What Are the Dangers of Preservatives?

Manufacturers use preservatives in many products that people consume and depend on for health. Many companies also use them in cosmetics. The intent of preservative use is well-meaning, because they prevent botulism, mold and bacteria, which gives products a longer shelf life and protect people from illness. Unfortunately, many preservatives have dangerous side effects that cause cancers, hyperactivity, nervous system damage and other problems. It should be noted that many studies incorporate feeding massive amounts of a preservative to laboratory rats, so some preservatives consumed in small amounts may not be as dangerous as some studies suggest.

Sodium Benzoate
Many soda manufacturers use sodium benzoate to prevent mold. This chemical can damage mitochondria in cells, which leads to neuro-degenerative diseases. Professor Andrew Kemp from the University of Sydney mentions in an editorial for the May 24, 2008, edition of the "British Medical Journal" that children "were significantly more hyperactive after they ate a mixture of food colorings and a preservative [sodium benzoate]."

Health & Safety Support Policies, Risk Assessment, Training UK Wide. Prompt, reliable service www.PhoenixHSC.co.uk
Sponsored Links
Sodium Nitrate
Sodium nitrate, which is found in many packaged meats like hot dogs, sausages and bacon, is used as a curing agent. The curing of meats reduces the possibility for botulism-causing bacteria. Although MeatSafety.org, a website sponsored by the American Meat Institute trade association, says that sodium nitrate is "safe in the levels used" according to a study done by the U.S. National Toxicology Program, some studies link pancreatic and lung cancers to an increased consumption of meats containing sodium nitrate.

Propyl Gallate
Food manufacturers use propyl gallate as a stabilizer in packaged meats, dried milk, candy, potato chips and baked goods. It is also used in cosmetics and pharmaceuticals. The National Toxicology Program, an agency in the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, reports that this preservative causes prostate inflammation and tumors of the thyroid, brain and pancreas.

Thimerosal
Manufacturers of vaccines use thimerosal, which is 49.6 percent mercury, as a preservative to prevent the growth of microorganisms. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) documents that in 1999, the Public Health Service issued statements "urging vaccine manufacturers to reduce or eliminate thimerosal in vaccines as soon as possible." The National Network for Immunization Information cites that "mercury can interfere with the developing nervous system." Although thimerosal is no longer used in childhood vaccinations in the United States, it is still extensively used in many flu vaccinations.

Potassium Bromate
Many bread companies still use potassium bromate to strengthen bread dough. Although countries like Britain and Canada banned the preservative as a carcinogen because significant evidence shows that it causes cancerous kidney and thyroid tumors in rats, it is still found in some baked goods in the United States. Potassium bromate is especially dangerous if the food product is not baked long enough at a high enough temperature.

BHA & BHT
Food manufacturers use BHA (butylated hydroxyanisole) and BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) to prevent oxygenation. This keeps many breads and snack foods fresh for longer periods of time because the fats cannot turn rancid from exposure to oxygen. The Center for Science in the Public Interest cites studies which show that BHA causes cancer in animals. It also asserts that the safety of BHT is unproven.

Dangers of Irradiated foods

Irradiated herbs, seasonings and spices are exposed to HALF A BILLION chest X-ray's worth of gamma radiation. This information is clearly publicized by the USDA and FDA.

The FDA presently supports the use of Cobalt-60 culled from nuclear reactors on all domestically produced conventional food. The level of gamma-radiation used starts at 1 KiloGray -- equivalent to 16,700,000 chest x-rays -- and goes all the way up to 30KiloGray (500,000,000 chest x-rays or 10,000 times a human lethal dose).

According to Green Med Info:

“Despite the irresponsible promotion of this process as safe, food irradiation destroys much of the vitamin content of food, produces a number of toxic byproducts: formaldehyde, benzene, and formic acid, as well as unique radiolytic products, e.g. 2-alklycyclobutanoes, that have been demonstrated to be cytotoxic (damages cells), genotoxic (damages DNA), and carcinogenic (causes cancer) in test tube and animal studies.”
Sources:
Green Med Info June 20, 2011

Green Med Info

Nutrition and Cancer 2002;44(2):189-91

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry October 5, 2005;53(20):7826-31

Food and Chemical Toxicology December 2007;45(12):2581-91




You're probably well aware that certain foods, like milk and juices, at your grocery store are pasteurized -- a process that uses heat to kill off bacteria from your food, and in the process destroys nutrients and denatures the food. But you may not know that foods may also be irradiated -- a process that exposes your food to radiant energy, including gamma rays, electron beams and X-rays.

Irradiation was approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in 1963, and today is used on more than 40 food products dispersed throughout 37 countries. If this sounds a bit alarming to you, you are not alone. After nuclear disasters like the Fukushima meltdown in Japan, radiation poisoning to food is one of the primary health concerns. So how is it that food processors can expose your food to radiation on purpose, in the name of food safety?

Are There Health Risks to Eating Irradiated Food?
The FDA claims, "Irradiation is an important food safety tool in fighting foodborne illness," noting that the sources and amounts of radiation applied to foods are not strong enough to cause the food to become radioactive. They also state that "food irradiation does not significantly change the nutrient content, flavor, or texture of food." However, as Sayer Ji, found of GreenMedInfo.com, states:

"The FDA presently supports and actively promotes the use of Cobalt-60 culled from Nuclear Reactors as a form of "electronic pasteurization" on all domestically produced conventional food.

The use of euphemisms like "food additive" and "pasteurization" to describe the process of blasting food with high levels of gamma-radiation cannot obviate the fact that the very same death-rays generated by thermonuclear warfare to destroy life are now being applied to food to "make it safer" …

This is not a hypochondriac's rantings, as we aren't talking here about small amounts of radiation. The level of gamma-radiation used starts at 1KiloGray (equivalent to 16,700,000 chest x-rays or 333 times a human lethal dose) and goes all the way up to 30KiloGray (500,000,000 chest x-rays or 10,000 times a human lethal dose)."

As you might suspect, exposing food to the equivalent of hundreds of millions of x-rays does not appear to be an innocuous act. Alternatively, evidence to date suggests it may be having a detrimental effect on the health of those who consume it.

A New Class of Food Contaminants
2-alkylcyclobutanones (2-ACBs) are radiolytic derivatives of triglycerides found exclusively in irradiated food. The compounds are generated proportionally to fat content of the food and the dose of absorbed radiation.

Research in animals suggests the compounds may promote tumor growth and colon cancer, and studies show 2-alkylcyclobutanones are able to cross the intestinal barrier, enter into the bloodstream, and be stored in the fat tissue of an animal. The compounds have also been shown to be cytotoxic and genotoxic, which means they may damage cells and DNA, respectively. Studies on human cells also revealed potential cancer-causing effects, with researchers concluding "this compound may be regarded as a possible risk factor for processes in colon carcinogenesis related to initiation and progression."

More Reasons to be Wary of Irradiation
Needless to say, the research to date is raising major red flags that irradiation is NOT as safe as food safety officials would have you believe. In addition to the formation of potentially toxic 2-ACBs, irradiation leads to the formation of furan from ascorbic acid, fructose, sucrose, or glucose. Furan in foods has been linked to liver toxicity, including carcinogenicity.

Another study found that cats developed "mysterious" and "remarkable" severe neurological dysfunction, including movement disorders, vision loss and paralysis, after being fed a diet of irradiated foods during gestation. When they were taken off the irradiated foods, they slowly recovered. This is a major clue that irradiated foods deserve some serious regulatory scrutiny, but unfortunately they have already infiltrated the food system. And it's not as though this concerning evidence was just recently brought to light. One paper on potential dangers, prepared for the meeting of the Joint FAO/IAEA/WHO Expert Committee on Irradiated Food, dates back to 1969. The author stated:

" … irradiation can bring about chemical transformations in food and food components resulting in the formation of potential mutagens."

Does Irradiation Actually Mask Filthy Food Production?
The FDA is quick to state that "Irradiation is not a substitute for good sanitation and process control in meat and poultry plants. It is an added layer of safety." But it is, in essence, a tool to wipe out bacteria, parasites and other potential pathogens that linger in food. This means food manufacturers have an out of sorts … After all, they're going to nuke everything later anyway, so why go to the trouble of actually growing your food in sanitary conditions to begin with?

