April 12, 2017
April 12, 2017
January 9, 2017
DESCRIPTION: Using skin lotion or hand sanitizer before touching thermal paper (cash register receipts and printed tickets) can facilitate the absorption of BPA into the body.
Deanna Minich Ph.D.
November 11, 2016
Your body has a natural, powerful, built-in system for detoxification that doesn’t require trendy juice cleanses or expensive protocols. All you have to do is sweat!
Doctors, health experts, and fitness gurus tell us that we should break a sweat every day – and for good reason. While sweating has a host of benefits simply because it’s a result of health-boosting exercise, the act of sweating itself heals the body as well. Whether you’re sitting in a sauna, walking on a warm day, or working out, sweating is a necessary bodily function with powerful healing effects.
Specifically, more studies are emerging lauding the detoxifying abilities of sweat. By clearing out a range of toxins, from persistent organic pollutants (POPs) to heavy metals, sweat plays an essential role in your body’s natural detox function. Let’s look at some of the toxins that are cleared from your body when you sweat:
1. Persistent organic pollutants (solvents, fumigants, and insecticides): A clinical study with 20 participants found that sweat samples contained a range of toxins, including pesticides DDT/DDE, endosulfan, methoxychlor, and endrin. In fact, nearly all parent compounds of pesticides were found in the samples studied, which shows that sweating is an effective way of diminishing your body’s toxic burden.
Additionally, the sweat sample contained some pesticides – including DDT, methoxychlor, and endrin – that were not present in the blood or urine samples collected from the same participant, suggesting that some pesticides are only mobilized and excreted through sweating.
2. Phthalate (plasticizer): Phthalate, found in plastic products, is another toxic chemical that is removed through sweat. In one study, researchers evaluated blood, sweat, and urine samples from 20 individuals, and discovered that all subjects had mono(2-ethylhexyl) phthalate (MEHP), a common phthalate, in each of the samples. The concentrations of this compound in sweat were more than twice as high as urine levels, showing that sweating may be the most effective way of ridding your body of this endocrine-disrupting compound.
3. Heavy metals: One study with 20 patients reported that when compared to urine, sweat contained about 24 times more cadmium, 19 times more nickel, 16 times more lead, and almost three times more aluminum. Overall, sweat proved more effective than urine at removing 14 out of the 18 heavy metals studied. It also contained larger quantities of 16 out of the 18 metals than the blood samples did.
Of all the metals, aluminum was found at the highest concentrations in sweat, with zinc, copper, and nickel also occurring at relatively high amounts in the studied samples.
4. Bisphenol A (BPA): Researchers examined the blood, urine, and sweat of 20 participants for BPA, an endocrine-disrupting toxin found in canned foods and plastic water bottles, among other things. Of the 20 sweat samples collected, 16 contained BPA, while only 14 urine and 2 blood samples tested positive for the toxin.
Not only does this reveal that sweat is the most effective way of removing BPA build-up in the body, it also shows that testing blood or urine for toxicity levels may not present the whole picture.
When it comes time to break a sweat, there are a host of activities that you can choose from. The majority of exercises and sports will get you sweaty: running/brisk walking, swimming, Bikram yoga, tennis, basketball – the list goes on. A low impact option is spending time in a sauna. When comparing an infrared sauna to a steam sauna, researchers found that the sweat from the infrared sauna contained more bismuth, cadmium, chromium, mercury, and uranium. The steam sauna caused higher levels of arsenic, aluminum, cobalt, copper, manganese, nickel, lead, tin, thallium, and zinc to be excreted.
It’s important to note that hydration is essential in maximizing the health benefits listed above. Sweating has powerful effects on your health, but not hydrating properly during and after sweating will lead to a host of separate health problems. An easy rehydration guideline to follow is to weigh yourself directly before and after sweating – the weight lost is the amount of water you should drink after to rehydrate yourself. For reference, one pound of water is slightly less than a ½ liter.
Additionally, sweat contains minerals that are essential to keep your body functioning optimally. After activities where you sweat excessively, it’s important to replace the minerals lost, especially zinc, copper, selenium, chromium, and potassium. Coconut water is a great source of potassium, and nuts, seafood, whole grains, and legumes generally contain relatively high levels of zinc, copper, selenium, and chromium.
Next time you feel yourself tempted to stay on the couch instead of going for a run, or opt to stay in the air conditioning instead of spending time in a sauna, think of all the “sweaty” benefits that you’re not getting! Breaking a sweat might seem like pain, but it’s worth it to keep your internal detox systems healthy and well-functioning.
Genuis, Stephen J., Kevin Lane, and Detlef Birkholz. “Human Elimination of Organochlorine Pesticides: Blood, Urine, and Sweat Study.” BioMed Research International 2016 (2016).
