The Good Health and Wellness Blog » pesticides

I Eat Healthy — So Why Am I Sick?

Good Health & Wellness Blog — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 19:03:26 +0000

Is Your Diet Making You Sick?

I have lost count of the times I hear the lament “I always eat healthy — so why am I sick”?

What is distressing is that these people really work at eating healthy, but to no avail.

They don’t drink soda. They do drink lots of water. They don’t eat cold cuts that contain nitrates or other prepared meats or foods. They eat lots of fruits and vegetables as they should and as is recommended.

You would think, as they think, that with such a healthy diet, they would be getting all the nutrients they need for a healthy life.

So why are they getting sick?

The answer is—because consuming conventional food, they are not getting the vitamins, minerals and other nutrients they think they are getting.

Their life is being sabotaged by the large conglomerate farms who are the major producers of our conventional fruits, vegetables, grains, milk and cheese.

The same is true for the factory farms that provide us with the major supply of our meat and fish.

The soil of conventional farms is depleted and has been for the last 80 years.

Conventional farming (i.e., intensive farming that uses chemicals) returns little or nothing to the soil and gradually depletes the soil of minerals.

Because only a small number of nutrients are replenished when using chemical fertilizers, (especially nitrogen, potassium and phosphorus), the soil gradually loses its trace elements that are essential for health, such as boron, chromium and selenium.

The mineral content in our food has become severely diminished.

Fruits, vegetables and other plants that we rely upon to supply minerals in our diet cannot take adequate amounts of minerals from the soil if there are no minerals there to take.

In 1940 and again in 1991, tests were performed on various fruits, vegetables (including carrots, broccoli, spinach and potatoes) and meats for mineral content.

It was found that the amounts of calcium, magnesium, iron and copper in our vegetables had declined during those 51 years by as much as 75 to 96 percent, while meats had lost 41 percent of their calcium and 54 percent of their iron.

Fruits had lost 27 percent of their zinc. Apples and oranges had lost 67 percent of their iron.

The tests were repeated in 2002 with similar results.

It is not only mineral content that has declined over the past half century. Levels of vitamins A and C have also dropped dramatically.

Wheat has lost much of its protein since 1900.

Nitrogen fertilization in conventional farming was found to decrease vitamin C concentrations in many fruits and vegetables.

Using potatoes as one of the examples, in a study to find out what nutrients the potato has lost over the last 50 years. This is what was concluded:

100% of Vitamin A
57% of Vitamin C and Iron
28% of Calcium
50% of Riboflavin
18% of Thiamine

Here are further examples, taken from the USDA’s own studies of the loss of vitamins and minerals in fruits and vegetables. Today as compared to 1975.

Apples: vitamin A is down 41%
Sweet peppers: vitamin C is down 31%
Watercress: iron is down 88%
Broccoli: calcium and vitamin A are down 50%
Cauliflower: vitamin C is down 45%; vitamin B1 is down 48%; and vitamin B2 is down 47%
Collards greens: vitamin A is down 45%; potassium is down 60%; and magnesium is down 85%

The USDA reported some 30 years ago that, “the highest death rate areas in the US generally corresponded to those where agriculturists had recognized that the soil was depleted.”

Degenerative diseases are prevalent in North America and Europe, in contrast with the absence of these diseases in places that have maintained natural farming methods.

Human milk has been found tainted with over 350 man-made contaminants including pesticides.

In the United States, dairy cows may be injected with a genetically modified growth hormone (rBGH also known as rBST, recombinant bovine somatotropin) to increase milk production.

Canadian and European governments have refused to permit the use of this hormone.

Not only does it increase the incidence of mastitis in cows, but it also increases the incidence of cancer in human beings.

The Pesticide Action Network reported that the overall incidence of cancer has risen by about 50 percent since 1971, and pesticide residues in food may be a contributing factor.

International authorities have listed 160 extensively used pesticides as possible human carcinogens.

Tests carried out in 2003 found chemical residues in one third of fruits and vegetables, with some containing as many as five different chemicals, some present in amounts exceeding government-set limit.

