Watchman News

Research1 published in the American Heart Association journal Circulation: Arrhythmia and Electrophysiology found an association between drinking sweetened beverages and atrial fibrillation. Atrial fibrillation, also called AFib, is an abnormal and often rapid heartbeat that occurs when the upper chambers in the heart (atria) beat out of sync with the lower chambers (ventricles).2

It’s a common symptom in people with heart failure or heart disease and one of the most common arrhythmias (irregular heartbeats) that affects more than 2 million U.S. adults. AFib can sometimes go away on its own, but it also can become more frequent with longer-lasting episodes that can lead to serious complications like stroke and heart failure.

The symptoms of AFib can look like other health problems, which is why it is crucial to understand the condition and receive the correct diagnosis. For example, the declining ability to pump blood to the lungs and elsewhere in the body can lead to lightheadedness, dizziness and fatigue, which are symptoms that can be attributed to several other health conditions.

AFib may make you feel like your heart has skipped a beat or is fluttering or pounding. Your risk increases with age, but lifestyle and dietary factors can also increase your risk, which is exactly what researchers found when they sought to determine if there was an association between drinking sweetened beverages and AFib.

Diet and Regular Soda Raises Heart Risk

The researchers acknowledged3 that a past association between sweetened beverages and cardiometabolic disease has been reported, but an association with atrial fibrillation was unclear. The study enrolled 201,856 participants who did not have AFib at the time the study began, had completed a 24-hour diet questionnaire and had genetic data available.

Research has found a genetic component to AFib. Genome-wide studies identified 140 genetic loci that are linked to the development of AFib.4 However, while genetic implications put an individual at higher risk of developing the condition, it is not a guarantee that the condition will develop.

There was a median follow-up of 9.9 years, during which 9,362 incidents of AFib were documented.5 The researchers evaluated the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB), artificially sweetened beverages (ASB) and pure fruit juice. The data showed that people who drank greater than 2 liters per week of sugar-sweetened or artificially sweetened beverages increased their risk of AFib, with those who drank artificially sweetened beverages experiencing a higher risk.

The highest risk was observed in people who had a genetic risk and consumed more than 2 liters of artificially sweetened beverages, while the lowest risk was observed in those who had a low genetic risk and consumed less than 1 liter of pure juice per week.

The association between sweetened beverages and AFib persisted even after adjustments were made for genetic susceptibility to the heart condition. “This study does not demonstrate that consumption of SSB and ASB alters AF risk but rather that the consumption of SSB and ASB may predict AF risk beyond traditional risk factors,” the researchers concluded.6

Many people reach for an artificially sweetened beverage advertising zero calories and sugar because they know other sodas and juices contain an alarming amount of both. Drinking a beverage advertised with zero calories and sugar can feel like you’re making better choices but as these researchers have demonstrated, artificial sweeteners may cause more harm than good.

While the data from the current study demonstrates a higher risk of consuming ASB, a press release from the American Heart Association about the study also noted that people who drink 2 liters of SSB each week increase their risk of AFib by 10%.7 Kris-Etherton, an emeritus professor of nutritional sciences at Penn State University, commented on the results of the study from China, saying:

“This is the first study to report an association between no- and low-calorie sweeteners and also sugar-sweetened beverages and increased risk of atrial fibrillation.

While there is robust evidence about the adverse effects of sugar-sweetened beverages and cardiovascular disease risk, there is less evidence about adverse health consequences of artificial sweeteners. In the meantime, water is the best choice, and, based on this study, no- and low-calorie sweetened beverages should be limited or avoided.”

Sweeteners in Diet Soda Can Destroy Your Gut Microbiome

While refined sugar feeds harmful, disease-causing bacteria in the gut,8 artificial sweeteners cause DNA damage in, and interfere with, the normal activity in gut bacteria. The artificial sweeteners reviewed in one study9 included aspartame, sucralose, saccharin, neotame, advantame and acesulfame potassium-k.

The animal study was published in the journal Molecules, and as noted by Business Insider,10 all the sweeteners “had a toxic, stressing effect, making it difficult for gut microbes to grow and reproduce.” According to the researchers, this effect can in turn affect your body’s ability to process carbohydrates.

While, overall, all six artificial sweeteners were found to have toxic effects on gut bacteria, there were individual differences in the type and amount of damage they produced.

Saccharin caused the greatest, most widespread damage, exhibiting both cytotoxic and genotoxic effects, meaning it is toxic to cells and damages genetic information in the cell (which can cause mutations).
Neotame was found to cause metabolic disruption in mice, and raised concentrations of several fatty acids, lipids and cholesterol. Several gut genes were also decreased by this sweetener.
Aspartame and acesulfame potassium-k — The latter of which is commonly found in sports supplements — were both found to cause DNA damage.

In a carefully crafted message, Ariel Kushmaro, Ph.D., professor of microbial biotechnology at Ben-Gurion University and lead author, told Business Insider, “We are not claiming that it’s toxic to human beings. We’re claiming that it might be toxic to the gut bacteria, and by that, will influence us.”11

These data support previous research published in 2013,12 which concluded that sucralose reduces the number, and alters the composition of, gut bacteria. Animal research13 in 2008 showed sucralose could kill gut bacteria and appeared to target beneficial microorganisms to a greater extent than pathologic bacteria.

This is crucial since anytime you destroy healthy intestinal bacteria, it opens the door to increased growth of unfriendly microorganisms that can cause health problems. A 2021 study14 found three of the six commonly used artificial sweeteners impair your gut bacteria’s ability to communicate and the “effect of these artificial sweeteners on numerous molecular events that are at the core of intestinal microbial function, and by extension on the host metabolism.”

Artificial Sweetener Tricks Your Body into Storing Fat

Since the 1960s, researchers have known that your body metabolizes different types of carbohydrates in different ways, which causes hormonal and physiological responses that influence fat accumulation and metabolism.15

While the sugar industry wants you to believe that all calories are the same, you can’t undo the effects of soda by cutting back on calories in your diet since refined sugar itself wreaks havoc on your gut microbiome and your metabolism.

In late 2021,16 research showed women who consumed foods with artificial sweeteners felt hungrier and ate more food than those who simply drank a sugar-sweetened beverage. Contrary to industry claims, research shows that artificial sweeteners stimulate your appetite, increase cravings for carbohydrates and produce a variety of metabolic dysfunctions that promote fat storage and weight gain.

For a list of research supporting dysfunction in fat storage and weight gain associated with consuming artificial sweeteners see “Reconfirmed: Artificial Sweeteners Make You Sick.” There is also a mounting number of studies that have shown artificial sweeteners raise your risk of obesity and Type 2 diabetes, perhaps to an even greater degree than sugar.

One animal study17 presented at the annual Experimental Biology conference in San Diego confirmed these results while exploring how different sweeteners affect the way food is used and stored, including the effect on vascular function. The researchers concluded:18

“Overall, results of this study suggest that exposure to high glucose and artificial sweetener administration lead to unique mechanisms of vascular impairment and homeostatic alterations that may be important during the onset and progression of diabetes and obesity.”

Diet Soda Linked to Depression, Gout and More

A damaged gut microbiome, fat storage and an increased risk of obesity may help explain how diet soda is linked to so many health conditions. A 2024 study19 showed sugar-sweetened beverages (SSB) and artificially sweetened beverages (ASB) increase your risk of cardiovascular disease as an adult regardless of your activity level.

The study evaluated 13,269 cardiovascular disease events and compared the results to those who never or rarely consume sweetened beverages against those who consumed two or more each day. They found a dose-dependent response, concluding:20

“Higher SSB intake was associated with CVD risk regardless of physical activity levels. These results support current recommendations to limit the intake of SSBs even for physically active individuals.”

Data have also linked sugar and artificially sweetened beverages with an increased risk of depression. Research21 showed that drinking four servings of soda a day increased the risk of depression by 30% compared to those who did not drink sweetened beverages of any kind.

People who drank primarily diet soda had a 31% increased risk of suffering depression, regular soda was associated with a 22% increased risk and those who drank diet fruit drinks had a 51% higher risk of depression. Regular fruit drinks were associated with a more modest 8% increased risk.

For a discussion of the potential pathways sugar impacts mental health, see “How Dietary Intervention Lifts Depression.” Soda and other SSBs are a leading source of added sugar, with 6 in 10 youths and 5 in 10 adults drinking at least one beverage on any given day.22 Even the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention states:23

“Frequently drinking sugar-sweetened beverages is associated with weight gain/obesity, Type 2 diabetes, heart disease, kidney diseases, nonalcoholic liver disease, tooth decay and cavities and gout, a type of arthritis.”

However, the CDC only suggests that “limiting the amount of SSB intake can help individuals maintain a healthy weight and have a healthy diet,” stopping far short of advising Americans to ditch these unhealthy drinks to avoid chronic disease.

Aspartame Has Been Linked to Many Health Problems

Aspartame is another powerful artificial sweetener that has been linked to a significant number of health conditions. A 2022 animal study24 found that at doses equivalent to 15% below the FDA-recommended maximum daily intake for humans, aspartame produced anxiety-type behavior and changes in genetic expression in areas of the brain that regulate anxiety and fear.

These changes in the amygdala occurred in the aspartame-exposed animals and in up to two generations that descended from aspartame-exposed males. The artificial sweetener is found in a long list of processed foods and beverages. In 2023, the World Health Organization’s International Research Agency on Cancer announced that aspartame is a possible carcinogen.25

Try Swapping Your Soda for Clean Water or Hibiscus Tea

If you’re drinking artificially sweetened, zero-calorie beverages it’s important to understand that they do not help if you’re overweight or have insulin resistance. Instead, they probably will make matters worse. I firmly believe ditching soda and other sweetened beverages is one of the most important steps you can take to improve your weight and your overall health.

Remember, pure water is zero calories, and you can easily add flavor by squeezing in fresh lemon or lime or a piece of frozen fruit. If you’re looking for something that’s more than water, consider swapping it for tea instead.

Drinking tea is flavorful and adds a healthy boost to your diet. Hibiscus tea has a pleasantly sharp flavor that’s like the tartness of cranberries and you can find it in liquid extract form, which allows you to add it to your glass of water. Hibiscus tea is rich in polyphenols and has other health benefits including protecting your liver and preventing metabolic syndrome.26

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published November 25, 2017.

I am so pleased to post this video and I hope it gives you as much joy as it did me when I first viewed it on 60 Minutes. It is beyond extraordinary to have a glimpse into someone as exceptionally talented as 12-year-old Alma. My only regret is that there is no way to post this without exposing you to a minutelong drug commercial, which I’m sure you realize I don’t endorse. For some of you, it may be the only time you see these commercials so let them entertain you.

Most of us are gifted with some degree of natural talent — something we do better, or with greater ease, than the average person. And then, there’s the true prodigies; people with seemingly unnatural talent. Their gift is so profound, and comes from God-only-knows-where. Alma Deutscher, from Basingstoke, England, is a perfect example of the latter.1

There are a number of musical prodigies out there, but Alma has most of them beat. She was able to name notes on the piano at age 2 and began playing piano and violin at the tender age of 3. Within a year of tutoring, she was playing Handel sonatas on the violin.

She’s now considered a virtuoso of both instruments. By the age of 4, she’d already begun composing her own melodies, and by 6 she’d written her first piano sonata. This was followed by a violin and orchestra concerto at 9.

In December last year, her full-length opera, “Cinderella,” premiered at the Casino Baumgarten Theatre in Vienna,2 the city of music, performed by the Viennese opera group, Oh!pera — an unattainable dream even for many adult composers who’ve spent a lifetime perfecting their craft. Alma, who wrote the score for every single instrument, and the lyrics, was 11 years old. The 2.5-hour long opera, with a musical score running 237 pages, received standing ovations.

Cinderella Reinvented by 11-Year-Old Prodigy

Many were also wowed by her creative reinvention of the classical tale of Cinderella. Rather than being matched with her true love by the way of a lost glass slipper of a particularly minute size — an idea Alma found to be “quite silly” — Cinderella is a talented composer and the pining prince is a poet. The tale is set in an opera production company run by the evil stepmother. The two stepsisters are divas with little talent and much vile.

Cinderella, with a natural talent for composing, is not allowed to perform. Meanwhile, the prince writes a love poem that ends up in Cinderella’s hands. Not knowing the identity of the poet, she falls in love with the words and sets them to music. After having her composition stolen by her evil stepsisters, who do their best to sing it at the ball, Cinderella finally gets her chance to perform for the prince.

The prince is enthralled by the enchanting melody, and sets out to discover who wrote the music to his poem. As in the classical story, he travels the land searching for his soulmate, but instead of looking for the foot that fits into the slipper, he sings a portion of the melody, knowing only the true composer can properly finish the song.

So, the prince falls in love with Cinderella not because of her physical beauty or tiny feet, but because of her talent, and because “he understands her,” to use Alma’s explanation. In other words, he recognizes his soulmate as a talented equal.

“I didn’t want Cinderella just to be pretty. I wanted her to have her own mind and her own spirit. And to be a little bit like me. So, I decided that she would be a composer,” Alma explains.3 “Cinderella” made its American sold-out debut December 16 at the Opera San Jose.4

Where Does the Music Come From?

Most interviews with Alma include the same question: Where does her music come from? In a “60 Minutes” interview, Scott Pelley received the following answer:5

“I don’t really know, but it’s really very normal to me to … walk around and having melodies popping into my head. It’s the most normal thing in the world. For me, it’s strange to walk around and not to have melodies popping into my head. So, if I was interviewing you, I would say, ‘Well, tell me Scott, how does it feel not having melodies popping into your head?'”

Oftentimes, the music comes when she’s most relaxed, either playing outdoors with her younger sister, or skipping rope. Her father, Guy Deutscher, a linguistics professor and amateur musician, taught her to read musical notes, but questions the influence of his role in her immense ability to create music, including scores for instruments she does not play.

He tells Pelley, “I thought it was me [that taught her to read music]. I hardly had to say [any]thing — and, you know, her piano teacher once said ‘it’s a bit difficult with Alma; it’s difficult to teach her because one always has the sense she’d ‘been there’ before.'” Alma also says she has “lots of composers” inside her mind, in a special “country” she created in her imagination.

These imaginary friends provide her with the emotional juices her tender youth lacks. Each one has their own emotional style of composing. One of them, Antonin Yellowsink, helped her compose a “dark and dramatic” violin concerto. “[S]ometimes when I’m stuck with something, when I’m composing, I go to them and ask them for advice. And quite often, they come up with very interesting things,” she says.

Would Rather Be Original Alma Than Second Mozart

Many compare Alma to Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart (1756-1791),6 one of the few childhood prodigies that can even compare to Alma’s talent. However, while flattered, Alma insists she would rather “prefer to be the first Alma than the second Mozart.” That said, she has a great affinity for the famed composer and musician, and “would have loved” to have him as a teacher.

The question is whether Alma wouldn’t have ended up teaching Mozart a thing or two. In a concerto in Israel, Alma performed one of Mozart’s piano concertos with a cadenza — a musical interlude where the orchestra goes silent, allowing the soloist to perform his or her own music. But in this case, Alma didn’t just perform Mozart’s solo. She created her own.

“It’s something that I composed because, you see, it’s a very early concerto of Mozart and the cadenza was very simple. It didn’t go to any different keys,” she tells Pelley. “And I composed quite a long one going to lots and lots of different keys doing lots of things in Mozart’s motifs,” Alma says. “So, you improved the cadenza of Mozart?” Pelley asks, to which she replies, “Well, yes.”

Robert Gjerdingen, a professor of music at Northwestern in Chicago who has acted as a “consultant to Alma’s education,” had the following to say about his star protégé:

“It’s kind of a comet that goes by and everybody looks up and just goes, ‘Wow.’ I sent her some assignments when she was six, seven, where I expected her to crash and burn, because they were very difficult.

It came back, it was like listening to a mid-18th century composer. She was a native speaker … It’s her first language — she speaks the Mozart-style. She speaks the style of Mendelssohn … She’s batting in the big leagues. And if you win the pennant, there’s immortality.”

The Many Benefits of Music

As for why she composes, Alma says her inspiration is to “make the world a better place,” and she believes beautiful music can do that. She is undoubtedly correct. Music is a form of emotional communication, an emotional protolanguage of sorts, and like emotions it can have a tremendous influence on psychological and even physical health. For example, music has been found to:

Help you exercise harder, while making it feel easier

Help Alzheimer’s patients reconnect with people around them, remember past life events and reduce agitation associated with dementia

Allow patients with Parkinson’s disease move more freely.7 The music appears to provide an external rhythm that bypasses the malfunctioning signals in the brain

Improve your mood; calm nerves; reduce stress and/or invigorate and energize

Facilitate connection and unification between people. Despite individual differences in musical preferences, classical music has been shown to elicit a very consistent pattern of brain activity in virtually all listeners. Areas activated include those involved in movement, planning, memory and attention. This brain activation creates a sort of unifying force that synchronizes and unifies people together8

What Happens in Your Brain When You Hear Music?

When you listen to music, much more is happening in your body than simple auditory processing. Research shows that music triggers activity in the nucleus accumbens, a part of your brain that releases the feel-good chemical dopamine and is involved in forming expectations. At the same time, the amygdala, which is involved in processing emotion, and the prefrontal cortex, which makes possible abstract decision-making, are also activated.9

Based on the brain activity in certain regions, especially the nucleus accumbens, captured by an fMRI imager while participants listened to music, the researchers could predict how much money the listeners were willing to spend on previously unheard music. As you might suspect, songs that triggered activity in the emotional and intellectual areas of the brain demanded a higher price.

Interestingly, the study’s lead author noted that your brain learns how to predict how different pieces of music will unfold using pattern recognition and prediction, skills that may have been key to our evolutionary progress. As reported by Time:10

“These predictions are culture-dependent and based on experience: someone raised on rock or Western classical music won’t be able to predict the course of an Indian raga, for example, and vice versa. But if a piece develops in a way that’s both slightly novel and still in line with our brain’s prediction, we tend to like it a lot. And that, says [lead researcher] Salimpoor, ‘is because we’ve made a kind of intellectual conquest.’

Music may, in other words, tap into a brain mechanism that was key to our evolutionary progress. The ability to recognize patterns and generalize from experience, to predict what’s likely to happen in the future — in short, the ability to imagine — is something humans do far better than any other animals. It’s what allowed us (aided by the far less glamorous opposable thumb) to take over the world.”

Alma’s future passion project is to write a book, turn it into a film and write the musical score. I hope you’ll take the time to view the featured 25-minute documentary about Alma Deutscher, and revel in her musical talent. You will not regret it. Then, if you’re eager for more, you can listen to some of the “Cinderella” performances in the 1.5-hour-long recording above. May she inspire you to help make the world a better place, every day.

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published May 21, 2019.

I’ve written about the collusion between industry and the U.S. federal regulatory agencies on many occasions throughout the years, and how industry-funded research simply tends to promote and support the industry agenda rather than shed truthful light on the benefits or risks of any given product.

In recent years, the hidden influence of The Coca-Cola Company over health and sugar science has been highlighted several times and, according to recent findings, it appears the company has not changed its secretive and deceptive ways, despite public assurances of transparency.

Documents obtained via Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests reveal Coca-Cola’s research agreements with certain universities give the company questionable rights over the research process, while other FOIA documents show Coca-Cola has an unreasonable amount of influence over the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

Truly, having a public health organization that protects and supports industry rather than looking out for public health is worse than having no public health protection agency at all, and making health decisions on Coca-Cola funded research is bound to lead public health in the wrong direction — which is exactly what’s been happening.

Coke’s Research Agreements Allow It to Bury Unfavorable Findings

Big Soda’s core message has been that the obesity epidemic is driven by a lack of activity, as opposed to indulging in sugar-based foods and beverages, despite overwhelming scientific evidence you will never be able to out-exercise your diet.

Recent FOIA documents obtained by the nonprofit consumer and public health watchdog organization U.S. Right to Know (USRTK) offer an explanation as to how the company can influence research to support and promulgate this false idea.1,2,3,4 As noted in a commentary in The British Medical Journal:5

“The research team, from the University of Cambridge, London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, the University of Bocconi, and non-profit group US Right to Know, looked at five research agreements made with four universities: Louisiana State University, University of South Carolina, University of Toronto, and the University of Washington.

They found that, although the contracts show that Coca-Cola does not have day-to-day control of the research, it has various rights throughout the process … This is despite Coca-Cola’s website stating that ‘in no event does The Coca-Cola Company have the right to prevent the publication of research results’ …

The authors are now calling on corporate funders to publish lists of terminated studies and on scientists to publish industry agreements to show that their findings are free from influence.”

Just how much influence do the agreements grant Coca-Cola? According to the featured paper,6 published in the Journal of Public Health Policy, the research contract provisions give Coke:7

The right to review and comment on studies before publication

Intellectual property rights connected to the research8,9

Control over study data

Control over disclosure of results

Control over acknowledgment of Coca-Cola funding, meaning the company could prevent the researchers from disclosing that their funding came from Coke

Power to terminate studies early for any reason, including no reason

Coke-Funded Science Cannot Be Trusted

In a USRTK press release, Gary Ruskin, co-director of USRTK and co-author of the paper, commented:10

“These contracts suggest that Coke wanted the power to bury research it funded that might detract from its image or profits. With the power to trumpet positive findings and bury negative ones, Coke-funded ‘science’ seems somewhat less than science and more like an exercise in public relations.”

Marion Nestle, Ph.D.,11 professor of nutrition and public health at New York University and author of “Soda Politics,” in which she dissects the many ways in which funding from the food and beverage industry influences scientific results, calls the USRTK findings “jaw-dropping.” She told Inverse:12

“It demonstrates what we have all long suspected. Companies that sponsor research make sure that they get what they pay for. The study documents the involvement of Coca-Cola in many aspects of developing research projects.

