Over the years I have learned that just because it says Organic, does not in fact mean it is. Many companies have and still are trying to jump on the money train called Organic.

Many companies say Organic when in fact only a few ingredients are organic. This is true with many food products and beauty products such as creams and bath oils.

I have even come across products with toxic chemicals in them that are still labeled organic because they do contains few organic ingredients.

So my advice to you is to check labels and read the ingredients. If you do not know what it is, then don’t risk it, don’t buy it.

Each and every day.. I hope the world will take a turn for the better, but I find something that proves it other wise. The problem here seems to be one evil. Money and the greedy men and women who have and want more of it.

Mostly.. it seems to be the medical industry from the US pushing its money into pockets and government allowing for things to pass that should not. Are people being bribed? In the US, of course… in Canada. I would hope not but it seems that each year we are adopting a few more ways of the Americans. Not a good thing!

If you cannot see a problem with this you honestly just need a good kick in the face. Look at where the US has taken there selves with greed and corruption. When it becomes all about money, everyone suffers as you see the world is now. This is all the side effect of one greedy, corrupt country.  Don’t get me wrong. It’s not everyone in America. My father is American, a lot of my friends are as well. It just seems like Americas dream of freedom was one of greed and corruption that has finally spilled over for the world to see.

Now it seems that the someone is up to something again.

Beverage companies like Coke (does the us medical industry have stakes in Coke & Pepsi?) and Pepsi are changing the way they label their beverages. What am I talking about you may be asking. Just go and buy some Ice Tea or other beverages from your local convenience store and look at the label. Not all companies are doing this yet and hopefully they won’t as its wrong! But when you look at the label you will see they have now changed the Ingredients list from “Nutritional Ingredients” to “Medicinal Ingredients”.

To most… it won’t seem like a big deal. To most… they don’t even notice it. But to those of you that care about the direction of our country and the world we live in, you might have noticed this. I personally became furious when I read this and put the product back on the shelf. I will not support it.

It is quite simple what effect this will have on our future. For those of you unsure, here is what it means when a company starts labeling Nutritional Ingredients as Medicinal.

• Nutritional Ingredients are now considered Medicinal.
• Medicinal Ingredients are considered medicine.
• This means that they can be regulated by the FDA.
• This means that normal nutritional ingredients in your food like carrots, potatoes, broccoli etc are considered medicinal, no longer nutritional & natural.
• This means the FDA/Goverment can and will control what you grow.
• This means they can make it illegal to grow FOOD because it has MEDICINAL Ingredients in it and only doctors and pharmacists can dispense medicine.
• This means you can no longer have a vegetable garden or pick fresh oranges or apples from a tree.
• This means we will have to eat what they say.
• This means we will get sick.
• This means you will have to buy their drugs to stay alive.

Don’t let the beverage industry get away with this. Whether they are doing intentionally or just trying a new marketing gimick. It is wrong.

Call them.. email them.. write them.
Spread the word and don’t buy their products.

If we are all aware, we can change the world.
They don’t control us, we control them. Without our money, they are nothing!

NUTRITIONAL INGREDIENTS ARE NOT MEDICINAL!

Here’s a little-known truth about Bayer that needs to be revisited. In 2006, it was discovered that Bayer found out a vaccine it was selling in the United States was accidentally contaminated with HIV.

In order to cover its tracks, say the journalists in this video (below), Bayer pulled the vaccines off the market and sold them to consumers in Japan, France, Spain and other countries, where hemophiliacs were then contaminated with HIV due to the vaccine.

Despite these apparent crimes, no Bayer executives faced arrest or prosecution in the United States.

A Bayer spinmeister had this to say: “Bayer behaved responsibly, ethically and humanely… [and its actions] were consistent with regulations.”

Sure they did. Don’t forget that Bayer is the same pharmaceutical company linked to Nazi Germany’s medical experiments on concentration camp prisoners. They have a long and dark history of being involved in the manufacture of chemical weapons. As stated on CorporateWatch.org

” IG Farben continued to grow during the inter-war period as one of the most powerful chemical and pharmaceutical companies in the world. Products included polyurethanes and the first ‘sulpha’ drugs. It is during Nazi-era Germany and WW2 that IG Farben (Bayer) entered its most sinister phase. IG Farben as the leading chemical company in Nazi Germany took over chemical plants across Nazi occupied Europe, used slave-labour in their factories (including operating their own concentration camp), conducted medical experiments on those held in the concentration camps and manufactured the poison gas used to kill thousands. At the end of the war the 1945 Potsdam Agreement called for the break up of IG Farben into its constituent companies. Twelve IG Farben employees and directors were jailed for war crimes at the Nuremburg Trials.”

