On July 1st, Seattle became the first major U.S. city to ban plastic straws and utensils. In 2008 an ordinance was passed that banned any one-time-use food-service items that aren’t recyclable or compostable, but the city made an exception for straws and utensils. Back then, biodegradable utensils and straws weren’t widely available. The exemption ended on June 30, and businesses can be fined $250 if they don’t comply.

Image credit: David Suzuki: Straws Suck

Our shoes, our clothing, our contact lenses, chewing gum, food containers, and so much more – all made of plastic. It’s in our salt, our food, and it’s in our water. Plastic may be the most insidious and enduring product we’ve ever produced. It is suffocating our planet and causing catastrophic pollution, much of it hidden and microscopic.

Related: How to Detox From Plastics and Other Endocrine Disruptors

Here’s a video about a whale dying from eating a plastic DVD case. Here’s a sea turtle with a straw stuck up its nose. Also, check out the documentary, Plastic Ocean.

People in the U.S. discard an estimated 500 million straws every day. Since Seattle has taken a stand against this completely unnecessary plastic waste hopefully others will follow suit.

Related Reading:

• Microplastics In Tap Water and Beer Around the Great Lakes, and Everywhere Else
• Drinking Bottled Water Means Drinking Microplastics, According To Damning New Study
• Many Hand-me-down Plastic Toys Are Toxic for Kids

Source:

• Seattle Becomes First Major U.S. City to Ban Straws – Washington Post

A South Korean family took a vacation to San Francisco two years ago. In a hotel room, their then-8-month-old son fell off their bed and hit his head.  After unsuccessfully trying to console him, they grew concerned. They called 911. An ambulance showed up and transported the family to Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital to check him out for internal injuries.

At the hospital, the doctors determined that the baby was fine. He had a short nap in his mother’s arms and drank some hospital infant formula. He was discharged less than four hours later. The family finished their vacation. Then, some two years later, a hospital bill arrived for $18,836. $15,666 of the charge was  designated “trauma activation.”

It’s a huge amount of money for my family. If my baby got special treatment, okay. That would be okay. But he didn’t. So why should I have to pay the bill? They did nothing for my son.”

If my baby got special treatment, okay. That would be okay. But he didn’t. So why should I have to pay the bill? They did nothing for my son.” – Jang Yeo-im, the mom, told Vox

Jang says they had travel insurance that covers only the first $5,000.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rm9jJYMZR90

Recommended:

• Trump’s Administration Is Not A Fan of Breastfeeding
• Galactagogues Foods, Herbs, and other Ways to Increase Breast
• Shaken Baby Syndrome – Child Abuse or Vaccine Injury?
• Common Bad Parenting Advice You Should Ignore
• Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• New Study Suggests Women Could, and Maybe Should, Eat While In Labor

A new report in Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise discovered that athletes who lost fluid equal to 2 percent their weight showed lower levels of cognition. Water loss at that level is considered a mild to moderate case of dehydration, but researchers still found symptoms impaired cognition, including difficulties focusing on tasks requiring attention and lowered motor coordination. Executive function, the processes that allow you to manage yourself and achieve goals, also declines when dehydration happens.

“We’ve known that physical performance suffers at a threshold of 2 percent of body mass, particularly when it’s from exercise in a warm environment,” said study co-author Mindy Millard-Stafford, a professor in the school of biological sciences and director of the physiology lab at the Georgia Institute of Technology.

“So the question was, what happens in the brain with the same amount of loss, which is pretty common with people who are active or work outside in the heat. Just like a muscle cell needs water, so do the cells in our brain.”

Recommended: What’s the Best Water for Detoxifying and For Drinking?

Drink

Water is still the gold standard of hydration. Eight glasses is the recommended daily amount of water. From there it can be difficult to sort through the latest and greatest hydrating hacks. These include but are not limited to coconut water, aloe water, fruit-infused water, and probiotic water. There are benefits to be had from these, but your best bet for hydration without side effects is filtered or spring water and cranberry lemonade (unadulterated cranberry juice, lemon juice, and stevia).

