Welcome Message
For those of you who
have
recently subscribed,
welcome. I hope you enjoy the newsletter. Select
newsletter articles are available in our library. A
newsletter archive is available at http://www.yourwellnessoptions.com/newsletter/subscribe.html.
Yes, I am
still here. Honestly, I just needed a break. I was at a
point where there was just too much going on in my life. So, I
took a look at all of it and determined where I could and wanted to cut
back and have done so. I am now ready to get back to publishing
the newsletter and working on the new website changes.
On
a personal note, I am taking a six week class for the Board of
Director's position I hold as well as an internet class on
vaccinations. The vaccination class will last for about 8 months
so you will likely see an article or two on vaccinations over the next
few months.
Instead
of writing an in-depth article this month (and for the next
couple months), I am going to write some short pieces on various health
issues looming about. Some of the issues have been around for
quite some time others you may not have heard about. Most of
these are on subjects I have not chosen to write on previously due to
the controversy involved (plus my desire to stay off big brother's
radar) but the
information is important to know even if you have a varying
viewpoint.
If you are currently not a subscriber and would like to receive our no
cost, monthly newsletter, you can subscribe at: http://www.yourwellnessoptions.com.
Have
a blessed day!
LeeAnn
Rahn
editor@yourwellnessoptions.com
FDA Lists 92 Symptoms from Nutrasweet (Aspartame)
by Mark Gold
Please
Note: This information required a Freedom Of Information
Act request to pry it from the reluctant hands of the FDA.
Nutrasweet
(brand name for Aspartame) was not approved until 1981, in dry foods.
For over eight years the FDA refused to approve it because of the
seizures and brain tumors this drug produced in lab animals. The FDA
continued to refuse to approve it until President Reagan took office (a
friend of Searle) and fired the FDA Commissioner who wouldn't approve
it. Dr. Arthur Hull Hayes was appointed as commissioner. Even then
there was so much opposition to approval that a Board of Inquiry was
set up. The Board said: "Do not approve aspartame". Dr. Hayes OVERRULED
his own Board of Inquiry.
Shortly
after Commissioner Arthur Hull Hayes, Jr., approved the use of
aspartame in carbonated beverages, he left for a position with G.D.
Searle's Public Relations firm.
Long-Term
Damage. It appears to cause slow, silent damage in those unfortunate
enough to not have immediate reactions and a reason to avoid it. It may
take one year, five years, 10 years, or 40 years, but it seems to cause
some reversible and some irreversible changes in health over long-term
use.
METHANOL
(AKA WOOD ALCOHOL/POISON) (10% OF ASPARTAME) Methanol/wood alcohol is a
deadly poison. People may recall that methanol was the poison that has
caused some "skid row" alcoholics to end up blind or dead. Methanol is
gradually released in the small intestine when the methyl group of
aspartame encounter the enzyme chymotrypsin.
The
absorption of methanol into the body is sped up considerably when free
methanol is ingested. Free methanol is created from aspartame when it
is heated to above 86 Fahrenheit (30 Centigrade). This would occur when
aspartame-containing product is improperly stored or when it is heated
(e.g., as part of a "food" product such as Jello).
Methanol
breaks down into formic acid and formaldehyde in the body. Formaldehyde
is a deadly neurotoxin. An EPA assessment of methanol states that
methanol "is considered a cumulative poison due to the low rate of
excretion once it is absorbed. In the body, methanol is oxidized to
formaldehyde and formic acid; both of these metabolites are toxic."
They recommend a limit of consumption of 7.8 mg/day. A one-liter
(approx. 1 quart) aspartame-sweetened beverage contains about 56 mg of
methanol. Heavy users of aspartame-containing products consume as much
as 250 mg of methanol daily or 32 times the EPA limit.
The
most well known problems from methanol poisoning are vision problems.
Formaldehyde is a known carcinogen, causes retinal damage, interferes
with DNA replication, and causes birth defects. Due to the lack of a
couple of key enzymes, humans are many times more sensitive to the
toxic effects of methanol than animals. Therefore, tests of aspartame
or methanol on animals do not accurately reflect the danger for humans.
