Why the U.S. Washes and Refrigerates Eggs, & Why Other Countries Don’t

American eggs are federally required to be washed and sanitized and then refrigerated. There are a few reasons for this, but the main reason is that our factory farms are disgusting. In Europe, eggs sold in supermarkets are not legally allowed to be washed.

I live in Mexico and one of the first things I noticed at the grocery stores here is that they do not refrigerate the eggs. They’re sold on a shelf with dry goods generally, like sugar or canned milk products. There are many options from tiny spotted ones to big brown ones, but they’re unwashed and unchilled. – Lily Da Vine

The FDA states that eggs must be sterilized and chilled to reduce the likelihood of salmonella infections. Much of the world focuses on, and/or legislated to place emphasis on, producing cleaner eggs. American chicken factories, on the other hand, are legendarily filthy, and we don’t seem motivated to change that.

Abysmal factory farming conditions are what create the problematic salmonella superbug (the same is true for eColi). Eggs become contaminated with salmonella in one of two ways, by either contaminating the egg internally upon production (due to a chicken with infected ovaries), or when the egg becomes in contact with contaminated chicken manure, and salmonella sticks to the porous shell.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xbqv1SuQJ0s

So the United States, in typical fashion, has decided that instead of regulating the farms to produce healthier food, we need to wash, sanitize, and cook our eggs. If you like raw eggs, be sure they aren’t factory farmed, and especially not American factory-farmed!

So what about real farm fresh eggs from a healthy farm where the eggs have room to run around, and they all get a healthy natural diet? Those eggs should be gently cleaned off, but not washed or made wet. There is a protective coating around the eggs that you want to preserve. If the eggs do get washed they should then be refrigerated or used shortly thereafter.

If you can’t produce your own eggs try finding a local farmer who does not wash or chill their eggs, and simply leaves them on the counter when you get home. Wash them just before you use them (if you want).

Other Common Egg Questions: Shell and Yolk Color

The color of the yolks are determined by diet and the freshness of the egg. Hens that get a variety of foods including lots of plants, alfalfa, bugs, for instance, are healthier than hens that have a restricted diet.  Healthy chickens have a darker yellow-orange yolk. Factory farmed chickens in the United States typically have diets of wheat, barley, or white corn which produces pale yellow yolks.

Shells are different colors because different chickens lay different eggs.

…egg color is determined by the genetics of the hens. The breed of the hen will indicate what color eggs she will produce. For example, Leghorn chickens lay white eggs while Orpington’s lay brown eggs and Ameraucana produce blue eggs. An Olive Egger, a chicken that lays olive green eggs, is the product of a cross between a hen and rooster that are from a brown egg and a blue egg laying breed. An interesting tip is to look at the chicken’s ear lobes; typically those with white ear lobes produce white eggs.” – Michigan State

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Trump Is Lifting Ban on Importing Elephant Trophies from Africa

The Trump administration is reported to be reversing the Obama administration’s ban on bringing heads of elephants killed in Zimbabwe and Zambia back to the U.S.

Imports will be allowed for elephants killed between Jan. 21, 2016 and the end of 2018. The decision has been cheered by many hunting and gun rights organizations. The United States and international authorities say the African elephant is an endangered species, and the Obama administration argued that allowing trophy imports of the elephants would harm the animals by encouraging the killing and poaching of them.

Even though elephants are listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, a provision in the act allows the government to give permits to import these trophies if there is evidence that the hunting actually benefits conservation for that species. The official said they have new information from officials in Zimbabwe and Zambia to support reversing the ban to allow trophy hunting permits.” – ABC News

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghr1oldTVJc

Legal, well-regulated sport hunting as part of a sound management program can benefit the conservation of certain species by providing incentives to local communities to conserve the species and by putting much-needed revenue back into conservation.” – FWS spokesman

Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., Donald Trump’s sons, are known to be fans of large game hunting.

Newsweek states that the elephant population has declined since 2001 in Zimbabwe and in some regions in Zambia.

Hunters often choose the healthiest or strongest members of animal populations, to have a more impressive trophy, but this can have negative effects on the species overall.

This 2015 poll showed that 86 percent of Americans are opposed to big-game hunting, and 60% of respondents said that it should be illegal.

Update!

Nice work everyone!



Why Are Our Natural Pollinators in Decline?

The loss of biodiversity is a worldwide, urgent crisis. Plant biodiversity is closely connected to insect biodiversity because pollinators assist the plants with reproduction and genetic variation. Research shows that commercial honey bee populations (various species) have decreased in the United States by 30-40% since 2006. Since the majority of food production relies on honey bees, it is important to determine the causes of these changes and implement the necessary solutions, such as reducing pesticide use on crops and implementing more organic agricultural practices. As consumers, our choices directly impact the environment, because many environmental issues are connected to the mass production of food and other goods. Sometimes we do not know about these issues until it is too late to fix them.

