On Thursday, July 7th, the senate voted 63-30 to approved a bipartisan compromise bill for a federal labeling of food made with genetically modified organisms. The bill is moving to the House of Representatives next.

Proponents of the bill say the law will be good for consumers, allowing shoppers to know what they’re getting, and the bill will provide a national standard for labeling.

There are three labeling options. Companies can label the food product as genetically modified or they can use a symbol that denotes GMOs, an on-pack symbol, the bar code, or the unreadable QR product code. When companies choose to label only through the QR code (and we guess that’s what most will do), the customer is expected to scan the barcode with their smartphones or call an 800 number.

Critics are quick to point out that this law will wipe out existing labeling laws like Vermont’s current legislation that does require clear and conscious GMO labeling. Also, this bill could exempt certain genetically modified foods from any kind of GMO labeling.

Proponents of labeling insisted that nothing short of text on packages would do. Some, including Senator Bernie Sanders, an independent from Vermont and erstwhile presidential candidate, also raised concerns over the definition in the bill for determining which foods would require labels, a sign that if the bill becomes law, legal challenges will almost certainly follow.” – New York Times

For example, if a biotech product is genetically engineered with items ‘found in nature,’ (such as bacteria), then it can be passed as a natural food product. Other GMOs, which cannot yet be detected by current technology, would also pass as whole foods under the new law. This would include foods made with non in vitro recombinant DNA techniques.” – Natural News

The USDA Secretary would also have the power to determine what concentration of GMO ingredients would fall under the labeling law, so it’s not unlikely consumers may ingest GMOs even after verifying that the QR bar Code says no GMO.

Even if the customer has a phone and a QR bar code app, and wants to take the time to scan the product, more often than not, cell phones don’t work at all or the internet is extremely slow inside a grocery store. Some grocery stores don’t even allow cell phones (This is true for Dekalb Farmer’s Market in Decatur Georgia. Be sure to check them out if you haven’t).

The law will not go into effect for two years if it does make it all the way to be signed into law. Consumers will have to wait, and no other states will be able to legislate labeling in the meantime.

Is Whole Foods in Cahoots With Monsanto?

Walter Robb, the CEO of Whole Foods backs the new bill, saying:

The alternative is that Vermont goes into effect and then there’s a number of other states behind that, it makes it difficult for manufacturers to be able to label and label to that different standard…

And I think the way she’s put the bill together, which is to give manufacturers choices, is I think the marketplace and the customers will take it from here… so obviously, I think she’s done a great piece of work… we are already are out there further with our commitment to full transparency by 2018. We’re not gonna… we’re looking at how these two live with each other, but we’re already past that, but I think in this day and age, to come together, to create some sort of a reasonable standard that manufacturers can… and gives the customer a lot more information is a pretty good thing.”

Whole Foods backed the bill. As Walter made clear, Whole Foods is looking out for their food manufacturers first and foremost. Whole Foods has helped champion the idea of food transparency, but the company would not get behind previous, more conscious legislation to label GMO foods. This bill’s ambiguous text leaves a lot to be interpreted, and it is clear this is a bill written by the food companies in an attempt to appease the public without actually affecting GMO sales.

Conclusion

If the bill passes into law, is it a step in the right direction? Maybe. It depends on how the legislation plays out. The bill, as it is now, leaves so much up for interpretation. The harder the public pushes for transparency, the more likely the bill will get better for consumers along the way, or get replaced by something better. Regardless, the best way to avoid GMOs is to avoid buying processed, manufactured food. Stick to the produce section in grocery stores (whole produce GMOs are very rare), visit your local farmer’s markets and get to know the farmers (not the guys who buy food from distributors and pretend to be farmers, get to know the actual farmers). And grow your own food! It’ll be interesting to see what happens with labeling whole produce if the bill passes and more foods do get genetically modified.

Related Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Doctors Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Foods That Promote Candida Overgrowth and Lead To Leaky Gut
• Candida, Gut Flora, Allergies, and Disease

Sources:

• Is Whole Foods Really Partnering with Monsanto? Here are the Facts – Live In the Now
• Senate Passes A GMO Labeling Bill That The Food Industry Likes – NPR
• U.S. GMO food labeling bill passes Senate – Reuters

There are very few packaged, process foods that I will eat. I’m not one to frequent the “health food” section where all the snack foods without HFCS are shelved. You’ll find me in the produce section. That’s after I’ve been to the farmer’s market and foraged, of course.

