Pages

Thursday, 31 October 2013

Six ways to boost fertility through nutrition

Published: Wednesday October 23, 2013 MYT 10:37:00 AM
Updated: Wednesday October 23, 2013 MYT 10:54:40 AM

A healthy diet may help in boosting your chances of getting pregnant.
A healthy diet may help in boosting your chances of getting pregnant.

Establish a healthy eating pattern for the best result.

For women hoping to conceive, experts advise watching your weight and following a Mediterranean-style diet to boost your odds of having a baby.

As fertility experts shared their research at the American Society for Reproductive Medicine in Boston, Massachussetts this week, Loyola University dietitian Brooke Schantz offered essential diet tips to increase your chances of having a baby.

“Establishing a healthy eating pattern and weight is a good first step for women who are looking to conceive,” she said. “Not only will a healthy diet and lifestyle potentially help with fertility, but it also may influence fetal well-being and reduce the risk of complications during pregnancy.”

Thirty percent of infertility is due to being either overweight or underweight, according to the National Infertility Association in the United States. Reducing extra weight by even 5% can enhance fertility, experts say.

For women looking to conceive, Schantz recommends the following:

– Reduce intake of foods with trans and saturated fats while increasing intake of monounsaturated fats, such as avocados and olive oil

– Lower intake of animal protein and add more vegetable protein to your diet

– Add more fiber to your diet by consuming whole grains, vegetables, and fruit

– Incorporate more vegetarian sources of iron such as legumes, tofu, nuts, seeds, and whole grains

– Consume high-fat dairy instead of low-fat dairy. A Harvard University study showed that women who ate more than two portions a day of low-fat dairy foods were 85% more likely to be infertile due to ovulatory disorders than those who only ate it less than once a week.

– Take a regular women’s multivitamin

But men aren’t left out of the equation. “Men who are looking to have a baby also have a responsibility to maintain a healthy body weight and consume a balanced diet, because male obesity may affect fertility by altering testosterone and other hormone levels,” Schantz said.

Approximately 40% of infertility issues are attributed to men, according to the American Society for Reproductive Medicine. — AFP Relaxnews

http://www.thestar.com.my/Lifestyle/Health/Nutrition/2013/10/23/Six-ways-to-boost-fertility-through-nutrition.aspx

Wednesday, 30 October 2013

What Are The Health Benefits of Apples?

October 28, 2013                    

Eating Apples

Story at-a-glance

  • Apples are packed with disease-fighting vitamins, antioxidants and more, making one of the top-ranked fruits for your health
  • Eating apples has been linked to a lower risk of chronic diseases including type 2 diabetes, cancer, heart disease, and dementia
  • Eating apples in their whole form, not juicing them, will give you the synergistic blend of nutrients and fiber the way nature intended, yielding greater health benefits than apple juice

By Dr. Mercola

Apples are the second most popular fruit in the US (bananas are the first),1 with each American eating about 19 pounds a year. 2 
Undoubtedly, many of those apples are consumed right now, during the fall, which is peak season for apples in the US. This is one sweet treat that you can feel good about eating, too, as apples are packed with disease-fighting vitamins, antioxidants and more, easily making them one of the top-ranked fruits for your health.

 

Apples Ranked Second Highest for Antioxidant Activity 

Compared to other commonly consumed fruits in the US, apples ranked second for highest antioxidant activity. However, they ranked highest for the proportion of free phenolic compounds, which means they are not bound to other compounds in the fruit and therefore may be more easily absorbed into your bloodstream.3 
Notably, much of apples’ antioxidant power is contained in the peel, where you’ll find antioxidants like catechin, procyanidins, chlorogenic acid, ploridizin and more. According to the New York Fruit Quarterly:4
“Since apples are so high in antioxidants, it is no surprise that apples, specifically, are associated with a decreased risk of chronic disease.
Three studies have specifically linked apple consumption with a decreased risk for cancer… [and] a study has shown that apple and pear consumption has been associated with a decreased risk of asthma.
Apple consumption has also been associated with a decreased risk of coronary heart disease… [and] a reduced risk of Type II diabetes was associated with apple and berry consumption in another major Finnish study.
In the laboratory, apples and the compounds in them have properties that may explain their effects in protecting against disease. Our lab has found that apples, and especially apple peels, have powerful antioxidant activity and can greatly inhibit the growth of liver cancer and colon cancer cells.
Based on results from all of these studies, it appears that apples may play a significant role in reducing the risk of a wide variety of diseases.”
I have four apple trees where I live in Chicago but hadn’t eaten that many of them. After reviewing this information, I think I will be consuming more next year, as the harvest season just finished for this year.

 

An Apple a Day to Keep 5 Chronic Diseases Away? 

