Healthy Beef Choices are Found Here...

CUD from Joe York on Vimeo.

Time for Green Chemistry

A Wake-Up Story from Healthy Child Healthy World on Vimeo.

Cookware for the Microwave...

Pyrex, a special type of glass known as thermal shock resistant glass. It is a fairly stable material that includes both boron and silicon, two minerals not present on the 2007 ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry) priority toxin list.

I would be highly concerned about migration of plastics from containers into food, and would suggest avoiding its use in cooking situations including in the microwave. (For the same reasons we would avoid using "boil-in-a-bag" type vegetables.) Icky!


www.whfoods.org

What does GMO mean?

"GMO" stands for "Genetically Modified Organisms," and in the case of food, it usually refers to foods which have been genetically engineered for reasons unrelated to health or nourishment. You may also see the term "GE foods" (which stands for "genetically engineered" foods) or terms like "genetically altered" or "genetically modified" or "genetically improved" to describe these foods.

The process of genetically modifying foods is very new to the world of agriculture. In 1994, there were zero acres of GE food crops in the entire United States. At present there are more than 100 million acres! The Center for Food Safety, a non-profit public interest and environmental advocacy group headquartered in Washington, D.C., estimates that 70-75% of all grocery store products contain at least one genetically modified ingredient. You have almost certainly already consumed many GE foods, whether you knew it or not!

Uncertain health risks with GE foods

The health risks associated with GE foods have not been clearly identified. However, many scientists have speculated that these foods are more likely to trigger allergic reactions in some people. Additionally, they suggest that they may change the protein composition of foods in a way that could present problems for the body's immune, inflammatory, digestive, and cellular signaling systems.

GE soybeans and GE corn are of special concern

In addition, a 2004 survey conducted by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology determined that 45% of all corn, 85% of all soybeans, and 76% of all cotton produced in the U.S. were genetically engineered. This very high percentage of genetic engineering for corn and soybeans is alarming because corn and soybeans are processed into so many commonly used ingredients in processed and prepackaged foods.

For corn, of course, the most common processing product is HFCS, or high fructose corn syrup. This product is found in literally thousands of processed foods, including sodas, baked goods, and many other foods. Other processed food ingredients that often come from corn include corn syrup, corn syrup solids, malt, maltodextrin, maltose, maltol, ethyl maltol, malt syrup, mannitol, dextrose, dextrin, and polydextrose. Of course, corn starch, corn flour, and corn oil are also corn-based ingredients.

As the most common GE food in the U.S., soybeans can be even more difficult than corn to identify in processed and prepackaged foods. The list of processed food ingredients derived from soybeans is a long one and includes: hydrolyzed vegetable protein (HVP), textured vegetable protein (TVP), textured soy protein (TSP), textured soy flour (TSF), lecithin, meat analogs, isolated soy protein, isolated vegetable protein, soy protein concentrate, and structured protein fiber (SPF). Of course, soy bran, soy fiber, soy nuts, soy oil, soy sauce, soy grits, soy meal are also made from soybeans.

Unless you stick with certified organic foods, you will need to avoid any products with the ingredients listed above if you want to minimize your risk of GE foods. There are simply too much GE corn and soybean crops being raised for you to be sure that your non-organic foods are "GE safe".

Organic will help you avoid GE foods

Since the National Organics Program forbids the genetic modification of foods to be certified as organic, you can go a long way in avoiding GE foods by purchasing organic. For example, a food that is certified as 100% organic cannot contain any of the ingredients listed above if those ingredients have been derived from genetically engineered corn or soy.

