Liquid Chlorophyll as Sodium Copper Chlorophyllin

Chlorophyllin is a water-soluble analog of the green plant pigment chlorophyll. Liquid chlorophyll products containing chlorophyllin are a mixture of chlorophyll and copper. Chlorophyllin is produced by extracting natural chlorophyll from mulberry leaves (post silkworm feeding) or the traditional alfalfa source (which today is mostly genetically modified/GMO) and reacting the chlorophyll to copper. Today chlorophyllin is compliant with the USP monograph as Sodium Copper Chlorophyllin and is water-soluble; chlorophyll in plants is a fat-soluble substance. Solubilized chlorophyllin is dispersible and stable in water, unlike the original plant chlorophyll, making liquid chlorophyll products possible. 

It is best to test each lot of chlorophyll for identity, microbial burden (including pathogens), and heavy metals to assure product safety. The sodium content of chlorophyllin is negligible; about 9.5 milligrams per 100 gram serving.  

Chlorophyll as Sodium Copper Chlorophyllin can function as a free radical neutralizer and may help to support the body's detoxification processes. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7788866/  and https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12628519/ 

Specifically, chlorophyllin ‘has potent antioxidant ability involving scavenging of various physiologically important ROS’ [reactive oxygen species]. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/11767414/ 

Chlorophyllin has been traditionally used as an internal deodorizer, both medically under FDA authorization (21CFR357.850) and as a dietary supplement, and it promotes cleansing and freshens breath. It has also been found to be a safe and effective detoxification agent suitable for use in individuals unavoidably exposed to dietary aflatoxins. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/12628519/ 

New Evidence that Canola (Rapeseed) Oil is Better than Olive Oil for Regulating Lipid and Inflammatory Markers in Obese Men

In a previous post I showed that Canola Oil was developed without Genetic Engineering (biotechnology; GMO):
http://honestnutrition.blogspot.com/2013/03/canola-oil-was-developed-without-gmo.html

In another post, I showed that canola oil had superior results to Olive Oil in comparisons of effects on cardiovascular health markers both in animal and human studies:
http://honestnutrition.blogspot.com/2013/05/is-canola-oil-better-than-olive-oil-for.html

Now there is another study comparing the two oils. In that report, Rapeseed (Canola) Oil improved liver Health and inflammatory markers in obese men better than olive oil did. Consuming the canola oil resulted in improvements over consuming olive oil in a number of key markers in those men:

* Higher levels of serum omega-3 fatty acids
* Lower levels of LDL and total cholesterol
* Lower levels of serum AST (aspartate aminotransferase); a liver enzyme that detects liver damage and is a risk factor for non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD)
* Reduction of the pro-inflammatory marker IL-6
* Indications of a potential long-term protective effect (gene expression resulting in a hormetic response) on inflammatory cytokines in adipose tissues

As before, the superior results from canola over olive oil are attributed to its higher omega-3 and lower omega-6 fatty acid content compared to olive oil. Don't think that olive oil is unhealthy; it's just that there is a myth that all canola oil is unhealthy, which repeatedly has been debunked by studies such as this latest one.

I would still advise against using Genetically Engineered (GMO) canola due to potential side effects such as the potential for unexpected new allergens and toxins, and the lack of long-term animal feeding studies actually proving safety. Since there is no way to track human reactions to GMO foods in North America due to a lack of will to impose documentation and labeling, we have no way to determine if the recent historical use supports their safety or risks. Because of the unscientific introduction of GMO foods and our current inability to pinpoint whether or not allergic or toxic reactions are occurring with their use, non-GMO (including organic) canola is the recommended type I suggest if you are considering using canola/rapeseed oil.


http://www.naturalhealthresearch.org/rapeseedcanola-oil-improves-liver-health-and-inflammation-levels-in-obese-men/
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/?term=25403327

Facts About Xylitol

Because of recent confusion and mis-statements by some bloggers, I'd like to report some facts about the sugar alcohol, Xylitol:

Like all sugar alcohols, unabsorbed (versus undigested) material is hygroscopic (attracts water) as it passes through the GI tract. This makes them potentially laxative at various doses; as always, moderation is the key.
o For xylitol, the common threshold is at 30-50 grams a day (1-2 ounces).
o For erythritol, an alternative sugar alcohol, there is practically no laxative effect since it is predominantly absorbed.

