The Alzheimer’s Aluminum Connection

In 1982, I was a psychology major attending Georgia State University. One of my favorite professors told us, “If you don’t want to get Alzheimer’s, avoid aluminum. When the brains of Alzheimer’s victims were studied post mortem, the one thing they all had in common was aluminum in their brain tissue. Don’t drink from aluminum cans. Stop buying canned food. And stop cooking in aluminum pans.”

I went home and threw out all of my aluminum pots and pans. I had quite a few. And I took the rest of his advice to heart. From that day forward, I bought drinks in glass bottles and avoided canned foods.

I always imagined the aluminum connection was common knowledge, at least in scientific circles. But in recent years, I discovered there was no general consensus regarding the aluminum, Alzheimer’s connection. As a matter of fact, it seems to have been an issue of debate. But isn’t that always the case when big business is involved? If we malign the aluminum soda can and all that canned food, if we stop wrapping our food in aluminum foil, businesses will lose a lot of money.

A quick internet search revealed the Alzheimer’s Association’s stance. Their website shows the following:

Myth 4: Drinking out of aluminum cans or cooking in aluminum pots and pans can lead to Alzheimer’s disease.

Reality: During the 1960s and 1970s, aluminum emerged as a possible suspect in Alzheimer’s. This suspicion led to concern about exposure to aluminum through everyday sources such as pots and pans, beverage cans, antacids, and antiperspirants. Since then, studies have failed to confirm any role for aluminum in causing Alzheimer’s. Experts today focus on other areas of research, and few believe that everyday sources of aluminum pose any threat.

And yet, recent studies have refuted the claim that there is no link between aluminum and Alzheimer’s. Aluminum accumulates in the body. We are not only exposed through cans and cookware, we accumulate aluminum through cosmetics, antiperspirants, medications, and vaccines.

In Professor Chris Exley’s article published by The Hippocratic Post he states, “ In my view, the findings are unequivocal in their confirmation of a role for aluminum in some if not all Alzheimer’s disease.”

The following quotes reiterate what my professor told us in the 1980s.

We already know that the aluminum content of brain tissue in late-onset or sporadic Alzheimer’s disease is significantly higher than is found in age-matched controls.”

“Individuals who develop Alzheimer’s disease in their late sixties and older also accumulate more aluminum in their brain tissue than individuals of the same age without the disease.”

Why would the Alzheimer’s Association say “…few believe that everyday sources of aluminum pose any threat.”?

Professor Exley concludes, “We should take all possible precautions to reduce the accumulation of aluminum in our brain tissue through our everyday activities and we should start to do this as early in our lives as possible.”

One thing is certain – aluminum is a neurotoxin that should not be injected into our children’s bodies through dozens of vaccines. Check out How To Detoxify and Heal From Vaccinations – For Adults and Children.

Related Reading:
Sources:


Probiotics, Bacteria, and Our Health

The human body is home to over five hundred different strains of bacteria that serve specific functions. Even bacteria of the same name may function in different ways. For example, if a specific strain of Lactobacillus (a commonly studied probiotic strain) helps prevent an illness, that doesn’t mean that another strain of Lactobacillus would have the same effect. We have yet to discover all the effects that probiotics have on the body, but we do know that the right strains, cultured and processed the right way, offer the following six proven health benefits:

1. Probiotics Provide Energy

According to Gastroenterologist Matthew Ciorba, up to 10% of our daily energy needs are provided through the process of fermentation by our gut flora. By breaking down the components of food that we are unable to digest (like fiber), bacteria in our gut allow us to assimilate fatty acids, sugars, and amino acids that we would not have access to otherwise.

Related: How To Heal Your Gut

2. Probiotics Are Antioxidants and Anti-inflammatory

An excess of oxygen radicals in the gastrointestinal tract is a potential cause of chronic diseases. As these oxygen radicals accumulate in the intestinal tract, they can damage the intestinal lining and create a state of chronic inflammation. Strains of Bifidobacterium and Lactobacillus have been found to limit the accumulation of free radicals in the intestinal tracts of rats by acting as antioxidants. The end-products that gut bacteria produce, like the short-chain fatty acid called butyrate, also have antioxidant properties that help to reduce inflammation and heal the intestinal wall.

