New Chemical
Sweetener (Flavor Enhancer)
It's a case of Big Food meets Big Pharma. And in case it isn't obvious, it's a win-win-lose. With us on the losing end.
At least with a drug, we have some idea of what the side effects might be.
But what could be worse than having an untested drug hit the market that no one, including the FDA, knows about? Well, what about having that drug put in the food supply?
And while the FDA always talks about "risk" versus "benefits," it can't make that argument here. That's because no one but the company that makes this ingredient knows exactly what it is -- or how it's made...
This additive, given the deceptively innocent name "Sweetmyx" (but also known as "S617"), will probably first show up in Pepsi drinks. But that's about all the company behind it is letting out of the bag.
Now with a name like Sweetmyx, you might think this is just a sweetener, maybe stevia mixed in with sugar or some other sweet ingredient. But this is no sweetener you've ever tasted before.
That's because it's actually a chemical with no taste on its own, one called a sweetness enhancer. Food companies like it because it lets them use less sugar or HFCS (high fructose corn sweetener) and get the calorie counts in products down.
Sweetmyx is a patented "discovery" that sounds like it's straight out of a sci-fi movie. Its job is to trick your brain into thinking things tastes sweeter than they really are.
The company behind this additive, Senomyx, calls it a "flavor ingredient." That sounds harmless enough. But wait till you hear how they invented it.
First they cloned human taste receptors. (What?)
Next, they went over "millions of molecules" to find which ones could "bind" to just the right taste receptors to achieve that make-believe sweet taste. So when Sweetmyx hits your mouth, it seeks out and activates the part of the tongue that signals a sweet taste to your brain.
Talk about mind-altering drugs!
The Feingold Association -- a non-profit group that studies the effects of additives and colors on kids -- says this about Sweetmyx:
"...when a chemical has a profound effect on how the body works (in this case, on how the taste buds work), it is considered a drug. A drug must undergo stringent regulations and testing, including discovery of side effects and interactions with drugs, for FDA approval -- far beyond anything required for approval of a ‘flavoring.'"
Wait until you hear this:
Because it's technically called a "food additive," the folks who make it get to decide if it's safe all on their own. And if they don't want to tell the FDA about it at all, well, they don't have to!
But Senomyx is so proud of its brand new additive, it broadcast the news far and wide. It even went so far as to imply the FDA had called it "safe." (But in this case, it was actually an industry group that made the claim.)
Now, while the FDA might not have taken any of its precious time to find out what Sweetmyx is or whether it's safe, it also didn't waste any time in issuing a denial. It sent out an official "statement" saying that not only wasn't the statement true, but this was the first the FDA had heard about it being referred to as safe -- by anyone!
So if you don't want to be part of the massive Sweetmyx experiment, you'll need to watch out. Because not only did they manage to keep WHAT it is a secret, they don't even have to tell us WHERE it is.
One thing we do know is that Pepsi drinks will likely be first -- and that could happen any day now. Then who knows where it might show up next?
So to stay safe, you should avoid anything that lists "artificial flavor" or "artificial sweetener" in its ingredients, because you won't find Sweetmyx listed there. Another tipoff will be new versions of products advertised as being lower in "sugar" and calories.
As usual, it is buyer beware!
It's a case of Big Food meets Big Pharma. And in case it isn't obvious, it's a win-win-lose. With us on the losing end.
At least with a drug, we have some idea of what the side effects might be.
But what could be worse than having an untested drug hit the market that no one, including the FDA, knows about? Well, what about having that drug put in the food supply?
And while the FDA always talks about "risk" versus "benefits," it can't make that argument here. That's because no one but the company that makes this ingredient knows exactly what it is -- or how it's made...
This additive, given the deceptively innocent name "Sweetmyx" (but also known as "S617"), will probably first show up in Pepsi drinks. But that's about all the company behind it is letting out of the bag.
Now with a name like Sweetmyx, you might think this is just a sweetener, maybe stevia mixed in with sugar or some other sweet ingredient. But this is no sweetener you've ever tasted before.
That's because it's actually a chemical with no taste on its own, one called a sweetness enhancer. Food companies like it because it lets them use less sugar or HFCS (high fructose corn sweetener) and get the calorie counts in products down.
Sweetmyx is a patented "discovery" that sounds like it's straight out of a sci-fi movie. Its job is to trick your brain into thinking things tastes sweeter than they really are.
The company behind this additive, Senomyx, calls it a "flavor ingredient." That sounds harmless enough. But wait till you hear how they invented it.
