Search posterous

Search all posts and users. Type a name, type a favorite song title, whatever! See what comes up.
  

More posterous blogs











More recommended blogs »

Here are posterous posts filed under pesticides...

7 Foods That Should Never Cross Your Lips

Food scientists are shedding light on items loaded with toxins and chemicals—and simple swaps for a cleaner diet and supersized health.

By Anne Underwood, Prevention
2Next >

Clean eating means choosing fruits, vegetables and meats that are raised, grown and sold with minimal processing. Often they're organic, and rarely (if ever) should they contain additives. But in some cases, the methods of today's food producers are neither clean nor sustainable. The result is damage to our health, the environment, or both. So we decided to take a fresh look at food through the eyes of the people who spend their lives uncovering what's safe—or not—to eat. We asked them a simple question: "What foods do you avoid?" Their answers don't necessarily make up a "banned foods" list. But reaching for the suggested alternatives might bring you better health—and peace of mind.

Top 10 reasons to go organic.

What the endocrinologist won't eat: canned tomatoes

Fredrick Vom Saal, Ph.D., is an endocrinologist at the University of Missouri who studies bisphenol-A.

The problem: The resin linings of tin cans contain bisphenol-A, a synthetic estrogen that has been linked to ailments ranging from reproductive problems to heart disease, diabetes and obesity. Unfortunately, acidity (a prominent characteristic of tomatoes) causes BPA to leach into your food. Studies show that the BPA in most people's body exceeds the amount that suppresses sperm production or causes chromosomal damage to the eggs of animals. "You can get 50 mcg of BPA per liter out of a tomato can, and that's a level that is going to impact people, particularly the young," says vom Saal. "I won't go near canned tomatoes."

 

 

 

The solution: Choose tomatoes in glass bottles (which do not need resin linings), such as the brands Bionaturae and Coluccio. You can also get several types in Tetra Pak boxes, like Trader Joe's and Pomi.

 

 

 

Budget tip: If your recipe allows, substitute bottled pasta sauce for canned tomatoes. Look for pasta sauces with low sodium and few added ingredients, or you may have to adjust the recipe.

Too busy to cook? Eat what the nutritionist would eat at a fast-food place.

What the farmer won't eat: corn-fed beef

Joel Salatin is co-owner of Polyface Farms and author of half a dozen books on sustainable farming.

The problem: Cattle evolved to eat grass, not grains. But farmers today feed their animals corn and soybeans, which fatten up the animals faster for slaughter. But more money for cattle farmers (and lower prices at the grocery store) means a lot less nutrition for us. A recent comprehensive study conducted by the USDA and researchers from Clemson University found that compared with corn-fed beef, grass-fed beef is higher in beta-carotene, vitamin E, omega-3s, conjugated linoleic acid (CLA), calcium, magnesium and potassium; lower in inflammatory omega-6s; and lower in saturated fats that have been linked to heart disease. "We need to respect the fact that cows are herbivores, and that does not mean feeding them corn and chicken manure," says Salatin.

The solution: Buy grass-fed beef, which can be found at specialty grocers, farmers' markets and nationally at Whole Foods. It's usually labeled because it demands a premium, but if you don't see it, ask your butcher.

Budget tip: Cuts on the bone are cheaper because processors charge extra for deboning. You can also buy direct from a local farmer, which can be as cheap as $5 per pound. To find a farmer near you, search eatwild.com.

 

2Next >

 

Filed under: pesticides

October 9 2009
by S. L. Baker, features writer (NaturalNews) According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, Parkinson's disease (PD) belongs to a group of conditions called motor system disorders which are the result of the loss of brain cells that produce the neurotransmitter dopamine. That's the critical key in the development of PD because dopamine's many functions in the brain include voluntary movement, cognition, learning, sleep, mood and more. So when PD strikes, it means dopamine in the body is disrupted and tremor, trembling, muscle rigidity, slowness of movement, sleep disruptions, dementia and a host of other problems can develop over time. But what causes PD to strike in the first place? What happens to those dopamine producing brain cells that causes this cascade of symptoms? For most cases, doctors usually just say it is idiopathic -- meaning no one knows. But a growing body of research has accumulated over the past year that points to a particular class of toxins that seem to be behind at least a significant portion of Parkinson's disease suffering. The culprit? Pesticides. Parkinson's disease and pesticidesNow comes yet another study showing an association between PD and pesticides. This one, just published in the Archives of Neurology, shows people whose occupations put them in contact with pesticides appear to have a dramatically increased risk of Parkinson's. It had some surprises -- occupations involving agriculture, education, health care, or welding were not associated with an increased risk of PD in this study but ever working in business and finance, legal occupations, construction or transportation and material moving was especially associated with a subtype of PD marked by gait disturbances.

