People who regularly eat nuts appear to live longer, according to the largest study of its kind. The findings, published in the New England Journal of Medicine, suggested the greatest benefit was in those munching on a daily portion.
The US team said nut eaters were likely to also have healthy lifestyles, but the nuts themselves were also contributing to their longer lifespan.
The British Heart Foundation said more research was needed to prove the link
The study followed nearly 120,000 people for 30 years. The more regularly people consumed nuts, the less likely they were to die during the study.
People eating nuts once a week were 11% less likely to have died during the study than those who never ate nuts.
Up to four portions was linked to a 13% reduction in deaths and a daily handful of nuts cut the death rate during the study by 20%.
Lead researcher Dr Charles Fuchs, from the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute and Brigham and Women’s Hospital, said: “The most obvious benefit was a reduction of 29% in deaths from heart disease, but we also saw a significant reduction – 11% – in the risk of dying from cancer.”
Eating nuts was linked to a healthier lifestyle – including being less likely to smoke or be overweight and more likely to exercise.
This was accounted for during the study, for example to eliminate the impact of smoking on cancer rates.
The researchers acknowledge that this process could not completely account for all of the differences between those regularly eating nuts and those not.
However, they said it was “unlikely” to change the results.
They suggest nuts are lowering cholesterol, inflammation and insulin resistance. …
“Choosing plain, unsalted options rather than honeyed, salted, dry-roasted or chocolate-covered will keep your salt and sugar intake down.”
Archive for the ‘Food’ Category
Posted by Xeno on November 21, 2013
Posted by Xeno on October 10, 2013
The European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition, known as EPIC, is a huge ongoing study involving ten countries. Very recently they published in the American Journal of Epidemiology an analysis of vegetable and fruit consumption as it relates to mortality. We’re probably all aware of the benefits of eating vegetables and fruits, but this research is interesting since it highlights the role these foods seem to have in reducing long-term risk of death.
The study was large and long term, including more than 450,000 participants from 10 European countries, who were recruited to the study between the years 1992 and 2000. Researchers followed the participants until the year 2010. Various analysis of the results showed that the more vegetables and fruits consumed by a person, the lower that person’s risk of all-cause mortality. This association, or reduced risk, was even more significant for the risk of death from cardiovascular disease (heart disease and stroke).
The results suggest that a combined total fruit and vegetable consumption of more than 569 grams a day lowers the risk of death by 10% when compared to a consumption of less than 249 grams per day. In addition, for every 200-gram increase in total daily fruit and vegetable consumption, the risk falls by 6%.
When looking at the risk of death from cardiovascular disease, a diet high in vegetables and fruits reduces the risk by 15%. In addition, over 4% of deaths due to cardiovascular disease could be prevented by consuming more than 400 grams total of these foods daily.
Posted by Xeno on October 6, 2013
… We’ve extensively documented that radioactivity from Fukushima is spreading to North America.
More than a year ago, 15 out of 15 bluefin tuna tested in California waters were contaminated with radioactive cesium from Fukushima.
Bluefin tuna are a wide-ranging fish, which can swim back and forth between Japan and North America in a year:
But what about other types of fish?
Sockeye salmon also have a range spanning all of the way from Japan to Alaska, Canada, Washington and Oregon:
Associated Press reports that both scientists and native elders in British Columbia say that sockeye numbers have plummeted:
Sockeye salmon returns plunge to historic lows.
Last month, [the Department of Fisheries and Oceans] noted returns for the Skeena River sockeye run were dire.
[Mel Kotyk, North Coast area director for the Department] said department scientists don’t know why the return numbers are so low…. “When they went out to sea they seemed to be very strong and healthy and in good numbers, so we think something happened in the ocean.”