As pointed out by Dr Woodrow C. Monte, Director of the Food Science and
Nutrition Laboratory at Arizona State University, "There are no human
or mammalian studies to evaluate the possible mutagenic, teratogenic,
or carcinogenic effects of chronic administration of methyl alcohol."
It
has been pointed out that fruit juices and alcoholic beverages contain
small amounts of methanol. It is important to remember, that the
methanol in natural products never appears alone. In every case,
ethanol is present, usually in much higher amounts. Ethanol is an
antidote for methanol toxicity in humans.
The
troops of Desert Storm were "treated" to large amounts of
aspartame-sweetened beverages which had been heated to over 86 degrees
F. in the Saudi Arabian sun. Many of them returned home with numerous
disorders similar to what has been seen in persons who have been
chemically poisoned by formaldehyde. The free methanol in the beverages
may have been a contributing factor in these illnesses. Other breakdown
products of aspartame such as DKP, may also have been a factor.
In
a 1993 act that can only be described as "unconscionable", the FDA
approved aspartame as an ingredient in numerous food items that would
always be heated to above 86° degrees F (30° degrees C).
Much
worse, on 27 June 1996, without public notice, the FDA removed all
restrictions from aspartame allowing it to be used in everything,
including all heated and baked goods.
The
truth about aspartame's toxicity is far different than what the
NutraSweet Company would have you readers believe. In February of 1994,
the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services released the listing
of adverse reactions reported to the FDA (DHHS 1994). Aspartame
accounted for more than 75% of all adverse reactions reported to the
FDA's Adverse Reaction Monitoring System (ARMS). By the FDA's own
admission fewer then ONE PERCENT of those who have problems with
something they consume ever report it to the FDA. This balloons the
almost 10,000 complaints they once had to around a million.
However,
the FDA has a record keeping problem (they never did respond to the
certified letter from the WEBMASTER of this site a major victim!) and
they tend to discourage or even misdirect complaints, at least on
aspartame. The fact remains, though, that MOST victims don't have a
clue that aspartame may be the cause of their many problems! Many
reactions to aspartame were very serious including seizures and death.
Those
reactions included:
- Abdominal Pain
- Anxiety attacks
- Arthritis
- Asthma
- Asthmatic Reactions
- Bloating, Edema (Fluid Retention)
- Blood Sugar Control Problems (Hypoglycemia or
Hyperglycemia)
- Brain Cancer (Pre-approval studies in animals)
- Breathing difficulties
- Burning eyes or throat
- Burning Urination
- Can't think straight
- Chest Pains
- Chronic cough
- Chronic Fatigue
- Confusion
- Death
- Depression
- Diarrhea
- Dizziness
- Excessive Thirst or Hunger
- Fatigue
- Feel unreal
- Flushing of face
- Hair Loss (Baldness) or Thinning of Hair
- Headaches/Migraines dizziness
- Hearing Loss
- Heart palpitations
- Hives (Urticaria)
- Hypertension (High Blood Pressure)
- Impotency and Sexual Problems
- Inability to concentrate
- Infection Susceptibility
- Insomnia
- Irritability
- Itching
- Joint Pains
- laryngitis
- "Like thinking in a fog"
- Marked Personality Changes
- Memory loss
- Menstrual Problems or Changes
- Migraines and Severe Headaches (Trigger or
Cause From
Chronic Intake)
- Muscle spasms
- Nausea or Vomiting
- Numbness or Tingling of Extremities
- Other Allergic-Like Reactions
- Panic Attacks
- Phobias
- Poor memory
- Rapid Heart Beat
- Rashes
- Seizures and Convulsions
- Slurring of Speech
- Swallowing Pain
- Tachycardia
- Tremors
- Tinnitus
- Vertigo
- Vision Loss
- Weight gain
Aspartame
Disease Mimics Symptoms or Worsens the Following Diseases
- Alzheimer's Disease
- Arthritis
- Birth Defects
- Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
- Diabetes and Diabetic Complications
- Epilepsy
- Fibromyalgia
- Lupus
- Lyme Disease
- Lymphoma
- Multiple Chemical Sensitivities (MCS)
- Multiple Sclerosis (MS)
- Parkinson's Disease
How
it happens:
Methanol,
from aspartame, is released in the small intestine when the methyl
group of aspartame encounters the enzyme chymotrypsin (Stegink 1984,
page 143). Free methanol begins to form in liquid aspartame-containing
products at temperatures above 86 degrees F. also within the human
body.
