Deconstructing Industrial Food Sickness | The Healthy Home Economist

Deconstructing Industrial Food Sickness | The Healthy Home Economist:

Sunday, August 29, 2010

My whole family ate dinner last night at Beef O'Brady's with a bunch of friends after a soccer game.. I hate Beefs because everytime I eat there I usually leave feeling pretty rotten. And, if I don't feel terrible when I walk out of the place, it is a pretty good bet that I will feel terrible within a few hours or the next morning when I wake up.

It certainly wasn't my choice to go to Beef O'Bradys. If it was up to me, I would have chosen some other restaurant that wasn't a chain.

Chain restaurants serve the worst quality food, have you noticed? To get a decent meal, you really need to go to a sole proprietorship type of restaurant where the cook is usually the owner (or at least milling around the kitchen area) and there is some degree of pride in the quality of the food that is served.

But, you can't live in a bubble, especially if you have children. When a bunch of friends want to go to Beef O'Brady's to hang out after the big game, you go along and try to eat whatever will cause the least amount of pain and suffering later.

I've tried the "I'm going home to eat" approach and found that it just doesn't work very well. Socializing with friends over a meal is a big part of getting to know folks and enjoying their company. Figuring out how to navigate the processed food landmines at a place like Beefs is just part of learning how to stay healthy in a world of garbage food. It isn't easy, but it's just part of the challenge.

All this blah blah blah about Beef O'Brady's is a roundabout way of bringing me to the main point of this blog: Industrial Food Sickness, also known as IFS.

What is Industrial Food Sickness anyway?

Anyone who has embarked upon an unprocessed, Real Food lifestyle instinctively knows exactly what I'm talking about here.

Food That Will Cause Industrial Food Sickness

Industrial Food Sickness is the short term illness folks experience when they eat highly processed, msg and additive laden food when their diet is unprocessed, nutrient dense, and whole foods based the majority of the time.


Dealing with IFS is one of the biggest concerns folks express to me when they transition to the unprocessed, Real Food way of life to experience their best health.


"Why can't I eat out anymore without feeling terrible for 2 days afterward?"


"Church and school potlucks make me feel ill and I find that I don't enjoy going anymore, why is that?"


Why do folks suddenly become prone to IFS? Why do foods that never seemed to bother you before you began to eat healthy suddenly keep you up all night with any combination of IFS symptoms: stomach cramps, headache, vomiting, diarrhea, joint pain, dizziness, and the most common symptom: absolute exhaustion (note: I zonked out on the couch for about an hour after getting home from Beefs).

The reason is because when you start eating whole, unprocessed Real Food the majority of the time, your gut begins to heal. Beneficial bacteria begin to re-establish dominance over the gut pathogens that have been ruling the roost for years, maybe even decades. Nutrient absorption improves tremendously as the perforations in the gut wall begin to heal and the enterocytes that are responsible for breaking down our food into particles that can be absorbed into the blood grow stronger with each passing day.

Throw some highly processed, additive laden food into this improving gut environment and suddenly, the entire healing process takes a violent step or two backwards. Processed food does not nourish beneficial gut flora; it encourages the growth of pathogens. This is why even a single meal of highly processed foods can cause a rapid surge of the gut pathogens at the expense of the beneficial flora. This battle between good and bad bacteria in your gut is what makes you feel so tired and sick after a meal at a typical American style restaurant, a potluck, or a birthday party with supermarket cake and high fructose corn syrup juice boxes.

Industrial Food Sickness can be compared to a teetotaler drinking a fifth of vodka and ending up in the Hospital Emergency Room with alcohol poisoning whereas a drunk doing the same thing would show little signs of drunkeness.

The difference is that the drunk is used to it!


Does being "used to it" mean that the fifth of vodka isn't harming the drunk?

Absolutely not! The drunk's liver is still getting slammed every time he drinks a fifth of vodka.

Similarly, just because you used to be able to go to Beef O'Brady's and eat whatever you wanted and not feel sick for 2 days does not mean that it wasn't devastating your insides!