3. Probiotics Resist Infection

The fermentation end-product butyrate also supports regulatory T-cell functions in the gut and contributes to the integrity of the intestinal wall. This allows the body to prevent infectious pathogens from getting in while we let our immune system eliminate them from the body. Probiotics also prevent pathogenic bacteria like E. coli from being able to colonize our intestinal tract by out-competing them for food, using acids to change the environment, and creating anti-microbial substances that prevent the bad bacteria from thriving.

Product Recommendation: Syntol AMD – Arthur Andrew Medical

4. Probiotics Prevent Digestive Issues

We need bacteria to digest food. Probiotics help prevent digestive issues in many ways. They keep our intestinal wall from being oxidized by free radicals by acting as antioxidants and triggering the production of protective mucous. Probiotics also produce substances that provide the intestinal wall with what it needs to heal itself. Butyrate, for example, provides the components that the intestinal wall needs to form new cells while providing energy for existing cells. Butyrate has also been found to increase intestinal motility, which helps prevent constipation.

Recommended: How To Reverse Fatty Liver Disease (Diet Plan Included)

5. Probiotics Produce Vitamin K and B Vitamins

In addition to producing butyrate, probiotics have the capacity to synthesize seven different vitamins:

  • Vitamin B12: Vitamin B12 is required for proper red blood cell formation, neurological function, and DNA synthesis.
  • Vitamin B6: Vitamin B6 is involved in more than 100 enzyme reactions that are mostly concerned with protein metabolism.
  • Vitamin B5: Vitamin B5 is needed to produce red blood cells, manufacture sex and stress-related hormones, synthesize cholesterol, and maintain a healthy digestive tract.
  • Vitamin B3: Vitamin B3 helps the body make various sex and stress-related hormones, improve circulation, and suppress inflammation.
  • Biotin: Biotin metabolizes carbohydrates, fats, and amino acids and plays a role in preventing insulin resistance.
  • Folate: Folate is essential for proper cell division.
  • Vitamin K: Vitamin K is required for the synthesis of proteins involved in blood clotting and bone formation.

These vitamins are essential for processes that affect every cell in the body, but our needs for these vitamins are not met by our probiotics alone. We must consume adequate amounts of these vitamins to receive their benefits because it is unclear how much of these vitamins is produced by our probiotics.

6. Probiotics Help with Fat Loss

A few studies suggest that specific Lactobacillus strains have an impact on body fat, weight, and metabolic disorders. For example, the ingestion of Lactobacillus gasseri SBT2055 for 12 weeks reduced fat mass gain, body weight, and waist to hip ratio in overweight subjects when compared to a placebo. This may be due to the link between leptin and probiotics. Leptin is a hormone secreted by fat cells that lets the brain know when we are full. Probiotics indirectly affect our leptin response by promoting a state of low inflammation and allowing us to get more nutrition out of every calorie we eat. This creates the perfect environment for fat loss.

Attack of the Antibiotics

Antibiotics are designed to kill a broad range of bacteria in an effort to fight off infection. Unfortunately, antibiotics also destroy over one-third of the bacteria in our gut. This causes rapid shifts in our microbiome (intestinal bacteria) that leaves us vulnerable to harmful bacteria like Clostridium difficile and Salmonella typhimurium.

Even if the harmful bacteria do not infect our system, our intestinal tract will still be compromised. Without a proper balance of beneficial flora, our intestinal tract will become inflamed and leaky, letting pathogens through. We will also lack the Vitamin K and B vitamins that are normally produced by probiotics in the large intestine. This can lead to hormonal imbalance, a lack of energy, and an increased risk of disease.

With all of these negative effects, it becomes obvious as to why antibiotic use is associated with a large number of health problems and an increased susceptibility to infectious diseases. The health of our microbiome is essential for our health and well-being. Check out How to Detoxify From Antibiotics and Other Chemical Antimicrobials for more on this.

Related: Signs You Have Too Much Candida

Don’t Worry, Change Is Simple

Even if you have taken antibiotics recently, you can begin to counteract their negative effects immediately. According to David Relman, a microbiologist at Stanford University, the bacteria in our gut adapt quickly to what we eat. In an article in the Frontiers in Microbiology, M.P. Francino explains that our microbiome is “…capable of returning to a composition similar to the original one.”

This means that food can be our medicine if we eat the “right” foods.

What Are the “Right” Foods?

The “right” foods are prebiotic. Probiotics provide your gut with the beneficial bacteria it needs to thrive. Prebiotics provide your beneficial bacteria with what they need to survive and to provide you with all of the benefits mentioned earlier in this article. Think raw produce, herbs, and spices.