The
methanol is then converted to formaldehyde. The formaldehyde converts
to formic acid - ant sting poison. Toxic formic acid is used as an
activator to strip epoxy and urethane coatings. Imagine what it does to
your tissues! (Note from Stephanie Relfe - Even the Australian
Cancer Council says that there are NO safe levels of formaldehyde).
Phenylalanine
and aspartic acid, 90% of aspartame, are amino acids normally used in
synthesis of protoplasm when supplied by the foods we eat. But when
unaccompanied by other amino acids we use [there are 20], they are
neurotoxic.
That
is why a warning for Phenylketonurics is found on EQUAL and other
aspartame products. Phenylketenurics are 2% of the population with
extreme sensitivity to this chemical unless it's present in food. It
gets you too, causing brain disorders and birth defects! Finally, the
phenyalanine breaks down into DKP, a brain tumor agent.
In
other words: Aspartame converts to dangerous by-products that have no
natural countermeasures. A dieter's empty stomach accelerates these
conversions and amplifies the damage. Components of aspartame go
straight to the brain, damage that causes headaches, mental confusion,
seizures and faulty balance. Lab rats and other test animals died
of brain tumors.
Despite
the claims of Monsanto and bedfellows:
1.
Methanol from alcohol and juices does not get converted to formaldehyde
to any significant extent. There is very strong evidence to confirm
this fact for alcoholic beverages and fairly strong evidence for
juices.
2.
Formaldehyde obtained from methanol is very toxic in *very small* doses
as seen by recent research.
3.
Aspartame causes chronic toxicity reactions/damage due to the methanol
to formaldehyde and other break down products despite what is claimed
otherwise by the very short, industry-funded experiments using a test
substance that is chemically different and absorbed differently than
what is available to the general public. "Strangely enough", almost all
independent studies show that aspartame can cause health problems.
4.
A common ploy from Monsanto is to claim that aspartame is "safe" yet a
few select people may have "allergic" reactions to it. This is typical
Monsanto nonsense, of course. Their own research shows that it does not
cause "allergic" reactions. It is their way of trying to minimize and
hide the huge numbers of toxicity reactions and damage that people are
experiencing from the long-term use of aspartame.
Summary
Given
the following points, it is definitely premature for researchers to
discount the role of methanol in aspartame side effects:
1.
The amount of methanol ingested from aspartame is unprecedented in
human history. Methanol from fruit juice ingestion does not even
approach the quantity of methanol ingested from aspartame, especially
in persons who ingest one to three liters (or more) of diet beverages
every day. Unlike methanol from aspartame, methanol from natural
products is probably not absorbed or converted to its toxic metabolites
in significant amounts as discussed earlier.
2.
Lack of laboratory-detectable changes in plasma formic acid and
formaldehyde levels do not preclude damage being caused by these toxic
metabolites. Laboratory-detectable changes in formate levels are often
not found in short exposures to methanol.
3.
Aspartame-containing products often provide little or no nutrients
which may protect against chronic methanol poisoning and are often
consumed in between meals. Persons who ingest aspartame-containing
products are often dieting and more likely to have nutritional
deficiencies than persons who take the time to make fresh juices.
4.
Persons with certain health conditions or on certain drugs may be much
more susceptible to chronic methanol poisoning.
5.