Genuis, Stephen J., et al. “Human elimination of phthalate compounds: blood, urine, and sweat (BUS) study.” The Scientific World Journal 2012 (2012).
Genuis, Stephen J., et al. “Blood, urine, and sweat (BUS) study: monitoring and elimination of bioaccumulated toxic elements.” Archives of environmental contamination and toxicology 61.2 (2011): 344-357.
Genuis, Stephen J., et al. “Human excretion of bisphenol A: blood, urine, and sweat (BUS) study.” Journal of Environmental and Public Health 2012 (2011).
Hew-Butler, Tamara, Joseph G. Verbalis, and Timothy D. Noakes. “Updated fluid recommendation: position statement from the International Marathon Medical Directors Association (IMMDA).” Clinical Journal of Sport Medicine16.4 (2006): 283-292.
August 11, 2016
For years, the chemical bisphenol A (BPA) – commonly found in plastic bottles, can linings and other products – has been linked to a number of negative health consequences, and now a new study has indicated that even in small doses BPA can cause significant changes in metabolism as well as affect the reproductive and nervous systems.
Researchers from the National Food Institute, Technical University of Denmark found “reduced sperm count, obesity and changes to breast development and behaviour” in rats who were given small amounts of BPA, and believe that similar effects may occur in humans.
These effects were observed in low doses – in roughly equivalent levels to what humans are exposed to on a daily basis.
From a university press release accompanying the study:
The results show that particularly low doses of bisphenol A affect the development of the animals. The female rats that were exposed to the lowest dose weighed more as adults, and their behaviour had changed in a direction that resembled male behaviour. This could indicate masculinization of the females’ brains. Male rats that were exposed to the lowest dose had increased growth of mammary gland tissue, and decreased sperm count as adults.
These effects were not observed at the higher bisphenol A doses.
Mammary gland changes that could be indicative of an early stage of breast cancer were observed in aging rats exposed to the second lowest dose of bisphenol A.
The results support previous studies, which show that particularly low doses of bisphenol A can affect the animals’ development, while higher doses have different effects.
Previous studies have linked bisphenol A to obesity, breast cancer, infertility in both males and females, early puberty, heart disease and nervous system damage. BPA disrupts the endocrine system, mimicking the hormone estrogen.
Endocrine disruptors are the link between human health hazards and plastic. … In the human body, endocrine disruptors mimic the actions of the hormone estrogen. They upset the hormonal balance and can stimulate the growth of tumors in the breast, uterus or prostate. They can affect fertility, pregnancy, and worse, can affect the fetus by interfering with testosterone, disrupting normal sexual development. This disruption is not often apparent until adulthood and includes the increased risk of cancer.
The EPA has done little to address the issue. It briefly considered a ban in 2012, but the only real action the agency has taken was to ban its use in baby products – two of every three canned goods still contain BPA in their linings.
In our modern world, it’s not easy to avoid contact with plastic, but you can take steps to minimize your exposure to BPA and other toxins found in plastic products.
Don’t microwave or heat food in plastic containers, stop using plastic wrap, use glass or metal food dishes and utensils, and don’t buy disposable plastic bottles.
Look for BPA-free labels if you purchase plastic bottles or canned goods, but keep in mind that BPA is not the only toxin found in plastic.
In fact, some of the “analog” chemicals used to replace BPA are highly suspect themselves – a pair of recent studies indicate that BPA substitutes “affect cells and animals in much the same ways.”
Pascal Coumailleau of INSERM’s Research Institute for Environmental and Occupational Health and the University of Rennes in France and colleagues measured the effects of four bisphenols on the brains of zebrafish.
Exposing the animals to higher concentrations of these chemicals than humans would typically encounter, the team found that three of four BPA analogs—BPS, BPF, and BPAF—are estrogenic, causing an upregulation in the brain of the enzyme aromatase, which converts androgens—such as testosterone—to estrogens. Overall, these chemicals are similar to BPA in their effects….
Clearly, it’s best to avoid using plastic products as much as possible, even those labeled BPA-free. It may be virtually impossible to completely eliminate plastics from your life, but, armed with an awareness of the dangers, you can take action to minimize exposure to its toxic effects.
August 8, 2016
DESCRIPTION: 90% of our exposure to the hormone-disrupting chemical bisphenol A comes from certain components of our diet.
June 21, 2016
The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), which took effect in 1976, allows high-production volume chemicals to be launched without their chemical identity or toxicity information being disclosed.
It also makes it very difficult for the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take regulatory action against dangerous chemicals. For starters, the act only gives the EPA 90 days to determine if a new chemical poses an unreasonable risk prior to it entering the market.