A wealth of research suggests that eating apples may impact your health in a number of beneficial ways:5
  • Brain Health: Apples have been found to protect neuron cells against oxidative stress-induced neurotoxicity and may play an important role in reducing the risk of neurodegenerative disorders, such as Alzheimer's disease.6
  • Stroke: Eating apples is linked to a decreased risk of stroke.7
  • Diabetes: Three servings of apples (and other fruits, such as blueberries and grapes) is linked to a 7 percent lower risk of type 2 diabetes.8 This may be due to their beneficial role in blood sugar regulation, as apples contain compounds that may:9
  • Lessen absorption of glucose from your digestive tract
  • Stimulate beta cells in your pancreas to secrete insulin
  • Increase uptake of glucose from your blood by stimulating insulin receptors
  • Cancer: Apples have a number of properties that may help reduce the risk of cancer, including antimutagenic activity, antioxidant activity, anti-inflammatory mechanisms, antiproliferative and apoptosis-inducing activity, as well as "novel mechanisms on epigenetic events and innate immunity." According to the journal Planta Medica:10
“Apple products have been shown to prevent skin, mammary and colon carcinogenesis in animal models. Epidemiological observations indicate that regular consumption of one or more apples a day may reduce the risk for lung and colon cancer.”
  • Heart Disease: Eating apples is associated with a lower risk of death from heart disease, an association that’s thought to be related to their content of antioxidant flavonoids.11

 

Eat Whole Apples for the Most Health 'Bang' for Your Buck 

While applesauce and apple juice do contain some valuable vitamins and antioxidants, eating apples in their whole form will give you the synergistic blend of nutrients and fiber the way nature intended. This is important for a number of reasons. For instance, apples are often thought of as a high-fiber food and many of its heart health benefits are linked to a type of fiber called pectin. 
In reality, apples really only contain about two to three grams of fiber per ounce, of which pectin accounts for about half. Even though this is a modest amount of pectin, it has a powerful impact on your health because of its interactions with other apple phytonutrients. As explained by the World’s Healthiest Foods:12
“… this relatively modest amount of pectin found in whole apples has now been shown to interact with other apple phytonutrients to give us the kind of blood fat lowering effects that would typically be associated with much higher amounts of soluble fiber intake.
In recent comparisons with laboratory animals, the blood fat lowering effects of whole apple were shown to be greatly reduced when whole apples were eliminated from the diet and replaced by pectin alone.
In summary, it's not fiber alone that explains the cardiovascular benefits of apple, but the interaction of fiber with other phytonutrients in this wonderful fruit. If you want the full cardiovascular benefits of apples, it's the whole food form that you'll want to choose. Only this form can provide you with those unique fiber-plus-phytonutrient combinations.”
Similarly, research shows that eating a whole apple before a meal may lead you to eat 15 percent fewer calories – an effect that was not associated with applesauce or apple juice.13 Eating a whole apple was also linked with greater feelings of satiety after a meal.

 

Some People May Need to Eat Apples in Moderation 

The other variable we haven’t yet covered is fructose, a type of sugar that is linked to many chronic health problems when consumed in excess. I believe most will benefit from restricting their fructose to 25 grams a day, and as little as 15 grams a day if you have insulin or leptin resistance.

This includes fructose from whole fruits like apples. Apples are a relatively high-fructose fruit, with 9.5 grams in a medium-sized apple. Apple juice will contain considerably more, which is another reason why you’re better off eating apples in their whole form.  
It is also important to time your eating of fructose-rich foods like apple correctly. One of the tricks that I personally use is to time my fruit intake. Eating one after a calorie-rich meal for ‘dessert’ will not have the same effect as if you eat it after a glycogen-depleting workout.

In the former case, the apple’s fructose is more likely to contribute to weight gain and insulin resistance; in the latter case, it will harmlessly replenish your glycogen stores within your muscles or be burned directly during your workout. I have actually been able to lose weight by increasing my fruit intake in this fashion. This works far better if you are metabolically adapted to burn fat as your primary fuel.   
If you’re insulin or leptin resistant (are overweight, diabetic, hypertensive, or have high cholesterol), which includes about 80 percent of Americans, then it would be advisable for you to limit your fruit intake to about 15 grams per day, which would be equivalent to eating approximately one apple and a handful of blueberries -- unless you timed the fruit consumption as described above and were doing fairly significant exercise in which you were burning a few hundred calories. 
If you are not insulin/leptin resistant, (are normal weight without diabetes, hypertension or high cholesterol) and regularly engage in strenuous physical activity or manual labor, then higher fructose intake is unlikely to cause any health problems. In this case, you can probably eat more fruit without giving it much thought.

What Else Should You Look for in an Apple? 