Xylitol is naturally found in plums, raspberries, and cauliflower; it is a naturally occurring sweetener that the body can handle.

Xylitol can be made from xylan; a fiber found in many plants including:
o corn husks, cobs, and stalks (corn bobs are the leading commercial source)
o certain hardwoods like birch and beech (relatively small commercial production is done in Europe for Scandinavian trees)
o rice, oat, wheat and cotton seed hulls (possible, but not a typical commercial source)
o various nut shells (possible, but not a typical commercial source)
o straw (possible, but not a typical commercial source)
o sugar cane (possible, but not a typical commercial source)

Xylitol does not require insulin.

Xylitol improves bone and tooth density, protects tooth enamel.

Xylitol has fewer calories than sugar; only about 2.4 calories per gram versus 4 for sugar.

Most xylitol is produced in China.
o However, GMO corn is not allowed for food production in China.
o There are some IP (documented as from non-GMO corn) supplies and others tested as non-GMO (the corn sources are tested before production, though IP is not in place yet).
o GMOs have not been found in xylitol from corn, despite unsubstantiated speculation from bloggers.
o China’s food safety laws have been expanded dramatically in recent years, and in some cases now exceed US standards.

Xylitol can be toxic to dogs, but so is chocolate. Pets can’t always eat our foods, but that doesn’t imply that these foods are somehow harmful to humans. This is a “straw man” argument that fades upon examination.

Canola Oil was developed without GMO biotechnology

The rape plant (Brassica napus) is related to mustard, turnip, cabbage, radish, and horseradish plants. Its oil has been used for centuries as a cooking oil in Europe and Asia (India and the Far East).

Both rapeseed oil and mustard seed oil contain relatively high levels of a fatty acid called erucic acid. As with some other oils, when heated to high temperatures unrefined rapeseed oil can release fumes which have been theorized to be associated with an increased lung cancer risk. These fumes have been blamed on its high erucic acid content; perhaps undeservedly since refined rapeseed oil did not seem to share this characteristic and since mustard seed oil is still a staple cooking oil in South and East Asia.

In any case, rapeseed oil was not sold as a food in the United States for many years, and this is why a low-erucic acid version was developed by traditional cross-breeding of varieties that had lower than usual levels. Originally developed in Canada in 1974, it was dubbed “Canola” oil to distinguish it from traditional rapeseed oil; the name implies its Canadian origin. This oil is often sold in Europe under its more commonly known “rapeseed” rather than the “Canola” name, even if the low erucic acid type is used.

Canola (low erucic acid rapeseed) oil received GRAS status in 1985, allowing it to be sold as a food or food additive in the United States.

These dates are long before the first commercial GMO crops were approved by the U.S. government in the mid-1990s. Since Canola’s breeding history actually goes back decades before that, it clearly was originally developed without the use of genetic engineering (GE, or biotechnology). Today, most of the canola grown in North America is GMO (from GE seeds); though there are still some Identity Preserved (IP) canola crops, from which is produced non-GMO canola oil.

The history of the use of rapeseed oil in food in the US is well summarized in the preamble of the final rule which affirmed the GRAS status of low erucic acid rapeseed (LEAR) oil (Federal Register, 1985: 21 CFR 184.1555 (c)(4)).

REFERENCES:

http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/crops/soybeans-oil-crops/canola.aspx#crophistory

http://www.hort.purdue.edu/newcrop/afcm/canola.html

http://www.snopes.com/medical/toxins/canola.asp

Natural Controversies: Free Webinar May 15th at 7 PM (CT)

I'm giving a free public webinar May 15th 7 pm CT on Natural Controversies. Register here:  http://americannutritionassociation.org/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=32 and use this code for free registration as my guest: SPKGST5629

We’ve all seen contradictory information about natural health products. Sensational reports may depict certain ones as always good or bad for us, but these are often based on inaccurate information. A combination of ignorance, bias, and other errors contribute to this mass confusion.