Pollinator Decline

The process used to detect declines in insect pollinator populations is very challenging, expensive, and time-consuming. It can take up to 20 years of monitoring to detect a small decline per year in some species such as birds, fish, and plants. With insects, it can take even longer due to the necessary sample sites, and long-term studies to determine the abundance and diversity of species, and it can be difficult to identify specimens to the species level. Although it would require a large investment to establish accurate pollinator monitoring programs at the regional, national or international level, it is worth the investment.

Agricultural and Ecological Value of Pollinators

The value of worldwide insect-pollinated crops is estimated around $200 billion per year. Insect pollination increases the size, quality, and quantity of fruit and/or seeds for the majority of our major crops worldwide. Global agricultural production will decrease significantly if pollinators drastically decline in number, requiring extensive investment to increase their numbers. If too many pollinator species were to go extinct, it would also require the use of alternative pollination techniques in order to maintain current food production rates. This would increase prices for consumers because other pollinating methods, hand or mechanical, are very expensive. It would be advisable to proactively prevent the decline of pollinators before the declines reach crisis levels.

Most of the insect decline research has been focused on “managed” honey bee colonies that are raised by beekeepers. However, there are not many programs that monitor the status of native bees and other wild pollinators such as flies, wasps, moths, and butterflies, which actually can be more effective pollinators of crops than managed honey bees.

In addition to pollinating crops, approximately 75 to 90 percent of all flowering plants are pollinated with the help of insects and other animals. Insects and flowering plants also serve a vital role as a food source for many species within ecosystems around the world. The ecological value of the insects and the plants they pollinate cannot truly be quantified, but it exceeds the contributions to agriculture.

Organic Certification

One potential solution to pollinator species decline would be an increase in organic agricultural practices. Overall, these practices are safer for pollinators and other wildlife. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) has a certification process for organic products. In order to qualify for certification, crops must meet a strict set of criteria established by the National Organic Program (NOP) which preserve natural resources and biodiversity (see USDA under “sources” for details). In general, USDA organic crops cannot be exposed to:

  • Radiation
  • Sewage
  • Prohibited pesticides
  • Synthetic fertilizers
  • Genetic modification

Organic livestock regulations include:

  • No antibiotics
  • No growth hormones
  • Fed 100% organic diet
  • Have access to the outdoors
  • Meet animal health and welfare standards

If a multi-ingredient product is labeled USDA organic, it must contain at least 95% organic ingredients. Residue testing is done on an annual basis by accredited certifying agents. The USDA Organic Seal is a leading global standard in organic agriculture.

Colony Collapse Disorder

The causes of pollinator decline are still being researched. Although there has been a decline in pollinators for many years, colony collapse disorder (CCD) was first reported in the U.S. in 2006, when whole colonies of adult honey bees began mysteriously dying. Studies have linked CCD to viruses, bacteria, fungi, mites, herbicides, fungicides, insecticides, habitat loss and cross-country transport. Pollinators also become malnourished as their habitat is destroyed, and as climate change leads to changes in flowering seasons.

Impacts of Chemicals Used in Conventional Agriculture

Herbicides

Although honey bees have received the most attention, species such as the monarch butterfly have also drastically declined since 2012. As herbicides destroy their larval food source, milkweed, they experience nutritional deficiency and habitat loss. Monarchs are known for their long migrations, and they require sufficient nutrition to survive such journeys. Pollinators are dependent on vegetation, just as vegetation is dependent on pollinators. When herbicides kill targeted plants, there are unintended consequences on many other plant species and the animals that rely on their presence. One example of this is the monarch butterfly, which has been negatively affected by the loss of milkweed. Many species of insects rely on very specific plant species for nectar, pollen, and nesting material. Applying herbicides can reduce the abundance of arthropods in general, which includes butterflies, moths, true bugs, flies, and bees among many others. Not only does this reduce insect biodiversity, but the other animals that feed on them, such as birds are also affected. Overall, it is important to minimize the areas of herbicide exposure, especially to native habitat surrounding croplands. It is also important to use selective herbicides that will not affect non-targeted plant species.

Fungicides

Some studies have shown that fungicide presence can contribute to CCD in honey bees. In contrast, other studies have shown that a fungal gut infection, could be the cause of the collapse in bee populations and that a fungicide could reduce CCD. It most likely depends on the type of fungicide used, and whether it is applied to crops or given directly to hives to treat a fungal infection. Because CCD is so complex, continued research is necessary to determine whether a fungicide is one potential solution, but it appears there are positive and negative effects.

Insecticides

A class of insecticides called neonicotinoids have been linked to immune suppression in honey bees, which allows for an increase in fungal infections. The European Commission has banned three neonicotinoids while further research is conducted; however, it is known that neonicotinoids can remain in the environment for at least six years. Although the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) conducted studies on the residues of neonicotinoids in agricultural environments, there have not been very many studies focused on the levels existing in water sources, due to insecticide runoff. Most species rely on natural water sources for survival, in which case, these chemicals could potentially be found in many animal species.

