Farm Communities » cancer prevention

MSG (Monosodium Glutamate) – The most common poison in your food.

admin — Fri, 20 Nov 2009 14:38:39 +0000

The first thing most of us think of when we hear MSG is Chinese food. Monosodium Glutamate is a quite commonly used flavor enhancer and it is an additive in many different foods, including many condiments, snack foods, canned foods and processed meats. According to the FDA, MSG is “generally recognized as safe.” These food labels may not indicate that they contain MSG; they might contain the words “hydrolyzed vegetable protein”, “HVP” or “yeast extract.” The best thing that we can do is to learn how to recognize MSG in our diets and stay away.

MSG might make your food taste better, but is it worth it? Obesity is one of this nations biggest problems and MSG has been linked to the cause. It is also said that toxic compounds can associated with such neurological diseases like Multiple Sclerosis, brain cancers, ADHD and more. Of course, the FDA still stands by their claim in amounts that would be used for cooking. They did admit that MSG symptom complex – short-term responses to the ingestion of MSG – is a problem for some people. The symptoms can include such reactions as headaches, sweating, nausea, chest pain and more. The only way to avoid this effect is to stay away from Monosodium Glutamate.

This additive is presented to us as a food product that is harmless, but it is poison. At the very least, it is completely unnecessary and as a matter of precaution, if nothing else, an additive that we should do our best to avoid.

farmcommunities.com

Artificial Sweeteners and Public Health

admin — Tue, 10 Feb 2009 02:16:50 +0000

Having a palate for sweet is natural since sweetness, characteristic of certain natural carbohydrates, means quick energy for the body, including the brain that needs a steady supply of glucose for normal functioning. Sugar is the dominant source of the natural sweetener, the carbohydrate, called sucrose. The pleasantness of sweet taste, however, is frequently the cause of exceeding the healthy quota of carbohydrates; people take to sweets and run into health problems – particularly obesity, dental decay, and worst of all, diabetes. To prevent the incidence and/or reduce the intensity of these health threats, while maintaining the desirable sweetness in taste, artificial sweeteners have been introduced in thousands of processed food items, especially in juices, ice-creams, and desserts. These substitutes of natural carbohydrates have been in use for decades but, like many other artificial ingredients, their use has become a matter of concern for health-conscious people.

Currently, several artificial sweeteners are used in both solid and liquid foods but the most commonly used are just a few in number: saccharine (about 300 times sweeter than sugar), aspartame (about 160 times sweeter than sugar), and cyclamate (about 30 times sweeter than sugar). Less well-known but still around in the food industry are artificial sweeteners like sucralose, neotame, and xylitol. One or more of these are known to people on a diet, especially to diabetics who benefit from xylitol (popularly called wood sugar, as it was first derived from birch) that closely mimics the taste of sugar but requires no insulin for its metabolism. Several research studies have been conducted to test the potential health risks associated with all these artificial sweeteners and the general inference resulting from the findings indicates that the possibility of some health problems does exist in their use.

The major risk associated with the use of saccharine, the oldest and most widely used artificial sweetener, is that of bladder cancer – the risk that caused the ban on its use in Canada. Saccharin has been found to cause bladder cancer in animals (in laboratory experiments) but only when taken in excess; in humans, research has found no risk of cancer associated with moderate consumption of saccharine. Cyclamate, similar to saccharine in many aspects but less sweet (only 30 times than sugar), has been banned in the US (but not in Canada) due to the potential risk of bladder cancer. Since research has not confirmed its carcinogenic (or any other serious) health effect in humans, its re-approval has been demanded in the US while more than 50 countries already allow its use.

The alleged carcinogenic character of aspartame – which is used in thousands of food items, most frequently used in diet sodas – has recently been the subject of much debate and research. Besides cancer, it was suggested by a study that aspartame may be the cause of brain tumors. However, recent research on animals and the analysis of case histories of many human patients have found that the sweetener is free of carcinogenic risk, and that of tumors, as long as the recommended quota for daily consumption is not exceeded beyond bounds. Still, the effects of aspartame remain controversial as other studies point to aspartame’s link with disorders of nervous system (especially phenylketonuria, or PKU), multiple sclerosis, and fibromyalgia.

Neotame is a new variety of aspartame, one not very common yet. Unlike aspartame, neotame retains its sweetening character during the cooking process and has not been found associated with PKU. Sucralose, which is even sweeter than saccharine, is comparatively less well-known and its health effects are just starting to be investigated by researchers. Xylitol, to date, remains quite safe and has been shown to strengthen teeth and helping with the repair of teeth cavities.

On the whole, opinion remains divided on the threatening health effects of artificial sweeteners; some argue in favor of complete abstinence from their use; and others allowing it. Following Aristotle’s rule of ‘the golden mean’, expert dieticians suggest moderation as the best choice in using artificial sweeteners. People on a diet, or just anyone at all, should get acquainted with the Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI), as approved by the FDA for artificial sweeteners, and try to keep their diet as natural as possible.

farmcommunities.com

Healthy Diet is Effective, not Nutritional Supplements

admin — Thu, 22 Jan 2009 23:29:45 +0000

As the awareness of the importance of vitamins and minerals is on a rise, some scientific evidence denies the efficacy assigned to nutritional supplements, particularly vitamin pills in maintaining optimum health. In a few recent studies, taking healthy food has been proved to promise good health while vitamin and mineral pills fail to emulate the dietary role in maintaining health.

Vitamin and mineral supplements have become the need of many health-conscious people, especially those who have learnt about the anti-aging and anti-oxidant effects of vitamins. Of these, Vitamin E and Vitamin C are particularly sought at health food stores due to their heavily advertized claims of effectiveness against ageing and preventing/healing infections. Naturally obtained from vegetables and fruits, these vitamins are sold in numerous supplements, commonly as pills and powder. However, a new research, led by Dr. Jennifer Lin (of the Brigham And Women’s Hospital in Boston, Massachusetts), has found that vitamin pills do not carry the health benefits obtained from the dietary sources of those same vitamins. The study was conducted on more than 7500 women and the results came after a follow up stretched over nine years.

Dr. Lin’s research concludes that antioxidant supplements containing Vitamin C, Vitamin E, and/or beta carotene do not offer any significant health benefits like preventing cancer or earlier aging. These findings agree with an earlier research, published in November 2008, involving about 15000 American men who did not show any cancer-prevention effect from the regular use of Vitamin C and Vitamin E supplements. However, the general consensus on eating a healthy and balanced diet stays valid as before. Fresh vegetables and fruits are the best and most health-friendly sources of essential vitamins and minerals.

What is important to remember about these findings? That, more than anything else, it is not a certificate to give up all calorie-rich diets and binge on vegetables and fruits. Strong immunity also requires enough calories to fight infections. Calorically restricted diet may work for some overweight people (though not indefinitely for them too), it gives a person to diseases more easily than those having healthy caloric levels. A recent study led by Professor Elizabeth Gardner, of the Michigan State University, concludes that caloric-deficient people are likely to fall a prey more easily to flu and other viral conditions and would need longer to recover even if they take the healthy levels of vitamins and minerals. This is in line with the term ‘balanced’ so frequently used with ‘diet’.

farmcommunities.com