Keep the fight for your right to know what's in your food going. Visit gmofreezone.org for t-shirts, buttons, signs and more. Just say "no" to GMO!
http://www.gmofreezone.org
Saturday, December 10, 2011
Friday, October 14, 2011
Organic and Natural Food Membership Club
If you have not yet heard about the Green Polka Dot Box, check them out for savings of 60% on natural and organic foods.
http://www.greenpolkadotbox.com/invite/gmofreebl
1. Over 90% of our projected products for launch have been shipped or they are already in our warehouse.
2. Membership is going to bust through 11,000 this week!
3. Our Free One-Year Club membership Drive has been extended to October 23rd.
4. Reward Membership activations for shopping priority will commence on October 24th.
5. The Green PolkaDot Box will open for business on the morning of November 1st.
http://www.greenpolkadotbox.com/invite/gmofreebl
http://www.greenpolkadotbox.com/invite/gmofreebl
1. Over 90% of our projected products for launch have been shipped or they are already in our warehouse.
2. Membership is going to bust through 11,000 this week!
3. Our Free One-Year Club membership Drive has been extended to October 23rd.
4. Reward Membership activations for shopping priority will commence on October 24th.
5. The Green PolkaDot Box will open for business on the morning of November 1st.
http://www.greenpolkadotbox.com/invite/gmofreebl
Sunday, October 2, 2011
Friday, September 23, 2011
Esdifan - Stop Diarrhea Fast and Naturally
OK, we don't normally endorse particular brands on this blog, but we have to pass along this great tip for an awesome product! We know many of you probably suffer from digestive disorders due to the effects of GMOs and toxins in the Standard American Diet. We have come across an amzaing, natural treatment that stops diarrhea fast. We have tested it and can personally recommend it as a proven alternative to OTC and prescription treatments. Read the testimonials and draw your own conclusions!
http://www.zeohealth.com/?VM12604esdifan.html
http://www.zeohealth.com/?VM12604esdifan.html
Saturday, September 17, 2011
Two Products To Try for Detox, Purification and IBS Relief
Two recommeded products to try
"Esdifan stops diarrhea fast and naturally."
http://www.zeohealth.com/?VM12604esdifan.html
Adya Clarity for water purification and health rejuvination
http://jrox.therawfoodworld.com/jrox.php?id=2369
"Esdifan stops diarrhea fast and naturally."
http://www.zeohealth.com/?VM12604esdifan.html
Adya Clarity for water purification and health rejuvination
http://jrox.therawfoodworld.com/jrox.php?id=2369
Wednesday, August 31, 2011
Saturday, August 27, 2011
Sunday, August 14, 2011
Why is Soros Selling Gold to Buy Farmland?
Investors are selling gold and buying up farmland around the world:
Why Is Soros Selling Gold and Buying Farmland?
Emergency Food - Long Life Shelf Life - Saving Families One Meal at a time
http://www.gmofreeworld.efoodsglobal.com/
SEO Made Simple
Blazing Fast Search Engine Optimization
Paypal Affiliate Programs Pays Instantly
What is SEO?
Design Your Own Custom Made Gifts
SEO Tool and Techniques
Affiliate Programs
Mobile Marketing Frenzy
Why Is Soros Selling Gold and Buying Farmland?
Emergency Food - Long Life Shelf Life - Saving Families One Meal at a time
http://www.gmofreeworld.efoodsglobal.com/
SEO Made Simple
Blazing Fast Search Engine Optimization
Paypal Affiliate Programs Pays Instantly
What is SEO?
Design Your Own Custom Made Gifts
SEO Tool and Techniques
Affiliate Programs
Mobile Marketing Frenzy
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Friday, July 8, 2011
Friday, June 17, 2011
Thursday, May 26, 2011
Confronting the Tyranny Head On
Alex Jones and Citizens Rock the Capital
5/26/11
In an impromptu show of support for standing against forced TSA pat-downs, Alex Jones and hundreds of local supporters showed up at the capital Wednesday afternoon to confront senators face to face. Americans are fed up with the abuse of power that seems to be increasing more and more everyday, and now the threat of making Texas a "no fly zone" if the senate did not stop the bill to override TSA authority was the final straw! It was gratifying to see people stand up to the tyranny that is taking place in our country. People are starting to wake up in America. Alternative news has gained rapid support in recent weeks. God bless America. Stand up for your freedoms as laid out in the Bill or Rights and the US Constitution!
Alex Jones & Fellow Texans Take to Capitol, Demand Representatives Resist TSA Tyranny
Republican Lt. Governor Killed TSA Bill for Obama - Republican Lt. Governor Killed TSA Bill for Obama
Food Prices Continue to Skyrocket. Be Prepared BEFORE The Food Shortage Gets Here.
Do You Know What's In Your Food? Find out at www.gmofree.us
Need to Get Your News Out FAST? Need Your site Ranking on Page 1 in the Search Engines?
Blazing Fast Search Engine Optimization Blows Away the Competition!
5/26/11
In an impromptu show of support for standing against forced TSA pat-downs, Alex Jones and hundreds of local supporters showed up at the capital Wednesday afternoon to confront senators face to face. Americans are fed up with the abuse of power that seems to be increasing more and more everyday, and now the threat of making Texas a "no fly zone" if the senate did not stop the bill to override TSA authority was the final straw! It was gratifying to see people stand up to the tyranny that is taking place in our country. People are starting to wake up in America. Alternative news has gained rapid support in recent weeks. God bless America. Stand up for your freedoms as laid out in the Bill or Rights and the US Constitution!
Alex Jones & Fellow Texans Take to Capitol, Demand Representatives Resist TSA Tyranny
Republican Lt. Governor Killed TSA Bill for Obama - Republican Lt. Governor Killed TSA Bill for Obama
Food Prices Continue to Skyrocket. Be Prepared BEFORE The Food Shortage Gets Here.
Do You Know What's In Your Food? Find out at www.gmofree.us
Need to Get Your News Out FAST? Need Your site Ranking on Page 1 in the Search Engines?
Blazing Fast Search Engine Optimization Blows Away the Competition!
