Even with natural sweeteners, we're back to reading labels. Stevia came to us as a simple leaf from a simple plant that is 200 times sweeter than sugar. It doesn't spike your blood sugar and has no known side effects. It definitely is not a carcinogen like most other sugar replacements.
You once were able to buy pure stevia, unadulterated in a powder form that required only a minuscule amount to sweeten. It is now commonly found with many brand names and usually in green packets that were meant to reflect its healthy nature. Those manufacturers that make the green packets of sweetener know they appeal to those who are health conscious, but their greed got the better of them. There is now stevia and then there is stevia. You really need to read carefully to see what you are actually getting. Most stevia packets include extenders of some kind with the intent of making a sugar-like quantity available in each packet. The extenders are up for grabs and unregulated. Some you might want to reject. This one has more dextrose and maltodextrin than stevia. Both added ingredients are as bad as sugar for your body. They are usually GMO sourced, can result in weight gain, cause the body to create insulin, have a high glycemic index and are dangerous for diabetics. In the case of maltodextrin, it can cause bloat, pain and affect gut health resulting in explosive, untrustworthy bowels.
Below is a copy of the letter I wrote to my municipal water board. You may feel free to copy and send it to yours. Instead of stirring up the same old question of "is fluoride safe or unsafe" I've brought up some issues that are hard to dispute.
Bottom line...The FDA classifies fluoride as an "unapproved drug," even though it has been used for 60 years. We know the position of the Center for Disease Control is that systemic use of fluoride does no good and that only a topical treatment shows any signs of improving dental health. We also know that there are changes to the body when fluoride is used. How then did this happen? Somewhere in my soul, it feels like greed is involved. Copy of my letter to my water district: This short fact sheet gives an overview of my concerns and those of others who question the efficacy, the dangers and the “why” of adding fluoride to our water supply. It is time to re-examine that decision. Of course there is science on all sides of this issue that will conflict, but we must question the policy. Without getting into the arguable science, I have listed a few points that don’t require opinion. Should you like more scientific data, I am happy to provide it. Fluoride Facts; 1. Fluoride is added to the water, not for the purpose of improving water quality, but rather for the alleged purpose of preventing tooth decay. The FDA qualifies the use of fluoride for this purpose as a drug. We are therefore drugging unsuspecting users without informed consent. This is not legal. Many are exposed against their will. Filtering drinking water is not the answer as showering and other uses are exposing humans to the drug. 2. The use of fluoride is not universally accepted. Most of Western Europe has refused fluoride because of the controversy surrounding it and the concept of mass drugging. 3. If in fact fluoridation was a positive influence, water is not the correct method for dosing. People consume water based on need of the water itself and without regard to the amount of the drug being consumed. It is easy to see that the amount of fluoride taken into a body cannot be regulated via the municipal water supply. We must be able to calculate the amount of fluoride that is absorbed during showering via the skin or through crop watering which is impossible for a user. We must also consider a bottle fed infant that ingests levels of fluoride equal to those of an adult. There is no research to warn what the outcome of this might be in the future. 4. According to fluoridealert.com, fluoride is not an essential nutrient and no disease or tooth decay is caused by the lack of fluoride. They also state that fluoride interferes with many enzymes and biological processes in the body. They quote many studies that prove fluoride interferes with the body’s biochemistry in fundamental ways. 5. In 60 years of forced fluoridation there are still no studies to prove efficacy or safety and still the FDA classifies it as an “unapproved new drug.” This should make the addition of fluoride without consent a criminal act. Although rather unscientific, I would also say that not one dentist has gone out of business because of fluoridated water. There is no apparent threat to the dental industry and no data that proves dwindling numbers of patients. 6. In 2001 the CDC concluded that the benefits of fluoride were topical and not systemic. With this in mind, why are we risking what could be a horrific outcome? 7. Studies of those fluoridated in comparison to those not fluoridated, show that each group has similar dental health in my research. Even the NIH has studied fluoride and determined that there is no significant relationship between tooth decay and fluoride among children. 8. Research shows that tooth decay does not increase when fluoridation is discontinued. 9. Many resources agree that the studies that brought us fluoridation were flawed. There is consistent evidence of potential harm and many resources, including the National Research Council, believe it may damage the brain. 10. Thirty-three independent studies from countries other than the USA report that exposure to fluoride will lower IQ. Other studies focus on damage to the pineal gland, thyroid function, arthritis, bone density loss, kidney damage, bone cancer and infertility with fluoride contamination. Is this not enough to ask yourself why we continue this practice? I am asking this Board to reconsider our use of fluoride in the water supply and to ask that we begin purchasing non-fluoridated water. When you have the option of keeping baby safe Why Not? Recipes for diaper cream, shampoo and baby powder. Somewhere in our history the smell of a baby became associated with commercial products. The most famous of these is Johnson & Johnson’s Baby Powder which is currently losing legal battles for causing ovarian cancer, yet, the imprint of that smell remains associated with baby.