Because much of the antioxidant content of an apple is found in its peel, you’ll want to leave the peel on when you eat it. For this reason, look for organic apples, which will be free from pesticides and other chemicals. Apples are one of the most pesticide-contaminated fruits there is,14 so if you’re planning to eat more apples, make them organic. If you purchase conventional apples, briefly soaking them in a solution of 10 percent vinegar to 90 percent water may help to remove some pesticides (and bacteria).  
But keep in mind that many pesticides are lipophilic, and are therefore capable of entering through the surface of conventional produce deep into the flesh of the fruit or vegetable within minutes. If you have your own apple trees, you can integrate high-performance agriculture techniques that will radically increase the nutrient content and also virtually eliminate any diseases that the apples might be acquire. When it comes to choosing an apple, the Washington State Apple Commission recommends:15
  • Choosing an apple with shiny, not dull, skin (dull apples will not be crisp)
  • Firm apples free from bruises and punctures
  • Refrigerating apples at 39 degrees F to maintain crispness
  • Protecting cut apples from browning by dipping them into a solution of one part citrus juice to three parts water
If you’re looking for even more apple facts and nutrition information, be sure to check out our apple food facts page.
[-] Sources and References




http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/10/28/apple-health-benefits.aspx?

Butter is not so bad after all

Published: Thursday October 24, 2013 MYT 1:30:00 PM
Updated: Thursday October 24, 2013 MYT 1:41:51 PM

A new report in a medical journal shows that butter and cheese may not be as bad for your heart as previously thought.
A new report in a medical journal shows that butter and cheese may not be as bad for your heart as previously thought.

Spread the word – saturated fats supposedly have little impact on one’s risks of heart disease.

Cheese lovers, rejoice. A new report in the British Medical Journal suggests that butter and cheese may not be as bad for your heart as previously thought.

Published this week, the report states that long-maligned saturated fats actually have little impact on your risks of heart disease and stroke and could even protect against these conditions.

Dr Aseem Malhotra, an interventional cardiology specialist registrar at Croydon University Hospital in London, wrote in the journal that fears about saturated fats have “dominated dietary advice and guidelines for almost four decades” but have “paradoxically increased our cardiovascular risks”.

Dairy products, which are high in saturated fat, are also rich in vitamins A and D, calcium and phosophorous. However, consumers should be clear not to confuse saturated fats with trans fats, often found in packaged foods and fast food.

Malhotra suggests a shift in focus from patients’ overall cholesterol, or blood fat, to whether or not they have a healthy balance of cholesterol from different food types. — AFP Relaxnews

http://www.thestar.com.my/Lifestyle/Health/Nutrition/2013/10/24/Butter-is-not-so-bad-after-all.aspx

Tuesday, 29 October 2013

GMO Labeling Has Its Day In Court

29 October 2013

GMO Labeling

Story at-a-glance

  • On November 5, Washington State will cast their votes for the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act." Your support is urgently needed
  • Attorney General Bob Ferguson has filed suit against the GMA in Thurston County Superior Court on behalf of the State of Washington, alleging the association violated the state’s campaign disclosure laws
  • Ferguson alleges the GMA illegally collected and spent more than $7 million on the No On Initiative 522 campaign, while hiding the identity of its contributors in order to shield them from consumer backlash
  • The lawsuit forced GMA to establish a political committee, aptly named Grocery Manufacturers Association Against I-522. A list of the financial donors has now been disclosed to the Public Disclosure Commission
  • Biotech are now trying to find a way to label that will still permit them to exist and make a profit. Pushing for federal labeling is one part of the plan to dilute the value of the label


By Dr. Mercola
We’re now only DAYS away from the next big GMO-labeling vote in the United States; this time in Washington State, where citizens will cast their votes for the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act," on November 5.  
As in last year’s California Proposition 37 GMO labeling campaign, the opposition from industry is fierce, with millions of dollars being poured into the anti-labeling campaign.  
This year, they’ve really outdone themselves, being caught in a money laundering scheme designed to protect the identity of food companies contributing money to defeat Initiative 522. As reported by SeattlePi.com:1
“The food industrial giants gave individually in California last year, contributing to a $46 million war chest that narrowly turned back the labeling measure.
In planning the anti-522 campaign, however, Grocery Manufacturers Association CEO Pamela Bailey recommended creation of a fund — which became the Defense of Brand Strategic Account — in part to “better shield individual companies from attack.” Donations would be laundered through the account.”
Most of the funding for the anti-labeling campaign in Washington State was donated by the Grocery Manufacturers Association of America (GMA). The big food- and beverage companies that spent millions on last year’s No on Prop 37 campaign, however, remained curiously absent from any list of donors throughout most of this year’s No on Initiative 522’s campaign.