First they cloned human taste receptors. (What?)
Next, they went over "millions of molecules" to find which ones could "bind" to just the right taste receptors to achieve that make-believe sweet taste. So when Sweetmyx hits your mouth, it seeks out and activates the part of the tongue that signals a sweet taste to your brain.
Talk about mind-altering drugs!
The Feingold Association -- a non-profit group that studies the effects of additives and colors on kids -- says this about Sweetmyx:
"...when a chemical has a profound effect on how the body works (in this case, on how the taste buds work), it is considered a drug. A drug must undergo stringent regulations and testing, including discovery of side effects and interactions with drugs, for FDA approval -- far beyond anything required for approval of a ‘flavoring.'"
Wait until you hear this:
Because it's technically called a "food additive," the folks who make it get to decide if it's safe all on their own. And if they don't want to tell the FDA about it at all, well, they don't have to!
But Senomyx is so proud of its brand new additive, it broadcast the news far and wide. It even went so far as to imply the FDA had called it "safe." (But in this case, it was actually an industry group that made the claim.)
Now, while the FDA might not have taken any of its precious time to find out what Sweetmyx is or whether it's safe, it also didn't waste any time in issuing a denial. It sent out an official "statement" saying that not only wasn't the statement true, but this was the first the FDA had heard about it being referred to as safe -- by anyone!
So if you don't want to be part of the massive Sweetmyx experiment, you'll need to watch out. Because not only did they manage to keep WHAT it is a secret, they don't even have to tell us WHERE it is.
One thing we do know is that Pepsi drinks will likely be first -- and that could happen any day now. Then who knows where it might show up next?
So to stay safe, you should avoid anything that lists "artificial flavor" or "artificial sweetener" in its ingredients, because you won't find Sweetmyx listed there. Another tipoff will be new versions of products advertised as being lower in "sugar" and calories.
As usual, it is buyer beware!
It's something you wouldn't wish on your worst enemy -- severe abdominal
cramping and embarrassing sudden diarrhea, sending you running off to the
closest bathroom.
You might think that you've got a stomach bug, or even Montezuma's revenge. But it could just be from eating those special "light" chips with the wonder additive, Olestra!
Yes, the fat-free fat that goes right through you is still around. And soon, it may be turning up in a whole lot of other foods.
You probably remember it from the '90s. The bathroom jokes on the Late Show and the warning label on certain snack foods about "loose stools."
But we've uncovered a little secret food manufacturers hope you won't find out about: Olestra is making a comeback. One way beyond chips and snacks.
Only the FDA has pulled a fast one that could leave you rushing for a bathroom...
Which is it....drug or food additive?
Procter & Gamble spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing this "fat-free fat." They weren't even sure whether it was a drug or a food additive at first. But one thing they did know from the get-go is that Olestra keeps the body from absorbing some very essential vitamins.
And then as soon as it hit the market, there were a few things we all learned quickly.
First, there were the consumer complaints, thousands of them.
One group, Center for Science in the Public Interest, collected over 2,000 reports from people telling about horrible-smelling diarrhea and awful cramps after eating foods containing Olestra. The group says that P&G got over 20,000 similar consumer reports.
By now, the FDA knew about all the nasty details. So you might think Olestra would have been banned entirely.
Not a chance. In fact, they kind of did the opposite.
The FDA's next move -- over a decade ago -- was to remove the "loose stools" warning label entirely. Believe it or not, they said P&G could drop it since everyone was now aware of this little, ah, problem.
But the FDA's gift basket to P&G wasn't quite finished yet.
You see, after the dip in sales, since we didn't all want to be dropping loose stools without warning, P&G needed to find new ways to make money on this baby.
So several years ago, P&G asked for permission to build a bigger market for this magic non fat...more than just chips and snacks.
So they wrote to the FDA asking to add Olestra to bagels, doughnuts, bread, cakes, taco shells, sweet rolls, waffles, frosting, yogurt and even mayo and granola bars! The list goes on and on.
P&G had made its own determination that all these would be "safe" to eat. The FDA had no objections, and presto, they were good to go.
So any day now these 'Olestra-ized' foods could be turning up in your supermarket – without the warning label.
Here's what you have to watch out for:
On any product calling itself "light," or "fat-free" check the ingredient list for Olestra or Olean (the brand name). Another tip-off would be foods with vitamins A, D, E and K, added in. (Those are the vitamins Olestra depletes.)
