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:


Another Malaria Drug Is Failing to Work

Malaria causes over 400,000 deaths a year.  Ninety-two percent of those deaths occur in Sub-Saharan Africa, although a total of 91 countries still report cases each year. We know that malaria is primarily spread through the Plasmodium falciparum and Plasmodium vivax species of mosquitos, but recent developments have made it clear that we need to adjust our prevention and treatment of the disease.

Typically, malaria prevention takes the form of insecticides sprayed inside houses and the deployment of nets treated with insecticides. The two most common species of mosquito spreading malaria have different territories. Plasmodium falciparum is concentrated in Africa, and Plasmodium vivax is everywhere else. Plasmodium vivax is already displaying resistance to the most popular antiparasitics, especially in South-East Asia. A team in London is now reporting the first failure of the anti-parasitic drug artemether-lumefantrine contracted from travel in Africa.

Heed the Resistance

More than 1,500 people a year in the U.K. are treated for malaria after foreign travel. The four cases of malaria that resisted the usual treatment were from individuals who traveled to Uganda, Angola, and Liberia. The treatment failures happened from October 2015 to February 2016, and the four patients were eventually treated with other means. Four doesn’t seem like many cases, but those four cases are from over a year ago and reported in a country where malaria is exclusively imported.

Drugs and Drug Combinations are Failing

The World Health Organization recommends that malaria drug regimens be routinely monitored. This is not the first time a treatment for malaria has failed. Another common malaria treatment is artemisinin-based combination therapy, a mix of artemisinin and piperaquine. While malaria has officially shown resistance to artemisinin (a derivative of sweet wormwood) since 2008, the combined use of the drug with piperaquine has yielded results until last year, when Cambodian doctors reported the drug combination had completely failed.

Controlling malaria and the carriers of the disease is becoming more difficult for a variety of reasons, and malaria’s actual drug resistance is not the only uprising occurring. Mosquitos, malaria’s long term carrier and partner-in-crime, are developing a resistance to the pesticides used to reduce their numbers. Mosquito netting sprayed in insecticide is a common prevention strategy, and more nets are being sprayed with two different insecticides. Who knows how long the double dose of insecticide will work, and at what point is the constant exposure to these pesticides considered too harmful for humans?

Running a Rigged Race

Here’s the bottom line: the bacteria and diseases are evolving and we aren’t. In fact, our ability to fight off infection through a strong immune system and a healthy, varied gut environment is going backward.

Scientists see this drug resistance as a warning sign rather than an invitation to panic. But these solutions do not help us to reclaim the microbiome diversity that we need to maintain a strong immune system. Diseases like malaria have already proven that conventional anti-parasitics have a shelf life. We’ve passed the warning sign, but have we hit the brakes yet?

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


What You Need to Know About the First GMO Apples

An apple a day keeps the doctor away, right? Apples are a perfect, portable snack loved by adults and kids alike. They are low in calories, high in fiber and are a great source of Vitamin C. The bad news? Apples are one of the dirty dozen, one of the most pesticide-laden fruits or vegetables on the market. The news is about to get worse for real food lovers. The first GMO apples will be going on sale in the Midwest as early as this February.

About the GMO Apples

The GMO, or genetically modified apples, were developed from the Golden Delicious variety and are sold under the Artic brand produced by Okanagan Specialty Fruits of Summerland, B.C. The apples are sold pre-sliced in plastic pouches. Instead of using citric acid to delay browning, the apples were genetically modified to reduce the amount of the enzyme, polyphenol oxidase (PPO), in the fruit. This enzyme is what causes the fruit’s flesh to oxidize, or turn brown, when exposed to air. The result is an apple that, once sliced, will not brown for up to three weeks.

What is Oxidation?

Oxidation is a natural chemical process that occurs in all living cells. When the skin of an apple is broken, the cell walls and membranes rupture,  allowing oxygen in. The process is accelerated by PPO, which results in the browning of the apple flesh.

