![]() March 1998Eye Health and Computers, bilberry, zeaxanthin, lutein,Since you are reading this newsletter, you probably spend a lot of time bathing your eyes and brain in rays from a computer monitor. A weekend in the country can't be beat for de-stressing and restoring balance, but what can you do right now? Certain nutrients aid in preventing and restoring computer-tired eyes. Below is a FAQ page about nutrition and eyes. We have seen a number of articles through the years detailing the role of nutrients in helping to prevent cataracts and macular degeneration. We link to some of these (including a concise article on our site). Let us know other questions you may have about eye nutrients, and definitely let us know your suggestions, too! How does viewing a computer screen cause eyestrain? Why do eye formulas contain many of the same ingredients? How does Bilberry function as an eye nutrient? How were the visual benefits of bilberry discovered? How does beta-carotene function as an eye nutrient? Vitamin A also prevents keratinization of the eyes, and with A's reduction ability, prevents cross-linkage of proteins. Vitamin A, of course, prevents night blindness (nyctalopia). How do lutein and zeaxanthin function as eye nutrients? A description of Nature's Life eye products Bilberry i Sight™ Is there any help for plain 'ol sore eyes? What are cataracts and what nutrients help prevent them? What is macular degeneration and what
nutrients help prevent it? Food Irradiation -- "Protecting" Us?Reprinted with permission from Better Nutrition Magazine, February, 1998 The recent mass-media coverage of food irradiation has obscured the real issues. In truth: 1) the answer to a safe food supply depends on whether the mainstream food industry accepts its responsibility to clean up its act -- for good; 2) the fact that irradiation doesn't turn our food radioactive is not a relief considering its real dangers; and 3) the public is rightfully suspicious of this bizarre solution to very real problems with our food supply. Toxicologist Marcia van Gemert, Ph.D., chaired a Food and Drug Administration (FDA) committee that investigated 441 studies on irradiated foods in the 1980s. In 1993, Dr. van Gemert issued a statement outlining why "those studies were inadequate to evaluate the safety of irradiated foods." These are the studies which underpin the FDA's December 2nd decision approving the irradiation of red meat. A 1975 clinical study in India, which appeared in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, looked at 15 malnourished children who were fed either irradiated or non-irradiated food. Eighty percent of the children fed irradiated food developed a pre-cancerous chromosomal disorder called polyploidy. A more recent study on 70 students in China (Chinese Medical Journal, 1987) also showed an increased rate of chromosomal abnormalities. In addition, the "unique radiolytic products" (URP's), or toxins, produced through irradiation include: known carcinogens such as formaldehyde (used in embalming) and naphthalene (used in moth repellents), and others. If this were not enough, essential vitamins, minerals, amino acids, and fatty acids are also destroyed at varying levels. And what about long-term effects? With carcinogens like formaldehyde, "It will take 30 years before you see increases in neoplasias -- leukemias and lymphomas," warned George Tritsch, Ph.D., retired researcher from the Roswell Park Memorial Institute and the New York State Department of Health. Whether it's Olestra yesterday, or irradiated food today, the FDA is sending a message to consumers that the public is not trusted to exercise personal responsibility or to observe the most basic food-preparation hygiene practices, respectively. More ominously, food processors will see this as the green light to continue to run filthy plants, to ignore sanitary food preparation regulations, and to use their record of tragic poisonings and fatalities to force widespread irradiation on us. If public "demand" is in question, an August 25th CBS News poll found that, nationwide, 73 percent of those polled oppose food irradiation, and 77 percent say they would not eat irradiated food. So what will irradiation accomplish? 1) It will offer short term litigation "protection" to food-processors, and will help them win huge food-chain contracts; 2) It will make irradiation companies very happy; and 3) It will fulfill the U.S. Department of Energy's (DOE) stated goal, through its Byproducts Utilization Program, to unload its stockpile of radioactive cesium 137 in order to drive Canadian cobalt 60 out of the market. "Irradiation of food is not a story of protection of the American public," said Gary Cibbs, D.O., in his prophetic 1993 book, The Food That Would Last Forever: Understanding the Dangers of Food Irradiation (Avery Publishing, phone: 1-800-548-5757). "Rather it is a story of money, politics, and the embalming of the American diet. Food irradiation is a toxic time bomb." -- James Gormley, Editor, Better Nutrition Magazine, February 1998 James Gormley has served as a managing editor for two of the most respected medical journals in the U.S., and as a social sciences/medical editor in book publishing. His nutrition articles cover important issues, keeping readers informed of the latest breakthroughs in nutritional approaches to optimal health and ongoing research into vitamins, botanicals, minerals, and other supplements. In the news...It's very gratifying to see nutrition and food supplements emerge as an important subject for the news media. The December 21st, 1998, issue of the New York Times had an excellent article, in which UNICEF says that fighting malnutrition is an investment that yields a large return, because micronutrients are cheap and require no refrigeration.
The BEST of health to you!
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. The products listed in this newsletter are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. Consult with your physician before taking any of these products. |