Homemade Toothpaste Recipe Mix equal parts coconut oil solids with baking soda and a drop of a flavorful essential oil. Your body is a machine that works 24 hours a day for you. When toxicity threatens, that machine knows what to do to remove danger from the body and begins to detox the threat as soon as possible. The chore is endless so whatever you can do to reduce the burden is probably a great idea. Trading in commercial toothpaste for a healthier version is one giant step to lessening the burden.
Here is what you can expect to find in commercial toothpaste. Triclosan is an antibacterial added to soaps, toothpaste, cosmetics and body washes with FDA approval. It can also be found in clothing, kitchenware, furniture and toys which are less regulated. Here is what FDA.gov says about Triclosan: Some short-term animal studies have shown that exposure to high doses of triclosan is associated with a decrease in the levels of some thyroid hormones. But we don’t know the significance of those findings to human health. Other studies have raised the possibility that exposure to triclosan contributes to making bacteria resistant to antibiotics. At this time, we don’t have enough information available to assess the level of risk that triclosan poses for the development of antibiotic resistance. There are other ongoing studies that involve the safety of triclosan. One is a study investigating the potential of developing skin cancer after a long-term exposure to triclosan in animals. Another is a study on the potential breakdown of triclosan to other chemicals on human skin after exposure to triclosan to ultraviolet (UV) rays. At this time, neither study has been completed. Sodium Lauryl Sulfate or SLS is a compound classified as a chemical and is responsible for almost everything you know and love that bubbles or foams, like toothpaste, soaps, body wash, shampoo and cleaning products. The problem is that it is responsible for skin irritations, disrupting hormone balance and has suspicious, but unconfirmed links to cancer, neurotoxicity and organ toxicity. According to EWG’s Skin Deep, it is a moderate treat. The real problem is that a “moderate threat” becomes a “dangerous threat” when it is in so many commercial products that the quantities of absorption and ingestion are beyond intended regulated limits. We know that the body will store SLS because of quantities found in the brain, heart and liver. Artificial Sweeteners, a normal additive for toothpaste, all have varying harmful effects. Only natural products like stevia or monk fruit are trustworthy options, having no links to cancer or diabetes. Fluoride is a topic of much debate. The American Dental Association, ADA, stands behind its use but it's good to remember that these are the same people who brought you silver, amalgam fillings containing mercury and claim that storing that mercury in your head will not harm you. The FDA classifies it as a drug. Even if you believe in fluoride as being helpful to teeth, you cannot believe in being drugged without your consent or knowing the proper dosage. In the case of children who ultimately swallow toothpaste and possibly combine that source with fluoridate water, this is a real problem. Propylene Glycol is a humectant in cosmetics, bringing a creamy texture to products. It is also used in industrial antifreeze and the major ingredient in brake and hydraulic fluid. Even though it is a strong skin irritant known to cause liver abnormalities and kidney damage, it is used to improve the consistency of cosmetics and some food products. This compound causes the fatal destruction of red blood cells, yet is one of the most widely used ingredients in cosmetics. It permeates the skin better than glycerin, and causes greater sensitivity reactions. This cancer causing agent, can be found in some dog food as a preservative. With that said, it seems like an unnecessary addition to your toothpaste. In your quest to clean at least some of the toxicity out of your life, trying healthier versions of toothpaste is an obvious choice. *In that quest, be aware that many of the popular health based companies are being bought by Corporate America. For consumers who care, that means reading and deciphering ingredients. Don’t be fooled by “natural” or the addition of an essential oil. So in the end, if you want a simple and cheap alternative try this homemade version of toothpaste. Homemade Toothpaste Recipe Coconut Oil Solids Baking Soda Peppermint Essential Oil Mix equal parts of coconut oil solids with baking soda and a few drops of peppermint or another essential oil. Store in a small jar or dish that can manage any melting of the oil on a hot day. There is no need to refrigerate. *NOTE: Just FYI these are some of the Corporate America purchases of trusted healthy brands. It would seem unwise to buy without investigation, as these manufacturers are responsible for much of the poisoning of humanity. Burt’s Bees is now owned by Clorex Tom’s of Maine is now owned by Colgate Palmolive The Body Shop is owned by L’Orleal Annie’s Homegrown is now General Mills Lara Bar is now General Mills Kashi is Kellogg’s product. Odwalla is owned by Coca Cola Honest Tea is owned by Coca Cola Naked Juice is a Pepsi product It's Beautiful, but once you Understand Toxicity in Your Kitchen There is More to Know Because the choices for lead-free dinnerware are few, Melamine looked like an exciting