What’s the big deal about browning apples? Well, for starters, it’s unattractive. Oxidation causes some loss of nutrients and causes the apple’s flesh to soften. For apple processors, this makes handling the fruit and getting it to market a delicate dance.

Now, there’s an apple that will not brown for 3 weeks when exposed to air. This is revolutionary for apple processors. This apple will allow some apple processors to limit additives to their apple products to prevent browning. It also ensures a longer shelf life for pre-cut apples.

Is it Safe?

In tomatoes, PPO is vital. It acts as a defense to ward off pests and pathogens. According to Arctic, PPO plays no active role in modern apples. Their scientific team used “gene silencing” to reduce the amount of PPO released by the apples, thereby practically eliminating PPO production in the Golden Delicious apples.

Is this breakthrough in the quest of making a non-browning apple safe for consumers? The USDA gave the GMO apples their stamp of approval, but like many GMO plants, only time will tell. Although Artic studied the “non-target” or side effects of the apple plants for 12 years, as with other GMO foods, no testing of long-term consumption by humans has been completed. For many of these foods, generational studies on animals were never completed either.

Alternatives

If you’re not ready to jump on the GMO brown-free bandwagon, here are few natural ways to keep apple oxidation at bay.

• Slice the fruit in water.
• Toss apple slices in lemon juice.
• Soak the slices in salt water or apple cider vinegar water.
• Sprinkle the slices with ascorbic acid (Vitamin C) powder.
• Wrap a rubber band around a sliced apple to put it back together.

These methods will keep your apple slices brown-free for several hours. Or, you can always just eat an apple in its entirety. For all the time, money and effort that went into keeping apples from oxidizing for three weeks, the reality is that brown apples won’t kill you! Skip the GMO apples and spend your money on organic ones.

Further Reading:
Sources:


More Vaccines Coming Down the Fast Track

In a way, vaccines are preventative medicine. Get the shot; develop immunity for a potentially deadly disease. Vaccine research development now wants to take the preventative mindset to a new level. Inspired by the Ebola outbreak that killed more than 11,000 people in Africa and the more recent Zika virus scare, the Coalition for Epidemic Preparedness Innovations (CEPI) has committed 460 million dollars to drive forward the development of three vaccines for Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS), Lassa fever, and Nipah virus. The coalition is also asking the World Economic Forum for a 500 million dollar donation to enable their goal of developing two different experimental vaccines for each disease within five years.

What’s the Big Deal?

There are many serious diseases with no known curative treatment beyond fluids and rest.  So what is it about these three diseases that make them special? And what’s the hurry? According to Dr. Jeremy Farrar of the Wellcome Trust (one of the Investors in CEPI), “We know from Ebola, Zika and SARS that epidemics are among the significant threats we face to life, health and prosperity. Vaccines can protect us, but we’ve done too little to develop them as an insurance policy.” The three diseases highlighted by CEPI currently have no vaccines and no clear treatment plans. They’re also on the World Health Organization’s (WHO) list of diseases that urgently need to be addressed with research and development.

The Chosen Three

MERS

MERS is a viral respiratory infection caused by the MERS-coronavirus. Since its discovery in 2012, the WHO has confirmed nearly 1,900 cases of MERS with 666 deaths, resulting in a 35% death rate. People with the infection report varying levels of fever, cough, diarrhea, and shortness of breath. Symptoms are more severe in people with pre-existing health conditions.

While the virus itself is believed to have originated from bats, camels appear to be the current viral host. The spread of the infection is believed to be through coughing or contact with respiratory secretions. Most people contract the virus in healthcare settings. While the majority of cases of MERS have been reported in the Arabian Peninsula, South Korea experienced an outbreak that infected 82 people in three days. In 2014,  2 cases were confirmed in the U.S.

