Orange drinks with 300 times more pesticide than tap water
By Sean Poulter
Last updated at 12:53 AM on 05th January 2009
* Comments (59)
* Add to My Stories
Fizzy drinks sold by Coca-Cola in Britain have been found to contain pesticides at up to 300 times the level allowed in tap or bottled water.
A worldwide study found pesticide levels in orange and lemon drinks sold under the Fanta brand, which is popular with children, were at their highest in the UK.
The research team called on the Government, the industry and the company to act to remove the chemicals and called for new safety standards to regulate the soft drinks market.
The industry denies children are at risk and insists that the levels found by researchers based at the University of Jaen in southern Spain are not harmful.
Fanta
The study uncovered pesticides in some fizzy drinks at up to 300 times the level permitted in tap water
The researchers tested 102 cans and bottles of soft drinks, bought from 15 countries, for the presence of 100 pesticides. The UK products were bought in London, Cambridge, Edinburgh, St Andrews and at Gatwick Airport.
The experts said the levels found were low under the maximum residue levels allowed for fruit, but they were 'very high' and 'up to 300 times' the figure permitted for bottled or tap water.
The chemicals detected included carbendazim, thiabendazole, imazalil, prochloraz, malathion and iprodione. They are mainly applied to fruit after harvest to stop it developing fungal infections and rotting.
A total of 19 products were bought in the UK, all made by Coca-Cola.
Two orange drinks bought in the UK contained imazalil at 300 times the limit permitted for a single pesticide in drinking water.
Two similar products contained 98 times the legal drinking water limit for thiabendazole.
The average level of the total pesticide contamination of the British drinks was 17.4 parts per billion - 34.6 times the EU maximum residue level for water.
Coca-Cola GB insisted the products are safe. A spokesman said: 'All of the drinks tested meet the safety regulations relating to food products made from agricultural ingredients, which include drinks with fruit juice as an ingredient.
'The generally miniscule levels that were detected were well within the acceptable daily intake levels and these findings should reassure consumers there is no safety issue here.'
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1105179/Orange-drinks-300-times-pesticide-tap-water.html#ixzz0dfCXimMJ
Monday, January 25, 2010
Low Vitamin D Levels Linked To Proliferation of H1N1
Prevent Disease
November 16, 2009
According to a recent study, as many as 77 percent of all Americans may be deficient in the vitamin essential for bone health and which may prevent H1N1 (Swine Flu) and seasonal flu, wheezing, winter-related eczema, upper respiratory infections and may help prevent cancer, autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, certain infectious diseases, myocardial infarctions – heart attacks – and many other serious diseases.
When subgroups of the population are considered, depending on which of the many reasonable definitions of deficiency are accepted, the picture is even more ominous. For example, an important new study from Children’s Hospital in Boston found that as many as 80 percent of Hispanic children and 92 percent of black children, what the study calls non-Hispanic black children, may also be deficient in this vitamin.
We’re talking about vitamin D, also called the sunshine vitamin and often considered the nutrient of the year, if not the decade. Its power as a determinant of human health can be captured by what happens when someone is D deficient. They are at risk for what is called rickets in children and osteomalacia in adults.
In its most extreme form, the bones soften and almost melt, making them so fragile that the simple act of walking up steps may cause bones to fracture and slight movement may cause excruciating pain. In its most severe form, a blood test for vitamin D may show zero. Dr. Fred Kaplan, an eminent orthopedic surgeon at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, whose patient had zero D, said this is rare even in Third World countries.
Why, in the land of plenty and, now, also in the land of over-consumption, overweight and obesity, can there be an epidemic of a vitamin D deficiency or any other nutrient? The reasons may not be fully understood, but the picture is still clear: Over time, we have obtained most of our vitamin D from the sun. When ultraviolet B rays hit the skin they cause the formation of vitamin D. But, in an age of sunscreens and well-placed fear of skin cancer, we tend to either stay out of the sun or use a sunscreen to shield us from its rays, including the ultraviolet B ray.
Even if you stayed in the sun all day in some locations, you would not get enough vitamin D. For example, north of Philadelphia, between November and March, the suns rays are not strong enough to precipitate the formation of vitamin D. And, during early morning and late afternoon, the sun’s rays are not strong enough to generate vitamin D. That’s a big part of the picture, as authorities find that exposure to the sun is the main determinant of vitamin D in humans. This leads us to the next source of vitamin D — our food. Some dairy products, such as milk, are fortified with vitamin D, but we tend to avoid dairy products due to their cholesterol and saturated fat content. Other sources are fatty fish such as salmon, tuna, mackerel, and herring. Still other sources are fortified cereal and other foods such as orange juice, now, often fortified both with vitamin D and calcium. But, most people don’t eat enough of these foods to get enough vitamin D. So, that leaves supplementation with multi-vitamins that include D, combination calcium and vitamin D pills, or vitamin D stand-alones.
There may be another reason for the epidemic – the epidemic of the overweight and obese, who cannot process vitamin D efficiently and are, consequently, more likely to be vitamin D deficient. One final reason for identifying the epidemic is better testing methods for vitamin D. There is a simple blood test now used to determine vitamin D status.
Still another reason for the D epidemic is the aging of the population, as older people — even the middle-aged — are more likely to have D deficiency.
There are other risk factors for a D deficiency, but they probably don’t play a big role in the growing number of people with that deficiency. Consumer Reports catalogued the following risk factors: “Being dark-skinned, middle-aged, or overweight; having a history of gastric-bypass surgery or a condition that interferes with the ability to absorb nutrients from food, such as celiac disease; having a history of kidney or liver disease, multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, or thyroid problems; taking medications that reduce blood levels of vitamin D, such as cholestyralmine (Questran and generic), colestripel (Colestid and generic), certain anticonvulsants; or orlistat (Alli, Xenical)” (Consumer Reports on Health, Nov. 2009).
