Cookwear can influence health

(NaturalNews) Nearly every American consumer is acquainted with the advantages of nonstick cookware. However two generations later we're learning that this convenience may carry a heavy price tag in terms of health. Recent findings show that 95% of Americans have detectable levels of a plastic material, polytetrafluoroethylene (PFTE) used to coat non-stick cookware, in their blood. Though the application technology has improved over the years the essential ingredient is still there. Also an unknown number of human illnesses are linked to toxic particles and gases emitted when non-stick surfaces break apart. Its safety has been questioned to the extent that a non profit research organization, the Environmental Working Group (EWG), petitioned the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission to warn the public of these safety concerns.

Low fat cooking necessitates nonstick cookware, but at what price? The Environmental Protection Agency says that ingesting small flakes of non-stick coatings is not known to cause any health maladies. One company making non-stick cookware has stated for the past 50 years that their non-stick coatings are safe. They further state there are no hazardous chemicals emitted if cookware is used responsibly keeping temperatures below 600 degrees Fahrenheit. Albeit a class-action suit filed by several states claims toxins are released under normal cooking use and that the company did not warn consumers about its dangers.

Another standby in almost every kitchen in America has been glass baking dishes. They were made with borosilicate glass but eventually the technology was sold along with the logo. Since then, there has been a ground swell of controversy with disturbing reports that the newer dishes often explode and shatter in the oven. A spokesman for the new manufacturer says the claims are unsubstantiated and the malfunctioning dishes are another brand even though the original logo is clearly displayed.

Stainless steel pots and pans, along with iron and stone cookware, are durable; the drawback with these is the need for more cooking oils so the food doesn't stick to the pan. This not only adds calories, but when oils are overheated they turn to unhealthy trans fats. New York Times science reporter Gina Kolata says: "The National Academy of Sciences, Department of Health and Human Services, National Heart Lung and Blood Institute and the Food and Drug Administration have all concluded: Trans fats are like butter or lard, -both increase cholesterol levels.

Ceramic, glass or enamel coated cookware can be safely heated to high temperatures, but at that point food enzymes and nutrients are destroyed. The health concern here comes from minor components such as pigments, lead, or cadmium. If the enamel coating has been scratched, these harmful materials to the body may leach into food.

Cookware made of aluminum conducts heat easily but has been associated with Alzheimer`s disease, though there is no proven link. Studies have shown aluminum alone leaches out into food during cooking, but we're told not to worry. Assured by the World Health Organization, we are safe if we consume no more than 50 milligrams daily.

Some of the healthiest cookware appears to be waterless, greaseless cookware made from surgical stainless steel. Most vegetables contain 90% water so cooking without adding oil, butter, fats or water preserves the minerals and natural salts. Made in the USA, the cookware creates a vapor seal and works like a small oven. Food is cooked at a low temperature for a minimal amount of time - the best way if you are cooking, to preserve minerals, vitamins and valuable nutrients.

Your healthmate,

Deanna Dean

www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/teflo...

consumeraffairs.com/news04/2008/08pyrex.html Joseph Enoch

townsendletter.com/june2006/healthrisk0606.htm

Americraft.com

home.howstuffworks.com/non-stickcookware.htm/printable
________________________________________

Carcinogenic Teflon and non-stick cooking items

(NaturalNews) It seems today that everyone is trying to market their product as "green". Consumers need to be aware, though, that just because their merchandise is labeled as "green" or "good for the environment," it does not mean that it actually is. A perfect example of this can be found in the cookware aisle. A pan that has a bamboo handle is made from some recycled materials and can be recycled after use, but it should not claim to be a "green" pan, especially when that pan is coated with a substance like Teflon. Not only can Teflon-coated and other non-stick cookware produce fumes that are highly toxic to birds, but it is clear that these products are also unhealthy for humans.

According to tests commissioned by Environmental Working Group (EWG), in the two to five minutes that cookware coated with Teflon is heating on a conventional stovetop, temperatures can exceed to the point that the coating breaks apart and emits toxic particles and gases. At various temperatures these coatings can release at least six toxic gases, including two carcinogens. Birds` respiratory systems are sensitive to the fumes of heated non-stick pans. The lungs of exposed birds have been known to hemorrhage and fill up with fluid leading to suffocation, a condition called "Teflon Toxicosis." Most bird owners are unaware of this hazard.