"Non-GMO" or ""GMO-free" on food labels

Unfortunately, no labeling laws for GE foods exist in the United States, even though England, France, Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland, China, Indonesia, and over 25 other countries require labeling of GE foods. (Some GE food crops are actually banned in many countries, including England, Japan, Brazil, Norway, India, and Thailand). In the United States, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has generally discouraged the use of terms like "GMO-free" or "non-GMO" on food labels and has expressed concern about these terms as being misleading. From the FDA's perspective, any statement that implies superiority of a "GMO-free" food is misleading because they note that there is no scientific evidence to support any increased health risks associated with GE foods. While I agree that scientific studies are sadly lacking in this area, I also believe that GE foods can logically be expected to bring with them added health risks, and I would like to see all GE foods and non-GE foods clearly labeled for this reason. However, until such labeling is widely adopted, the only way to lower your GMO risks is to stick with certified organic foods

whfoods.org

Cuciferous - easy for you to say

Did you know that the phytonutrients found in cruciferous vegetables, such as Brussels sprouts, cabbage, broccoli, and kale, actually signal our genes to increase production of enzymes involved in detoxification?

For about 20 years, we've known that many phytonutrients work as antioxidants to disarm free radicals before they can damage DNA, cell membranes and fat-containing molecules such as cholesterol. Now, research is revealing that phytonutrients in cruciferous vegetables, like Brussels sprouts, work at a much deeper level. The phytonutrients in crucifers initiate an intricate dance inside our cells in which gene response elements direct and balance the steps among dozens of detoxification enzyme partners, each performing its own protective role in perfect balance with the other dancers. The natural synergy that results optimizes our cells' ability to disarm and clear free radicals and toxins, including potential carcinogens — one reason why cruciferous vegetables appear to lower our risk of cancer more effectively than any other vegetables or fruits. So, while Brussels sprouts may be miniature in size, they are giants when it comes to helping to protect cellular structures and DNA from the damage caused by free radicals.

whfoods.org

I now grow my own broccoli sprouts, which are reported to contain 50 times more! nutrients than the actual broccoli. Because it's a LIVE food. My doctor recently prescribed the herb Broccolinate, which among other things, helps to prevent breast cancer. GET OUT!

What Foods are the Most Unhealthy?

The "unhealthiest" foods tend to be those that least resemble their original natural ingredients and those that have the most added refined and artificial additives. Prime examples are the so-called "white foods"-white sugar, white flour, and white fat, and the gamut of foods in which they are the principal ingredients. It's not that these foods are white in color-many of them are actually not. It's that these foods have had many of their natural components-including their natural colors-processed away. "White foods" is simply the shorthand label that we are using when we refer to these heavily processed, nutrient-depleted foods.

"White sugar" includes refined sugar cane or sugar beets having virtually all B vitamins, minerals, antioxidants, and other essential nutrients removed. Corn syrup is also a "white sugar," made from processed cornstarch and essentially devoid of other nutrients.
"White flour," analogously, is whole wheat flour minus its nutrient-packed wheat germ and fibrous bran. Nutritionally speaking, white flour is a ghost-like shadow of its original whole grain.
"White fat" can include rendered animal lard, vegetable oils "hydrogenated" to make them hard at room temperature, and refined fats such as cottonseed oil. Hydrogenation is a chemical process that transforms natural fats into more saturated trans-fatty acids that do not occur naturally and which are strongly associated with cardiovascular disease.

Foods having "whites" as their primary ingredients are frighteningly ubiquitous! Examples include soft drinks, breads, hamburger and hotdog buns, crackers, pasta, pastries and pastry fillings, pies, cakes, frostings, margarine and bread spreads, jellies, sweets and candies, frozen dinners, pizzas, snack foods, doughnuts, candy bars, and cookies-all of which are common snack and convenience foods. Indeed, many of these combine all three whites together-white sugar, flour, and fat! Furthermore, these foods frequently contain artificial colors, artificial flavors, preservatives, texturizing and processing agents, and other additives that further detract from their nutritional stature and your health.

whfoods.org

Continuous Chest Compression CPR

This is new and is without mouth-to-mouth breathing. Check it out!

Is it OK to store fruits and vegetables in plastic bags in the refrigerator?

I believe that fruits and vegetables can usually be stored in plastic bags (like those you get in the market's produce section, or plastic "zip-lock" type bags) at normal refrigerator temperatures. I have yet to see research that shows significant health risks to be associated with plastic bags when used at the low refrigerator temperatures of 35-40°F (2-4°C).