Be thankful that now your body has healed enough from your Real Food lifestyle to tell you that it is in distress from the garbage you just fed it!

Industrial Food Sickness is your canary in the mine that what you just ate wasn't the best of choices.

I used to detest Industrial Food Sickness. It used to bother me that I couldn't eat garbage food anymore without feeling terrible.

Now I realize that IFS is just a signal that my body is so much healthier than before. My body is well enough to feel sick when it is assaulted by processed food instead of just numb. That is a very good thing!

If you are reading this and you haven't ever experienced Industrial Food Sickness, I would recommend that you change over to the Real Food Lifestyle as quickly as possible. You are like the drunk drinking a fifth of vodka and not feeling a thing. Your body is so messed up it has become numb to the pain.

Industrial Food Sickness is the one illness you want to experience as it is a very strong deterrent to eating the foods that will bring you chronic ill health. It's also a very good sign that your health is improving!


Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

Protestors of toxic GM crops resort to literally destroying them

Protestors of toxic GM crops resort to literally destroying them:
Tuesday, August 24, 2010 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer

(NaturalNews) Biotechnology giants like Monsanto continue to push their genetically-modified (GM) crop seeds on the nations of the world, in most cases bypassing the clear will of the people in the process. But some people have decided that enough is enough. For the second time in two years, a group of protestors has destroyed GM grapevines at a French vineyard, uprooting all 70 of the experimental plants before being arrested.

Besides causing damage to the intestines, immune system and organs, GMs require heavy applications of pesticides to even grow at all. They typically only last for one planting due to their altered genetic programming. And they cross-pollinate with non-GM crops and cause "superweeds" to form.

But public opposition through legislation and loud voices has done little to curb the expanding implementation of GM crops around the world. Even the Obama Administration has done nothing but kowtow to biotechnology interests. So concerned citizens from various nations have decided to simply destroy the crops..

The vineyard isn't the only place that has experienced the wrath of an upset public, either. Back in July, protestors ravished the fields of two experimental corn crops in Spain. And back in the early 1990s, when the U.S. was first transitioning many of its staple crops to GM varieties, cotton farmers in India burned hordes of GM cotton in protest of the toxic crops.

According to reports, Monsanto recently tried to offer 475 tons of hybrid corn to Haitian earthquake victims, but the nation rejected the offer as nothing more than a ploy to further impose GM crops around the world.

All in all, GM crops are a failure. They threaten the world's food supply, they are toxic to the environment and to humans and they serve no legitimate purpose in agriculture other than to give complete control of food to a few multinational corporations.

Sources for this story include:

http://foodfreedom.wordpress.com/20...

Articles Related to This Article:

• Monsanto: The world's poster child for corporate manipulation and deceit

• New Generation of Drug-Producing GM Crops Could Threaten Food Supply and Devastate US Farmers

• UCS Study Says Genetically Modified Crops Have Failure to Yield

• Radical weather patterns devastate California crops, endanger residents with rare freeze

• Genetically Modified Crops Implicated in Honeybee Colony Collapse Disorder

• Genetically Engineered Crops have Led to Massive

FDA uses egg recall to demand more power, authority over food

FDA uses egg recall to demand more power, authority over food:
Thursday, August 26, 2010 by: Ethan A. Huff, staff writer
(NaturalNews) Following the recall of more than half a billion commercially-produced eggs potentially tainted with salmonella, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is now petitioning the U.S. Congress for more power and authority over food. Margaret Hamburg, FDA chief, recently pressed for laws to be enacted that would permit the agency to take a "preventive approach" in food safety endeavors.

According to reports and estimates from the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), roughly 1,300 people have been sickened by salmonella poisoning from eggs distributed by two mega-farms in Iowa, prompting a widespread egg recall. At this point, there are no reported deaths from the bacteria.

Ironically, the FDA already has the power and authority to regulate the food industry in a way that could have prevented this outbreak, but the agency has utterly failed to hold producers responsible for maintaining clean and safe facilities. For years, the FDA has permitted large commercial egg producers to run filthy operations without consequence.