For humans an effect called "polymer fume fever" has been acknowledged. This is said to be a temporary influenza-like syndrome, but it is still unknown what the long term effects of exposure might be. As if this was not bad enough, when the pans with these coatings get scratched during cooking, small amounts of plastic and leached aluminum cling to the food and then are ingested.

Toxic chemicals are also prevalent in the environment because of the use of these pans. A study done in 2005 by the Environmental Working Group in collaboration with Commonweal found perflourooctanoic acid (PFOA), a chemical found in such pans and a known carcinogen, in the umbilical cord blood of newborns. John Hopkins Medical Center did a similar test in 2006 where PFOA was present in the umbilical cord blood of 99% of the 300 infants tested.

There are many new pans on the market today that are considered safe, but research is necessary to figure out exactly what chemicals are present. Cast iron pans are also a great alternative. They add beneficial iron to the diet and they heat evenly without adding toxic chemicals to the dish.

www.ewg.org/node/8296

www.ecomall.com/greenshopping/teflo...

www.naturalpath.com/healthy_eating/...

www.fluoridealert.org/pesticides/te...

Aspartame linked to leukemia and limphoma

NCI Study Links Aspartame To Leukemia & Lymphoma

* EFSA blesses formaldehyde-forming aspartame on April 20
* NCI backs study linking formaldehyde to
leukemia, lymphoma on May 14

From Dr. Betty Martini
Mission Possible International
5-21-9


The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) announced April 20, 2009: ..."on the basis of all the evidence currently available including the [second] published ERF study there is no indication of any genotoxic or carcinogenic potential of aspartame and that there is no reason to revise the previously established ADI (allowable daily intake) for aspartame of 40mg/kg bw/day." Truth be told: aspartame is an addictive excitoneurotoxic, genetically engineered, carcinogenic that interacts with virtually all medications.

EFSA is blinded by allegiance to commercial interests so it invents objections to acclaimed medical research, disregarding the suffering, ruined lives and death their cupidity brings to Europe.

In 2005 the renowned Ramazzini Foundation of Oncology and Environmental Sciences reported a rigorous three years study on 1,800 rats, concluding: aspartame causes significant increases in lympomas/leukemias and is a multi-potential carcinogen. EFSA invented "deficiencies" in the study to protect manufacturers pet poison. The second study, ERF 2007, entirely verified the first. Dr. Morando Soffritti, who led both projects, noted that so much formaldehyde developed in aspartame-exposed rats that their skin turned yellow.

Who is the European Food Safety Authority? In 2002 a review of aspartame a review of aspartame y the European commission, Scientific Committee on Food attempted to pass off this deadly addictive drug as safe. An assessment by the European Anti-Fraud Agency (OLAF) revealed the opinion was written by a single person and not by the entire Scientific Committee on Food. OLAF did not reveal the name of this individual or any scientific expertise or conflict of interest he/she had.

Astonishingly, one unnamed individual writes each opinion of the committees. Next, persons, often industry consultants, review the draft. What is clear: neither the author nor the Committee (including industry consultants) considered or had familiarity with the scientific research detailed in the 2002 analysis.

The European Commission, Scientific Committee on Food is defunct and reviews are now conducted by EFSA, which is composed of many of the same scientists with conflicts of interest who were on the earlier bureaucracy.

America's FDA approved aspartame as a synthetic sweetener in 1981. However, studies given the FDA by the manufacturer hide the fact the poison caused tumors in lab rats.

An Interesting Twist Of Formaldehyde Fate

On May 14, 2009, the National Cancer Institute confirmed the link between formaldehyde and cancer. The NCI's Laura E. Beane Freeman, Ph.D. reported that an extended analysis of workers exposed to formaldehyde was associated with a 37 percent increased death-risk from lymphoma and leukemia. "The overall patterns of risk seen in this extended follow-up of industrial workers are consistent with a causal association between formaldehyde exposure and cancers of the blood and lymphatic system and warrant continued concern," Online: Journal of the National Cancer Institute.

