To Your Health - January 2013
To Your Health - January 2013
Related Products:
Adr
SvG
CLM
TRMA
Rhodiola Rosea (Rhodiola Force 300)
Thyroid Glandular
Progest-E Complex
Pregnenolone

Related Publications:
Loomis 24-Hour Urinalysis

Related Books:
The Enzyme Cure
Thyroid & Enzyme Nutrition
shim

By Lita Lee, Ph.D.
Newsletter: January 2013

Update on GMOs (Frankenfoods) and on anti-psychotic drugs: the case of Adam Lanza.


Tell-A-Friend | Ask-A-Question | Join Our Mail List

 Click to view PDF of this Article.  Get Adobe Copy    Click to view MS WORD of this Article. Get MS Word Copy

Field T not in database
$

January 2013 – To Your Health

Dear Friends,

Welcome to my first newsletter of 2013, and I am glad we are all still here! Just as I suspected we would be! In this issue, I emphasize the need for organic foods to avoid GMOs and other toxic agribusiness chemicals. I also have addressed the issues behind random killings in which the drugs used by these poor souls are not even mentioned in the mainstream media. The case of Adam Lanza is yet the latest episode.

A message from Jan Engels-Smith, a Shaman, for 2013, from her newsletter:

“As the light returns and the next thousand years are in motion, I wish you blessing beyond measure. I pray that you thrive, are passionate about life and that you attain a spiritual awareness through your personal ascension that brings you internal peace and joy. I hold you I the loving 5th dimension of trust, belief and miracles. Please read my prophesies that focus on how our altered thinking and growth will lead us to an empowered state for 2013 and beyond.”

To Your Health,

Lita Lee



“If you don’t read the newspapers you are uninformed. If you do read the newspapers you are misinformed.”
 —Mark Twain


GMO Update

I have been writing about GMOs for many years – guess things haven’t changed much so please support your organic farmers, especially your local ones.

GMOS: Used in Gardens Everywhere, This "Biodegradable" Product is Likely Carcinogenic
June 12, 2012
By Ronnie Cummins

It has been a year since the Organic Consumers Association (OCA) joined with Mercola.com, National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC), Fluoride Action Network (FAN), Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), and Consumers for Dental Choice to form a new non-profit coalition, Health Liberty.

This alliance has proven to be a brilliant merging of talent, networks, resources and passion around consumer rights and protection.

Each of us is committed to fighting on behalf of consumers everywhere for the right to make an informed choice about whether or not to avoid those risks. When it comes to genetically engineered foods, the risks to your health come from multiple angles. The genetic alteration itself can cause significant problems in animals and humans consuming the food, but the potential hazards of the chemicals sprayed in large quantities on such crops are just as great.

Genetically Engineered Foods: The Right to Know
With the help of our new coalition partners, and many other concerned organizations and individuals, the OCA has focused this past year on what we believe is the most critical threat to the health of consumers and our planet: genetically modified organisms (GMOs), also referred to as genetically engineered (GE) seeds and food.

With little or no regulatory restraints, labeling requirements, or scientific protocol, bio-engineers since the 1990s have been creating hundreds of new genetically engineered “Frankenfoods” and crops. The research is done with little concern for the human and environmental hazards and the negative socioeconomic impacts on the world's several billion farmers and rural villagers.

Since the advent of GMO testing, the OCA has relentlessly gone to bat against the biotech and agribusiness industries, Food Inc., and the FDA and the USDA, in an effort to protect human health and the environment from the potential hazards of these genetically modified organisms.

Over the years, we have fought the battle on numerous fronts, using every tactic in the book. Our latest and potentially most successful strategy has been to fight for consumers’ basic right to know what is in their food — and to take that battle directly to voters, through citizens’ initiatives.

This two-pronged strategy — demanding the basic right to know through the use of direct democracy tools — is our best chance at winning the fight against genetically engineered foods.

We believe that once food manufacturers are required to label any and all genetically modified ingredients in their food products — which will finally give consumers the ability to choose whether or not to buy those products — consumers will stop buying them, and manufacturers will stop making them.

That strategy has been successful in Europe and more than 20 other countries that require labeling of genetically engineered foods. Consumers in those countries have spoken clearly: We don’t want those products. And manufacturers have responded by reformulating their products to be GMO-free.

Using Direct Democracy to Force GMO Labeling
The notion that consumers have the right to know about genetically engineered foods has gathered steam, culminating this year in an unprecedented number of state — and one federal — campaigns to require GMO labeling. The OCA has supported individual legislative efforts this past year in Washington State, Vermont, Hawaii, and Connecticut.

