Organic Change, Organic Life, Eco-Friendly Water

The next time an FDA panel convenes to discuss whether to ban BPA, the endocrine-disrupting industrial chemical used in can liners, it will have new data to consider -- a study by the agency's own scientists. In a  just-released report , they tested a range of commonly used canned foods, from peas to chili, and found "detectable" levels of BPA in 71 of 78 samples. Given that millions of Americans consume these foods daily and that the dangers of BPA have been known for years now, you might think there's a broad range of studies looking at the question of BPA leaching into everyday foods. Not so. The FDA researchers surveyed the literature, and found a glaring hole. They write: It was clear that there were no large scale studies of the U.S. market and that there were significant data gaps for highly consumed canned foods, such as chili, pastas and pork and beans. So now the gap has been filled and we know that a broad swath of the public is exposed regularly to a tox...

The current media debate about the benefits (or lack of harm) of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) in our diet misses the obvious. The average American increased their consumption of HFCS (mostly from sugar sweetened drinks and processed food) from zero to over 60 pounds per person per year. During that time period, obesity rates have more than tripled and diabetes incidence has increased more than seven fold. Not perhaps the only cause, but a fact that cannot be ignored. Doubt and confusion are the currency of deception, and they sow the seeds of complacency. These are used skillfully through massive print and television advertising campaigns by the  Corn Refiners Association ’s attempt to dispel the “myth” that HFCS is harmful and assert through the opinion of “medical and nutrition experts” that it is no different than cane sugar. It is a “natural” product that is a healthy part of our diet when used in moderation. Except for one problem. When used in moderation it is a major cau...

The controversial gas-drilling practice is tainting water. Your food might be next. by  Barry Estabrook     May 14, 2011 here's a stunning moment in the Academy Award-nominated documentary  Gasland , where a man touches a match to his running faucet—to have it explode in a ball of fire. This is what hydraulic fracturing, a process of drilling for natural gas known as "fracking," is doing to many drinking water supplies across the country. But the other side of fracking—what it might do to the food eaten by people living hundreds of miles from the nearest gas well—has received little attention. Fracking well. Photo credit: Riverkeeper Unlike many in agriculture, cattle farmer Ken Jaffe has had a good decade. But lately he's been nervous, worried fracking will destroy his business. Jaffe's been good to his soil, and the land has been good to him. By rotating his herd of cattle to different pastures on his Catskills farm every day, he has restored the once-eroded la...

The debate about sunscreens rages on. Dermatologists advise slathering up every day. Nutritionists and holistic doctors advise sun exposure to get vitamin D. Some even say sunscreens cause cancer, and a disturbing study showed that people who used more commercial sunscreen had more melanoma. Where is the truth? We might never know. Sunscreen manufacturers need to sell their product and natural sunscreen companies have little money for research. The FDA is mute and has never said that sunscreens prevent  skin cancer . It is clear that commercial sunscreen  ingredients (like oxybenzone and methoxycinnamate) are potent hormone disruptors and potential carcinogens. My advice is to never use these commercial sunscreens. What should you do? Be judicious and safe. Get  sun exposure . It is the best and most reliable source of vitamin D. But avoid sunburn, which damages the  skin   and may increase your risk of skin  cancer . Avoid baking in the  sun ...

The produce lobby is livid that consumers might be concerned about pesticides. They are taking their fury out on the USDA for its annual report on pesticide use ( via  The Washington Post ): In a recent letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, 18 produce trade associations complained that the data have "been subject to misinterpretation by activists, which publicize their distorted findings through national media outlets in a way that is misleading for consumers and can be highly detrimental to the growers of these commodities." This report happens also to be the basis for the Environmental Working Group's popular "Dirty Dozen" and "Clean Fifteen"  lists  of fruit and vegetables with the most and least pesticide residues. The produce lobbyists are pretty steamed about those, too: "There are some organizations with agendas that do want to scare people away from fresh produce," said Kathy Means, a vice president at the Produce Marketing A...