Irradiation is essentially a very effective medium for masking filthy conditions in slaughterhouses and food processing plants. The foundational solution to this problem lies in preventing contamination at the source -- on the farm, during processing and shipping, and so on -- not in wiping out pathogens later using questionable technological interventions like radiation! There simply shouldn't be any need for irradiation, as there simply shouldn't be E. coli in your lettuce or Salmonella in your poultry in the first place.

So why is there?

Our "global food system," which encourages farming on a massive scale, poses steep problems for food safety. Not only can one batch of contaminated spinach or peppers easily sicken people across an entire country, but it's very difficult to trace a contaminated food back to its source … and even harder to then pinpoint the source of the contamination.

Public health agencies like the FDA use the term "field-to-fork continuum" to describe the path any given food takes on the way to your plate, and during any of the following steps, contamination is possible:

•Open field production
•Harvesting
•Field packing
•Greenhouse production
•Packinghouse or field packing
•Repacking and other distribution operations
•Fresh-cut/value-added processing
•Food service and retail
•Consumer
As you can see, the more steps your food goes through before it reaches your plate, the greater your chances of contamination becomes.

But again, the solution is not to subject your foods to radiation to make them "safe" … they should be safe from the get-go, and this is one of the primary reasons why I encourage you to think long and hard about the sources of your food. If you are able to get your food directly from the field or after harvest, such as directly from a farmer or farmer's market, you knock out five potential operations that could expose your food to contamination, not to mention you'll have assurance the food has not been irradiated.

Do You Want to Avoid Irradiated Foods?
In the United States, the following foods may be irradiated:

Fresh meat and poultry (including whole or cut up birds, skinless poultry, pork chops, roasts, stew meat, liver, hamburgers, ground meat, and ground poultry) Wheat and wheat powder White potatoes
Many spices Dry vegetable seasonings Fresh shell eggs
Fresh produce


Fortunately, the FDA currently requires that irradiated foods include labeling with the statement "treated with radiation" or "treated by irradiation" and the international symbol for irradiation, the radura:



However, there are exceptions:

•Irradiated meat used in another product (such as sausage) does not have to contain the radura image on the package (it does have to list irradiated meat in the ingredients, though).
•Restaurants are not required to disclose the use of irradiated foods. So be aware that any time you eat out, you have no way of knowing if your food has been irradiated.
You can also avoid irradiation by choosing locally grown, organic foods as much as possible. Certified organic foods may not be irradiated, and foods from a small, local farm are unlikely to be either. So, as I've said many times before, supporting the small farmers in your area and, as much as possible, getting your food from these types of high-quality, small-scale local sources is one of the simplest ways to access pure, unadulterated food.





Related Links:
Irradiated Food Causes Brain Damage

FDA Allows Irradiation of Produce

What are the Most Common Food Infections?

90 Year-Old Powerful Natural Cancer Therapy You've Probably Never Heard Of

If you're a regular reader, you're probably well aware of the link between the foods you eat and your risk of cancer. But for those of you who may be just joining us, suffice to say that virtually everything you put into (or onto) your body can either help or hinder your natural healing mechanisms, and thereby influence your risk of cancer.

This is not an "alternative" view at all. Rather, even the conservative American Cancer Society states that one-third of cancer deaths are linked to poor diet, physical inactivity, and carrying excess weight.

Once you understand this, it is not a stretch to embrace the teachings of the Gerson Therapy, which has helped thousands of people recover from so-called incurable diseases, including cancer.

What is The Gerson Therapy?
The Gerson Therapy, developed by Dr. Max Gerson in the 1920s, is focused on the concept that you have the power to heal yourself, and it uses non-toxic methods, including organic foods, juicing, detoxification and supplements, to activate this healing potential.

As stated by the non-profit Gerson Institute:

"The Gerson Therapy is a powerful, natural treatment that boosts your body's own immune system to heal cancer, arthritis, heart disease, allergies, and many other degenerative diseases. One aspect of the Gerson Therapy that sets it apart from most other treatment methods is its all-encompassing nature.

An abundance of nutrients from thirteen fresh, organic juices are consumed every day, providing your body with a superdose of enzymes, minerals and nutrients. These substances then break down diseased tissue in the body, while enemas aid in eliminating the lifelong buildup of toxins from the liver. With its whole-body approach to healing, the Gerson Therapy naturally reactivates your body's magnificent ability to heal itself - with no damaging side-effects."

The Gerson Research Organization maintains a collection of reports documenting the research behind the Gerson Therapy as well as the role of diet on cancer, and you can hear anecdotes from patients who have improved using the therapy in the video above, as well as read case studies here.

Many of the success stories include people whose conventional doctors gave no hope for recovery, who were able to overcome their disease against all odds using not toxic cancer drugs but natural fruits and vegetables. The system is not a miracle cure for everyone, and even the Gerson Institute states that "No treatment works for everyone, every time" … but most conventional physicians offer only ONE route for cancer treatment -- drugs, radiation and surgery -- while ignoring or discounting alternative options such as this.

The Problem with Conventional Cancer Treatment
Unfortunately, the leading cancer treatments in the United States are notoriously toxic and come with devastating, including lethal, side effects. Conventional medicine is so desperate to give the illusion of fighting the good fight that many of these drugs are used despite the fact that they're not really doing much to prolong or improve the quality of life of those diagnosed with cancer.

The best-selling (and extremely expensive) cancer drug Avastin, for example, was recently phased out as a treatment for metastatic breast cancer after studies concluded its benefits were outweighed by its dangerous side effects. Treating a disease that is in large part caused by toxins with toxins seems ignorant at best.

Cancer is, by and large, mostly a man-made disease, the tragic result of humans veering too far off course and avoiding health-sustaining diets and activities, while embracing a highly unnatural sedentary, stress-filled lifestyle with exposure to excess chemicals around every corner.

Among the primary culprits fueling our cancer epidemic are:

Pesticide- and other chemical exposures Processed and artificial foods (plus the chemicals in the packaging) Wireless technologies, dirty electricity, and medical diagnostic radiation exposure
Pharmaceutical drugs Obesity, stress, and poor sleeping habits Lack of sunshine exposure and use of sunscreens


I strongly believe that cancer rates are escalating because modern medicine is in no way, shape or form addressing these underlying causes of most cancers. Instead, most of the research is directed toward expensive drugs that target late stages of the disease and greatly pad the drug companies' wallets -- but simply do not prevent or "cure" cancer.

If ever there was an area in which an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure it is cancer. I strongly believe that if you are able to work your way up to the advanced health plan, you will virtually eliminate the risk of most cancers.

This is what sets the Gerson Therapy apart from conventional cancer treatments as well. Even though there are some aspects of this program that conflict with my own views, such as the consumption of fruits and fruit juices, there is no doubt that it is far less toxic than most conventional treatments. And, unlike chemotherapy and cancer drugs, it is seeking to address the underlying systemic causes of cancer and activate your body's ability to heal itself.

Why Haven't You Heard of the Gerson Therapy?
Some of you may have heard of the Gerson Therapy, but the vast majority have not. In fact, most alternative cancer treatments are belittled, discredited or completely ignored by the mainstream press and public health agencies.

Why?

Most public health organizations are bought and paid for by the very same companies whose products contribute to cancer … or are heavily financed by the cancer drug industry. This includes even generally well respected organizations like the American Cancer Society.

In the report titled American Cancer Society —More Interested In Accumulating Wealth Than Saving Lives, Dr. Samuel S. Epstein, chairman of the Cancer Prevention Coalition, plainly lays to bare the many conflicts of interest that hamper the effectiveness of this organization.

For example, the ACS has close financial ties to both makers of mammography equipment and cancer drugs. But that's just for starters. Other conflicts of interest include ties to, and financial support from, the pesticide-, petrochemical-, biotech-, cosmetics-, and junk food industries—again the very industries whose products are the primary contributors to cancer!

Once you realize that these conflicts of interest are there, it becomes quite easy to understand why the ACS never addresses the environmental components of cancer, and why information about avoidable toxic exposures are so conspicuously absent from their National Breast Cancer Awareness campaigns.

"This is no accident," Dr. Epstein writes. "Zeneca Pharmaceuticals--a spin-off of Imperial Chemical Industries is one of the world's largest manufacturers of chlorinated and other industrial chemicals, including those incriminated as causes of breast cancer.

