Why There Is Chlorine on Your Chicken

Chicken that comes from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) is often washed in a strong chlorine or other antimicrobial solution to remove contaminants. The UK has banned chlorine-washed chicken from being imported, but their plan to exit...

Analysis by Dr. Joseph MercolaFact Checked
October 01, 2019

STORY AT-A-GLANCE

• In the U.S., most poultry that comes from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) is washed in a strong chlorine or other antimicrobial solution as a way to kill pathogens
• The EU has banned U.S. chicken imports since 1997 due to the practice of chlorine washing
• The U.K.’s plan to exit from the EU has opened the issue for debate, as the countries will have the option to reconsider their current laws, including whether or not to accept “chlorine chicken” from the U.S.
• The U.S. government offered to pay up to $93,257 (£75,000) for an organization to gather up prominent British journalists and take them on tours of U.S. chicken farms
• Chlorine washing may not remove bacteria as expected, but simply renders it unable to be detected by standard testing

In the U.S., most poultry that comes from concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) is washed in a strong chlorine or other antimicrobial solution as a way to kill pathogens.1 The chlorine rinses or sprays are intended to act as antimicrobials that reduce Salmonella and other common causes of foodborne illness.

The EU, however, does not use chlorine washes on its chicken and wants no part of America’s “chlorinated chicken” either — it has banned U.S. chicken imports since 1997 due to the practice of chlorine washing. The concern isn’t necessarily due to the chlorine wash itself, but to the fact that it may allow for poor sanitation and dirty poultry to enter the food supply.

“The real fear is that heavily soiled birds may not be sufficiently disinfected, and that relying on chlorine washing could lead to poorer hygiene standards overall,” wrote food safety expert Simon Dawson of Cardiff Metropolitan University.

However, the U.K.’s plan to exit from the EU has opened up the issue for debate, as the countries will have the option to reconsider their current laws, including whether or not to accept “chlorine chicken” from the U.S.

US May Pay to Influence British Media Over Chicken

The U.S. government offered to pay up to $93,257 (£75,000) for an organization to gather up prominent British journalists and take them on tours of U.S. chicken farms. The goal is to create a favorable spin on the U.S. chicken industry as a whole, including the practice of chlorine washing. In a tender (a British term for a contract bid) seen by BuzzFeed News, it’s stated that the purpose of the press tour is to alleviate misconceptions about U.S. farming:2

“The misconceptions include animal welfare standards, GMOs and labeling, and the use of antibiotics in livestock production … Media stories about ‘industrial scale’ U.S. agriculture, usually focused on so-called ‘chlorinated chickens’, are negative, misleading, and often inaccurate.

… Participants will explore small, medium, and large farms representing various certification standards (organic, natural, conventional), research institutions supporting science-based agricultural practices, government agencies that focus on ensuring food is nutritious and safe, and other relevant institutions connected to U.S. farming.

… The locations should be carefully chosen to be geographically and culturally diverse and reflect the breadth of choice the U.S. consumer has when making food decisions.”

The tender also cited a British survey that found “only 1% of British consumers would buy American meat over British meat.”3 As it stands, the EU allows only water to decontaminate meat, which means imports of chlorine-washed chicken aren’t allowed. The ban was put in place based on precautionary measures, according to Dawson, who wrote:4

“When the ban was introduced, officials were keen that food manufacturers should focus on overall hygiene rather than relying on a single chemical decontamination step to eliminate microorganisms. It was also believed that the chemical decontamination step could encourage antibiotic resistance.”

CAFO Chicken Softens Up the World

Sir Ian Boyd, chief scientific adviser at the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra), gave the green light to chlorinated chicken in an interview with Sky News, stating there were no health concerns from eating such meat:5

"From a health perspective there really isn't a problem with chlorinated chicken. The issue is about production processes and animal welfare, and that is a values-based choice that people need to make. My view is that we need to be allowed to make that choice.”

