BPA and Kids
Follow the money -- and the logic -- and you will see the FDA's recent statements on BPA are a bunch of bull.
Do you know why BPA has been removed from baby bottles and sippy cups? It's not because BPA is unsafe. It's because consumers became aware that it's unsafe.
If the bottle industry knew about BPA dangers, but consumers didn't, do you think the industry would have gone to great lengths to remove it? Of course not.
The FDA finally got around to banning BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups. That would have been a far-sighted move in 2002. In 2012, it's essentially pointless.
Don't get me wrong. It's a good thing that kids are getting less BPA exposure. But it's because of the PR and sales effect of being able to put a "BPA-free" sticker on your bottle, not the 13th hour move by the FDA.
And to prove it, FDA officials have made it clear they don't intend to take any further steps to limit BPA use.
As I've mentioned before, BPA disrupts hormonal activity. And with each year, we've seen mounting evidence that it promotes cancer, birth defects, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes.
But the agency still claims BPA is safe. In fact, an FDA spokesperson told USA Today that the new ban has nothing to do with safety. She states flatly that the bottle industry wanted the ban. So the FDA gave them their ban.
Ignore for a second what an absurd statement that is. Because what's hiding behind that statement is the bad news for you, me and every child. Because the ban is on BPA in bottles, not on BPA. And you won't believe where else your kids and grandkids are getting bombarded by BPA.......In their fillings!
For many years, scientists have known that BPA exposure is potentially dangerous. And yet, someone developed a type of tooth filling -- for use in children! -- that contains BPA. So they've taken BPA bottles out of kids' mouths, and then EMBEDDED BPA in their teeth!
And the results won't surprise anyone. Not anyone paying attention anyway. In a new study, children with BPA fillings were more likely to have emotional issues, including depression and anxiety.
And this was just a five-year study. Many kids will have these fillings their entire lives!
Just when we got the word out on Mercury, now this! Add to that, the use of BPA fillings is growing because they're "tooth colored." And here's the clincher: The FDA regulates tooth fillings. That means NOTHING is going to happen beyond this study. Not if the FDA continues genuflecting to the industry.
Here are the only two words you need to know to get an idea of what BPA industry clout might be like around the FDA: "Bayer" and "Dow."
According to the USDA, these two global giants produce "the bulk" of BPA. And the total BPA market is worth about $8 billion annually. So there's no mystery as to why the FDA "believes" BPA is perfectly safe. Bayer. Dow. $8 billion. Mystery solved!
Parents, you can avoid BPA fillings by asking your child's dentist about another type of filling. It's called a "componer." The new BPA study also included children with componer fillings. The researchers found no links between componers and behavioral problems.
Follow the money -- and the logic -- and you will see the FDA's recent statements on BPA are a bunch of bull.
Do you know why BPA has been removed from baby bottles and sippy cups? It's not because BPA is unsafe. It's because consumers became aware that it's unsafe.
If the bottle industry knew about BPA dangers, but consumers didn't, do you think the industry would have gone to great lengths to remove it? Of course not.
The FDA finally got around to banning BPA in baby bottles and sippy cups. That would have been a far-sighted move in 2002. In 2012, it's essentially pointless.
Don't get me wrong. It's a good thing that kids are getting less BPA exposure. But it's because of the PR and sales effect of being able to put a "BPA-free" sticker on your bottle, not the 13th hour move by the FDA.
And to prove it, FDA officials have made it clear they don't intend to take any further steps to limit BPA use.
As I've mentioned before, BPA disrupts hormonal activity. And with each year, we've seen mounting evidence that it promotes cancer, birth defects, heart disease, and type 2 diabetes.
But the agency still claims BPA is safe. In fact, an FDA spokesperson told USA Today that the new ban has nothing to do with safety. She states flatly that the bottle industry wanted the ban. So the FDA gave them their ban.
Ignore for a second what an absurd statement that is. Because what's hiding behind that statement is the bad news for you, me and every child. Because the ban is on BPA in bottles, not on BPA. And you won't believe where else your kids and grandkids are getting bombarded by BPA.......In their fillings!
For many years, scientists have known that BPA exposure is potentially dangerous. And yet, someone developed a type of tooth filling -- for use in children! -- that contains BPA. So they've taken BPA bottles out of kids' mouths, and then EMBEDDED BPA in their teeth!
And the results won't surprise anyone. Not anyone paying attention anyway. In a new study, children with BPA fillings were more likely to have emotional issues, including depression and anxiety.
And this was just a five-year study. Many kids will have these fillings their entire lives!
Just when we got the word out on Mercury, now this! Add to that, the use of BPA fillings is growing because they're "tooth colored." And here's the clincher: The FDA regulates tooth fillings. That means NOTHING is going to happen beyond this study. Not if the FDA continues genuflecting to the industry.
Here are the only two words you need to know to get an idea of what BPA industry clout might be like around the FDA: "Bayer" and "Dow."