Zeneca has also been the sole multimillion-dollar funder of the National Breast Cancer Awareness Month since its inception in 1984, besides the sole manufacturer of Tamoxifen, the world's top-selling anticancer and breast cancer "prevention" drug, with $400 million in annual sales. Furthermore, Zeneca recently assumed direct management of 11 cancer centers in U.S. hospitals. Zeneca owns a 50 percent stake in these centers known collectively as Salick Health Care."

It's no small irony that the cancer drug Tamoxifen has been found to cause cancer and increase risk of death, while several top-notch preventive strategies and many safe and effective cancer treatments are ignored.

The ACS, along with the National Cancer Institute, virtually exclusively focus on cancer research and the diagnosis and chemical treatment of cancer. Preventive strategies, such as avoiding chemical exposures, and potential cures, such as the Gerson Therapy, Dr. Nick Gonzalez's nutritional approach or medical marijuana, receive virtually no consideration at all.

My Top 12 Tips for Cancer Prevention
Cancer is devastating far too many families and taking many way before their time. It's time to fight back and take control of your health by following the cancer-preventive lifestyle changes below.

Avoid Fructose and Sugar

It's quite clear that if you want to avoid cancer, or are currently undergoing cancer treatment, you absolutely MUST avoid all forms of sugar -- especially fructose -- and this is largely due to its relation to insulin resistance.

According to Lewis Cantley, director of the Cancer Center at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center at Harvard Medical School, as much as 80 percent of all cancers are "driven by either mutations or environmental factors that work to enhance or mimic the effect of insulin on the incipient tumor cells," Gary Taubes reports.

Some cancer centers, such as the Cancer Centers of America, have fully embraced this knowledge and place their patients on strict low-sugar, low-grain diets. But conventional medicine in general has been woefully lax when it comes to highlighting the health dangers of this additive.

As a standard recommendation, I strongly advise keeping your TOTAL fructose consumption below 25 grams per day including fruits. But for most people it would also be wise to limit your fructose from fruit to 15 grams or less, as you're virtually guaranteed to consume "hidden" sources of fructose if you drink beverages other than water and eat processed food.
Optimize Vitamin D

There's overwhelming evidence pointing to the fact that vitamin D deficiency plays a crucial role in cancer development. Researchers within this field have estimated that about 30 percent of cancer deaths -- which amounts to 2 million worldwide and 200,000 in the United States -- could be prevented each year simply by optimizing the vitamin D levels in the general population.

On a personal level, you can decrease your risk of cancer by MORE THAN HALF simply by optimizing your vitamin D levels with sun exposure. And if you are being treated for cancer it is likely that higher blood levels—probably around 80-90 ng/ml—would be beneficial.

If the notion that sun exposure actually prevents cancer is still new to you, I highly recommend you watch my one-hour vitamin D lecture to clear up any confusion. It's important to understand that the risk of skin cancer from the sun comes only from excessive exposure.
Exercise

If you are like most people, when you think of reducing your risk of cancer, exercise doesn't immediately come to mind. However, there is some fairly compelling evidence that exercise can slash your risk of cancer. One of the primary ways exercise lowers your risk for cancer is by reducing elevated insulin levels, which creates a low sugar environment that discourages the growth and spread of cancer cells.

For example, physically active adults experience about half the incidence of colon cancer as their sedentary counterparts, and women who exercise regularly may reduce their breast cancer risk by 20 to 30 percent compared to those who are inactive.

It's important to include a large variety of techniques in your exercise routine, such as strength training, aerobics, core-building activities, and stretching. Most important of all, however, is to make sure you include high-intensity, burst-type exercise, such as Peak 8.

These exercises activate your super-fast twitch muscle fibers, which can increase your body's natural production of human growth hormone. For detailed instructions, please see this previous article.
Get appropriate amounts of high quality animal-based omega-3 fats.
Eat according to your nutritional type. The potent anti-cancer effects of this principle are very much underappreciated. When we treat cancer patients in our clinic this is one of the most powerful anti-cancer strategies we have.
Have a tool to permanently erase the neurological short-circuiting that can activate cancer genes. Even the CDC states that 85 percent of disease is caused by emotions. It is likely that this factor may be more important than all the other physical ones listed here, so make sure this is addressed. My particular favorite tool for this purpose, as you may know, is the Emotional Freedom Technique.
Only 25 percent of people eat enough vegetables, so by all means eat as many vegetables as you are comfortable with. Ideally, they should be fresh and organic. Cruciferous vegetables in particular have been identified as having potent anti-cancer properties. Remember that carb nutritional types may need up to 300 percent more vegetables than protein nutritional types.
Maintain an ideal body weight.
Get appropriate amounts of high-quality sleep.
Reduce your exposure to environmental toxins like pesticides, household chemical cleaners, synthetic air fresheners and air pollution.
Reduce your use of cell phones and other wireless technologies, and implement as many safety strategies as possible if/when you cannot avoid their use.
Boil, poach or steam your foods, rather than frying or charbroiling them. Better yet eat as many of your foods raw as you can.
Looking for Alternative Cancer Treatment?
Only you can determine what type of treatment to seek if you are struggling with cancer; if alternative treatments make sense to you, please be sure to listen to my interview with Dr. Nick Gonzalez, a physician focused on alternative cancer treatment using a three-pronged nutritional approach similar to the Gerson Therapy.

You can also view the highly popular video of Dr. Burzynski and article that we ran three weeks ago, which now has half a million views.

The Stunning Effect of This Single Vitamin on CANCER...

What if a cure for cancer has been right here all along? What if the very agency charged with protecting your health is the one keeping you from that cure?

A Lawless, Rogue Agency Out of Control
Ten years ago a former New York State assemblyman, Daniel Haley, wrote a scathing exposé on how the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) systematically shuts the door on effective and non-toxic products, many for cancer.

The FDA is the chief agency in charge of protecting and promoting Americans' health and safety. But in 10 stunning, true stories in his book, "The Politics of Healing," Haley describes how the FDA has suppressed and banned natural health cures – eight of them for cancer. He later wrote about two additional cancer cures that worked, which the FDA also disallowed.

The FDA even admitted that one of these treatments, discovered by Dr. Stanislaw Burzynski, was successful with some of the most incurable forms of cancer. I shared this with you in a recent article that showed his film, but stories like this are far too common, and you can't help but wonder how many people have died while the FDA denied them cancer treatments that work.

Haley brazenly calls the FDA a rogue, out of control agency that has lied in Congressional testimonies, deliberately falsified data, and destroyed evidence to prohibit cures like Burzynki's from coming to market. The FDA's loyalties are to the drug industry, not to individuals, Haley says.

His claims mirror those of Dr. David Graham, who once worked in the FDA's Office of Drug Safety. In 2004 Dr. Graham blew the whistle on six drugs that were harming people, including Vioxx, but instead of acting on his warnings, Graham's superiors pulled him off his job. He fought back in a PBS television special when he told how he'd been chastised at the FDA for thinking the FDA served the public. The "FDA is there to serve the drug industry," Graham said his supervisors told him.

'Virtually Every' Drug Company Now Targeting Cancer Therapies
Today, the FDA continues to serve its client, Big Pharma, by making sure that toxic chemotherapy, along with surgery and radiation, are the only cancer treatment options legally available to you. This industry is huge, with 139 cancer treatment drugs in the pipeline just for women alone. All told there are over 900 experimental cancer therapies under investigation. No wonder so many pharmaceutical companies are ramping up their cancer drug research!

According to the New York Times:

"Virtually every large pharmaceutical company seems to have discovered cancer, and a substantial portion of the smaller biotechnology companies are focused on it as well. Together, the companies are pouring billions of dollars into developing cancer drugs."

Note they said drugs, not cures. That's because this industry isn't set up for a cure, even though they say that's what they're looking for. It's also why economic forecasts predict 20 million new cancers by 2025, with the $50 billion-a-year cancer treatment business increasing by 15 percent a year. Pfizer alone projects its annual cancer drug returns will be $11 billion by 2018.