I used to love a good “nutrition” bar, though. I remember when I thought Power Bars were healthy. Then I went through a Cliff Bar phase for a couple of years. It took a while (baby steps), but I eventually realized that prepared foods made by companies did not make me feel good. Learning about health and wellness taught me why they aren’t good for us; the main reason is they’re loaded with sugar!

Of all the bars I’ve known, I couldn’t think of one that I would consider “healthy.” Healthier, as in far healthier than your conventional energy bars maybe, but not actually “healthy.” Not until now.

Josh Eichel emailed me and asked me to check out his new energy bars. I had just finished doing squats, and I was hungry for something fast and easy. Josh couldn’t teleport me one of his energy bars, and he used way too many exclamation points in his email (you know how those fitness dudes are, right?), but I was interested in food bars at that moment because I felt a twinge of nostalgia for the old days when I would do a heavy set of weight lifting followed by 5 or  6 energy bars.

Although I said yes, I was sure I was going to see the ingredient list and take a pass. I was wrong.

Josh, currently a student at Northeastern University in Boston, started his business, All In Nutrition, in April 2015. Like me, Josh wasn’t pleased with the unhealthy products sold as nutrition bars and energy bars. He wanted an energy bar that wasn’t sugar-laden junk food. Instead of doing the sensible thing (stop eating them or just make your own) he started his business. Take a look at the ingredients:

Wicked Dark Chocolate Cayenne Energy Bars

• GMO-Free, Grass Fed Whey Protein from New Zealand
• Sunflower Seed Butter
• Organic Dates
• Organic Cacao Chocolate Chips, Organic Cacao Nibs
• Organic Cocoa
• Gluten-Free Whey Protein Crisps
• Sunflower Seeds
• Coffee
• Green Tea
• Chile Powder and Cayenne Pepper
• Binding agents are Organic Vegetable Glycerin and GMO-Free Prebiotic Fiber

Wicked Maple Energy Bars

• Vermont Maple
• GMO-Free, Grass Fed Whey Protein from New Zealand
• Organic Cashew Butter
• Organic Dates
• Gluten Free Whey Protein Crisps
• Almonds
• Three seed blend of Chia seeds, Flax seeds, and Pumpkin seeds
• Goji Berries
• Coffee
• Green Tea
• Chlorella
• Spirulina
• Stevia
• Binding agents are Organic Vegetable Glycerin and GMO-Free Prebiotic Fiber

The ingredients list is pretty impressive. I asked for a sample and received two bars a few days later. After I ate them,  I was sad. I was sad because he didn’t send me more than two.

Are these Maple and Chocolate Wicked Energy Bars Good For You?

Many people view energy bars as a nutritious meal replacement. For a health nut like me who lives off of salads, makes super healthy smoothies for desert, soaks and sprouts nuts, and doesn’t generally eat chocolate unless it’s raw, these bars are a treat. In fact, they’re a well-deserved treat after a good workout routine, but they aren’t a replacement for a healthy meal. As store bought energy bars go, it doesn’t get much better, but I do have a couple of nitpicks.

Cooking chia and flax eliminates health benefits. Ideally, the seeds and nuts should be sprouted, most or all ingredients should be raw, and though stevia is doing much of the sweetening, the dates and maple syrup do contain too much sugar for anyone who is battling a health issue.

On the other hand, the whey protein in Wicked Energy Bars is the best whey protein I know of, all of the ingredients are fantastic, the taste of both bars is really very good, and most importantly, my body felt good eating one after a workout.

I like them so much, I am adding them to Green Lifestyle Market. We’ll either sell them or I’ll eat them. Either one is fine with me.

Ah, bacteria, the original cockroach. No matter what you use to try and annihilate it, it keeps coming back, stronger than before. Strains of bacteria like listeria, campylobacter, and salmonella caused food poisoning affecting one in six people in the U.S. The bacteria resistant to the “antibiotic of last resort” has arrived in the U.S., and researchers in Canada have discovered a newly evolved, heat-loving strain of E. coli that survives temperatures high enough to cook meat medium-well. If harmful bacteria were to go into business, the stock would be climbing and the future would look terrific.

