Children’s consumption of artificial sweeteners has officially hit a 200% increase

Image: Children’s consumption of artificial sweeteners has officially hit a 200% increase
Source: NaturalNews.com
Vicki Batts
February 25, 2017

Artificial sweeteners are contentious ingredients that have been the subject of controversy for quite some time. It seems as if since the day they were introduced into the marketplace, their safety has been questioned. In spite of overwhelming concern, sugar substitutes have carved their very own niche in our society and have become a staple in many homes.

Unsurprisingly, an increasing number of adults and children are consuming artificial sweeteners. These non-nutritive substitutes are marketed as low-calorie, and few are able to resist the chance to have the cake and eat it too. However, the health consequences of these nefarious chemicals still remains something of an unknown.

Currently, several artificial sweeteners have been approved for use by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). They are aspartame, sucralose, acesulfame-potassium, saccharin, neotame and advantame. Stevia is a natural low-calorie sweetener that is also FDA-approved. In spite of FDA approval, many people rightfully remain skeptical at the actual effects these chemicals may have on the human body.

The findings were recently published in the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. A staggering 200 percent increase in artificial sweetener consumption among children was observed, while a 54 percent increase was seen in adults. This drastic increase was seen between the years of 1999 and 2012.

In a press release, the study’s lead author Dr. Allison Sylvetsky, an assistant professor of exercise and nutrition sciences at the George Washington University Milken Institute School of Public Health, said,”The findings are important, especially for children, because some studies suggest a link between low-calorie sweeteners and obesity, diabetes and other health issues.”

This study offers some of the most recent stats on the consumption of low-calorie sweeteners in the form of food, beverages or packets for the United States’ population.

What is most concerning about the substantial increase in artificial sweetener usage among children is that the effects of long-term consumption on kids is entirely unknown. The Nutrition Source from Harvard’s School of Public Health recommends that children avoid consuming sugar substitutes for this very reason.

To conduct their study, the research team disseminated data from the National Health and Nutrition Evaluation Survey (NHANES) from 2009 to 2012, and compared their analysis to a previous study that used data from 1999-2008. In total, data from some 17,000 people was analyzed.

More specifically, the scientists reviewed survey results from two dietary interviews in which participants were asked to recall what they ate and drank during the previous 24-hour period. This, of course, comes with many inherent drawbacks. Regardless, their analysis revealed that 44 percent of adults and 20 percent of children were consuming sugar substitutes more than once a day.

Interestingly enough, the team noted that the amount of low-calorie sweetened foods and drinks consumed actually increased with body mass index. Previous studies have also indicated that consuming artificial sweeteners may actually increase your risk of diabetes, obesity and other health issues.

The team also discovered that some children as young as two-years old were reportedly consuming artificial sweeteners, either in food or drink. Given that the data collected was self-reported, it is very possible that the number of adults and children consuming artificial sweeteners could be much higher than indicated.

The study authors noted that some parents may not understand that labels indicating “light” or “no added sugar” could mean a product contains a low-calorie sweetener. It’s also possible that many people do not understand that those ingredients are not inherently healthier than natural sugar.

In their news release, the team advised parents to follow federal dietary guidelines, recommendations that include limiting consumption of added sugars.  Sylvetsky also suggested, “Drink water instead of soda. Sweeten a serving of plain yogurt with a little fruit.”

“And don’t forget an apple or another piece of fresh fruit is a great snack for both kids and adults.”

One thing is for certain: we, as a country, need to stop being so reliant on artificial sweeteners, and start eating more whole foods.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

FoxNews.com

ScienceMag.org

HSPH.Harvard.edu

Horrifying: Toxic chemical in Pepsi known to cause DNA breaking, fragmentation

Image: Horrifying: Toxic chemical in Pepsi known to cause DNA breaking, fragmentation
Source: NaturalNews.com
Vicki Batts
February 22, 2017

High-fructose corn syrup is’t the only ingredient found in sodas that consumers should be concerned about. Pepsi and other sodas contain a toxic byproduct known as 4-Methylimidazole, or 4-MEI for short, that may be increasing your cancer risks.