“We’ve never seen anything like this in all these years I’ve done this. I’ve asked the elders and they have never seen anything like this at all.” [said Chief Wilf Adam]
Vancouver News 1130 notes that Alaskan and Russian salmon stocks have crashed as well:
“The sockeye runs way up north in the Skeena are low. The [fish] out of Bristol Bay, Alaska is down 30 to 35 per cent over last year. Russia has got a limited number of fish in the market. They are down about 40 per cent over all their salmon fisheries.”
(Russia’s East Coast sits on the Sea of Japan. Indeed, Japan is closer to Russia than to Korea.)
Alaska’s Juneau Empire newspaper writes:
We are concerned this hazardous material is hitching a ride on marine life and making its way to Alaska.
Currents of the world’s oceans are complex. But, generally speaking, two surface currents — one from the south, called the Kuroshio, and one from the north, called the Oyashio — meet just off the coast of Japan at about 40 degrees north latitude. The currents merge to form the North Pacific current and surge eastward. Fukushima lies at 37 degrees north latitude. Thousands of miles later, the currents hit an upwelling just off the western coast of the United States and split. One, the Alaska current, turns north up the coast toward British Columbia and Southeast Alaska. The other, the California current, turns south and heads down the western seaboard of the U.S.
The migration patterns of Pacific salmon should also be taken into consideration. In a nutshell, our salmon ride the Alaska current and follow its curve past Sitka, Yakutat, Kodiak and the Aleutian Islands. Most often, it’s the chinook, coho and sockeye salmon migration patterns that range farthest. Chum and pink salmon seem to stay closer to home. Regardless of how far out each salmon species ventures into the Pacific, each fish hitches a ride back to its home rivers and spawning grounds on the North Pacific current, the same one pulling the nuclear waste eastward.
We all know too much exposure to nuclear waste can cause cancer. And many understand that certain chemicals, such as cesium-137 and strontium-9, contained in said waste products can accumulate in fish by being deposited in bones and muscle permanently.
We are concerned our Alaska salmon are being slowly tainted with nuclear waste. We are worried about the impact this waste could have on our resources, and especially the people who consume them.
We urge scientists in Alaska to be proactive about conducting research and monitoring our salmon species.
Similarly, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reports that salmon are migrating through the radioactive plume, but Canadian authorities aren’t testing the fish:
[Award-winning physician and preventative health expert Dr. Erica Frank, MD, MPH]: There are Pacific wild salmon that migrate through the radioactive plumes that have been coming off of Fukushima. Then those fish come back to our shores and we catch them.
CBC Reporter: The Canada Food Inspection Agency says it now relies on Japan for test results concerning radiation.
(American authorities aren’t testing fish for radioactivity either.)
Another example – pacific herring – is even more dramatic. Pacific herring is wide-ranging fish, spanning all the way from Japan to Southern California:
Every single pacific herring examined by a biologist in Canada was found to be hemorrhaging blood. As Ene News reports:
The Globe and Mail, Aug 13, 2013 (Emphasis Added): Independent fisheries scientist Alexandra Mortonis raising concerns about a disease she says is spreading through Pacific herring causing fish to hemorrhage. [...] “Two days ago I did a beach seine on Malcolm Island [near Port McNeill on northern Vancouver Island] and I got approximately 100 of these little herring and they were not only bleeding from their fins, but their bellies, their chins, their eyeballs. [...] “It was 100 per cent … I couldn’t find any that weren’t bleeding to some degree. And they were schooling with young sockeye [salmon]”
Sun News, Aug 12, 2013: [Morton] dragged up several hundred of the fish this past weekend and found the apparent infection had spread – instead of their usual silver colour the fish had eyes, tails, underbellies, gills and facesplastered with the sickly red colour. “I have never seen fish that looked this bad,” [...] In June, the affected fish were only found in eastern Johnstone Strait, but have since spread to Alert Bay and Sointula, she said.
Canada.com, Aug 16, 2013: Morton [...] pulled up a net of about 100 herring near Sointula and found they were all bleeding. “It was pretty shocking to see,” said Morton [...] Herring school with small sockeye salmon and are also eaten by chinook and coho.
