Go Back   AzBilliards.com > Main Category > Non Pool Related
Reload this Page Why Is The Food Industry Trying To Kill Us? - Top 10 Food Additives to Avoid
Reply
Page 210 of 210 « First 110160200208209210
 
Share Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 2267 votes, 5.00 average.
Old
  (#3136)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
10-16-2019, 10:02 AM

Why Everything Is Getting Louder

October 12th, 2019

Via: The Atlantic:

Scientists have known for decades that noise—even at the seemingly innocuous volume of car traffic—is bad for us. “Calling noise a nuisance is like calling smog an inconvenience,” former U.S. Surgeon General William Stewart said in 1978. In the years since, numerous studies have only underscored his assertion that noise “must be considered a hazard to the health of people everywhere.” Say you’re trying to fall asleep. You may think you’ve tuned out the grumble of trucks downshifting outside, but your body has not: Your adrenal glands are pumping stress hormones, your blood pressure and heart rate are rising, your digestion is slowing down. Your brain continues to process sounds while you snooze, and your blood pressure spikes in response to clatter as low as 33 decibels—slightly louder than a purring cat.

Experts say your body does not adapt to noise. Large-scale studies show that if the din keeps up—over days, months, years—noise exposure increases your risk of high blood pressure, coronary heart disease, and heart attacks, as well as strokes, diabetes, dementia, and depression.
  
Reply With Quote

Old
  (#3137)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
10-17-2019, 04:55 AM

Where Obesity Places The Biggest Burden On Healthcare


by Tyler Durden Wed, 10/16/2019 - 22:55

Friday was World Obesity Day, an annual campaign established in 2015 to stimulate and support practical actions that will help people achieve and maintain a healthy weight and reverse the global obesity crisis. As Statista's Niall McCarthy notes, the scale of that crisis has been highlighted by a new OECD report which shows just how much bulging waistlines are costing health systems around the world.

Obese people tend to avail of of healthcare services more frequently with a higher rate of specialty care visits, inpatient stays and surgery, all leading to higher healthcare spending. The OECD states that obese people have 2.4 times more prescriptions than healthy-weight individuals on average while hospital stays are longer and require more expensive and complex treatment.

For example, obesity is responsible for 70 percent of all treatment costs for diabetes, 23 percent of treatment costs for cardiovascular diseases and 9 percent for cancers. On average, treating diseases caused by excess weight costs 8.4 percent of total health spending in OECD nations.


So where is the financial burden highest?


You will find more infographics at Statista

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, the U.S. has to spend the most battling the bulge. Obesity is expected to cost the health system $644 per capita annually from 2020 to 2050 - 14 percent total American health expenditure. By comparison, Canada will "only" have to spend $295 each year during the same period which equates to 11 percent of its total health spending.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3138)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
10-18-2019, 07:42 AM

Stunning Survey Reveals Quarter Of Americans Have Never Eaten Vegetables

by Ben Renner


NEW YORK — The most popular vegetable in America is — corn! That’s according to a survey of 2,000 Americans who were asked which vegetables they liked and disliked the most. However, it turns out the most surprising result of the study may be that a staggering number of adults haven’t eaten any vegetables their entire lives.

Overall, a whopping 91.4% of respondents enjoy eating corn. Potatoes came in an extremely close second at 91.2%, while carrots and tomatoes were tied for the third-most-liked vegetable at 89%. Rounding out the top five are onions and green beans, which tied as the fifth-most popular veggies (87%) according to the survey, which was commissioned on behalf of VeggieTracker.com by Dr. Praeger’s.

On the other side of the spectrum, the most hated vegetable is turnips. Nearly three in ten respondents (27%) say they dislike the root veggie. Beets were a close second on the dislike list, at 26%, with radishes (23%), and brussels sprouts (21%) rounding out the bottom four.

The survey also reveals some shocking numbers — and perhaps a telling truth about the American diet. One in four respondents say they’ve actually never eaten a vegetable at all! And of those who do eat vegetables, the average person only includes veggies in a third of their meals.

“Most of us already know they should be eating more vegetables. While more and more people are adopting plant-based diets, there’s still a long way to go toward reaching recommended consumption levels,” says Larry Praeger, CEO of Dr. Praeger’s, in a statement.

The survey revealed that, while many don’t eat vegetables, many more are motivated to increase their vegetable intake. Nearly three in four (72%) of Americans admit they wish they ate more vegetables than they do currently. Similarly, 67% say they feel guilty when they don’t have any produce with their meal.

As for why respondents say they don’t eat vegetables, a quarter say their produce rots before they can eat it, and the same number feels vegetables are too expensive to buy. Another 22% find veggie take too long to prepare, and 20% aren’t sure how to cook them properly.

Curious as to the rest of the results? Here’s a look at the top 10 most popular vegetables among Americans:

Corn 91%
Potatoes 91%
Carrots 89%
Tomatoes 89%
Onion 87%
Green beans 87%
Cucumbers 86%
Broccoli 85%
Cabbage 84%
Peas 83%

And the most hated vegetables, according to the survey:

Turnip 27%
Beets 26%
Radish 23%
Brussels sprouts 21%
Artichoke 20%
Eggplant 20%
Butternut squash 20%
Zucchini 18%
Mushroom 18%
Asparagus 16%

The survey was conducted by market research firm OnePoll.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3139)
justnum
AzB Silver Member
justnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond reputejustnum has a reputation beyond repute
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 9,543
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Dec 2005
   
10-18-2019, 08:01 AM

Is eating food products from inbred farm animals safe to eat?

I've switched over to eating less animal foods, and have noticed significant changes. Like my hormones are in overdrive.

I think eating food products have been damaging my DNA at the molecular level.