It is no surprise that its funded research typically comes out with results that are useful for Coca-Cola marketing purposes. Industry funded research is marketing research, not scientific research.”

High Time for All Branches of Science to Mandate Preregistration of Studies

Since September 27, 2007, Section 801 of the Food and Drug Administration Amendments Act requires any clinical trial being undertaken to be registered, and summary results must be submitted to ClinicalTrials.gov13 regardless of the outcome of the study. The reason for this is to help prevent publication bias where only positive findings see the light of day.

Unfortunately, this law only applies to certain clinical trials of drugs, biological products and medical devices,14 and while researchers in many other fields have taken to preregistering their studies,15,16 which means they must also publish their results, it’s not a blanket requirement across the board.

As of yet, preregistration of trials is not a requirement for nutritional research, although there’s a movement toward it. As noted in the 2015 editorial “Goals in Nutrition Science 2015-2020,” published in Frontiers of Nutrition:17

“[T]here is a general movement in science for ‘Transparency and Openness Promotion,’ formalized in ‘The TOP Guidelines.’18 The guidelines recognize eight standards: citation, data transparency, analytic methods (code) transparency, research materials transparency, design and analysis transparency, preregistration of studies, preregistration of analysis plans, and replication.

These standards aim to improve the communication of science, allowing improved understanding and replicability of results. Because the TOP Guidelines are being adopted across fields of science, the field of nutrition will not have to act in isolation to improve its scientific practices. Instead, we can build on and work with the minds and resources coming from a spectrum of scientific inquiry.”

Another paper,19 “Best Practices in Nutrition Science to Earn and Keep the Public’s Trust,” published in January 2019, also highlights the TOP (transparency and openness promotion) guidelines that call for preregistration of studies.

On a quick side note, the first analysis20 of preregistered studies reveals there’s been a sharp increase in null findings, suggesting the practice is working as intended.

As reported by Nature, “Studies that preregister their protocols publish more negative findings that don’t support their hypothesis, than those that don’t.”21 This is important, because when mainly positive studies are published, it can easily create the false appearance that the evidence for a particular treatment is far stronger than it actually is.

CDC Colludes With Coca-Cola to Deceive You

Earlier this year, another batch of emails obtained via FOIA requests (after USRTK sued the CDC to get a response) revealed Coca-Cola was actively lobbying the CDC “to advance corporate objectives rather than health, including to influence the World Health Organization,” USRTK said in a post on its website,22 adding that the documentation demonstrates “a need for clearer policies on avoiding partnerships with manufacturers of harmful products.”

These documents, featuring correspondence between Coca-Cola executives and the CDC, can be found in the USCF Food Industry Documents online archive.23,24 A paper25,26,27,28 detailing the connections between Coke and the CDC based on the email cache was published in The Milbank Quarterly in January 2019. In a press release announcing the publication of the paper, USRTK said:29

“Coca-Cola’s contact with the CDC shows the company’s interest in gaining access to CDC employees, to lobby policymakers, and to frame the obesity debate by shifting attention and blame away from sugar-sweetened beverages …

‘It is not the proper role of the CDC to abet companies that manufacture harmful products,’ said Gary Ruskin, co-director of U.S. Right to Know. ‘Congress should investigate whether Coca-Cola and other companies that harm public health are unethically influencing the CDC, and subverting its efforts to protect the health of all Americans.’

‘Once again we see the grave risks that arise when public health organisations [sic] partner with manufacturers of products that pose a threat to health,’ said Martin McKee, professor of European public health at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine.

‘Sadly, as this example, and more recent ones in the United Kingdom show, these risks are not always appreciated by those who should know better.’”

CDC Official Helped Coke Influence World Health Organization

In March 2015, WHO published a new sugar guideline that specifically targeted sugary beverages, calling them out as a primary cause for childhood obesity around the world, especially in developing nations, where the soda industry is now aggressively expanding its reach.

WHOs recommendation to limit soda consumption was a huge blow to an already beleaguered soda industry, struggling to maintain a declining market share amid mounting evidence identifying sweetened drinks as a primary contributor to the obesity and diabetes epidemics.

Email correspondence between Alex Malaspina, a former Coca-Cola scientific and regulatory affairs leader and the founder of the food industry-funded group International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), and Barbara Bowman, Ph.D., then-director of the CDC’s Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, revealed Bowman repeatedly tried to help Malaspina get an audience with WHO officials, with the aim to talk them into relaxing the sugar limits.30,31

As noted by the USRTK,32 while Bowman’s job was to prevent obesity and related health problems, she “appeared happy to help the beverage industry cultivate political sway with the World Health Organization.”

Bowman left the agency at the end of June 2016, just two days after the initial reports about her cozy relationship with Coke were made public,33 which suggests she understood full well how inappropriate her behavior was.

This case also highlights the reality of corporate loyalty. As reported by the Huffington Post,34 early in her career, Bowman worked as a senior nutritionist for Coca-Cola. She also co-wrote one of the editions of a nutritional book published by ILSI.35

It’s human nature to remain loyal to former employers and colleagues, which is why the revolving door between industry and the agencies that regulate them is so problematic. People don’t shed their corporate mindset just because they get a government title and a new set of responsibilities.

Latest Coca-Cola Funded Study Again Blames Inactivity for Childhood Obesity

Coca-Cola and other soda makers have invested a lot of money in research and PR efforts aimed at protecting sales through misdirection. Coca-Cola in particular has worked hard to make it seem as though they’re concerned about public health while secretly undermining real efforts to improve it.

For example, a historical analysis36 published in 2016 found the sugar industry funded research that identified dietary fat as the culprit in heart disease, not sugar, and didn’t disclose that funding.

A 2017 study37 revealed that while sponsoring 95 U.S. health organizations, Coke was lobbying against public health bills aimed at reducing soda consumption through taxing, sugar limits and other strategies.

Coca-Cola and many other junk food manufacturers are also notorious for funding — and thus influencing — food and nutrition conferences and education.38

Most recently, a Coke-funded study39 published in the International Journal of Obesity January 31, 2019, evaluated “the single and joint associations of objectively measured moderate-to-vigorous physical activity and sedentary time on week and weekend days with obesity in children from 12 countries …”

They concluded the odds of obesity were highest among those who got the least amount of physical activity on both weekdays and weekends. Children with the lowest odds of obesity were the most active throughout the whole week. As noted by Nestle in her Food Politics blog:40

“This is another paper from the ISCOLE study funded by Coca-Cola, that seems to be aimed at casting doubt on the idea that sugary beverages might promote weight gain. Instead, these results suggest that physical activity is a more important factor.

Of course physical activity is important for health, but doesn’t expend nearly as many calories as is usually needed to compensate for soft drink intake. I learned about this study from a Weighty Matters blog post41 by Dr. Yoni Freedhoff, who runs a weight management center in Ottawa.

In his view, the ISCOLE study ignores evidence42 that childhood obesity is a determinant of physical activity, ‘not the other way around.’ He also questions the ‘no influence’ statement in the funding disclosure, on the basis of emails43 between ISCOLE investigators and Coca-Cola that not surprisingly suggests that these relationships have the very real potential to influence the framing of results even if funders [are] not involved in study design.

As I discuss in ‘Unsavory Truth,’ the influence of food-industry funders appears to occur at an unconscious level; investigators do not recognize the influence and typically deny it.”

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published June 23, 2019.

Zen Honeycutt, founder of Moms Across America, is nothing if not committed to action. In this inspiring interview, we discuss her book, “Unstoppable: Transforming Sickness and Struggle Into Triumph, Empowerment and a Celebration of Community,” which delves into the state of the world’s food supply, how to navigate through the many hazards of the standard American diet, and how you can become a powerful change agent yourself.

Like so many other parents, Honeycutt struggled to identify the roots of her children’s many health issues, which included allergies, autoimmune problems and symptoms of autism.

“I was completely confused and baffled,” she says. “Why was this happening? My kids had 19, 20 and 22 food allergies [respectively]. My husband and I had none of them. What was going on with the food supply? Thanks to Robyn O’Brien, Jeffrey Smith and all the scientists who started exposing information, I found out about genetically modified organisms (GMOs).”

She also discovered the disturbing truth about glyphosate, and how this pernicious weed killer, used on a wide variety of foods, whether they’re GMO or not, decimates your gut microbiome and contributes to a host of health problems, some of which plagued her own children.

“The problem is glyphosate’s so prevalent. This is the declared active chemical ingredient in Roundup that 80% of GMOs are engineered to withstand. It’s sprayed on all kinds of crops as a drying agent. It’s in most of our food.

And then you combine that with all the other toxins in our environment, in our vaccines, in our pajamas, in our sofas and baby bottles and all of that — you’ve got all these chemicals and toxins coming at our kids. That’s just a recipe for disaster.

Our kids are sick. One out of 2 children have a chronic illness; 1 in 2 males and 1 in 3 females are expected to get cancer in America today. That’s not OK with me. That was the impetus for me starting Moms Across America. It was to raise awareness about GMOs and toxic chemicals in our food supply.”

Standing Up to Monsanto

On January 30, 2015, Honeycutt was given the opportunity to speak at a Monsanto shareholders meeting1 as a proxy for the John Harrington Investment Group. You can read her presentation here. The referendum she presented was passed, causing Monsanto’s stock to significantly drop in the aftermath.

“I think a lot of the shareholders in that room probably were uncomfortable with owning Monsanto’s stock after that meeting,” she says. “That was probably one of the most terrifying and significant moments of my life, because I had the opportunity to speak on behalf of parents … with sick children.

I got to stand up in front of the entire shareholders meeting and basically hold them to account, to say how their products are harming our children. I got to meet Hugh Grant … the former chief executive officer (CEO) of Monsanto.

I looked him in the eye and said, ‘You know, Mr. Grant, it takes a big man to make a big and powerful company. But it takes an even bigger man to acknowledge when something’s not working and to go in a new direction … Moms Across America is looking forward to the day when Monsanto makes products that no longer harm our children.’

He said, ‘We’re always looking forward to have progress. We’ve got science on our side.’ I said, ‘Well, we actually have science on our side too, [and it shows] that your products harm our children … Just consider, what if you’re wrong? What are the consequences?’ … There’s … global consequence.’

He said, ‘If you’re wrong, you’re worrying an awful lot of people.’ I said, ‘But if I’m wrong, the consequence is only that people are eating organic. There’s nothing wrong with organic’ …

So many of us get concerned about … ‘What if trolls come after me? What if I get attacked?’ People are actually concerned for their physical safety in this climate right now. But … we cannot be stopped … We need to be unstoppable … We cannot let fear interfere with our commitment. We need to take action … Chemical companies should not be involved in our food supply. That’s all there is to it.”

As noted by Honeycutt, it’s important to realize that the science Monsanto (now Bayer) claims is on their side was bought and paid for by them. Some studies have even been shown to have been ghostwritten by the company itself. Such facts have come out during the discovery process of some of the lawsuits against Monsanto, which now number well over 11,000.

Meanwhile, many peer-reviewed, independent studies have found glyphosate-based herbicides to be carcinogenic.2 Glyphosate has also been shown to be a DNA mutagen, a chelator of important minerals,3 an antibiotic,4 an endocrine disruptor5,6 and more.7,8,9,10,11

Research12 even found that among children born of women with high exposure to glyphosate during pregnancy the rate of autism spectrum disorder with intellectual disability was 30% higher than among those born of mothers who lived further from highly-sprayed areas. Children who on top of that were exposed to pesticides during their first year were at 50% increased risk.

As noted by Honeycutt, while the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s review13 found glyphosate was not a carcinogen, its conclusion was based on industry-funded science, not independent science. In fact, according to some of the members on the scientific advisory panel convened to evaluate the strength of the EPA’s decision, the agency violated its own guidelines by discounting and downplaying data from studies linking glyphosate to cancer.14

Turning Devastation Into Triumph

More often than not, people who stand up to big industry end up paying a high price. Many lose their careers in the process. A similar situation, although impossible to prove, happened to the Honeycutts. Two weeks after Honeycutt attended Monsanto’s shareholders meeting, an outside consultant came into and reorganized her husband’s company.

“My husband was the only one fired,” Honeycutt says. “Now, I can’t say that it was definitely connected to Monsanto, but Monsanto was one of their clients. My husband was in the information technology (IT) division. He had nothing to do with Monsanto. He had nothing to do with sales. I don’t even think he knew that they were a client for a very long time, not until I got into this.

He lost his job. At first we thought it was devastating … But … everything that seems devastating can actually be the best thing that ever happened to you … We made this into the best thing that ever happened to us. My husband got search engine optimization training. He became a consultant. His company is called Organic Results.

He now does consulting for companies that we believe in, to improve the traffic to their websites. He’s a consultant for Moms Across America. He runs our marketing. He … helps us with our Health Solutions Store … He’s been an integral part of Moms Across America, and part of the reason why we’re able to still stay around.

The cool thing is we get to work together every day. He gets to be with our sons who are 16, 13 and 10 now. They get to have their dad around. It’s just phenomenal. I just absolutely love that we get to do what we’re doing.”

Eating Organic Can Make a World of Difference

As mentioned, all three of Honeycutt’s children struggled with food allergies. Her oldest son had a severe allergic reaction at 18 months after eating a nut. At the age of 5, he nearly died on Thanksgiving due to a pecan in the stuffing.

“One day, when he was about 8 years old, he had this rash around his mouth that had been going on and off for about seven months. It would last for about two weeks at a time. We didn’t know what it was. He looked at me really forlornly. He said, ‘Mom, I wish all my allergies would go away.’ I said, ‘Me too, buddy.’ But in my head, I was thinking, ‘That’s never going to happen.’

Then I realized what I was saying in my head. I was like, ‘Wait a second. That’s not what I’m committed to. I’m committed to empowerment. What if there was something we could do?’ I remembered my cousin, Sara, who had gone gluten-free for a long time and then was able to eat gluten about a year later.

I said, ‘Ben, would you like to be able to eat a slice of pizza or have a piece of birthday cake at a birthday party like a year from now?’ I painted that picture; that future. He said yes. I said, ‘Well then, would you be my partner in your health? Would you drink green drinks and go to alternative doctors?’ He said yes … We made a deal, and he did.

I did the research. He took the actions. He drank the green drinks. We took care of his gut bacteria. Within four months of going GMO-free, the rash was dramatically better. You could barely see it. It was a faint pink line under his lip if he was exposed to the allergen, which we figured out was carrageenan, by going to an alternative doctor.

And then within about a year or two of going organic … his allergies to walnuts and pecans went from a 19 down to 0.2. He no longer has a life-threatening food allergy. The peace of mind that I have as a mother that my son won’t die from food is priceless. It’s enormous. Our doctors’ bills, by the way, are dramatically lower.

We used to spend $12,000 to $15,000 with good health insurance. Now it’s maybe a couple hundred. It’s nothing. That’s just for checkups or whatever. We haven’t had to go for a sick doctor visit in three and a half years. He’s dramatically better.”

Autism Symptoms Linked to Glyphosate Exposure

Honeycutt’s second child developed a sudden onset of autism symptoms. “He was basically like an 8-year-old who was acting like a 3- or 4-year old. He was having tantrums. His grades went from As to Ds in math … His behavior was very erratic. He was trying to hit us … He was not being himself.” Honeycutt says.

A medical checkup revealed he had gut dysbiosis caused by C. difficile. According to the doctor, who specialized in autism, the inflammation in his gut was also causing inflammation in his brain. Glyphosate is known to do this, which prompted the Honeycutt’s to have him tested for glyphosate exposure.

“My son was the first one to be tested in America for glyphosate in his urine. We had finally initiated that. Moms Across America had put out the word to everybody. You can get your urine, your tap water and your breast milk tested for glyphosate.

His levels were eight times higher than was ever found in Europe, when Friends of the Earth did testing in Europe. I was furious that Roundup was in my son. We went 100% organic. Within six weeks, we retested him. His glyphosate levels were no longer detectable, and his autism symptoms were gone.

All we did was take care of his gut. We did give him an antifungal. We didn’t have to do a probiotic in there, but we gave him lots of sauerkraut, organic food. He ate no sugar from Thanksgiving to New Year’s, so he didn’t feed the bad gut bacteria. He recovered. He has not had a single autism symptom [in] five years now.”

Glyphosate Found in Vaccines

Now, food is not the only source of glyphosate exposure. Years ago, Honeycutt came across a Facebook post listing vaccine ingredients. Among them: polysorbate 80 — which like glyphosate can break down the blood-brain barrier and let toxins in — aluminum, bovine serum (blood) and egg.

Honeycutt realized some of these ingredients are likely GMO, or have been fed GMOs, and if so, they’re likely contaminated with glyphosate since glyphosate cannot be washed off. When an animal eats glyphosate-contaminated feed, their body parts become contaminated as well. Moms Across America sent five childhood vaccines to be tested for glyphosate, and every single one of them came back positive.

“The measles, mumps, rubella (MMR) vaccine came back 25 times higher than the other vaccines. Another scientist independently tested 14 more vaccines, and they also came back and confirmed our results,” Honeycutt says.

“His MMR vaccine came back 35 times higher. We all know that the problem around the MMR vaccine is that … it causes gut dysbiosis. [Andrew Wakefield] didn’t say it causes autism. He said it causes gut dysbiosis. Incidentally, practically every child who has autism has gut dysbiosis.

This, to me, was huge, because what I’m thinking is, ‘What if glyphosate in vaccines is one of the major contributing factors to vaccine damage?’ If you think about it, mercury was in vaccines back in 1929, but it wasn’t until the late ’90s when GMOs and glyphosate came on the scene that there was a huge spike in autism.

Now, to be fair, there was also a huge spike in the numbers of vaccines given. Our children are now getting 49 doses by age 12 and 69 doses by age 18. The numbers of vaccines our children are getting are also extremely high. But there are children who get one vaccine and they’re damaged after that. You have to look at what changed in the ingredients.”

Another variable that happened in the late ’90s was the dramatic increase in exposure to wireless radiation, and this too may be a significant contributor. There may even be a toxic synergy between the two that is contributing to the health deterioration we now see in so many children. The good news is that you have the ability to make a difference.

More Information

Aside from reading Honeycutt’s book, “Unstoppable: Transforming Sickness and Struggle Into Triumph, Empowerment and a Celebration of Community,” you can also learn more by visiting MomsAcrossAmerica.org and signing up for their newsletter. When you sign up, you’ll receive a free mini e-book of “Unstoppable.” Under the Action tab, you can also sign up to volunteer and post events.

“When you have that event, we know you’re serious about getting the word out, so we send you free materials,” Honeycutt says. “You only have to pay for shipping … We have some great flyers, ‘Why Eat Organic?’ ‘What’s Going on With Toxins in Our Food Supply?’ … We don’t make it a scary situation. It’s just informative. We always bring solutions …

You give them a stack of 100 flyers and you say, ‘Could you leave this at your school? Or your library? Or your community center?’ … Just get the word out about what’s happening in our food supply … That’s a great way to get involved … You can also join in the 4th of July parades. It costs anywhere from nothing to maybe 30 to 50 dollars, if you want to buy a banner and also pass out flyers.

You can have movie nights. There are some great movies you can show over an organic potluck. That’s my favorite thing to do. We’ll also connect you with other moms on our Monday Moms Connect Calls at 5 p.m., Pacific time. If you sign up to our newsletter, you’ll get an invitation to that.

We’ve expanded our mission to ‘We educate and inspire mothers and others to transform the food industry and environment, creating healthy communities together.’ By environment, we include anything that’s coming at our kids. If that’s a vaccine, if it’s drugs, if it’s pollution, if it’s EMFs — no matter what it is that’s coming at our kids that’s going to overwhelm them [or] increase the toxic burden — we will address that …

To opt out of this toxic system, we need to not only eat organic food or grow our own organic food. We need to also learn how to take care of ourselves through herbs and plants and opt out of that whole Big Pharma system.”

Moms Across America is also looking for more advisers, including moms who want to help educate others on these topics. If you’re interested, please contact them.

Get Involved!

As noted by Honeycutt, everyone has a moment when they decide to take action. For her, the realization that she had the power to make a difference came early. Her father was a great supporter from an early age and when, at the age of 12, Honeycutt came home saying class president elections were coming up, he suggested she should run.

“I said, ‘Me? Why me?’ He said, ‘Why not?’ I was like, ‘Oh. OK. Why not?’ I ran and won,” she says. “If there’s something you want to do or you’re interested in doing, something you want to take on, [ask yourself] why not you? That quote from Lilly Tomlin: ‘I always thought someone should do something about that, and then I realized I am somebody’ — that’s it.

I want everybody to believe that they are somebody; that they are, in fact … amazing … My personal commitment now is to empower community leaders to be global game changers, because that’s what it’s going to take …

Moms who are watching us right now … say, ‘You know what? I’m the one who’s going to get Roundup out of my town. I’m the one who’s going to stop this vaccine mandate in my city. I’m the one who’s going to get my school to have GMO-free food.’

When you do that, you — us, all of us collectively — we change the game around the world … So, sign up to Moms Across America and see where you can start taking action. Because when you do, it’s incredibly fulfilling.”

Thousands of popular foods and drinks are made artificially sweet with chemical sweeteners. Long claimed to be a healthy choice because they contain no calories or sugar, evidence continues to emerge that consuming artificial sweeteners is a good way to wreck your health.

It doesn’t matter if you choose aspartame (Equal), sucralose (Splenda) or another artificial sweetener. Consuming these products is putting your health at risk, so much so that even the World Health Organization warned people not to consume them.