On the other hand, I'd like to mention that the practice of shrink-wrapping individual foods in thin plastic wrap is not one I recommend. That's because this practice can increase the amount of food surface that comes into tight and direct contact with the plastic, potentially causing additional migration of chemicals from the plastic into the food. However slight, this added risk seems unnecessary to me and easily avoided.

I'd also like to point out that while plastic may be an acceptable storage method for produce kept in the refrigerator, the heating of plastic can be problematic in that there is a greater potential for the migration of the plastic chemicals into the food. Therefore, I would avoid all methods of cooking that involve plastics such as any type of "boil-in-a-bag" food, heating food in a plastic container in the microwave, and heating in the oven using "oven-safe" plastic containers.

whfoods.org

Does hydration enhance nutrient metabolism? Hmmm?

Being optimally hydrated is always a way to improve safety of nutrient metabolism, especially water-soluble nutrients including certain forms of minerals and proteins. Having plenty of water in your bloodstream, cells, and tissue spaces outside of the cells is one way to decrease the concentration of these nutrients as well as their metabolic breakdown products (like ammonia in the case of proteins).

whfood.org

Cauliflower

Did you know that along with its wealth of vitamins and minerals, cauliflower, like the other cruciferous vegetables, contains powerful sulfur compounds that have repeatedly been found to help prevent cancer? Since 1993, the National Cancer Institute has been demonstrating that prevention, rather than cure, is the way to decrease deaths related to cancer. And they have found the way to prevention is eating the proper foods! Research on the prevention of cancer, as well as diabetes, heart disease, and obesity, all points strongly to the food we eat as a key factor that has the potential to cut back dramatically on the rates of these chronic diseases. And some of the best foods for disease prevention are the sulfur-containing cruciferous vegetables, such as cauliflower. These vegetables contain compounds, including sulforaphane and isothyiocyanates, which help the liver to neutralize potentially harmful cancer-causing compounds and to suppress tumor cell growth and the movement of cancer to other parts of the body (metastasis).

whfoods.org

How do foods affect my sleep?

There's no doubt that there are many of us that have trouble getting a good night's sleep. The statistics here are striking. For example, 42% of all healthy, middle-aged women in the United States report some kind of sleep trouble, including difficulty falling asleep, waking up during the night, or not feeling refreshed in the morning.

Sleep is a "mind-body" experience

There's no doubt that from a physiological standpoint that sleep is a complicated event and one that's related to many factors that cut across the "mind-body" spectrum. When we can't get to sleep because we're worried and feeling anxious, or depressed and feeling down, or confused and can't figure something out, we obviously aren't going to get to the root of our sleep trouble until we're able to work through the parts of our lives that we're feeling anxious or depressed about. At the same time, however, our nutritional status and the food we eat always influence our sleep. While we can't afford to overlook the psychological aspects, we also need to pay attention to the way we eat.

Patterns and timing make a difference

We've all heard the advice, "don't eat a big meal too close to bedtime." Although this advice sounds simple, it's actually very important and not that easy to follow. On our World's Healthiest Foods website, we've tried to emphasize the sheer joy of eating healthy food. Getting to savor the aroma, taste, and visual beauty of food is a part of what it means to be healthy. Many of us eat a meal late at night-within two hours of bedtime-precisely because we haven't made time during the day to enjoy food.

In fact, we let ourselves get so hungry that we don't really care any more about the joy of eating. We just want something in our stomach! Research shows that the timing and size of our evening meal is closely related to the timing and size of our other meals throughout the day. When we have a cup of coffee in the car on the way to work, grab a sandwich for lunch, or take care of all the household chores before getting around to dinner, we are setting ourselves up for a bad night's sleep.

Sometimes we rationalize and think that a big meal will actually help us get to sleep by exhausting our body as it tries to digest the large meal. It's tempting logic, but research evidence points in the opposite direction. A large meal does the opposite of slowing our body down. It asks our circulatory system to move more blood to our digestive tract. It asks our stomach to secrete more gastric acid. It asks our pancreas to become more active and produce digestive enzymes. It asks the smooth muscles around our intestines to become active. In short, when it comes to our physiology, a large meal does anything but relax us.