Ever since swapping chicken, pork and beef for a variety of grains, beans, pasta, nuts and seeds. I feel like a teenager waking up with rocks in my pants.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3140)
Slide Rule
NPR Commies Garbage Skum
Slide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond reputeSlide Rule has a reputation beyond repute
 
Slide Rule's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 78,627
vCash: 500
iTrader: 1 / 100%
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Peoples Republic of Amerika
   
10-18-2019, 10:41 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimmyg View Post

Stunning Survey Reveals Quarter Of Americans Have Never Eaten
Vegetables

by Ben Renner


NEW YORK — The most popular vegetable in America is — corn! That’s according
to a survey of 2,000 Americans who were asked which vegetables they liked and
disliked the most. However, it turns out the most surprising result of the study may be
that a staggering number of adults haven’t eaten any vegetables their entire lives.

Overall, a whopping 91.4% of respondents enjoy eating corn. Potatoes came in an
extremely close second at 91.2%, while carrots and tomatoes were tied for the third
most-liked vegetable at 89%. Rounding out the top five are onions and green beans,
which tied as the fifth-most popular veggies (87%) according to the survey, which
was commissioned on behalf of VeggieTracker.com by Dr. Praeger’s.

On the other side of the spectrum, the most hated vegetable is turnips. Nearly three
in ten respondents (27%) say they dislike the root veggie. Beets were a close second
on the dislike list, at 26%, with radishes (23%), and brussels sprouts (21%) rounding
out the bottom four.

The survey also reveals some shocking numbers — and perhaps a telling truth about
the American diet. One in four respondents say they’ve actually never eaten a
vegetable at all!
And of those who do eat vegetables, the average person only
includes veggies in a third of their meals.

“Most of us already know they should be eating more vegetables. While more and
more people are adopting plant-based diets, there’s still a long way to go toward
reaching recommended consumption levels,” says Larry Praeger, CEO of Dr.
Praeger’s, in a statement.

The survey revealed that, while many don’t eat vegetables, many more are motivated
to increase their vegetable intake. Nearly three in four (72%) of Americans admit they
wish they ate more vegetables than they do currently. Similarly, 67% say they feel
guilty when they don’t have any produce with their meal.

As for why respondents say they don’t eat vegetables, a quarter say their produce
rots before they can eat it, and the same number feels vegetables are too expensive
to buy. Another 22% find veggie take too long to prepare, and 20% aren’t sure how to
cook them properly.

Curious as to the rest of the results? Here’s a look at the top 10 most popular
vegetables among Americans:


Corn 91%
Potatoes 91%
Carrots 89%
Tomatoes 89%
Onion 87%
Green beans 87%
Cucumbers 86%
Broccoli 85%
Cabbage 84%
Peas 83%

And the most hated vegetables, according to the survey:

Turnip 27%
Beets 26%
Radish 23%
Brussels sprouts 21%
Artichoke 20%
Eggplant 20%
Butternut squash 20%
Zucchini 18%
Mushroom 18%
Asparagus 16%

The survey was conducted by market research firm OnePoll
.
All well and good.

My question is where does Argilla stand with the natives?


.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3141)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
10-30-2019, 09:06 AM

Flu Shots Rarely Work for People Over Age 65


by Kate Raines Published December 18, 2015 | Medicine, Elderly

Story Highlights:

Annual flu shots often fail to prevent influenza in the elderly.

Aging immune systems often do not mount robust responses to challenge from natural pathogens or vaccines.

Now high potency influenza vaccines and reactive squalene adjuvants are being added to vaccines for the elderly.

For the 2014-2015 “flu season,” the reported effectiveness of the annual flu shot was only 14% in those over age 50.1

It has been long recognized that elderly people do not respond well to vaccination as a whole and that their immune responses to annual influenza vaccinations are especially weak. The elderly are at higher risk for serious complications from infections like influenza and pneumonia because aging immune systems often do not mount a robust response to challenge from natural pathogens or vaccines.

The number of Americans over age 65 hospitalized for influenza in the 2014-2015 flu season was higher than had been previously reported since government health officials began to collect the data in 2005.2 Regardless of the highly questionable therapeutic value and potentially harmful side effects of the influenza vaccine, public health authorities insist that the annual flu shot is the best defense there is for seniors.
NIH Influenza Vaccine Study Bites Back

It is not a new finding that the flu shot provides little benefit to aging populations. Public health officials have known for many years that analyses of influenza vaccine effectiveness repeatedly reveal the vaccine often does not prevent influenza or influenza complications among the elderly.3 4 [And it is important to remember that the annual flu shot only protects against three to four strains of type A or type B influenza and does not prevent other viral or bacterial infections that cause respiratory symptoms and deaths from “influenza like illness.”]5

Influenza vaccination rates in the 65+ age group rose from approximately 15% in the 1960s to 65% in the 1980s, while mortality from influenza infections among the elderly in response to increasing vaccination rates has continued to climb.3 Unable to accept that the flu vaccine does not protect the elderly, in 2005 the National Institutes of Health (NIH) set out to prove “once and for all” that other factors must be obscuring what they were sure was a significant benefit of the vaccine. The study backfired on them when results confirmed that flu-related death had increased since routine vaccination of older Americans became widespread.4

In that study published in 2006, NIH researchers reported that…

… estimates of vaccine efficacy available from clinical trials suggest that increased influenza vaccination coverage should have substantially reduced influenza-related mortality as measured by excess mortality estimates” (but, that) “Our findings indicate that the mortality benefits of influenza vaccination may be substantially less than previously thought.5

The researchers explained this discrepancy by pointing out:

… the sharp decline in influenza-related deaths among people aged 65 to 74 years in the years immediately after A(H3N2) viruses emerged in the 1968 pandemic was most likely due to the acquisition of natural immunity to these viruses. Because of this strong natural immunization effect, by 1980, relatively few deaths in this age group (about 5000 per year) were left to prevent… together with the flat excess mortality rates after 1980, this suggests that influenza vaccination of persons aged 45 to 74 years provided little or no mortality benefit beyond natural immunization acquired during the first decade of emergence of the A(H3N2) virus.5

