CDC Reveals Disturbing Truth about Factory Farms and Superbugs..


Story at-a-glance

  • Agricultural usage accounts for about 80 percent of all antibiotic use in the US, so it’s a MAJOR source of human antibiotic consumption
  • According to a new CDC report, antibiotics used in livestock plays a role in antibiotic resistance and “should be phased out”; 22 percent of antibiotic-resistant illness in humans is in fact linked to food
  • MRSA infection has been rapidly increasing among people outside hospital settings as well. Increasing evidence points to factory-scale hog facilities as a source
  • Previous research suggests you have a 50/50 chance of buying meat tainted with drug-resistant bacteria when you buy meat from your local grocery store
  • Excessive exposure to antibiotics—which includes regularly eating antibiotic-laced CAFO meats—also takes a heavy toll on your gastrointestinal health. This in turn can predispose you to virtually any disease.
  • Antibiotics

According to the European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control (ECDC), antibiotic resistance is a major threat to public health worldwide, and the primary cause for this man-made epidemic is the widespread misuse of antibiotics.1

Antibiotic overuse occurs not just in medicine, but also in food production. In fact, agricultural usage accounts for about 80 percent of all antibiotic use in the US,2 so it’s a MAJOR source of human antibiotic consumption.

According to a 2009 report3 by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) on this subject, factory farms used a whopping 29 million pounds of antibiotics that year alone.

Animals are often fed antibiotics at low doses for disease prevention and growth promotion, and those antibiotics are transferred to you via meat, and even through the animal manure that is used as crop fertilizer.

Antibiotics are also used to compensate for the crowded, unsanitary living conditions associated with large-scale confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs).

CDC Confirms Link Between CAFOs and Superbugs

Now, the US Center for Disease Control and Prevention4 (CDC) has finally come out saying that yes, antibiotics used in livestock plays a role in antibiotic resistance and “should be phased out.” According to the CDC’s report,5 22 percent of antibiotic-resistant illness in humans is in fact linked to food. As reported by the featured article:6

“The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) said that the report shows that drug-resistant hazards in the food supply pose a serious threat to public health. One-third of the 12 resistant pathogens that CDC categorized as a ‘serious’ threat to public health are found in food.”

The four drug-resistant pathogens in question are Campylobacter, which causes an estimated 310,000 infections and 28 deaths per year; Salmonella, responsible for another 100,000 infections and 38 deaths annually; along with E.coli and Shigella. To address this growing problem, the CDC’s report issues the following recommendations:

  • Avoid inappropriate antibiotic use in food animals
  • Track antibiotic use in food animals
  • Stop spread of Campylobacter among animals on farms
  • Improve food production and processing to reduce contamination
  • Educate consumers and food workers about safe food handling practices

Source: CDC.gov, Antibiotic Resistance Threats in the United States, 2013

MRSA Spreading Via Hog Farms?

Two drug-resistant pathogens more commonly associated with antibiotic overuse in human medicine include Clostridium difficile and Staphylococcus aureus. Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA) infects more than 80,460 people and kills 11,285 people annually. Disturbingly, as discussed in a recent Mother Jones7 article, MRSA infection has been rapidly increasing among people outside hospital settings as well.

As stated in the article:

“Increasing evidence points to factory-scale hog facilities as a source. In a recent study,8 a team of researchers led by University of Iowa’s Tara Smith found MRSA in 8.5 percent of pigs on conventional farms and no pigs on antibiotic-free farms. Meanwhile, a study9, 10 just released by the journal JAMA Internal Medicine found that people who live near hog farms or places where hog manure is applied as fertilizer have a much greater risk of contracting MRSA.”

In the latter study, people with the highest exposure to manure were 38 percent more likely to contract community-associated MRSA, and 30 percent more likely to get healthcare-associated MRSA. Level of exposure was calculated based on proximity to hog farms, the size of the farms, and how much manure the farm in question used. 

Back in 2009 a University of Iowa study11 found that a full 70 percent of hogs and 64 percent of workers in industrial animal confinements tested positive for antibiotic-resistant MRSA. The study pointed out that, once MRSA is introduced, it could spread broadly to other swine and their caretakers, as well as to their families and friends.

In other parts of the world, such as the European Union, the use of antibiotics as growth promoters in animal feed has been banned for years. Yet in the US this is still a topic of debate, with industry supporters trying to downplay the inevitable fact that this irresponsible use of antibiotics is most likely posing a serious risk to human health and the environment.

As reported in 2011, you have a 50/50 chance of buying meat tainted with drug-resistant bacteria when you buy meat from your local grocery store. This shocking finding came from a study by the Translational Genomics Research Institute,12 which revealed that 47 percent of the meat and poultry samples tested contained antibiotic-resistant Staphylococcus aureus bacteria. These were samples from 80 different brands of beef, chicken, pork, and turkey from more than two dozen grocery stores scattered across the United States, in large cities from Los Angeles to Washington D.C.