Dr. Caroline M. Tanner of the Parkinson's Institute in Sunnyvale, California, and her research team studied 519 people suffering from with PD along with 511 controls who were the same age and sex and lived in the same location. The research subjects were questioned about their work history and exposure to toxic chemicals, including solvents and pesticides. The results showed that among people with Parkinson's disease, occupational pesticide exposure was associated with a significantly increased risk of the disease. Forty-four (8.5 percent) PD patients reported pesticide exposure on the job compared to 27 (5.3 percent) of the people in the control group.

The researchers point out in their study that while there is growing evidence suggesting a cause and effect association between pesticide use and PD, the term "pesticide" is broad and includes many chemicals and mechanisms of use. "Because few investigations have identified specific pesticides, we studied eight pesticides with high neurotoxic plausibility based on laboratory findings. Use of these pesticides was associated with higher risk of parkinsonism, more than double that in those not exposed," the scientists wrote. They found three specific, individual compounds that tripled the risk of PD: an organochloride (2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid), an herbicide (paraquat) and an insecticide (permethrin). What's more, all three of these chemicals have already been shown in previous laboratory research to impact the dopamine producing brain cells that are affected by Parkinson's disease. "This convergence of epidemiologic and laboratory data from experimental models of Parkinson's disease lends credence to a causative role of certain pesticides in the neurodegenerative process," the authors conclude. "Other pesticide exposures such as hobby gardening, residential exposure, wearing treated garments or dietary intake were not assessed. Because these exposures may affect many more subjects, future attention is warranted." As previously covered by NaturalNews, another study earlier this year found the pesticide B-hexachlorocyclohexane (B-HCH) also appears to be a strong trigger for PD(http://www.naturalnews.com/026842_d...). In addition, a University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA) study placed pesticides at the top of the list of probable causes of Parkinson's. That research, published in the American Journal of Epidemiology, showed exposure to a combination of two widely used pesticides increased the risk of PD by an incredible 75 percent (http://www.naturalnews.com/026177_d...).

For more information::
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/...
http://www.ninds.nih.gov/disorders/...

Filed under: pesticides

Kara says...

Speaking of the Environmental Working Group (EWG), they have developed a Shopper's Guide to Pesticides, recognizing that people can't afford to buy everything at a premium or that they might not be able to find an organic option in some cases. Some foods are worse than others when it comes to pesticide use. This Dirty Dozen list gives you the top 12 foods that are the most toxic, as well as the Clean 15 - the top fifteen foods to buy even if they aren't organic.

This is an excerpt on the EWG website about pesticides:

As acknowledged by the U.S. and international government agencies, different pesticides have been linked with a variety of toxic effects, including:

  • Nervous system effects
  • Carcinogenic effects
  • Hormone system effects
  • Skin, eye and lung irritation

Given the rate of cancer in our region, I can't help but want to do everything I can to lower my family's risk. This seems like a reasonable approach. Do I always buy organic? No, of course not. Do I consume some of the Dirty Dozen in my home or at others'? Absolutely, but much less so now that I'm aware of this list.

Unfortunately, the Dirty Dozen includes apples, grapes, bell peppers and peaches - the most popular produce in our house. The origin of the food does make a difference, so buying produce from Canada and the US is a good idea if you have a choice. Also, the less the food has travelled, the less fuel it takes to transport it, generally-speaking, and the lower amount of chemicals needed to keep it fresh.

Here's the Dirty Dozen at a glance in case you don't have time to download the wallet guide:

RANK FRUIT OR VEGGIE SCORE
1 (worst) Peach 100 (highest pesticide load)
2 Apple 93
3 Sweet Bell Pepper 83
4 Celery 82
5 Nectarine 81
6 Strawberries 80
7 Cherries 73
8 Kale 69
9 Lettuce 67
10 Grapes - Imported 66
11 Carrot 63
12 Pear 63


I recognize that the EWG is a more-than-passionate US lobby group that is incredibly biased about sustainability issues, but they provide really helpful resources to those of us who are trying to live in the mainstream with some moderation.

Filed under: pesticides

ChowBaby says...

a quick friday post about getting local fruits and veggies.

this Michelle Slatalla article in the NY Times was published this summer. but i missed it. if you did, too, it's a great resource for finding local veggies online. well, at least if you live in CA, WA, TX, IL, OR or NY.

the sites that she (and, now, i) list are delivery services that bring organic, local fruits and veggies to your door. as a brooklynite, i'm used to getting groceries delivered from fresh direct. it's not without complication... or guilt. the scheduling. the extra packaging. and the extra gas and food miles that home delivery adds to the equation. but i'll stand by my decision to get groceries home delivered for as long as it enables more home cooked meals and better eating (fresh direct has a good organic selection from which we do most of our shopping).

if services like these empower families to eat better and support their local farms, then i'm all for it. and maybe, if they haven't already, these services will get creative about lessening the impact of individual home delivery so that, at the very least, the upside of creating a support system for local farmers balances the downside.