The Truth about Vitamin D
Everyone's talking about vitamin D right now, especially since the Institute of Medicine's Food and Nutrition Board (FNB) updated their recommended dietary allowance (RDA) for it. The truth is that most Americans are deficient in vitamin D, and studies show that vitamin D supplementation can both prevent and kill many infections and diseases, including cancer.

Vitamin D isn't actually a vitamin, although scientists refer to it as such. It's actually a steroid hormone that you get from sun exposure, food sources and/or supplementation. The term refers to either vitamin D2 or D3, but according to the National Vitamin D Council, D3 (chemical name 25-hydroxy vitamin D) is real vitamin D, and is the same substance produced naturally through your skin by sun exposure.

Older research appears at odds on whether your body cares which form of D it's getting. But a study in the January 2011 Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism found that D3 is 87 percent more effective than D2, and is the preferred form for treating vitamin D deficiency. It's measured in international units (IU's) in nanograms per milliliter, or ng/mL. The Vitamin D Council believes that a person's D3 levels should be at least 50 ng/mLfor your body to function properly. (To determine whether you might be deficient, you need to get your vitamin D levels tested, and ideally, you'll want to get tested regularly thereafter to ensure you're maintaining optimal levels year-round.)

Fourteen famous vitamin D researchers gave the FNB this information, but the FNB apparently ignored the information that the researchers presented because their "updated" RDA levels ended up being so pitifully low that it's doubtful it can significantly impact Americans' deficiency, let alone fight off diseases like cancer and heart disease.

Experts Protest 'Impossible' New RDA Levels
Depending on your age, the new recommendations are 600 to 800 IUs a day for adults and between zero and 600 IUs a day for children. The FNB also said that taking vitamin D in amounts of 10,000 IUs or more could be dangerous – but that's ridiculous, seeing that a 30-minute dose of sunshine can give an adult more than 10,000 IUs! Since countless studies indicate that much higher levels of vitamin D are required for optimal health, it's no surprise that experts lost no time denouncing the FNB's recommendations.

"It's almost impossible to significantly raise your vitamin D levels when supplementing (at the FNB levels)," the Vitamin D Council posted on its website.

Hidden Agendas and Conflicts of Interest
Suspecting that conflicts of interest and hidden agendas played a part in this, the Vitamin D Council filed Freedom of Information (FOIA) requests so they could examine the FNB's notes on the process. They're still waiting on an answer, but I'm wondering if it doesn't have something to do with the fact that over 1,350 clinical trials on vitamin D are currently being conducted by major drug companies, all based on the prevention or cure of many illnesses and diseases, including 388 for cancer.

Yes, cancer.

From breast to prostate, to colorectal to brain cancers, and even basal cell carcinoma (skin cancer), Drug companies such as Pfizer and Merck are currently either sponsoring or collaborating on clinical trials based on the premise that vitamin D administered orally, intravenously or topically (for skin cancer) may either prevent or cure cancer. Cancer foundations and institutes are all in on the clinical study game as well, such as the National Cancer Institute and the National Institutes of Health. Even the U.S. Department of Defense and the Department of Veteran Affairs are studying ways to prevent and cure cancer with vitamin D!

What's really interesting is that several of these studies are using vitamin D in amounts of 50,000 IUs a day or more – which flies strongly in the face of the FNB's claims that self-supplementing with 10,000 could be dangerous to your health. Since recent studies show that supplements of up to 40,000 IUs a day don't appear to be toxic, and that doses as low as 400 IUs a day are too low to even maintain skeletal health, let alone prevent cancer,

The FDA's Definition of Drug vs. Supplement
Over 800 studies already show that vitamin D could have cancer-prevention and/or treatment possibilities. But the problem is that it's a natural substance that can't be patented as a simple supplement, meaning there's no real revenue in it, compared to a prescription brand drug. That's why many drug studies involving vitamins of any kind hinge on how the FDA defines drugs and supplements.

A drug is defined as a product meant for the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of a disease. A supplement is defined as a product that is meant to simply "supplement" or "enhance" a normal diet within the daily allowances recommended by the FDA. Drugs – and retailers who sell supplements are not allowed to tell you that vitamin D can possibly "prevent, mitigate or cure" cancer without having the FDA accuse them of selling a drug that hasn't been approved through the proper FDA process.

Again, Follow the Money if You Want to Know the Truth
That process of getting a drug to market costs an average $359 million and takes nearly 10 years– with a good portion of the money going directly to the FDA through user fees. Over the years these fees have become a major funding source for the FDA. What drug companies get in return is faster FDA reviews and drug approvals.

As a result, a kind of you-scratch-my-back-I'll-scratch-yours scenario has ensued, with drug companies maintaining major leverage over the FDA when it comes to protecting their revenue sources, including making sure the $60 billion-a-year supplement business doesn't get in the way of drug sales. The history of FDA laws and regulations on file at Harvard Law School, explains how years ago an FDA task force long ago established this policy

"… to ensure that the presence of dietary supplements on the market does not act as a disincentive to drug development."

So how does this relate to too-low RDA levels for vitamin D?

A look at the clinical trials shows that most of them involve "high-potency" D3 supplements, which puts them in the drug category if it turns out they can mitigate, treat or cure cancer. And that means they can be patented – and sold to you as prescriptions at sky-high prices.

Drug Companies Are Elbowing Their Way into Your Healthcare Plan
Another way that Big Pharma has moved in on the cancer industry is through pharmacy benefit managers (PBMs), which administer drug benefits for about 95 percent of all patients with prescription drug coverage. PBMs decide which drugs flow through the healthcare system. Supposedly they choose the best drugs and prices for your plan. But what if I told you that the businesses that sell the drugs have been helping to decide which drugs your PBM pays for?

Regulators have been working hard to nip conflicts of interest in the bud, but over the years numerous court cases have shown that drug companies and PBMs working together has led to higher prices and limited drug choices – and allegations of price-setting through secret deals with pharmaceutical companies.

Official Agencies Wedded to Toxic Chemotherapy
I have an employee who was diagnosed with breast cancer last year. After her mastectomy, she was told she had several months of chemotherapy and radiation ahead of her. But she sought a second opinion at a renowned cancer treatment center – and learned that chemotherapy was NOT going to be part of her treatment plan because her type of cancer doesn't respond to chemotherapy.

"And since chemo is poison, why would we want to poison you for no reason?" the oncologist told her.

That's right – a person in the business of "selling" cancer treatment actually said he wasn't going to poison her "for no reason" – something I consider unusual in an industry that is wedded to toxic chemotherapy. The employee was pronounced cancer-free four months later, without chemo or radiation, which may leave you wondering, as it did me, how many patients die every year from toxic chemotherapy they got but didn't need?

Some experts believe that as much as 25 percent, or more, of patients who undergo chemotherapy are killed by it. Dr. Vincent Speckhart, a former U.S. Air Force flight surgeon and oncologist, was so concerned about deaths from chemo that he told a Congressional committee:

"After 13 years of using FDA-approved chemotherapy protocols, I concluded that such therapies were extremely toxic, poorly tolerated, and not effective in prolonging survival in most solid tumors of adults. In 1983, my patients began to request therapies other than chemotherapy. I agreed, and without even knowing it, I became an 'alternative practitioner' and was red-flagged by opponents of this form of therapy."

In other words, if you're a physician who divorces the status quo of cancer treatment, you'd better watch out. In his book, Haley talks about how this "gross government intrusion into the healing arts," costs thousands – and perhaps millions – of lives and facilitates the drug industry by squelching people like Dr. Speckhart and Burzynski.

Arm Yourself with Knowledge to Protect Your Healthcare Freedom
It doesn't help that the FDA as well as other "official cancer medicine" agencies have a swinging door of employees going back forth between the agency and Big Pharma to work. In a new book, "National Cancer Institute and American Cancer Society: Criminal Indifference to Cancer Prevention and Conflicts of Interest," former Cancer Prevention Coalition president Dr. Samuel S. Epstein shows just how bad the conflicts are.

Quoting former NCI director Samuel Broder, Epstein says "the NCI has become a government pharmaceutical company." And the ACS, Epstein says, is more interested in "accumulating wealth than saving lives." With close ties to cancer treatment businesses, the ACS has a track record that "clearly reflects conflicts of interest" when it comes to cancer treatment policies and prevention strategies, Epstein alleges.