According to Kristina Fiore of MedPage Today, "Since the 1980s, the Institute has studied a cohort of 25,619 workers employed before Jan. 1, 1966 in 10 industrial plants that produced formaldehyde in molded-plastic products, photographic film, decorative laminates and plywood. The formaldehyde cohort, originally assessed through Dec. 31, 1979, was then updated through Dec. 31, 1994."

Researchers have not yet identified the mechanism by which formaldehyde causes leukemia but the pattern is consistent with "a possible causal association, with the largest risks occurring closer in time to relevant exposure." She called for further study to "evaluate risks of these cancers in other formaldehyde-exposed populations and to assess possible biological mechanisms."

Toxicologist, Dr. George Schwartz, told team NutraSweet in 1999 they had presented a one-sided self serving polemic defending their potentially dangerous product and said, "As one example, your comment that "formate is quickly eliminated by the body" is demonstrably false. .. The study done by Trocho et al, Formaldehyde derived from dietary aspartame binds to tissue components in vivo. Life Sciences 63:5:p.337-49, 1998, clearly demonstrates cellular persistence and accumulation, or in layman's terms, that formaldehyde can remain and accumulate in the body."

It is absolutely established that formaldehyde converted from the methyl ester in aspartame embalms living tissue and damages DNA. http://www.mpwhi.com/formaldehyde_from_aspartame.pdf

EPA listed formaldehyde as a probable human carcinogen in 1987. In 2004 the International Agency for Research on Cancer went further classifying formaldehyde as a "known human carcinogen" based partly on research suggesting a link to leukemia. Dr. Woodrow Monte (Aspartame: Methanol and the Public Health) in New Zealand saw that the New Zealand Food Safety Authority was concerned formaldehyde was found in pajamas. He wrote: "If you are concerned about formaldehyde in your pajamas then think twice about taking it with your breakfast cereal. Aspartame or Equal, the controversial sweetener virtually forced down the throats of the American FDA by the notorious former US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld (the president of the company that produced it) turns into Formaldehyde inside your children's bodies. It is well known aspartame or Equal (E951/951) turns into wood alcohol when it is consumed, however, few people realize this wood alcohol morphs into formaldehyde in the cells of the human body. Formaldehyde is a Class 1 causing agent (the world class of carcinogen) and is responsible for everything from sick house syndrome to birth defects. Definitely something we don't want to see in Pajamas but most certainly not in our food."

Dr. James Bowen said: "Other examples of this toxic axis are the extreme poisonings caused by formaldehyde, which plasticizes corpses, and is a deadly carcinogen. Both acute and chronic poisonings from methanol with the several other synergistic poisonings from aspartame ingestion steadily accumulate within aspartame consumers until finally hastening or culminating in fatal events."

"The NCI study confirms the work of Dr. Soffritti," said Mission Possible Director Dr. Betty Martini. "Now we have to get the NCI to realize that the 'biological mechanisms' that cause formaldehyde-induced cancers from workplace exposures are likely to be identical to the 'biological mechanisms' causing aspartame-induced cancers. Research shows formaldehyde, which aspartame produces, causes lymphoma and leukemia in both lab rats and people. EFSA's general review of aspartame will be completed in November. With their tight relationship with industry what should we expect? Perhaps they'll remember Mark Twain's words: "Always do right; this will gratify some people and astonish the rest."

FDA has admitted aspartame carcinogenicity; nevertheless the NCI and NIH recently said aspartame is a safe artificial sweetener.

Note: For 30 years the neurotoxicity/carcinogenicity of aspartame have been demonstrated in numerous studies posted on the sites below. This research is confirmed by the case histories of thousands of victims who suffered dread infirmities or died from the myriad complications from this chemical poison. This could end if the NCI announces workplace formaldehyde and dietary formaldehyde have the same affect on the body and produce the same cancers.

FDA Toxicologist, Dr. Adrian Gross, told Congress in 1985 aspartame violates the Delaney Amendment because it causes cancer and an allowable daily intake should never have been allowed to be set.

Russell Blaylock, M.D. said in "Health and Nutrition Secrets to Save Your Life": "So in the case of diet drinks in aluminum cans, the very toxic brain aluminum fluoride compound co-exists with multiple toxins found in aspartame, thus creating the most powerful government-approved toxic soup imaginable."