The fact that antibiotic-resistant superbugs are found so widely in US meat supplies is a major red flag, a sign that we are nearing the point of no return where superbugs will continue to flourish with very little we can do to stop them. While I am not one to recommend many medications, antibiotics can be VERY useful when you need to treat a serious bacterial infection. When used properly, in the correct contexts and with responsibility, antibiotics can and do save lives that are threatened by bacterial infections. But they will only remain effective if urgent changes are made to curb the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria and disease… and this will only happen with a serious reduction in their use now.

Choose Your Foods Wisely

Conventional medicine certainly needs to curtail its prescriptions for antibiotics, but even if you use antibiotics judiciously you’re still exposed to great amounts of antibiotics from the foods you eat, and this is entirely unnecessary. This is one of the primary reasons why I ONLY recommend organic, grass-fed, free-range meats or organic pastured chickens, as non-medical use of antibiotics is not permitted in organic farming. They’re also far superior to CAFO-raised meats in terms ofnutritional content.

To source pure, healthful meats, your best option is to get to know a local farmer — one who uses non-toxic farming methods. If you live in an urban area, there are increasing numbers of community-supported agriculture programsavailable that offer access to healthy, locally grown foods even if you live in the heart of the city. Being able to find high-quality meat is such an important issue for me personally that I’ve made connections with sources I know provide high-quality organic grass-fed beef and free-range chicken, both of which you can find in my online store. You can eliminate the shipping charges, however, if you find a trusted farmer locally. If you live in the US, the Weston Price Foundation13 also has local chapters in most states, and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase these types of foods, including grass-fed raw dairy products like milk and butter.

How CAFO Meats May Decimate Your Gut Health

Antibiotic-resistant disease is not the only danger associated with the misuse of these drugs. Excessive exposure to antibiotics—which includes regularly eating antibiotic-laced CAFO meats—also takes a heavy toll on your gastrointestinal health. This in turn can predispose you to virtually any disease. Protecting your gut health and reducing the spread of antibiotic-resistant bacteria are significant reasons for making sure you’re only eating grass-fed, organically-raised meats.

In related news, researchers at Oregon State University point out the close links between your gut health and a wide range of health issues.14 As noted in the university press release:

“Problems ranging from autoimmune disease to clinical depression and simple obesity may in fact be linked to immune dysfunction that begins with a ‘failure to communicate’ in the human gut, the scientists say. Health care of the future may include personalized diagnosis of an individual’s ‘microbiome’ to determine what prebiotics or probiotics are needed to provide balance.

Appropriate sanitation such as clean water and sewers are good. But some erroneous lessons in health care may need to be unlearned—leaving behind the fear of dirt, the love of antimicrobial cleansers, and the outdated notion that an antibiotic is always a good idea. We live in a world of ‘germs’ and many of them are good for us.

An emerging theory of disease, [Dr. Natalia] Shulzhenko said, is a disruption in the ‘crosstalk’ between the microbes in the human gut and other cells involved in the immune system and metabolic processes. ‘In a healthy person, these microbes in the gut stimulate the immune system as needed, and it in turn talks back,’ Shulzhenko said. ‘There’s an increasing disruption of these microbes from modern lifestyle, diet, overuse of antibiotics and other issues. With that disruption, the conversation is breaking down.’”

The widespread deterioration of people’s gut health can be traced back to the change in our modern diet. This includes the introduction of meats from unnaturally-raised livestock, fed genetically engineered corn and soy along with a mixture of antibiotics and other drugs. But another important dietary factor is the shunning of traditionally fermented foods, which are naturally high in the beneficial bacteria necessary for optimal gut health. Mounting research shows that beneficial bacteria in your gut is likely to have significant benefits to your health and may be essential for:

  • Protection against over-growth of other microorganisms that could cause disease
  • Digestion of food and absorption of nutrients and certain carbohydrates
  • Producing vitamins, absorbing minerals, and eliminating toxins
  • Preventing allergies
  • Maintaining natural defenses

Numerous studies have also shown that your gut flora plays a role in:

  • Mood, psychological health, and behavior
  • Celiac disease
  • Diabetes
  • Weight gain and obesity
  • Metabolic syndrome

Nurturing Your Gut Flora Is One of the Foundations of Optimal Health

Besides antibiotics, your gut bacteria are also vulnerable to factors such as chlorinated water, antibacterial soaps, pollution, and agricultural chemicals—especially glyphosate, which, incidentally, is the most widely used herbicide in the world. To protect your gut health, it’s important to avoid processed, refined foods in your diet and to regularly reseed your gut with good bacteria by eating non-pasteurized, traditionally fermented foods, such as fermented vegetables, or taking a high-quality probiotic supplement.