Attorney General Files Suit Against Grocery Manufacturers Association 

On October 16, Attorney General Bob Ferguson filed suit2 against the GMA in Thurston County Superior Court on behalf of the State of Washington, alleging the association had violated the state’s campaign disclosure laws. According to the press release:3
“Ferguson alleges the GMA illegally collected and spent more than $7 million while shielding the identity of its contributors. The funds were spent to express opposition to Initiative 522...
“When Washington state voters overwhelming approved Initiative 276 in 1972, they voiced their desire for transparency and openness in elections,” Ferguson said. “Truly fair elections demand all sides follow the rules by disclosing who their donors are and how much they are spending to advocate their views.”
... The AGO [Attorney general’s office] is preparing to seek a temporary restraining order asking the court to order the GMA to immediately comply with state disclosure laws. The AGO is also requesting civil penalties and costs of investigation and trial, including reasonable attorney’s fees, injunctive relief and any other relief the court deems appropriate.”
According to the filed complaint, the GMA began plotting and planning how to best defeat Initiative 522 back in December of 2012, placing particular emphasis on the establishment of a separate GMA fund to “combat current threats and better shield individual companies from attack.”  
You can find a summarized timeline of the development of the anti-labeling campaign in Joel Connelly’s article on SeattlePi.com.4 For example, in it he reveals that:
“The Grocery Manufacturers Association names its fund the “Defense of Brand Strategic Account” and determines that association members would be assessed, separate from their normal association dues. The account would be segregated...”
The Attorney General has requested the Superior Court impose the following penalties on the GMA, which, according to Ferguson, are meant to serve as deterrents in future state elections as well:
  • Assess a penalty for failing to comply with state campaign finance laws in a “timely properly” manner
  • Pay for the costs of the investigation, plus the state’s attorney fees, and
  • If found guilty of intentionally violating state campaign finance laws, be ordered to pay triple the damages

 

Who’s Trying to Block Your Right to Know What’s in Your Food? 

As you may recall, after defeating Prop. 37 in California by a tiny margin, several companies that had contributed to the anti-labeling campaign suffered significant repercussions—from being barraged by critical press and humiliating attacks by angry consumers on social networks like Facebook.

To sweeping boycott campaigns. General Mills, Pepsi Co, Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods, Heinz and Campbell Soups were among last year’s anti-labeling campaign contributors.  
As one parent stated in a comment on Cheerios Facebook page at the time:
"So sorry that the food my kids loved as toddlers is one I can't support anymore. I can't believe that General Mills has the well-being of its customers in mind when it contributes to movement against labeling of GMOs."
Recent polls show that 64-66 percent of likely voters in Washington State strongly support GMO labeling. No wonder many of the same companies wanted to circumvent having to reveal their unchanged stance on this issue. Now they’ve been forced to reveal themselves however, and I suspect the backlash could very well become even greater than before.  

On October 17, in response to the Attorney General’s suit, the GMA established a political committee to oppose the GMO labeling initiative, aptly named Grocery Manufacturers Association Against I-522.5 A list of the committee’s donors has also been disclosed to the Public Disclosure Commission. According to a statement issued that same day:
"In the spirit of continuing cooperation and in an effort to provide Washington voters with full transparency about GMA's funding for the "No on 522" campaign, the association has voluntarily decided to establish a Washington State political committee and to file reports with the PDC disclosing the source of all funds used in connection with Washington State elections."
As of this writing, the list of donors and amount of each company’s donation submitted to the Public Disclosure Commission includes the following, which totals up to $7,222,5006, 7. Looks like Pepsi, Coke, and Nestle are the top funders trying to hide their identity. Quite the triangle of authority of junk food producers, and purveyors of chronic disease:

CompanyAmount donatedCompanyAmount donated
Abbott Nutrition127,459 Bimbo Bakeries USA94,693
Campbell Soup Co265,140 Bruce Foods Corp3,006
Cargill Inc98,601 Bumble Bee Foods36,073
Coca-Cola1,047,332 Bunge North America94,993
ConAgra Foods285,281 Clement Pappas & Co. Inc21,043
Dean Foods120,245 Clorox Company12,024
Bush Brothers & Co16,233 Flowers Foods141,288
Del Monte Foods 86,576 Hormel Foods52,908
General Mills598,819 J.M. Smucker Co241,091
Hershey248,305 Knouse Foods14,429
Hillshire Brands97,398 Welch Foods28,859
Kellogg221,852 Land O'Lakes99,803
Moody Dunbar1,804 McCormick & Co102,208
Nestle USA1,052,743 Mondelez Global144,895
Ocean Spray, Cranberries, Inc55,313 Pinnacle Foods Group120,846
PepsiCo1,620,899 Rich Products Corp24,049
Sunny Delight Beverages Co21,043 Shearer's Foods, Inc25,251