In all, 18 states tried and failed to pass popular GMO labeling legislation this year, watching cowardly governors and state legislatures back down under the weight of massive lobbying efforts on the part of Big Biotech and in some states, threats of lawsuits from Monsanto.

On May 2, 2012, campaign volunteers representing a broad and unprecedented health, environmental, and consumer coalition, spearheaded by the Organic Consumers Association, Mercola.com, Food Democracy Now, Label GMOs, Natural News, and scores of other groups, filed ballot petition papers signed by almost a million California registered voters to place a Citizens Initiative on the Ballot in November 2012 that will require labeling of genetically engineered foods and food ingredients, and ban the routine industry practice of labeling and marketing such foods as “natural.”

This battle has not yet been won — we are stepping up efforts to educate California's voters on the dangers of genetically engineered foods, mobilize them to spread the word, and get out the vote.

To fund the campaign OCA, the Organic Consumers Fund (our grassroots lobbying ally), Mercola.com, and our allies have been forced to raise over $4 million dollars thus far, with another $4-6 million needed before November, to counter the anticipated $50 million dollar war chest of Monsanto, the biotech industry, and the Grocery Manufacturers Association. The good news is that although we may be outspent 10 to one, polls show that 80-90 percent of California voters support labeling of genetically engineered foods.

Scientists Warn about the Potential Health Hazards of Genetically Engineered Foods
An increasing number of scientists are warning that current gene-splicing techniques are crude, inexact, and unpredictable — and therefore inherently dangerous. Yet, pro-biotech governments and regulatory agencies maintain that genetically engineered foods and crops are "substantially equivalent" to conventional foods, and therefore require neither labeling nor pre–market safety-testing.

This Brave New World of Frankenfoods is frightening. Today, nearly 80 percent of all processed foods containing corn, soy, or canola oil contain unlabeled genetically altered ingredients. This, despite a long list of potential health hazards, including:

Toxins and poisons: GE products clearly have the potential to be toxic and a threat to human health. In 1989, a GE brand of L-tryptophan, a common dietary supplement, killed 37 Americans. More than 5,000 others were permanently disabled or afflicted with a potentially fatal and painful blood disorder, eosinophilia myalgia syndrome (EMS), before it was recalled by the FDA.

Dr. Ray Peat: There was a dimer of tryptophan in the tryptophan produced by engineered bacteria, and it was more toxic than ordinary tryptophan, but in the same ways. Animals given very big doses of tryptophan got the same eosinophiliamyalgia syndrome, and a very similar syndrome develops naturally in stress and malnutrition, because stress releases our own tryptophan and directs it mainly to serotonin synthesis. Tryptophan is an amino acid that's important for growth, and when there is too much after the growth phase is finished, it turns on stress and degeneration.

Increased cancer risks: In 1994, the FDA approved the sale of Monsanto's controversial recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH). This genetically engineered hormone is injected into dairy cows to force them to produce more milk.

Scientists have warned that significantly higher levels (400-500 percent or more) of a potent chemical hormone, Insulin-Like Growth Factor (igf-1), in the milk and dairy products of rBGH injected cows, could pose serious hazards such as human breast, prostate, and colon cancer. A number of studies have shown that humans with elevated levels of igf-1 in their bodies are much more likely to get cancer.

Food allergies: The alarming rise in childhood allergies in the past two decades has been linked by scientists to the arrival of genetically engineered foods in the 1990s. In 1996, a major GE food disaster was narrowly averted when Nebraska researchers learned that a Brazil nut gene spliced into soybeans could induce potentially fatal allergies in people sensitive to Brazil nuts. Animal tests of these Brazil nut-spliced soybeans had turned up negative.

People with food allergies, whose symptoms can range from mild unpleasantness to sudden death, may likely be harmed by exposure to foreign proteins spliced into common food products. Since humans have never before eaten most of the foreign proteins now being gene-spliced into foods, stringent pre-market safety-testing (including long-term animal feeding and volunteer human feeding studies) is necessary in order to prevent a future public health disaster.

Antibiotic resistance: When gene engineers splice a foreign gene into a plant or microbe, they often link it to another gene, called an antibiotic resistance marker (ARM) gene, which helps determine if the first gene was successfully spliced into the host organism.

Some researchers warn that these ARM genes might unexpectedly recombine with disease-causing bacteria or microbes in the environment or in the guts of animals or people who eat genetically engineered food. These new combinations may be contributing to the growing public health danger of antibiotic resistance — of infections that cannot be cured with traditional antibiotics, for example new strains of salmonella, e-coli, campylobacter, and enterococci.

