Tag Archives: GMO

Gluten Free | The Paleo Diet

Last week, The New York Times published an op-ed by Roger Cohen, its International Affairs and Diplomacy correspondent, regarding…wait for it – gluten!1 Has gluten become the nefarious “sticking point” that underlies our most critical diplomatic issues? Or was this just another of Cohen’s haughty rants against people who purchase organic food, implement health-optimizing diets, and keep abreast of nutrition science research? Spoiler alert – it’s the latter.

The gist of Cohen’s latest article, “This Column is Gluten-Free,” is that wheat has gotten a bad rap, despite graciously feeding the world for the past 12,000 years. Cohen acknowledges that gluten is harmful for the roughly 1% of the population that has celiac disease, but what about the remainder of the estimated 30% of Americans who are cutting back on gluten or going gluten-free?2

Does non-celiac gluten sensitivity (NCGS) exist? Is there evidence that gluten can be harmful for the general population? According to Cohen, people who eschew gluten (celiac patients excluded) are “self-indulgent” narcissists with imaginary food intolerances. “Having a special dietary requirement,” Cohen asserts, “is one way to feel special in the prevailing ‘me’ culture.”

Narcissism seems to be Cohen’s favorite buzzword when describing nutrition-motivated people, particularly those who buy organic food and avoid gluten. In this capacity, he uses the n-word no less than three times in his latest article, and in a previously article, he scolds the “affluent narcissism” of the upper middle class, people who purchase organic food while the poor “get a lot more nutrients from the two regular carrots they can buy for the price of one organic carrot.”3

This gets to the crux of Cohen’s ethos. He takes issue with individualism and self-determination, preferring a social structure whereby the balance of power is significantly tilted toward the state. In yet another recent article, he comments on a Pew Global Attitudes survey for which Americans and Europeans were asked which is more important,

  1. “freedom to pursue life’s goals without state interference,” or
  2. “state guarantees that nobody is in need.”

Much to Cohen’s dismay, 58% of Americans say the former is more important (compared to 62% of Europeans who prefer the latter).4 He then suggests the government should be more empowered to dictate how people eat, starting with a “coordinated policy action” designed to reduce sugar consumption, but where would it end?

What if the government decided that gluten is only dangerous for those with celiac disease? Could it outlaw a generalized form of “gluten-free” labeling? After all, because the US government supports GMO foods and deems them absolutely safe, it has repeatedly thwarted legislative attempts to implement mandatory GMO labeling. Not surprisingly, Cohen also strongly supports GMO foods:

“To feed a planet of 9 billion people,” he insists, “we are going to need high yields not low yields; we are going to need genetically modified crops; we are going to need pesticides and fertilizers and other elements of the industrialized food processes that have led mankind to be better fed and live longer than at any time in history.”5

Feeding the poor is a noble goal, even with subsistence-level nutrition, but so is health optimization for individuals, which is a primary goal of nutrition science research. These goals, however, are not incompatible; they are complementary. Nevertheless, Cohen’s steadfast resolve to restore wheat’s “amber waves” reputation prevents him from critically assessing and/or acknowledging the scientific research on gluten, the dangers of which extend far beyond just celiac patients.

Just last month, for example, researchers at the National Institutes of Health published a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled, cross-over trial on people who don’t have celiac disease but believe themselves to be gluten sensitive. The results? “The severity of overall symptoms increased significantly during 1 week of intake of small amounts of gluten, compared with placebo.”6

For further reading on the science behind how gluten can damage the gut and compromise health, check out Trevor Connor’s excellent 5-article review, “The Wheat Series.” Nutrition is always vulnerable to politicization, but rather than choosing sides, why not seek mutually beneficial solutions to complex, interdependent challenges? Being kind and respectful also helps immensely (leave the diet-shaming for the narcissists).

