Sunday, January 9, 2011
Friday, January 7, 2011
Thursday, January 6, 2011
The why of organically raised animal foods...
Organically raised animals foods like beef and poultry are better for your health than their conventionally raised counterparts because the animals from which they come are better fed, raised under healthier conditions, and are not able to be treated with most of the drugs and hormones often used in non-organic methods of raising livestock.
In the case of organics, "livestock" is actually a broad term used to refer to cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, chickens, and other animals that are often raised for the purpose of providing food. However, "livestock" does not include any fish or seafood products.
The key organic standards for livestock include:
Use of 100% organic feed
No use of sewage sludge when pastures are fertilized or when food is being produced to feed animals
No use of genetically engineered foods when feeding animals
No use of irradiation to preserve meats
No use of nitrates or nitrites to preserve meats
No use of growth promoters or growth hormones
No use of plastic pellets for roughage in feed
No use of antibiotics
Required access to the outdoors, including access to pasture in the case of ruminant animals (including cows, goats, sheep, and deer)
When it comes to the raising of all animals, these organic rules must be applied no later than the second day of life for poultry, and no later than the last third of gestation (pregnancy) for other animals.
whfoods.org
In the case of organics, "livestock" is actually a broad term used to refer to cattle, sheep, goats, pigs, chickens, and other animals that are often raised for the purpose of providing food. However, "livestock" does not include any fish or seafood products.
The key organic standards for livestock include:
Use of 100% organic feed
No use of sewage sludge when pastures are fertilized or when food is being produced to feed animals
No use of genetically engineered foods when feeding animals
No use of irradiation to preserve meats
No use of nitrates or nitrites to preserve meats
No use of growth promoters or growth hormones
No use of plastic pellets for roughage in feed
No use of antibiotics
Required access to the outdoors, including access to pasture in the case of ruminant animals (including cows, goats, sheep, and deer)
When it comes to the raising of all animals, these organic rules must be applied no later than the second day of life for poultry, and no later than the last third of gestation (pregnancy) for other animals.
whfoods.org
Monday, January 3, 2011
Sunday, January 2, 2011
Which berry is the better berry? :|
All whole foods-including fruits like blueberries and cranberries-have their own unique nutrient profiles. The uniqueness of these foods is especially pronounced when it comes to phytonutrients like flavonoids and carotenoids. Since many of these flavonoids and carotenoids function as antioxidants in the body, there can be important differences between these two fruits (as there are between any two fruits). I would not refer to either fruit as being ""better"" or ""worse"" in terms of its antioxidant composition but as being different and possessing unique antioxidant profiles of their own, which provide unique benefits. Therefore, both are well worth including in a Healthiest Way of Eating.
Peonidins, anthocyanosides, quercetin, cyanidins, lutein, and beta-carotene would be examples of phytonutrients prominent in cranberries; most of these function as antioxidants. For blueberries, the phytonutrient list would include cynanidins, delphinidins, malvidins, petunidins, peonidins, proanthocyanins, and quercitin. Once again, many of these phytonutrients would provide antioxidant support.
www.whfoods.org
Peonidins, anthocyanosides, quercetin, cyanidins, lutein, and beta-carotene would be examples of phytonutrients prominent in cranberries; most of these function as antioxidants. For blueberries, the phytonutrient list would include cynanidins, delphinidins, malvidins, petunidins, peonidins, proanthocyanins, and quercitin. Once again, many of these phytonutrients would provide antioxidant support.
www.whfoods.org
Tuesday, December 21, 2010
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
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
Thursday, December 16, 2010
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
Cookware to avoid....
Aluminum
Cookware made from materials that carry with them substantial risk of toxicity, even if research shows relatively little leaching of their toxic substances, should automatically not be considered to be among your best options. We would put aluminum cookware into this category. In the past five years, we've seen over 100 studies about aluminum and disease. This metal has consistently been placed in the top 200 health-jeopardizing toxins by the ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry) at the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
We realize that many improvements have been made in aluminum pots and pans with the advent of anodized aluminum (in which a thicker aluminum oxide layer is created on the surface of the pan). Yet, we still recommend avoidance of aluminum cookware due to the potential toxicity of aluminum itself. (This focus on the health aspects of aluminum cookware does not even take into account environmental problems related to the mining and dressing of aluminum.)