Wednesday, May 25, 2011
5 Reasons High Fructose Corn Syrup Can Kill You
Posted By Mark Hyman, MD On May 13, 2011 @ 7:30 pm In Articles,UltraWellness Library
[1]IF YOU CAN’T CONVINCE THEM, CONFUSE THEM.
—Harry Truman
The current media debate about the benefits (or lack of harm) of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in our diet misses the obvious. The average American increased their consumption of HFCS (mostly from sugar sweetened drinks and processed food) from zero to over 60 pounds per person per year. During that time period, obesity rates have more than tripled and diabetes incidence has increased more than seven fold. Not perhaps the only cause, but a fact that cannot be ignored.
Doubt and confusion are the currency of deception, and they sow the seeds of complacency. These are used skillfully through massive print and television advertising campaigns by the Corn Refiners Association [2]’s attempt to dispel the “myth” that HFCS is harmful and assert through the opinion of “medical and nutrition experts” that it is no different than cane sugar. It is a “natural” product that is a healthy part of our diet when used in moderation.
Except for one problem. When used in moderation it is a major cause of heart disease [3], obesity [4], cancer, dementia [5], liver failure, tooth decay and more.
Why is the corn industry spending millions on misinformation campaigns to convince consumers and health care professionals of the safety of their product? Could it be that the food industry comprises 17 percent of our economy?
The Lengths the Corn Industry Will Go To
The goal of the corn industry is to call into question any claim of harm from consuming high fructose corn syrup, and to confuse and deflect by calling their product natural “corn sugar”. That’s like calling tobacco in cigarettes natural herbal medicine. Watch the slick ad [6] where a caring father walks hand in hand with his four-year-old daughter through a big question mark carved in an idyllic cornfield.
In the ad, the father tells us:
“Like any parent I have questions about the food my daughter eats – like high fructose corn syrup. So I started looking for answers from medical and nutrition experts, and what I discovered whether it’s corn sugar or cane sugar your body can’t tell the difference. Sugar is sugar. Knowing that makes me feel better about what she eats and that’s one less thing to worry about.”
Physicians are also targeted directly. I received a 12-page color glossy monograph from the Corn Refiners Association reviewing the “science” that HFCS was safe and no different than cane sugar. I assume the other 700,000 physicians in America received the same propaganda at who knows what cost.
In addition to this, I received a special “personal” letter from the Corn Refiner’s Association outlining every mention of the problems with HCFS in our diet – whether in print, blogs, books, radio or television. They warned me of the errors of my ways and put me on “notice”. For what I am not sure. To think they are tracking this (and me) that closely gives me an Orwellian chill.
New websites like www.sweetsurprise.com [7] and www.cornsugar.com [8] help “set us straight” about HFCS with quotes from professors of nutrition and medicine and thought leaders from Harvard and other stellar institutions.
Why is the corn industry spending millions on misinformation campaigns to convince consumers and health care professionals of the safety of their product? Could it be that the food industry comprises 17 percent of our economy?
But are these twisted sweet lies or a sweet surprise, as the Corn Refiners Association websites claim?
What the Science Says about HFCS
Let’s examine the science and insert some common sense into the conversation. These facts may indeed come as a sweet surprise. The ads suggest getting your nutrition advice from your doctor (who, unfortunately, probably knows less about nutrition than most grandmothers). Having studied this for over a decade, and having read, interviewed or personally talked with most of the “medical and nutrition experts” used to bolster the claim that “corn sugar” and cane sugar are essentially the same, quite a different picture emerges and the role of HCFS in promoting obesity, disease and death across the globe becomes clear.
Last week over lunch with Dr. Bruce Ames, one of the foremost nutritional scientists in the world and Dr. Jeffrey Bland, a nutritional biochemist, a student of Linus Pauling and I reviewed the existing science, and Dr. Ames shared shocking new evidence from his research center on how HFCS can trigger body-wide inflammation and obesity.
Here are 5 reasons you should stay way from any product containing high fructose corn syrup and why it may kill you.
1. Sugar in any form causes obesity and disease when consumed in pharmacologic doses.
Cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup are indeed both harmful when consumed in pharmacologic doses of 140 pounds per person per year. When one 20 ounce HFCS sweetened soda, sports drink or tea has 17 teaspoons of sugar (and the average teenager often consumes two drinks a day) we are conducting a largely uncontrolled experiment on the human species. Our hunter gather ancestors consumed the equivalent of 20 teaspoons per year, not per day. In this sense, I would agree with the corn industry that sugar is sugar. Quantity matters. But there are some important differences.
2. HFCS and cane sugar are NOT biochemically identical or processed the same way by the body.
High fructose corn syrup is an industrial food product and far from “natural” or a naturally occurring substance. It is extracted from corn stalks through a process so secret that Archer Daniels Midland and Carghill would not allow the investigative journalist, Michael Pollan to observe it for his book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma. The sugars are extracted through a chemical enzymatic process resulting in a chemically and biologically novel compound called HFCS.
Some basic biochemistry will help you understand this. Regular cane sugar (sucrose) is made of two-sugar molecules bound tightly together – glucose and fructose in equal amounts. The enzymes in your digestive tract must break down the sucrose into glucose and fructose, which are then absorbed into the body.
HFCS also consists of glucose and fructose, not in a 50-50 ratio, but a 55-45 fructose to glucose ratio in an unbound form. Fructose is sweeter than glucose. And HCFS is cheaper than sugar because of the government farm bill corn subsidies. Products with HFCS are sweeter and cheaper than products made with cane sugar. This allowed for the average soda size to balloon from 8 ounces to 20 ounces with little financial costs to manufacturers but great human costs of increased obesity, diabetes and chronic disease.
Now back to biochemistry. Since there is there is no chemical bond between them, no digestion is required so they are more rapidly absorbed into your blood stream. Fructose goes right to the liver and triggers lipogenesis (the production of fats like triglycerides and cholesterol) this is why it is the major cause of liver damage in this country and causes a condition called “fatty liver” which affects 70 million people. The rapidly absorbed glucose triggers big spikes in insulin – our body’s major fat storage hormone. Both these features of HFCS lead to increased metabolic disturbances that drive increases in appetite, weight gain, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, dementia and more.