One of the reasons why fermented foods are so beneficial is because they contain a wide variety of different beneficial bacteria. Also, if fermented with a probiotics starter culture, the amount of healthy bacteria in a serving of fermented vegetables can far exceed the amount you’ll find in commercial probiotics supplements, making it a very cost-effective alternative. Ideally, you want to eat a variety of fermented foods to maximize the variety of bacteria you’re consuming. Healthy options include:

Lassi (an Indian yogurt drink, traditionally enjoyed before dinner) Various pickled fermentations of cabbage (sauerkraut), turnips, eggplant, cucumbers, onions, squash, and carrots Tempeh
Traditionally fermented raw milk such as kefir or yogurt, but NOT commercial versions, which typically do not have live cultures and are loaded with sugars that feed pathogenic bacteria Natto (fermented soy) Kim chee

 

When choosing fermented foods, steer clear of pasteurized versions, as pasteurization will destroy many of the naturally occurring probiotics. This includes most of the “probiotic” yogurts you find in every grocery store these days; since they’re pasteurized, they will be associated with all of the problems of pasteurized milk products. They also typically contain added sugars, high-fructose corn syrup, artificial coloring, and artificial sweeteners, all of which will only worsen your health.

When you first start out, you’ll want to start small, adding as little as half a tablespoon of fermented vegetables to each meal, and gradually working your way up to about a quarter to half a cup (2 to 4 oz) of fermented vegetables or other cultured food with one to three meals per day. Since cultured foods are efficient detoxifiers, you may experience detox symptoms, or a “healing crisis,” if you introduce too many at once. That said, three very positive changes occur when your good-to-bad intestinal bacteria ratio is brought back into balance:

  • Digestive problems diminish or disappear
  • Your immune system de-stresses and is better equipped to fight off disease of all kinds, contributing to a longer and healthier life
  • Your body begins to use all the good food and nutritional supplements you feed it

Non-food crops lock up enough calories to feed 4 billion.


Global calorie availability could be increased by as much as 70 per cent — feeding an additional 4 billion people — by shifting cropland use to produce food for humans rather than livestock feed and biofuels, according to new research.

Such a shift could free up calories roughly equivalent to the yield increases achieved for maize, wheat and rice between 1965 and 2009, researchers say in the study, published in Environmental Research Letters this month (1 August).

“When talking about the future of food security, people often suggest that we grow our way out of the problem: that if we just keep producing more corn and soybeans we will be able to feed the world.

Our study provides an alternative point of view,” Emily Cassidy, lead author of the study and environmental scientist at the University of Minnesota, United States, tells SciDev.Net.

Researchers looked at the 41 crops that provide more than 90 per cent of world’s calories. They analysed where the crops are grown, the overall production and also how the crops are used: for direct human consumption, animal feed or biofuels.

“Globally, 36 per cent of all calories are fed to animals. We found that decreasing grain-fed meat consumption by 50 per cent would be enough additional calories for two more billion people,” says Cassidy.

Reducing meat consumption, or shifting it away from beef to poultry and pork, has the potential to feed more people per hectare of cropland because beef is not energy efficient, Cassidy adds.

“When we feed 100 calories of average corn and soy to beef cattle we get only three per cent of these calories back, while the efficiency is better for pork and chickens,” she says.

“We found that decreasing grain-fed meat consumption by 50 per cent would be enough additional calories for two more billion people.”

Emily Cassidy

Researchers also looked at crop allocation in terms of proteins.

“Half of the protein that we produce with crops actually goes to animals for feed. We could have the right amount of protein and amino acids if we were to directly consume crops,” says Cassidy. “We are actually losing a lot of protein in the plant-animal conversion process.”

Yet, the authors recognise that the recent global trends are towards more meat consumption and biofuel production.

“Meat is part of the human culture and it’s important for food security in many parts of the world, but when we increase crop yields in affluent nations we are just feeding animals and this is not turning into much food for human consumption,” says Cassidy.

According to Cassidy, a shift from yield intensification for meat production in rich countries could redirect investments and attention to countries in Africa and South Asia that need to increase crop productivity to feed people.

But Barbara Adolph, a researcher at the International Institute for Environment and Development, in United Kingdom, believes that the problem is not just related to present agricultural resources and investments.

“One of the challenges is that most of the meat consumption will soon be happening in China and to a lesser extent India, as well as Sub-Saharan Africa, where the growing middle class is consuming more and more meat and dairy products,” she tells SciDev.Net. “So re-allocation of crop land in the rich countries will only go so far — we also need to think about changing consumption patterns among the rich in the South.”

Barbara Burlingame, a deputy director at the nutrition and consumer protection division of the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organization, says: “We cannot be dogmatic about meat and dairy consumption, because a little goes a long way in terms of quality nutrients for the diet”.

She adds that “bringing food losses and waste under control, fromagriculture through household and retail, will serve to relieve pressures on natural resources”.

However, she tells SciDev.Net: “If agriculture were nutrition-driven, we would see global demand for meat and dairy decrease, and we would see less land use for biofuels“.

Source:Scivx

 

We Are What We Eat, Or Are We?


Not a clinic day goes by without multiple patients asking me what they should eat, both while on treatment for their cancer and during the survivorship period. If you Google diet and cancer, you are informed that there are 207 million results.1 Such an association seems logical; we all grew up hearing the phase “you are what you eat,” a phrase attributed to French politician and gastronome Jean Anthelme Brillat-Savarin, who wrote in 1826, “Dis-moi ce que tu manges, je te dirai ce que tu es [Tell me what you eat and I will tell you what you are].”2 Despite the persistent belief for the past nearly two centuries, there remain limited, consistent data on most dietary factors and many disease, including cancers.