This epidemic of vitamin D deficiency recently came into focus with the publication of an important study led by Dr. Jonathan Mansbach at Children’s Hospital In Boston. The study appears in the November issue of the journal Pediatrics. The study looked at vitamin D levels of 5,000 children and, extrapolating to the entire U.S. population of children, found that millions were receiving what the study called suboptimal levels of D. As noted above, depending on the definition of deficiency or suboptimal levels, the study found 80 percent of Hispanics and 92 percent of black children were at the suboptimal levels. Others have previously documented widespread vitamin D deficiency in children. For example, Dr. Babette Zemel, a vitamin D expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), who is Director of the Nutrition and Growth Laboratory of that hospital and Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Penn’s medical school, found that 55 percent of children she studied were vitamin D deficient, in a study published in 2007.
The Mansbach study notes that we’re far from knowing everything we should about how to bring children and adults up to optimal levels, how to avoid any long-run adverse consequences and exactly what level of vitamin D is optimal.
* A d v e r t i s e m e n t
* efoods
It does recommend, in view of its findings, that children take vitamin D supplements because of the clear health benefits from doing so. The study doesn’t make specific recommendations, but the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children with inadequate sun exposure get a daily intake of at least 400 International Units of vitamin D — vitamin D3 is now recommended as it is better absorbed than D2. The adult recommendations, according to a report in The American Family Physician, as cataloged by www.medscape.com, are as follows:
• In older adults, vitamin D supplementation of 700 to 800 IU per day is associated with a lower risk for falls … and fractures.
• To prevent vitamin D deficiency, adults with inadequate sun exposure should have a vitamin D intake of 400 to 600 IU per day.
• Adults with vitamin D deficiency, except for those with malabsorption syndromes, should receive maintenance dosages of 800 to 1,000 IU of vitamin D per day.
Dr. Zemel recommends that most adults take vitamin D supplementation of between 1,000 and 2,000 IU of vitamin D, which seems to make the most sense in view of the evidence that I’ve reviewed. Of course, you may want to run this issue past your doctor at your next visit. She said there is some variability in the response to vitamin D so, some may reach optimal levels with 1,000 IU, while others may require more. In severe deficiency cases, more aggressive supplementation may be called for, such as 500,000 IU by injection.
The Medscape report also notes that excessive amounts of vitamin D can be toxic. It states, “Because vitamin D is fat soluble and can be stored in fat, there are concerns regarding toxicity from excessive supplementation. Signs and symptoms of vitamin D toxicity may include headache, metallic taste, nephrocalcinosis or vascular calcinosis, pancreatitis, nausea, and vomiting.” There is a study indicating toxicity is reached at 10,000 I.U. daily. Dr. Zemel told me vitamin D toxicity is extraordinarily rare.
You can be sure there will be continuing and extensive studies of vitamin D to answer many questions. Dr. Mansbach says, “We need to perform randomized controlled trials to understand if vitamin D actually improves these wide-ranging health outcomes. At present, however, there are a lot of studies demonstrating associations between low levels of vitamin D and poor health. Therefore, we believe many U.S. children would likely benefit from more vitamin D.”
Although evidence is not clear on how to prevent H1N1 flu, the suggestions for prevention include taking vitamin D supplements, especially in the winter. In a report in the Examiner.com, five simple steps are recommended to prevent H1N1:
• Get enough vitamin D.
• Use proper hygiene — for example, frequent hand washing, cough into your elbow instead of your hands and avoid contact with public surfaces with your hands whenever possible.
• Adequately rinse the nose and throat.
• Get enough sleep.
• Consume plenty of garlic and other antiviral herbs.
Dr. Zemel believes it is too early to make hard and fast conclusions on the vitamin D/H1N1 connection. Dr. Charlene Compher, an expert on diet and health at Penn, agrees it is too early to draw conclusions on H1N1. But, Dr. Zemel and others note that vitamin D does strengthen the immune response and, therefore, may be useful in preventing H1N1.
Dr. James E. Dowd, a professor of medicine at Michigan State University and Diane Stafford stated, in their book The Vitamin D Cure, about the flu/vitamin D connection, “More respiratory infections during the winter are probably directly related to lower vitamin D production.” They note several factors contribute to the winter infection scenario. In the winter, there aren’t as much ultraviolet B rays, which inactivate many viruses. With less ultraviolet B getting through, humans produce less vitamin D of their own. Finally, vitamin D is important to mobilize the immune system response to infections. As a result of all this, respiratory infections start to rise in late September and peak in February. So, Dr. Dowd’s final advice is to forget the chicken soup with too many noodles, too much salt, and too little chicken and take vitamin D instead. My final advice is to get chicken soup that doesn’t have too much salt, too many noodles, and too little chicken and get someone who can make unsalted chicken soup, with the noodles and chicken you want and, then, take your vitamin D.
Dr. Bruce Kinosian, a geriatrician at Penn and an expert on diet and health, did sound a cautionary note, that vitamins thought to be a magical cure-all often turn out to have quite the opposite effect. He cites a long list of such vitamins of the year, which later fizzled. The most prominent case involved vitamin E, which, in excessive doses, was found to cause lung cancer in a segment of the population.
Perhaps the most fundamental preventive approach was recently recommended by Dr. Sidney Wolfe of the Health Research Group. He said take the most powerful and effective drug — a healthy lifestyle. This is the same prescription written over 800 years ago by the eminent Jewish physician and philosopher Maimonides, who said most of us die as a result of our lifestyle. Sometimes ancient wisdom is more powerful than modern technology.