And so it goes… So, what you can do to protect yourself from getting cancer, or what can you do if you already have it? The good news is that knowledge is power, and there are things you can do for yourself, right now, not to only to prevent cancer, but to make sure you have the right cancer treatment if you do get it.

Because cancer is almost wholly a man-made disease, it's especially important to recognize that you do have power over many things that could cause you to get cancer. Taking control of your health will put you in a position to make the best health decisions possible if you do get cancer.

Here's a list to get you started on a cancer prevention plan:

Normalize your vitamin D levels with safe amounts of sun exposure. This works primarily by optimizing your vitamin D level. Ideally, monitor your vitamin D levels throughout the year.
Control your insulin levels by limiting your intake of processed foods and sugars/fructose as much as possible.
Get appropriate amounts of animal-based omega-3 fats.
Get appropriate exercise. One of the primary reasons exercise works is that it drives your insulin levels down. Controlling insulin levels is one of the most powerful ways to reduce your cancer risks.
Eat according to your nutritional type. The potent anti-cancer effects of this principle are very much underappreciated. When we treat cancer patients in our clinic this is one of the most powerful anti-cancer strategies we have.
Have a tool to permanently erase the neurological short-circuiting that can activate cancer genes. Even the CDC states that 85 percent of disease is caused by emotions. It is likely that this factor may be more important than all the other physical ones listed here, so make sure this is addressed. My particular favorite tool for this purpose, as you may know, is the Emotional Freedom Technique.
Only 25 percent of people eat enough vegetables, so by all means eat as many vegetables as you are comfortable with. Ideally, they should be fresh and organic. Cruciferous vegetables in particular have been identified as having potent anti-cancer properties. Remember that carb nutritional types may need up to 300 percent more vegetables than protein nutritional types.
Maintain an ideal body weight.
Get enough high-quality sleep.
Reduce your exposure to environmental toxins like pesticides, household chemical cleaners, synthetic air fresheners and air pollution.
Reduce your use of cell phones and other wireless technologies, and implement as many safety strategies as possible if/when you cannot avoid their use.
Boil, poach or steam your foods, rather than frying or charbroiling them.
You also can help by voicing your opposition to the FDA's censorship of alternative cancer treatments by sending a letter to your Congressional representatives and asking them to support H.R. 1364, a bill to amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act concerning the distribution of information on legitimate scientific research in connection with foods and dietary supplements. Call or write your Congressman now, and stop the censorship of your right to alternative cancer therapies and possibly a cure.

The Western World Needs Moringa Too.

“Why doesn’t everybody in the world already know about this?”



This is a common reaction that people have when they discover the astounding nutritional benefits of Moringa.



According to recent nutrition studies, Moringa ranks among the top natural products in providing nutrition, vitamins, antioxidants as well as vital proteins. The Moringa plants comes from the Moringa tree founds, among other regions in the world, in the Indian subcontinent.



In India, the Moringa plant has had a long history of success according to India’s age-old medicinal tradition known as Ayurveda (meaning “the science of life”). Ayurveda texts note that the Moringa plant contains more than 90 different kinds of nutrients.



While Moringa has as yet been little known to American audience, many civilizations across the globe have turned to the Moringa plant for sustenance and as remedies for ailments. Above of all, this plant is also known to maintain good health.



PER 1 GRAM



Vitamin C As much as 7 Oranges - An antioxidant required for at least 300 metabolic functions in the body. X7

Vitamin A – as much as 4 Carrot - Important for eyes, skin, bone health, and more. X4

Vitamin B – as much as 4 servings of Pork - Maintains health of nerves, liver, muscles, brain, and more. X4

Vitamin E – as much as 4 servings of Black Sesame - Prevents cell damage, oxidation, and more. X4

Calcium – as much as 4 servings of Milk - Vital for strong bones, teeth, transmission of nerve impulses, and more. X4

Protein – as much as 2 servings of Yogurt - Necessary for growth, development, proper acid-alkali balance, and more. X2

Potassium – as much as 3 Bananas - Important for healthy nervous system, regular heart rhythm, and more. X3

Zinc – as much as 2 Oysters - Promotes healthy immune system, healing of wounds, reproductive health, and more. X2

GABA – more than 30 servings of Brown Rice - Gamma-Amino butyric Acid, an amino acid, is needed for proper brain function and more. X30

Polyphenol – more than 8 servings of Red Wine or 11 servings of Dark Chocolate - Plant compounds that have antioxidant properties to scavenge free radicals and more. X8

Why Do Vegetables Become Contaminated in the First Place?

The foundational solution to this problem lies in preventing it at the source -- on the farm, during processing and shipping, and so on. There simply shouldn't be E. coli in your lettuce or Salmonella in your tomatoes.

So why is there?

Our "global food system," which encourages farming on a massive scale, poses steep problems for food safety. Not only can one batch of contaminated spinach or peppers easily sicken people across an entire country, but it's very difficult to trace a contaminated food back to its source … and even harder to then pinpoint the source of the contamination.

Public health agencies like the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) use the term "field-to-fork continuum" to describe the path any given food takes on the way to your plate, and during any of the following steps, contamination is possible:

Open field production
Harvesting
Field packing
Greenhouse production
Packinghouse or field packing
Repacking and other distribution operations
Fresh-cut/value-added processing
Food service and retail
Consumer
As you can see, the more steps your food goes through before it reaches your plate, the greater your chances of contamination becomes. If you are able to get your food directly from the field or after harvest, such as directly from a farmer or farmer's market, you knock out five potential operations that could expose your food to contamination.

There is, of course, also potential for contamination directly in the farm field.

For instance, the 2006 spinach scare that sickened hundreds across the United States was initially blamed on wild pigs that spread E. coli bacteria by trampling fences around a spinach field in California. But it was also suggested that other sources may have been to blame, specifically contaminated water including runoff, flooding or irrigation water.

Even the FDA notes that the best solution to food-borne illness resulting from fresh produce lies in preventing it at the source:

"Once fresh produce has been contaminated, removing or killing the microbial pathogens while maintaining the fresh attribute of the produce is very difficult. Prevention of microbial contamination at all steps in the field-to-fork continuum is preferable to treatment to eliminate contamination after it has occurred."

The Agency has developed draft guidance intended to reduce the contamination potential for tomatoes, melons and leafy greens, but these suggestions either do not go far enough or are not being followed by food producers, as contamination is still occurring. Further, there are countless other produce items being grown with little regard for food safety, and the risk that a contaminated pepper or tomato could wind up on your dinner plate remains omnipresent.

Does Washing Your Produce Make it Safe?
The FDA offered seven basic tips to help clean your fruits and veggies, and one of them was to wash produce under plain running water.

But is this actually helpful?

Well, washing under running water will certainly do away with grime and visible dirt on the surface, but this isn't necessarily the source of contamination. Rather, most pathogenic bacteria are going to be invisible, and they can at times exist inside the plant, where no amount of washing can touch them.

Further, microbes on fruits and veggies often form into tightly knit packs called biofilms. Salmonella, E. coli and other types of infectious bacteria live together in biofilms to stay out of harm's way, and once attached they can be difficult to remove, especially on produce with rough surfaces, such as spinach or cantaloupe.

On the other hand, washing your produce will help to remove some pesticides. So if you buy conventionally grown produce, I do recommend you wash it in clean water, not so much to remove bacteria but to help take off some pesticides. (It won't remove them all, but it may help).

The other issue is that most produce is waxed after harvest to withstand the long journey to market and to protect against the many hands that touch it.

Wax seals in pesticide residues and debris, which make them even more difficult to remove with just water. To reach the contaminants buried beneath the surface of your vegetables and fruits, you need a cleanser that also removes the wax, which is what my fruit and vegetable wash does.

In some cases, removing the peel may also help to get rid of bacteria, but keep in mind that often the skin is where the majority of the nutrients are so you'll want to eat it for optimal nutrition.

Many may know that I have not been very fond of alkaline water makers in the past. While I am still opposed to some of the large multi-level brands, I have been more carefully evaluating their claims and have actually been very impressed with the ACID water they produce. Most of the units can either create alkaline or acid water. The acid water is not designed for drinking but it is an excellent cleaning and sterilizing agent and may be the ideal way to clean any contaminated vegetables.