Lassa Fever

Of the three diseases fast-tracked for research and development, Lassa fever has been around the longest. It was discovered in 1969 in Nigeria. It predominantly occurs in West Africa and is transmitted to humans from the African rat, the most common rat in West Africa. Eighty percent of the people who contract Lassa fever have no symptoms other than a mild fever, but around 5,000 of the cases reported every year result in death. The cases that are fatal include symptoms of vomiting, fever, bleeding from body parts, and pain in the back, chest, and abdomen. A quarter of the survivors experience hearing loss. Lassa fever is difficult to distinguish from other hemorrhagic fevers like Ebola, yellow fever, and malaria.

Nipah Virus

Fruit bats are the natural hosts of the Nipah virus. Outbreaks of the virus occur almost every year in Bangladesh, and the virus occurs in India and surrounding countries as well. While the Nipah virus has not caused as many fatalities as the other two diseases targeted by CEPI, the death rate is more severe with nearly three-quarters of those infected dying. Symptoms of the virus include acute respiratory syndrome and acute fatal encephalitis. Nipah virus is transmitted to people through contact with pigs (a likely food source for bats), fruit bats, and raw date palm sap that has been contaminated by them.

Is This the Only Way to Accomplish This?

This is a very aggressive research and development campaign. Developing a single vaccine is a long process that takes from 10-15 years. CEPI’s goal is an ambitious one, but then that makes sense. CEPI is founded by some familiar entities, including the government of Norway, the government of India, and the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. In the midst of the flurry of announcements and ambition, it’s easy to ignore potential issues.

As long as camels, pigs, mice, and bats are around, these diseases will always be present. In the case of Nipah virus, vaccines won’t necessarily stop the spread of it as there has never been a case of it being transmitted from person to person. Sanitation and ensuring that people have the knowledge and option to avoid using contaminated date palm sap. It would be interesting to see how education and strategies on how to avoid African rats in Western Africa would impact the number of people who contract Lassa fever.

As we’ve seen over and over, sanitation and education make a huge difference in preventing the spread of disease. Dispersing sanitation and disease prevention information and improving living conditions has helped to stop the spread of polio, measles, and mumps. Why not utilize sanitation and education to eradicate these diseases as well? The answer is obvious. It may cost less than the development of a vaccine, but it won’t result in a product pharmaceutical companies can sell.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Plant-Based Milk Draws “Misleading Label” Claims From Dairy Industry

The answer to an age-old question in advertising used to be simple. Got milk? Yes, America answered. But that is not our new reality. The question remains the same. The answer now? What kind of milk?

Milk is no longer something your local milkman drops off in a crate on your front porch. Milk comes in many different varieties. There are dairy versions like cow, goat, sheep, or buffalo (though the last two milks usually end up as cheeses). If you’re vegan or lactose-intolerant, there are options like almond milk, soy milk, coconut milk, rice milk, hemp milk, oat milk, pea milk…yeast milk? At this point, it’s safe to say milk is a both a universal and incredibly niche item. Cow milk is everywhere, but if you know where to look, the options magically open up.

Why on earth does this box of milk have almonds on it? This is sooooo confusing!

Protecting the People from Reading Labels

More than thirty congressional members have signed a letter to the Food and Drug Administration to ask that the FDA take “appropriate action” in regards to milk labels. While their idea of appropriate action is not specified in the letter, it’s clear that the dairy industry considers plant-based milk products a threat. Unfortunately for the current food establishment, this is not the first or last time customer demand will force them to adapt or die.

Americans are eating less meat. They’re more environmentally conscious. Allergies are also on the rise, and more people are beginning to see the correlation between what they eat and their overall health. Half of Americans consume non-dairy milk, and over one-third of them are open to plant-based eating in general. This is naturally going to open up the food market for healthy competition from alternatives to traditional meat and dairy. The “appropriate reactions” from big food companies so far have been to run to the FDA, claiming a product label like almond milk has the potential to fool customers into thinking they are buying dairy milk. Another example is Hellman’s Mayonnaise claiming consumers needed to be protected from vegan mayonnaise because it isn’t “real” mayonnaise.

Is This the System We Want?