WHO Warns Against Non-Sugar Sweeteners for Weight Loss

Diet foods and drinks are among the most common products that contain artificial sweeteners. Marketed as tools for weight loss, this deceptive practice lures people into thinking they’re a smart way to shed extra pounds.

Yet, a systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by the World Health Organization revealed “there is no clear consensus on whether non-sugar sweeteners are effective for long-term weight loss or maintenance, or if they are linked to other long-term health effects at intakes within the ADI.”1

In May 2023, WHO released a new guideline, advising not to use non-sugar sweeteners (NSS) for weight control because they don’t offer any long-term benefit in reducing body fat in adults or children.2

What’s more, the systematic review suggests “potential undesirable effects from long-term use of NSS, such as an increased risk of type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and mortality in adults.” In a news release, Francesco Branca, WHO director for nutrition and food safety, said:

“Replacing free sugars with NSS does not help with weight control in the long term. People need to consider other ways to reduce free sugars intake, such as consuming food with naturally occurring sugars, like fruit, or unsweetened food and beverages. NSS are not essential dietary factors and have no nutritional value. People should reduce the sweetness of the diet altogether, starting early in life, to improve their health.”

The WHO guidance to avoid artificial sweeteners applies to all categories of the chemicals, including acesulfame K, aspartame, advantame, cyclamates, neotame, saccharin and sucralose. The systematic review and meta-analysis included 283 studies, which revealed artificial sweeteners are linked to an increased risk of:3

Obesity
Type 2 diabetes

High fasting glucose
All-cause mortality

Cardiovascular events
Death from cardiovascular disease

Stroke
High blood pressure

Bladder cancer
Preterm birth and possible adiposity in offspring later in life

According to the WHO study:

“Mechanisms by which NSS as a class of molecules might exert effects that increase risk for obesity and certain NCDs [non-communicable diseases] have been reviewed extensively and include interaction with extra-oral taste receptors, possibly with alteration of the gut microbiome.

Because sugars and all known NSS presumably elicit sweet taste through the TAS1R heterodimeric sweet-taste receptor, which has been identified not just in the oral cavity but in other glucose-sensing tissues, it is not surprising that such a group of vastly different chemical entities could be responsible for similar effects on health.”

Reasons To Be Wary of Sucralose

In the U.S., sucralose is the most commonly used artificial sweetener. It’s found in more than 6,000 food products, including many diet beverages. When the U.S. Food and Drug Administration approved sucralose in 1998, none of the studies it reviewed involved humans.4

One of sucralose’s key marketing claims has long been that it neither metabolizes nor bioaccumulates in the human body, thus making it a basically inert substance. In 2018, however, an animal study found sucralose was metabolized in the gastrointestinal tract and accumulated in fat tissue.

This was “not part of the original regulatory decision process for this agent and indicate that it now may be time to revisit the safety and regulatory status of this organochlorine artificial sweetener,” the researchers wrote at the time.5

Based on these findings, consumer group U.S. Right to Know (USRTK) asked the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) to investigate whether sucralose’s marketing claims are deceptive. According to USRTK:6

“Sucralose is 600 times sweeter than sugar and itself contains no calories. Although it has been marketed as a healthy product that can help fend off obesity and diabetes, sucralose consumption has been linked to leukemia, weight gain, obesity, diabetes, liver inflammation, metabolic dysfunction and other illnesses.”

In 2022, a study published in Microorganisms also revealed that consuming sucralose — in “amounts, far lower than the suggested ADI”7 — for just 10 weeks was enough to induce gut dysbiosis and altered glucose and insulin levels in healthy, young adults.

The bacteria most affected by sucralose appeared to belong primarily to the phylum Firmicutes, which are centrally involved in glucose and insulin metabolism. However, it doesn’t end there. Animal studies suggest the sucralose-altered gut microbiome could be involved in inflammation of the gut and liver, as well as cancer.

Additionally, a new study published May 29, 2023, in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health found that a chemical broken down in the body when you consume sucralose is genotoxic and breaks up your DNA.8 The fat soluble compound, sucralose-6-acetate, is produced in your gut during digestion at a threshold exceeding the European Food Safety Authority’s maximum allowance for a single sucralose-sweetened drink in one day.

In their abstract,9 study authors noted the DNA-damaging implications of such toxicity: “Sucralose-6-acetate significantly increased the expression of genes associated with inflammation, oxidative stress and cancer … Overall, the toxicological and pharmacokinetic findings for sucralose-6-acetate raise significant health concerns regarding the safety and regulatory status of sucralose itself.”

A Warning About Sucralose Intake During Pregnancy

A 2023 study published in Biomedicines also raised red flags about consuming sucralose during pregnancy.10 Animal studies have previously found that sucralose intake during pregnancy may increase the risk of weight gain, metabolic disturbances and low-grade systemic inflammation in offspring. The research team found similar effects in humans.

The study evaluated newborns from women who had heavy sucralose intake — defined as more than 36 milligrams (mg) of sucralose a day during pregnancy — or light sucralose ingestion, defined as less than 60 mg a week. Newborns from mothers with heavy sucralose intake experienced a number of negative metabolic and inflammatory effects compared to newborns of light intake women, including:

Significant increases in birth weight and insulin
Substantial increase in the percentage of inflammatory nonclassical monocytes
Higher IL-1 beta and TNF-alpha with lower IL-10 expression

From 2000 to 2010, the consumption of artificial sweeteners increased 54% in adults and 200% in children. The researchers called for urgent investigation into the effects of artificial sweetener intake during pregnancy, which could significantly increase chronic disease burden in adulthood:

“Together with numerous studies in animal models, present results expand on the notion that sucralose and other NNS [non-nutritive sweeteners] may act as obesogenic factors during fetal development, influencing the onset of obesity and metabolic disease in childhood.

We encourage other research teams to conduct prospective cohort studies to follow up on newborns intrauterinally exposed to sucralose across the years to draw significant conclusions regarding the possible role of NNS in programming obesity and metabolic disease later in life.

The urgent need for additional investigation in this field is justified when considering that up to 50% of obese children become obese in adulthood with a 4-fold increased risk of developing chronic non-communicable diseases such as T2D.”

Is Aspartame Making You Anxious?

Artificial sweeteners’ detrimental effects aren’t limited to the physical realm. Mental health effects have also been reported, including for aspartame. Approved by the FDA in 1981, aspartame can be found in close to 5,000 food and beverage products. Worldwide, 3,000 to 5,000 metric tons of aspartame are produced annually, and, like sucralose, it’s widely consumed by adults, including pregnant women, and children.11

When you consume aspartame, it’s broken down into aspartic acid, phenylalanine — a precursor of monoamine neurotransmitters — and methanol, which may have “potent” effects on your central nervous system, Florida State University (FSU) College of Medicine researchers noted.

Their study, published in PNAS, linked aspartame consumption to anxiety and found the mental health changes were passed on to future generations. The FDA’s recommended maximum daily intake value for aspartame is 50 milligrams per kilogram.

The FSU study involved mice drinking water that contained aspartame at a dosage of approximately 15% of the FDA’s maximum daily intake for humans. The dose was equivalent to a human drinking six to eight 8-ounce cans of diet soda daily.12

The mice consumed the aspartame-laced water for 12 weeks, which led to “robust, dose-dependent anxiety.”13 “It was such a robust anxiety-like trait that I don’t think any of us were anticipating we would see,” study author Sara Jones said. “It was completely unexpected. Usually you see subtle changes.”14

The study came about after the research team looked at the transgenerational effects of nicotine, revealing epigenetic changes in sperm cells. Similar effects may be occurring from artificial sweeteners. Study co-author Pradeep Bhide, the Jim and Betty Ann Rodgers Eminent Scholar Chair of Developmental Neuroscience in the Department of Biomedical Sciences, explained:15

“What this study is showing is we need to look back at the environmental factors, because what we see today is not only what’s happening today, but what happened two generations ago and maybe even longer.”

Mice exposed to aspartame had changes in the expression of genes that regulate excitation-inhibition balance in the amygdala, a region of the brain involved in regulating anxiety and fear. The changes were also seen in up to two generations from the aspartame-exposed mice.16

Aspartame Linked to Cancer, Weight Gain

There’s no reason to consume aspartame if you value your health. Like sucralose, it’s linked to a number of serious health problems, including:17

Cancer
Cardiovascular disease
Alzheimer’s disease

Seizures
Stroke and dementia
Intestinal dysbiosis

Mood disorders
Headaches
Migraines

Adding insult to injury, since many people consume aspartame thinking it will help them “diet,” it’s also linked to weight gain, increased appetite and obesity-related diseases.

In a 2017 systematic review and meta-analysis18 published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal, consuming artificial sweeteners was associated with increases in weight and waist circumference along with increased incidence of obesity, high blood pressure, metabolic syndrome, Type 2 diabetes and cardiovascular events.

Regarding cancer, a 2022 population-based cohort study published in PLOS Medicine, which involved 102,865 adults, revealed artificial sweeteners — especially aspartame and acesulfame-K — were associated with increased cancer risk, including breast cancer and obesity-related cancers.19

Are You Ready to Ditch Artificial Sweeteners?

It’s clear that artificial sweeteners have no place in a healthy diet. Fortunately, as you work to eliminate ultraprocessed foods from your meals, you’ll naturally consume less artificial sweeteners, which are primarily found in products like diet drinks, desserts, candies, snacks and flavored yogurts. Be aware, however, that they’re also hidden in condiments, salad dressing and medications, so you’ll need to read labels to ensure you avoid them.

If cravings are stopping you from giving up these toxic sweeteners, the video above shows how to use the Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT), a psychological acupressure tool, when you feel a craving coming on. It can help you overcome the urge to consume a poisonous artificial sweetener.

Other natural craving-busters include sour foods like fermented vegetables or water with lemon juice. When you feel the urge to eat something artificially sweet, grab a glass of water or tea with citrus juice added for a much healthier treat.

Editor’s Note: This article is a reprint. It was originally published October 16, 2018.

Recent research into the health effects of artificial sweeteners deliver yet another blow to safety claims. The animal study,1,2,3,4,5 published in the journal Molecules, found all artificial sweeteners currently approved and deemed safe by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration cause DNA damage in, and interfere with the normal and healthy activity of gut bacteria. The artificial sweeteners included in this study included:

Artificial sweetener
Brand name(s)

Aspartame
NutraSweet, Spoonful, Canderel, Equal, NatraTaste Blue

Sucralose
Splenda, Zerocal, Sukrana, SucraPlus, Candys, Cukren and Nevella

Saccharin
Sweet ‘N Low, Sweet Twin, Sugar Twin, Necta Sweet

Neotame
Newtame

Advantame
(No brand names)

Acesulfame potassium-k
Sunnette, Sweet One, ACE, ACE K, Sweet ‘N Safe

All Artificial Sweeteners Are Toxic to Gut Bacteria

As reported by Business Insider,6 the research team concluded that all of these sweeteners “had a toxic, stressing effect, making it difficult for gut microbes to grow and reproduce.” While the authors do not directly refer to them as having antibiotic effects, when something is killing bacteria, that’s essentially what’s happening.

According to the researchers, the effects on your gut health may in turn affect your body’s ability to process regular sugar and other carbohydrates. According to this study, the toxic limit for these artificial sweeteners appears to be around 1 milligram per milliliter (mg/mL).

Ariel Kushmaro, Ph.D., professor of microbial biotechnology at Ben-Gurion University and lead author, told Business Insider, “We are not claiming that it’s toxic to human beings. We’re claiming that it might be toxic to the gut bacteria, and by that, will influence us.”

Sweetener-Specific Effects

While, overall, all six artificial sweeteners were found to have toxic effects on gut bacteria, there were individual differences in the type and amount of damage they produced. For example:

Saccharin caused the greatest, most widespread damage, exhibiting both cytotoxic and genotoxic effects, meaning it is toxic to cells and damages genetic information in the cell (which can cause mutations).
Neotame was found to cause metabolic disruption in mice, and raised concentrations of several fatty acids, lipids and cholesterol. Several gut genes were also decreased by this sweetener.
Aspartame and acesulfame potassium-k — The latter of which is commonly found in sports supplements — were both found to cause DNA damage.

Hazards of Sucralose

Previous studies have also revealed an extensive list of safety concerns for sucralose (a synthetic organochlorine sweetener), some of which are very similar to those found in the featured study, including:7

Genotoxicity (DNA damage) and potentially adverse epigenetic effects

The generation of toxic compounds (chloropropanols) when heated

Destruction of gut bacteria;8 one study9 found it can kill as much as 50% of your microbiome, and appears to target beneficial microorganisms

Alterations in glucose, insulin and glucagon-like peptide-1 levels and responses,10 which raises the risk for diabetes

Decreased red blood cells, a sign of anemia, at levels above 1,500 mg per kilo per day

Increased male infertility by interfering with sperm production and vitality, as well as brain lesions at higher doses

Kidney enlargement and calcification

Significantly increased risk for miscarriage (in rabbits, spontaneous abortions affected nearly half the rabbit population given sucralose, compared to zero aborted pregnancies in the control group)

Significantly increased death rate (a 23% death rate in rabbits, compared to a 6% in the control group)

Bioaccumulation11

Potential drug interactions12

Artificial Sweeteners Linked to Diabetes and CVD

Other recent research13,14 adds to the ever-growing evidence pile showing that artificial sweeteners raise your risk of obesity and Type 2 diabetes to the same or greater degree as sugar. The study in question explored how different sweeteners — including glucose, fructose, aspartame and acesulfame potassium-k — affect energy usage, energy storage and vascular functioning.

According to the authors, both high amounts of sugar and artificial sweeteners caused vascular impairment and other cardiovascular disease (CVD) effects “that may be important during the onset and progression of diabetes and obesity.” The artificial sweeteners, however, accumulated in the blood, thereby harming the blood vessel lining to a greater degree.

Of the two artificial sweeteners included in this study, acesulfame potassium appeared to be the worst. As noted by lead author Brian Hoffmann, Ph.D., assistant professor in the department of biomedical engineering at the Marquette University and Medical College of Wisconsin:15

“Sweeteners kind of trick the body. And then when your body’s not getting the energy it needs — because it does need some sugar to function properly — it potentially finds that source elsewhere,” Hoffman says.16

One alternative sugar source is muscle and, indeed, evidence of protein break down was found in the animals’ blood. Essentially, the rats were burning muscle as a source of energy when given artificial sweeteners. Hoffman also notes that this research is different from previous attempts to conclusively tie artificial sweeteners to health problems:

“Most of these sweeteners were approved well before we had the technology to perform studies like my lab is doing. So they weren’t able to look as in-depth at some of the potential effects being caused.

By knowing what biochemical changes these are causing through these large-scale studies, we can take an unbiased approach and see what’s changing to give us a better direction. What I like to tell people is that most things in moderation are going to be fine …

It’s when people start to chronically consume these [drinks] — say, a person drinks two, three, four … every day — that we should start to be concerned. Because you’re starting to introduce these biochemical changes and the body has no time to recover.”

Artificial Sweeteners Associated With Many Health Problems

Research published over the last three decades has also convincingly shown that artificial sweeteners stimulate appetite, increase cravings for carbs, and produce a variety of metabolic dysfunctions that promote fat storage and weight gain.

As early as 1986, a study17 that examined nearly 78,700 women for one year found women who used artificial sweeteners were significantly more likely to gain weight compared to those who did not use them, regardless of their initial weight.

According to the researchers, the results “were not explicable by differences in food consumption patterns. The data do not support the hypothesis that long-term artificial sweetener use either helps weight loss or prevents weight gain.”

Similarly, the 25-yearslong San Antonio Heart Study,18 published in 2005, found those who drank diet soda were significantly more likely to gain weight compared to those who drank regular soda. On average, for each diet soft drink the participants drank per day, they were 65% more likely to become overweight during the next seven to eight years, and 41% more likely to become obese.

In 2010, an important scientific review19 was published in the Yale Journal of Biology and Medicine. It summarized the epidemiological and experimental evidence available on artificial sweeteners’ effects on weight, and explained those effects in light of the neurobiology of food reward.

More than 11,650 children aged 9 to 14 were included in this study. Each daily serving of diet beverage was associated with a BMI increase of 0.16 kg/m2. It also showed the correlation between increased usage of artificial sweeteners in food and drinks, and the corresponding rise in obesity. According to the authors:

“[F]indings suggest that the calorie contained in natural sweeteners may trigger a response to keep the overall energy consumption constant … Increasing evidence suggests that artificial sweeteners do not activate the food reward pathways in the same fashion as natural sweeteners … [A]rtificial sweeteners, precisely because they are sweet, encourage sugar craving and sugar dependence.”

Three years later, a report20 published in the journal Trends in Endocrinology & Metabolism highlighted the fact that diet soda drinkers suffer the same exact health problems as those who opt for regular soda, including excessive weight gain, Type 2 diabetes, cardiovascular disease and stroke. The researchers proposed that frequent consumption of artificial sweeteners may induce metabolic derangements.

Your Body Is Not Fooled by Zero-Calorie Sweetness

Right around 2013, research started emerging detailing some of the reasons for why zero calorie sweeteners can make you gain weight. A study in the Journal of Physiology21,22 showed that when you eat something sweet, your brain releases dopamine, which activates your brain’s reward center.

The appetite-regulating hormone leptin is also released, which eventually informs your brain that you are “full” once a certain amount of calories has been ingested. When you consume something that tastes sweet but doesn’t contain any calories, your brain’s pleasure pathway still gets activated by the sweet taste, but there’s nothing to deactivate it, since the calories never arrive.

Artificial sweeteners basically trick your body into thinking that it’s going to receive calories, but when the calories fail to arrive, your body continues to signal that it needs more, which results in carb cravings.

The following year, 2014, another important study23 was published in the journal Nature. It was, for the first time, able to clearly show causality, revealing there’s a direct cause and effect relationship between consuming artificial sweeteners and developing elevated blood sugar levels.

People who consumed high amounts of artificial sweeteners were found to have higher levels of HbA1C — a long-term measure of blood sugar — compared to nonusers or occasional users of artificial sweeteners.

Seven volunteers who did not use artificial sweeteners were then recruited, and asked to consume the equivalent of 10 to 12 single-dose packets of artificial sweeteners daily for one week. Four of the seven people developed “significant disturbances in their blood glucose,” according to the researchers.

Some became prediabetic within just a few days! The reason for this dramatic shift was traced back to alterations in gut bacteria. Some bacteria were killed off, while others started proliferating. Which brings us back full circle to the featured study in the journal Molecules, which showed that all artificial sweeteners currently on the U.S. market have the ability to impair and/or kill gut bacteria.

Considering what we now know about the gut microbiome and its influence on health and disease, it’s becoming easier to see how and why artificial sweeteners are able to wreak havoc on your health.

To Improve Your Health, Ditch the Artificial Sweeteners

If you’re overweight and/or have insulin resistance or Type 2 diabetes, it’s really important to understand that artificial sweeteners are not going to help matters. They’re probably only going to make it worse.

If you have to choose between two evils, regularly-sweetened beverages are likely less hazardous in the long run, since your body at least knows how to metabolize fructose, even if it is processed.

That said, I firmly believe ditching soda and other sweetened beverages is one of the most important steps you can take to improve your weight and health. Remember, pure water is a zero-calorie drink. You cannot find a beverage that contains fewer calories.

If you want some flavor, just squeeze a little bit of fresh lemon or lime into mineral water. In instances where your cooking, baking or beverage needs a little sweetener, be mindful of your choice. For more information, see “Sugar Substitutes — What’s Safe and What’s Not.”

Approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration in 1981, aspartame can now be found in close to 5,000 food and beverage products. Worldwide, 3,000 to 5,000 metric tons of aspartame are produced annually, and it’s widely consumed by adults, including pregnant women, and children.1

When you consume aspartame, it’s broken down into aspartic acid, phenylalanine — a precursor of monoamine neurotransmitters — and methanol, which may have “potent” effects on your central nervous system,2 Florida State University (FSU) College of Medicine researchers noted.

Their study, published in PNAS,3 raises more red flags about this synthetic sweetener. It not only linked aspartame to anxiety but suggests the mental health changes may be passed on to future generations.

Aspartame Induced Anxiety for Generations

The FDA’s recommended maximum daily intake value for aspartame is 50 milligrams per kilogram. The FSU study involved mice drinking water that contained aspartame at a dosage of approximately 15% of the FDA’s maximum daily intake for humans. The dose was equivalent to a human drinking six to eight 8-ounce cans of diet soda daily.4

The mice consumed the aspartame-laced water for 12 weeks, which led to “robust, dose-dependent anxiety.”5 “It was such a robust anxiety-like trait that I don’t think any of us were anticipating we would see,” study author Sara Jones said. “It was completely unexpected. Usually you see subtle changes.”6

The anxiety-like behaviors were evidenced during maze tests, and they persisted across multiple generations — passed down from male mice exposed to aspartame. When the mice were treated with the human anxiety drug diazepam, the anxiety-like behaviors disappeared. According to the study:7

“The anxiety was alleviated by a single administration of diazepam, a positive allosteric modulator of the GABA-A receptor, consistent with the key role of GABA-A receptors in the regulation of anxiety. RNA sequencing demonstrated significant changes in expression of genes associated with glutamatergic and GABA receptor signaling in the amygdala, a brain region associated with regulation of anxiety.

Perhaps even more strikingly, the anxiety phenotype, its response to diazepam, and changes in amygdala gene expression were transmitted from the aspartame-exposed male founders to their descendants.”

Aspartame Disrupts Gene Expression in the Brain

The study shows that exposure to aspartame disrupts gene expression in the amygdala brain region, which plays a role in the regulation of anxiety and fear responses.8 The disruptions persisted for at least two generations.