In 2006, veteran reporter Sharyl Attkisson interviewed Dr. Tom Reichert, the only government-independent co-author of that study (i.e., the only one allowed to go on record). Dr. Reichert explained they had set out fully expecting their investigation would prove that influenza vaccines helped prevent death from influenza in older adults but that they were, instead, “astonished” to discover this was not the case.6

Health Officials and Vaccine Makers Adding Squalene Adjuvants to Flu Shots for Elderly

In 2009, the FDA licensed influenza vaccines for those over age 65 that contain four times as much antigen as flu vaccines for other age groups in what has turned out to be a failed attempt to hyperstimulate immune responses in the elderly to confer protection.6 7 When that did not do the job, in September 2015 an FDA vaccine advisory committee voted to fast track the licensure of flu vaccines that contain squalene, a controversial oil in water vaccine adjuvant linked with serious reactions that can produce chronic inflammation in the body, including autoimmunity.8 9 10

Other Options for Preventing Influenza in Elderly

Given the evidence that influenza vaccinations have long failed to work for older people, especially those in fragile health living in long-term care facilities or nursing homes, as winter approaches it is useful to look what happens to the aging human immune system and how natural immunity can be strengthened to help vulnerable elderly populations stay healthy during the “flu season.”

The Aging Immune System

There are two ‘branches’ to the immune system:7 8 9 Innate or cell mediated immunity refers broadly to the “first responders” that meet the challenge from an infectious microbe. The innate system response is comprised of several stages, including surface-area physical barriers (skin and mucous membranes), which defend against infectious microbes that enter a cut, for example; inflammatory responses that involve production of white blood cells and specific enzymes; and natural killer cells that search for cells that have undergone changes they recognize as undesirable.

The second branch of the immune system induces humoral or “learned” immunity. It is related to the body’s ability to mount an appropriate antibody response to infection by a specific pathogen and to remember how to defend against that “enemy” in the future.

The workhorses in stimulating inflammatory responses and resolving inflammation to acquire humoral immunity are the “naïve lymphocytes,” essentially blank slates that can respond to any of the host of foreign antigens encountered over the course of a lifetime, and the “memory lymphocytes,” which recognize and respond to antigens they have been exposed to previously.

Several age-related changes, which interact to diminish robust immune responses by the elderly, have been described as “immunosenescence,” a term coined by Dr. Roy Walford. A recognized and highly regarded pioneer in the study of how the body ages,10 Dr. Walford has written about those natural changes.

He explains that, first, the innate cell mediated immune response as we age becomes slower and doesn’t produce as many general-defensive cells. Lung tissues and blood vessels in general become less flexible, so the body can’t as easily effectively deal with challenge from infectious microbes.

But inevitable changes in the learned humoral immune response really tips the balance for older adults. Both the number of naïve lymphocytes being produced and the functionality of the memory lymphocytes begin their gradual decline soon after puberty, but the changes don’t significantly impair functional immunity through most of adult life. According to another expert on the aging immune system, “Only in the late phase of life does the progressive decline of immune function create vulnerability, with a resultant increase in morbidity and mortality due to infection in the elderly.”11

With fewer and more sluggish fighter cells effectively lowering the body’s ability to respond to challenges from both previously encountered and newly encountered microbes, the aging immune system is unable to mount enough of an appropriate inflammatory response and resolve it to achieve either natural or artificial vaccine induced immunity. This means older adults can be at much higher risk of complications from natural infections and vaccination.

That Elusive Influenza Virus

The influenza virus is constantly changing, sometimes rapidly, another reason why the elderly are so vulnerable to serious effects of influenza. Scientists recognize that flu vaccines do not work well against a more virulent influenza A H3N2 strain, which unexpectedly predominated during the 2014-2015 flu season.12

It isn’t hard to understand the pharmaceutical industry’s push for annual flu vaccination for everyone, whether it works or not: There’s a lot of money in the flu vaccine business. And public health officials seem to believe “even a little protection is better than none,” but it’s not like we are talking about a product that is completely free of side effects.

Both inactivated and live virus influenza vaccines are associated with serious adverse reaction reports in the medical literature and in the federally operated vaccine adverse events reporting system (VAERS). The public can search the VAERS database to read descriptions of influenza vaccine reactions here.

Protection Without Vaccination

The influenza virus is a constant presence, but influenza infections and outbreaks are primarily identified in late fall and winter. There are many hypotheses offered to explain why influenza appears to be more prevalent in the colder months, including improved stability of the virus in lower temperatures; reduced blood flow to mucous membranes during colder weather; indoor crowding; increased survival time for the airborne virus in low humidity, and a correlation between dry heated air and viral transmission.13

Many health care providers endorse the use of cool air humidifiers during the flu season, as moisturized air is thought to make it harder for influenza viral particles to circulate and be transmitted. Clinical EFT practitioner and nutritionist Valerie Burke, MSN champions her “fabulous five”: Vitamin D3, probiotics, green tea, elderberry (Sambucus nigra), and Echinacea, all of which have evidence for supporting healthy immune function.14

Influenza infection may not always be avoidable, but taking steps to strengthen our immunity to improve the odds of moving through an influenza infection without experiencing serious complications can help us avoid irrational “fear of flu”—no matter what our age. It is a fear that is encouraged by the pharmaceutical and medical trade industries to persuade us to believe that reliance on the ineffective influenza vaccine is the best way to stay healthy during the flu season, especially for the elderly.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3142)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
11-01-2019, 07:35 AM

What Makes “Impossible Burger” Possible? New GMO Plant-based “Meat” Approved by FDA but not Tested



What Makes the “Impossible Burger” Possible?


by Alliance for Natural Health

Behind the approval of the plant-based burger that will be hitting store shelves soon. Action Alert!

Plant-based meat products seem to be all the rage. They are billed as a healthier, more environmentally-friendly alternative to traditional meat, and the fad is catching on.