The EPA states they typically don’t get the toxicity data in time to make such determinations, and as such, the EPA has only regulated five chemicals and requested testing for 200 since 1976. There are about 64,000 chemicals in use right now that are not regulated or tested for environmental repercussions.1
An overhaul of the TSCA is desperately needed and has been for decades, making this month’s Senate approval of an update a monumental occasion. Last month, the House approved the update to the TSCA, and it will now be signed into law.
There are some problems with the update, however — especially it’s timeline. As Bloomberg reported:2
“By the time EPA finishes work on the chemicals it has prioritized, the children of today’s children will have been exposed to them — probably for years.”
TSCA Update: Safety Tests Can Take up to 7 Years Per Chemical
There’s no doubt that the EPA should be testing more chemicals for safety, but the TSCA update doesn’t go far enough to protect Americans.
On the bright side, the new agreement would give the EPA authority to require companies to provide safety data for untested chemicals and also prevent chemicals from coming to market if they haven’t been tested for safety.
It also removes the 90-day limit for the EPA to determine chemical risks and, at least on the surface, eliminates a requirement that chemical regulations had to take into account the cost of compliance. Other notable improvements include:3
The EPA has already identified 90 chemicals as high priority, and such chemicals are supposed to take precedence.
However, the bill’s language was created after close work with the American Chemistry Council in order to ensure it would “win the support of industry.”4 As such, while the bill requires the EPA to begin conducting safety tests on roughly 64,000 chemicals, they only have to test 20 chemicals at a time.
Further, each chemical has a seven-year deadline, such that it will be a very long time before potentially toxic chemicals stop being used. As Bloomberg reported:5
“An analysis by the Environmental Working Group (EWG), which has criticized the TSCA rewrite as too weak, estimates that EPA needs 28 years to complete risk evaluations on the 90 chemicals in its work plan, 30 years to finalize related regulations on those chemicals, and 35 years to implement the resulting rules.”
States May Lose Ability to Restrict Toxic Chemicals
Congress caved in to industry and allowed a single regulatory system to oversee the industry, and also allowed companies the right to seek a federal waiver from the rules for certain chemicals.
Under the new agreement, states may lose their power to regulate chemicals they deem toxic. In return, language was inserted to allow states to restrict a chemical’s use only if the federal risk review takes more than 3 ½ years. As The Washington Post reported:6
“The EWG’s Scott Faber, the organization’s vice president for government affairs, said the EWG walked away from the bill because it represents ‘only a slight improvement’ on ‘the worst environmental law in the books.'”
Other Glaring Problems With the Chemical Bill Update
The EWG pointed out several other notable failures in the new legislation:
“States have been the only cops on the chemical safety beat, regulating scores of chemicals and driving marketplace innovation. Any legislation that claims to be better than current law would permit state action until an EPA rule is final.”
“To make TSCA better than the status quo, Congress should provide enough funding to review the most dangerous chemicals in a generation — not a century … The compromise only provides about half of what’s needed.”
The EWG noted that the bill contains “poison pill provisions that could keep the EPA tied in legal knots” and “negotiators should have at least removed vague requirements that rules be ‘cost-effective.'”
“Since the compromise allows the industry to dictate up to half of the chemicals EPA will assess for safety, you can bet a lot of their favorite chemicals will soon be bearing this stamp of approval.”
Many Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals Are Unsafe at Any Level
The European Commission is in the process of creating regulations for endocrine-disrupting chemicals. Endocrine disruptors are chemicals known to interfere with development and reproduction, and they may cause serious neurological and immune system effects.
The disruptions occur because such chemicals mimic hormones in your body, including the female sex hormone estrogen, the male sex hormone androgen, and thyroid hormones.
Endocrine-disrupting chemicals may block hormonal signals in your body, or interfere with the way the hormones or receptors are made or controlled.9 Your normal hormone levels may be altered, or the chemicals may change the way such hormones travel through your body.
They’ve been implicated in a host of diseases from cancer and infertility to obesity and diabetes — and they’re found in countless consumer items such as cosmetics, plastics and pesticides.
In 2009, the European Parliament declared that endocrine-disrupting chemicals would not be allowed on the market, and they enlisted the European Commission to determine criteria to identify these chemicals.
The chemical industries then called for an “impact assessment” to be released before the criteria could be released. Environmental Health News explained the repercussions:10
“National health authorities, industry and NGOs are thus in suspended animation awaiting a decision on these criteria for identification — a regulatory tool that will then enable restrictions or, more radically, prohibitions on the use of certain endocrine disruptors.
Today, seven years later, these criteria still do not exist. This impact assessment, with its highly confidential conclusions (as secret as the location of the fountain of youth), is largely responsible for this delay. It was not originally part of the plan, but industry called for it as a way to weaken the regulation.
[This year] Sweden curtly reminded the Commission that the Court ‘prohibits the use of economic considerations to define criteria.’ So what is the nature of the ‘economic considerations’ contained in the pages of the impact study under lock and key?