Commercial egg production has continued to become more consolidated over the years as well. Many commercial flocks live in tighter, filthier conditions than they used to, which has caused more disease to spread. The two producers involved in the current egg recall, both of which operate egg production facilities that have been in violation of safety standards on numerous occasions, have been permitted to continue operating despite their atrocities.

"It's a horrible story. It could have been prevented. Everybody knew it was a problem, and nobody was willing to take action," explained Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition at New York University and author of several books on food safety and nutrition.

But instead of apologizing for its grave regulatory errors, the FDA actually had the audacity to ask for more power. The last thing the agency needs is more control. If anything, a massive reduction in FDA power is more fitting in light of the current dilemma.

Sources for this story include:

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/FDA-c...

GlaxoSmithKline pushing dangerous Avandia drug on thousands in new global clinical trial (opinion)

GlaxoSmithKline pushing dangerous Avandia drug on thousands in new global clinical trial (opinion):

(NaturalNews) Back in February, I wrote an article about how a Senate Finance Committee report revealed that GlaxoSmithKline, the maker of the diabetes drug Avandia, knew that its drug was dangerous and caused heart attacks; yet GSK went out of its way to hide this important information from the public and kept on selling Avandia. Now, GSK has now decided to launch a global clinical trial of this dangerous drug that could potentially harm thousands of people.

Both FDA and GSK scientists have found that Avandia is dangerous and significantly increases the risk of heart attacks, but the drug remains on the market to this day. FDA officials have rejected sound scientific evidence demonstrating the dangers of the drug, including evidence from the FDA's own scientists. (Read all about the Avandia scandal in my previous article on the subject.)

Meanwhile, GSK is moving forward with a global clinical trial that it says will compare the safety of Avandia with other diabetes drugs in its class. In other words, according to press reports, GSK knows Avandia is dangerous, but it's choosing to go ahead with a trial anyway... a trial that could put the lives of thousands of people at risk.

Real scientists say Avandia drug trial is unethical and dangerous

Dr. David Juurlink, chief of clinical pharmacology and toxicology at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Center in Toronto, and Dr. Sidney Wolfe, director of health research for the consumer advocacy group Public Citizen, have petitioned the FDA to stop the GSK drug trial. Citing concerns that the trial is "unethical" and "dangerous", the two are doing what the FDA itself should be doing - assessing the evidence and coming to a rational conclusion about risk versus benefit.

After all, it was Dr. Juurlink's 2009 study which already found that Avandia increases the risk of heart failure and death by 30 percent more than another diabetes drug in the same class. Not only has Avandia been proven to be dangerous, it's been proven to be even more dangerous than the competition.

And numerous studies years before found that Avandia increases the risk of heart problems and death, prompting the FDA to issue two black-box warnings for the drug back in 2007.

But at this point, it doesn't seem to matter how many people suffer and die from Avandia because the FDA somehow doesn't believe there is "conclusive evidence" that Avandia is dangerous, so pharmacies everywhere continue to sell it. And even though GSK knows that Avandia is statistically responsible for an increase in deaths, it continues to push this drug on the masses.

GSK guilty of negligent deaths?

If you really think about it, what GSK is doing amounts to negligent homicide. The company is knowingly and willfully selling a dangerous drug that's killing people, and now it wants to subject even more people to unnecessary risk of death through a medically unnecessary clinical trial that's global in scope.

I say "medically unnecessary" because there have already been a number of studies verifying that Avandia is dangerous. Why create another trial with 16,000 participants to reveal what we already know? How many more people need to suffer or die before the FDA pulls the drug from the market?

The sheer lunacy of what's taking place here in the name of "medicine" and "science" is shocking -- even to those of us who follow the crimes and corruption of Big Pharma on a regular basis. Real scientists and doctors know this behavior by GSK is appalling, and apparently so does much of the public who, according to new reports, are refusing to even participate in the trial.

GSK can't even get Americans to participate in the trial, so it's moving to third-world countries

Typically when drug companies conduct clinical trials, they pay people a sum of money to act as guinea pigs for a new drug. (Sadly, many people are willing to ingest experimental substances for a couple hundred bucks). However according to a recent Wall Street Journal article, GSK can't even get Americans to sign up!

