Orthorexia Nervosa – New mental disorder aimed at people who insist on eating a clean diet
by: Mike Bundrant
(NaturalNews) In a world where meaning is malleable, you can twist the truth however you want. You can create a story to make worthwhile endeavors look bad. You can make harmful practices appear attractive.
The mental health system has recently taken a shot at making healthy food choices appear dangerous, if you can imagine, especially when those choices are your top priority.
Clinicians are actively diagnosing patients with orthorexia nervosa, the extreme desire to eat pure food.
This is not a parody. It’s actually happening.
If you have a strong desire to eat pure, uncontaminated food, then you could be suffering from a mental disorder per this new medical labeling trend.
According to the Guardian: Orthorexics commonly have rigid rules around eating. Refusing to touch sugar, salt, caffeine, alcohol, wheat, gluten, yeast, soy, corn and dairy foods is just the start of their diet restrictions. Any foods that have come into contact with pesticides, herbicides or contain artificial additives are also out.
Doctors and mental health professionals are very concerned, of course, as orthorexia nervosa seems to be ‘on the rise.
Ursula Philpot, chairperson of the British Dietetic Association mental health division, was quoted as follows: I am definitely seeing significantly more orthorexics than just a few years ago. Other eating disorders focus on quantity of food but orthorexics can be overweight or look normal. They are solely concerned with the quality of the food they put in their bodies, refining and restricting their diets according to their personal understanding of which foods are truly pure.
Philpot further asserts:
Those most susceptible are middle-class, well-educated people who read about food scares in the papers, research them on the internet, and have the time and money to source what they believe to be purer alternatives.
Are you with me? If you are well-educated, like to do your own research and eat only foods that you (all by yourself) determine to be healthy and pure, then it is safe to say that you are at risk for ‘catching’ orthorexia nervosa.
Yes, orthorexia, is something that you can catch like a disease, according to the National Eating Disorder Association (NEDA). On the NEDA website, they ask the questions: Why does someone get orthorexia? This positions orthorexia as capable of latching onto you like a cold.
Other authorities position orthorexia as a brain disorder
A 2013 study associated orthorexia with impaired executive functioning (based on self-reporting). This means, according to researchers, that the better you do with cognitive tasks, including planning and decision-making, the less likely you are to have orthorexia.
So, if you’re high functioning and smart, you shouldn’t have problems eating chemically-laden food, at least once in a while.
If your brain is not functioning properly, then you’re very likely to begin insisting that everything in your diet consist of real food.
I don’t know if orthorexia nervosa is a grand conspiracy – another way to misle innocent people into eating junk. If it were a conspiracy, it would be a brilliant one. I can’t imagine a better message from the likes of big food and big pharma.
We could boil down this message as follows:
Hey, we’re busy profiteering by infecting the planet and the food supply with chemicals. If you insist on avoiding our noxious faire, then you’re a mental case. Your brain has gone haywire and you should seek professional help from one of our mental health representatives.
When you arrive, you will be diagnosed mentally ill, of course. But don’t worry, we have pills for that. We’ve got you covered! Soon, your brain will be corrected and you’ll have no problem eating our crap.
Do you have orthorexia nervosa?
WebMD can help get started down the path to diagnosis. Just ask yourself the following questions, per their website:
• Are you spending more than three hours a day thinking about healthy food?
• Are you planning tomorrow’s menu today?
• Is the virtue you feel about what you eat more important than the pleasure you receive from eating it?
• Has the quality of your life decreased as the quality of your diet increased?
• Have you become stricter with yourself?
• Does your self-esteem get a boost from eating healthy?
• Do you skip foods you once enjoyed in order to eat the “right” foods?
• Does your diet make it difficult for you to eat anywhere but at home, distancing you from friends and family.
• Do you feel guilt or self-loathing when you stray from your diet?
• When you eat the way you’re supposed to, do you feel in total control?
Are any of these leading questions? You be the judge.
The ‘symptoms’ are common
There are people out there that experience anxiety about chemicals in their food. There may be people who are obsessive about eating only 100% pure food – and will go to any length to avoid food manufactured with impure ingredients. This may mean avoiding food at social gatherings, refusing certain foods prepared by others and taking considerable time planning and preparing meals.
Are all natural health advocates candidates for this diagnosis? Natural health lovers be warned. One nutritionist says that you are in danger if you eat only healthy food. To quote Jennifer Culbert (SAR’09), a registered dietician: So if someone cuts out processed food, or things that are genetically modified, or not grown organically, the danger is that they can become malnourished or underweight.
Got it? You must eat processed food, GMO’s and plenty of non-organic ingredients in order to avoid malnourishment.
How much more ridiculous can we get here, folks? My brain is spinning as I pick myself up off the floor. Laughing your ass off is dangerous, too. You can fall out of your chair.
Let’s be fair, though
The originator of the term is one Steven Bratman, MD. Dr. Bratman has taken some heat for his new term. On his website, he explains very carefully that he never intended for his concept to applied to anyone who is merely pursuing health by eating well. It was only intended for those who are suffering from an over-focus or “unhealthy obsession” with pure food.
I understand. I am sure there are those who take it too far. Not by eating only 100% real food 100% of the time, but by alienating others in their life who choose to eat a conventional diet. After alienating those around them, the health obsessed individual could get pretty lonely. This could be a valid concern.
Additionally, I am sure it is possible to become so paranoid about your food the even the purest and healthiest food choices available become suspicious. At this point, you might begin to dangerously restrict your diet.
Another fair point: Orthorexia nervosa is not an official diagnosis in the Diagnostic and Statistics Manual (DSM). It is merely used by clinicians, but not officially sanctioned by the APA.
Fair enough. The problem, however, is that clinicians are using it as a practical diagnosis and some of them appear to quite sloppy about it, in my humble opinion.
For example, one registered dietitian, Julie Upton, reported to the Huffington Post, “We have no specific criteria [for orthorexia], but we know it when we see it.”
And thus the problem with the mental health system in general and with mental “disorders.” The labels are there. If you get one, then you are officially mentally ill. You have a brain disorder. Yet, there are rarely, if ever, tests to validate the so-called brain disorder prior to prescribing meds.
There are pills to chemically alter your brain, but no tests. Have you ever had your child diagnosed as ADHD and put on psychiatric drugs? What tests were done to determine the physiological necessity of the drug?