‘Response’ from Canadian Government
Vancouver 24 hrs, Aug 11, 2013: [Morton] says Fisheries and Oceans Canada [FOC] is ignoring the problem. [...] According to emails from FOC, the federal authority had asked the marine biologist to send in 20 to 30 herring in September 2011, saying that would be “more than sufficient for the lab to look for clinical signs of disease and provide sufficient diagnostics.” She did, andhasn’t heard back since. [...]FOC officials did not respond to a request for comment by the 24 hours presstime.
Canada.com, Aug 16, 2013: Fisheries and Oceans Canada istrying to confirm reports from an independent biologist that herring around northern Vancouver Island have a disease that is causing bleeding from their gills, bellies and eyeballs. [...] Arlene Tompkins of DFO’s [Department of Fisheries and Oceans'] salmon assessment section said staff in the Port Hardy area have not found bleeding herring. “We are trying to retrieve samples, but [Monday] we were not successful because of heavy fog,” she said. “We haven’t had any other reports of fish kills or die-offs [see salmon report below].” Tompkins has seen photographs provided by Morton [...]
Sea lions will eat a lot of different prey items: octopus, squid, small sharks. But their bread and butter is herring ….
Given that pacific herring are suffering severe disease, it is worth asking whether the “unusual mortality event” of Southern California sea lions is connected.
The bottom line – as nuclear experts said 4 days after the Japanese earthquake and tsunami – is that we all need to demand that fish be tested for radiation.
Notes: Apologists for reckless nuclear policy claim that low-level radiation is safe. Scientists have thoroughly debunked those claims.
We are not implying that all of the drop off in salmon populations is due to radiation. There may be many other factors, as well. Also, while tuna may in fact swim all of the way from Japan to North America, and salmon may swim hundreds or thousands of miles, no single salmon or herring swims all the way between Asia and the Americas. …
Posted by Xeno on October 6, 2013
Dr. Don Huber is likely the leading GMOexpert in the world. He is an award-winning, internationally recognized scientist, and professor emeritus of plant pathology at Purdue University for the past 35 years.
His agriculture research is focused on the epidemiology and control of soil-borne plant pathogens, with specific emphasis on microbial ecology, cultural and biological controls, and the physiology of host-parasite relationships.
His research over the past few decades has led him to become very outspoken against genetically modified organisms (GMO) and genetically engineered (GE) foods and the use of Roundup in agriculture in general.
He’s really one of the best scientists we have in the GMO movement for documenting the dangers of genetically engineered foods.
“I appreciate the opportunity to share a little bit of my research and the research of many other scientists who are expressing concern; recognizing that we’ve missed the boat in much of this discussion and much of the process, because it’s really a food and health safety issue that we’re dealing with here,” he says.
Three Things You Need to Know About GMOs
There’s a lot of confusion about thebasic validity of concerns about genetically engineered (GE) foods. Many have been deceived into thinking that there’s really no difference between GE foods and conventional fare, and all these worries are just paranoid fear-mongering.
According to Dr. Huber, the following three facts are some of the most important that everyone needs to understand about GMOs:
- Despite what the media and so-called “experts” proclaim, there are NO peer-reviewed scientific papers establishing the safety of GMO crops.According to Dr. Huber, so far, no one has been able to establish that there’s a safety factor to either the genetically engineered proteins (i.e. the foreign proteins produced by the genetically modified plant) or the chemicals we’re consuming in ever larger quantities as a result of the genetic engineering process.There are, however, both clinical and peer-reviewed scientific papers showing the hazards of GMO crops, including harmful secondary effects.
“A group of us met with top USDA administrators. They assured us that they based all their decisions on peer-reviewed science. When we asked them if they would share any of that, they were unable to produce any,” he says.
- Epidemiological patterns show there’s an identical rise in over 30 human diseases correlated with our increased usage of glyphosate and the increased prevalence of genetically engineered proteins in our food.