Fast-food giant Burger King has announced the “Impossible Whopper,” a meatless version of their popular sandwich. What you probably haven’t been told is that these plant-based meats are made possible through a new form of genetic engineering that has undergone virtually no safety testing. Once again, the American consumer will be Big Food’s guinea pig—unless we speak up.

The Impossible Burger is able to give the impression of “bleeding” like real meat because it releases a compound called heme. Heme is found naturally in beef and is released during the cooking process.

Heme can also be sourced from soy plants, specifically the roots, but it isn’t sustainable: it takes one acre of soy to produce just one kilogram of soy heme. To circumvent this problem, Impossible Foods, the manufacturer of the Impossible Burger, creates heme through synthetic biology (synbio).

Here’s how it works. The genetic code for the heme protein is inserted into genetically modified yeast. The yeast is then fed so it grows, replicates, and manufactures heme.

The FDA recently approved this synbio “heme” as a color additive, which means that the Impossible Burger can hit supermarket shelves. (Note: the approval of heme was only relevant to selling the burgers raw in supermarkets—restaurants did not need heme to be approved by the FDA to serve cooked plant-based burgers.)

Has “heme” produced in this way been tested for safety? Has it been confirmed that this method of producing the compound will not lead to allergic reactions? No. But that hasn’t prevented the FDA from giving the green light in yet another capitulation to Big Food.

This goes far beyond the Impossible Burger. A wide range of biopharmaceutical compounds have been produced by using yeast synthetic biology, including antimicrobials (penicillin), pain killers (hydrocodone, opioids), antioxidants (resveratrol, B-carotene, lycopene), and even snake venom. Dairy and egg products created through synthetic biology are also being investigated. Why spend all the time and energy to source these compounds from the natural world when souped-up, genetically modified yeast can be programmed to manufacture them for you?

Given the embarrassingly narrow definition of what constitutes a GMO that has been adopted by the federal government, none of the foods produced using synbio will have to be labeled as “bioengineered.” We’ll have a wave of new foods coming to the market, without any safety testing, and without being clearly labeled that they were produced using genetic engineering. This is unacceptable.

Action Alert! Tell Congress and the FDA that “heme” produced with synbio must be adequately tested before it is released to the public. Please send your message immediately.

Read the full article at ANH-USA.org.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3143)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
11-08-2019, 08:35 AM

November 8, 2019

Holistic Alternatives for Fighting the Flu



by Crystal Lauer - Health Impact News

As a majority of us pull our boots and sweaters out of storage, sprinkle copious amounts of pumpkin spice on every hot drink and embrace the season of simmering stews and crackling fires with excitement, the changing of the seasons from summer to fall is also met with the reminder that flu season is right around the corner.

That reminder will not be a subtle one as the propaganda machine whines into a full roar from every doctor’s office, news channel, drugstore, grocery store, online advertising etc. with the warning that the flu shot is all that is standing between you and certain unavoidable infection.

But it simply isn’t true.

Influenza is a contagious illness that targets the respiratory system and leaves its victim vulnerable to secondary infections such as pneumonia, bronchitis, sinusitis, and other serious diseases which can lead to complications and even death.

Anyone can contract the Influenza virus, with young children, older people, pregnant women and immune compromised individuals at greater risk for complications as a result of the flu.

Symptoms of the flu largely affect the respiratory system, come on suddenly and include fever, cough, runny or congested nose, chills, headache and body aches, sore throat and fatigue.

According to the Center for Disease Control (CDC) an average of 8% of the U.S. population gets ill from the influenza virus each year, with a range of 11% to 3% depending on which season is being evaluated. The same study found that children are the most likely to get sick and those over 65 years of age the least likely.

While the conventional treatment for the flu is the Influenza vaccine, there are many who are rightly concerned with its ingredients and questionable efficacy. Moreover, the heavy-handed way the flu vaccine has been touted as an imperative to avoiding the flu virus, while being backed by high levels of propaganda rather than real science or trials, has left many individuals confused and fearful.

To read more on the topic of the tactics used to push the billion dollar flu vaccine and drug market, see:
Retired Medical Doctor Exposes Deceptive Statistics Used to Justify Billion Dollar Flu Vaccine and Drug Market

The reality is that there are many excellent holistic modalities which can strengthen your immune system and naturally prepare you for the flu season, some of which confer a higher percentage of protection from the virus than does the widely-pushed flu vaccine.

Many studies have been done which have drawn a link between vitamin D deficiency and the influenza virus. While many people understand the critical relationship between bone and muscle health and vitamin D, there are some who are still not aware that vitamin D is also essential for the bodies defense against acute respiratory infections.

The Harvard Gazette reports that several observational studies associated below average vitamin D levels with a higher vulnerability to acute respiratory infections, and daily or weekly supplementation provided the greatest protection for those with existing low levels, in most cases cutting the risk by half.

According to Dr. Mercola, in an article entitled Vitamin D is More Effective Than Flu Vaccine, Study Says,

“To prevent influenza in one person, 40 people must receive the flu vaccine whereas one case of flu can be prevented for every 33 people taking vitamin D. If you are severely vitamin deficient, vitamin D supplementation is 10 times more effective than the flu vaccine.”


In his research findings, published in ISRN Infectious Diseases, Anthony R. Mawson notes that resistance and susceptibility to influenza depend upon the vitamin D to Vitamin A ratio in an individual.

While vitamin A plays an important part in resisting disease, it is also quite capable of becoming a villain if Vitamin D is deficient.

Vitamin D deficiency increases the availability and toxic potential of retinoids and allows for over-expression of vitamin A. He hypothesizes that the seasonal recurrence of the ever-present influenza virus is spurred into action by an individual’s decline in vitamin D and the resulting retinoid accumulation.

As winter approaches, the days grow shorter, and chilly weather drives individuals who have spent months in sleeveless shirts and shorts while soaking in the summer sun to cover up, bundle up and stay indoors.

This decrease in solar exposure, through which much of our vitamin D is derived, could very possibly be contributing to our susceptibility to opportunistic viral strains making their way through the population during the winter months.