 

Beware: Big Business Will Try to Dilute the GMO Label

Big Biotech is seeing the end of their game now and are scrambling to rescue what they can, by any means possible. Such “backup plans” appear to include carefully selected mouthpieces writing “independent” opinion pieces, ostensibly agreeing that labeling is a good idea, while simultaneously proposing plans that would significantly dilute the value of the label. One way to do this would be to make it ubiquitous, i.e. so prevalent that you encountered it on virtually every single food item in every single store, regardless of whether the food actually contained traces of it or not in the final product. 
This tactic was suggested by one of  Biotech’s primary spokespeople, Mark Lynas, in a recent article.8 In it, he states that people are “getting increasingly scared of GMOs precisely because the industry is fighting a rearguard battle not to tell people which foodstuffs contain them,” calling the industry’s fight against labeling “the worst PR strategy ever.” Correctly, he also states that this is “the opposite of advertising – instead of telling people about the benefits of your product and encouraging them to seek it out, you have to smuggle your core products into peoples’ shopping baskets so that they can only buy them either unknowingly or by mistake.” 
This epic fail of a strategy has been incredibly successful up until this point though. Keeping you in the dark about what’s in your food and calling it ‘natural’ has been the number one “sales strategy” of junk foods producers utilizing heavily subsidized ingredients since the inception of genetically engineered food crops. And had educational- and labeling campaigns by concerned citizens, scientists and organic organizations failed, the “worst PR strategy ever” would have been left in force indefinitely.  
The Prop 37 campaign was the first truly effective education campaign in this regard, which is why you cannot look upon it as a failure. It raised an enormous amount of awareness about this issue. Before last year, many Americans had no idea what genetically engineered food was, or that they were eating it daily, or that it might be a component causing their health problems. Now that labeling is reaching the point of inevitability, Big Biotech are trying to find a way to label that will still permit them to exist and make a profit. But how to dilute the label to where people don’t care if a product is labeled or not?
“Consumer right to know, however unjustifiable on scientific grounds, is an argument that – once a critical mass of people are demanding it – it is be political suicide to oppose. However, simply giving in is not an option either,” Lynas writes.
“Having different laws in every state would indeed be a short-cut to prohibition, which is exactly why the labeling activists have chosen it as their strategy. So those of us who want to defend science and who understand the true potential of biotechnology have no option – we have to change the game... And maybe, just maybe, the most powerful weapon the antis have in their arsenal will ultimately turn out to be their Achilles heel.”

 

Industry Will Seek Refuge in Ubiquity 

In his article, Lynas proposes a way forward that would virtually guarantee GMO label ubiquity. Quite simply, you’d be hard-pressed to find an item that didn’t have one, and it would hit you all at once. In short order, you’d be so used to seeing the GMO label, and so overwhelmed by lack of options (or so their reasoning goes) the GMO label wouldn’t even register as an item calling out for a choice to be made.  To accomplish this kind of saturation to the point of complacency, GMO labeling must be:
  • Mandatory; industry-wide; and operated at the federal level
  • Designed in such a way that there’s no implication of health- or safety issues
  • Process-based, so that the label must be used whether the final product contains any residue of GMO or not
According to Lynas, “ubiquity is surely the industry’s safest refuge.” Personally, I believe the industry may be underestimating the depth of the concerns that people have about the safety of genetically engineered foods and the giant chemical companies that make them.  
The FDA battle will be significant, but the existing European standards along with a few state laws will set a bar that will likely need to be matched or result in political disaster for the administration.  I have never supported FDA labeling strategies as a first step as they are too highly influenced by lobbyists, you can bet the agency is receiving pressure from the biotech and junk food industry to set a standard before they lose more ground through state and international laws– an FDA ruling is inevitable. 
Recent history has shown that food companies will relent and change their ingredients once they realize that you, and millions of others, really don’t want GMO’s in your food, and won’t buy it if it contains GMO ingredients. There are alternatives, but biotech companies like Monsanto have been so efficient in their takeover of agriculture, even to the point of buying up seed companies to eliminate competition, that many food manufacturers now have a hard time obtaining non-GMO ingredients. The upshot, of course, is that increased demand for non-GMO ingredients by major food companies will encourage farmers to revert back to conventional, non-GMO crops.  
Yet another tactic that industry could reach for is labeling similar in its requirements as those for other nutrients, like sodium or trans fats. Oftentimes, if a product contains less than a certain amount per serving, it doesn’t have to be disclosed on the label. This is why you oftentimes find products listing ridiculously tiny serving sizes. Many products containing GMOs could slip below the radar this way as well.   