- Genetically engineered foods, as well as conventional crops that are heavily sprayed with glyphosate (the active ingredient in Monsanto’s herbicide Roundup), have lower nutrient density than organic foods. They also contain high amounts of pesticides with documented harmful health effects, along with novel, highly allergenic, proteins.
Little-Known Facts About Glyphosate
You can’t really discuss genetic engineering without also addressing the chemicals these plants are engineered to tolerate. About 85 percent of all genetically engineered plants are herbicide-tolerant—designed to tolerate very high levels of herbicides, glyphosate in particular. These are the so-called Roundup Ready crops.
It’s important to realize that glyphosate is not “just” an herbicide. As explained by Dr. Huber, it was first patented as a mineral chelator. It immobilizes nutrients, so they’re not physiologically available for your body.
“You may have the mineral [in the plant], but if it’s chelated with glyphosate, it’s not going to be available physiologically for you to use, so you’re just eating a piece of gravel,” Dr. Huber says.
Naturally, health effects are bound to occur if you’re consistently eating foods from which your body cannot extract critical nutrients and minerals. Mineral deficiencies can lead to developmental and mental health issues, for example. Glyphosate is also patented as anantibiotic—and a very effective one at that— against a large number of beneficial organisms. Unfortunately, like all antibiotics, it also kills vitally important beneficial soil bacteria and human gut bacteria.
“Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, Enterococcus faecalis—these are organisms that keep you healthy either by providing accessibility to the minerals in your food or producing many of the vitamins that you need for life. They’re also the natural biological defenses to keep Clostridium, Salmonella, and E.coli from developing in your system,” Dr. Huber explains.
“When you take the good bacteria out, then the bad bacteria fill that void, because there aren’t any voids in nature. We have all of these gut-related problems, whether it’s autism, leaky gut, C. difficile diarrhea, gluten intolerance, or any of the other problems. All of these diseases are an expression of disruption of that intestinal microflora that keeps you healthy.”
Glyphosate was first patented as a chelator in 1964 by Stauffer Chemical Co. It was patented by Monsanto and introduced as an herbicide in 1974. And then in 1996, Roundup Ready crops hit the market. There’s been a steep increase in the usage of Roundup since then, because you can apply it multiple times without damaging your crop. Making matters worse, they’re now also using glyphosate as a ripening agent—even for non-GMO crops. It’s applied right before harvest time to ripen off the crop.
“We have about a five-fold increase in glyphosate usage on many of our GMO crops. With the Roundup Ready-resistant weeds, we see that rate going up exponentially,” he says.
Did You Know? EPA Just Increased Allowable Limits of Glyphosate in Your Food
Despite well-understood health risks, the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is repeatedly approached by agricultural and biotech companies asking for increased limits of this pernicious toxin in your food.
“The companies say we have to increase the amount of glyphosate that we can have in your food, so we can have a ‘safe’ product – not based on science but based on how much chemical is actually in our food!”Dr.Huber says.
On May 1, the EPA went ahead and doubled the amount of glyphosate allowed in food… Soybean oil may now contain as much as 40 parts per million (ppm) of glyphosate. Meanwhile, research by Dr. Monika Krueger at Leipzig University shows that a tenth of a part per million is all that it takes to kill your Lactobacillus, Bifidobacterium, andEnterococcus faecalis! So soybean oil is now allowed to contain a whopping4,000 times the known limit at which it can impact your health.
See the “GMO dangers” folder on the xenophilius.woefpress.com Box widget for free downloads of more from Dr Huber.
Posted by Xeno on September 29, 2013
Dr. Mercola writes:
Alzheimer’s disease is at epidemic proportions, with 5.4 million Americans—including one in eight people aged 65 and over—living with the disease. In the next 20 years, it is projected that Alzheimer’s will affect one in four Americans, rivaling the current prevalence of obesity and diabetes.
There is still no known accepted cure for this devastating disease, and no effective treatments. Alzheimer’s drugs are often of little to no benefit at all, which underscores the importance of prevention throughout your lifetime.