According to the USDA, these two global giants produce "the bulk" of BPA. And the total BPA market is worth about $8 billion annually. So there's no mystery as to why the FDA "believes" BPA is perfectly safe. Bayer. Dow. $8 billion. Mystery solved!
Parents, you can avoid BPA fillings by asking your child's dentist about another type of filling. It's called a "componer." The new BPA study also included children with componer fillings. The researchers found no links between componers and behavioral problems.
Allergy help
Imagine you're feeling miserable, suffering from seasonal allergies. If someone suggests you sniff powdered plant extract into your nostrils, you might think they're crazy.
After all, plants are the source of your misery. And you already have a powdered plant extract up your nose. It's called "pollen." And it's your sworn enemy.
But here's the catch... The REAL source of your misery is not pollen.
In most people with seasonal allergies, the misery is caused by what's NOT happening in the nasal passages. A layer of mucus protects your nasal passages from pollen, dust, mold spores, etc. When mucus production is low, your protection is also low.
Some years ago, a UK engineer named Mike James formulated an organic powered plant extract. Nasaleze was developed 10 years ago. When the extract is sniffed into the nose, it creates a gel that protects the nasal passages, just like mucus.
Numerous studies have proved the effectiveness of Nasaleze in adults. Two years ago, that research began to include children. During a six-week trial, nearly all the kids who used Nasaleze reduced allergy symptoms better than those who took conventional treatments.
That lead to an interesting development...Junior Nasaleze with a strawberry flavor. And that made me wonder... A flavor? For a nose powder? I had a friend try it and she said "It's somewhere between a flavor and an aroma. Very subtle."
There's no dosage difference between original Nasaleze and the new version because there are no active ingredients -- not in a medicinal sense anyway. That also means there are no side effects -- none for kids. None for adults.
Banning Vitamins and Our Rights
When our
forefathers rang the Liberty Bell 237 years ago, I guarantee you this is not
what they had in mind. In fact, Philadelphia is becoming more the City of
Oppression than the City of Brotherly Love. And the ringleader is a big player
in the high-profit pharmaceutical world dressed in sheep's clothing.
I first heard about Paul Offit a few months ago. He's the genius who said he "can't believe" people would ever take a megavitamin. Well now he's taken his attack on alternative medicine a step further. The tragic part is he's putting children at risk -- in the name of the almighty buck.
Offit is chief of infectious disease at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Recently, he announced that CHOP (as it's known), will no longer include dietary supplements on its list of allowed products for patients.
But here's what's really frightening...
When kids come to the hospital, parents will now be asked if their children are taking dietary supplements. If they are, staff members have been instructed to STRONGLY discourage supplement use. They'll even offer a pamphlet to create doubts about supplements to further their vitamin witch-hunt.
And Offit announced it all in a video with a straight face (surrounded by dozens of books that say "Vaccines" on their spines, by the way) and pointing his finger like we'd better listen up -- or else.
Seems shocking at first. Until you discover where Offit's real paycheck comes from.
He occupies a $1.5 million dollar research chair at the hospital, funded by Merck -- one of the true giants of Big Pharma. But that's not Offit's only Merck connection. He also holds a patent on a childhood vaccine produced by Merck called RotaTeq. Now, he won't say out loud how much he's earned off this connection, but it's said to be as much as $55 million!
Heard enough? Well, as they say in those late night sales pitches... "But wait -- there's more!"
One of Offit's other titles at CHOP is Chair of the "Therapeutic Standards Committee." That may sound innocent enough until you hear about the hospital's new partner in "therapeutic innovation." It's no less than Pfizer.
Merck? Pfizer? Offit is obviously on Big Pharma's Christmas card list. No wonder he's leading the mission to put an end to supplement use. So what's next? Maybe Dr. Offit will decide that milk can't be served in the hospital cafeteria since it's fortified with vitamin D.
I first heard about Paul Offit a few months ago. He's the genius who said he "can't believe" people would ever take a megavitamin. Well now he's taken his attack on alternative medicine a step further. The tragic part is he's putting children at risk -- in the name of the almighty buck.
Offit is chief of infectious disease at the Children's Hospital of Philadelphia. Recently, he announced that CHOP (as it's known), will no longer include dietary supplements on its list of allowed products for patients.
But here's what's really frightening...
When kids come to the hospital, parents will now be asked if their children are taking dietary supplements. If they are, staff members have been instructed to STRONGLY discourage supplement use. They'll even offer a pamphlet to create doubts about supplements to further their vitamin witch-hunt.
And Offit announced it all in a video with a straight face (surrounded by dozens of books that say "Vaccines" on their spines, by the way) and pointing his finger like we'd better listen up -- or else.
Seems shocking at first. Until you discover where Offit's real paycheck comes from.
He occupies a $1.5 million dollar research chair at the hospital, funded by Merck -- one of the true giants of Big Pharma. But that's not Offit's only Merck connection. He also holds a patent on a childhood vaccine produced by Merck called RotaTeq. Now, he won't say out loud how much he's earned off this connection, but it's said to be as much as $55 million!