Chronic diseases and side effects from slow poisons often build
silently over a long period of time. Many chronic diseases which seem
to appear suddenly have actually been building in the body over many
years.
6.
An increasing body of research is showing that many people are highly
sensitive to low doses of formaldehyde in the environment.
Environmental exposure to formaldehyde and ingestion of methanol (which
converts to formaldehyde) from aspartame likely has a cumulative
deleterious effect.
7.
Formic acid has been shown to slowly accumulate in various parts of the
body. Formic acid has been shown to inhibit oxygen metabolism.
8.
The are a very large and growing number of persons are experiencing
chronic health problems similar to the side effects of chronic methanol
poisoning when ingesting aspartame-containing products for a
significant length of time. This includes many cases of eye damage
similar to the type of eye damage seen in methanol poisoning cases.
Note:
It often takes at least sixty days without any aspartame NutraSweet to
see a significant improvement. (Note from Stephanie Relfe: Drink
plenty of good water. Preferably water filtered by reverse osmosis. If
not that, spring water. Not tap, distilled or mineral water).
Check
all labels very carefully (including vitamins and pharmaceuticals).
Look for the word "aspartame" on the label and avoid it. (Also, it is a
good idea to avoid "acesulfame-k" or "sunette.") Finally, avoid getting
nutrition information from junk food industry PR organizations such as
IFIC or organizations that accept large sums of money from the junk and
chemical food industry such as the American Dietetic Association.
If
you are a user of any products with aspartame, and you have physical,
visual, mental problems take the 60-day no aspartame test. If, after
two months with no aspartame your symptoms are either gone, or are much
less severe, please get involved to get this neurotoxin off the market.
Write a letter to the FDA, with a copy to Betty Martini (for proof of
how the FDA doesn't keep proper records). Write your congressmen.
Return products containing aspartame to the point of purchase... for a
FULL refund. Make a big stink if they WON'T give you a full refund!
Tell all your friends and family... and if they stop using aspartame
and also "wake up well"... get them involved in the same way.
Aspartame
is an "approved sweetener" because of a few greedy and dishonest people
who place profits above human life and well-being. With the FDA and our
Congress culpable, only an INFORMED and ACTIVE public will affects its
reclassification from "food additive" to TOXIC DRUG, and removed from
the human food chain.
Also
Note: Aspartame has one use that I know of - it makes an EXCELLENT ant
poison. Put a few tablespoons on a nest of fire ants and see how long
before they disappear.
Article
courtesy of: Mark Gold mgold@tiac.net
- researcher for twenty years on such subjects. For more
information you may also visit www.dorway.com.
IMPORTANT
NOTE FROM THE EDITOR: I applaud you should
you make the decision to remove aspartame from your daily life.
Please, I beg you, do not replace it with another artifical sweetner
though. From all the information I have read thus far, Splenda is
just as toxic and the "It tastes like sugar because it is made from
sugar" claim is nothing more than a PR campaign. Splenda is a
chemical; there is NOTHING natural about it.
The
Case for a GM-Free Sustainable World - A Summary
Published by Independent Science
Panel Report Released
June 15,2003
Drafted
by Mae-Wan Ho and Lim Li Ching
with
contributions from Joe Cummins, Malcolm Hooper, Miguel Altieri, Peter
Rosset, Arpad Pusztai, Stanley Ewen, Michel Pimbert, Peter Saunders,
Edward Goldsmith, David Quist, Eva Novotny, Vyvyan Howard, Brian John,
and others on the Panel
Why
GM-Free?