References

1. Cohen, R. (October 19, 2015). This Column is Gluten-Free. The New York Times. Retrieved from //www.nytimes.com/2015/10/20/opinion/this-column-is-gluten-free.html?_r=0

2. Strom, S. (February 17, 2014). A Big Bet on Gluten-Free. The New York Times. Retrieved from //www.nytimes.com/2014/02/18/business/food-industry-wagers-big-on-gluten-free.html

3. Cohen, R. (September 6, 2012). The Organic Fable. The New York Times. Retrieved from //www.nytimes.com/2012/09/07/opinion/roger-cohen-the-organic-fable.html

4. Cohen, R. (August 5, 2015). Incurable American Excess. The New York Times. Retrieved from //www.nytimes.com/2015/08/07/opinion/roger-cohen-incurable-american-excess.html

5. Cohen, R. (August 5, 2015). Incurable American Excess. The New York Times. Retrieved from //www.nytimes.com/2015/08/07/opinion/roger-cohen-incurable-american-excess.html

6. Di Sabatino, A., et al. (September 2015). Small Amounts of Gluten in Subjects With Suspected Nonceliac Gluten Sensitivity: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled, Cross-Over Trial. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol, 13(9). Retrieved from //www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/25701700

GMO | The Paleo Diet

The fairly recent development – nay – may I say obsession – with genetically modified foods, is certainly one of our generation’s most important battles.1, 2, 3 On the one hand – quite clearly – we have never entered into these waters before.4, 5 We, as a species, have never eaten artificial foods that have been so wholly manufactured, designed (molecule by molecule) by food chemists, and consumed so egregiously.6, 7, 8 And – largely – we have never been fatter as a world population, as a result.9, 10, 11, 12 This is all pretty indisputable.

GMO Fig 1 | The Paleo Diet

De vendômois JS, Cellier D, Vélot C, Clair E, Mesnage R, Séralini GE. Debate on GMOs health risks after statistical findings in regulatory tests. Int J Biol Sci. 2010;6(6):590-8.

On the other hand, we have also (perhaps unknowingly) been consuming foods that have all along been somewhat genetically modified. Interesting research came out this week, which showed that the sweet potato (which is a staple of many different types of healthy diets) looks to have been altered all along – by nature itself.13 This interesting and important discovery must not be ignored.

The researchers state (perhaps somewhat over-ambitiously) that: “our finding, that the sweet potato is naturally transgenic, while being a widely and traditionally consumed food crop, could affect the current consumer distrust of the safety of transgenic food crops.” While the idea that some foods may be naturally genetically modified, is interesting and important, does it really change the argument that Monsanto should not be designing robo-foods?

I guess that all depends on your perspective. There are solid arguments on each side.14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 How can we possibly feed an already overly dense population (which is ballooning in numbers by the second) on what is left of our natural soil? It doesn’t really seem very likely – no matter how much I (or anyone else) would like to believe it is. Does this make Monsanto a necessary evil? Again, it depends on your perspective.

Should the US State Department really be paying for Monsanto’s marketing items?20 That is an easier argument to win. But the time has come when big agribusiness and government are now one and the same.21, 22, 23 Is this a dangerous precedent? The issue of GMOs is a problem that raises more questions than answers. Quite simply, like mass surveillance issues, we have never before been in this situation. And that isn’t a local, regional, or even national statement. That is a global statement. We – as a species – are in unchartered territory.

I think the potential danger lies in the fact that a wrong decision here could mean widespread death, disease, and global problems – the type of which has rarely – if ever – been seen before in human history. And when you are talking about people’s lives – that is quite a gamble. This is why the anti-GMO groups are so heartfelt and emotional in their battle. But at the same time, they provide no real solutions for how to feed so many people.

GMO Fig 2 | The Paleo Diet

Jones L. Science, medicine, and the future. Genetically modified foods. BMJ. 1999;318(7183):581-4.

Should we be able to buy apples that do not brown?24 Should we be able to purchase sugar water, made in a factory with deplorable conditions?25 Whether we like it or not, this is the world which our peers – yes, other humans – have banded together to create. And it certainly won’t be slowing down anytime soon. The current state of humanity is a bit like a ship at sea – and we don’t really have a compass. We are in unchartered territory, and we aren’t sure of the right decision to make – whether it will lead us to clear waters or into a storm of unfathomable proportions.