These units are typically well over $1,000 though so it would not make sense to purchase one for this purpose but if you have one you certainly could use it for that. If you don't then a high-quality vegetable wash, like the one we carry, would be more cost effective.

One FDA "Tip" to Ignore: Irradiation
In 2008 the FDA published a final rule allowing the use of irradiation on fresh iceberg lettuce and spinach. They call this a "safe measure for safer" produce, but dousing your veggies with ionizing radiation, which is what irradiation is, is nothing more than a last-ditch attempt by the FDA to make their supervision and certification of the crumbling food system appear safe.

This way, agribusiness can continue to grow and process spinach and lettuce in the filthiest conditions imaginable, and it will still be perfectly safe for you to eat it, thanks to the varying doses of radiation.

The FDA maintains that irradiated foods are no different from non-irradiated foods (which is not surprising considering they also consider meat from cloned animals the same as non-cloned meat). Clearly, they have done an excellent job of ignoring the alarming data on food irradiation that has spanned over four decades.

Reproductive dysfunction, chromosomal abnormalities, liver damage, and strange gene-damaging chemicals have all been linked to irradiation.

The FDA also notes that "irradiation does not take the place of washing," so what, then, is the point?

Currently, irradiated foods must be labeled with either the statement "treated with radiation" or "treated by irradiation," and the international symbol for irradiation, the radura. That might change in the future, but for now I suggest avoiding all foods that contain these labels, or buying organic, as organic food is not irradiated.

Is There Any Way to Find "Cleaner" Produce?
No one wants to worry that their fresh produce is contaminated with disease-causing microbes, and the last thing you want to do is avoid eating health-boosting veggies due to this fear. Instead, the key to making sure that any food you eat is safe is to get it from a high-quality source. I can't stress the importance of this enough.

When you get your produce from small farmers that raise their food in natural settings using clean water, as opposed to massive agribusiness conglomerations that use sewage sludge as fertilizer, there is very little risk in eating these foods raw. The same goes for meat, eggs, and raw dairy products, as well.

Choosing organic produce can also add at least some level of quality, as organic crops cannot be grown with synthetic pesticides or sewage sludge-based fertilizers, nor can they be irradiated.

I suggest browsing through my Sustainable Agriculture resource page to find farmer's markets, family farms and other sources of safe, high-quality food. Not only are these sources likely to grow their crops in more sanitary conditions than a conventional agribusiness farm, but there's a better chance that it will also be locally grown.

The closer you are to the source of your food, the fewer hands it has to pass through and the less time it will sit in storage -- so the better, and likely safer, it will be for you and your family.

This Addictive Commonly Used Food Feeds Cancer Cells, Triggers Weight Gain, and Promotes Premature Ageing

Is sugar a sweet old friend that is secretly plotting your demise?

There is a vast sea of research suggesting that it is. Science has now shown us, beyond any shadow of a doubt, that sugar in your food, in all its myriad of forms, is taking a devastating toll on your health.

The single largest source of calories for Americans comes from sugar—specifically high fructose corn syrup. Just take a look at the sugar consumption trends of the past 300 years:[1]

In 1700, the average person consumed about 4 pounds of sugar per year.
In 1800, the average person consumed about 18 pounds of sugar per year.
In 1900, individual consumption had risen to 90 pounds of sugar per year.
In 2009, more than 50 percent of all Americans consume one-half pound of sugar PER DAY—translating to a whopping 180 pounds of sugar per year!
Sugar is loaded into your soft drinks, fruit juices, sports drinks, and hidden in almost all processed foods—from bologna to pretzels to Worcestershire sauce to cheese spread. And now most infant formula has the sugar equivalent of one can of Coca-Cola, so babies are being metabolically poisoned from day one if taking formula.

No wonder there is an obesity epidemic in this country.

Today, 32 percent of Americans are obese and an additional one-third are overweight. Compare that to 1890, when a survey of white males in their fifties revealed an obesity rate of just 3.4 percent. In 1975, the obesity rate in America had reached 15 percent, and since then it has doubled.

Carrying excess weight increases your risk for deadly conditions such as heart disease, kidney disease and diabetes.

In 1893, there were fewer than three cases of diabetes per 100,000 people in the United States. Today, diabetes strikes almost 8,000 out of every 100,000 people.[1]

You don’t have to be a physician or a scientist to notice America’s expanding waistline. All you have to do is stroll through a shopping mall or a schoolyard, or perhaps glance in the mirror.

Sugars 101 -- Basics of How to Avoid Confusion on this Important Topic


It is easy to become confused by the various sugars and sweeteners. So here is a basic overview:

Dextrose, fructose and glucose are all monosaccharides, known as simple sugars. The primary difference between them is how your body metabolizes them. Glucose and dextrose are essentially the same sugar. However, food manufacturers usually use the term “dextrose” in their ingredient list.
The simple sugars can combine to form more complex sugars, like the disaccharide sucrose (table sugar), which is half glucose and half fructose.
High fructose corn syrup (HFCS) is 55 percent fructose and 45 percent glucose.
Ethanol (drinking alcohol) is not a sugar, although beer and wine contain residual sugars and starches, in addition to alcohol.
Sugar alcohols like xylitol, glycerol, sorbitol, maltitol, mannitol, and erythritol are neither sugars nor alcohols but are becoming increasingly popular as sweeteners. They are incompletely absorbed from your small intestine, for the most part, so they provide fewer calories than sugar but often cause problems with bloating, diarrhea and flatulence.
Sucralose (Splenda) is NOT a sugar, despite its sugar-like name and deceptive marketing slogan, “made from sugar.” It’s a chlorinated artificial sweetener in line with aspartame and saccharin, with detrimental health effects to match.
Agave syrup, falsely advertised as “natural,” is typically HIGHLY processed and is usually 80 percent fructose. The end product does not even remotely resemble the original agave plant.
Honey is about 53 percent fructose[2], but is completely natural in its raw form and has many health benefits when used in moderation, including as many antioxidants as spinach.
Stevia is a highly sweet herb derived from the leaf of the South American stevia plant, which is completely safe (in its natural form). Lo han (or luohanguo) is another natural sweetener, but derived from a fruit.
All Sugars are Not Equal
Glucose is the form of energy you were designed to run on. Every cell in your body, every bacterium—and in fact, every living thing on the Earth—uses glucose for energy.

But as a country, sucrose is no longer the sugar of choice. It’s now fructose.

If your diet was like that of people a century ago, you’d consume about 15 grams per day—a far cry from the 73 grams per day the typical person gets from sweetened drinks. In vegetables and fruits, it’s mixed in with vitamins, minerals, enzymes, and beneficial phytonutrients, all which moderate the negative metabolic effects. Amazingly, 25 percent of people actually consume more than 130 grams of fructose per day.

Making matters worse, all of the fiber has been removed from processed foods, so there is essentially no nutritive value at all. And the very products most people rely on to lose weight—the low-fat diet foods—are often the ones highest in fructose.

It isn’t that fructose itself is bad—it is the MASSIVE DOSES you’re exposed to that make it dangerous.

There are two overall reasons fructose is so damaging:

Your body metabolizes fructose in a much different way than glucose. The entire burden of metabolizing fructose falls on your liver.
People are consuming fructose in enormous quantities, which has made the negative effects much more profound.
The explosion of soda consumption is the major cause of this.

Today, 55 percent of sweeteners used in food and beverage manufacturing are made from corn, and the number one source of calories in America is soda, in the form of high fructose corn syrup.

Food and beverage manufacturers began switching their sweeteners from sucrose to corn syrup in the 1970s when they discovered that HFCS was not only far cheaper to make, it’s about 20 percent sweeter than conventional table sugar that has sucrose.

HFCS contains the same two sugars as sucrose but is more metabolically risky to you, due to its chemical form.

The fructose and the glucose are not bound together in HFCS, as they are in table sugar, so your body doesn’t have to break it down. Therefore, the fructose is absorbed immediately, going straight to your liver.

Too Much Fructose Creates a Metabolic Disaster in Your Body
Dr. Robert Lustig, Professor of Pediatrics in the Division of Endocrinology at the University of California, San Francisco, has been a pioneer in decoding sugar metabolism. His work has highlighted some major differences in how different sugars are broken down and used by the human body.