Pepsi has come under fire for violations of California’s Proposition 65 in relation to 4-MEI. The Center for Environmental Health even filed a complaint against the beverage giant in 2013 due to their violations. Pepsi has since paid the organization some $385,000 and provided them with updates on product compliance, and a settlement was reached in 2015. Following that settlement, Pepsi “agreed to require its caramel coloring suppliers to meet certain 4-MEI levels in products shipped for sale to the United States, to ensure that the carcinogen’s levels will not exceed 100 parts per billion.”

As of 2016, a newer settlement will now be requiring Pepsi to apply the same product standards nationwide.

What is 4-MEI and why should it be regulated?

4-MEI is an impurity that is created during the manufacturing of caramel colors III and IV. The FDA maintains that they have “no reason to believe” that 4-MEI is carcinogenic. The agency is reportedly re-evaluating the public’s exposure to 4-MEI to ensure manufacturers are using it safely but is not currently recommending dietary changes.

This is rather perplexing because studies conducted by the federal government clearly showed that long-term exposure to 4-MEI increased the incidence of lung cancer in both male and female mice. The federal government’s findings even prompted the state of California to add 4-MEI to their Proposition 65 list of carcinogens. While there are no federal limits yet for 4-MEI, the state of California requires products that contain more than 29 micrograms (mcg) to be labeled.

The California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment chose 29 micrograms as the “cut off point” because they concluded that amounts at that level or above pose a one in 100,000 risk of cancer — meaning that being exposed to that amount daily for a lifetime will result in no more than one excess cancer case per 100,000 people.

Urvashi Rangan, Ph.D., toxicologist and executive director of Consumer Reports’ Food Safety & Sustainability Center, believes that this amount is too high. “It’s possible to get more than 29 micrograms of 4-MEI in one can of some of the drinks we tested. And even if your choice of soft drink contains half that amount, many people have more than one can per day.”

Rangan explains that because colorants are deliberately added to foods, they should pose a negligible risk, which is defined as no more than one excess case of cancer per one million people. To meet that level, the experts at Consumer Reports say that sodas need to contain no more than 3mcg of 4-MEI per can.

Research on 4-MEI in soda

In 2014, Consumer Reports led investigative research on the amount of 4-MEI found in a number of different sodas. Between April and September of 2013, they tested 81 samples of different soft drinks from five separate manufacturers. In December 2013, another 29 samples were collected from the same five manufacturers. All of the samples were purchased in the California or New York metropolitan areas.

What they found was shocking: there was a tremendous amount of disparity and inconsistency among the samples. Most notably, samples of regular Pepsi from the New York area gathered during the first round of testing was revealed to contain an astronomical average of 174 mcg of 4-MEI. During the second round, samples from the same area averaged  32 mcg. The researchers also found that in general, New York samples boasted much higher levels of 4-MEI than their Californian counterparts.

The findings prompted Consumer Reports to petition the FDA for 4-MEI regulation and labeling. “Europe has labeling requirements and consumers in the United States should have the right to make an informed choice about what they are drinking and eating,” said  Dr. Rangan.

Following the Consumer Reports 2014 study, researchers from the Johns Hopkins Center For A Livable Future conducted their own research, which was published in 2015. Their research estimated average exposure to 4-MEI and modeled the potential cancer burden owed to the ingredient. What they found was that between 44 and 58 percent of people over the age of 6 consumed at least one can of soda per day.

Their data showed that current average 4-MEI exposure from soft drinks poses a cancer risk that exceeds the accepted negligible risk of one extra case of cancer per one million people.

Senior study author, Keeve Nachman — also the director of the Food Production and Public Health Program at the center, and an assistant professor at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health — stated that their research indicated soft drink consumers were being exposed to an avoidable and unnecessary cancer risk thanks to an ingredient that is added for purely aesthetic purposes.

“This unnecessary exposure poses a threat to public health and raises questions about the continued use of caramel coloring in soda,” Nachman said.

Read More At: NaturalNews.com

Sources:

TheHeartySoul.com

FDA.gov

FoodNavigator-USA.com

OEHHA.CA.gov

ConsumerReports.org

Journals.PLOS.org

Hub.JHU.edu

Is the Soda Industry Hiding Health Risks of Drinking Soda?

