Friday, April 20, 2012

How Doctors and Patients Do Harm



How Doctors and Patients Do Harm

BOOKS |   | April 20, 2012, 1:56 PM 9

Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society.Christopher T. MartinDr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society.
Just how broken is the United States health care system? Dr. Otis Brawley, chief medical officer for the American Cancer Society, paints a grim picture in his new book “How We Do Harm: A Doctor Breaks Ranks About Being Sick In America’’ (St. Martin’s Press).
If the title alone doesn’t clue you in, the reader quickly discovers that Dr. Brawley is determined to make everyone as uncomfortable as possible about the flaws, inconsistencies and inequities that are rampant in American medical care. The book, written with Paul Goldberg, a journalist, begins with a frightening tale of a poor woman who for so long went untreated for breast cancer that her whole breast literally falls off at home. She arrives at the hospital carrying it in a plastic bag, clinging to the naïve hope that it might be reattached. Dr. Brawley treated the woman at Grady Hospital in Atlanta, which happens to be the largest hospital in the United States, as well as the safety-net hospital for poor and uninsured patients in the area.
Dr. Brawley says it makes him furious when he hears “politicians and pundits” assert that American health care is the best in the world. The statement may be true for the rich, he says, but “it’s not a great place to be sick if you are poor and uninsured and want consistent, basic care.”
“I have seen enough to conclude that no incident of failure in American medicine should be dismissed as an aberration,” he writes. “Failure is the system.”
But as you nod your head in agreement, be warned that Dr. Brawley doesn’t place all the blame on insurance companies, hospitals and doctors. He also blames patients who have bought into the notion that more care — more treatment, more screening, more scans, more drugs — is better care. Many Americans, particularly wealthier ones, he says, are “gluttonous” in their consumption of health care resources and often use them unwisely.
I recently spoke with Dr. Brawley about the problems in American medicine, how both doctors and patients can be greedy and why he became such a “loudmouth.” Here’s our conversation.
Q.

What prompted you to write this book?
A.
I started looking at my career, listening to the discussions going on about health care reform and health care costs being exorbitant. A lot of people didn’t seem to realize that in a lot of the discussion, we’re talking about human beings who are suffering because of lack of health care, and sometimes we’re suffering because of overuse of health. People are so focused on fears about rationing of health care. The talk should not be about rationing health care but about rational health care. So much of what we do in health care is irrational.
Q.

Can you describe an experience you’ve had with irrational health care?
A.
There was a man with colon cancer who went to a wonderful hospital with a wonderful reputation. He got surgery and was referred to a medical oncologist who has a wonderful reputation as a doctor to the rich and famous in Atlanta. That medical oncologist started giving him chemotherapy and two other expensive drugs. When this man lost his insurance, the oncologist basically dropped him, and the guy ended up being seen by me at the county hospital. A doctor who is training with me to be an oncologist immediately realizes that this guy is getting a chemotherapy regimen for colon cancer that we stopped using about 15 years ago. His medical oncologist was practicing the best medicine of the late 1980s, but we were in 2006. The other drugs he was being prescribed were totally unnecessary. But the doctor could get a substantial markup and make a substantial amount of money by selling them. The oncologist had known just enough to be greedy and prescribe drugs he can make money off of, but he didn’t know enough to prescribe the chemotherapy that would have given the patient a much better chance of surviving his cancer.
I’ve seen that so many times, where doctors really have failed to evolve and failed to learn as the profession and the scientific evidence have changed over time.
Q.
But in reading the book, you don’t just blame doctors for being greedy. You blame patients for being gluttonous. Can you explain?
A.
Another patient of mine had early colon cancer. Three doctors had told her she should not get chemotherapy. She decided she wanted it, and she went doctor-shopping until she found a doctor who would give it to her. Her insurance had no way to object to her getting this inappropriate chemotherapy because privacy laws prevent disclosing the stage of the disease to the insurance company. She was referred to me by a relative who was concerned about what she was doing. She readily admitted that she had three different medical opinions that said she should not get chemotherapy, but she wanted chemotherapy. So a doctor made $10,000 off that six months of chemotherapy, and she got an increased risk of leukemia for the rest of her life, not to mention losing her hair and everything else, with no scientific evidence that the treatment reduced her risk of the colon cancer coming back.
I blame patients, I blame doctors, I blame hospitals, I blame drug companies, I blame insurance companies. Our health care system is messed up because the system is designed to fail, and everybody is responsible for health care failing as it is now.
Q.
The story about the woman whose breast fell off was horrible. What were you trying to tell us with that example?
A.
We so frequently talk about breast cancer almost as if it’s a boutique disease or trendy. I feel some people have forgotten how terrible this disease can be. This lady – I saw a lot of things in her background that were lessons for society about what we need to do if we want to defeat breast cancer. When she realized she had something growing in her breast, she had insurance, but logistics having to do with her job and child care and a little bit of denial kept her from going to the doctor and getting this thing diagnosed and treated when it was likely curable. Later on, when she wanted to see a doctor, she couldn’t because her insurance had gotten so expensive that she had to drop it. If she had come in when she first found this thing 9 or 10 years earlier, I probably could have cured it, and it would have cost about a tenth of what we spent when she was uninsured and receiving free care from the hospital. She lived for about two years after I met her. That’s a failure of medicine to educate people.
Q.
In the book, you talk about a conversation with a hospital marketing executive who talks about drumming up business with free prostate cancer screenings at a mall health fair. How did that affect you?
A.
That was the beginning of Otis Brawley becoming a loudmouth in the prostate cancer screening debate. We’re making promises to patients and making them think we know things we don’t know and making money off of them. There is a subtle little corruption in medicine. We’re selling chemo to people who don’t need it, giving prostate screening when it might save lives, but we make them think it definitely does, and then I see a lady whose breast is falling off who couldn’t afford to see a doctor when she wanted to see one.
Q.

Is there any hope that things might improve someday?
A.
I am trying to get folks, through this book, to talk a little more about rational use of health care and realize that we are actually hurting people with overtreatment. Health care needs to be consumed in a wiser way that is much more concerned about allegiance to the science. We need to be more concerned about the welfare of our patients. There was a recent report, the 45 tests we do too much, that I was thrilled to see. People are starting to realize that we need to be a little wiser in our use of health care.

The Reality of Chemical Terrorism In Our Food



April 20, 2012
The Reality of Chemical Terrorism In Our Food

Is it really that hard for most people to believe that we are being assaulted on a daily basis by chemical terrorism? Genetically modified foods, artificial flavours, colors, preservatives, emulsifiers, and sweeteners all made with toxic chemicals, all of which are proven toxic to human health. We are being bombarded on a daily basis by an astronomical level of toxicity, all controlled by these chemical terrorists on behalf of the food industry. Worse is we let them.



How many more toxins will we permit in our food supply before we stand united and simply say "we've had enough?" How long will it take until we assertively proclaim that we will not allow any more chemicals or toxins in our foods? 

Since food and health regulators cannot properly do their job to protect the public, there will come a tipping point when the people will have to do it for them. We discuss toxic chemicals almost every day, but what percentage of the population is interested enough, curious enough or most of all disciplined enough to actually make the dietary changes necessary to rid all the toxins from the foods they eat? How many people can avoid all processed foods every single day? I would estimate that percentage to be extremely small. Barriers are typically societal pressure, convenience and income. The reality is that we could all have a safe and healthy food industry if we truly wanted it. There are just not enough of us that want it that badly....yet.

Every year or two we have a new chemical terrorist making its way into the food supply almost like clock work. Once the public becomes savvy to the harmful nature of the new toxin, it is then renamed, rebranded and often modified into a deadlier form than its predecessor. Aspartame and aminosweet, and high fructose corn syrup and corn sugar are two excellent examples.

Let's take a look at some of the biggest offenders that are in more than 80% of the foods we eat.

Artificial Flavors and Colors
Artificial flavors and colors means it is derived from a chemical made in a laboratory and has no nutritional value. Every single artificial flavor and color in the food industry has some kind of detrimental health effect. These include neurotoxicity, organ, developmental, reproductive toxicity and cancer.

* Examples
- Glutamates 
Monosodium Glutamate (MSG) 
- Maltodextrin 
- Autolyzed Yeast Extract
- Disodium Guanylate
- Disodium Inosinate
- Blue 1, Blue 2
- Yellow 5, Yellow 6
- Red 3, Red 40

Genetically Modified Foods 
GM Foods causes allergies, organ damage, cancer, immunotoxicty, and damaging transgenes which affect future generations. Many fruits and vegetables for sale in the U.S. are already genetically modified. The most commercialized GM fruit is papaya from Hawaii—about half of Hawaii's papayas are GM.

* Examples
- Corn flour, meal, oil, starch, gluten, and syrup
- Corn Sweeteners such as fructose, dextrose, and glucose 
- Modified food starch 
- Soy flour, lecithin, protein, isolate, and isoflavone 
- Most vegetable oils and vegetable proteins
- Canola oil (also called rapeseed oil)
- Cottonseed oil 
- Anything not listed as 100% cane sugar 

Toxic Preservatives 
Artificial preservatives are responsible for causing a host of health problems pertaining to respiratory tract, heart, blood and other. Some are very neurotoxic especially when combined with specific nutrients.

* Examples 
- Antimicrobials
- Nitrites (i.e. Sodium Nitrite)
- Nitrates (i.e. Sodium Nitrate)
- Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA)
- Butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT) 
- Sulfites (i.e. Sodium Sulfite)
- Potassium Sorbate
- Benzoic Acid 
- Propyl Gallate 
- Sodium Benzoate 

Toxic Emulsifiers 
An emulsifier replaces surface proteins and aids in forming the network in specific food recipes. There are no healthy non-organic emulsifiers. They are all toxic causing everything from infertility, digestive disorders and migraines. 

* Examples 
- Polysorbate 80 
- Mono-diglycerides 
- Carrageenan
- Xanthan Gum (non-organic)
- Guar Gum 
Soy Lecithin or Soya Lecithin

Toxic Sweeteners
Sweeteners such as Neotame are thousands of times sweeter than sugar. They are all very potent, neurotoxic, immunotoxic and excitotoxic.
* Examples 
Aspartame
High Fructose Corn Syrup
Neotame
Sucralose
Sodium cyclamate
- Acesulfame-K 

Toxic Adulterants 
Food fraud and economically motivated food adulteration is highlighted by some very toxic substances which cause cancer, glaucoma, digestive and liver disorders. These are added to foods to increase their color, volume or weight.

* Examples
Metanil Yellow
- Potassium bromate 
Malachite Green
- Tamarind seeds 
Washing powder
- Argemone seeds 

This list is by no means extensive. There are now hundreds of toxic additives in our food supply. Chemical terrorism in our food supply must end and it starts with you.

Please look at the ingredient lists before you purchase any processed foods. If you see any of these, don't buy the product. Continue to educate yourself on the influx of new toxins introduced every year. Eventually, if we investigate enough the answers come. Rule of thumb, if the ingredient list has one chemical or more...it's one too many.

Marco Torres is a research specialist, writer and consumer advocate for healthy lifestyles. He holds degrees in Public Health and Environmental Science and is a professional speaker on topics such as disease prevention, environmental toxins and health policy. 

Monday, April 16, 2012

Why You Need To Add Mangoes On Your Grocery Your List


April 16, 2012
Why You Need To Add Mangoes On Your Grocery Your List

Not only do they taste great, but mangoes are also loaded with several qualities that are excellent for your health. Their powerful antioxidants are known to neutralize free radicals that cause damage to cells and lead to health problems like heart disease, premature aging and cancer among other things. 



- Mango fruit is rich in pre-biotic dietary fibre, vitamins, minerals, and has antioxidant compounds. It is beneficial for digestion too.
- According to a new research, mangoes have been found to protect against colon, breast and prostate cancers.
- Fresh mango is a rich source of potassium, which is an important component of cell and body fluids that helps to control heart rate and blood pressure.
- Vitamin E, which is abundantly present in mangoes, helps to regulate sex hormones and boosts sex drive.
- Mango helps to clear clogged pores that cause acne. Just slice a mango into thin pieces and keep them on your face for 10 to 15 minutes and then take bath or wash your face and see the results.
- It's a known fact that mangoes are rich in Iron. People who suffer from anaemia can take mangoes regularly along with their dinner. It is especially good for women after menopause.
- High level of soluble dietary fibre, Pectin and Vitamin C present in mangoes helps to lower serum cholesterol levels.

- Some studies say that eating mangoes reduces the risk of kidney stone formation. 

- In Chinese medicine, mangoes are considered sweet and sour with a cooling energy. They are useful for those suffering from anaemia, bleeding gums, cough, fever, nausea and even sea sickness. 

- With its high iron content, mangoes are excellent for pregnant women and those who suffer from anaemia. 

- Studying for exams? This fruit is rich in glutamine acid-- an important protein for concentration and memory. Instead of snacking on unhealthy chips and cookies, why not feast on slices of mangoes instead.
- A recent study shows that not only the flesh of a mango but the leaves can fight diabetes.
Health tip: Before going to bed put some 10 or 15 mango leaves in warm water and close it with lid. The next day morning filter the water and drink it in empty stomach. Do this regularly.

Vitamin C Supplements Reduce Blood Pressure Without Side Effects Associated With Medication

April 15, 2012
Vitamin C Supplements Reduce Blood Pressure Without Side Effects Associated With Medication

A new study released in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition shows that taking vitamin C supplements in the short-term reduces both systolic blood pressure (SBP) and diastolic blood pressure (DBP) all without any side effects making it an excellent natural alternative to dangerous medications. 

Previous research has found that therapy with vitamin C may help heart failure patients by improving the function of their blood vessels.

The current meta-analysis led by Stephen P Juraschek of the Johns Hopkins School of Medicine and colleagues showed that taking as low as 500 mg per day of vitamin C for an average of eight weeks lowered SBP and DBP by 3.84 mm Hg and 1.48 mm Hg, respectively.

Twenty-nine trials met eligibility criteria for the primary analysis and among participants who had hypertension or high blood pressure, taking vitamin C reduced SBP and DBP by 4.85 mm Hg and 1.67 mm Hg, respecively. 

The researchers said in their report that observational studies indicated increased vitamin C intake, vitamin C supplementation, and higher serum vitamin C are all associated with lower blood pressure. 

This meta-analysis was intended to examine the blood pressure-lowering effects of vitamin C in clinical trials. Previous trials were inconsistent. 

The researchers concluded that "vitamin C supplementation reduced SBP and DBP. Long-term trials on the effects of vitamin C supplementation on BP and clinical events are needed." 

Late famous chemist Dr. Linus Pauling recommended that people need to have increasing intake of vitamin C as they are getting older. People in their 50's may take 5000 mg per day. Vitamin C does not result in any side or adverse effects. 

Commenting on the study, Dr. Samuel Georges said "the study demonstrates worthy alternatives for those sensitive to blood pressure medications, especially considering the lack of side effects from vitamin C supplementation."

Intraveous injection of vitamin C solution has been found to protect against cancer. This vitamin may also help diabetes and heart disease among other things. 

It should be pointed out that vitamin C supplements on the market may be full of fillers. Foodconsumer.org recommends that food consumers should use 100% pure vitamin C. 

Intraveous injection of vitamin C has been found to prevent damage induced by cancer-causing radiation, prevent gastric cancer, lung cancer, Alzheimer's disease, leukemia, prostate cancer, melanoma, breast cancer, smoke-induced atherosclerosis, infections, diabetes, heart failure damage, heart disease, age-related cataract, gout, inhibit HIV replication, and promote wound healing. 

Natasha Longo has a master's degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany.

Sunday, April 15, 2012

Millions against Monsanto: The food fight of our lives



Millions against Monsanto: The food fight of our lives

Sunday, April 15, 2012 by: Ronnie Cummins



(NaturalNews) "If you put a label on genetically engineered food you might as well put a skull and 
crossbones on it." -- Norman Braksick, president of Asgrow Seed Co., a subsidiary of Monsanto, 
quoted in the Kansas City Star, March 7, 1994

"Monsanto should not have to vouchsafe the safety of biotech food. Our interest is in selling 
as much of it as possible. Assuring its safety is the FDA's job." -- Phil Angell, Monsanto's director
of corporate communications, quoted in the New York Times, October 25, 1998

For nearly two decades, Monsanto and corporate agribusiness have exercised near-dictatorial 
control over American agriculture, aided and abetted by indentured politicians and regulatory 
agencies, supermarket chains, giant food processors, and the so-called "natural" products industry.

Finally, public opinion around the biotech industry's contamination of our food supply and 
destruction of our environment has reached the tipping point. We're fighting back.

This November, in a food fight that will largely determine the future of what we eat and what we 
grow, Monsanto will face its greatest challenge to date: a statewide citizens' ballot initiative that 
will give Californians the opportunity to vote for their right to know whether the food they buy is 
contaminated with GMOs.

A growing corps of food, health, and environmental activists - supported by the Millions against 
Monsanto and Occupy Monsanto Movements, and consumers and farmers across the nation 
- are boldly moving to implement mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods in California
through a grassroots-powered citizens ballot initiative process that will bypass the 
agribusiness-dominated state legislature. If passed, the California Right to Know Genetically 
Engineered Food Act will require mandatory labeling of genetically engineered foods and food 
ingredients, and outlaw the routine industry practice of labeling GMO-tainted foods as "natural."

Passage of this initiative on November 6 will radically alter the balance of power in the marketplace,
enabling millions of consumers to identify - and boycott - genetically engineered foods for the first
time since 1994, when Monsanto's first unlabeled, genetically-engineered dairy drug, recombinant 
Bovine Growth Hormone (rBGH), was forced on the market,

As Alexis Baden-Mayer, Political Director for the Organic Consumers Association, pointed out at 
an Occupy Wall Street teach-in in Washington DC in early April: "The California Right to Know 
Genetically Engineered Food Act ballot initiative is a perfect example of how the grassroots 
99% can mobilize to take back American democracy from the corporate bullies, the 1%. 
By aggressively utilizing one of the last remaining tools of direct democracy, the initiative process
(available to voters not only in California and 23 other states, but in thousands of cities and counties
across the nation), we can bypass corrupt politicians, make our own laws, 
and force corporations like Monsanto to bend to the will of the people, in this case granting us 
our fundamental right to know what's in our food."

Moving the Battleground

This is not the first time Monsanto has been challenged by citizens' initiatives or state and local 
legislative efforts. But this time, the momentum is in our favor.

In the past, GMO "right-to-know" activists have been outmaneuvered and outgunned by Monsanto 
and its minions in every state, except Vermont and Connecticut, where passing a labeling bill is 
still, at least theoretically, a long-shot. (Monsanto recently threatened to sue the state of Vermont
if legislators there pass a GMO labeling bill).

Efforts to pass GMO labeling laws at the federal level have gone nowhere, despite the fact that 
more than one million consumers have emailed "Just Label It" petitions to the FDA, demanding 
mandatory labeling. (The FDA counted only 394 of the signatures, claiming that the main petition 
was submitted as a single document, or docket, and therefore counted as only one signature.)

Dennis Kucinich of Ohio has introduced his perennial GMO labeling bill in the U.S. House of 
Representatives, though everyone knows it will never make it out of committee and come to a 
full House vote on the floor. Similar symbolic bills have been introduced in 18 state legislatures.

The battle has been raging for decades. But this time, it's different.

Behind this historic California initiative is a broad, growing and powerful health, environmental, and 
consumer coalition, which includes the Organic Consumers Association, Organic Consumers 
Fund, Food Democracy Now!, Mercola.com, Nature's Path, Lundberg Family Farms, LabelGMOs.
org, Eden Foods, Alliance for Natural Health, Dr. Bronner's, United Farm Workers Union, 
American Public Health Association, Cornucopia Institute, Institute for Responsible Technology, 
Sierra Club, Rainforest Action Network, California Certified Organic Farmers, and scores of others.

This time, the industry faces informed - and alarmed - consumers who understand the danger
of allowing out-of-control chemical and biotech companies like Monsanto, Dow, or Dupont - the 
very same corporations that have assaulted us with toxic pesticides and industrial chemicals, 
Agent Orange, carcinogenic food additives, PCBs, and now global warming - to dictate their food 
choices.

Keeping Consumers in the Dark, Keeping Farmers and Scientists Intimidated

Why has it taken so long to get this far? How have Monsanto and its cohorts been able to grow 
and maintain market supremacy while force-feeding unlabeled "Frankenfoods" to the public for
decades?

By buying off politicians, bullying farmers and scientists, and keeping consumers in the dark.

Monsanto has sued more than 150 farmers across the US and Canada, and threatened thousands 
of others, for refusing to pay for "intellectual property theft" after their fields were contaminated 
by Monsanto's patented genetically engineered crops.

The company has harassed and used the media to bully scientists who have exposed the public 
health and environmental hazards of genetically engineered foods and crops in the United States, 
Canada, Latin America, and Europe. The renowned scientist Dr. Arpad Pusztai from the UK, was 
pressured and discredited for reporting on the dangers of genetic engineering until he was 
eventually fired from his job. The same thing happened to the UK's Environmental Minister, 
Michael Meacher.

In a number of other cases, scientists such as Ignacio Chapela, have received death threats. 
Chapela also said he received death threats to his children from "a high government official" in 
Mexico after he showed contamination of native corn with Monsanto's GMOs. Other scientists, 
most notably Andres Carrasco from Argentina, have been assaulted by thugs. Monsanto has 
even hired the notorious mercenary gang, Blackwater, to spy on its opponents worldwide.

Why has Monsanto gone to such great lengths to thwart GMO labeling laws and initiatives? 
Because it understands the threat that truth-in-labeling poses for GMOs - and biotech industry 
profits. As soon as genetically engineered foods are labeled in the U.S., millions of consumers 
will read these labels and react. They'll complain to grocery store managers and companies, they'll
talk to their family and friends. They'll switch to foods that are organic or at least GMO-free. 
Once enough consumers complain about GE foods and food ingredients, stores will eventually stop 
selling them. Farmers will stop planting them.

Europe Shows Labels Can Drive GMOs off the Market

In Europe, there almost no genetically engineered crops, while here in the US, nearly 75% of all 
supermarket foods - including many so-called "natural" foods - are GE-tainted. Why? 
Because Europe requires labeling of genetically engineered foods - and the US does not.

This is exactly why activists have launched the California Ballot Initiative. Passing mandatory GMO
food labeling in just one large state, California, the eighth largest economy in the world, where there 
is tremendous opposition to GE foods as well as a multi-billion dollar organic food industry, will 
ultimately have the same impact as a national labeling law.

If California voters pass the California Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act, the biotech 
and food industry will face an intractable dilemma. Will they dare put labels on their branded food
products in just one state, California, admitting these products contain genetically engineered 
ingredients, while withholding this ingredient label information in the other states? Will they allow
their organic and non-GMO competitors to drive down their GMO-tainted brand market share?

The answer to both of these questions is likely no. What most of them will do is start to shift to 
organic and non-GMO ingredients, so as to avoid what the Monsanto executive 16 years ago aptly
described as the "skull and crossbones" label.

Can you imagine Kellogg's selling its Corn Flakes breakfast cereal in California with a label that 
admits it contains or may contain genetically engineered corn? This would be the kiss of death 
for their iconic brand. How about Kraft Boca Burgers admitting that their soybean ingredients are 
genetically modified? How about the entire non-organic food industry (including many so-called 
"natural" brands sold in Whole Foods or Trader Joe's) admitting that a large proportion of their 
products are GE-tainted?

Once food manufacturers and supermarkets are forced to come clean and label genetically 
engineered products, they will likely remove all GE ingredients, to avoid the "skull and 
crossbones" effect, just like the food industry in the EU has done. In the wake of this development 
American farmers will convert millions of acres of GE crops to non-GMO or organic varieties.

What Now? The Campaign Needs Volunteers and Money

Monsanto, the Farm Bureau, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association - under the guise of its 
front group, the so-called Coalition Against the Costly Food Law - are building up a massive war 
chest up to defeat the California Ballot Initiative. They will literally spend millions to spread lies 
and disinformation that GMO foods and crops are perfectly safe - and that we need more, not less 
GMO food and biofuel crops in this era of climate change and growing population.

