Glyphosate Levels in Breakfast Foods: What is safe?

April 19, 2016

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the world’s most widely used herbicide, its use being largely associated with crops genetically modified to be resistant to it. Increasing numbers of scientific studies are demonstrating that glyphosate residues are now ubiquitous in the environment and may be common in foods. In 2015, the World Health Organization, through the International Agency for Research on Cancer, classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

Today, ANH-USA releases the results of its own research that shows that glyphosate residues are widely distributed in common foods, such as bagels, breakfast cereals, and eggs. The study reveals further evidence that glyphosate accumulates in animal tissues, presumably also in humans. The majority of samples tested contained levels below the EPA’s proposed ‘allowable daily intake’ or ADI, but this level is increasingly contested because it fails to take into account recent evidence of carcinogenicity or toxicity of adjuvants in glyphosate formulations or the very wide distribution of glyphosate in food and water. The ADI reflects instead a threshold that should not be exceeded through normal agricultural practice and the US level exceeds that of the EU by nearly six times.

Brief history of glyphosate:

Glyphosate  (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) is the active ingredient in the Roundup herbicide developed by Monsanto and first released commercially in 1974. After the introduction of the first Roundup Ready Crop, soybeans, in 1996, use of Roundup increased dramatically. Other crops soon followed: GMO canola oil, corn, cotton, sugar beets, and alfalfa. By 2007, glyphosate was the most widely used herbicide in commercial agriculture and second most widely used by home gardeners.[1] Other companies, such as Dupont, developed their own glyphosate resistant crop varieties, and GMO seeds now account for 94% of soybeans and 89% of all corn grown in the U.S. [2] Hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate are dumped on the land yearly – in crop growing, in weed control in cities, even in environmental efforts to restore native species to prairie lands or other areas succumbing to invasive plants.

Glyphosate was for many years touted by its makers as being harmless to humans and wildlife and rapidly biodegradable. In fact, because it was considered safe it was not monitored in the US by either the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program or the FDA’s Pesticide Residue Monitoring Program. However, one year ago, March 20, 2015, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans. Glyphosate has been linked to the increase of many cancers, such as breast, thyroid, kidney, pancreas, liver, bladder, and myeloid leukaemia.[3]   Using Monsanto’s early studies on glyphosate safety, Drs. Samsel and Seneff have described the possible mechanisms by which glyphosate may trigger cancer. [4]

This year the FDA for the first time will begin testing some foods, namely corn and soybeans, for glyphosate residues.[5] Based on existing knowledge of the persistence of glyphosate, it can be expected that these Roundup Ready crops will be found to contain residues of glyphosate. However, given the extensive use of the herbicide, it will also be likely to be distributed in many other foods.

To investigate the possibility of glyphosate residues in common foods, ANH-USA has taken the initiative and begun preliminary investigations through an independent laboratory testing initially common breakfast foods that contribute to what many consider “the most important meal of the day.”

Current Safety Standards

The EPA Allowable Daily Intake (ADI) for glyphosate is set at 1,750 µg (1.75 mg) per kg of bodyweight. The EU ADI is just 0.3 mg per kg body weight. The US safety level was determined based on industry tests of high levels of glyphosate on adult laboratory animals. Critics claim that the tests may not be accurate because glyphosate may be an endocrine disrupter, which would affect hormones in the body and thereby produce different effects at various stages of human development.[6] Furthermore, the tests were done on glyphosate in isolation and did not include the commercial pesticide formulations containing additional adjuvants which may themselves be toxic or intensify the toxicity of glyphosate.

Glyphosate was up for its 15-year toxicity reassessment by the EPA last summer but action was postponed until 2016.[7] Meanwhile Roundup continues to be sprayed on a multitude of crops, not just the Roundup Ready variety, but on wheat, dry beans, oats, sugarcane, and others. Just how much glyphosate is making its way onto our plates?

Breakfast Foods Tested

ANH-USA purchased regular and organic versions of twelve popular breakfast foods and breakfast food ingredients, for a total of twenty-four items. Categories tested were: flour, corn flakes, instant oatmeal, bagels, yogurt, bread, frozen hash browns, potatoes, hot cereal, eggs, non-dairy creamers, and dairy based coffee creamers. Tests were done by an independent laboratory using the ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) test.

Findings

ANH-USA’s testing found that ten of our sample foods or ingredients contained detectable levels of glyphosate.

FOOD	Glyphosate ppb
Instant Oatmeal Strawberries & Cream	1,327.1
Whole Wheat Bagels	491.9
Organic Multibagels	151.5
Whole Grain Bread: whole wheat	403.0
Organic Whole Wheat Bread	136.4
Hot Cereal Whole Grain	260.6
Large Eggs	102
Organic Cage Free Antibiotic Free Large Eggs	169
Organic Coffee Creamer	104
Organic Soy Creamer Non GMO	86

 

EPA regulations have set tolerances levels of glyphosate residue, which are helpful as a basis of comparison for our findings. Of note is the finding that our sample of organic cage free eggs contained more glyphosate than the allowable tolerance level.

Item	FDA Tolerance level	Lab finding
Potatoes (potatoes, hash browns)	0.2ppm = 200ppb	<13 – 34.4ppb
Grain (flour, bagels, bread, hot cereal)	30ppm = 30,000ppb	<75 – 491.9ppb
Eggs	0.05ppm = 50ppb	102-169ppb
Corn   (corn flakes)	5.0ppm = 5000ppb	<75ppb
Oats   (instant oatmeal)	30ppm = 30,000ppb	<75 – 1327.1ppb
Soy   (creamer)	20ppm = 20,000ppb	<75 – 104 ppb

Fourteen of the twenty-four items tested contained less than 75 ppb of glyphosate, which is equivalent to 75 µg of glyphosate per liter of testing solution. This is well below the ADI of 1,750 µg per kg of bodyweight per day.

FOOD	Glyphosate ppb
All Purpose Flour	<75
Organic Unbleached Flour	<75
Corn Flakes	<75
Organic Corn Flakes	<75
Organic Instant Oatmeal	<75
Yogurt, French Vanilla	<75
Organic Yogurt, French Vanilla	<75
Frozen Hash Brown Potatoes	34.4
Organic Frozen Hash Browns	<13
Russet Potato	24.1
Organic Hot Cereal	<75
Organic Soy Creamer	<75
Dairy Creamer	<75

Causes for Concern

The major finding from this analysis is that glyphosate is showing up in food products where it is not intended to be, supporting claims made by many critics that glyphosate is far more ubiquitous in our food system than the public is made to believe. Foods with the highest levels of glyphosate – oatmeal, bagels, bread, and wheat cereal – are from non-Roundup Ready crops, the residues likely being present as a result of the common practice to use the herbicide as a desiccant shortly before harvest.[8]

Furthermore, high levels were also found in eggs and dairy creamer, the latter exceeding the EPA’s allowable limit for residue levels. These animal products are not sprayed directly with glyphosate, which indicates that the chemical is entering the food chain and building up in the tissues of the animals, otherwise known as bioaccumulation. If glyphosate can accumulate in the animals we eat, it must also accumulate in humans. Dr. Anthony Samsel speaks to the dangers of glyphosate bioaccumulation:

Glyphosate is a synthetic amino acid and analog of glycine which is one of our canonical amino acids.  Bioaccumulation of glyphosate, by mis-incorporation into protein structure is disastrous to the biology of all living things. This herbicide should never have been allowed onto the market.  Monsanto’s own sealed trade secret studies show that glyphosate bioaccumulates in all tissues.[9]  Bioaccumulation of this synthetic amino acid leads to tissue destruction at the molecular level, a cell at a time.  Monsanto found destruction of every gland and organ of laboratory animals during long-term chronic studies.  However, they dismissed all findings through the use of unrelated historical controls.[10]

To further add to these findings, the amounts detected by the ELISA test for glyphosate do not include any analogs of glyphosate, such as N-Acetylglyphosate which is used by Dupont in its GMO formulations. These analogs could not be detected by the test but may be present in the food with the end result a greater bioaccumulation of glyphosate in our bodies and consequential increased chance of biological disruption and disease.