With this in mind, optimizing your vitamin D levels may be your best defense against the influenza virus as well as other respiratory illnesses.

Develop Better Sleeping Patterns


Along with the optimization of your vitamin D levels, evaluating and refining sleep patterns can make the difference in infection-proofing your immune system.

Many of us living fast-paced lives filled with conveniences, have long pushed the boundaries on healthy sleep patterns to provide for these lives.

For some of us, the boundaries ceased to exist, practically from childhood, when buses arrived at the crack of dawn to shuttle us to school and homework and activities ate up our evenings and nights.

As adults, our patterns have proceeded to worsen as we wake early and work or play late into the night surrounded by unnatural light, technology, high stress and very little attention paid to the time.

There never seems to be enough time and sadly sleep is the loser in the flurry of industry, establishing a lifetime pattern of sleep deprivation, which leaves us vulnerable to decreased immune response along with a host of other chronic issues.

While you sleep, protective proteins called cytokines are released by your immune system to help you sleep while others are released to fight off infection, inflammation and help mitigate damage done by stress.

Research shows that even as little as a partial night’s sleep causes a disruption in immune function and reduces natural T-cell cytokine production.

To add insult to injury, all that lack of sleep is also increasing inflammation, which is a contributing factor in many chronic illnesses including heart disease.

If you want to increase your resistance to sickness and lower your inflammation, sleep is an element that cannot be overlooked. For adults, an average of 7 to 9 hours of sleep are optimal, with children needing considerably more at 10 to 13 hours.

Eat Nourishing Foods

Before you rush off to bed and attempt to catch up on decades of lost sleep, it may interest you to know that how you eat and what you drink will also contribute to how well your immune system responds to a perceived threat. Nourishing foods such as bone broths and soups made from pastured organic chickens or grass-fed organic beef, vegetables, raw dairy, eggs from organic pastured chickens, omega rich fish and seafood, and herbs are an excellent base for a healing and infection-protective diet.

Removing excess sugar and carbohydrates will keep blood sugars stable and reduce the stress response. Keeping your stress response low allows the immune system to function properly and attend to its primary job of defending you from invading viruses, bacteria and toxins. Remaining well-hydrated by drinking plenty of water will also reduce physical stress and help remove circulating toxins.

While diet, sleep and optimizing vitamin D are all important steps in strengthening your immune system, there is also the practical advice of making sure to wash your hands frequently, avoid being in crowded spaces, keep your hands away from your face and disinfect and clean surfaces regularly.

Herbs and Spices


Several herbs and spices are also known for their anti-viral and immune boosting superpowers.

Elderberry tops the list with its impressive compounds that inhibit the influenza virus from entering and replicating in human cells.

By blocking key proteins that allow for viral attachment to cells, elderberry is able to inhibit the viral cycle at several stages.

Researchers also found the elderberry solution stimulated the release of certain cytokines in the body which facilitated a more “efficient response against the invading pathogen.” The study out of the University of Sydney suggests that elderberry can both help to inhibit and reduce the symptoms of the influenza virus.

In our home we do all the above as well as preparing fresh ginger root tea, simmered with cinnamon, clove, and sometimes throwing in a few culinary juniper berries, all of it working to strengthen respiratory and immune health, all the while improving circulation and blood sugar response.

If the tea needs sweetening, we use either stevia leaf or honey, the latter of which is well known for its antiviral and respiratory supporting properties.

A chicken bone broth is also frequently simmered with fresh thyme and nettle for added antiviral and immune boosting benefits. Thyme breaks up mucus and helps support respiratory health, as well as having anti-bacterial and anti-viral properties. Nettle is both mineral rich and immune boosting as it has the ability to facilitate detoxification.

Essential Oils

Just to make sure everyone in our household has the odds in their favor when it comes to facing the flu season, oregano essential oil, clove essential oil and thyme essential oil is applied in varying amounts, dependent on ages and sizes, to the bottom of the feet, before bed and in the mornings. Boswellia oil and resin combination is also taken at the first signs of respiratory infection. There are many other essential oils that can be combined to benefit the natural immune response, but these are just a few of our preferences.

So, while you’re getting down your boots and sweaters from storage and prepping your fireplace for the first logs to be lit, remember to get ahead of the coming flu season and have a strategy for keeping both you and your loved ones healthy and strong through the holidays and all throughout winter.

References

Gary G. Kohls, MD (last). “Retired Medical Doctor Exposes Deceptive Statistics Used to Justify Billion Dollar Flu Vaccine and Drug Market.” Health Impact News, n.d. https://healthimpactnews.com/2017/re...d-drug-market/.

Irwin M (last), McClintick J, Costlow C, Fortner M, White J, and Gillin JC. “Partial Night Sleep Deprivation Reduces Natural Killer and Cellular Immune Responses in Humans.” FASEB J. 10, no. 5 (April 1996): 643–53.

“Key Facts About Influenza (Flu).” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, n.d. https://www.cdc.gov/flu/about/keyfacts.htm.

Mawson, Anthony R. “Role of Fat-Soluble Vitamins A and D in the Pathogenesis of Influenza: A New Perspective.” ISRN Infectious Diseases 2013, no. 246737 (n.d.): 26. http://dx.doi.org/10.5402/2013/246737.

Sue McGreevey and Mike Morrison. “Study Confirms Vitamin D Protects against Colds and Flu.” The Harvard Gazette, February 15, 2017. https://news.harvard.edu/gazette/sto...-cold-and-flu/.

University of Sydney. “Elderberry Compounds Could Help Minimize Flu Symptoms, Study Suggests.” Science Daily, April 23, 2019. https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0423133644.htm

“Vitamin D Is More Effective Than Flu Vaccine, Study Says.” Mercola Take Control of Your Health, n.d. https://articles.mercola.com/sites/a...u-vaccine.aspx.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3144)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
11-12-2019, 08:04 AM

The Reason Big Pharma and Big Food Want You to Think Eggs are Bad – And Why They Are Not



Time Magazine cover from 1984, demonizing eggs to promote the cholesterol theory of heart disease and fuel a multi-billion dollar statin drug industry.

by Paul Fassa - Health Impact News

Ever since the cholesterol theory of heart disease was created during the 1970s and 1980s, eggs have been vilified as a potential threat for not only heart disease, but more recently even diabetes.