Non-stick cookware
Pots and pans with non-stick coatings are another type of cookware we would put into this category of toxic materials risk. The non-stick coating industry started out with Teflon in 1946 but has since grown to include many other coatings including Silverstone, Tefal, Anolon, Circulon, Caphalon and others. Products like Caphalon actually combine aluminum with non-stick materials by subjecting anodized aluminum to a polymer infusion process. We do not like to use cookware with non-stick surfaces.
Copper cookware
Pots and pans made from 100% copper fall into a slightly different category. Even though it is also a metal on the ATSDR priority toxin list just like aluminum, copper is an essential mineral that is currently deficient in many U.S. diets. Its essential nutrient status makes it different from aluminum, and some people include it as a desirable cookware material for this reason.
We take a somewhat conservative approach here since we don't like the idea of cooking directly on a copper surface due to potential (however slight) risk of copper toxicity. Adults need approximately 900 micrograms of copper per day, according to the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) established by the National Academy of Sciences. The Tolerable Upper Limit (UL) for copper is about 10 times that amount, at 10,000 micrograms (the same as 10 milligrams). While you're very unlikely to get that amount of copper migration from your cookware into your food (even under highly acidic conditions that increase leaching), we prefer to avoid all possible risk.
Stainless steel
With stainless steel, you get a cooking surface that can include some less risky materials than aluminum or non-stick coatings (such as the essential minerals iron, chromium, and manganese). It is is also more stable and less prone to leaching. While some research has expressed concern about leaching of chromium from stainless steel, this mineral is both essential and currently deficient in the diets of many U.S. adults. Based on the research, we believe the health risk here is less than the risk posed by leaching of another essential mineral, copper, from the surface in a 100% copper pan.
Stainless steel pans often have an inner core of aluminum or copper (and some have a copper-clad bottom). The reason this is done is because these two metals are very efficient heat conductors. Since the aluminum or copper is sandwiched between layers of steel and neither come in contact with the food, we think that these types of stainless steel cookware are fine to use.
What some cite as a concern for stainless steel is the leaching of nickel, a potentially toxic metal fairly high up on the ATSDR list of priority toxins. Yet, because the alloy (combination of metals used) in stainless steel cookware is more stable than other cookware materials you are less likely to have any leaching, of any metal, including nickel. An exception would be stainless steel pots and pans that have been damaged by harsh scouring with an abrasive material like steel wool. Provided that you take good care of your stainless steel cookware and keep the cooking surfaces intact, we believe you are making an excellent choice in cookware with this material.
Cast iron
Cast iron is also a cookware material we really like. When properly seasoned, the surface itself is great for cooking, and when material does leach from cast iron, it's an essential mineral (iron) that many of us can easily incorporate into a healthy day of mineral intake. For some individuals, cast iron cookware can actually make a very important contribution to health. An exception would be individuals who may be at risk of iron overload. If you already have plenty of iron in your diet, in your bloodstream, and attached to storage proteins in your cells, you do not want to be adding leached iron from cast iron cookware. You may want to visit an iron disorders website like www.irondisorders.org or www.ironoverload.org to learn more about potential risk factors in this area.
We realize that many improvements have been made in aluminum pots and pans with the advent of anodized aluminum (in which a thicker aluminum oxide layer is created on the surface of the pan). Yet, we still recommend avoidance of aluminum cookware due to the potential toxicity of aluminum itself. (This focus on the health aspects of aluminum cookware does not even take into account environmental problems related to the mining and dressing of aluminum.)
Non-stick cookware
Pots and pans with non-stick coatings are another type of cookware we would put into this category of toxic materials risk. The non-stick coating industry started out with Teflon in 1946 but has since grown to include many other coatings including Silverstone, Tefal, Anolon, Circulon, Caphalon and others. Products like Caphalon actually combine aluminum with non-stick materials by subjecting anodized aluminum to a polymer infusion process. We do not like to use cookware with non-stick surfaces.
Copper cookware
Pots and pans made from 100% copper fall into a slightly different category. Even though it is also a metal on the ATSDR priority toxin list just like aluminum, copper is an essential mineral that is currently deficient in many U.S. diets. Its essential nutrient status makes it different from aluminum, and some people include it as a desirable cookware material for this reason.
We take a somewhat conservative approach here since we don't like the idea of cooking directly on a copper surface due to potential (however slight) risk of copper toxicity. Adults need approximately 900 micrograms of copper per day, according to the Dietary Reference Intakes (DRIs) established by the National Academy of Sciences. The Tolerable Upper Limit (UL) for copper is about 10 times that amount, at 10,000 micrograms (the same as 10 milligrams). While you're very unlikely to get that amount of copper migration from your cookware into your food (even under highly acidic conditions that increase leaching), we prefer to avoid all possible risk.
Stainless steel
With stainless steel, you get a cooking surface that can include some less risky materials than aluminum or non-stick coatings (such as the essential minerals iron, chromium, and manganese). It is is also more stable and less prone to leaching. While some research has expressed concern about leaching of chromium from stainless steel, this mineral is both essential and currently deficient in the diets of many U.S. adults. Based on the research, we believe the health risk here is less than the risk posed by leaching of another essential mineral, copper, from the surface in a 100% copper pan.
Stainless steel pans often have an inner core of aluminum or copper (and some have a copper-clad bottom). The reason this is done is because these two metals are very efficient heat conductors. Since the aluminum or copper is sandwiched between layers of steel and neither come in contact with the food, we think that these types of stainless steel cookware are fine to use.
What some cite as a concern for stainless steel is the leaching of nickel, a potentially toxic metal fairly high up on the ATSDR list of priority toxins. Yet, because the alloy (combination of metals used) in stainless steel cookware is more stable than other cookware materials you are less likely to have any leaching, of any metal, including nickel. An exception would be stainless steel pots and pans that have been damaged by harsh scouring with an abrasive material like steel wool. Provided that you take good care of your stainless steel cookware and keep the cooking surfaces intact, we believe you are making an excellent choice in cookware with this material.
Cast iron
Cast iron is also a cookware material we really like. When properly seasoned, the surface itself is great for cooking, and when material does leach from cast iron, it's an essential mineral (iron) that many of us can easily incorporate into a healthy day of mineral intake. For some individuals, cast iron cookware can actually make a very important contribution to health. An exception would be individuals who may be at risk of iron overload. If you already have plenty of iron in your diet, in your bloodstream, and attached to storage proteins in your cells, you do not want to be adding leached iron from cast iron cookware. You may want to visit an iron disorders website like www.irondisorders.org or www.ironoverload.org to learn more about potential risk factors in this area.
The Bottom Line...
Favorite: all-around cookware pieces are those made from stainless steel or cast iron. More than likely, the stainless steel cookware will have a core made from aluminum or copper since these metals are efficient conductors of heat. While we don't recommend cookware that features aluminum or copper as the cooking surface, stainless steel cookware with cores (or even bottoms) made from these materials are acceptable. That's because if you take care of your pots and pans and don't excessively scrub them, the copper or aluminum will not come in contact with your food.
Cast iron is another type of cookware we recommend. Even if some of the iron leaches from the cookware into your food, in most cases this is acceptable since many people can easily incorporate iron into a healthy day of mineral intake.
Aavoid pans with non-stick coatings as well as those made from anodized aluminum.
www.whfoods.org
Cast iron is another type of cookware we recommend. Even if some of the iron leaches from the cookware into your food, in most cases this is acceptable since many people can easily incorporate iron into a healthy day of mineral intake.
Aavoid pans with non-stick coatings as well as those made from anodized aluminum.
www.whfoods.org
Monday, December 13, 2010
Salts. What's the Diff?
What is the difference between different types of salt such as kosher salt, sea salt, iodized salt, and regular salt?
The differences between types of salt-kosher salt, sea salt, iodized salt, and regular table salt-are a little more complicated than you might expect. In terms of its chemical structure, salt is a crystal composed of the elements sodium and chloride. While these two elements give salt its basic chemical structure, there are about one million trillion sodium-plus-chloride pairs in a single grain of salt.
There are three basic ways to obtain salt. First, salt can be mined since it is part of natural rock formations like halite. This mined salt can be processed and converted into ordinary table salt. Second, salt can be obtained from the ocean and produced by evaporating the water and leaving behind the salt. This salt can also be processed to produce a sea salt that looks and feels basically identical to table salt. However, because there are often additional minerals left following the evaporation of the sea water, sea salt can provide a little more nourishment in this context than other forms of salt. Third, salt can be produced from scratch in a science lab, although you won't see this type of salt in the grocery store because the other ways to obtain salt are much cheaper.
From the standpoint of religious dietary laws, "kosher salt" is somewhat of a misleading term since all pure salt would technically be considered kosher because of its purely mineral (sodium plus chloride) composition. This rule would apply to all pure salt, whether it was originally obtained from sea or land. However, in a practical, everyday sense what makes kosher salt different is its size and shape. Whether obtained from sea salt or mined salt, kosher salt production takes place with an alteration in the evaporation process that result in much larger and irregular chunks of salt.
