Striving4Zen

Starting on September 1, 2007, it became illegal for 100% raw almonds to be manufactured and sold in the US, with two exceptions (discussed below). Read the new law and its specific provisions by going to California Almond Board.

The origins of this new law date back to 2001, when an outbreak of Salmonella poisoning in Canada was traced back to an almond grower in California. At that time, the California Department of Health Services worked with that grower to increase the safety of almond production. But when a second round of Salmonella problems occurred with an entirely different grower, the federal government stepped in to consider a more comprehensive set of actions. The USDA, together with the U.S. FDA, CDC, California Almond Board, and other agencies drafted legislation designed to prevent further Salmonella outbreaks based on post-harvest processing of almonds.

Specifically, these government agencies designed a mandatory pasteurization program in which handlers of almonds would be required to process the almonds in such a way that a dramatic reduction in the amount of Salmonella bacteria would take place. To achieve this dramatic reduction in Salmonella bacteria, two major alternatives were envisioned: (1) exposure to steam heat sufficient to raise the surface temperature of the almond kernels to about 200°F (93°C) or (2) insertion of the kernels into a closed chamber where they could be exposed to propylene oxide gas (please note that fumigation with propylene oxide is not allowed in the processing of almonds if the almonds are going to be sold as certified organic).

Two exceptions to these processing requirements were included in the legislation. First, almond growers can receive exemption from these requirements if they can show that their ordinary manufacturing process achieves the same minimum 4-log reduction in Salmonella content. For example, their ordinary manufacturing process might include enough dry roasting or blanching to accomplish this same goal. Second, almond growers can also receive exemption if they will only be selling their almonds directly to customers at local markets, with a limit of 100 pounds per person per day in direct farmer's market sales.

What are the health implications of this new legislation? First, I am expecting us to see a certain amount of potentially problematic almonds being prevented from entering the marketplace, and that prevention will be a good thing. Second, I am also expecting us to see some nutrient loss in steam-heated almonds that will be unwanted, and, in the case of many almonds, also unnecessary. Third, I am expecting us to see some propylene oxide residues in almonds that were gassed to reduce Salmonella concentrations, and this will be a bad thing because propylene oxide is classified by the U.S. EPA as a probable human carcinogen.

In the long run, I believe the only solution to the Salmonella-and-almonds predicament will be to understand the underlying reasons why Salmonella bacteria become present in certain batches of almonds and to correct these underlying problems. Problems which, I believe have evolved due to non-sustainable approaches to almond growing and inappropriate post-harvest processing. Yet, in the meantime, if you are looking for 100% raw, organically grown almonds, your only option is to purchase from a grower at a local farmer's market, from a grower who has received exemption from the mandatory processing rules, or from a certified organic almond grower outside of the United States who exports almonds to this country.

Source

Labels: almonds, blanching, dry roasted, FDA, Nuts, pasteurization, salmonella, toxic, toxins

An alarming study published in the Journal of Biological Science this week points toward serious health hazards from genetically engineered foods and pesticides. The research, conducted by scientists from France, Italy, New Zealand, U.K. and U.S., corroborates the decade-long criticism by public interest organizations such as the Organic Consumers Association, Greenpeace, and Friends of the Earth that European Food Safety bureaucrats and the U.S. FDA have used unreliable tests to assess the safety of food and products containing genetically modified organisms (GMOs). GMOs are now found in more than 80% of (non-organic) foods sold in conventional grocery stores in the U.S., as well as the majority of animal feed in the EU.

Read more....

Labels: FDA, genetically engineered, genetically modified, GMO, study

A Food and Drug Administration report released yesterday recommends stronger warnings and dose limits on drugs containing the painkiller acetaminophen, citing an increased risk of liver injury.

The recommendation covers both prescription doses and over-the-counter medication, of which Johnson & Johnson's Tylenol is the most well known.

Source

Labels: acetaminophen, FDA, medication, pills, tylenol, warning

No more tears, but something more harmful lurks inside?

