(NaturalNews – Zach C. Miller) Certain working professionals, such as carpenters and painters, might know what trisodium phosphate (TSP) is. They’d know that TSP is an industrial cleaning agent used for paint prep work, as a degreasing agent, as a mildew remover, siding cleaner and lead abating agent. However, what these working pros wouldn’t expect is for TSP to be in their breakfast, lunch, and toothpaste!

TSP used for industrial cleaning comes with first aid warnings on it due to the compound’s extreme alkalinity. Yet, breakfast cereal manufacturers are bold enough to put this product in their cereals and even list it right on the ingredient label! Go ahead right now and look in your cabinet, if you have a mainstream breakfast cereal in there you might see TSP listed on the label in plain sight.

TSP and the FDA’s hypocrisy

The FDA has approved TSP to be generally recognized as safe (GRAS). Because of its alkalinizing cleaning properties, TSP has been used in dishwashing and laundry products over the years. But government studies have found that TSP is bad for the environment and as such TSP was phased out of common household cleaning products in 2011. The hypocrisy of this is outstanding; TSP is bad for our ecology, but it’s okay to put it in food!?

Along with GMOs and gluten, TSP is another item you’ll probably want to add to your list of things to avoid in foods that you buy and support with your dollar. Luckily, TSP usually is easily visible on the ingredients list, so if you know where to look you can avoid buying it for your family.

What types of products contain trisodium phosphate?

Among the cereals that contain it are Wheaties, most types of Cheerios, Lucky Charms, Trader Joe’s brands, and others. It appears that most General Mills cereal brands contain TSP. However, there are many brands of cereals that potentially have TSP added as an ingredient so check your labels. Some other foods and products that contain TSP include:

– Processed meats
– Processed cheese
– Many canned soups
– Commercial cakes and baked goods (added as a leavening agent)
– Toothpastes
– Baby toothpastes
– Mouthwash
– Hair coloring and bleaching products

The FDA has stated that TSP is not a risk in food, but on the PAN Pesticides Database-Chemicals website it clearly states to avoid contact with TSP, either internally or topically (as in hair products). Some of the health problems that can arise from ingesting TSP are: irritation the gastric mucosa, reduction of lactic acid in muscles, a mineral imbalance leading to loss of calcium from bones, and calcification of the kidneys. The daily recommended value of TSP is 70mg. Western diets consisting of junk food sometimes reach upwards of 500mg of TSP, which leads to an increased risk of developing osteoporosis and other health problems.

Sources for this article include
http://www.onlineholistichealth.com/trisodium-phosphate-food/
http://www.nutrition.und.edu*1
http://www.foodfacts.com
http://www.activistpost.com

(NaturalNews – Jonathan Benson) Millions of prohibitionist-minded Americans have been exposed as complete hypocrites by research proving that refined sugar is more addictive than even hard drugs like cocaine. A compilation of scientific evaluations looking at both sugar and synthetic sweeteners reveals that these omnipresent substances often trigger the same or stronger responses in the brain as illegal drugs, and are sometimes much harder to break in terms of habitual consumption.

A paper published in the journal PLOS ONE back in 2007, for instance, explains how rats given the option to choose between drinking water sweetened with saccharin (Sweet’n Low) or intravenous cocaine almost always chose the water. A shocking 94 percent of rats, according to the researchers, actually preferred the high that they got from saccharin as opposed to the cocaine rush.

The same study found that sucrose, or common table sugar, was also preferred by the rats over cocaine. Based on this observance, the research team noted that regardless of caloric content, the sheer intensity and pleasure of sweetness seems to be more addictive than even the sensitization and intoxication brought about by cocaine, which mainstream society still recognizes as being much more harmful than sugar.

“Refined sugars (e.g., sucrose, fructose) were absent in the diet of most people until very recently in human history,” wrote the researchers from University of Bordeaux in France and James Cook University in Australia. “Today overconsumption of diets rich in sugars contributes together with other factors to drive the current obesity epidemic.”