Studies of red meat and processed meat have been a rare example of fairly consistent results showing an association between increased intake and risk of developing colorectal cancer.3,4 In 2007, The World Cancer Fund and American Institute of Cancer Research‘s expert panel reported that there was convincing evidence that red meat and processed meat increased the risk of developing colorectal cancer.5 Their meta-analyses found that consumption of red meat led to a 1.43 (95% CI, 1.05 to 1.94) increased risk of colorectal cancer per times per week consumed and 1.29 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.60) per 100 g/d. Similarly, consumption of processed meat was associated with a 1.21 (95% CI, 1.04 to 1.42) increased risk per 50 g/d.4 Given these consistent findings, it seems reasonable to test whether consumption of red or processed meat affected patients who already have a diagnosis of colorectal cancer.

In this issue of Journal of Clinical Oncology, McCullough et al6 report on a cohort of 2,315 subjects who developed colorectal cancer while participating in the Cancer Prevention Study-II Nutrition Cohort. They report that the quantity of red and processed red meat consumed before the diagnosis of colorectal cancer was associated with all-cause but not colorectal cancer–associated mortality. Though not statistically significant, the data suggest that this increase was due to cardiovascular-associated mortality. However, the consumption of red and processed meat after diagnosis was not associated with either end point. Curiously, those with the highest consumption of red and processed meat consistently before and after diagnosis did have an increased risk of colorectal cancer–associated mortality. This seemingly highest risk group (high intake before and after diagnosis) did not have a statistically higher risk of overall or cardiovascular-associated mortality.

Several issues are worthy of consideration in interpreting the McCullough study.6 First, why did an exposure that convincingly increases the risk of developing colorectal cancer not affect the natural history of the disease once it developed?7,8 Although the exact mechanism of action for red and processed meat increasing colorectal cancer development is not known, several plausible biologic mechanisms have been proposed. Red and processed meats cooked at high temperatures contain heterocyclic amines, which are carcinogenic. A second mechanism involves endogenous formation in the gastrointestinal tract of N-nitroso compounds from the heme in red meat, many of which are carcinogenic. In addition, nitrites or nitrates added to meat for preservation could increase exogenous exposure to nitrosamines, N-nitroso compounds, and their precursors. All these proposed mechanisms lead to carcinogenic effects on the mucosa of the bowel, leading to mutational effects on those cells and potential for abnormal growth and cancer formation. The risk of recurrence for patients with nonmetastatic colorectal cancer is related to the growth of micrometastatic disease, already spread before detection and treatment of the primary lesion. Thus, local carcinogenic effects will be less significant to colorectal cancer survivors’ outside risk of forming new primary tumors. In contrast, recent studies on diet and colorectal cancer survivorship have demonstrated association with cancer recurrence, specifically as a result of high intakes of Western-pattern diet and glycemic load.9,10 Both exposures are proposed to be associated with disease recurrence by increasing insulin and insulin-like growth factors, which affect cell growth, proliferation, and metastatic potential, thereby influencing the growth of micrometastatic disease in colorectal cancer survivors.11

Another consideration in survivorship studies is what recommendations can be made to the patient at hand. When a patient is diagnosed with cancer, they want recommendations on what they can do now to help their chances of cure and/or survival. If an exposure before diagnosis is associated with an outcome, but not the exposure after diagnosis, there is not necessarily a recommendation that can be made to a patient. However, such data may suggest a factor that influenced the biology of the tumor that developed. Another question is whether more favorable or less favorable biology influenced by the exposure can be affected by what the patient does after diagnosis. One consideration could be whether a worse prognosis tumor as a result of dietary exposure should influence treatment given to the patient (ie, the factor having prognostic and predictive value). Certainly, studies of diet and lifestyle to date are far from being able to lead to such conclusions. However, it is possible such a mechanism might explain the curious finding that colorectal cancer–associated mortality was influenced by high consumption of red and processed meat both before and after diagnosis, but not in either time frame only. Specifically, patients with high consumption of red and processed meat before diagnosis should try to decrease intake after diagnosis because those who maintained high levels had a higher risk of recurrence. Such a conclusion is purely speculative on the basis of the data in this article and would need other cohorts to further clarify.

Finally, the study by McCullough et al suggests that some risk factors for colorectal cancer also increase risk for other diseases, and thus colorectal cancer patients will often have comorbidities that influence survival. Thus, the current study does remind clinicians that, although one cannot influence exposures before diagnosis, management of comorbidities is important in the care of colorectal cancer survivors to improve survival.