Large corporations often handicap their competition while pretending to play the part of the consumer’s champion. Pay no attention to the fact that the vegan mayo behind the curtain is serving a growing population looking for healthier and more environmentally friendly options while egg costs have never been higher. You, the consumer, have been wronged by their confusing label. The language in the letter to the FDA from dairy state congressmen seems altruistic…until you realize they have claimed the consumer is not capable of reading a label. Why on earth does this box of milk have almonds on it? This is sooooo confusing!

Consumers have more access to information than ever before, and they’ve changed. Questioning the status quo is now the thing to do. Tactics like letters released and lawsuits filed over “misleading labels” are a system that believes people aren’t able to see the bias, and it’s also one of the reasons these industries are floundering right now. Consumers want healthier options and product accountability. Hellmann’s may have figured something out… their new vegan mayo line launched in 2016, 2 years after they tried to shut down Just Mayo.

Further Reading:
Sources:


CBD Oil is Legal in Certain States and Federally Illegal – Officially Schedule 1

Is cannabidiol (CBD) oil illegal? Well…what country do you live in? If you answered the United States, the answer is yes. CBD oil and any “extract containing one or more cannabinoids that have been derived from any plant of the genus Cannabis” has (as of December 14, 2016) been given a new controlled substance code by the DEA and firmly classified as a schedule I substance. So, illegal.

But wait! There’s another question, guys! What state do you live in? Obviously,  if you live in a state where marijuana is legalized in all forms or in a state with legalized medical marijuana, CBD oil is freely available. There are also 16 states that have passed laws specifically allowing the prescription (super illegal by federal standards) or the study of CBD oil in the case of patients experiencing seizures, muscle spasms, and epilepsy. This leaves about 6 states where marijuana is illegal in any form. Oh, but remember, even in the states where it is legal, it is illegal to possess it in any building or facility managed by the federal government.

Why Does It Have To Be So Confusing?

CBD is available with a prescription in Australia and Canada and the U.K. Oddly enough, CBD oil is listed in the cosmetic ingredient database in the E.U. In the U.S., it’s illegal to have or use CBD oil in Idaho, for example. But every surrounding state allows it. Get your head in the game, Idaho!

The U.S. federal policy on marijuana is nonsensical. Marijuana is not legal because of the tetrahydrocannabinol (THC). CBD oil is not legal, even when tested to ensure the trace amounts of THC are below a certain threshold (which varies, although the smallest amount allowed seems to be .3%). Hemp is not legal according to the final rule released from the DEA in 2016, as it is in the genus Cannabis and classified as a schedule I like heroin (oxycontin is a schedule II drug, for reference). Not banned? A schedule III synthetic version of THC known as Dronabinol is currently accepted for medical use.

Covering Your Ass, DEA-Style

More than half of Americans believe medical marijuana should be legal. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals took away the federal government’s ability to fund prosecution of people using medical marijuana according to state laws. In the words of former attorney general Eric Holder,

You know, we treat marijuana in the same way that we treat heroin now, and that clearly is not appropriate.”

With support for medical marijuana growing in the United States, why is the federal government dragging its heels?

The government claims there is not enough research to be sure that CBD and other cannabinoids have medicinal benefit, which is kind of a cop-out, as the research itself is illegal. The government ignores the countless stories and videos showing the amazing effect CBD oil has on people and children suffering from epilepsy, seizures, and neurological disorders. The denial of marijuana as medicine also directly contradicts the government’s Investigation of New Drugs (IND) program founded in 1978 (the program has since been closed to new patients). Under that program, there are still a tiny number of people (3) receiving medical marijuana from the federal government. So while the federal government has labeled marijuana a schedule I substance, they are also still legally dispensing marijuana to patients. But they still claim it can’t be legalized because they don’t have enough “research.”