But there was one more thing I learned during lunch with Dr. Bruce Ames. Research done by his group at the Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute [9] found that free fructose from HFCS requires more energy to be absorbed by the gut and soaks up two phosphorous molecules from ATP (our body’s energy source). This depletes the energy fuel source or ATP in our gut required to maintain the integrity of our intestinal lining. Little “tight junctions” cement each intestinal cell together preventing food and bacteria from “leaking” across the intestinal membrane and triggering an immune reaction and body wide inflammation.
High doses of free fructose have been proven to literally punch holes in the intestinal lining allowing nasty byproducts of toxic gut bacteria and partially digested food proteins to enter your blood stream and trigger the inflammation that we know is at the root of obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, dementia and accelerated aging. Naturally occurring fructose in fruit is part of a complex of nutrients and fiber that doesn’t exhibit the same biological effects as the free high fructose doses found in “corn sugar”.
The takeaway: Cane sugar and the industrially produced, euphemistically named “corn sugar” are not biochemically or physiologically the same.
3. HFCS contains contaminants including mercury [10] that are not regulated or measured by the FDA
An FDA researcher asked corn producers to ship a barrel of high fructose corn syrup in order to test for contaminants. Her repeated requests were refused until she claimed she represented a newly created soft drink company. She was then promptly shipped a big vat of HFCS that was used as part of the study that showed that HFCS often contains toxic levels of mercury because of chlor-alkali products used in its manufacturing.(i [11]) Poisoned sugar is certainly not “natural”.
When HFCS is run through a chemical analyzer or a chromatograph, strange chemical peaks show up that are not glucose or fructose. What are they? Who knows? This certainly calls into question the purity of this processed form of super sugar. The exact nature, effects and toxicity of these funny compounds have not been fully explained, but shouldn’t we be protected from the presence of untested chemical compounds in our food supply, especially when the contaminated food product comprises up to 15-20 percent of the average American’s daily calorie intake?
4. Independent medical and nutrition experts DO NOT support the use of HCFS in our diet, despite the assertions of the corn industry.
The corn industry’s happy looking websites www.cornsugar.com [8] and www.sweetsurprise.com [7] bolster their position that cane sugar and corn sugar are the same by quoting experts, or should we say mis-quoting …
Barry M. Popkin, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has published widely on the dangers of sugar-sweetened drinks and their contribution to the obesity epidemic. In a review of HFCS in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,(ii [12]) he explains the mechanism by which the free fructose may contribute to obesity. He states that:
“The digestion, absorption, and metabolism of fructose differ from those of glucose. Hepatic metabolism of fructose favors de novo lipogenesis [production of fat in the liver]. In addition, unlike glucose, fructose does not stimulate insulin secretion or enhance leptin production. Because insulin and leptin act as key afferent signals in the regulation of food intake and body weight [to control appetite], this suggests that dietary fructose may contribute to increased energy intake and weight gain. Furthermore, calorically sweetened beverages may enhance caloric overconsumption.”
He states that HFCS is absorbed more rapidly than regular sugar, and that it doesn’t stimulate insulin or leptin production. This prevents you from triggering the body’s signals for being full and may lead to overconsumption of total calories.
He concludes by saying that:
“… the increase in consumption of HFCS has a temporal relation to the epidemic of obesity, and the overconsumption of HFCS in calorically sweetened beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity.”
The corn industry takes his comments out of context to support their position. “All sugar you eat is the same.”
True pharmacologic doses of any kind of sugar are harmful, but the biochemistry of different kinds of sugar and their respective effects on absorption, appetite and metabolism are different, and Dr. Popkin knows that.
David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, and a personal friend has published extensively on the dangers and the obesogenic properties of sugar-sweetened beverages. He was quoted as saying that “high fructose corn syrup is one of the most misunderstood products in the food industry.” When I asked him why he supported the corn industry, he told me he didn’t and that his comments were taken totally out of context.
Misrepresenting science is one thing, misrepresenting scientists who have been at the forefront of the fight against obesity and high fructose sugar sweetened beverages is quite another.
5. HCFS is almost always a marker of poor-quality, nutrient-poor disease creating industrial food products or “food-like substances”.
The last reason to avoid products that contain HFCS is that they are a marker for poor-quality, nutritionally depleted, processed industrial food full of empty calories and artificial ingredients. If you find “high fructose corn syrup” on the label you can be sure it is not a whole, real, fresh food full of fiber, vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and antioxidants. Stay away if you want to stay healthy. We still must reduce our overall consumption of sugar, but with this one simple dietary change you can radically reduce your health risks and improve your health.
While debate may rage about the biochemistry and physiology of cane sugar vs. corn sugar, this is in fact beside the point (despite the finer points of my scientific analysis above). The conversation has been diverted to a simple assertion that cane sugar and corn sugar are not different.
The real issues are only two.
We are consuming HFCS and sugar in pharmacologic quantities never before experienced in human history — 140 pounds a year vs. 20 teaspoons a year 10,000 years ago.
High fructose corn syrup is always found in very poor quality foods that are nutritionally vacuous and filled with all sorts of other disease promoting compounds, fats, salt, chemicals and even mercury.
These critical ideas should be the heart of the national conversation, not the meaningless confusing ads and statements by the corn industry in the media and online that attempt to assure the public that the biochemistry of real sugar and industrially produced sugar from corn are the same.
Know I’d like to hear from you …
Do you think there is an association between the introduction of HFCS in our diet and the obesity epidemic?
What reason do you think the Corn Refiners Association has for running such ads and publishing websites like those listed in this article?
What do you think of the science presented here and the general effects of HFCS on the American diet?
Please leave your thoughts by adding a comment below.
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Dufault, R., LeBlanc, B., Schnoll, R. et al. 2009. Mercury from chlor-alkali plants: Measured concentrations in food product sugar. Environ Health. 26(8):2.
(ii) Bray, G.A., Nielsen, S.J., and B.M. Popkin. 2004. Consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 79(4):537-43. Review.
[1]IF YOU CAN’T CONVINCE THEM, CONFUSE THEM.
—Harry Truman
The current media debate about the benefits (or lack of harm) of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in our diet misses the obvious. The average American increased their consumption of HFCS (mostly from sugar sweetened drinks and processed food) from zero to over 60 pounds per person per year. During that time period, obesity rates have more than tripled and diabetes incidence has increased more than seven fold. Not perhaps the only cause, but a fact that cannot be ignored.