Source: NaturalSociety.com
Julie Fidler
December 7, 2016

When the soda industry funds studies into the health risks associated with consuming its products, soda always comes out looking rosy, according to researchers at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF).

A team of scientists from the university recently looked at studies published between 2001 and 2016 on the relation of soft drink consumption to obesity and diabetes. They found a 100% probability that a published study that finds no link between sugary beverage consumption and poorer metabolic health was underwritten by the beverage makers themselves, or was authored by researchers with financial ties to that industry. [1]

So the next time you see a study claiming that sugary drinks aren’t that bad for you, do a little digging and find out who funded the study. If the study wasn’t conducted by independent researchers, it’s probably trying to dupe you.

Source: Business Insider

Dean Schillinger, lead author of the report and chief of the UCSF division of general internal medicine at San Francisco General Hospital, said:

“If you look at just the independent studies, it becomes exceedingly clear that these drinks are associated with diabetes and obesity. Yet there are pockets of society that believe that they don’t cause these diseases because of the controversy that industry has created.” [2]

The authors wrote:

“This industry seems to be manipulating contemporary scientific processes to create controversy and advance their business interests at the expense of the public’s health.” [1]

Said Schillinger:

“If you were to poll the average American, you would find tremendous variation in the degree to which they understand and/or believe drinking five Mountain Dews a day can cause diabetes.” [3]

That’s the average amount consumed by teenagers in West Virginia, he noted.

Deceptive Dollars

Researchers looked at 60 experimental studies for their analysis and found that 26 of the articles – 43% – uncovered no link whatsoever between sugary soda consumption and either obesity or metabolic dysfunction. [1]

The remaining 34 articles, on the other hand – approximately 57%did reveal a link between the consumption of sugar-sweetened drinks and those health problems.

As you probably guessed, the 26 studies that showed no link between sugary drinks and health problems were carried out by researchers with financial ties to the beverage industry.

Repeat Performance

Wait; haven’t we seen this kind of disingenuous type of “science” before?

Well, pretty much everywhere.

The revelation that the beverage industry funds soda studies that frame their products in a positive light may be shocking, but it shouldn’t be surprising. When you write about this sort of thing for a living, biased research starts to become old news.

In September, I wrote about how the sugar industry fooled the public for 5 decades by hiring Harvard scientists to downplay the link between sugar consumption and heart disease and promote saturated fat as the cause, instead.

The Sugar Association, as it was called in the 1960s, was behind the market saturation of low-fat foods, which, unsurprisingly, required huge amounts of added sugar to even be edible.

In October, I wrote about how Coca-Cola and Pepsi fund 96 U.S. health groups, including some run by the government. Yes, even the American Diabetes Association took money from the nation’s top two soda companies.

And let’s not forget about the pharmaceutical industry. From 2006 to 2014, there was a 43% increase in clinical trials funded by drug companies. The federal government does not require drug companies to hire 3rd parties to test their products.

Those are just three examples of the dishonesty going on behind the backs of Americans each and every day.

But unlike the Sugar Association, most companies these days don’t go out and “buy” the results they want. Instead, they apply subtle pressure to the researchers they are funding. Sometimes that’s not even necessary. Sometimes all it takes to skew a researcher’s work in favor of a company is the back-of-the-mind knowledge of where the money is coming from.

New York University food researcher Marion Nestle said: “It’s way too simple to say that companies buy the results they want.” She added that:

“[T]here is something about funding that leads – almost certainly unconsciously and unwittingly – to skewing studies to get the desired results. This is not hard to do.” [1]

The beverage industry, of course, insists it has nothing but the best intentions. In a statement, the American Beverage Association (ABA) says that”

“Beverage companies are engaged in public health issues because we too want a strong, healthy America. We recognize that we have a role to play in reducing obesity, and we are taking voluntary actions to reduce calories and sugar from beverage consumption — working together as competitors and engaging with prominent public health groups.” [3]

The new review was published 31 October 2016 in the Annals of Internal Medicine.

Read More At: NaturalSociety.com

Sources:

[1] Los Angeles Times

[2] The New York Times

[3] HealthDay


Many Of These Conditions Can Be Linked To Gluten!