That's what the Campaign For Safe Cosmetics would lead you to believe. The coalition of health, environmental, and consumer groups — armed with a letter signed by nearly 50 groups totaling some 1.7 million members — approached Johnson & Johnson to ask that the company reformulate its products to be free of chemicals suspected of causing cancer.

The substances in question are 1,4-dioxane (a byproduct of the manufacturing process) the preservative formaldehyde, which is slowly released by a chemical called Quaternium-15, both probable human carcinogens . . . and both found in the much-loved Johnson's Baby Shampoo, marketed as the "number-one choice of hospitals."

According to a Johnson & Johnson spokesperson:

The trace levels of certain compounds that were noted by the Campaign For Safe Cosmetics can result from processes that make our products gentle for babies and safe from bacteria growth. Many regulatory agencies around the world consider these trace levels safe.

The quantity in question in the baby shampoo is 210 parts per million of formaldehyde and a "low level" of 1,4-dioxane, amounts thought to be absorbed by the skin. But if the two chemicals were food additives, they'd have to be tested before being sold to prove they didn't contain dangerous chemicals . . . and these two would fail. Since the FDA is not involved in cosmetic product regulation, the point is (somewhat) lost but shocking nonetheless.

SOURCE

Labels: 1.4-dioxane, chemicals, FDA, formaldehyde, health and safety, Johnson's Baby Shampoo, personal care, toxic

The "once you pop, you can't stop" Pringles campaign seemed kind of cute, but the catch phrase actually embodied truth in advertising. Former FDA commissioner David A. Kessler says some foods are scientifically engineered with particular combinations of salt, sugar, and fat that ultimately take you to your "bliss point" and keep you reaching for more.

The appetite is manipulated by these flavor combinations and your willpower doesn't stand much of a chance after you've had a taste. The brain's pleasure system is shot into nirvana, and then you crave to relive that moment of pleasure by eating the same junk food. But that doesn't mean you're powerless — knowing what foods trigger your bliss point will enable you to avoid them, and ultimately those cravings should vanish.

In his book, The End of Overeating: Taking Control of the Insatiable American Appetite, Kessler identifies some of the most blissful (and offensive) menu items.

Classically comforting dishes like cheese fries, buffalo wings, chicken tenders, spinach dip, and potato skins, are all designed so you want to devour the entire plate. If moderation just isn't an option when you're presented with these foods, skip the order altogether and find a creative swap instead.

For example, satisfy your desire for potato skins by ordering a healthy baked potato instead. Top it with salsa or broccoli and go light on the cheese, butter, and sour cream for a nutritious and delicious substitute. You should notice your cravings subside the more you forgo those tricky foods that entice you to keep eating.

Thanks Fit!

Labels: bliss point, cravings, David A. Kessler, eating healthy, FDA, junk food, new book

In Food, Inc., filmmaker Robert Kenner lifts the veil on our nation's food industry, exposing the highly mechanized underbelly that has been hidden from the American consumer with the consent of our government's regulatory agencies, USDA and FDA.

Our nation's food supply is now controlled by a handful of corporations that often put profit ahead of consumer health, the livelihood of the American farmer, the safety of workers and our own environment.

Featuring interviews with such experts as Eric Schlosser Fast Food Nation, Michael Pollan The Omnivore's Dilemma, In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto along with forward thinking social entrepreneurs like Stonyfield's Gary Hirshberg and Polyface Farms' Joel Salatin, Food, Inc. reveals surprising-and often shocking truths-about what we eat, how it's produced, who we have become as a nation and where we are going from here.

Source

Labels: Fast Food Nation, FDA, food, Inc., Michael Pollan, organic food, Robert Kenner, Stonyfield

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand wants the feds to test commonly used baby shampoos and cosmetics, after a study revealed that many popular brand-name items contain cancer-causing substances.

"It's important to me because I'm a mom with two young kids," the state's junior senator told The Post. "When I read this report, it basically talked about products that I have in my bathroom and I've been using for years."