In conclusion, studies of host factors and cancer survival require us to consider whether the results can be of utility to our patients. First, if the exposure after diagnosis influences outcomes, one should consider whether the strength of the evidence justifies making recommendations to alter diet or lifestyle, for instance. Although a randomized controlled trial would be ideal to address this question, changing diet and lifestyle behaviors in the number of patients needed to have statistical powers remains a challenge. Because studies of diet and lifestyle in colorectal cancer survivors are all observational to date, one needs to consider potential biases and confounding. Second, it is important to understand whether an exposure affects cancer recurrence, survival, or both. Although both end points are important in survivorship care, they may have different management implications. Finally, although a message that prediagnosis diet influences outcomes may seem to have limited utility for a patient when they develop cancer, it furthers the strength of the recommendation for people to maintain a healthy diet and lifestyle throughout their life to maximize the health benefits.

Source: JCO

The Effect of Violent and Nonviolent Video Games on Heart Rate Variability, Sleep, and Emotions in Adolescents With Different Violent Gaming Habits.


Abstract

Objective To study cardiac, sleep-related, and emotional reactions to playing violent (VG) versus nonviolent video games (NVG) in adolescents with different gaming habits.

Methods Thirty boys (aged 13–16 years, standard deviation = 0.9), half of them low-exposed (≤1 h/d) and half high-exposed (≥3 h/d) to violent games, played a VG/NVG for 2 hours during two different evenings in their homes. Heart rate (HR) and HR variability were registered from before start until next morning. A questionnaire about emotional reactions was administered after gaming sessions and a sleep diary on the following mornings.

Results During sleep, there were significant interaction effects between group and gaming condition for HR (means [standard errors] for low-exposed: NVG 63.8 [2.2] and VG 67.7 [2.4]; for high-exposed: NVG 65.5 [1.9] and VG 62.7 [1.9]; F(1,28) = 9.22, p = .005). There was also a significant interaction for sleep quality (low-exposed: NVG 4.3 [0.2] and VG 3.7 [0.3]); high-exposed: NVG 4.4 [0.2] and VG 4.4 [0.2]; F(1,28) = 3.51, p = .036, one sided), and sadness after playing (low-exposed: NVG 1.0 [0.0] and VG 1.4 [0.2]; high-exposed: NVG 1.2 [0.1] and VG 1.1 [0.1]; (F(1,27) = 6.29, p = .009, one sided).

Conclusions Different combinations of the extent of (low versus high) previous VG and experimental exposure to a VG or an NVG are associated with different reaction patterns—physiologically, emotionally, and sleep related. Desensitizing effects or selection bias stand out as possible explanations.

 

 

The 9 Foods You Should Never Eat

Story at-a-glance

  • Studies have repeatedly shown artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite, increase carbohydrate cravings, stimulate fat storage and weight gain. One recent study found both saccharin and aspartame cause greater weight gain than sugar
  • Processed meats increase your risk of cancer, especially bowel cancer, and NO amount of processed meat is “safe.” So ditch the deli meats and opt instead for fresh organically-raised grass-fed or pastured meats, or wild caught salmon
  • Margarine and vegetable oils are two of the absolute worst fats to eat. Both contain heart-harming trans fats, for example. Your best alternative for cooking is coconut oil, as it’s less susceptible to heat damage
  • Microwave popcorn, table salt, non-organic produce like potatoes, and unfermented soy products, including soy protein isolate, are more harmful than beneficial as they all contain hazardous contaminants
  • Most canned foods contain BPA, a toxic chemical. Acidity causes BPA to leach into your food. Stick to fresh fruits and vegetables, or switch over to brands that use glass containers instead—especially for acidic foods like tomatoes

 

Many foods have been heavily promoted as being healthy when they are nothing more than pernicious junk foods. In the featured article, Clean Plates1 founder Jared Koch shared his list of nine staple foods that are far less “good for you” than you’ve been led to believe.

Here, I expand on the selections that are mentioned in the featured article.

1. Canned Tomatoes

Many leading brands of canned foods contain BPA — a toxic chemical linked to reproductive abnormalities, neurological effects, heightened risk of breast and prostate cancers, diabetes, heart disease and other serious health problems. According to Consumer Reports’ testing, just a couple of servings of canned food can exceed the safety limits for daily BPA exposure for children.

High acidity — a prominent characteristic of tomatoes – causes BPA to leach into your food. To avoid this hazardous chemical, avoid canned foods entirely and stick to fresh fruits and vegetables, or switch over to brands that use glass containers instead—especially for acidic foods like tomatoes.

2. Processed Meats

As Koch warns, processed deli meats like salami, ham, and roast beef are not only typically made with meats from animals raised in confined animal feeding operations (CAFOs).

This means they’re given growth hormones, antibiotics and other veterinary drugs, and raised in deplorable conditions that promote disease, these meats are also filled with sodium nitrite (a commonly used preservative and antimicrobial agent that also adds color and flavor) and other chemical flavorings and dyes.