Chemicals applied to the surface of a fruit or vegetable can be partially removed by washing or peeling, but some chemicals enter and permeate the plant or are designed not to wash off in water (rain).

Safety tests do not consider the ‘cocktail effect’ of the many agro-chemicals and food additives that are simultaneously present in the human body.

Many pesticides are suspected of being endocrine disrupters, affecting sexual characteristics, hormone production or metabolism, thyroid function or brain function.

Children are especially susceptible, and later in life, may suffer disorders of behavior and reproduction and be more prone to disease. These chemicals affect not only human beings but also other animals.

On the other hand, fertilization of crops with cow dung (as may occur on organic farms) can increase vitamin B12 to a level that may contribute significantly to the diet of vegans. Secondary nutrients also tend to be more abundant in organically grown fruits and vegetables.

A well-enriched soil resulted in excellent plant health, which, in turn, produced healthy animals that fed upon well-nourished plants; and human beings whose diet consisted of these fresh and wholesome healthy plants and animal products also enjoyed abundant health.

Organically reared cows, which eat fresh grass, clover pasture and grass clover silage, produced milk on average 50 percent higher in Vitamin E (alpha tocopherol), 75 percent higher in beta carotene (precursor of Vitamin A) and two to three times higher in the antioxidants lutein and zeaxanthine than non-organic milk.

Organic milk not only has more antioxidants but also higher levels of omega 3 essential fatty acids.

More recently, doctors and nutritionists administering “alternative” cancer therapies have found that a completely organic diet is essential for a successful outcome.

According to the Nutritional Cancer Therapy Trust (NCTT), nutritional cancer therapies that involve the avoidance of pollutants and toxins as much as possible, the exclusive consumption of organically grown foods and increases in nutrient intakes, have yielded good results.

The director of NCTT said that “the overwhelming number of patients following alternative cancer therapies are those who have been declared terminal, with minimal life expectancies following initial allopathic treatment. The ability of these patients to gain remission from all clinical evidence of cancer is therefore very significant.”

To sum up, food produced according to organic principles is superior to that produced by conventional means, i.e., with chemical inputs.

Organic foods are likely to have higher nutritional content, such as vitamins and minerals.

They also rarely contain residues of harmful agricultural chemicals or additives, and for the time being, they exclude GM foods that could damage the immune systems and/or internal organs of experimental animals.

Out of all of the nutrients analyzed only niacin levels actually did increase.

The conclusion was very similar for 25 fruits and vegetables under the same test conditions.

Broccoli had a huge reduction in which all nutrients had significantly declined, surprisingly including niacin.

An article from (Natural News) states that soil scientists have known for many years about the decline in soil fertility.

To address the problem, farmers, agricultural companies and governments have advocated a number of solutions which, however, have not ensured that our food is more nutritious.

Farming is big business and the aim is to give people cheaper food and make profits.

This has meant that crops are genetically modified to ensure resistance against disease and to stimulate faster growth, that pesticides and herbicides are used to control pests, that ammonium-based fertilizers are applied to try to improve the soil.

This business has created an entirely unnatural ecosystem, where the soil has become barren and devoid of micro-organisms that are needed to create organic mineral complexes.

The trace minerals have been used up and there is no immediate way to restore the micro-organisms.

The minerals from the soil contribute to producing nutrient rich food (including minerals).

These nutrients are absorbed by us when we consume food.

Like it or not we are connected to the soil. If it’s depleted, then so are we.

Unhealthy, barren soil does not produce food that is abundant in nutrients.

For example, between 1951 and 1999 Vitamin A was completely lost in onions and potatoes.

Soil that is depleted is unable to help nutrient deficient plants overcome attacks from pests and fungus. This means more pesticides are used.

Synthetic (inorganic) fertilizers have little benefit since they create insoluble mineral complexes which are difficult for plants to absorb.

Dr Richard Drucker (of Drucker Labs) reports that healthy nutrient-rich crops need 70 trace minerals, but that farming is only replacing 3-5 of these.

