouth just by asking (and paying the price, of course)!

Dental amalgam fillings are made from about 50 percent mercury and the rest an amalgam of silver, tin, copper, zinc and other metals.

Mercury is a potent toxin that can damage your brain, central nervous system and kidneys. Children and fetuses, whose brains are still developing, are most at risk, and that is why it’s especially dangerous for pregnant women to get an amalgam … but really anyone can be impacted. Again, those most at risk include:

Pregnant and nursing women
Children
Fetuses
People with already high levels of mercury bioburden
Those who are sensitive to mercury exposure
Help for Those Who Already Have Mercury Fillings

If your mouth is currently free of mercury fillings, good for you. Make sure you keep it that way by seeing a biological dentist who can recommend a truly inert material that will not harm your health in the event you do need a filling.

For those of you who have mercury fillings, I recommend that you have them removed … but avoid making the mistake I did 20 years ago by having it done by a non-biological dentist. You see, when you have these fillings removed you can be exposed to significant amounts of mercury vapors if the dentist doesn’t know what he or she is doing.

It’s also for this reason that I suggest you get healthy BEFORE having your fillings removed, as you want your detoxification mechanisms optimized prior to removal.

Once you’re ready to go ahead with it, do your research and seek out a highly qualified biological dentist. Some things that need to be done to keep you (and your dentist) safe during the procedure include:

Providing you with an alternative air source and instructing you not to breath through your mouth
Using a cold-water spray to minimize mercury vapors
Putting a rubber dam in your mouth so you don’t swallow or inhale any toxins
Using a high-volume evacuator near the tooth at all times to evacuate the mercury vapor
Washing your mouth out immediately after the fillings have been removed (the dentist should also change gloves after the removal)
Immediately cleaning your protective wear and face once the fillings are removed
Using room air purifiers
If you opt not to have your mercury fillings replaced, or if you’re concerned about the mercury burden in your body right now, I highly recommend reviewing my Mercury Detoxification Protocol, which details the things you can do right now to help detoxify your body of this toxic substance.

Please Let Your Voice Be Heard About This Important Issue

Consumers for Dental Choice is working to abolish mercury dental fillings, and you can join their fight!

As I said earlier, Deputy Commissioner Joshua Sharfstein is the FDA official in charge of the amalgam rulemaking. His e-mail address is Sharfstein@fda.hhs.gov or you can call him at (301)796-5000.

Please contact Mr. Sharfstein and let him know how you feel about the FDA’s atrocious ruling on mercury fillings. Not speaking up now means the poisoning of another generation of American children.

Dental Association Forces Disabled to Get Toxic Fillings

Dental Association Forces Disabled to Get Toxic Fillings Posted by Dr. Mercola | March 20 2010 | 9,256 views Email this to a friend Share this article
In an act of moral depravity, the Pennsylvania Dental Association (PDA) and the Philadelphia County Dental Society (PCDS) have endorsed strong-arming parents of children with disabilities to force their written consent to mercury fillings.

These dental societies gave their stamp of approval to dentists who deny all treatment to disabled children unless the parents agree to expose their children to mercury.

Acknowledging that not having routine dental care is detrimental to health, the PDA/PCDS witness noted that people with disabilities in Philadelphia have no feasible alternative.

So the PDA and the PCDS are forcing parents of children with disabilities — even children who already have neurological disorders — to agree to mercury-laden implants or else no dentist will even clean their child’s teeth.

The evidence suggests that the Pennsylvania Dental Association has been planning its assault on the rights of disabled children for the past year.

Sources:
Yahoo Health February 25, 2010

Consumers for Dental Choice March 8, 2010

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

The Pennsylvania Dental Association (PDA) has a dental patient bill of rights on its Web site that states, very clearly:

You have a right to schedule an appointment with the dentist of your choice.
You have a right to ask about treatment alternatives and be told, in language you can understand, the advantages and disadvantages of each.
You have a right to be treated in a professional and ethical manner by your dentist and dental team.
By forcing parents of children with disabilities to sign consent forms agreeing to mercury fillings, or else be denied even basic dental care, they are clearly violating three of their own patient rights.

But perhaps this is not surprising considering their Web site also states:

“Studies have failed to find any link between amalgam restorations and any medical disorder. Amalgam continues to be a safe restorative material for dental patients.”

As Charles Brown, Charles Brown, legal counsel for the Consumers for Dental Choice, writes:

“The PDA and the PCDS are forcing parents of children with disabilities — even children who already have neurological disorders — to choose: either “consent” to the implantation of a neurotoxin an inch from your child’s brain or no dentist will even clean your child’s teeth.”