Doubt and confusion are the currency of deception, and they sow the seeds of complacency. These are used skillfully through massive print and television advertising campaigns by the Corn Refiners Association [2]’s attempt to dispel the “myth” that HFCS is harmful and assert through the opinion of “medical and nutrition experts” that it is no different than cane sugar. It is a “natural” product that is a healthy part of our diet when used in moderation.
Except for one problem. When used in moderation it is a major cause of heart disease [3], obesity [4], cancer, dementia [5], liver failure, tooth decay and more.
Why is the corn industry spending millions on misinformation campaigns to convince consumers and health care professionals of the safety of their product? Could it be that the food industry comprises 17 percent of our economy?
The Lengths the Corn Industry Will Go To
The goal of the corn industry is to call into question any claim of harm from consuming high fructose corn syrup, and to confuse and deflect by calling their product natural “corn sugar”. That’s like calling tobacco in cigarettes natural herbal medicine. Watch the slick ad [6] where a caring father walks hand in hand with his four-year-old daughter through a big question mark carved in an idyllic cornfield.
In the ad, the father tells us:
“Like any parent I have questions about the food my daughter eats – like high fructose corn syrup. So I started looking for answers from medical and nutrition experts, and what I discovered whether it’s corn sugar or cane sugar your body can’t tell the difference. Sugar is sugar. Knowing that makes me feel better about what she eats and that’s one less thing to worry about.”
Physicians are also targeted directly. I received a 12-page color glossy monograph from the Corn Refiners Association reviewing the “science” that HFCS was safe and no different than cane sugar. I assume the other 700,000 physicians in America received the same propaganda at who knows what cost.
In addition to this, I received a special “personal” letter from the Corn Refiner’s Association outlining every mention of the problems with HCFS in our diet – whether in print, blogs, books, radio or television. They warned me of the errors of my ways and put me on “notice”. For what I am not sure. To think they are tracking this (and me) that closely gives me an Orwellian chill.
New websites like www.sweetsurprise.com [7] and www.cornsugar.com [8] help “set us straight” about HFCS with quotes from professors of nutrition and medicine and thought leaders from Harvard and other stellar institutions.
Why is the corn industry spending millions on misinformation campaigns to convince consumers and health care professionals of the safety of their product? Could it be that the food industry comprises 17 percent of our economy?
But are these twisted sweet lies or a sweet surprise, as the Corn Refiners Association websites claim?
What the Science Says about HFCS
Let’s examine the science and insert some common sense into the conversation. These facts may indeed come as a sweet surprise. The ads suggest getting your nutrition advice from your doctor (who, unfortunately, probably knows less about nutrition than most grandmothers). Having studied this for over a decade, and having read, interviewed or personally talked with most of the “medical and nutrition experts” used to bolster the claim that “corn sugar” and cane sugar are essentially the same, quite a different picture emerges and the role of HCFS in promoting obesity, disease and death across the globe becomes clear.
Last week over lunch with Dr. Bruce Ames, one of the foremost nutritional scientists in the world and Dr. Jeffrey Bland, a nutritional biochemist, a student of Linus Pauling and I reviewed the existing science, and Dr. Ames shared shocking new evidence from his research center on how HFCS can trigger body-wide inflammation and obesity.
Here are 5 reasons you should stay way from any product containing high fructose corn syrup and why it may kill you.
1. Sugar in any form causes obesity and disease when consumed in pharmacologic doses.
Cane sugar and high fructose corn syrup are indeed both harmful when consumed in pharmacologic doses of 140 pounds per person per year. When one 20 ounce HFCS sweetened soda, sports drink or tea has 17 teaspoons of sugar (and the average teenager often consumes two drinks a day) we are conducting a largely uncontrolled experiment on the human species. Our hunter gather ancestors consumed the equivalent of 20 teaspoons per year, not per day. In this sense, I would agree with the corn industry that sugar is sugar. Quantity matters. But there are some important differences.
2. HFCS and cane sugar are NOT biochemically identical or processed the same way by the body.
High fructose corn syrup is an industrial food product and far from “natural” or a naturally occurring substance. It is extracted from corn stalks through a process so secret that Archer Daniels Midland and Carghill would not allow the investigative journalist, Michael Pollan to observe it for his book, The Omnivore’s Dilemma. The sugars are extracted through a chemical enzymatic process resulting in a chemically and biologically novel compound called HFCS.
Some basic biochemistry will help you understand this. Regular cane sugar (sucrose) is made of two-sugar molecules bound tightly together – glucose and fructose in equal amounts. The enzymes in your digestive tract must break down the sucrose into glucose and fructose, which are then absorbed into the body.
HFCS also consists of glucose and fructose, not in a 50-50 ratio, but a 55-45 fructose to glucose ratio in an unbound form. Fructose is sweeter than glucose. And HCFS is cheaper than sugar because of the government farm bill corn subsidies. Products with HFCS are sweeter and cheaper than products made with cane sugar. This allowed for the average soda size to balloon from 8 ounces to 20 ounces with little financial costs to manufacturers but great human costs of increased obesity, diabetes and chronic disease.
Now back to biochemistry. Since there is there is no chemical bond between them, no digestion is required so they are more rapidly absorbed into your blood stream. Fructose goes right to the liver and triggers lipogenesis (the production of fats like triglycerides and cholesterol) this is why it is the major cause of liver damage in this country and causes a condition called “fatty liver” which affects 70 million people. The rapidly absorbed glucose triggers big spikes in insulin – our body’s major fat storage hormone. Both these features of HFCS lead to increased metabolic disturbances that drive increases in appetite, weight gain, diabetes, heart disease, cancer, dementia and more.
But there was one more thing I learned during lunch with Dr. Bruce Ames. Research done by his group at the Children’s Hospital Oakland Research Institute [9] found that free fructose from HFCS requires more energy to be absorbed by the gut and soaks up two phosphorous molecules from ATP (our body’s energy source). This depletes the energy fuel source or ATP in our gut required to maintain the integrity of our intestinal lining. Little “tight junctions” cement each intestinal cell together preventing food and bacteria from “leaking” across the intestinal membrane and triggering an immune reaction and body wide inflammation.