Government authorities have been aware of the problem for 70 years.

In 1936 it admitted that almost all soils in the US were depleted of minerals, and this was reiterated again in 1992 at the Earth Summit.

What does that say about progress?

Another reason why soils are depleted is acid rain.

The University of Maine published a study in the December 2003 issue of the Soil Science Society of America Journal which confirms that acid rain depletes nutrients from the soil.

Authorities have long ignored scientists’ reports that acid rain depletes the soil of nutrients needed for growing trees.

Can we then get minerals from other sources? Drucker believes that the best inorganic trace minerals from coral, colloidal or ionic, have very large and insoluble molecules that are difficult to absorb at cellular level.

Further, once they are absorbed, they accumulate in the body and are stored in fatty tissues. Over time, these substances become toxic leading to possible disease.

Given this problem, we can assume that it will be difficult to get minerals from other sources.

He does suggest that we need high quality supplements until a solution is found.

Organic minerals have very small molecules which are easily absorbed through the cells. The minerals work as activators in the body as they are required to set off chemical reactions.

For example, magnesium is an activator for over 300 enzymes and is important for the energy system of the body.

Dr Linus Pauling is famous for saying that every disease, sickness and ailment is related to mineral deficiency.

The reason is that minerals are required for every cell in our body to function.

If minerals are lacking in our food, vitamins are of no use because vitamins (and enzymes) need minerals for them to work in our bodies.

This means that vitamin supplements would be of no use unless we also have adequate minerals.

Organic crops contained significantly more vitamin C, iron, magnesium, and phosphorus and significantly less nitrates than conventional crops.

There were non-significant trends showing less protein but of a better quality and a higher content of nutritionally significant minerals with lower amounts of some heavy metals in organic crops compared to conventional ones.

Conclusions: There appear to be genuine differences in the nutrient content of organic and conventional crops.

In commercial conventional farming, minerals like iron and magnesium have dropped by more than 80 percent. That’s from the powerful fertilizers they use that practically sterilize the soil – leaving it with little to no mineral content.

Because of the lack of vital vitamins, minerals, trace elements, and phytochemicals in conventionally grown and raised food, those who are on conventional diets cannot possibly live a healthy life, even if they are taking an abundance of nutritional supplements.

The amount of herbicides, pesticides and hormones found in conventional farmed and raised foods make the bodies of those consuming these foods toxic and acidic.

That is a recipe for developing every major disease you can think of and the reason we have so many sick people among those eating a conventional western diet.

So now you know.

If you don’t eat organic, there is no way you won’t eventually get diseased given the lack of nutrients and the heavy content of herbicides, pesticides, and hormones that are in all conventionally grown and raised food.

People tell me that organic food is expensive. I tell them it is not.

When you consider that organic food has a 50% to 60% higher content of nutrients then conventional food, you will find that you will not have to eat as much.

Your body will get the nutrients it needs, with much less consumption, and no poisons.

Soil all over the US is so depleted of nutrients that even organic farms are feeling the pinch.

This is why it is so important to supplement your diet with all natural nutritional supplements even when you eat organic foods.

To balance the equation for a healthy life, if you drink, drink alcohol in moderation, drink at least 64 ounces of filtered tap water a day, no bottled water, no soda of any kind, no power drinks, and do exercise on a regular basis.

Your life is in your hands, not your doctors.

Be kind to your body and it will be kind to you.

To your good heath & longevity.

Ira Marxe
“The Good Health & Wellness Guy”

Note: Good Health Supplements are dietary supplements and are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure or prevent any disease. Any statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Readers should consult appropriate health professionals as necessary on any matter relating to their health and well-being. Individual results will vary and statements mentioned are anecdotal and may not represent typical results.

It’s Not Health Care You Need…It’s Food Care!

Good Health & Wellness Blog — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:35:40 +0000

It's Food Care!

It is a given that all life begins at the cellular level.

It is also a given that for your cells to function as healthy cells, they must have the energy level they were designed for, 70 to 90 millivolts.