Damage to food quality and nutrition: A 1999 study by Dr. Marc Lappe published in the Journal of Medicinal Food found that concentrations of the beneficial phytoestrogen compounds thought to protect against heart disease and cancer were lower in GE soybeans than in traditional strains. These and other studies, including Dr. Pusztai’s, indicate that GE food will likely result in foods lower in quality and nutrition. For example, the milk from cows injected with rBGH contains higher levels of pus, bacteria, and fat.

GE Crops and Farming Techniques Threaten the Planet
From the decimation of the planet's critical honeybee and monarch butterfly populations, to the creation of super weeds and super insects, to the depletion of valuable nutrient-rich farming soil, genetic engineering poses a dangerous and potentially irreversible threat, to planet Earth.

Among the dangers of GE crops, are:

  • Increased Pesticide Residues: Contrary to biotech industry propaganda, recent studies have found that U.S. farmers growing GE crops are using just as many toxic pesticides and herbicides as conventional farmers and in some cases more. The “benefits” of these herbicide-resistant crops are that farmers can spray as much of a particular herbicide on their crops as they want — killing the weeds without damaging their crop.
    Scientists estimate that herbicide-resistant crops planted around the globe will triple the amount of toxic broad-spectrum herbicides used in agriculture. These broad-spectrum herbicides are designed to literally kill everything green.
  • Damage to Beneficial Insects and Soil Fertility: In 1999, Cornell University researchers made a startling discovery. They found that pollen from genetically engineered BT corn was poisonous to Monarch butterflies. The study adds to a growing body of evidence that GE crops are adversely affecting a number of beneficial insects, including ladybugs and lacewings, as well as beneficial soil microorganisms, bees, and possibly birds.
  • Creation of GE “Super weeds” and “Super pests”: Genetically engineering crops to be herbicide-resistant or to produce their own pesticide presents dangerous problems. Pests and weeds will inevitably emerge that are pesticide or herbicide-resistant, which means that stronger, more toxic chemicals will be needed to get rid of the pests.
    Herbicide resistant “super weeds” are already emerging. GE crops such as rapeseed (canola) have spread their herbicide-resistance traits to related weeds such as wild mustard plants. Lab and field tests also indicate that common plant pests such as cotton bollworms, living under constant pressure from GE crops, are evolving into “super pests” completely immune to BT sprays and other environmentally sustainable bio-pesticides.
    This will present a serious danger for organic and sustainable farmers whose biological pest management practices will be unable to cope with increasing numbers of super pests and super weeds.
  • Genetic Pollution: “Genetic pollution” and collateral damage from GE field crops already have begun to wreak environmental havoc. Wind, rain, birds, bees, and insect pollinators have begun carrying genetically-altered pollen into adjoining fields, polluting the DNA of crops of organic and non-GE farmers. An organic farm in Texas has been contaminated with genetic drift from GE crops grown on a nearby farm.
    Because they are alive, gene-altered crops are inherently more unpredictable than chemical pollutants-they can reproduce, migrate, and mutate. Once released, it is virtually impossible to recall GE organisms back to the laboratory or the field.
  • Genetic “Bio-Invasion”: By virtue of their “superior” genes, some GE plants and animals will inevitably run amok, overpowering wild species in the same way that exotic species, such as kudzu vine and Dutch elm disease have created problems when introduced in North America. What will happen to wild fish and marine species, for example, when scientists release into the environment carp, salmon, and trout that are twice as large, and eat twice as much food, as their wild counterparts?
Most Commonly Used Herbicide Found to be Carcinogenic
As if the health hazards of genetically altered food crops weren’t bad enough, glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup, has also been deemed a major health hazard both to the environment, and to animal and human health. It is toxic to human cells, and according to a French research team, it is also carcinogenic. The team has studied the herbicide extensively, and published at least five articles on glyphosate potential for wide-ranging environmental and human harm (1-5). Their research shows that glyphosate:
  • Causes cell cycle deregulation, which is a hallmark of tumor cells and human cancers
  • Inhibits DNA synthesis in certain parts of the cell cycle — the process by which cells reproduce that underlies the growth and development of all living organisms
  • Impedes the hatchings of sea urchins. (Sea urchins were used because they constitute an appropriate model for the identification of undesirable cellular and molecular targets of pollutants.) The delay was found to be dose dependent on the concentration of Roundup. The surfactant polyoxyethylene amine (POEA), another major component of Roundup, was also found to be highly toxic to the embryos when tested alone, and could therefore be a contributing factor.
It doesn't matter that the Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health recently published “research” to the contrary (5), the French team says ― the world needs to know the truth about who did that “safety-finding” research. It was funded by none other than Monsanto itself! Is it any wonder they came to the conclusion that:
“[T]he available literature shows no solid evidence linking glyphosate exposure to adverse developmental or reproductive effects at environmentally realistic exposure concentrations.”