In the case of orthorexia nervosa, there apparently aren’t any criteria for diagnosis. Clinicians “just know.” How dumb do you doctors, dietitians and counselors think we are?
The other problem is this: There is absolutely nothing wrong with eating a 100% clean, healthy diet 100% of the time!
Check the reference links below and you will discover that I am not making this stuff up. Hey! Are you an orthorexic?
Today on Survival Saturday, we have a series of stories that could all be headlined, “What could possibly go wrong?” Do you remember the reality show by that name, where a couple of guys apply science and logic to ill-conceived ideas and explain exactly what could go wrong when you power a skateboard with homemade rockets? Perhaps our future doom won’t be caused by some kind of epic disaster, but by the unwillingness of the people to actually accept reality and apply logic to it.
Survival Saturday is a round-up of the week’s news and resources for folks who are interested in being prepared.
This Week in the News…
Coming to a City Near You: Aerial Spraying of GMO Bacteria over Residential Neighborhoods
If you ever wondered whether you might possibly be an unwilling participant in a science experiment, I think it’s pretty safe to assume that you are.
The Washington Department of Health has recommended that people stay indoors for half an hour after the spray. (They don’t mention anything about sealing doors and windows with duct tape or closing vents to the outside, but hey, maybe that’s just me.) Of course, the USDA, always a proponent of things GMO and unnatural, says everything will be just fine, claiming that “the acidic diet of most Americans renders the bacteria harmless, though it is persistent in produce and food products.” Apparently, this GMO bacteria pesticide has been sprayed on our food for a while now, although I must have missed the announcement of that practice.
Let me preface by saying that this little rant does not reflect my opinions on who can use which bathroom. Honestly, I don’t care. There are stall doors. Don’t even get me started on pondering how bathroom laws would be enforced or how it isn’t the government’s place to be potty monitors. We have bigger problems in this country than who pees where and you’d be wise not to get sidetracked by that ridiculous debate.
Okay – back to the story.
I’ll never forget when my kiddo was in 4th grade. She was telling me about an event that happened in school and being very vague in her description of the girl involved. Finally, it dawned on me. I asked her, “Are you talking about the girl in your class who is black?” Since there was only one child in the class of African American descent, that did indeed narrow it down. But my daughter was horrified because the kids had been taught never to refer to a person’s race, even when it was the most accurate descriptor. If I thought that was absolutely ridiculous, I had no idea at the time what was coming down the pipe of political correctness.
Well, here it is. And what has come out of the pipe is the pure sewage of cognitive dissonance.
What could possibly go wrong in a society that politely accepts fantasy as fact? It seems pretty obvious to me that college students are being prepped for the world Orwell had imagined.
Here’s What’s Going on Behind the Pending Economic Disaster
Meanwhile, secret meetings between those in the economic know abounded last week and Saudi Arabia threatened the US with massive economic reprisals – and by massive, I mean billions and billions of dollars – if their part in 9/11 came to light in a bipartisan bill on the table in Congress that would allow victims of 9/11 and other terrorist attacks to sue foreign governments.
A commodity trader has come forward (sort of…anonymously) and said that the current plan in the economic world is even worse. In his own words:
Here comes my Very-REAL Conspiracy Theory: the stupid FED and other Central Bankers around the world acting in unison to artificially raise inflation so that they can hopefully get out of the F’ing mess they got themselves into with this low/negative rate BS. Call me crazy, and I am not a “conspiracy theorist” – but what is happening has absolutely no “reasonable” explanation. So I have to think outside the box…
The FED and other Central Banks have already destroyed the equity and other macro-financial markets… it is now turn for the commodities markets…
Oh – and on a related note, if you ever wondered why no bankers have gone to jail for their parts in the economic cluster pulling the rest of the country under – an insider explains exactly why in this article. What could possibly go wrong with ignoring that?
You’ve Got to Taste It to Believe It
Do you have the supplies you need to survive an interruption in the supply chain? Regardless of what type of disaster you are preparing for, it pays to have nutritious, long-term supplies that you can rely on. Preppers Market features the products I use to ensure my own family’s health and well-being. You won’t find any GMOs, any soy, or chemical preservatives in our foods. Gluten-free products are also available for those who do not tolerate wheat products.
Emergency foods are hard to fully appreciate without tasting. Before you make an expensive purchase, try our 4 recipe Sampler Pack: Pasta Primavera, Enchilada Beans and Rice, Granola and Sweet Habanero Chili.
Healthy food storage with GMO-Free ingredients and great taste are rare. I know you’ll be convinced when you taste test our food!
If you’re wondering what could possibly go wrong if we get someone left-leaning in office, consider that Scalia’s replacement could very likely be the deciding factor in whether or not the Second Amendment remains strong. And now, Chelsea Clinton has danced on his freshly turned grave affirmed the plan to poke even more holes in our right to protect ourselves and our families, and even points out how much easier it will be now that Scalia is no longer on the bench. As reported by SHTFplan:
“It matters to me that my mom also recognizes the role the Supreme Court has when it comes to gun control. With Justice Scalia on the bench, one of the few areas where the court actually had an inconsistent record relates to gun control.”
“Sometimes the court upheld local and state gun control measures as being compliant with the Second Amendment and sometimes the court struck them down.”
“So if you listen to Moms Demand Action and the Brady Campaign and the major efforts pushing for smart, sensible, and enforceable gun control across our country — disclosure [they] have endorsed my mom, they say they believe the next time the court rules on gun control, it will make a definitive ruling.”
Oh – I do! Here’s one last link. Remember how our cat disappeared on moving day? Well, our pampered housecat managed to survive almost 5 weeks in the forest, and now he’s back. Of course, it got me thinking about how we could all learn some survival lessons from a lost kitty – you can check out the story here, assuming you don’t hate cats or happy endings.
Due to the efforts of thousands in a grassroots campaign, as well as the actions of Senator Maria Sachs and Representative Vasilinda who started a campaign 3 years ago, 3 GMO labeling bills are being put forth in Florida – Senate bills SB 1700 and SB 1708, and House bill HB 1369.