Fortunately, Alzheimer’s prevention is actually easier than you might think. There’s exceptionally compelling research showing that your brain has great plasticity, which you control through your diet and lifestyle choices.
Here, Dr. David Perlmutter—probably the leading natural medicine neurologist in the US, from my perspective—shares his insights into this pervasive problem. I don’t know anyone who exceeds his level of expertise in traditional neurology and still shares the same philosophical orientation that I have.
He has a clinic in Naples, Florida, and he’s been very active in publishing his findings in peer-reviewed medical journals. He’s also a fellow of the American College of Nutrition, as am I.
“I have a very strong background in traditional neurology,” Dr. Perlmutter says. “As a neurologist for many years, I became more and more frustrated with our lack of ability to actually treat diseases. We were really only treating symptoms.
When I finally began to understand what the proximate cause of the various illnesses we were dealing with was, I realized that mainstream neurology, though I don’t want to sound too critical, really pays no attention to the causation part of the story.”
The Role of Grains in Disease Propagation
He realized an answer would never become apparent by simply writing prescriptions and hoping for the best. Instead, he began investigating the role of nutrition on brain health. Alzheimer’s, according to the RAND Corporation, is currently costing us some $200 billion a year, yet it is largely preventable. And virtually no one talks about that!
“This is a disease that is highly revenue-producing for mega factories of various so-called Alzheimer’s drugs,” Dr. Perlmutter says. “The point is there is no meaningful treatment in 2013. It is a disease predicated on lifestyle choices primarily, because of the high amount of carbohydrates/sugar that we now, as Western-culture individuals, are consuming.
It’s a preventable disease. It surprises me at my core that no one’s talking about the fact that so many of these devastating neurological problems are, in fact, modifiable based upon lifestyle choices.”
Dr. Perlmutter specifically looked at the impact of gluten and casein, or wheat and dairy primarily, on autoimmune diseases. His New York Times Bestseller, Grain Brain, reveals his findings, the cornerstones of which are the powerfully toxic role of glucose (sugar) and carbohydrates in one’s diet.
He also stresses that gluten sensitivity is involved in most chronic disease, including those affecting the brain, because of how gluten affects your immune system. Unfortunately, many people, physicians included, still believe that if you don’t have celiac disease, gluten is fair game and you can eat as much of it as you like.
Full-blown Celiac disease, which is gluten sensitivity affecting your small intestine, affects an estimated 1.8 percent of people in Western cultures. But gluten sensitivity may actually affect as much as 30 to 40 percent of all people, and according to Dr. Alessio Fasano at Massachusetts General Hospital, virtually all of us are affected to some degree.
This is because we all create something called zonulin in the intestine in response to gluten. This protein, found in wheat, barley and rye, makes your gut more permeable, which allows proteins to get into your bloodstream that would otherwise have been excluded. That then sensitizes your immune system and promotes inflammation and autoimmunity. This kind of gut permeability is also promoted by things like antibiotics and chlorinated water.
The Gut-Brain Connection is Critical to Understand
Once gluten sensitizes your gut, it then becomes more permeable and all manner of previously excluded proteins—including casein and other dairy proteins—have direct access to your bloodstream, thereby challenging your immune system.
“They’ve been talking about it for years and years (which is now just gaining traction in mainstream medicine) that our health really depends on maintaining a barrier of the intestine from the bloodstream,” Dr. Perlmutter says.
“We now understand that the so-called blood-brain barrier, or that barrier that keeps things out of the brain where they don’t belong, is also affected by gluten, according to new research. It’s a very exciting time when we recognize that our biggest exposure to the environment is actually the lining of our intestines – not our lungs, not our skin. We are in fact very much dependent on the microbiota, the bacteria living in the gut, to maintain our health.”