I can’t resist one more observation on Maimonides. He was born In Cordoba, Spain in 1135. But Cordoba was soon taken over by a Muslim sect that demanded all infidels convert to Islam. So the family had to emigrate. He ended up in Cairo, where he practiced medicine. Of course, I doubt, if he were alive today, even the greatest physician of his time would not be allowed to practice medicine there. Does this piece of history suggest, the more things change, the more they stay the same, and does it also after a sad commentary on the state of human progress?
Prevent Disease
November 16, 2009
According to a recent study, as many as 77 percent of all Americans may be deficient in the vitamin essential for bone health and which may prevent H1N1 (Swine Flu) and seasonal flu, wheezing, winter-related eczema, upper respiratory infections and may help prevent cancer, autoimmune diseases such as multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, certain infectious diseases, myocardial infarctions – heart attacks – and many other serious diseases.
When subgroups of the population are considered, depending on which of the many reasonable definitions of deficiency are accepted, the picture is even more ominous. For example, an important new study from Children’s Hospital in Boston found that as many as 80 percent of Hispanic children and 92 percent of black children, what the study calls non-Hispanic black children, may also be deficient in this vitamin.
We’re talking about vitamin D, also called the sunshine vitamin and often considered the nutrient of the year, if not the decade. Its power as a determinant of human health can be captured by what happens when someone is D deficient. They are at risk for what is called rickets in children and osteomalacia in adults.
In its most extreme form, the bones soften and almost melt, making them so fragile that the simple act of walking up steps may cause bones to fracture and slight movement may cause excruciating pain. In its most severe form, a blood test for vitamin D may show zero. Dr. Fred Kaplan, an eminent orthopedic surgeon at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania, whose patient had zero D, said this is rare even in Third World countries.
Why, in the land of plenty and, now, also in the land of over-consumption, overweight and obesity, can there be an epidemic of a vitamin D deficiency or any other nutrient? The reasons may not be fully understood, but the picture is still clear: Over time, we have obtained most of our vitamin D from the sun. When ultraviolet B rays hit the skin they cause the formation of vitamin D. But, in an age of sunscreens and well-placed fear of skin cancer, we tend to either stay out of the sun or use a sunscreen to shield us from its rays, including the ultraviolet B ray.
Even if you stayed in the sun all day in some locations, you would not get enough vitamin D. For example, north of Philadelphia, between November and March, the suns rays are not strong enough to precipitate the formation of vitamin D. And, during early morning and late afternoon, the sun’s rays are not strong enough to generate vitamin D. That’s a big part of the picture, as authorities find that exposure to the sun is the main determinant of vitamin D in humans. This leads us to the next source of vitamin D — our food. Some dairy products, such as milk, are fortified with vitamin D, but we tend to avoid dairy products due to their cholesterol and saturated fat content. Other sources are fatty fish such as salmon, tuna, mackerel, and herring. Still other sources are fortified cereal and other foods such as orange juice, now, often fortified both with vitamin D and calcium. But, most people don’t eat enough of these foods to get enough vitamin D. So, that leaves supplementation with multi-vitamins that include D, combination calcium and vitamin D pills, or vitamin D stand-alones.
There may be another reason for the epidemic – the epidemic of the overweight and obese, who cannot process vitamin D efficiently and are, consequently, more likely to be vitamin D deficient. One final reason for identifying the epidemic is better testing methods for vitamin D. There is a simple blood test now used to determine vitamin D status.
Still another reason for the D epidemic is the aging of the population, as older people — even the middle-aged — are more likely to have D deficiency.
There are other risk factors for a D deficiency, but they probably don’t play a big role in the growing number of people with that deficiency. Consumer Reports catalogued the following risk factors: “Being dark-skinned, middle-aged, or overweight; having a history of gastric-bypass surgery or a condition that interferes with the ability to absorb nutrients from food, such as celiac disease; having a history of kidney or liver disease, multiple sclerosis, osteoporosis, or thyroid problems; taking medications that reduce blood levels of vitamin D, such as cholestyralmine (Questran and generic), colestripel (Colestid and generic), certain anticonvulsants; or orlistat (Alli, Xenical)” (Consumer Reports on Health, Nov. 2009).
This epidemic of vitamin D deficiency recently came into focus with the publication of an important study led by Dr. Jonathan Mansbach at Children’s Hospital In Boston. The study appears in the November issue of the journal Pediatrics. The study looked at vitamin D levels of 5,000 children and, extrapolating to the entire U.S. population of children, found that millions were receiving what the study called suboptimal levels of D. As noted above, depending on the definition of deficiency or suboptimal levels, the study found 80 percent of Hispanics and 92 percent of black children were at the suboptimal levels. Others have previously documented widespread vitamin D deficiency in children. For example, Dr. Babette Zemel, a vitamin D expert at Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia (CHOP), who is Director of the Nutrition and Growth Laboratory of that hospital and Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Penn’s medical school, found that 55 percent of children she studied were vitamin D deficient, in a study published in 2007.
The Mansbach study notes that we’re far from knowing everything we should about how to bring children and adults up to optimal levels, how to avoid any long-run adverse consequences and exactly what level of vitamin D is optimal.
* A d v e r t i s e m e n t
* efoods
It does recommend, in view of its findings, that children take vitamin D supplements because of the clear health benefits from doing so. The study doesn’t make specific recommendations, but the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children with inadequate sun exposure get a daily intake of at least 400 International Units of vitamin D — vitamin D3 is now recommended as it is better absorbed than D2. The adult recommendations, according to a report in The American Family Physician, as cataloged by www.medscape.com, are as follows:
• In older adults, vitamin D supplementation of 700 to 800 IU per day is associated with a lower risk for falls … and fractures.