A briefing from the Centre for Food Policy called Boyd’s statement misleading. One of the briefing’s co-authors, Tim Lang, professor of food policy at City University, stated, “For the chief scientist at Defra to say what he did is not accidental.”6

“Professor Boyd’s statement may be an early sign that Westminster is trying to soften up the public for lower-standard food imports from the U.S.,” he added. “They are very keen to have a ‘trophy’ trade deal post-Brexit and the lowering of U.K. food safety and animal welfare standards is at stake. We cannot accept what is sure to lead to an unprecedented and radical decline in food quality standards.”7

Chlorine Washes May Not Remove Bacteria

Research published in mBio raised serious concerns over the use of chlorine washing, revealing that it may not remove bacteria as expected.8 The study involved spinach contaminated with listeria and salmonella, which was subjected to chlorine washing.

After the treatment, the bacteria were not killed but rather entered a “viable but non-culturable state (VBNC),” meaning they could still cause food poisoning but couldn’t be picked up by standard testing. “These data show that VBNC foodborne pathogens can both be generated and avoid detection by industrial practices while potentially retaining the ability to cause disease,” the study noted.9

Further, in a compliance guidelines released by the USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS), it’s explained that chlorine rinses and sprays have the potential to make contamination worse instead of better, depending on the force of the water pressure used and the direction of the spray:

“When applying water rinses and sprays, establishments should consider the water pressure applied. Some studies have found that elevated spray pressure may force bacteria into muscle or skin rather than washing it off.

… Rinses or sprays should be designed, installed, and calibrated to remove incidental contamination. When not properly designed or implemented, rinses or sprays may not effectively remove contamination and may even spread contamination from one part of the carcasses to another part or even to adjacent carcasses.”

Aside from the notion that chlorine washes are simply a way to perpetuate unsanitary and inhumane conditions on poultry farms, the use of chlorine washes, and chilling poultry in chlorinated water, can lead to residual disinfection byproducts (DBPs) in the poultry.

DBPs are highly toxic and can be carcinogenic. While studies suggest poultry chilled in chlorinated water likely contributes only 0.3% to 1% of daily exposure to DBPs,10 it’s still a contaminant you’re better off avoiding.

Rates of Food Poisoning Higher in US

The British have a right to be concerned about opening their refrigerators to U.S. food, considering an analysis by Sustain revealed rates of foodborne illness in the U.S. are significantly higher than in the U.K. They found that, annually, 14.7% of the U.S. population suffers from foodborne illness, compared to 1.5% in the U.K.11

Kath Dalmeny, chief executive of Sustain, said in a news release, “Our analysis shows that if we accept imported meat without robust standards, we may also import increased food poisoning and possibly even deaths. The U.S. is demanding we drop our food standards for trade, but our research shows cheap U.S. meat will come at a cost to our health and economy."12

Indeed, chicken is easily one of the most contaminated foods in the U.S. and also has a weak nutritional profile compared to other protein sources, including pasture-raised chicken.

One study by the USDA Agricultural Research Service (ARS) found that chicken samples gathered at the end of production after having been cut into parts, as you would purchase in the grocery store, had an astonishing positive rate of 26.2% contamination with salmonella.13 Many people are not aware that chicken is responsible for an alarming number of cases of foodborne illness every year.

According to U.S. CDC statistics, there were 5,760 reported foodborne outbreaks between 2009 and 2015, resulting in 100,939 illnesses, 5,699 hospitalizations and 145 deaths.14 Of these, chicken was responsible for the most outbreak-associated illnesses — 3,114 illnesses in total (12%).

Salmonella contamination is of particular concern, as data suggests multidrug-resistant salmonella has become particularly prevalent. And raw chicken has become a notorious carrier of salmonella, campylobacter, clostridium perfringens and listeria bacteria.15 Even a significant number of urinary tract infections may be caused by contaminated chicken.16

Inspection Standards Not Being Met

A June 2018 FSIS report found that the extent of salmonella contamination in U.S. chicken parts is largely unknown because 35% of large chicken-slaughter facilities in the U.S. are not meeting FSIS inspection standards.17

Perhaps in response, in November 2018 FSIS for the first time publically published chicken producers and their rankings on salmonella safety standards, which are updated each week as new samples are tested.