Sugar addiction is biologically equivalent to drug addiction

But is it just that the taste of sweetness is enjoyable, or is there something more going on in the brain to indicate actual dependency and addiction? Nearly 40 years ago, William Dufty helped answer this question when he penned a book entitled Sugar Blues, which highlighted the addictive properties of sugar and how sweets are a major driver for declining public health.

Many of the ideas presented in this groundbreaking book have been affirmed and reaffirmed by science, which has repeatedly demonstrated that certain neuroendocrine pathways are activated in response to sugar. The infamous “sweet tooth” and frequent sugar cravings are indicative of how these pathways drive obsessive consumption and addiction.

“In most mammals, including rats and humans, sweet receptors evolved in ancestral environments poor in sugars and are thus not adapted to high concentrations of sweet tastants,” wrote the author of another study involving bees, which experienced cocaine-withdrawal-type symptoms when their sweet floral resources were taken away from them.

“The supranormal stimulation of these receptors by sugar-rich diets, such as those now widely available in modern societies, would generate a supranormal reward signal in the brain, with the potential to override self-control mechanisms and thus to lead to addiction.”

Wheat, cow’s milk contain opioid components similar to heroin

Wheat and processed milk are similarly addictive, according to GreenMedInfo, which documents how many processed foods made from these additives possess narcotic properties, acting in a similar way to heroin when consumed. Modern wheat actually contains psychoactive chemicals that bind to opioid receptors in the nervous system, literally acting as a drug inside the body.

Wheat contains a variety of opioid peptides known as gluten exorphins, while cow’s milk contains a variety of casomorphin peptides. Both of these component classes are highly addictive, and are part of the reason why foods made with them are often referred to as “comfort” foods.

“Fructose… is known to increase brain levels of endogenous morphine following ingestion, and may produce metabolic products in the brain very similar to those produced by morphine,” wrote Sayer Ji for GreenMedInfo about another highly addictive food additive prevalent in the American food supply.

Sources:
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
http://www.greenmedinfo.com
http://science.naturalnews.com

(NaturalNews – Jonathan Benson) It is safe to say that the link between soda consumption and health conditions like diabetes and weight gain has been clearly established by a plethora of scientific research published in recent years. But what has not necessarily been fully recognized or understood is how consuming soft drinks affects the behavioral normalcy of children, particularly young children — that is, until now.

A new study set to appear in the Journal of Pediatrics has found, perhaps not surprisingly, that soft drinks like soda pop and processed juice can make children hyper, irritable and unable to focus, especially compared to their non-soda-drinking peers. Sugar-filled beverages, it turns out, can also make children aggressive, violent and even suicidal, altering brain chemistry and disrupting normal physiological balance.

To come to these conclusions, Shakira Suglia, Sc.D., and her colleagues from Columbia University, the University of Vermont and the Harvard School of Public Health assessed roughly 3,000 five-year-old children enrolled in the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study. The participating children came from 20 large U.S. cities, and their mothers reported information on their soft drink consumption patterns and behavioral profiles.

Upon analysis, it was found that a shocking 43 percent of children consumed at least one serving of soda or other soft drink per day, and four percent consumed four or more servings daily. But the really disturbing part is that, with each increase in soda consumption among all the children, aggression issues, withdrawal, attention disorders and other conditions became more pronounced.

In essence, after accounting for various outside influencing factors like socioeconomic status, parental stability (or lack thereof) and living situations, the study team verified that soda consumption is a direct cause of behavioral problems in young children. In fact, children who drank four or more soft drinks per day were found to be twice as likely as their peers to get in fights, destroy other people’s property and physically attack others.

“We found that the child’s aggressive behavior score increased with every increase in soft drinks servings per day,” says Dr. Suglia about the findings.

People of all ages damage their brains by drinking soft drinks, research shows

Earlier studies have found that older children, teenagers and even adults are behaviorally affected by soft drink consumption as well. A 2011 study published in the journal Injury Prevention, for instance, found that teenagers who drink at least five cans of soda per week, less than one per day, are more likely to have violent, aggressive tendencies.

Similarly, individuals of all ages were found in another study by the same authors to be more prone to mood-related behavioral problems, including feelings of belligerence, depression and suicide. All across the board, drinking soda and other sugar-dense beverages is a surefire way to mess up your brain and mental health, based on this collective research.