Source: iHealthTube.com
Dr. Bob DeMaria
July 26, 2016

Is gluten just the newest ‘thing’ in health or is there really something to it? Dr. Bob DeMaria, the Drugless Doctor, discusses the role gluten can play in the body and what kind of health challenges it could lead to. Do you have signs that gluten is hard on your body? How do you know? Dr. Bob discusses this as well. Find out if many of these conditions can be linked to gluten!

The 9 Most Popular Foods, Drinks & ‘Medicines’ That Cause Chronic Disease By Destroying Good Gut Bacteria

[Editor’s Note]

For those wishing to know more about this abstruse subject, please read:

Gut & Psychology Syndrome – Natural Treatment For Autism, Dyspraxia, ADD, Dyslexia, ADHD, Depression, Schizophrenia by Dr. Natasha Campbell-Mcbride

Gut bacteria
Source: NaturalNews.com
S.D. Wells
June 29, 2016

Would you drive up to a gas station and purposely put diesel fuel in your new car, knowing that it would break down, possibly within days, even though diesel is still “fuel?” If your garden was growing beautiful, organic vegetables, and you woke up one morning and saw hundreds of little bugs crawling on your produce, but they hadn’t eaten it yet, would you spray everything with toxic bug killer, try to rinse it off afterwards, and then still eat it and feed it to your kids?

In the first example, once your car burns up the regular gas and starts using the diesel, the engine will shut down. Plus, the longer the wrong fuel stays in your car’s system, the more damage it does to the engine, the fuel system and the injectors. In the second example, the toxic bug-killer is going to soak into most of the food, especially anything leafy or of the “dirty dozen,” which have porous outer coverings; therefore, washing them off does virtually no good.

Common sense tells us that in either case, the wrong kind of fuel, or worse, food soaked in poison, breaks down your “motor” and weakens your entire system. The human body is not very different to a car’s motor. Even though we have cleansing organs made to filter toxins, they can only do so much work, and when they get overloaded, they too work less efficiently, and eventually, break down and stop working altogether. Lines get clogged, like your digestive tract, and fuel injectors inject the wrong fuel, like your heart sending less blood and oxygen to your extremities, and the body simply stops “firing on all cylinders.”

Good gut bacteria (flora) should outnumber bad gut bacteria 85 percent to 15 percent

If you don’t know it already, genetically engineered or genetically modified (GM) food means that the seeds, stems, leaves and produce all contain bug-killing and weed-killing genes so that corporations can try to increase their profits. You cannot wash these pesticides off. These genes continue doing their “work” in your body, in your gut, in your organs, in your heart, in your brain and in your digestive tract. For example, the BT corn genes are designed to dissolve the rootworm beetle’s insides, so that when they eat corn, they either die or cannot reproduce. These bad genes, namely insecticides and herbicides, do not simply disappear or become inactive when humans consume them. These toxic, genetically modified genes dissolve humans’ good gut bacteria, diluting immunity in what becomes a highly acidic environment.

Did you know that each of us has roughly 4 pounds of bacteria in our gut? That’s why they call it a “gut bomb,” when you eat a meal chock full of pesticides, including most gluten, processed sugar and hydrogenated GM oils, and you feel awful for 10 to 20 minutes, or even longer. Your gut and your central nervous system are thrown for a loop, trying to find the pathogens and poisons, all while your immune system is severely compromised, making it more susceptible to colds, viruses, bacteria and other infections – ones you may already have, that then take hold of you.

That’s why doctors often tell patients they may feel a “little sick” or “weak” after a flu shot or vaccine – because you (or your children or babies) have been injected with some of the most lethal neurotoxins on earth, including mercury, formaldehyde and weakened versions of the viruses you most want to avoid. At this time, your body scrambles for nutrients, most likely emptying your reserves, just to fight off these foreign bacteria and GM-derived chemicals and pathogens. Not one MD on the planet will be honest and tell the patient that vaccines severely compromise immunity, sometimes for life (as with many autism cases). Did you know that some autism cases recede when good gut bacteria is replenished and sustained?