Official institutional warnings of egg consumption continue, even as the cholesterol theory of heart disease is crumbling with the emerging unbiased science proving otherwise.

Diabetes type 2 has become epidemic in cultures that have embraced western processed food diets. There have been some epidemiological surveys that have managed to associate egg consumption with an increased risk of diabetes.

Those seem to be publicized more than studies that have the different conclusions. Finland has recently shown other conclusions with both a large, unbiased epidemiological study and a follow-up study that analyzed metabolic features among egg eaters.

Both concluded that those who enjoy eggs in their diet have less risk of diabetes.

The Epidemiological Finnish Study That Went Against Official Nutritional Recommendations


An epidemiological survey study inspires the often repeated adage “association does not mean causation.” But association serves as an impetus for “further studies” that become laboratory and clinical in nature.

The following two studies illustrate this very dynamic, both within the same Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease (KIHD) Risk Factor Study cohort.

In 2015, researchers of the University of Eastern Finland concluded their tracking of 2,342 men, aged 42-60, from the KIHD cohort assembled during the early 1980s to analyze dietary effects on chronic diseases and heart health.

The title of their report that was published by the The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in April of 2015 is Egg consumption and risk of incident type 2 diabetes in men: the Kuopio Ischaemic Heart Disease Risk Factor Study.

Records of medical examinations taken at the four and 11-year points, and at this cohort’s 20-year endpoint (2006-2008), were made available for researchers worldwide. So far the KIHD project has been used for 500 international studies.

After already using this cohort to determined that egg consumption did not create cardiovascular disease, the Eastern Finland University researchers decided to analyze the glucose measurements and insulin resistance markers taken from examinations every few years until the cohort’s endpoint 20 years later.

Those who were scrutinized for metabolic disorders, insulin resistance, and serum glucose levels, all markers of pre-diabetes and diabetes 2, consumed one egg a day on average. This is a higher egg count than many other similar studies.

From the study’s text:

… because the evidence on the impact of egg consumption on the risk of T2D [type 2 diabetes] is limited and mixed, we investigated the association between egg consumption and risk of incident T2D in middle-aged and older men from eastern Finland.

We previously showed that egg consumption was not associated with carotid atherosclerosis or risk of myocardial infarction in this study population.

In secondary analyses we also investigated the association of egg consumption with plasma glucose, serum insulin, and serum C-reactive protein (CRP) at baseline and in a subgroup after 4 y [years] of follow-up. [Emphasis added] (Source)


If you go to the full study text available here, you’ll discover the details that led to these researchers concluding:

Higher egg intake was associated with a lower risk of T2D [type 2 diabetes] in this cohort of middle-aged and older men.

Somehow, an association between high cholesterol serum readings and diabetes had been made in the past by the “cholesterol creates cardiovascular disease” crowd.

The mounting evidence that cholesterol is vital for health and that people with low cholesterol have more health issues and shorter lives than those with high cholesterol is largely ignored when it comes to corporate-sponsored “mainstream” media coverage.

See:

Statin Scam: People with Higher Cholesterol Live Longer than People with Low Cholesterol

Because egg yolks are high in cholesterol, eggs remain a wrong target with the mainstream media and official nutritional institutions who are in lockstep with the cholesterol con.

To now admit that the science does not support the cholesterol theory of heart disease would be akin to destroying Big Pharma’s most profitable line of drugs: statins.

Combining the cholesterol/saturated fat theory of heart disease with obesity and metabolic disorders leading to diabetes was probably created and exploited as a distraction from the real dietary issues creating these unhealthy conditions:

Processed trans-fatty acid processed vegetable oils used to replace healthy saturated fats and heavy sugar consumption.

See:

Study: People Eating Eggs Have Less Risk for Heart Disease
Recent Serum Analysis Study Confirmed the Outcome of the Prior Epidemiological Study


The University of Eastern Finland then followed the 2015 study to actually measure metabolic markers that signal metabolic dysfunction or metabolic syndrome leading to diabetes 2 to further understand how eggs help prevent diabetes 2 instead of causing it.

This study is titled Metabolic Profiling of High Egg Consumption and the Associated Lower Risk of Type 2 Diabetes in Middle‐Aged Finnish Men. It was published on December 12, 2018, in the journal Molecular Nutrition.

This study involved a smaller number of participants from the large KIHD cohort, 239, who were divided into four groups from their baseline serum metabolic readings to their outcomes after the 20-year study.

The four groups were divided according to those who ate more eggs, one a day, or fewer eggs, two per week, and whether each group remained healthy or developed type 2 diabetes over the length of this 20-year KIHD study.

University of Eastern Finland researcher Stefania Noerman stated:

The purpose of the current study was to explore potential compounds that could explain this [inverted] association using non-targeted metabolomics, a technique that enables a broad profiling of chemicals in a sample. (Source)


The researchers used non-targeted LC‐MS‐based metabolic profiling which uses ultra performance liquid chromatography coupled with mass spectrometry (UPLC-MS). It is a powerful technique to investigate metabolism. (Source)

Potential compounds such as baseline tyrosine levels, along with an unknown hexose‐containing compound and other predominant metabolites, can predict type 2 diabetes cases. The researchers discovered an inverse relationship.

The group that consumed more eggs had lower diabetes predictive metabolite readings than the group that ate fewer eggs. The researchers concluded:


Our current findings may underline some potential metabolites that can explain how egg intake is associated with a lower risk of T2D [type 2 diabetes].