Two types of neonicotinoids are major pesticides used to treat corn and soybeans in the United States. In addition, plants used for backyard landscaping, that are sold in commercial nurseries, may also have been grown using these pesticides. The toxicity for oral exposure in bees is much higher than contact exposure. For instance, according to the calculated LD50 (lethal dose, and the amount it takes to kill half of an adult hive in 24 hours), and the quantities applied to corn fields, the amount of neonicotinoid in one corn kernel would be enough to kill an entire colony. These findings suggest that testing the drinking water of bees is an important factor when determining the level of toxicity, which typically is underreported. The repeated exposure to various pesticides in nectar, pollen and drinking water, have a direct effect on the decline of bees and other insects.

The costs of neonicotinoids outweigh the benefits which the EPA may have overestimated. They may increase the yield of some crops, but have the potential to reduce biodiversity, negatively impacting species at multiple levels in ecosystems. Ultimately, a growing human population increases the demand for pollinator-dependent crops to meet worldwide consumer needs, yet pollinators continue to decline. This imbalance between supply and demand would most likely cause a food shortage, increasing the price of food for consumers.

Fertilizers

The use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers instead of manure-based methods can cause significant nitrate contamination of nearby freshwater systems. The use of synthetic nitrogen fertilizers allows farmers to continually grow crops on the same land without waiting for nutrients to return naturally. This appears to be a practical solution to feeding a growing human population; however, studies also show that there is enough food produced annually to feed the current population, it is just an issue of distribution and waste. While issues surrounding food distribution and waste production are very complex, the simple solution of overusing synthetic fertilizers is having negative long-term effects on the environment. Runoff from agricultural land can cause “dead zones” in bodies of water where the oxygen is depleted due to eutrophication (algal bloom, death, and decomposition). This leads to the collapse of local ecosystems and loss of biodiversity because species, such as fish and other invertebrates can die from a lack of oxygen.

Organic methods have a lower yield than conventional methods, which is partially due to the prohibited use of synthetic fertilizers. However, the price we pay for ecosystem damage caused by excess nitrogen is tremendous. One potential solution is the use of leguminous cover crops, such as beans, peas, and clover, to perform nitrogen fixation at a sufficient rate to increase crop yield. Legumes are known for attracting nitrogen-fixing bacteria to their roots. When used as a cover crop (planted over the soil in the offseason), they can help to add nutrients and organic matter to the soil for future crops while also reducing erosion.

Crop yield and GMOs

Reducing wasted food is key to meeting the food demands of the world. Americans waste 215 meals per person, per year. Some argue that in order to use organic farming methods to produce enough food for the world, it would require more land to produce the same amount of food, which would lead to further deforestation and biodiversity loss. Another argument is that genetically modified organisms (GMOs) help us provide enough food for the world, and genetic modification is not permitted by USDA organic certification. However, organic agriculture could produce enough food for the current population, and a potentially larger population without increasing the land use, partially through the use of leguminous cover crops for nitrogen fixation. Organic agricultural methods around the globe do have a lower yield than conventional; however, it depends on the context, and can range from 5 to 34 percent lower. It depends on the crop type, growing conditions and standard of organic practices. Perennial plants, fruit trees, legumes and oilseed crops are the best candidates for high output under organic conditions. Growing a diverse selection of crops, that are grown without insecticides or genetic modification, can protect pollinator populations while maximizing crop yield.

Instead of debating crop yield between conventional and organic agriculture, the focus should be shifted to how much food is wasted, and learning how to be more resourceful with our food, in order to supply enough nutrition worldwide. In this way, we can utilize safer farming methods that support biodiversity while still providing food for a growing human population.

Related: Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods

Conclusion

It is estimated that organic food sales have increased by approximately 20 percent each year since 1990. As consumers continue to become more educated about organic certification and the ways it can affect the environment and their health, the demand will most likely increase. From a long-term environmental perspective, we cannot afford to continue to use conventional agricultural practices. The price premium on organic products today should be considered an investment in the future for our planet and our ability to feed the world.

If insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and synthetic fertilizers have been shown to negatively affect pollinators and many other species, it can be assumed that the use of USDA organic standards in agriculture could be one way to decrease the rate of decline in wildlife populations, and preserve biodiversity. The majority of worldwide crops rely on pollinators for efficient yield. If pollinator populations continue to decline, there will be a significant reduction in food production and an increase in prices for consumers. Purchasing organic foods directly supports an industry using methods found to be safer for bees and other pollinator species. It also meets the demand for higher standards in production and health. If consumers demand certified organic garden and landscaping plants, or at least plants grown without neonicotinoid pesticides, they can assist local pollinator populations with a safe food source. As a result of this demand, the agriculture and retail industries will respond, and organic options will become more affordable and readily available.