Continue Reading At: NaturalNews.com

Soda Off the Menu for Kids at Applebee’s, IHOP, and Others

image-applesbees-soda_735-350
Source: NaturalSociety.com
Anna Scanlon
April 16, 2016

Parents have it a little easier when dining out these days: Applebee’s has decided to remove soda from the children’s menu, with IHOP following suit. Children and parents can still request their favorite bubbly beverage, but it simply won’t appear on the menu. [1]

Tom Linafelt, of Dine Equity (which owns both companies) was quoted as saying, “While soft drinks are still available by request, we believe this is a small step in assisting parents when dining out, as parents are in the best position to determine the appropriate food and beverage choices for their children.”

IHOP and Applebee’s are following suit of other popular eateries, such as McDonald’s, Wendy’s, and Burger King who have also removed soda from their children’s menu. They hope the change will make it easier for parents to negotiate with children to pick healthier options if they are limited to what is available to them on the menu. [2]

Currently, 1 in 5 children are categorized as obese, and 1 in 3 are overweight. The Center for Disease Control reports that the number of obese adolescents has quadrupled in the past 30 years due to ever-increasing caloric meals and sedentary lifestyles. About 70% of obese children under the age of 18 are at risk for cardiovascular disease and even suffer from high blood pressure and high cholesterol. Obesity in childhood is linked to obesity in adulthood, as well as many different types of cancers.

Continue Reading At:  NaturalSociety.com

Top 20 Addictive Foods: Are You Hooked?

Source: GreenMedInfo.com
Margie King, Health Coach

Let food be thy medicine.  Just don’t let it be thy drug. 

Can’t resist a slice – or two or three – of pizza?  You may well be addicted.

Researchers from the Department of Psychology at the University of Michigan and the New York Obesity Research Center at the Mount Sinai – St. Luke’s Hospital in New York wanted to know what foods felt addictive to real people.[i]

They posited that highly processed foods may trigger an addictive response in some people that leads to unintended overeating.  And they observed that these foods share common traits with highly addictive drugs.

Like other drug problems, they say, “food addiction” is characterized by:

  1. Loss of control over consumption;
  2. Continued use despite negative consequences; and
  3. Inability to cut down despite the desire to do so.

And neuro-imaging studies show similar brain patterns in “food addicts” and drug addicts.  In particular both show increased activation of the reward regions of the brain in response to food cues – just like other addictions.

Although you may have your own suspicions, human studies haven’t confirmed which foods are most likely to trigger an addiction.  Animal studies suggest that highly processed foods like Oreo Double Stuf cookies, cheesecake, and icing set off binges.

To get a better handle on what foods are most likely to get the better of people, the researchers asked about 500 people to complete a Yale Food Addiction Scale (YFAS) survey to determine which of 35 foods were most associated with problem eating behaviors.  Problem behaviors included trouble cutting down on the food, or losing control over how much of the food was eaten, or feeling that you aren’t eating enough of the food.

The foods in the survey fit into four categories:

  1. Chocolate/French Fries: high in both fat and refined carbohydrates/sugar
  2. Cheese/Bacon: high in fat but not refined carbohydrates/sugar
  3. Pretzels/Soda: high in refined carbohydrates/sugar but not fat
  4. Broccoli/Chicken: low in both fat and refined carbohydrates/sugar

In general, the researchers found that processed foods high in fat and having a high glycemic load, were most frequently associated with addictive eating behaviors. The glycemic load measures how quickly a standard serving of a particular food will spike your blood sugar.

There was an interesting exception. The researchers found that men had more of a problem with some unprocessed foods (e.g., steak, nuts, cheese) than women did.

Here’s the list:

  1. Pizza
  2. Chocolate
  3. Chips
  4. Cookies
  5. Ice Cream
  6. French Fries
  7. Cheeseburger
  8. Soda
  9. Cake
  10. Cheese
  11. Bacon
  12. Fried Chicken
  13. Rolls (plain)
  14. Popcorn (buttered)
  15. Breakfast Cereal
  16. Gummy Candy
  17. Steak
  18. Muffins
  19. Nuts
  20. Eggs

Although some of the foods on the list are unprocessed, the researchers observed that processing tends to result in a higher concentration of addictive substances in a food with the addition of fat, carbs, and sugar. In other words, the dose of fat and sugar you get in cake or pizza is much higher than you would find in nature. And, they note, the combination of fat and sugar in a single food rarely occurs in nature.

Continue Reading At: GreenMedInfo.com