Conclusion

Initial testing of breakfast foods for glyphosate levels detected glyphosate above 75 ppb in 11 out of 24 foods. This suggests that Americans are consuming glyphosate in common foods on a daily basis. The true safety of this chemical, just last year identified as a probably carcinogen by the WHO, is unknown. Current EPA standards have not been rigorously tested for all foods and all age groups. Nor have the effects of other ingredients in glyphosate formulations been evaluated. Evidence linking glyphosate with the increased incidence of a host of cancers is reason for immediate reevaluation by the EPA and FDA.

[1] http://ift.tt/1MrWhBQ

[2] ibid.

[3] Samsel and Seneff.  Glyphosate, Pathways to Modern Diseases IV: Cancer and Related Pathologies.  Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry  2015 Volume 15, Number 3, pp. 121-159.

[4] Ibid.

[5] http://ift.tt/211YoaQ

[6] http://ift.tt/1VQFEbA

[7] http://ift.tt/1meTSmS

[8] http://ift.tt/1Hsq2iK

[9] Samsel and Seneff.  Glyphosate, Pathways to Modern Diseases IV: Cancer and Related Pathologies.  Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry  2015 Volume 15, Number 3, pp. 121-159

[10] Comment provided by Dr. Samsel to ANH-USA upon review of this paper.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1SygFUa via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/24i7XAP

Glyphosate Levels in Breakfast Foods: What is safe?

April 19, 2016

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in the world’s most widely used herbicide, its use being largely associated with crops genetically modified to be resistant to it. Increasing numbers of scientific studies are demonstrating that glyphosate residues are now ubiquitous in the environment and may be common in foods. In 2015, the World Health Organization, through the International Agency for Research on Cancer, classified glyphosate as a probable human carcinogen.

Today, ANH-USA releases the results of its own research that shows that glyphosate residues are widely distributed in common foods, such as bagels, breakfast cereals, and eggs. The study reveals further evidence that glyphosate accumulates in animal tissues, presumably also in humans. The majority of samples tested contained levels below the EPA’s proposed ‘allowable daily intake’ or ADI, but this level is increasingly contested because it fails to take into account recent evidence of carcinogenicity or toxicity of adjuvants in glyphosate formulations or the very wide distribution of glyphosate in food and water. The ADI reflects instead a threshold that should not be exceeded through normal agricultural practice and the US level exceeds that of the EU by nearly six times.

Brief history of glyphosate:

Glyphosate  (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine) is the active ingredient in the Roundup herbicide developed by Monsanto and first released commercially in 1974. After the introduction of the first Roundup Ready Crop, soybeans, in 1996, use of Roundup increased dramatically. Other crops soon followed: GMO canola oil, corn, cotton, sugar beets, and alfalfa. By 2007, glyphosate was the most widely used herbicide in commercial agriculture and second most widely used by home gardeners.[1] Other companies, such as Dupont, developed their own glyphosate resistant crop varieties, and GMO seeds now account for 94% of soybeans and 89% of all corn grown in the U.S. [2] Hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate are dumped on the land yearly – in crop growing, in weed control in cities, even in environmental efforts to restore native species to prairie lands or other areas succumbing to invasive plants.

Glyphosate was for many years touted by its makers as being harmless to humans and wildlife and rapidly biodegradable. In fact, because it was considered safe it was not monitored in the US by either the USDA’s Pesticide Data Program or the FDA’s Pesticide Residue Monitoring Program. However, one year ago, March 20, 2015, the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) classified glyphosate as a probable carcinogen for humans. Glyphosate has been linked to the increase of many cancers, such as breast, thyroid, kidney, pancreas, liver, bladder, and myeloid leukaemia.[3]   Using Monsanto’s early studies on glyphosate safety, Drs. Samsel and Seneff have described the possible mechanisms by which glyphosate may trigger cancer. [4]

This year the FDA for the first time will begin testing some foods, namely corn and soybeans, for glyphosate residues.[5] Based on existing knowledge of the persistence of glyphosate, it can be expected that these Roundup Ready crops will be found to contain residues of glyphosate. However, given the extensive use of the herbicide, it will also be likely to be distributed in many other foods.

To investigate the possibility of glyphosate residues in common foods, ANH-USA has taken the initiative and begun preliminary investigations through an independent laboratory testing initially common breakfast foods that contribute to what many consider “the most important meal of the day.”

Current Safety Standards

The EPA Allowable Daily Intake (ADI) for glyphosate is set at 1,750 µg (1.75 mg) per kg of bodyweight. The EU ADI is just 0.3 mg per kg body weight. The US safety level was determined based on industry tests of high levels of glyphosate on adult laboratory animals. Critics claim that the tests may not be accurate because glyphosate may be an endocrine disrupter, which would affect hormones in the body and thereby produce different effects at various stages of human development.[6] Furthermore, the tests were done on glyphosate in isolation and did not include the commercial pesticide formulations containing additional adjuvants which may themselves be toxic or intensify the toxicity of glyphosate.

Glyphosate was up for its 15-year toxicity reassessment by the EPA last summer but action was postponed until 2016.[7] Meanwhile Roundup continues to be sprayed on a multitude of crops, not just the Roundup Ready variety, but on wheat, dry beans, oats, sugarcane, and others. Just how much glyphosate is making its way onto our plates?

Breakfast Foods Tested

ANH-USA purchased regular and organic versions of twelve popular breakfast foods and breakfast food ingredients, for a total of twenty-four items. Categories tested were: flour, corn flakes, instant oatmeal, bagels, yogurt, bread, frozen hash browns, potatoes, hot cereal, eggs, non-dairy creamers, and dairy based coffee creamers. Tests were done by an independent laboratory using the ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) test.

Findings

ANH-USA’s testing found that ten of our sample foods or ingredients contained detectable levels of glyphosate.

FOOD	Glyphosate ppb
Instant Oatmeal Strawberries & Cream	1,327.1
Whole Wheat Bagels	491.9
Organic Multibagels	151.5
Whole Grain Bread: whole wheat	403.0
Organic Whole Wheat Bread	136.4
Hot Cereal Whole Grain	260.6
Large Eggs	102
Organic Cage Free Antibiotic Free Large Eggs	169
Organic Coffee Creamer	104
Organic Soy Creamer Non GMO	86

 

EPA regulations have set tolerances levels of glyphosate residue, which are helpful as a basis of comparison for our findings. Of note is the finding that our sample of organic cage free eggs contained more glyphosate than the allowable tolerance level.

Item	FDA Tolerance level	Lab finding
Potatoes (potatoes, hash browns)	0.2ppm = 200ppb	<13 – 34.4ppb
Grain (flour, bagels, bread, hot cereal)	30ppm = 30,000ppb	<75 – 491.9ppb
Eggs	0.05ppm = 50ppb	102-169ppb
Corn   (corn flakes)	5.0ppm = 5000ppb	<75ppb
Oats   (instant oatmeal)	30ppm = 30,000ppb	<75 – 1327.1ppb
Soy   (creamer)	20ppm = 20,000ppb	<75 – 104 ppb

Fourteen of the twenty-four items tested contained less than 75 ppb of glyphosate, which is equivalent to 75 µg of glyphosate per liter of testing solution. This is well below the ADI of 1,750 µg per kg of bodyweight per day.