Sources:


Safe Fish to Eat and the Fish to Avoid

We’ve always been told fish is a nutritious choice, a good source of lean protein and healthy fats. But is it still a good choice today? Whether we choose cooked fish or sushi in a restaurant, we buy our fish at the market, or we hook a worm and catch our own, it may not be healthy or safe to eat. And if we bought it, we may be a victim of seafood fraud.

Fishy Bait and Switch Schemes

Seafood fraud is serious business. Oceana has found that, on average, 1 in 5 samples of seafood is mislabeled at every sector of the supply chain. In other words, there is a 1 in 5 chance that the fish you buy at a restaurant or market may not be what you thought you were buying. Chances are, it may not be what they thought they were buying, either.

Oceana reports, “Asian catfish, hake, and escolar were the three types of fish most commonly substituted. Specifically, farmed Asian catfish was sold as 18 different types of higher-value fish.”

This isn’t just a scam that affects your pocketbook; it may affect your health. “More than half (58 percent) of the samples substituted for other seafood posed a species-specific health risk to consumers, meaning that consumers could be eating fish that could make them sick.”

In April 2017, George Washington University published their findings from testing the fish from 6 popular Washington D.C. restaurants. They discovered 1 in 3 samples were not what they claimed to be.

Fish substitution is not only a racket to sell a lower priced fish at a higher price, it is also a means to sell illegally caught endangered fish.

Related: 5 Tons of GM Fish Sold for Human Consumption (And only the producer knows where they are)

Radioactive Fish

Yes, you can find articles claiming that we are being poisoned by radioactive fish, but the sources are… questionable. But then again, can we trust the FDA when they say we are not in danger? The following is a response to a direct inquiry.

“To date, FDA has no evidence that radionuclides are present in the U.S. food supply at levels that would pose a public health concern. This is true for both FDA-regulated food products imported from Japan and U.S. domestic food products, including seafood caught off the coast of the United States. Consequently, FDA is not advising consumers to alter their consumption of specific foods imported from Japan or domestically produced foods, including seafood. FDA continues to closely monitor the situation at and around the Fukushima Dai-ichi facility, as it has since the start of the incident and will coordinate with other Federal and state agencies as necessary, standing ready to take action if needed, to ensure the safety of food in the U.S. marketplace.”

So we are eating radioactive fish, but the contamination is at such a low level we don’t need to worry? Ah, okay…

Old McDonald Had a Farm…

Think of everything you’ve ever read or seen about the horrors of factory farming with pigs, chickens, and cows and imagine it’s worse for fish – much worse. Half of the fish consumed today are raised in aquafarms under horrific conditions of extreme overcrowding and filth. Some fish are genetically modified to accelerate growth. Hormones are injected to change reproduction. Antibiotics are added to the water in some countries. Fish that normally eat plants are fed fish and fish oils.

There is a high mortality rate among farm-raised fish. A high percentage of the fish are deaf or blind. Parasitic infestations are common. PETA reports, “Sea lice, for example, eat at the fish, causing their scales to fall off and creating large sores. In severely crowded conditions, these parasites often eat down to the bone on fish’s faces, resulting in what is sometimes called a “death crown.”

So, we are not only looking at genetic modification, disease, hormones, antibiotics, filth, starvation, genetically modified feed, and inhumane treatment, we also color fish. Salmon have artificial coloring added to their feed that changes the color of their flesh. Farm raised salmon are not naturally pink. They are gray. Chemicals are added to their feed to cause their flesh to turn pink. So we are also ingesting those chemicals when we eat farm-raised salmon. Bon appétit!

Related: Genetically Modified Salmon Is On Its Way To Your Store

The Mercurial Rise and More

The level of mercury in fish remains a serious health concern. We are warned to avoid certain fish. Scientific American lists the following as carrying “proportionately large mercury burden.”

  • bluefin tuna
  • walleye
  • king mackerel
  • marlin
  • bluefish
  • shark
  • swordfish
  • wild sturgeon
  • opah
  • bigeye tuna

Other fish that are “Also of concern, but to a slightly lesser extent” are:

  • orange roughy
  • Chilean sea bass
  • blue crab
  • lingcod
  • Spanish mackerel
  • spotted seatrout
  • wahoo
  • grouper
  • snapper
  • halibut
  • tile fish
  • rock fish
  • sable fish
  • blackfin, albacore, and yellowfin tuna.

Top level predators in the fish world accumulate mercury due to longevity and a constant diet of smaller, mercury laden fish. Concentrations in fish can be 1-10 million times higher than the mercury concentration in the water.