“Soft drinks are highly processed products containing carbonated water, high-fructose corn syrup, aspartame, sodium benzoate, phosphoric or citric acid, and often caffeine, any of which might affect behavior,” say the authors of the Journal of Pediatrics study.

Sources for this article include:
http://www.sciencedaily.com
http://healthland.time.com
http://www.reuters.com
http://science.naturalnews.com

(NaturalNews – Zach C. Miller) Lately, it seems that every supermarket has a hand-sanitizing station prominently displayed near the doors. In fact, the trend of using hand sanitizers has really ramped up in recent years, with more people carrying around their own personal-size versions of the stuff around with them.

And why not? Hand sanitizers seem like the perfect way to stay clean and disinfect on the go and don’t seem to have any downside. Unfortunately, there are some hidden down sides lurking in supposedly “clean” hand sanitizers that could lead to trouble with regular and repeated use. As you’ll see below, finding out the real truth about products we use daily is vital, especially when matters of health and well-being are concerned.

Triclosan

Triclosan is antibacterial chemical agent added mainly to soaps and personal care and cleaning products. Strangely, it’s also found in clothing, cookware, furniture and toys in an attempt to reduce bacteria levels. Research on triclosan has raised questions about potential hazards to human health. Triclosan has been shown to disrupt hormone regulation, disrupt immune system function and contribute to the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria (i.e. superbugs). Indeed, the use of triclosan is contributing to an epidemic of antibiotic resistance. This happens when bacteria are regularly exposed to antibacterial agents; the bacteria adapt and grow stronger, more resistant and more immune.

Parabens

Parabens are ubiquitously found in many personal care products such as shampoo, conditioner, body wash, soaps, hand sanitizers and lotions for the purpose of discouraging the growth of microbes. If you look at the label of personal care products, you’ll see one or more of these names: ethylparaben, butylparaben, methylparaben and propylparaben. Unfortunately, parabens are linked to endocrine disruption, skin irritation, reproductive toxicity, immunotoxicity and cancer. Parabens also mimic estrogen by binding to estrogen receptors on cells, and they increase the expression of genes regulated by estradiol, a natural form of estrogen. Because parabens are used to kill microbes in water-based products, they inherently contain toxicity for cells in general.

Chemically synthesized artificial fragrances

Most hand sanitizers have a fragrance, and that means that they are very likely to be full of toxic chemicals. Because fragrances are considered to be “trade secrets,” companies aren’t required to disclose what ingredients they contain. That means that they can be created from just about anything — including hundreds of dangerous chemical compounds. Artificial and chemical fragrances have been associated with allergies, dermatitis, respiratory distress, hormone disruption and potentially negative effects on the reproductive system. The solution here is to look for unscented hand sanitizers to avoid chemically synthesized fragrances. But even unscented hand sanitizers may still contain triclosan and parabens; if you look at the label and see the word antibacterial, it means that your hand sanitizer likely contains triclosan and you should inspect the ingredients label to make sure.

Better options and solutions

While not as convenient or trendy, getting back to basics and just using soap and water is really a better, time-tested way to clean your hands. But there are also natural hand sanitizers appearing on the market which don’t contain yucky chemicals. It’s always nice to support companies that create products that have ingredients in them that you can actually pronounce…

Sources:
http://www.thealternativedaily.com
http://www.organicauthority.com
http://www.mayoclinic.org
http://safecosmetics.org
http://science.naturalnews.com

(NaturalNews – L.J. Devon) Coca-Cola’s global sales have dropped for the third straight year. For the first time in 15 years, Coca-Cola’s global soda sales volumes fell in the first quarter of the year. The excitement of the fizzy drinks is begging to fizzle out. Consumers are growing concerned with their waistlines, their diabetes and their overall health, as they gradually shift away from all the sugar, the calories, the caramel colors, the artificial flavors and the preservatives.