At that level your cells easily absorb nutrients, convert the nutrients into usable components the body needs, then rids itself of the resultant waste created by this conversion process.

Energy also allows your cells to rid themselves of the toxins they absorb from the nutrients (food) you feed them.

When the nutrients you feed your cells contain high levels of toxins, as do most packaged and conventional foods available to us today, the cell’s energy becomes overtaxed, dissipated, and unable to rid themselves of all the toxins.

This condition causes a lowering of the cells millivolt energy level. This results in cellular dysfunction, inflammation, and the beginnings of disease.

Example: Cancer cells have a measurable energy level of 15 to 20 millivolts.

The purer our food, the fewer toxins our cells have to deal with. This minimizes cellular stress, and optimizes cellular health.

Healthy cells easily perform the functions they were designed for and quickly rid the body of waste and toxins.

Conventional foods sprayed with herbicides and pesticides cause toxic build-up in our cells. Toxins are poisons that interfere with the normal function of providing nutrients to the body.

The greater the toxic build-up, the fewer the nutrients the cells can provide.

It stands to reason then, if we don’t get the nutrients we need from our cells, our bodies cannot function in the healthy manner for which they were designed.

Our bodies will break down in one way or another and, over time, will develop some form of degenerative disease.

It’s really that simple.

Cells are not something people think about in their relationship to their bodies. Cells exist, and people take them for granted.

When was the last time you had a conversation with anybody about your cells?

The result is, people don’t understand their cells needs or workings.

Let me emphasize, your cells are where life begins.

Cells make tissues. Tissues make organs. Organs make systems. If you want to be healthy all your life, you had better pay attention your cells.

Your cells need you to ingest good food so it can get good nutrition.

Your cells cannot convert toxins into anything useful. They cannot convert toxins into the energy needed to function.

Worse — toxins absorb energy leaving little left for nutrient conversion.

With that said, let me tell you that we live in a country that promotes and supports a basic food supply loaded with toxins.

And what’s even more frightening, companies like Monsanto, with the blessing and support of our government, are increasing their influence and are succeeding in crowding out healthy food and filling the marketplace with more and more of their Genetically Engineered “Franken foods”.

If you think our health care bill is high now, wait until you see what that bill will grow to if we allow this trend to continue.

Let’s take a look at what is happening in Argentina after 12 years of planting Monsanto’s GE soya.

Soya is now planted in over 50% of Argentina’s farm land.

Remember these promises:

1. Monsanto GE soya will increase yields per acre versus conventional soya.

2. Use Monsanto GE soya and the farmer will need to use less herbicide. It should also be noted that Monsanto GE soya seeds are far more expensive than conventional soya seeds.

We know that herbicides are detrimental to the health and welfare of humans, animals and fish.

We also know that these herbicides, when sprayed onto farms, don’t stay on those farms but get into our streams, rivers and lakes from run-off from those farms, or contaminate other farms and homes by the wind.

The following report is a result of an important study done in Argentina relating to the environmental damage due to the use of Monsanto’s GE soya.

I am using Argentina as an example in a country that is being destroyed by Monsanto’s GE soya and herbicide and is now waking up and starting to take back some control, versus what is happening here in the USA where Monsanto is destroying farms and farmers, and poisoning our food supply, because there is no control.

In April 2009 Andrés Carrasco, an Argentinian embryologist, gave an interview to the leading Buenos Aires newspaper Página 12, in which he described the alarming results of a research project he is leading, studying the impact of the herbicide glyphosate on the fetuses of amphibians.

Dr Carrasco, who works in the Ministry of Science’s Conicet (National Council of Scientific and Technical Investigations), said that their results suggests that the herbicide could cause brain, intestinal and heart defects in fetuses.

Glyphosate is the herbicide used in the cultivation of Monsanto’s genetically modified soya which now covers some 18 million hectares, about half of Argentina’s arable land.

Carrasco said that the doses of herbicide used in their study were “much lower than the levels used in the Monsanto fumigations”. Indeed, as some weeds have become resistant to glyphosate, many farmers are greatly increasing the concentration of the herbicide.