High doses of free fructose have been proven to literally punch holes in the intestinal lining allowing nasty byproducts of toxic gut bacteria and partially digested food proteins to enter your blood stream and trigger the inflammation that we know is at the root of obesity, diabetes, cancer, heart disease, dementia and accelerated aging. Naturally occurring fructose in fruit is part of a complex of nutrients and fiber that doesn’t exhibit the same biological effects as the free high fructose doses found in “corn sugar”.
The takeaway: Cane sugar and the industrially produced, euphemistically named “corn sugar” are not biochemically or physiologically the same.
3. HFCS contains contaminants including mercury [10] that are not regulated or measured by the FDA
An FDA researcher asked corn producers to ship a barrel of high fructose corn syrup in order to test for contaminants. Her repeated requests were refused until she claimed she represented a newly created soft drink company. She was then promptly shipped a big vat of HFCS that was used as part of the study that showed that HFCS often contains toxic levels of mercury because of chlor-alkali products used in its manufacturing.(i [11]) Poisoned sugar is certainly not “natural”.
When HFCS is run through a chemical analyzer or a chromatograph, strange chemical peaks show up that are not glucose or fructose. What are they? Who knows? This certainly calls into question the purity of this processed form of super sugar. The exact nature, effects and toxicity of these funny compounds have not been fully explained, but shouldn’t we be protected from the presence of untested chemical compounds in our food supply, especially when the contaminated food product comprises up to 15-20 percent of the average American’s daily calorie intake?
4. Independent medical and nutrition experts DO NOT support the use of HCFS in our diet, despite the assertions of the corn industry.
The corn industry’s happy looking websites www.cornsugar.com [8] and www.sweetsurprise.com [7] bolster their position that cane sugar and corn sugar are the same by quoting experts, or should we say mis-quoting …
Barry M. Popkin, Ph.D., Professor, Department of Nutrition, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has published widely on the dangers of sugar-sweetened drinks and their contribution to the obesity epidemic. In a review of HFCS in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition,(ii [12]) he explains the mechanism by which the free fructose may contribute to obesity. He states that:
“The digestion, absorption, and metabolism of fructose differ from those of glucose. Hepatic metabolism of fructose favors de novo lipogenesis [production of fat in the liver]. In addition, unlike glucose, fructose does not stimulate insulin secretion or enhance leptin production. Because insulin and leptin act as key afferent signals in the regulation of food intake and body weight [to control appetite], this suggests that dietary fructose may contribute to increased energy intake and weight gain. Furthermore, calorically sweetened beverages may enhance caloric overconsumption.”
He states that HFCS is absorbed more rapidly than regular sugar, and that it doesn’t stimulate insulin or leptin production. This prevents you from triggering the body’s signals for being full and may lead to overconsumption of total calories.
He concludes by saying that:
“… the increase in consumption of HFCS has a temporal relation to the epidemic of obesity, and the overconsumption of HFCS in calorically sweetened beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity.”
The corn industry takes his comments out of context to support their position. “All sugar you eat is the same.”
True pharmacologic doses of any kind of sugar are harmful, but the biochemistry of different kinds of sugar and their respective effects on absorption, appetite and metabolism are different, and Dr. Popkin knows that.
David S. Ludwig, M.D., Ph.D., Associate Professor of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, and a personal friend has published extensively on the dangers and the obesogenic properties of sugar-sweetened beverages. He was quoted as saying that “high fructose corn syrup is one of the most misunderstood products in the food industry.” When I asked him why he supported the corn industry, he told me he didn’t and that his comments were taken totally out of context.
Misrepresenting science is one thing, misrepresenting scientists who have been at the forefront of the fight against obesity and high fructose sugar sweetened beverages is quite another.
5. HCFS is almost always a marker of poor-quality, nutrient-poor disease creating industrial food products or “food-like substances”.
The last reason to avoid products that contain HFCS is that they are a marker for poor-quality, nutritionally depleted, processed industrial food full of empty calories and artificial ingredients. If you find “high fructose corn syrup” on the label you can be sure it is not a whole, real, fresh food full of fiber, vitamins, minerals, phytonutrients and antioxidants. Stay away if you want to stay healthy. We still must reduce our overall consumption of sugar, but with this one simple dietary change you can radically reduce your health risks and improve your health.
While debate may rage about the biochemistry and physiology of cane sugar vs. corn sugar, this is in fact beside the point (despite the finer points of my scientific analysis above). The conversation has been diverted to a simple assertion that cane sugar and corn sugar are not different.
The real issues are only two.
We are consuming HFCS and sugar in pharmacologic quantities never before experienced in human history — 140 pounds a year vs. 20 teaspoons a year 10,000 years ago.
High fructose corn syrup is always found in very poor quality foods that are nutritionally vacuous and filled with all sorts of other disease promoting compounds, fats, salt, chemicals and even mercury.
These critical ideas should be the heart of the national conversation, not the meaningless confusing ads and statements by the corn industry in the media and online that attempt to assure the public that the biochemistry of real sugar and industrially produced sugar from corn are the same.
Know I’d like to hear from you …
Do you think there is an association between the introduction of HFCS in our diet and the obesity epidemic?
What reason do you think the Corn Refiners Association has for running such ads and publishing websites like those listed in this article?
What do you think of the science presented here and the general effects of HFCS on the American diet?
Please leave your thoughts by adding a comment below.
To your good health,
Mark Hyman, MD
References
(i) Dufault, R., LeBlanc, B., Schnoll, R. et al. 2009. Mercury from chlor-alkali plants: Measured concentrations in food product sugar. Environ Health. 26(8):2.
(ii) Bray, G.A., Nielsen, S.J., and B.M. Popkin. 2004. Consumption of high-fructose corn syrup in beverages may play a role in the epidemic of obesity. Am J Clin Nutr. 79(4):537-43. Review.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Prince Charles Warns About GMO Dangers
Prince Charles Warns GM Crops Risk Causing The Biggest Ever Environmental Disaster
Perhaps the Royal Family will have the influence needed to compete with the money and influence of Gates and "foundations" that are pushing the GMO agenda. Please keep spreading the awareness!