In addition, our digestive tracts are set up to work best when we are standing; lying down results in gravity pulling the "wrong way" to help foods digest. Even though the practice of napping after a meal is common, it isn't ideal from the standpoint of digestion. Sitting and resting are fine. For example, enjoying each other's company around the table after a delicious meal is a good idea. But lying down to sleep just doesn't help digestion.

It's also worth thinking about the physiological purpose of eating in regard to late-night meals. Nutrients and energy get released from food after we eat, not before. They help increase our vitality hours after the meal has been eaten; they cannot go back and compensate for a prior day's worth of activity that received no nutritional support. The time to have our largest meal is always before we need the most nutritional support, i.e., before we have the most physically demanding part of our day. Sleep is the least physically demanding part of the day, and the least logical target for release of food energy and nutrients. We tell ourselves we've had a hard day, and we're starved, but at this point, it's too late to repair any nutritional damage done. We need the nourishment before the hard day (and hopefully it will make the day less difficult). I should also mention how important it is not to go to bed actually hungry; this can interfere with sleep, usually by failing to keep the brain supplied with enough glucose (sugar).

whfoods.org

Your skin acts as a barrier to the world, yet it is not impenetrable.

That is why many of the healing practices we use are fomentations, oils, ointments etc. The skin will absorb much of what is placed on it. "Chemicals can be absorbed through the skin and into the blood stream, causing toxic effects". Some say absorption through the skin is more dangerous than through the mouth. What is absorbed through the skin doesn't go through the digestive system where enzymes break them down and detoxify them. What is absorbed through the skin goes directly to the bloodstream without being filtered through the liver. So it is very wise to be aware of what you are placing on your skin so that it will bring healing and life.

George Mateljin

Bees in Trouble - and so are we

Please do not anyone tell me our foods are not laced with dangerous chemicals. These poor bees. I have seen shows on this, and it is so sad for the owners of these bee farms. They LOVE their bees and when they arrive at their destination - the majority of them are dead. Just awful...

Can beans help lower my cholesterol levels?

All beans and legumes, without question, can be heart-healthy parts of a balanced diet and helpful in lowering cholesterol levels. There are several aspects of this beans-and-cholesterol equation, however, that may have been misunderstood amidst all of the popular press writing about diet, heart health, and cholesterol.

One of those potential areas of misunderstanding involves amount. How many beans does it take to reduce cholesterol? And how great a reduction in cholesterol levels can you expect from eating beans? Research in this area is clear and consistent: you can expect to get a 5-15% reduction in your LDL-cholesterol level when you change your diet to include about 1.5 cups of cooked legumes 4 days per week or more over the course of several months. This same level of bean intake can also be expected to lower your risk of coronary heart disease, on average, by between 10-20%.

While there are many benefits from eating beans, their exact role in your overall health will depend upon your other risk factors (both dietary and lifestyle) and your existing cholesterol levels. The American Heart Association describes an LDL-cholesterol level of 130-159 milligrams per deciliter as "borderline high," levels of 160-189 as "high," and levels above 190 as "very high." Even though a 5-15% decrease in your LDL level would be desirable if your LDL cholesterol was in the very high range, it would not drop your LDL level below the "high range" under any circumstance.

A second area of potential misunderstanding involves nutritional factors in beans and legumes that are actually responsible for cholesterol reduction. Original studies in this area focused heavily on the soluble fiber content of beans as the primary reason for cholesterol reduction. Beans are definitely very good sources of dietary fiber, including water-soluble fibers like pectins, gums, and mucilages. However, these fibers are not the only mechanism-and may not even be the primary mechanism-through which beans help reduce LDL cholesterol levels. Proteins, isoflavones, saponins, and other phytonutrients are all under active investigation as bean components that may play key roles in cholesterol reduction and protection against heart disease.