According to Dr. Perlmutter, much of our current disease burden stems from the fact that we are contaminating our immune systems with proteins to which the human immune system has never, in the history of humankind, been previously exposed to. …
Posted by Xeno on September 17, 2013
Steadfast efforts to end the senseless prohibition of raw milk sales in Arkansas have finally been successful, at least in a somewhat limited sense. Residents living in the Natural State will now be able to purchase raw milk directly from the farms where it is produced, thanks to the recent passage of House Bill 1536. However, raw milk sales at farmers markets and retail stores will still be prohibited under the new law.
According to ArkansasOnline.com, Governor Mike Beebe recently signed into law HB 1536, also known as Act 1209, following its passage by the state’s General Assembly back in April. The bill will allow for the incidental sale of locally-produced raw milk directly from the farm, given that the farmer posts a sign at the entrance to the farm indicating that its milk products are not pasteurized or regulated by the state.
The new rule will also require that raw milk farmers affix standard labels to milk containers notifying customers that the milk is not pasteurized. These same farmers, whether they produce raw cow’s milk or goat’s milk, will be barred from selling more than 500 gallons of it per month, presumably an effort to keep as tight of a lid as possible on this growing segment of the grassroots dairy industry.
Previously, Arkansans wanting raw cow’s milk had to either bootleg their milk from nearby states with fewer authoritarian restrictions, or find a local farmer willing to gift it to them without official payment. Raw goat’s milk, on the other hand, had previously been legal for on-farm sales only, with the caveat that only 100 gallons of it be sold a month. That restriction will be increased to 500 gallons per month under HB 1536.
“Thank you Jesus, we don’t have to drive to another state and bootleg raw milk anymore,” wrote one commenter on a recent announcement posted at A Campaign for Real Milk, a project of
The Weston A. Price Foundation (WAPF). “This is a great day in Arkansas!” …
I was very concerned and skeptical about raw milk, but after researching the real risks and benefits, I now buy whole raw milk for use in milkshakes. When I’m starting to feeling sick it helps me recover quickly. I believe this is because there are immunity factors in raw milk which are disabled by pasteurization. The site http://www.raw-milk-facts.com/raw-medicine.html agrees:
Here’s a partial list of some of the more biologically active ingredients identified in bovine colostrum that helps explain why it’s such a potent tool for healing:
Immunoglobulins IgG, IgA, IgM, IgE, IgD: Large, complex sugar/protein (glycoprotein) molecules (also known as antibodies) used by the immune system to find and deactivate pathogens such as bacteria and viruses.
Transforming Growth Factor Beta: Stimulates growth and repair of the gastro-intestinal tract.
Epidermal Growth Factor: Biochemically regulates cellular growth, cellular division and cell type. Fosters rapid tissue repair.
Glutathione: Powerful antioxidant that offers protection to cells from free radicals.
Interferons: Specialized proteins that inhibit replication of viruses within cells throughout the body.
Interleukins: A large group of signaling molecules that help regulate the immune system.
Oligosaccharides: Groups of 3-10 sugar molecules that protect against pathogens by competing for binding sites on the intestinal epithelium and provide support to friendly probiotic bacteria.
Proline-rich Polypeptide (PRP) or Colostrinin: Anti-inflammatory hormone that helps regulate immune system activity by stimulating the thymus gland.
Transferrin: Immune system glycoprotein that binds free iron, which, in turn, inhibits bacterial growth.
In cows, newborn calves import up to 90% of their immunity to pathogens and disease from the first 24 hours of suckling. Human newborns get the bulk of their mother’s immunity transferred to them prior to birth (across the placenta) but still need that first colostrum to optimize their immune systems. Gentle reminder for all you mothers-to-be out there: whatever you do, make sure your infant gets its fill of your first milk, then continue to breast feed for as long as you can.
Posted by Xeno on September 7, 2013
… South Korea announced on Friday that it was banning all fish imports from along Japan’s northeastern coast because of what officials called growing public worry over radioactive water leaking into the Pacific Ocean near the crippled Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant.