Nitrites can be converted into nitrosamines in your body, which are potent cancer-causing chemicals. Research has linked nitrites to higher rates of colorectal, stomach and pancreatic cancer. But that’s not all. Most processed deli meats also contain other cancer-promoting chemicals that are created during cooking. These include:

  • Heterocyclic Amines (HCAs) which are hazardous compounds created in meats and other foods that have been cooked at high temperatures. According to research, processed meats are clearly associated with an increased risk of stomach, colon and breast cancers.
  • Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons (PAHs): Many processed meats are smoked as part of the curing process, which causes PAHs to form. PAHs can also form when grilling. When fat drips onto the heat source, causing excess smoke, and the smoke surrounds your food, it can transfer cancer-causing PAHs to the meat.
  • Advanced Glycation End Products (AGEs): When food is cooked at high temperatures—including when it is pasteurized or sterilized—it increases the formation of AGEs in your food. AGEs build up in your body over time leading to oxidative stress, inflammation and an increased risk of heart disease, diabetes and kidney disease.

The truth is, processed meats are not a healthful choice for anyone and should be avoided entirely, according to a 2011 reviewof more than 7,000 clinical studies examining the connection between diet and cancer. The report was commissioned by The World Cancer Research Fund2 (WCRF) using money raised from the general public. Therefore the findings were not influenced by any vested interests, which makes it all the more reliable.

It’s the biggest review of the evidence ever undertaken, and it confirms previous findings: Processed meats increase your risk of cancer, especially bowel cancer, and NO amount of processed meat is “safe.” You’re far better off ditching the deli meats and opting instead for fresh organically-raised grass-fed or pastured meats, or wild caught salmon.

3. Margarine

The unfortunate result of the low-fat diet craze has been the shunning of healthful fats such as butter, and public health has declined as a result of this folly. There are a myriad of unhealthy components to margarine and other butter impostors, including:

  • Trans fats: These unnatural fats in margarine, shortenings and spreads are formed during the process of hydrogenation, which turns liquid vegetable oils into a solid fat. Trans fats contribute to heart disease, cancer, bone problems, hormonal imbalance and skin disease; infertility, difficulties in pregnancy and problems with lactation; and low birth weight, growth problems and learning disabilities in children. A US government panel of scientists determined that man-made trans fats are unsafe at any level.
  • Free radicals: Free radicals and other toxic breakdown products are the result of high temperature industrial processing of vegetable oils. They contribute to numerous health problems, including cancer and heart disease.
  • Emulsifiers and preservatives: Numerous additives of questionable safety are added to margarines and spreads. Most vegetable shortening is stabilized with preservatives like BHT.
  • Hexane and other solvents: Used in the extraction process, these industrial chemicals can have toxic effects.

Good-old-fashioned butter, when made from grass-fed cows, is rich in a substance called conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). CLA is not only known to help fight cancer and diabetes, it may even help you to lose weight, which cannot be said for its trans-fat substitutes. Much of the reason why butter is vilified is because it contains saturated fat. If you’re still in the mindset that saturated fat is harmful for your health, then please read the Healthy Fats section of my Optimized Nutrition Plan to learn why saturated fat is actually good for you.

4. Vegetable Oils

Of all the destructive foods available to us, those made with heated vegetable oils are some of the worst. Make no mistake about it–vegetable oil is not the health food that you were lead to believe it was. This is largely due to the fact that they are highly processed, and when consumed in massive amounts, as they are by most Americans, they seriously distort the important omega-6 to omega-3 ratio. Ideally, this ratio is 1:1.

Anytime you cook a food, you run the risk of creating heat-induced damage. The oils you choose to cook with must be stable enough to resist chemical changes when heated to high temperatures, or you run the risk of damaging your health. One of the ways vegetable oils can inflict damage is by converting your good cholesterol into bad cholesterol—by oxidizing it. When you cook with polyunsaturated vegetable oils (such as canola, corn, and soy oils), oxidized cholesterol is introduced into your system.

As the oil is heated and mixed with oxygen, it goes rancid. Rancid oil is oxidized oil and should NOT be consumed—it leads directly to vascular disease. Trans-fats are introduced when these oils are hydrogenated, which increases your risk of chronic diseases like breast cancer and heart disease.

So what’s the best oil to cook with?

Of all the available oils, coconut oil is the oil of choice for cooking because it is nearly a completely saturated fat, which means it is much less susceptible to heat damage. And coconut oil is one of the most unique and beneficial fats for your body. For more in-depth information about the many benefits of coconut oil, please see this special report. Olive oil, while certainly a healthful oil, is easily damaged by heat and is best reserved for drizzling cold over salad.

5. Microwave Popcorn

Perfluoroalkyls, which include perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA), and perfluorooctane sulfonate (PFOS), are chemicals used to keep grease from leaking through fast food wrappers, are being ingested by people through their food and showing up as contaminants in blood. Microwave popcorn bags are lined with PFOA, and when they are heated the compound leaches onto the popcorn.