FOOD	Glyphosate ppb
All Purpose Flour	<75
Organic Unbleached Flour	<75
Corn Flakes	<75
Organic Corn Flakes	<75
Organic Instant Oatmeal	<75
Yogurt, French Vanilla	<75
Organic Yogurt, French Vanilla	<75
Frozen Hash Brown Potatoes	34.4
Organic Frozen Hash Browns	<13
Russet Potato	24.1
Organic Hot Cereal	<75
Organic Soy Creamer	<75
Dairy Creamer	<75

Causes for Concern

The major finding from this analysis is that glyphosate is showing up in food products where it is not intended to be, supporting claims made by many critics that glyphosate is far more ubiquitous in our food system than the public is made to believe. Foods with the highest levels of glyphosate – oatmeal, bagels, bread, and wheat cereal – are from non-Roundup Ready crops, the residues likely being present as a result of the common practice to use the herbicide as a desiccant shortly before harvest.[8]

Furthermore, high levels were also found in eggs and dairy creamer, the latter exceeding the EPA’s allowable limit for residue levels. These animal products are not sprayed directly with glyphosate, which indicates that the chemical is entering the food chain and building up in the tissues of the animals, otherwise known as bioaccumulation. If glyphosate can accumulate in the animals we eat, it must also accumulate in humans. Dr. Anthony Samsel speaks to the dangers of glyphosate bioaccumulation:

Glyphosate is a synthetic amino acid and analog of glycine which is one of our canonical amino acids.  Bioaccumulation of glyphosate, by mis-incorporation into protein structure is disastrous to the biology of all living things. This herbicide should never have been allowed onto the market.  Monsanto’s own sealed trade secret studies show that glyphosate bioaccumulates in all tissues.[9]  Bioaccumulation of this synthetic amino acid leads to tissue destruction at the molecular level, a cell at a time.  Monsanto found destruction of every gland and organ of laboratory animals during long-term chronic studies.  However, they dismissed all findings through the use of unrelated historical controls.[10]

To further add to these findings, the amounts detected by the ELISA test for glyphosate do not include any analogs of glyphosate, such as N-Acetylglyphosate which is used by Dupont in its GMO formulations. These analogs could not be detected by the test but may be present in the food with the end result a greater bioaccumulation of glyphosate in our bodies and consequential increased chance of biological disruption and disease.

Conclusion

Initial testing of breakfast foods for glyphosate levels detected glyphosate above 75 ppb in 11 out of 24 foods. This suggests that Americans are consuming glyphosate in common foods on a daily basis. The true safety of this chemical, just last year identified as a probably carcinogen by the WHO, is unknown. Current EPA standards have not been rigorously tested for all foods and all age groups. Nor have the effects of other ingredients in glyphosate formulations been evaluated. Evidence linking glyphosate with the increased incidence of a host of cancers is reason for immediate reevaluation by the EPA and FDA.

[1] http://ift.tt/1MrWhBQ

[2] ibid.

[3] Samsel and Seneff.  Glyphosate, Pathways to Modern Diseases IV: Cancer and Related Pathologies.  Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry  2015 Volume 15, Number 3, pp. 121-159.

[4] Ibid.

[5] http://ift.tt/211YoaQ

[6] http://ift.tt/1VQFEbA

[7] http://ift.tt/1meTSmS

[8] http://ift.tt/1Hsq2iK

[9] Samsel and Seneff.  Glyphosate, Pathways to Modern Diseases IV: Cancer and Related Pathologies.  Journal of Biological Physics and Chemistry  2015 Volume 15, Number 3, pp. 121-159

[10] Comment provided by Dr. Samsel to ANH-USA upon review of this paper.

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1SygFUa via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1T2JmrA

Is Monsanto’s Glyphosate Actually Helping the Environment?

Many environmentalists are falling for this glib marketing pitch. Here is why it’s false. Action Alert!

At the federal and local levels, stopping invasive plants with pesticides like glyphosate is being seen as a conservation priority. But what is it doing to our soil and our food?

For many years, the federal government has been devoting large sums of money to combating “invasive plants”—plants which are not native to a particular location and which can cause damage to the environment, like crowding out native species and reducing crop yields. This has also been happening at the local level, with community conservation groups increasingly seeing the fight against invasive species as the primary means by which the environment can be restored to its natural state.

To those looking to rid the land of invasive species, only one solution, essentially, is being offered—toxic pesticides.

This trend has, of course, been exploited by Monsanto, which uses its significant influence with government officials to sell more Roundup. For much of the 1990s until recent years, Monsanto’s Roundup profits were growing steadily. One Monsanto executive has been quoted as saying, “Roundup was God at Monsanto.”

The strategy paid large dividends. In 2014, the government spent $2 billion fighting invasive species—half of which was budgeted for glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) and other pesticides. State conservation officials almost uniformly rely on Monsanto’s glyphosate and other pesticides to manage their weed problems—a 2014 study found that 90% of California’s land managers used glyphosate, and similar stories can be told of other states.

The justification given by the Department of the Interior for shelling out $1 billion worth of taxpayer dollars to Monsanto to buy pesticide is that invasive species cost the national economy about $120 billion each year—though this is a patently phony statistic. It is based on a report by David Pimentel, an ecologist whose other work includes a report which estimates that cats cost us $17 billion a year, which suggests that his figures tend to be overblown, to say the least (he calculated that cats kill about 560 million birds a year, and valued each bird at $30). The transparently fake figures tell us this is less about saving the environment and more about directing millions of taxpayer dollars to Monsanto.

The tragic and ironic truth is that the use of such pesticides on invasive weeds is only exaggerating the problem.

First, we’ve known for quite some time that, just as bacteria have developed resistance to overused antibiotics, weeds develop a resistance to glyphosate and other herbicides, which leads to a cycle of more and more chemicals being dumped on plants to try to outpace nature.

More fundamentally, the use of pesticides on invasive weeds is destroying the soil biota. Just as most of the genetic material found inside the human body belongs to the rich assortment of bacteria and microorganisms, the soil is home to a wide variety of organisms that aid in healthy plant growth. And just as taking antibiotics and being exposed to toxic chemicals destroys our gut microbiota, the heavy use of pesticides wreaks similar havoc on the soil biota—it affects rhizospheres (soil and organisms around the root of a plant or tree), worms (crucial for aerating soil, circulating nutrients, and increasing microbial activity), and mycorrhizae fungi (which plants rely on for nutrients and moisture).

Monoculturing—the farming practice in which one type of plant is grown season after season, without cycling through other types of crops to replenish the soil—has also depleted the nutrients from our soil and has exacerbated the spread of invasive plant species.

Just as our gut microbiota are increasingly seen as crucial to human health, microbes in the soil are essential to the proper functioning of the ecosystem—not to mention in providing humans with clean, nutritious food. Healthy soil means healthy plants; healthy plants mean healthy food, both for animals and humans.

Action Alert! If you haven’t already, send a message to the EPA urging the agency to ban glyphosate. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Seven Casualties in the War on Natural Health

Why Does the FDA Think Eating Buttered Cigarettes or Egg Shells is OK?

Open Letter: Glyphosate Testing

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1NPImFM via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1NPMp5d

Is Monsanto’s Glyphosate Actually Helping the Environment?

Many environmentalists are falling for this glib marketing pitch. Here is why it’s false. Action Alert!

At the federal and local levels, stopping invasive plants with pesticides like glyphosate is being seen as a conservation priority. But what is it doing to our soil and our food?

For many years, the federal government has been devoting large sums of money to combating “invasive plants”—plants which are not native to a particular location and which can cause damage to the environment, like crowding out native species and reducing crop yields. This has also been happening at the local level, with community conservation groups increasingly seeing the fight against invasive species as the primary means by which the environment can be restored to its natural state.

To those looking to rid the land of invasive species, only one solution, essentially, is being offered—toxic pesticides.

This trend has, of course, been exploited by Monsanto, which uses its significant influence with government officials to sell more Roundup. For much of the 1990s until recent years, Monsanto’s Roundup profits were growing steadily. One Monsanto executive has been quoted as saying, “Roundup was God at Monsanto.”

The strategy paid large dividends. In 2014, the government spent $2 billion fighting invasive species—half of which was budgeted for glyphosate (the active ingredient in Roundup) and other pesticides. State conservation officials almost uniformly rely on Monsanto’s glyphosate and other pesticides to manage their weed problems—a 2014 study found that 90% of California’s land managers used glyphosate, and similar stories can be told of other states.