The Environmental Defense Fund tells us, “The problem of mercury-contaminated fish is widespread. According to the EPA’s National Listing of Fish Advisories:

  • Mercury advisories increased 95% between 2003 and 2010 (from 2,362 to 4,598). This is largely due to greater monitoring, not necessarily greater pollution.
  • All 50 states currently issue mercury advisories.
  • As of 2010, almost 18 million lake acres and approximately 1.4 million river miles were covered by some type of consumption advisory.
  • Currently, 28 states have statewide mercury advisories in freshwater lakes or rivers, and 19 states have statewide advisories for mercury in their coastal waters.”
Related: Top 5 Foods that Detox Heavy Metals and Toxins – With Protocol

The EPA says, “The 2011 total of 4,821 advisories covers 42% of the Nation’s total lake acreage and 36% of the nation’s total river miles.” But the EPA tells us mercury is not the only contaminant causing concern. “Ninety–four percent of all advisories in effect in 2011 involved five bioaccumulative chemical contaminants: mercury, PCBs, chlordane, dioxins, and DDT.” Remember these facts are 6 years old. How much worse is it now?

What Fish Should We Eat?

If you choose to eat fish, which fish should you choose? Clearly, this should be a simple question with an agreed upon list – but it isn’t. If you search through article after article on the Internet, zeroing in on trusted sources, you will still find widely varying lists. Although it is common knowledge that tuna is high in mercury, you will find tuna on many of these lists along with shellfish (the scavengers of the sea), and varieties of farm raised fish.

The most agreed upon healthy choices are:

  • Alaskan salmon (wild caught)
  • Cod
  • Mackerel (though Spanish Mackerel is on the “also of concern” list)
  • Sardines
  • Herring

We advise taking the time to research. Fish is not the same from one store to another. Look into the sustainability and health issues with each source.

Also: Seafood & Mercury – What’s Safe To Eat & What’s Not

Pollution is the Key

We can hook that worm or cast the perfect fly to catch a fish from a crystal clear lake or flowing stream. But we’d better check the local advisories before we eat it. There’s a good chance we’ll be advised to limit how much we eat or to avoid feeding our catch to pregnant women, small children, or the elderly.

It’s a no brainer. If we continue to pollute the water, we continue to pollute the fish. Although you’d never know it based on our current behavior, our oceans are not a dumping ground. If we continue to burn fossil fuels, we will continue to pump mercury into the air. Mercury will fall to the ground to contaminate the earth and our water. If we continue to use toxic chemicals that run off into our waterways, they will come back to us full circle through our food chain.

We have choices to make. Let’s make the right ones. For now? Be careful of the fish you choose to eat.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


A Guide to Finding and Choosing The Healthiest Eggs

They are fooling you. The words on the egg cartons don’t mean what you think they do.

“Vegetarian-fed”, “cage-free”, “omega-3 enriched”, “free-range”, “organic”, “humanely-raised”, and “pasture-raised” all seem like healthy choices, but they don’t accurately reflect how healthy the eggs are.

The egg aisle of a grocery store is like a political primary debate. Every egg carton is saying what you what to hear to get your vote. But they are just words.

Words that are used with the intent to make you buy the eggs, but they don’t provide you with the answer to the question:

Which eggs are the healthiest?

To find the healthiest eggs, you must find the healthiest hens — hens that eat what they are biologically designed to eat.

Chickens are Not Vegetarians

Among the dozens of different egg cartons, you think you’ve found the holy grail. Eggs from 100% vegetarian-fed chickens. Vegetables are healthy, so these must be the healthiest, right?

The only problem is that the healthiest chickens eat omnivorous diets. Chickens love to munch on green plants, wild seeds, earthworms, and insects. In fact, many chickens prefer insects over plants.

Every time I see “vegetarian-fed” on a carton of eggs, I am reminded of the time I held a big juicy worm four feet above a group of chickens. They jumped with vigor — flapping their wings, doing anything to get the worm before their hen friends.

Surely, they’d do the same for any kind of food. They are probably just hungry. But when I tried the same with sunflower seeds and fresh organic vegetables, they turned away and continued scraping the ground with their claws to find bugs and worms.

Related: Animal vs. Plant Protein – What’s Better?

The Truth About Vegetarian-fed Chickens

“Vegetarian-fed”, however, does not mean the chickens are roaming around an organic vegetable garden oasis. In most cases, the egg companies didn’t change anything, but how they label their eggs.

For example, an egg carton that is labeled 100% vegetarian-fed and cage-free indicates that the chickens were raised indoors in a confined space with hundreds of other chickens.

To give you some perspective, imagine you are in a subway car during rush hour. Packed so many people that you almost kissed the guy next to you. Now imagine living your life in that subway car — no one gets out unless they die. (But at least you are not in cages, and you get free food!)

The chickens are, however, provided with food that is scientifically designed to cover their needs. Here’s an example of a typical “vegetarian” diet reported by Mother Earth News:

Here’s the ingredients list from “16 percent Layer Crumbles,” a feed designed for hens raised in confinement: “Grain Products, Plant Protein Products, Processed Grain Byproducts, Roughage Products, Forage Products, Vitamin A Supplement, Vitamin D3 Supplement, Vitamin E Supplement, Vitamin B12 Supplement, Riboflavin Supplement, Niacin Supplement, Calcium Pantothenate, Choline Chloride, Folic Acid, Manadione Sodium Bisulfite Complex, Methionine Supplement, Calcium Carbonate, Salt, Manganous Oxide, Ferrous Sulfate, Copper Chloride, Zinc Oxide, Ethylenediamine Dihydriodide, Sodium Selenite.”