You see, the average joe has more common sense than the FDA, and a lot of people know that Avandia is dangerous. The Wake Forest University Baptist Medical Center in North Carolina, for example, which is one of GSK's study sites, has "not succeed[ed] in recruiting anybody" in over a year. And this is during a time when a lot of Americans are out of jobs and desperately need the cash.

So what does GSK do in response? It opens dozens of new sites in third-world countries where it can prey on innocent poor people who are less informed about the dangers of Avandia.

In fact, this is part of the reason why Dr. Juurlink and Dr. Wolfe are urging the FDA to stop the trial. They recognize how evil it is for GSK to exploit ill-informed people from other countries when things aren't going so well for Avandia back at home. In targeting low-income third-world study subjects, GSK is demonstrating itself to be a ruthless, money-hungry organization that has no qualms about exploiting human lives to achieve its profit goals.

The inhumanity of the medical-industrial complex

The whole Avandia fiasco is truly indicative of the way the medical-industrial complex operates. You would think that after all the studies and trials proving its dangers, the countless lawsuits and the official government report, that GSK would at least back down from this drug. Not only has GSK continued to deny the obvious truth about Avandia's risks, but now it is shamelessly pressing forward to expand the market for Avandia around the world. (Remind you of anything? How about Big Tobacco?)

It seems obvious that Avandia should be pulled from the market and GSK investigated for its role in pushing a knowingly harmful drug. At the very least, there should be a moratorium on the sale of the drug until GSK can prove the safety of Avandia. But in the real world, this dangerous drug is being treated as safe and its producer is allowed to continue using it on human guinea pigs around the world.

If GSK was a person, that person might be classified as a serial killer (and the FDA would be considered its accomplice). Both GSK and the FDA, if they were people, would be pursued for their crimes against society. But because they are two of the key organizational players in the global medical-industrial complex, they continue to perpetrate their crimes without consequence.

This may be changing, though, as people wake up to the truth. The fact that GSK can't get U.S. participants to sign up for its Avandia clinical trials says to me that people are really starting to recognize "the emperor has no clothes." Big Pharma's lies can only continue for so long before the truth is exposed.

Articles Related to This Article:

• Avandia fraud explained: Why Big Pharma keeps lying about its drugs (opinion)

• FDA refuses to pull dangerous diabetes drug Avandia, even knowing it will kill thousands

• GlaxoSmithKline deliberately hid evidence of Avandia harm, says Senate report

• GlaxoSmithKline reportedly threatened diabetes expert over Avandia warnings

• It is Official: Diabetes Drug Avandia Causes Heart Attacks

• 90 percent of scientists backing Avandia diabetes drug had financial ties to drug companies

How to Protect Yourself from Chemical Exposure

How to Protect Yourself from Chemical Exposure:
Posted By Dr. Mercola

A growing body of research links five of the most commonly used chemicals in the world to a host of ailments, including cancer, sexual problems and behavioral issues. Here's what CNN suggests you can do about them:

1. BPA — Bisphenol A

   BPA is used to make lightweight, clear, heat-resistant plastic. It's also used in epoxy resins.

   A growing body of research suggests that BPA poses a potential cancer risk and may disrupt the extremely sensitive chemical signals in your body called the endocrine system.

   To avoid it, buy stainless steel bottles and glass food storage containers. Switch to fresh or frozen vegetables instead of canned. If you buy plastic, check for the number on the bottom — if there is a number 7, assume the container contains BPA unless it explicitly says otherwise.

2. Phthalates

   This family of chemicals softens plastics. Phthalates are considered endocrine disrupters. Research has also shown phthalates disrupt reproductive development. Avoid shampoos, conditioners and other personal care products that list "fragrance" as an ingredient.

3. PFOA — Perfluorooctanoic acid (also called C8)

   PFOA is used to make Teflon and other nonstick and stain- or water-repellent products. PFOA causes cancer and developmental problems. You can reduce your potential exposure by using stainless steel or cast iron cookware. If you use nonstick cookware, do not overheat it — this releases toxic gas.