The report, issued by the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, found that products including Baby Magic Soft Baby Scent Baby Lotion, and CVS and Johnson & Johnson brand baby shampoos contain the chemicals formaldehyde and 1.4-dioxane.

Gillibrand's proposed legislation, the Safe Baby Products Act, would require the FDA to investigate by testing the products and report its findings. The Campaign for Safe Cosmetics study tested 28 products and found the presence of both chemicals in 61%.

Dr. John Bailey, a former FDA cosmetics analyst now with the trade group Personal Care Products Council, said the agency had already determined that levels of the two chemicals in child bath products were safe.

Source

Labels: 1.4-dioxane, beauty, cosmetics, FDA, formaldehyde, toxic, toxins

On Friday, December 12, the Environmental Working Group made public internal government documents disclosing the Food and Drug Administration's secret plans to reverse federal warnings that pregnant women and children limit their fish intake to avoid mercury, a neurotoxin especially dangerous to the fetus and infants. EWG obtained both the FDA plan, stamped "CLOSE HOLD," and memos by senior Environmental Protection Agency scientists attacking FDA's rationale. The Washington Post broke the story, and other national stories followed.

Reaction from Capitol Hill was swift and sharp. Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-VT., denounced the FDA: "Now, in the administration's 11th hour, they are quietly trying to water down advisories for women and children about the dangers of mercury in fish, disregarding sound science on this issue. Mercury is a potent neurotoxin capable of impairing childhood development at very low levels."

Read the Washington Post story here.

Labels: EPA, EWG, FDA, fish, mercury, toxic, toxic metals, toxins, tuna

Rather than dealing with the problems inherent in a disease-ridden factory-farmed food system, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) announced in mid-September it will allow the irradiation of lettuce and spinach. Food irradiation is the controversial practice of bombarding food with high levels of x-rays (ionizing radiation) in order to destroy disease causing pathogens. Unfortunately, in the process of irradiation, other hazards arise, like the creation of toxic free radicals, vitamin and nutrient loss, and the formation of carcinogenic chemicals.

While irradiated lettuce and spinach must be labeled in supermarkets (see symbol above right), there are currently no labeling requirements whatsoever for restaurants, schools, hospitals, or nursing homes serving irradiated produce or other nuked foods such as beef. Over the past decade, OCA and our allies in the organic community have prevented corporate agribusiness and the nuclear industry from contaminating organic standards. Food irradiation is prohibited on any product labeled as "organic." There is currently a 30 day comment period for the FDA's new rule.

Source

Labels: FDA, irradation, organic, toxic, vegetables

The first FDA approved stevia based sweetener Truvia is now for sale online. Previously, other stevia sweeteners have been labeled as "dietary supplements," but Truvia has the distinction of being known as a zero-calorie sweetener. Because it is derived from an herb, it is considered "natural."

Developed by Cargill in partnership with Coca-Cola, Truvia will be used in a handful of Coke products. Rumor has it that Pepsi is working on a zero calorie stevia sweetener of its own. Let the cola wars begin.

If you live in NYC, you can sample Truvia at Rockefeller Center today!!

Thanks for the Tip!

Labels: artificial sweeteners, FDA, new product, Stevia

Does your sunscreen work?

An investigation of nearly 1,000 brand-name sunscreen products finds that 4 out of 5 contain chemicals that may pose health hazards or don't adequately protect skin from the sun's damaging rays. Some of the worst offenders are leading brands like Coppertone, Banana Boat, and Neutrogena.

More than a million cases of skin cancer are diagnosed in the U.S. every year, but FDA still hasn't finalized sunscreen standards first announced 30 years ago. Click here to tell FDA you're tired of waiting.

Meanwhile, companies are free to claim but not provide broad spectrum protection. Until FDA requires that all sunscreens be safe and effective, Environmental Working Group's comprehensive sunscreen guide—including a list of 143 products that offer very good sun protection—fills in the gaps.

Source & Source & Source

Labels: FDA, hazardous, skin cancer, sunscreen, sunshine

Dental Fillings: They are toxic, world’s largest health regulator admits

Amalgam fillings in our teeth are toxic and harmful to our health, America’s health regulator, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), has finally admitted after claiming for years that they were safe.