And don't forget about those chips. The original Frito-Lay WOW chips have been renamed Lay's Light, with the Olean logo on top of the package.
Make sure you know if you're getting any Olestra in your foods. It might be good business for Procter but for you and me, it definitely isn't worth the gamble.
You might think that you've got a stomach bug, or even Montezuma's revenge. But it could just be from eating those special "light" chips with the wonder additive, Olestra!
Yes, the fat-free fat that goes right through you is still around. And soon, it may be turning up in a whole lot of other foods.
You probably remember it from the '90s. The bathroom jokes on the Late Show and the warning label on certain snack foods about "loose stools."
But we've uncovered a little secret food manufacturers hope you won't find out about: Olestra is making a comeback. One way beyond chips and snacks.
Only the FDA has pulled a fast one that could leave you rushing for a bathroom...
Which is it....drug or food additive?
Procter & Gamble spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing this "fat-free fat." They weren't even sure whether it was a drug or a food additive at first. But one thing they did know from the get-go is that Olestra keeps the body from absorbing some very essential vitamins.
And then as soon as it hit the market, there were a few things we all learned quickly.
First, there were the consumer complaints, thousands of them.
One group, Center for Science in the Public Interest, collected over 2,000 reports from people telling about horrible-smelling diarrhea and awful cramps after eating foods containing Olestra. The group says that P&G got over 20,000 similar consumer reports.
By now, the FDA knew about all the nasty details. So you might think Olestra would have been banned entirely.
Not a chance. In fact, they kind of did the opposite.
The FDA's next move -- over a decade ago -- was to remove the "loose stools" warning label entirely. Believe it or not, they said P&G could drop it since everyone was now aware of this little, ah, problem.
But the FDA's gift basket to P&G wasn't quite finished yet.
You see, after the dip in sales, since we didn't all want to be dropping loose stools without warning, P&G needed to find new ways to make money on this baby.
So several years ago, P&G asked for permission to build a bigger market for this magic non fat...more than just chips and snacks.
So they wrote to the FDA asking to add Olestra to bagels, doughnuts, bread, cakes, taco shells, sweet rolls, waffles, frosting, yogurt and even mayo and granola bars! The list goes on and on.
P&G had made its own determination that all these would be "safe" to eat. The FDA had no objections, and presto, they were good to go.
So any day now these 'Olestra-ized' foods could be turning up in your supermarket – without the warning label.
Here's what you have to watch out for:
On any product calling itself "light," or "fat-free" check the ingredient list for Olestra or Olean (the brand name). Another tip-off would be foods with vitamins A, D, E and K, added in. (Those are the vitamins Olestra depletes.)
And don't forget about those chips. The original Frito-Lay WOW chips have been renamed Lay's Light, with the Olean logo on top of the package.
Make sure you know if you're getting any Olestra in your foods. It might be good business for Procter but for you and me, it definitely isn't worth the gamble.
My comment:
Try to avoid
all Low-Fat and No-Fat foods. As I have
shown many times, fat is not the problem. Processed and artificial foods are. Go with the natural and unchanged version
whenever you can. When foods are artificially changed or enhanced they are no
longer healthy for your body, and that includes all processed diet foods. Make better
choices and eat only natural and organic foods as much as possible.
Media Attacks Katie Couric for Presenting
HPV Information and a Different Perspective
Taken from an article on Mercola.com
The medical establishment lashed out at Katie because she dared to question the safety or effectiveness of a government recommended vaccine….even after $3 billion in federal compensation has already been awarded to vaccine victims in the US for injuries stemming from the Gardasil vaccine
Katie's unforgiveable transgression? On her afternoon talk show,
she gave two mothers, who had witnessed their daughters' health suddenly
deteriorate after Gardasil shots, an opportunity to speak about what happened.7, 8
She gave an international HPV infection expert,9 who participated in Gardasil vaccine
clinical trial research, an opportunity to comment about the effectiveness of
Gardasil vaccine and the need for all girls – whether they get vaccinated or
not – to get regular pap screening.10
She gave a pediatrician an opportunity to encourage parents to
vaccinate their 11-year-old boys and girls because "HPV vaccine does not
seem to be any risker than any of the other vaccines we routinely use;"11, 12 and Katie gave a mother and her daughter
an opportunity to enthusiastically endorse the vaccine.13
Katie Couric presented information and a range of perspectives
about a current topic being discussed by millions of parents and young women in
homes and doctors' offices across the country. She did it because she is an
intellectually honest journalist, a compassionate mother, and a cancer prevention pioneer.
