Archive for October, 2015

Monday, October 26, 2015 @ 09:10 AM
posted by Rudi

The WHO is expected to publish a report listing processed meat as a cancer-causing substance with the highest of five possible rankings

52K
2K
30
152
55K
Email
Bacon being grilled

When meat is preserved by smoking, curing or salting, or by adding preservatives, cancer-causing substances (carcinogens) can be formed Photo: Alamy
 By Agency

10:51AM BST 23 Oct 2015

Comments1818 Comments

Global health experts are to warn that bacon, ham and sausages are as big a cancer threat as cigarettes, it has been reported.

“The WCRF advises that people can reduce their bowel cancer risk by eating no more than 500g (cooked weight) per week of red meat, such as beef, pork and lamb”

The World Health Organisation(WHO) will publish a report on Monday on the dangers of eating processed meats.

It is expected to list processed meat as a cancer-causing substance, while fresh red meat is also expected to be regarded as bad for health, the Daily Mail said.

The classifications, by the WHO’s International Agency for Research on Cancer, are believed to regard processed meat as “carcinogenic to humans”, the highest of five possible rankings, shared with alcohol, asbestos, arsenic and cigarettes.

The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) has warned for several years that there is “strong evidence” that consuming a lot of red meat can cause bowel cancer.

• Gene increases cancer risk posed by processed meat

It also says there is “strong evidence” that processed meats – even in smaller quantities – increase cancer risk.

One possible reason is that the compound that gives red meat its colour, haem, may damage the lining of the bowel.

In addition, when meat is preserved by smoking, curing or salting, or by adding preservatives, cancer-causing substances (carcinogens) can be formed.

Studies also show that people who eat a lot of red meat tend to eat fewer plant-based foods that protect against cancer.

The WCRF advises that people can reduce their bowel cancer risk by eating no more than 500g (cooked weight) per week of red meat, such as beef, pork and lamb.

It also says people should eat processed meats such as ham, bacon and salami as little as possible.

Burger King's bacon double cheeseburger, coming soon to a home near youHamburgers count as red meat  Photo: burgerking.co.uk

Foods like hamburgers, minced beef, pork chops and roast lamb are also regarded as red meat.

As a rough guide, the WCRF says 500g of cooked red meat is the same as 700g of raw red meat.

• Processed meat blamed for one in 30 early deaths

Processed meat is meat which has been preserved by smoking, curing or salting, or by the addition of preservatives.

Examples include ham, bacon, pastrami and salami, as well as hot dogs and some sausages.

How much red meat do we eat?

The average person in the UK has 2.5oz (70g) meat a day 3oz (88g) among men, 2oz (52g) among women) but 33 per cent have more than 3.5oz (100g) a day.

off
Wednesday, October 21, 2015 @ 05:10 PM
posted by Beth Clay

A quick report on the Senate “Biotech” Food Regulations Subcommittee Hearing held today. (The POP Campaign submitted testimony to be posted soon)

Almost all of the members made at least a short appearance (except Mitch McConnell, maybe Thad Cochrane and maybe on David Perdue)

Rather than an ‘oversight’ activity, it seemed more like a lovefest of biotech food industry.  No partisanship on display.  The toughest question of the day was the patent question – i.e. how can it be materially different for US Patent Office but not for FDA?  Tepid response was not challenged.

Video and written testimony available at:  http://www.ag.senate.gov/hearings/agriculture-biotechnology-a-look-at-federal-regulation-and-stakeholder-perspectives

There was a long line of people to get in, but the hearing room was very large and accommodated the 200+ people in attendance.  About 50 of those likely were from the 3 federal agencies as they seemed to clear out after their panel finished.

It was obvious that this was a ‘pro forma’ hearing to lay the ground work for the legislation. Sen. Stabenow indicated she thought they would pass a bill by year’s end.  Sen. Hoeven indicated he is working on one.  Discussion in the line was that no democrat had yet agreed to cosponsor.

The talking points for the members took a different tone this time.  The prevailing themes:

  1. We have to feed the growing population world-wide – it is a national security issue.
  2. For democrats – Climate change was also mentioned.
  3. Numerous members asked government witnesses how everyone (including committee) can do a better job explaining biotech so that the public trusts that they are safe?
  4. Minor mention of increased food costs with labeling.

All 3 federal agencies say they have sufficient authority to regulate GMOs.  FDA witness did say that if the nutritional content was different, they would mandate labeling.

The government panel went on for 2 hours.

The public panel started with Mrs. Joanna Lidback, the female Vermont farmer – who it turns out only grows grass – not GMOs.  She is apparently is the industry darling because she has testified multiple times. At one time she admitted that she only plants grasses.

Daryl Thomas, SVP at snack food company Herr Foods ( a family owned business) turns out is married to the bosses daughter which meant he REALLY had to deliver the message to keep labeling voluntary.  His own senator (Sen. Casey) was not able to stay to hear him testify, but did stay long enough to introduce him and lend his support to the cause.

The only ‘opposing’ witness was Mr. Gary Hirshberg of Stonyfield Farm, Inc. who was there on behalf of Just Label It.  It covered all the important points- calling for a national mandatory labeling, factual , value neutral (like the EU – two word insertion in ingredients list).  He also mentioned how the voluntary guidance document issued in 2001 has just left industry to run amuck.  He underscored that companies change labels all the time and doing is not a big deal; he said the 64 countries that have mandated labeling are not seeing problems, and that the stigma concern is not valid.  The cost concern is not valid.

Mr. Jaffee from Center for Science in the Public Interest was also given a platform to testify (again) – testimony pretty much the same as the House version.  He wants more regulations, and he was the voluntary premarket review at FDA to be mandatory

The latest industry shill was Dr. Ronald E. Kleinman  Physician in Chief Mass General Hospital for Children Boston , MA  – not discussed at the hearing was that he has conflicts of interest.  His bio at Mass General states “He consults for the Grain Food Foundation, Sesame Street Foundation, Beech Nut, the Burger King External Advisory Board, and General Mills.”  This was not disclosed or discussed at the hearing.  He thinks that parents just need to be talked to and told that GMOS are safe…that our food supply is safe.

One of other issues brought up was pesticides.  The EPA talked about their role in regulating PIP crops – these are bioengineered to release a protein that kills one or more types of bugs/pests.  He says they are safe for humans, and have led to less pesticide use.

One of the Republican senators asked if Glyco was linked to cancer, and the EPA witness stated they did a review last year of the epidemiology research and did not find a link.  None of them brought up the other health risks, or the increased use of herbicides with GMOs. (except Hishberg).

Sadly, none of the Senators asked any tough questions.  It was like they knew they had to do this hearing since they had not covered the topic in 10 years, so they can check this off, let Hoeven introduce the bill, then move it through the Mark up hearing, and Check this off their to do list.

 

off
Tuesday, October 20, 2015 @ 03:10 PM
posted by Rudi

If you want to listen to the hearing at 7:00 Am Eastern Time, go to:  http://www.ag.senate.gov/hearings/agriculture-biotechnology-a-look-at-federal-regulation-and-stakeholder-perspectives

POP NOTICE -Senate Sub_n

off