The justification given by the Department of the Interior for shelling out $1 billion worth of taxpayer dollars to Monsanto to buy pesticide is that invasive species cost the national economy about $120 billion each year—though this is a patently phony statistic. It is based on a report by David Pimentel, an ecologist whose other work includes a report which estimates that cats cost us $17 billion a year, which suggests that his figures tend to be overblown, to say the least (he calculated that cats kill about 560 million birds a year, and valued each bird at $30). The transparently fake figures tell us this is less about saving the environment and more about directing millions of taxpayer dollars to Monsanto.

The tragic and ironic truth is that the use of such pesticides on invasive weeds is only exaggerating the problem.

First, we’ve known for quite some time that, just as bacteria have developed resistance to overused antibiotics, weeds develop a resistance to glyphosate and other herbicides, which leads to a cycle of more and more chemicals being dumped on plants to try to outpace nature.

More fundamentally, the use of pesticides on invasive weeds is destroying the soil biota. Just as most of the genetic material found inside the human body belongs to the rich assortment of bacteria and microorganisms, the soil is home to a wide variety of organisms that aid in healthy plant growth. And just as taking antibiotics and being exposed to toxic chemicals destroys our gut microbiota, the heavy use of pesticides wreaks similar havoc on the soil biota—it affects rhizospheres (soil and organisms around the root of a plant or tree), worms (crucial for aerating soil, circulating nutrients, and increasing microbial activity), and mycorrhizae fungi (which plants rely on for nutrients and moisture).

Monoculturing—the farming practice in which one type of plant is grown season after season, without cycling through other types of crops to replenish the soil—has also depleted the nutrients from our soil and has exacerbated the spread of invasive plant species.

Just as our gut microbiota are increasingly seen as crucial to human health, microbes in the soil are essential to the proper functioning of the ecosystem—not to mention in providing humans with clean, nutritious food. Healthy soil means healthy plants; healthy plants mean healthy food, both for animals and humans.

Action Alert! If you haven’t already, send a message to the EPA urging the agency to ban glyphosate. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Seven Casualties in the War on Natural Health

Why Does the FDA Think Eating Buttered Cigarettes or Egg Shells is OK?

Open Letter: Glyphosate Testing

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1NPImFM via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1TbHJIy

Why Does the FDA Think Eating Buttered Cigarettes or Egg Shells is OK?

Not to mention driving under the influence—and murder.

Earlier this month, Robert O’Neill, the (now retired) Navy SEAL who claims to have shot and killed Osama bin Laden, was arrested for driving under the influence in his home state of Montana. In a statement to USA Today, O’Neill said he had not been drinking and driving, but had taken a prescribed sleep aid to deal with long-standing insomnia.

As more and more people take these strong and often toxic sleeping pills, such stories will only proliferate. Recall our past coverage of Robert Stewart storming into a nursing home where his estranged wife worked and killing eight people. His defense was that he was under the influence of Ambien, one of the most common sleep aids, and therefore not in control of his actions.

In 2013, US Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the killing of sixteen Afghan civilians. He had admitted to regularly using sleeping pills and drinking alcohol.

The dangerous effects of sleeping pills are known to both drug companies and the FDA. The information sheets dispensed with the sleeping aids like Ambien state, in small print, that medications in this class have occasional side effects like sleepwalking, “abnormal thinking,” and “strange behavior.”

Ambien users even sued the manufacturer because of bizarre sleep-eating behaviors while on the drugs. People were eating things like buttered cigarettes and eggs, complete with the shells, while under the influence of Ambien. An attorney called people in this state “Ambien zombies.”

Other studies have shown that sleeping pills bring an increased risk of dying early or getting cancer. Another recent study showed that anticholinergic medicines sold as over-the-counter sleep aids are associated with cognitive impairment and an increased risk of dementia.

Because of the many side effects associated with Ambien, the FDA seems to be extremely cautious about approving future sleeping drugs. As we’ve argued before, the FDA approval process for sleeping pills is something of a façade: the clinical trials required for sleeping pills such as Ambien investigate the drug’s effectiveness only for the short-term—and they are approved only for short-term use, when in reality people take them for years. What is far worse is the safety review, which is clearly inadequate.

The FDA has no apparent problem approving drugs that cause people to crash cars, eat buttered cigarettes, and perhaps even commit violent acts, but actively works to restrict consumer access to natural medications that have a superb safety record as well as effectiveness. As we’ve said many times before—the FDA’s hostility toward supplements and natural medicine has almost nothing to do with safety and much more to do with ensuring bumper profits for Big Pharma.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Is Monsanto’s Glyphosate Actually Helping the Environment?

Seven Casualties in the War on Natural Health

Open Letter: Glyphosate Testing

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1Tbyl7M via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1TbHJIm

Open Letter: Glyphosate Testing

Last week, we published a white paper concerning the presence of glyphosate in common American breakfast foods. We performed our tests using the ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) methodology, and disseminated the results to our members and the media.

In publicizing the results of this test, it was not our intention to identify or target any particular company or brand, particularly given the limitations of all testing methodologies, and especially because it detracts from the larger issue, which is that glyphosate appears to be ubiquitous in all of our food. Although we excluded company information from the materials we disseminated, company names were unintentionally shared with the media via the lab results.

Our goal is to further a conversation on a much larger issue: the growing prevalence of dangerous chemicals in our food system as a whole. It is our hope that research in this vein will educate consumers and gain the attention of regulators, spurring them to action to protect public health and remove dangerous substances from the food we eat and feed our families.

The ELISA testing was always meant to be a first step, a prelude to a more in-depth examination of this issue. All testing methodologies have their limitations, and the ELISA method is no different. To ensure that we have the best, most accurate results possible for specific levels of glyphosate in these foods, we will be performing additional testing using other methodologies. This additional testing will give us an even clearer understanding of what is going on in our food system and what should be done to protect Americans from harm.

We look forward to sharing the results of this subsequent testing with our members and the general public, and to continue to serve our role as staunch advocates for consumer access to safe, clean food.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Is Monsanto’s Glyphosate Actually Helping the Environment?

Seven Casualties in the War on Natural Health

Why Does the FDA Think Eating Buttered Cigarettes or Egg Shells is OK?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1TbymbP via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1TbHGMP

Why Does the FDA Think Eating Buttered Cigarettes or Egg Shells is OK?

Not to mention driving under the influence—and murder.

Earlier this month, Robert O’Neill, the (now retired) Navy SEAL who claims to have shot and killed Osama bin Laden, was arrested for driving under the influence in his home state of Montana. In a statement to USA Today, O’Neill said he had not been drinking and driving, but had taken a prescribed sleep aid to deal with long-standing insomnia.

As more and more people take these strong and often toxic sleeping pills, such stories will only proliferate. Recall our past coverage of Robert Stewart storming into a nursing home where his estranged wife worked and killing eight people. His defense was that he was under the influence of Ambien, one of the most common sleep aids, and therefore not in control of his actions.

In 2013, US Army Staff Sgt. Robert Bales was sentenced to life in prison without parole for the killing of sixteen Afghan civilians. He had admitted to regularly using sleeping pills and drinking alcohol.

The dangerous effects of sleeping pills are known to both drug companies and the FDA. The information sheets dispensed with the sleeping aids like Ambien state, in small print, that medications in this class have occasional side effects like sleepwalking, “abnormal thinking,” and “strange behavior.”

Ambien users even sued the manufacturer because of bizarre sleep-eating behaviors while on the drugs. People were eating things like buttered cigarettes and eggs, complete with the shells, while under the influence of Ambien. An attorney called people in this state “Ambien zombies.”

Other studies have shown that sleeping pills bring an increased risk of dying early or getting cancer. Another recent study showed that anticholinergic medicines sold as over-the-counter sleep aids are associated with cognitive impairment and an increased risk of dementia.

Because of the many side effects associated with Ambien, the FDA seems to be extremely cautious about approving future sleeping drugs. As we’ve argued before, the FDA approval process for sleeping pills is something of a façade: the clinical trials required for sleeping pills such as Ambien investigate the drug’s effectiveness only for the short-term—and they are approved only for short-term use, when in reality people take them for years. What is far worse is the safety review, which is clearly inadequate.

The FDA has no apparent problem approving drugs that cause people to crash cars, eat buttered cigarettes, and perhaps even commit violent acts, but actively works to restrict consumer access to natural medications that have a superb safety record as well as effectiveness. As we’ve said many times before—the FDA’s hostility toward supplements and natural medicine has almost nothing to do with safety and much more to do with ensuring bumper profits for Big Pharma.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Is Monsanto’s Glyphosate Actually Helping the Environment?

Seven Casualties in the War on Natural Health

Open Letter: Glyphosate Testing

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1Tbyl7M via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1MWvKlm

Open Letter: Glyphosate Testing

Last week, we published a white paper concerning the presence of glyphosate in common American breakfast foods. We performed our tests using the ELISA (enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay) methodology, and disseminated the results to our members and the media.

In publicizing the results of this test, it was not our intention to identify or target any particular company or brand, particularly given the limitations of all testing methodologies, and especially because it detracts from the larger issue, which is that glyphosate appears to be ubiquitous in all of our food. Although we excluded company information from the materials we disseminated, company names were unintentionally shared with the media via the lab results.

Our goal is to further a conversation on a much larger issue: the growing prevalence of dangerous chemicals in our food system as a whole. It is our hope that research in this vein will educate consumers and gain the attention of regulators, spurring them to action to protect public health and remove dangerous substances from the food we eat and feed our families.

The ELISA testing was always meant to be a first step, a prelude to a more in-depth examination of this issue. All testing methodologies have their limitations, and the ELISA method is no different. To ensure that we have the best, most accurate results possible for specific levels of glyphosate in these foods, we will be performing additional testing using other methodologies. This additional testing will give us an even clearer understanding of what is going on in our food system and what should be done to protect Americans from harm.

We look forward to sharing the results of this subsequent testing with our members and the general public, and to continue to serve our role as staunch advocates for consumer access to safe, clean food.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Is Monsanto’s Glyphosate Actually Helping the Environment?

Seven Casualties in the War on Natural Health

Why Does the FDA Think Eating Buttered Cigarettes or Egg Shells is OK?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1TbymbP via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1T2tqFP

Seven Casualties In The War On Natural Medicine

Seven Casualties In The War On Natural Medicine

  Follow List   Embed List

1

Regulators Are Making It Harder For Cancer Patients To Get The Treatments They Need— Like Intravenous Vitamin C

When my husband was diagnosed with cancer, our whole world was turned upside down. Chemo treatment didn’t seem to be helping and was making him miserable, so we started exploring our options. One doctor said we should try a different approach, including using intravenous vitamin C, which he would get from a compounding pharmacy. We said OK. His quality of life started to improve, and after a while we were told that the cancer was in remission. We were overjoyed. If I could speak to the FDA, I would tell them—please don’t eliminate access to compounded treatments like this. I believe it helped save my husband’s life. -Melanie P.

Upvote

React with Emoji

0

View more lists from ANH-USA

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1VEHiwY via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1WfXbZb

Seven Casualties In The War On Natural Medicine

Seven Casualties In The War On Natural Medicine

1

Regulators Are Making It Harder For Cancer Patients To Get The Treatments They Need— Like Intravenous Vitamin C

When my husband was diagnosed with cancer, our whole world was turned upside down. Chemo treatment didn’t seem to be helping and was making him miserable, so we started exploring our options. One doctor said we should try a different approach, including using intravenous vitamin C, which he would get from a compounding pharmacy. We said OK. His quality of life started to improve, and after a while we were told that the cancer was in remission. We were overjoyed. If I could speak to the FDA, I would tell them—please don’t eliminate access to compounded treatments like this. I believe it helped save my husband’s life. -Melanie P.

Upvote

React with Emoji

0

View more lists from ANH-USA

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1VEHiwY via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/211uSOX

ANH Releases Study of Glyphosate in Breakfast Foods

Glyphosate, primary ingredient in popular herbicide Round Up, present in 40% of products tested

April 19, 2016 — Today, the Alliance for Natural Health-USA (ANH-USA) released the results of food safety testing conducted on an assortment of popular breakfast foods. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing revealed the presence of glyphosate; the most widely used agricultural herbicide, in 10 of the 24 food samples tested.

Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine) is an herbicide developed in 1970 by Monsanto, who began developing GMO crops designed to withstand high doses of Roundup. Today, these seeds account for 94% of all soybeans and 89% of all corn being produced. The prevalence of these crops means that hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate are dumped onto the land every year.

“We decided to do this testing to see just how ubiquitous this toxin has become in our environment. We expected that trace amounts would show up in foods containing large amounts of corn and soy,” explained Gretchen DuBeau, executive and legal director of ANH-USA. “However, we were unprepared for just how invasive this poison has been to our entire food chain.”

This poison, recently named a probable carcinogen, or cancer-causing agent, by the World Health Organization (WHO), was detected in 10 of the 24 breakfast foods tested. Analysis revealed the presence of glyphosate in oatmeal, bagels, eggs- including the organic variety, potatoes and even non-GMO soy coffee creamer.

“Glyphosate has been linked to increases in levels of breast, thyroid, kidney, pancreatic, liver, and bladder cancers and is being served for breakfast, lunch and dinner around the world,” said DuBeau. “The fact that it is showing up in foods like eggs and coffee creamer, which don’t directly contact the herbicide, shows that it’s being passed on by animals who ingest it in their feed. This is contrary to everything that regulators and industry scientists have been telling the public.”

The presence of glyphosate in eggs and dairy supports the fear that the chemical is accumulating in the tissue of these animals, and therefore presumably also in human tissue, in a process called bioaccumulation.

Furthermore, testing for glyphosate alone does not even give us the full picture. The amounts detected by the ELISA test for glyphosate do not include any analogs of glyphosate, such as N-Acetylglyphosate, which is used by DuPont in its GMO formulations. These analogs may also be present in food and would add to the amount of glyphosate accumulated in human tissue. Glyphosate and its analogs are known endocrine disrupters for humans.

Clearly Americans are consuming glyphosate daily. The true safety of this chemical, just last year identified as a probably carcinogen by the WHO, is unknown. Current EPA standards have not been rigorously tested for all foods and all age groups. Evidence linking glyphosate with the increased incidence of a host of cancers is reason for immediate reevaluation by the EPA and FDA.

To view the full results of the study click here.

ANH-USA has produced a video related to the study findings, which can be viewed here.

# # #

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1S8NWID via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/20UHEyt

ANH Releases Study of Glyphosate in Breakfast Foods

Glyphosate, primary ingredient in popular herbicide Round Up, present in 40% of products tested

April 19, 2016 — Today, the Alliance for Natural Health-USA (ANH-USA) released the results of food safety testing conducted on an assortment of popular breakfast foods. Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) testing revealed the presence of glyphosate; the most widely used agricultural herbicide, in 10 of the 24 food samples tested.

Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl) glycine) is an herbicide developed in 1970 by Monsanto, who began developing GMO crops designed to withstand high doses of Roundup. Today, these seeds account for 94% of all soybeans and 89% of all corn being produced. The prevalence of these crops means that hundreds of millions of pounds of glyphosate are dumped onto the land every year.

“We decided to do this testing to see just how ubiquitous this toxin has become in our environment. We expected that trace amounts would show up in foods containing large amounts of corn and soy,” explained Gretchen DuBeau, executive and legal director of ANH-USA. “However, we were unprepared for just how invasive this poison has been to our entire food chain.”

This poison, recently named a probable carcinogen, or cancer-causing agent, by the World Health Organization (WHO), was detected in 10 of the 24 breakfast foods tested. Analysis revealed the presence of glyphosate in oatmeal, bagels, eggs- including the organic variety, potatoes and even non-GMO soy coffee creamer.

“Glyphosate has been linked to increases in levels of breast, thyroid, kidney, pancreatic, liver, and bladder cancers and is being served for breakfast, lunch and dinner around the world,” said DuBeau. “The fact that it is showing up in foods like eggs and coffee creamer, which don’t directly contact the herbicide, shows that it’s being passed on by animals who ingest it in their feed. This is contrary to everything that regulators and industry scientists have been telling the public.”

The presence of glyphosate in eggs and dairy supports the fear that the chemical is accumulating in the tissue of these animals, and therefore presumably also in human tissue, in a process called bioaccumulation.

Furthermore, testing for glyphosate alone does not even give us the full picture. The amounts detected by the ELISA test for glyphosate do not include any analogs of glyphosate, such as N-Acetylglyphosate, which is used by DuPont in its GMO formulations. These analogs may also be present in food and would add to the amount of glyphosate accumulated in human tissue. Glyphosate and its analogs are known endocrine disrupters for humans.

Clearly Americans are consuming glyphosate daily. The true safety of this chemical, just last year identified as a probably carcinogen by the WHO, is unknown. Current EPA standards have not been rigorously tested for all foods and all age groups. Evidence linking glyphosate with the increased incidence of a host of cancers is reason for immediate reevaluation by the EPA and FDA.

To view the full results of the study click here.

ANH-USA has produced a video related to the study findings, which can be viewed here.

# # #

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1S8NWID via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1Sr6MK3

B Vits: Deep Sixing Them the Easy Way

The FDA seems to have figured out that it doesn’t need to ban B vitamins to eliminate them from the market. Action Alerts!

Injectable vitamin B12 is one of the most common treatments employed by integrative (and many conventional) physicians for the wide range of benefits it confers to patients. B12 is used to treat stress, anxiety, depression, mood-related disorders, fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and many other conditions.

This treatment was, for many years, very affordable. As Dr. Jonathan Collin points out in the April edition of the Townsend Letter, the price of a 30cc vial of injectable B12 was around $30 in the mid-2000s—or about $1 per shot. Now, that same 30cc vial could cost as much $200—almost a 700% increase in a decade.

What explains this astounding increase? In short, it is a direct result of the FDA’s war on natural medicine.

We’ve been writing for many months now about the new regulations that threaten the customized medications favored by many integrative doctors. These medications, made by compounding pharmacies, are tailored to meet the specific requirements of an individual’s biology.

Following the passage of the Drug Quality and Security Act in 2013, however, the federal government tightened its control over compounding pharmacies, which are absolutely crucial to the practice of individualized medicine. As the FDA formulates rules to implement the law, it is becoming increasingly clear that many, many natural vitamins, herbs, and supplements have been targeted by the agency for elimination. We’ve recently reported that substances like curcumin, boswellia, aloe vera, and more have already been banned from compounding.

With these draconian regulations, and the threat of more to come, it has become especially difficult for doctors to obtain medications like compounded B12 in its methyl form—the form of B12 preferred by many integrative doctors because it does not need to be converted by the body before use.

The rising cost of the methyl form of B12 previously available from compounding pharmacies has in turn given drug companies a green light to start price gouging on their manufactured B12 (cyanocobalamin). This has led to the 700% price increase mentioned above—for what is actually an inferior product compared to the methyl form. It is inferior because this form of B12 must be converted by the body into the methyl form before it can be used, and not everyone’s body can do this.

In short, the FDA’s treatment of customized medicine—almost certainly by design—has made it much more difficult to get the methyl B12, while simultaneously allowing drug companies to gouge patients for the synthetic product.

This isn’t the first time the agency has used sneaky maneuvers to do the bidding of drug companies. You may recall the case of pyridoxamine, one of three natural and bioavailable forms of vitamin B6. This vitamin has many health benefits; indeed, we could not live without B6. Despite this, in 2009 the FDA banned the supplement form of pyridoxamine in response to a petition from a drug company—they wanted to use it in a drug formulation.

The company in question, BioStratum, Inc., argued that supplements containing pyridoxamine were illegal because BioStratum had filed an investigational new drug (IND) application with the FDA in 1999, and there was no evidence that supplements containing pyridoxamine had been marketed before then. The FDA agreed. To add insult to injury, nothing ever came of BioStratum’s drug application—meaning that pyridoxamine is no longer available today in any form, either drug or supplement. The FDA apparently couldn’t care less about this outcome.

An even more important form of vitamin B6, pyridoxal-5′-phosphate (P5P), faces a similar threat. The FDA has a petition from Medicure Pharma to ban P5P because the company wants to turn this critical vitamin into a drug. This is especially scary—all forms of B6, natural or synthetic, must be converted to P5P for the body to use them. If the FDA approves the petition, anyone who is not able to convert synthetic B6 to P5P would have to rely solely on Medicure’s product to stay alive.

The pattern, then, is clear. When it’s not politically (or legally) feasible for the FDA to ban a natural substance outright to protect their Big Pharma clients’ bottom lines, the agency resorts to back-channel methods such as engineering higher prices or fake shortages to eliminate them. We must not let them get away with this.

There is currently an effort in the House of Representatives to withhold funding from the FDA until the agency fixes the problems it has created in the compounding industry that restrict consumer access to natural medicine. Threatening the purse strings is usually the only way to get the agency’s attention. Indeed, we believe that is why the agency is so beholden to the pharmaceutical industry—Congress made the mistake of allowing Big Pharma to pay the agency’s bills, including its salaries.

Action Alert! Write to your member of Congress and urge him or her to support FY 2017 appropriations language that would withhold funding from the FDA until the agency states how it will allow “office use” of compounded medicines to continue, and how the compounding of supplements will move forward. Please send your message immediately.

Action Alert! Tell the FDA to reject Medicure’s petition to ban P5P. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Poison for Breakfast, Anyone?

Is the Government Trying to Stamp Out Cheap Medical Testing Technology?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1QkGVyM via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1rfYyMh

B Vits: Deep Sixing Them the Easy Way

The FDA seems to have figured out that it doesn’t need to ban B vitamins to eliminate them from the market. Action Alerts!

Injectable vitamin B12 is one of the most common treatments employed by integrative (and many conventional) physicians for the wide range of benefits it confers to patients. B12 is used to treat stress, anxiety, depression, mood-related disorders, fatigue, cognitive dysfunction, and many other conditions.

This treatment was, for many years, very affordable. As Dr. Jonathan Collin points out in the April edition of the Townsend Letter, the price of a 30cc vial of injectable B12 was around $30 in the mid-2000s—or about $1 per shot. Now, that same 30cc vial could cost as much $200—almost a 700% increase in a decade.

What explains this astounding increase? In short, it is a direct result of the FDA’s war on natural medicine.

We’ve been writing for many months now about the new regulations that threaten the customized medications favored by many integrative doctors. These medications, made by compounding pharmacies, are tailored to meet the specific requirements of an individual’s biology.

Following the passage of the Drug Quality and Security Act in 2013, however, the federal government tightened its control over compounding pharmacies, which are absolutely crucial to the practice of individualized medicine. As the FDA formulates rules to implement the law, it is becoming increasingly clear that many, many natural vitamins, herbs, and supplements have been targeted by the agency for elimination. We’ve recently reported that substances like curcumin, boswellia, aloe vera, and more have already been banned from compounding.

With these draconian regulations, and the threat of more to come, it has become especially difficult for doctors to obtain medications like compounded B12 in its methyl form—the form of B12 preferred by many integrative doctors because it does not need to be converted by the body before use.

The rising cost of the methyl form of B12 previously available from compounding pharmacies has in turn given drug companies a green light to start price gouging on their manufactured B12 (cyanocobalamin). This has led to the 700% price increase mentioned above—for what is actually an inferior product compared to the methyl form. It is inferior because this form of B12 must be converted by the body into the methyl form before it can be used, and not everyone’s body can do this.

In short, the FDA’s treatment of customized medicine—almost certainly by design—has made it much more difficult to get the methyl B12, while simultaneously allowing drug companies to gouge patients for the synthetic product.