- GM crops failed to deliver promised benefits
- No increase in yields or significant
reduction in
herbicide and pesticide use
- United States lost an estimated $12 billion
over
GM crops amid worldwide rejection
- Massive crop failures of up to 100%
reported in
India
- High risk future for agbiotech: "Monsanto
could
be another disaster waiting to happen for investors"
- GM crops posing escalating problems on the
farm
- Transgenic lines unstable: "most cases of
transgene inactivation never reach the literature"
- Triple herbicide-tolerant volunteers and
weeds
emerged in North America
- Glyphosate-tolerant weeds plague GM cotton
and
soya fields, atrazine back in use
- Bt biopesticide traits threatening to
create
superweeds and bt-resistant pests
- Extensive transgenic contamination
unavoidable
- Extensive transgenic contamination found in
maize
landraces in remote regions of Mexico
- 32 out of 33 commercial seed stocks found
contaminated in Canada
- Pollen remains airborne for hours, and a 35
mile
per hour wind speed is unexceptional
- There can be no co-existence of GM and
non-GM
crops
- GM crops not safe
- GM crops have not been proven safe:
regulation
was fatally flawed from the start
- The principle of 'substantial equivalence',
vague
and ill defined, gave companies complete licence in claiming GM
products 'substantially equivalent' to non-GM, and hence 'safe'
- GM food raises serious safety concerns
- Despite the paucity of credible studies,
existing
findings raise serious safety concerns
- 'Growth-factor-like' effects in the stomach
and
small intestine of young rats were attributed to the transgenic process
or the transgenic construct, and may hence be general to all GM food
- Dangerous gene products are incorporated
into food
crops
- Bt proteins, incorporated into 25% of all
GM
crops worldwide, are harmful to many non-target insects, and some are
potent immunogens and allergens for humans and other mammals
- Food crops are increasingly used to produce
pharmaceuticals and drugs, including cytokines known to suppress the
immune system, or linked to dementia, neurotoxicity and mood and
cognitive side effects; vaccines and viral sequences such as the
'spike' protein gene of the pig coronavirus, in the same family as the
SARS virus linked to the current epidemic; and glycoprotein gene gp120
of the AIDS virus that could interfere with the immune system and
recombine with viruses and bacteria to generate new and unpredictable
pathogens.
- Terminator crops spread male sterility
- Crops engineered with 'suicide' genes for
male
sterility, promoted as a means of preventing the spread of transgenes,
actually spread both male sterility and herbicide tolerance traits via
pollen.
- Broad-spectrum herbicides highly toxic to
humans
and other species
- Glufosinate ammonium and glyphosate, used
with
herbicide tolerant GM crops that currently account for 75% of all GM
crops worldwide, are both systemic metabolic poisons
- Glufosinate ammonium is linked to
neurological,
respiratory, gastrointestinal and haematological toxicities, and birth
defects in humans and mammals; also toxic to butterflies and a number
of beneficial insects, to larvae of clams and oysters, Daphnia
and some freshwater fish, especially the rainbow trout; it inhibits
beneficial soil bacteria and fungi, especially those that fix nitrogen.
- Glyphosate is the most frequent cause of
complaints and poisoning in the UK, and disturbances to many body
functions have been reported after exposures at normal use levels;
glyphosate exposure nearly doubled the risk of late spontaneous
abortion, and children born to users of glyphosate had elevated
neurobehavioral defects; glyphosate retards development of the foetal
skeleton in laboratory rats, inhibits the synthesis of steroids, and is
genotoxic in mammals, fish and frogs; field dose exposure of earthworms
caused at least 50 percent mortality and significant intestinal damage
among surviving worms; Roundup (Monsanto's formulation of glyphosate)
caused cell division dysfunction that may be linked to human cancers.
- Genetic engineering creates super-viruses
- The most insidious dangers of genetic
engineering
are inherent to the process; it greatly enhances the scope and
probability of horizontal gene transfer and recombination, the main
route to creating viruses and bacteria that cause disease epidemics.
- Newer techniques, such as DNA shuffling,
allow
geneticists to create in a matter of minutes in the laboratory millions
of recombinant viruses that have never existed in billions of years of
evolution
- Disease-causing viruses and bacteria and
their
genetic material are the predominant materials and tools of genetic
engineering, as much as for the intentional creation of bio-weapons.
