by Tanya Martin
(Torrance California)
Watermelon Juice Recipe
2 Oranges
1 Zucchini
1 Apple
1 Pear
1 Cucumber
This blend came out tasting like watermelon, we were amazed. Makes around 24 ounces of juice. Enjoy!
See photo or order Faces of Juicing recipe book at http://facesofjuicing.com/
There are articles all over the Internet right now about “fake organic” food from China. Wanting to keep you informed, I read through many of them. The problem was, they all seemed to quote other sources and reading on, I found that these sources quoted other sources and so on. There didn’t seem to be any credible first-hand sources for this information. Was this all just rumor run rampant, as Whole Foods claims?
Whole Foods has been accused of selling these “fake organic” foods from China but they claim that “any product sold as organic in the US, regardless of where it’s grown, must be certified to the USDA’s National Organic Program standard by a USDA-accredited certifier.”
Well, I wanted to know more about this USDA certification of imported organics. It took quite a bit of digging but what I eventually found was more disturbing than any of those copycat articles.
I found frightening information about all food from China, frightening lack of regulation concerning organic food from China, and, worst of all, shocking information about our National Organic Program (NOP).
Before I go on, I want to reassure you about your options. You don’t have to break the bank buying all of your foods organic. Read which foods are commonly pesticide-ridden and those that usually aren’t in How to Buy Organic. I’ll tell you about the “beyond organic” movement that has arisen in response to NOP problems. Check out this source here to learn more, What is Beyond Organic?
First of all, I was surprised to learn how much food the US imports from China: China is the third-largest source of food imports according to a 2009 report by the Economic Research Service (ERS). For example, 60 percent of our apple juice and over half of the garlic we use in the US is from China. The ERS claims that food safety is a critical issue with Chinese imports but that “there are no simple solutions to addressing the safety hazards since they appear to occur in many different types of foods at all links in the supply chain.”
Reading through the USDA article “Imports From China and Food Safety Issues” is alarming. The FDA regularly refuses shipments from China because of filth, unsafe additives, veterinary drug residues and mislabeling. Filth violations and unsafe additives are the most common violations in Chinese imports and reading what constitutes “filth” is only recommended to those with strong stomachs.
What this report did make evident is that pollution in China is so prevalent that even more stringent regulation is unlikely to make great improvements in food quality there. The ERS reports that banned agricultural chemicals are still used and even when they’re not–they still exist in the soil and water. Many farms are in industrial regions where air, water and soil pollution is concentrated, especially in terms of cadmium and lead levels. Animal and human waste spoil the water, many workers don’t have hygiene awareness and fraudulent record-keeping is common.
More information about pollution in China can be found in the Stanford Journal of Internation Law ”Is ‘USDA Organic’ a Seal of Deceit?” by Chenglin Liu (print).
Is “USDA Organic” a Seal of Deceit? covers the pitfalls of USDA Certified Organics Produced in the United States, China and Beyond. This article was originally published in the summer 2011 issue of Stanford Journal of International Law and is available for a fee on many scholarly studies websites. To avoid subscription prices, you can read this article via your local or statewide library. Based upon court cases and the evidence presented in them, this white paper was my most disturbing find.
In terms of pollution, author and law professor Chenglin Liu reports that only five percent of household sewage and 17 percent of industrial sewage in China is properly treated. A Chinese government study found that 90 percent of Chinese groundwater is polluted. China is the world’s biggest user of chemical fertilizers and one of the largest producers and users of pesticides. Worse of all, Chinese farmers traditionally did use organic methods. When farmlands were socialized in the 1960's, they were forced to use new farming techniques, fertilizers and pesticides by the Chinese government. After decades of such heavy use of agricultural chemicals, soil quality has decreased to the point that USDA economist Fred Gales claims that it is “almost impossible to grow truly organic food in China.”
I also took a look at the 2010 USDA Foreign Agriculture Report, an organic report on China. The authors of this report surmise that because of increasing demand within China and worldwide, within 10 years, China may “become the fourth largest organic market in the world.” They report that food safety issues in China make organics a profitable market. Consumers are willing to pay 300 percent more for organic asparagus, 10 times more for organic beef, and generally, five to 10 times more for all organic vegetables. This kind of profit drives unscrupulous practices.