Take a look at the scientific data that reveals the truth behind some Natural Controversies:

• What are some of the dieting secrets that work long term?
• Some experts claim that all sugars are the same to the body; others claim that certain sweeteners like fructose are bad for you. What’s good and bad about fructose and how does it work in the body?
• Aren’t the vitamins and minerals in food better for us than the forms commonly used in dietary supplements?
• A few years ago, doctors routinely warned us against taking high doses of vitamin D but now it’s the latest thing.
• How much vitamin D is considered healthy?
• What are the safety limits?
• What is the difference between its forms, D-2 and D-3?
• Some fish oils are in a triglyceride form while others are in a form called ethyl esters. What are the differences and benefits of each form?
• Soy foods are highly controversial; with some health gurus warning against its use and others promoting it as an important health food. What does science tell us about the safety of soy foods versus their potential benefits?

• Vitamin E had been touted as important to cardiovascular health until recent studies questioned its safety. Is it safe, at what levels, and why is there so much controversy over this basic essential nutrient?

• Are stearates hydrogenated? Bad for us?

What's the difference between non-GMO and organic?

IP-Certified Organics are produced without GMOs (genetically modified organisms) but are not tested for potential GMO contamination by pollen drift, etc. The IP stands for 'identity preserved"; in other words, there is an audit trail documenting the production and process inputs and a third party certifier overseeing and signing off on the paperwork. All crops and foods produced under this designation meet U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) regulations under its National Organic Program (USDA-NOP) that include allowable and non-allowable agricultural and food production inputs. Such inputs include irradiation (not allowed), agricultural chemicals (only natural source ones allowed), and GMOs (not allowed). Theer are also lists of allowed/not allowed food addititives and rules for making label claims for organics.

IP-non-GMO certification is similar, but this certification is only for processes that exclude introducing GMO substances or seeds. The difference is that there are other restrictions as to what is allowed to be used with organics that don't apply to non-GMO conventional foods. For example, agricultural chemicals, synthetic food additives, etc are allowed with non-GMO but not for certified organics.

Testing is another issue. Testing of such products is not widely done, and studies have shown that there is less GMO contamination of certified organics than conventional crops when neither is supposed to contain GMOs. Exports to Europe may require GMO testing to be done and results must be under a threshold (typically 0.5% maximum). But most certified organic and non-GMO certified ingredients are not tested for residual GMOs that could have gotten in by seed contamination, pollen drift, handling errors, etc. and this is usually not considered to be a significant problem that requires testing.

Price Lookup Codes Identify Organic and Genetically Engineered Produce

The International Federation for Produce Coding (IFPC) creates Price-Look Up (PLU) codes for fresh fruits and vegetables. These four-digit codes are put on stickers and applied to the produce items. Organic and genetically engineered produce are identified by a fifth PLU digit on the sticker. You can identify organic items by the number "9" leading the five-digit PLU, and you can identify genetically engineered items by the number "8" leading a five-digit PLU number. Both of these categories will have five digits instead of the standard four. The four-digit code remains the same even if a fifth digit (8 or 9) is added. In the following example, conventional bananas have a standard PLU code of 4011. Organic bananas are coded 94011 and genetically engineered bananas are coded 84011. For me, the 9 prefix (for organic produce) is desirable and the 8 (for genetically engineered) is not. I use this rhyme to remind myself of the difference: “I hate eight, but nine is fine.” For more information about PLU codes, visit www.plucodes.com/plucodesfaq.asp

Neil rebuts article on GMO (Biotech) safety

My response to the AMERICAN COUNCIL ON SCIENCE AND HEALTH's Health FactsAndFears article titled, "Studies Indicate GM Crops Are Safer and Healthier" is posted on their website below the original article: http://www.acsh.org/factsfears/newsID.962/news_detail.asp