- Transgenic DNA in food taken up by bacteria
in
human gut
- Transgenic DNA from plants has been taken
up by
bacteria both in the soil and in the gut of human volunteers;
antibiotic resistance marker genes can spread from transgenic food to
pathogenic bacteria, making infections very difficult to treat.
- Transgenic DNA and cancer
- Transgenic DNA known to survive digestion
in the
gut and to jump into the genome of mammalian cells, raising the
possibility for triggering cancer
- Feeding GM products such as maize to
animals may
carry risks, not just for the animals but also for human beings
consuming the animal products
- CaMV 35S promoter increases horizontal gene
transfer
- Evidence suggests that transgenic
constructs with
the CaMV 35S promoter could be especially unstable and prone to
horizontal gene transfer and recombination, with all the attendant
hazards: gene mutations due to random insertion, cancer, re-activation
of dormant viruses and generation of new viruses.
- A history of misrepresentation and
suppression of
scientific evidence
- There has been a history of
misrepresentation and
suppression of scientific evidence, especially on horizontal gene
transfer. Key experiments failed to be performed, or were performed
badly and then misrepresented. Many experiments were not followed up,
including investigations on whether the CaMV 35S promoter is
responsible for the 'growth-factor-like' effects observed in young rats
fed GM potatoes.
GM
crops have failed to deliver the promised benefits and are posing
escalating problems on the farm. Transgenic contamination is now widely
acknowledged to be unavoidable, and hence there can be no co-existence
of GM and non-GM agriculture. Most important of all, GM crops have not
been proven safe. On the contrary, sufficient evidence has emerged to
raise serious safety concerns, that if ignored could result in
irreversible damage to health and the environment. GM crops should
therefore be firmly rejected now.
Why
Sustainable Agriculture?
- Higher productivity and yields especially in
the
Third World
- 8.98 million farmers adopted sustainable
agriculture practices on 28.92 million hectares in Asia, Latin America
and Africa; reliable data from 89 projects show higher productivity and
yields: 50-100% increase in yield for rainfed crops, and 5-10% for
irrigated crops; top successes include Burkina Faso, which turned a
cereal deficit of 644 kg per year to an annual surplus of 153 kg,
Ethiopia, where 12 500 households enjoyed 60% increase in crop yields,
and Honduras and Guatemala, where 45 000 families increased yields from
400-600 kg/ha to 2,000-2,500 kg/ha
- Long-term studies in industrialised
countries
show yields for organic comparable to conventional agriculture, and
often higher
- Better soils
- Sustainable agricultural practices reduce
soil
erosion, improve soil physical structure and water-holding capacity,
which are crucial in averting crop failures during periods of drought
- Soil fertility maintained or increased by
various
sustainable agriculture practices
- Biological activity higher in organic
soils: more
earthworms, arthropods, mycorrhizal and other fungi, and
micro-organisms, all beneficial for nutrient recycling and suppression
of disease
- Cleaner environment
- Little or no polluting chemical inputs with
sustainable agriculture
- Less nitrate and phosphorus leached to
groundwater from organic soils
- Better water infiltration rates in organic
systems, therefore less prone to erosion and less likely to contribute
to water pollution from surface runoff
- Reduced pesticides and no increase in pests
- Integrated pest
management cut the number of
pesticide sprays in Vietnam from 3.4 to one per season, in Sri Lanka
from 2.9 to 0.5 per season, and in Indonesia from 2.9 to 1.1 per season
- No increase in crop losses due to pest
damage
resulted from withdrawal of synthetic insecticides in Californian
tomato production
- Pest control achievable without pesticides,
reversing crop losses, as for example, by using 'trap crops' to attract
stem borer, a major pest in East Africa
- Supporting biodiversity and using diversity
- Sustainable agriculture promotes
agricultural
biodiversity, which is crucial for food security; organic farming can
support much greater biodiversity, benefiting species that have
significantly declined
- Integrated farming systems in Cuba are 1.45
to
2.82 times more productive than monocultures
- Thousands of Chinese rice farmers doubled
yields
and nearly eliminated the most devastating disease simply by mixed
planting of two varieties
- Soil biodiversity enhanced by organic
practices,
bringing beneficial effects such as recovery and rehabilitation of
degraded soils, improved soil structure and water infiltration.
