Dear Reader,
I can't believe it's been a whole month since I wrote. The Equinox has passed and the days are getting longer. I have 3 baby chicks in the tool shed and check the temperature several times a day to keep them warm until they are a little bigger and can survive our cool days and nights. The two hens I have are producing one egg for me every day. The pink blossoms are filling out on the ornamental cherries and the pear and plum blossoms are slowly opening up. Let's hope the bees find them in a timely fashion.
All this spring time activity makes me ponder how all the people who decided to lose weight this past winter are doing. I know the gal at the bank is sticking to it and I can see it in her face as she drops to her goal--39 pounds down already. Dr. Chaney has just sent out a review of the findings from the big Nurses' study on health begun back in the 70's about their weight and their quality of life. I thought you'd be interested. It could give you a little boost if you were one of those who wanted to get back to your high school weight.
Dr. Chaney says:
Most of you probably already know that obesity can cut your life short.
But some people seem to take the attitude that life is short and uncertain anyway.
I've heard people say "Why should I bother to make lifestyle changes that could add a few years to my life when I could be run over by a car tomorrow?"
The answer is simple! It's not just how long you live, it's how well you live.
It's all about living a long AND healthy life!
A recent study by scientists at Harvard and Brigham and Women's Hospital in Boston (Sun et al, British Medical Journal, 330: b3796, 2009) addressed this issue very clearly.
They followed 17,065 women who had enrolled in the Nurses Health Study in 1976 and had subsequently reached age of 70 and asked how obesity affected their health at age 70.
They were not just looking at survival. They were looking at healthy survival.
They defined healthy survivors as those women who were free of chronic diseases (heart disease, diabetes, hypertension, for example) and had no cognitive, physical or mental limitations.
The results were clear cut.
Every one unit increase in Body Mass Index (weight in kg/(height in meters)squared) was associated with a 12% decreased probability of healthy survival to age 70.
Women who were at ideal weight at age 18, but had gained 22 pounds or more by middle age, were 59% less likely to enjoy good health at age 70 than the women who had maintained ideal weight through middle age.
The effect of body weight on healthy survival was even more dramatic for those women who were already overweight at age 18 and gained 22 pounds or more by middle age. Their probability of enjoying good health at age 70 was 79% less than women who had maintained ideal weight through middle age.
And just in case there are guys reading this Health Tip who think this doesn't apply to you, there is a study showing that healthy survival in men is also dramatically decreased by obesity (JAMA, 296:
2343-2350, 2006).
So while lifestyle changes are never easy, they are definitely worth the effort. It really is not just about how long you live, it's about how well you live.
I wish you a long AND healthy life!
To Your Health!
Dr. Stephen G Chaney
And so do I! Be well, Betsy
Monday, April 4, 2011
Thursday, March 3, 2011
Our teens are putting on make-up. what's the risk?
Dear Reader,
A friend sent me the following news story and reminded me once more of the commitment I made after climbing Mt. Shasta with the Breast Cancer Fund. After making our climb up this awesome mountain which is just a few feet shorter than Mt. Rainier, we celebrated our stamina and hard work. The next day we spent the entire day developing our Strong Voices to speak out about the toxins in our environment which may cause breast and other cancers. In particular is the make up we use and our teenagers are beginning to use. On my goal board is a picture of 12 year olds preening in front of the mirror together, trying on their mothers' lipstick, eye shadow, blush and hair products. The caption says: Because "use Daily" shouldn't be dangerous advice. My granddaughters have noticed this picture and asked about it. How can I influence them in this age of television and group shopping trips to the drug store for the cheapest stuff available?
I offer this for your consideration. And by the way, I have checked all the ingredients in skin care products by Shaklee and found every ingredient to be safe at the Safe Cosmetics web site.
Makeup Makeover for
Teens and Tweens
Little bundles of joy—you wrapped them in organic cotton blankets, made sure their milk was hormone-free and their food had no preservatives. You raised them green—until now that is, when puberty is at your doorstep. Those precious little ones are now talking cosmetics, nail polish, shaving cream, hair products and acne remedies; products that may contain hormonally active chemicals and preservatives.
Research suggests tweens and teens are particularly vulnerable to exposures from hormone disrupting chemicals. As their bodies undergo accelerated growth to adulthood, their endocrine systems are sensitive to even low levels of the hormonally active chemicals found in body care and other everyday products. Federal regulations do not require companies to test either products or ingredients for safety, so nearly all personal care products have ingredients not tested for safety by an accountable agency.
Teens may use even more products than adults, and parents can help guide them toward safer choices.
Here are four chemical categories to know about:
Phthalates are a component of artificial fragrance, although you will not see it listed in the ingredients as manufacturers are not required to do so. They are also known hormone disruptors linked to a number of reproductive problems. You may be familiar with phthalates, as they are also used to soften plastics.
Musks are another component of artificial fragrance. Research links musks to cancer and hormone disruption.
Parabens are widely used as preservatives in cosmetics and are considered hormone disrupting chemicals. Some can also irritate the skin.
Triclosan is used as a preservative in deodorants, face and body washes, toothpaste, acne remedies and cosmetics. Triclosan accumulates in fat tissues so concentrations build up over time. Research links triclosan to thyroid disruption. You probably know triclosan as an antibacterial ingredient used in hand soaps.
So what is a parent to do? Urge your tween or teen to:
Use fewer products.
Use simpler products with a short list of ingredients you can research and trust.
Research products at Skin Deep Personal Products database, www.cosmeticsdatabase.com.
Avoid products with fragrance, musk, parabens, triclosan and sodium lauryl /laureth sulfate in the ingredients list.
Don’t trust terms like hypoallergenic, dermatologist-tested, natural or organic (when it comes to body care products).
Check out www.teensturninggreen.org.
Talk with your child about what beauty really is.
Source: Environmental Working Group research study “Teen Girls’ Body Burden of Hormone-Altering Cosmetics Chemicals,” http://www.ewg.org/book/export/html/26953 September, 2008.
If you liked this edition of Growing Up green, check out out blog post on hosting a toxic-free spa day birthday party.
Washington Toxics Coalition
4649 Sunnyside Avenue N, Suite 540,Seattle, WA 98103
206-632-1545 : info@watoxics.org
We hope you enjoyed this edition of Growing Up Green.
Happy Day, Betsy
Betsy Bell's Health4u
www.HiHoHealth.com
A friend sent me the following news story and reminded me once more of the commitment I made after climbing Mt. Shasta with the Breast Cancer Fund. After making our climb up this awesome mountain which is just a few feet shorter than Mt. Rainier, we celebrated our stamina and hard work. The next day we spent the entire day developing our Strong Voices to speak out about the toxins in our environment which may cause breast and other cancers. In particular is the make up we use and our teenagers are beginning to use. On my goal board is a picture of 12 year olds preening in front of the mirror together, trying on their mothers' lipstick, eye shadow, blush and hair products. The caption says: Because "use Daily" shouldn't be dangerous advice. My granddaughters have noticed this picture and asked about it. How can I influence them in this age of television and group shopping trips to the drug store for the cheapest stuff available?
I offer this for your consideration. And by the way, I have checked all the ingredients in skin care products by Shaklee and found every ingredient to be safe at the Safe Cosmetics web site.
Makeup Makeover for
Teens and Tweens
Little bundles of joy—you wrapped them in organic cotton blankets, made sure their milk was hormone-free and their food had no preservatives. You raised them green—until now that is, when puberty is at your doorstep. Those precious little ones are now talking cosmetics, nail polish, shaving cream, hair products and acne remedies; products that may contain hormonally active chemicals and preservatives.
Research suggests tweens and teens are particularly vulnerable to exposures from hormone disrupting chemicals. As their bodies undergo accelerated growth to adulthood, their endocrine systems are sensitive to even low levels of the hormonally active chemicals found in body care and other everyday products. Federal regulations do not require companies to test either products or ingredients for safety, so nearly all personal care products have ingredients not tested for safety by an accountable agency.