The only thing that remains that allows those who enjoy eggs to feel comfortable is how to choose the eggs that are the healthiest. The cheapest, most common eggs are from mass producers who confine their hens to cages in large warehouses. And they are the ones that are most often recalled for salmonella.

Look for eggs from cage-free and pastured chickens.

  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3145)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
11-13-2019, 07:50 AM

The Newest Fake Meat Is Made from Thin Air

November 12th, 2019

pHood!

https://www.fastcompany.com/90428522...ner=feedburner

Most plant-based meat, such as the Impossible Burger or the Beyond Burger, uses protein made from soy or peas. The newest meat alternative uses protein made from air instead, in a process that transforms CO2 into an ingredient with the same nutritional profile as the protein you find in animals.

Air Protein, a Bay Area-based startup, unveiled the first prototypes of “air-based” meat today. The technology behind it comes from an idea first explored by NASA in the 1960s, when scientists trying to figure out how to feed astronauts in space discovered that it was possible to use microorganisms to convert CO2—breathed out by astronauts—into food. Using a similar process on Earth, inside fermentation tanks, could help radically improve the environmental footprint of food.
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3146)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
11-17-2019, 08:56 AM

Blowing the Lid Off the Claim that Canola Oil is “Healthy”



by Dr. Jospeh Mercola
Mercola.com

Warning
: This oil comes with potentially damaging side effects due to either the ingredient it’s made from or the manufacturing process used to extract it. Because these negative effects overshadow the potential benefits, I do not recommend this oil for therapeutic use. Always be aware of the potential side effects of any herbal oil before using.

Canola oil is widely promoted as “one of the best oils for heart health.”1 However, this information is rather flawed, as canola oil and similar highly processed cooking oils hold untold dangers to your health.

Read on to learn what you should know about canola oil, and what my personal recommendations for the best cooking oil are.

What is canola oil?

Referred to as “the healthiest cooking oil” by its makers, canola oil is low in saturated fats and high in monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA) and polyunsaturated fats (PUFA) such as oleic acid, linoleic acid and alpha-linolenic (ALA).2,3

The oil is produced from a series of processes ranging from solvent extraction with hexane, to refining, bleaching and deodorization.4

Although canola is a type of rapeseed, the canola you see on store shelves is not the rapeseed you may be familiar with that is used for industrial and nonedible purposes, such as for lubricants, plastics and hydraulic fluids.

The edible canola oil, on the other hand, is specifically grown as a food crop, genetically altered to contain significantly lower levels of erucic acid and glucosinolate in it, which makes it safe to eat.5

The modification focuses on broadening the seasons and regions where the plants can be cultivated and maximizing yield.

The bad news is that in order to boost the resistance, researchers have developed herbicide-tolerant canola, including Roundup-ready and Liberty-tolerant types.6

How is canola oil used?


Canola oil is a common ingredient in food products such as salad dressings, salad oil and margarines.7

Even though it’s marketed as a food product, according to the Canola Council of Canada, once plant-sourced oils like canola oil are processed they “can be used industrially to formulate lubricants, oils, fuels, soaps, paints, plastics, cosmetics or inks.”

Canola can also be used to produce ethanol and biodiesel. The point is, the Canola Council says, is that “just because you can do this doesn’t make the approved food oils at the grocery store somehow poisonous or harmful.”8

Composition of canola oil

Canola oil is often praised by the mainstream food industry due to its fatty acid content:9

Saturated fat — Canola oil contains about 7%, or about half the amount found in corn oil, olive oil and soybean oil.

Monounsaturated fatty acids (MUFA)
— This is the most abundant fat in canola oil. The MUFA oleic acid makes up 61% of canola oil — second only to olive oil.

Polyunsaturated fatty acid (PUFA)
— Compared to palm oil and olive oil, canola oil has a higher amount of PUFA. It has a ratio of omega-6 fat (linoleic acid) and omega-3 fat (alpha-linolenic acid) of 2-to-1.

How is canola oil made?


Unfortunately, details you’re told by vegetable oil manufacturers about canola oil’s production and benefits don’t tell the whole story.


As mentioned, canola oil was created through the hybridization and genetic alteration of the rapeseed, a plant used for industrial purposes.10 Rapeseed oil came from the plant known as “rape,” from a Latin word meaning “turnip.”11

Along with cruciferous vegetables, rape is a domesticated crop belonging to the Brassicaceae family.12

Although rapeseed oil is composed of 60% monounsaturated fat, it is inedible because of two dangerous substances:

Erucic acid — a type of fatty acid that is associated with Keshan’s disease, characterized by fibrotic lesions in the heart13

Glucosinolates — bitter compounds that negatively affected the taste of rapeseed oil14

To turn rapeseed oil into an edible product
, Canadian manufacturers used selective breeding to formulate seeds that had lower levels of erucic acid and glucosinolates. Canola oil, also known as “low erucic acid rapeseed (LEAR),” was formed.15

But, what the manufacturers don’t call attention to when they’re calling canola “healthy” is that hexane, one of the chemicals needed to extract oil from the seeds, is an HAP: a hazardous air pollutant. This begs the question of whether hexane is safe when ingested.16

According to the Toxicology Data Network, hexane may target the central nervous system and respiratory system when ingested.17 While hexane occurs in canola oil in only minute amounts, there are no sufficient studies that prove that it is safe to ingest.

Another part of the processing of canola oil is deodorizing, which is the step responsible for its bland taste. The bad news with this is that deodorizing reduces canola oil’s omega-3 fatty acids by up to 20%18 — so in the end, there’s not enough omega-3s for you to reap the benefits.

Is canola oil safe?

Although the food industry says it is, I do not believe canola oil is safe. Despite its “generally recognized as safe” (GRAS) status, no long-term human safety studies have been conducted on canola oil.19

Animal studies, however, contradict some of the health claims about canola oil.

For example, in Canadian research published in 1997 in Nutrition Research, piglets fed with milk replacers containing canola oil had signs of vitamin E deficiency, even if the replacement contained sufficient amounts of the nutrient.