These chemicals are part of an expanding group of chemicals commonly referred to as “gender-bending” chemicals, because they can disrupt your endocrine system and affect your sex hormones. The EPA has ruled PFCs as “likely carcinogens,” and has stated that PFOA “poses developmental and reproductive risks to humans.” Researchers have also linked various PFCs to a range of other health dangers, such as:

  • Infertility — A study published in the journal Human Reproduction3 found that both PFOA and PFOS (perfluorooctane sulfonate), dramatically increased the odds of infertility. PFOA was linked to a 60 to 154 percent increase in the chance of infertility.
  • Thyroid disease — A 2010 study4 found that PFOA can damage your thyroid function. Individuals with the highest PFOA concentrations were more than twice as likely to report current thyroid disease, compared to those with the lowest PFOA concentrations. Your thyroid contains thyroglobulin protein, which binds to iodine to form hormones, which in turn influence essentially every organ, tissue and cell in your body. Thyroid hormones are also required for growth and development in children. Thyroid disease, if left untreated, can lead to heart disease, infertility, muscle weakness, and osteoporosis.
  • Cancer — PFOA has been associated with tumors in at least four different organs in animal tests (liver, pancreas, testicles and mammary glands in rats), and has been associated with increases in prostate cancer in PFOA plant workers.
  • Immune system problems — Several studies by scientists in Sweden indicate that PFCs have an adverse effect on your immune system. As described in a report on PFCs by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), PFOA was found to decrease all immune cell subpopulations studied, in the thymus and spleen, and caused immunosupression.
  • Increased LDL cholesterol levels – A 2010 study in the Archives of Pediatric & Adolescent Medicine5 found that children and teens with higher PFOA levels had higher levels of total cholesterol and LDL or “bad” cholesterol, while PFOS was associated with increased total cholesterol, including both LDL cholesterol and HDL or “good” cholesterol.

I strongly recommend avoiding any product you know contain these toxic compounds, particularly non-stick cookware, but also foods sold in grease-proof food packaging, such as fast food and microwave popcorn. Clearly, if you’re eating fast food or junk food, PFCs from the wrapper may be the least of your problems, but I think it’s still important to realize that not only are you not getting proper nutrition from the food itself, the wrappers may also add to your toxic burden.

6. Non-Organic Potatoes and Other Fresh Produce Known for High Pesticide Contamination

Your best bet is to buy only organic fruits and vegetables, as synthetic agricultural chemicals are not permissible under the USDA organic rules. That said, not all conventionally grown fruits and vegetables are subjected to the same amount of pesticide load. While Koch focuses on potatoes, as they tend to take up a lot of pesticides and other agricultural chemicals present in the soil, I would recommend reviewing the “Shopper’s Guide to Pesticides in Produce”6 by the Environmental Working Group.

Of the 48 different fruit and vegetable categories tested by the EWG for the 2013 guide, the following 15 fruits and vegetables had the highest pesticide load, making them the most important to buy or grow organically:

Apples Celery Cherry tomatoes
Cucumbers Grapes Hot peppers
Nectarines (imported) Peaches Potatoes
Spinach Strawberries Sweet bell peppers
Kale Collard greens Summer squash

 

In contrast, the following foods were found to have the lowest residual pesticide load, making them the safest bet among conventionally grown vegetables. Note that a small amount of sweet corn and most Hawaiian papaya, although low in pesticides, are genetically engineered (GE). If you’re unsure of whether the sweet corn or papaya is GE, I’d recommend opting for organic varieties:

Asparagus Avocado Cabbage
Cantaloupe Sweet corn (non-GMO) Eggplant
Grapefruit Kiwi Mango
Mushrooms Onions Papayas (non-GMO. Most Hawaiian papaya is GMO)
Pineapple Sweet peas (frozen) Sweet potatoes

7. Table Salt

Salt is essential for life—you cannot live without it. However, regular ‘table salt’ and the salt found in processed foods are NOT identical to the salt your body really needs. In fact, table salt has practically nothing in common with natural salt. One is health damaging, and the other is healing.

  • Processed salt is 98 percent sodium chloride, and the remaining two percent comprises man-made chemicals, such as moisture absorbents, and a little added iodine. These are dangerous chemicals like ferrocyanide and aluminosilicate. Some European countries, where water fluoridation is not practiced, also add fluoride to table salt
  • Natural salt is about 84 percent sodium chloride. The remaining 16 percent of natural salt consists of other naturally occurring minerals, including trace minerals like silicon, phosphorous and vanadium

Given that salt is absolutely essential to good health, I recommend switching to a pure, unrefined salt. My favorite is an ancient, all-natural sea salt from the Himalayas. Himalayan salt is completely pure, having spent many thousands of years maturing under extreme tectonic pressure, far away from impurities, so it isn’t polluted with the heavy metals and industrial toxins of today. And it’s hand-mined, hand-washed, and minimally processed. Himalayan salt is only 85 percent sodium chloride, the remaining 15 percent contains 84 trace minerals from our prehistoric seas. Unrefined natural salt is important to many biological processes, including:

  • Being a major component of your blood plasma, lymphatic fluid, extracellular fluid, and even amniotic fluid
  • Carrying nutrients into and out of your cells
  • Maintain and regulate blood pressure
  • Increasing the glial cells in your brain, which are responsible for creative thinking and long-term planning
  • Helping your brain communicate with your muscles, so that you can move on demand via sodium-potassium ion exchange

While natural unprocessed salt has many health benefits, that does not mean you should use it with impunity. Another important factor is the potassium to sodium ratio of your diet. Imbalance in this ratio can not only lead to hypertension (high blood pressure) and other health problems, including heart disease, memory decline, erectile dysfunction and more. The easiest way to avoid this imbalance is by avoiding processed foods, which are notoriously low in potassium while high in sodium. Instead, eat a diet of whole, ideally organically-grown foods to ensure optimal nutrient content. This type of diet will naturally provide much larger amounts of potassium in relation to sodium.