In addition to the impact on the industry, will they take into account the cost of diseases related to exposure to endocrine disruptors in Europe, which was estimated by independent studies to be at between 157 billion and 288 billion euros per year?”
For Endocrine Disruptors, Low Doses May Be More Toxic
It’s unknown whether the European Commission or the EPA will take into account the fact that sometimes, low doses of chemicals have the potential for great harm.
Many studies assume a linear dose-response relationship for the chemical and any given effect. That is, they assume that if a chemical causes organ damage at 200 parts per million (ppm), it will cause greater damage at higher exposures and less damage at lower levels.
This is a dangerous assumption, because for many toxins, including some endocrine-disrupting chemicals, harm is exerted even at very small doses. Patricia Hunt, Ph.D., a geneticist at Washington State University, explained that endocrine disruptors like bisphenol A (BPA), which act like hormones, “don’t play by the rules.”
Even low-level exposure — levels to which people are currently being exposed — may be enough to damage developing eggs and sperm, for instance. In one of Hunt’s studies, researchers found disruptions to egg development after rhesus monkeys, which have human-like reproductive systems, were exposed to either single, daily doses of BPA or low-level continuous doses.11
Your Body Is Not a Toxin Dumping Ground
It’s virtually impossible to avoid all of the toxic chemicals in your environment, but that doesn’t mean you have to sit silently by while corporations use your home, your water, your air and your body as a convenient toxin dumping ground. Until change occurs on a global scale, you can significantly limit your exposure by keeping a number of key principles in mind.
April 10, 2016
These are some of the best links of the week. If you read nothing else, read these.
Why Vaxxed Was Shot Down At Tribeca – Up Close & Personal
A no BS view into why the Documentary Vaxxed was taken down.
Campbell To Remove BPA Chemical From Canned Foods By 2017
New Study – Is The Great Sphinx Of Giza Over 800,000 Years Old?
A megalithic-sized wrench is thrown into conventional history regarding ancient civilizations, the pyramids, and more with a new study released.
Costco Gets Creative To Meet Shoppers’ Huge Appetite For Organics
Do Memes Exist? Or Are They Fictions?
A rather poignant analysis into Memes.
Protect Yourself Against Those Running The World’s Economy For Your ‘Benefit’
The Boomer Retirement Meme Is A Big Lie
This is truly a must-read.
April 6, 2016
If you are a parent, there are two links related to education that you are implored to read. Its quite concerning given the direction that education seems to be heading into.
James Corbett from the CorbetReport does an outstanding job at sifting through media propaganda regarding the Panama Paper. Definitely worth a listen.
If you’re interested in the nature of how reality/consciousness works, listening the work of Tom Campbell will be well worth your time.
Intriguingly, Costco has undertaken a new bold move due to the growing organic food demand. It should set the standard for years to come.
Hope everyone is doing well. Be safe.
Australian Educator: Computers In The Classroom A Scandalous Waste
Physicist & Consciousness Research Tom Campbell Discusses The Nature Of Reality [Part 3]
[Source: Tom Campbell]
Campbell To Remove BPA Chemical From Canned Foods By 2017
Costco Gets Creative To Meet Shoppers’ Huge Appetite For Organics
Can’t help but think that what happened with Chipotle regarding fast food issues could happen with Costco for such a bold move. Still, really big props for doing what’s right.
Protect Yourself Against Those Running The World’s Economy For Your ‘Benefit’
A true gander into how the world economy really works, and what to do about it.
JFK & The United Putsch Of America – A Conversation With Dr. Joseph P. Farrell
What I Learned About The Panama Papers
A must listen.
American Food Giant Del Monte Now Committed To BPA-Free, GMO-Free Products
April 5, 2016
A newly-released analysis shows just how prevalent Bisphenol A (BPA), a chemical often used in plastic products and food can linings, is in the food industry. Though while the figures are scary, the information has sparked a great deal of positive changes in the food industry, such as Campbell’s move to remove BPA in its canned goods by 2017.
Bisphenol A (BPA was officially banned in baby bottles and sippy cups in 2012, but it is still widely used in canned foods to line the cans, and is also used to make reusable plastic food containers, and sports water bottles.
The chemical has been shown to increase the risk for diabetes, heart disease, infertility, and many other health problems. It has been linked to breast cancer in well over 130 studies. In addition, BPA is associated with brain damage; hormonal problems; and development issues in fetuses, infants, and young children. 
So it’s clear why we want to find safe replacements for the chemical and avoid BPA as individuals.
If you’ve heard the rumor that microwaving plastic food containers can leech chemicals into your food, it’s not a conspiracy theory or pure hype. Heating the containers does cause BPA to enter your food. BPA is also the reason why you should avoid bottled water, and if you do chug a bottle, you should recycle it and never reuse it.