Teens may use even more products than adults, and parents can help guide them toward safer choices.
Here are four chemical categories to know about:
Phthalates are a component of artificial fragrance, although you will not see it listed in the ingredients as manufacturers are not required to do so. They are also known hormone disruptors linked to a number of reproductive problems. You may be familiar with phthalates, as they are also used to soften plastics.
Musks are another component of artificial fragrance. Research links musks to cancer and hormone disruption.
Parabens are widely used as preservatives in cosmetics and are considered hormone disrupting chemicals. Some can also irritate the skin.
Triclosan is used as a preservative in deodorants, face and body washes, toothpaste, acne remedies and cosmetics. Triclosan accumulates in fat tissues so concentrations build up over time. Research links triclosan to thyroid disruption. You probably know triclosan as an antibacterial ingredient used in hand soaps.
So what is a parent to do? Urge your tween or teen to:
Use fewer products.
Use simpler products with a short list of ingredients you can research and trust.
Research products at Skin Deep Personal Products database, www.cosmeticsdatabase.com.
Avoid products with fragrance, musk, parabens, triclosan and sodium lauryl /laureth sulfate in the ingredients list.
Don’t trust terms like hypoallergenic, dermatologist-tested, natural or organic (when it comes to body care products).
Check out www.teensturninggreen.org.
Talk with your child about what beauty really is.
Source: Environmental Working Group research study “Teen Girls’ Body Burden of Hormone-Altering Cosmetics Chemicals,” http://www.ewg.org/book/export/html/26953 September, 2008.
If you liked this edition of Growing Up green, check out out blog post on hosting a toxic-free spa day birthday party.
Washington Toxics Coalition
4649 Sunnyside Avenue N, Suite 540,Seattle, WA 98103
206-632-1545 : info@watoxics.org
We hope you enjoyed this edition of Growing Up Green.
Happy Day, Betsy
Betsy Bell's Health4u
www.HiHoHealth.com
Friday, February 18, 2011
Do bad bugs cause obesity
Gentle Reader, How are you doing with your resolve to become a healthier you in 2011?
First of all, it is not as easy to keep up the tiny steps one must do consistently every day over a long period of time to get the results we all want out of life. The right choices every time we put something in our mouth. The consistent effort to take a 30 minute walk every single day.
Here's an ordinary person, Aileen, putting it out there for everyone to see on a you tube video made in her living room. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDyIvVFgBwY
We'll cheer her on and get inspiration.
Second, I want to share this interesting article that came across my desk a few days ago about the challenge bad bugs--unhealthy bacteria--in our intestinal track may cause as we are trying so hard to stick to our healthy eating. Read on from Dr. Chaney:
"I came across a very interesting and thought provoking article the other day in a very prestigious scientific journal (Vijay-Kumar et al, Science, 328: 228-231, 2010).
"But first, a bit of background information:
"It has been known for some time that the types of bacteria found in the intestines of obese people are different than those found in the intestines of lean individuals.
"But no one really knew the significance, if any, of that observation.
"The current study compared a strain of mice that are genetically predisposed to obesity with wild type (genetically lean) mice.
"They first looked at the intestinal bacteria. It turned out that the obese mice and lean mice had the same differences in intestinal bacteria that humans have.
"And just like obese humans the obese mice displayed insulin resistance, and elevated levels of triglycerides, cholesterol and blood sugar (They were pre-diabetic).
"Since the obese mice also ate more than the lean mice many of the observed differences could have been due to the excess calories and resulting weight gain.
"To test that hypothesis, the scientists limited the amount of food that the genetically obese mice (the mice that were genetically predisposed to obesity) ate so that it was identical to what the genetically lean mice ate.
"Even though the genetically obese mice were no longer overweight they still displayed increased insulin resistance compared to the genetically lean mice.
"Based on this and other experiments the scientists eventually concluded that it was the insulin resistance that was causing the mice to overeat and, therefore, become obese.
"The scientists then decided to test the hypothesis that the particular bacterial strains found in the intestines of genetically obese mice might be causing the insulin resistance.
"In the first experiment they killed off the intestinal bacteria in the genetically obese mice by putting high dose antibiotics in their food.
"Depleting the intestinal bacteria created some health problems for the mice, but it completely prevented the insulin resistance, overeating and obesity normally observed with this strain of mice.
"In the second experiment they sterilized the intestines of the genetically lean mice and then colonized their intestines with intestinal bacteria from the genetically obese mice.
"When they did this, the genetically lean mice developed many of the characteristics of the genetically obese mice including insulin resistance, overeating, obesity and hyperglycemia.
"In short, the genetically lean mice became overweight and developed diabetes.
"Based on these experiments and other studies the scientists hypothesized that the wrong kinds of intestinal bacteria can make a significant contribution to insulin resistance, which in turn can lead to overeating and obesity.
"In short, they concluded that bad bugs may make you fat.
"Does this mean that you should rush out and buy some probiotics (friendly bacteria) as part of your weight loss strategy?
"The simple answer is no. That would be premature. These studies were performed in mice and genetics obviously played a role in the results.
"In short, we are a long way from knowing to what extent intestinal bacteria might contribute to obesity in humans.
"However, there are many very good reasons to make sure that you supply friendly bacteria to your intestinal track on a regular basis.
"For example, we know that bad bacteria in your intestine can compromise your immune system, convert foods that you eat to cancer causing chemicals, and cause chronic inflammation - which contributes to a number of major diseases.
"We can't yet say whether good bugs will help keep you slim, but we do know that they can help keep you healthy."
Dr. Stephen G Chaney
My own experience with bad bacteria was extreme. I had to stop eating all fruit, all dairy, all refined carbohydrates and take a twice daily dose of asidophilus/bifidus, plus garlic to get rid of the pesky yeast (unfriendly bugs) in my system. It wasn't easy, but I am not plagued by pre-diabetic conditions any more. They would easily come back and I do have those symptoms around the holidays when I allow an excess of sugary treats and wine.
Consider combating bad bugs even thought the research isn't complete. You'll be glad you did.
For help, use Shaklee's Vitalizer which has Optiflora along with a multi, carotinoids/E/Omega and B/C. Add Garlic and a Soy shake to your daily routine and eat plenty of vegetables, small servings of organic meat, fish and chicken and you'll be surprised at how you can alter your intestinal flora for the better. Cinch is a delicious way to get at least one healthy meal a day. Watch the inches disappear and your tendency to sickness along with them.
In good health,
Betsy
Betsy Bell's Health4U
206 933 1889
http:HiHohealth.com
First of all, it is not as easy to keep up the tiny steps one must do consistently every day over a long period of time to get the results we all want out of life. The right choices every time we put something in our mouth. The consistent effort to take a 30 minute walk every single day.
Here's an ordinary person, Aileen, putting it out there for everyone to see on a you tube video made in her living room. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sDyIvVFgBwY
We'll cheer her on and get inspiration.
Second, I want to share this interesting article that came across my desk a few days ago about the challenge bad bugs--unhealthy bacteria--in our intestinal track may cause as we are trying so hard to stick to our healthy eating. Read on from Dr. Chaney:
"I came across a very interesting and thought provoking article the other day in a very prestigious scientific journal (Vijay-Kumar et al, Science, 328: 228-231, 2010).
"But first, a bit of background information:
"It has been known for some time that the types of bacteria found in the intestines of obese people are different than those found in the intestines of lean individuals.
"But no one really knew the significance, if any, of that observation.
"The current study compared a strain of mice that are genetically predisposed to obesity with wild type (genetically lean) mice.
"They first looked at the intestinal bacteria. It turned out that the obese mice and lean mice had the same differences in intestinal bacteria that humans have.
"And just like obese humans the obese mice displayed insulin resistance, and elevated levels of triglycerides, cholesterol and blood sugar (They were pre-diabetic).
"Since the obese mice also ate more than the lean mice many of the observed differences could have been due to the excess calories and resulting weight gain.
"To test that hypothesis, the scientists limited the amount of food that the genetically obese mice (the mice that were genetically predisposed to obesity) ate so that it was identical to what the genetically lean mice ate.
"Even though the genetically obese mice were no longer overweight they still displayed increased insulin resistance compared to the genetically lean mice.
"Based on this and other experiments the scientists eventually concluded that it was the insulin resistance that was causing the mice to overeat and, therefore, become obese.
"The scientists then decided to test the hypothesis that the particular bacterial strains found in the intestines of genetically obese mice might be causing the insulin resistance.
"In the first experiment they killed off the intestinal bacteria in the genetically obese mice by putting high dose antibiotics in their food.
"Depleting the intestinal bacteria created some health problems for the mice, but it completely prevented the insulin resistance, overeating and obesity normally observed with this strain of mice.
"In the second experiment they sterilized the intestines of the genetically lean mice and then colonized their intestines with intestinal bacteria from the genetically obese mice.
"When they did this, the genetically lean mice developed many of the characteristics of the genetically obese mice including insulin resistance, overeating, obesity and hyperglycemia.
"In short, the genetically lean mice became overweight and developed diabetes.
"Based on these experiments and other studies the scientists hypothesized that the wrong kinds of intestinal bacteria can make a significant contribution to insulin resistance, which in turn can lead to overeating and obesity.
"In short, they concluded that bad bugs may make you fat.
"Does this mean that you should rush out and buy some probiotics (friendly bacteria) as part of your weight loss strategy?
"The simple answer is no. That would be premature. These studies were performed in mice and genetics obviously played a role in the results.
"In short, we are a long way from knowing to what extent intestinal bacteria might contribute to obesity in humans.
"However, there are many very good reasons to make sure that you supply friendly bacteria to your intestinal track on a regular basis.
"For example, we know that bad bacteria in your intestine can compromise your immune system, convert foods that you eat to cancer causing chemicals, and cause chronic inflammation - which contributes to a number of major diseases.
"We can't yet say whether good bugs will help keep you slim, but we do know that they can help keep you healthy."
Dr. Stephen G Chaney
My own experience with bad bacteria was extreme. I had to stop eating all fruit, all dairy, all refined carbohydrates and take a twice daily dose of asidophilus/bifidus, plus garlic to get rid of the pesky yeast (unfriendly bugs) in my system. It wasn't easy, but I am not plagued by pre-diabetic conditions any more. They would easily come back and I do have those symptoms around the holidays when I allow an excess of sugary treats and wine.
Consider combating bad bugs even thought the research isn't complete. You'll be glad you did.
For help, use Shaklee's Vitalizer which has Optiflora along with a multi, carotinoids/E/Omega and B/C. Add Garlic and a Soy shake to your daily routine and eat plenty of vegetables, small servings of organic meat, fish and chicken and you'll be surprised at how you can alter your intestinal flora for the better. Cinch is a delicious way to get at least one healthy meal a day. Watch the inches disappear and your tendency to sickness along with them.
In good health,
Betsy
Betsy Bell's Health4U
206 933 1889
http:HiHohealth.com
Tuesday, February 8, 2011
What's in the soft soap you're using?
As a breast cancer survivor I take particular interest in avoiding all substances that could have cancer causing agents. You might want to know about your soft soap, something you use everyday, in your own home, at work, in the public places where we wash our hands.
This news just came from one of my favorite organizations, the Safe Cosmetics Campaign. I'm on the mailing list because I have worked with The Breast Cancer Fund, a partner and supporter. This blog post is too late for you to take action, but you can learn about the problem and take personal action when you shop.
Remember that Shaklee makes products that contain no triclosan or anything else that could possibly cause cancer.
For over two years the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has been warning people about triclosan, an antibacterial chemical (actually a pesticide!) that can disrupt hormones, lower sperm production and harm immune systems. We’ve asked Walmart to get soaps and other products containing triclosan off store shelves, and we asked the FDA, the agency in charge of cosmetics safety, to take action, too. We’ve seen no movement from either one.
Now the effort to ban triclosan for non-medical uses (like in cosmetics, toys and cutting boards) has gone to the Environmental Protection Agency. And that's your chance: The EPA is taking public comments through February 7. Submit your comments in support of a triclosan ban right now!
Researchers have found triclosan in the majority of Americans, including pregnant women. The chemical can have adverse effects on fetal growth and development, may lead to bacterial resistance to antibiotics and harms aquatic life. It's in more than 75 percent of liquid hand soaps in the U.S., yet triclosan is no more effective than regular soap and water.
We're making progress: Europe and Japan have made moves to limit triclosan in cosmetics, and several members of the U.S. Congress are pushing the EPA and FDA to take another look. Meanwhile, several U.S. cosmetics companies are moving away from triclosan.
EPA action to ban triclosan would be a huge victory for our health and environment. Don't miss your chance to voice your support to the EPA before the public comment period ends!
Be well, be safe, be healthy.
Betsy
Betsy Bell's Health4u
206 933 1889
http://HiHoHealth.com
This news just came from one of my favorite organizations, the Safe Cosmetics Campaign. I'm on the mailing list because I have worked with The Breast Cancer Fund, a partner and supporter. This blog post is too late for you to take action, but you can learn about the problem and take personal action when you shop.
Remember that Shaklee makes products that contain no triclosan or anything else that could possibly cause cancer.
For over two years the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics has been warning people about triclosan, an antibacterial chemical (actually a pesticide!) that can disrupt hormones, lower sperm production and harm immune systems. We’ve asked Walmart to get soaps and other products containing triclosan off store shelves, and we asked the FDA, the agency in charge of cosmetics safety, to take action, too. We’ve seen no movement from either one.
Now the effort to ban triclosan for non-medical uses (like in cosmetics, toys and cutting boards) has gone to the Environmental Protection Agency. And that's your chance: The EPA is taking public comments through February 7. Submit your comments in support of a triclosan ban right now!
Researchers have found triclosan in the majority of Americans, including pregnant women. The chemical can have adverse effects on fetal growth and development, may lead to bacterial resistance to antibiotics and harms aquatic life. It's in more than 75 percent of liquid hand soaps in the U.S., yet triclosan is no more effective than regular soap and water.
We're making progress: Europe and Japan have made moves to limit triclosan in cosmetics, and several members of the U.S. Congress are pushing the EPA and FDA to take another look. Meanwhile, several U.S. cosmetics companies are moving away from triclosan.
EPA action to ban triclosan would be a huge victory for our health and environment. Don't miss your chance to voice your support to the EPA before the public comment period ends!
Be well, be safe, be healthy.
Betsy
Betsy Bell's Health4u
206 933 1889
http://HiHoHealth.com
Tuesday, February 1, 2011
Now you see it. Now you don't.
Thanks to Dr. Stephen Chaney for this important information.
Most supplement companies are reluctant to abandon a well-established brand - even when they have something better to sell.
On a recent visit to our optometrist he alerted us to a perfect example of that in the area of eye health.
But, first a bit of background.
Many of you have probably heard of AREDS (Age Related Eye Disease Study) conducted by the National Eye Institute. That study showed that high doses of the antioxidants vitamin C, beta-carotene, vitamin E and the mineral zinc significantly decreased the risk of macular degeneration in high risk patients.
Very shortly after the study was completed several companies started marketing vitamin supplements based on the amounts of those nutrients used in the AREDS study.
However, by the time that study was published there were already several other published studies showing that lutein and zeaxanthin were a better choice than beta-carotene and that omega-3 fatty acids also significantly reduced the risk of macular degeneration. In addition, many experts felt that the amount of zinc used in the original AREDS formulation was too high.
So the National Eye Institute immediately started an AREDS 2 study with the revised formulation and most of the manufacturers of AREDS supplements started marketing AREDS 2 supplements.
Our optometrist told us people interested in reducing the risk of macular degeneration really should be using the AREDS 2 supplements rather than the AREDS formulations offered by the same companies.
Since he knew that we used Shaklee products he also asked us whether it was possible to get those nutrients in the right amount from Shaklee supplements.
So we did some label reading. Vitalizer, 1 Vita E Complex, 2 CarotoMax, 2 OmegaGuard and 1 Zinc Complex come very close to the AREDS 2 formulation.
So the bottom line is:
If you are interested in reducing the risk of macular degeneration look for an AREDS 2 formulation and Shaklee can fit the bill.
To Your Health!
Dr. Stephen G Chaney
Most supplement companies are reluctant to abandon a well-established brand - even when they have something better to sell.
On a recent visit to our optometrist he alerted us to a perfect example of that in the area of eye health.
But, first a bit of background.
Many of you have probably heard of AREDS (Age Related Eye Disease Study) conducted by the National Eye Institute. That study showed that high doses of the antioxidants vitamin C, beta-carotene, vitamin E and the mineral zinc significantly decreased the risk of macular degeneration in high risk patients.
Very shortly after the study was completed several companies started marketing vitamin supplements based on the amounts of those nutrients used in the AREDS study.
However, by the time that study was published there were already several other published studies showing that lutein and zeaxanthin were a better choice than beta-carotene and that omega-3 fatty acids also significantly reduced the risk of macular degeneration. In addition, many experts felt that the amount of zinc used in the original AREDS formulation was too high.
So the National Eye Institute immediately started an AREDS 2 study with the revised formulation and most of the manufacturers of AREDS supplements started marketing AREDS 2 supplements.
Our optometrist told us people interested in reducing the risk of macular degeneration really should be using the AREDS 2 supplements rather than the AREDS formulations offered by the same companies.
Since he knew that we used Shaklee products he also asked us whether it was possible to get those nutrients in the right amount from Shaklee supplements.
So we did some label reading. Vitalizer, 1 Vita E Complex, 2 CarotoMax, 2 OmegaGuard and 1 Zinc Complex come very close to the AREDS 2 formulation.
So the bottom line is:
If you are interested in reducing the risk of macular degeneration look for an AREDS 2 formulation and Shaklee can fit the bill.
To Your Health!
Dr. Stephen G Chaney
Friday, January 21, 2011
Trouble in the alfalfa fields
Dear Reader,
As more and more people turn to fresh fruits and vegetables (did you hear that Walmart is going to make them affordable in order to help turn the obesity tide around?), the trouble lurking in the background is the genetic make up of them. The cell is an amazing community of workers and the power behind it all is food, real food, food that grew and developed along with us humans in a web of symbiotic relationship.
We have an ogre in our fields, Monsanto. Only with vigilance and persistence will we be able to curb their insistence on modifying the genetic composition of the foods we eat. There is a growing body of research showing the long term result of these modifications. The cell can tell.
One reason I have presented the entire article including the pictures is because Shaklee produces Alfalfa Tabs, a product many use to help with arthritis, blood cleansing and circulation, joint flexibility, anti-inflammation, natural diuretic and the list goes on and on. We don't actually understand why alfalfa is so beneficial to the body, but those of us who take it in large quantities know alfalfa calms allergies, takes the ache out of our knees, reduces swelling after an operation, makes our breath and feet smell sweeter and we don't have to use deodorant. Shaklee searches far and wide to obtain non-GMO alfalfa, organically grown, irrigated with uncontaminated water. You'll see why that's important when you read the following article by Jeffrey M. Smith.
Monsanto’s Roundup Triggers Over 40 Plant Diseases and Endangers Human and Animal Health
While visiting a seed corn dealer’s demonstration plots in Iowa last fall, Dr. Don Huber walked passed a soybean field and noticed a distinct line separating severely diseased yellowing soybeans on the right from healthy green plants on the left (see photo). The yellow section was suffering from Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS), a serious plant disease that ravaged the Midwest in 2009 and ’10, driving down yields and profits. Something had caused that area of soybeans to be highly susceptible and Don had a good idea what it was.
The diseased field on the right had glyphosate applied the previous season. Photo by Don Huber
Don Huber spent 35 years as a plant pathologist at Purdue University and knows a lot about what causes green plants to turn yellow and die prematurely. He asked the seed dealer why the SDS was so severe in the one area of the field and not the other. “Did you plant something there last year that wasn’t planted in the rest of the field?” he asked. Sure enough, precisely where the severe SDS was, the dealer had grown alfalfa, which he later killed off at the end of the season by spraying a glyphosate-based herbicide (such as Roundup). The healthy part of the field, on the other hand, had been planted to sweet corn and hadn’t received glyphosate.
This was yet another confirmation that Roundup was triggering SDS. In many fields, the evidence is even more obvious. The disease was most severe at the ends of rows where the herbicide applicator looped back to make another pass (see photo). That’s where extra Roundup was applied.
Don’s a scientist; it takes more than a few photos for him to draw conclusions. But Don’s got more—lots more. For over 20 years, Don studied Roundup’s active ingredient glyphosate. He’s one of the world’s experts. And he can rattle off study after study that eliminate any doubt that glyphosate is contributing not only to the huge increase in SDS, but to the outbreak of numerous other diseases.
Sudden Death Syndrome is more severe at the ends of rows, where Roundup dose is strongest. Photo by Amy Bandy.
Roundup: The perfect storm for plant disease
More than 30% of all herbicides sprayed anywhere contain glyphosate—the world’s bestselling weed killer. It was patented by Monsanto for use in their Roundup brand, which became more popular when they introduced “Roundup Ready” crops starting in 1996. These genetically modified (GM) plants, which now include soy, corn, cotton, canola, and sugar beets, have inserted genetic material from viruses and bacteria that allows the crops to withstand applications of normally deadly Roundup.
(Monsanto requires farmers who buy Roundup Ready seeds to only use the company’s Roundup brand of glyphosate. This has extended the company’s grip on the glyphosate market, even after its patent expired in 2000.)
The herbicide doesn’t destroy plants directly. It rather cooks up a unique perfect storm of conditions that revs up disease-causing organisms in the soil, and at the same time wipes out plant defenses against those diseases. The mechanisms are well-documented but rarely cited.
The glyphosate molecule grabs vital nutrients and doesn’t let them go. This process is called chelation and was actually the original property for which glyphosate was patented in 1964. It was only 10 years later that it was patented as an herbicide. When applied to crops, it deprives them of vital minerals necessary for healthy plant function—especially for resisting serious soilborne diseases. The importance of minerals for protecting against disease is well established. In fact, mineral availability was the single most important measurement used by several famous plant breeders to identify disease-resistant varieties.
Glyphosate annihilates beneficial soil organisms, such as Pseudomonas and Bacillus bacteria that live around the roots. Since they facilitate the uptake of plant nutrients and suppress disease-causing organisms, their untimely deaths means the plant gets even weaker and the pathogens even stronger.
The herbicide can interfere with photosynthesis, reduce water use efficiency, lower lignin , damage and shorten root systems, cause plants to release important sugars, and change soil pH—all of which can negatively affect crop health.
Glyphosate itself is slightly toxic to plants. It also breaks down slowly in soil to form another chemical called AMPA (aminomethylphosphonic acid) which is also toxic. But even the combined toxic effects of glyphosate and AMPA are not sufficient on their own to kill plants. It has been demonstrated numerous times since 1984
Glyphosate with sterile soil (A) only stunts plant growth. In normal soil (B), pathogens kill the plant. Control (C) shows normal growth.
· that when glyphosate is applied in sterile soil, the plant may be slightly stunted, but it isn’t killed (see photo).
The actual plant assassins, according to Purdue weed scientists and others, are severe disease-causing organisms present in almost all soils. Glyphosate dramatically promotes these, which in turn overrun the weakened crops with deadly infections.
“This is the herbicidal mode of action of glyphosate,” says Don. “It increases susceptibility to disease, suppresses natural disease controls such as beneficial organisms, and promotes virulence of soilborne pathogens at the same time.” In fact, he points out that “If you apply certain fungicides to weeds, it destroys the herbicidal activity of glyphosate!”