Perhaps the Royal Family will have the influence needed to compete with the money and influence of Gates and "foundations" that are pushing the GMO agenda. Please keep spreading the awareness!
Saturday, April 23, 2011
Petition - No Subsidies For Poison Crops
Click Here to Congress, "No Subsidies for Poison Crops!"
Petition now live. Target = 10,000 Plus
Signatures recieved within first 24 hour = 102
Please sign and share with everyone you know!
Thank You!
Petition now live. Target = 10,000 Plus
Signatures recieved within first 24 hour = 102
Please sign and share with everyone you know!
Thank You!
Friday, April 22, 2011
Labeling GMO Food - New ballot initiative in the U.S.
http://www.gmwatch.org/latest-listing/1-news-items/13084-labeling-gmo-food-new-ballot-initiative-in-the-us
source - gmwatch.org
Thursday, 21 April 2011 21:11
1. Labeling GMO food - The right to know what you’re eating
2. 'Genetic labelling' claims wrong
NOTE: There's a new initiative in the US to get mandatory GM labelling put on the 2012 ballot (item 1). The website related to the article below is here: http://labelgmos.org/
We expect biotech interests in the US to try their usual trick of persuading people to reject the labelling initiative on the claimed grounds that it will increase food prices for consumers. But this claim has been exposed as hogwash in an article by Prof Chris Viljoen (item 2), who says, "There has never been a documented report that genetic modification labelling has led to a cost increase in food anywhere."
---
---
1. Labeling GMO food
The right to know what you’re eating
By Christine G.K. LaPado
NewsReview.com
April 21, 2011
http://bit.ly/eVUE0c
Local grandmother and food activist Pamm Larry is leading a grassroots charge to get an initiative put on the 2012 California ballot that would require all genetically modified (GMO) foods—including meat and other products from animals fed GMO foods—to be labeled as such.
Larry (pictured) calls herself the "primary instigator" behind the Committee for the Right to Know, which recently launched a website called Label GMOs: It’s Our Right to Know (www.labelgmos.org). She just got back from the San Francisco Green Festival, and she was asked to return to San Francisco in September to help organize and participate in a conference on GMOs.
Larry said that after "bitching and moaning" for years about the increasing prevalence of GMO foods and lack of labeling as such, she decided to act.
In January, she "took six weeks to learn about government and the initiative process," and by early April she had a website and a Facebook page up and running with more than 700 supporters.
Larry has been gaining support throughout the state, including from the California State Grange, she said.
She has to have a properly worded document to state authorities by September; upon approval, the big job begins of garnering enough signatures to get the initiative put on the ballot.
"As consumers, we have a right to know what we put in our mouth," Larry said.
Go to www.labelgmos.org to learn more and to volunteer to help.
---
---
2. 'Genetic labelling' claims wrong
CHRIS VILJOEN
BusinessDay
Published: 2011/02/03 07:39:05 AM
http://www.businessday.co.za/Articles/Content.aspx?id=133250
It was with interest that I read recent press articles about calls to label modified foods. I was most interested in the comments on the perceived link between the threshold for labelling and the cost of labelling.
First, whether the threshold is 5% or 1%, there is no cost difference in laboratory testing — I should know as I run the GMO Testing Facility that performs routine genetic modification detection in SA.
Further, the regulations make provision for companies to assume an ingredient contains genetically modified matter if it was derived from a crop for which there is a genetically modified equivalent being produced in SA, such as maize or soybean. In such a case, no laboratory testing would be required, with no additional cost to the company. Compared to this, companies that want to indicate an ingredient has not been genetically modified would be required to verify this using laboratory tests — but this is no different to what is being practised.
Second, the proposition that genetic modification labelling will increase food costs 10% to 20% is unfounded and based on misinformation. In a comprehensive study in the European Union (EU) it was estimated that the added cost to food of genetic modification labelling ranged from 0,01% to 0,17%, depending on the stringency required. The EU system for genetic modification labelling is considerably more stringent than in SA and from this it is reasonable to suggest that the labelling cost to food would be much lower in SA.
There has never been a documented report that genetic modification labelling has led to a cost increase in food anywhere. What is being implemented in SA can be considered a minimum level compared to genetic modification labelling in other countries, including Australia, Brazil, China, New Zealand and the EU.
Third, the comment that some food products "cannot be accurately analysed or labelled because they do not contain detectable protein" is misleading. It is true that processing destroys protein, making it undetectable, but the world standard for performing genetic modification analysis on food is not based on detecting protein but rather DNA (the molecule responsible for making the protein).
DNA is considerably more stable than protein and genetic modification detection laboratories around the world routinely analyse highly processed food ingredients, including starches and oils.
It is true, however, that extremely processed products cannot be tested accurately for genetically modified content as even the DNA may be destroyed. In such cases the ingredients used to make the extremely processed product can be tested.
Finally, genetic modification labelling is no different to labelling foods for the presence of additives or colorants — common practice in SA. There is no report that this practice has resulted in any food cost increase either. If consumer rights are truly autonomous, genetic modification labelling should be no exception.
Prof Chris Viljoen
GMO Testing Laboratory, University of the Free State
source - gmwatch.org
Thursday, 21 April 2011 21:11
2. 'Genetic labelling' claims wrong
NOTE: There's a new initiative in the US to get mandatory GM labelling put on the 2012 ballot (item 1). The website related to the article below is here: http://labelgmos.org/
We expect biotech interests in the US to try their usual trick of persuading people to reject the labelling initiative on the claimed grounds that it will increase food prices for consumers. But this claim has been exposed as hogwash in an article by Prof Chris Viljoen (item 2), who says, "There has never been a documented report that genetic modification labelling has led to a cost increase in food anywhere."
---
---
1. Labeling GMO food
The right to know what you’re eating
By Christine G.K. LaPado
NewsReview.com
April 21, 2011
http://bit.ly/eVUE0c
Local grandmother and food activist Pamm Larry is leading a grassroots charge to get an initiative put on the 2012 California ballot that would require all genetically modified (GMO) foods—including meat and other products from animals fed GMO foods—to be labeled as such.