This unprecedented about-turn marked the sudden end of a lawsuit that had been mounted by advocacy groups, such as Moms Against Mercury, who are seeking to ban the use of mercury in amalgam fillings and children's vaccinations.

In an official statement, which has been posted on the FDA website, the regulator admitted that mercury-containing dental fillings “may have neuro-toxic effects on the nervous systems of developing children and fetuses.”

The statement puts the US in line with a handful of other countries that already ban the use of mercury fillings in pregnant women. The FDA is calling for further research, and may announce a complete ban on amalgam fillings next year.

As we exclusively reported in an earlier E-news bulletin, Denmark imposed a complete ban on amalgam fillings this year. In the meantime, pregnant women, and people with “a health condition that makes them more sensitive to mercury exposure”, or with high levels of mercury already, should talk to their dentists about safer alternatives, the FDA has announced.

Mercury has also been traditionally used as a preservative in children’s vaccinations, although the process of removing it began in 2000, and current stocks contain no mercury-based thimerosal.

Source

Labels: amalgam fillings, ban, FDA, mercury, study

Stevia is a non-caloric herb native to Paraguay that has been used as a sweetener for over 1,500 years in South America. If anyone is doubting its safety, I would encourage them to consider that fact; it is a MAJOR clue that stevia is safe.
Stevia has also been used in Japan since the early 1970s to sweeten pickles and other foods. In the United States, however, the FDA has turned down at least three industry requests to use stevia in foods.
Please understand that Japan is not encumbered by the same conflicts of interest as the United States, and most of their research is not directly financed or greatly influenced by the very industry that is seeking to promote a product. So in this environment stevia has proven to be safe.
What is ironic, of course, is that while the FDA is scrutinizing this naturally sweet herb, they maintain a historically generous attitude toward synthetic chemical sweeteners like aspartame and sucralose.To use stevia as a commercial food additive would require years of testing. Even though this sweetener has passed the test of time, it is viewed as dangerous until proven otherwise. Not so with the big-name artificial sweeteners on the market; they are innocent until proven guilty.
In the United States, stevia has been the subject of searches and seizures, trade complaints, and embargoes on importation. Many believe that the FDA’s actions regarding stevia are nothing more than a restraint to trade designed to benefit the artificial sweetener industry.
Stevia is not the only natural sweetener that is being unfairly targeted by the FDA. A pair of entrepreneurs tried unsuccessfully to create a natural sweetener based on a West African berry called Synsepalum Dulcificum, for instance. However, in 1974 the FDA ruled that their natural product was a food additive that needed years of testing before it could be used commercially. Now here’s the kicker: that very same year, the FDA approved the dangerous artificial sweetener aspartame.
Mercola

Labels: artificial sweeteners, FDA, Mercola, Stevia

The FDA, under pressure from the powerful sugar and artificial sweetener lobby, has issued a warning letter to Celestial Seasonings for using a popular natural sweetener in some of its teas. The letter indicates the FDA classifies the herb stevia as "unsafe", even though it is a main staple sweetener in countries like China and Japan and has been used without negative health effects by indigenous people for at least 400 years. In the FDA's letter to Celestial Seasonings, the agency aggressively condemns the use of the herb, noting that "enforcement action may include seizure of violative products".
The FDA claims no evidence has been provided to the agency regarding the herb's safety, but federal records reveal the FDA has received over a thousand scientific studies regarding stevia, and all but one of them verify the safety of the herb. In sharp contrast, nearly half of the studies provided to the FDA regarding the artificial sweetener aspartame, previously owned by Monsanto, indicate serious health concerns, yet it is one of the most commonly used (and one of the most profitable) sweeteners in the U.S. The OCA has also verified the FDA has strengthened enforcement of stevia imports at the borders. Last week, the agency updated a document that mandates detainment of imported food products containing stevia. Learn more: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_7140.cfm

Labels: artificial sweeteners, FDA, Stevia