Fisheries in Fukushima prefecture are nearly all closed, and fish caught in nearby prefectures are sold on the Japanese market only after tests have shown them to be safe for consumption.
However, South Korea’s ban applies to a total of eight prefectures with a combined coastline of more than 700 kilometres (430 miles), regardless of whether the fish pass safety standards or not.
The South Korean government made the move because of insufficient information from Tokyo about what steps will be taken to address the leakage of contaminated water from the Fukushima Dai-ichi nuclear power plant, according to a statement by the Ministry of Oceans and Fisheries.
Posted by Xeno on August 31, 2013
A 10-year-old boy has won Alaska’s annual giant cabbage contest, submitting a 92.3-pound (41.9 kg) specimen named “Bob” to officials at the state fair.
Vía Reuters: Oddly Enough http://feeds.reuters.com/~r/reuters/oddlyEnoughNews/~3/zOMpzXhrBZ4/story01.htm
Posted by Xeno on August 28, 2013
The FDA is yet again putting burdens on farmers who use healthy, sustainable practices, and justifying them with fear-based assumptions rather than data. The agency’s latest move is a draft guidance document that will make it all but impossible for farmers with 3,000 or more laying hens to keep the birds on pasture.
The stated goal is to prevent the spread of salmonella from wild birds and other animals to the hens. But there is absolutely no evidence that pastured chickens pose a food safety threat. To the contrary, all the major incidents of salmonella in eggs have come from confinement factory farms.
Back in 2007, the FDA issued a rule to address the problem with laying hens carrying salmonella and passing it into their eggs. Under that rule, farms with more than 3,000 hens must take extensive steps to address the risk of salmonella contamination, including testing both the birds and the hen houses. Thanks to this mandatory testing, FDA now has several years of data on where salmonella has occurred – yet its new guidance document doesn’t refer to any cases of salmonella being connected to hens having access to pasture.
Hens that spend time outdoors in the sunlight, eating plants and insects, are healthier than hens kept crammed closely together inside a building. Informal testing has also shown that eggs from pastured hens are more nutritious than eggs from hens kept indoors and raised on exclusively on grain.
But FDA’s draft guidance document creates new burdens specifically for farmers who allow their hens to have access to pasture. Despite the lack of evidence, the FDA assumes that exposure to any wild animal creates a health risk, and that farmers should have to somehow keep their hens away from wild birds and other creatures. The FDA guidance suggests that farmers must cover their outdoor pastures with either roofing or netting, or use noise cannons to scare away wild birds. Of course, roofing a pasture is not only cost-prohibitive, but would prevent sun and rain from reaching the plants and animals in the pasture, defeating the whole purpose of having pastured hens. And the noise cannons that would scare away wild birds would also scare the laying hens.
The FDA, as usual, is favoring the mainstream industry practices. Although eggs labeled “organic” must allow birds outdoor access, the large-scale industrial operations simply connect small “porches” to their facilities and claim that this is enough. FDA’s guidance document gives the green light to this substandard process, while penalizing the producers who seek to provide true access to pasture.
Take Action! The FDA is accepting comments on its proposed guidance until September 23, 2013. Please write to the FDA today!
You can submit comments to FDA through their online system at http://www.regulations.gov/#!submitComment;D=FDA_FRDOC_0001-4090
TIPS: We recommend that you write your comment ahead of time and save it on your computer, because there is a time limit when using the Federal Register System and you may get timed out if you write your comment from scratch. (See sample comments below.)
- If your comment is less than one page, you can copy and paste it into the comment box. If it is longer, you can simply write “see attached” and UPLOAD a separate document, such as a Word or PDF file, with your comments instead.
- Uncheck the box that says “I am submitting on behalf of a third party,” so that you do not have to enter an organization name.
- For category, select “individual consumer” or “private industry”
- Click “continue”.