Larry (pictured) calls herself the "primary instigator" behind the Committee for the Right to Know, which recently launched a website called Label GMOs: It’s Our Right to Know (www.labelgmos.org). She just got back from the San Francisco Green Festival, and she was asked to return to San Francisco in September to help organize and participate in a conference on GMOs.
Larry said that after "bitching and moaning" for years about the increasing prevalence of GMO foods and lack of labeling as such, she decided to act.
In January, she "took six weeks to learn about government and the initiative process," and by early April she had a website and a Facebook page up and running with more than 700 supporters.
Larry has been gaining support throughout the state, including from the California State Grange, she said.
She has to have a properly worded document to state authorities by September; upon approval, the big job begins of garnering enough signatures to get the initiative put on the ballot.
"As consumers, we have a right to know what we put in our mouth," Larry said.
Go to www.labelgmos.org to learn more and to volunteer to help.
---
---
2. 'Genetic labelling' claims wrong
CHRIS VILJOEN
BusinessDay
Published: 2011/02/03 07:39:05 AM
http://www.businessday.co.za/Articles/Content.aspx?id=133250
It was with interest that I read recent press articles about calls to label modified foods. I was most interested in the comments on the perceived link between the threshold for labelling and the cost of labelling.
First, whether the threshold is 5% or 1%, there is no cost difference in laboratory testing — I should know as I run the GMO Testing Facility that performs routine genetic modification detection in SA.
Further, the regulations make provision for companies to assume an ingredient contains genetically modified matter if it was derived from a crop for which there is a genetically modified equivalent being produced in SA, such as maize or soybean. In such a case, no laboratory testing would be required, with no additional cost to the company. Compared to this, companies that want to indicate an ingredient has not been genetically modified would be required to verify this using laboratory tests — but this is no different to what is being practised.
Second, the proposition that genetic modification labelling will increase food costs 10% to 20% is unfounded and based on misinformation. In a comprehensive study in the European Union (EU) it was estimated that the added cost to food of genetic modification labelling ranged from 0,01% to 0,17%, depending on the stringency required. The EU system for genetic modification labelling is considerably more stringent than in SA and from this it is reasonable to suggest that the labelling cost to food would be much lower in SA.
There has never been a documented report that genetic modification labelling has led to a cost increase in food anywhere. What is being implemented in SA can be considered a minimum level compared to genetic modification labelling in other countries, including Australia, Brazil, China, New Zealand and the EU.
Third, the comment that some food products "cannot be accurately analysed or labelled because they do not contain detectable protein" is misleading. It is true that processing destroys protein, making it undetectable, but the world standard for performing genetic modification analysis on food is not based on detecting protein but rather DNA (the molecule responsible for making the protein).
DNA is considerably more stable than protein and genetic modification detection laboratories around the world routinely analyse highly processed food ingredients, including starches and oils.
It is true, however, that extremely processed products cannot be tested accurately for genetically modified content as even the DNA may be destroyed. In such cases the ingredients used to make the extremely processed product can be tested.
Finally, genetic modification labelling is no different to labelling foods for the presence of additives or colorants — common practice in SA. There is no report that this practice has resulted in any food cost increase either. If consumer rights are truly autonomous, genetic modification labelling should be no exception.
Prof Chris Viljoen
GMO Testing Laboratory, University of the Free State
Thursday, April 14, 2011
Monday, April 11, 2011
Rally and GMO Info
Thanks to all who listened to our Atlanta interview this afternoon on http://wrfg.org! And thanks to the radio station for giving this worthy cause some well deserved airtime!
Right to Know Rally Info:
http://www.gmomarch.org
http://right2knowrally.com
Petition! Please sign if you have not already done so!
http://apps.facebook.com/causes/petitions/525
GMO Info and Resources:
resonsibletechnology.org - Institute for Responsible Technology
http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org
http://trushinlabelingcoalition.org
Article on how the Right To Know Rallies came about:
http://hartkeisonline.com/food-politics/rallies-for-right-to-know-about-gmos-to-be-held-in-21-states/
Big thanks to Trish Wright for driving this movement, along with all the volunteers across the nation who coordinated and/or worked behind the scenes for rallies on March 26th and ongoing rallies leading up to the big march in October from New York to DC!
For more information and to get involved, also visit these facebook pages:
GMO Truth Alliance
Millions Against Monsanto
Rally For The Right To Know
Take Action!
*Educate yourself on the dangers of Genetically Modified Organisms (Genetically Engineered Foods)
*Contact your congressional reps and senators
*Sign the Petition to demand honest labeling
*Attend an upcoming Rally
*"Like" us on Facebook and Twitter
*Tell everyone you know about the dangers of GMOs
THANK YOU ~ THANK YOU ~ THANK YOU!
Together we can make our voices be heard! We have a Right to Know if our food is GMO!
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Sunday, April 10, 2011
Radio Interview - April 11, 2011
Tune in to WRFG 89.3 FM Monday at 12:45 pm as we discuss the recent Rally for The Right To Know in Atlanta.
Listen online at http://wrfg.org
Listen online at http://wrfg.org
Friday, April 1, 2011
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Organic Farmers and Seed Sellers Sue Monsanto
ORGANIC FARMERS AND SEED SELLERS SUE MONSANTO TO PROTECT THEMSELVES FROM PATENTS ON GENETICALLY MODIFIED SEED: Preemptive Action Seeks Ruling That Would Prohibit Monsanto From Suing Organic and Seed Growers If Contaminated By Roundup Ready Seed
(Read Article)
New York - March 29, 2011
This, on the heels of nationwide rallies held simultaneously on Saturday, March 26th to stand up for the "Right to Know" if foods contain GMOs. Ralliers in Washington, DC and cities from the east coast to Hawaii stood in solidarity to demand GMO foods be labeled and educate others on the dangers of GMOs. Atlanta's rally included "GMO Joe Schmo" who sang along with Mike Adams' rap video "Just Say No to GMO"!