This feed may seem like it is covering all of the nutritional needs of the chicken, but studies show that vegetarian-fed chickens that live in confinement lay eggs that have:

  • 1/3 more cholesterol
  • 1/4 more saturated fat
  • 2/3 less vitamin A
  • 2 times less omega-3 fatty acids
  • 3 times less vitamin E
  • 7 times less beta carotene
  • 50 percent less folic acid
  • 70 percent less vitamin B12
  • 50-112% less Vitamin D

But what are they comparing these eggs too? Eggs from chickens that are free to roam the outdoors and eat all types of plants and insects — the healthiest eggs. Words like “pastured”, “pasture-raised”, and “free-range” on egg cartons seem to reflect this healthy lifestyle, but they do not guarantee that the chickens were raised in this way. In fact,  “pastured”, “pasture-raised”, and “free-range” eggs just mean that the chickens had some access to the outdoors — regardless if it is a lifeless mud pit or a luscious green pasture.

But does it really matter if the chickens are outdoors? If we feed them a wide variety of seeds, plants, and insects, then they’ll be healthy, right?

Not so fast. Like humans, chickens don’t solely rely on diet for health. Sun exposure matters as much to chickens as it does to us.

Chickens Sun Bathe Too

If we don’t get any sun, our vitamin D levels drop, followed by less energy and depression. When we are chronically vitamin D deficient, our bones can become brittle and break easily. The same happens to chickens who have little access to the outdoors. (That’s right, they synthesize vitamin D from the sun just like us.)

Vitamin D deficient chickens will also lay brittle eggs that provide us with less nutrition. But the vegeterian feed has vitamin D in it — shouldn’t that cover their vitamin D needs?

Two animal researchers, Heuser and Norris, showed that 11 to 45 minutes of sunshine daily were sufficient to prevent rickets in growing chickens, but no improvements were obtained with vitamin D supplementation. This suggests that chickens are much better at using sunlight to synthesize vitamin D than using supplemental vitamin D.

Related: Vitamin D – The #1 Vitamin You Need: From Treating Depression to Preventing Cancer

What About “Omega-3 Enriched” Eggs?

Don’t fall for the hype. Although they do have higher omega-3s, these eggs are just as bad as conventional eggs.

Omega-3 enriched eggs usually come from chickens that are fed omega-3 supplements like krill oil, flaxseed oil, and algae oil on top of their unhealthy vegetarian diet. These oils are most likely rancid and unhealthy for the chickens.

The healthiest way to enrich eggs with omega-3s is by letting the chickens eat what they are designed to eat. Chickens that naturally feed on pasture have significantly increased amounts of omega-3s in their eggs compared to conventional eggs.

Related: Everything You Should Know About Fat

The Healthiest Egg

Now, we are beginning to put it all together. Chickens are omnivores that need access to the outdoors whenever they choose. Eggs that come from chickens who live the way that they are supposed to live are the healthiest.

This contention is even backed up by research that Mother Earth News conducted. They tested the nutrient content of eggs from chickens who lived under natural conditions. The editor-in-chief of Mother Earth News, Cheryl Long, commented that:

“Our test results reveal that the unnatural and inhumane conditions of factory farms are giving us substandard food. Consumers will get more nutritious eggs if they pay a premium for true free-range eggs from birds raised on pasture.”

How to Know if You Have The Healthiest Eggs

It doesn’t matter how many catchy words an egg carton throws at you. It could say “pasture-raised”, “non-GMO”, “humanely raised”, “organic”, or “I swear to God these are healthy — please trust me,” but that doesn’t mean they are the best eggs you can get.

This is because claims like “pastured” “pasture-raise” “cage-free” and “free-range” don’t mean what you think they do. Labeling laws allow egg products to display these terms even if the egg-laying chickens spend little or no time outdoors in a pasture setting.

Non-GMO and organic eggs are also promising, but organic and non-GMO eggs may still be fed a vegetarian diet with little access to the outdoors. Bummer. So what can you do?

The only way to find the healthiest possible eggs is to connect with the farmer of the chickens that made them. Visit or reach out to the farm/company that produces the eggs that you normally buy and find out how they raise their hens. I’ve personally done this for Handsome Brook Farm’s pasture-raised eggs and found out that they were making false claims on their packaging. Their eggs are no better than cheaper “cage-free” eggs.

To find the healthiest eggs, it is best to stay local and get to know the farmer. Do a quick search on localharvest.org and eatwild.com to find a farmer that has quality eggs.

The Quickest Way to Know if You Have High-Quality Eggs

If you are not sure that you can trust the eggs you are having now, you can test them in two ways.

The Egg Shell Crack Test:

If the egg shell is very brittle and has little to no membrane on the inside, then it came from a chicken that is vitamin D deficient (and probably deficient in other vitamins and minerals as well). This indicates that the chickens didn’t have much access to the sun.