The new Monsanto-funded safety research actually used the French team’s original research to debunk the evidence that Roundup could have human or environmental safety issues. And that didn’t sit well with the French team, which was so angered they wrote a detailed response to Monsanto’s article, accusing the researchers of minimalizing the French group’s work and publishing misleading information.

What Lies Ahead: The Food Fight of Our Lives
Monsanto and Food Inc.’s stranglehold over the nation’s food and farming system is being challenged in a food fight that will largely determine the future of American agriculture. Genetically engineered foods have absolutely no benefits for consumers or the environment, only hazards.

After 20 years of biotech bullying and force-feeding unlabeled and hazardous genetically engineered (GE) foods to animals and humans, a critical mass of food and health activists have decided it's time to move beyond small skirmishes and losing battles and go on the offensive.

It’s time to move the food fight over labeling GE food from the unfavorable terrain of Washington, D.C., and Capitol Hill, where Monsanto and Food Inc. exercise near-dictatorial control, to California, the heartland of organic food and farming and anti-GMO sentiment, where 90 percent of the body politic, according to recent polls, support GMO labeling.

Monsanto and their allies understand the threat that truth-in-labeling poses for the future of genetically engineered foods. As soon as genetically engineered foods start to be labeled in the United States, millions of consumers will start to read these labels and react. They’ll complain to grocery store managers and companies, they’ll talk to their family and friends. They’ll start switching to foods that are organic or at least GMO-free. Once enough consumers start complaining about GE foods and food ingredients, stores will eventually stop selling them and farmers will stop planting them.

If you are willing to volunteer or donate money to this campaign visit the Organic Consumers Fund website (http://organicconsumersfund.org/label/) or call the OCA office at 218-226-4164. It’s time to stand up to Monsanto and win the Food Fight of our lives. Please join us!

About the Author

Ronnie Cummins is the founder and Director of the Organic Consumers Association. He has been a writer and activist since the 1960s, with massive expertise in human rights, anti-war, anti-nuclear, consumer, labor, environmental, and sustainable agricultural areas. He is the author of several published articles, a children's book series called Children of the World, and Genetically Engineered Food: A Self-Defense Guide for Consumers.

About the Organic Consumers Association

The Organic Consumers Association (OCA) is an online and grassroots 501(c)3 public interest organization promoting health, justice, and sustainability. It prides itself as the only organization in the United States focused on promoting the views and interests of the country’s estimated 76 million organic and socially responsible consumers.

The OCA participates in the important issues of food safety, industrial agriculture, genetic engineering, children's health, corporate accountability, Fair Trade, environmental sustainability, and other key topics. The Organic Consumers Fund, a 501(c)4, is the OCA's grassroots action and lobbying arm.

References:
________________________________________
[1] Marc, J., Mulner-Lorillon, O., Boulben, S., Hureau, D., Durand, G., and Belle, R. 2002. Pesticide Roundup provokes cell division dysfunction at the level of CDK1/cyclin B activation. Chem. Res. Toxicol. 15: 326–31

[2] Marc, J., Mulner-Lorillon, O., Durand, G., and Belle, R. 2003. Embryonic cell cycle for risk assessment of pesticides at the molecular level. Environmental. Chemistry. Letters. 1: 8–12

[3] Marc, J., Belle, R., Morales, J., Cormier, P., and Mulner-Lorillon, O. 2004a. Formulated glyphosate activates the DNA-response checkpoint of the cell cycle leading to the prevention of G2/M transition. Toxicol. Sci. 82: 436–42

[4] Marc, J., Mulner-Lorillon, O., and Belle, R. 2004b. Glyphosate-based pesticides affect cell cycle regulation. Biol. Cell. 96: 245–49

[5] Marc, J., Le Breton, M., Cormier, P., Morales, J., Belle, R., and Mulner-Lorillon, O. 2005. A glyphosate-based pesticide impinges on transcription. Toxicol. Appl. Pharmacol. 203:1–8
ii Journal of Toxicology and Environmental Health 2012: 15(1)

Blogs from Lita Lee

Articles: Genetic Engineering - Frankenfoods and More


“Mental” Illness — Can Your Brain Be Ill?