4. Formaldehyde

   Formaldehyde is an ingredient in resins that act as a glue in the manufacture of pressed wood products. It is a known human carcinogen, causing cancers of the respiratory or gastrointestinal tract.

   Buying furniture free from formaldehyde eliminates much of the exposure you face from the chemical. If you have wood products containing formaldehyde, increase ventilation, reduce humidity with air conditioning or dehumidifiers and keep your home cool.

5. PBDEs — Polybrominated diphenyl ethers

   PBDEs are a group of chemicals used as flame retardants. Toxicology tests show PBDEs may damage your liver and kidneys and affect your brain and behavior. Try to find products without PBDE flame retardants and be sure to sweep up dust.

Sources:

CNN May 31, 2010

Thanks to the spoils of the industrial revolution, your body is now home to a growing cocktail of chemicals.

Intermingling with your red and white blood cells, your endocrine system, brain, tissues and other organs are chemicals used to make epoxy resins, non-stock cookware, flame-resistant upholstery and plastic -- clearly substances that have no business taking residence in a living, breathing creature such as yourself.

Your Body Probably Contains Over 200 Chemicals

A typical American comes in regular contact with 6,000 chemicals and an untold number of potentially toxic substances on a less frequent basis. There are about 75,000 chemicals regularly manufactured and imported by U.S. industries, so you could potentially be exposed to any number of them.

Given the vast amounts of chemicals in the environment, it's not too surprising that the CDC's Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals found an average of 212 chemicals in Americans' blood or urine.

Likewise, an Environmental Working Group study found that blood samples from newborns contained an average of 287 toxins, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and Teflon chemicals, and this is from exposures they received before birth.

When it comes to the potentially hazardous chemicals you and your family are exposed to as you go about your daily lives, it can easily feel overwhelming. There are chemicals literally everywhere, but rather than feeling burdened by the thought I encourage you instead to focus on simple steps you can take to reduce your risk.

A good starting point, as CNN as suggested above, is to focus on avoiding some of the most pervasive, and most toxic, chemicals that are virtually guaranteed to be in your home right now.

Five Top Common Chemicals to Avoid …

The five chemicals listed by CNN are definitely worthy of eliminating from your life as much as possible, and given that they are among the most widely used chemicals around, doing so will make a serious positive impact on your chemical exposure.

They gave a great summary above, but I'll touch on them again briefly here:

• BPA: BPA is one of the world's highest production-volume chemicals and is widely used in the production of plastics, canned foods and soda cans, food packaging, baby bottles and toys and more.

  The chemical can lead to heart disease, diabetes and liver problems in adults, and previous research has linked BPA to serious developmental and reproductive problems.

  You can find 10 tips to minimize your BPA exposure here.

• Phthalates: Phthalates, or "plasticizers," are a group of industrial chemicals used to make plastics like polyvinyl chloride (PVC) more flexible and resilient. They're also one of the most pervasive of the endocrine disrupters.

  These chemicals have increasingly become associated with changes in development of the male brain as well as with genital defects, metabolic abnormalities and reduced testosterone in babies and adults.

  You can help reduce your exposure by using the tips in this past article.

• PFOA: Teflon-coated cookware is the primary source of dangerous perfluorinated chemicals (PFOAs). Teflon pans quickly reach temperatures that cause the non-stick coating to begin breaking down, releasing toxins that have been linked to cancer, birth defects and thyroid disease into the air in your kitchen.

  I highly recommend you throw away this type of non-stick cookware immediately and replace it with either ceramic or glass. My personal choice is ceramic cookware, because it's very durable and easy to clean, and there's absolutely no risk of exposure to harmful chemicals.

• Formaldehyde: Formaldehyde, most commonly known as embalming fluid, serves a number of purposes in manufactured products. It is actually frequently used in fabrics to give them a variety of "easy care properties" as well as being a common component of pressed-wood products.