- Check the box that you have read and understood the statement, and be sure to click “submit comment.” You should be taken to a new screen with a confirmation number
DEADLINE: Comments are due by September 23, 2013
(It is very important that you personalize these comments! Form comments will all be counted as a single submission. Just a couple of sentences at the beginning – who you are and why this is important to you – make a difference. If you have a personal story to share, about your farm or a farm you buy food from, that’s even better!)
The FDA needs to base its requirements on science, not fear and speculation.
There is no evidence that letting hens have access to pasture increases the risk of salmonella contamination in their eggs. The provisions of the draft guidance document are unnecessary and unfairly target pastured producers.
While not improving food safety, the requirements will drive many pastured producers out of business. Building a canopy over a pasture is extremely expensive; even protecting a small part of it would cost more than most farms’ profits. Any structure that cut off sun or rain would quickly turn the grass-covered pasture into dry dirt, defeating the purpose of raising hens outdoors on pasture. Having to extend the fence below the surface of the ground would make it impossible to have movable fences, making it harder to do rotational pasture management. And using a noise cannon would scare the hens.
The FDA’s new outdoor egg rules aren’t necessary for food safety, but it will hurt farmers and consumers who want to have truly pastured eggs. I urge you to revoke all of the provisions in the draft guidance document that include requirements on the pasture portion of a pastured laying hen farm.
I only eat eggs these days from pastured hens. They are more expensive but worth it.
Posted by Xeno on August 28, 2013
… The U.S. FDA has announced that Pfizer will stop the sale of the animal drug 3-Nitro. The drug is used in chicken feed, but an agency analysis detected inorganic arsenic in the livers of chickens treated with the drug.
3-Nitro is used to help control coccidiosis, a parasitic disease that affects the intestinal tracts of animals, and also so that the chickens will gain more weight.
The Wall Street Journal reports:
“The agency said it recently conducted a study of 100 broiler chickens that detected inorganic arsenic at higher levels in the livers of chickens treated with 3-Nitro compared with untreated chickens … Pfizer said sale of 3-Nitro would be stopped by early July in order to allow animal producers to transition to other treatments.” For some of you, this may be the first time you’re hearing about Roxarsone, but it has been used in chicken feed since the 1940s. More than 70 years later, the FDA conducted an analysis that found chickens treated with the drug do in fact have arsenic in their livers – and as a result manufacturer Pfizer will be stopping sale of the drug (brand name 3-Nitro) early this month.
What is this? The FDA conducts studies? That’s news to me. I thought they only look at the results of studies companies commission.
More info from the FDA web site:
When were these animal drugs approved?
FDA approved the use of products containing arsenic many years ago. The first approval for 3-Nitro® (Roxarsone), NADA 005-414, was on March 21, 1944. There have been several subsequent approvals for 3-Nitro® (Roxarsone) for combination use, the most recent being 2009.
What are arsenic-based animal drugs used for?
Animal drugs containing arsenic are approved for use in animal feeds for chickens, turkeys, and pigs (most common use is in broiler chickens). In poultry, they are approved for growth promotion, feed efficiency and improved pigmentation; they are also approved in combination with other drugs to prevent coccidiosis.
How could FDA approve arsenic as safe for consumption in an animal intended for food?
The scientific understanding at the time of approval was that the organic arsenic in 3-Nitro® (Roxarsone) would be excreted as organic arsenic, which is not known to be a carcinogen. Until recently, scientific evidence indicated that animals exposed to organic arsenic rapidly excrete the compound in its original form–as organic arsenic. FDA approved the product at doses and withdrawal times that, based on this available information, allowed for the safe and effective use of the product when used according to the label directions.
The use of Roxarsone is needed to kill parasites that would otherwise kill the chickens raised in horrid factory farm conditions. Poultry farmers can either take better care of their animals or use more vaccines, other drugs, etc.
If you read the study http://www.fda.gov/downloads/AnimalVeterinary/SafetyHealth/ProductSafetyInformation/UCM257545.pdf it says this was partly investigated due to lawsuits in the Midwest that contend arsenic in “litter” caused ill effects in humans.