Polls report that ‘9 of 10’ people in the U.S. want to know what’s in their food, while 64 other countries already require GMO labeling. Yet we’re still struggling to achieve the right to know exactly what we’re consuming. With the DARK ACT and TTIP threatening food security and transparency, biotech giants like Monsanto and others in the biotech industry have been trying to keep everyone clueless about what’s in the food.
But as Vermont has proven, we can rise from the defeat of California’s Proposition 37 – a low point for the anti-GMO movement.
To support these bills, since we know that the biotech industry and organizations like the Grocery Manufacturer’s Association already have their henchmen trying to defeat them, consider calling to ask your Senator to co-sponsor SB 1700 and SB 1708 today!
You can say:
I am calling to request that Senator ___________ co-sponsor Senate Bill 1700 & 1708, the genetically engineered food labeling bill, introduced by Senator Sachs, because we have the right to know what’s in the food we feed our families.
If you don’t know what district you are in, search here.
Here is a brief overview of SB 1700, SB 1708, and HB 1369.
HB 1369: Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
“Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods; Provides mandatory labeling requirements for genetically engineered raw foods & processed foods made with or derived from genetically engineered ingredients; directs DOH to adopt rules; provides for injunctive relief actions; requires court to award costs & fees under certain circumstances; specifies injunctive relief actions do not preclude civil actions for damages or personal injury.
SB 1700: Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
“Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods; Providing mandatory labeling requirements for genetically engineered raw foods and processed foods made with or derived from genetically engineered ingredients by a specified date, etc.”
SB 1708: Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods
“Labeling of Genetically Engineered Foods; Providing lists of raw agricultural commodities at high risk or potentially at risk for cultivation in a genetically engineered form; requiring the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services to publish the lists by a specified date and to update a published list annually, etc.”
In a move that will likely rock the mainstream, mega-food industry, Campbell Soup Company announced that it will work to become the first major food company to adopt food labels that will disclose genetically modified ingredients.
The decision by Campbell to attach a GMO label to its products is undoubtedly motivated by the continually-growing pressure from the people for food companies to engage in food transparency. Food providers such as Chipotle, Ben & Jerry’s, and even Hershey’s and General Mills have made moves to limit or eliminate genetically modified ingredients in at least some of their products – but never has going GMO-free been so mainstream and on a grand-scale.
“- Campbell’s will be launching several lines of organic kid’s soups, and removing MSG from all their kid’s soups. In August 2015, the company will introduce Campbell’s Organic soup for kids in three chicken noodle varieties. The soups will be non-GMO and certified Organic.
– Pepperidge Farm will be launching several organic wheat versions of their popular Goldfish Crackers. Look for organic wheat versions of regular, cheddar, and parmesan in the coming year. They still need to remove GMOs and go completely organic with the rest of their ingredients.
– Increasing organics across other food lines, and increasing the number of organic products offered by Plum.”
It was a bit of a shock to those of us in the health food industry, as Campbell contributed hundreds of thousands of dollars to fight GMO labeling efforts across the nation.
But based on recent interviews with Denise Morrison, chief executive of Campbell, it seems the company’s tune has changed (at least on the surface).
“We will withdraw from any coalition that doesn’t support mandatory labeling,” Ms. Morrison said. “We were involved in fighting the state ballots in California and Washington out of concern over a state-by-state patchwork, yet we didn’t participate in the fights in any other state beyond those. Any money we did spend after that was in support of seeking a federal solution.”
Adding to the news and probably most intriguing is the fact that Campbell is actually calling nationwide, uniform GMO labeling that would be mandatory.
“We’re optimistic that a federal solution can be reached in a reasonable amount of time, but if that’s not the case, we’re preparing to label all our products across the portfolio.
…We’ve always believed consumers have a right to know what’s in their food. We know that 92 percent of Americans support G.M.O. labeling, and transparency is a critical part of our purpose.”
About three-quarters of products made by Campbell (maker of brands like Pepperidge Farm, Prego, Plum Organics and V8 in addition to its namesake soups) – contain genetically modified ingredients from corn, canola, soybeans or sugar beets, the 4 most prevalent GMO crops.
This is a great win for the health food industry at large, as it shows a clear sign that our desire and demand for GMO labeling and food transparency is reaching new heights.
When you finally realize that mainstream food companies are basically selling us food full of chemicals and devout of nutrients, you may, like many others, start to become a little fanatic about reading ingredients lists, seeking out GMO-free products, supplementing with superfoods, and actually paying attention to what goes into your body.
Well, guess what? Now, you suddenly may have a mental disorder, at least according to scientists at the University of Northern Colorado who conducted a case study about the obsession of eating healthy. This new eating disorder is called orthorexia nervosa (ON) and is said to be driven by a fear of being unhealthy and disgust for low-quality food.
“Orthorexia nervosa (ON) is a term introduced to describe a condition characterized by a pathologic obsession for bio-logically pure and healthy nutrition.” ~Ryan M. Moroze, MD. et al [1]
The psychologists conducting the study argue that healthy eating can become dangerous if one becomes fixated on the types of ingredients in food, how the food is cooked, and what materials are used to prepare it. Those “suffering” from orthorexia may take extra time to prepare their food and carefully consider what they are willing to eat.
In this day and age, 90% of grocery store shelves, at least in the United States, are filled with processed foods, most of which are scientifically engineered to create physical and psychological dependency. Mega-portion processed meals have lead to spiking rates of diabetes, heart disease, cancer, and obesity. Shouldn’t conscientious effort to prepare and eat healthy foods be called sensible and smart instead of potentially dangerous?
Let’s agree that obsessive behavior is never really healthy, regardless of the situation. So what’s really the danger? Thomas Dunn, associate professor of psychology at the University of Northern Colorado and co-author of a recent paper believes the following:
“Such draconian diets can lack essential nutrients, and they make the vitamins and minerals a person does get from meals of exclusively, say, leafy greens, impossible for the body to absorb. This can lead to fragile bones, hormonal shifts, and cardiac problems, along with psychological distress and entrenched, delusional thinking.” [2]
We have been so meticulously programmed by food marketers that mainstream processed foods are “natural” “healthy” and “nutritious”, yet the statistics speak for themselves: the typical mainstream diet is making us unhealthy. Regardless of the substantial rise in obesity and numerous diseases, even people that follow the mantra of “healthy diet and exercise” are finding it increasingly difficult to be healthy because food bought in stores is just not what is used to be.
In the face of declining public health, doctors pump us full of pills that don’t really address the issue. Food corporations only care about profits, and their marketers lie to help them get those profits. Who else is left to help us find a path toward optimum health but ourselves?
How can you judge if you or someone you love is suffering from orthorexia? Similarly to most other mental illness assessment, a quick review of a checklist of potential traits will do. According to Dunn, if you identify with two or more of the following traits, you might need to see a counselor:
1. You consume a nutritionally unbalanced diet because of concerns about “food purity.”
2. You’re preoccupied about how eating impure or unhealthy foods will affect your physical or emotional health.
3. You rigidly avoid any food you deem to be “unhealthy,” such as those containing fat, preservatives, additives or animal products.
4. You spend three or more hours per day reading about, acquiring or preparing certain kinds of food you believe to be “pure.”
5. You feel guilty if you eat foods you believe to be “impure.”
6. You’re intolerant of other’s food beliefs.
7. You spend an excessive proportion of your income on “pure” foods. [4]
Considering this list, I’m a certified health nut!
If psychologists are so eager to create new mental illness, why not create a fancy label for the people participating in hot-dog eating contests, contributing to the daily consumption of 1.9 billion servings of Coca-cola products, or opting for the quad-stacked Big Mac and supersize fries.
“Orthorexia has not yet found its way into the latest edition of the psychiatric bible, the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM), yet is commonly being lumped in with other eating disorders. Stepping back and looking at the ones pushing this label on us shows highly questionable motives. Psychiatry as a whole is deeply in bed with a pharmaceutical industry that makes the drugs to “treat” every one of these “disorders.” It is often these companies that are wielding influence behind the scenes to invent more mental health categories with their toxic products as the answer.” ~ Jefferey Jaxen [5]
What are the ingredients for a revolution? Such a recipe can be combined together in many different ways. History has continually shown that real change that truly educates and empowers everyday people rarely comes from central governments and corporations. There is nothing more dedicated and pure on this planet than a mother’s love for her child. This timeless maternal instinct has given birth to a true revolution unlike anything witnessed in modern times.
Moms Know Best
Children are being damaged by vaccines; this is a fact. Trusting mothers have become activated by a deep desire to rescue their children from a system that has let them down, despite government regulatory agencies that are asleep at the wheel and failing to protect the health of our children. In the face of a mainstream medical community that has lost sight of its ethics and independent thinking, mothers have united through love in a common goal to provide answers for their children when the medical, legal, and political systems have given up on them. The Thinking Moms’ Revolution (TMR) was born out of a deep desire to recover their children.
Starting from the dedicated work of 23 mothers (and one dad) of children harmed by the system, the initial collaboration quickly grew into a revolution. A truly grassroots movement, the Thinking Moms have become a whirlwind of alternative research and new healing methods with a core of continual education to bring new awareness. As more mothers joined, all working without pay, the message became exponentially stronger creating a buzz. TMR, and its non-profit arm, Team TMR, has jointly authored two books (with two more on the way) leveraging their combined experience and knowledge. In addition, TMR cuts across all boundaries on their quest for healing knowledge and truth, where nothing is off limits for healing that works. TMR’s quest has educated other parents about the success of cannabidiol oil, eliminating GMO food from their children’s diet, advanced detoxification methods and much more, all while the mainstream medical community played the sidelines. The group’s presence can always be found at alternative health conferences, medical presentations, protests, regulatory hearings, and state houses to influence legislation. Even the mainstream media has been forced to take notice.
The distinct advantage of this revolution is that it is solely focused on effective, efficient, and healing truth. Mothers of damaged children have no time, energy, or care for politics, egos, and finger pointing. Perhaps this is why TMR has stood the test of time with their focused message. In 1998, the mainstream media and medical community turned their back on the correlation between gut health and the autism spectrum, originally demonstrated by Andrew Wakefield and 12 of his colleagues, when research published in the medical journal The Lancet was retracted. The members and participants of TMR were among those to see the truth behind this research and make intensive efforts toward gut healing with great success. There is no doubt that the efforts of TMR was key to an often stubborn mainstream medical community’s acceptance of revolutionary, game-changing research on gut health, and on vaccines and their connection to autism.
Open Sourced Solutions
On November 1st, TMR is launching the first and only interactive online TV Network, called TMR Nation TV, consisting of 10 channels, all geared toward helping families thrive and achieve health and medical freedom in today’s world. Topics that TMR has always championed on the way to recovering their children’s health will now have the opportunity to be open sourced online for others to weigh in on. Clean food, expert interviews, siblings and family stories, politics, prevention and recovery can be built upon and added to by those with valuable, everyday experience.
The importance and timing of this network and its information is essential. We are living in a time when families and communities are looking for real information that can be implemented today. The fallibility and trust of major medical studies has come under heavy fire in the face of corruption and inaccurate findings. The peer-reviewed process, once thought to be sacred, is crumbling before the public’s eye, often revealing conflicts of interest and theories that don’t always translate into reality. Trust is becoming a scarce commodity among the political and mainstream medical communities as the idea of health freedom is being pressured out of the public dialogue. The age old tradition of everyday mothers and families directly sharing what works can now be supercharged and focused, bringing effective solutions from people embodying healing and medical freedom, minus any corrupting influences such as corporate pressure, political conflicts, and plan old lies.
People Helping People
Team TMR is a 501c3 organization that provides help to families struggling with medical, emotional, educational, and financial hardship due to complex medical needs faced by their children diagnosed with autism and other developmental disabilities. Mainstream medicine has effectively ignored autistic children and their families with their lack of clarity, answers, and overly expensive treatments. The alternative medical community, thinking outside the box, along with dedicated families, know how to recover autistic children and are doing it on a regular basis. Team TMR is supercharging that effort by handing out grant money quarterly to families in need of these proven treatments. Funds are gathered from TMR’s book sales and donations. See the Thinking Moms’ Revolution Facebook page for more information on TMR Nation TV.
These five facts will inspire you to ditch refined, processed flour for good.
Refined, white flour is one of the main perpetrators to many modern-day diseases of affluence. It is now well known that white flour spikes the blood sugar, is devoid of most nutrients, and can block the internal villi in the intestinal membrane, contributing to ailments such as leaky gut syndrome (a root symptom to many ‘diseases’ today).
But those aren’t the only ill effects caused by consuming a diet high in refined foods which include white flour. Following are 5 shocking facts about white flour that will inspire you to switch to whole, unprocessed foods for good.
1) White Flour Has NO Nutrients
Because foods have been processed and refined, manufacturers have to fortify certain nutrients (which your body does not metabolize and utilize as efficiently as when derived from whole foods) because they no longer contain them! Concerning white flour and bread(s), when the wheat seed’s bran is removed, it’s six outer layers and the germ (which contains 76%) of the vitamins and minerals is lost. 97% of the dietary fiber is also removed, which is why constipation and cancer of the bowel are so prevalent in ‘developed’ nations.
In addition, processing and bleaching white flour removes ALL of its vitamin E, 50% of its calcium, and 70% of its phosphorous, iron, magnesium, and B vitamins.
So what you’re paying for when you spend less on white bread and baked goods is… literally nothing. Except a hefty healthcare bill down the road if you don’t start consuming real foods right now.
2) Carcinogen Potassium Bromate Is Added – You Don’t Want This
Once all the layers, nutrients, and fiber are removed, flour is bleached, preserved and aged with chlorine dioxide. Manufacturers continue to further refine it by adding chalk, alum, and ammonium carbonate to make it seem more appealing texture-wise and visually.
Unfortunately, they then add potassium bromate to the mix. This ingredient is a very powerful oxidizer that damages cells. Potassium bromate is also considered to be a category 2B carcinogen (= possibly carcinogenic to humans), as classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). Banned in most developed countries in 1994 (including all countries in the European union, UK, and Canada – but NOT in the United States), it is an ingredient every household should avoid.
3) White Flour Is A Natural Insecticide
Like harmful glyphosate-containing insecticides produced by Monsanto, white flour will KILL bugs that creep into bags of it and begin to consume it.
It KILLS bugs that attempt to live off of it. What could make one think it’s ideal for human consumption, then?
4) Contains The Amino Acid L-Cysteine
Yes, you need amino acids (the building blocks of protein) to survive, but this non-essential amino acid is introduced to most conventional baked goods only to speed industrial processing. Perhaps this is also another link in the huge allergy epidemic many people experience in the US when they consume baked goods, but not in Europe where more quality and care is given to producing food.
L-cysteine is found in most pizza doughs, cookies, pastas, pastries, and fast food buns. While it can be produced for cheap, more economical sources include duck feathers and human hair. Other L-cysteine sources include chicken feathers, cow horns, and petroleum byproducts. Most L-cysteine sources also come from China, where there is a history of poor regulation.
We don’t know about you, but that’s disgusting.
5) White Flour Is A Known Contributor To Diabetes
Diabetes has quickly become a global epidemic, and it is now predicted to become the 7th leading cause of death by the year 2030. The ‘disease’ is largely caused by a diet high in refined foods (including baked goods made from white flour and artificial sweeteners), not enough fiber, and less than the daily recommendation of unprocessed fruits, vegetables, and leafy greens.
One way white flour is a main contributor to this disease of affluence is that it contains the ingredient alloxan, which is what makes bread look fresh and clean. Studies show, however, that alloxan destroys the beta cells of the pancreas. In fact, the effects of alloxan are so severe, the Textbook of Natural Medicine calls the chemical “a potent beta-cell toxin.”
Unfortunately, the FDA still deems this ingredient to be “safe,” and, therefore, companies continue to use it and include it in many foods. Yikes.
According to research done by Dr. Gary Null, however, which is documented in the Clinicians Handbook of Natural Healing, vitamin E effectively protected lab rats from the harmful effects of administered alloxan. That means, fortunately, that it is possible to reverse the dreadful effects caused by alloxan production.
First step: ditch all white flours from your diet; second step: start eating more almonds, avocado, and healthy sources of fat with abundant stores of Vitamin E. You’ll likely notice your skin improves from these added nutrients, as well.
All in all, refined, white flour is utilized in many products of today because it is cheap. But if there’s anything that should be common sense by now, it should be the understanding that there are no shortcuts in life. The human body hasn’t even fully adapted from the inclusion of grains in the last 10,000 years; and now, it’s quite evident that a diet of processed, refined junk (including refined sugar and white rice) is devastating to the system.
Did you know that AstraZeneca, manufacturer of two blockbuster breast cancer drugs (one of which is classified as a known human carcinogen), is behind Breast Cancer Awareness Month?
Why is it, do you think, that during Breast Cancer Awareness Month (BCAM) you never hear the word “carcinogen” mentioned, but are barraged a million times over by the word “cure”?
Truth be told, BCAM should be renamed Breast Cancer Un-Awareness Month, as it has nothing to do with generating awareness about the true causes and solutions for the breast cancer epidemic and everything to do with making the public focus on a presumably not-yet-existent “cure” to be produced through the pharmaceutical pipeline somewhere off in the future only after enough money is raised.
Instead of identifying and addressing the known causes of cancer, like the many mammary carcinogens now identified in body care products,GMO and processed foods, and our polluted environment, the mission of BCAM is to make people think that the best way to prevent breast cancer is to “detect it early.”
This viral meme describes the underlying agenda succinctly:
Back in 2012, when we first wrote “The Dark Side of Breast Cancer [Un]Awareness Month,” in order to shed light on this travesty, the real history of Breast Cancer Awareness Month’s origins was still relatively unknown despite the fact that it was a matter of the public record. According to the Wikipedia page on the topic:
“NBCAM was founded in 1985 as a partnership between the American Cancer Society and the pharmaceutical division of Imperial Chemical Industries (now part of AstraZeneca, maker of several anti-breast cancer drugs). The aim of the NBCAM from the start has been to promote mammography as the most effective weapon in the fight against breast cancer.”
The reference link listed on Wikipedia for the paragraph above comes from the BCAM website, but is now dead. For reasons that remain a mystery, the BCAM website was taken offline by AstraZeneca in the intervening years. Despite this, the BCAM domain name — www.nbcam.org — still links directly to AtraZeneca’s HealthCare Foundation page; astounding evidence that AstraZeneca owned and controlled BCAM and still does. You can still view the WayBackMachine’s archived NBCAM website here if you are curious.
And so why is this connection so important?
What is so disturbing about AstraZeneca’s founding role in BCAM is that it “just happens” to make two blockbuster breast cancer drugs, Tamoxifen and Arimidex — a conflict of interest so flagrant, its hard to ignore. Even more disturbing is that Tamoxifen is actually classified by the International Agency for Research on Cancer as a known human carcinogen! A carcinogenic “treatment” for breast cancer? No wonder BCAM won’t allow the word “carcinogen” mentioned in any of its campaigns.
Back when AstraZeneca kept the BCAM website functioning, it was easy to prove how BCAM and AstraZeneca had pinkwashed the concept of the true causes of cancer (carcinogens) from the public mind. You used to be able to plop the word “carcinogen” into the site’s search engine feature and you would retrieve the following highly suspect results:
Your search – carcinogen – did not match any documents. No pages were found containing “carcinogen”.
Likewise, back in 2012, on Susan G. Komen’s website, the term “carcinogen” only emerged twice, and both in the context of denying the likelihood of there being a connection between smoking and breast cancer. If you search the site today, the term has been further scrubbed, with no informative results retrieved with the term.
Clearly this is strategic. There are literally thousands of possible and known carcinogens identified in various public databases, such as Toxnet.gov. Roundup herbicide, for instance, was recently reclassified as a probable carcinogen by the World Health Organization. If the goal is really to protect women and reduce breast cancer morbidity and mortality, shouldn’t Breast Cancer Awareness Month focus on identifying and reducing exposure to probable and/or known carcinogens? Failing to do so is equivalent to deceit, if not malfeasance, is it not?
This all makes greater sense when you understand the history behind BCAM’s founder AstraZeneca. AstraZeneca was formed through the merger of Astra AB and Zeneca Group (a pharmaceutical subsidiary of Imperial Chemical Industries) in 1999. Imperial Chemical Industries, a multinational corporation responsible for producing breast cancer causing petrochemical derivatives such as vinyl chloride and pesticides, founded National Breast Cancer Awareness Month in 1985, in partnership with the American Cancer Society, in order to promote the widespread adoption of x-ray mammography, whose failings if not horrors we have documented extensively elsewhere.
This means the very corporation that contributed significantly to accelerating the breast cancer epidemic also profited and still profits from new diagnoses of breast cancer and their treatment.
Sadly, Breast Cancer Awareness Month is a time of increasing awareness not of the preventable causes of breast cancer, but of the breast cancer industry’s insatiable need to both raise money for research into a would-be “pharmaceutical cure,” and to promote its primary means of “prevention”: early detection via x-ray mammography.’It’s also a cause-marketing feeding frenzy with a disturbingly vast array of carcinogen-containing products sporting Susan G. Komen’s pink ribbon, presumably “in support” of raising awareness, including the hot pink fracking drill bit pictured above.
Please, before you consider going on a march, donating to the “cause,” or buying a pink-ribbon-bedecked product this month, consider the true origins of the year’s most widespread brainwashing event. For real information on the real causes and solutions for cancer watch the upcoming Truth about Cancer documentary series, of which I will be a part. It promises to be the much needed antidote to the propaganda that has spread as viciously as cancer itself. You can also use our Cancer Research database with thousands of articles and study abstracts on treating cancer naturally.
Finally, please share the meme below (save to desktop and re-upload to Facebook and other social media platforms), with the link to this article: http://tinyurl.com/pinkwashed.
In the world of Round Up Ready corn and other genetically modified crops, we’re in dire need of another ‘solution.’ Frank Kutka has been working on ‘Organic Ready’ corn for over 15 years as an all-around answer to biotech’s cancer causing crops.
Kutka is a plant breeder who has been attempting to grow corn that naturally resists GM crop contamination through cross-pollination, thus eliminating Monsanto’s prevalently grown GMO corn from infesting organic farmer’s crops.
Kutka has been searching for traits in the ancient grain teosinte which makes it very unlikely that GM pollen can enter corn silk, thus making cross-pollination nearly impossible. He explains:
“The trait has been known and used for decades. It was first used in popcorn in the 1950s and then in white corn varieties in the 1970s… It greatly reduces the risk of out-crossing.”
Kutka has been searching for this pollen-blocking trait since 2001, when he was a student at Cornell University. If he is successful, then it will make the job of organic farmers much easier, since many of them face contamination of crops that they work very hard to keep organic, paying exorbitant fees to obtain a USDA organic label.
Needless to say, Kutka, like all farmers growing organic crops, faces an enormous challenge. U.S. farmers currently plant millions of acres of GMO corn, among other GMO crops. Around 93% of the year’s corn crop was genetically modified.
While this makes Monsanto happy, it leaves those looking for non-contaminated, heirloom, organic, non-GMO corn a little miffed, to say the least. These millions of acres of corn can also easily contaminate other crops – including those which are not even corn, just because Mother Nature continues to work. GMO genes cross over into other plants, causing them to contain variant DNA like the mother plant. This is many argue that GMO crops must be banned, and that GMO labeling simply isn’t enough.
In 2014, a survey of organic farmers from 17 states, predominantly in the Midwest, shows 67% of farmers planned to delay planting corn so their crops would pollinate later than their neighbors’ GM corn, at an average cost of $16,000. Delaying the growing season is just one expense organic farmers have to contend with in competition with corporate seed monopolies.
Kutka hopes his ‘Organic Ready’ corn will be able to remedy cross-pollination of ‘Roundup Ready’ crops within the year.
The evidence is mounting – GMOs are a danger to health. Long-term studies have revealed organ damage, cancer, and reproductive damage in second and third generation animal studies. There are doctors who are willing to publicly take a stand against genetic engineering. Here are a few of them.
Dr. Mehmet Oz
Dr. Mehmet Oz is a renowned heart surgeon and the host of the popular television show, The Dr. OZ Show.
Whether you support genetically engineered crops or not, the freedom to make an informed choice should belong to consumers. The bill in Congress this month proposing to block states from independently requiring labeling offers a coup to pro-GMO groups.
As a scientist, I am not that concerned about GMOs themselves, but I am worried about why they were created. Highly toxic herbicides would kill crops unless they were genetically modified, but with the genetic upgrade, these plants can be doused with much higher doses, with potential complications to the environment. The WHO believes that glyphosate is “probably a human carcinogen.” Perhaps we are all showing “disdain for science and evidence-based medicine,” but I would argue that unleashing these products creates a real-time experiment on the human species. Sure, we will eventually know if these pesticides are a problem, but at the expense of the pain and suffering and disease in real people. I owe my kids more. And so do you.
Dr. John H. Boyles
Board certified in the American Environmental Medicine and the American board of Otolaryngology, Dr. Boyles currently practices medicine in Centerville Ohio at the Dayton Ear Nose & Throat Surgeons, Inc.
This exchange of DNA between the species is totally against nature. We simply don’t know what it will produce. We don’t know if it is safe, and it has not yet been proven to be safe.
We do not fully understand how gene spicing works within a single species. We certainly can’t predict how it will work when attempting to combine more than one species.
Yes, the means by which to prove safety was developed around the year 2000. No companies performing the gene splicing will use the procedures, because if their product were to be proven unsafe, then they cannot sell that product.
Patients at Dayton Ear, Nose, & Throat Surgeons, Inc. were tested for allergies with organic and genetically modified varieties of foods. Some of the patients tested reacted both to the organic soy and the altered soy. Other patients reacted to the GMO soy, but had no reaction to organic soy. Another group tested positively to the organic, but had no allergic reaction to the GMO soy. And some patients had no allergic reaction to either the GMO soy or the organic soy.
It has come to our attention that by altering genes, scientists are creating a separate allergy to foods that did not exist in patients before. By changing or altering the structure of the plant, GMOs can cause separate reactions from the same food.
You owe it to yourself and your family to make healthier food choices. Any allergic person can benefit from a diet with increased organic foods. Control what you can, and steer clear of GMO foods.
Dr. Emily Lindner
Dr. Emily Lindner is an internist with a dual practice of Internal Medicine and Complementary/Integrative Medicine. She is certified in Functional and Nutritional Medicine.
I tell my patients to avoid genetically modified foods because in my experience, with those foods there is more allergies and asthma. … And what emanates from that is everything. Lots of arthritis problems, autoimmune diseases, anxiety… neurological problems; anything that comes from an inspired immune system response.
When I change people from a GMO diet to a GMO-free diet I see results instantaneously in people who have foggy thinking and people who have gut symptoms like bloating, gas, irritation. In terms of allergies, it might take two to five days. In terms of depression, it starts to lift almost instantaneously. It takes from a day, to certainly within two weeks.
Dr. Robin Bernhoft
Dr. Robin Bernhoft is a surgeon who retrained in environmental medicine after suffering from an environmental illness caused by the toxic skin scrubs used before surgery. He has since regained his health.
“…all physicians should prescribe non-genetically modified food for all patients, and that we should educate all of our patients on the potential health dangers, and known health dangers of GMO food.”
Dr. Mercola
Dr. Mercola is an osteopathic physician and an entrepreneur. He is known for being a strong proponent of alternative medicine.
Monsanto and other biotech companies claim genetically modified (GM) crops have no impact on the environment and are perfectly safe to eat.
Federal departments in charge of food safety in the US and Canada have not conducted tests to affirm this alleged “safety,” but rather have taken the industry-conducted research at face value, allowing millions of acres of GM crops to overtake farmland.
These foods, largely in the form of GM corn and soy (although there are other GM crops, too, like sugar beets, papaya and crookneck squash), can now be found in the majority of processed foods in the US.
In other words, if you eat processed foods, you’re already eating them… and these crops are already being freely planted in the environment. But what if it turns out that Monsanto was wrong, and the GM crops aren’t actually safe?
Monsanto is the world leader in GM crops, and their Web site would have you believe that they are the answer to world hunger. Thanks to their heavy PR campaign, if you’ve been primarily a reader of the mainstream press, you’ve probably been misled into thinking GM crops are, in fact, the greatest thing since sliced bread, that they provide better yields of equal or better quality food, pest and weed resistance, reduced reliance on pesticides, and more… But thankfully, the truth is unfolding and the tide is finally beginning to turn.
Dr. Russell Blaylock
Dr. Blaylock is a board certified neurosurgeon. He practiced medicine for 25 years before pursuing his nutritional studies and research full time. He now owns a nutritional practice, and is a health practitioner, lecturer, and author. He is known for confronting controversial issues in medicine and backing up his arguments with impeccable research. He warns that most of the studies on GMOs are terminated within or at ninety days and test animals are destroyed – with good reason. The following comments are in response to a long-term GMO study published in the journal, “Food and Chemical Toxicology.”
Virtually all of these studies use rats and are terminated at 90 days.This study clearly shows that most of the harmful effects of GMO foods occur after 90 days.
In this study, animals were fed the GMO corn for two years in concentrations commensurate to what people would eat. What they found is beyond shocking.
The animals fed GMO food died two to three times more often than the animals eating a normal diet. Male rats demonstrated liver damage 2.5 to 5.5 times more often than control rats.
Of extreme concern was the finding that the females developed massive breast tumors at a high rate in the GMO-fed animals.
Even more frightening is that almost half of all babies are now being fed soy-based formula. This is not the only study to find problems with GMO foods, but it is the most damning.
In my estimation, all GMO foods should be removed from stores, and GMO crops should be destroyed. The implications of this disaster is almost beyond belief and GMO crops are being heavily promoted all over the world by the IMF, Council on Foreign Relations, and other international organizations.
Dr. Richard Lacey M.D., Ph.D
Dr. Lacey is an expert in food safety issues who served for four years on a U.K. government advisory panel on food as it relates to human and animal health. In 1989-1990, he warned against the practice of feeding cattle rendered meat from sheep and other animals, predicting the “mad cow” epidemic before it occurred. He has written five books on food safety, including one published by Cambridge University Press in 1994 containing a detailed discussion of genetically engineered food. He does not believe GMOs are safe and clearly reminds us that their safety has never been established.
It is my considered judgment that employing the process of recombinant DNA technology (genetic engineering) in producing new plant varieties entails a set of risks to the health of the consumer that are not ordinarily presented by traditional breeding techniques. It is also my considered judgment that food products derived from such genetically engineered organisms are not generally recognized as safe on the basis of scientific procedures within the community of experts qualified to assess their safety.
Recombinant DNA technology is an inherently risky method for producing new foods. Its risks are in large part due to the complexity and interdependency of the parts of a living system, including its DNA. Wedging foreign genetic material in an essentially random manner into an organism’s genome necessarily causes some degree of disruption, and the disruption could be multi-faceted. Further, whether singular or multi-faceted, the disruptive influence could well result in the presence of unexpected toxins or allergens or in the degradation of nutritional value. Further, because of the complexity and interactivity of living systems — and because of the extent to which our understanding of them is still quite deficient — it is impossible to predict what specific problems could result in the case of any particular genetically engineered organism.
…To the best of my judgment, neither genetically engineered foods as a general class nor any genetically engineered food in particular is generally recognized as safe among those experts qualified by training and experience to evaluate their safety…
…In my opinion, the number of scientists who are not convinced about the safety of genetically engineered foods is substantial enough to prevent the existence of a general recognition of safety. Second, there is insufficient evidence to support a belief that genetically engineered foods are safe. I am not aware of any study in the peer-reviewed scientific literature that establishes the safety of even one specific genetically engineered food let alone the safety of these foods as a general class.Few properly designed toxicological feeding studies have even been attempted, and I know of none that was satisfactorily completed. Those who claim that genetically engineered foods are as safe as naturally produced ones are clearly not basing their claims on scientific procedures that demonstrate safety to a reasonable degree of certainty. Rather, they are primarily basing their claims on a set of assumptions that, besides being empirically unsubstantiated, are in several respects at odds with the bulk of the evidence.
The main assumptions are: (a) that producing food through recombinant DNA technology in itself entails no greater risks than producing it through sexual reproduction between members of the same species and (b) that the same safeguards commonly employed by breeders using conventional techniques will suffice for genetically engineered foods.
As far as I can ascertain, the current policy of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration is primarily based on these two assumptions. Therefore, although it claims to be “science-based,” this claim has no solid basis in fact. The only way to base the claims about the safety of genetically engineered food in science is to establish each one to be safe through standard scientific procedures, not through assumptions that reflect more wishful thinking than hard fact.
American Academy of Environmental Medicine
This is an official statement from the American Academy of Environmental Medicine.
Genetically Modified Foods
According to the World Health Organization, Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) are “organisms in which the genetic material (DNA) has been altered in such a way that does not occur naturally.” This technology is also referred to as “genetic engineering”, “biotechnology” or “recombinant DNA technology” and consists of randomly inserting genetic fragments of DNA from one organism to another, usually from a different species. For example, an artificial combination of genes that includes a gene to produce the pesticide Cry1Ab protein (commonly known as Bt toxin), originally found in Bacillus thuringiensis, is inserted in to the DNA of corn randomly. Both the location of the transferred gene sequence in the corn DNA and the consequences of the insertion differ with each insertion. The plant cells that have taken up the inserted gene are then grown in a lab using tissue culture and/or nutrient medium that allows them to develop into plants that are used to grow GM food crops.
Natural breeding processes have been safely utilized for the past several thousand years. In contrast, “GE crop technology abrogates natural reproductive processes, selection occurs at the single cell level, the procedure is highly mutagenic and routinely breeches genera barriers, and the technique has only been used commercially for 10 years.”
Despite these differences, safety assessment of GM foods has been based on the idea of “substantial equivalence” such that “if a new food is found to be substantially equivalent in composition and nutritional characteristics to an existing food, it can be regarded as safe as the conventional food.” However, several animal studies indicate serious health risks associated with GM food consumption including infertility, immune dysregulation, accelerated aging, dysregulation of genes associated with cholesterol synthesis, insulin regulation, cell signaling, and protein formation, and changes in the liver, kidney, spleen and gastrointestinal system.
There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation as defined by Hill’s Criteria in the areas of strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility.The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.
…Also, because of the mounting data, it is biologically plausible for Genetically Modified Foods to cause adverse health effects in humans.
In spite of this risk, the biotechnology industry claims that GM foods can feed the world through production of higher crop yields. However, a recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists reviewed 12 academic studies and indicates otherwise: “The several thousand field trials over the last 20 years for genes aimed at increasing operational or intrinsic yield (of crops) indicate a significant undertaking. Yet none of these field trials have resulted in increased yield in commercialized major food/feed crops, with the exception of Bt corn.” However, it was further stated that this increase is largely due to traditional breeding improvements.
Therefore, because GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health and are without benefit, the AAEM believes that it is imperative to adopt the precautionary principle, which is one of the main regulatory tools of the European Union environmental and health policy and serves as a foundation for several international agreements.
…With the precautionary principle in mind, because GM foods have not been properly tested for human consumption, and because there is ample evidence of probable harm, the AAEM asks:
Physicians to educate their patients, the medical community, and the public to avoid GM foods when possible and provide educational materials concerning GM foods and health risks.
Physicians to consider the possible role of GM foods in the disease processes of the patients they treat and to document any changes in patient health when changing from GM food to non-GM food.
Our members, the medical community, and the independent scientific community to gather case studies potentially related to GM food consumption and health effects, begin epidemiological research to investigate the role of GM foods on human health, and conduct safe methods of determining the effect of GM foods on human health.
For a moratorium on GM food, implementation of immediate long term independent safety testing, and labeling of GM foods, which is necessary for the health and safety of consumers.
(This statement was reviewed and approved by the Executive Committee of the American Academy of Environmental Medicine on May 8, 2009.)
Conclusion
In America, there is a fascination and an appreciation of most new technologies. Before GMOs were widely adopted more medical professionals and scientists marveled at the technological advancements making genetic engineering possible; this awe and wonder was widespread long before the downsides of GMOs became well known. It turns out they are worse than almost anyone thought.
Now that GMOs have been widely adopted in the American diet, more and more doctors are discovering that GMOs are devastating to our health. It is becoming more common for doctors to advise their patients to avoid GMOs. Recently, members of Sermo, an online community of physicians, were surveyed as to whether or not they support GMO labeling. The majority, 68% of them are in favor of requiring food manufacturers to label products containing GMOs.
For years, there has been a tired argument that if you’re against GMOs then you’re against science, but just because we have the technology to do something, it doesn’t necessarily follow that we should. The majority of new technologies are abandoned due to flaws that become painfully apparent after they have become widespread. At present we are feeling that pain.
Be sure to check out Doctors Against Vaccines and Understanding and Detoxifying from GMOs.
, however, which is documented in the 