“What this study is showing is we need to look back at the environmental factors, because what we see today is not only what’s happening today, but what happened two generations ago and maybe even longer,” study co-author Pradeep Bhide, with FSU’s department of biomedical sciences, explained.9

Aspartame’s effects on the brain have been questioned for years. In 2018, researchers with Universiti Sains Malaysia found a connection between neurophysiological symptoms and aspartame, which can elevate levels of phenylalanine and aspartic acid in the brain.10

Elevated levels of these compounds may inhibit the release and synthesis of a number of regulators of neurophysiological activity, including neurotransmitters, dopamine, norepinephrine and serotonin. The researchers explained:11

“Aspartame acts as a chemical stressor by elevating plasma cortisol levels and causing the production of excess free radicals. High cortisol levels and excess free radicals may increase the brains vulnerability to oxidative stress which may have adverse effects on neurobehavioral health.

… We reviewed studies linking neurophysiological symptoms to aspartame usage and conclude that aspartame may be responsible for adverse neurobehavioral health outcomes. Aspartame consumption needs to be approached with caution due to the possible effects on neurobehavioral health.”

Neurophysiological symptoms that may be linked to aspartame consumption include:12

Learning problems
Headache
Seizure

Migraines
Irritable mood
Anxiety

Depression
Insomnia

Aspartic acid, which aspartame is broken down into, is also thought to act as an excitatory neurotransmitter in the central nervous system. Researchers have proposed since at least 2008 that consuming too much aspartame may cause certain mental disorders and result in “compromised learning and emotional functioning.”13

Caution may be especially warranted during pregnancy. In a study on newborn rats, those that consumed aspartame — via their lactating mothers that had been fed aspartame — experienced problems with development (weight loss) and behavioral changes suggestive of anxiety.14

Industry Spreads Myth That Artificial Sweeteners Are Safe

If you listen to industry front group the International Sweeteners Association, you’ll come away believing artificial sweeteners are not only safe but beneficial for weight management, diabetes and oral health.15 Even health officials and government groups have adopted the rhetoric that swapping sugar for artificial sweeteners is a good thing. As The Guardian reported:16

“Public health organizations around the world have largely accepted the sweetener industry’s claims, particularly when it comes to managing diabetes. One article on the NHS website quotes a dietitian who describes sweeteners as “a really useful alternative for people with diabetes who need to watch their blood sugar levels while still enjoying their favorite foods.””

Yet, a systematic review and meta-analysis conducted by the World Health Organization revealed, “there is no clear consensus on whether non-sugar sweeteners are effective for long-term weight loss or maintenance, or if they are linked to other long-term health effects at intakes within the ADI.”17

In fact, their study found, “There is suggestion of negative health effects with long-term use …”18 Cohort/case-control studies included in WHO’s systematic review revealed a range of concerning effects with artificial sweetener consumption, including increased:19

Obesity and body mass index
Type 2 diabetes

High fasting glucose
All-cause mortality

Cardiovascular disease mortality
Cardiovascular events

Stroke
High blood pressure

Bladder cancer
Premature birth

“In a startling turnaround,” The Guardian noted, “the WHO’s draft guidance stated that non-sugar sweeteners should ‘not be used as a means of achieving weight control or reducing risk of non-communicable diseases’ such as diabetes or heart disease. Suddenly, the whole rationale for sweeteners as a ‘healthy’ alternative looked much shakier.”20

Meanwhile, industry group The Calorie Control Council, whose members include Coca-Cola, PepsiCo and Cargill, said it was “disappointed” in WHO’s findings and continued to insist that artificial sweeteners are useful for managing body weight and blood sugar levels.21

Heart Disease, Stroke Among the Risks

Along with risks to brain health, consuming aspartame (Equal), acesulfame potassium and sucralose (Splenda) puts your heart health at risk as well. In a nine-year study involving 103,388 people, researchers linked the products to cardiovascular disease and stroke.22

Researchers from France studied the detailed dietary records of adults with an average age of 42.23 Specifically, three non-consecutive days (two weekdays and one weekend day) of 24-hour dietary records were assigned at the study’s start and again every six months thereafter. Participants detailed all foods and beverages they consumed during that time, including quantities, brand names and even photographs to validate the recordings.24

The dietary records were further validated using blood and urinary biomarkers. Then, the researchers looked for any associations with cardiovascular diseases, including coronary heart disease and cerebrovascular disease, which refers to disorders that affect blood flow in the brain, such as stroke, aneurysms and vascular malformations.

Total artificial sweetener intake was associated with increased risk of overall cardiovascular disease (CVD) and cerebrovascular disease, the study found. Among the specific artificial sweeteners, aspartame was associated with an increased risk of stroke (defined in the study as cerebrovascular events), while acesulfame potassium and sucralose were associated with increased coronary heart disease risk.25

“Our results suggest no benefit from substituting artificial sweeteners for added sugar on CVD outcomes,” the study found.26 “The findings from this large-scale prospective cohort study suggest a potential direct association between higher artificial sweetener consumption (especially aspartame, acesulfame potassium, and sucralose) and increased cardiovascular disease risk.”27

Liver Damage, Disturbances to Gut Microbes and More

It’s time to reexamine the widely parroted myth that artificial sweeteners can be part of a “healthy” diet. Their consumption can cause disturbances throughout your body. In research presented at the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology 2022 annual meeting it was revealed that artificial sweeteners — specifically acesulfame potassium and sucralose — may interfere with your liver’s delicate detoxification process.

The study found that acesulfame potassium and sucralose inhibited the activity of P-glycoprotein, a “defense protein” that’s important for protecting organisms against environmental toxins.28 For comparison, the toxin DDT (dichloro-diphenyl-trichloroethane) has also been found to inhibit P-glycoprotein (PGP), which is one reason why researchers have stated, “Even in small amounts, these contaminants could interfere with the human body’s natural ability to defend itself.”29

Artificial sweeteners including saccharine, sucralose, aspartame and acesulfame potassium may also lead to shifts in gut microbiota similar to those caused by antibiotics.30 Artificial sweeteners have also been shown to induce glucose intolerance by altering gut microbiota.31 Disruption of gut microbiota, in turn, has been linked to nonalcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD), and artificial sweeteners may also have a role to play in this condition.32

Make the Choice to Avoid Artificial Sweeteners

Video Link

To protect your health, avoiding artificial sweeteners is important. In addition to diet beverages, they’re found in thousands of other ultraprocessed products, including flavored yogurts, desserts, snacks and tabletop sweeteners. Even ketchup, salad dressing and medications often contain them.

Once you’ve decided to eliminate artificial sweeteners from your diet, read labels of any processed foods you buy to be sure they’re not hidden inside. If you’re tempted by a sweet craving, try eating something sour, like water with lemon juice or fermented vegetables. Sour taste may help diminish your desire for sweets.

I also recommend learning to use the psychological acupressure technique called the Emotional Freedom Techniques (EFT). When you feel a craving coming on, use EFT to release the unhealthy urge. It’s an excellent tool to overcome the emotional component of food cravings, helping you say goodbye to artificial sweeteners for good.

Your entire body takes direction from your hormones. Hormones are secreted by your endocrine system and are responsible for telling your organs what to do and when to do it.1 They are essentially chemical messengers that travel throughout your bloodstream, working slowly over time to affect processes like growth and development, metabolism and reproduction.
Sometimes, these chemical messengers may get out of balance, and this leads to chronic disorders such as Type 2 diabetes, weak bones and infertility.2 Hormones may be secreted by your adrenal glands, endocrine-related organs, hypothalamus, sex glands and other organs.3
Progesterone is important to fertility and supporting a pregnancy. It’s a steroid hormone secreted by the corpus luteum and then by the placenta if you become pregnant.4 In some cases, when couples suffer from infertility, they choose in vitro fertilization (IVF).
This is a complex series of procedures in which eggs are retrieved from the ovaries, fertilized by sperm in a lab and then transferred into the uterus.5 One full cycle can take up to three weeks6 and cost $12,000.7 In response to her struggles with infertility, Amy Galliher-Beckley, Ph.D.,8 co-founded MFB Fertility and the progesterone test Proov.9
The Estrogen and Progesterone Relationship
Each of your bodily systems maintains a balance to help you maintain optimal health. Your reproductive system is no different. For a woman, there are several hormones affecting a complex system to mature an egg follicle and release an egg where it travels to the uterus. If fertilized, the egg must implant into the uterus, called the endometrium, where it begins to develop into a baby.
These events are controlled by hormones secreted from several sources in the body. The ovaries produce the eggs and are the main source of estrogen. The adrenal glands sit on top of each kidney and also make a small amount. Estrogen plays a role in physical changes during puberty; it also controls the menstrual cycle, protects bone health and affects your mood.10
The second hormone essential to fertility is progesterone, a steroid hormone that is first secreted by the corpus luteum. After the egg is released, the corpus luteum is left attached to the ovary, which functions as a temporary gland.11 These two hormones are controlled by the release of other hormones.
During the menstrual cycle gonadotropin-releasing hormone is secreted from the hypothalamus, triggering the secretion of follicle-stimulating hormone (FSH) from the pituitary gland.12 This begins follicle development and triggers a rise in estrogen.
Luteinizing hormone (LH), also secreted by the pituitary gland, supports the maturation of the follicle and a trigger to cause the egg to be released. When estrogen levels get sufficiently high it signals a sudden release of LH, around mid-cycle, which triggers a set of events that ultimately release the mature egg from the follicle.13
Once released, the empty follicle becomes the corpus luteum, which produces progesterone. The release of progesterone triggers the uterus to develop a highly vascularized bed suitable for implantation of a fertilized egg.
Without fertilization, the corpus luteum begins to degenerate, the secretion of progesterone drops off and menstruation occurs. If pregnancy occurs then the corpus luteum produces progesterone for the first 10 weeks until production is taken over by the placenta.14,15
Not About Getting Pregnant, but Staying Pregnant
As Beckley explains in her interview with Forbes magazine,16 her test is not about getting pregnant, but rather staying pregnant. Progesterone not only prepares the uterus for the egg to implant; it also protects the endometrium from degeneration and menstruation. While the body is producing high levels of progesterone during a pregnancy, a second egg will not mature.17
In order to maintain a pregnancy, the corpus luteum must continue to secrete progesterone. This maintains the blood vessels in the endometrium to feed the growing baby. It is in these early weeks that women with low levels of progesterone may have difficulty, both conceiving and developing the right environment for a fertilized egg to grow.
Some women who do get pregnant are at a high risk for miscarriage.18 The test Beckley developed comes with sticks used in much the same way ovulation and pregnancy tests are used. These sticks measure the amount of progesterone metabolites excreted in the urine. To date, this is the first at-home, over-the-counter test used to evaluate a woman’s ability to produce progesterone.19 Beckley explains:20

“Low progesterone is the number one cause of unexplained infertility. Women who go through IVF protocols all are offered progesterone. If you are not going through IVF, most doctors don’t talk about progesterone, they don’t offer progesterone, they don’t test for progesterone. When your progesterone crashes too quickly, it is called a luteal phase defect.”

Luteal Phase Defect Increases Chances of Miscarriage
The luteal phase in a woman’s cycle begins after ovulation and represents the second half of the menstrual cycle. The luteal phase is named after the corpus luteum. Luteal Phase Defect (LPD) results in an abnormal endometrial growth that may not support a pregnancy.21,22
While researchers struggle to identify the underlying dysfunction and efficacy of LPD in supporting fertility, experts report women undergoing IVF always have LPD present.23 LPD is marked with a luteal phase less than 11 days. However, not all physicians believe the condition exists; reliable tests are lacking.24
Beckley developed the Proov urine test to help women identify a reduction in progesterone during their cycle. According to Beckley,25 her test gives women more knowledge about how their body works and provides a foundation for asking their infertility doctors better questions.
The test measures the presence of metabolites in the urine that should increase and remain elevated after ovulation. It may be used to confirm ovulation and confirm levels of progesterone afterward. A single negative test before ovulation followed by a single positive test will confirm ovulation for women trying to get pregnant.26
For women trying to conceive, the test is recommended four days after peak fertility and then for continued testing 10 days past ovulation.27 When questions arise about levels of progesterone to maintain a pregnancy, they recommend testing six days after peak fertility and as needed during the pregnancy since the test should remain positive.
Other Functions of Progesterone
Although LPD has a significant impact on a woman’s ability to carry a pregnancy, it is the subject of debate.28 In some cases, the ovaries release enough progesterone but the uterine lining does not respond.29 LPD has been linked to other health conditions, including:30

Anorexia
Endometriosis

High levels of exercise
Obesity

Thyroid disorders
Polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)

High levels of prolactinemia (the hormone responsible for breast milk)

In some circumstances, when these conditions are treated, the LPD resolves.31 Later in life, if levels of progesterone decline, a woman’s period may become irregular, heavier and longer,32 increasing her chance of experiencing anemia, depending on the amount and length of her period.33
Variations in hormone levels after menopause may also influence cognition and mood.34 In a study of 643 healthy postmenopausal women, researchers found that while estrogen had little effect on tests of executive function or global cognition, progesterone concentrations were associated with verbal memory. The researchers suggest this positive association merits additional study.
Bioidentical progesterone, also known as micronized progesterone in the oral form, has been successful in helping relieve hot flashes and night sweats during menopause. Dr. Jerilynn Prior from the University of British Columbia Vancouver presented her study at an endocrine society meeting during which she compared the use of progesterone to placebo.35
The study assigned 114 postmenopausal women into one of two groups, a placebo group and another who took 300 mg of micronized oral progesterone daily. To be eligible for the study, the women had to be off hormone therapy for at least six months.36
At the end of the 12-week study, researchers found that the group taking micronized progesterone demonstrated a 56% decrease in a score reflecting the number and intensity of symptoms, while the women taking the placebo reported a 28% decrease.37
Age Does Affect Hormone Balance
As is borne out by the number of women struggling with hormonal imbalances as they age and those requiring fertility assistance to become pregnant after 40,38 Beckley is vocal about the difficulty women may have supporting a pregnancy after she turns 40.39
Beckley says,40 “The closer a woman gets to menopause, the least likely her body is going to be able to support a pregnancy.” Much of this is related to the imbalance of hormones required to successfully support a pregnancy that occurs as women age.
Her research in designing the progesterone urine test led Beckley to believe 30% to 40% of women who undergo IVF treatment to become pregnant ultimately do not need IVF.41 Instead, they may require progesterone to develop a healthy endometrial lining and support early pregnancy.
Overall Fertility Is on the Decline
Couples experience infertility for a number of reasons. In a study42 released in 2017, researchers evaluated 38 years of information and found sperm counts declined significantly between 1973 and 2011. The sperm counts declined 52% to 59% in men located in North America, Europe and Australia.
The Australian Department of Health reports 1 in every 6 Australian couples suffers from fertility problems, which they attribute to the decision to have children later in life as well as declining sperm count. Quality and lifestyle factors such as smoking, not eating healthfully, consuming excessive amounts of alcohol and not having a healthy BMI also affect fertility.43
In May 2019, the Pew Research Center reported that for the fourth year in a row, key fertility indicators for U.S. couples declined, reaching a record low.44 Two of the three indicators used to determine fertility reflected a decline in numbers.
The total fertility rate, or the estimation of the number of children a woman would have in her lifetime, was 1.73 children in 2018. This was lower than the estimate of 1.74 from the mid-1970s.45
Research suggests men’s fertility is affected by environmental toxins and chemicals you may find in your own home, which I discuss in a past article, “50 Percent Fertility Reduction Because of These Household Chemicals.”
Additionally, as described in the past article, “Birth Rate Reaches Record Low as Premature Deliveries Rise,” statistics from the CDC show the number of new births was down 2% in 2018 as compared to 2017, but the number of premature births was rising. Infertility and pregnancy are complex conditions that likely need a comprehensive approach to experience a successful outcome.

By Dr. Mercola
Over the years, I’ve written a number of articles outing industry front groups1 such as the Genetic Literacy Project, the American Council for Science and Health (ACSH),2 Science 2.0, GMO Answers, Independent Women’s Forum, Science Codex, Center for Consumer Freedom and the Center for Inquiry.
Once you start to investigate these front groups, you’ll find the same names appearing again and again, cowriting articles, interviewing each other and referring to each other’s work in a closed loop.
I’ve also written about academics and journalists who, while presenting themselves as independent experts, are actually shills for industry. This is a fairly close-knit group of individuals, so the worst actors are not hard to identify based on their associations.
Well-established actors include Forbes contributor Kavin Senapathy,3 Henry Miller, Steven Salzberg,4 Bruce Chassy, Jon Entine,5,6 Kevin Folta, Keith Kloor7 and Mark Lynas.
Learn to Recognize Astroturfing When You See It

In the TED Talk above, award-winning investigative journalist Sharyl Attkisson discusses strategies used by industry to manipulate public opinion and steer online discussion.
A strategy that has become phenomenally popular with the advent of social media is astroturfing, which is when a special interests group creates a fake grassroots campaign for or against a particular agenda. You might think it’s a group of moms devoted to children’s health that is touting the benefits of GMOs or vaccines, for example, when in fact the campaign is run by industry.
Increasingly over the past year or so you may have seen a number of articles simultaneously criticizing both the “anti-vaxxers” and “anti-GMO movement,” making contemptuous and sometimes wildly insulting comments about people who question the safety of either of these industries and their wares.
While GMOs and vaccines may seem like strange bedfellows, the cross-linking of these two industries in propaganda material is neither accidental nor haphazard.
Industry Messaging Example

In a May 18, 2017 Forbes article,8 Senapathy (one well-known mouthpiece for the GMO industry) took aim at the “anti-vaccine and anti-GMO movements,” saying they’re “inextricably linked and cause preventable suffering.”

“The thoroughly answered question of whether vaccines cause autism isn’t really a question outside of conspiracy-theorist circles,” Senapathy writes.

“The body of evidence shows that vaccination has … vastly reduced suffering and death … and that vaccines don’t cause autism, cancer, dementia or long term health problems, and that any minute risk is vastly outweighed by benefits to individuals and society.

Yet with the backing of prominent leaders like Robert DeNiro and Robert Kennedy Jr., anti-vaccine groups fuel common narratives that keep herd immunity down, directly leading to suffering and death.

Now with Donald Trump embracing vaccine skeptics, the anti-vaccine movement has earned a hallowed place on the shelf next to other tinfoil hat clad schools of thought.

The question of the safety of genetically engineered crops (GMOs) has been answered just as thoroughly, and the anti-GMO movement deserves its own place on the same shelf, not just for being wrong but for its role in unconscionable suffering …

She goes on to point out how similar the communication tactics are between vaccine and GMO detractors. Ironically, her article reveals just as much if not more about the biotech and vaccine industries’ messaging tactics. You can go through her article and check off numerous boxes for how to spot a piece of industry propaganda.
That includes the claim that the science is settled (which automatically precludes the need for further discussion), citing a fellow industry shill (in this case Kloor), using strong, derogatory language when describing those who disagree with industry talking points, making ample references to “conspiracy theories” and “other tinfoil hat clad schools of thought.”
Seven Classic Propaganda Techniques

Whenever you hear or read that someone is a “quack,” and that “the science has been settled,” or that something is “science-based,” it’s probably a smear campaign created by an astroturf group, industry front group or paid shill. In fact, the seven techniques of propaganda have been clearly delineated and are used without exception by most industries. As noted by writer Morgan Crouch in his article, “What Are the Seven Techniques of Propaganda?” these include:9

Name calling — Derogatory terms or discriminatory words used to arouse suspicion and prejudice
Glittering generalities — Slogans, catchphrases and highly generalized statements that sound good but mean little and prove nothing (such as “the science is settled”)
Transfer — The linking of a company/industry idea with a revered symbol
Testimonial — Testimony by a respected authority, similar to celebrity endorsement
Plain folks — Corporate material presented by someone who appears to be “just like you” — someone who shares your concerns and ideals
Bandwagon — Creating the illusion that there’s a consensus, which capitalizes on people’s inherent desire to be on the “right” side
Card stacking — Using only those facts that support the company’s/industry’s ideas, with the aim of making you assume these facts are conclusive. As noted by Crouch, “By ‘stacking cards against the truth,’ propagandists can control the beliefs of their audience”

Pesticide and Vaccine Partnerships Revealed
While Senapathy tries to show how those who question the safety of either GMOs or vaccines are all alike — that is, tinfoil hat-wearing lunatics who follow flat earth theories in their spare time — what she ultimately achieves is a perfect example of industry PR.
This systematic messaging strategy has been carefully developed, and is known to have a penetrating psychological effect. Both the vaccine and biotechnology industries use the same terminology and the same psychological assault strategies to make you feel like you’re in the wrong — or worse.