The rankings range from category 1 to 3. Category 1 describes facilities that had less than 50% of the maximum allowable salmonella during the testing window. Category 2 describes facilities that had more than 50% (but still within the maximum allowed), while category 3 is the worst — facilities that exceeded the maximum level of salmonella.18

If you look at the FSIS rankings,19 what you’ll notice is the frequency of category 2 and 3 on the list. A category 3 ranking isn’t grounds for immediate suspension, either. Instead, FSIS notifies facilities if they don’t meet standards and at that point decides whether further action is needed.

Don’t Buy Raw CAFO Chicken

As recently as the 1920s, chickens were raised primarily for their eggs — not their meat. Back then, chicken meat was expensive, not considered very tasty and only available seasonally, as chickens were typically slaughtered in the fall after they were no longer needed for laying eggs.

Unfortunately, it's virtually impossible to mass-produce clean, safe, optimally nutritious foods at rock-bottom prices, chicken included, which is why most people are better off avoiding CAFO chicken — whether it came from the U.S. or elsewhere. If you can’t imagine giving up chicken, finding a local grass fed farmer raising chickens on pasture is the safest, and healthiest, route to go.

There are farmers using poultry-centered regenerative agriculture systems, in which tall grasses and trees protect the birds from predators instead of cages — in addition to optimizing soil temperature and moisture content, extracting excess nutrients that the chickens deposit, bringing up valuable minerals from below the soil surface and being a high-value perennial crop.

It’s the opposite of CAFOs — regenerating the land instead of destroying it, raising chickens humanely instead of cruelly and producing nutritionally superior, safe food. You might even consider raising your own backyard chickens. You can also try leaving all CAFO chicken at the store and opting for another chicken-produced food instead: eggs, particularly organic pastured varieties.

While chicken is advertised as a healthy source of protein, due to contamination concerns, stick with only non-CAFO pastured chicken or eggs. Whole eggs are an excellent source of protein, healthy fats (omega-3) and antioxidants, including choline, along with vitamins A, D, E and K.

Pastured eggs can provide you with much of the nutrition that CAFO chickens cannot, without the risks of contamination (and no chlorine washing required).

https://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2019/10/01/chlorine-washed-chicken.aspx

Water Wars — Destroying the Essence of Life

At least 15 million Americans depend on the Mississippi River for water, but its headwaters are being polluted by industrial agriculture. Increased nitrate concentration in drinking water, which is linked to cancer and birth defects, is just one of the devastating consequences.

October 18, 2016 

Story at-a-glance

• Since 2011, about 400 square miles of forest, marshes and grasslands in the Upper Mississippi watershed have been lost to agriculture and urban development
• Forests and marshes help to keep water supplies naturally cleansed and refreshed — the opposite of what occurs when industrial agriculture moves in
• Among the environmental assaults already being seen include increased nitrate contamination in drinking water and rapidly depleting aquifers

By Dr. Mercola

Mark Twain once wrote, "The basin of the Mississippi is the body of the nation," but even the mighty Mississippi is facing mounting environmental threats.

The Mississippi River was named the second-most polluted waterway in the U.S. in 2012,1 but it still maintained swatches that were considered to be relatively pristine, particularly in the Upper Mississippi in Minnesota.

Now that, too, is being threatened by changes in the landscape, namely increasing industrial agriculture that is depleting groundwater for irrigation while flooding the area with chemicals.

Forests Rapidly Replaced With Corn, Soy and Potato Fields

Since 2011, about 400 square miles of forest, marshes and grasslands in the Upper Mississippi watershed have been lost. The once-rich natural ecosystems were cleared out to make way for agriculture and urban development.