  • Spud.com in Seattle, Portland, San Fran and Los Angeles
  • Greenling.com in TX
  • Naturaldirect.com in Illinois
  • Mypersonalfarmers.com in NY State (around Hudson Valley) and Stamford, CT
  • Organicstoyou.org in Portland & Hood River area of Oregon
  • eat your veggies. have a great weekend.

    -S

    Filed under: pesticides

    ChowBaby says...

    dr. alan greene, one of our favorite go-to experts and a dallas pediatrician, just finished a 3-year experiment with an "n" of "1" (he used himself as the study population)—where he ate only organic foods for 3 whole years. his goal? to see how feasible it was, to examine the challenges, and to see if there were tangible health benefits. he reports that it was far easier to eat organic at home than out. that he had to reduce the amount of meat he ate because organic meat costs so much. and that after 3 years, he gets sick much less frequently. 

    we try to eat all organic in our family too. and i'm especially committed to feeding my son organic, even more than myself or my husband, for the reasons we talk about all the time:

  • According to the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Academy of Sciences, standard chemicals are up to 10 times more toxic for children than for adults. The fact is children take in more toxic chemicals relative to their body weight than adults and their developing organ systems are less capable of detoxifying chemicals
  • The Food and Drug Administration conducted laboratory tests of eight top-selling baby foods which revealed the presence of 16 pesticides, including three carcinogens
  • In blood samples of children aged 2 to 4 years, concentrations of pesticide residues are 6 times higher for those eating conventionally farmed fruits and vegetables when compared with those eating organic food
  • The Centers for Disease Control reports that one of the main sources of pesticide exposure for children comes from the food they eat
  • but it isn't always easy to do. and, especially in this economy, financially daunting for many of us. but it's important to keep in mind that value of organic isn't just about the the price of an organic product. it's about the long-term cost of NOT eating organic. about how it affects our kids' health, the planet's health, and the health of generations to come.

    if you really find yourself forced to choose organic vs non-organic, whether because of availability or cost concerns, most experts agree that certain foods should always be organic. we blogged a list of top-10 foods in the past that you can check it out here.

    and then read about Dr. Greene's experiment yourself  here.


    m

    Filed under: pesticides

    Jean says...



    Le plus étonnant c'est l'agriculteur qui dit (2'15 dans la bande annonce) qu'il ne consomme pas ce qu'il produit.

    Les décès dus aux cancers sont en augmentation dans toutes les tranches d'age et surtout chez les enfants ou les cancers étaient très rares autrefois. Cette augmentation ne peut pas s'expliquer par des facteurs génétiques, les seules explications possibles sont environnementales: nutrition, stress, autres pollutions (atmosphérique, électromagnétiques, sonores). Chacun de ces impacts environnementaux influent sur plus sur certains cancers que d'autres comme il est bien connu que la cigarette favorise certains cancers. Ainsi les cancers particulièrement favorisés par une mauvaise alimentation sont: estomac, colon, sein, foie, prostate, pancréas, leucémies, etc. Le seul cancer en baisse est celui de l'estomac grâce au réfrigérateur qui a permis la diminution de la salaison pour conserver les aliments.

    N'oublions pas non plus que pour lutter contre le cancer, il faut ajouter, en plus du bio, une alimentation équilibrée et cuisine saine. Il faut proscrire toutes les substances cancérigènes ou favorisant le développement du cancer: viandes et légumes grillés, huiles cuites, .... Enfin il est nécessaire d'adopter une alimentation anticancer favorisant les défenses naturelles contre le cancer (comme les cellules NK - Natural Killers - de notre système immunitaire), pour cela les aliments essentiels sont: ail, oignon, curcuma, acides gras oméga-3 (que l'on trouve dans les poissons, l'huile de colza, la graine de lin, les noix).

    Pour en savoir plus lire le livre de David Servan Schreiber: Anticancer qui décrit très bien cette épidémie, ses causes nutritionnelles, et surtout les solutions qui sont non seulement préventives, mais aussi (cela est moins connu) curatives.

    Pour ceux qui comprennent l'anglais, voir mon billet sur le sujet, qui contient un régime anti-maladies dont le cancer:
    Become Healthier, and Stay Healthy.

    Filed under: Pesticides