  Formaldehyde has been shown to cause cancer in animals, and may cause cancer in humans. Other common adverse health effects include fatigue, skin rashes, and allergic reactions. Choosing all natural materials for your clothing and furniture can help cut down on your exposure.

• PBDEs: These flame-retardant chemicals have been linked to altered thyroid levels, decreased fertility and numerous problems with development when exposure occurs in utero. PBDEs are commonly found in household items like upholstery and television and computer housings. Fortunately, several states now ban the use of PBDEs, so there is some progress toward reducing exposure.

  Another common source of PBDEs is your mattress, and since you can spend up to a third of your life in bed, this is a significant health concern. Mattress manufacturers are not required to label or disclose which chemicals their mattresses contain. Look for 100 percent wool, toxin-free mattresses.

  Another viable option is to look for a mattress that uses a Kevlar, bullet-proof type of material in lieu of chemicals for fire-proofing. Stearns and Foster uses this process for their mattresses, which is sufficient to pass fire safety standards.

What Else Can You do to Reduce Unnecessary Chemical Exposure to Your Family?

Rather than compile an endless list of what you should avoid, it's far easier to focus on what you should do to lead a healthy lifestyle with as minimal a chemical exposure as possible:

1. As much as possible, buy and eat organic produce and free-range, organic foods to reduce your exposure to pesticides and fertilizers.
2. Rather than eating conventional or farm-raised fish, which are often heavily contaminated with PCBs and mercury, supplement with a high-quality purified krill oil, or eat fish that is wild-caught and lab tested for purity.
3. Eat mostly raw, fresh foods, steering clear of processed, prepackaged foods of all kinds. This way you automatically avoid artificial food additives, including dangerous artificial sweeteners, food coloring and MSG.
4. Store your food and beverages in glass rather than plastic, and avoid using plastic wrap and canned foods (which are often lined with BPA-containing liners).
5. Have your tap water tested and, if contaminants are found, install an appropriate water filter on all your faucets (even those in your shower or bath). My personal favorite, and the one I personally use, is a high-quality reverse osmosis (RO) filter. You just need to add a few minerals back to the water, but RO reliably removes virtually every possible contaminant that could be in the water.
6. Only use natural cleaning products in your home.
7. Switch over to natural brands of toiletries such as shampoo, toothpaste, antiperspirants and cosmetics. The Environmental Working Group has a great safety guide to help you find personal care products that are free of phthalates and other potentially dangerous chemicals. I also offer one of the highest quality organic skin care lines, shampoo and conditioner, and body butter that are completely natural and safe.
8. Avoid using artificial air fresheners, dryer sheets, fabric softeners or other synthetic fragrances.
9. Replace your Teflon pots and pans with ceramic or glass cookware or a safe nonstick pan.
10. When redoing your home, look for "green," toxin-free alternatives in lieu of regular paint and vinyl floor coverings.
11. Replace your vinyl shower curtain with one made of fabric, or install a glass shower door.

It is important to make these positive and gradual steps toward decreasing your chemical risk through healthy lifestyle choices. While you make the switch to remove and reduce chemicals around your home, remember that one of the ways to significantly reduce your toxic load is to pay careful attention to what you eat.

Organically-grown, biodynamic whole foods are really the key to success here, and, as an added bonus, when you eat right, you're also optimizing your body's natural detoxification system, which can help eliminate toxins your body encounters from other sources.

Related Links:

Six Risky Chemicals You're Carrying in Your Body

9 Hidden Toxins Lurking in Your Food

232 Toxic Chemicals found in 10 Babies

humans lived in tribes

"All humans lived in tribes for 99% of our time on earth. The present nuclear family system is only the result of the more natural tribal society being destroyed by kings and emperors who wanted slaves and wanted everyone to depend on their government rather than on one another."