This is the second fastest rate of land conversion in the U.S., according to a national study reported by a Star Tribune special report.2 Forests and marshes help to keep water supplies naturally cleansed and refreshed — the opposite of what occurs when industrial agriculture moves in. The Star Tribune continued:3

"That breathtaking transformation [of natural land being converted to industry] is now endangering the cleanest stretch of America's greatest river with farm chemicals, depleted groundwater and urban runoff.

At this rate, conservationists warn, the Upper Mississippi — a recreational jewel and the source of drinking water for millions of Minnesotans — could become just another polluted river."

Among the environmental assaults already being seen include increased nitrate contamination in drinking water, which is the result of fertilizer pollution. Park Rapids, Minnesota, spent $3 million to dig deeper wells due to nitrate contamination.

It's estimated that 10 percent of private drinking wells may have nitrate levels that pose dangers to pregnant women and infants.4

There's also been widespread damage to water quality, including a rise in algae-promoting phosphorus, sediment turning once clear water cloudy and bacteria. Since these contaminants are emerging in the headwaters of the Mississippi, it inevitably flows downstream, furthering the environmental destruction.

Potato Growers Stressing Out Aquifers for Irrigation

Demand for irrigation near the Upper Mississippi has increased to the point that aquifers and rivers that feed the Mississippi are becoming rapidly depleted.

R.D. Offutt, the largest potato grower in the U.S., applied for 54 irrigation permits in Minnesota in 2014 — each would allow the company to pump up to 1 million gallons of water a year from the Pineland Sands Aquifer near Park Rapids, Minnesota, according to the Star Tribune. They continued:5

"Offutt's plan represented just the latest in a burst of demand for agricultural irrigation in an area known for sandy soils that can become perfect for growing corn, soybeans and potatoes — given sufficient water.

Irrigation has increased by an average of 77 million gallons per year since 1988, or 85 percent, according to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR)."

Another 10,000 acres above the vulnerable aquifer have already been slated to be deforested for farming and another 20,000 acres may soon follow, according to the DNR. Further polluting the Mississippi poses significant risk not only in Minnesota but also downstream.

At least 15 million Americans depend on the river for water, as do 40 percent of migrating waterfowl in the U.S. and 25 percent North American fish species.6 It can be difficult to stop the destructive changes, since much of the vulnerable land is privately owned.

However, state agencies and conservationists, aware of the perilous state of the river and its tributaries, have purchased thousands of acres of land, or placed it under permanent easement, to help protect and preserve the environment.

Still, many areas remain at risk, not only in Minnesota but in the lower Mississippi river as well. In a rainbow-colored photograph taken by photographer J. Henry Fair, there's striking evidence of so-called "red mud" in an area south of Baton Rouge, Louisiana.7

This toxic sludge is an aluminum-processing waste product — the same substance that led to four deaths and created a state of emergency in Hungary when a broken reservoir containing the red mud flooded hundreds of houses.8

Iowa Report Highlights Health Effects of Nitrates in Drinking Water

Iowa has long faced problems with elevated levels of nitrates in drinking water and has been identified as a top contributor to pollution (nitrates and phosphorus) causing the dead zone in the Gulf of Mexico.

Now a new report released by the Iowa Environmental Council (IEC) has attempted to summarize the related health risks of nitrates in drinking water.9

Researchers reviewed over 100 studies on the health effects of nitrates in drinking water, and found multiple studies linked them to birth defects, bladder cancer andthyroid cancer.

While many of the health problems were found with nitrate levels higher than the drinking water standard of 10 mg/L, some studies suggested nitrate levels lower than the drinking water standard may still pose health risks. About 15 percent of private wells in Iowa may have nitrate levels that exceed federal standards.10

Water quality, or lack thereof, received renewed attention in Iowa recently after the water utility in Des Moines, Iowa sued three counties, alleging they polluted the river with nitrates from agricultural runoff. The water utility has already spent $1.5 million to remove nitrates from drinking water.