By weakening plants and promoting disease, glyphosate opens the door for lots of problems in the field. According to Don, “There are more than 40 diseases of crop plants that are reported to increase with the use of glyphosate, and that number keeps growing as people recognize the association between glyphosate and disease.”
Roundup promotes human and animal toxins
Photo by Robert Kremer
Some of the fungi promoted by glyphosate produce dangerous toxins that can end up in food and feed. Sudden Death Syndrome, for example, is caused by the Fusarium fungus. USDA scientist Robert Kremer found a 500% increase in Fusarium root infection of Roundup Ready soybeans when glyphosate is applied (see photos and chart). Corn, wheat, and many other plants can also suffer from serious Fusarium-based diseases.
But Fusarium’s wrath is not limited to plants. According to a report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, toxins from Fusarium on various types of food crops have been associated with disease outbreaks throughout history. They’ve “been linked to the plague epidemics” of medieval Europe, “large-scale human toxicosis in Eastern Europe,” oesophageal cancer in southern Africa and parts of China, joint diseases in Asia and southern Africa, and a blood disorder in Russia. Fusarium toxins have also been shown to cause animal diseases and induce infertility.
As Roundup use rises, plant disease skyrockets
When Roundup Ready crops were introduced in 1996, Monsanto boldly claimed that herbicide use would drop as a result. It did—slightly—for three years. But over the next 10 years, it grew considerably. Total herbicide use in the US jumped by a whopping 383 million pounds in the 13 years after GMOs came on the scene. The greatest contributor is Roundup.
Over time, many types of weeds that would once keel over with just a tiny dose of Roundup now require heavier and heavier applications. Some are nearly invincible. In reality, these super-weeds are resistant not to the glyphosate itself, but to the soilborne pathogens that normally do the killing in Roundup sprayed fields.
Having hundreds of thousands of acres infested with weeds that resist plant disease and weed killer has been devastating to many US farmers, whose first response is to pour on more and more Roundup. Its use is now accelerating. Nearly half of the huge 13-year increase in herbicide use took place in just the last 2 years. This has serious implications.
As US farmers drench more than 135 million acres of Roundup Ready crops with Roundup, plant diseases are enjoying an unprecedented explosion across America’s most productive crop lands. Don rattles off a lengthy list of diseases that were once under effective management and control, but are now creating severe hardship. (The list includes SDS and Corynespora root rot of soybeans, citrus variegated chlorosis (CVC), Fusarium wilt of cotton, Verticillium wilt of potato, take-all root, crown, and stem blight of cereals, Fusarium root and crown rot, Fusarium head blight, Pythium root rot and damping off, Goss’ wilt of corn, and many more.)
In Brazil, the new “Mad Soy Disease” is ravaging huge tracts of soybean acreage. Although scientists have not yet determined its cause, Don points out that various symptoms resemble a rice disease (bakanae) which is caused by Fusarium.
Corn dies young
In recent years, corn plants and entire fields in the Midwest have been dying earlier and earlier due to various diseases. Seasoned and observant farmers say they’re never seen anything like it.
“A decade ago, corn plants remained green and healthy well into September,” says Bob Streit, an agronomist in Iowa. “But over the last three years, diseases have turned the plants yellow, then brown, about 8 to 10 days earlier each season. In 2010, yellowing started around July 7th and yield losses were devastating for many growers.”
Bob and other crop experts believe that the increased use of glyphosate is the primary contributor to this disease trend. It has already reduced corn yields significantly. “If the corn dies much earlier,” says Bob, “it might collapse the corn harvest in the US, and threaten the food chain that it supports.”
A question of bugs
In addition to promoting plant diseases, which is well-established, spraying Roundup might also promote insects. That’s because many bugs seek sick plants. Scientists point out that healthy plants produce nutrients in a form that many insects cannot assimilate. Thus, farmers around the world report less insect problems among high quality, nutrient-dense crops. Weaker plants, on the other hand, create insect smorgasbords. This suggests that plants ravaged with diseases promoted by glyphosate may also attract more insects, which in turn will increase the use of toxic pesticides. More study is needed to confirm this.
Roundup persists in the environment
Monsanto used to boast that Roundup is biodegradable, claiming that it breaks down quickly in the soil. But courts in the US and Europe disagreed and found them guilty of false advertising. In fact, Monsanto’s own test data revealed that only 2% of the product broke down after 28 days.
Whether glyphosate degrades in weeks, months, or years varies widely due to factors in the soil, including pH, clay , types of minerals, residues from Roundup Ready crops, and the presence of the specialized enzymes needed to break down the herbicide molecule. In some conditions, glyphosate can grab hold of soil nutrients and remain stable for long periods. One study showed that it took up to 22 years for glyphosate to degrade only half its volume! So much for trusting Monsanto’s product claims.
Glyphosate can attack from above and below. It can drift over from a neighbors farm and wreak havoc. And it can even be released from dying weeds, travel through the soil, and then be taken up by healthy crops.
The amount of glyphosate that can cause damage is tiny. European scientists demonstrated that less than half an ounce per acre inhibits the ability of plants to take up and transport essential micronutrients (see chart).
As a result, more and more farmers are finding that crops planted in years after Roundup is applied suffer from weakened defenses and increased soilborne diseases. The situation is getting worse for many reasons.
The glyphosate concentration in the soil builds up season after season with each subsequent application.
Glyphosate can also accumulate for 6-8 years inside perennial plants like alfalfa, which get sprayed over and over.
Wheat affected after 10 years of glyphosate field applications.
Glyphosate residues in the soil that become bound and immobilized can be reactivated by the application of phosphate fertilizers or through other methods. Potato growers in the West and Midwest, for example, have experienced severe losses from glyphosate that has been reactivated.
Glyphosate can find its way onto farmland accidentally, through drifting spray, in contaminated water, and even through chicken manure!
Imagine the shock of farmers who spread chicken manure in their fields to add nutrients, but instead found that the glyphosate in the manure tied up nutrients in the soil, promoted plant disease, and killed off weeds or crops. Test results of the manure showed glyphosate/AMPA concentrations at a whopping 0.36-0.75 parts per million (ppm). The normal herbicidal rate of glyphosate is about 0.5 ppm/acre.
Manure from other animals may also be spreading the herbicide, since US livestock consume copious amounts of glyphosate—which accumulates in corn kernels and soybeans. If it isn’t found in livestock manure (or urine), that may be even worse. If glyphosate is not exiting the animal, it must be accumulating with every meal, ending up in our meat and possibly milk.
Add this threat to the already high glyphosate residues inside our own diets due to corn and soybeans, and we have yet another serious problem threatening our health. Glyphosate has been linked to sterility, hormone disruption, abnormal and lower sperm counts, miscarriages, placental cell death, birth defects, and cancer, to name a few. (See resource list on glyphosate health effects.)
Nutrient loss in humans and animals
The same nutrients that glyphosate chelates and deprives plants are also vital for human and animal health. These include iron, zinc, copper, manganese, magnesium, calcium, boron, and others. Deficiencies of these elements in our diets, alone or in combination, are known to interfere with vital enzyme systems and cause a long list of disorders and diseases.
Alzheimer’s, for example, is linked with reduced copper and magnesium. Don Huber points out that this disease has jumped 9000% since 1990.
Manganese, zinc, and copper are also vital for proper functioning of the SOD (superoxide dismustase) cycle. This is key for stemming inflammation and is an important component in detoxifying unwanted chemical compounds in humans and animals.
Glyphosate-induced mineral deficiencies can easily go unidentified and untreated. Even when laboratory tests are done, they can sometimes detect adequate mineral levels, but miss the fact that glyphosate has already rendered them unusable.
Glyphosate can tie up minerals for years and years, essentially removing them from the pool of nutrients available for plants, animals, and humans. If we combine the more than 135 million pounds of glyphosate-based herbicides applied in the US in 2010 with total applications over the past 30 years, we may have already eliminated millions of pounds of nutrients from our food supply.