Dealing With the Usual Suspects

Chipotle has suffered business setbacks. Blue Bell Creameries are permanently closed. Most recently, General Mills has recalled a full lot of their Gold Medal flour. The common thread? E. coli, listeria, salmonella, and all of those pesky bacteria responsible for over four million pounds of food being recalled in the U.S. in 2015 and food poisoning affecting roughly 48 million people.

The methods for detecting bacteria and pathogens in our food have become more sophisticated, so it’s likely there have been many unrecorded outbreaks in the past. But then again, the number of cases attributed to the most well-known bacteria that cause food poisoning (like listeria, salmonella, or E. coli), have remained steady over the years, while campylobacter bacteria and rare Vibrio infections are on the rise. When increased detection and better food safety standards still do not result in a decline in pathogens, where does that leave us?

Soooo…Fire?

From food safety 101 we know that food is only considered safe when we heat it enough to kill off harmful bacteria. But what do you do when the bacteria has mutated to withstand those temperatures, like the strain of E. coli discovered by Canadian researchers?

Food safety literature recommends heating beef to 160 degrees, although they also note that 140 degrees is a sufficient temperature to kill harmful bacteria in less than a minute. But the new strain of E. coli does not die. In fact, it lived for over an hour at a temperature of  140 degrees. Right now, 16 genes with this mutation are present in about 2% of E. coli strains (good and bad), but with the other evolutionary strides bacteria have been making, who knows what will happen!

Fire’s Out. Soooo…Antibiotics?

People in the U.S. can now look forward to the newest shot fired in the bacteria vs. antibiotic war, now that bacteria has been found to be immune to colistin, a long-acknowledged “antibiotic of last resort”. Constant use of antibiotics has encouraged bacteria to evolve, to build up an immunity to these drugs.

An entire group of antibiotics – sulphonamides – is being phased out due to bacteria resistance. Gonorrhea is showing signs of resistance to last resort treatment in 10 different countries, and there are no new antibiotics in development to treat it.  Stories like these are becoming more and more common as our extensive use of antibiotics continues to breed stronger bacteria. We respond with new antibiotics and the next generation of the bacteria is more resistant than before. When it ends, do you really think we’re going to end up on top?

Can We Actually Control the Bacteria?

If your reaction to hearing all of this bad news about bacteria is to scream something along the lines of, “Kill it with fire!” you’re not alone. Solutions like antibiotics, antibacterial soaps, and hand sanitizers came with a price. They became part of the problem.

There are no easy answers here. Ideally, we will stop treating livestock with unneeded antibiotics. We will stop the indiscriminate use of antibiotics to treat infections and seek alternative treatments whenever possible. Maybe we will go so far as to change our diets to build immunity and encourage our natural, protective bacteria to thrive.

Are we past the point that these changes will be enough. Is our microbial world going to end up a cautionary tale a la Jurassic Park? Keep in mind that we can’t just seal off the island.

Related Reading:

• After Taking Antibiotics, This Is What You Need To Do To Restore Healthy Intestinal Flora
• Candida, Gut Flora, Allergies, and Disease
• The Fascinating Bacteria in our Gut, and How it Affects Our Whole Lives
• How to Detoxify From Chemotherapy and Repair the Body

Sources:

• Researcher’s Warn of New E. Coli Strain That Can ‘Survive Cooking’ – grubstreet.com
• Germ Resistant to Antibiotic of Last Resort Appears in U.S. – npr.org
• Antimicrobial Resistance – World Health Organization
• Trends in Foodbourne Illness in the United States, 2012 – cdc.gov
• How Food Recalls Really Work – eater.com

Stevia is a zero calorie sweetener that comes from a herbaceous plant, Stevia rebaudiana, a relative of the sunflower that is native to South America. It has been used as a sweetener and a medicine by the Guaraní people of Brazil and Paraguay for more than 1,500 years.

First, we heard this natural sweetener that is from 200 times to 400 times sweeter than sugar, has no calories, and doesn’t raise glucose levels in the blood. Next, we heard possible health benefits, especially for diabetics. It may even be a wonderful antioxidant that lowers cholesterol, lowers blood pressure, and helps fight cancer. But is the stevia you are buying at the grocery store the same sweetener with these health benefits?

Stevia leaves can be dehydrated and crushed to make a whole food sweetener with definite health benefits including an array of antioxidants. But, as is often the case, this healthy food is probably not what you are buying. Stevia’s sweetness comes from glycosides contained in the leaves. The two primary glycosides are stevioside and rebaudioside (though there are as many as seven). Stevioside has an aftertaste some experience as bitter while others say it tastes like licorice. Rebaudioside is sweeter without an aftertaste. When you buy stevia, you may be buying stevia extract that is just rebaudioside. And stevia may not be the only ingredient. Take Truvia for example.

Truvia’s lists 3 ingredients on their label: erythritol, stevia leaf extract, and natural flavors. Erythritol is a sugar alcohol, a calorie-free sugar substitute made from sugar that has been known to cause headaches, diarrhea, and stomach upset when large amounts are ingested. For some people, a regular size portion will cause this reaction. The third ingredient is natural flavors. That could be anything, even aspartame or MSG.

Dr. Axe writes, “According to the United States patent for the Coca-Cola Company, Truvia goes through a 42 step process to make this processed sweetener. First, the rebaudioside is extracted from the stevia leaf then, chemical solvents are added including acetonitrile which is toxic to the liver and is a carcinogen. They then add in a GMO corn derivative in erythritol.”

And yet, when most people buy Truvia, they believe they are buying stevia.

Teas, extracts, and tinctures made with high-quality, whole-leaf stevia, on the other hand, contain up to seven sweet compounds (glycosides) and an array of antioxidants.

Quality Stevia

Green leaf stevia, made by crushing dried stevia leaves into powder, is the least processed. It is 30-40 times sweeter than sugar (rather than 200-400 times) and is a little bitter by comparison to the processed varieties. Dr. Axe recommends the brands Sweet Leaf Stevia and Organic Traditions.

If you want to ensure you are getting the best possible stevia, grow your own! See the link below to Mother Earth News and a great article on growing stevia. They even tell you how to make extract, which is very simple. Just add ½ cup of lightly crushed leaves to 1 cup of almost boiling water and steep it for 40 minutes. Strain and refrigerate. What could be easier?

Recommended Reading:

• Healthy Sugar Alternatives & More
• Candida, Gut Flora, Allergies, and Disease
• Heal Cavities, Gum Disease, Naturally with Organic Oral Care – Toothpaste recipes included
• How to Cure Lyme Disease, and Virtually Any Other Bacterial Infection, Naturally
• How to Optimize Curcumin Absorption – With Golden Milk Tea Recipe

Sources:

• All About Growing the Stevia Plant – Mother Earth News
• Stevia Side Effects: Good or Bad? – Dr. Axe Food Is Medicine
• Stevia Dangers – Stevia.net
• History of Use – Stevia.net
• The Benefits and Risks of Erythritol as a Sweetener – Livestrong

Europe has become a battleground between environmental groups and big biotech companies. A French farmer won a case against Monsanto after suffering neurological problems due to inhaling their weedkiller, Lasso. By now, everyone has seen the study from the World Health Organization’s cancer agency calling glyphosate, the darling of Monsanto’s herbicides, probably carcinogenic. Instances like these and many others have left some European Nations wary of these chemicals, as evidence of their toxicity to humans is on the rise.

The Votes Are…Not In

And now we come to a crossroads. The European license for glyphosate is scheduled to expire on June 30. Previous meetings of nations of the European Union to renew the license for a 15-year span have ended in stalemates, as countries have refused to support that renewal in the face of growing scientific unrest and public opposition. The latest meeting took place Monday, with the executive body of the European Union, the European Commission (which is not affiliated with any specific country), proposing a 12- to 18-month extension for more scientific study. Malta was the only voice speaking against the extension, but the lack of votes from Germany, France, Italy, Greece, Austria, Portugal and Luxembourg kept the extension from being adopted.

The Results Are…Likely To Go One of Two Ways

So what happens now, with the glyphosate license expiring in less than a month? Option one would be an executive decision by the European Commission ignoring the lack of agreement from EU Nations and reauthorizing glyphosate. While possible, this scenario flies in the face of the Commission’s support of the democratic process that led to last year’s law allowing countries to make their own decisions regarding genetically modified crops. The leader of the Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, has publicly proclaimed his unwillingness to act against the interests of the majority view. The proposal of an extension did receive support from many countries, though, and Monsanto could see losses of potentially up to $5 billion dollars, which could result in some serious corporate pressure on the Commission.

What’s behind door number two? The simple option: leave it be. If a new agreement is not in place by the 30th of June, the license  is expired and all glyphosate products need to be gone from European Union shelves in six months. Is this more likely to happen if there are only eight votes either blocking or missing in keeping glyphosate from the shiny new license it desires? It seems unlikely until you consider some of the countries that abstained: Germany, France, and Italy, aka, three of the most powerful countries in the EU. The more you look at it, the more prudent this option becomes, really. Glyphosate has been labeled as probably cancer-causing. A product with issues (dangerous malfunctions, allergens or food contamination) would be pulled the shelves immediately. Why is glyphosate any different?

The Whole World Should be Watching

Europe has been on the forefront of recent biotech regulations in agriculture, and the decision, in this case, will resonate throughout the world. Supporters of a renewed license have pointed to the fear and confusion this will cause with consumers, which consumers would be well within their rights to feel. A probable cancer-causing chemical that has previously been sprayed with wild abandon is pulled off of shelves until a scientific consensus can be reached. What exactly is there to fear again? The knowledge that safety takes a backseat to profits, perhaps.

Related Reading:

• How To Avoid GMOs
• Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System and Balancing Our Hormones
• How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children
• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Scientists Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Doctors Against GMOs – Hear From Those Who Have Done the Research
• Celebrities Against GMOs

Sources

• Malta Alone in Voting Against Glyphosate, But Abstentions Block EU Proposal – timesofmalta.com
• UPDATE 4-EU Countries Refuse to Back New Licence For Glyphosate Weed-Killer – cnbc.com
• EU Nations Refuse to Back New License for Glyphosate Weed-Killer – reuters.com

While fresh, organic, whole foods are the ideal, few of us have the time or dedication to make everything from scratch. Though many die-hard foodies make their own condiments, who makes their own olive oil?

Recently a quest for gluten-free balsamic vinegar led to the discovery of Vitacost, an online grocery that carries most, if not all, of the packaged pantry items we would ever need. Their costs were a complete surprise. While a few things were a bit higher, others were lower. Groceries are delivered to your door. There are no travel costs. No taxes. And what makes it truly affordable, no shipping charge for orders over $49.00 (or $25.00 for selected products).

Soon after discovering Vitacost, I noticed advertising for a similar company, Thrive Market. Both are vocal about competing with Whole Foods. It was time to do a serious cost and website comparison to learn a little more about these companies.

Vitacost

Vitacost started their business in 1994 as an online source for third party vitamins and supplements. In 1999, the company began carrying proprietary brands. Over the years, it expanded into personal care products, sports and fitness diet supplies, pet supplies, green cleaning supplies, and “shelf-stable” natural and organic food. Vitacost was purchased by Kroger in 2014. The company now carries more than 45,000 items.

Thrive Market

Thrive Market is new in the game, having launched in September of 2014. Thrive is growing in leaps and bounds, though their selection is sparse compared to Vitacost and they require a $60.00 annual membership fee. The company now reports that they have acquired more than 200,000 members. They also claim to be carbon neutral and to be a company with a conscience that gives away memberships to those who cannot afford them. The company is working hard to make healthy foods (organic and non-GMO foods) accessible to everyone.

Website Comparison

Vitacost is hands down the winner when it comes to website design and user-friendly features. While Thrive has incorporated many of the same search features, they don’t have all as many categories so narrowing search parameters isn’t nearly as precise.

A search in Vitacost for olive oil reveals 172 hits in food and beverages. On the side of the screen, the user can limit choices by checking one or more of the 24 specialty choices such as GMO-free, gluten-free, organic, sugar-free, kosher, vegan, BPA-free, etc. Further limitations can be made by choosing brands, price range, form (like chips or liquid), servings, flavor, ratings, featured products, or price range.

The same search on Thrive Market results in 19 hits in the food category. The search can be further narrowed by the following categories: form, manufacturers, certifications and awards (certified gluten-free, kosher, non-GMO, etc.) environmental and social (categories like family-owned business, made in the USA, women-owned business, recyclable), health and ingredients (sugar free, salt free, pesticide free, etc.), and lifestyle (their broad categories like gluten free, paleo, vegan, etc.)

Where Vitacost’s site really shines is how it allows shoppers to save and organize favorite items. Shoppers can even create separate folders. For instance, you can create a folder for canned goods, one for baking items, one for cookies, one for pasta, etc. When you return to the site you can open a folder and check off items you wish to purchase rather than searching through the site. You can also reorder from a previous order (you can even modify it) and you can set up and schedule automatic re-orders for the items you know you are going to purchase regularly.

Amazon

Although prices were competitive on some items, others were ridiculously high. However, Amazon may remain the go-to spot for large bulk items like 25lb bags of rice or cases of canned goods.

Prices are accurate as of 5/30/2016.

It is clear that both Vitacost and Thrive Market are viable alternatives to shopping at Whole Foods even before taxes, travel costs, and time are considered. For these who don’t live near a store that carries these items, online shopping may be the only means to purchase natural and organic staples. Affordable, accessible quality foods are now within the reach of all our citizens.

Recommended Reading:

• Detox Cheap and Easy Without Fasting – Recipes Included
• Total Nutrition – Make your own Homemade Multivitamin and Mineral Formula
• Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System and Balancing Our Hormones
• Candida, Gut Flora, Allergies, and Disease
• How to Eat Healthy On a Budget
• Eating Right when the Budget is Tight

Sources:

• Vitacost – Wikipedia
• Company information supplied by Vitacost
• Thrive Market wants to build an online Whole Foods for people who aren’t rich – Recode
• Can Thrive Market be a Kinder, Gentler Amazon for Organic Food? – Civil Eats

The Detox Project is a research organization bringing awareness to the public by testing for man-made chemicals in our bodies and in our food. The project gives consumers an accurate report on the levels of glyphosate in their urine.

Through this unique public testing project carried out by a laboratory at the University of California San Francisco (UCSF), glyphosate was discovered in 93% of urine samples during the early phase of the testing in 2015. The urine and water testing was organized by The Detox Project and commissioned by the Organic Consumers Association.

The project has provided more urine samples for testing than any other glyphosate bio-monitoring urine study ever in America. It was supported by members of the public, who themselves paid for their urine and water samples to be analyzed for glyphosate residues by the UCSF lab.

The data released in a presentation by the UCSF lab only covers the first 131 people tested. Further data from this public bio-monitoring study, which is now completed, will be released later in 2016.

Later this year, The Detox Project will be working alongside a new, larger lab to enable the public to once again test their urine for glyphosate residues. The Detox Project is also researching whether or not an organic diet has an effect on the level of man-made chemicals in our bodies. They’re not just testing for glyphosates either, they are also testing for 150+ man-made chemicals.

The Results

Glyphosate was found in 93% of the 131 urine samples tested at an average level of 3.096 parts per billion (PPB). Children had the highest levels with an average of 3.586 PPB.

The regions with the highest levels were the West and the Midwest with an average of 3.053 PPB and 3.050 PPB respectively.

Glyphosate residues were not observed in any tap water samples during the early phase of the project, most likely due to phosphorus removal during water treatment.

The Method

Glyphosate (N-(phosphonomethyl)glycine ) is directly analyzed using liquid chromatography- tandem mass spectrometry (LC-MS/MS). Water and urine samples are prepared for analysis by solid phase extraction using an ion exchange column. Extracted samples are injected to the LC-MS/MS and the analyte is separated using an Obelisc N column (SIELC Technologies, Prospect Heights, IL) through isocratic elution. Ionization of glyphosate is achieved using an electrospray ionization source operated in negative polarity. The analyte is detected by multiple reaction monitoring using a 13C-labelled glyphosate as the internal standard. Quantification of the analyte is done by isotope dilution method using an eight-point calibration curve.

The assay has a limit of quantification of 0.5 ng/mL. The intra- and inter-day precision observed are 6-15% in concentrations that range 0.5-80 ng/mL. Recoveries for glyphosate range 70-80% at concentrations within the assay’s linear dynamic range.

Glyphosate and Health Concerns

Glyphosate-containing herbicides are sold under trademarks including Monsanto’s “Roundup”. Glyphosate was labeled a “probable human carcinogen” by the World Health Organization’s cancer agency IARC in 2015. The European Union is currently putting restrictions on the use of glyphosate due to health concerns.

Glyphosate has never been studied at the level of exposure that we in the U.S. are currently being subjected to (under 3 mg/kg body weight/day). Industry-funded science many years ago suggested that lower exposure is likely safe, but that more exposure could prove to be dangerous. Modern independent science has discovered that many toxic chemicals can have major effects on our endocrine system, sometimes at very low doses. Interestingly enough, due to the nature of endocrine disrupters, there’s often a “sweet spot”, where less or more exposure would be more damaging to health. These chemicals are known as hormone disruptors, or endocrine disruptors.

For more on the endocrine system check out Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System and Balancing Our Hormones.

A study from March 2015 stated that the health cost to the European Union of only a few of these endocrine disrupting chemicals is over EUR 150 Billion per year. The same report also said that lower IQs, adult obesity, and potentially 5% or more of autism cases may be linked to exposure to endocrine disruptors like glyphosate.

“With increasing evidence from laboratory studies showing that glyphosate-based herbicides can result in a wide range of chronic illnesses through multiple mechanisms, it has become imperative to ascertain the levels of glyphosate in food and in as large a section of the human population as possible. Thus, the information gathered by the glyphosate public testing service being offered by The Detox Project is most timely and will provide invaluable information for the consumer and scientists like myself evaluating the toxicity of real world levels of exposure to this most widely used pesticide.”

These results show that both the U.S. regulators have let down consumers in America. Independent science shows that glyphosate may be a hormone hacker at these real-life exposure levels found in the food products. The safe level of glyphosate ingestion is simply unknown despite what the EPA and Monsanto would have everyone believe.” – Henry Rowlands, Director, The Detox Project

If consumers had any doubt about the extent to which they are being poisoned by Monsanto’s Roundup, these tests results should put those doubts to rest,” – Ronnie Cummins, International Director of Organic Consumers Association 

It’s interesting to note that the testing is on a volunteer bases, and some speculate that people getting tested are more likely than the general public to purchase organic foods and avoid GMOs.

How to Avoid and Detox Endocrine Disruptors

The most common endocrine disruptors we are likely to have in our bodies include Bisphenol–A, AKA BPAs, Phthalates (added to plastics to make them softer and last longer), Parabens, PBDE’s (found in flame retardants) PCB’s, Dioxin: (an unintentional by-product of many industrial processes),  pesticides and herbicides, and heavy metals. It’s a scary list, and there’s obviously many more chemicals we haven’t heard about yet.

The good news is that studies have shown that fresh, raw, organic vegetables detox the body of all of these toxins. It’s becoming more and more imperative that we grow our own food and buy unpackaged, unprocessed food to prepare at home. Get gardening and get detoxing if you’re not already. See the recommended reading list below for more on this.

Conclusion

If you’re ready to send in a sample, unfortunately, the project was put on hold. Due to the enormous interest, they had to temporarily stop the urine and water testing program until they are working with a much larger lab, which is supposed to begin in “summer, 2016.” You can sign up if you’re interested at The Detox Project here.

Recommended Reading:

• Understanding and Detoxifying Genetically Modified Foods
• Detox Cheap and Easy Without Fasting – Recipes Included
•  Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System and Balancing Our Hormones
• How to Start a Vegetable Garden – How to Grow Vegetables
• How to Start an Organic Garden

Sources:

• Detox Project
• UCSF Presentation Reveals Glyphosate Contamination in People Across America – Organic Consumers Association
• Nine Out of 10 Americans Tested Positive for Monsanto’s Cancer-Linked Weedkiller Glyphosate – Alternet