- Environmentally and economically sustainable
- Research on apple production systems ranked
the
organic system first in environmental and economic sustainability, the
integrated system second and the conventional system last; organic
apples were most profitable due to price premiums, quicker investment
return, and fast recovery of costs
- A Europe-wide study showed that organic
farming
performs better than conventional farming in the majority of
environmental indicators
- A review by the United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organization (FAO) concluded that well-managed organic
agriculture leads to more favourable conditions at all environmental
levels
- Ameliorating climate change by reducing
direct
& indirect energy use
- Organic agriculture uses energy much more
efficiently and greatly reduces CO2 emissions compared with
conventional agriculture, both with respect to direct energy
consumption in fuel and oil and indirect consumption in synthetic
fertilizers and pesticides
- Sustainable agriculture restores soil
organic
matter content, increasing carbon sequestration below ground, thereby
recovering an important carbon sink
- Organic agriculture is likely to emit less
nitrous dioxide (N2O), another important greenhouse gas and
also a cause of stratospheric ozone depletion
- Efficient, profitable production
- Any yield reduction in organic agriculture
more
than offset by ecological and efficiency gains
- Smaller farms produce far more per unit
area than
larger farms characteristic of conventional farming
- Production costs for organic farming are
often
lower than conventional farming, bringing equivalent or higher net
returns even without organic price premiums; when price premiums are
factored in, organic systems are almost always more profitable
- Improved food security and benefits to local
communities
- A review of sustainable agriculture
projects
showed that average food production per household increased by 1.71
tonnes per year (up 73%) for 4.42 million farmers on 3.58 million
hectares, bringing food security and health benefits to local
communities
- Increasing productivity increases food
supplies
and raises incomes, thereby reducing poverty, increasing access to
food, reducing malnutrition and improving health and livelihoods
- Sustainable agricultural approaches draw
extensively on traditional and indigenous knowledge, and place emphasis
on the farmers' experience and innovation, thereby improving their
status and autonomy, enhancing social and cultural relations within
local communities
- For every £1 spent at an organic box
scheme
from Cusgarne Organics (UK), £2.59 is generated for the local
economy; but for every £1 spent at a supermarket, only
£1.40 is generated for the local economy
- Better food quality for health
- Organic food is safer, as organic farming
prohibits pesticide use, so harmful chemical residues are rarely found
- Organic production bans the use of
artificial
food additives, such as hydrogenated fats, phosphoric acid, aspartame
and monosodium glutamate, which have been linked to health problems as
diverse as heart disease, osteoporosis, migraines and hyperactivity
- Studies have shown that on average, organic
food
has higher vitamin C, higher mineral levels and higher plant phenolics
- plant compounds that can fight cancer and heart disease, and combat
age-related neurological dysfunctions - and significantly less
nitrates, a toxic compound.
Sustainable
agricultural practices have proven beneficial in all aspects relevant
to health and the environment. In addition, they bring food security
and social and cultural well being to local communities everywhere.
There is an urgent need for a comprehensive global shift to all forms
of sustainable agriculture.
To
learn more about the
Independent Science Panel, scientists involved, and their 120 page
final report please visit: http://www.i-sis.org.uk
Download the FULL
REPORT.
If
you like this original article from the Institute of Science in
Society, and would like to continue receiving articles of this calibre,
please consider making a donation or purchase on our website. ISIS is
an independent, not-for-profit organisation dedicated to providing
critical public information on cutting edge science, and to promoting
social accountability and ecological sustainability in
science.
Independent Science Panel Members
From http://www.i-sis.org.uk
Prof.
Miguel Altieri
Professor of Agroecology, University of California, Berkeley, USA
Dr.
Michael Antoniou
Senior Lecturer in Molecular Genetics, GKT School of Medicine, King's
College, London.