According to Página 12, this means that, in practice, the herbicide applied in the fields is between 50 and 1,540 times stronger than that used by Carrasco.

The results in the study are confirming what peasant and indigenous communities – the people most affected by the spraying – have been denouncing for over a decade.

The study also has profound consequences for the USA’s anti-narcotics strategy in Colombia, because the planes spray glyphosate, reinforced with additional chemicals, on the coca fields (and the peasants living among them).

Three days after the interview, the Association of Environmental Lawyers filed a petition with the Argentine Supreme Court, calling for a ban on the use and sale of glyphosate until its impact on health and on the environment had been investigated.

Five days later the Ministry of Defense banned the planting of soya in its fields.

This sparked a strong reaction from the multinational biotechnology companies and their supporters.

Fearful that their most famous product, a symbol of the dominant farming model, would be banned, they mounted an unprecedented attack on Carrasco, ridiculing his research and even issuing personal threats.

He was accused of inventing his whole investigation, as his results have not yet been peer-reviewed and published in a prestigious scientific journal.

According to an article in the Argentine press, after news about the study broke, Dr. Carrasco was the victim of an act of intimidation, when four men arrived at his laboratory in the Faculty of Medicine and acted extremely aggressively.

Two of the men were said to be members of an agrochemical industry body but refused to give their names. The other two claimed to be a lawyer and notary.

They apparently interrogated Dr. Carrasco and demanded to see details of the experiments. They left a card Basílico, Andrada & Santurio, attorneys on behalf of Felipe Alejandro Noël.

Carrasco was firm in his response: “When one is dealing with a subject of limited public interest, one can keep the study secret until all the last details have been resolved. But when one uncovers facts that are important for public health, one has an obligation to make an effort to publish the results urgently and with maximum publicity.”

Even so, he was clearly taken aback by the strength of the reaction. “It was a violent, disproportionate, dirty reaction”, he said. “I hadn’t even discovered anything new, only confirmed conclusions that others had reached. One has to remember, too, that the study originated in contacts with communities that have suffered the impact of agro-chemicals. They are the undeniable proof of the impact.”

He is not intimidated: “If I know something, I will not shut my mouth.”

Further: The intense application year after year of a single herbicide – glyphosate – has led to the emergence of weeds that have become resistant to this chemical.

Some of the better known of these “super-weeds”, as they are popularly called, are: Hybanthus parviflorus (Violetilla), Parietaria debilis (Yerba Fresca), Viola arvensis (Violeta Silvestre – Field pansy), Petunia axillaris (Petunia), Verbena litoralis (Verbena), Commelina erecta (Flor de Santa Lucía – Slender dayflower), Convolvulus arvensis (Correhuela – Field bindweed), Ipomoea purpurea (Bejuco – Morning glory), Iresine difusa (Iresine) and recently Sorghum halepense (Sorgo de alepo – Johnson grass), which, because it is a difficult weed to control, has caused considerable alarm among farmers.

“Super Weeds” created by ecological imbalances inherent in mono-cropping with a GM crop, long predicted by ecologists, are jeopardizing the long-term economic and environmental viability of RR soya.

But instead of rethinking the whole agricultural model and encouraging farmers to return to mixed farming, where natural balances make it far easier to control weeds, the Argentine authorities had been offering their full support to Monsanto, which is planning over the next five years to introduce a new form of GM soya.

The new soya will have a gene inserted into it which makes it resistant to dicamba, a herbicide that kills broadleaf weeds.

According to Robert Hartzler, a weed specialist at Iowa University, dicamba brings its own problems. The compound’s volatility means that it will kill off broad-leaved plants on fields and in houses up to half a kilometer away, which will undoubtedly cause yet further serious problems for the rural population.

Monsanto is confident that resistance won’t become a serious problem, but Hartzler is not so sure. “I don’t think we can say that resistance won’t develop”, says Hartzler, “but it is a much lower likelihood than with other herbicide classes. But then, that’s what they originally said about glyphosate.”

Now back to the USA.