8. Soy Protein Isolate and Other Unfermented Soy Products

Sadly, most of what you have been led to believe by the media about soy is simply untrue. One of the worst problems with soy comes from the fact that 90 to 95 percent of soybeans grown in the US are genetically engineered (GE), and these are used to create soy protein isolate. Genetically engineered soybeans are designed to be “Roundup ready,” which means they’re engineered to withstand otherwise lethal doses of herbicide.

The active ingredient in Roundup herbicide is called glyphosate, which is responsible for the disruption of the delicate hormonal balance of the female reproductive cycle. What’s more, glyphosate is toxic to the placenta, which is responsible for delivering vital nutrients from mother to child, and eliminating waste products. Once the placenta has been damaged or destroyed, the result can be miscarriage. In those children born to mothers who have been exposed to even a small amount of glyphosate, serious birth defects can result.

Glyphosate’s mechanism of harm was only recently identified, and demonstrates how this chemical disrupts cellular function and induce many of our modern diseases, including autism. Soy protein isolate can be found in protein bars, meal replacement shakes, bottled fruit drinks, soups and sauces, meat analogs, baked goods, breakfast cereals and some dietary supplements.

Even if you are not a vegetarian and do not use soymilk or tofu, it is important to be a serious label reader. There are so many different names for soy additives, you could be bringing home a genetically modified soy-based product without even realizing it. Soy expert Dr. Kaayla Daniel offers a free Special Report7, “Where the Soys Are,” on her Web site. It lists the many “aliases” that soy might be hiding under in ingredient lists — words like “bouillon,” “natural flavor” and “textured plant protein.”

Besides soy protein isolate, ALL unfermented soy products are best avoided if you value your health. Thousands of studies have linked unfermented soy to malnutrition, digestive distress, immune-system breakdown, thyroid dysfunction, cognitive decline, reproductive disorders and infertility—even cancer and heart disease.

The only soy with health benefits is organic soy that has been properly fermented, and these are the only soy products I ever recommend consuming. After a long fermentation process, the phytate and “anti-nutrient” levels of soybeans are reduced, and their beneficial properties become available to your digestive system. To learn more, please see this previous article detailing the dangers of unfermented soy.

9. Artificial Sweeteners

Contrary to popular belief, studies have found that artificial sweeteners such as aspartame can stimulate your appetite, increase carbohydrate cravings, and stimulate fat storage and weight gain. In one of the most recent of such studies8, saccharin and aspartame were found to cause greater weight gain than sugar.

Aspartame is perhaps one of the most problematic. It is primarily made up of aspartic acid and phenylalanine. The phenylalanine has been synthetically modified to carry a methyl group, which provides the majority of the sweetness. That phenylalanine methyl bond, called a methyl ester, is very weak, which allows the methyl group on the phenylalanine to easily break off and form methanol.

You may have heard the claim that aspartame is harmless because methanol is also found in fruits and vegetables. However, in fruits and vegetables, the methanol is firmly bonded to pectin, allowing it to be safely passed through your digestive tract. Not so with the methanol created by aspartame; there it’s not bonded to anything that can help eliminate it from your body.

Methanol acts as a Trojan horse; it’s carried into susceptible tissues in your body, like your brain and bone marrow, where the alcohol dehydrogenase (ADH) enzyme converts it into formaldehyde, which wreaks havoc with sensitive proteins and DNA. All animals EXCEPT HUMANS have a protective mechanism that allows methanol to be broken down into harmless formic acid. This is why toxicology testing on animals is a flawed model. It doesn’t fully apply to people.

Guidelines for Healthy Food

Whatever food you’re looking to eat, whether organic or locally grown, from either your local supermarket or a farmer’s market, the following are signs of a high-quality, healthy food. Most often, the best place to find these foods is from a sustainable agricultural group in your area. You can also review my free nutrition plan to get started on a healthy eating program today:

  • It’s grown without pesticides and chemical fertilizers (organic foods fit this description, but so do some non-organic foods)
  • It’s not genetically engineered
  • It contains no added growth hormones, antibiotics, or other drugs
  • It does not contain artificial anything, nor any preservatives
  • It is fresh (if you have to choose between wilted organic produce or fresh conventional produce, the latter may still be the better option as freshness is important for optimal nutrient content)
  • It did not grown in a factory farm
  • It is grown with the laws of nature in mind (meaning animals are fed their native diets, not a mix of grains and animal byproducts, and have free-range access to the outdoors)
  • It is grown in a sustainable way (using minimal amounts of water, protecting the soil from burnout, and turning animal wastes into natural fertilizers instead of environmental pollutants)
  • Source: mercola.com