Organic certification in China is wildly diversified. The Chinese Organic Food Certification Center (COFCC) is supposedly in charge but only certifies about 30 percent of organic products. The rest are certified through third parties, private firms, individual inspectors and international firms. As of 2010, the authors report that there is no agreement between China and the US as what constitutes organic. They also report that organic standards are poorly enforced in China, that no clear authority exists, that mislabeling is common and that many producers use expired organic labels. Some organic companies don’t even produce their own food but subcontract to others. Some companies label their goods as organic when only a tiny portion of their produce is grown organically.
Professor Liu reports that there are three ways that imported foods can be sold as organic in the US. 1) Foods can be certified by a USDA-accredited certifying agent, either US-based or foreign-based; 2) foods may be stamped with the USDA seal if the US has a recognition agreement with that country, an agreement that the country’s own certifying agents can use this seal because they follow US organic regulations; 3) equivalency agreements exist through which the US and other countries agree that their organic standards are equivalent.
We don’t have an equivalency agreement or a recognition agreement with China so technically, Whole Foods is right: organic food from China must be certified by a USDA-accredited certifier. But here’s the rub. There aren’t enough US certifiers to go around, only about 94 exist. The USDA certifies agents in China to certify farms and other producers. In 2007, an audit of two farms and four certifiers in China found many issues of noncompliance. For example, the certifiers had little experience with organic certification stipulations, often didn’t even understand them, and in once case, a German-based certifying company in China didn’t even provide the NOP organic standards to applying agents.
Also in 2007, the USDA realized that the Organic Crop Improvement Association (OCIA) had been using employees from the Chinese Ministry of Environmental Protection. It would be in their best interest to push organic certification no matter what actual practices were taking place. The OCIA certifies 1800 organic operations in 11 countries, 233 in China. It took three years for the USDA to take action and suspend OCIA for one year, and they didn’t tell the American public until 2010.
Professor Liu finds Whole Food’s rebuttal ridiculous because it claims equivalency in organic standards and certification whether the food is from US or beyond. Liu points out that in one instance, the USDA granted conditional accreditations to certifiers based only on paperwork and didn’t check to see that they complied with conditions set forth for seven years. NOP regulations only stipulate a once-yearly check on farms and Liu reports that China’s government agencies can’t even enforce their own laws, never mind that of the US.
Why did China keep having problems with tainted milk and products made with this milk? Because local governments cover up such scandals as a matter of course. These local governments are closely tied to food manufacturers and it is in their best interest economically to boost manufacturing any way they can. The court system also has ties with food manufacturers reports Liu, and the news media is controlled by the Chinese government. Bribes for licenses are common and ethics aren’t very strong in the food industry in China. The use of additives to enhance look and taste, for instance, rule over health concerns.
Farmers in China don’t voluntarily choose to grow organic: they’re ordered to. Village leaders are in charge of farm cooperatives and are the gatekeepers for USDA certifying agents. An agent might be shown a sampling of organic farming rather than all the practices within the cooperative and many farmers reported that that didn’t know what organic meant or what they were supposed to do. Local officials commonly disrupt, delay or circumvent certifier’s tours of these farms.
Fraudulent labeling is very common in Chinese food manufacturing and because so many departments and agencies are involved in this chain, there are plenty of ways to duck under the radar. For two years, Jiahe products were carried on Carrefour, Wal-Mart and other grocery chain shelves even though they weren’t verified to be free of pesticides.
In terms of corruption, Argentina, Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico, the Philippines and Thailand all rank worse than China. Yet these countries are the top ten suppliers of fruits and vegetables to the US reports Liu. Growing demand for organic food drives imports. Liu reports that 40 percent of the organic food consumed in the US is imported from over 100 other countries.
Then there’s the National Organic Program. The US certainly isn’t immune to corruption. The NOP was instituted because small farmers thought regulation would protect them. Instead, as the organic industry has been co-opted by mega-corporations, loopholes in organic standards and regulations become cavernous.
Those small farms? They’ve been gobbled up by big business and organic practices become industrial organic practices. Kellogg now owns Bear Naked and Kashi, Heinz and Hein own 19 organic brands. Coca-Cola, Con-Agra, General Mills, Kraft, and Mars M&M own most of the market. Michael Pollan reports that “five giant farms control fully one-half of the $400 million organic produce market in California.” To see who owns your favorite organic brand, check out this info graphic, Organic Sells Out to Mega Corporations.
The truth is, there is no perfect standard. But in general, organic foods are typically of higher quality than conventional. Even then, I would recommend not buying foods from China whether it’s organic or not. Support companies who are willing to show you there production methods and be completely transparent like Beyond Organic. I also recommend shopping at your local farmers market and asking them how they produce their foods. Buying local or from a single owned organic company is your safest bet when buying any foods including organic.
Chinese imports are a common part of US food supply.Environmental pollution in China makes any food grown there hazardous or nutrient-deplete.Organic regulation of Chinese foods is a joke.Corruption is common in many of the countries that contribute to US food sources, organic and otherwise.Organic regulation in the US has been severely compromised by corporate interests.It’s better to know the person that provides your food than rely on organic certifications. SourcesPeoples Republic of China: Organics Report, October 26, 2010
“Is “USDA Organic” a Seal of deceit? The Pitfalls of USDA Certified Organics Produced in the United States, China and Beyond.
USDA.gov – Imports From China and Food Safety Issues
The Organic Watergate—White Paper: Connecting the Dots: Corporate Influence at the USDA’s National Organic Program
www.nytimes.com Michael Pollan: Behind the Organic-Industrial Complex
Disclosure of Material Connection: Some of the links in the post above may be “affiliate links.” This means if you click on the link and purchase the item, I will receive an affiliate commission. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will add value to my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
As Joel Salatin eloquently stated in the foreword to Beyond Bacon by Matthew McCarry and Stacy Toth, “a pig is more than bacon.” While bacon is typically considered to be the gateway meat that is able to convert even the staunchest vegetarian into an omnivore, there is so much more nutrition and culinary delight to be gained from the rest of the animal.
I believe pork is underrated in the Paleo world, with most consuming bacon as a garnish or side dish without a second thought to the rest of the animal. This is why I was excited to receive my copy of Beyond Bacon – I love cooking with pastured pork, lard, ribs, jowls, and even the trotters.
Beyond Bacon: A delicious ode to pork that respects the whole hog.
Beyond Bacon is not only a beautifully designed cookbook with loads of delicious recipes such as Asian Short Ribs, Apple and Bacon Stuffed Pork Chops, and even desserts like Yellow Lard Cake and Apple Fritters, but it also contains an incredibly informative foreword explaining how to find affordable pastured pork, the history of pig cultivation, the nutritional science of pork, and the best tools to use in the kitchen when cooking with the whole hog. You’ll even learn how to create your own pork stock and render your own lard.
McCarry and Toth also share their family’s story, which was first described on their website, Paleo Parents. They explain how eating a Paleo lifestyle has helped their family lose weight, gain energy, and eliminate countless health problems that were significantly reducing their overall quality of life for many years. Further, they share the overall goal of Beyond Bacon: to remove readers’ fear of organ meats, bone broth, and healthy fats, and to provide delicious ways of incorporating nourishing pastured pork products into the diet. They even explain how followers of the Paleo, Primal, and Weston A. Price-approved diets can rest assured that eating pork will not negatively affect their health, and can even improve it.
The photography is stunning, and showcases the local farms that McCarry and Toth source their pastured pork products from. They explain the importance of finding a reputable source of pastured pork, describing the environmental, health, and even flavor benefits of choosing properly-raised hogs over their CAFO counterparts. Not to mention, it’s easy to see how happy these pigs are when flipping through this book – there are even photos where you’d swear the pig was smiling! While some may take this as an excuse not to eat pork, I see these images as confirming my dedication to finding properly-raised animals for moral, environmental, and personal health reasons.
For more information and even some recipe samples from Beyond Bacon, you can check out Stacy and Matt’s blog here, where they reveal a few of their recipes and special features, and share other reviews of the cookbook. If you’re ready to buy the book, you can click here to order it from Amazon. You won’t be disappointed in this remarkable addition to your Paleo bookshelf, and you just might discover a newfound love for headcheese, chitterlings, and organ-rich scrapple! This truly is a cookbook that respects the whole hog.
Tagged as: bacon, beyond bacon, cookbook, cooking, cuisine, health, lard, nutrition, paleo, pork, primal, weston price
I hate spam too. Your email is safe with me.Follow Chris Online:
Discover your own ideal diet & end confusion about what to eat forever.
Learn More
Boost fertility naturally & promote lifelong health for you & your baby.
Learn More
Personalized online portal with easy-to-use tools, expert advice, and the support of a passionate, intelligent community.
Learn More
Break through the energy swings, digestive upset, and obstacles of adopting a Paleo diet.
Learn More
Google Reader (the most popular RSS service) is going out of service tomorrow (July 1st). If you use Google Reader and RSS to follow this blog, you’ll need to find an alternate way of staying tuned in. You have a few options:
See you on the other side!
I hate spam too. Your email is safe with me.Follow Chris Online: Discover your own ideal diet & end confusion about what to eat forever.
Learn More Boost fertility naturally & promote lifelong health for you & your baby.
Learn More Personalized online portal with easy-to-use tools, expert advice, and the support of a passionate, intelligent community.
Learn More Break through the energy swings, digestive upset, and obstacles of adopting a Paleo diet.
Learn More
In Part 1 of this series, I talked about why the basic premise of the acid-alkaline theory is flawed, and I showed that the evidence doesn’t support the idea that a net acid-forming diet is harmful to bone health. Now I want to look at the effect of dietary acid load on other health conditions.
Can the acidity or alkalinity of your diet affect your risk for muscle loss, cancer, and more?
There is some research claiming that acid-forming diets cause muscle wasting, and the proposed mechanism is similar to that of the acid-ash hypothesis of osteoporosis. Some researchers hypothesize that in order to eliminate excess acid and maintain homeostasis, the kidneys must steal amino acids from muscle tissue. (1, 2) Just as a higher acid load increases calcium in the urine, it also increases nitrogen in the urine, leading some to believe that an acid-forming diet causes net nitrogen loss. However, some of these studies neglect to measure nitrogen balance, so this is not necessarily true. (3, 4) In fact, one study showed that a higher acid diet improved nitrogen balance! (5) This theory also does not acknowledge that protein, although it’s acid forming, actually increases the body’s ability to excrete acid. (6) Finally, the one observational study concluding that alkaline diets improve lean muscle mass didn’t even measure the overall acid load of the diet. (7) Instead, they used potassium intake as an approximate measure, and just assumed that the observed improvement in muscle mass was due to the diet being more alkaline. This, in addition to the limitations that always accompany observational data, makes the evidence less than convincing, especially since the clinical trials have conflicting results.
One of the more popular claims of the alkaline diet is that it can cure cancer. Proponents say that because cancer can only grow in an acidic environment, a net-alkaline diet can prevent cancer cells from growing, and can eliminate existing cancer cells. This theory is incorrect for a few reasons. First of all, the hypothesis depends on the ability of food to substantially change the pH of the blood and extracellular fluid, which I’ve already shown is not the case. (8, 9, 10) Second, cancer is perfectly capable of growing in an alkaline environment. The pH of normal body tissue is 7.4, which is slightly alkaline, and in almost every experiment done with cancer cells, they are grown in an environment at that pH. (11)
Now, cancer cells do tend to grow better in an acidic environment, but the causality is reversed. Once a tumor develops, it creates its own acidic environment through up-regulated glycolysis and reduced circulation, so the pH of the patient’s blood no longer determines the pH of the cancer. (12) It’s not the acidic environment that causes the cancer; it’s the cancer that causes the acidic environment. To top it all off, the only comprehensive review on ‘diet-induced’ acidosis and cancer did not even acknowledge this as a valid mechanism by which an acid-forming diet could increase cancer risk. They discuss a few biological pathways that could potentially link dietary acid load and cancer, but they admit that it’s mostly speculation and there’s no direct link. (13)
There are a few observational studies attempting to link acid-forming diets with hypertension, but the results are mixed. (14, 15) There’s also limited observational data associating higher acid loads with things like high cholesterol, obesity, and insulin resistance, but there are no proposed mechanisms or clinical studies to validate the hypotheses. (16, 17)
There are a few review papers examining the effect of acid-forming diets and health, but as you’ve seen above, the evidence they have to review is sparse. (18, 19, 20, 21, 22) If you read these papers, you’ll notice that whenever they cite trials showing the deleterious effects of acidosis, those trials were done on patients with chronic kidney disease or diabetes-induced acidosis. In the studies done on healthy people, they’re given ammonium chloride to induce acidosis. What you won’t see are clinical trials showing health consequences from purely ‘diet-induced’ acidosis. (Perhaps because ‘diet-induced’ acidosis doesn’t exist!) You’ll also notice that the strongest two hypotheses deal with osteoporosis and muscle wasting, and that links with other diseases are speculative or based on observational data. And although conflicts of interest don’t necessarily mean their conclusion can’t be trusted, it’s interesting to note that one of these reviews was funded by “pH Sciences®,” which “develops and manufactures patent-protected ingredients that safely and effectively manage biological pH levels.” (23)
In sum, I am not convinced that an acid-forming diet has negative effects on healthy people, based on the science. But just to be sure, it’s always a good idea to observe healthy cultures to see if there’s any anthropological evidence to support or refute the hypothesis.
There are a few studies where researchers attempted to approximate the net acid load of Paleolithic diets. One estimated that 87% of pre-agricultural people ate net-alkaline diets, and proposed this discrepancy with our modern diets as a possible reason for our declining health. (24) However, a more recent study estimated that only half of the world’s hunter-gatherer societies eat net-alkaline diets, while the other half are net acid-forming. (25) They reason that the other estimate is likely accurate for our earlier ancestors, because their tropical habitat would’ve provided ample fruits and vegetables. This idea is confirmed by another analysis that showed increasing acid load with increasing latitude. (26) Even without the study, it stands to reason that as humans moved into less hospitable environments, the animal content (and acid load) of their diet increased.
Given the subpar clinical science on this topic, I think the evolutionary argument is far more convincing. If half of the world’s hunter-gatherer populations avoid the ‘diseases of civilization’ on an acid-forming diet, it would seem that acid load has little to no bearing on overall health. For some case studies, we can always look to Weston Price’s work to see quite clearly that acid-forming diets are not detrimental to health. Based on Price’s descriptions, many of the traditional diets he studied would have been primarily acid-forming, including the Swiss, the Masai, and the Inuit. Yet despite their high intake of animal foods or grains and their comparatively low intake of fruits and vegetables, they maintained excellent health.
I don’t deny that many people have seen significant health improvements when switching to an alkaline diet, but there are many possible reasons for this not having to do with pH balance. Eating more fresh produce is rarely a bad idea, especially when it displaces nutrient poor processed foods. A person switching to an alkaline diet would significantly reduce their consumption of grains, which could cause dramatic health improvements for somebody with a leaky gut or gluten sensitivity. Dairy would also be minimized, which would help those with dairy sensitivities. And although pure sugar isn’t an acid-forming nutrient, many laypeople claim that it is, so alkaline diets tend to contain far less sugar than a standard Western diet.
Between the scientific evidence (or lack thereof) and the anthropological research, I think we can be confident that the acid load of our diets doesn’t negatively impact healthy people. For those with renal failure or similar conditions that affect kidney function, it’s a different story—there’s certainly room for manipulation of urine pH in the treatment of those conditions. But for someone with functioning kidneys, there should be no concern that an acid-forming diet will harm health.
Now I’d like to hear from you: what are your opinions on the acid-alkaline diet theory? Have you ever tried eating an alkaline diet, and if so, did you experience health benefits? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
Tagged as: acid, alkaline, ammonia, Cancer, health, loss, muscle, paleo, pH, urine, wasting I hate spam too. Your email is safe with me.Follow Chris Online: Discover your own ideal diet & end confusion about what to eat forever.
Learn More Boost fertility naturally & promote lifelong health for you & your baby.
Learn More Personalized online portal with easy-to-use tools, expert advice, and the support of a passionate, intelligent community.
Learn More Break through the energy swings, digestive upset, and obstacles of adopting a Paleo diet.
Learn MoreQ Hey. I have recently converted to raw food diet. Nuts and seeds are an important part of my diet, especially now. In regard to soaking to release inhibitors. I have heard different things. Whats your view or can you point me to a good source of info. Thanks. Have an awesome day = )
A Here's a link that explains soaking nuts and dried fruit. should I soak nuts
Here's more detailed information on nuts including nutritional traits of different varieties.
Like nuts, which are actually large seeds, edible seeds are best if soaked before eating, except hemp which does not have enzyme inhibitors.
Honey is a sweetener that has been used for thousands of years. It has some health benefits as well as some negatives. In the end I will answer whether honey is something you should have in your diet or not?
.
Disclosure of Material Connection: Some of the links in the post above may be “affiliate links.” This means if you click on the link and purchase the item, I will receive an affiliate commission. Regardless, I only recommend products or services I use personally and believe will add value to my readers. I am disclosing this in accordance with the Federal Trade Commission’s 16 CFR, Part 255: “Guides Concerning the Use of Endorsements and Testimonials in Advertising.”