Deficiency in vitamin E can be dangerous, as it can lead to free radical damage and cardiovascular problems.20

A year later, researchers found the piglets fed with canola oil had reduced platelet count and an increase in platelet size. The researchers concluded that the ingestion of canola oil interfered with normal hematological development.21

In another animal test conducted, rats ended up with high blood pressure, an increased risk for stroke and a shortened lifespan when canola oil became their primary source of fat.22

It is important to take note that these studies were made prior to the introduction of GE canola oil. This means you face not only the dangers of canola oil discovered in these studies, but also the potential hazards of genetically modified vegetable oils that may remain as residues in the final product.

Side effects of canola oil

So, what really happens when you use canola oil in your food?

The answer is that canola oil and other heated vegetable oils are some of the worst ingredients you can add to your food, if for no other reason that eating foods with canola oil will only distort your omega-6 to omega-3 ratio.

The bottom line is if you’re using canola oil, it’s time to throw it out and replace it with fats that will truly benefit your health.

One of your best options is coconut oil, which I personally use. Olive oil is also good, but if you’re going to cook with an oil, coconut is the better choice because it tolerates higher heat levels, as I explain later in this section.

Another problem with canola oil is that it’s even more dangerous when hydrogenated, which is common in processed foods. Manufacturers hydrogenate the oil because it prolongs processed foods’ shelf life.23

And then, to make matters worse, consuming these foods exposes you to even higher levels of trans fats.24

So, the idea that canola oil is beneficial to your health is nothing but a myth.


Another myth is that saturated fat is bad for you. The “bad” fat belief stemmed from Ancel Keys’ Seven Countries Study,25which linked saturated fat with heart disease.

The truth is that his research was manipulated to achieve the conclusion that saturated fat is “bad,” as he selectively analyzed data from seven countries rather than comparing all data from 22 studies available to him at the time.

When you look at the majority of the data he had available to him, you’ll find that all the data combined actually disproved his theory. The truth is saturated fat does not cause heart disease and is, in fact, an important part of a healthy diet.26

The reason coconut oil is the best choice for cooking is that it’s resistant to heat damage, unlike canola oil and other vegetable oils.

Coconut oil also carries beneficial fat like lauric acid, which provides antiviral, antibacterial and antiprotozoa properties.27

Read the full article at Mercola.com.
References


1 WebMD, Canola Oil Cooking Benefits

2, 24 Medical News Today, What are the most healthful oils?

3 Nutr Rev. 2013 Jun; 71(6): 370–385.

4 Canola Council of Canada, Canola Seed and Oil Processing

5, 6 North Dakota State University, Canola Production Field Guide

7 Reference Module in Food Science, 2016

8 Canola Council of Canada, Canola: The Myths Debunked

9 Oklahoma State University, Canola Oil: Nutritional Properties

10 Hortic. 1005, 227-232

11 Top 100 Food Plants, 2009

12 ”Canola: Chemistry, Production, Processing and Utilization,” p 1 2015

13 Lipid Oxidation, 2013

14 Molecular Nutrition & Food Research 62(18):1700990

15 Food Standards Australia New Zealand 2003

16 The Weston A. Price Foundation, 2009

17 National Institutes of Health, Toxicology Data Network

18 Harvard T.H. Chan, School of Public Health

19 Mayo Clinic, Nutrition and Healthy Eating

20 Nutrition Research, 17(2), 1997

21 J Nutr. 1999 Jul;129(7):1261-8

22 J Nutr. 2000 May;130(5):1166-78

23 Practical Guide to Vegetable Oil Processing, 2017

25 The Seven Countries Study, Ancel Keys

26 BMJ 2013; 347

27 Encyclopedia of Food Sciences and Nutrition, 2003
  
Reply With Quote
Old
  (#3147)
jimmyg
Mook! What's a Mook?
jimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond reputejimmyg has a reputation beyond repute
 
jimmyg's Avatar
 
Status: Offline
Posts: 31,426
vCash: 500
iTrader: 0 / 0%
Join Date: Jun 2006
   
Yesterday, 07:49 AM

Too Much Screen Time May Be Stunting Toddlers’ Brains

November 19th, 2019

Via: U.S. News:

Toddlers who spend loads of time looking at tablets, smartphones or TVs may be changing their brains, and not for the better.

A new study using brain scans showed that the white matter in the brains of children who spent hours in front of screens wasn’t developing as fast as it was in the brains of kids who didn’t.

It’s in the white matter of the brain where language, other literacy skills, and the process of mental control and self-regulation develop, researchers say.

“What we think happens is that the development of these skills really depends on the quality of the experience, such as interaction with people, interaction with the world and playing,” explained lead researcher Dr. John Hutton. He is director of the Reading and Literacy Discovery Center at Cincinnati Children’s Hospital.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
‘Insect Apocalypse’ Poses Risk to All Life on Earth, Conservationists Warn

November 20th, 2019

Via: Guardian:

The planet is at the start of a sixth mass extinction in its history, with huge losses already reported in larger animals that are easier to study. But insects are by far the most varied and abundant animals, outweighing humanity by 17 times.

Insect population collapses have been reported in Germany and Puerto Rico, and the first global scientific review, published in February, said widespread declines threaten a “catastrophic collapse of nature’s ecosystems”.

Insects can be helped to recover by “rewilding” urban gardens and parks, Goulson said. “There is potential for a huge network of insect-friendly habitats right across the country. Already a lot of people are buying into the idea that they can make their gardens more wildlife friendly by letting go of control a bit. There are also quite a lot of councils going pesticide free.”

But he said: “The bigger challenge is farming – 70% of Britain is farmland. No matter how many gardens we make wildlife friendly, if 70% of the countryside remains largely hostile to life, then we are not going to turn around insect decline.”
  
Reply With Quote
Reply
Page 210 of 210 « First 110160200208209210

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump



Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
vBulletin Security provided by vBSecurity (Lite) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2019 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.