Heard enough? Well, as they say in those late night sales pitches... "But wait -- there's more!"
One of Offit's other titles at CHOP is Chair of the "Therapeutic Standards Committee." That may sound innocent enough until you hear about the hospital's new partner in "therapeutic innovation." It's no less than Pfizer.
Merck? Pfizer? Offit is obviously on Big Pharma's Christmas card list. No wonder he's leading the mission to put an end to supplement use. So what's next? Maybe Dr. Offit will decide that milk can't be served in the hospital cafeteria since it's fortified with vitamin D.
Multivitamins at Every Age
Here's a big win for those of us who believe in the power of vitamins: A
new study finds that our daily supplements really do make a difference--even in
seemingly healthy young adults and middle-aged people.
Not that I needed any convincing--and I doubt you did, either--but the
mainstream media just loves to bash vitamins. That's why you probably didn't
see much coverage of the latest research, which found that vitamins can help
boost vitality and mental sharpness.
The randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study-- the gold standard
of research--involved 215 healthy men between the ages of 30 and 55, randomly
assigned to either a multivitamin or a placebo for 33 days.
The subjects were asked about their moods, stress levels and overall health...
and then asked to complete some physical and mental tasks--such as counting
backwards by threes or sevens, starting from a random number.
At the start of the study, everyone was roughly equal. Thirty-three days
later, however, and they weren't so equal anymore. In fact, those who took their daily
multivitamins reported significant improvement in mental health, lower stress
levels and better moods. They were even able to handle those tricky
backwards-counting tests better. They
also had lower levels of "mental tiredness" and "mental
fatigue."
Those on the placebo, on the other hand, had no noticeable changes,
according to researchers from Northumbria University, where the study was
conducted.
This study was funded by Bayer, which of course wants to sell you
Bayer-branded vitamins. But don't let that sully the victory, because it's
solid evidence of how vitamins can help make sure we get all the nutrients we
need--and how much better we function when we do.
Despite all the recent vitamin-bashing, this study is also solid proof of the
benefits of a multivitamin, even in the seemingly healthy people who mistakenly
believe they don't need one. You do--nearly everyone does. Just make sure you
pick the right supplements for your lifestyle.
While it's important to get your nutrients from food, most of us can't--or
don't--get everything we need with our meals. In addition, our nutritional
needs can change as we age.
Talk to your doctor, ideally a good naturopathic physician, about choosing
the right supplements for your lifestyle. In most cases, you'll want to start
with a high-quality multivitamin, and then add specific supplements that match
your individual needs.
Vitamin D is a great addition for most people, since even the mainstream
readily admits that most of us are badly deficient, and most multivitamins
don't contain nearly enough of it.
Be sure to use “whole food” vitamins whenever possible as they are much
more effective than man made vitamins. I suggest also taking a flax, fish or
krill oil supplement too. Many vitamins are fat soluble and require fat to be
utilized by the body.
Splenda Is Not So Splendid
No blood sugar spikes. (Awesome!)
No insulin spikes. (Even better!)
For years, those have been the key selling points for sucralose. That's the artificial sweetener most of us call Splenda. You probably know the yellow packet. You've seen it a thousand times in those little containers in every diner in America. And many people reach for it because they believe it's better for them than sugar.
Well you'll never guess what researchers have just discovered. Turns out, Splenda has a dirty little secret. Since it first landed on grocery store shelves, I've been warning you that Splenda is not a healthy sugar substitute.
To make Splenda, scientists use a "patented" process to tinker with sugar. It sounds elaborate but what they actually do is insert chlorine into the chemical makeup.
Chlorine? Oh yum! But in this new study, chlorine is not the concern.
Researchers recruited obese subjects who did not have type 2 diabetes. Also, none of them used Splenda. (Good call!) And at the end of this study, I'm sure they all vowed to avoid it forever.
Here's why...
In a round of controlled dietary interventions, Splenda prompted blood sugar and insulin spikes. And this occurred even at low doses. So a couple of packets here. A couple of packets there. Maybe a slice of cake or pie made with Splenda. Repeat that pattern on a regular basis and you know what that adds up to... Type 2 diabetes risk.
The real problem here is that many people on weight-loss diets turn from sugar to Splenda. In fact, Splenda is a mainstay of the Atkins diet. But now it appears that many of those dieters are careening right toward the very health issues they're trying to avoid.
If you're looking for a sugar substitute, avoid all things yellow, pink and blue. Try stevia or xylitol or coconut sugar. They are natural and have low impact on your blood sugar. You can get stevia in just about any grocery store now and coconut sugar is available in more and more grocery stores every day. I order my Xylitol online through Amazon.
The information on
this blog is provided for educational purposes only. It is not a substitute for
professional medical care, and medical advice and services are not being
offered. If you have, or suspect you have, a health problem you should consult
your physician (preferably a Naturopath).
No comments:
Post a Comment