What is the advantage of these larger-sized chunks? There is no nutritional advantage related to size, but kosher salt gets its name because it was originally designed to help in the koshering of meats. Koshering meat is a very important process in the dietary laws of several religions (especially Judaism), and many different factors are required in order for a meat to be considered kosher. One of these factors is the careful removal of all blood from the animal. Kosher salt-because of its larger grain size-dissolves more slowly when it is used to cure freshly cut meat. For this reason, it can do a better job drawing the blood out from the still uncooked meat. (If it were much bigger, however, the blood would simply spill off of it.)
Unrelated to this meat koshering process, however, many cooks like to use kosher salt because its larger size is simply more convenient and practical for certain kinds of food preparation. If you decide to cook with kosher salt, you'll need to follow the manufacturer's instructions about conversion of the fine-grained table salt amount in your recipe to the larger-grained kosher salt amount. There isn't one simple conversion method for substituting table salt with kosher salt because different manufacturers make kosher salts with grains that are always larger but vary significantly in size.
Any version of salt can be iodized or non-iodized. In the United States, iodized salt was introduced into the marketplace in the early 1920's in an effort to help lower the incidence of goiter. Goiter is a condition in which the thyroid gland enlarges to try and maintain its optimal function, and one possible cause of goiter is dietary iodine deficiency. The way salt is iodized is usually very simple and involves the addition of an iodine-containing mineral salt (like potassium iodide) to the sodium chloride. Sea salt, kosher salt, and regular table salt can all be purchased in iodized or non-iodized versions. To know whether you'd be better off purchasing iodized or non-iodized salt, it's important to know how effectively your diet is providing you with iodine.
whfoods.org
The differences between types of salt-kosher salt, sea salt, iodized salt, and regular table salt-are a little more complicated than you might expect. In terms of its chemical structure, salt is a crystal composed of the elements sodium and chloride. While these two elements give salt its basic chemical structure, there are about one million trillion sodium-plus-chloride pairs in a single grain of salt.
There are three basic ways to obtain salt. First, salt can be mined since it is part of natural rock formations like halite. This mined salt can be processed and converted into ordinary table salt. Second, salt can be obtained from the ocean and produced by evaporating the water and leaving behind the salt. This salt can also be processed to produce a sea salt that looks and feels basically identical to table salt. However, because there are often additional minerals left following the evaporation of the sea water, sea salt can provide a little more nourishment in this context than other forms of salt. Third, salt can be produced from scratch in a science lab, although you won't see this type of salt in the grocery store because the other ways to obtain salt are much cheaper.
From the standpoint of religious dietary laws, "kosher salt" is somewhat of a misleading term since all pure salt would technically be considered kosher because of its purely mineral (sodium plus chloride) composition. This rule would apply to all pure salt, whether it was originally obtained from sea or land. However, in a practical, everyday sense what makes kosher salt different is its size and shape. Whether obtained from sea salt or mined salt, kosher salt production takes place with an alteration in the evaporation process that result in much larger and irregular chunks of salt.
What is the advantage of these larger-sized chunks? There is no nutritional advantage related to size, but kosher salt gets its name because it was originally designed to help in the koshering of meats. Koshering meat is a very important process in the dietary laws of several religions (especially Judaism), and many different factors are required in order for a meat to be considered kosher. One of these factors is the careful removal of all blood from the animal. Kosher salt-because of its larger grain size-dissolves more slowly when it is used to cure freshly cut meat. For this reason, it can do a better job drawing the blood out from the still uncooked meat. (If it were much bigger, however, the blood would simply spill off of it.)
Unrelated to this meat koshering process, however, many cooks like to use kosher salt because its larger size is simply more convenient and practical for certain kinds of food preparation. If you decide to cook with kosher salt, you'll need to follow the manufacturer's instructions about conversion of the fine-grained table salt amount in your recipe to the larger-grained kosher salt amount. There isn't one simple conversion method for substituting table salt with kosher salt because different manufacturers make kosher salts with grains that are always larger but vary significantly in size.
Any version of salt can be iodized or non-iodized. In the United States, iodized salt was introduced into the marketplace in the early 1920's in an effort to help lower the incidence of goiter. Goiter is a condition in which the thyroid gland enlarges to try and maintain its optimal function, and one possible cause of goiter is dietary iodine deficiency. The way salt is iodized is usually very simple and involves the addition of an iodine-containing mineral salt (like potassium iodide) to the sodium chloride. Sea salt, kosher salt, and regular table salt can all be purchased in iodized or non-iodized versions. To know whether you'd be better off purchasing iodized or non-iodized salt, it's important to know how effectively your diet is providing you with iodine.
whfoods.org
Friday, December 10, 2010
Sunday, December 5, 2010
Merry Christmas everybody!
http://www.godvine.com/Christmas-Lights-to-the-Music-of-Amazing-Grace-77.html
Friday, December 3, 2010
What is the best tuna to buy?