If the lawsuit succeeds, the agriculture industry will have to make changes to limit runoff.11 The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that removing nitrate from U.S. drinking water costs nearly $5 billion a year,12 which the industrial agriculture industry has been largely shielded from.

Sinkhole at Florida Fertilizer Plant May Lead to Contaminated Drinking Water

A large sinkhole has emerged under a gypsum stack at a Mosaic Co. fertilizer plant in Mulberry, Florida. Gypsum stacks are made out of phosphogypsum, a radioactive byproduct of the fertilizer industry (it's created when the companies use sulfuric acid to break down phosphate rock).

There are at least 70 gypsum stacks in the U.S., including about 20 in regions of west-central Florida, which are prone to sinkholes that allow the waste to seep into groundwater. ABC News reported:13

"The waste pile in Central Florida contains radioactive radium and uranium, radon gas, sulfates and other contaminants, according to the [U.S.] EPA[Environmental Protection Agency].

So far more than 200 million gallons of wastewater have been dumped into the Floridan Aquifer, a key drinking-water source for millions of people.

The company has found contaminants in a well being used to recover polluted water that is within a quarter mile from the hole, which means the contaminated water has reached the aquifer."

In 2015, Mosaic settled a nearly $2 billion lawsuit with the EPA due to the company's management of pollution. "In the settlement, EPA cited a need for the company to prevent the release of hazardous, highly corrosive wastewater, and to improve its detection of potential leaks and spills," ABC News continued.14

Chemical Fertilizer Use May Get Worse Before It Gets Better

Synthetic fertilizers destroy natural nitrogen found in the soil, which means farmers must use increasing amounts of the fertilizers each year just to sustain their yields.

It's estimated that in the last four decades, nitrogen fertilizer efficiency has decreased by two-thirds while their use per hectare (2.47 acres) of land has increased by seven times.15 Excess nitrogen in the soil gets mineralized into nitrate, which can then leach into water where it causes serious damage.

While fertilizer companies claim their products are necessary to feed the world, research suggests working withnature instead of against it via agroecology or "ecological farming" can produce just as much food without the need for chemical fertilizers.16 On an individual level you can help by buying food from farmers who are using natural methods and soil-regenerative techniques, such as no-till, cover crops, composting and livestock integration, instead of chemical fertilizers.

Your Water Is Probably Toxic

It's going to take change on a global scale — to industry, agriculture and public policy — to stop the water pollution that's already taking a health and environmental toll, but you can also act on an individual level to help the problem and protect yourself.

Considering the widespread contamination found in water around the globe, it's best to assume yours is less than pure and take steps to remedy it, such as using a high-quality water filtration system (unless you can verify the purity of your water). If you have well water, it would be prudent to have your water tested for nitrates and other contaminants. If you have public water, you can get local drinking water quality reports from the EPA.

To be certain you're getting the purest water you can, filter the water both at the point of entry and at the point of use. This means filtering all the water that comes into the house, and then filtering again at the kitchen sink and shower.

Unfiltered water can also expose you to dangerous chlorine vapors and chloroform gas. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and other U.S. government agencies report that most homes in the U.S. have measurable levels of chloroform gas, courtesy of chlorinated tap water.

Unless you have a whole house water filter, chlorine will vaporize from every toilet bowl in your home and every time you wash your clothes or dishes, or take a shower or bath. Chloroform gas, chlorine vapors and the associated DBPs may increase your risk of asthma, airway inflammation and respiratory allergies. Chloroform gas alone can cause dizziness, nausea and general fatigue.

If you get your water from a municipal water supply and don't have a whole house filter, it really is important to open up windows on opposing sides of your home so you get cross ventilation. Keep the windows open for five to 10 minutes a day to remove these gases. Ideally, use a whole house filtration system.

One of the best I've found so far is the Pure & Clear Whole House Water Filtration System, which uses a three-stage filtration process — a micron sediment pre-filter, a KDF water filter and a high-grade carbon water filter — to filter out chlorine, disinfection byproducts (DBPs) and other contaminants. You can find more information about water filters in my video below.

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/articles/archive/2016/10/18/drinking-water-nitrate-contamination.aspx

Are These Deadly Carcinogens Lurking in Your Pool?

Healthwise

Swimming isn’t just for cooling off. It’s also one of the best ways to exercise. Swimming forces you to use your whole body to build strength and stamina. It also puts minimal stress on your joints. But spending time in the water may be doing you more harm than good.

June 10th, 2014

Pools may be weakening your immune system. But that’s not even the worst of it—you could also be putting yourself at greater risk for cancer.

New research from the CDC found that exposure to pool chemicals led to almost 5,000 emergency room visits in 2012 alone.1

The most frequent diagnosis? Poisoning.2

The worst—and most common—offenders are chlorine and bromine. Most people who use these chemicals have good intentions: Shocking a pool with high amounts of chlorine kills bacteria. This is especially important in public pools. But using too much may do way more than just irritate your eyes. It can cause serious lung damage over time. After all, soldiers in World War I used chlorine as a chemical weapon.3

Your skin absorbs chlorine. So you don’t have to swallow pool water to be at risk. But the chemicals themselves aren’t even the worst part. The disinfection byproducts (DBPs) they produce when they meet organic matter—like your skin and hair—are even more dangerous.

One study found that regular exposure to trihalomethanes (THMs)—a type of DBP—in swimming pools increases bladder cancer risk by up to 57%. Even more disturbing? This risk was over 20% higher than people who frequently drank water polluted with chlorine.4 But this isn’t the only study showing the dangers of DBP exposure.

Researchers in Thailand found that skin exposure from swimming in chlorinated pools made up for 94% of total THM-related cancer risk.5 Another study revealed that just 40 minutes contact with DBPs in swimming pools causes DNA damage that may lead to cancer.6 And don’t forget that DBPs seriously weaken your immune system. This may be why indoor swimming pool workers are up to three times more likely to suffer from respiratory problems and chronic colds.7

Pool chemicals and the toxic byproducts they form are dangerous. But swimming in a stew of other people’s bacteria doesn’t sound great either. Your best bet is to avoid these pools entirely. They aren’t your only options.

If you live close enough, try the ocean instead. Swimming in the ocean may help balance skin flora and serotonin levels.8 You can also find facilities that have saltwater pools. They expose you to far less chlorine than conventional pools.

If you’re all out of options—or already have a pool of your own—try limiting the amount of time you spend in the water. Taking a few quick dips instead of a long soak may help cut down your exposure. Just remember to rinse off with fresh water before and after getting out.

References:
1http://www.cdc.gov/media/releases/2014/p0515-chemical-injuries.html
2http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/276888.php
3http://www.bt.cdc.gov/agent/chlorine/basics/facts.asp
4http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/content/165/2/148.abstract
5http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18595407?ordinalpos=7&itool=EntrezSystem2.PEntrez.Pubmed.Pubmed_ResultsPanel.Pubmed_DefaultReportPanel.Pubmed_RVDocSum
6http://www.newswise.com/articles/view/568170/?sc=rsmn&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+NewswiseMednews+%28Newswise%3A+MedNews%29
7http://www.erj.ersjournals.com/content/29/4/690.abstract
8http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-102698/Three-health-benefits-sea.html

http://institutefornaturalhealing.com/2014/06/are-these-deadly-carcinogens-lurking-in-your-pool/

Healthwise

Safe, Natural Tips for Cancer Patients! - Video

Information Time: 11:55
Added: 10/24/2012 Views: 4835

 They're also things than anyone can do to improve overall health. Naturopath and nutritionist David Getoff goes through a number of steps that he uses with his own cancer patients to help them try and improve their health while battling the disease.

http://www.ihealthtube.com/aspx/viewvideo.aspx?v=127c3d19997a7ae0

How to Cut Your Risk of Cancer in Half - MUST WATCH

How to Cut Your Risk of Cancer in Half  - Dr Mercola


Uploaded on 27 Mar 2007

http://www.mercola.com/ Internationally renowned natural health physician Dr. Joseph Mercola talk about the amazing no cost way to radically reduce your risk of cancer and completely free.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cdSfuawgDiE

4:15 Never user commercial sunblocks or sunscreen - they contain toxic chemicals.

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

 

Shocking Update -- Sunshine Can Actually Decrease Your Vitamin D


Uploaded on 11 May 2009

http://articles.mercola.com/sites/art... As you no doubt know, exposure to sunlight causes vitamin d to be produced in your skin. but it is only a portion of the solar spectrum known as uvb that has this effect. other parts of the solar spectrum can have very different results.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J1sTYuL-QsU

Water Workouts a Great Alternative: Study

November 23, 2012 | 16,238 views

Story at-a-glance

• Working out in water can give you just as intense a workout as doing so on land, new research revealed
• Benefits of water workouts include increased flexibility, less wear and tear on your body and built-in resistance training
• When you exercise in water, your heart rate will be lower than on land, even if you’re exercising very strenuously, so you need to listen to your body, not rely on heart rate, to gauge when you’ve had enough
• Water exercise will also dramatically lower stress on injured joints and allow you to decrease your risk of joint injuries
• The ideal water to use would be ocean water, which will not only ground you but is also free from chlorine, fluoride and disinfection byproducts of chlorine (DBPs), which are 10,000 times more toxic than chlorine
• Swimming pools typically contain chlorine, and along with it, disinfection byproducts (DBPs), which have been linked to cancer and respiratory effects; working out in a non-chlorinated pool, ocean or other natural body of water may be preferable to a chlorinated pool

By Dr. Mercola

If you're tired of your workout routine and want a change of pace, moving your workout to the water may offer some unique benefits.

While you might think you can't actually get as intense a workout in the water, new research found that's not true at all, and in some ways a water workout may be better than one on land.

Benefits of Water Workouts Revealed

After measuring workout intensity levels among people exercising on a stationary bike on land, and one designed for use in a pool, researchers found that the aerobic intensity was the same.

However, while working just as hard, those in the water had lower heart rates, because the pressure of the water helps your blood circulate more effectively with fewer heartbeats.

According to the American Council on Exercise, your heart rate will be reduced by as much as 17 beats per minute compared to land exercise,¹ so be sure to keep this in mind if you measure your heart rate to watch your intensity.

When you're in the water, your heart rate will be lower than on land, even if you're exercising very strenuously, so you need to listen to your body, not rely on heart rate, to gauge when you've had enough.

The study, which was presented at a meeting of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the Canadian Cardiovascular Society, also found that the water-based workout caused less wear and tear on your body, making it an ideal alternative if you have trouble exercising on land.

When you exercise in water, you have to support only a fraction of your body weight compared to on land. In fact, the water reduces your weight by about 90 percent!² This means the stress on your weight-bearing joints, bones and muscles is greatly reduced, lessening your chances of injury or sore muscles.

Plus, the water acts as a form of built-in resistance, as though you've surrounded your body with weights, making it simple to increase the intensity of your workout and challenge muscles you might not on land. Also, because water lessens the effects of gravity, you're able to move your body through a wider range of motion, which is an ideal way to improve your flexibility. Even your lungs get a beneficial workout, as the water pressure makes them work harder than they would on land.

If you are overweight or obese, elderly, have arthritis, joint pain, osteoporosis or an injury that makes weight-bearing exercise on land difficult or painful, a water workout may be for you.

Working out in Water: Important Caveats to Consider

If you decide to work out in water, keep in mind that land-based exercise is still important to get weight-bearing benefits (the kind that will help strengthen your bones and prevent bone loss and osteoporosis). Another important consideration: swimming pools typically contain chlorine, and along with it, disinfection byproducts (DBPs), which are formed when bromide, naturally existent in the source water, and/or organic materials like hair, skin, sweat, dirt and urine react with the large amounts of chlorine used to sanitize the pool water.

DBPs are over 10,000 times more toxic than the chlorine itself and have been linked to DNA damage and cancer. In one study, more than 100 DBPs were identified in pool water, and when researchers measured evidence of genotoxic (DNA damage that may lead to cancer) and respiratory effects on swimmers who swam in a chlorinated pool for 40 minutes, they found:³

• Increased micronuclei in blood lymphocytes, which are associated with cancer risk
• Urine mutagenicity, a biomarker of exposure to genotoxic agents
• An increase in serum CC16, which suggests an increase in lung epithelium permeability

This is a serious issue if you swim in chlorinated pools on a regular basis, as your body absorbs higher levels of DBPs by swimming in a chlorinated pool once than you would by drinking tap water for one week! In fact, in one study on trihalomethanes (THMs), one of the most common DBPs, found the cancer risk from skin exposure while swimming comprised over 94 percent of the total cancer risk resulting from being exposed to THMs!⁴ The authors even went so far as to conclude that swimming in a chlorinated pool presents "an unacceptable cancer risk."

As an aside, DBPs are also the likely culprits for the increased incidence of sinusitis and sore throats among swimming instructors,⁵ as well as the negative impact of chlorinated pools on the respiratory health of children and adolescents. In fact, one study found that in children with allergic sensitivities, swimming in chlorinated pools significantly increased the likelihood of asthma and respiratory allergies.⁶

This doesn't necessarily mean you have to give up swimming. Swimming in an ocean is an excellent alternative, as is swimming in a lake or other natural body of water. You can also find a way to keep your pool clean from bacteria, algae, and other organisms without the use of dangerous chemicals.

One of the best solutions is NOT to chlorinate your pool and just use a maintenance "shock" treatment every five or six days, which will kill the algae buildup. The shock treatment volatilizes in about 24-48 hours and gives you a several-day window in which you can safely use your pool. You can also reduce the amount of organic material you bring into the pool, and thereby the amount of DBPs created, by showering prior to entering and teaching your children not to urinate in the water.

Using Water After Your Workout Also Beneficial

Have you ever felt just fine immediately following your workout, but within 24 hours, you start to feel pain? This is called delayed-onset muscle soreness (DOMS), and for some, this discomfort is enough to make you think twice before going back to the gym or engaging in activities you would otherwise enjoy.

Immersing yourself in a cold-water bath 24, 48, 72 and even 96 hours after exercise appears to be significantly more effective than rest in relieving delayed-onset muscle soreness.⁷ Cold water immersion, or "cryotherapy," is thought to help reduce muscle inflammation and pain after exercise. It works by lowering the damaged tissue's temperature and locally constricting blood vessels. Cold also helps numb nerve endings, providing you with instant, localized pain relief.

So, if you want to relieve sore muscles following an intense workout, you can try spending 20 minutes or so in a cold tub of water (10-15 degrees C, or 50-59 degrees F). If you don't like the idea of full-body cryotherapy, you can also try a more targeted approach by applying a cold pack to a specific area of your body. While this won't give you full-body relief from muscle soreness, it can be beneficial for an injury or a pulled muscle.

[-] Sources and References

• Study presented at a meeting of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada and the Canadian Cardiovascular Society, Toronto, Canada, November 6, 2012
• MedicineNet October 31, 2012

• ¹ American Council on Exercise, Fit Facts
• ² American Council on Exercise, Fit Facts
• ³ Environ Health Perspect. 2010 November; 118(11): 1531–1537.
• ⁴ J Environ Sci (China). 2008;20(3):372-8.
• ⁵ ERJApril 1, 2007 vol. 29 no. 4 690-698
• ⁶ Pediatrics. 2009 Oct;124(4):1110-8. Epub 2009 Sep 14.
• ⁷ The Cochrane Library February 15, 2012

 [+] Comments (30)

 http://fitness.mercola.com/sites/fitness/archive/2012/11/23/water-workouts.aspx