Caffeinated, alcoholic, and sweetened beverages like coffees, tea, beer, and sodas are classified as diuretics, which is thought to lead to dehydration in the body. Beverages with high sugar content leads to a feeling of dehydration, as water in the body rushes to blood left unbalanced by sugar. Interestingly, milk does not cause dehydration as the sugars in the lactose cause the body to retain the water from it for longer, but dairy causes phlegm and inflammation in the body. Avoid these.

Eat

What you’re eating is at least as important as drinking water. Fried and ultra-processed foods are high in sodium and notorious for drying out the body. Processed foods high in protein like cured meats are a doubly problematic, as they make your kidneys work harder.

On the opposite end of the spectrum are vegetables and fruit. You know, those foods you should be eating. Summer is the perfect time to eat for hydration, with water-heavy fruits and vegetables like melons, tomatoes, and cucumbers are abundant. Eating a salad daily will provide the body with nutrients it needs to function its best while also maintaining healthy water levels.

Recommended: Stop Eating Like That and Start Eating Like This – Your Guide to Homeostasis Through Diet

You Can Do It

It’s only getting hotter, and this study confirms that dehydration can lead to serious issues. Even if you aren’t an athlete, proper hydration is an important part of staying healthy. Most of the food available at the grocery store can dehydrate you. If you aren’t peeing clearly, maybe it’s time to take a look at what you’re eating.

Sources:

• Dehydration may muddle your thinking – Reuters
• Here’s Why Sugar Makes You So Thirsty – Health.com
• How to Tell If You Are Dehydrated – Livestrong
• 9 Foods That Will Dehydrate You (Slideshow) – The Daily Meal

There was an unexpected battle over a resolution supporting the use of breast milk at the World Health Organization in may. The New York Times reported that the resolution to encourage breastfeeding was expected to be approved quickly by hundreds of government delegates but the United States delegates opposed the language.

The World Health Organization (WHO) of the United Nations is an agency headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland that is concerned with international public health. A proposed resolution asked countries to restrict the misleading marketing of breast milk substitutes. In multiple studies spanning decades of research, breastmilk has been proven beyond a doubt to be the healthiest option for children. The New York Times reported that the resolution was expected to pass easily but U.S. delegates took issue with the language that encouraged countries to “protect, promote and support breastfeeding.” The U.S. did not want to impede the sale of baby formulas.

The U.S. Delegates reportedly told Ecuador, who planned to introduce the resolution, that if the proposal wasn’t dropped that the U.S. would implement trade measures and withdraw military support from northern Ecuador (violence from boarding Colombia causes ongoing issues here). The Ecuadorian delegates caved and then health advocates found another sponsor for the resolution. The Russian delegation introduced the measure, and unlike with Ecuadorian, Russia received no resistance from the U.S.

The Trump administration’s aggressive attempts to water down an international resolution supporting breast-feeding go against decades of advice by most medical organizations and public health experts.” – NY Times

Global health experts believe that the president’s stance on baby formula was due to a lack of knowledge regarding breastfeeding and the history of how baby formulas are marketed in developing countries. In these poor countries when powdered formula is mixed with unclean, unsafe water, it can lead to death.

What happened was tantamount to blackmail, with the U.S. holding the world hostage and trying to overturn nearly 40 years of consensus on best way to protect infant and young child health,” Patti Rundall, policy director of Baby Milk Action

Despite the United States’ best efforts, the final resolution retained most of the original language, but the portion calling on WHO to provide support to countries seeking to halt “inappropriate promotion of foods for infants and young children,” was removed.

A 2016 study published by The Lancet stated that breastfeeding could save 843,000 lives and $300 billion in reduced health care costs a year. The New York Times reported that the baby food market is a $70 billion industry.

This kind of support for corporations over health isn’t new. We could thank Trump’s administration for being so blatantly corrupt and unsubtle that the issues like this are brought out into the open. We could, but we won’t.

Recommended Reading:

• Galactagogues Foods, Herbs, and other Ways to Increase Breast
• Shaken Baby Syndrome – Child Abuse or Vaccine Injury?
• Common Bad Parenting Advice You Should Ignore
• Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• New Study Suggests Women Could, and Maybe Should, Eat While In Labor

Glyphosate is the active ingredient in RoundUp. It’s been deemed a “probable carcinogen” by the World Health Organization (WHO), but the EPA decided the product can be used on our food at “safe levels.” The EPA banned glyphosate 30 years ago but then reversed its decision based on studies conducted by the chemical industry. Scientists wanted to determine if these “safe” levels of glyphosate are, in fact, actually safe. The Global Glyphosate Study found that glyphosate poses health risks even at very low levels.

Conducted by Italy’s Ramazzini Institute in partnership with the University of Bologna, the Genoa Hospital San Martino, the Italian National Institue of Health, Mount Sinai in New York, and George Washington University, the study is scheduled for publication in the scientific journal Environmental Health.

Related: Monsanto’s Name To Be Retired – Bayer Aims To Erase Sordid History

The study shows that children are at significantly greater risk of damage by these pesticides, which are heavily sprayed at school playgrounds, public parks, people’s laws, and other places where children often play.

Researchers have concluded that the supposedly “safe” levels of glyphosate cause microbiome imbalances and damage DNA (genotoxicity). Every animal on the planet has a unique microbiome. A healthy and diverse microbiome is essential for good health. Damage to this ecosystem occurred very quickly with pesticide consumption.

Related: How to Avoid GMOs in 2018 – And Everything Else You Should Know About Genetic Engineering

Related: Sugar Leads to Depression – World’s First Trial Proves Gut and Brain are Linked (Protocol Included)

The Ramazzini Institute in Italy announced they’re launching a crowdfunding campaign for the first-ever comprehensive global study on glyphosate-based herbicides.

This is our chance to take scientific control away from the chemical industry – we can, at last, make a real difference – Please Donate to the Study Here.” – Sustainable Pulse

How prevalent is glyphosate in food? The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) tested 3188 foods and determine that glyphosate was found in nearly one-third of all foods tested. Some foods contain alarmingly high levels of the chemical.

The majority of bacteria found on supermarket meat is antibiotic resistant, according to the Environmental Working Group. The EWG follows the Food and Drug Administration’s yearly bacterial contamination and resistance tests, and the analysis of the most recently released year, 2015, shows that almost 80% of bacteria discovered on supermarket meats is resistant to antibiotics. The bacteria detected, including salmonella and Enterococcus faecalis, demonstrated resistance to crucial antibiotics like amoxicillin and tetracyclines. To listen to the FDA, antibiotic-resistant bacteria in the meat aisle at the grocery store is not an issue, but Dawn Undurraga, EWG’s nutritionist and author of the report, sees things differently.

Consumers need to know about potential contamination of the meat they eat, so they can be vigilant about food safety, especially when cooking for children, pregnant women, older adults or the immune-compromised…By choosing organic meat and meat raised without antibiotics, consumers can help reduce the amount of antibiotics used in farm animals and slow the spread of drug resistance…”

Recommended: Best Supplements To Kill Candida and Everything Else You Ever Wanted To Know About Fungal Infections

What to Look For

Different types of meat registered at different levels of antibiotic-resistant bacteria, and the winner of the title most resistant goes to ground turkey. Seventy-nine percent of ground turkey tested positive for antibiotic-resistant bacteria. This continues a trend, as 73% of salmonella detected on turkey in 2014 was resistant to at least one antibiotic. Other types of meat tested also displayed antibiotic-resistant, though not on the same level, with pork chops at 71%, ground beef at 62%, and chicken breasts, leg, wings, and thighs at 36%.

Tetracyclines were another major point of concern. These are the most used class of antibiotics in food animals, and it shows in the percentage of bacteria that are resistant to that specific class. The bacteria responsible for an estimated 80 percent of human infections, Enterococcus faecalis, had significant resistance to tetracyclines across the different meats tested. Enterococcus faecalis on pork had the highest numbers, with 84 percent of bacteria present demonstrating tetracycline resistance. Chicken showed 71 percent resistance, and 26 percent of the bacteria found on beef registered resistance.

Recommended: How to Avoid GMOs in 2018 – And Everything Else You Should Know About Genetic Engineering

The Resistance is Growing

The meat industry in the U.S. is deeply flawed. E.coli has developed resistance to all 14 of the antibiotics the FDA tested in 2014. Salmonella was not far behind, developing resistance to 13 of the tested antibiotics. Several countries have limited or banned meat imports from the U.S., either due to chemicals that are given to animals during their life (pork treated with ractopamine is rejected by China) or the final treatment of meat for sale (chlorine-washed chicken in the European Union). The recent report released from the FDA suggests that those things are unlikely to change in a timely fashion.