Perhaps the tables have finally turned on Monsanto, the CHEMICAL COMPANY that brought us AGENT ORANGE and Herbacides like RoundUp followed by seeds cleverly engineered to soak up pesticides and herbacides. Do you see the conflict of interest here? Why has it taken this long for the general public to see this sinister plan? Perhaps now things have finally come to light thanks to social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter and various blog sites where news travels faster than the speed of light. Whatever the case, consumers have a right to know what is in their food and the right to choose wholesome, natural, untainted food for their families. The time is NOW for any company including GMOs in their products to disclose this on the food labels. And the time is NOW for Monsanto to no longer be allowed to control agencies like the FDA, USDA and any branch of state or federal government. The time is NOW for patents on seeds to be deemed invalid. The time is NOW for citizens to take back their freedom of choice and demand government subsidies for GMOs be ceased immediately!
Follow these links to stay on top of changing developments:
http://www.gmomarch.org/
http://www.facebook.com/rallyfortherighttoknow2011
http://www.responsibletechnology.org
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Millions-Against-Monsanto-by-OrganicConsumersorg/289934516904
(Read Article)
New York - March 29, 2011
This, on the heels of nationwide rallies held simultaneously on Saturday, March 26th to stand up for the "Right to Know" if foods contain GMOs. Ralliers in Washington, DC and cities from the east coast to Hawaii stood in solidarity to demand GMO foods be labeled and educate others on the dangers of GMOs. Atlanta's rally included "GMO Joe Schmo" who sang along with Mike Adams' rap video "Just Say No to GMO"!
Perhaps the tables have finally turned on Monsanto, the CHEMICAL COMPANY that brought us AGENT ORANGE and Herbacides like RoundUp followed by seeds cleverly engineered to soak up pesticides and herbacides. Do you see the conflict of interest here? Why has it taken this long for the general public to see this sinister plan? Perhaps now things have finally come to light thanks to social media outlets like Facebook and Twitter and various blog sites where news travels faster than the speed of light. Whatever the case, consumers have a right to know what is in their food and the right to choose wholesome, natural, untainted food for their families. The time is NOW for any company including GMOs in their products to disclose this on the food labels. And the time is NOW for Monsanto to no longer be allowed to control agencies like the FDA, USDA and any branch of state or federal government. The time is NOW for patents on seeds to be deemed invalid. The time is NOW for citizens to take back their freedom of choice and demand government subsidies for GMOs be ceased immediately!
Follow these links to stay on top of changing developments:
http://www.gmomarch.org/
http://www.facebook.com/rallyfortherighttoknow2011
http://www.responsibletechnology.org
http://www.facebook.com/pages/Millions-Against-Monsanto-by-OrganicConsumersorg/289934516904
Sunday, March 27, 2011
Rally Successes - One Person Can Make a Difference!
Here is a great article on how the Right to Know rallies came about, thanks to Trisha Wright! Thanks everyone who volunteered, coordinated and participated in all the rallies across the nation on Saturday. You can make a difference!
http://hartkeisonline.com/food-politics/rallies-for-right-to-know-about-gmos-to-be-held-in-21-states/
Keep the movement growing!
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/index.cfm#righttoknow
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://hartkeisonline.com/food-politics/rallies-for-right-to-know-about-gmos-to-be-held-in-21-states/
Keep the movement growing!
http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/index.cfm#righttoknow
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Friday, March 18, 2011
Rally For the Right to Know - Sat. March 26th
Please join the Rally For the Right to Know in Washington D. C. next Saturday. If you can't attend the national event, join a local rally in your state. Visit the links below for general info. Look for your state under the "discussions" tab.
Rally in DC
Atlanta Rally
The main Rally Page has information to fliers and sources for T-shirts, etc.
Links for additional gear and products are listed here or you may have your own resource.
Rush your order now to receive in time for Saturday's been event!
Vendor - Zazzle:
Tank Top - Click to Order (See images below)
Magnets & Buttons - Click Here to Order (See images below)
From Oval City Stickers - Millions Against Monsanto, Etc.
http://www.ovalcitystickers.com/health--wellness.html
Rally in DC
Atlanta Rally
The main Rally Page has information to fliers and sources for T-shirts, etc.
Links for additional gear and products are listed here or you may have your own resource.
Rush your order now to receive in time for Saturday's been event!
Vendor - Zazzle:
Tank Top - Click to Order (See images below)
Magnets & Buttons - Click Here to Order (See images below)
http://www.ovalcitystickers.com/health--wellness.html
Saturday, January 29, 2011
Outrage Pours In After USDA Approves GE Alfalfa Deregulation!
http://go.usa.gov/Y08
Thursday the USDA announced alfalfa would become deregulated thus allowing genetically engineered alfalfa to grow alongside organic and non-ge alfalfa. By Friday night, their Facebook Page had over 171 comments - all of which were expressing GRAVE DISAPPOINTMENT and DISAPPROVAL of the decision. What will it take for our government to take seriously the dangers of GMO's? Please continue to visit the USDA page and post your opposition.
http://www.facebook.com/USDA#!/USDA/posts/189844441034999
Also, pick up the phone and call the 3 key contacts responsible for this action - Tom Vilsack, President Obama, and Monsanto. We must let our voices be heard. It may be the weekend, but we will not forget about this by Monday. Call, call call, post, post, post...
202-720-3631 TOM VILSACK
202-456-1111 OBAMA
314-694-1000 MONSANTO
Several have also mentioned a class action law suit and are currently in the process of seeking out attorneys. Keep the pressure on!
Thursday the USDA announced alfalfa would become deregulated thus allowing genetically engineered alfalfa to grow alongside organic and non-ge alfalfa. By Friday night, their Facebook Page had over 171 comments - all of which were expressing GRAVE DISAPPOINTMENT and DISAPPROVAL of the decision. What will it take for our government to take seriously the dangers of GMO's? Please continue to visit the USDA page and post your opposition.
http://www.facebook.com/USDA#!/USDA/posts/189844441034999
Also, pick up the phone and call the 3 key contacts responsible for this action - Tom Vilsack, President Obama, and Monsanto. We must let our voices be heard. It may be the weekend, but we will not forget about this by Monday. Call, call call, post, post, post...
202-720-3631 TOM VILSACK
202-456-1111 OBAMA
314-694-1000 MONSANTO
Several have also mentioned a class action law suit and are currently in the process of seeking out attorneys. Keep the pressure on!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