I always like to recommend foods as close to their whole, natural forms as possible. Yet, in the case of tuna, it is difficult for me to stick with this principle 100% due to the types of fresh (and frozen) tuna most widely available in the marketplace and their relative risk of mercury toxicity.
Canned light tuna, ordinarily made from skipjack tuna, actually poses a substantially lower risk in terms of mercury exposure than fresh yellowfin or albacore tuna. So this type of tuna-canned light tuna-is the type that's best for you to buy if you want to eat tuna relatively often (for example, about one meal per week). If you are only interested in eating tuna about once per month, other options include yellowfin or albacore tuna (that is either fresh or frozen, troll or pole caught), which I would describe as having a medium mercury exposure risk. While from an ecological standpoint, I would rank these tuna as "best choices" most of us will probably want to consider the mercury and health risks right alongside of the ecological ones when deciding upon our food purchases.
While canned light tuna is my "best choice" recommendation when it comes to canned tuna, it's important to take a close look at the "canned light" label as skipjack, yellowfin, bluefin, and tongol can all be sold as "light" tuna. Skipjack is your best choice among these light tuna options for lowering your risk of mercury exposure.
I also recommend water-packed versus oil-packed tuna whenever you are buying canned tuna. In addition to questioning the quality of non-organic oils used in oil-packed tuna (and the unnecessary, lower-quality fat calories they provide), water-packed tuna, on average, contains a slightly higher omega-3 fat content than oil-packed tuna. However small it may be, it is yet another important benefit that it offers.
There are also more expensive, specialty brands of canned tuna available in the marketplace that may serve as a good option. Some of these specialty products give you better flavor and more omega-3 fatty acids due to higher-quality production methods.
They may also involve more sustainable fishing methods than many other forms of canned tuna.
whfoods.org
Canned light tuna, ordinarily made from skipjack tuna, actually poses a substantially lower risk in terms of mercury exposure than fresh yellowfin or albacore tuna. So this type of tuna-canned light tuna-is the type that's best for you to buy if you want to eat tuna relatively often (for example, about one meal per week). If you are only interested in eating tuna about once per month, other options include yellowfin or albacore tuna (that is either fresh or frozen, troll or pole caught), which I would describe as having a medium mercury exposure risk. While from an ecological standpoint, I would rank these tuna as "best choices" most of us will probably want to consider the mercury and health risks right alongside of the ecological ones when deciding upon our food purchases.
While canned light tuna is my "best choice" recommendation when it comes to canned tuna, it's important to take a close look at the "canned light" label as skipjack, yellowfin, bluefin, and tongol can all be sold as "light" tuna. Skipjack is your best choice among these light tuna options for lowering your risk of mercury exposure.
I also recommend water-packed versus oil-packed tuna whenever you are buying canned tuna. In addition to questioning the quality of non-organic oils used in oil-packed tuna (and the unnecessary, lower-quality fat calories they provide), water-packed tuna, on average, contains a slightly higher omega-3 fat content than oil-packed tuna. However small it may be, it is yet another important benefit that it offers.
There are also more expensive, specialty brands of canned tuna available in the marketplace that may serve as a good option. Some of these specialty products give you better flavor and more omega-3 fatty acids due to higher-quality production methods.
They may also involve more sustainable fishing methods than many other forms of canned tuna.
whfoods.org
Thursday, November 25, 2010
I never knew Ms. Taffel, but I work with her husband...amazing teacher!
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid49911610001?bctid=676187650001
Friday, November 19, 2010
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
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![My Honda Shadow VLX 650 [2005-2007]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_nUCICQi5pJg/SIOGhMwVKKI/AAAAAAAAAAc/VS8N7KYXrKU/S220/99+VLX001.jpg)
![Naval Petty Officer 2nd Class - CRT [Veteran]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzi65mssFSAlTiuYJay3mcpYpzyJzGhKgBYXLDNBoKf6lmsmUroWupwjRHwQMRCuutRVWBh9-y4Yv6m6yIDt760SYJFmE843C4dU85agMX75LEO7b8sasUvcvJmsnY9u1HeJ7EYy_jb7GU/s150/adam+lincoln+mem.jpg)