If I’m Wrong, I Don’t Want to Know About it

So, to recap: CBD oil is banned federally due to the psychoactive compound THC (which it has in super small quantities if any) and a lack of research supporting medicinal claims, but a synthetic drug that is basically THC is legally available, and certain patients from an older (That’s where the research went!) government program have access to legal medical marijuana…from the government. Why? The current federal stance on marijuana (medicinal or otherwise) is about control of the medical marijuana market. If companies manufacturing medical marijuana extracts like CBD oil are able to control which products get through to market, they have the potential to create a monopoly. Once again, profits and market control are higher on the list of government priorities than providing medical relief to patients who truly need it.

Recommended Reading:
Sources:


Bacteria Resistant to All Available Antibiotics Has Claimed Its First Victim

The doomsday predictions about antibiotic resistant superbugs sound like the plot of a science fiction movie. The bacteria are coming! Who will save us when we don’t have any options left?

Conventional medicine has allowed us to put much of the onus of taking care of ourselves on someone or something else. Why take care of yourself and build your immune system naturally (it’s hard work!) when an antibiotic can knock an infection out with a snap of the fingers? The same principle has been applied to our food supply. Rather than raise animals in humane environments on a diet designed to keep them healthy (also hard work), our food system chooses the easy route and pumps cows, pigs, and sheep full of unnecessary antibiotics.

Now a Nevada woman has died. Her death from an antibiotic-resistant superbug, the bacteria New Delhi metallo-beta-lactamase (NDM), is not notable on the surface. As of 2014, an estimated 23,000 people in the U.S. have died from bacteria like these, according to the CDC. The patient in question was a lady of 70, who had been in and out of hospitals for a two-year period in India with the last stay being in summer 2016. Not an unusual story, in and of itself. But here’s the worrying part. The CDC has determined that the NDM that the woman was infected with was untreatable by all available antimicrobial drugs in the U.S.

The Last Resort…Has Failed

There are a few antimicrobial drugs of last resort. One of them is colistin, a powerful antimicrobial not regularly used due to its damaging effect on the kidneys. While select bacteria that contain the mcr-1 (mechanism of colistin resistance 1) gene are immune to another drug, colistin functioned as a cleaner of sorts for anything else. That worked because the bacteria were not exchanging the gene. That is no longer the case. Bacteria are now exchanging the mcr-1 gene, and cases, where colistin is ineffective, began showing up in the U.S. in summer 2016. If that wasn’t enough to cause a deep and profound uneasiness, the NDM bacteria resistant to all available antibiotics didn’t even have the mcr-1 gene. This bacteria didn’t even need the gene we’ve identified as the one resistant to powerful antibiotics.

The Tipping Point

Is this the point where we find that we can’t go back? Is worldwide health going to spiral out of control, chased by ever stronger and more evolved bacteria? Indigenous tribes of foragers give us a glance at what the first line of defense, our intestinal flora, used to be. In a comparison of the microbiome of a small group of Italians and a group of Hadza foragers from Tanzania, the Hadza’s lack of exposure to antibiotics and highly seasonal, largely plant-based,  diet resulted in a much greater and more diverse microbiome. Maybe they wouldn’t be able to fend off one of the new superbugs, but they likely would not have developed them in the first place. How do we get those microbes back? Can we get those microbes back? No one seems to have a good answer for that, but it’s clear that antibiotic resistant bacteria keep putting their star players in the game while the Western diet keeps yanking any and everybody out.

Eat Your Veggies

There is magic in a well maintained digestive system. Get your fiber may be a funny old people joke…until you haven’t pooped in a few days. A diet lacking in raw, organic plant matter is never going to provide the tools needed to move things through the digestive system, which gives harmful bacteria a greater chance to develop and take over. The Western diet in its current form provides them with the food they need to thrive. If the digestive system is compromised, bacteria takes advantage of that. In that system, antibiotics will be the answer at some point, making it that much harder to cultivate the natural defenses the immune system needs.

Antibiotic-resistant bugs are not only the health industry’s fault. Factory farms cannot be assigned all of the blame either. The decline of our natural bacteria and immunities has created the perfect hosts for the bacteria strong and adaptable enough to survive modern medicine and an increasingly unhealthy way of eating.

Recommended Reading:
Sources: