There is so much great information and so many relevant posts out on the web that periodically I will share some of them with you. Please let me know if you see some that I need to know about!
The High Fructose Corn Syrup Name Game
Avoiding GMOs When Eating Out
9 Ways to Fix Our Food System
Showing posts with label GMOs. Show all posts
Showing posts with label GMOs. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
Tuesday, September 13, 2011
Kashi Serves Up "All-Natural" GMO Soy, Corn and Sugar
Kashi products have been labeled "all-natural" and/or containing "nothing artificial" since 1999, but in reality there are many unnaturally processed, synthetic and GMO ingredients in their products. Kashi senior nutritionist and healthy lifestyle expert, Jeff Johnson, said that the company stands by it's claims. He said, "Kashi provides comprehensive information about our foods to enable people to make well-informed decisions. We stand behind our advertising and labeling practices." Those same advertising and labeling practices that prompted a class action lawsuit by consumers. The suit claims that Kashi products aim to take advantage of a booming market for natural foods and beverages - a market that is growing by leaps and bounds.
The FDA, which regulates the labeling of packaged foods, currently has not defined the term "natural", but it has said that a product is not natural if it contains synthetic or artifical ingredients. I honestly don't know how much more "unnatural" GMO soy can be??? Which leads me to ask, "Mr. Johnson - what part of synthetic and artificial do you not understand?"
Another thing that greatly concerns me is that Kashi has a campaign directed at kids through parents, who not knowing any better, are purchasing these Frankenfoods for their kids. These parents have been led to believe that they are purchasing healthier items for their children when in reality they are paying more money for the same garbage in different packaging. On Kashi's home page there is a large block of text that states - "Want to help your kids eat better? We want to help. Explore our Kid-friendly top-10 favorites and get tips on serving your family good-for-you foods." Well, if GMO sugar, GMO corn and GMO soy are healthier, than Kashi just might be on to something...
This post was shared at Traditional Tuesdays and Real Food Wednesday.
Friday, September 9, 2011
Biotech Interests Using Big Guns to Fight GMO Labeling
I recently ran across a publication named, Western Farm Press. Described on it's wesite as Timely Reliable Information for Western Agriculture, what I found were a bunch of California biotech, BigAg proponents whose main purpose is to tell lies about organic and conventional farming, GMOs and to oppose anyone who wants to see GMO labeling become mandatory. From the amount of time and space that is devoted to these topics, there is obviously a very large concern that anti-biotech is starting to get way more attention than these BigAg proponents feel comfortable with.
In a recent article, Harry Cline refers to those of us wanting truth in labeling as the "anti-biotech/anti-genetically modified/anti-science crowd". He adds, "it is about time this GMO labeling issue be tackled head-on so the public can be told the truth. Truth is, everything we eat today has been genetically modified, using either conventional plant and animal breeding or biotech technology." Yes, it is time that the truth be told, but it is a much different truth than what BigAg or Western Farm Press would have us believe.
The article goes on to state that a University of California team of scientists has identified no less than 14 different "so-called" genetically modified feedstuffs that are fed to cattle. Included are: Roundup Ready corn, Bt grain and silage corn as well as distillers grain; Roundup Ready soybeans, Roundup Ready cottonseed, Bt cottonseed, Roundup Ready alfalfa, Roundup Ready canola, BST used to increase milk production, genetically-engineered Renet used in 90 percent of commercial cheese production, Roundup Ready sugar beets, glufosinate-resistant corn grain and silage, glufosinate-resistant cotton, glufosinate-resistant canola and imidazalione-tolerant corn.
While not all dairy cows are fed the list of chemicals, obviously enough cows are that Mr. Cline believes that all milk coming from the state of California would have to be labeled GMO. And, honestly, isn't that the real issue????? Dairy farmers are so concerned that if their milk is labeled GMO, consumers will stop buying it and drinking it.
Mr. Cline then goes on to spout the "absurdity" of the anti-biotech movement, the scarcity of products worldwide and how the only "logical" answer is biotechnology and scientific advancement. Maybe Harry should ask the farmers in India how biotechnology and Round-Up Ready frankenfood is working for them.
It's called GM Genocide - an estimated 125,000 India farmers have committed suicide after planting genetically modified "magic" seeds. Coerced by Monsanto and other biotech companies with promises of higher yield and big returns on investment, the farmers purchased the GMO seeds only to have the crops fail miserably and, in turn, be massively indebted to the BigAg companies. Many of the farmers have ingested the very insecticide they were told they wouldn't need, to kill themselves. The seed cost is 1,000 percent more than conventional, non-GMO seed. India farmers and some state governments are fighting back, taking legal action against Monsanto and turning to organic Indian crops instead of GMO.
Mr. Cline, you said, "it is time agriculture and food processors take on this anti-biotech crowd straight out, with the facts and put a stop to this mandatory GMO labeling nonsense. It is time consumers are told the truth." Yes, it is time consumers are told the truth. But let's tell the whole truth, not the "truth" that BigAg, the USDA, the FDA and people like you twist to suit your own purposes. Perhaps you and your biotech ilk won't be satisified until what happened in India happens in the US.
SOURCES:
Organic Consumer Association
Mail Online
Western Farm Press
This post was shared on Fight Back Friday.
In a recent article, Harry Cline refers to those of us wanting truth in labeling as the "anti-biotech/anti-genetically modified/anti-science crowd". He adds, "it is about time this GMO labeling issue be tackled head-on so the public can be told the truth. Truth is, everything we eat today has been genetically modified, using either conventional plant and animal breeding or biotech technology." Yes, it is time that the truth be told, but it is a much different truth than what BigAg or Western Farm Press would have us believe.
While not all dairy cows are fed the list of chemicals, obviously enough cows are that Mr. Cline believes that all milk coming from the state of California would have to be labeled GMO. And, honestly, isn't that the real issue????? Dairy farmers are so concerned that if their milk is labeled GMO, consumers will stop buying it and drinking it.
Mr. Cline then goes on to spout the "absurdity" of the anti-biotech movement, the scarcity of products worldwide and how the only "logical" answer is biotechnology and scientific advancement. Maybe Harry should ask the farmers in India how biotechnology and Round-Up Ready frankenfood is working for them.
It's called GM Genocide - an estimated 125,000 India farmers have committed suicide after planting genetically modified "magic" seeds. Coerced by Monsanto and other biotech companies with promises of higher yield and big returns on investment, the farmers purchased the GMO seeds only to have the crops fail miserably and, in turn, be massively indebted to the BigAg companies. Many of the farmers have ingested the very insecticide they were told they wouldn't need, to kill themselves. The seed cost is 1,000 percent more than conventional, non-GMO seed. India farmers and some state governments are fighting back, taking legal action against Monsanto and turning to organic Indian crops instead of GMO.
Mr. Cline, you said, "it is time agriculture and food processors take on this anti-biotech crowd straight out, with the facts and put a stop to this mandatory GMO labeling nonsense. It is time consumers are told the truth." Yes, it is time consumers are told the truth. But let's tell the whole truth, not the "truth" that BigAg, the USDA, the FDA and people like you twist to suit your own purposes. Perhaps you and your biotech ilk won't be satisified until what happened in India happens in the US.
SOURCES:
Organic Consumer Association
Mail Online
Western Farm Press
This post was shared on Fight Back Friday.
Tuesday, August 30, 2011
What's Really in Ice Cream
Do You Know What's in Your Ice Cream?
Recently, I was in my local mainstream grocery store, picking up the very few items that I feel comfortable purchasing there, and walked over to the frozen section to check out the ice cream options as my son had been asking for ice cream. I picked up one, put it back, grabbed another brand, put it back, one after the other, reading the ingredients listed on the packaging. I was amazed and completely grossed out by what I read on the labels. THIS is what food manufacturers are calling Ice Cream??? And there is an entire aisle, as there is in every grocery store chain, devoted to this chemically-laced Frankenfood. I admit that there was a time when I would have put whatever brand was on sale into my cart and taken it home. But as I have become more aware of EXACTLY what is in our food, I am more and more baffled as to why anyone is purchasing these foods...am I the only one who actually reads the labels??? In case I am, let me share with you what is in grocery store ice cream...
Here is the ingredient list for Breyer's Original Chocolate Chip Chookie Dough Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Whey, Natural Tara Gum, Natural Flavor, Annatto (Color). Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Pieces: Wheat Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Palm Oil, Water, Soybean Oil, Powdered Sugar (Sugar, Cornstarch), Chocolate Liquor, Salt, Cocoa Butter, Natural Flavor (Milk), Soy Lecithin, Baking Soda. Chocolate Flavored Chips: Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa Powder (Processed With Alkali), Milkfat, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla Extract.
Here is the ingredient list for Publix's Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Cookie Dough Pieces (Wheat Flour, Brown Sugar, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin)Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils)Water, Natural Flavors, Soy Lecithin and Salt) Corn Syrup, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali), Butter Oil, Lecithin, Vanilla) Cookie Dough Flavor (Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Natural Flavors, Molasses and Salt) Stabilizer (Carob Bean Gum, Guar Gum) Natural Flavor and Annatto Color.
Here is the ingredient list for Edy's Nestle Toll House Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Frozen Dairy Dessert: Skim Milk, Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough [Wheat, Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Margarine (Soybean Oil, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Soy Lecithin, Natural Flavor, Mono and Diglycerides, Annatto Color, Turmeric Color, Vitamin A Palmitate, Whey) Soybean Oil, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla Extract) Eggs, Water, Corn Starch, Molasses, Soy Lecithin, Natural and Artificial Flavor, Salt]Cream, Semi-Sweet Chocolate [Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Milkfat, Soy Lecithin, Vanillin (Artificial Flavor) Natural Flavor] Sugar, Dextrose, Corn Syrup, Polydextrose, Corn Starch, Malodextrin, Mono and Diglycerides, Cellulose Gel, Cellulose Gum, Guar Gum, Natural Flavor, Sorbitol, Carrageenan, Citric Acid, Annatto Color.
Here is the ingredient list for Blue Bell Homemade Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream (no Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Available): Milk, Cream, Sugar, Skim Milk, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Corn Syrup, Natural and Artificial Vanilla Flavor, Cellulose Gum, Vegetable Gums (Guar, Carrageenan, Carob Bean)Salt, Annatto Color.
Here is the ingredient list for Blue Bunny Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Original Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough {Bleached Flour, Sugar, Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils)Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla and Natural Flavoring) Water, Corn Syrup Solids, Sodium Bicarbonate, Salt, Artificial Flavor) Buttermilk, Whey, Corn Syrup, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Dextrose, Soy Lecithin, Vanillin) Guar Gum, Mono & Diglycerides, Natural Flavors, Artificial Flavors, Sodium Phosphate, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Citrate, Carrageenan, Polysorbate 80, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Molasses, Salt.
Here is the ingredient list for Ben & Jerry's Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Cream, Skim Milk, Liquid Sugar, Water, Unbleached Wheat Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Egg Yolks, Butter, Eggs, Expeller Pressed Soybean Oil, Chocolate Liquor, Coconut Oil, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali)Vanilla Powder, Milkfat, Soya Lecithin, Carrageenan.
Here is the ingredient list for Haagen-Dazs Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Cream, Skim Milk, Cookie Dough (Flour, Sugar, Butter, Coconut Oil, Brown Sugar, Corn Oil, Water, Fructose, Corn Syrup Solids, Salt, Vanilla, Baking Soda) Sugar, Chocolaty Chips (Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa Processed with Alkali, Cocoa, Butter Oil, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla) Egg Yolks, Natural Vanilla.
Here is the ingredient list for Mayfield Select Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Milkfat and Nonfat Milk, Cookie Dough and Chips {Cookie Dough [Flour(Bleach White), Sugar, Brown Sugar (Sugar, Molasses) Margarine (Liquid and Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Whey Solids, Mono and Diglycerides, Soy Lecithin, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Beta Carotene (Color)Vitamin A Palmitate)Water, Vanilla, Salt, Baking Soda] Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin (Emulsifier), Artificial Flavoring] Sugar, Corn Syrup, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Sweetcream Buttermilk, Whey, contains Less than 2% of Molasses, Guar Gum, Mono and Diglycerides, Xanthan Gum, Polysorbate 80, Cellulose Gum, Carrageenan, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Annatto (Color), Salt.
Here is the ingredient list for Mayfield Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Select Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Nonfat Milk, Sugar, Corn Syrup, Cookie Dough {Unenriched Flour, Brown Sugar, Sugar, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin]Water, Natural Flavors, Soy Lecithin, Salt, Sodium Bicarbonate) Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate, Coconut Oil, Soy Lecithin (an Emulsifier)Vanilla Extract, Salt] Vanilla Extract, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Natural Flavors, Molasses, Mono and Diglycerides, Cellulose Gum, Guar Gum, Salt, Carrageenan, Annatto (Color).
Creamy, Healthier Ice Cream - What's the Catch?
On a quest to create an ice cream that provides full-fat and creamy flavor while at the same time providing the virtues of a bowl of steamed vegetables, the ice cream industry has probed the depths of the Arctic Ocean. So, for those people who struggle with temptation in the freezer section, new industrial processes have provided a way for manfacturers to produce very creamy, dense, reduced-fat ice creams with fewer additives.
What is this "miracle" probed from the depths of the Arctic Ocean, you ask? A protein cloned from the blood of an Arctic Ocean fish, the ocean pout. But, don't be alarmed, no fish will be mined - the manufacturers are not going to go to the cost of extracting this protein from the fish - a process that Unilever describes as "not sustainable or economically feasible". Instead, the compaay has developed a process for making it - altering the genetic structure of a strain of baker's yeast so that it produces the protein during fermentation. This ingredient, called an ice-structuring protein, makes the ice cream creamier by preventing ice crystals from growing. Ice Cream manufacturers using this genetically engineered protein include: Dreyer's/Edy's (Slow Churned), Breyers (Light Double Churned) and Haagen-Dazs (Light).
Almost all commercial ice creams contain industrial ingredients that mimic the effects of butterfat and egg yolks: some are natural (although still entirely unneeded), like carrageenan, extracted from algae plentiful in the Irish Sea; others are synthetic, like monoglycerides and diglycerides. Personally, I don't know what's wrong with making ice cream the old-fashioned way - cream, milk, eggs, sugar, vanilla extract. And if you want to know what's really in that carton, take it out of the freezer and set it in your sink overnight. Once thawed, all of the synthetics, gum, chemicals and junk will be left in the carton for you to see.
Needless to say, I did not purchase any ice cream from that grocery store. I did, however, buy some heavy cream to make my own.
SOURCES:
The NY Times.com
Zeer.com
This post is linked at Real Food Wednesday http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/08/real-food-wednesday-8312011.htmlutm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed3A+kellythekitchenkop+%28Kelly+the+Kitchen+Kop%29
Recently, I was in my local mainstream grocery store, picking up the very few items that I feel comfortable purchasing there, and walked over to the frozen section to check out the ice cream options as my son had been asking for ice cream. I picked up one, put it back, grabbed another brand, put it back, one after the other, reading the ingredients listed on the packaging. I was amazed and completely grossed out by what I read on the labels. THIS is what food manufacturers are calling Ice Cream??? And there is an entire aisle, as there is in every grocery store chain, devoted to this chemically-laced Frankenfood. I admit that there was a time when I would have put whatever brand was on sale into my cart and taken it home. But as I have become more aware of EXACTLY what is in our food, I am more and more baffled as to why anyone is purchasing these foods...am I the only one who actually reads the labels??? In case I am, let me share with you what is in grocery store ice cream...
Here is the ingredient list for Breyer's Original Chocolate Chip Chookie Dough Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Whey, Natural Tara Gum, Natural Flavor, Annatto (Color). Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Pieces: Wheat Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Palm Oil, Water, Soybean Oil, Powdered Sugar (Sugar, Cornstarch), Chocolate Liquor, Salt, Cocoa Butter, Natural Flavor (Milk), Soy Lecithin, Baking Soda. Chocolate Flavored Chips: Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa Powder (Processed With Alkali), Milkfat, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla Extract.
Here is the ingredient list for Publix's Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Cookie Dough Pieces (Wheat Flour, Brown Sugar, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin)Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils)Water, Natural Flavors, Soy Lecithin and Salt) Corn Syrup, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali), Butter Oil, Lecithin, Vanilla) Cookie Dough Flavor (Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Natural Flavors, Molasses and Salt) Stabilizer (Carob Bean Gum, Guar Gum) Natural Flavor and Annatto Color.
Here is the ingredient list for Edy's Nestle Toll House Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Frozen Dairy Dessert: Skim Milk, Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough [Wheat, Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Margarine (Soybean Oil, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Soy Lecithin, Natural Flavor, Mono and Diglycerides, Annatto Color, Turmeric Color, Vitamin A Palmitate, Whey) Soybean Oil, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla Extract) Eggs, Water, Corn Starch, Molasses, Soy Lecithin, Natural and Artificial Flavor, Salt]Cream, Semi-Sweet Chocolate [Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Milkfat, Soy Lecithin, Vanillin (Artificial Flavor) Natural Flavor] Sugar, Dextrose, Corn Syrup, Polydextrose, Corn Starch, Malodextrin, Mono and Diglycerides, Cellulose Gel, Cellulose Gum, Guar Gum, Natural Flavor, Sorbitol, Carrageenan, Citric Acid, Annatto Color.
Here is the ingredient list for Blue Bell Homemade Vanilla Flavored Ice Cream (no Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Available): Milk, Cream, Sugar, Skim Milk, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Corn Syrup, Natural and Artificial Vanilla Flavor, Cellulose Gum, Vegetable Gums (Guar, Carrageenan, Carob Bean)Salt, Annatto Color.
Here is the ingredient list for Blue Bunny Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Original Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Sugar, Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough {Bleached Flour, Sugar, Vegetable Shortening (Partially Hydrogenated Soybean and Cottonseed Oils)Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla and Natural Flavoring) Water, Corn Syrup Solids, Sodium Bicarbonate, Salt, Artificial Flavor) Buttermilk, Whey, Corn Syrup, Chocolate Chips (Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Dextrose, Soy Lecithin, Vanillin) Guar Gum, Mono & Diglycerides, Natural Flavors, Artificial Flavors, Sodium Phosphate, Cellulose Gum, Sodium Citrate, Carrageenan, Polysorbate 80, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Molasses, Salt.
Here is the ingredient list for Ben & Jerry's Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Cream, Skim Milk, Liquid Sugar, Water, Unbleached Wheat Flour, Sugar, Brown Sugar, Egg Yolks, Butter, Eggs, Expeller Pressed Soybean Oil, Chocolate Liquor, Coconut Oil, Cocoa (Processed with Alkali)Vanilla Powder, Milkfat, Soya Lecithin, Carrageenan.
Here is the ingredient list for Haagen-Dazs Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Cream, Skim Milk, Cookie Dough (Flour, Sugar, Butter, Coconut Oil, Brown Sugar, Corn Oil, Water, Fructose, Corn Syrup Solids, Salt, Vanilla, Baking Soda) Sugar, Chocolaty Chips (Sugar, Coconut Oil, Cocoa Processed with Alkali, Cocoa, Butter Oil, Soy Lecithin, Vanilla) Egg Yolks, Natural Vanilla.
Here is the ingredient list for Mayfield Select Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Ice Cream: Milkfat and Nonfat Milk, Cookie Dough and Chips {Cookie Dough [Flour(Bleach White), Sugar, Brown Sugar (Sugar, Molasses) Margarine (Liquid and Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Water, Salt, Whey Solids, Mono and Diglycerides, Soy Lecithin, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Beta Carotene (Color)Vitamin A Palmitate)Water, Vanilla, Salt, Baking Soda] Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate Liquor, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin (Emulsifier), Artificial Flavoring] Sugar, Corn Syrup, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Sweetcream Buttermilk, Whey, contains Less than 2% of Molasses, Guar Gum, Mono and Diglycerides, Xanthan Gum, Polysorbate 80, Cellulose Gum, Carrageenan, Natural and Artificial Flavors, Annatto (Color), Salt.
Here is the ingredient list for Mayfield Chocolate Chip Cookie Dough Select Ice Cream: Milk, Cream, Nonfat Milk, Sugar, Corn Syrup, Cookie Dough {Unenriched Flour, Brown Sugar, Sugar, Partially Hydrogenated Soybean Oil, Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate, Cocoa Butter, Soy Lecithin]Water, Natural Flavors, Soy Lecithin, Salt, Sodium Bicarbonate) Chocolate Chips [Sugar, Chocolate, Coconut Oil, Soy Lecithin (an Emulsifier)Vanilla Extract, Salt] Vanilla Extract, Brown Sugar, High Fructose Corn Syrup, Natural Flavors, Molasses, Mono and Diglycerides, Cellulose Gum, Guar Gum, Salt, Carrageenan, Annatto (Color).
Creamy, Healthier Ice Cream - What's the Catch?
On a quest to create an ice cream that provides full-fat and creamy flavor while at the same time providing the virtues of a bowl of steamed vegetables, the ice cream industry has probed the depths of the Arctic Ocean. So, for those people who struggle with temptation in the freezer section, new industrial processes have provided a way for manfacturers to produce very creamy, dense, reduced-fat ice creams with fewer additives.
What is this "miracle" probed from the depths of the Arctic Ocean, you ask? A protein cloned from the blood of an Arctic Ocean fish, the ocean pout. But, don't be alarmed, no fish will be mined - the manufacturers are not going to go to the cost of extracting this protein from the fish - a process that Unilever describes as "not sustainable or economically feasible". Instead, the compaay has developed a process for making it - altering the genetic structure of a strain of baker's yeast so that it produces the protein during fermentation. This ingredient, called an ice-structuring protein, makes the ice cream creamier by preventing ice crystals from growing. Ice Cream manufacturers using this genetically engineered protein include: Dreyer's/Edy's (Slow Churned), Breyers (Light Double Churned) and Haagen-Dazs (Light).
Almost all commercial ice creams contain industrial ingredients that mimic the effects of butterfat and egg yolks: some are natural (although still entirely unneeded), like carrageenan, extracted from algae plentiful in the Irish Sea; others are synthetic, like monoglycerides and diglycerides. Personally, I don't know what's wrong with making ice cream the old-fashioned way - cream, milk, eggs, sugar, vanilla extract. And if you want to know what's really in that carton, take it out of the freezer and set it in your sink overnight. Once thawed, all of the synthetics, gum, chemicals and junk will be left in the carton for you to see.
Needless to say, I did not purchase any ice cream from that grocery store. I did, however, buy some heavy cream to make my own.
SOURCES:
The NY Times.com
Zeer.com
This post is linked at Real Food Wednesday http://kellythekitchenkop.com/2011/08/real-food-wednesday-8312011.htmlutm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed3A+kellythekitchenkop+%28Kelly+the+Kitchen+Kop%29
Tuesday, August 23, 2011
GMO Labeling Wars Continue
The FDA and USDA are at it again...not only do they want to prohibit the labeling of products that contain GMO ingredients, they also want to prohibit the labeling of products that don't contain GMO ingredients. Basically, they are trying to outlaw truth in labeling and openly working to deceive the public. In a draft of their written position, the FDA and USDA stated that mandatory labeling of GMOs is "false, misleading [and] deceptive" because it implies that there is a difference between GMO ingredients and non-GMO ingredients.
Fortunately, science and pure common sense, which are both lacking at the FDA and USDA, indicates that GMOs are different than non-GMOs and that the public has a right to know the types of ingredients that are in the products they buy. Not only are GMOs structurally different than non-GMOs, but GMOs are actually toxic. Several studies have shown they are harmful to the body. For more information regarding the dangers of GMOs, check out the following website: http://www.seedsofdeception.com/.
The labeling matter is further complicated because the FDA has maintained a tough stance for food makers who don't use genetically engineered ingredients and want to promote their products as an alternative. The agency allows manufacturers to label their products as not genetically engineered as long as those labels are accurate and do not imply that the products are therefore more healthful.
The dairy industry was warned in 1994 that it could not use "Hormone Free" labeling on milk from cows that are not given engineered hormones because all milk contains some hormones.
A flurry of enforcement letters have been sent to food makers, including B&G Foods, who was told it could not use the phrase "GMO-free" on its Polaner All Fruit strawberry spread label because GMO refers to genetically modified organisms and strawberries are produce, not organisms.
Spectrum Canola Oil was told that it could not use a label that included a red circle with a line through it and the words "GMO," saying the symbol suggested that there was something wrong with genetically engineered food.
And the rocket scientists over at Monsanto had this to say, "Requiring labeling for ingredients that don’t pose a health issue would undermine both our labeling laws and consumer confidence. Ensuring that such labeling is accurate would also put a huge burden on regulatory agencies."
"This to me raises questions about whose interest the FDA is protecting," said Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio), who has introduced legislation that would require labeling for genetically engineered food. "They are clearly protecting industry and not the public."
SOURCES:
NaturalNews.com
FoodNavigator-USA.com
The labeling matter is further complicated because the FDA has maintained a tough stance for food makers who don't use genetically engineered ingredients and want to promote their products as an alternative. The agency allows manufacturers to label their products as not genetically engineered as long as those labels are accurate and do not imply that the products are therefore more healthful.
The dairy industry was warned in 1994 that it could not use "Hormone Free" labeling on milk from cows that are not given engineered hormones because all milk contains some hormones.
A flurry of enforcement letters have been sent to food makers, including B&G Foods, who was told it could not use the phrase "GMO-free" on its Polaner All Fruit strawberry spread label because GMO refers to genetically modified organisms and strawberries are produce, not organisms.
Spectrum Canola Oil was told that it could not use a label that included a red circle with a line through it and the words "GMO," saying the symbol suggested that there was something wrong with genetically engineered food.
And the rocket scientists over at Monsanto had this to say, "Requiring labeling for ingredients that don’t pose a health issue would undermine both our labeling laws and consumer confidence. Ensuring that such labeling is accurate would also put a huge burden on regulatory agencies."
"This to me raises questions about whose interest the FDA is protecting," said Rep. Dennis J. Kucinich (D-Ohio), who has introduced legislation that would require labeling for genetically engineered food. "They are clearly protecting industry and not the public."
SOURCES:
NaturalNews.com
FoodNavigator-USA.com
Monday, August 22, 2011
Local Butcher Chooses Factory Farmed Meat
Last week I learned that there was a butcher shop that wasn't too far from my home - and for a minute, I was really excited! I remember going to the the butcher shop with my mom and grandmother as a little girl. I have been looking for someplace to purchase grass fed and pastured meats between purchasing larger orders directly from a local farmer and/or buying online to save on the high cost of shipping. So, I quickly sent an email inquiring where they procurred their meat - local or not - if the meats were grass fed/pastured without hormones/antibiotics, fed a diet with no GMO Corn/GMO soy and was the meat minimally processed? All perfectly reasonable questions, right? Here was the response:
"Thanks for your questions. Of course many of our products come from different farms and from various vendors, so it would be misleading to answer your questions with a short response where a lengthy and detailed one is much more appropriate.
We do not personally uphold the idea that technology in food always has negative outcomes, and we bring in products that are in line with that belief. I am 100% up front and honest with customers when they come into my shop about the products we carry, so that they can make a decision as to what to buy. We are not an organic shop. Many people cannot afford the price tag that comes with the organic certification, and some do not believe in the practice at all. Fortunately we all have the right to do our own research and buy the foods we are comfortable feeding our families.
As in the case of any hot topic issue, there are extremists on both fronts. Our goal is to be a middle ground between two very extreme worlds, so that consumers have an option to buy better quality food, that is still affordable. Each and every consumer is certainly entitled to their own beliefs and if our shop does not fall into a certain belief system, we are not an appropriate fit for that consumer.
As store owners, we are also entitled to sell the food we have researched and believe in. I do not sell anything that I do not feed my own family. I believe in the products I sell based on the research I have done that comes from numerous scientifically based sources, and will not sell a product to anyone who is looking for something different. To do so would be a complete corruption of my morals.
Please let me know if you have any questions about a certain product that I carry."
Thank you,
Christina Noble
Noble Meat Market
I was certainly not surprised at her response, but I was a bit taken aback...not only did I get the feeling that she was being defensive, she actually called me (and you) EXTREMIST because we choose to purchase meat from animals grown a certain way. Since when does wanting something your way make us extremist? I was sad that a person whose livelihood centers around selling meat was so short-sighted and obviously had fallen for the hype that Big Ag and the FDA are selling. I sent her this response:
"Thank you very much for your response and your honesty. It is refreshing. I appreciate that you also provided a detailed explanation of your personal beliefs and that your products are aligned with those beliefs.
I do not consider myself an extremist, more of a member of a growing population in search of the truth and the types of "real" food that our ancestors ate. The foods not altered with antibiotics, hormones, GMO corn, GMO soy, high fructose corn syrup, artificial sweeteners and not contributing to the epidemic of obesity in the U.S. I appreciate your stance in taking the middle ground. It certainly is the safe place to take a stand and allows you to run your business without challenging your belief system.
As for the cost of organic, grass-fed, pastured, etc. meats, they are more costly due to the fact that they are not subsidizied by the U.S. government unlike the meats produced at Factory Farms and whose lobbyists are running and controlling the FDA. The same FDA who is firmly in bed with Big Ag and Big Pharma and much more concerned with money than the health of human beings.
I encourage you to do some more research. There is a reason that organic foods are the largest growing segment of the food industry and that farmers markets are opening all over the country.
Thank you again for your response."
What do you think?
"Thanks for your questions. Of course many of our products come from different farms and from various vendors, so it would be misleading to answer your questions with a short response where a lengthy and detailed one is much more appropriate.
We do not personally uphold the idea that technology in food always has negative outcomes, and we bring in products that are in line with that belief. I am 100% up front and honest with customers when they come into my shop about the products we carry, so that they can make a decision as to what to buy. We are not an organic shop. Many people cannot afford the price tag that comes with the organic certification, and some do not believe in the practice at all. Fortunately we all have the right to do our own research and buy the foods we are comfortable feeding our families.
As in the case of any hot topic issue, there are extremists on both fronts. Our goal is to be a middle ground between two very extreme worlds, so that consumers have an option to buy better quality food, that is still affordable. Each and every consumer is certainly entitled to their own beliefs and if our shop does not fall into a certain belief system, we are not an appropriate fit for that consumer.
As store owners, we are also entitled to sell the food we have researched and believe in. I do not sell anything that I do not feed my own family. I believe in the products I sell based on the research I have done that comes from numerous scientifically based sources, and will not sell a product to anyone who is looking for something different. To do so would be a complete corruption of my morals.
Please let me know if you have any questions about a certain product that I carry."
Thank you,
Christina Noble
Noble Meat Market
I was certainly not surprised at her response, but I was a bit taken aback...not only did I get the feeling that she was being defensive, she actually called me (and you) EXTREMIST because we choose to purchase meat from animals grown a certain way. Since when does wanting something your way make us extremist? I was sad that a person whose livelihood centers around selling meat was so short-sighted and obviously had fallen for the hype that Big Ag and the FDA are selling. I sent her this response:
"Thank you very much for your response and your honesty. It is refreshing. I appreciate that you also provided a detailed explanation of your personal beliefs and that your products are aligned with those beliefs.
I do not consider myself an extremist, more of a member of a growing population in search of the truth and the types of "real" food that our ancestors ate. The foods not altered with antibiotics, hormones, GMO corn, GMO soy, high fructose corn syrup, artificial sweeteners and not contributing to the epidemic of obesity in the U.S. I appreciate your stance in taking the middle ground. It certainly is the safe place to take a stand and allows you to run your business without challenging your belief system.
As for the cost of organic, grass-fed, pastured, etc. meats, they are more costly due to the fact that they are not subsidizied by the U.S. government unlike the meats produced at Factory Farms and whose lobbyists are running and controlling the FDA. The same FDA who is firmly in bed with Big Ag and Big Pharma and much more concerned with money than the health of human beings.
I encourage you to do some more research. There is a reason that organic foods are the largest growing segment of the food industry and that farmers markets are opening all over the country.
Thank you again for your response."
What do you think?
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
The BioTech Industry Thinks We're Stupid
At a time when more Americans then ever before want to know more about their food - where it is grown, what it contains, how it is produced - the FDA's recent decision to approve GMO salmon, which will be available for sale in the U.S. in 2-3 years, seems completely and utterly ridiculous. Coupled with the statisics that show industrialized agriculture is being criticized, farmers markets are popping up everywhere and organic food is one of the fastest growing segments of the food industry, it makes you wonder what the FDA is thinking (and question if they live in a cave completely oblivious to the outside world with the possible exception of Big Ag). This landmark decision approved the first GMO animal to be consumed by humans in the U.S. And it scares me to death!
The FDA flat-out refuses to even consider labeling genetically altered food. In the case of the GMO salmon, the FDA says it cannot require a label on the GM food once it determines that the fish is not "materially" different from other salmon. The FDA defends its approach, saying it is simply following the law, which prohibits misleading labels on food. And the fact that a food, in this case salmon, is produced through a different process, is not sufficient to require a label.
Not only does the FDA refuse to allow labeling of GMO foods, they are also restricting conventional food makers from stating on their labels that their products do not contain any genetically modified ingredients.
The biotechnology industry is opposed to mandatory labeling, saying it will only bewilder a public that is not well informed about genetic engineering. "Extra labeling only confuses the consumer," said David Edwards, director of animal biotechnology at the Biotechnology Industry Organization. "It differentiates products that are not different. As we stick more labels on products that don't really tell us anything more, it makes it harder for consumers to make their choices."
The FDA flat-out refuses to even consider labeling genetically altered food. In the case of the GMO salmon, the FDA says it cannot require a label on the GM food once it determines that the fish is not "materially" different from other salmon. The FDA defends its approach, saying it is simply following the law, which prohibits misleading labels on food. And the fact that a food, in this case salmon, is produced through a different process, is not sufficient to require a label.
Not only does the FDA refuse to allow labeling of GMO foods, they are also restricting conventional food makers from stating on their labels that their products do not contain any genetically modified ingredients.
The biotechnology industry is opposed to mandatory labeling, saying it will only bewilder a public that is not well informed about genetic engineering. "Extra labeling only confuses the consumer," said David Edwards, director of animal biotechnology at the Biotechnology Industry Organization. "It differentiates products that are not different. As we stick more labels on products that don't really tell us anything more, it makes it harder for consumers to make their choices."
In the European Union and Japan, it is nearly impossible to find genetically modified foods, largely because laws require labeling, said William K. Hallman, director of the Food Policy Institute at Rutgers University. "No one wants to carry products with such a label," he said. "The food companies figure that consumers won't buy it." There is nothing to stop salmon producers or food makers in the United States from voluntarily labeling their products as genetically engineered - except a fear of rejection in the marketplace, Hallman said. And David Edwards thinks consumers are confused.
Ever since the FDA approved the first genetically altered material for use in food in 1992, when Monsanto developed a synthetic hormone injected into cows to increase milk production, the agency has held that it cannot require food producers to label products as genetically engineered. In the intervening years, the use of genetically engineered crops has skyrocketed - 93% of this year's soybean crop is genetically engineered, according to the U.S. Agriculture Department. Byproducts of those crops - soy lecithin, for example - are found in thousands of processed foods from chocolate bars to breakfast cereal. None is labeled as containing genetically modified ingredients.
The recent approval of GM salmon has consumer advocates worried about labeling for genetically engineered beef, pork and other fish which will soon be lined up for federal approval. The AquAdvantage Atlantic salmon has been given a gene from the ocean pout, an eel-like fish, and a growth hormone from a Chinook salmon. This particular salmon grows twice as fast as it's conventionally grown counterpart. Those of you looking to buy salmon will have a tough time picking out the conventional fish from the one created with genes from another species. You could be certain of getting the non-modified version if you bought salmon labeled as "wild," but most salmon consumed in the U.S. is farmed.
Monday, August 15, 2011
The Truth About Canola Oil?
Have you ever wondered where Canola oil comes from? Unlike Olive oil (olives), Peanut oil (peanuts), Coconut oil (coconuts), I'm not familiar with a Canola plant, fruit, seed or nut. That's because there is no Canola plant to produce this oil from. Canola oil is made from genetically modified rapeseed. This oil was first introduced by our neighbors to the north, Canada, and the word Canola was made up in 1978 from "CANadian Oil, Low Acid". The fact is, Canola oil is an artificially created, genetically modified food whose seed is so far deviated from natural rapeseed that it has actually been patented. How's that for a science experiment?
Mainstream media, the U.S. and Canadian governments, the FDA, the USDA, the American Heart Association and more would have us believe that Canola oil is not only "heart healthy", but good for you. And don't forget Big Ag's influence with their heavy-handed marketing tactics. Canola oil is cheap to produce and they have spent a lot of money trying to convince you, me and the rest of the world to purchase it as your "healthy" oil choice. Since when has Big Ag been concerned abour our health?
The History...
In the mid-1980's, the oil industry in American was in a bind. Numerous government and medical agencies were promoting polyunsaturated oils as "heart healthy" alternatives to "artery-clogging" saturated fats. Polyunsaturated oils, Corn and Soybean, were under attack for causing numerous health problems including cancer. The oil industry couldn't continue advocating large amounts of ployunsaturated oils AND continue to promote them as healthy with the mounting evidence to the contrary. And they certainly couldn't return to using the traditional healthy saturated fats - butter, coconut oil, palm oil, tallow, lard - without admiting they were wrong and had made a mess of things.
According to “The Great Con-ola,” the solution was to embrace the use of monounsaturated oils, such as olive oil. Monounsaturated oils had been shown to have a “better” effect than polyunsaturated oils on cholesterol levels and other blood parameters. In addition, many heart-healthy advocates had popularized the notion that a Mediterranean diet, rich in olive oil, protected against heart disease and ensured a long and healthy life. Unfortunately, olives required special growing conditions that made it impossible for olive oil to be used widely and olive oil was costly, especially for mass-produced commercial products.
Traditional rapeseed oil was a monounsaturated oil that had been used extensively in many parts of the world. It contains almost 60 percent monounsaturated fatty acids compared to approximately 70 percent in olive oil. Unfortunately, rapeseed oil also comprised of erucic acid, a 22-carbon monounsaturated fatty acid that had been associated with Keshan’s disease, characterized by fibrotic lesions of the heart.
In the late 1970s, using a technique called seed splitting, Canadian plant breeders came up with a variety of rapeseed that produced a monounsaturated oil (low in 22-carbon erucic acid and high in 18-carbon oleic acid) very like olive oil. Originally, it was called LEAR (Low Erucic Acid Rapeseed). However, neither the name Rape nor LEAR were considered suitable for marketing purposes. The new name, Canola, was considered a hit.
In the 1980s, Canola oil began to be marketed in the United States. In order for that to happen, it had to be granted GRAS (generally regarded as safe) status by the FDA. GRAS status is typically awarded to foods and herbal products that have been traditionally used, for hundreds or even thousands of years, without known adverse effects. Canola oil was a new product without any track record. And it was developed from a product known to have toxic effects. So how did Canada obtain GRAS status for it's new product? No one knows for sure, but it has been rumored that the Canadian government spent $50 million U.S. to get it approved.
False Health Claims...
While it is true that Canola oil is high in monounsaturates, it is anything but “healthy.” We’ve been led to believe that high monounsaturated fat oils are good for us and they are in the case of virgin olive oil or other unprocessed nut or seed oils. However, one of the biggest problems with highly processed and refined vegetable oils such as corn, soybean and Canola is that the polyunsaturated component of the oil is highly unstable under heat, light and pressure. All of which heavily oxidize the polyunsaturates increasing free radicals in your body. The end result of all of this refining and processing are oils that are highly inflammatory in your body when you ingest them, potentially contributing to heart disease, weight gain and other degenerative diseases.
Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), cold pressed without the use of heat and chemicals, is good for you. Canola oil, typically extracted and refined using high heat, pressure and toxic petroleum solvents such as hexane, contains trans fats. It is all of the high heat and high pressure solvent processing that actually turns the healthy omega-3 content into trans fat. It also undergoes a process of caustic refining, degumming, bleaching and deodorization. According to Dr. Mary Enig, Nutritional Biochemist, “Although the Canadian government lists the trans fat content of Canola at a minimal 0.2 percent, research at the University of Florida in Gainesville, found trans fat levels as high as 4.6 percent in commercial liquid Canola oil.” And this is the garbage that they are marketing to you as a “heart-healthy” oil!
One More Thing...
If you do a Google search for organic pesticides, the number one hit is for recipes that use Canola oil. In fact, Mike Adams, The Healthy Ranger, has a video on Natural News.com that reveals that common cooking oils such as Canola and Soy are key ingredients in pesticide products because they work! The video shows how one pesticide product that kills insects is made with 96% canola oil and is so dangerous that the label reads, "Hazards to humans and domestic animals." Watch the video here - http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=AEE77E1636E97778AB05E6F31D6B1C27.
And Last, but Not Least...
In 1996, Japanese scientists announced a study in which a special Canola oil diet had actually killed laboratory animals. Reacting to this unpublished, but verified and startling information, a duplicate study was conducted by Canadian scientists, using piglets and a Canola oil-based milk-replacer diet. In this second study, published in Nutrition Research 1997, the researchers verified that Canola oil depleted the piglets of vitamin E to a dangerously low level.
Any “food” that depletes vitamin E rapidly is extremely dangerous. Vitamin E is absolutely essential to human health. It is critically necessary in the body when processed fats are eaten because Vitamin E controls the lipid peroxidation that results in dangerous free-radical activity, which in turn causes lesions in your arteries and other problems. Canola oil has now been shown to be a very heavy abuser of Vitamin E, with the potential for rapidly depleting the body of this important vitamin.
Mainstream media, the U.S. and Canadian governments, the FDA, the USDA, the American Heart Association and more would have us believe that Canola oil is not only "heart healthy", but good for you. And don't forget Big Ag's influence with their heavy-handed marketing tactics. Canola oil is cheap to produce and they have spent a lot of money trying to convince you, me and the rest of the world to purchase it as your "healthy" oil choice. Since when has Big Ag been concerned abour our health?
The History...
In the mid-1980's, the oil industry in American was in a bind. Numerous government and medical agencies were promoting polyunsaturated oils as "heart healthy" alternatives to "artery-clogging" saturated fats. Polyunsaturated oils, Corn and Soybean, were under attack for causing numerous health problems including cancer. The oil industry couldn't continue advocating large amounts of ployunsaturated oils AND continue to promote them as healthy with the mounting evidence to the contrary. And they certainly couldn't return to using the traditional healthy saturated fats - butter, coconut oil, palm oil, tallow, lard - without admiting they were wrong and had made a mess of things.
According to “The Great Con-ola,” the solution was to embrace the use of monounsaturated oils, such as olive oil. Monounsaturated oils had been shown to have a “better” effect than polyunsaturated oils on cholesterol levels and other blood parameters. In addition, many heart-healthy advocates had popularized the notion that a Mediterranean diet, rich in olive oil, protected against heart disease and ensured a long and healthy life. Unfortunately, olives required special growing conditions that made it impossible for olive oil to be used widely and olive oil was costly, especially for mass-produced commercial products.
Traditional rapeseed oil was a monounsaturated oil that had been used extensively in many parts of the world. It contains almost 60 percent monounsaturated fatty acids compared to approximately 70 percent in olive oil. Unfortunately, rapeseed oil also comprised of erucic acid, a 22-carbon monounsaturated fatty acid that had been associated with Keshan’s disease, characterized by fibrotic lesions of the heart.
In the late 1970s, using a technique called seed splitting, Canadian plant breeders came up with a variety of rapeseed that produced a monounsaturated oil (low in 22-carbon erucic acid and high in 18-carbon oleic acid) very like olive oil. Originally, it was called LEAR (Low Erucic Acid Rapeseed). However, neither the name Rape nor LEAR were considered suitable for marketing purposes. The new name, Canola, was considered a hit.
In the 1980s, Canola oil began to be marketed in the United States. In order for that to happen, it had to be granted GRAS (generally regarded as safe) status by the FDA. GRAS status is typically awarded to foods and herbal products that have been traditionally used, for hundreds or even thousands of years, without known adverse effects. Canola oil was a new product without any track record. And it was developed from a product known to have toxic effects. So how did Canada obtain GRAS status for it's new product? No one knows for sure, but it has been rumored that the Canadian government spent $50 million U.S. to get it approved.
False Health Claims...
While it is true that Canola oil is high in monounsaturates, it is anything but “healthy.” We’ve been led to believe that high monounsaturated fat oils are good for us and they are in the case of virgin olive oil or other unprocessed nut or seed oils. However, one of the biggest problems with highly processed and refined vegetable oils such as corn, soybean and Canola is that the polyunsaturated component of the oil is highly unstable under heat, light and pressure. All of which heavily oxidize the polyunsaturates increasing free radicals in your body. The end result of all of this refining and processing are oils that are highly inflammatory in your body when you ingest them, potentially contributing to heart disease, weight gain and other degenerative diseases.
Extra virgin olive oil (EVOO), cold pressed without the use of heat and chemicals, is good for you. Canola oil, typically extracted and refined using high heat, pressure and toxic petroleum solvents such as hexane, contains trans fats. It is all of the high heat and high pressure solvent processing that actually turns the healthy omega-3 content into trans fat. It also undergoes a process of caustic refining, degumming, bleaching and deodorization. According to Dr. Mary Enig, Nutritional Biochemist, “Although the Canadian government lists the trans fat content of Canola at a minimal 0.2 percent, research at the University of Florida in Gainesville, found trans fat levels as high as 4.6 percent in commercial liquid Canola oil.” And this is the garbage that they are marketing to you as a “heart-healthy” oil!
One More Thing...
If you do a Google search for organic pesticides, the number one hit is for recipes that use Canola oil. In fact, Mike Adams, The Healthy Ranger, has a video on Natural News.com that reveals that common cooking oils such as Canola and Soy are key ingredients in pesticide products because they work! The video shows how one pesticide product that kills insects is made with 96% canola oil and is so dangerous that the label reads, "Hazards to humans and domestic animals." Watch the video here - http://naturalnews.tv/v.asp?v=AEE77E1636E97778AB05E6F31D6B1C27.
And Last, but Not Least...
In 1996, Japanese scientists announced a study in which a special Canola oil diet had actually killed laboratory animals. Reacting to this unpublished, but verified and startling information, a duplicate study was conducted by Canadian scientists, using piglets and a Canola oil-based milk-replacer diet. In this second study, published in Nutrition Research 1997, the researchers verified that Canola oil depleted the piglets of vitamin E to a dangerously low level.
Any “food” that depletes vitamin E rapidly is extremely dangerous. Vitamin E is absolutely essential to human health. It is critically necessary in the body when processed fats are eaten because Vitamin E controls the lipid peroxidation that results in dangerous free-radical activity, which in turn causes lesions in your arteries and other problems. Canola oil has now been shown to be a very heavy abuser of Vitamin E, with the potential for rapidly depleting the body of this important vitamin.
Friday, August 12, 2011
Monsanto's Newest Unregulated, Unlabeled Frankenfood - Sweet Corn
It has finally happened - THE SKY IS FALLING (or it may as well be) - Monsato has produced it's first genetically modified frankenfood that will be sold directly to U.S. and Canadian consumers. That's right folks, Monsanto has bioteched a new sweet corn and it will be showing up on your grocery produce aisle before the end of the year (and you won't be able to tell the difference between it and conventionally produced corn). This sweet corn is the first Monsanto GMO product created that will be sold directly to consumers. Previously, Monsanto's GMO crops were only used in processing sugar and oils, as animal feed, made into fibers and in highly processed foods and ingredients.
These new seeds - which have been engineered to kill insects above and below ground, produce Bt toxin (a genetically modified form of a pesticide) and is "RoundUp Ready" - will be introduced to farmer's in the southeastern United States starting this fall. The franken-seeds will be distributed to the 250,000-acres currently serving the U.S. fresh corn market. Monsanto is also in talks with companies that would can or freeze the corn.
What does this mean to consumers? Well, until recently, Monsanto's Bt corn and cotton were mainly used for animal feed and in highly processed ingredients. However, even with this fairly limited exposure, Bt toxin has been found in the blood of pregnant women and fetuses. And Bt crops have proven deadly for grazing animals from livestock to monarch butterflies. No one knows what will happen to people who eat Monsanto's new Bt sweet corn.
And let us not forget that this GMO sweet corn is also "RoundUp Ready". What does that mean for the "new sweet corn crop"? It means it can tolerate unlimited amounts of Monsanto's herbicide, RoundUp.
What does that mean for us? Roundup has been shown to cause endocrine disruption, damage to DNA, reproductive and developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity and cancer, as well as birth defects. A Monsanto spokesperson said that they did not expect much consumer outcry. Really...
Once again, our "friends" at the FDA are giving carte blanche to Big Ag. This sweet corn was never reviewed by government regulators for safety or environmental impact and, like everything else on the shelves of U.S. grocery and healthfood stores, it won't be labeled as GMO. It was bad enough when they fed it to livestock, now they want us to eat it too?! This is outrageous! Please join with me to take action against Big Ag. Click on the link to tell the President, Congress and the USDA to label GMO foods!
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_23767.cfm
This post is part of Fight Back Friday at Food Renegade.
These new seeds - which have been engineered to kill insects above and below ground, produce Bt toxin (a genetically modified form of a pesticide) and is "RoundUp Ready" - will be introduced to farmer's in the southeastern United States starting this fall. The franken-seeds will be distributed to the 250,000-acres currently serving the U.S. fresh corn market. Monsanto is also in talks with companies that would can or freeze the corn.
What does this mean to consumers? Well, until recently, Monsanto's Bt corn and cotton were mainly used for animal feed and in highly processed ingredients. However, even with this fairly limited exposure, Bt toxin has been found in the blood of pregnant women and fetuses. And Bt crops have proven deadly for grazing animals from livestock to monarch butterflies. No one knows what will happen to people who eat Monsanto's new Bt sweet corn.
And let us not forget that this GMO sweet corn is also "RoundUp Ready". What does that mean for the "new sweet corn crop"? It means it can tolerate unlimited amounts of Monsanto's herbicide, RoundUp.
What does that mean for us? Roundup has been shown to cause endocrine disruption, damage to DNA, reproductive and developmental toxicity, neurotoxicity and cancer, as well as birth defects. A Monsanto spokesperson said that they did not expect much consumer outcry. Really...
Once again, our "friends" at the FDA are giving carte blanche to Big Ag. This sweet corn was never reviewed by government regulators for safety or environmental impact and, like everything else on the shelves of U.S. grocery and healthfood stores, it won't be labeled as GMO. It was bad enough when they fed it to livestock, now they want us to eat it too?! This is outrageous! Please join with me to take action against Big Ag. Click on the link to tell the President, Congress and the USDA to label GMO foods!
http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_23767.cfm
This post is part of Fight Back Friday at Food Renegade.
Thursday, August 11, 2011
Produce PLU Codes - Thwarted Again
In grocery stores, all produce that is sold in bulk has a Price Look-up (PLU) code that consists of either a 4 or 5 digit number, printed on a sticker and attached to it. For example:
Organic - a 5-digit number always beginning with the number 9 (94001)
Conventional - a 4-digit number always beginning with the number 4 (4001)
GMO - a 5-digit number always beginning with the number 8 (84001)
Well, you might say, I've never seen any produce with a 5-digit number starting with the number 8.
In 1992 biotech companies were so sure that we wanted to eat their "science experiments" that they were all for adding a new code so that their "frankenfood" could be easily identified - certain that consumers would want to know which food was altered and rush right in and buy it. NOT! Those biotech geniuses soon learned that we didn't want their "frankenfood" and were purposely NOT buying it due to the new code listed on it. So, what did those biotech companies do, they removed the "8" from the labels. That's right "frankenfood", food created in a laboratory, GMO has NO restrictions, NO labeling requirements.
The only way that we "know" we are being protected from these gentically modified foods is to buy Certified Organic. However, as we are learning, even that may not protect us from GMOs as companies producing these products do not necessarily follow the strict guidelines that have been set to protect the consumer. And the FDA is virtually powerless to do anything about it.
Organic - a 5-digit number always beginning with the number 9 (94001)
Conventional - a 4-digit number always beginning with the number 4 (4001)
GMO - a 5-digit number always beginning with the number 8 (84001)
In 1992 biotech companies were so sure that we wanted to eat their "science experiments" that they were all for adding a new code so that their "frankenfood" could be easily identified - certain that consumers would want to know which food was altered and rush right in and buy it. NOT! Those biotech geniuses soon learned that we didn't want their "frankenfood" and were purposely NOT buying it due to the new code listed on it. So, what did those biotech companies do, they removed the "8" from the labels. That's right "frankenfood", food created in a laboratory, GMO has NO restrictions, NO labeling requirements.
The only way that we "know" we are being protected from these gentically modified foods is to buy Certified Organic. However, as we are learning, even that may not protect us from GMOs as companies producing these products do not necessarily follow the strict guidelines that have been set to protect the consumer. And the FDA is virtually powerless to do anything about it.
Wednesday, August 10, 2011
J. M. Smucker is Turning Over in His Grave
I recently read an article on the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) website - Santa Cruz Organics Supports GMOs. Santa Cruz Organics (parent company J.M. Smucker's) was recently queried by OCA about their stance on GMOs (genetically modified organisms). The July 14, 2011 response from their customer relations department smacked of corporate double talk, did not answer the question and pulled out the FDA and USDA "cloak of protection" justification. Please see the original letter here: http://www.organicconsumers.org/articles/article_23708.cfm
As a purchaser of organic foods, the MAIN reason being that I want to avoid GMOs at all cost, I was angered by their lackadaisical non-answer. I quickly pulled up the Santa Cruz Organics website and sent off a nice little note letting them know that I was very displeased with what I read in the CS letter and that I wanted further confirmation that they were not allowing GMO products to cross-contaminate the organic products. In order to be labeled "organic" there are very strict guidelines as to what and what cannot be included in a product. Any and all GMO is strictly forbidden, or at least that is what we have been led to believe.
On August 8, 2011, I received the following response:
Thank you for contacting Santa Cruz Organic®. Our products are manufactured using strict quality control procedures that meet or exceed all applicable government and industry standards.
Smucker Natural Foods, Inc. cares about the health and safety of our consumers. We have taken great care to provide products that are made with high quality and wholesome ingredients.
We have established a documentation program for all of our natural products and their respective ingredients, with the goal of utilizing only ingredients grown and produced without the use of biotechnology.
Smucker Natural Foods, Inc. has an extensive documentation program verifying that suppliers of our organic raw materials meet the requirements of the National Organic Program.
Our consumers can be assured that we are in full compliance with existing Federal regulations and policies with respect to food labeling and product safety. We will continue to monitor this situation and comply with any future regulations.
If you should have further questions or need additional information, please visit us at www.scojuice.com or contact us at 888-569-6994, Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Sincerely,
Carla
Consumer Relations Representative
Once again, a non-answer! Nowhere does it state that they are doing anything to prevent the cross-contamination of products that was disclosed in the first CS response. Typically, they have chosen to use the corporate psycho-babble response about what their organization supposedly "does". We all know that shortcuts are taken, mistakes are made and the fact that they obviously process BOTH GMO and non-GMO products in the same facility tells me that they know that cross-contamination occurs and are obviously not going to do anything about it. Santa Cruz Organics has just been added to my "do not buy" list.
I feel certain that Jerome Monroe (J.M.) Smucker is rolling around in his grave at what his company has become. I wonder what the small town farmer from Orrville, Ohio would say today?
As a purchaser of organic foods, the MAIN reason being that I want to avoid GMOs at all cost, I was angered by their lackadaisical non-answer. I quickly pulled up the Santa Cruz Organics website and sent off a nice little note letting them know that I was very displeased with what I read in the CS letter and that I wanted further confirmation that they were not allowing GMO products to cross-contaminate the organic products. In order to be labeled "organic" there are very strict guidelines as to what and what cannot be included in a product. Any and all GMO is strictly forbidden, or at least that is what we have been led to believe.
On August 8, 2011, I received the following response:
Thank you for contacting Santa Cruz Organic®. Our products are manufactured using strict quality control procedures that meet or exceed all applicable government and industry standards.
Smucker Natural Foods, Inc. cares about the health and safety of our consumers. We have taken great care to provide products that are made with high quality and wholesome ingredients.
We have established a documentation program for all of our natural products and their respective ingredients, with the goal of utilizing only ingredients grown and produced without the use of biotechnology.
Smucker Natural Foods, Inc. has an extensive documentation program verifying that suppliers of our organic raw materials meet the requirements of the National Organic Program.
Our consumers can be assured that we are in full compliance with existing Federal regulations and policies with respect to food labeling and product safety. We will continue to monitor this situation and comply with any future regulations.
If you should have further questions or need additional information, please visit us at www.scojuice.com or contact us at 888-569-6994, Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Eastern Standard Time.
Sincerely,
Carla
Consumer Relations Representative
Once again, a non-answer! Nowhere does it state that they are doing anything to prevent the cross-contamination of products that was disclosed in the first CS response. Typically, they have chosen to use the corporate psycho-babble response about what their organization supposedly "does". We all know that shortcuts are taken, mistakes are made and the fact that they obviously process BOTH GMO and non-GMO products in the same facility tells me that they know that cross-contamination occurs and are obviously not going to do anything about it. Santa Cruz Organics has just been added to my "do not buy" list.
I feel certain that Jerome Monroe (J.M.) Smucker is rolling around in his grave at what his company has become. I wonder what the small town farmer from Orrville, Ohio would say today?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)