This isn’t the first time the agency has used sneaky maneuvers to do the bidding of drug companies. You may recall the case of pyridoxamine, one of three natural and bioavailable forms of vitamin B6. This vitamin has many health benefits; indeed, we could not live without B6. Despite this, in 2009 the FDA banned the supplement form of pyridoxamine in response to a petition from a drug company—they wanted to use it in a drug formulation.

The company in question, BioStratum, Inc., argued that supplements containing pyridoxamine were illegal because BioStratum had filed an investigational new drug (IND) application with the FDA in 1999, and there was no evidence that supplements containing pyridoxamine had been marketed before then. The FDA agreed. To add insult to injury, nothing ever came of BioStratum’s drug application—meaning that pyridoxamine is no longer available today in any form, either drug or supplement. The FDA apparently couldn’t care less about this outcome.

An even more important form of vitamin B6, pyridoxal-5′-phosphate (P5P), faces a similar threat. The FDA has a petition from Medicure Pharma to ban P5P because the company wants to turn this critical vitamin into a drug. This is especially scary—all forms of B6, natural or synthetic, must be converted to P5P for the body to use them. If the FDA approves the petition, anyone who is not able to convert synthetic B6 to P5P would have to rely solely on Medicure’s product to stay alive.

The pattern, then, is clear. When it’s not politically (or legally) feasible for the FDA to ban a natural substance outright to protect their Big Pharma clients’ bottom lines, the agency resorts to back-channel methods such as engineering higher prices or fake shortages to eliminate them. We must not let them get away with this.

There is currently an effort in the House of Representatives to withhold funding from the FDA until the agency fixes the problems it has created in the compounding industry that restrict consumer access to natural medicine. Threatening the purse strings is usually the only way to get the agency’s attention. Indeed, we believe that is why the agency is so beholden to the pharmaceutical industry—Congress made the mistake of allowing Big Pharma to pay the agency’s bills, including its salaries.

Action Alert! Write to your member of Congress and urge him or her to support FY 2017 appropriations language that would withhold funding from the FDA until the agency states how it will allow “office use” of compounded medicines to continue, and how the compounding of supplements will move forward. Please send your message immediately.

Action Alert! Tell the FDA to reject Medicure’s petition to ban P5P. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

Poison for Breakfast, Anyone?

Is the Government Trying to Stamp Out Cheap Medical Testing Technology?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/1QkGVyM via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1NzBqwy

Poison for Breakfast Anyone?

ANH-USA tested common breakfast foods for the presence of glyphosate, the toxic herbicide. Here’s what we found. Action Alert!

By now it has become common knowledge that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup—the most common weed killer in the world—poses many grave threats to human health and has been classified as a possible carcinogen by the World Health Organization.

We also know that glyphosate is increasingly prevalent, turning up in blood, urine, and even breast milk. To dig deeper—to see just how pervasive glyphosate is in our food system—we tested twenty-four popular breakfast foods and ingredients, including items such as flour, corn flakes, bagels, yogurt, potatoes, organic eggs, and coffee creamers. (Click here to read the full white paper.)

The findings confirmed what we feared: our food system has been saturated with glyphosate, reaching even into some organic products.

While the levels of glyphosate found in these foods were below the safety levels set by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), these limits have come under fire by consumer advocates for being far too high. The EPA’s safety limits also fail to take into account recent evidence of the danger of “inert” ingredients (which are actually not inert) added to pesticides. Remember, too, that the EPA relies almost exclusively on science funded by industry to determine the safety of the chemicals it reviews.

We were surprised to see foods that tested highest for glyphosate were from non-Roundup Ready crops—and these crops are presumably sprayed less heavily with Roundup than the crops that are designed to tolerate the herbicide.

Especially worrisome are the levels of glyphosate found in some organic eggs and dairy creamers, animal products which are not sprayed directly with glyphosate. This indicates that the chemical is entering the food chain and building up in the tissues of animals—likely also the case for humans.

Clearly, Americans are consuming glyphosate on a daily basis. And this, according to the evidence accumulated so far, will have profound consequences for our health.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, it also appears that we’re being exposed to glyphosate in less obvious ways—through hygienic products. A new study found that 85% of cotton products such as gauze, cotton balls, and feminine products like pads and tampons tested positive for glyphosate. Sixty-two percent of the products also contained AMPA, a derivative of glyphosate that could be even more toxic.

The pervasiveness of glyphosate in our food and consumer products could be setting the stage for a public health nightmare, yet government officials are unconcerned, presumably because of their close crony ties to Big Food, Big Biotech, and Big Pharma. In 2013, the EPA actually raised the allowable limits of glyphosate in food and feed crops. That’s right: they raised it!

Action Alert! Write to the EPA and urge them to reconsider their approval of glyphosate. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

B Vits: Deep Sixing Them the Easy Way

Is the Government Trying to Stamp Out Cheap Medical Testing Technology?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/23X7Zhn via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1SqU7qn

Is the Government Trying to Stamp Out Cheap Medical Testing Technology?

The government claims it wants to bring down medical costs and also make Americans healthier. But does it really? Or is it mostly interested in creating and protecting medical monopolies that can lead to big campaign donations? Action Alert!

The innovative blood testing company Theranos is now facing even harsher sanctions from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). We at ANH-USA have been following this story of lab-testing innovator Theranos for some time. We are not only concerned here with crony medicine. Cheap and reliable testing is absolutely vital for natural medicine.

The company is in the process of perfecting blood-testing technology that is cheaper, faster, and more convenient for consumers. The basic idea is simple—create testing technology that would allow individuals to keep tabs on their own health at a fraction of the cost and inconvenience of traditional blood testing.

Unfortunately, for the past year or so, the company has been hit with attack after attack from federal regulators (see our recent articles for more background).

The most recent actions come from CMS. After the agency inspected Theranos’s facility late in 2015, it sent a letter in January 2016 detailing a number of supposed deficiencies that were found in one of the company’s labs.

Theranos responded in February with a plan to address the alleged deficiencies, but CMS shot back in a letter dated March 18 that Theranos had failed to address 43 out of 45 deficiencies that had been identified by their inspectors last year. In the March letter, CMS stated that it intends to revoke the California lab’s license and prohibit Elizabeth Holmes, the founder, chairman, and CEO of Theranos, from owning or running any other lab for at least two years. In the world of lab testing, this is unprecedented and clearly intended to destroy Theranos.

Theranos was given ten days to respond to CMS’s letter and offer evidence as to why the sanctions should not be imposed. According to the Wall Street Journal—which has been stoking this fire—Theranos has indeed responded, and CMS is determining its next move.

This isn’t the only threat to the medical testing field. As we’ve reported previously, the FDA has also been throttling innovators in medical testing and is looking to expand its regulatory power over the field by regulating tests as medical devices—a move that members of Congress have vehemently denounced.

We suspect that the pretext for all of this is to protect hospitals, which have invested heavily in medical testing and derive much revenue from it. Hospitals partner with the government in myriad ways and get all sorts of monopoly benefits from it. For example, a doctor employed by a hospital, even if outside the hospital, will often receive a much higher fee from Medicare for a particular medical procedure or service.

Government is also friendly with two independent companies, LabCorp and Quest Diagnostic. The two enjoy a virtual monopoly over medical testing outside of hospitals. The numbers speak for themselves: according to OpenSecrets.org, Quest Diagnostics spent $640,000 on lobbying efforts in 2013; LabCorp spent $340,000; and the Federation of American Hospitals spent $3,260,000. This money was specifically spent on lobbying; there were also many, many campaign contributions.

What happens to medical testing in general, and to innovators such as Theranos in particular, has enormous implications for the future of natural medicine.

Consider the world that a company like Theranos could make possible. Chronic diseases could be caught early and monitored like they never could before. With the speed and convenience of this testing, more individuals would be empowered to take control of their health. For instance, a person might read an article about the importance of vitamin D in the morning and, on the spur of the moment, pop in to a nearby drug store the same afternoon to get an inexpensive vitamin D 25-OH test, thus providing a near-immediate answer to the question of their own vitamin D level. Or, rather than a hypothyroid patient going to an endocrinologist every few months to measure hormone levels, a patient can simply stop into a Walgreens and get the routine blood work they need to manage their condition.

We don’t actually much like the Walgreens model. Better still would be to do the testing in the privacy of your own home. But Theranos decided to work with Walgreens, hoping that by allying with such big company, it would buy some protection. That clearly did not work, and Walgreens has now backed away from the relationship.

If you have ever tried to convince your doctor of why a certain test is needed, or if you’ve experienced the cost of traditional testing in both time and money, you’ll appreciate the approach being pioneered by Theranos and other innovators. We must do what we can to defend innovators from those who want to use government regulation as a weapon to kill competitors, especially competitors offering a cheaper product.

Action Alert! Write to CMS and the FDA and tell them to back off lab-testing innovators! Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

B Vits: Deep Sixing Them the Easy Way

Poison for Breakfast, Anyone?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/23X7Zhh via Aloe for Health

from http://ift.tt/1SqU8KX

Poison for Breakfast Anyone?

ANH-USA tested common breakfast foods for the presence of glyphosate, the toxic herbicide. Here’s what we found. Action Alert!

By now it has become common knowledge that glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup—the most common weed killer in the world—poses many grave threats to human health and has been classified as a possible carcinogen by the World Health Organization.

We also know that glyphosate is increasingly prevalent, turning up in blood, urine, and even breast milk. To dig deeper—to see just how pervasive glyphosate is in our food system—we tested twenty-four popular breakfast foods and ingredients, including items such as flour, corn flakes, bagels, yogurt, potatoes, organic eggs, and coffee creamers. (Click here to read the full white paper.)

The findings confirmed what we feared: our food system has been saturated with glyphosate, reaching even into some organic products.

While the levels of glyphosate found in these foods were below the safety levels set by Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), these limits have come under fire by consumer advocates for being far too high. The EPA’s safety limits also fail to take into account recent evidence of the danger of “inert” ingredients (which are actually not inert) added to pesticides. Remember, too, that the EPA relies almost exclusively on science funded by industry to determine the safety of the chemicals it reviews.

We were surprised to see foods that tested highest for glyphosate were from non-Roundup Ready crops—and these crops are presumably sprayed less heavily with Roundup than the crops that are designed to tolerate the herbicide.

Especially worrisome are the levels of glyphosate found in some organic eggs and dairy creamers, animal products which are not sprayed directly with glyphosate. This indicates that the chemical is entering the food chain and building up in the tissues of animals—likely also the case for humans.

Clearly, Americans are consuming glyphosate on a daily basis. And this, according to the evidence accumulated so far, will have profound consequences for our health.

And if that wasn’t bad enough, it also appears that we’re being exposed to glyphosate in less obvious ways—through hygienic products. A new study found that 85% of cotton products such as gauze, cotton balls, and feminine products like pads and tampons tested positive for glyphosate. Sixty-two percent of the products also contained AMPA, a derivative of glyphosate that could be even more toxic.

The pervasiveness of glyphosate in our food and consumer products could be setting the stage for a public health nightmare, yet government officials are unconcerned, presumably because of their close crony ties to Big Food, Big Biotech, and Big Pharma. In 2013, the EPA actually raised the allowable limits of glyphosate in food and feed crops. That’s right: they raised it!

Action Alert! Write to the EPA and urge them to reconsider their approval of glyphosate. Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

B Vits: Deep Sixing Them the Easy Way

Is the Government Trying to Stamp Out Cheap Medical Testing Technology?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/23X7Zhn via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/1QkGTaf

Is the Government Trying to Stamp Out Cheap Medical Testing Technology?

The government claims it wants to bring down medical costs and also make Americans healthier. But does it really? Or is it mostly interested in creating and protecting medical monopolies that can lead to big campaign donations? Action Alert!

The innovative blood testing company Theranos is now facing even harsher sanctions from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS). We at ANH-USA have been following this story of lab-testing innovator Theranos for some time. We are not only concerned here with crony medicine. Cheap and reliable testing is absolutely vital for natural medicine.

The company is in the process of perfecting blood-testing technology that is cheaper, faster, and more convenient for consumers. The basic idea is simple—create testing technology that would allow individuals to keep tabs on their own health at a fraction of the cost and inconvenience of traditional blood testing.

Unfortunately, for the past year or so, the company has been hit with attack after attack from federal regulators (see our recent articles for more background).

The most recent actions come from CMS. After the agency inspected Theranos’s facility late in 2015, it sent a letter in January 2016 detailing a number of supposed deficiencies that were found in one of the company’s labs.

Theranos responded in February with a plan to address the alleged deficiencies, but CMS shot back in a letter dated March 18 that Theranos had failed to address 43 out of 45 deficiencies that had been identified by their inspectors last year. In the March letter, CMS stated that it intends to revoke the California lab’s license and prohibit Elizabeth Holmes, the founder, chairman, and CEO of Theranos, from owning or running any other lab for at least two years. In the world of lab testing, this is unprecedented and clearly intended to destroy Theranos.

Theranos was given ten days to respond to CMS’s letter and offer evidence as to why the sanctions should not be imposed. According to the Wall Street Journal—which has been stoking this fire—Theranos has indeed responded, and CMS is determining its next move.

This isn’t the only threat to the medical testing field. As we’ve reported previously, the FDA has also been throttling innovators in medical testing and is looking to expand its regulatory power over the field by regulating tests as medical devices—a move that members of Congress have vehemently denounced.

We suspect that the pretext for all of this is to protect hospitals, which have invested heavily in medical testing and derive much revenue from it. Hospitals partner with the government in myriad ways and get all sorts of monopoly benefits from it. For example, a doctor employed by a hospital, even if outside the hospital, will often receive a much higher fee from Medicare for a particular medical procedure or service.

Government is also friendly with two independent companies, LabCorp and Quest Diagnostic. The two enjoy a virtual monopoly over medical testing outside of hospitals. The numbers speak for themselves: according to OpenSecrets.org, Quest Diagnostics spent $640,000 on lobbying efforts in 2013; LabCorp spent $340,000; and the Federation of American Hospitals spent $3,260,000. This money was specifically spent on lobbying; there were also many, many campaign contributions.

What happens to medical testing in general, and to innovators such as Theranos in particular, has enormous implications for the future of natural medicine.

Consider the world that a company like Theranos could make possible. Chronic diseases could be caught early and monitored like they never could before. With the speed and convenience of this testing, more individuals would be empowered to take control of their health. For instance, a person might read an article about the importance of vitamin D in the morning and, on the spur of the moment, pop in to a nearby drug store the same afternoon to get an inexpensive vitamin D 25-OH test, thus providing a near-immediate answer to the question of their own vitamin D level. Or, rather than a hypothyroid patient going to an endocrinologist every few months to measure hormone levels, a patient can simply stop into a Walgreens and get the routine blood work they need to manage their condition.

We don’t actually much like the Walgreens model. Better still would be to do the testing in the privacy of your own home. But Theranos decided to work with Walgreens, hoping that by allying with such big company, it would buy some protection. That clearly did not work, and Walgreens has now backed away from the relationship.

If you have ever tried to convince your doctor of why a certain test is needed, or if you’ve experienced the cost of traditional testing in both time and money, you’ll appreciate the approach being pioneered by Theranos and other innovators. We must do what we can to defend innovators from those who want to use government regulation as a weapon to kill competitors, especially competitors offering a cheaper product.

Action Alert! Write to CMS and the FDA and tell them to back off lab-testing innovators! Please send your message immediately.

Other articles in this week’s Pulse of Natural Health:

B Vits: Deep Sixing Them the Easy Way

Poison for Breakfast, Anyone?

from The Alliance for Natural Health http://ift.tt/23X7Zhh via Aloe for Health
from Tumblr http://ift.tt/26dnCmL