Monthly Archives: June 2012

Healthy Living Kids & Family Real Food Toxin Alert!

Deceptions in the Food Industry: Baked versus Fried

www.mypicshares.com

In this continuing series of Deceptions in the Food Industry, I want to address yet another fallacy the food industry uses to make us think a product they sell is healthy – baked versus fried on labels. I know a lot of people who eat real food would never touch a bag of the above pictured products. But, I still see a lot of people in general eating these foods, and I see them sold in many places.

I frequently see packages of chips, crackers, or other packaged foods that read “baked” or “baked instead of fried” on the label. I also hear people say that when you bake something instead of fry it – even some home-made foods – it’s healthier.

When you honestly think about this statement, does it really make any sense? If the premise is that the food is healthier because it’s baked in the oven, that’s just plain wrong. Why would something be healthier just because it’s not fried?

If the premise is that fat is unhealthy, that’s also wrong. Don’t believe me? Read this article by cardiologist Dr. Dwight Lundell, M.D., who admits the low-fat scam we’ve been fed by conventional health simply isn’t true.  Dr. Joseph Mercola also believes saturated fats are really important for health too. There’s also this blog post by Tim Ferriss with an explanation by bariatric doctors (those who treat obesity) Dr. Michael Eades and Dr. Mary Eades: 7 Reasons to Eat More Saturated Fats.

Over the last 50+ years, many people have associated fried with foods like french fries, battered items like fish, fried chicken, chicken nuggets, chicken fried steak, tater tots, fried calamari, etc.  What  makes the food unhealthy is not that it’s deep fried. It’s the fact that it’s cooked in a highly processed oil that it is harmful to consume.

Here’s an explanation from eHow about why baked is healthier than fried:

“There really is no competition when it comes to weight loss. Fried foods, eaten regularly, will defeat all the hard work that you put into creating a healthy lifestyle. Baked foods, on the other hand, allow you to actually taste the food without contributing to an expanding waistline and a diminished quality of life. Just compare the calorie and fat content of a fried chicken drumstick (905 calories, 52.39 grams of fat) to a baked drumstick (110 calories, 10.1 grams of fat).”

Notice how the first explanation of why baked is healthier than fried never actually tells you why baked foods are healthier. It just talks about caloric amount and fat content. So according to this source, the act of baking causes less calories and less fat. Sorry, don’t buy it (see references above about why saturated fat is healthy for us to eat).  And the only way it could be less calories and fat is if less oil was used and the chicken was somehow reduced in fat content. I’m not sure if  the second is actually possible when it’s simply compared with cooking the same type of chicken by frying.  But we aren’t given that information, so the whole statement is misleading.

Here’s Livestrong’s explanation about why baking is healthier than frying:

“Just because a dish is prepared by baking doesn’t mean that it’s low in fat. The food may have a high fat content to start with, which is the case when it comes to animal products like meat and cheese. To eliminate excess fat from baked foods, prepare them in a dish that allows the oil to drain away, such as a roasting pan. Since animal skin is also high in fat, remove it before eating to further reduce calories in the dish.”

Now we’ve got a second explanation, which tells us that it’s the type of pan we cook our foods in, such as a baking dish, which allows oil to “drain away” and the fact that we should remove any excess fat from the animal product, to reduce its calories and therefore make it healthier.

The problem isn’t with calories or fat, it’s with the kind of fat and calories – most of which are industrial fats (probably some type of canola, soybean, or cottonseed oil) and factory-farmed chicken. We need fat and calories to keep us going, give us energy, keep our moods and blood sugar level, nourish our brains, nervous systems and cardiovascular system, conceive, nurse, and carry babies, and so that every cell in our bodies can function properly.

I’m always amused when medical web sites try to advise on nutrition. Physicians typically have no training in real nutrition, and the recommendations I’ve seen are usually wrong. They tell us to limit our calories, fat, portion sizes, eat more grains, vegetables, and exercise more.  They are also critical of animal fats, in particular red meat, and tell us it’s healthy to consume polyunsaturated fats for good heart health.

Let’s be real here. We’ve been told to eat this way for decades.  I frequently hear people complaining that they are hungry, are exercising themselves to death, and are still having weight and health problems.

Are disease rates going down? I think not! Here are statistics from the CDC on obesity, a strong predictor of general health decline.