One thing however is clear. When it comes to personal responsibility, what to put in your own mouth – you are in control. A Paleo Diet will provide the best nutrition, best results and best health.26, 27, 28, 29, 30 The other questions that loom are ones that we all have a say in, so make your own voice heard – whatever side it may be on.

REFERENCES

[1] Hug K. Genetically modified organisms: do the benefits outweigh the risks?. Medicina (Kaunas). 2008;44(2):87-99.

[2] De vendômois JS, Cellier D, Vélot C, Clair E, Mesnage R, Séralini GE. Debate on GMOs health risks after statistical findings in regulatory tests. Int J Biol Sci. 2010;6(6):590-8.

[3] Varzakas TH, Arvanitoyannis IS, Baltas H. The politics and science behind GMO acceptance. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2007;47(4):335-61.

[4] Marris C. Public views on GMOs: deconstructing the myths. Stakeholders in the GMO debate often describe public opinion as irrational. But do they really understand the public?. EMBO Rep. 2001;2(7):545-8.

[5] Schmidt CW. Genetically modified foods: breeding uncertainty. Environ Health Perspect. 2005;113(8):A526-33.

[6] Dona A, Arvanitoyannis IS. Health risks of genetically modified foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2009;49(2):164-75.

[7] Monteiro CA, Levy RB, Claro RM, De castro IR, Cannon G. Increasing consumption of ultra-processed foods and likely impact on human health: evidence from Brazil. Public Health Nutr. 2011;14(1):5-13.

[8] Slimani N, Deharveng G, Southgate DA, et al. Contribution of highly industrially processed foods to the nutrient intakes and patterns of middle-aged populations in the European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition study. Eur J Clin Nutr. 2009;63 Suppl 4:S206-25.

[9] Roth J, Qiang X, Marbán SL, Redelt H, Lowell BC. The obesity pandemic: where have we been and where are we going?. Obes Res. 2004;12 Suppl 2:88S-101S.

[10] De vendômois JS, Cellier D, Vélot C, Clair E, Mesnage R, Séralini GE. Debate on GMOs health risks after statistical findings in regulatory tests. Int J Biol Sci. 2010;6(6):590-8.

[11] Swinburn BA, Sacks G, Hall KD, et al. The global obesity pandemic: shaped by global drivers and local environments. Lancet. 2011;378(9793):804-14.

[12] Catenacci VA, Hill JO, Wyatt HR. The obesity epidemic. Clin Chest Med. 2009;30(3):415-44, vii.

[13] Kyndt T, Quispe D, Zhai H, et al. The genome of cultivated sweet potato contains Agrobacterium T-DNAs with expressed genes: An example of a naturally transgenic food crop. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2015;:201419685.

[14] Key S, Ma JK, Drake PM. Genetically modified plants and human health. J R Soc Med. 2008;101(6):290-8.

[15] Dronamraju K. GMO debate: inconclusive. Front Genet. 2013;4:123.

[16] Torgersen H. The real and perceived risks of genetically modified organisms. EMBO Rep. 2004;5 Spec No:S17-21.

[17] Maghari BM, Ardekani AM. Genetically modified foods and social concerns. Avicenna J Med Biotechnol. 2011;3(3):109-17.

[18] Jones L. Science, medicine, and the future. Genetically modified foods. BMJ. 1999;318(7183):581-4.

[19] Somerville C. The genetically modified organism conflict. Plant Physiol. 2000;123(4):1201-2.

[20] Available at: //www.huffingtonpost.com/leslie-hatfield/new-analysis-of-wikileaks_b_3306842.html. Accessed April 23, 2015.

[21] Available at: //www.thelibertybeacon.com/2013/09/06/monsantos-u-s-government-connections-and-icons-11855/. Accessed April 23, 2015.

[22] Available at: //www.nffc.net/Issues/Corporate Control/USDA INC. Accessed April 23, 2015.

[23] Available at: //www.globalresearch.ca/monsanto-controls-both-the-white-house-and-the-us-congress/5336422. Accessed April 23, 2015.

[24] Available at: //naturalsociety.com/usda-approves-first-gmo-apple-planting/. Accessed April 23, 2015.

[25] Available at: //www.chinadaily.com/china/2009-08/20/content_8591019.htm. Accessed April 23, 2015.

[26] Kowalski LM, Bujko J. [Evaluation of biological and clinical potential of paleolithic diet]. Rocz Panstw Zakl Hig. 2012;63(1):9-15.

[27] Konner M, Eaton SB. Paleolithic nutrition: twenty-five years later. Nutr Clin Pract. 2010;25(6):594-602.

[28] Klonoff DC. The beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on type 2 diabetes and other risk factors for cardiovascular disease. J Diabetes Sci Technol. 2009;3(6):1229-32.

[29] Jönsson T, Granfeldt Y, Lindeberg S, Hallberg AC. Subjective satiety and other experiences of a Paleolithic diet compared to a diabetes diet in patients with type 2 diabetes. Nutr J. 2013;12:105.

[30] Jönsson T, Granfeldt Y, Ahrén B, et al. Beneficial effects of a Paleolithic diet on cardiovascular risk factors in type 2 diabetes: a randomized cross-over pilot study. Cardiovasc Diabetol. 2009;8:35.

Not Your Grandmother’s Food | Organic | The Paleo Diet

In honor of National Farmers Market Week,1 it’s time we discuss how our food has changed in the past 100 years.2 From soil degradation,3 to fertilizer use,4 to pesticides,5 to genetically modified organisms (GMOs),6 and to why “organic and local” is always the best option.7

Soil erosion is one of the most serious environmental and public health problems facing human society.8 Studies show soil is being lost from agricultural areas 10 to 40 times faster than the rate of soil formation,9 which could be consequentially disastrous for the human race.

Economically, soil erosion costs roughly $37.6 billion, annually.10 Another cause for concern is declining nutrient density. Three studies of historical food composition data found declines of 5% to 40% (or more) in minerals of vegetables.11

Nutrient Concentrations

Apparent changes in nutrient concentrations in 20 vegetables and 20 fruits with 95% confidence intervals (partially recalculated from Mayer, 1997; U.K. data, 1930s to 1980s).

Eighty-year changes in nutrient concentrations found in a study of 45 maize cultivars grown side by side in Iowa and California (means ± 95% confidence intervals).

Eighty-year changes in nutrient concentrations found in a study of 45 maize cultivars grown side by side in Iowa and California (means ± 95% confidence intervals).

Fertilizers are made largely from nitrogen and hydrogen.12 These two elements are combined to make anhydrous ammonia.13 This is the basis for all synthetic nitrogen fertilizers.14 The hydrogen source in this process is natural gas, a non-renewable resource.15 The high cost of fertilizer production is also largely in part due to hydrogen.16 So, our current system, which allows us to produce enough food for our ever-expanding population,17 is reliant on a non-renewable fossil fuel.18 Currently, global hydrogen production is 48% from natural gas, 30% from oil, and 18% from coal.19

Food for a hungry world. Food grown with nitrogen fertilizers feeds an estimated 2 billion people worldwide. Areas including Asia are becoming increasingly dependent on such fertilizers, to the detriment of the environment.

Food for a hungry world. Food grown with nitrogen fertilizers feeds an estimated 2 billion people worldwide. Areas including Asia are becoming increasingly dependent on such fertilizers, to the detriment of the environment.

We have all heard the adage “if a little is good, a lot more would be better.” Despite the documented negative effects of pesticide use,20 they continue to still be used in large amounts. The rampant use of these chemicals catastrophically affects humans, and other life forms.21

GMOs are still relatively new, in the grand scheme of science and agriculture,22 and while some skeptics question evidence of harm, people continue to fight tooth and nail to stop foods from being genetically altered, or at least labeled as such.23 In 2012, 17.3 million farmers grew genetically engineered crops across 170 million hectares.24 One of the best examples of harm, coming from GMOs, comes from regulators who discovered Gene VI, which has been posited as “unsafe for human consumption.”25, 26

CaMV-Genome

54 out of 86 different transgenic events (unique insertions of foreign DNA) in the US food supply contain portions of this gene. Researchers themselves concluded that this “might result in unintended phenotypic changes.” The repercussions are undeniable.

So, what is the best option for consumers? Well, in the spirit of this celebratory week, local and organic will almost always produce the best results.27 Sadly, this is sometimes impacted by socioeconomic status.28 However, in a recent study researchers found the healthiest diets cost about $1.50 more per day than the least healthy diets.29 “Food deserts” are common, these days.30 Small, local, food stores can have a positive impact on vegetable intake, especially in urban areas.31

Adopting a Paleo Diet will help keep your food local, organic, and hopefully free of pesticides and GMOs. Try to celebrate the farmer’s market every week, not just one week out of the year. Real people, with good intentions, grow our best food. Voice your opinion with your hard-earned dollar, and support them.

References

1. Available at: //blogs.usda.gov/2014/07/29/what-are-you-doing-for-national-farmers-market-week/. Accessed July 30, 2014.

2. Smith JL. Atwater to the present: what have we learned about our food supply?. J Nutr. 1994;124(9 Suppl):1780S-1782S.

3. Macías FA, Oliveros-bastidas A, Marín D, Castellano D, Simonet AM, Molinillo JM. Degradation studies on benzoxazinoids. Soil degradation dynamics of (2R)-2-O-beta-D-glucopyranosyl-4-hydroxy-(2H)- 1,4-benzoxazin-3(4H)-one (DIBOA-Glc) and its degradation products, phytotoxic allelochemicals from Gramineae. J Agric Food Chem. 2005;53(3):554-61.

4. Olson RA. Fertilizers for food production vs energy needs and environmental quality. Ecotoxicol Environ Saf. 1977;1(3):311-26.

5. Jackson RJ, Fan AM. Pesticides in food. West J Med. 1990;152(3):286-7.

6. Dona A, Arvanitoyannis IS. Health risks of genetically modified foods. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2009;49(2):164-75.

7. Pelletier JE, Laska MN, Neumark-sztainer D, Story M. Positive attitudes toward organic, local, and sustainable foods are associated with higher dietary quality among young adults. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013;113(1):127-32.

8. Pimentel, D. (2006). Soil Erosion: A Food and Environmental Threat. Environ Dev Sustain, [online] 8(1), pp.119-137.

9. Pimentel D, Burgess M. Soil Erosion Threatens Food Production. Agriculture. 2013; 3(3):443-463.

10. Uri ND. The environmental implications of soil erosion in the United States. Environ Monit Assess. 2001;66(3):293-312.

11. Davis, D. (2009). Declining fruit and vegetable nutrient composition: What is the evidence?. HortScience, 44(1), pp.15–19.

12. Available at: //www.newyorker.com/tech/elements/the-fertilizer-bomb. Accessed July 30, 2014.

13. Fitzgerald SD, Grooms DL, Scott MA, Clarke KR, Rumbeiha WK. Acute anhydrous ammonia intoxication in cattle. J Vet Diagn Invest. 2006;18(5):485-9.

14. Mukome F, Doane T, Silva L, Parikh S, Horwath W. 2013. Testing protocol ensures the authenticity of organic fertilizers. Calif Agr 67(4):210-216. DOI: 10.3733/ca.v067n04p210

15. Available at: //www.soilassociation.org/motherearth/viewarticle/articleid/3205/the-problems-with-manufactured-nitrogen-fertilisers. Accessed July 30, 2014.

16. Available at: //www.sfgate.com/homeandgarden/article/The-case-against-synthetic-fertilizers-2506802.php. Accessed July 30, 2014.

17. Keinan A, Clark AG. Recent explosive human population growth has resulted in an excess of rare genetic variants. Science. 2012;336(6082):740-3.

18. Cheng S, Logan BE. Sustainable and efficient biohydrogen production via electrohydrogenesis. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 2007;104(47):18871-3.

19. Demirel, Y. (2012). Energy. 1st ed. London: Springer, p.57.

20. Dich J, Zahm SH, Hanberg A, Adami HO. Pesticides and cancer. Cancer Causes Control. 1997;8(3):420-43.

21. Aktar MW, Sengupta D, Chowdhury A. Impact of pesticides use in agriculture: their benefits and hazards. Interdiscip Toxicol. 2009;2(1):1-12.

22. Varzakas TH, Arvanitoyannis IS, Baltas H. The politics and science behind GMO acceptance. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr. 2007;47(4):335-61.

23. Available at: //www.wholefoodsmarket.com/gmo-your-right-know. Accessed July 30, 2014.

24. Van eenennaam AL. GMOs in animal agriculture: time to consider both costs and benefits in regulatory evaluations. J Anim Sci Biotechnol. 2013;4(1):37.

25. Podevin N, Du jardin P. Possible consequences of the overlap between the CaMV 35S promoter regions in plant transformation vectors used and the viral gene VI in transgenic plants. GM Crops Food. 2012;3(4):296-300.

26. Available at: //www.independentsciencenews.org/health/regulators-discover-a-hidden-viral-gene-in-commercial-gmo-crops/. Accessed July 30, 2014.

27. Crinnion WJ. Organic foods contain higher levels of certain nutrients, lower levels of pesticides, and may provide health benefits for the consumer. Altern Med Rev. 2010;15(1):4-12.

28. Curl CL, Beresford SA, Hajat A, et al. Associations of organic produce consumption with socioeconomic status and the local food environment: Multi-Ethnic Study of Atherosclerosis (MESA). PLoS ONE. 2013;8(7):e69778.

29. Rao, M., A. Afshin, G. Singh, and D. Mozaffarian. “Do Healthier Foods and Diet Patterns Cost More than Less Healthy Options? A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.” BMJ Open 3.12 (2013): E004277.

30. Pearson T, Russell J, Campbell MJ, Barker ME. Do ‘food deserts’ influence fruit and vegetable consumption?–A cross-sectional study. Appetite. 2005;45(2):195-7.

31. Bodor JN, Rose D, Farley TA, Swalm C, Scott SK. Neighbourhood fruit and vegetable availability and consumption: the role of small food stores in an urban environment. Public Health Nutr. 2008;11(4):413-20.

What Exactly ARE You Eating?

Many Americans subsist primarily on a processed food diet,1 and more importantly, they do not realize what exactly they’re consuming.2 In fact, a very important and so far, criminally under looked recent study, revealed consumers drinking soda were ingesting more fructose than labels showed.3 Many sodas, and other sweetened beverages, such as juices (which are almost entirely marketed and consumed by growing children4) list no high fructose corn syrup on the label. In the study, many of these drinks were found to actually contain more fructose than the beverages that did list it on the label. In fact, the lead author states “we found what ends up being consumed in these beverages is neither natural sugar nor HFCS, but instead a fructose-intense concoction that could increase one’s risk for diabetes, cardiovascular disease and liver disease.”

This is but one example of the many mistruths that are put out on a daily basis by the food industry.5 Since eating at “fast food” restaurants is positively associated with households with children, a high fat diet and body mass index (BMI),6 it is increasingly important, especially for our children’s health, to make sure food companies labeling accurately. The average American consumes 23 teaspoons of added sugars and sweeteners per day,7 when the AHA recommendation is between 5 and 9 teaspoons daily for adults.8 And yet, children consume roughly 15 teaspoons of sugar per day, by some estimates.9

How inaccurate and deceitful is the food industry? In 2008, eight fast food hamburgers were scientifically assessed, to determine their actual content. The results? “Fast food hamburgers are comprised of little meat (median, 12.1%). Approximately half of their weight is made up of water. Unexpected tissue types found in some hamburgers included bone, cartilage, and plant material; no brain tissue was present. Sarcocystis parasites were discovered in 2 hamburgers.”10

With 25% of hamburgers containing parasites, I cannot stress how much we need to pay attention. The detrimental effect of genetically modified organisms (GMOs) has received slightly more attention, yet 88% of corn and 93% of soybeans are still genetically modified.11 Compare this with less than 20% of crops that were genetically modified in 1996, a mere 18 years ago.12

In a laughable attempt at self-regulation, the food industry has repeatedly stated that it will: curtail children’s food marketing, sell fewer unhealthy products in schools, and label foods responsibly.13 Of these criteria, only one has been met: periodic assessment to determine compliance. And this has been funded by their own industry, not a third party group.

In another excellent paper,14 food companies were found to operate similarly to tobacco companies, which should come as no surprise, since Philip Morris bought Kraft Foods in 1988.15 Astute readers will notice that combining the emerging food science, with increasingly ruthless marketing tactics by big tobacco companies (who now own big food companies) and the invention and subsequent widespread deployment of high fructose corn syrup – all directly coincide with the timing of the current obesity pandemic.16 A pandemic that has skyrocketed since the 1970s.17

Pay attention to the food additives and preservatives which may be harmful to the human body. These include:

  • Butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA)
  • Propyl gallate
  • Aspartame
  • Monosodium glutamate (MSG)
  • Acesulfame-K
  • Olestra
  • Potassium bromate
  • Saccharin
  • Yellow #6
  • Blue #1, #2
  • Red #3
  • Sodium sulfite

When making food choices, eliminate these additives and reap the wealth of benefits from eating an all-natural Paleo Diet. Eat real food without reservations. Organic, grass-fed, pasture-raised or wild caught. Read and understand the ingredient list. You (and your body) will know exactly what you are getting, and a Paleo Diet is the easiest, simplest, and most delicious way to do it.

References

1. Eicher-miller HA, Fulgoni VL, Keast DR. Contributions of processed foods to dietary intake in the US from 2003-2008: a report of the Food and Nutrition Science Solutions Joint Task Force of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, American Society for Nutrition, Institute of Food Technologists, and International Food Information Council. J Nutr. 2012;142(11):2065S-2072S.

2. Nyenje ME, Odjadjare CE, Tanih NF, Green E, Ndip RN. Foodborne pathogens recovered from ready-to-eat foods from roadside cafeterias and retail outlets in Alice, Eastern Cape Province, South Africa: public health implications. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2012;9(8):2608-19.

3. Available at: //www.nutritionjrnl.com/article/PIIS0899900714001920/. Accessed June 29, 2014.

4. Skatrud-mickelson M, Adachi-mejia AM, Mackenzie TA, Sutherland LA. Giving the wrong impression: food and beverage brand impressions delivered to youth through popular movies. J Public Health (Oxf). 2012;34(2):245-52.

5. Available at: //www.theguardian.com/world/2014/feb/07/fake-food-scandal-revealed-tests-products-mislabelled. Accessed June 29, 2014.

6. Jeffery RW, Baxter J, Mcguire M, Linde J. Are fast food restaurants an environmental risk factor for obesity?. Int J Behav Nutr Phys Act. 2006;3:2.

7. USDA, ERS (2012) Loss-Adjusted Food Availability.

8. American Heart Association (2009) Dietary Sugars Intake and Cardiovascular Health.

9. Available at: //www.bbc.com/news/health-27941325. Accessed June 29, 2014.

10. Prayson B, Mcmahon JT, Prayson RA. Fast food hamburgers: what are we really eating?. Ann Diagn Pathol. 2008;12(6):406-9.

11. USDA, ERS (2012) “Genetically engineered varieties of corn, upland cotton, and soybeans, by State and for the United States, 2000-12.”

12. USDA, ERS (2012) Adoption of Genetically Engineered Crops in the U.S.

13. Sharma LL, Teret SP, Brownell KD. The food industry and self-regulation: standards to promote success and to avoid public health failures. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(2):240-6.

14. Brownell KD, Warner KE. The perils of ignoring history: Big Tobacco played dirty and millions died. How similar is Big Food?. Milbank Q. 2009;87(1):259-94.

15. Available at: //abcnews.go.com/Business/story?id=88088. Accessed June 29, 2014.

16. Available at: //www.nytimes.com/2013/02/24/magazine/the-extraordinary-science-of-junk-food.html. Accessed June 29, 2014.

17. Caballero B. The global epidemic of obesity: an overview. Epidemiol Rev. 2007;29:1-5.

Affiliates and Credentials