Consumer Beware: Antibiotic Free Meats That Aren't | The Healthy Home Economist

Consumer Beware: Antibiotic Free Meats That Aren't | The Healthy Home Economist:
Wellness information stripped of the ever present, cleverly disguised profit motive that is behind health messages in the media. True Health and Wellness Information that is a Refuge from the Propaganda!
Friday, August 13, 2010

Consumer Beware: Antibiotic Free Meats That Aren't

Reading food labels is a confusing experience for the majority of consumers. This confusion is purposely engineered in many instances to keep consumers guessing and product sales flowing. MSG, for example, hides behind over 50 different labeling names. Overwhelmed consumers are often deceived into buying products loaded with MSG that they would never buy if labeling policies required full disclosure.

This very effective cat and mouse game is also played with other neurotoxins like aspartame (nutrasweet), splenda, neotame and other artificial sweeteners consumers actively attempt to avoid. These pseudo sugars are frequently hidden in sports drinks and other "low carb" fare using the overly broad "natural" or "artificial" flavorings labels that allow food manufacturers to hide the exact names of undesirable chemicals away from the concerned eyes of the consumer.

To avoid undesirable additives, consumers must battle an ever changing landscape of labeling gamesmanship played by food manufacturers that is aided and abetted by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Is Your Meat Truly Free of Antibiotics?

Neurotoxins aren't the only chemicals consumers are trying to avoid in their food. An ever growing segment of the consumer market is seeking meat from animals raised without antibiotics due to concern over the rapid rise of superbugs like MRSA and the ever plummeting age in which young girls are experiencing the onset of puberty - both of which are linked to low dose antibiotics in animal feed.

In Denmark, a ban on the use of antibiotics in animal feed drastically reduced antibiotic resistant infections in people. "The Danish Experiment", a source of pride for the country's 17,000 farmers, provides strong evidence that feeding antibiotics to animals has deadly consequences in humans.

Low dose antibiotics fed to livestock via feed causes them to mature more quickly, and this may be one cause of early development in girls who consume meat and milk produced from such animals.

Just another reason to avoid taking your children to fast food restaurants where the meats are an antibiotic residue pharma fest. Ah, but I digress ....

Antibiotics in drinking water is yet another environmental problem linked to the use of these drugs by agribusiness. A shocking 70% of all antibiotics used in the United States every year is purchased by agribusiness for otherwise healthy livestock!


There's The Rub

Do you want meat from this animal?

Consumers concerned about the problems described above and wishing to avoid antibiotics in their food are falling all over themselves to buy meat and milk from animals not subjected to the daily insult of antibiotics in their feed. As with other undesirables like MSG and aspartame, antibiotics are hiding behind confusing labeling nuances.

According to the USDA (Federal Register, Vol. 67, No. 250; December 30, 2002), a product labeled "Not Fed Antibiotics" or "No Subtherapeutic Antibiotics Used" may actually come from an animal that was given antibiotics for illness or injury. An FDA antibiotic withdrawal period prior to "harvest" (slaughter) to reduce (but not necessarily eliminate) antibiotic residue in the meat must be observed for either of these labels to be used.

Even more vague are meats with the label "No Detectable Antibiotic Residue". Products with this label mean that "a statistical sampling analysis using a science based protocol" was unable to detect any antibiotic residue. In other words, the animals could have been eating antibiotic laced feed for the entire production phase but the farmer simply followed the prescribed FDA withdrawal phase before slaughter. If subsequent "science based" tests failed to find antibiotic residue, the label is permitted.

The best labels for consumers seeking no antibiotic meats at the store are "No Antibiotics Used" or "Raised Without Antibiotics". These labels mean that the animal was raised from birth to slaughter with no antibiotics used at any time.

Best Way to Source Truly Antibiotic Free Meats

Interestingly, the USDA prohibits the label "Antibiotic Free" for some reason. It seems to me that if a consumer wants to source truly antibiotic free meats, it would be best to go to a local farmer where you can familiarize yourself with how the animals are raised and observe production procedures.

I personally feel more comfortable trusting an actual person I've had a conversation with about how the animals are treated in both illness and health than a label that may or may not be accurate or whose semantics has deceived my buying intentions!

*A special thanks to Stanley Fishman, author of Tender Grassfed Meat, for helping me track down the USDA reference material for this article.

Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

This post is submitted to Fight Back Friday

Picture1 Credit

Picture2 Credit