They will lie and say that GMO labels will be costly to the food industry and raise food prices. 
They will say that it is the job of the FDA to decide whether GMOs are labeled, not the states. 
Yet we already know that this battle will never be won in Washington DC, where Monsanto and 
Food Inc. lobbyists have politicians in their back pockets. It will only be won in places like California
(or Vermont), vital centers of organic food and farming and anti-GMO sentiment, where 90% of the 
body politic, according to recent polls, support mandatory labeling.

This citizens initiative in California is a battle all of us. Please contact the campaign if you are 
willing to volunteer to join a national phone bank to contact California voters this fall or provide other 
support.

It's time to take back control over our food and farming system. It's time to stand up to Monsanto 
and the Biotech Bullies.



Friday, April 13, 2012

Decayed Meat Treated With Carbon Monoxide


Decayed Meat Treated With Carbon Monoxide To Make It Look Fresh At The Grocery

Most meat eaters may be unaware that more than 70% of all beef and chicken in the United States, Canada and other countries is being treated with poisonous carbon monoxide gas. It can make seriously decayed meat look fresh for weeks. The meat industry continues to allow this toxic gas injection into many of the meat products people consume on a daily basis. The question is, how many people have become ill by this chemically altered meat that is being sold to families all over the world?

 

Carbon monoxide (often referred to as CO) is a colorless, odorless, tasteless gas, one measly oxygen molecule away from the carbon dioxide we all exhale. But that one molecule makes a big difference in that it does very, very bad things to the human body at very, very low concentrations.
CO is toxic because it sticks to hemoglobin, a molecule in blood that usually carries oxygen, even better than oxygen can. When people are exposed to higher levels of CO, the gas takes the place of oxygen in the bloodstream and wreaks havoc. Milder exposures mean headaches, confusion, and tiredness. Higher exposures mean unconsciousness and death, and even those who survive CO poisoning can suffer serious long-term neurological consequences.



The Canadian Meat Packers Council recommends that the internal meat temperatures not go above 39 degrees Celsius or 4 degrees Fahrenheit. That has also been defined by other international meat regulators as the optimum storage temperature of meat. Even small increases of one or two degrees can cause a huge increase in bacterial growth. For example, an increase in the temperature of -1.5 degrees Celsius to 2 degrees Celsius would cut the shelf life of meat in half.

However, keeping meat at these temperatures is very challenging for grocery retailers. The actual surface temperature of displayed fresh meat is often much higher than the thermometer of the display case due to UV radiation from the display case lighting which penetrates the meat packaging and heats the surface just as the sun can cause a sunburn on a cold winter day. Various studies have found that the internal temperature of meat from display cases does exceed 50 degrees Celsius which is more than 10 degrees higher than recommended temperatures.

The meat consequently decomposes very quickly, so the meat industry heavily invested in modified atmospheric packaging which utilizes carbon monoxide gas to extend the shelf life and resist spoilage.

In a carbon monoxide system, with low oxygen, the carbon monoxide will react with the myoglobin and give the meat a bright red colour. The low oxygen mixture artificially limits the growth of spoilage organisms that are commonly caused by increased levels of heat in display cases. 

So although carbon monoxide is a gas that can be fatal when inhaled in large quantities, the meat industry insists that it is not harmful to human health when ingested via atmospheric packaging. 

This is not true of course since C. perfringens bacteria, the third-most-common cause of food-borne illness, has been proven to grow on what is considered fresh meat right out of the supermarket that is well within the expiry dates on the labels. Marissa Cattoi a lab tech who analyzes meat samples for a health and safety agency says the bacteria are commonly found on fresh grocery meat. "We commonly test for C.perfringens bacteria and about half of the fresh meat products that come in are positive despite them being within the expiry period. 100% of the these cases come from packagers who adopted atmospheric packaging methods such as the use of carbon monoxide gas," she stated. 

The United States, Canada, Australia, the U.K and many European countries currently utilize atmospheric packaging practices to prevent meat from spoiling. 

Natasha Longo has a master's degree in nutrition and is a certified fitness and nutritional counselor. She has consulted on public health policy and procurement in Canada, Australia, Spain, Ireland, England and Germany.

Sources:
foodandwaterwatch.org
pdfdownload.org
abcnews.com
promolux.com