Many experts agree that one of the best ways to get probiotics in your diet is by eating fermented vegetables. Kim chi, sauerkraut, and pickles are fermented vegetables that contain different kinds of probiotics. These probiotics are already working to digest your meal before you eat it, which makes nutrients within the food more bioavailable. This is especially beneficial for those with digestive issues.

To ensure that you are eating the best fermented vegetables, check the label on the container. Look for the words “raw”, “unpasteurized”, and “naturally fermented.”  When looking at labels, smaller, local businesses are worth a close look, and anything national will most certainly be pasteurized in some way. Most of the probiotics are killed when the product is heated or pasteurized. Also, make sure there are no preservatives like sodium benzoate or sodium sulfite. The best fermented vegetables are made using organic vegetables and unrefined salt. Herbs, spices, and seeds are added for more flavor and nutrition.

Fermented vegetables also provide you with plenty of prebiotic material. As our bacteria enjoy their meal, they produce many highly beneficial end-products like butyrate.

Non-starchy vegetables like broccoli and artichokes, greens like kale and collards, and salad greens like spinach and arugula come with plenty of fiber to feed your probiotics and plenty of nutrients to feed your body.

After Dr. Mercola had his homemade sauerkraut tested in a lab, he reported that “…a 4-6 ounce serving of the fermented vegetables had ten trillion bacteria.” This means that 2 ounces of sauerkraut had more probiotics than a full bottle of 100-count probiotic capsules.

Michael Edwards, OLM’s Editor-in-Chief has an unusual opinion of fermented foods.

I love sauerkraut and I hope everyone reading this learns to make it. Fermented vegetables have many benefits (for instance, see the vitamins up at #5), but the bacteria itself doesn’t make my list. Our stomach acid kills most of it. That’s what stomach acid is designed to do.  I know some who swear they make such a potent product that much more of the bacteria makes it into the gut. After trying some of these products, I agree.

But, for anyone who is sick, and especially anyone who has an abundance of Candida, fermented vegetables cannot provide enough, or cannot provide a strong enough strain of bacteria to counteract a sick gut’s biofilm. I recommend a high qaulity, trusted probiotic supplement along with a prebiotic diet.”

What about Yogurt?

Dairy products, like milk, are commonly known as an essential part of our diet, so probiotic-rich yogurt should be called a “superfood”, right?

Unfortunately, some of the widely accepted beliefs about the benefits of dairy products, like the belief that dairy builds strong bones, have been disproven. Dairy has also been linked to various cancers, especially prostate and breast cancer. Combine these findings with the fact that conventional yogurt lacks beneficial prebiotics and contains high amounts of sugar, and it becomes clear why it may be best to limit the consumption of dairy. Due to the state of the dairy industry and how yogurt is processed, even plain, unsweetened conventional yogurt is more likely to feed pathogens than to be a source of probiotics.

The Dirty Truth about Supplements

Scientific literature is riddled with uncertainty regarding the effectiveness of probiotic supplements. For example, a Canadian study in 2004 measured the viable organisms in 10 brands of probiotic preparations and none matched the amount on their labels. Eight brands had only 10% of the stated number of probiotics and two of the brands had no viable probiotics at all.

Even if these probiotic supplements contained all of the viable probiotics that they promised, there would still be no guarantee that the probiotics would survive the journey to the intestinal tract.

Most probiotic supplements are also ineffectual for a multitude of reasons. It’s not just the probiotic count that matters; strain quality varies widely and are more often ineffectual. Of the ones I’ve tried (about 45) Bio-K, Abzorb, and FloraMend are three I know of that work. Most probiotic supplements are a waste of money, and many actually feed Candida and other non-benefical microflora.” – Michael Edwards

The Treacherous Journey of Probiotics

First, probiotics must survive the environment they are exposed to when they are outside of the body. Once the probiotics are ingested, they must survive the extreme acidity of stomach acid and bile acids. One study states that, “…survival rates have been estimated at 20–40% for selected [probiotic] strains.” According to the American Nutrition Association, Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, and Streptococcus probiotic strains can survive the journey through the stomach. However, L. bulgaricus and S. thermophilus, as well as Leuconostoc and Lactococcus species, cannot survive.

Even when the probiotics make it to the intestinal tract, they still have to attach to and colonize the intestinal wall. This is another uncertain aspect in consuming probiotics that is difficult to measure. Unfortunately, there is no way to guarantee that the probiotics in your sauerkraut, kim chi, or probiotic supplement will actually colonize your intestinal tract.

How to Make Probiotics Work for You

Even the best probiotic will do little to combat a poor diet. In fact, the best probiotic supplement is the “right” food. To improve your digestive health and receive all the benefits of probiotics, all you have to do is eat prebiotics and probiotics in the form of raw, unpasteurized fermented organic vegetables and organic non-starchy vegetables every day. With enough time on this kind of diet without processed and refined foods, almost anyone can improve their digestive system.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Vaccines Linked to the Diagnosis of Neurological Disorders

As natural health advocates, we are not anti-science. In fact, we want more vaccine science, not less. A new study from Yale School of Medicine and Penn State College of Medicine is just that. Researchers have discovered an association between the timing of vaccines and the onset of certain brain disorders in a subset of children.

Data from more than 95,000 insured children age 6-15 was analyzed. The study compared data from three groups: comparing children with certain neurological conditions, children who had received treatment for broken bones, and children who received treatment for open wounds. Dates of treatment for the 3 groups was analyzed comparing the onset of illness or injury to each child’s vaccinations.

The neurological conditions in the first group included obsessive-compulsive disorder, anorexia nervosa, anxiety disorder, chronic tic disorder, attention deficit hyperactivity disorder, major depressive disorder, and bipolar disorder.

Researchers looked at each child’s medical records for the year prior to treatment to establish whether or not the child had received vaccines during that period.

This was a well-designed, tightly controlled study. Control subjects without brain disorders were matched with the subjects by age, geographic location and gender.

As expected, broken bones and open wounds showed no significant association with vaccinations.

New cases of major depression, bipolar disorder or ADHD also showed no significant association with vaccinations.

However, children who had been vaccinated were 80 percent more likely to be diagnosed with anorexia and 25 percent more likely to be diagnosed with OCD than their non-vaccinated counterparts. Vaccinated children were also more likely to be diagnosed with an anxiety disorder and with tics compared to the controls.” – Robert Kennedy

Different Vaccines, Different Disorders

Certain vaccines resulted in higher diagnoses of certain disorders. The flu shot (recommended yearly by the CDC), was associated with a higher level of OCD, anorexia, and anxiety disorder. Children vaccinated for meningitis, hepatitis A, and hepatitis B saw higher rates of anorexia, chronic tic disorder, and OCD.

Study Conclusions

In the world we live in, science goes where the money goes. Researchers know that conducting a study that questions the safety or efficacy of vaccines is not likely to be a profitable endeavor. In fact, anyone working in science today knows how dangerous it is to disrupt the status quo. For one of many examples, check out Vaccines, Retroviruses, DNA, and the Discovery That Destroyed  Judy Mikovits’ Career. Regardless of these risks, these researchers have concluded:

This pilot epidemiologic analysis implies that the onset of some neuropsychiatric disorders may be temporally related to prior vaccinations in a subset of individuals.”

Perhaps the first half of the study’s opening sentence and the final closing sentence were chosen in an attempt to align themselves with the conventional vaccine stance and to mitigate blowback from the damning conclusions reached by their study.

The opening sentence was,

Although the association of the measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine with autism spectrum disorder has been convincingly disproven, the onset of certain brain-related autoimmune and inflammatory disorders has been found to be temporally associated with the antecedent administration of various vaccines.”

The first half of this sentence is simply not true. The CDC whistleblower, Dr. William Thompson, revealed the CDC coverup of evidence that the MMR is linked to autism in African American male children under a certain age. The second half is warning us about other problems: brain related autoimmune diseases and inflammatory disorders.

The final sentence was downright ridiculous. After revealing the association between these neurological disorders and vaccines, they had the guile to end their article with this sentence.

Finally, given the modest magnitude of these findings and the clear public health benefits of the timely administration of vaccines in preventing mortality and morbidity in childhood, we encourage families to maintain the currently recommended vaccination schedules while taking all necessary precautions as documented by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.”

This sentence speaks for itself. Draw your own conclusions.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Fast Food Packaging Contains Dangerous Chemicals According to New Study – As If the Food Isn’t Bad Enough!

A new study reports that fast food packaging contains concerning levels of certain perfluoroalkyls and polyfluoroalkyls (PFAs), a relative of the chemicals used in non-stick pans, furniture, packing tape, and waterproof clothes. Among the items tested for PFAs were dessert and bread wrappers, sandwich and burger wrappers, paperboard containers, and paper cups. The dessert and bread wrappers were the biggest offenders, with 56% of them containing PFAs. Not only do these PFAs break down slowly in nature, but they’ve also been linked to higher cholesterol, higher rates of kidney and bladder cancer, weakened antibody responses to vaccines in children, and suppressed immune systems.

It’s Not Just the Wrappers

Fluorosurfactants come in many forms. They can be called PFAs, PFOA, PFOS, and PFCs. These chemicals are in the majority of stain-resistant, waterproof, non-stick, and fire-retardant items. The plethora of acronyms make it difficult to understand which ones have been banned. This creates confusion companies can use to their advantage.

The EPA has established a safety limit for these products, but the government doesn’t regulate them beyond that. The FDA did ban three PFCs found in pizza boxes and microwave popcorn bags in 2016, and a form of PFAs, known as long chain PFAs, was banned in the early 2000s. All PFAs found in products like fast food wrappers are now short chain PFAs, which are the long chain PFAs minus a set of carbon molecules.

The Slow Takeover

In 2013, the Environmental Health Perspectives Journal published a study linking PFOAs in Teflon pans to thyroid disease. Many scientists have called for companies to stop using non-essential PFAs, while the FDA has approved nearly 100 new PFCs to use in food packaging in the last decade. The speed at which new fluorosurfactants are being developed makes it unlikely that scientific concerns will be taken as seriously as they should be.

Since fluorosurfactants take so long to break down in nature, they have plenty of time to migrate to water sources, release into the air, and contaminate soil. After looking at 36,000 water samples from more than 4,800 public water sources in 2016, Harvard University found that 16 million Americans are drinking water with PFAs. Of those water sources, 66 of them had levels at or above what the EPA considers safe.

Persistent Waste Creates Persistent Problems

One wonders where the ever growing number of PFAs will end up when they run out of space. No one seems to be clear on how they got in our water, and it doesn’t seem likely that anyone is going to step up and regulate them. PFAs continue to resist decomposition and mysteriously leach into water supplies and the food they are wrapped around unchecked, leaving us with a higher likelihood of thyroid disease, certain cancers, infertility, and developmental disorders in children. At some point, the advice to avoid fast-food wrappers, microwave popcorn, and nonstick cookware will only minimize the exposure to PFAs. True avoidance will no longer be an option.

Related Reading:
Sources:


New Study Suggests Women Could, and Maybe Should, Eat While In Labor

Hospitals typically restrict women from eating and drinking during labor. Women are given ice chips and intravenous fluids to prevent dehydration. A review of previous studies looks at women who were allowed to eat before delivery and found that they had a slightly shorter labor than those who were restricted to ice chips and water.

Concerns go back to a 1940s study that showed women who delivered under general anesthesia were at risk of regurgitating and aspirating food that was inside their stomachs while they were under sedation. Fortunately, the use of general anesthesia during delivery is far less common today.

The information does not prove that eating caused deliveries to happen sooner, but we suspect there is at least a cause and effect happening like the way that eating can lead us to defecate sooner than if we had not eaten. There’s only so much room in there. Regardless of whether or not our theory is true, the woman’s uterus is mostly muscle. Our muscles need fuel. As anyone who has ever tried to run a marathon, ride a century (a 100-mile bike ride) or otherwise push their body to the physical limit knows, you will bonk, or hit the wall, if you run out of sugar. A long and intense labor is like completing an ironman triathlon and then going back for more. Even at its best, labor uses a massive amount of energy.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Textile Industry’s Health and Environmental Impacts – What Are You Wearing?

Amid today’s discussion of the renewable energy crisis and the impacts of fossil fuel harvest and consumption, many people are forgetting one major industry that is fed by the oil rigs – the textile industry.

This sleeping giant is responsible for greater environmental contamination and more waste than any other industry, and due to the unawareness of the general population, its demand is ever-increasing.

The discussion surrounding carbon emissions and fuel consumption is a worthwhile one to be had, for sure, but the silence surrounding the flagrant disregard for environmental safety in the textile industry is one that has gone on long enough.

It’s time to bust this can of worms wide open and acknowledge what many of us have wondered the extent of for some time – the vast and unconscionable lapse in ethics and environmental concern in the textile industry.

The Rise of Man-Made Fibers

Once upon a time, things were made with pretty simple materials, but the process was very time and labor intensive, and as the industry grew, one of the first areas it took hold in was in textiles. We went from small farmers hand-spinning wool to gigantic factories mass-producing fabrics by the ton.

As the manufacturing process expanded and was refined, modern “improvements” were made. Chemicals were added to the fabrics to help prevent wrinkles and shrinkage. The fabrics were soaked in great vats of artificial dyes and flame retardants, and soon the factory workers had to wear masks to compensate for the health hazards associated with working with these chemicals.

Then came the advent of a petroleum-based textile that many forget is a product of the big oil industry – polyester. This cheap fiber was much more cost-effective to produce than natural fibers like wool and cotton and could be made in any color or elasticity. Its versatility quickly contributed to its rise with every major clothing and textile retailer in the world. Polyester began its reign.

The Effects on Your Health

First, let’s scale things down a bit and focus on how the modern textile industry’s functionality is directly affecting you. After all, there’s no greater way to tug on the heartstrings of a populace and compel them to give a damn than to show them how it directly affects them, so let’s engage in a little shameless emotional manipulation here.

With their convenience and cost-savings, these artificial fibers and manufacturing methods brought a host of problems that, for the most part, still remain quietly under the rug. We’re surrounded by fabrics all the time, and most of us never give a second thought as to how those textiles came about or the consequences of their production.

Polyester is essentially a plastic – a petroleum-based product that’s the result of a long, toxic manufacturing process. Plastics themselves have been found to cause hormonal disruption and are strongly linked to the formation of breast cancer cells1.

The connections between health concerns and polyester and plastic are still being studied. Though polyester and plastic are derived from the same chemical compound, the finishing process creates a much different product. However, it has been discovered that polyester emits phytoestrogens3, which are known endocrine system disruptors and, are again, strongly linked with breast cancer.

The bottom line is, we’re still studying and understanding the long-term health effects of artificial fibers like polyester and the finishing processes that go into them. The textiles themselves are only the tip of the iceberg, and many printed clothes use PVC for screen printing – a compound that is considered so dangerous to human health, it’s been banned from use in water supply pipes and is on its way to being regulated out of the children’s toy industry4.

Flame retardant chemicals pose another threat entirely. Since synthetic fibers burn much more quickly than natural ones, manufacturers have taken to using a host of flame retardants decrease the flammability of these textiles. The result has certainly been effective at making products more fire safe, but the effects and health concerns linked to flame retardant chemicals are well known2, and many government regulation bodies are taking a stand against their use.

…levels of the chemicals in the blood of North Americans appear to have been doubling every two to five years for the past several decades.”

Acting on growing evidence that these flame retardants can accumulate in people and cause adverse health effects — interfering with hormones, reproductive systems, thyroid and metabolic function, and neurological development in infants and children — the federal government and various states have limited or banned the use of some of these chemicals, as have other countries.” ~Elizabeth Grossman, Yale Environment 360

Despite this knowledge, there is no blanket ban in the U.S. for flame retardant chemicals, and a staggering number of companies and manufacturers are still using chemical cocktails that run the gamut, from electronics to baby bedding. The result?

“Many infants are in physical contact with products treated with these chemicals 24 hours a day.”

It’s a scary thought that some of our most fragile, precious lives are the ones most frequently and consistently in contact with these items, but it’s the humbling truth, and it doesn’t appear to be changing anytime soon.

Though legislation has been passed by a few state governments, the bottom line is that manufacturing of products drenched in these chemicals is still widespread, and the process isn’t likely to change until new formulations that are safer, but still effective at slowing fires, are developed.

How Do You Avoid Flame Retardant Chemicals?

The issue with flame retardant chemicals is a challenging one. We don’t want to expose ourselves and our children to chemicals that have been proven to be detrimental to our health, but in a world full of petroleum-based products that burn quickly and easily, it’s essential to protect ourselves from these highly flammable materials.

Companies have done some experimenting, but ultimately, what comes back is almost always another version of the same product with many of the same health concerns. The industries argue that these chemicals are saving lives, and who can debate that when the products they are treating are so highly flammable?

The solution is simple. We need to stop using highly flammable textiles in the first place. It all comes full circle back to petroleum-based products, and that’s where the majority of the issues lie. By sourcing products made from natural fibers, which burn much more slowly, we avoid the need for flame retardant chemicals.

We’re Poisoning Our Planet for Fabrics

It sounds sensationalist, but that’s as simple and cut and dried as it gets. The textile industry is responsible for a whopping 20% of industrial water pollution7, with many of the compounds being permanent fixtures in our world’s water supply. Cancer-causing endocrine disruptors and synthetic chemical compounds that won’t ever break down are now a part of our water supply, and there’s little hope of changing that.

Aside from the chemical cocktails that frequently pollute our water supply, there is a massive energy input needed for modern man-made textiles and a tremendous amount of waste in those industries. Most synthetic fibers are direct products of the petroleum industry, where a tremendous amount of energy is needed just to harvest the raw materials, let alone convert it to fabric.

The process of turning petroleum into polyester is a nasty one. Factory workers, many of them children, often experience horrible work conditions and face a host of health issues. The superheating of the materials needed to create polyester is horribly energy-intensive, and the by-products are known to cause lasting, long-term, and often debilitating health effects.

Textile Safety and Sustainability – Even Natural Fibers Aren’t Exempt

Despite the stunning array of health and environmental concerns associated with man-made fibers and their chemical processes, it’s only fair to shed light on another issue that’s similarly troubling – the impacts of conventional agriculture on the natural fiber industry.

It’s an unfortunate fact that the cotton industry accounts for 6.8% of worldwide pesticide use and 16% of insecticide use, despite being grown on only 2.5% of the world’s agricultural lands5. Conventional cotton farming methods are far from sustainable. And the worst part? Those chemicals are in your clothes.

The health risks associated with the use of pesticides for humans is well-known and documented with the primary concerns being for neurological issues, endocrine system disruption, respiratory problems, and even cancer6.

Healthy Alternatives to Toxic Textiles

In a market so rampantly saturated with the use of pesticides, the best thing you can do for your health and safety is to source organic cotton and wool products whenever possible. Organic cotton is grown without the use of synthetic pesticides and is typically grown in areas with greater regulation for worker safety – not factories and child-labor powered institutions.

Wool is a fantastic material as well that is often produced by small farmers, so purchasing it is a great way to support them. Organic mattresses often use a combination of organic wool and organic cotton. Natural latex options are a great way to avoid polyesters in furniture and mattresses, and there are even some manufactured foam products that are made without the use of nasty chemicals like formaldehyde and parabens. Of course, organic cotton and wool are also a great choice for mattresses, pillows, and furniture cushions.

Take a good hard look around your home, and you’ll see that petroleum-based products dominate our lives. From plastics to polyesters, these products seem unavoidable, but the health effects and environmental concerns are too far-reaching to overlook.

It’s time to start making better product selections. Get started with the area of your home where your skin makes the most contact with synthetic fibers every day – your bed. Natural mattresses are a crucial stepping stone to putting your foot down and saying no to the toxic, unsustainable practices of the textile industry.

OEKO-TEX: The Easy Way to Spot Safe Materials

If you’re buying lots of manufactured items like baby toys, bedding, and equipment, OEKO-TEX maintains a fabulous standard for vetting products and materials for safety compliance. This third-party testing system consists of an international group of scientists and laboratories who offer their certifications to products meeting their stringent standards and objective test criteria.

There is no data manipulation, no conflict of interest – just the information you need to make an informed purchase decision. If a product has met their standards for testing, they won’t be quiet about it. Look for the label or a mention of this certification in product descriptions.

It gets pretty technical, but if you’d like to take a look for yourself, dive into the OEKO-TEX guidelines here. Now we recommend you clean out your closet and check out Holistic Guide to Healing the Endocrine System, and make sure you’re sleeping on a nontoxic mattress like the ones below.

Related Products:
Recommended Reading:
Sources:

 



Monsanto’s Glyphosate, Fatty Liver Disease Link Proven – Published, Peer-reviewed, Scrutinized Study

Glyphosate. The world’s most popular herbicide. An alleged cause of cancer. Available in supermarkets across the nation, whether you want it or not. So what is the latest accomplishment for Monsanto’s golden child? Fatty liver disease!

Dr. Michael Antoniou from King’s College in London has found a link between the herbicide and non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, a condition whose symptoms include fatigue, nausea, jaundice, cirrhosis, and abdominal pain, among others. It is found primarily in overweight and obese people, people with diabetes, and those with high cholesterol. According to Dr. Robin Mesnage, another author of the study,

The concentration of glyphosate that was added to the drinking water of the rats corresponds to a concentration found in tap water for human consumption. It is also lower than the contamination of some foodstuffs.”

Where is the Science?