This loss is something we simply can’t afford. We’re already suffering from progressive nutrient deprivation even without Roundup. In a UK study, for example, they found between 16-76% less nutrients in 1991, compared to levels in the same foods in 1940.
Livestock disease and mineral deficiency
Roundup Ready crops dominate US livestock feed. Soy and corn are most prevalent—93% of US soy and nearly 70% of corn are Roundup Ready. Animals are also fed derivatives of the other three Roundup Ready crops: canola, sugar beets, and cottonseed. Nutrient loss from glyphosate can therefore be severe.
This is especially true for manganese (Mn), which is not only chelated by glyphosate, but also reduced in Roundup Ready plants (see photo). One veterinarian finds low manganese in every livestock liver he measures. Another vet sent the liver of a stillborn calf out for testing. The lab report stated: No Detectible Levels of Manganese—in spite of the fact that the mineral was in adequate concentrations in his region. When that vet started adding manganese to the feed of a herd, disease rates dropped from a staggering 20% to less than ½%.
Veterinarians who started their practice after GMOs were introduced in 1996 might assume that many chronic or acute animal disorders are common and to be expected. But several older vets have stated flat out that animals have gotten much sicker since GMOs came on the scene. And when they switch livestock from GMO to non-GMO feed, the improvement in health is dramatic. Unfortunately, no one is tracking this, nor is anyone looking at the impacts of consuming milk and meat from GM-fed animals.
Alfalfa madness, brought to you by Monsanto and the USDA
As we continue to drench our fields with Roundup, the perfect storm gets bigger and bigger. Don asks the sobering question: “How much of the hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate that have been applied to our most productive farm soils over the past 30 years is still available to damage subsequent crops through its effects on nutrient availability, increased disease, or reduced nutrient of our food and feed?”
Instead of taking urgent steps to protect our land and food, the USDA just made plans to make things worse. In December they released their Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Roundup Ready alfalfa, which Monsanto hopes to reintroduce to the market.
Alfalfa is the fourth largest crop in the US, grown on 22 million acres. It is used primarily as a high protein source to feed dairy cattle and other ruminant animals. At present, weeds are not a big deal for alfalfa. Only 7% of alfalfa acreage is ever sprayed with an herbicide of any kind. If Roundup Ready alfalfa is approved, however, herbicide use would jump to unprecedented levels, and the weed killer of choice would of course be Roundup.
Even without the application of glyphosate, the nutritional quality of Roundup Ready alfalfa will be less, since Roundup Ready crops, by their nature, have reduced mineral . When glyphosate is applied, nutrient quality suffers even more (see chart).
The chance that Roundup would increase soilborne diseases in alfalfa fields is a near certainty. In fact, Alfalfa may suffer more than other Roundup Ready crops. As a perennial, it can accumulate Roundup year after year. It is a deep-rooted plant, and glyphosate leaches into sub soils. And “Fusarium is a very serious pathogen of alfalfa,” says Don. “So too are Phytophthora and Pythium,” both of which are promoted by glyphosate. “Why would you even consider jeopardizing the productivity and nutrient quality of the third most valuable crop in the US?” he asks in frustration, “especially since we have no way of removing the gene once it is spread throughout the alfalfa gene pool.”
It’s already spreading. Monsanto had marketed Roundup Ready alfalfa for a year, until a federal court declared its approval to be illegal in 2007. They demanded that the USDA produce an EIS in order to account for possible environmental damage. But even with the seeds taken off the market, the RR alfalfa that had already been planted has been contaminating non-GMO varieties. Cal/West Seeds, for example, discovered that more than 12% of their seed lots tested positive for contamination in 2009, up from 3% in 2008.
In their EIS, the USDA does acknowledge that genetically modified alfalfa can contaminate organic and non-GMO alfalfa, and that this could create economic hardship. They are even considering the unprecedented step of placing restrictions on RR alfalfa seed fields, requiring isolation distances. Experience suggests that this will slow down, but not eliminate GMO contamination. Furthermore, studies confirm that genes do transfer from GM crops into soil and soil organisms, and can jump into fungus through cuts on the surface of GM plants. But the EIS does not adequately address these threats and their implications.
Instead, the USDA largely marches lock-step with the biotech industry and turns a blind eye to the widespread harm that Roundup is already inflicting. If they decide to approve Monsanto’s alfalfa, the USDA may ultimately be blamed for a catastrophe of epic proportions.
Please send a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, urging him not to approve Roundup Ready alfalfa, and to fully investigate the damage that Roundup and GMOs are already inflicting.
International bestselling author and filmmaker Jeffrey M. Smith is the executive director of the Institute for Responsible Technology. His first book, Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating, is the world's bestselling and #1 rated book on GMOs. His second, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, documents 65 health risks of the GM foods Americans eat everyday. To help you choose healthier, non-GMO brands, use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide.
Betsy Bell's Health4U
www.HiHoHealth.com
As more and more people turn to fresh fruits and vegetables (did you hear that Walmart is going to make them affordable in order to help turn the obesity tide around?), the trouble lurking in the background is the genetic make up of them. The cell is an amazing community of workers and the power behind it all is food, real food, food that grew and developed along with us humans in a web of symbiotic relationship.
We have an ogre in our fields, Monsanto. Only with vigilance and persistence will we be able to curb their insistence on modifying the genetic composition of the foods we eat. There is a growing body of research showing the long term result of these modifications. The cell can tell.
One reason I have presented the entire article including the pictures is because Shaklee produces Alfalfa Tabs, a product many use to help with arthritis, blood cleansing and circulation, joint flexibility, anti-inflammation, natural diuretic and the list goes on and on. We don't actually understand why alfalfa is so beneficial to the body, but those of us who take it in large quantities know alfalfa calms allergies, takes the ache out of our knees, reduces swelling after an operation, makes our breath and feet smell sweeter and we don't have to use deodorant. Shaklee searches far and wide to obtain non-GMO alfalfa, organically grown, irrigated with uncontaminated water. You'll see why that's important when you read the following article by Jeffrey M. Smith.
Monsanto’s Roundup Triggers Over 40 Plant Diseases and Endangers Human and Animal Health
While visiting a seed corn dealer’s demonstration plots in Iowa last fall, Dr. Don Huber walked passed a soybean field and noticed a distinct line separating severely diseased yellowing soybeans on the right from healthy green plants on the left (see photo). The yellow section was suffering from Sudden Death Syndrome (SDS), a serious plant disease that ravaged the Midwest in 2009 and ’10, driving down yields and profits. Something had caused that area of soybeans to be highly susceptible and Don had a good idea what it was.
The diseased field on the right had glyphosate applied the previous season. Photo by Don Huber
Don Huber spent 35 years as a plant pathologist at Purdue University and knows a lot about what causes green plants to turn yellow and die prematurely. He asked the seed dealer why the SDS was so severe in the one area of the field and not the other. “Did you plant something there last year that wasn’t planted in the rest of the field?” he asked. Sure enough, precisely where the severe SDS was, the dealer had grown alfalfa, which he later killed off at the end of the season by spraying a glyphosate-based herbicide (such as Roundup). The healthy part of the field, on the other hand, had been planted to sweet corn and hadn’t received glyphosate.
This was yet another confirmation that Roundup was triggering SDS. In many fields, the evidence is even more obvious. The disease was most severe at the ends of rows where the herbicide applicator looped back to make another pass (see photo). That’s where extra Roundup was applied.
Don’s a scientist; it takes more than a few photos for him to draw conclusions. But Don’s got more—lots more. For over 20 years, Don studied Roundup’s active ingredient glyphosate. He’s one of the world’s experts. And he can rattle off study after study that eliminate any doubt that glyphosate is contributing not only to the huge increase in SDS, but to the outbreak of numerous other diseases.
Sudden Death Syndrome is more severe at the ends of rows, where Roundup dose is strongest. Photo by Amy Bandy.