The shaming of Katie Couric for caring and daring to ask questions
about Gardasil vaccine was a well-orchestrated campaign of intimidation. It was
a warning delivered to all journalists that – no matter who you are – your
character will be assassinated if you step out of line and question the
safety or effectiveness of a government recommended vaccine.
The cyber lynch mob presenting opinion as unassailable fact
delighted in quoting each other and did not reserve their vitriol for Katie.
Two mothers on the show were ridiculed for describing their daughters' Gardasil
vaccine reaction symptoms, which are similar to those reported by many, many
others in the US and around the world.23-43
Here are
some key points:
- After giving airtime to two
mothers whose daughters’ health suddenly deteriorated after Gardasil
shots, a smear campaign against seasoned journalist Katie Couric was
unleashed
- $3 billion in federal compensation
has been awarded to vaccine victims in the US for injuries stemming from
the Gardasil vaccine
- By December 13, 2013, Gardasil had
generated nearly 30,000 adverse reaction reports to the US government,
including 140 deaths
- Such adverse reaction reports are
only a fraction of the numbers of Gardasil reactions, injuries, and deaths
that have actually occurred, as most doctors either do not report it, or
make reports directly to Merck
- By 2006, pap tests had driven down
the numbers of new cases of cervical cancer to 9,700 per year with about
3,700 deaths—hardly the kind of death toll that would warrant injecting
every single woman in the country against HPV
Now It is confirmed - Mammograms
Do Not Save Lives
It's time to look past the pink ribbons, the massive PR machine, and the
amazing women we've all loved who have fallen victim to breast cancer.
Because results from one of the largest and most thorough studies are finally in. It examined 90,000 women over 25 years.
And its conclusion is clear: Mammograms don't save lives.
So why do they still insist on subjecting women to the pain, the radiation and the false positives?
These results reveal (again) an alarming story of how women everywhere have been frightened by their doctors and caring family members into having a dangerous and unnecessary test.
And how they line up for it again and again every single year.
This is not the first time research has debunked the mammogram illusion of being a life-saver.
And no matter how many reports come out, it doesn't look like the medical mainstream is going to change its mind, at least not in this century.
That's why the results of this study are something that every single woman needs to know about.
Here's some of what the Canadian researchers found out in this 25-year study:
Because results from one of the largest and most thorough studies are finally in. It examined 90,000 women over 25 years.
And its conclusion is clear: Mammograms don't save lives.
So why do they still insist on subjecting women to the pain, the radiation and the false positives?
These results reveal (again) an alarming story of how women everywhere have been frightened by their doctors and caring family members into having a dangerous and unnecessary test.
And how they line up for it again and again every single year.
This is not the first time research has debunked the mammogram illusion of being a life-saver.
And no matter how many reports come out, it doesn't look like the medical mainstream is going to change its mind, at least not in this century.
That's why the results of this study are something that every single woman needs to know about.
Here's some of what the Canadian researchers found out in this 25-year study:
- Mammograms do not
lower the number of women who are dying from breast cancer. The death rate
for both groups in the study -- those who took mammograms and those who
didn't -- was almost exactly the same.
- Mammograms are leading
to over-diagnoses of breast cancer. This means the test might find cancers
that do not require treatment.
- There was no advantage
in finding breast cancers with a mammogram when they were too small to
detect in an exam done by hand.
- One in five cancers
found by mammograms are the kind that should not be treated. Yet,
women who are told they have breast cancer often panic. Many undergo
surgery, chemo and radiation, not knowing what the best course of action
is.
Keep in mind, not all breast cancers are death sentences. Researchers say that many cancers grow slowly and some don't grow at all. But the mainstream view is to treat all cancers aggressively, with painful and disfiguring procedures. This dogma causes not only physical pain but severe emotional harm -- as far too many women are subjecting themselves to radical mastectomies.
Of course, the American College of Radiology immediately called the study results "flawed" (a favorite expression when long-held beliefs are debunked).
But over in Switzerland, they are taking a different view.
The Swiss Medical Board recently advised that no new programs to promote mammography be started. Its big concern was about over-diagnosis leading to unnecessary surgical procedures.
Your doctor probably thinks like mine does when it comes to mammograms, "Just do it, for heaven's sake!"
If you're going to "just do" anything, remember that self-breast exams are absolutely essential. Learn how to do them correctly by a trained nurse, and do them monthly.
Until next
time, stay healthy and happy
JD Roma
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