Here’s a recent headline and introduction of a report published by our USDA:

USDA Says Biotech Is Compatible with Organic
The Unexplored Potential of Organic-Biotech Production  Global Agricultural Information Network  By Cyndi Barmore  USDA Foreign Agricultural Service, 5/26/2009

Report Highlights:

The organic movement rejects biotechnology as inherently contradictory to its fundamental goal of promoting environmental protection in agriculture.

European organic promoters in particular stress respect for nature over yield maximization, campaigning for a return to traditional production methods and inputs. [1]

In reality, the divide between organics and biotechnology is an artificial construction maintained by ideology rather than science.

A governmental decision to change organic regulations to permit the use of biotechnology could have far-reaching policy implications for global agriculture.

Allowing producers to gain organic certification for biotech crops could encourage the development of a new type of environmentally sustainable agricultural production with greater benefits for the consumer.

The following is a response to this report by the USDA from Organic Consumer Association.

OCA Editor’s Note: This USDA report attempting to make the case for ‘organic genetically engineering’ is part of a well-funded campaign coordinated by Monsanto and their governmental, corporate, and non-profit partners to legitimize a dangerous and untested technology.

This is a campaign to impoverish farmers by making them dependent on expensive genetically modified seeds and the array of chemicals needed to grow them. It is also making guinea pigs of consumers who are being force-fed unlabeled genetically modified foods.

There are several important reports that rebut the USDA’s specious claims of the benefits of genetic engineering, including: Failure to Yield: Evaluating the Performance of Genetically Engineered Crops (Union of Concerned Scientists, 2009 www.ucsusa.org click on Food & Agriculture then Failure to Yield [A must read]) and Who Benefits from GM Crops? Genetically Modified Crops Increase Pesticide Use and Fail to Alleviate Poverty (Friends of the Earth International and Center for Food Safety, 2008 www.centerforfoodsafety.org [A must read]) Learn about the World According to Monsanto.

With the battle to save our farms and food supply ongoing, I am now happy to report that thanks to the efforts of the Union of Concerned Scientists and OCA, (August 29, 2009), the USDA has pulled their pro-GMO report from their Web site after receiving thousands of letters from organic consumers.

This is another example of the power the public has when they join together and speak up.

If we are to survive as a healthy human race we need to understand the peril we are in and know we can survive if we keep in mind the needs of our cells.

Think about the need of your cells every time you put food in your mouth.

The huge corporations poisoning our food supply are all about money.

Take away their money and you take away their power and we can get back to wholesome food and the healthy nutrients needed to feed our cells.

We need to eat organic.

We need to boycott such food giants like Kellogs who have switched to genetically engineered sugar.

Whole Foods Markets who are offering “Natural” foods that are nothing more than conventional foods at higher prices.

Hamburger fast food chains buy the cheapest, lowest grade beef out of feed lots steeped in filth.

National brand chicken and pork come from factory farms loaded with hormones and anti-biotics.

The same is true for milk and butter that is not organic.

Boycott soy bean oil because it is processed with the poisonous solvent, hexane.

Refined vegetable oils and hydrogenated and partially hydrogenated vegetable oils are trans-fats that are just short of plastic.

Canola oil which is genetically engineered and loaded with omega 6 which is detrimental to heart health.

Sodas, power drinks and especially diet sodas are especially bad for you.

Bleached white and enriched white flour in any form should not appear in your diet.

Processed foods are your cell’s enemy.

Eat at least 60% raw foods. Eat wild fish, not farmed.

Grass fed beef, not grain fed, wherever possible. The difference in taste is as significant as the benefit to your body.

Do you use a deodorant? If you do because you need to, then know that your body has an abundance of toxins.

People with a low level of toxins in their bodies do not develop body odor.

Take care of your cells and you can guarantee yourself a healthy, robust and long life.

And before I forget, here’s a message from my trainer…

“If you don’t exercise, your life will not be as robust or long lasting.”

To your cells! May they forever be brimming with energy. The rest will take care of itself!

To your good heath & longevity.

Ira Marxe
“The Good Health & Wellness Guy”