So how do you protect yourself? With how quickly antibiotic resistance is evolving, the only meat you can eat that’s guaranteed to be free of resistant bacteria is no meat. If that’s not an option you’re ok with, make sure you’re buying responsibly raised meat, not treated with antibiotics and free range. Find your local farmer and talk to him about his animal treatment practices. Know where your food is coming from.

Sources:

• Supermarket Meat Still Superbugged, Federal Data Show – EWG
• 2015 NARMS Integrated Report – FDA.gov
• Superbugs Found in Most U.S. Supermarket Meat – Organic Consumers
• Chlorine Wash Doesn’t Remove Salmonella on Chicken – Organic Lifestyle Magazine

For a month before President Obama signed the first federal GMO labeling law in 2016 Vermont’s own labeling law took effect. The labels implemented in Vermont were clear and concise and informed customers of products “produced with genetic engineering” or “partially produced using genetic engineering.” Two years after that program, researchers at the University of Vermont found that those labels made consumers more likely to trust GMOs. Researchers examined more than 7,800 surveys of Vermonters and their attitudes towards GMOs and saw opposition to genetically modified foods dropped 19% after the labeling law took effect. The research doesn’t provide sales numbers, but people reported they were more likely to trust in GMOs. What does this mean, and will we see that same shift in attitudes when the federal labeling law is finalized at the end of July?

Related: Monsanto’s Name To Be Retired – Bayer Aims To Erase Sordid History

Just Gimme A Reason

Why do labels make consumers more likely to feel positively towards GMOs? There isn’t a definitive answer to that question, but the study of from the University of Vermont points to the control that labeling gives consumers.

A choice is important in the modern world, and the staunch opposition to GMO labeling by biotech companies has served to make many people suspicious of their intentions and frustrated with the lack of transparency. The Vermont labeling did nothing to indicate that GMOs are safer, yet allowing people a choice improved attitudes towards GMOs by nearly 20 percent. For today’s consumer, the ability to opt out of a service is crucial.

Related: GMO Rice Approved While Other GMO Grasses Cannot Be Contained

Label Confusion

How will that dynamic play out with the federal labeling law legally required to be finalized by July 29?

To begin with, there are differences in the way labeling will be implemented. Labels in Vermont were simple and concise. In contrast, national labels will be a single sentence, a standardized icon, or a QR code. The labels are likely to look something like this:

Companies are also able to label their products as “bioengineered” as opposed to genetically modified or GMO, an option that could confuse consumers. Plans are not finalized yet, but there is also the possibility that highly refined sugars and oils made from genetically modified corn, soybeans, and sugar beets, will not require the GMO label. What began as a clear indication of food with genetically modified ingredients in a single state has evolved into a tentative nationwide plan that significantly muddies the waters of the GMO issue.

Loopholes proposed by the Trump administration could exempt more than 10,000 – or one out of six – genetically modified foods from a new GMO disclosure law.” – New analysis by EWG.

Related: How to Avoid GMOs in 2018 – And Everything Else You Should Know About Genetic Engineering

So Bored

Confusing labels likely won’t matter much. The world seems to have moved on from the debate over the problems caused by GMOs. Allowing people the choice to opt out of these products has the potential to calm public anxiety more than years campaigning and safety studies from Monsanto ever could. In fact, GMOs are in the best position, politically, they’ve been in years due to the positive press from the step forward in labeling, the disappearance of the Monsanto name, and a public focused on more immediate political issues.

Is this the point where the public expresses approval for GMOs? Or do we say nothing and achieve the same thing?

Sources:

• Consumers Fear GMOs Less When They’re Labeled, Vermont Study Finds – WBUR
• Mandatory GMO labels are coming to your food – Washington Post
• Mandatory labels can improve attitudes toward genetically engineered food – Science Advances
• USDA on GMO labeling law: ‘Still on track, but a little behind’ – Food Dive