I highly recommend watching Lustig’s lecture in its entirety if you want to learn how fructose is ruining your health biochemically.

As I mentioned earlier, after eating fructose, most of the metabolic burden rests on your liver. This is NOT the case with glucose, of which your liver breaks down only 20 percent. Nearly every cell in your body utilizes glucose, so it’s normally “burned up” immediately after consumption.

So where does all of this fructose go, once you consume it?

Onto your thighs. It is turned into FAT (VLDL and triglycerides), which means more fat deposits throughout your body.

Eating Fructose is Far Worse than Eating Fat
However, the physiological problems of fructose metabolism extend well beyond a couple of pant sizes:

Fructose elevates uric acid, which decreases nitric oxide, raises angiotensin, and causes your smooth muscle cells to contract, thereby raising your blood pressure and potentially damaging your kidneys.[1]

Increased uric acid also leads to chronic, low-level inflammation, which has far-reaching consequences for your health. For example, chronically inflamed blood vessels lead to heart attacks and strokes; also, a good deal of evidence exists that some cancers are caused by chronic inflammation. (See the next section for more about uric acid.)
Fructose tricks your body into gaining weight by fooling your metabolism—it turns off your body’s appetite-control system. Fructose does not appropriately stimulate insulin, which in turn does not suppress ghrelin (the “hunger hormone”) and doesn’t stimulate leptin (the “satiety hormone”), which together result in your eating more and developing insulin resistance.[3] [4]
Fructose rapidly leads to weight gain and abdominal obesity (“beer belly”), decreased HDL, increased LDL, elevated triglycerides, elevated blood sugar, and high blood pressure—i.e., classic metabolic syndrome.
Fructose metabolism is very similar to ethanol metabolism, which has a multitude of toxic effects, including NAFLD (non-alcoholic fatty liver disease). It’s alcohol without the buzz.
These changes are not seen when humans or animals eat starch (or glucose), suggesting that fructose is a “bad carbohydrate” when consumed in excess of 25 grams per day. It is probably the one factor responsible for the partial success of many “low-carb” diets.

One of the more recent findings that surprised researchers is that glucose actually accelerates fructose absorption, making the potential health risks from HFCS even more profound.[1]

You can now see why fructose is the number one contributing factor to the current obesity epidemic.

Is Uric Acid the New Cholesterol?
By now you are probably aware of the childhood obesity epidemic in America—but did you know about childhood hypertension?

Until recently, children were rarely diagnosed with high blood pressure, and when they were, it was usually due to a tumor or a vascular kidney disease.

In 2004, a study showed hypertension among children is four times higher than predicted: 4.5 percent of American children have high blood pressure. Among overweight children, the rate is 10 percent. It is thought that obesity is to blame for about 50 percent of hypertension cases in adolescents today.[1]

Even more startling is that 90 percent of adolescents who have high blood pressure have elevated uric acid levels.

This has led researchers to ask, what does uric acid have to do with obesity and high blood pressure?

In his book, The Sugar Fix: The High-Fructose Fallout That is Making You Fat and Sick, Dr. Robert J. Johnson makes a compelling argument for a previously unrecognized connection between excess sugar consumption and high uric acid levels. However, he promotes artificial sweeteners as an alternative to sugar and makes other recommendations that I don't agree with.

Dr. Johnson is a conventional physician who has not accepted large parts of natural medicine, however, he is one of the leading researchers defining the extent of fructose toxicity. He has spent many years of his life dedicating himself to uncover this mystery.

There are more than 3,500 articles to date showing a strong relationship between uric acid and obesity, heart disease, hypertension, stroke, kidney disease, and other conditions. In fact, a number of studies have confirmed that people with elevated serum uric acid are at risk for high blood pressure, even if they otherwise appear to be perfectly healthy.

Uric acid levels among Americans have risen significantly since the early half of the 20th Century. In the 1920s, average uric acid levels were about 3.5 ml/dl. By 1980, average uric acid levels had climbed into the range of 6.0 to 6.5 ml/dl and are probably much higher now.

How Does Your Body Produce Uric Acid?
It’s a byproduct of cellular breakdown. As cells die off, DNA and RNA degrade into chemicals called purines. Purines are further broken down into uric acid.

Fructose increases uric acid through a complex process that causes cells to burn up their ATP rapidly, leading to “cell shock” and increased cell death. After eating excessive amounts of fructose, cells become starved of energy and enter a state of shock, just as if they have lost their blood supply. Massive cellular die-off leads to increased uric acid levels.

And cells that are depleted of energy become inflamed and more susceptible to damage from oxidative stress. Fat cells actually become “sickly,” bloating up with excessive amounts of fat.

There is a simple, inexpensive blood test for determining your uric acid level, which I recommend you have done as part of your routine health checkups. Your level should be between 3.0 and 5.5 mg/dl, optimally.

There is little doubt in my mind that your uric acid level is a more potent predictor of cardiovascular and overall health than your total cholesterol level is. Yet virtually no one is screening for this.

Now that you know the truth you don’t have to be left out in the cold, as this is a simple and relatively inexpensive test that you can get at any doctor’s office. Odds are very good your doctor is clueless about the significance of elevated uric acid levels, so it will not likely be productive to engage in a discussion with him unless he is truly an open-minded truth seeker.

Merely get your uric acid level, and if it is over 5 then eliminate as much fructose as you can (also eliminate all beer), and retest your level in a few weeks.

Sugar Sensitization Makes the Problem Even WORSE!
There is yet another problem with sugar—a self-perpetuating one.

According to Dr. Johnson1, sugar activates its own pathways in your body—those metabolic pathways become “upregulated.” In other words, the more sugar you eat, the more effective your body is in absorbing it; and the more you absorb, the more damage you’ll do.

You become “sensitized” to sugar as time goes by, and more sensitive to its toxic effects as well.

The flip side is, when people are given even a brief sugar holiday, sugar sensitization rapidly decreases and those metabolic pathways become “downregulated.” Research tells us that even two weeks without consuming sugar will cause your body to be less reactive to it.

Try it for yourself! Take a two-week sugar sabbatical and see how different you feel.

Are Fruits Good or Bad for You?
Keep in mind that fruits also contain fructose, although an ameliorating factor is that whole fruits also contain vitamins and other antioxidants that reduce the hazardous effects of fructose.

Juices, on the other hand, are nearly as detrimental as soda, because a glass of juice is loaded with fructose, and a lot of the antioxidants are lost.

It is important to remember that fructose alone isn’t evil as fruits are certainly beneficial. But when you consume high levels of fructose it will absolutely devastate your biochemistry and physiology. Remember the AVERAGE fructose dose is 70 grams per day which exceeds the recommend limit by 300 percent.

So please BE CAREFUL with your fruit consumption. You simply MUST understand that because HFCS is so darn cheap, it is added to virtually every processed food. Even if you consumed no soda or fruit, it is very easy to exceed 25 grams of hidden fructose in your diet.

If you are a raw food advocate, have a pristine diet, and exercise very well, then you could be the exception that could exceed this limit and stay healthy.

Dr. Johnson has a handy chart, included below, which you can use to estimate how much fructose you’re getting in your diet. Remember, you are also likely getting additional fructose if you consume any packaged foods at all, since it is hidden in nearly all of them.

Fruit Serving Size Grams of Fructose
Limes 1 medium 0
Lemons 1 medium 0.6
Cranberries 1 cup 0.7
Passion fruit 1 medium 0.9
Prune 1 medium 1.2
Apricot 1 medium 1.3
Guava 2 medium 2.2
Date (Deglet Noor style) 1 medium 2.6
Cantaloupe 1/8 of med. melon 2.8
Raspberries 1 cup 3.0
Clementine 1 medium 3.4
Kiwifruit 1 medium 3.4
Blackberries 1 cup 3.5
Star fruit 1 medium 3.6
Cherries, sweet 10 3.8
Strawberries 1 cup 3.8
Cherries, sour 1 cup 4.0
Pineapple 1 slice
(3.5" x .75") 4.0
Grapefruit, pink or red 1/2 medium 4.3
Fruit Serving Size Grams of Fructose
Boysenberries 1 cup 4.6
Tangerine/mandarin orange 1 medium 4.8
Nectarine 1 medium 5.4
Peach 1 medium 5.9
Orange (navel) 1 medium 6.1
Papaya 1/2 medium 6.3
Honeydew 1/8 of med. melon 6.7
Banana 1 medium 7.1
Blueberries 1 cup 7.4
Date (Medjool) 1 medium 7.7
Apple (composite) 1 medium 9.5
Persimmon 1 medium 10.6
Watermelon 1/16 med. melon 11.3
Pear 1 medium 11.8
Raisins 1/4 cup 12.3
Grapes, seedless (green or red) 1 cup 12.4
Mango 1/2 medium 16.2
Apricots, dried 1 cup 16.4
Figs, dried 1 cup 23.0



In addition to limiting your intake of fructose, you should eliminate all sweetened beverages and fruit juices (including all artificial sweeteners) and drink only pure water and raw milk.