Bayer Corp, the maker of aspirin, is trying to get the FDA to approve the use of aspirin as a preventive measure against heart attacks. The ploy, of course, is to get permission to run TV ads that say, “One aspirin a day will prevent heart attacks, even if you’ve never had a heart attack.”
Bayer wants every person in the world to take one aspirin a day. Why? Because it’s good for profits, of course. Very good for profits. Get the entire population believing that aspirin is good for them, and get the FDA to line up behind it, and you’ve got a great racket running.
In reality, eating some chlorella each day, or flax oil each day, or some fresh fruits and vegetables each day is probably far better for your heart than an aspirin a day, and real foods don’t cause gastrointestinal scarring, either.

Dr Holger Crone MD NMD HD

White coffee filters, white toilet paper, white tampons, what sugar, white, white, white! Does it all have to be white?

I think their is an unknown obsession with white items.. and its killing us.

Personally I don’t care what colour my sugar is as long as it tastes like sugar. As long as my coffee filter, filters my coffee I am good there too. Tampons, well I dont use them but them miss does and I have read and hear some things about the chemicals used in bleaching those and how it can and I am pretty sure she would not care if they were not white either.

This obsession with white is killing people and they just don’t see it.

Now the companies who make these items say to us “the chemicals that can leech out of the product are minimal and harmless in such small amounts”. That is if they say anything at all. Now lets take a minute and add up how many times a day you drink coffee, times that by the week, times that by the month, then times that by the year… you will see that it adds up to a MASSIVE NUMBER and a boatload of bad chemicals being put into your body.

Then add in other items you use during the day that have been bleached white with harmful chemicals like your toilet paper, tampons, and more.

See there is a much bigger picture here.. its not about just one thing. Its about a little bit of everythign adding up to a big problem.

So.. next time you go to get your coffee filters.. reach for the unbleached tan looking ones. When it comes to toilet paper.. get the recycled kind, since it ends up rather non white in the end anyways.

It will do your body good!

P.S. And don’t forget to tell your store manager your not a fool and to stop using the word ORGANIC and NATURAL as a reason to over price items and rip us off.

The chemicals, called phthalates, are found in many ordinary products including cosmetics, toys, vinyl flooring and medical supplies. They are used to stabilize fragrances and make plastics flexible.

In the study, they were found in elevated levels in the urine of babies who’d been recently shampooed, powdered or lotioned with baby products.

Phthalates (pronounced thowl-ates) are under attack by some environmental advocacy groups, but experts are uncertain what dangers, if any, they might pose. The federal government doesn’t limit their use, although California and some countries have restricted their use.

Animal studies have suggested that phthalates can cause reproductive birth defects and some activists believe they may cause reproductive problems in boys and early puberty in girls.

Rigorous scientific evidence in human studies is lacking. The current study offers no direct evidence that products the infants used contained phthalates, and no evidence that the chemicals in the babies’ urine caused any harm. Still, the results worried environmental groups that support restrictions on these chemicals.

“There is an obvious need for laws that force the beauty industry to clean up its act,” said Stacy Malkan of Health Care Without Harm.

The study’s lead author, Dr. Sheela Sathyanarayana, a University of Washington pediatrician, said, “The bottom line is that these chemicals likely do exist in products that we’re commonly using on our children and they potentially could cause health effects.”

Babies don’t usually need special lotions and powders, and water alone or shampoo in very small amounts is generally enough to clean infant hair, Sathyanarayana said.

Concerned parents can seek products labeled “phthalate-free,” or check labels for common phthalates, including DEP and DEHP.

But the chemicals often don’t appear on product labels. That’s because retail products aren’t required to list individual ingredients of fragrances, which are a common phthalate source.

The Food and Drug Administration “has no compelling evidence that phthalates pose a safety risk when used in cosmetics,” spokeswoman Stephanie Kwisnek said. “Should new data emerge, we will inform the public as well as the industry.”

The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention says the health effects in humans are uncertain.

“Although several studies in people have explored possible associations with developmental and reproductive outcomes (semen quality, genital development in boys, shortened pregnancy, and premature breast development in young girls), more research is needed,” a 2005 CDC report said.

The new study, which appears in February’s issue of the journal Pediatrics, involved 163 babies. Most were white, ages 2 to 28 months and living in California, Minnesota and Missouri.

The researchers measured levels of several phthalates in urine from diapers. They also asked the mothers about use in the previous 24 hours of baby products including lotions, powders, diaper creams and baby wipes.

All urine samples had detectable levels of at least one phthalate, and most had levels of several more. The highest levels were linked with shampoos, lotions and powders, and were most prevalent in babies younger than 8 months.

John Bailey, chief scientist at the Personal Care Products Council, questioned the methods and said the phthalates could have come from diapers, lab materials or other sources.

“Unfortunately, the researchers of this study did not test baby care products for the presence of phthalates or control for other possible routes of exposure,” Bailey said.

My recommendations is to always read the ingredients. I live by the saying, “if you can’t eat it.. I don’t put it on my skin”. You might think this makes it hard to shop for soap and other items, but really it does not. What it does is save our family money as we are not out there buying into the elaborate marketing gimics of product companies. Go back to the basics and live your life healthy and disease free.

For those of you interested in Sodium Lauryl Sulfate .. here is some info for you.

Both Sodium Lauryl Sulfate (SLS) and its close relative Sodium Laureth Sulfate (SLES) are commonly used in many soaps, shampoos, detergents, toothpastes and other products that we expect to “foam up”. Both chemicals are very effective foaming agents, chemically known as surfactants.

SLS and SLES are esters of Sulphuric acid – SLS is also known as “Sulfuric acid monododecyl ester sodium salt”, however there are over 150 different names by which it is known – see them here. In fact, SLES is commonly contaminated with dioxane, a known carcinogen.

Although SLES is somewhat less irritating than Sodium Lauryl Sulfate, it cannot be metabolised by the liver and its effects are therefore much longer-lasting.

A report published in the Journal of The American College of Toxicology in 1983 showed that concentrations as low as 0.5% could cause irritation and concentrations of 10-30% caused skin corrosion and severe irritation. National Institutes of Health “Household Products Directory” of chemical ingredients lists over 80 products that contain sodium lauryl sulfate. Some soaps have concentrations of up to 30%, which the ACT report called “highly irritating and dangerous”.

Shampoos are among the most frequently reported products to the FDA. Reports include eye irritation, scalp irritation, tangled hair, swelling of the hands, face and arms and split and fuzzy hair. The main cause of these problems is sodium lauryl sulfate

TORONTO (CP) – Armed with tests that suggest the body of every Canadian carries trace evidence of dangerous chemicals, Ontario’s New Democrats are spearheading an effort that would help them learn exactly what carcinogens or toxins they are exposed to on a daily basis.

Toxic chemicals are in many everyday products, from household cleaners and laundry detergents to hair dyes and cosmetics, said NDP environment critic Peter Tabuns, who is pushing for a new law that would compel manufacturers to disclose dangerous ingredients in their products.

Consumers would demand changes if labels told them exactly what a product contains, Tabuns said in an interview.

“Right now, most people don’t know whether or not products that they buy have cancer-causing agents in them.”

Tabuns hopes to convince Ontario to follow the example of California, where community right-to-know legislation has helped get arsenic out of bottled water and lead removed from some candies. Manufacturers there opted to find alternatives rather than list carcinogens on their labels, he said.

“They are not going to want to have that label on their products,” Tabuns said. “They know that consumers, especially parents, don’t want to subject themselves to exposure.”

He cited the example of Gillette, which reformulated Liquid Paper correction fluid to eliminate trichloroethylene, a suspected carcinogen, rather than comply with California’s 15-year-old law to label the product with a warning that the ingredient could cause cancer.

The members of Canada’s Chemical Producers Association believe in right-to-know legislation, but “the devil is in the details,” said Michael Bourque, the association’s vice-president of public affairs.

He cautioned against labelling products that contain only a few parts per billion of a certain chemical – levels that scientists say are safe.

“One problem (is) where you provide a fire hose of information that no one can drink from it, or you provide lists of things that are in such minute quantities that we don’t know whether there’s an impact,” Bourque said.

“Do we support giving people information that’s going to confuse them, alarm them unnecessarily? No, we don’t.”

The lobby group Environmental Defence has issued three reports since 2005 detailing tests on Canadian children, adults and even four federal MPs that found evidence of 68 different chemicals, including pesticides, PCBs, stain repellents, fire retardants, mercury and lead.

Environmental Defence policy director Aaron Freeman said legislation like that proposed by Tabuns is “absolutely essential” in order to help protect consumers.

“You’re seeing consumers making environmentally sound choices when they’re given information, (such as) the slow-motion explosion toward organic food and non-toxic alternatives in areas like pesticides and cosmetics,” he said.

“It’s true that some chemicals are only in certain products at very small amounts, but for some chemicals, those small amounts are still very toxic. At a very basic level, if something is toxic, we have a right to know.”

Tabuns’ private member’s bill, dubbed the Community Right to Know act, has received second reading in the Ontario legislature, but there’s no indication the Liberal government will agree to hold public hearings on the bill or allow it to come back to the legislature for third and final reading.

Anne O’Hagan, the senior communications adviser to Environment Minister Lauren Broten, said the government supports the general idea behind the bill. “More information can only be a good thing when it comes to the environment.”

Tabuns’ bill also calls for better worker access to warnings about harmful chemicals they are exposed to on the job, and he plans to introduce companion legislation, a Toxic Use Reduction act, to force companies to cut the use, waste and spillage of toxic chemicals.

The European Union and the state of Vermont have similar product-labelling laws, and Tabuns said it’s time Canada started catching up with those jurisdictions that help protect consumers from dangerous chemicals.

“This issue really has arrived, and the political momentum among the public is there,” he said. “If the (Liberals) don’t act, they will face the loss of support from environmentalists and public health advocates in the next election.”

Written by: KEITH LESLIE