In her article, Senapathy basically accuses all vaccine and GMO safety advocates of being killers, merely for asking questions and not settling for non-answers, and doing what they think is right for their own health and that of their children.
Another article10 that connects the vaccine and chemical technology industries was recently published by The Feed.
In it, Ashleigh Morse, Ph.D., whose training centers on psychology and the influence of environmental cues on decision-making, and who says she works as a consultant to “a range of clients” in the field of science communication and public health,11 argues that juries are incapable of assessing the validity of scientific evidence presented in court, or the validity of the scientific methods used.
Specifically, Morse — whose professional credits include a single published research paper listed on her LinkedIN bio on the role of opioid processes in reward and decision-making — is referring to the recent jury verdict against Monsanto, but she goes on to link that to vaccine science. “When juries decide on the science, we get autism linked to vaccines and the Monsanto verdict,” she writes.
When In Doubt, Blame the Russians

Then there’s the curious claim that the Russians are to blame for Americans’ lack of faith in vaccine safety.12 According to a recent paper13 published in the American Journal of Public Health, Russian trolls and Soviet-directed Twitter bots promoted anti-vaccine information on social media to “amplify the vaccine debate” and create dissent in the U.S.
According to the authors, “Accounts masquerading as legitimate users create false equivalency, eroding public consensus on vaccination,” and “Directly confronting vaccine skeptics enables bots to legitimize the vaccine debate.” Those two sentences are interesting and revealing indeed.
In a nutshell, they’re saying that by providing anti-vaccine content, these bots made it seem as though there was actually something to discuss when, in the opinion of the authors, no discussion about vaccine safety should occur at all.
Apparently, it is their view that the vaccine debate is “illegitimate,” since there’s “public consensus” on vaccines (refer back to the bandwagon strategy, No. 6 in the propaganda list above).
In other words, everyone knows vaccines are safe; the science is settled, so there’s no valid reason to question it. Summing up the alleged Russian bots’ efforts to sway public opinion against vaccination, the authors referred to it as “weaponized health communication.”
The Russians Did It Again

Coincidentally, the vaccine paper above was submitted for publication shortly after news stories began circulating claiming the Russians were behind anti-GMO rhetoric.14 Minnesota Farm Living writes:15

“Researchers from Iowa State University (Shawn Dorius and Carolyn Lawrence-Dill) wanted to better understand the controversy around genetically engineered food.16 The issue is with the overwhelming belief in the science community is that GMOs are safe, consumers still question their safety. Dorius and Lawrence-Dill wanted to find out why.

What they found was surprising. The ISU researchers looked at not only how U.S. publications portrayed GMOs but also looked at the American versions of RT and Sputknik, two Russian publications. They counted how many times the term ‘GMO’ was used in different publications …

They went a step further and analyzed the tone of each article. What they found is the Russian publications were overwhelming anti-GMO. The articles talked negatively about environmental risks, nutrition concerns, and health risks of GMOs.”

Here, the author links to the “Are GMOs Safe?” page on the Genetic Literacy Project’s website as evidence to support GMO safety. But, the Genetic Literacy Project is a well-known front group for the GMO industry and hardly a reliable source of impartial information.
As for why the Russians would want to spread anti-GMO rhetoric in the U.S., the study authors note Russia has an interest in creating division among the American people to weaken the country as a whole, and to promote their own agricultural exports, as Russia banned GMOs in 2016 and is trying to increase its exports of organic food.
Claim of Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety Is Patently False
In the Minnesota Farm Living article cited above, you can see the telltale industry rhetoric in the sentence, “the overwhelming belief in the science community is that GMOs are safe, [yet] consumers still question their safety.” The reality is there is no scientific consensus on the safety of GMOs.
That is in fact the title of a scientific statement17 published in the peer-reviewed journal Environmental Sciences Europe, January 24, 2015. The statement, aptly titled “No Scientific Consensus on GMO Safety,” was signed by 300 scientists, researchers, physicians and scholars.
What’s more, the paper states that the claim of scientific consensus on GMO safety is in actuality “an artificial construct that has been falsely perpetuated,” and that such a claim “is misleading and misrepresents or outright ignores the currently available scientific evidence and the broad diversity of scientific opinions among scientists on this issue.”
In addition, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration still does not possess any evidence demonstrating safety because they do not do scientific reviews. And even if they did, hundreds of scientists say there’s no evidence demonstrating that genetically engineered foods are safe, and a number of independent studies have raised serious health concerns.
To learn more about how GMOs were introduced into the food supply without safety testing, see my two-part interview with attorney Steven Druker, author of “Altered Genes, Twisted Truth.” (Part 1, Part 2.)
GMO-Vaccine Convergence
The reason for the joining of PR forces between the vaccine and biotech industries becomes clearer when you take into account the fact that GMOs are moving into the vaccine industry. The 2016 article,18 “GMOs Lead the Fight Against Zika, Ebola and the Next Unknown Pandemic,” published in The Conversation, asserts that GMOs play a “vital role” in medicine, adding:

“Most modern biomedical advances, especially the vaccines used to eradicate disease and protect against pandemics … rely on the same molecular biology tools that are used to create genetically modified organisms.

To protect the public, scientists have embraced GMO technology to quickly study new health threats, manufacture enough protective vaccines, and monitor and even predict new outbreaks.”

Additionally, scientists are also exploring the possibility of vaccinating plants against pests as an alternative to using pesticides.19 In other words, it’s really quite crucial for these two bedfellows, strange as their joining may seem at first, to get people to embrace both genetic engineering and vaccines.
That’s why we’re now seeing more and more articles deriding both vaccine and GMO safety advocates in the same piece, whether it necessarily makes sense to do so or not.
Both of these industries are using the exact same messaging strategies — because so far they have worked — to achieve the same aim: Shame those who dare question the safety of either, and make them feel like ignorant outcasts and social misfits, thereby shutting down the conversation.
Preempting Your Rights
In my five-part “Ghost in the Machine” series, I discuss the many ways in which big industries manipulate science, and how they’ve captured our regulatory agencies and manipulate our political system. Here’s a listing of the series, in case you missed any of them:

“Introduction to Ghost in the Machine — A New Article Series That Exposes How Puppet Masters Control the Planet for Their Benefit”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 1 — Drug Safety and Media Shaped by Big Pharma”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 2 — Success Breeds Greed That Gets in the Way of Ethics, Common Sense and Caution”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 3 — Pride and the Politics of Vaccines”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 4 — The War on Supplements, Essential Oils and Homeopathy”

“Ghost in the Machine, Part 5 — Lies, Denial, Deceit and Manipulative ‘Research'”

A feature common to both the vaccine industry and the biotech industry is the use of legislation to preempt your rights and force you to use their products whether you want to or not, and without regard for the health consequences.
In recent years, I’ve written extensively about the vaccine industry’s attempts to mandate vaccines and eliminate personal belief exemptions across the U.S. In some cases, they’ve succeeded. In others, they’ve lost, but efforts to strip every American of their right to informed consent and medical freedom is ongoing.
The chemical technology industry is following the same agenda. One of the latest infringements on your rights is a provision in the Farm Bill that would block local governments from regulating pesticide use. The U.S. House committee approved the draft back in April. As noted by Jay Feldman, executive director of Beyond Pesticides:20

“This is really a backdoor attempt to interfere with state governments and local governments. I think the trend is for local governments to engage on this issue. This would undermine that.”

Monsanto Ghostwriting Shill Attempts to Tie USRTK to Russian Troll Efforts
A common corporate tactic is to use “third-party experts” to bring the industry’s message to the public under the cloak of independent opinion or expertise (No. 4, “Testimonial”). The idea is that academic types are far more credible than industry employees when it comes to defending the industry’s position.
A well-known spokesperson for the GMO industry is Henry Miller, who was thoroughly outed as a Monsanto shill during the 2012 Proposition 37 GMO labeling campaign in California. A “No on 37” advertisement had to be pulled off the air because Miller was fraudulently identified as being part of the Stanford University faculty.
Last year, Miller was outed yet again — this time as a ghostwriter for Monsanto. Forbes fired Miller when it became clear he had submitted ghostwritten material. On a relevant side note, Senapathy has cowritten articles with Miller, which is why some of her Forbes articles ended up being deleted as well,21 and the foreword for her book “Fear Babe” was written by Folta, a University of Florida professor who hid his financial ties to Monsanto.
The Freedom of Information Act Request (FOIA) discovery against Monsanto was led by U.S. Right to Know (USRTK). Proving he’s still working on Monsanto’s behalf, Miller penned a two-part article22,23 for Investor’s Business Daily this past summer, in which he tries — quite unsuccessfully — to tie USRTK to the alleged Russian GMO disinformation campaign.
The fact that they’re still turning to Miller is probably a sign of just how desperate Monsanto (now Bayer) has become. Other discovery documents obtained by USRTK included email correspondence revealing Monsanto has been quite desperate for a number of years already.
In an email dated February 26, 2015, Daniel Goldstein, senior science lead of medical sciences and outreach for Monsanto, tells Monsanto’s food safety scientific affairs lead, John Vicini, Ph.D.:24

In this email, Goldstein admits two pearls: First, the list of supporters willing to do their dirty work is short — which is why we keep seeing the same names pop up in pro-GMO propaganda pieces — and ACSH is a most valuable front group for the biotech industry.
Another Undercover Ambassador for GMO Industry Wants You to Think the Russians Are Responsible for ‘Anti-Vaccine Myths’

So, who else wants you to think that “the Russians did it”? Mark Lynas, a long-term shill for the GMO industry, just published: “Opinion: Russian Campaign to Spread Anti-Vaccine Myths Part of a Wider War on Science and Truth”25 on the Alliance for Science website.
As the other examples cited above, Lynas — normally a pro-GMO advocate — is now cross-linking GMOs and vaccines, closely mimicking the core message of Senapathy’s article, which is that “Many anti-GMO groups and anti-vaxxers are closely linked.”
Again, what we’re seeing is a crossover or merging of the GMO and vaccine industries in terms of messaging and propaganda angles. Rather than fighting public doubt separately, the shills for these industries are now putting out a single joint message that anyone who doubts the science presented by either of them is an anti-science nut job.
The take-home message here is that these tactics are nothing but a PR ploy. Yes, they’re trying to make you feel like an outsider, an outcast. They’re trying to make you feel ashamed of your “ignorance,” or worse, as if you’ve fallen for false propaganda propagated by evil Russians in an effort to divide and conquer.
But all you really need to do is look for the hallmarks of astroturfing, and you’ll quickly see through their ruse. You are not wrong for questioning flawed and biased science. You are not ignorant for questioning whether vaccines and GMOs might be unsafe when there’s a clear lack of evidence to support safety claims.
You are not a danger to the public for looking at the evidence and making your own decisions about whether or not you want your family to receive a particular vaccine or eat a certain food. Your inquiries and thought processes are only dangerous to the industries in question which, by the way, are willing to go to just about any lengths to hide the dangers of their products in order to maintain their profits. Stand your ground. It’s solid.

By Dr. Mercola
Food is certainly a cornerstone of living a healthy lifestyle, and it’s one of my true passions. My interest began during my 30 years of practice and experience, when I personally witnessed the healing powers of healthy whole foods.

Many chronic diseases can be prevented and in some cases reversed via the many health-giving properties of whole foods. Eating right is truly one of the most powerful tools available to help you take control of your health.

Aside from its therapeutic potential, food is delicious, and it’s arguably in the kitchen and around the dinner table that many of life’s most memorable moments take place. With that in mind, food should be about enjoyment, culture and family just as much as it is about health and nutrition.

This is why Mercola Healthy Recipes was created — to provide a resource where you can find recipes that are both delicious and truly good for you. Even better, the recipes are based on my optimized nutrition plan, making it even easier to follow the plan and eat right.

Whether you’re looking for a tangy salad to enjoy on a hot summer’s day or a hearty bowl of soup or stew to get you through the winter, Mercola Healthy Recipes has meals for every palate and occasion.
From busy weeknights to company-worthy fare, vegetable dishes and meats, the recipes we’ve included will bring out your inner chef while helping you reach optimal health.

The Three Recipes I Eat Almost Daily

Many people ask what I personally eat. The recipes that follow provide examples of my typical breakfast, lunch and snack.
My Chocolate Fat Bomb recipe provides you with the energy you need to perform your tasks in your daily life whether at home, school or at work, and it’s full of healthy ingredients like avocados to give you a surge in energy.

Click Here

My delicious keto salad is a recipe that I’ve tinkered with over the last few months. It’s also rich in “good” fats that help lower your risk of heart disease and manage cholesterol levels.

Click Here

My Macadamia Nut Fudge is a mouth watering recipe that is loaded with all-natural ingredients. It’s the combination of healthy fats and nutrients that make it so tasty and a great complement to the other foods I eat throughout the day.

Click Here

Bone Broth: One of Our Most Popular Recipes of 2016
Bone broth contains a variety of valuable nutrients, including calcium, collagen, and bone marrow, in a form your body can easily absorb and use.

Bone broth’s popularity as a superfood is growing, and it’s become quite trendy over the last couple of years, even though bone broth may quite possibly be one of the oldest meals on record.

Homemade bone broth may help reduce joint pain and inflammation, promote strong bones and boost hair and nail growth — no wonder it’s been one of our most popular articles of 2016!

The recipe that follows calls for beef bones, but you can also make bone broth using whole organic chicken, whole fish (including the head) or fish bones, or pork. Each will render a different flavor.
If you’re using chicken, simply place the entire chicken, raw, into the pot in place of the beef bones and proceed with the recipe as follows. One note, if cooking a whole chicken, the meat should start separating from the bone after about two hours.

Simply remove the chicken from the pot and separate the meat from the bones. Then place the bones back in and continue to simmer.
You can even use bones from a roasted chicken or turkey carcass to make bone broth, which is incredibly cost effective since you would otherwise throw them away. Click below to see the recipe details.

Click Here

A New Recipe Series to Try — Three Homemade Condiments
You may not realize how many unsavory ingredients, from high-fructose corn syrup to soybean oil to genetically modified ingredients (GMOs), are found in common store-bought condiments.
You can make far healthier versions, quickly, at home — and they taste better too. Click on the button below for more information and ingredients.

Click Here

Expand Your Culinary Horizons With Mercola Healthy Recipes
At Mercola Healthy Recipes, we’ve created healthy, balanced recipes that your body was designed to eat. This way, you can satisfy your taste buds, expand your culinary horizons and support your health, all with no fuss. You can use the buttons below to browse through all Mercola Healthy Recipes or search for a recipe of your choice.
See All Mercola Recipes
 

New and Improved Search Engine
Enter Your Search Below

Search

Using technology from

By Dr. Mercola

Another Thanksgiving has come and gone, which means today you may have a refrigerator that’s overflowing with leftovers. Ironically, the holiday season from Thanksgiving to New Year – a time centered on gratitude and giving – is actually one of the most wasteful times of year.
Household waste, including trash from packages and wrapping paper along with food waste, increases by more than 25 percent during the holidays, adding an additional 1 million tons a week to US landfills.1
As for turkey, Americans buy about 581 million pounds for Thanksgiving, and throw away 200 million of them – that’s more than one-third of it, wasted. According to the Natural Resources Defense Council:2

“Along with trashing uneaten turkeys… [Americans will] be wasting the resources necessary for its production…
…meaning 105 billion gallons of water (enough to supply New York City for over 100 days) and greenhouse gas emissions equivalent to 800,000 car trips from New York to San Francisco. That’s enough turkey to provide each American household that is food insecure with more than 11 additional servings.”

If you’ve got turkey leftover, don’t throw it in the trash. Repurpose it into another meal. Even the bones and carcass can be used to make an incredibly delicious and healthy roast turkey vegetable soup.

Roast Turkey Vegetable Soup

This recipe for Roast Turkey Vegetable Soup, from Earthbound Farm Organic,3 is perfect after Thanksgiving, but you can make it year-round (and substitute organic pastured chicken, if you like).
It makes use of your leftover turkey meat and, even better, the bones and carcass. The latter, which many people throw away as “waste,” are actually what make this soup so good for you – it creates nourishing bone broth.

Roast Turkey Vegetable Soup4

Ingredients

1 organic turkey carcass (with most meat removed)

2 yellow onions (cut into 8 pieces each)

2 large carrots (cut into 1-inch lengths)

2 stalks celery (cut into 1-inch lengths)

1 bay leaf

3 sprigs fresh thyme

12 fresh parsley stems

1 tsp whole black peppercorns

1 large carrot (cut in half lengthwise, then crosswise into 1/4-inch slices)

2 stalks celery (sliced 1/4 inch thick)

1 small fennel bulb (cored, cut in half, and sliced 1/4 inch thick)

1 leek (cut in half lengthwise, then crosswise into 1/4-inch slices)

1 cup green beans (cut into 1-inch lengths)

2 small zucchini (cut in half lengthwise, then crosswise into 1/4-inch slices)

3 cups cubed cooked turkey meat (optional)

Salt (to taste)

Freshly ground pepper (to taste)

Directions

Preheat the oven to 400°F. Place the turkey carcass and bones in a roasting pan and place in the oven. Roast for 45 minutes, then add the onions, carrots, and celery to the pan. Cook until the vegetables and bones begin to brown, 30 to 45 minutes.

Transfer the contents of the roasting pan to a large stock pot. Add cold water to completely cover the bones and bring to a simmer over high heat.

Add the bay leaf, thyme sprigs, parsley, and peppercorns; reduce the heat to a setting that will maintain a slow simmer.

Cook the stock for 4 hours, adding more water if the level drops below the bones and vegetables.

Let cool for 30 minutes, then strain the stock through a colander or sieve, pressing on the solids to extract all the liquid. Discard the contents of the colander. At this point, you can continue with the soup recipe, or cool the stock and refrigerate it, covered, for up to 5 days, or freeze it.

Return the stock to a large Dutch oven or 4-quart pot. Add the carrots and cook the soup over medium heat for 10 minutes.

Add the celery, fennel, and leeks, and cook for 5 minutes. Add the green beans and raise the heat to medium-high. Cook for 5 minutes, then add the cubed turkey and the zucchini. Continue cooking until the zucchini are tender, about 5 minutes.

Season to taste with salt and pepper, and serve hot.

Bone Broth Is Healing to Your Gut

Bone broth is a staple of the GAPS Diet, which is based on the Gut and Psychology Syndrome (GAPS) principles developed by Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride. It is an excellent food to improve your gut, bone, and joint health.

The GAPS diet is often used to treat children with autism and other disorders rooted in gut dysfunction, but just about anyone with allergies or less than optimal gut health can benefit from it, as it is designed to heal leaky gut.

If your gut is leaky or permeable, partially undigested proteins have the opportunity to pass through your intestine and access your bloodstream and contribute to allergic reactions. This is known as leaky gut syndrome, or LGS.

When your intestinal lining is repeatedly damaged due to reoccurring leaky gut syndrome, damaged cells called microvilli become unable to do their job properly. They become unable to process and utilize the nutrients and enzymes that are vital to proper digestion.

Eventually, digestion is impaired and absorption of nutrients is negatively affected. As more exposure occurs, your body initiates an attack on these foreign invaders. It responds with inflammation, allergic reactions, and other symptoms we relate to a variety of diseases.

The primary food that you focus on eating if you start out on the GAPS diet is bone broth, because not only is it very easily digested, it also contains profound immune-optimizing components. This is why, even if you don’t have gut issues, bone broth is still a wonderful staple food to include in your diet.

6 Top Benefits of Bone Broth

There are many reasons for incorporating good-old-fashioned bone broth into your diet. The following health benefits attest to its status as “good medicine.”

Helps heal and seal your gut, and promotes healthy digestion: The gelatin found in bone broth is a hydrophilic colloid. It attracts and holds liquids, including digestive juices, thereby supporting proper digestion Inhibits infection caused by cold and flu viruses, etc.: A study published over a decade ago found that chicken soup indeed has medicinal qualities, significantly mitigating infection5

Reduces joint pain and inflammation, courtesy of chondroitin sulphates, glucosamine, and other compounds extracted from the boiled down cartilage Fights inflammation: Amino acids such as glycine, proline, and arginine all have anti-inflammatory effects.

Arginine, for example, has been found to be particularly beneficial for the treatment of sepsis6 (whole-body inflammation). Glycine also has calming effects, which may help you sleep better

Promotes strong, healthy bones: Bone broth contains high amounts of calcium, magnesium, and other nutrients that play an important role in healthy bone formation Promotes healthy hair and nail growth, thanks to the gelatin in the broth

You Can Make Bone Broth from Beef, Pork, or Fish, Too

If you’re not a fan of turkey, don’t worry. You can also make bone broth using whole organic chicken, whole fish (including the head) or fish bones, beef marrow bones, or pork. Each will render a different flavor, with chicken being the mildest. Perhaps the most important caveat when making broth, whether you’re using turkey, chicken, or beef, is to make sure the bones are from organically raised, pastured or grass-fed animals. As noted by Sally Fallon, chickens raised in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) tend to produce stock that doesn’t gel, and this gelatin has long been valued for its therapeutic properties.7 As noted by Hilary Boynton, co-author of The Heal Your Gut Cookbook: Nutrient-Dense Recipes for Intestinal Health Using the GAPS Diet:

“You definitely want to get the best bones you can get—bones from pastured animals. If you can’t find a farmer in your area, reach out to your local Weston A. Price chapter leader… There are also resources to get homemade bone broth if you can’t make it yourself. …If you can only get CAFO bones, I guess you go with that. You can still get some healing benefits. But it would be better to go with bones from pastured animals.”

If you’re wondering when you’ll have time to simmer bone broth for hours on the stove, try preparing homemade bone broth by using a slow cooker or crockpot. A slow cooker is actually an excellent way to go, as it is safer than leaving a burner on for extended periods. To use a slow cooker, you will need to first bring the broth to a boil in a pot on your stove (since a slow cooker won’t boil), then skim the scum off the top. Pay careful attention to this stage, as once the broth begins to boil the scum is rolled right back into the broth. The scum are the impurities that you want to remove. You can then transfer the broth to your slow cooker and turn it on to low heat for 24 to 72 hours.

What Else Can You Do to Reduce Food Waste During the Holidays?