Roundup: The perfect storm for plant disease
More than 30% of all herbicides sprayed anywhere contain glyphosate—the world’s bestselling weed killer. It was patented by Monsanto for use in their Roundup brand, which became more popular when they introduced “Roundup Ready” crops starting in 1996. These genetically modified (GM) plants, which now include soy, corn, cotton, canola, and sugar beets, have inserted genetic material from viruses and bacteria that allows the crops to withstand applications of normally deadly Roundup.
(Monsanto requires farmers who buy Roundup Ready seeds to only use the company’s Roundup brand of glyphosate. This has extended the company’s grip on the glyphosate market, even after its patent expired in 2000.)
The herbicide doesn’t destroy plants directly. It rather cooks up a unique perfect storm of conditions that revs up disease-causing organisms in the soil, and at the same time wipes out plant defenses against those diseases. The mechanisms are well-documented but rarely cited.
The glyphosate molecule grabs vital nutrients and doesn’t let them go. This process is called chelation and was actually the original property for which glyphosate was patented in 1964. It was only 10 years later that it was patented as an herbicide. When applied to crops, it deprives them of vital minerals necessary for healthy plant function—especially for resisting serious soilborne diseases. The importance of minerals for protecting against disease is well established. In fact, mineral availability was the single most important measurement used by several famous plant breeders to identify disease-resistant varieties.
Glyphosate annihilates beneficial soil organisms, such as Pseudomonas and Bacillus bacteria that live around the roots. Since they facilitate the uptake of plant nutrients and suppress disease-causing organisms, their untimely deaths means the plant gets even weaker and the pathogens even stronger.
The herbicide can interfere with photosynthesis, reduce water use efficiency, lower lignin , damage and shorten root systems, cause plants to release important sugars, and change soil pH—all of which can negatively affect crop health.
Glyphosate itself is slightly toxic to plants. It also breaks down slowly in soil to form another chemical called AMPA (aminomethylphosphonic acid) which is also toxic. But even the combined toxic effects of glyphosate and AMPA are not sufficient on their own to kill plants. It has been demonstrated numerous times since 1984
Glyphosate with sterile soil (A) only stunts plant growth. In normal soil (B), pathogens kill the plant. Control (C) shows normal growth.
· that when glyphosate is applied in sterile soil, the plant may be slightly stunted, but it isn’t killed (see photo).
The actual plant assassins, according to Purdue weed scientists and others, are severe disease-causing organisms present in almost all soils. Glyphosate dramatically promotes these, which in turn overrun the weakened crops with deadly infections.
“This is the herbicidal mode of action of glyphosate,” says Don. “It increases susceptibility to disease, suppresses natural disease controls such as beneficial organisms, and promotes virulence of soilborne pathogens at the same time.” In fact, he points out that “If you apply certain fungicides to weeds, it destroys the herbicidal activity of glyphosate!”
By weakening plants and promoting disease, glyphosate opens the door for lots of problems in the field. According to Don, “There are more than 40 diseases of crop plants that are reported to increase with the use of glyphosate, and that number keeps growing as people recognize the association between glyphosate and disease.”
Roundup promotes human and animal toxins
Photo by Robert Kremer
Some of the fungi promoted by glyphosate produce dangerous toxins that can end up in food and feed. Sudden Death Syndrome, for example, is caused by the Fusarium fungus. USDA scientist Robert Kremer found a 500% increase in Fusarium root infection of Roundup Ready soybeans when glyphosate is applied (see photos and chart). Corn, wheat, and many other plants can also suffer from serious Fusarium-based diseases.
But Fusarium’s wrath is not limited to plants. According to a report by the UN Food and Agriculture Organization, toxins from Fusarium on various types of food crops have been associated with disease outbreaks throughout history. They’ve “been linked to the plague epidemics” of medieval Europe, “large-scale human toxicosis in Eastern Europe,” oesophageal cancer in southern Africa and parts of China, joint diseases in Asia and southern Africa, and a blood disorder in Russia. Fusarium toxins have also been shown to cause animal diseases and induce infertility.
As Roundup use rises, plant disease skyrockets
When Roundup Ready crops were introduced in 1996, Monsanto boldly claimed that herbicide use would drop as a result. It did—slightly—for three years. But over the next 10 years, it grew considerably. Total herbicide use in the US jumped by a whopping 383 million pounds in the 13 years after GMOs came on the scene. The greatest contributor is Roundup.
Over time, many types of weeds that would once keel over with just a tiny dose of Roundup now require heavier and heavier applications. Some are nearly invincible. In reality, these super-weeds are resistant not to the glyphosate itself, but to the soilborne pathogens that normally do the killing in Roundup sprayed fields.
Having hundreds of thousands of acres infested with weeds that resist plant disease and weed killer has been devastating to many US farmers, whose first response is to pour on more and more Roundup. Its use is now accelerating. Nearly half of the huge 13-year increase in herbicide use took place in just the last 2 years. This has serious implications.
As US farmers drench more than 135 million acres of Roundup Ready crops with Roundup, plant diseases are enjoying an unprecedented explosion across America’s most productive crop lands. Don rattles off a lengthy list of diseases that were once under effective management and control, but are now creating severe hardship. (The list includes SDS and Corynespora root rot of soybeans, citrus variegated chlorosis (CVC), Fusarium wilt of cotton, Verticillium wilt of potato, take-all root, crown, and stem blight of cereals, Fusarium root and crown rot, Fusarium head blight, Pythium root rot and damping off, Goss’ wilt of corn, and many more.)
In Brazil, the new “Mad Soy Disease” is ravaging huge tracts of soybean acreage. Although scientists have not yet determined its cause, Don points out that various symptoms resemble a rice disease (bakanae) which is caused by Fusarium.
Corn dies young
In recent years, corn plants and entire fields in the Midwest have been dying earlier and earlier due to various diseases. Seasoned and observant farmers say they’re never seen anything like it.
“A decade ago, corn plants remained green and healthy well into September,” says Bob Streit, an agronomist in Iowa. “But over the last three years, diseases have turned the plants yellow, then brown, about 8 to 10 days earlier each season. In 2010, yellowing started around July 7th and yield losses were devastating for many growers.”
Bob and other crop experts believe that the increased use of glyphosate is the primary contributor to this disease trend. It has already reduced corn yields significantly. “If the corn dies much earlier,” says Bob, “it might collapse the corn harvest in the US, and threaten the food chain that it supports.”
A question of bugs
In addition to promoting plant diseases, which is well-established, spraying Roundup might also promote insects. That’s because many bugs seek sick plants. Scientists point out that healthy plants produce nutrients in a form that many insects cannot assimilate. Thus, farmers around the world report less insect problems among high quality, nutrient-dense crops. Weaker plants, on the other hand, create insect smorgasbords. This suggests that plants ravaged with diseases promoted by glyphosate may also attract more insects, which in turn will increase the use of toxic pesticides. More study is needed to confirm this.
Roundup persists in the environment
Monsanto used to boast that Roundup is biodegradable, claiming that it breaks down quickly in the soil. But courts in the US and Europe disagreed and found them guilty of false advertising. In fact, Monsanto’s own test data revealed that only 2% of the product broke down after 28 days.
Whether glyphosate degrades in weeks, months, or years varies widely due to factors in the soil, including pH, clay , types of minerals, residues from Roundup Ready crops, and the presence of the specialized enzymes needed to break down the herbicide molecule. In some conditions, glyphosate can grab hold of soil nutrients and remain stable for long periods. One study showed that it took up to 22 years for glyphosate to degrade only half its volume! So much for trusting Monsanto’s product claims.
Glyphosate can attack from above and below. It can drift over from a neighbors farm and wreak havoc. And it can even be released from dying weeds, travel through the soil, and then be taken up by healthy crops.
The amount of glyphosate that can cause damage is tiny. European scientists demonstrated that less than half an ounce per acre inhibits the ability of plants to take up and transport essential micronutrients (see chart).