I wrote a post about the dangers of polyunsaturated fatsHere’s an excerpt:

“Remember that many of the polyunsaturated fats are new fats that have only been around for just over a hundred years. Even though oils like cottonseed, soy, and others like corn, safflower, and sunflower have existed in plants, they haven’t been available in their current states on the grocery store shelves in bottles as sold in mass production. These oils are processed, refined, deodorized, and subjected to high heat temperatures. Polyunsaturated fats are very fragile and are denatured easily, while saturated fats have been used in cooking for thousands of years and have stood the test of time for consumption and overall good effect on health.

When you consider the history of humanity and how long people have eaten real fats like butter, lard, and tallow from animals and animal products, it’s pretty obvious what’s been causing the spike in cardiovascular and other health diseases since the industrial revolution.”

Because the foods are cooked in rancid, highly processed, deodorized, polyunsaturated that are manufactured under high heat temperatures, it really makes these oils as bad as the hydrogenated oils that food companies are now often fond of claiming are not contained in their products. Plus, when foods like potatoes, corn, and other foods including cereals, crackers, and breads – pretty much all starchy foods – are fried in these or really any oils, they become carcinogenic due to the acrylamides generated by the process of raising the temperature.

According to TruthAboutAbs:

“Acrylamides in foods were discovered in 2002 by Swedish scientists, and made some big headlines (at least in America) when they were first reported. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) really has not acknowledged the negative impact of cancer-causing acrylamides, and food manufacturers, so far, are not putting warning labels on their products concerning the levels of acrylamides, either.

Acrylamides are cancer-causing chemicals that are created when foods are grilled, fried, baked or roasted at fairly high temperatures.  It is thought that an amino acid found in starchy foods, changes its form when heated to become acrylamide. High-temperature cooking methods, such as frying, baking, or broiling, have been found to produce the most acrylamides, while boiling and steaming produce far less.

The World Health Organization, (WHO) and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) stated that levels of acrylamides in certain foods pose a “major concern” and more research is needed to determine the dangers.

In one study, it was found that women who consumed 40 micrograms or more of acrylamides each day had twice the risk of endometrial and ovarian cancer risk of women who ate foods with little or no acrylamides. 40 mcg is the amount of acrylamides in a small portion of potato chips.”

The chemical storm that makes up processed foods

There are also a lot of other undesirable ingredients in these foods as well…refined table salt, soy lecithin, sugar, corn syrup, and corn starch (the last 3 almost always from GMO sources). Over the last several years, reports have been increasing that this GMO substance contains mercury as well.

Even though companies like Lay’s Potato Chips, are now hitting heavy on marketing their products by emphasizing on the label that their chips only have 3 ingredients, guess what? As we’ve already shown, those ingredients are still some of the worst things you could put in your body!  Their web site says, “All natural oil” (sunflower and corn oil).  Again, these are polyunsaturated fats that are heavily processed under high heat, and like all polyunsaturated fats, are fragile and their bonds break down in those conditions.

Another problem is these oils are too high in Omega 6s. This is a major reason why we have so many health issues. Too many Omega 6s cause an inflammatory response in the body, and ultimately, disease.

A few weeks ago I noticed that food companies are now resorting to selling “chips” made from beans and other substances, as though somehow these are healthier than the potato and corn chips people have been eating for decades.  The ones I saw were black bean and lentil “chips”, once again baked, and touting various health claims on the package such as “no saturated fat”, “natural”, “healthy”, and of course, “baked”.

What kind of fat is are these products cooked in?  More of the same: polyunsaturated vegetable oils like sunflower oil, canola oil, soybean oil, peanut oil, and safflower oil. Sorry folks, this is still not healthy.

There are only two of these oils which have been around for many years and only one that people actually consumed in the historical past: sunflower and safflower oil. But these oils are most often expeller pressed and subjected to high heat, so they become rancid and should be avoided as well. Safflower oil was never used as an oil for consumption, it was instead used in industrial and commercial contexts such as for cosmetics, dyes, and painting.

The science behind why polyunsaturated fats are so unhealthy

If you eat these foods regularly, you might as well say hello to cancer, diabetes, heart disease, auto-immune problems, and weight issues. Those substances build up calcium deposits in your body, and in particular, your arteries. This is one of the culprits of hardening of the arteries, or cardiovascular disease.  In 1994 a study published in the The Lancet revealed that nearly three quarters of the fat in artery clogs is unsaturated, with very little of it being from saturated fat.

The very nature of polyunsaturated molecules is that they are highly unstable. They have more than one double bond, and normally share those electrons with other atoms to enable the molecule to become stable and saturated. Oxygen is attracted to the extra electrons in the polyunsaturated molecule because it is absent two electrons in its outer shell, making it relatively reactive. The more unsaturated the molecule is, the higher the likelihood is of it being unstable at a faster rate. Heated polyunsaturated oils like canola, corn, peanut, sunflower, safflower, and soybean oils become oxidized which causes rancidity.  Thus, saturated oils are the most stable and most suitable for cooking.

So, give up the very non-scientific notion that fat is bad for you to eat. And remember that despite the decrease in butter consumption per person annually of about 18 pounds in the earlier part of the 20th century to about 4 pounds per year in modern day, heart disease began increasing around that time and is still on the rise. What replaced butter and other animal fats like lard and tallow around that same time period was modern, polyunsaturated vegetable oils – and also white flour and sugar.

Read this post which tells the truth about cottonseed oil, how prevalent it was and still is, and how it was developed.

Have you read the other posts in my Deceptions in the Food Industry series?

Omega 3s

Low-sodium and no salt added

All-natural

Whole grains

Lean meats

More information:

The oiling of America – Weston A. Price Foundation

Cholesterol myth exposed

Fat Head the movie – exerpt

Gary Taubes – cholesterol and saturated fats 

Cholesterol-and-Health.com – Chris Masterjohn – web site with scientific discussions about why cholesterol and fat are healthy for us

Suggested Reading:

Fat and Cholesterol are Good for You – Uffne Ravnskov

Put Your Heart in Your Mouth – Dr. Natasha Campbell-McBride

Activism Healthy Living Kids & Family

Wakefield Upheld: Italian Court Gives Case to Family of MMR-Vaccine Injured Child

www.mypicshares.com
It seems the “fraudulent” findings of Dr. Andrew Wakefield’s work are being proven once again in a court of law to solidify the very real connection between autism and vaccines. An Italian court has ruled that Valentino Bocca’s autism symptoms were in fact linked to the MMR injection he received when he was 15 months old.

The child was vaccinated in March of 2004. After returning home, there were immediate adverse symptoms noticeable by the parents. Over the next year, regression was evident, and the autism diagnosis was given. The child is now 100% disabled by the disease.

Previous court cases which used similar research findings

This isn’t the first time a court has ruled in favor of parents of a child with autistic health symptoms who was given the the MMR vaccine. In September of 2010, the Poling family was awarded 1.5 million for life care in a case where the investigation revealed that prior to July 2000, Hannah Poling was a “normal” child at the age of 18 months, but after receiving vaccines to immunize her against 9 different diseases – measles, mumps, rubella, polio, varicella, diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, and Haemophilus influenzae.

Shortly after, Hannah began exhibiting the following symptoms: screaming fits, developed high fevers, stopped eating, failed to respond when spoken to, and other symptoms of autism. Her parents filed a claim in federal vaccine court, and more than 2 years lapsed before both sides came to a settlement about the compensation amount for Hannah’s injuries.

In August of 2010, the Fletcher family in Britain was compensated £90,000 for their son Robert who experienced severe brain damage after receiving the MMR vaccine as an infant, and 18 years of legal battles.  He is unable to stand or feed himself, and speaks minimally.

Another case in 2009 awarded a family $810K+ when it ruled that acute brain damage was caused by an MMR vaccine given to a child. Here are the court case papers.

“But”, you may ask, “Why haven’t I seen anything about this in the mainstream news media?

Mainstream news outlets have shown their clear and unrelenting support for mainstream medicine, which has flagrantly criticized and derailed brave doctors like Andrew Wakefield and his colleagues. In 2010, a British Journalist named Brian Deer made it his mission to be a major instrument which would bring Dr. Wakefield down, and he was successful.

“But”, you may ask, “Didn’t Dr. Wakefield make money after his reputation was soiled?”

There are always those who will point the finger at Dr. Wakefield and say that he’s made money on his book Callous Disregard, or that he’s becoming a millionaire from all the press he’s gotten (interviews, publications, etc.) because of the “fraudulent studies” he produced. And those people believe that study is somehow harmful to children.

Everyone is entitled to make a living, it’s what’s done with that living that counts.

Here are some important questions: exactly how are Dr. Wakefield’s findings, his interviews, or his book harming children? Because parents wanted answers and weren’t getting to the bottom of why their children were sick? Because he produced findings showing an outcome about something people didn’t want to hear? Because his findings are the same as what’s now being revealed at Wake University Medical School, and also previously replicated in study after study after study?

In his book, Dr. Wakefield talks about how since 1991, the U.S. Vaccine Court and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services has been settling cases of vaccine-related issues (autism) who exhibit neurological and developmental issues. These cases usually don’t make the news, and you can’t read about them in general media outlets.

In 2008, CBS News reported that these entities had in fact settled these cases out of court, and their public statements continued to be that no connection existed between the incidence of autism and the vaccines they were recommending.

I want to understand how these facts somehow make Dr. Wakefield a bad, incompetent doctor. The real answer is, they don’t.  But it does show how a massive cover up on the behalf of journalists being paid off by special interests of the pharmaceutical companies takes place.

Why doesn’t Brian Deer look into the reasons why so many parents bring their children to the doctor with complaints of many different types of symptoms that match up with autism and related disorders? Why isn’t there a thorough investigation being done about the thousands upon thousands of children who are vaccine-injured?

There is a database containing this information called VAERS (Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System), and the cases listed are just what’s been reported. Why isn’t there a massive outcry of injustice and fraud to these journalists and these entities, who are clearly covering up important information the public should know?

So even despite reports that these entities were settling cases of vaccine-injured children out-of court, according to the CDC’s vaccine information page:

“Gaps in the scientific knowledge of rare vaccine side effects prompted the CDC to develop the Vaccine Safety Datalink (VSD) project in 1990. This project involves partnerships with eight large managed care organizations (MCOs) to monitor vaccine safety.”

Why do systems like the Vaccine Safety Datalink exist if vaccines are safe?

In 1986, the CDC also established the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program: 

“Individuals and their families can qualify for compensation in three ways. One is to show that an injury found on the Vaccine Injury Table occurred in the appropriate time interval following immunization. The other two ways to qualify include proving that the vaccine caused the condition or demonstrating that the vaccine worsened or aggravated a pre-existing condition.”

and the National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act:

“The topic of vaccine safety became prominent during the mid 1970s with increases in lawsuits filed on behalf of those presumably injured by the diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus (DPT) vaccine. [4] Legal decisions were made and damages awarded despite the lack of scientific evidence to support vaccine injury claims.”

If all of these cases were truly lacking in real scientific evidence to support vaccine injury claims, why bother having these systems in place? And why do courts continue to rule in favor of the vaccine-injured children?

Another important question: Why are there no real, third party studies or research showing the efficacy and safety of vaccines? The vested interest studies conducted by the vaccine manufacturers should not be considered sufficient, which is what are currently used in defense of the vaccines pharmaceutical companies manufacture and sell.

An even more important question iswhy are there so many reports of children having tell-tale symptoms after receiving these vaccines? 

Misrepresentation on the other side

Remember, everyone has to make a living…it’s what you do with that living that counts.

What about the income Brian Deer received from efforts to destroy Dr. Wakefield’s livelihood and career while protecting large, corrupt, corporations who never seem to have real answers for the vaccines they produce…and which continue to harm children?

In March of 2012, Brian Deer was found to have misrepresented the facts about findings of Dr. Wakefield’s research. The high court in the U.K. found that Professor John Walker-Smith, a co-author of the same document prepared by Dr. Wakefield detailing findings of the connection between bowel disorder and the MMR vaccine, was found innocent of all charges brought against him alleged by the GMC (General Medical Council in Britain).

Judge Mitting reported that the GMC, “on the basis of sensible instructions, does not invite me to remit it to a fresh Fitness to Practice panel for redetermination. The end result is that the finding of serious professional misconduct and the sanction of erasure are both quashed.”

In a post I wrote in 2010, I discussed why the statements made by Brian Deer were false. I also listed out a series of other valid studies done before Wakefield’s work, showing similar findings.  Fraudulent findings cannot be replicated over and over again. It’s just not possible.

What about this article by J.B. Handley discussing reasons why Brian Deer’s professional character should be called into question – such as the fact that Brian Deer made the statement that he worked for the Sunday times since the 1980s, when the The Sunday Times refutes this in print, claiming that he is not a member of their staff.

Dr. Wakefield’s reputation

It would stand to reason that if Professor John Walker-Smith’s name was cleared, Dr. Wakefield’s would be also, correct? However, if he were exonerated, the results for pharmaceutical companies would be disastrous. Consumers would know once and for all that the MMR vaccine is problematic and that there is a clear connection between bowel disorder and the vaccine, and that autism is not a made-up health issue which does involve pathologies in the gut that are introduced by an outside source such as a vaccine.

These facts are the very things that the pharmaceutical industry, government, and media have collectively spent much time, effort, and money working to cancel out and eliminate as truth to the public.

This document shows new evidence which would condemn the BMJ’s retraction of Dr. Wakefield’s research, showing a study from Professor John Walker-Smith:

“New documents have come to light confirming our report of intestinal disease and autistic regression following MMR vaccine published in the medical journal The Lancet in 1998, The documents prove that there was no fraud. They describe 7 of The Lancet children, and were written by Professor John Walker-Smith in December 1996, 14 months before our team’s paper was published.

Professor John Walker-Smith prepared the documents as a report for a scientific meeting based upon his own assessment of the children’s disorder, supported by the study’s senior pathologist Dr. Dhillon. I was not involved in these assessments (see Level 4, Walker-Smith’s sworn testimony). I am accused of altering the findings to report disease where none existed and deceiving my colleagues in the process.

It has also been revealed that Dr. Godlee, the responsible editor at the British Medical Journal that published the allegations, did not adequately check these facts – facts that were referred to in both my book, Callous Disregard: Autism and Vaccines – The Truth Behind a Tragedy, published by Skyhorse Publishing in May 2010, and my complaint
about Brian Deer to the UK’s Press Complaints Commission.”

One of the most glaring errors the media, mainstream medical authorities, and other critics of Dr. Wakefield have made is a lack of acknowledgement of many other bodies of research confirming his findings.  Repeatedly, researchers are finding a clear link between inflammation in the digestive tract and autism, as well as the connection between the MMR vaccine with bowel disease.  Autism is caused by bowel disease.  In these cases, the bowel disease is exacerbated to the point by the vaccine that children experience full-blown autism.

The media and mainstream medical community continue to dispel this occurrence, and so its importance is reduced to nothing in the eyes of the world-wide health community. 

From The Daily Mail discussing an ongoing study being conducted by Wake Forest University:

” … a team from the Wake Forest University School of Medicine in North Carolina are examining 275 children with regressive autism and bowel disease – and of the 82 tested so far, 70 prove positive for the measles virus … the team’s leader, Dr Stephen Walker, said: ‘Of the handful of results we have in so far, all are vaccine strain and none are wild measles.

This research proves that in the gastrointestinal tract of a number of children who have been diagnosed with regressive autism, there is evidence of measles virus. What it means is that the study done earlier by Dr Wakefield and published in 1998 is correct.

That study didn’t draw any conclusions about specifically what it means to find measles virus in the gut, but the implication is it may be coming from the MMR vaccine. If that’s the case, and this live virus is residing in the gastrointestinal tract of some children, and then they have GI inflammation and other problems, it may be related to the MMR.”

The second paragraph is very telling: in the gastrointestinal tract of a number of children who have been diagnosed with regressive autism, who are shown to be experiencing GI inflammation and other problems which may be related to the MMR, there is evidence of measles virus being present (vaccine strain).

Although there are many factors which come into play in the development of autism including environmental factors, diet, health of the parents before conception, none of these kids were healthy before they received their vaccines. If they were, autism would not have become a full-blown issue. In my mind, that is clear evidence of the causation between the MMR and autism.

Coincidence? You be the judge.

More information:

Summary of MMR vaccines and damages

Industry studies showing the MMR vaccine doesn’t cause autism

Why Medical Authorities Went to Such Extremes to Silence Dr. Wakefield (interview with Dr. Mercola)

Autism Fraud? Researcher a Victim of Yellow Journalism

Charlie’s Story: From A Mother’s Heart

Why Vaccines are Scientific Fraud 

Vaccine Risk Awareness Network

Dr. Wakefield Interview with Dr. Mercola, Part I of 10

VaxTruth: Meet The Children

Photo credit: AllHealthHub