Dr.
Susan Bardocz
Biochemist, formerly Rowett Research Institute, Scotland
Prof.
David Bellamy OBE
Internationally renowned botanist, environmentalist, broadcaster,
author and campaigner; recipient of number awards; President & Vice
President of many conservation and environmental organisations.
Dr.
Elizabeth Bravo V.
Biologist, researcher and campaigner on biodiversity and GMO issues;
co-founder of Acción Ecológica; part-time lecturer at
Universidad Politécnica Salesiana, Ecuador.
Prof.
Joe Cummins
Professor Emeritus of Genetics, University of Western Ontario, London,
Ontario, Canada.
Dr.
Stanley Ewen
Consultant Histopathologist at Grampian University Hospitals Trust;
formerly Senior Lecturer in Pathology, University of Aberdeen; lead
histopathologist for the Grampian arm of the Scottish Colorectal Cancer
Screening Pilot Project.
Edward
Goldsmith
Recipient of the Right Livelihood and numerous awards,
environmentalist, scholar, author and Founding Editor of The Ecologist.
Dr.
Brian Goodwin
Scholar in Residence, Schumacher College, England.
Dr.
Mae-Wan Ho
Co-founder and Director of the Institute of Science in Society; Editor
of Science in Society; Science Advisor to the Third World Network and
on the Roster of Experts for the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety;
Visiting Reader, Open University, UK and Visiting Professor of Organic
Physics, Catania University, Sicily, Italy.
Prof.
Malcolm Hooper
Emeritus Professor at the University of Sunderland; previously,
Professor of Medicinal Chemistry, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences,
Sunderland Polytechnic; Chief Scientific Advisor to the Gulf War
Veterans.
Dr.
Vyvyan Howard
Medically qualified toxico-pathologist, Developmental Toxico-Pathology
Group, Department of Human Anatomy and Cell Biology, The University of
Liverpool; Member of the UK Government's Advisory Committee on
Pesticides.
Dr.
Brian John
Geomorphologist and environmental scientist; Founder and long-time
Chairman of the West Wales Eco Centre; one of the coordinating group of
GM Free Cymru
Prof.
Marijan Jošt
Professor of Plant Breeding and Seed Production, Agricultural College
Križevci, Croatia.
Lim
Li Ching
Researcher, Institute of Science in Society and Third World Network;
deputy-editor of Science in Society.
Dr.
Eva Novotny
Astronomer and campaigner on GM issues for Scientists for Global
Responsibility, SGR
Prof.
Bob Orskov OBE
Head of the International Feed Resource Unit in Macaulay Institute,
Aberdeen, Scotland; Fellow of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, FRSE;
Fellow of the Polish Academy of Science.
Dr.
Michel Pimbert
Agricultural ecologist and Principal Associate, International Institute
for Environment and Development.
Dr.
Arpad Pusztai
Private consultant; formerly Senior Research Fellow at the Rowett
Research Institute, Aberdeen, Scotland.
David
Quist
Microbial ecologist, Ecosystem Science Division, Environmental Science,
Policy and Management, University of California, Berkeley, USA.
Dr.
Peter Rosset
Agricultural ecologist and rural development specialist; Co-director of
the Institute for Food and Development Policy (Food First), Oakland,
California, USA.
Prof.
Peter Saunders
Professor of Applied Mathematics at King's College, London.
Dr.
Veljko Veljkovic
AIDS virologist, Center for Multidisciplinary Research and Engineering,
Institute of Nuclear Sciences, VINCA, Belgrade, Yugoslavia.
Roberto
Verzola
Secretary-General, Philippine Greens, Member of the Board of Trustees,
PABINHI (a sustainable agriculture network), Coordinator, SRI-Pilipinas
(network of advocates for the System of Rice Intensification).
Prof.
Oscar B. Zamora
Professor of Agronomy, Department of Agronomy, University of the
Philippines Los Banos-College of Agriculture (UPLB-CA), College,
Laguna, The Philippines.
|