 

Wild Card Could Shift the Status Quo on GMOs 

Unforeseen wild cards could come into play too. The American press has been anything but astute in its reporting on GMO’s. This could quickly change however, should Pierre Omidyar and Glenn Greenwald’s new media organization aimed at providing independent in-depth journalism take off, for example.9 At that point, any journalist interested in a career would have to quit regurgitating industry propaganda and start digging around for the real story. In the case of GMO’s, the tipping point for genetically engineered foods would quickly be reached were the real story to hit the masses as part of their daily news feed.  
As Jeffrey Smith explained in a previous interview:
“In January 1999, the biotech industry boldly predicted that within five years 95 percent of all commercial seeds in the world would be genetically modified and patented. They did not anticipate the gag order of a scientist being lifted three weeks later in Europe.
A firestorm of media reported on his results of a GMO-feeding study. Over 700 articles were written within a single month in the UK. In 10 weeks, the tipping point of consumer rejection was achieved in Europe – heralded not by the European Commission banning GMOs, but by Unilever banning GMOs, then Nestlé, and then virtually everyone in Europe because they realized that using genetically modified ingredients had become a marketing liability.”

 

Monsanto Sponsors Food Prize... and Awards it to Itself 

Before I wrap this up, there’s a related story that is too hilarious not to include, in light of these discussions about transparency, honesty and integrity. On October 17, Monsanto’s executive vice president and chief technology officer, Robert T. Fraley, a scientist with Syngenta, along with a third scientist from private industry, were awarded the World Food Prize10 at a fancy red carpet event. The prize, totalling $250,000, was awarded for "feeding a growing global population." 
A testament to growing public awareness on these issues, the move was widely ridiculed as a joke taken straight from the parody publication The Onion.  Why? Well, first of all, Monsanto itself donated $5 million to the fund. Syngenta is also a financial backer. Besides such obvious conflicts of interest, Eric Holt-Gimenez of Food First11 commented that awarding the World Food Prize to monopolies that profit from hunger is like giving the Nobel Peace prize for going to war—noting, with some irony, that this too has been done in the recent past...
“The World Food Prize has become a corporate celebration of self,” he writes“Even The New York Times12 suggested that this award may be a PR attempt to counter the growing global backlash against GMOs. It is also an effort to fibrillate the industry's flat economic performance that has followed the heady days of the 2008-09 food crisis (in which they made record profits while a billion people were pushed into the ranks of the hungry).”

 

Kuai Ousts GMO’s 

While Big Biotech pays their lackeys to pat themselves on the back, yet another area of the world has taken a firm stand against genetically engineered foods. According to the Huffington Post:13
“After a marathon hearing, the Kauai County Council passed a hotly debated bill... that could lead to prison time or fines for employees of agricultural companies if they don’t divulge specifics about pesticide use, abide by strict setback rules for spraying chemicals or disclose when they grow genetically engineered crops... The law is set to take effect in nine months — with or without the mayor’s signature, because bills receiving five or more votes are veto-proof.
... Attorneys for the biotech companies said during the hearings that aspects of the bill are “vague and ambiguous” or amount to an “illegal taking” of property. Council members said that they expect biotech companies to file lawsuits in response to the bill's passage. (Small farmers are exempt from the bill’s pesticide provisions.)
Earlier this month, nine local attorneys, including prominent environmental lawyers, released a statement urging council members not to bow to pressure from the biotech companies. "We believe that Bill 2491 is sound, and the mere threat of a lawsuit by industry interests should not prevent the council from taking action they believe is important to their community," the statement read.”

 

Join Us in Your Right to Know by Getting GMOs Labeled!


 

While California Prop. 37 failed to pass last November by a very narrow margin, the fight for GMO labeling is far from over. In the past few weeks, Connecticut and Maine have passed GMO-labeling bills, and 20 other states have pending legislation to label genetically engineered foods. So, now is the time to put the pedal to the metal and get labeling across the country—something 64 other countries already have.
I hope you will join us in this effort. 
The field-of-play has now moved to the state of Washington, where the people's initiative 522, "The People's Right to Know Genetically Engineered Food Act," will require food sold in retail outlets to be labeled if it contains genetically engineered ingredients. Please help us win this key GMO labeling battle and continue to build momentum for GMO labeling in other states by making a donation to the Organic Consumers Association (OCA).  
Donate Today! 
Remember, as with CA Prop. 37, they need support of people like YOU to succeed. Prop. 37 failed with a very narrow margin simply because we didn't have the funds to counter the massive ad campaigns created by the No on 37 camp, led by Monsanto and other major food companies. Let's not allow Monsanto and its allies to confuse and mislead the people of Washington and Vermont as they did in California. So please, I urge you to get involved and help in any way you can.
  • No matter where you live in the United States, please donate money to these labeling efforts through the Organic Consumers Fund.
  • Sign up to learn more about how you can get involved by visiting Yeson522.com!
  • For timely updates on issues relating to these and other labeling initiatives, please join the Organic Consumers Association on Facebook, or follow them on Twitter.
  • Talk to organic producers and stores and ask them to actively support the Washington initiative.




[-] Sources and References




http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2013/10/29/gmo-labeling-campaign.aspx

Steaming Food - MUST READ

STEAMING FOOD
 
Kind of make sense to me !
 
Xuanwu Hospital Professor Qi article:


When steaming your food, make sure you leave the lid open to boil the water first, before putting your food into the steamer.
 
If the chlorinated water is used straight from the tap, your food will be contaminated from the absorption of the cancer causing chlorine upon heating-up of the water.
 
So, make sure that the water is already boiling before you start steaming your food!


Please forward to others to create awareness.

 

 
Article by: Professor Qi from Xuanwu Hospital
 
 
转发就是善行:
 
 
宣武医院齐教授的文章:蒸食物请一定要是先开着盖子把水烧开,再放入要蒸的食物,盖上盖子!  难怪有癌症的人愈来愈多。用锅蒸煮东西时,一定要用开水,或是过滤过的水。因为如果直接用自来水,自来水有氯,再经过加热后,由于锅盖是盖着的,氯被全部包覆在食物上,所以一定要用煮沸过的开水或用已过滤掉氯的水来蒸东西。因为氯有致癌的危险。这真的很重要!即使只是蒸馒头,都要有此常识。
 
 
 
Source: this is from an email forwarded to me today by Wendy.
 

Bugs that benefit us

Published: Monday October 14, 2013 MYT 12:00:00 AM
Updated: Monday October 14, 2013 MYT 7:26:00 AM

by kathy van mullekom

Ladybug on green-headed coneflower.
Ladybug on green-headed coneflower.

Not all bugs are destroyers. Some are worth nurturing as they do our plants a favour.

BAD bugs vs good bugs – it’s the name of the game when it comes to environmentally-friendly gardening.

Knowing which is which can mean a healthy, chemical-free garden as opposed to a chemically dependent garden that may get sicker as time marches on.

“Not all insects are bad, in fact many are quite good, especially in the landscape,” says Dan Nortman, an agent with Virginia Cooperative Extension.

“A ‘diverse landscape’ will attract beneficial insects, which are those insects that provide pollination and pest control services in our yards.

“For most insects that provide pest control, there is a larval stage and an adult stage. Larval stages are generally the stage that provides control, feeding on other insects, whereas the adult stage of most beneficial insects feeds on nectar.

Assassin bugs and their empty egg casings.(Courtesy Jan Newton/www.claytonvnps.org/MCT)
Assassin bugs and their empty egg casings.
 
“Therefore, it is important to provide a nectar source for as much of the active growing season as possible. Having flowers that provide nectar will attract beneficial insects, and they will then lay their eggs on plants infested with harmful insects, and the larvae that hatch from those eggs will provide some pest control.”

Some beneficial insects can nectar on roses, camellias and other large flowered plants, but many of them flourish when they have access to small flowers, Nortman said.

Planting mint family herbs, umbellifers, such as dill, fennel, cilantro and Queen Anne’s lace and other plants, like yarrow, helps promote some of the smaller beneficial insects. Some cultivars of fennel, such as bronze fennel can become invasive, as can Queen Anne’s lace, mint and non-native yarrow.

“There are many more helpful insects than there are harmful ones,” says Kris Braman, professor in the Department of Entomology at the University of Georgia.

“Learn to identify the ‘helpful vs harmful insects’ and tolerate some pest pressure because it provides food to keep the beneficials at home. Conserve beneficials by modifying pesticide use.”

Native plant expert Jan Newton agrees: “If a gardener or homeowner sprays insecticide to get rid of ‘bad’ or unwanted bugs, they also kill the beneficial bugs along with butterflies and bees that help pollinate flowers and crops.”

A praying mantis surveys its surroundings. (Courtesy Kris Braman/MCT)
Alert: A praying mantis surveys its surroundings.

Here are the most common beneficial insects, according to the experts:

> Ladybugs – They are voracious predators on soft-bodied insects, such as aphids, mealybugs, whiteflies, and even small caterpillars. They are particularly beneficial because they feed on pest insects as larvae and as adults. Adults are also nectar feeders.

> Lacewings – They are small delicate green or brown insects as adults, and voracious predators of aphids, scales and other soft-bodied insects as larvae. The green lacewing lays its eggs on the surface of the leaf, at the end of a silken strand.