Fortunately, Consumers for Dental Choice, a nonprofit corporation whose purpose is to educate the public about the health and environmental dangers of mercury fillings, has asked the Attorney General of Pennsylvania to open a civil rights investigation into this matter.

If you live in Pennsylvania and would also like to encourage Attorney General Thomas Corbett to investigate this unethical act, you can email civilrights@attorneygeneral.gov.

What’s this All About?
A war has been brewing against the use of toxic mercury fillings in dentistry for years, but last year the Food and Drug Administration’s new regulation on mercury amalgam fillings fired the proverbial first shot.

The FDA’s rule, published August 4, said there would be no warnings to patients, not even young women and parents of young children, that the mercury from amalgam fillings is a reproductive toxin and a neurotoxin.

The FDA even gave the amalgam industry the green light to sell and place amalgam without disclosing to consumers that the fillings are mainly mercury, even though the agency is aware of the industry’s long-time deceptive practice of marketing amalgam as “silver fillings.”

The FDA’s ruling is in direct contradiction to the conclusions of their own 2006 Joint Panel of FDA scientific experts, as well as the International Academy of Oral Medicine & Toxicology Scientific Advisory Board members who reviewed the same papers.

As Charles Brown stated:

“The FDA remains alone in the world in failing to protect children and pregnant women from mercury fillings. Since 1996, Canadian dentists have been told not to put mercury amalgam in children or pregnant women. Since 1998, British dentists have been told the same for pregnant women. Norway and Sweden have banned amalgam altogether.

Regrettably, this rule should have meant the end of two-tiered dentistry: mercury for the poor and choice for the rest. Instead the FDA has failed to carry out its mission of protecting the public health.”

We are currently fighting to have mercury fillings banned completely in the United States, as it has been in some other European countries.

So for the Pennsylvania Dental Association and the Philadelphia County Dental Society to be demanding disabled children consent to having these toxins implanted in their mouths … or else be denied dental care … is an atrocious violation of civil rights.

Get the Facts about Mercury Fillings
Since mercury fillings are still legal and commonly used in the United States, it’s up to you to make sure you do not have this toxic metal implanted into your, or your child’s, mouth.

It’s an ironic fact that the metallic mercury used by dentists to manufacture dental amalgam is shipped as a hazardous material to the dental office. Any amalgam leftover is also treated as hazardous and requires special precautions to dispose of.

Yet you can have those same toxic fillings put into your mouth just by asking (and paying the price, of course)!

Dental amalgam fillings are made from about 50 percent mercury and the rest an amalgam of silver, tin, copper, zinc and other metals.

Mercury is a potent toxin that can damage your brain, central nervous system and kidneys. Children and fetuses, whose brains are still developing, are most at risk, and that is why it’s especially dangerous for pregnant women to get an amalgam … but really anyone can be impacted. Again, those most at risk include:

Pregnant and nursing women
Children
Fetuses
People with already high levels of mercury bioburden
Those who are sensitive to mercury exposure
If your mouth is currently free of mercury fillings, make sure you keep it that way by seeing a biological dentist who can recommend a truly inert material that will not harm your health in the event you do need a filling.

For those of you who have mercury fillings, I recommend that you have them removed … but avoid making the mistake I did 20 years ago by having it done by a non-biological dentist. You see, when you have these fillings removed you can be exposed to significant amounts of mercury vapors if the dentist doesn’t know what he or she is doing.

It’s also for this reason that I suggest you get healthy BEFORE having your fillings removed, as you want your detoxification mechanisms optimized prior to removal.

Once you’re ready to go ahead with it, do your research and seek out a highly qualified biological dentist using these resources:

Dental Amalgam Mercury Solutions: e-mail dams@usfamily.net or call 651-644-4572 for an information packet
Consumers for Dental Choice
International Academy of Biological Dentistry and Medicine
International Academy of Oral Medicine and Toxicology
Holistic Dental Association
International Association of Mercury Safe Dentists
Join the Crusade for Mercury-Free Dentistry in America
If you missed my interviews with Charlie Brown, who is the stealth behind-the-scenes champion for consumer protection in the United States with respect to mercury, please take a moment to watch them now.

Most Americans are absolutely unaware of what he and his organization have tirelessly been doing for the last 10 years by seeking to eliminate the use of mercury in dentistry in the United States.

If you feel half as strongly as I do about the use of mercury in dentistry, I encourage you to watch all of the videos at this link so you can understand the problem and, more importantly, actively participate in the process to eliminate mercury in dentistry in the United States.