• To prevent vitamin D deficiency, adults with inadequate sun exposure should have a vitamin D intake of 400 to 600 IU per day.
• Adults with vitamin D deficiency, except for those with malabsorption syndromes, should receive maintenance dosages of 800 to 1,000 IU of vitamin D per day.
Dr. Zemel recommends that most adults take vitamin D supplementation of between 1,000 and 2,000 IU of vitamin D, which seems to make the most sense in view of the evidence that I’ve reviewed. Of course, you may want to run this issue past your doctor at your next visit. She said there is some variability in the response to vitamin D so, some may reach optimal levels with 1,000 IU, while others may require more. In severe deficiency cases, more aggressive supplementation may be called for, such as 500,000 IU by injection.
The Medscape report also notes that excessive amounts of vitamin D can be toxic. It states, “Because vitamin D is fat soluble and can be stored in fat, there are concerns regarding toxicity from excessive supplementation. Signs and symptoms of vitamin D toxicity may include headache, metallic taste, nephrocalcinosis or vascular calcinosis, pancreatitis, nausea, and vomiting.” There is a study indicating toxicity is reached at 10,000 I.U. daily. Dr. Zemel told me vitamin D toxicity is extraordinarily rare.
You can be sure there will be continuing and extensive studies of vitamin D to answer many questions. Dr. Mansbach says, “We need to perform randomized controlled trials to understand if vitamin D actually improves these wide-ranging health outcomes. At present, however, there are a lot of studies demonstrating associations between low levels of vitamin D and poor health. Therefore, we believe many U.S. children would likely benefit from more vitamin D.”
Although evidence is not clear on how to prevent H1N1 flu, the suggestions for prevention include taking vitamin D supplements, especially in the winter. In a report in the Examiner.com, five simple steps are recommended to prevent H1N1:
• Get enough vitamin D.
• Use proper hygiene — for example, frequent hand washing, cough into your elbow instead of your hands and avoid contact with public surfaces with your hands whenever possible.
• Adequately rinse the nose and throat.
• Get enough sleep.
• Consume plenty of garlic and other antiviral herbs.
Dr. Zemel believes it is too early to make hard and fast conclusions on the vitamin D/H1N1 connection. Dr. Charlene Compher, an expert on diet and health at Penn, agrees it is too early to draw conclusions on H1N1. But, Dr. Zemel and others note that vitamin D does strengthen the immune response and, therefore, may be useful in preventing H1N1.
Dr. James E. Dowd, a professor of medicine at Michigan State University and Diane Stafford stated, in their book The Vitamin D Cure, about the flu/vitamin D connection, “More respiratory infections during the winter are probably directly related to lower vitamin D production.” They note several factors contribute to the winter infection scenario. In the winter, there aren’t as much ultraviolet B rays, which inactivate many viruses. With less ultraviolet B getting through, humans produce less vitamin D of their own. Finally, vitamin D is important to mobilize the immune system response to infections. As a result of all this, respiratory infections start to rise in late September and peak in February. So, Dr. Dowd’s final advice is to forget the chicken soup with too many noodles, too much salt, and too little chicken and take vitamin D instead. My final advice is to get chicken soup that doesn’t have too much salt, too many noodles, and too little chicken and get someone who can make unsalted chicken soup, with the noodles and chicken you want and, then, take your vitamin D.
Dr. Bruce Kinosian, a geriatrician at Penn and an expert on diet and health, did sound a cautionary note, that vitamins thought to be a magical cure-all often turn out to have quite the opposite effect. He cites a long list of such vitamins of the year, which later fizzled. The most prominent case involved vitamin E, which, in excessive doses, was found to cause lung cancer in a segment of the population.
Perhaps the most fundamental preventive approach was recently recommended by Dr. Sidney Wolfe of the Health Research Group. He said take the most powerful and effective drug — a healthy lifestyle. This is the same prescription written over 800 years ago by the eminent Jewish physician and philosopher Maimonides, who said most of us die as a result of our lifestyle. Sometimes ancient wisdom is more powerful than modern technology.
I can’t resist one more observation on Maimonides. He was born In Cordoba, Spain in 1135. But Cordoba was soon taken over by a Muslim sect that demanded all infidels convert to Islam. So the family had to emigrate. He ended up in Cairo, where he practiced medicine. Of course, I doubt, if he were alive today, even the greatest physician of his time would not be allowed to practice medicine there. Does this piece of history suggest, the more things change, the more they stay the same, and does it also after a sad commentary on the state of human progress?
'Cancer link' to heavy mobile use Mobile phone user
'Cancer link' to heavy mobile use
Mobile phone user
The majority of studies have not found an increased cancer risk
Heavy mobile phone use may be linked to an increased risk of cancer of the salivary gland, a study suggests.
Researchers looked at 500 Israelis who had developed the condition and compared their mobile phone usage with 1,300 healthy controls.
Those who had used the phone against one side of the head for several hours a day were 50% more likely to have developed a salivary gland tumour.
The research appeared in The American Journal of Epidemiology.
Numerous studies have focused on the risk of tumours among those who use mobile phones, and overwhelmingly found no increased cancer risk.
But researchers at Tel Aviv University say these have tended to focus on brain tumours, and often did not include long-term users.
Cancer of the salivary gland is a very rare condition. Of the 230,000 cases of cancer diagnosed in the UK for instance annually, only 550 relate to this area.
Mixed messages
Dr Siegal Sadetzki, who led the research, said while mobile phone use in Israel was much heavier than in many other parts of the world, this gave an insight into what the long-term, cumulative impact could be.
Precautions should be taken in order to diminish the exposure and lower the risk for health hazards
Dr Siegal Sadetzki
Tel Aviv University
"Compared to other studies, the amount of exposure to radiofrequency radiation we saw here was much higher. If you like, you're seeing what could happen elsewhere 'speeded-up' in Israel," she said.
One of the key findings of the study was that heavy users in rural areas had an even higher risk that those in cities, due, the team suggested, to the fact that mobile phones in areas without strong signals need to emit more radiation to work properly.
But Dr Sadetzki stressed one study was not enough to prove a link, and that further research was needed.
Nonetheless, until more evidence became available, a "precautionary" approach was best, she said, particularly when it comes to children's use of mobile phones.
Despite these latest findings, the largest and longest-running investigation ever to be carried out into mobile phone usage found no increased risk of any sort of cancer.
It followed 420,000 people in Denmark, some of whom had been using a mobile phone for as long as ten years.
There was in fact a lower incidence of cancer than expected in a group of that size, suggesting mobile phones had no impact on the development of tumours.
Last year, the UK's Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme said that while the evidence so far was "reassuring", there was still a need for studies to examine the very long-term impact, and to look at the effect in children.
Ed Yong, of Cancer Research UK, said: "Mobile phones are a relatively recent invention and new research into any possible health risks is welcome.
"However, it's important to remember that the vast majority of studies so far have found that mobile phones do not increase the risk of any type of cancer."
Mobile phone user
The majority of studies have not found an increased cancer risk
Heavy mobile phone use may be linked to an increased risk of cancer of the salivary gland, a study suggests.
Researchers looked at 500 Israelis who had developed the condition and compared their mobile phone usage with 1,300 healthy controls.
Those who had used the phone against one side of the head for several hours a day were 50% more likely to have developed a salivary gland tumour.
The research appeared in The American Journal of Epidemiology.
Numerous studies have focused on the risk of tumours among those who use mobile phones, and overwhelmingly found no increased cancer risk.
But researchers at Tel Aviv University say these have tended to focus on brain tumours, and often did not include long-term users.
Cancer of the salivary gland is a very rare condition. Of the 230,000 cases of cancer diagnosed in the UK for instance annually, only 550 relate to this area.
Mixed messages
Dr Siegal Sadetzki, who led the research, said while mobile phone use in Israel was much heavier than in many other parts of the world, this gave an insight into what the long-term, cumulative impact could be.
Precautions should be taken in order to diminish the exposure and lower the risk for health hazards
Dr Siegal Sadetzki
Tel Aviv University
"Compared to other studies, the amount of exposure to radiofrequency radiation we saw here was much higher. If you like, you're seeing what could happen elsewhere 'speeded-up' in Israel," she said.
One of the key findings of the study was that heavy users in rural areas had an even higher risk that those in cities, due, the team suggested, to the fact that mobile phones in areas without strong signals need to emit more radiation to work properly.
But Dr Sadetzki stressed one study was not enough to prove a link, and that further research was needed.
Nonetheless, until more evidence became available, a "precautionary" approach was best, she said, particularly when it comes to children's use of mobile phones.
Despite these latest findings, the largest and longest-running investigation ever to be carried out into mobile phone usage found no increased risk of any sort of cancer.
It followed 420,000 people in Denmark, some of whom had been using a mobile phone for as long as ten years.
There was in fact a lower incidence of cancer than expected in a group of that size, suggesting mobile phones had no impact on the development of tumours.
Last year, the UK's Mobile Telecommunications and Health Research Programme said that while the evidence so far was "reassuring", there was still a need for studies to examine the very long-term impact, and to look at the effect in children.
Ed Yong, of Cancer Research UK, said: "Mobile phones are a relatively recent invention and new research into any possible health risks is welcome.
"However, it's important to remember that the vast majority of studies so far have found that mobile phones do not increase the risk of any type of cancer."
MSG Linked to Obesity
MSG Linked to Obesity
EurekaAlert
August 24, 2008
CHAPEL HILL – People who use monosodium glutamate, or MSG, as a flavor enhancer in their food are more likely than people who don’t use it to be overweight or obese even though they have the same amount of physical activity and total calorie intake, according to a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Public Health study published this month in the journal Obesity.
Researchers at UNC and in China studied more than 750 Chinese men and women, aged between 40 and 59, in three rural villages in north and south China. The majority of study participants prepared their meals at home without commercially processed foods. About 82 percent of the participants used MSG in their food. Those users were divided into three groups, based on the amount of MSG they used. The third who used the most MSG were nearly three times more likely to be overweight than non-users.
“Animal studies have indicated for years that MSG might be associated with weight gain,” said Ka He, M.D., assistant professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the UNC School of Public Health. “Ours is the first study to show a link between MSG use and weight in humans.”
Because MSG is used as a flavor enhancer in many processed foods, studying its potential effect on humans has been difficult. He and his colleagues chose study participants living in rural Chinese villages because they used very little commercially processed food, but many regularly used MSG in food preparation.
science technology MSG Linked to Obesity
science technology MSG Linked to Obesity
science technology MSG Linked to Obesity
“We found that prevalence of overweight was significantly higher in MSG users than in non-users,” He said. “We saw this risk even when we controlled for physical activity, total calorie intake and other possible explanations for the difference in body mass. The positive associations between MSG intake and overweight were consistent with data from animal studies.”
As the percentage of overweight and obese people around the world continues to increase, He said, finding clues to the cause could be very important.
“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other health organizations around the world have concluded that MSG is safe,” He said, “but the question remains – is it healthy?”
EurekaAlert
August 24, 2008
CHAPEL HILL – People who use monosodium glutamate, or MSG, as a flavor enhancer in their food are more likely than people who don’t use it to be overweight or obese even though they have the same amount of physical activity and total calorie intake, according to a University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill School of Public Health study published this month in the journal Obesity.
Researchers at UNC and in China studied more than 750 Chinese men and women, aged between 40 and 59, in three rural villages in north and south China. The majority of study participants prepared their meals at home without commercially processed foods. About 82 percent of the participants used MSG in their food. Those users were divided into three groups, based on the amount of MSG they used. The third who used the most MSG were nearly three times more likely to be overweight than non-users.
“Animal studies have indicated for years that MSG might be associated with weight gain,” said Ka He, M.D., assistant professor of nutrition and epidemiology at the UNC School of Public Health. “Ours is the first study to show a link between MSG use and weight in humans.”
Because MSG is used as a flavor enhancer in many processed foods, studying its potential effect on humans has been difficult. He and his colleagues chose study participants living in rural Chinese villages because they used very little commercially processed food, but many regularly used MSG in food preparation.
science technology MSG Linked to Obesity
science technology MSG Linked to Obesity
science technology MSG Linked to Obesity
“We found that prevalence of overweight was significantly higher in MSG users than in non-users,” He said. “We saw this risk even when we controlled for physical activity, total calorie intake and other possible explanations for the difference in body mass. The positive associations between MSG intake and overweight were consistent with data from animal studies.”
As the percentage of overweight and obese people around the world continues to increase, He said, finding clues to the cause could be very important.
“The U.S. Food and Drug Administration and other health organizations around the world have concluded that MSG is safe,” He said, “but the question remains – is it healthy?”
High-fructose diets impair memory
High-fructose diets impair memory
Press TV
July 20, 2009
Adopting a diet rich in fructose, a form of sugar commonly found in processed foods and beverages, may result in impaired spatial memory.
Previous studies had reported various health problems such as insulin insensitivity, type 2 diabetes, obesity and cardiovascular disease following the use fructose, the sweetener commonly found in table sugar, fruit juice concentrates and high fructose corn syrup.
According to a study conducted in Georgia State University, high fructose intake can also impair memory in consumers. It, however, does not influence an individual’s ability to learn.
Unlike glucose, high levels of triglycerides are produced during the digestion process of fructose within the liver.
This fat can subsequently interfere with the insulin signaling mechanism of the brain, affecting not only the survival of brain cells but also their ability to change based on new experiences.
Scientists concluded that the high content of fructose can impair memory.
Press TV
July 20, 2009
Adopting a diet rich in fructose, a form of sugar commonly found in processed foods and beverages, may result in impaired spatial memory.
Previous studies had reported various health problems such as insulin insensitivity, type 2 diabetes, obesity and cardiovascular disease following the use fructose, the sweetener commonly found in table sugar, fruit juice concentrates and high fructose corn syrup.
According to a study conducted in Georgia State University, high fructose intake can also impair memory in consumers. It, however, does not influence an individual’s ability to learn.
Unlike glucose, high levels of triglycerides are produced during the digestion process of fructose within the liver.
This fat can subsequently interfere with the insulin signaling mechanism of the brain, affecting not only the survival of brain cells but also their ability to change based on new experiences.
Scientists concluded that the high content of fructose can impair memory.
Fructose-Sweetened Beverages Linked to Heart Risks
Fructose-Sweetened Beverages Linked to Heart Risks
By NICHOLAS BAKALAR
Published: April 22, 2009
Some research has suggested that consumption of high-fructose corn syrup, used as a sweetener in a wide variety of foods, may increase the risk of obesity and heart disease. Now, a controlled and randomized study has found that drinks sweetened with fructose led to higher blood levels of L.D.L, or "bad" cholesterol, and triglycerides in overweight test subjects, while drinks sweetened with another sugar, glucose, did not. Both L.D.L. and triglycerides have been linked to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases visceral adiposity and lipids and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese humans (The Journal of Clinical Investigation)
The study was published online on Monday in The Journal of Clinical Investigation.
Researchers at the University of California, Davis, assigned 32 overweight men and women, whose average age was 55, to groups consuming either fructose-sweetened or glucose-sweetened drinks over a 10-week period. The drinks, specially formulated for the study, contained only pure fructose or pure glucose.
For the first two weeks, the volunteers lived in a clinical research center, consuming a balanced diet high in complex carbohydrates and undergoing various blood tests and measurements of body fat. This phase established baseline measurements for the study.
As outpatients for the next two weeks, the subjects ate their usual diets, plus either fructose- or glucose-sweetened drinks consisting of 25 percent of their energy requirements. After returning to the center for more tests, the participants spent six more weeks as outpatients on their usual diets, then finally two more weeks in the clinic on the high-carbohydrate diet while drinking the sweetened beverages.
While outside the hospital, the subjects’ diets were tracked with daily phone calls, and compliance with consumption of the drinks was measured by urine tests.
The two groups had been matched for age, weight, fasting triglyceride levels, insulin concentrations, total cholesterol and other factors. But by the end of the study, the researchers found, those participants consuming fructose beverages had significantly increased blood levels of triglycerides and L.D.L., compared to those consuming drinks sweetened with glucose.
Although there was a similar moderate weight gain in both groups, the fructose drinkers also had larger increases in fat inside the abdomen, also associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
The study was intended only to learn more about the metabolic impacts of glucose and fructose consumption, the authors noted, not the health effects of high-fructose corn syrup, which is a mixture of fructose and glucose. Table sugar also contains both glucose and fructose, as do many fruits and some vegetables.
Dr. Peter J. Havel, the senior author and a nutrition professor at the University of California, Davis, said that the findings “do not imply that anyone should avoid fruit, which contains only small amounts of fructose and has other important nutritional benefits.”
John S. White, a biochemist who has published widely on nutritive sweeteners and was not involved in this study, said that the experimental setup did not reproduce a real-life diet. The study did not test high-fructose corn syrup, he said, and judgments should not be made about it from the findings.
By NICHOLAS BAKALAR
Published: April 22, 2009
Some research has suggested that consumption of high-fructose corn syrup, used as a sweetener in a wide variety of foods, may increase the risk of obesity and heart disease. Now, a controlled and randomized study has found that drinks sweetened with fructose led to higher blood levels of L.D.L, or "bad" cholesterol, and triglycerides in overweight test subjects, while drinks sweetened with another sugar, glucose, did not. Both L.D.L. and triglycerides have been linked to an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
Consuming fructose-sweetened, not glucose-sweetened, beverages increases visceral adiposity and lipids and decreases insulin sensitivity in overweight/obese humans (The Journal of Clinical Investigation)
The study was published online on Monday in The Journal of Clinical Investigation.
Researchers at the University of California, Davis, assigned 32 overweight men and women, whose average age was 55, to groups consuming either fructose-sweetened or glucose-sweetened drinks over a 10-week period. The drinks, specially formulated for the study, contained only pure fructose or pure glucose.
For the first two weeks, the volunteers lived in a clinical research center, consuming a balanced diet high in complex carbohydrates and undergoing various blood tests and measurements of body fat. This phase established baseline measurements for the study.
As outpatients for the next two weeks, the subjects ate their usual diets, plus either fructose- or glucose-sweetened drinks consisting of 25 percent of their energy requirements. After returning to the center for more tests, the participants spent six more weeks as outpatients on their usual diets, then finally two more weeks in the clinic on the high-carbohydrate diet while drinking the sweetened beverages.
While outside the hospital, the subjects’ diets were tracked with daily phone calls, and compliance with consumption of the drinks was measured by urine tests.
The two groups had been matched for age, weight, fasting triglyceride levels, insulin concentrations, total cholesterol and other factors. But by the end of the study, the researchers found, those participants consuming fructose beverages had significantly increased blood levels of triglycerides and L.D.L., compared to those consuming drinks sweetened with glucose.
Although there was a similar moderate weight gain in both groups, the fructose drinkers also had larger increases in fat inside the abdomen, also associated with an increased risk of cardiovascular disease.
The study was intended only to learn more about the metabolic impacts of glucose and fructose consumption, the authors noted, not the health effects of high-fructose corn syrup, which is a mixture of fructose and glucose. Table sugar also contains both glucose and fructose, as do many fruits and some vegetables.
Dr. Peter J. Havel, the senior author and a nutrition professor at the University of California, Davis, said that the findings “do not imply that anyone should avoid fruit, which contains only small amounts of fructose and has other important nutritional benefits.”
John S. White, a biochemist who has published widely on nutritive sweeteners and was not involved in this study, said that the experimental setup did not reproduce a real-life diet. The study did not test high-fructose corn syrup, he said, and judgments should not be made about it from the findings.
Iraq littered with high levels of nuclear and dioxin contamination, study finds
• Greater rates of cancer and birth defects near sites
• Depleted uranium among poisons revealed in report
Pollution caused by the bombing of oil pipelines and the type of munitions used in two wars have led to health problems in Barsa, southern Iraq. Photograph: Dan Chung
More than 40 sites across Iraq are contaminated with high levels or radiation and dioxins, with three decades of war and neglect having left environmental ruin in large parts of the country, an official Iraqi study has found.
Areas in and near Iraq's largest towns and cities, including Najaf, Basra and Falluja, account for around 25% of the contaminated sites, which appear to coincide with communities that have seen increased rates of cancer and birth defects over the past five years. The joint study by the environment, health and science ministries found that scrap metal yards in and around Baghdad and Basra contain high levels of ionising radiation, which is thought to be a legacy of depleted uranium used in munitions during the first Gulf war and since the 2003 invasion.
The environment minister, Narmin Othman, said high levels of dioxins on agricultural lands in southern Iraq, in particular, were increasingly thought to be a key factor in a general decline in the health of people living in the poorest parts of the country.
IraqToxic Toxic zones in Iraq
"If we look at Basra, there are some heavily polluted areas there and there are many factors contributing to it," she told the Guardian. "First, it has been a battlefield for two wars, the Gulf war and the Iran-Iraq war, where many kinds of bombs were used. Also, oil pipelines were bombed and most of the contamination settled in and around Basra.
"The soil has ended up in people's lungs and has been on food that people have eaten. Dioxins have been very high in those areas. All of this has caused systemic problems on a very large scale for both ecology and overall health."
Government study groups have recently focused on the war-ravaged city of Falluja, west of Baghdad, where the unstable security situation had kept scientists away ever since fierce fighting between militants and US forces in 2004.
"We have only found one area so far in Falluja," Othman said. "But there are other areas that we will try to explore soon with international help."
The Guardian reported in November claims by local doctors of a massive rise in birth defects in the city, particularly neural tube defects, which afflict the spinal cords and brains of newborns. "We are aware of the reports, but we must be cautious in reaching conclusions about causes," Othman said. "The general health of the city is not good. There is no sewerage system there and there is a lot of stagnant household waste, creating sickness that is directly affecting genetics. We do know, however, that a lot of depleted uranium was used there.
"We have been regulating and monitoring this and we have been urgently trying to assemble a database. We have had co-operation from the United Nations environment programme and have given our reports in Geneva. We have studied 500 sites for chemicals and depleted uranium. Until now we have found 42 places that have been declared as [high risk] both from uranium and toxins."
Ten of those areas have been classified by Iraq's nuclear decommissioning body as having high levels of radiation. They include the sites of three former nuclear reactors at the Tuwaitha facility – once the pride of Saddam Hussein's regime on the south-eastern outskirts of Baghdad – as well as former research centres around the capital that were either bombed or dismantled between the two Gulf wars.
The head of the decommissioning body, Adnan Jarjies, said that when inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency arrived to "visit these sites, I tell them that even if we have all the best science in the world to help us, none of them could be considered to be clean before 2020."
Bushra Ali Ahmed, director of the Radiation Protection Centre in Baghdad, said only 80% of Iraq had so far been surveyed. "We have focused so far on the sites that have been contaminated by the wars," he said. "We have further plans to swab sites that have been destroyed by war.
"A big problem for us is when say a tank has been destroyed and then moved, we are finding a clear radiation trail. It takes a while to decontaminate these sites."
Scrap sites remain a prime concern. Wastelands of rusting cars and war damage dot Baghdad and other cities between the capital and Basra, offering unchecked access to both children and scavengers.
Othman said Iraq's environmental degradation is being intensified by an acute drought and water shortage across the country that has seen a 70% decrease in the volume of water flowing through the Euphrates and Tigris rivers.
"We can no longer in good conscience call ourselves the land between the rivers," she said. "A lot of the water we are getting has first been used by Turkey and Syria for power generation. When it reaches us it is poor quality. That water which is used for agriculture is often contaminated. We are in the midst of an unmatched environmental disaster."
• Greater rates of cancer and birth defects near sites
• Depleted uranium among poisons revealed in report
Pollution caused by the bombing of oil pipelines and the type of munitions used in two wars have led to health problems in Barsa, southern Iraq. Photograph: Dan Chung
More than 40 sites across Iraq are contaminated with high levels or radiation and dioxins, with three decades of war and neglect having left environmental ruin in large parts of the country, an official Iraqi study has found.
Areas in and near Iraq's largest towns and cities, including Najaf, Basra and Falluja, account for around 25% of the contaminated sites, which appear to coincide with communities that have seen increased rates of cancer and birth defects over the past five years. The joint study by the environment, health and science ministries found that scrap metal yards in and around Baghdad and Basra contain high levels of ionising radiation, which is thought to be a legacy of depleted uranium used in munitions during the first Gulf war and since the 2003 invasion.
The environment minister, Narmin Othman, said high levels of dioxins on agricultural lands in southern Iraq, in particular, were increasingly thought to be a key factor in a general decline in the health of people living in the poorest parts of the country.
IraqToxic Toxic zones in Iraq
"If we look at Basra, there are some heavily polluted areas there and there are many factors contributing to it," she told the Guardian. "First, it has been a battlefield for two wars, the Gulf war and the Iran-Iraq war, where many kinds of bombs were used. Also, oil pipelines were bombed and most of the contamination settled in and around Basra.
"The soil has ended up in people's lungs and has been on food that people have eaten. Dioxins have been very high in those areas. All of this has caused systemic problems on a very large scale for both ecology and overall health."
Government study groups have recently focused on the war-ravaged city of Falluja, west of Baghdad, where the unstable security situation had kept scientists away ever since fierce fighting between militants and US forces in 2004.
"We have only found one area so far in Falluja," Othman said. "But there are other areas that we will try to explore soon with international help."
The Guardian reported in November claims by local doctors of a massive rise in birth defects in the city, particularly neural tube defects, which afflict the spinal cords and brains of newborns. "We are aware of the reports, but we must be cautious in reaching conclusions about causes," Othman said. "The general health of the city is not good. There is no sewerage system there and there is a lot of stagnant household waste, creating sickness that is directly affecting genetics. We do know, however, that a lot of depleted uranium was used there.
"We have been regulating and monitoring this and we have been urgently trying to assemble a database. We have had co-operation from the United Nations environment programme and have given our reports in Geneva. We have studied 500 sites for chemicals and depleted uranium. Until now we have found 42 places that have been declared as [high risk] both from uranium and toxins."
Ten of those areas have been classified by Iraq's nuclear decommissioning body as having high levels of radiation. They include the sites of three former nuclear reactors at the Tuwaitha facility – once the pride of Saddam Hussein's regime on the south-eastern outskirts of Baghdad – as well as former research centres around the capital that were either bombed or dismantled between the two Gulf wars.
The head of the decommissioning body, Adnan Jarjies, said that when inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency arrived to "visit these sites, I tell them that even if we have all the best science in the world to help us, none of them could be considered to be clean before 2020."
Bushra Ali Ahmed, director of the Radiation Protection Centre in Baghdad, said only 80% of Iraq had so far been surveyed. "We have focused so far on the sites that have been contaminated by the wars," he said. "We have further plans to swab sites that have been destroyed by war.
"A big problem for us is when say a tank has been destroyed and then moved, we are finding a clear radiation trail. It takes a while to decontaminate these sites."
Scrap sites remain a prime concern. Wastelands of rusting cars and war damage dot Baghdad and other cities between the capital and Basra, offering unchecked access to both children and scavengers.
Othman said Iraq's environmental degradation is being intensified by an acute drought and water shortage across the country that has seen a 70% decrease in the volume of water flowing through the Euphrates and Tigris rivers.
"We can no longer in good conscience call ourselves the land between the rivers," she said. "A lot of the water we are getting has first been used by Turkey and Syria for power generation. When it reaches us it is poor quality. That water which is used for agriculture is often contaminated. We are in the midst of an unmatched environmental disaster."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)