George Mateljan

Why is range-fed and grass-fed meat and poultry better?

The natural behavior of cows, chickens turkeys, pigs, and other animals commonly eaten for food in the United States is to live outdoors and to consume food that is part of the natural habitat. For example, in the case of ruminant animals like cows, there is a long history of development in which the digestive system of the cow has adapted to foraging and consumption of plants often referred to as "forages." These plants include many grasses and legumes.

When cows are fed in a non-natural way, digestive tract problems can develop, and medications may be needed to offset problems caused by the cows' non-natural diet. For example, when being raised to provide non-organic beef, it is not unusual for a cow to be fed more than 10 pounds of corn per day. Since the cow's digestive system is poorly matched to this large volume of grain in the daily diet, it is placed at risk for certain problems including bursting of the stomach from excessive amounts of gas that can be produced by fermentation of grain. In the case of non-organic beef, medications that prevent gas formation (like poloxalene) may be given to cows on a preventive basis as part of their standard diet to prevent this gas formation. However, the routine administration of a medication like poloxalene cannot be carried out in the raising of certified organic beef. Research studies have made it clear that cows remain healthier when they are fed and raised in a natural way. Healthier cows also mean healthier meat for all individuals who include meat in their diet.

One great benefit of grass feeding is the increased presence of omega-3 fatty acids in beef provided by grass-fed cattle. I've seen two studies on Australian beef that clearly document this trend, which stems from the natural presence of alpha-linolenic acid (also known as ALA, the omega-3 fatty acid that serves as the building block for all other omega-3 fats) in pasture grasses and legumes. While more complicated omega-3 fats like EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) are not present in pasture crops, these critical omega-3 fats are produced in the cow's body from the ALA present in the pasture plants and you can receive substantial amounts of EPA and DHA from pasture-fed beef along with its ALA. These amounts are still very low, however, in comparison with the far greater amount of EPA and DHA provided by an equivalent amount of an omega-3-containing fish like salmon. The amount of ALA in grass-fed beef is also very much lower than the amount of ALA provided by plant foods like flaxseeds and walnuts, which are rich in this omega-3 fatty acid.

I want to point out that the purchase of certified organic beef, poultry, and other meats does not guarantee range-feeding. Unfortunately, the livestock living conditions spelled out in the National Organics Program only includes "access to the outdoors" and "access to pasture" and does not specify any required period of time for natural outdoor living. Nor does it require any amount of foraging crops in the diet. For this reason, you'll need to look for the terms "range-fed" or "grass-fed" on the label in addition to the organic certification. Organic meat that is not labeled either "range-fed" or "grass-fed" is still a very good option for you in the market, but if organic combined with range-fed or grass-fed is available, I encourage you to consider that combination as your best option.

--George Mateljan

It's that BPA baby! Ick!

I agree with the majority of what this article says...

Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Ditch the Climate Change Debate by Ron Jones

A recent editorial cartoon that I ran across cleverly expressed a great deal of my own thoughts around the climate change debate. The cartoonist (Joel Pett, Lexington Herald-Leader) depicts an obviously unconvinced audience member at a presentation where benefits of clean energy are being displayed on the stage screen. The attendee is shown demanding an answer to a question similar to the following:

"What if it turns out that climate change is all a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"

The presenter he is questioning has a list of goals on the screen including:
• Energy Independence
• Preserve Rainforests
• Sustainability
• Green Jobs
• Livable Cities
• Renewables
• Clean Water, Air
• Healthy Children

In a single frame, and with surgical irony, the cartoonist has masterfully steered us to the question I have been asking myself and others for a long time, which is essentially, why are we not able to shift the dialog onto a productive level that leaves the polarization and bickering behind so we can just get started on the enormous task of cleaning up the mess we've been helping to make?

We don't have to reach some final, indisputable conclusion on the "climate" debate to know that there are plenty of good reasons to take steps to replace 18th and 19th century technologies and the polluting energy sources that have been fueling them.