option. It's lightweight, durable, inexpensive and comes in beautiful color and pattern options. It is worth of some research. Melamine has been used as an industrial fertilizer and the finished product for dinnerware does include formaldehyde. Many will rely on the fact that it meets FDA requirements, but even the FDA notes that it's toxicity can leach into food. Long term exposure from storing food on plates, heat and acidic foods allow the release more easily. Cutting food with knives could also be a contributor. Additionally, some Melamine products are not even dishwasher safe while others are limited to the top rack of dishwashers adding to the worry that dishwashing and microwaving might also help spread the contaminants. In 2007 150 brands of pet food were recalled because of Melamine contamination. In simple, routine taste tests pets died from exposure. The danger to humans is mostly related to the kidneys, with kidney failure, kidney infection, kidney stones, high blood pressure and death being the primary concerns. To risk or not to risk is a personal decision, but being armed with the facts is essential. Below are FDA responses to questions on their site, FDA.gov. Some interesting notes to consider give clue to the casual attitude of the Administration. The warnings are softened by saying the risk is minimal. They state that in one test 3 of 19 samples were considered a danger. Nineteen samples is hardly adequate to safeguard consumers and where are those 3 brands that are hazardous if not on the same shelf as the other 16? They say also that tests were done in exaggerated conditions of food being held at 160 degrees for 2 hours. The FDA admits that acidic foods are at a higher risk and claim that because these foods are only about 10% of the normal diet, all should be fine. This seems an incredible response to the question, "Could Melamine be harmful to my health?' Using the logic provided, those with a healthier diet will be at a higher risk than those who do not incorporate such foods. Melamine in Tableware: Questions and Answers by FDA.gov: What is melamine? Melamine is a chemical that has many industrial uses. In the United States, it is approved for use in the manufacturing of some cooking utensils, plates, plastic products, paper, paperboard, and industrial coatings, among other things. In addition, although it is not registered as a fertilizer in the U.S., melamine has been used as a fertilizer in some parts of the world. Melamine may be used in the manufacturing of packaging for food products, but is not FDA-approved for direct addition to human food or animal feeds marketed in the U.S. I recently read that plastic tableware from China contained high levels of melamine. Can the melamine from these products get into foods and drinks? The Taiwan Consumers' Foundation recently tested plastic tableware made in China and found that it contained melamine at a level of 20,000 parts per billion. This type of tableware is manufactured with a substance called melamine-formaldehyde resin. It forms molecular structures that are molded, with heat, to form the shape of the tableware. A small amount of the melamine used to make the tableware is "left over" from this chemical reaction and remains in the plastic. This left-over melamine can migrate very slowly out of the plastic into food that comes into contact with the tableware. If melamine from plastic tableware can get into foods and drinks, does it make the foods or drinks harmful to health? It has been found that melamine does not migrate from melamine-formaldehyde tableware into most foods. The only measured migration, in tests, was from some samples (three out of 19 commercially available plates and cups) into acidic foods, under exaggerated conditions (that is, the food was held in the tableware at 160 oF for two hours). When adjusted for actual-use conditions (cold orange juice held in the tableware for about 15 minutes), the migration would be less than 10 parts of melamine per billion parts of juice. This is 250 times lower than the level of melamine (alone or even in combination with related compounds – analogues – known to increase its toxicity) that FDA has concluded is acceptable in foods other than infant formula (2,500 parts per billion); in other words, well below the risk level. In addition, such highly acidic foods make up only about 10% of the total diet, so the dietary level of melamine in these scenarios would be less than one part per billion. However, when highly acidic foods are heated to extreme temperatures (e.g.,160 ° F or higher), the amount of melamine that migrates out of the plastic can increase. Foods and drinks should not be heated on melamine-based dinnerware in microwave ovens. Only ceramic or other cookware which specifies that the cookware is microwave-safe should be used. The food may then be served on melamine-based tableware. Should I stop using plastic tableware? Foods and drinks may be served on plastic tableware. Plastic tableware that does not specify that it’s microwave-safe should not be used to heat foods and drinks. How did FDA decide what level of melamine in food doesn’t pose a risk to health? A safety and risk assessment estimates the risk that specific substances have on human health, based on the best scientific data available at the time. FDA has done this type of assessment to identify the risk posed by melamine and its analogues in foods (Interim Safety and Risk Assessment of Melamine and Its Analogues in Food for Humans). The risk assessment was conducted by scientists from FDA’s Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition and FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine, and included a review of the scientific literature on melamine toxicity. Animal studies also provided valuable information for this work. The assessment underwent peer review by a group of experts identified by an independent contractor. What problems can melamine cause if people eat or drink food contaminated with it? Products with melamine contamination above the levels noted in FDA’s risk assessment may put people at risk of conditions such as kidney stones and kidney failure, and of death. Signs of melamine poisoning may include irritability, blood in urine, little or no urine, signs of kidney infection, and / or high blood pressure. On The Fence About Fluoride? Unsure Who to Trust? It's Past Time to Make Up Your Mind. Fluoride has made its way into our daily lives via public water providers. The truth about how a poison, once part of Vietnam's Agent Orange crisis, came to being part of the public water supply is still somewhat mysterious. We know the original claims were in regard to reducing dental cavities, but even the DCD disputes that claim. Often agencies within the same governments that provide fluoridated water, challenge the practice too. Even your bottled water is at risk of containing fluoride without your knowledge. A water filer may or may not manage fluoride.
According to the Center for Disease Control, 2012 report on Community Water Fluoridation the percentage of the US population receiving community water with fluoridation was 67%. Of the 52,734 community water providers in the US then, only 18,502 agencies were providing fluoridated water. That means that these providers were serving large populations. The states providing the largest populations with fluoridated water are California, Florida, Illinois, New York and Texas even though the question of efficacy and danger continue. If we reduce the arguments for and against fluoridation of public water to the basic facts, there seems to be no reason for this practice to continue. No matter which side of the fence is yours, the practice appears to be unfair and illegal. Note the facts and decide if your health rights are being managed by the government without your consent. Fluoride Facts: 1. Fluoride is added to water not for the purpose of improving water quality, but for the purpose of preventing tooth decay and/or disease. The FDA qualifies the use of fluoride for this purpose as a drug. We are therefore, drugging unsuspecting users without informed consent, which we know is not legal. Many are exposed against their will. 2. The use of fluoride is not universally accepted. Most of Western Europe has refused fluoride because of the controversy surrounding it and the concept of mass drugging. 3. If, in fact, fluoridation was a positive influence water is not the correct method for dosing. People consume water based on need of water itself and without regard to the amount of the drug being consumed. It is easy to see that the amount of fluoride taken into a body cannot be regulated via the municipal water supply. In that equation we must also calculate the amount of fluoride that is absorbed into the body via the skin during bathing or swimming, which almost no consumer can know. We must also consider a bottle fed infant that ingests levels of fluoridation meant for an adult for which there is no research on outcome. 4. According to fluoridealert.org fluoride is not an essential nutrients and no disease or tooth decay is caused by a lack of fluoride. They also state that fluoride interferes with many enzymes and biological processes in the body. They quote many studies that prove fluoride interferes with the body’s biochemistry in fundamental ways. 5. In more than 60 years of forced fluoridation there are still no studies to prove efficacy or safety and still the FDA classifies it as an “unapproved new drug.” This makes the addition of fluoride without consent a criminal act. 6. The CDC in 2001 concluded that the benefits of fluoride were topical and not systemic. With this in mind, why are we risking what could be a horrific outcome? 7. Even the National Institute of Health has studied fluoride and determined that there is no significant relationship between tooth decay and fluoride among children. 8. Research shows that tooth decay does not increase when fluoridation is discontinued. 9. Many sources agree that the studies that brought us fluoridation were flawed. There is consistent evidence of potential harm and many sources, including the National Research Council, believe it may damage the brain. 10. Thirty-three independent studies from countries other than the USA report that exposure to fluoride will lower IQ. Other studies focus on damage to the pineal gland, thyroid function, arthritis, bone density loss, kidney damage, bone cancer, and infertility with fluoride contamination. It is time the practice of fluoridating public water be challenged, if for no other reason than we are mass drugging populations without consent. It is unfair that those who cannot afford to filter their drinking and bathing water be subjected to fluoridation. |
AuthorSusan Trump Archives
January 2024
Categories
All
|