That’s why Coca-Cola is coming out with a new marketing campaign targeting the consumers’ health-diligence. Coke executives plan on boosting global marketing spending by one billion dollars over the next three years. The company has already started adorning their bottles and cans of Coke with labels that claim “no artificial flavors, no preservatives added.” While this sounds like a positive step in the right direction for any company, it doesn’t compensate for the fact that the Coke is full of phosphoric acid, which is essentially an artificial flavor and preservative. On top of that, phosphoric acid lowers bone density and causes kidney disease. So is the new Coca-Cola label claim a downright lie?

Class action suit targets Coca-Cola’s misleading new label claims

In October 2013, a man named Paul Merrit filed a class action suit in California challenging Coke’s all-natural label claims. A federal class action suit filed in March 2014 by a man named Ronald Sowizrol follows along with the same challenge against Coca-Cola.

George Engurasoff and Joshua Ogden are now representing a class action suit against Coca-Cola Refreshments USA Inc., claiming the company is falsely advertising their signature beverage. The complaint wants Coca-Cola to label the phosphoric acid as an artificial flavor and preservative instead of pretending that it doesn’t exist. Coca-Cola executives argued that phosphoric acid is not on the FDA’s list of artificial flavors and therefore does not qualify as one.

U.S. District Judge Jeffrey White responded to Coca-Cola, saying that “these lists are not exhaustive” and that “the absence of phosphoric acid on these lists does not mean that the FDA has made a finding that phosphoric acid is not an artificial flavor.” In fact, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) says artificial flavors are used specifically to add flavor and are anything not derived from natural sources like fruit and vegetable juice, plant materials or dairy products. The industry must admit that phosphoric acid is a non-natural mass-produced chemical added to give soda its tart and tangy flavor.

Facts about phosphoric acid

Phosphoric acid gives beverages like Coca-Cola a strong acidity which is greater than lemon juice or vinegar. Although colorless, odorless and clear, phosphoric acid is not tasteless. It’s the very acidifying agent that gives the beverage a tangy flavor. That same tangy flavor ingredient can also remove rust on vehicles. The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition shows how phosphoric acid chemically robs the bones, lowering human bone density. Furthermore, it’s been linked to kidney stones and kidney disease. Similar phosphate compounds are also found naturally in meat and dairy products, which helps explain why meat, dairy and sodas similarly cause inflammation in the human body. Phosphoric acid is mass-produced in large quantities and is also recognized in the industry as E338, orthophosphoric acid or phosphoric(V) acid.

If Coca-Cola desires to continue selling phosphoric acid poison, then they should at least be honest about it and not pretend that their beverages contain “no artificial flavors [and] no preservatives.”

Sources for this article include:
http://www.courthousenews.com
http://blog.fooducate.com
http://finance.yahoo.com
http://science.naturalnews.com

(NaturalNews – S. D. Wells) Step right up to your favorite food bar, whether at Whole Foods, Harris Teeter or Farm Fresh, and “get you some” potato salad, coleslaw, egg salad, pasta salad, chicken salad, tuna salad, baked goods, or just make your own salad with lots of salad “dressing” and you are most likely getting a few heaping tablespoons of rapeseed oil with each serving, better known these days as canola oil. Now, whether or not there really is any such thing as organic canola oil, well, the jury is still out on that one. Regardless, canola oil is not good for you, and it ALL goes through a “deodorizing” processing stage that removes the “stink” of rapeseed, in case you didn’t know.

Canola oil can have detrimental effects on your health, especially the genetically modified (GM) canola that Monsanto so conveniently manufacturers for the masses to consume. It’s all mixed into those fancy, condiment-loaded, creamy salads at the friendly grocer, and it’s FRESH! Step right up to the fresh bar! Add in some tasty conventional spices and keep it hot or cold in those little bins for those “whole” food enthusiasts. Lots of people pack a few of the canola “mixtures” into plastic (BPA) containers and take them home. What exactly are you taking home, though?

There is no such thing as a canola plant

Wait, did you think there was a canola plant, like corn, soy or sunflower? Did you think making canola is just about pressing seeds? How DOES rapeseed oil magically turn into canola oil? It’s “deodorized” with a chemical component. Do you want to put a “hex” on your health? Insert “hexane” and wait for problems to rear their ugly head. Hexane, a vapor component of gasoline, is used to process oils and has been since World War II. And yes, hexane is flammable. Hexane is a chemical made from crude oil, the mainstream solvent extraction method of the entire Western world. So how is this organic? Good question.

The omega-3 fatty acids of processed canola oil are transformed during the deodorizing process into trans fatty acids. The reason why canola is particularly unsuitable for consumption is that it contains a very-long-chain fatty acid called erucic acid, which under some circumstances is associated with fibrotic heart lesions.

Here’s an interesting fact: In 1985, the Federal Register (official journal of the federal government of the United States) stated that the FDA outlawed canola oil in infant formulas because it retarded growth. So, 25 years ago it was not good for babies, but now it’s suddenly okay for everyone else? (http://www.functionalmedicineuniversity.com)

There’s a “not-so-heart-healthy” nation just below Canada

Just when you think that you’re eating healthy, you get fooled again. It’s the “cash crop” canola con! They’ve exploited that “gray area” so well for years. If you’re not sure, it probably “ain’t pure.” Oh, but its Canada’s top export to the USA by the millions of pounds of seed, oil, and meal per year.

But wait, some fast food chains were bragging recently because they are getting rid of their trans fat oils and switching to canola oil, like it’s some big move toward a “heart-healthy” nation, instead of using that pesticide-ridden soybean oil. So they must have been using that “close by choice” sales trick, where the consumer chooses from a lesser of evils but still falls for the gag. Sounds like two-party politics. So what’s your mayonnaise made with? What is the most prominent ingredient of your salad dressing, meaning what are the first few ingredients listed, because you know food manufacturers must list ingredients from the most first to the least last, right?

Oh, but the backlash will come, because people love their canola! Either that or they have no idea how much they are eating each day. They’re not doing the math. Add up those items from the canola food bar, condiments at home and some baked goods and what have you got? A “little bit” of rapeseed oil is moving through your digestive tract and your cleaning organs, and your body is not happy about it. Do you think Whole Foods uses organic canola for the food bar, or should you ask? Should it say? Everything that is prepackaged says so on the label. Too bad you can’t “Fooducate” the food bar items using the phone app (http://fooducate.com). Would it even matter if it was organic? I mean, can you have organic fibrotic heart lesions?

A biochemist would tell you that canola oil has higher levels of trans fatty acids than soybean oil and other toxic GMO “hybrid” oils that the masses use on a regular basis. This would include the hydrogenated vegetable oils cottonseed, safflower and corn.

Avoid the “All-You-Care-to-Eat” Canola Food Bar!

Take a quick look at the short-term and long-term damage you could be doing to your body by consuming canola regularly:

• Canola depletes vitamin E.
• Canola increases the rigidity of membranes, which can trigger degenerative diseases.
• Because of canola’s high sulfur content, it goes rancid easily, which can exacerbate allergies and compound problems for people with bronchial or asthmatic issues.
• Human studies reveal canola causes an increase in lung cancers.
• Canola can shorten lifespan of animals and lower platelet count.
• Daily canola consumption can raise your triglycerides over 40 percent.
• Canola oil molds quickly and also inhibits enzyme function.
• It opens the door for free radicals, undermining natural antioxidants, and can be linked to increased incidence of many diseases.
• Canola leaves no foul taste when it’s spoiled, so it’s hard to tell if you’re eating rancid erucic acid.

The Harvard School of Public Health stated decades ago that there is no safe level of trans fats, yet still, if there are less than 500 mg per half-cup serving, the FDA allows food manufacturers to use the label saying “no trans fats.” So who measures that half-cup at the food bar? Maybe you’re getting A HALF-CUP of CANOLA for lunch and dinner. Do you know the chemistry of your own cell membranes? Maybe you should. (http://www.bostonglobe.com)

Did you know that canola was man-made by a scientist at a university lab in Canada? The genes of the rapeseed plant were actually bred to produce less toxic erucic acid. Great, design a poisonous crop to meet FDA guidelines, then ship it to the USA! After creating this infamous genetically modified “invention,” this same scientist, Dr. Baldur Steffanson, went to work for Calgene, which was later bought by the biotech giant Monsanto! Who do you think also developed the “Roundup-Resistant” variety of GMO Canola? You guessed it – Dr. Steffanson, the “Father of Canola.” Thanks doc – for your contribution of weed killer and rapeseed oil hidden in our food! (http://timemachine.siamandas.com)

Still want to fill up those handy “to-go” containers at the “whole” foods bar? Still think all those creamy salads are the “bomb”? Think again. Don’t be fooled by canola just because the “debate” isn’t settled. Thanks to the “cloud” around the debate, it infiltrates the “whole food” market. Try grape seed oil or coconut oil for your own salads that YOU put together and can trust. Both of those oils can also tolerate high heat. Organic extra-virgin olive oil is good for you, but only if you don’t cook it at high heat. Stay healthy my friends.

Sources for this article include:
http://www.greencradle.net
http://www.youtube.com
http://www.organicconsumers.org
http://timemachine.siamandas.com
http://www.naturalnews.com
http://www.laleva.cc
http://preventdisease.com
http://www.functionalmedicineuniversity.com
http://www.bostonglobe.com

(NaturalNews – Michael Ravensthorpe) For centuries, shiitake mushrooms (Lentinula edodes) have been utilized as a medicine in their native East Asia. Traditional Chinese medicine, for instance, would commonly prescribe shiitake for people suffering from upper respiratory disease, poor blood circulation and fatigue. In Japan, shiitake were beloved for their anti-aging properties. And Europeans, who have rigorously studied shiitake under the microscope since they first arrived on the continent, appreciate their impressive cholesterol lowering and weight loss properties.

However, an American study published in the Cancer Prevention Research journal has also found that a compound present in shiitake mushrooms can suppress the rate of cervical cancer growth, making them a viable alternative for aggressive and unnatural allopathic cancer treatments.

AHCC vs. HPV

According to the study authors, shiitake mushrooms contain an alpha-glucan called active hexose correlated compound (AHCC), which is a mixture of amino acids, polysaccharides and minerals. This compound, which appears to be unique to shiitake, is well known for its anti-tumor benefits. With this information in mind, the researchers sought to determine whether AHCC could also eradicate human papillomavirus (HPV), an extremely common sexually-transmitted infection which, if left untreated, can cause women to develop cervical cancer.

For the study, the researchers treated two cervical cancer cells (SiHa [HPV 16/18 positive] and C-33A [HPV negative]) in vitro with a 0.42 mg/mL dose of AHCC, then incubated them for 72 hours. Two additional trials followed: one in which the same AHCC dose was repeated once every 24 hours for one week, and another in which mice suffering from HPV were fed a 50 mg/kg dose of AHCC daily for the same period.

The results showed that AHCC suppressed HPV in all three trials. In the first trial, the AHCC suppressed HPV expression during the first 24 hours, but the HPV came back with a vengeance during the next 24 hours. Fortunately, continuous in vitro exposure — such as that experienced in the other two trials — resulted in sustained HPV suppression. Specifically, sustained AHCC treatment resulted in an overall 15.9 percent decrease in HPV activity compared to the control groups.

“[T]hese data suggest daily dosing of AHCC will eradicate HPV 16/18 infections and may have a role in the prevention of HPV-related cervical cancer,” concluded Dr. Judith Smith, lead researcher, and scientist at the University of Texas. “Furthermore, there is a potential for the addition of AHCC to primary treatment regimens for cervical cancer, which may potentially improve response rates and prevent recurrence.”

Dr. Smith’s findings were presented at the Society of Gynecological Oncology’s 45th Annual Meeting on Women’s Cancer in Tampa, Florida in March 2014.

Sources for this article include:

• Shiitake – Half Hill Farm
• Shiitake Mushroom – Natural News
• Could MUSHROOMS prevent cervical cancer? Fungi extract kills virus and slows tumor growth – Daily mail
• http://cancerpreventionresearch.aacrjournals.org
• http://www.mskcc.org/cancer-care/herb/ahcc
• http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/stdfact-hpv.htm