******************

Contact

Dr. Betty Martini, D.Hum.
Founder, Mission Possible World Health International
9270 River Club Parkway
Duluth, Georgia 30097
770-242-2599
E-Mail: BettyM19@mindspring.com
http://www.wpwhi.com
http://www.wnho.net
http://www.dorway.com
bettym19@mindspring.com

Aspartame Toxicity Center: http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame


For references confirming material in this article:
www.mpwhi.com, http://www.dorway.com, http://www.wnho.net

Aspartame Toxicity Center:
http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame

OLAF Comment:
http://www.holisticmed.com/aspartame/scf2002-postscript.htm

Aspartame Disease: An Ignored Epidemic, H. J. Roberts, M.D.:
http://www.sunsentpress.com

Excitotoxins: The Taste That Kills, neurosurgeon Russell Blaylock, M.D.:
http://www.russellblaylockmd.com

Aspartame documentary: Sweet Misery: A Poisoned World:
http://www.soundandfury.tv

Clip explaining political chicanery of Don Rumsfeld in approval:
http://www.soundandfury.tv/pages/rumsfeld.html

What the real aspartame experts said about EFSA's review:
http://dorway.com/dorwblog/?p=1939

FDA audit: Bressler Report:
http://dorway.com/dorwblog/?page_id=56

recognize toxic chemicals in the natural labelled care products

(NaturalNews) A common belief among consumers is that products labeled "natural" must be safe and beneficial to consume or use. Often the ingredient lists on these "natural" products contain chemicals that are unrecognizable and unfamiliar to most people. The bad news is that the products that are labeled as "natural" by manufacturers are usually far from natural and safe. The good news is that it is possible to be an informed consumer with the information necessary to avoid these products. Learning about these toxic chemicals is the first step toward avoiding them and this is quite simple to do, using the Internet as a tool.

Almost every synthetic chemical that exists has a Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) that contains the facts about the chemical as well as any potential dangers associated with human health. The MSDS lists a summary of the facts for each chemical and summarizes other facts such as hazard identification, first aid instructions, exposure limits, and other names that are associated with the specific chemical. It can be very surprising to read MSDS information for "natural" chemicals and find information warning of dangers associated with these chemicals.

One can't help but wonder how and why these chemicals can be labeled as natural under these conditions.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) Hazard Communication Standard (HCS) has stipulated that a MSDS must be created for any chemicals that are considered hazardous according to criteria described in the Hazard Communication Standard. All hazardous chemicals must be indexed and an MSDS must be published for each of them.

An enlightening exercise for any consumer who is concerned about toxic chemicals is to perform a Google search for specific ingredients contained in his/her personal care products. Entering the specific chemical name along with "MSDS" in the search field will return MSDS results for the specific chemicals searched for. Another resource for researching specific ingredients is www.hazard.com/msds.

Within this website are three search options:

1.Search by manufacturer
2.Search by name of chemical
3.Search the Chemical Toxicity Database

Chemicals to Avoid in Personal Care Products:

Cocoamide DEA, diethanolamine, TEA, triethanolamine, MEA -- Used as a shampoo thickener and foam stabilizer. According to the MSDS for Cocoamide DEA, this chemical is harmful if swallowed or inhaled and contact with skin, eyes, and clothing should be avoided.

Propylene glycol, propylene oxide, polyethylene glycol -- Listed on the FDA government website as a known carcinogen. This is a common ingredient in many moisturizers and lotions. It has also been connected with kidney and liver damage in scientific testing. Propylene glycol has also now been connected with common skin rashes and skin damage.

Sodium lauryl sulfate, sodium laureth sulfate -- A common ingredient in shampoos and liquid soaps. SLS may be the most dangerous ingredient used in personal care products. SLS is the active ingredient in garage floor cleaners, engine degreasers and industrial strength soaps. This is a very corrosive chemical used to clean industrial and greasy surfaces.

Sodium Fluoride -- The fluoride that is added to drinking water is hydrofluoric acid. This is a compound of fluorine, which is actually a chemical byproduct of aluminum, steel, cement, phosphate, and other assorted ingredients. Fluoride in this form has no nutritional value and is one of the most caustic industrial chemicals. Fluoride is also an active ingredient in rat and cockroach poisons.