What Was Not Reported in the Case of Adam Lanza

Predictions Confirmed: MSM Says Shooter Adam Lanza Was on Violence-Linked Anti-Psychotic Fanapt
by Anthony Gucciardi
December 19th, 2012 | Updated 12/19/2012 at 8:21 pm

The ‘Connecticut Shooter’ Adam Lanza has now been reported by mainstream media to indeed be taking the violence-linked anti-psychotic drug known as Fanapt, a prediction I made after the news of the shooting broke. And as I explained in my previous article regarding this drug by name, Fanapt has a very disturbing history of FDA testing and approval. It also has a long line of side effects that echo reports that drugs of this nature ultimately lead to suicidal behavior and increased overall aggression — side effects covered up by Big Pharma corporate scientists.

As Business Insider now reports in an article that is going viral across the web, Adam Lanza was indeed taking Fanapt — a drug with ‘troubled history’ as the article details.

Knowing that virtually every major shooter of similar circumstance and scenario had been on similar drugs including the Columbine shooters, Ted Kaczinski the Unabomber’, and many others, it was easy to see that Adam Lanza fit the bill as well. Of course this prediction was met with opposition stating that Big Pharma’s anti-psychotic and anti-depressant drugs were ‘perfectly safe’ and I was simply assuming things based on no evidence. Of course the reality is that the very creator of Prozac, Eli Lilly & Co., actually kept the link between suicidal behavior and Prozac consumption a secret to protect their own interests.

This link was cleverly hidden for years until it broke back in 2005, yet still many are unaware of the real dangers.

But what about Fanapt, the drug Lanza was taking? The drug itself has an even more troubled past. After initially being rejected by the FDA for ‘severe problems’ in patients, Fanapt was eventually approved after a disturbing lack of study. Fanapt was only tested on around 500 people before going on sale in the U.S.

But what’s even more concerning than the shoddy trials of the drug is the side effects listed on both the package insert for the drug and various online medical sites. These include:
• Hostility
• Aggression
• Mania
• State of confusion
• Impulse-control disorder

Many of these side-effects are listed as ‘frequent’. It should come as no surprise then to find out that Fanapt was initially thrown out by its first producer, grabbed by a later company, rejected by the FDA, then only later did it meet the mass market. Ultimately, however, it ended up prescribed to Adam Lanza and many other individuals who are being ‘treated’ for the very issues that the drug has been shown to cause.

So why is almost nothing being said about Fanapt and the potential connection to the violent outbreak that thoroughly encompasses these side effects? Why is there no serious mention of how virtually all previous killers were on similar medications?

The fact is that no one wants to talk about how Big Pharma’s concoctions are damaging our bodies and warping our minds. Instead, doctors will continue to prescribe Fanapt and other drugs to young children and teens without considering the severe repercussions. That is unless the alternative news and informed individuals push the issue into the forefront as done many times before.

There is no reason that drugs like Fanapt need to be pushed on young children who are already struggling with serious mental battles. Half of all United States citizens will be classified as ‘mentally ill’ and drugged up with antidepressants, anti-psychotics, and so on. But perhaps the Big Pharma drug system is truly mentally ill?

About Anthony Gucciardi:

Anthony is an accomplished investigative journalist whose articles have appeared on top news sites and have been read by millions worldwide. Anthony's articles have been featured on top health & political websites read by millions worldwide such as Reuters, Yahoo News, MSNBC, and Bloomberg. Anthony is also a founding member of Natural Attitude, a leading developer of super high quality spagyric formulations.


A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z 

Shipping & Returns    |   Privacy    |   Terms & Conditions



Your best source for  nutritional & alternative health news!

Tell-A-Friend
about this great web page.!



My Account
Login
Checkout

Enter the search term for the product you are looking for below:

Articles...
Newsletters - To Your Health
Get Acrobat Reader
  FREE Plug-in to view 
  or print  our documents!

1-503-775-2251


Notice: I am a chemist and an enzyme nutritionist, not a medical doctor. I do not diagnose, prescribe for, treat or claim to prevent, mitigate or cure any human diseases. I provide enzymes and other dietary supplements to improve digestion and to nourish and support normal function and structure of the body. If you suspect any disease, please consult your physician.

The statements on this website have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. These statements and the formulations listed are not intended to diagnose, prescribe for, treat or claim to prevent, mitigate or cure any human disease. They are intended for nutritional support only. The third party information referred to herein is neither adopted nor endorsed by this web site but is provided for general informational purposes.


ThemeMagic.com - powerful & affordable self edit web sites and e-commerce stores.Free web site by esseff Digital, LLC.© 2009, Lita Lee, Ph. D., All rights reserved.
To use any content or information on this site, you must obtain express written permission.