They do this because the larvae are such voracious predators that the first one to hatch would cannibalise a significant amount of the other eggs. Brown lacewings are a related separate species that does not lay its eggs on silken strands. As a consequence, they are rarer. Adults lacewings are most often nectar feeders.

> Syrphid flies – Also known as hover flies, they are important predators of soft-bodied insects as larvae. The larva is a large green maggot, and is often spotted feeding in aphid colonies.

The adult is a bee mimic, with yellow and black stripes on the abdomen that is seen hovering around flowers, where it is nectaring. The difference between a bee and a hover fly is that the hover fly has two wings and bees have four wings, but most people probably won’t get close enough to notice.

> Predatory bugs – Assassin bugs and big-eyed bugs prey on bad stuff such as tomato hornworms, thrips and spider mites. Nectar and pollen in flowers attract them, and ornamental grasses and shrubs provide them with shelter.

> Predatory midges – These extremely small flies feed on nectar as adults and aphids and other small, soft-bodied insects as larvae. Although they are quite small, they are valuable predators because the adult is able to lay a few dozen eggs in an aphid colony, so there is effective pest control.

> Parasitoid wasps – They are large to microscopically small wasps that lay their eggs inside other insects. After the eggs are laid, their larvae begin to eat the host insect from the inside. They are completely harmless to people.

Other parasitoid wasps lay their eggs in caterpillars, aphids and grubs. A common sight for most homeowners is the parasitic wasp seen on the tomato/tobacco hornworm. When you see cotton like “pills” on the outside of a hornworm, it is the result of a parasitoid wasp.

What has happened is that a wasp has implanted its eggs into the hornworm. The eggs then develop into larvae, which feed on the inside of the hornworm. When the larvae are ready to pupate, they move to the surface of the insect and form the cottony cocoons that you see.

> Praying mantis – Mantid egg capsules contain 200 or more eggs that are usually seen on twigs and stems. They provide some natural insect control.

> Spiders – Although spiders are icky and often thought of as dangerous, they greatly help prevent bad bug breakouts in the garden, especially among veggie plantings.

> Dragonflies and damselflies – These flying jewels like many insects, especially mosquitoes. – Daily Press/McClatchy Tribune Information Services

http://www.thestar.com.my/News/Environment/2013/10/14/Bugs-that-benefit-us.aspx

Monday, 28 October 2013

This Lady-Finger Vegetable Lowers Blood Sugar

October 27, 2013

Prepare to be shocked…

Naturally lower blood sugar
Nearly 70 percent of people in the U.S. are either diabetic or pre-diabetic. SEVENTY PERCENT!

Worst of all, most cases are entirely preventable. A recent issue of Natural Health Dossier gave a unique protocol to reverse type 2 diabetes (even though the mainstream tells you it’s not possible).

But when thinking about prevention, most people focus on the things they shouldn’t eat. Things like sweets, bread, and too much fruit top the list. But just as important?  Eating more of the foods that can help keep blood sugar in check.

And there’s one vegetable that breaks down starches before they ever get the chance to turn into glucose in your bloodstream.1

It’s known as the “lady-finger” of the vegetable world.

The blood-sugar stabilizer is okra. The seeds are full of alpha-glucosidase inhibitors. They prevent starches from converting to glucose—sugar in your bloodstream.

Researchers say okra can dramatically lower blood sugar levels. They’re even looking at it as a potential alternative treatment for diabetes.2

The fiber in okra steadies your blood sugar by regulating the rate at which sugar is absorbed from the intestinal tract. A half-cup of cooked okra has about 4.1 grams of fiber.

It’s also heavy in vitamin A, vitamin B6, vitamin C, vitamin K, magnesium, potassium, and zinc.

If you overcook okra, you’ll lose all those vitamins. And you’ll make it slimy. Which is how many people have tried—and hated—okra.

But if you make it correctly, okra will be crisp and flavorful. And it will give you a new appreciation for this misunderstood lady-finger.

Two delicious and healthy ways to eat okra are grilling and very lightly steaming. (We don’t recommend frying it of course).

To grill, toss the pods in some olive oil and seasoning. Throw on the grill for 10 minutes. You could add some minced garlic to the olive oil. Garlic pairs very well with the flavor of okra.

Speaking of garlic, slice it up and sauté in olive oil. After a minute, add sliced okra and a splash of water to lightly steam it. If you don’t overcook it, the result will be fresh, lightly crisp okra. Not slimy at all.

So if you’ve tried okra and thought you didn’t like it, time to give it another go. Like most vegetables, the way you cook it makes all the difference. And eating okra can make a difference in your blood sugar health.

Look for organic, smaller pods. As okra matures and increases in size, it gets tougher.

References:1 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24079173
2 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3178946/


http://institutefornaturalhealing.com/2013/10/this-lady-finger-vegetable-lowers-blood-sugar