The answer must reside somewhere deep in human nature. There seems to be an irresistible force of passion that makes us dig in our heels and refuse to budge when we feel strongly about something. In this case, it doesn't really matter if we're talking about those who view "climate change" or "global warming," as some prefer to refer to it, as the great challenge of our time or those who are absolutely convinced that it is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.
It seems that those who have taken a passionate stand either way are prepared to fight over this for as long as takes, and unfortunately, the fact that people in both camps seem determined to drive to an "all or nothing" resolution keeps getting in the way of potential progress on the things we could agree on.

Even the most hardcore climate skeptics don't try to make their case by denying or stating opposition to goals like those listed by the cartoonist, they just refuse to go there. At the same time, their counterparts, who are every bit as passionate in their insistence that mankind's activities are at the center of all the problems in the world, often appear to be pushing for absolute and immediate solutions with little or no willingness to explore common ground. The net result is an ongoing bitter conflict that is often stalled by distractions leaving those of us in the middle stranded and feeling like we can't do anything meaningful to influence the outcome.
I am personally convinced that we are indeed witnessing measurable levels of global climate change. I only make this statement based on personal observation and certainly not because I believe the reports of governments, including our own, or the findings of scientists I have never met. I have reached my conclusion because I have observed certain evidence with my own eyes. I've visited glaciers from Alaska to New Zealand that are receding at unprecedented and alarming rates. I have flown over millions of acres of America's western forests and seen the beetle kill that is resulting from milder winter temperatures to the detriment of not only the trees, but also virtually every species in that ecosystem.

What I have no way of verifying on my own is how much of this shift is attributable to the activities of the human species. I seriously doubt that it is the primary factor. Both sides of this debate agree that the scale and complexity of the Earth's atmosphere and its global climate have seen numerous dramatic shifts to one extreme or the other over time.

What I do know is that I have seen the contrast between the air in Beijing and other cities in the Northern Hemisphere with that of still pristine regions of the South Pacific. The calamity is there for anyone who is interested to see. I have also fished a variety of streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs throughout North America where the fish populations face collapse from human-caused pollution and where signs are posted to warn against consuming the fish that are there.
Put simply, we have used our one and only planetary home and all of its natural systems as a garbage dump of one kind or another for practically all of recorded human history. Sadly, the situation has only worsened over the last few centuries as we made industrial "advances" and as human population has swelled. We have treated it like a trash can and no matter how big the can is, it can only hold so much. We are reaching that point and before it's too late we need to revise our practices. It's time to clean up our act and "create a better world"—whether global warming is a hoax or not.

Where are regulations regarding organic foods heading?

It's important for all of us to be aware that the USDA's process for certifying organic foods is constantly evolving. Already, the organics process has seen proposals to allow genetically engineered food and irradiated food within the scope of certified organic labeling. Proposals to allow sewage sludge in the cultivation of organic food have also been introduced. Thanks to widespread public involvement, including letter writing and in-person testimony, none of these proposals were adopted and certified organic food is still free from genetic engineering, irradiation, and sewage sludge. However, many changes will continue to be proposed. For example, much current debate is focused on a proposal to allow organic certification of fish and shellfish products, and the details of this process are still being discussed and formulated. For more information about current issues in organic labeling, or to become more involved in public comment opportunities related to organic regulations, you can visit the National Organics Program (NOP) website. The NOP Newsroom can be a good place to start to learn about recent notices and announcements related to proposed changes in the organic certification process.
George Mateljan

What type of cookware should I use for microwave cooking?

Pyrex, a special type of glass known as thermal shock resistant glass, is a cookware material we like, especially if you have decided to do microwave cooking. Pyrex is a fairly stable material that includes both boron and silicon, two minerals not present on the 2007 ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry) priority toxin list.

We are highly concerned about migration of plastics from containers into food. Therefore, we would suggest avoiding its use in cooking situations including in the microwave. (For the same reasons we would avoid using "boil-in-a-bag" type vegetables.)

The George Mateljan Foundation, a not-for-profit foundation with no commercial interests, is a new force for change to help make a healthier you and a healthier world.