The Egg Yolk Color Test:

Egg yolks with a deep orange color are higher in vitamin A and beta-carotene. This deep color indicates that the chicken has access to a diverse array of different plants. A pale, yellow yolk tells you that the chicken ate a diet consisting of mostly white corn and other nutrient-depleted grains that aren’t as healthy for the chicken.

Does Your Egg Pass The Test?

If the egg shell is resilient, and the yolk is a dense orange color then you have some healthy eggs. Conversely, if the shell shatters easily and has a pale yolk then it most likely came from an unhealthy chicken.

The Best Way to Prepare Eggs

If you have high-quality eggs, it is best to eat the yolk raw and cook the egg whites.

Eggs yolks should be eaten raw because cooking them will oxidize their cholesterol (rendering it unhealthy), and denature many of the vitamins (rendering them useless). If you don’t like the taste of raw eggs, then put a couple yolks into your morning smoothies with some lemon juice. This way you won’t taste the raw egg, and the lemon juice will prevent some of the nutrients from denaturing.

But before you eat the yolk, make sure you separate it from the egg white. The egg white has proteins in it that bind to the b-vitamins, making them useless. If you want to get the extra protein that the whites provide, then you can cook them until they turn white (but not brown). Cooking the egg white will deactivate the proteins binding to the b-vitamins, so you can get all of the vitamins out of the raw yolk and all of the protein from the whites at the same time.

The Takeaway

The healthiest eggs come from the healthiest hens.

Don’t blindly trust the words on the egg carton. The only way to know if you have healthy eggs is by finding out how the chickens are raised. Do your research, and get to know your egg farmer.

If you are looking to get the most nutrition out of your high-quality eggs, it is best to have the egg yolks raw and the egg whites cooked.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Horseshoe Crabs: The Blue Blood That’s Fueling the Medical Industry

Anyone who has ever benefited from an injection, a pacemaker, or a joint replacement, has the humble horseshoe crab to thank. In fact, all FDA approved vaccines, injectable drugs, and implanted medical devices owe their effectiveness to the blood of horseshoe crabs.

Why Horseshoe Crab Blood?

Horseshoe crabs are some of the oldest animals on the planet. At least 200 million years older than dinosaurs, these crustaceans have survived multiple mass extinctions that doomed millions of their companions. Yet, crabs today are experiencing an unprecedented threat to their existence- and your medical history is most likely contributing to the problem.

Four hundred and fifty million years of existence has led to a lot of evolutionary advantages for the horseshoe crab, specifically in their blood. This cerulean-hued substance is filled with antibacterial properties that make it incredibly valuable for medical procedures. The coloring comes from copper, which interacts with crab blood like iron does in ours. Rather than looking red, however, copper turns crab blood blue.

In many ways, the crab’s circulatory system has little in common with our own. When pathogens enter a crab’s body, their blue blood cells release a chemical called amoebocyte lysate (LAL) that thickens on contact with the invading substance and acts as a physical barrier against it, preventing it from spreading throughout the body.

While many animals have similar blood mechanisms for keeping out intruders, few do it as well as the horseshoe crab. Crab blood amebocytes can coagulate around as little as one part in a trillion of bacteria (the equivalent of a grain of sand in a pool), and the reaction takes less than an hour, in contrast to more than two days for mammal blood.

Must Read: How to Kill Fungal Infections

Crab Blood Use in Human Medicine

The unique properties of crab blood make it incredibly useful in medicine today. Pharmaceutical companies rely on LAL to test their equipment, medical implants, and more for any trace of invading toxins.

This means that crab blood is used in labs, as individual cells are burst to gain access to the coagulogen inside. Contamination can then be detected in any substance that comes into contact with this blood, and any dangerous bacteria that’s present will quickly become encapsulated in a highly obvious gel. If no gel is formed, then the likelihood of bacterial contamination is so low that the substance is considered safe for human use.

LAL tests are a quick, simple, and highly accurate way to seek out contamination in human medical supplies. Every drug certified by the FDA requires LAL testing, meaning that the demand for crab blood is sky-high. In short, everyone in the United States that has had a medical injection in some form has directly benefited from crab blood, and without crab blood, more people would die from preventable infections.

Rising Demand

As demand for crab blood continues to grow, so do the number of crabs caught every year. Roughly 200,000 crabs were harvested for their blood in the 1990s, and that number had risen to over 600,000 by 2012. At present, over three-quarters of a million crabs are harvested every year for medical use. These crabs are caught directly from the ocean, strapped into trays in mobile laboratories and bled for up to three days. Quart bottles are quickly filled with their highly-valued blood, which can sell for $60,000 a gallon. Each crab caught is expected to “donate” a full third of his blood for an industry that rakes in over $50 million a year.