Mineral Oil, Petrolatum and Coal Tar -- Used in many moisturizing products. Mineral oil is a petroleum by-product that interferes with skin's ability to eliminate toxins. Because of this it promotes acne and other skin disorders. Mineral oil has also been associated with premature aging. Any product that contains mineral oil may be contaminated with cancer causing Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons.

Consumers who are armed with accurate information about toxic ingredients contained in common personal care products will be able to make informed decisions that will protect their health.

Source: http://www.inspiredliving.com/organ...

Environmental pollution and diabetes 2 risk

(NaturalNews) Nearly every person and animal in the world has detectable levels of poly-chlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) in his or her body. It is thought that the levels in most people are low enough to never cause harm. However, to the list of adverse health effects resulting from high PCB exposure, a new ailment has been added, type 2 diabetes.

This was reported in the August 2008 issue of the journal Diabetes Care. The data for the study originated from an incident in late 1970s Taiwan, when cooking oil laced with PCBs poisoned thousands of Taiwanese. From 1993 to 2003, the researchers examined 378 victims and compared them to 370 reference subjects of the same neighborhoods who had not been exposed.

During the 24 years, the development of type 2 diabetes in exposed women was twice as common as in unexposed women. The women who had been the most severely affected by the PCB poisoning had more than five-times the rate of type 2 diabetes.

For unstated reasons, men did not experience an increased risk.

Past studies have shown that people with diabetes have higher levels of PCBs and other organic pollutants in their blood than people without the disorder. It's possible that the body of a person with the disorder is not as efficient at removing these pollutants as a healthy body.

One of the researchers, Yueliang Leon Guo, said that since there are detectable levels of PCBs in everyone's body, even low levels may be a factor in the rise of diabetes throughout the world. Of course, a person's activity level and diet are the overriding factors.

PCBs are a class of 200 similar man-made chemicals. They had diverse applications (fluorescent lights, insecticides, insulation, adhesives, lubricants, etc.) before they were banned in the late 1970s. Despite being banned, PCBs still permeate our world as a result of being dumped in rivers and they escape into the environment by other vectors. Many PCB products are still in use today. This class of chemicals continues to move up the food chains and become more concentrated through a process called bioaccumulation.

PCBs are very persistent chemicals. They don't break down easily and are difficult to destroy. It will take several generations for PCBs to disappear entirely from our bodies.

Seeing as these chemicals are invisible and widespread, avoidance is difficult. Besides staying away from known sources, the best choice you can make is to keep your defenses strong by staying vibrantly healthy.

Source:

Increased Risk of Diabetes and Poly-chlorinated Biphenyls and Dioxins
(http://care.diabetesjournals.org/cgi/co...)

Toxic sofas

At least 1,000 people suffer horrific burns from 'toxic' leather sofas

By Lucy Ballinger
Last updated at 6:33 PM on 28th May 2008
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10...ther-sofas.html


At least 1,000 people have suffered horrific burns from leather sofas sprayed with a toxic substance to stop them going mouldy.

Baby Archie Lloyd-Bennett is among the victims who have suffered chronic skin complaints from contact with one of the sofas.

He suffered blisters all over his body after lying on the chair, and has had hospital treatment for the angry red burns.

The nine-month-old boy now has seven lotions, creams and pills to treat his condition.

The Chinese-made settees are sold by High Street chain Argos and Land of Leather for between £600 and £850

Victims have visited A&E departments and doctors' surgeries with severe skin complaints after buying the leather suites from the shops.

The chairs had been treated with a fungicide to stop them going mouldy in storage. But the substance triggered violent irritant-related eczema in some customers

Baby Archie's mother Rebecca Lloyd-Bennett, 25, had to take her son to Birmingham Children's Hospital.

'He was red raw after lying on the sofa in his nappy,' Mrs Lloyd-Bennett told The Sun.

'He has been in agony. It is very itchy and he now has gloves to stop him scratching.'

The family's dog Kes was also affected by the toxic chemical. His hair fell out and he needed £1,000 of vet's treatment.

Solicitors have been approached by customers who have suffered from serious skin complaints from the settees, including one who claimed they were hospitalised for a week.

Last year there were 60 complaints about sofas from Argos and northern chain Walmsley's bought from the Linkwise Furniture factory in southern China.

Customers were told that not everyone who bought a sofa would suffer a reaction but the number was high enough to call it a 'widespread' outbreak.