You can buy pure glucose (dextrose) as a sweetener for about $1 a pound. It is only 70% as sweet as sucrose, so you’ll end up using a bit more of it for the same amount of sweetness, making it slightly more expensive than sucrose—but still well worth it for your health as it has ZERO grams of fructose.

Remember that glucose can be used directly by every cell in your body and as such is far safer than the metabolic poison fructose.

Beer is also a good beverage to AVOID since it increases uric acid levels, just like fructose does, resulting in many of the same toxic effects.

All alcoholic beverages cause you to produce excess uric acid (and block your kidneys from excreting it), but beer seems to have a more pronounced effect on uric acid levels because it’s a rich source of guanosine, the type of purine that is most readily absorbed by the body.1

76 Additional Ways Sugar Can Ruin Your Health
In addition to throwing off your body's homeostasis and wreaking havoc on your metabolic processes, excess sugar has a number of other significant consequences.

Nancy Appleton, PhD, author of the book Lick the Sugar Habit[5], contributed an extensive list of the many ways sugar can ruin your health from a vast number of medical journals and other scientific publications.

Sugar can suppress your immune system and impair your defenses against infectious disease.[6] [7]
Sugar upsets the mineral relationships in your body: causes chromium and copper deficiencies and interferes with absorption of calcium and magnesium.[8] [9] [10] [11]
Sugar can cause a rapid rise of adrenaline, hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children.[12] [13]
Sugar can produce a significant rise in total cholesterol, triglycerides and bad cholesterol and a decrease in good cholesterol.[14] [15] [16] [17]
Sugar causes a loss of tissue elasticity and function.[18]
Sugar feeds cancer cells and has been connected with the development of cancer of the breast, ovaries, prostate, rectum, pancreas, biliary tract, lung, gallbladder and stomach.[19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]
Sugar can increase fasting levels of glucose and can cause reactive hypoglycemia.[26] [27]
Sugar can weaken eyesight.[28] 1
Sugar can cause many problems with the gastrointestinal tract including: an acidic digestive tract, indigestion, malabsorption in patients with functional bowel disease, increased risk of Crohn's disease, and ulcerative colitis.[29] [30] [31] [32] [33]
Sugar can cause premature aging.[34] In fact, the single most important factor that accelerates aging is insulin, which is triggered by sugar. 1
Sugar can lead to alcoholism.[35]
Sugar can cause your saliva to become acidic, tooth decay, and periodontal disease.[36] [37] [38]
Sugar contributes to obesity. [39] 1
Sugar can cause autoimmune diseases such as: arthritis, asthma, and multiple sclerosis.[40] [41] [42]
Sugar greatly assists the uncontrolled growth of Candida Albicans (yeast infections) [43]
Sugar can cause gallstones.[44]
Sugar can cause appendicitis.[45]
Sugar can cause hemorrhoids.[46]
Sugar can cause varicose veins.[47]
Sugar can elevate glucose and insulin responses in oral contraceptive users.[48]
Sugar can contribute to osteoporosis.[49]
Sugar can cause a decrease in your insulin sensitivity thereby causing an abnormally high insulin levels and eventually diabetes.[50] [51] [52]
Sugar can lower your Vitamin E levels.[53]
Sugar can increase your systolic blood pressure.[54]
Sugar can cause drowsiness and decreased activity in children.[55]
High sugar intake increases advanced glycation end products (AGEs),which are sugar molecules that attach to and damage proteins in your body. AGEs speed up the aging of cells, which may contribute to a variety of chronic and fatal diseases. [56] 1
Sugar can interfere with your absorption of protein.[57]
Sugar causes food allergies.[58]
Sugar can cause toxemia during pregnancy.[59]
Sugar can contribute to eczema in children.[60]
Sugar can cause atherosclerosis and cardiovascular disease.[61] [62]
Sugar can impair the structure of your DNA.[63]
Sugar can change the structure of protein and cause a permanent alteration of the way the proteins act in your body.[64] [65]
Sugar can make your skin age by changing the structure of collagen.[66]
Sugar can cause cataracts and nearsightedness.[67] [68]
Sugar can cause emphysema.[69]
High sugar intake can impair the physiological homeostasis of many systems in your body.[70]
Sugar lowers the ability of enzymes to function.[71]
Sugar intake is higher in people with Parkinson's disease.[72]
Sugar can increase the size of your liver by making your liver cells divide, and it can increase the amount of fat in your liver, leading to fatty liver disease.[73] [74]
Sugar can increase kidney size and produce pathological changes in the kidney such as the formation of kidney stones.[75] [76] Fructose is helping to drive up rates of kidney disease. 1
Sugar can damage your pancreas.[77]
Sugar can increase your body's fluid retention.[78]
Sugar is enemy #1 of your bowel movement.[79]
Sugar can compromise the lining of your capillaries.[80]
Sugar can make your tendons more brittle.[81]
Sugar can cause headaches, including migraines.[82]
Sugar can reduce the learning capacity, adversely affect your children's grades and cause learning disorders.[83] [84]
Sugar can cause an increase in delta, alpha, and theta brain waves, which can alter your ability to think clearly.[85]
Sugar can cause depression.[86]
Sugar can increase your risk of gout.[87]
Sugar can increase your risk of Alzheimer's disease.[88] MRI studies show that adults 60 and older who have high uric acid are four to five times more likely to have vascular dementia, the second most common form of dementia after Alzheimer’s.1
Sugar can cause hormonal imbalances such as: increasing estrogen in men, exacerbating PMS, and decreasing growth hormone.[89] [90] [91] [92]
Sugar can lead to dizziness.[93]
Diets high in sugar will increase free radicals and oxidative stress.[94]
A high sucrose diet of subjects with peripheral vascular disease significantly increases platelet adhesion.[95]
High sugar consumption by pregnant adolescents can lead to a substantial decrease in gestation duration and is associated with a twofold-increased risk for delivering a small-for-gestational-age (SGA) infant.[96] [97]
Sugar is an addictive substance.[98]
Sugar can be intoxicating, similar to alcohol.[99]
Sugar given to premature babies can affect the amount of carbon dioxide they produce.[100]
Decrease in sugar intake can increase emotional stability.[101]
Your body changes sugar into 2 to 5 times more fat in the bloodstream than it does starch.[102]
The rapid absorption of sugar promotes excessive food intake in obese subjects.[103]
Sugar can worsen the symptoms of children with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD).[104]
Sugar adversely affects urinary electrolyte composition.[105]
Sugar can impair the function of your adrenal glands.[106]
Sugar has the potential of inducing abnormal metabolic processes in normal, healthy individuals, thereby promoting chronic degenerative diseases.[107]
Intravenous feedings (IVs) of sugar water can cut off oxygen to your brain.[108]
Sugar increases your risk of polio.[109]
High sugar intake can cause epileptic seizures.[110]
Sugar causes high blood pressure in obese people.[111]
In intensive care units, limiting sugar saves lives.[112]
Sugar may induce cell death.[113]
In juvenile rehabilitation centers, when children were put on low sugar diets, there was a 44 percent drop in antisocial behavior.[114]
Sugar dehydrates newborns.[115]
Sugar can cause gum disease.[116]
It should now be crystal clear just how damaging sugar is. You simply cannot achieve your highest degree of health and vitality if you are consuming a significant amount of it.

Fortunately, your body has an amazing ability to heal itself when given the basic nutrition it needs, and your liver has an incredible ability to regenerate. If you start making changes today, your health WILL begin to improve, returning you to the state of vitality that nature intended.