You’ve now got a way to use up all that leftover turkey, including the bones and carcass. But what about your other leftovers? First, reduce the amount of excess at future holiday meals by cooking only as much as you need. There are many free calculators online to help you make an accurate estimate. One to try is the Perfect Portion Tool from Love Food Hate Waste.8 While shopping, look for locally produced foods, which are fresher and keep longer, as well as have a smaller ecological footprint.
You can also make a point to buy the “ugly ducklings” in the produce section, which makes use of food that might otherwise be thrown away. When you store your food, such as produce, create a “vacuum pack” to help protect it from oxygen and airborne microbes that will accelerate its decay. Leave the produce in the bag it came in from the grocery store, place it against your chest, and use your arm to squeeze the excess air out of the bag. Then seal it with a twist tie (or use an automatic vacuum sealer like the FoodSaver).
Next, turn your food scraps into valuable fertilizer by composting. This benefits soil, plants, and the greater environment, while keeping more food waste out of landfills. Finally, donate excess food and garden produce to food banks, soup kitchens, pantries, shelters—and your friends and neighbors. If you’re adventurous, there are even apps available, such as LeftoverSwap, that allow you to swap leftovers with others in your community.

[DELETE PREVIOUS ARTICLES ABOUT BROCCOLI SPROUT BENEFITS] – Requested by DOC

By Dr. Mercola

Science has proven time after time that food is potent medicine.  Broccoli, for example, has a solid scientific foundation showing it’s one of the most valuable health-promoting foods around.

For example, a compound in broccoli, glucosinolateglucoraphanin, produces a metabolite called sulforaphane that can significantly improve your blood pressure and kidney function1 by normalizing a process called DNA methylation.

Interestingly, preliminary research suggests sulforaphane may also be of particular benefit for those with autism—improving verbal communication and decreasing repetitive behaviors.

Broccoli Compound May Improve Symptoms of Autism

While limited in scope, the study still shows that food is an important part of the treatment plan for autism, and can have a significant impact on behavior. A total of 44 boys and men diagnosed with autism were enrolled in the study.

Some received sulforaphane in capsule form, while the controls received a placebo. As reported by Time Magazine:2

“The compound was chosen because it can help trigger a heat-shock response, a series of biological events that protect cells from stress during fevers; some people with autism have been known to see improvement in regard to repetitive behaviors, for example, during fevers.

Around 80 percent of the participants had a history of experiencing the ‘fever effect.’”

Positive results were observed within as little as four weeks. Communication improved, as did symptoms of hyperactivity and irritability. By the end of the 18-week study, about 50 percent of those receiving sulforaphane experienced improved ability to interact socially.

About one-third of those treated did not have any noticeable results however, so more research needs to be done to ascertain how and why the compound works in certain cases. Still, considering the many health benefits of broccoli, there’s certainly no reason to avoid it.

On the contrary, I believe part of the reason for its beneficial effect on autistic symptoms may be related to its ability to affect gene expression, inhibit certain detrimental gut bacteria, and promote detoxification of harmful environmental pollutants.

All of these factors play a role in autism, and pretty much anything that will have a beneficial effect on them is likely to be useful to some degree.

Sulforaphane Benefits Gene Expression and Gut Health

Sulforaphane is an organic sulfur compound found in cruciferous vegetables, including broccoli, Brussels sprouts, cabbage, cauliflower, horseradish, and arugula—but broccoli sprouts is the richest source.

Sulforaphane has been shown to have antimicrobial properties. It also kills cancer stem cells, which slows tumor growth. As noted earlier, it also normalizes DNA methylation, which plays a role in a number of diseases, including hypertension, kidney function,3 gut health,4 and cancer.

In simple terms, DNA methylation5 is the process by which a methyl group (one carbon atom attached to three hydrogen atoms) is added to part of a DNA molecule.

This is a crucial part of normal cell function as it allows cells to “remember who they are and where they have been.” DNA methylation also suppresses viral- and other disease-related gene expression.

Sulforaphane influences bacteria as well. For example, broccoli sprouts have been shown to inhibit Helicobacter pylori, the bacteria thought to cause gastric ulcers. Interestingly, H. pylori may also play a role in autism.

It is widely known that autistic children tend to suffer from gastrointestinal (GI) problems, with those experiencing the worst GI problems often having the most severe cases of autism.

In one study,6 researchers analyzed the gut microflora of 20 healthy and 20 autistic children using fecal samples, and found distinct differences between the two groups.

Specifically, those with autism had reduced levels of Prevotella, Coprococcus, and Veillonellaceae, compared to healthy children. These belong to groups of carbohydrate-degrading and/or fermenting microbes, and may be critical for healthy interactions between microbes in the gut.

The presentation below discusses the links between H. pylori and autism and language delays, noting that H. pylori can instigate leaky gut and influences genes associated with the speech disorder apraxia7 that affects many autistic children.

Other Health Benefits of Broccoli

Other research has shown that broccoli can be helpful in the prevention of:

Heart disease
UV radiation damage to your skin when applied topically8
Osteoarthritis9, 10, 11, 12
Allergies13
Diabetes14

The sulforaphane from broccoli plays a role in activating more than 200 different genes, which accounts for its varied effects. Fortunately, you don’t have to consume vast volumes of broccoli to reap its benefits. In one study,15 just four servings of broccoli—about 10 broccoli spears—per week was found to protect men from prostate cancer.

Broccoli Sprouts Combat Exposure to Environmental Pollutants

Another major benefit of broccoli sprouts relates to its ability to detox pollutants, as demonstrated in recent research.16, 17, 18  This is important for virtually everyone these days, but especially women planning a pregnancy. Autistic children are known to have higher levels of environmental toxins in their system, and this underlying toxic burden plays a significant role.

For example, one recent study19, 20, 21, 22 found that every one percent increase in genital malformations in newborn males within a particular US county was associated with a 283 percent increased rate in autism. According to the researchers, genital malformations are signs of exposure to harmful toxins.

The correlation between genital malformation and autism in turn offer strong support for the notion that autism is the result of parental overexposure to environmental toxins. Another study23 published last year also found that autistic children have markedly higher levels of toxic volatile organic compounds (VOCs). They also had fewer healthy bacteria, such as Bifidobacterium. With regards to the detoxifying powers of broccoli sprouts, Time Magazine noted that:24

“Broccoli sprouts specifically are a source of glucoraphanin, which creates sulforaphane when chewed or swallowed. That compound accelerates the body’s ability to detoxify from various pollutants…”

The three-month long study included about 300 Chinese men and women living one of the most polluted areas of China, a rural community in the Jiangsu Province. The test group drank half a cup a day of a beverage consisting of sterilized water, pineapple and lime juice, with dissolved freeze-dried broccoli sprout powder. The control group drank the same mixture without the addition of the sprouts.

After urine and blood tests were collected and analyzed, the researchers found that the test group, who received the broccoli sprout powder, excreted far greater levels of two carcinogens. Excretion of benzene increased 61 percent, and the rate of excretion of acrolein increased by 23 percent. Benzene is usually found in car exhaust fumes, but can also be ingested via soda, where it can form from benzoate salt—used as a preservative. Acrolein forms from the breakdown of certain indoor air pollutants, from the burning of organic matter such as tobacco, and the burning of fuels like gasoline.

Factors That Likely Contribute to Autism

With autism spectrum disorder now affecting as many as one in 50 children,25 it seems reasonable to assume that there are MANY factors contributing to this problem. Evidence suggests it’s rooted in a combination of toxic overload and other aggravating factors, including but not limited to the following:

Gut dysbiosis, especially in combination with vaccines and their additives like mercury (thimerosal), aluminum, and others, which are known to damage your mitochondria—the powerhouses in your body’s cells that produce energy. Your gastrointestinal system is often referred to as your “second brain,” containing some 100 million neurons—more than in either your spinal cord or your peripheral nervous system.
Vitamin D deficiency. The link between vitamin D deficiency in pregnant women and the proportionate jump in autism has been highlighted by Dr. John Cannell. Vitamin D receptors appear in a wide variety of brain tissue early in the fetal development, and activated vitamin D receptors increase nerve growth in your brain. I believe vitamin D deficiency during pregnancy is a MAJOR contributing factor to autism, especially when you consider that vitamin D also helps in the detoxification of mercury. Without sufficient amounts of vitamin D, any subsequent toxic assaults—regardless of the source—will be further magnified.
Electromagnetic radiation (EMR) from cell phones, cell towers, and Wi-Fi devices, which can trap heavy metals inside of nerve cells, accelerate heavy metal toxicity, and hinder natural detoxification processes.
Microbial toxins, such as mold. Children with autism not only have overwhelmed detoxification pathways and often heavy metal toxicity, but, according to Dr. Klinghardt, their bodies are also frequently beset by toxic microbes, including neuro-borreliosis, and possibly other Lyme co-infections.
Mercury toxicity. Pregnant mothers may inadvertently contribute to their child’s toxic load via dental amalgams, 50 percent of which are mercury, a known neurotoxin.

Healing the Gut May Be Key for the Treatment of Autism

Getting back to the issue of food, while broccoli sprouts may certainly be useful, parents of autistic children would do well to consider implementing the GAPS diet. Women planning a pregnancy can also reduce their chances of having an autistic child by paying careful attention to their gut health, along with avoiding toxic exposures of all kinds.

GAPS stands for Gut and Psychology Syndrome, pioneered by neurologist Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride, who successfully reversed her son’s autism. In her research, she discovered that nearly all mothers of autistic children have abnormal gut flora, which is significant because babies inherit their gut flora from their mothers at the time of birth. Establishing normal gut flora in the first 20 days or so of life plays a crucial role in the maturation of your baby’s immune system.

Babies who develop abnormal gut flora have compromised immune systems, which put them at higher risk for suffering vaccine reactions. If your baby has suboptimal gut flora, vaccines can become the proverbial “last straw” — the trigger that “primes” his/her immune system to develop chronic health problems.  This helps explain why not every child is damaged by vaccines, and why autism rates keep rising. More children are now born with elevated toxicity levels and damaged gut flora right from the start… Such is the legacy of our increasingly toxic world. Tack on a few exacerbating factors, and the child’s body simply cannot handle the onslaught.

The best way to prevent GAPS is for the mother to avoid all processed foods, sugar, antibiotics (including CAFO meats and antibacterial soaps) and birth control pills prior to conception as these cause yeast and fungi to grow and also cause leaky gut. This can then be followed by breastfeeding and avoiding the use of antibiotics during (intrapartum) and after delivering.  It’s also a good idea to make sure your baby’s microbiome is healthy before getting any vaccinations. Fortunately, it’s possible to rather inexpensively identify GAPS within the first weeks of your baby’s life, which can help you make better-informed decisions about vaccinations, and about how to proceed to set your child on the path to a healthy life.

The entire process for identifying children who would be at risk for developing autism from a vaccine is described in her book Gut and Psychology Syndrome, but to sum it up, in her practice she starts out by collecting a complete health history of the parents, and their gut health is assessed. Then, within the first few days of life, the stool of the child can be analyzed to determine the state of her gut flora, followed by a urine test to check for metabolites, which can give you a picture of the state of your child’s immune system. These tests are available in most laboratories around the world and cost a very reasonable amount, about $80 to $100 per test.

In my view, it is absolutely VITAL to perform this analysis BEFORE you consider vaccinating your child. If the test results are normal, the likelihood of autism after vaccines is dramatically reduced. If you find that your baby has abnormal gut microflora, or begins to develop symptoms of autism a year or two later, the GAPS program should be started immediately, as the younger the child is when you start the treatment, the better the results.

By Dr. Mercola

If you’ve ever had qualms about eating genetically modified (GM) foods, you’d likely be deeply concerned about receiving a GM vaccine as well.
Such vaccines are already being produced – some are even on the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) recommended vaccine schedule – even though, as is the case with GM foods, we know very little about their long-term effects.
In the interview above, Vicky Debold, PhD, RN, director of research and patient safety with the National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), spoke with me about the many reasons to be very wary of this new technology, which is far more intertwined with other biotech “innovations,” like GM food, than you might think.

Nobody Knows What Happens When You Inject People with GM Vaccines

There have been some fair warnings, though. In 2006, researchers wrote in the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health:1

“Genetically modified (GM) viruses and genetically engineered virus-vector vaccines possess significant unpredictability and a number of inherent harmful potential hazards… Horizontal transfer of genes… is well established. New hybrid virus progenies resulting from genetic recombination between genetically engineered vaccine viruses and their naturally occurring relatives may possess totally unpredictable characteristics with regard to host preferences and disease-causing potentials.
…There is inadequate knowledge to define either the probability of unintended events or the consequences of genetic modifications.”

Though this was six years ago, little has changed even as the technology has advanced. Today we have several different types of GM vaccines in production, development or research phases, such as:

DNA vaccines: DNA for a microbe’s antigens are introduced into the body, with the expectation that your cells will take up that DNA, which then instructs your cells to make antigen molecules. As the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Disease (a division of the National Institutes of Health) put it, “In other words, the body’s own cells become vaccine-making factories.”2
Naked DNA vaccines: A type of DNA vaccine in which microscopic particles coated with DNA are administered directly into your cells.
Recombinant Vector vaccines: Similar to DNA vaccines, but they use a virus or bacteria to act as a vector (or “carrier) to introduce microbial DNA into your cells.

There are experimental GM vaccines being developed that use tumorigenic cancer cells and cells from humans, dogs, monkeys, cows, pigs, rodents, birds and insects. What happens when foreign DNA is inserted into the human body is a mystery. Will it trigger undesirable changes in human cells or tissues? Will it combine or exchange genetic material with human DNA? Will it transfer to future generations? No one knows…

“We don’t know what portion of the [GM] DNA can be incorporated into our own genome, we don’t know what portion could be inheritable to our children, we also don’t know what happens when the immune system is exposed to DNA that has been recombined in lots of ways that the human body, through the course of time, has never had any exposure to… what diseases of the immune system may occur because of these exposures,” Debold said.
“Use of foreign DNA in various forms has the potential to cause a great deal of trouble, not only because there is the potential for it to recombine with our own DNA, there is the potential for it to turn the DNA ‘switches,’ the epigenetic parts of the DNA, on and off.”

Vaccine Adjuvants Used in GM Vaccines May be Even More Toxic Than Usual

An adjuvant is added to a vaccine in order to boost the body’s immune reaction to the viral or bacterial antigen contained in a vaccine. Under ideal circumstances, the antigen is what your body responds to and makes antibodies against (e.g. the lab altered viral or bacterial organisms being injected). By boosting your body’s immune response in this artificial way, the vaccine manufacturer can use a smaller amount of antigen, which makes production less expensive and the product more profitable (although definitely not safer, as adjuvants are usually foreign substances, metals or chemicals which can cause the immune system to overreact and attack the host body.)
Aluminum is a common vaccine adjuvant and also a well-known neurotoxin that can cause chronic inflammation in the body, including the brain. Although aluminum adjuvants have been added to inactivated vaccines used for decades in the U.S., aluminum-based adjuvants are not strong enough for GM vaccines, according to Debold, so drug companies are primarily interested in using oil-based adjuvants, like squalene, and other substances that can hyper-stimulate the body’s immune response.
While oil-based vaccine adjuvants like squalene have been proven to generate powerful acute inflammatory immune responses that stimulate increased production of antibodies, they have also been associated with unresolved, chronic inflammation in the body that can cause brain and immune system dysfunction, including autoimmune diseases.3 While the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has so far not licensed any vaccines distributed in the U.S. that contain squalene as an adjuvant, squalene adjuvants are used in some vaccines sold in Europe and other countries.

GM Vaccines You May Have Given to Your Kids…

Many are unaware that, despite the completely unknown long-term health consequences, GM vaccines are already in use and have been administered to American infants, children and adults for many years. Among them:

Hepatitis B vaccine: An inactivated recombinant DNA vaccine licensed for newborn infants and children in 1991, in which parts of the hepatitis B virus gene are cloned into yeast
Rotavirus vaccine: Live attenuated vaccines first licensed for infants and children licensed in 2006, which either contain genetically engineered human rotavirus strains or human-bovine hybridized reassortment rotavirus strains4
HPV vaccine (Gardasil or Cervarix): A recombinant vaccine licensed in 2006, which is prepared from virus-like particles (VLP’s) and may also include use of an insect-cell Baculovirus expression vector system for production

Then there are those “hybrid” vaccines that cross the (very narrow) threshold into the GM food realm… for instance, goats are being genetically engineered to become “pharm animals” that carry vaccines in their milk. If the experiments being conducted by researchers from Texas A&M are successful, they will produce an “edible” malaria vaccine, with the ultimate goal being that children drinking the milk will become vaccinated in the process. If vaccines in your milk sounds a bit to “out there,” it shouldn’t, as there are many connections between the companies that make GM food and those that make GM vaccines.

The Close Ties Between GM Foods and GM Vaccines

The companies that make vaccines and GMOs (genetically modified organisms) are deeply intertwined, only recently spinning off or merging to specialize in one or the other. Most vaccine revenues are earned by five companies that together held nearly 80 percent of the market in 2010:5

Sanofi Pasteur
GlaxoSmithKline
Merck & Co.
Pfizer
Novartis

These companies, which use genetic engineering to produce vaccines, are also primarily responsible for the introduction of genetic engineering into the food supply. For instance:

Genetic engineering giant Syngenta (third in total sales in the commercial agricultural seeds market) is the progeny of parent companies Novartis and AstraZeneca.
In 2001, Bayer CropScience became a leading genetically engineered crop producer with its purchase of Aventis’ agribusiness division.6
In 2004, Aventis merged with and into Sanofi. The new Sanofi-Aventis Group became the world’s 3rd largest pharmaceutical company. Aventis Pasteur, the vaccine division of Sanofi-Aventis Group, changed its name to Sanofi Pasteur. Sanofi Pasteur is the vaccines division of Sanofi Group. It is the largest company in the world devoted entirely to vaccines.
Prior to splitting its genetically engineered crop business from its vaccine business, Aventis was known primarily for the StarLink corn debacle (a type of GM corn grown for use in animal feed that contaminated the U.S. food supply in 2000). Bayer now sells Aventis’s Liberty Link crops, engineered to tolerate high doses of the company’s toxic herbicide called Liberty (glufosinate).7
Stauffer Seeds was a spin-off of Stauffer Chemical, formerly a division of Novartis.8 Stauffer Seeds and Prodigene conducted clinical trials on pigs using an edible vaccine for transmissible gastroenteritis virus (TGEV) expressed in corn.9
Prodigene was caught contaminating the food supply with its edible vaccine and the company went out of business, but not before it received a $6-million investment from the Governors Biotechnology Partnership, chaired by Iowa Governor Tom Vilsack. Vilsack, now the Obama Administration’s USDA Secretary, didn’t want any restrictions placed on experimental pharma crops. In reaction to suggestions that pharma crops should be kept away from food crops, Vilsack argued that ‘we should not overreact and hamstring this industry.’10
Prior to 1997, Monsanto (the world leader in GM crops) operated under three parts, the Ag Business (for agricultural products), the Chemicals Business, and the Pharmaceuticals Business, which is now Pharmacia, a subsidiary of Pfizer, the biggest pharmaceutical company in the world and the largest manufacturer of vaccines for food animals.11, 12
GlaxoSmithKline, while producing few products for food or agriculture, has been genetically engineering plants, animals and microorganisms for use in vaccines, pharmaceuticals and medical research.13

Bill Gates, Warren Buffet Supporting Propagation of Both Vaccines and GMOs

The most influential, and, of course, richest advocates for genetic engineering and vaccines are Bill Gates and Warren Buffet. They have business as well as philanthropic interests in these technologies and their Gates Foundation (Buffet has donated over $1.5 billion to the Foundation) allows them to mix business with philanthropy.
They – and the corporations they invite to join them – use the tax shelter of a non-profit organization to invest in for-profit enterprises. Gates & Buffet get tax write-offs for putting money in their foundation, but their foundation can give money (both as grants & investments) directly to for-profit corporations creating for-profit products.
This, obviously, creates huge conflict of interests.
For instance, Monsanto and other biotech companies have collaborated with the Gates Foundation via the Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) to promote the use of genetically modified (GM) crops in Africa. The Gates Foundation has donated hundreds of millions of dollars to AGRA, and in 2006 Robert Horsch was hired for the AGRA project. Horsch was a Monsanto executive for 25 years. In a nutshell, the project may be sold under the banner of altruism and ‘sustainability,’ but in reality it’s anything but. It’s just a multi-billion dollar enterprise to transform Africa into a GM-crop-friendly continent. The Foundation has also invested heavily in Monsanto stock, purchasing over $23 million worth in 2010.14
The Gates Foundation is also closely partnered with Big Pharma, to whom Bill Gates pledged $10 billion to distribute and administer multiple vaccines to children around the world. This, too, is billed as a humanitarian effort to save lives, but what children living in poverty in developing countries need most is healthy, plentiful food, clean water, better sanitation and improved living conditions. These are the keys to preventing the spread of infectious disease, and they appear to be wholly ignored by Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and non-profit organizations with financial ties to Big Pharma – at the children’s expense.
The Gates Foundation is even funding surveillance of anti-vaccine groups, and the following vaccine companies are supported by the Foundation through both investments and philanthropic projects:

Sanofi
GlaxoSmithKline
Merck
Pfizer
Novartis

Important Movements on the Horizon for Both GM Foods and Vaccines

It’s important to get all the facts before making your decision about vaccination; and to understand that in many state public health laws you still have the legal right to opt out of using a vaccine that you or your child do not want to receive. At present, all 50 states allow a medical exemption to vaccination (medical exemptions must be approved by an M.D. or D.O.); 48 states allow a religious exemption to vaccination; and 17 states allow a personal, philosophical or conscientious belief exemption to vaccination.
However, Washington state now requires parents to obtain the signature of a medical doctor or state-designated medical worker to obtain a philosophical exemption to vaccination. That is because non-medical vaccine exemptions have been restricted in Washington and Vermont and are under attack in California and New Jersey, while there is evidence that medical trade association lobbyists will be working to eliminate or severely restrict vaccine exemptions in Arizona, Connecticut, New York, Colorado and many other states.
Health liberty in America is being threatened by forced vaccination proponents employed by federal and state health departments, who are working with pharmaceutical companies and with Pharma-funded non-profit organizations to encourage government-enforced implementation of “no exceptions” one-size-fits-all vaccine laws. If you want to protect YOUR freedom to make informed, voluntary vaccination decisions in America, you need to take action today. (National vaccination policies are made at the federal level but vaccine laws are made at the state level, and it is at the state level where your action to protect your vaccine choice rights will have the greatest impact).
Signing up to be a user of NVIC’s free online Advocacy Portal at www.NVICAdvocacy.org gives you access to practical, useful information to help you communicate with your elected state legislators and become an effective vaccine choice advocate in your own community. You will get real-time Action Alerts about what you can do if there are threats to vaccine exemptions in your state. With the click of a mouse or one touch on a Smartphone screen, you will be put in contact with YOUR elected representatives so you can let them know how you feel and what you want them to do. Plus, when national vaccine issues come up, you will have all the information you need to make sure your voice is heard.
I also recommend that you join NVIC on facebook, and if you can contribute monetarily, doing so at NVIC.org.
As for GM foods, you can help to pass the United States’ first GMO labeling law – Proposition 37 – that will require labeling of genetically modified (GM) foods and food ingredients – and ban the routine industry practice of labeling and marketing such foods as “natural.” Prop 37 is the best chance we have of defeating the corporate agri-giants, and of forcing food manufacturers to stop hiding dangerous ingredients in our food, without our knowledge.