As a result, more and more farmers are finding that crops planted in years after Roundup is applied suffer from weakened defenses and increased soilborne diseases. The situation is getting worse for many reasons.
The glyphosate concentration in the soil builds up season after season with each subsequent application.
Glyphosate can also accumulate for 6-8 years inside perennial plants like alfalfa, which get sprayed over and over.
Wheat affected after 10 years of glyphosate field applications.
Glyphosate residues in the soil that become bound and immobilized can be reactivated by the application of phosphate fertilizers or through other methods. Potato growers in the West and Midwest, for example, have experienced severe losses from glyphosate that has been reactivated.
Glyphosate can find its way onto farmland accidentally, through drifting spray, in contaminated water, and even through chicken manure!
Imagine the shock of farmers who spread chicken manure in their fields to add nutrients, but instead found that the glyphosate in the manure tied up nutrients in the soil, promoted plant disease, and killed off weeds or crops. Test results of the manure showed glyphosate/AMPA concentrations at a whopping 0.36-0.75 parts per million (ppm). The normal herbicidal rate of glyphosate is about 0.5 ppm/acre.
Manure from other animals may also be spreading the herbicide, since US livestock consume copious amounts of glyphosate—which accumulates in corn kernels and soybeans. If it isn’t found in livestock manure (or urine), that may be even worse. If glyphosate is not exiting the animal, it must be accumulating with every meal, ending up in our meat and possibly milk.
Add this threat to the already high glyphosate residues inside our own diets due to corn and soybeans, and we have yet another serious problem threatening our health. Glyphosate has been linked to sterility, hormone disruption, abnormal and lower sperm counts, miscarriages, placental cell death, birth defects, and cancer, to name a few. (See resource list on glyphosate health effects.)
Nutrient loss in humans and animals
The same nutrients that glyphosate chelates and deprives plants are also vital for human and animal health. These include iron, zinc, copper, manganese, magnesium, calcium, boron, and others. Deficiencies of these elements in our diets, alone or in combination, are known to interfere with vital enzyme systems and cause a long list of disorders and diseases.
Alzheimer’s, for example, is linked with reduced copper and magnesium. Don Huber points out that this disease has jumped 9000% since 1990.
Manganese, zinc, and copper are also vital for proper functioning of the SOD (superoxide dismustase) cycle. This is key for stemming inflammation and is an important component in detoxifying unwanted chemical compounds in humans and animals.
Glyphosate-induced mineral deficiencies can easily go unidentified and untreated. Even when laboratory tests are done, they can sometimes detect adequate mineral levels, but miss the fact that glyphosate has already rendered them unusable.
Glyphosate can tie up minerals for years and years, essentially removing them from the pool of nutrients available for plants, animals, and humans. If we combine the more than 135 million pounds of glyphosate-based herbicides applied in the US in 2010 with total applications over the past 30 years, we may have already eliminated millions of pounds of nutrients from our food supply.
This loss is something we simply can’t afford. We’re already suffering from progressive nutrient deprivation even without Roundup. In a UK study, for example, they found between 16-76% less nutrients in 1991, compared to levels in the same foods in 1940.
Livestock disease and mineral deficiency
Roundup Ready crops dominate US livestock feed. Soy and corn are most prevalent—93% of US soy and nearly 70% of corn are Roundup Ready. Animals are also fed derivatives of the other three Roundup Ready crops: canola, sugar beets, and cottonseed. Nutrient loss from glyphosate can therefore be severe.
This is especially true for manganese (Mn), which is not only chelated by glyphosate, but also reduced in Roundup Ready plants (see photo). One veterinarian finds low manganese in every livestock liver he measures. Another vet sent the liver of a stillborn calf out for testing. The lab report stated: No Detectible Levels of Manganese—in spite of the fact that the mineral was in adequate concentrations in his region. When that vet started adding manganese to the feed of a herd, disease rates dropped from a staggering 20% to less than ½%.
Veterinarians who started their practice after GMOs were introduced in 1996 might assume that many chronic or acute animal disorders are common and to be expected. But several older vets have stated flat out that animals have gotten much sicker since GMOs came on the scene. And when they switch livestock from GMO to non-GMO feed, the improvement in health is dramatic. Unfortunately, no one is tracking this, nor is anyone looking at the impacts of consuming milk and meat from GM-fed animals.
Alfalfa madness, brought to you by Monsanto and the USDA
As we continue to drench our fields with Roundup, the perfect storm gets bigger and bigger. Don asks the sobering question: “How much of the hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate that have been applied to our most productive farm soils over the past 30 years is still available to damage subsequent crops through its effects on nutrient availability, increased disease, or reduced nutrient of our food and feed?”
Instead of taking urgent steps to protect our land and food, the USDA just made plans to make things worse. In December they released their Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) on Roundup Ready alfalfa, which Monsanto hopes to reintroduce to the market.
Alfalfa is the fourth largest crop in the US, grown on 22 million acres. It is used primarily as a high protein source to feed dairy cattle and other ruminant animals. At present, weeds are not a big deal for alfalfa. Only 7% of alfalfa acreage is ever sprayed with an herbicide of any kind. If Roundup Ready alfalfa is approved, however, herbicide use would jump to unprecedented levels, and the weed killer of choice would of course be Roundup.
Even without the application of glyphosate, the nutritional quality of Roundup Ready alfalfa will be less, since Roundup Ready crops, by their nature, have reduced mineral . When glyphosate is applied, nutrient quality suffers even more (see chart).
The chance that Roundup would increase soilborne diseases in alfalfa fields is a near certainty. In fact, Alfalfa may suffer more than other Roundup Ready crops. As a perennial, it can accumulate Roundup year after year. It is a deep-rooted plant, and glyphosate leaches into sub soils. And “Fusarium is a very serious pathogen of alfalfa,” says Don. “So too are Phytophthora and Pythium,” both of which are promoted by glyphosate. “Why would you even consider jeopardizing the productivity and nutrient quality of the third most valuable crop in the US?” he asks in frustration, “especially since we have no way of removing the gene once it is spread throughout the alfalfa gene pool.”
It’s already spreading. Monsanto had marketed Roundup Ready alfalfa for a year, until a federal court declared its approval to be illegal in 2007. They demanded that the USDA produce an EIS in order to account for possible environmental damage. But even with the seeds taken off the market, the RR alfalfa that had already been planted has been contaminating non-GMO varieties. Cal/West Seeds, for example, discovered that more than 12% of their seed lots tested positive for contamination in 2009, up from 3% in 2008.
In their EIS, the USDA does acknowledge that genetically modified alfalfa can contaminate organic and non-GMO alfalfa, and that this could create economic hardship. They are even considering the unprecedented step of placing restrictions on RR alfalfa seed fields, requiring isolation distances. Experience suggests that this will slow down, but not eliminate GMO contamination. Furthermore, studies confirm that genes do transfer from GM crops into soil and soil organisms, and can jump into fungus through cuts on the surface of GM plants. But the EIS does not adequately address these threats and their implications.
Instead, the USDA largely marches lock-step with the biotech industry and turns a blind eye to the widespread harm that Roundup is already inflicting. If they decide to approve Monsanto’s alfalfa, the USDA may ultimately be blamed for a catastrophe of epic proportions.
Please send a letter to USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack, urging him not to approve Roundup Ready alfalfa, and to fully investigate the damage that Roundup and GMOs are already inflicting.
International bestselling author and filmmaker Jeffrey M. Smith is the executive director of the Institute for Responsible Technology. His first book, Seeds of Deception: Exposing Industry and Government Lies About the Safety of the Genetically Engineered Foods You're Eating, is the world's bestselling and #1 rated book on GMOs. His second, Genetic Roulette: The Documented Health Risks of Genetically Engineered Foods, documents 65 health risks of the GM foods Americans eat everyday. To help you choose healthier, non-GMO brands, use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide.
Betsy Bell's Health4U
www.HiHoHealth.com
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)