Glyphosate has been on the market since 1974 and since the advent of genetically-modified, Roundup ready crops in 1996, more than 18 billion tons of the stuff has been used worldwide (nearly a fifth of that was in the U.S. alone). It’s been linked to environmental degradation, and the number of studies linking glyphosate to health issues are growing. The work from King’s College is the first to definitively identify a real risk glyphosate poses to human health. Dr. Antoniou says,

The findings of our study are very worrying as they demonstrate for the first time a causative link between an environmentally relevant level of Roundup consumption over the long-term and a serious disease.”

Long-term studies on the impact of glyphosate are few and subject to huge amounts of scrutiny. A previous two-year study, the Seralini study in 2012, tested rats for long-term toxicity and found that the rats developed tumors and had shorter life spans. The study was heavily criticized, and the publisher retracted it in 2013 despite protests from the authors.

The recently discovered link between glyphosate and fatty liver disease is peer-reviewed, scrutinized, published in Scientific Reports, and from a prestigious university. But it has only now been released. One of the authors on the paper is Gilles-Eric Seralini (he of the previously retracted study), and this study uses the same, roundly criticized breed of rat from the previous study. The Crop Protection Association has already called the validity of this study into question saying, “Glyphosate is amongst the most thoroughly tested herbicides on the market, and those studies by expert regulators have consistently concluded that glyphosate does not pose a risk to public health.”

Americans Enjoy a More Substantial Glyphosate Allowance

The Crop Protection Association is correct. Glyphosate is one of the most tested herbicides on the market (although generally for 90 days, not 730). From this testing, the government has decided that there is a safe amount of glyphosate that can be ingested. That amount, the allowable daily intake (ADI), is 1.75 mg per kg of body weight in the United States. In Europe, the ADI is much lower at 0.3 mg per kg of bodyweight. Immediately, this discrepancy calls to mind a certain stereotype, that of the overweight American tourist bobbing merrily through a sea of slim and sneering Europeans. With the link between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and glyphosate, is it too much of a leap to think that the rise of obesity in America could be caused by our lax attitude towards the omnipresent herbicide?

What is Non-Alcoholic Liver Disease?

Basically, fat accumulates in the liver when the liver cannot break it down or process it fast enough. The liver normally stores some fat, but when the liver builds up more than 5 – 10 percent of its weight in fat, it’s called fatty liver disease. In alcoholic fatty liver disease, the liver can break down if it is unable to process the amount of alcohol ingested. Non-alcoholic fatty liver disease follows the same model, only without the alcohol. This problem, like so many health problems, starts in the gut.

Bacteria in the large and small intestine like Lactobacillus and Bifidobacterium are responsible for breaking down fats in the body. The liver helps with this, sending bile into the small intestine to help with turning the food into smaller molecules. But a digestive system without enough beneficial bacteria to properly digest food is left with something closer to the original fat molecules. Unabsorbed fats should stay in the intestine, but the bile from the liver is responsible for cleaning the intestine. Almost all of that bile is recycled back to the liver, potentially carrying the less digested fats with it. From there, the liver can be overwhelmed by the accumulated fats that it can’t clear out, much like its response to alcohol in alcoholic fatty liver disease.

And the Glyphosate Is…?

Much of the blame for non-alcoholic liver disease can be placed squarely on the diet of those who have it. Processed sugars and refined foods feed opportunistic, less helpful microbes in the gut like Candida, that in turn crowd out beneficial bacteria and place more stress on the liver. It’s all about the processed foods – the foods likely to have the highest concentration of glyphosate. And the glyphosate is everywhere.

The Detox Project at the University of California San Francisco found glyphosate in 93% of the urine samples from their early tests. This is the glyphosate that was processed out of the body. Meanwhile, the poor liver chugs along like some cliche of an overworked housewife, left with the overload of improperly digested food molecules, toxic food additives, and who knows exactly how much herbicide piled on top of it.

Research Matters. So Where’s the Rest of It?

Lack of research is the biggest issue with current government attitudes towards glyphosate and why this study matters. The authors of this study saw the connection between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and glyphosate with a regular dose 75,000 times below the European limit and over 400,000 times below the U.S. limit. There is no way to measure how much glyphosate people are being exposed to through proximity to agriculture, their food, and even their tap water. Glyphosate is everywhere, and we barely even know the results of long-term, repeated exposure to it.

Imagine a study, much in the vein of this one, where scientists gave test subjects the full U.S. government allowable daily intake of glyphosate regularly for two years. Do you even want to see those results?

Further Reading:
Sources: