healthnut

If you use Neutrogena, Coppertone, Kiss My Face, or any of the other popular brands of sunblock/sunscreen, you may want to read this. Approximately 80% of the sunblock/sunscreen products do very little to protect you. In fact, some maybe harmful.

Badger, which is on the top of the list as one of the safest, is a chemical free sunblock product that is safe for the face and body. Its ingredients include: Organic Extra Virgin Olive Oil, Beeswax, Organic Jojoba Oil, Organic Cocoa Butter, Wild Africa Shea Butter, Organic CO2 Extract of Seabuckthorn Berry, and Essential Oils of Lavender, Moroccan Blue Tansy, Ylang Ylang, Lime, and Orange with 20.5% of zinc oxide as the active ingredient for sun protection. It has a nice minty scent, too. However, the price is exhuberant - $12 per 2.9 oz.. or $33 per 8 oz but a little goes a long way.

Now that the company has gained publicity, I hope the price will drop so that more people can use this great product.

http://abclocal.go.com/kgo/story?section=edell&id=5401179

http://www.cosmeticsdatabase.com/browse.php?sunscreens=1&best=1

Kellogg is processed food, so how much it will improve will be insignificant. The best way for parents to improve their kids’ nutrition is to cook from scratch with quality ingredients. You will be surprise how much junk is added in processed food these days.

http://www.mlive.com/newsflash/business/index.ssf?/base/business-0/1181781300137010.xml&storylist=mibusiness

Kellogg to raise nutrition of kids’ food
6/14/2007, 7:51 a.m. ET
By MICHAEL J. SNIFFEN
The Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — Kellogg Co., the world’s largest cereal maker, has agreed to raise the nutritional value of cereals and snacks it markets to children.

The Battle Creek, Mich., company avoided a lawsuit threatened by parents and nutrition advocacy groups worried about increasing child obesity. Kellogg intends to formally announce its decision Thursday.

The company said it won’t promote foods in TV, radio, print or Web site ads that reach audiences at least half of whom are under age 12 unless a single serving of the product meets these standards:

_No more than 200 calories.

_No trans fat and no more than 2 grams of saturated fat.

_No more than 230 milligrams of sodium, except for Eggo frozen waffles.

_No more than 12 grams of sugar, not counting sugar from fruit, dairy and vegetables.

Kellogg said it would reformulate products to meet these criteria or stop marketing them to children under 12 by the end of 2008.

“By committing to these nutrition standards and marketing reforms, Kellogg has vaulted over the rest of the food industry,” said Michael F. Jacobson, executive director of the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “This commitment means that parents will find it a little easier to steer their children toward healthy food choices — especially if other food manufacturers and broadcasters follow Kellogg’s lead.”

Jacobson’s nutrition advocacy group, along with two Massachusetts parents and the Boston-based Campaign For A Commercial-Free Childhood, had served notice in January 2006 of intent to sue Kellogg and the Nickelodeon cable TV network under a Massachusetts law to stop them from marketing junk food to kids.

Center spokesman Jeff Cronin said Kellogg contacted the plaintiffs shortly thereafter and began negotiating the new standards, so the lawsuit was not filed and will not be filed.

“We are pleased to work collaboratively with industry and advocacy groups to unveil these standards,” said David Mackay, Kellogg’s CEO. “We feel the Kellogg Nutrient Criteria set a new standard for responsibility in the industry.”

With 2006 sales of almost $11 billion, Kellogg is not only the No. 1 cereal-maker but also a leading producer of snack foods. Its brands include Kellogg’s, Keebler, Pop-Tarts, Eggo, Cheez-It, Rice Krispies and Famous Amos.

Globally, 50 percent of the products Kellogg markets to children do not meet the criteria, said Mark Baynes, Kellogg’s chief marketing officer. A third of the cereals it markets to children in the U.S. fall outside standards.

Pop-Tarts and Froot Loops don’t meet the criteria, though most cereals fall inside the calorie guideline, Baynes said. Meeting the sugar and sodium standards could be the most challenging.

Kellogg also announced that it will continue to refrain from advertising to children under age 6, and will not in the future:

_Advertise to children any foods in schools and preschools that include kids under age 12.

_Sponsor placement of any of its products in any medium primarily directed at kids under age 12.

_Use branded toys connected to any foods that do not meet the nutrition standards.

_Use licensed characters on mass-media ads directed primarily to kids under 12 or on the front labels of food packages unless they meet the standards.

The advertising agreement does not apply to marketing characters Kellogg owns, like Tony the Tiger, but it does apply to characters the food company licenses, like the cartoon figure Shrek, said Susan Linn, co-founder of the Campaign For A Commercial-Free Childhood.

She said Kellogg was the first food company to agree to restrict advertising using licensed media characters like Shrek.

“These characters play an incredibly important role in children’s lives. Kids see them every day; they have toys of them,” Linn said. “The media characters are much more powerful (than company-owned characters like Tony the Tiger). The food companies want to keep using them because they sell a lot of food; kids really respond to them.”

Earlier this month, a Federal Trade Commission study found that half the ads for junk food, sugary cereals and soft drinks are on children’s programs, double the percentage 30 years ago. Children between ages 2 and 11 saw approximately 5,500 food ads on television in 2004, half of them on kids’ shows with audiences of 50 percent children or greater.

American companies spend about $15 billion a year marketing and advertising to children under age 12, the Institute of Medicine said last year when it warned that one-third of American children are obese or at risk for becoming obese.

In response, Kellogg and McDonald’s Corp. joined eight other major food and drink companies last November in an industry-sponsored pledge to promote more healthy foods and exercise in their child-oriented advertising. A year earlier, Kraft Foods Inc. had promised to curb ads to young children for snack foods, including Oreos and Kool-Aid.

 

Food-flavoring workers at risk for lung disease

Noxious gases in factories cause rare, life-threatening condition, CDC says

Reuters

Updated: 3:45 p.m. PT April 26, 2007

Workers at factories that make food flavorings are at risk of a rare and life-threatening lung disease called bronchiolitis obliterans, the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said on Thursday.

But the Occupational Safety and Health Administration is not yet paying proper attention to the issue, an expert focusing on the cases said.

The hard-to-treat condition causes vague symptoms such as cough and shortness of breath, but steadily worsens, the CDC said in its weekly report on death and disease.

It “is known to be caused by exposure to noxious gases in occupational settings and has been described in workers in the microwave-popcorn industry who were exposed to artificial butter-flavoring chemicals, including diacetyl,” the report read.

The CDC described the cases of two California workers, a 29-year-old man and a 40-year-old woman, who became progressively sicker. The woman eventually had to quit her job because of illness. Neither smoked.

Both were eventually diagnosed with bronchiolitis obliterans. Diacetyl, which produces a butter flavor, was the main suspect although the CDC team said other flavorings may have played a role.

“Neither worker was employed in the microwave-popcorn industry; both were workers in the flavor manufacturing industry, which produces artificial butter flavoring and other flavors such as cherry, almond, praline, jalapeno and orange,” the report reads.

Since then, five other workers in the same industry have been found to have the lung disease.

OSHA said this week it was starting a program to deal with the problem in popcorn workers.

David Michaels of the George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services, who has closely tracked the issue, said the CDC had already helped popcorn factories deal with the problem.

“So two days ago OSHA issued a press announcement that they are making a national emphasis program on popcorn factories, which I think is quite cynical because the popcorn factories are one of the few places that probably have successfully addressed the problem,” Michaels said in a telephone interview.

Safe occupational exposure levels for diacetyl and many other flavoring chemicals have not been established, the CDC noted.

“Because the manufacture of flavorings involves more than 2,000 chemicals, workers in the general flavor-manufacturing industry are exposed to more chemicals than workers in the microwave popcorn industry, which primarily uses butter flavorings,” the report adds.

URL: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18338470/

If you are curious about the plastic containers used for food, here is a helpful reference.

http://www.americanchemistry.com/s_plastics/bin.asp?CID=1102&DID=4645&DOC=FILE.PDF

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2007/05/04/BUGUSPKP6D1.DTL&hw=lazarus&sn=004&sc=214

What the heck is in those water bottles?

David Lazarus

Friday, May 4, 2007

If you’re a bottled-water drinker — and you know you are — do you know what exactly is in the bottle? Probably not.

One reason is because the bottled-water industry isn’t required to make such info readily available to consumers. It isn’t even required to let people know that much of the bottled water consumed in the United States is actually tap water.

‘This doesn’t make sense to me,’ said state Sen. Ellen Corbett, D-San Leandro. ‘More and more, people are treating bottled water as their primary source of drinking water. They ought to be able to know what’s in it.’

To remedy this situation, she’s introduced legislation — SB220 — that would require bottled-water companies to compile an annual ‘consumer confidence report’ detailing results of water-quality tests.

It also would require bottled-water packaging to clearly identify the source of the contents and inform consumers where they can obtain more info, and require that water-vending machines be cleaned at least once a month.

‘I’d call this a very reasonable measure,’ Corbett said.

Her bill is now making its way through the Legislature. It’s scheduled to be heard next week in the Senate Appropriations Committee.

According to Beverage Marketing Corp., the leading compiler of facts and figures about the beverage industry, Americans drink more bottled water than any other commercial beverage except carbonated soft drinks — more than milk, more than coffee, more than beer.

We spent nearly $11 billion last year drinking almost 8.3 billion gallons of bottled water. Put another way, the average American consumed almost 28 gallons of Aquafina, Dasani, Evian or hundreds of other brands that comprise the up to $100 billion global market for bottled water.

Within a decade, Beverage Marketing Corp. estimates, bottled water could overtake soda as the leading beverage in the United States. (The average American drinks more than 50 gallons of soda annually.)

The bottled-water industry opposes Corbett’s legislation. It says there are already plenty of regulations to keep consumers safe.

SB220 ‘would place requirements on bottled water that do not exist for any other food product,’ said Stephen Kay, vice president of the International Bottled Water Association, an industry group.

‘In fact,’ he said, ‘bill sponsors have not clearly identified why bottled water should be subject to this special treatment, while other food products are not.’

Actually, the legislation is pretty specific about why greater disclosure is needed for bottled water. It notes that, according to a survey by the Public Policy Institute of California, almost half of all state residents rely on bottled water ‘as their primary source of drinking water.’

It also says that ‘consumers of bottled water and vended water should be afforded the same water quality ‘right to know’ protections and regulatory oversight of bottled and vended water products as those established for tap water.’

State law requires frequent testing of tap water and for the data to be readily available to the public. The San Francisco Public Utilities Commission, for example, posts its annual water-quality reports on its Web site (sfwater.org).

Lea Brooks, a spokeswoman for the California Department of Health Services, said bottled water must meet the same basic quality standards as tap water.

‘But it doesn’t have to meet tap water’s secondary standards for taste and clarity,’ she said. ‘That’s just the way the law is.’

Randy Kanouse, chief lobbyist in Sacramento for the East Bay Municipal Utility District, said the law needs to reflect the fact that bottled water now plays a vital role in the lives of millions of Californians. EBMUD is co-sponsoring Corbett’s bill.

‘You don’t want to regulate bottled water like you regulate orange soda,’ Kanouse said. ‘You want to regulate it like you regulate tap water.’

Kay at the International Bottled Water Association said there’s been no such demand from consumers, ‘and no instances where consumers have been placed at risk due to substandard bottled water regulations.’

Kanouse responded by citing the experience of his cousin, whose 8-year-old son has been diagnosed with Asperger syndrome, a form of autism. He said a doctor determined that the boy had an unusually high level of metals in his body and advised that steps be taken to limit further exposure.

‘My cousin was able to find out from her municipal water supplier how much metal was in her tap water,’ Kanouse said. ‘She couldn’t find out for bottled water.’

What’s remarkable here is that bottled-water companies are already required by state and federal regulations to test their products much as tap water is tested. They just aren’t required to make their findings available to consumers.

‘It’s not a question of not wanting to provide data to consumers,’ said Kay at the industry association. ‘We just don’t want to separate this one food product from others.’

Be that as it may, at least one bottled water company already offers such info to customers. Nestle, the largest purveyor of bottled water in the United States, makes data about ingredients available on Web sites for its domestic brands, which include Arrowhead, Poland Spring and Ice Mountain.

For instance, the company’s Arrowhead site (arrowheadwater.com) includes a complete mineral content analysis of the water that clearly states how much copper, lead and other elements can be found (or not found) within.

‘We designed this based on what we thought would be logical questions about the water,’ said Jane Lazgin, a spokeswoman for Nestle Waters North America. ‘People like it. They thank us and they appreciate it.’

She said Nestle hasn’t taken a position on Corbett’s bill.

Nestle’s reticence notwithstanding, Corbett said one reason other beverage companies oppose her bill is because they don’t like the provision requiring that labels include ‘the source of the bottled water.’

The leading bottled-water brand in the United States is PepsiCo’s Aquafina, followed by Coca- Cola’s Dasani. Each is responsible for more than $1 billion in sales annually.

Aquafina and Dasani are marketed, as per federal guidelines, as ‘purified water.’ What that really means, though, is that the contents of both brands originate from the same pipes that supply water to people’s kitchen sinks.

The only difference is that purified water undergoes any of a variety of filtration treatments to remove chlorine and most dissolved solids. Corbett’s bill would make that clearer to consumers.

‘I think that’s one of their big concerns,’ she said of opponents to the legislation.

Corbett also said that if SB220 is passed by the Legislature, which seems entirely possible, she hopes Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, as a fitness buff, would recognize the merits of the bill and sign it into law.

‘A lot of people who work out drink bottled water,’ Corbett said. ‘It wouldn’t surprise me if the governor does, too.’

And he’d probably be as grateful as the rest of us to know what exactly he’s pouring down his throat.