By Dr. Mercola

Scientists in Norway have released results from experimental feeding studies carried out over a 10-year period, and the verdict is in: If you want to avoid obesity, then avoid eating genetically engineered (GE) corn, corn-based products, and animals that are fed a diet of GE grain.
As reported by Cornucopia.org1, the project also looked at the effects on organ changes, and researchers found significant changes that affected weight gain, eating behaviors, and immune function.

How Genetically Engineered Corn and Soy Can Wreak Havoc on Your Health

According to the featured article2:

“The results show a positive link between GE corn and obesity. Animals fed a GE corn diet got fatter quicker and retained the weight compared to animals fed a non-GE grain diet. The studies were performed on rats, mice, pigs and salmon, achieving the same results.
… Researchers found distinct changes to the intestines of animals fed GMOs compared to those fed non-GMOs. This confirms other studies done by US researchers. Significant changes occurred in the digestive systems of the test animals’ major organs including the liver, kidneys, pancreas, genitals and more.”

Their findings (which were published July 11, 2012 in Norway by Forskning.no, an online news source devoted to Norwegian and international research3) showed that animals fed genetically engineered Bt corn ate more, got fatter, and were less able to digest proteins due to alterations in the micro-structure of their intestines.
They also suffered immune system alterations. The impaired ability to digest proteins may be of particular concern as this can have far-reaching implications for your health. If your body cannot digest proteins, your body will be less able to produce amino acids, which are necessary building blocks for proper cell growth and function.
As noted by Cornucopia.org:

“This not only may relate to a rise in obesity, but to increases in many modern diseases. These diseases include diabetes, digestive disorders, inflammatory bowel disease, colitis, autism spectrum disorders (ASD) (ADD), autoimmune diseases, sexual dysfunction, sterility, asthma, COPD and many more.
…[Lead author] Professor Krogdahl explains: “It has often been claimed that the new genes in genetically modified foods can’t do any damage because all genes are broken down beyond recognition in the gut. Our results show the contrary; that genes can be taken up across the intestinal wall, is transferred to the blood and is left in the blood, muscle and liver in large chunks so that they can be easily recognized… The biological impact of this gene transfer is unknown.”

Bt Toxin Found in Blood of Women and Fetuses

This is not the first time scientists have revealed significant biological impacts and related health problems as a result of eating a diet of genetically engineered foods. More often than not, unless the research is tainted by industry ties, studies into the effects of genetically engineered foods demonstrate that it is anything but safe. This isn’t so surprising when you consider that simple logic will tell you it’s probably not wise to consume a plant designed to produce its own pesticide, for example.
So-called “Bt corn” is equipped with a gene from the soil bacteria Bacillus thuringiensis (Bt), which produces Bt-toxin—a pesticide that breaks open the stomach of certain insects and kills them. This pesticide-producing corn entered the food supply in the late 1990’s, and over the past decade, the horror stories have started piling up.
Monsanto and the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) swore that the toxin would only affect insects munching on the crop. The Bt-toxin, they claimed, would be completely destroyed in the human digestive system and would not have any impact on animals and humans. The biotech companies have doggedly insisted that Bt-toxin doesn’t bind or interact with the intestinal walls of mammals, and therefore humans.
The featured research proves all such claims false.
Prior findings have already shown that Bt corn is anything but innocuous to the human system. Just last year, doctors at Sherbrooke University Hospital in Quebec found Bt-toxin in the blood4 of:

93 percent of pregnant women tested
80 percent of umbilical blood in their babies, and
67 percent of non-pregnant women

Bt-toxin breaks open the stomach of insects. Could it similarly be damaging the integrity of your digestive tract? If Bt-toxins can damage the intestinal walls of newborns and young children, the passage of undigested foods and toxins into the blood from the digestive tract could be devastating to their future health. Scientists speculate that it may lead to autoimmune diseases and food allergies. Furthermore, since the blood-brain barrier is not developed in newborns, toxins may enter the brain causing serious cognitive problems. Some healthcare practitioners and scientists are convinced that this one mechanism for autism.
If Bt genes are colonizing the bacteria living in the digestive tract of North Americans, we might expect to see an increase in gastrointestinal problems, autoimmune diseases, food allergies, and childhood learning disorders since the advent of Bt crops in 1996, and that’s exactly what’s being reported. For example, between 1997 and 2002 the number of hospitalizations related to allergic reactions to food increased by a whopping 265 percent. One out of 17 children now has some form of food allergy and allergy rates are rising.

Genetically Engineered Foods Trigger Adverse Immune System Responses

There’s plenty of evidence showing that the Bt-toxin produced in genetically modified Bt crops like corn and cotton plants is toxic to humans and mammals andtriggers immune system responses. For example, in government-sponsored research in Italy5, mice fed Monsanto’s Bt corn showed a wide range of immune responses, such as:

Elevated IgE and IgG antibodies, which are typically associated with allergies and infections
An increase in cytokines, which are associated with allergic and inflammatory responses. The specific cytokines (interleukins) that were found to be elevated are also higher in humans who suffer from a wide range of disorders, from arthritis and inflammatory bowel disease, to MS and cancer
Elevated T cells (gamma delta), which are increased in people with asthma, and in children with food allergies, juvenile arthritis, and connective tissue diseases.

Rats fed another of Monsanto’s Bt corn varieties called MON 863, also experienced an activation of their immune systems, showing higher numbers of basophils, lymphocytes, and white blood cells6. These can indicate possible allergies, infections, toxins, and various disease states including cancer. There were also signs of liver and kidney toxicity.

USDA Clears Roundup Ready Sugar Beets

So-called “Roundup Ready” crops are another type of genetically engineered crops. While Bt crops contain a gene that produces a pesticide inside the plant itself, Roundup Ready crops are designed to withstand otherwise lethal topical doses of glyphosate—a broad spectrum herbicide, and the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup as well as hundreds of other products.
This way, the crop survives while all weeds are theoretically eliminated from the field. I say ‘theoretically’ because the overuse of the herbicide has led to the rapid development of glyphosate-resistant superweeds. It’s estimated that more than 130 types of weeds spanning 40 U.S. states are now herbicide-resistant, and the superweeds are showing no signs of stopping.
Roundup Ready crops have also been linked to serious health problems—particularly relating to fertility and birth defects—as has glyphosate itself, which is why the latest news regarding the deregulation of Roundup Ready sugar beets is all the more disappointing.
A number of organizations challenged the USDA approval of Roundup Ready (RR) sugar beets in 2008, arguing that the beets would contaminate related organic and non-GE crops such as table beets and chard. Further, they said that the pesticide-resistant beets would increase pesticide impacts on the environment and worsen the current epidemic of pesticide-resistant superweeds.
A lawsuit was filed against the USDA in 2009 for failure to complete an Environmental Impact Study. A federal judge agreed, temporarily suspending all planting of RR sugar beets. The suspension was later overridden by the USDA, ostensibly to prevent a sugar shortage. After a number of additional legal twists and turns, the USDA has now announced its decision to deregulate Monsanto’s Roundup Ready genetically modified sugar beets7. According to a July 19 press release by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS)8:

“After completing both a thorough environmental impact statement and plant pest risk assessment, holding three public meetings and considering and analyzing thousands of comments regarding its analyses, APHIS has determined that, from the standpoint of plant pest risk, Roundup Ready sugarbeets are as safe as traditionally bred sugarbeets.”

GM Companies Threaten Food Security and Sovereignty

A landmark speech delivered during the 2011 SEMEAR conference in Sao Paulo, Brazil, on how genetically modified (GM) seed companies threaten food security and food sovereignty has resulted in a call to action by an unlikely source who is a key player in the soy industry. Pierre Patriat, President of APROSMAT, the association of seed producers of Mato Grosso, Brazil, does not oppose genetically engineered (GE) crops, but he does recognize the unprecedented threat to food security that GM seeds pose.
Saying that the GM industry is rapidly taking away Brazilian farmers’ freedom of choice, he asked for “immediate mobilization and action on the part of concerned industry members, government, lawmakers, farmers, and civil society to avert the threat to food sovereignty posed by the GM industry’s control of markets through their patented seeds,” according to a recent report by GM Watch9.
In his speech, which I recommend reading in its entirety to learn more, Patriat wisely says:

“… [T]oday, people think everything can be resolved through the seed. If soybean rust occurs they say, “Just wait, this can be resolved with genetic engineering!” A problem with nematodes? – “We’ll change the seed directly!” They want to solve all problems that way… But as long as we have alternative solutions we don’t need genetic engineering to get rid of all problems.
Today we have a big problem with nematodes for a simple reason, not least because of the lack of a medium-term agricultural policy. There is a solution known to every agronomist: Crop rotation! That is how weeds and pests are weakened. It is so simple! Another way is soil management and measures to correct the soil – fundamental things nobody pays attention to anymore because everything has to be resolved through the seed.
No one does rotation any more – everyone does succession [planting same crop in succession]. These are problems that are not resolved by biotechnology. The man who is going to spend 150-200 Brazilian dollars per hectare would do much better to invest it in the [quality of the] land. The profitability in the medium term will be much better for sure. This does not mean that constant seed improvement will not bring solutions. But we ought to cooperate and define the base for new regulations, so that everyone may collaborate harmoniously without abusing their economic power.
Because today there are no brakes on the abuse of economic power over seed, and even worse, this affects the sovereignty of a country, because it is a matter of food security and food security is national security.”

The issue of food sovereignty is certainly not restricted to Brazil. It’s becoming a serious threat to every nation on this planet as genetically engineered crops spread. These seeds are owned by private companies, and it’s imperative to understand that once a country allows GE crops to monopolize their agricultural sector, it becomes completely beholden to and dependent upon a corporation for the ability to grow food and feed its citizens!

By Dr. Mercola

Edible flowers are ordinarily associated with haute cuisine and wedding cakes, but you may have several tasty varieties right in your own backyard.
Adding flowers to your meals will not only make an ordinary dish look gourmet, they can be quite flavorful and nutritious.
Historically speaking, many different cultures valued fresh flowers in their culinary endeavors; rose petals were popular among Asian Indians, daylily buds often appear in oriental dishes, Romans used violets, and stuffed squash blossoms were popular in Italian and Hispanic cultures.1

If you’re used to adding fresh herbs to your food, adding in a sprinkling of fresh flowers is not much different, but there are some unique guidelines to be aware of.

Not Every Flower is Edible

Before eating any flower, you need to make sure it is edible. As a general rule, assume any flower from a florist, nursery or garden center is not edible, as these are nearly always heavily treated with pesticides. The same goes for flowers you find near a roadside or in any garden that has been treated with chemicals. Stick to organically grown flowers, or those you grow yourself (without pesticides/herbicides).
Some flowers, however, even organic ones, can make you very sick if eaten. Daphne, foxglove, daffodils, and hyacinths are just a few examples of poisonous flowers that should not be used for food purposes. The slideshow above contains 42 examples of flowers that are safe to eat, but there are many others. Consult a reference book on edible flowers, or ask an expert in this area, before branching out further, and if you’re not sure, don’t eat it.

Flower Power: Are Flowers Good for You?

Flowers are natural plant foods, and like many plant foods in nature often contain valuable nutrients for your health. For instance, dandelions contain numerous antioxidant properties and flavonoids, including FOUR times the beta carotene of broccoli, as well as lutein, cryptoxanthin and zeaxanthin. They’re also a rich source of vitamins, including folic acid, riboflavin, pyroxidine, niacin, and vitamins E and C. Other examples include:

Violets contain rutin, a phytochemical with antioxidant and anti-inflammatory properties that ay help strengthen capillary walls
Rose petals contain bioflavonoids and antioxidants, as well as vitamins A, B3, C and E
Nasturtiums contain cancer-fighting lycopene and lutein, a carotenoid found in vegetables and fruits that is important for vision health
Lavender contains vitamin A, calcium and iron, and is said to benefit your central nervous system
Chive blossoms (the purple flower of the chive herb) contain vitamin C, iron and sulfur, and have traditionally been used to help support healthy blood pressure levels

Flowers are Fragile, Handle with Care

Flowers are extremely perishable and do not do well when stored in the refrigerator. Ideally, pick them fresh and serve them as soon as possible (store them upright in a glass of water while preparing). If you must store them, place them carefully between two moist paper towels, wrap in plastic or place in an airtight container, and put them in the fridge. When ready to use, rinse each flower gently with water, and blot it carefully dry. You can use a knife or tweezers to remove the stem, leaves and pistil, then separate the petals (generally only the petals are eaten).
Flowers can be eaten raw in salads (nasturtiums, dandelion and primrose are popular for this purpose), added to appetizers or infused into sauces and other dishes. Every flower has a unique taste, so you will find the ones that appeal to you most just like any other herb or spice. For instance, bee balm tastes similar to oregano, carnations have a clove-like flavor, and marigolds are sometimes called “poor man’s saffron” because of their peppery, saffron-like flavor.
If they’re not available for free in your own backyard, you can find edible flowers at gourmet food shops, farmers’ markets and other specialty food shops.

Start Slowly When Eating Flowers

Flowers are tiny but they can pack a powerful punch, especially if they’re new to your diet. Introduce them sparingly at first to avoid any potential digestive upset or allergic reactions. This is especially important if you have allergies to pollen, as eating flowers may exacerbate your symptoms. Even high-quality, nutritious edible flowers can cause an unexpected reaction in some people. Try them one at a time and in SMALL amounts to see how your body is going to react.

By Dr. Mercola

Goats are being genetically engineered to become “pharm animals” that carry vaccines in their milk.
Current experiments being conducted by researchers from Texas A&M are geared toward producing an “edible” malaria vaccine, with the ultimate goal being that children drinking the milk will become vaccinated in the process.
While claiming that bioengineered animals could be “life-savers” for people in third-world countries, the researchers ignore the glaring issue that such biotechnology often produces unknown, and unintended, health consequences that prove tragic for individuals and the environment.

Vaccines in Your Milk?

Transmogrifying farm animals into “pharm” animals to act as living and breathing pharmaceutical factories is not new.
In 2009, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved the first drug produced by livestock that had been bioengineered to express a human gene.
In that case, the protein was extracted from the milk of genetically engineered (GE) goats.
In the latest instance, researchers introduced DNA coding for the malaria parasite into the goat genome linked to milk production.
The DNA is supposed to “switch on” only in the mammary gland when the goat produces milk.
As we’ve seen in the past with genetically modified plants, genetically engineered vaccine-producing animals might enter the food supply unexpectedly — exposing unintended recipients to the vaccine. Or the animals might escape and breed with others, passing these bioengineered genes on with unpredictable consequences. Even the technology itself is risky at best, because when animals are exposed to foreign DNA, literally anything can happen.
Take, for instance, milk from cows treated with a synthetic, genetically engineered growth hormone called rBGH. rBGH milk differs from natural milk nutritionally, pharmacologically, immunologically, and hormonally, and along with causing health problems in the cows, it is linked to cancer in humans. What does ingesting the DNA from the malaria parasite in your milk cause? No one knows.

Vaccine Makers See Dollar Signs When They See Third-World Countries

Malaria is caused by a parasite of the species Plasmodium, which is spread from person to person by infected mosquitoes. Every year, it results in about 1 million deaths, the majority of which are in third-world countries. We are certainly in need of a solution, and while it sounds good in theory that a child could be protected from malaria just by drinking a glass of milk, remember that vaccines often weaken and confuse children’s immune systems, which ultimately increases their susceptibility to the very infectious diseases vaccines are designed to prevent.
The most vulnerable of the world’s children are those in the poorest countries where death and disease is often a result of malnutrition, and where children are often battling some sort of infection 200 days out of the year. Vaccines can be devastating to these already immunosuppressed children, as well as to adults.
However, emerging vaccine markets like third-world countries will soon outgrow developed markets by hundreds of billions of dollars. Emerging markets are areas of the world that are beginning to show promise as a profitable venture for many products, including vaccines. And emerging markets – primarily in developing countries in Southeast and Central Asia, and Africa – have been on vaccine makers’ radar for quite some time.

Giving Immune-Compromised Children Vaccines May Create Illness, Not Cure It

One reason that vaccine makers are interested in these parts of the world is that that’s where most of the world’s deaths from major infectious diseases occur. The only problem has been that, until recently, making vaccines for undeveloped countries with no money to pay for them, was not exactly a profitable goal for vaccine makers.
Concerned that developed countries would have little or no resources for addressing serious infectious diseases if vaccine makers continued their pull-out, the World Health Organization and the G8 – the top developed countries in the world – responded with a plan for inducing vaccine companies to stay in the business.
That plan was called Advance Market Commitments (AMCs). Under AMCs, developed countries make legal, binding agreements to purchase vaccines that are needed in low-income countries. The purchase guarantees a bottom line for the manufacturers. In return, the manufacturers promise to sell those vaccines at reduced prices in the countries where they are most needed.
Unfortunately, legally binding, advance market commitments to purchase vaccines that are mostly needed in third world countries could backfire on developed countries that don’t need – or want – certain vaccines. Malaria is one of the top neglected diseases that world health leaders want to address with AMCs, so the GM vaccine-producing goat milk might already be on their radar.
The ability to resist diseases like malaria requires a strong immune system, and for that, you require good nutrition, clean drinking water, and sanitation. If we want to help people in other countries to lower their malaria rates, it would be wise to focus on these basics first. In order to eradicate infectious disease from a nation, you have to first address compromised immune systems. If you hit immune suppressed children with a potent, adjuvant-loaded vaccine, you’re far more likely to create new disease, not eradicate it.
It’s similar to the corporations seeking to plant genetically modified golden rice in the developing world to purportedly alleviate vitamin A deficiency. What people in the developing world need to receive ample dietary vitamin A are the basics like access to a diverse range of nutritious foods — including animal products like eggs, cheese and meat and vegetables such as dark leafy greens and sweet potatoes. This is the type of diet that is attained from biodiverse farming — the opposite of what will occur if golden rice is planted on a large scale. So in the end it appears the golden rice will do little to improve vitamin A levels in the poor — and may actually make vitamin A deficiency worse.

Fertility Problems, DNA Damage Among the Serious Health Problems Linked to GM Foods

The vaccine-producing GM goats are a double-edged sword because while no one knows for sure what consuming GM vaccine-containing milk will do to humans, there’s very convincing evidence that genetically modified foods spell nothing but trouble for your health.
In one review of genetically modified organisms (GMO) — an analysis of 19 animal studies — it was revealed that nearly 10 percent of blood, urine, organ and other parameters tested were significantly influenced by GMOs, with the liver and kidneys faring the worst.
In the only human feeding study ever published on genetically modified foods, seven volunteers ate Roundup-ready soybeans. These are soybeans that have herbicide-resistant genes inserted into them in order to survive being sprayed with otherwise deadly doses of Roundup herbicide. In three of the seven volunteers, the gene inserted into the soy transferred into the DNA of their intestinal bacteria, and continued to function long after they stopped eating the GM soy!
So, exposing children in third world countries to these potential risks needs to be carefully considered before a malaria vaccine is distributed in GM milk especially when there are other innovative ways of fighting malaria available. In addition, Jeffrey Smith, founder of the Institute for Responsible Technology, has documented at least 65 serious health risks from GM products of all kinds. Among them:

Offspring of rats fed GM soy showed a five-fold increase in mortality, lower birth weights, and the inability to reproduce
Male mice fed GM soy had damaged young sperm cells
The embryo offspring of GM soy-fed mice had altered DNA functioning
Several US farmers reported sterility or fertility problems among pigs and cows fed on GM corn varieties
Investigators in India have documented fertility problems, abortions, premature births, and other serious health issues, including deaths, among buffaloes fed GM cottonseed products

Why We MUST Insist on Mandatory Labeling of GM Foods

Mandatory labeling may be the only way to stop the proliferation of GM foods in the US because while GM seeds are banned in several European countries, in the U.S., certain states are actually passing legislation that protects the use of GM seeds and allows for unabated expansion! At present, no less than 14 states have passed such legislation. Michigan’s Senate Bill 7771, if passed, would make that 15. The Michigan bill would prevent anti-GMO laws, and would remove “any authority local governments may have to adopt and enforce ordinances that prohibit or regulate the labeling, sale, storage, transportation, distribution, use, or planting of agricultural, vegetable, flower or forest tree seeds.”
While legislation like this sounds like crazy nonsense to most people, such bills are essentially bought and paid for through the millions of dollars Monsanto and other biotech companies spend lobbying the US government each year. In the first quarter of 2011 alone, Monsanto spent $1.4 million on lobbying the federal government — a drop from a year earlier, when they spent $2.5 million during the same quarter.
Their efforts of persuasion are also made infinitely easier by the fact that an ever growing list of former Monsanto employees are now in positions of power within the federal government.

Proof Positive that GMO Labeling WILL Change the Food Industry

Many don’t fully appreciate the strategy of seeking to have genetically engineered foods labeled in California. The belief is that large companies would refuse to have dual labeling; one for California and another for the rest of the country. It would be very expensive and a logistical nightmare. So rather than have two labels, they would simply not carry the product, especially if the new label would be the equivalent of a skull and crossbones. This is why we are so committed to this initiative as victory here will likely eliminate genetically engineered foods from the US.
Powerful confirmation of this belief occurred in early 2012 when both Coca-Cola Company and PepsiCo Inc. chose to alter one of their soda ingredients as a result of California’s labeling requirements for carcinogens2:

“Coca-Cola Co. and PepsiCo Inc. are changing the way they make the caramel coloring used in their sodas as a result of a California law that mandates drinks containing a certain level of carcinogens bear a cancer warning label. The companies said the changes will be expanded nationally to streamline their manufacturing processes. They’ve already been made for drinks sold in California.”

This is a PERFECT example of the national impact a California GMO labeling mandate can, and no doubt WILL, have. While California is the only state requiring the label to state that the product contains the offending ingredient, these companies are switching their formula for the entire US market, rather than have two different labels. According to USA Today:

“A representative for Coca-Cola, Diana Garza Ciarlante, said the company directed its caramel suppliers to modify their manufacturing processes to reduce the levels of the chemical 4-methylimidazole, which can be formed during the cooking process and as a result may be found in trace amounts in many foods. “While we believe that there is no public health risk that justifies any such change, we did ask our caramel suppliers to take this step so that our products would not be subject to the requirement of a scientifically unfounded warning,” Garza-Giarlante said in an email.”

Learn More about Genetically Modified (GM) Foods

Due to lack of labeling, many Americans are still unfamiliar with what GM foods are. We have a plan to change that, and I urge you to participate and to continue learning more about GM foods and helping your friends and family do the same.
To start, please print out and use the Non-GMO Shopping Guide, created by the Institute for Responsible Technology. Share it with your friends and family, and post it to your social networks. You can also download a free iPhone application, available in the iTunes store. You can find it by searching for ShopNoGMO in the applications.
Your BEST strategy, however, is to simply buy USDA 100% Organic products whenever possible, (as these do not permit GM ingredients) or buy whole fresh produce and meat from local farmers. The majority of the GMO’s you’re exposed to are via processed foods, so by cooking from scratch with whole foods, you can be sure you’re not inadvertently consuming something laced with GM ingredients. When you do purchase processed food, avoid products containing anything related to corn or soy that are not 100 percent organic, as any foods containing these two non-organic ingredients are virtually guaranteed to contain genetically engineered ingredients, as well as toxic herbicide residues.
To learn more about GM foods, I highly recommend the following films and lectures:

Hidden Dangers in Kid’s Meals
Your Milk on Drugs – Just Say No!
Everything You Have to Know About Dangerous Genetically Modified Foods

Many have long suspected that U.S. policy on genetically modified (GM) organisms was being influenced by the multinational corporations that profit from genetic engineering and the export-oriented agribusiness. However, recently released Wikileaks cables document just how close that relationship has become.
The U.S. Department of State has virtually become an agency for promoting the private interests of the Monsanto Corporation.
As European social movements pressure their governments for an ongoing moratorium on GM seeds and foods, Monsanto and other biotech corporations have been pushing to find new market footholds, using hybrids even in impoverished Haiti following the January 12, 2010 earthquake. They have been pursuing such goals in collaboration with USAID, the U.S. State Department and the Gates Foundation Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA).
According to Netline:

“The collusion of the Gates Foundation with Monsanto corporation is no accident, as high level officials leading AGRA are former Monsanto executives. The recent purchase by AGRA of $500,000 worth in Monsanto stocks was vivid proof of that close relationship. Despite many words by Gates officials since the inception of the AGRA agenda denying that GMO seeds would be used as part of AGRA, their close relationship with Monsanto has now been revealed to be a key element in their agronomic ‘new green revolution’ strategy.”

In the video above, you can also see Gates’ wrong-headed ideas about vaccines.
Microsoft founder Bill Gates was recently interviewed by CNN Chief Medical Correspondent Sanjay Gupta. Gates was attending the World Economic Forum to push his mission of eradicating polio by 2012. Gates, through his foundation, has pledged $10 billion to provide vaccinations to children around the world .
In the course of the interview, in regards to the vaccine-autism connection, Gates said:

“… [I]t’s an absolute lie that has killed thousands of kids. Because the mothers who heard that lie, many of them didn’t have their kids take either pertussis or measles vaccine, and their children are dead today. And so the people who go and engage in those anti-vaccine efforts — you know, they, they kill children. It’s a very sad thing, because these vaccines are important.”

How can someone so smart also be so confused about this issue? Unfortunately, that may actually be part of the problem.
Bill Gates may be one of the most destructive “do-gooders” on the planet because he is rich enough to get what he wants and he has a high opinion of his own intelligence. It is hard enough fighting Big Pharma, Big Government and Big Medicine on vaccines, but when another opponent is one of the wealthiest and most influential philanthropists in the world, it is even harder.
Fortunately, truth is more powerful than money. It is the only reason that the voices of parents and vaccine injured children continue to be heard above the relentless promotion of lies by the wealthy and powerful.

Puzzled by the mass deaths of birds and fish in Alabama? It’s also happening elsewhere, across the Eastern and Southern U.S. and around the world — Gizmodo has a handy map of all the U.S. events.
The Activist Post offers some theories. Before you read them, however, bear in mind what Yahoo News has to say about the subject:

“… [M]ass die-offs happen all the time and usually are unrelated … Federal records show they happen on average every other day somewhere in North America. Usually, we don’t notice them and don’t try to link them to each other …

And there have been much larger die-offs than the 3,000 blackbirds in Arkansas. Twice in the summer of 1996, more than 100,000 ducks died of botulism in Canada.”

Here are the theories listed by the Activist Post:

Mainstream Explanations: These have included lightning, hail, mid-air collision, power lines, and New Year fireworks for the birds, and a disease for the fish. But this seems like a heck of a coincidence, and where are the roasted birds from a lightning strike?
Meteor showers: During this period of intense seasonal meteor shower, some people reported hearing sonic booms in the area that might have been an indication of a local shock wave.
New Madrid Fault Line: Could it be related to the recent earthquake activity along a fault line that runs along the mid-eastern section of the U.S.? Could it have dispersed pollutants into the water and atmosphere?
Government testing: Only certain species have been affected, but within the entire region. And some reports have indicated that the organs of the birds were liquefied — could this implicate species-specific bio-weapons?
GMOs: There are other die-offs are happening across other species, such as bees and bats. Some think they could be poisoned by genetically modified plants.
Geoengineering: Could spraying in the area have caused this?
HAARP: Both birds and fish navigate in highly coordinated ways. Could the HAARP array off in Alaska have short-circuited their navigation systems? Or is it the result of electromagnetic pollution for other human devices?
Scalar Weapons: Some wonder if the cause is directed energy beam weapons deployed via satellite.
Project Blue Beam: Another theory is a sound generator weapon.
Geomagnetic and other Earth changes: The magnetic pole is moving. Add to this a dwindling magnetosphere and falling oxygen levels, plus an increase in sun activity and magnetic storms.

Update: A Wisconsin lab has apparently determined that the birds, at least, died of blunt force trauma.

Scientists have discovered that your circadian rhythms regulate the energy levels in your cells. In addition, the proteins involved with circadian rhythms and metabolism are intrinsically linked and dependent upon each other. This finding has far-reaching implications, which could include new ways to treat cancer, diabetes, obesity and a host of related diseases.
24-hour circadian rhythms govern fundamental physiological functions in almost all organisms. These circadian clocks are the essential time-tracking systems in your body. Disruption of these rhythms can profoundly influence human health.
In a new study, researchers showed that an enzyme protein which is an essential molecular gear of the circadian machinery interacts with a protein that senses cell energy levels and modulates aging and metabolism.
This suggests that proper sleep and diet may help maintain or rebuild the balance between your circadian clock and your metabolism, and could also help explain why lack of rest or disruption of normal sleep patterns can increase hunger, leading to obesity-related illnesses and accelerated aging.
 
 

Vitamin D Dose Recommendations

Age
Dosage

Below 5
35 units per pound per day

Age 5 – 10
2500 units

Age 18 – 30
5000 units

Pregnant Women
5000 units

WARNING:
There is no way to know if the above recommendations are correct. The ONLY way to know is to test your blood. You might need 4-5 times the amount recommended above. Ideally your blood level of 25 OH D should be 60ng/ml.

Dessert time!  Today, I’ll show you a delicious recipe for protein types.  And who doesn’t like a good banana split?  Nobody. That’s who.  But the best part is, this is a banana split that’ll like you back!
INGREDIENTS:

1 banana, split lengthwise

Approx. ¼ cup raw, organic cream (protein types may use more if desired)

¼  tsp pure vanilla extract

Sprinkle of xylitol or stevia, to taste (optional)

Drizzle of Pure Gold Raw Honey (available through Mercola.com)

PREPARATION: 

Arrange split banana into dessert bowl.

Pour cream into Magic Bullet type blender.

Pour vanilla extract into cream.

Sprinkle xylitol or stevia into cream if desired.

Blend well to thicken.

Dollop cream mix onto/between banana halves.

Drizzle a bit of Pure Gold Raw Honey over top.

Quite delicious!  A very quick & simple and totally yummy banana split that protein types will absolutely love!

By Dr. Mercola

Up until the 1990s, no research had ever been conducted to determine the impact of fluoride on the pineal gland — a small gland located between the two hemispheres of the brain that regulates the production of the hormone melatonin. Melatonin is a hormone that helps regulate the onset of puberty and helps protect the body from cell damage caused by free radicals.
It is now known — thanks to the meticulous research of Dr. Jennifer Luke from the University of Surrey in England — that the pineal gland is the primary target of fluoride accumulation within your body.
After finding that the pineal gland is a major target for fluoride accumulation in humans, Dr. Luke conducted animal experiments to determine if the accumulated fluoride could impact the functioning of the gland — particularly the gland’s regulation of melatonin.
Luke found that animals treated with fluoride had lower levels of circulating melatonin, as reflected by reduced levels of melatonin metabolites in the animals’ urine. This reduced level of circulating melatonin was accompanied — as might be expected — by an earlier onset of puberty in the fluoride-treated female animals.
U.S. girls are reaching puberty at younger ages than ever before. In the 1990s, breast development — the first sign of puberty in girls — at age 8 was considered an abnormal event that should be investigated by an endocrinologist.
However, by 1999, following a 1997 study that found almost half of African Americans and 15 percent of whites had begun breast development by age 8, the Lawson Wilkins Pediatric Endocrine Society suggested changing what is viewed as “normal.”
Instead of acknowledging that girls reaching puberty at increasingly younger ages is a sign that something is wrong, some “experts” would rather just change the definition of what’s considered normal!
In reality, something is wrong, very wrong, when 5-, 6- and 8-year-old girls are starting puberty. Some studies have even found girls as young as 2 who are starting sexual development.
Not only do these children have to deal with an unfairly increased risk of breast cancer down the road, but they lose precious years of their childhood because their bodies have matured faster than their minds.

What is Causing Early Puberty?

There are likely numerous factors contributing to this phenomenon, but one is certainly environmental chemicals. Along with endocrine-disrupting chemicals (BPA, phthalates, PFOA (Teflon)) and PCBs, fluoride has also been suggested.
Fluoride has been added to the U.S. water supply for so long — and has been thoroughly hoisted upon people around the world for its supposed benefit to teeth — that hardly anyone thinks twice about it.
Well, this was not always the case. In 1944, LP Anthony, DDS editor of the Journal of the American Dental Association, said: “Fluoride is a highly toxic substance … ”
Before that, in 1936, an article in the Journal of the American Dental Association stated that fluoride at the 1 ppm (part per million) concentration is as toxic as arsenic and lead.
The Journal of the American Medical Association also stated in their September 18, 1943 issue that fluorides are general protoplasmic poisons that change the permeability of the cell membrane by certain enzymes.
And, an editorial published in the Journal of the American Dental Association, October 1, 1944, stated:
“Drinking water containing as little as 1.2 ppm fluoride will cause developmental disturbances. We cannot run the risk of producing such serious systemic disturbances. The potentialities for harm outweigh those for good.”
Others, too, have tried to spread the word about the dangers of fluoride, including Christopher Bryson, the author of The Fluoride Deception, who has recently called the widespread promotion of fluoride “scientific fraud on a grand and global scale.”
Yet, this element, or as some may call it, this caustic industrial chemical, is deliberately added to about two-thirds of U.S. public water supplies. For people living in these areas, fluoride is a part of every glass of water, every bath and shower, and every meal cooked using that water.
In the UK, meanwhile, 42 schools have decided it is a good idea to add fluoride to children’s milk in schools. And some of you may also think that the fluoride treatments offered by your dentist are a good idea.
Well, it’s time to shed this myth once and for all.

Fluoride is the Active Toxin in Rat Poisons and Cockroach Powder

Common sense would dictate, then, that this can’t be a good thing to put in your body, and your instincts would be correct.
Once inside your body, fluoride destroys your enzymes by changing their shape. You may remember that your body depends on thousands of enzymes to perform various cell reactions, and without these enzymes, we would all die. They are able to perform their reactions because they have a specific shape that allows them to work with other elements in your body, like a lock and key.
Once fluoride destroys their shape, however, your body does not recognize the enzymes, and in fact will view them as foreign invaders and attempt to attack them.
When your enzymes are damaged, it can lead to collagen breakdown, eczema, tissue damage, skin wrinkling, genetic damage, and immune suppression. It can also cause problems with your:

Immune system
Digestive system
Respiratory system
Blood circulation

Kidney function
Liver function
Brain function
Thyroid function

Studies from China have even confirmed that elevated fluoride exposure leads to reduced I.Q. in children. This is understandable when you consider that even at levels as low as 1 ppm, studies have demonstrated direct toxic effects on brain tissue, including:

Reduction in lipid content
Impaired anti-oxidant defense systems
Damage to your hippocampus
Damage to your purkinje cells
Increased uptake of aluminum
Formation of beta-amyloid plaques (the classic brain abnormality in Alzheimer”s disease)
Accumulation of fluoride in your pineal gland

This last effect is completely in correlation with the research of Dr. Jennifer Luke, which suggests that fluoride impacts your pineal gland’s regulation of melatonin, and this may contribute to the early onset of puberty.

All of These Risks, and it Doesn’t Even Help Your Teeth!

Clearly risks as serious as those above would not justify preventing a few cavities, yet, fluoride does not even do that.
Figures from the World Health Organization show the same declines in tooth decay that have been experienced in fluoridated countries since the 1960s have occurred equally in non-fluoridated countries.
In another study from 2004, pro-fluoridation dental researchers from the University of Aderlaide in South Australia were unable to demonstrate any difference in the permanent teeth between children who had lived all their lives drinking fluoridated water and those who had drunk rain or bottled water.
What does fluoride do to your teeth, then?
Well, it’s known that it interferes with the development of tooth enamel, a condition called “dental fluorosis.” Those in favor of fluoride like to say that fluorosis is a purely “cosmetic condition,” but rarely do symptoms appear for no reason.
In this case, the white spots that form on your teeth after consuming too much fluoride are likely a warning sign that other tissues are being impacted. Studies have shown, for instance, that children with severe dental fluorosis are more likely to have bone fractures.
The Environmental Working Group even reported a finding from a Harvard PhD thesis that showed boys exposed to fluoridated water when they were between the ages of 6 and 8 had a seven-fold increased risk of developing osteosarcoma, a form of frequently fatal bone cancer.
If you’re wondering how to keep your teeth healthy, remember that fluoride was never the answer in the first place. Instead, look to your diet for naturally healthy teeth. In fact, most people whose diet includes very little sugar and few processed foods have very low rates of tooth decay.
As for how to get toxic fluoride out of your drinking water, regular carbon-based filtration will NOT work. About the only way to remove this toxic chemical from your water is to use a reverse osmosis filter.

Other Hidden Sources of Fluoride

If you have any non-stick pans, the moment you start to heat them they will start to volatilize fluoride as that is the polymer that makes them “non-sticky.” The higher the heat, the more fluoride you will have in your home. So do yourself a favor and get rid of all of your non-stick pots and pans.

Many foods have been heavily promoted as being healthy. But not all of them are. Here are some foods which are far less “good for you” than most people believe.
Energy bars
Energy bars usually contain protein and fiber, but they may also be loaded with calories. That’s fine if you occasionally make one a meal, but most people eat them as snacks.
Granola
Granola sounds healthy. But it’s often high in fat, sugar and calories. Don’t be fooled by a seemingly low calorie count; the portion sizes on the label are usually tiny.
Salad Toppings
The pecans and Gorgonzola cheese on Panera Bread’s Fuji Apple Chicken Salad propel it into double-cheeseburger territory. Before ordering a salad, check its nutrition information.
Smoothies
Added sugars can make some smoothies the equivalent of drinking fruit pie filling. The smallest serving of Jamba Juice’s Orange Dream Machine has 340 calories and an astonishing 69 grams of sugars.
Sushi Rolls
Sushi rolls vary, and the fried bits and mayonnaise in some can really jack up the calories.
Yogurts
The “fruit” in yogurt is really jam (that is to say, mostly sugar).

Teens who skip breakfast are more likely to be obese. This may be one of the causes of rising obesity rates among adolescents.
According to the largest study to follow the breakfast habits of teens, those who skipped the meal were five pounds heavier on average. They also ate less healthily during the day and exercised less frequently.
The obesity rate for adolescents has tripled over the past 20 years.

Vaccines, Depression and Neurodegeneration After Age 50: Another Reason to Avoid the Recommended Vaccines.
By Russell L. Blaylock, M.D., CCN
It has been estimated that 14.8 million Americans suffer from major depressive disorder and of this number 6 million are elderly. If we include anxiety disorders, which commonly accompany depression, the number jumps to 40 million adults.
Depression later in life tends to last longer and be more severe than at younger ages. It is also associated with a high rate of suicide. Previously, it was thought that major depression was secondary to a deficiency in certain neurotransmitters in the brain, particularly the monoamines, which include serotonin, norepinephrine and dopamine.
While alterations in these important mood-related neurotransmitters is found with major depression, growing evidence indicates that the primary culprit is low-grade, chronic brain inflammation.
This exclusive article will review in detail the functions and impact of various agents on depression and neurodegeneration, including:

The impact of MSG on your brain and mood

The link between elevated brain glutamate and inflammation

The connections between pesticides and neurological disorders such as Alzheimer’s and Parkinson’s disease

How vaccinations cause brain inflammation

The impact of an expanding vaccine schedule for the elderly

The shocking truth, linking brain inflammation to neurodegenerative diseases

How vaccine additives such as mercury and aluminum impact your brain health

The real danger of live virus vaccines

Current recommendations by the CDC for adult vaccinations include a total of 14 separate inoculations with infectious agents and powerful immune adjuvants.
According to CDC recommendations, multiple vaccinations for a single disease are separated by no more than 4 weeks, which is close enough together to trigger a smoldering process of brain inflammation and excitotoxicity that can not only result in depression, anxiety and high suicide rates, but can increase your risk of developing one of the neurodegenerative diseases as well.
We have also seen that in many cases a person will be injected with several vaccines during a single office visit and this means that their body is exposed to a very large dose of immune adjuvant. Compelling studies, using many animal species as well as humans, have shown that this overactivates brain inflammatory mechanisms that can last for years.
I urge you to read Dr. Blaylock’s full-length article, Vaccines, Depression and Neurodegeneration After Age 50: Another Reason to Avoid the Recommended Vaccines, a Mercola.com exclusive, for a fascinating in-depth look at how neurodegenerative diseases are created, and how to protect yourself from what many consider to be simply side effects of the ravages of time — but are anything but a natural byproduct of aging.

During the low-fat diet craze, many people learned, wrongly, to shun butter from their diets. Well, I’m going to tell you something that may be music to your ears: Butter can be a very healthy part of your diet.In fact, butter, when made from grass-fed cows, is rich in a substance called conjugated linoleic acid (CLA). CLA is not only known to help fight cancer and diabetes, but it may also help you to lose weight! Much of the reason why butter was, and continues to be, vilified is because it contains saturated fat. If you’re still in the mindset that saturated fat is harmful for your health, then please read this past article to learn why saturated fat is actually good for you. The reality is that most people — about two-thirds of the U.S. population — can include grass-fed butter in their diets and thrive! Those who may do better with lower fat choices are carb nutritional types (and are in the minority).But there is one caveat. Ideally, your butter should be raw (unpasteurized), otherwise you’ll run into the health issues associated with all pasteurized dairy. Making Your Own ButterGetting back to the topic of this post, what better way to get healthy, tasty butter than to make it yourself? This link will take you step-by-step through the process of butter-making. I recommend, though, that in addition to seeking out cream from grass-fed cows, as the article recommends, that you also look for cream that is raw (you will likely need to join a food coop or speak to a farmer directly for this).True, it takes a little more elbow grease to churn your own butter at home, but you’ll be left with butter that is vastly superior, in taste and nutrition, to anything you’ll find in a store.