Must Read: Heal Gum Disease and Cavities Naturally – Step by Step

The Costs for Crabs

The climbing demand for crab blood has a tremendous cost for horseshoe crab populations. After the bloodletting, crabs are returned to the ocean far away from where they were harvested in order to prevent them from getting picked up again. According to the industry, less than a quarter of bled crabs die from the procedure, but recent evidence is beginning to challenge those claims.

Studies have shown that removing a third of a crab’s blood leaves them disorientated and disabled once they get back into the ocean, which significantly impacts a female’s ability to breed. Making matters worse, most crabs are harvested in shallow water, which is the preferred place for females to lay their eggs. The impacts of bloodletting on nesting crabs is unknown, but it’s unlikely that females produce many viable offspring after the process.

No Quotas for the Medical Community

Strange as it may sound, regulations surrounding the harvesting of horseshoe crabs are surprisingly scant. While the Atlantic States Marine Fisheries Commission has harvest quotas in place for fishermen that catch horseshoe crabs to use as bait, laboratory companies are exempt from these quotas. Arguing that the value of their product should exempt them from regulation, the medical industry is instead required to follow voluntary, open-ended “best management” practices for crab harvesting.

A Critical Dip in Crab Populations

Today, scientists are starting to notice the impacts of the crab blood industry. Fewer crabs are spotted along the Atlantic coast each year, and concern is growing that the biomedical industry is critically endangering one of the oldest surviving species on earth. Smaller numbers of females are spawning each year, and the evidence is increasingly clear that blood harvesting is having a bigger impact on the overall population than previously believed. Post bleeding, crabs are lethargic, slow and less likely to look for food or a mate, which threatens their populations even when the procedure doesn’t immediately kill them.

There’s much that’s still unknown about the lives of horseshoe crabs, but the evidence is clear that the biomedical industry is taking a tremendous toll on their populations. Dwindling of this ancient species isn’t just a concern for conservationists, it’s an issue for everyone who relies on modern medical services.

Every one of us is connected to the horseshoe crab, but we are quickly losing the power to save it.

Recommend Reading:
Sources:


Microplastics in Sea Salt – A Growing Concern

When it comes to long-term thinking for the health of the planet, humans often fall short of common sense. Plastic, one of the most durable products in the world, is consistently used for products no one actually wants to last forever, like single-use grocery bags and cheap children’s toys. The ever-increasing amounts of plastics glutting the planet today are leading to dire consequences for many natural spaces, especially the ocean. Worst of all, the overabundance of plastic particles is starting to make it into our diet in the unlikeliest of ways- sea salt.

Related: How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors

The Rise of Plastic in the Ocean

Every year, roughly 13 million metric tons of plastic finds its way into the ocean. A study from 2014 found that there are more than 5 trillion pieces of plastic in the ocean, and over 90 percent of them are less than a quarter inch long. Called microplastics, these tiny pieces tend to pose the biggest threat because they are often eaten by plankton and other small creatures and quickly make their way through the food chain to larger fish, birds, and other species.

Previous research on the levels of microplastics in the ocean has revealed that the quantities are unexpectedly high in seafood like fish and clams. However, recent research has discovered that microplastics are also detectable in sea salt.

Contamination in Sea Salt

A survey of 16 brands of sea salt from eight countries revealed to researchers that microplastics were present in all but one brand. Published in Scientific Reports, this research team found trace amounts of the plastic polymers polypropylene and polyethylene. In all, the research revealed that the tested salt contained about 1,200 plastic particles per pound. Most of these particles were found to be fragments of old plastic products, fibers, and paints that were broken down to their small size in the ocean, which ruled out the possibility that the sea salt packaging itself was to blame.

The Impacts for Human Health

In general, sea salt is considered a healthier alternative to regular table salt. Found to strengthen the immune system, improve heart health, and decrease the symptoms of asthma, many people believe that using sea salt is better for their bodies than other, refined varieties of salt. However, the prevalence of plastic in many sea salt brands might be a reason to be concerned.

Microplastics are a threat to organisms because their small size makes it easy for them to absorb organic pollutants and store them in the bodies of those that eat them. Yet there’s little reason for you to worry about the negative health effects of plastic- tainted sea salt, as the amounts of microplastics found in salt are so low that they are not considered a health risk. Researchers estimate that most people swallow fewer than 40 particles of plastic in sea salt every year, compared to the estimated 11,000 particles that shellfish lovers likely consume each year. Somewhat reassuringly, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) classifies polypropylene and polyethylene- based plastic polymers as safe for human consumption at these levels.

The Overall Damage for the Environment

In many ways, the danger of microplastics in sea salt doesn’t come from the risk for your body, but from what they mean for the rest of the planet. Plastic has become so prevalent in the world today that it’s hard to find places without it. From the ocean floor to the ice in Antarctica, microplastics are increasingly polluting natural spaces, and their long-term impacts on the world are still far from understood. If plastic particles can wind up in your salt shaker, there’s no telling where else it will soon be found.

Related Reading:
Sources: