Posts Tagged ‘Toxins’

Everything in Moderation? A New Look

Posted by myhealthexperts on January 27, 2009

If caffeine is toxic - whats moderation?

If caffeine is toxic - whats moderation?

A common phrase I often hear from my clients when asked about their health is ‘everything in moderation.’ But what exactly defines moderation? How do we know that our moderation is really balanced? Are there hidden factors we are unaware of that skew our idea of moderation? Is moderate exposure to toxins a safe and healthy choice?

In this era of increasing health risks such as cancer, infertility, emotional issues like depression and anxiety, and the epidemic of childhood issues like ADD/ADHD and autism – can we afford to wait until after the fact to realize we did not do our best to prepare ourselves and our family?

Dr. Eunice Stagliola, MyHealthExperts resident toxicologist, is going to speak on such issues in the first of her lecture series on ‘Living Toxic’. This lecture is going to be this Wednesday, January 28 at 7 pm at Tommy K’s in Stamford. Seating is limited so RSVP ASAP!

Tommy K’s is at 54 Research Drive, Stamford. Call (203) 325-9544 for directions. Please feel free to share this invitation with others you think may be interested.

Posted in Body, Detox, Did You Know?, Hidden Dangers | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

Drowning in Poisons

Posted by myhealthexperts on February 2, 2008

Another of countless studies showing just how SEVERELY polluted our planet, and our bodies are. The true depth and breath of this problem is being kept hidden from the public.  Children are our “Canary in a coal mine” in that they are much more sensitive to exposures than adults. And children are increasingly developing neurological, immunological andf behavioral problems due largely to the toxic loads their bodies are subjected to. We might literally poison ourselves into extinction if current trends persist.

WASHINGTON – A recent study by the US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) found that three quarters of 285 commonly consumed foods and beverages are contaminated with perchlorate, a toxic rocket fuel ingredient. According to the study, every day, the average two-year-old is exposed to more than half of the EPA “safe” dose (RfD) of perchlorate from food alone. This is bad news for children in communities in 28 states who also are exposed to perchlorate through contaminated tap water. Very low levels of perchlorate in tap water will cause the average two year old to exceed EPA’s safe exposure level.

Two-year-olds are particularly vulnerable because they eat and drink substantial amounts of food and water relative to their small size. An Environmental Working Group analysis of FDA data found that perchlorate levels as low as 4 parts per billion (ppb) in tap water could expose the average two-year-old to an unsafe dose of the rocket fuel contaminant every single day.

FDA’s finding of high food exposures for small children makes clean up of perchlorate-contaminated water imperative. Perchlorate in tap water can be controlled through filtration and clean up. Perchlorate in food is harder to manage because the source of contamination is not clear, although contaminated irrigation water is one known source where levels could be reduced.

read more here: http://www.ewg.org/node/25877

Posted in Body, Did You Know?, Eat, Environment, Hidden Dangers, See | Tagged: , , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

Cosmetics Toxic Dangers

Posted by myhealthexperts on January 13, 2008

I love the so called Health Guru’s and Medical Experts that claim you don’t need dietary supplements. This is fine if you are okay with increasing your risk of cancer, depression, heart disease, infertility….the list goes on and on. Keep trusting those “Authority Figures”!

Here is yet another reason why You Need Added Detox Support from Supplements!!!

(Detox support that MyHealthExperts.com can give you!)

Women ingest anywhere from 7 to 12 POUNDS of lipstick in their lifetime. Did our ancestors have to evolve detox capacity to remove lipstick from their bodies? NO!! You’re body is ill equipped to deal with this and all the modern exposures to toxins we get daily.

How do you think the body gets rid of these toxic poisons?  Detoxification pathways that involve enzymes, amino-acids and vitamins in addition to herbs that also facilitate and enhance these key detox processes.

“Some frightening statements have appeared in press reports in recent months: “Put down the lipstick if you value his sperm.” “In a lifetime a woman eats about 4.5kg of lipstick. Most contain coal tar dyes that are carcinogenic.” “Nail varnish contains some of the most toxic substances in cosmetics including toulene, a central nervous system toxin.” “Powder foundations are up to 80 per cent talc, a known carcinogen.” Is this just scaremongering? Are we exposed to more carcinogens eating burned toast? Consumers are beginning to wake up to the fact that we know very little about the chemicals we slather over our bodies. Irritants, toxins, potential carcinogens (which cause cancer), mutagens (which damage DNA) and teratogens (which cause birth defects) are just some of the chemicals said to be lurking in these feel-good products. (source: http://www.ewg.org/node/15094 )

“Lipsticks tested ranged from high-end $30 Dior lipsticks to drugstore offerings. L’Oreal owns six of the 11 lipsticks with the alleged highest lead content, under the brands of L’Oreal and Maybelline.

The brands with highest lead content included: L’Oreal Colour Riche in True Red and Classic Wine, Maybelline’s Incredifull Lipcolor in Maximum Red, and Christian Dior Addict Positive Red.

The lipsticks do not list lead as an ingredient and there is no FDA requirement to report the level of lead in lipstick, Malkan said.” (source: http://www.ewg.org/node/25632

Toxicity of some common ingredients in cosmetics

The following ingredient assessments include DEA, lanolin, mineral oil, propylene glycol, parabens, artificial colours and fragrances. Specific references are included.

DEA – diethanalomine

DEA is a detergent and emulsifier, frequently used in both cosmetics and shampoos. It is used by itself and in combination as part of cocamide DEA, lauramide etc. In spite of US FDA warnings and recommendations to the cosmetics industry dating back to the 1970’s, concerning the NTP (National Toxicology Program) findings that DEA has a relationship to cancers in animal testing, it is still widely used. The NTP tests revealed that DEA can cause cancer in rats by itself, and it can combine with other chemicals to form nitrosamines which are also cancer causing. They also found that repeated skin application to mouse skin of DEA or cocamide-DEA, induced liver and kidney cancer and accumulated in organs, such as the brain, where it induced chronic toxic effects. DEA is also noted as a mild skin and severe eye irritant.

Propylene glycol

Propylene glycol is frequently mistaken by consumers for ethylene glycol which is a dangerous antifreeze (propylene glycol can also be used for this) that is highly toxic by ingestion. The urban myth/story that my dog licked up the car antifreeze and died, refers to ethylene glycol. There are conflicting opinions about propylene glycol mainly due to the fact that there are several types which are commonly grouped together. They are propylene glycol, propylene glycol alginate and propylene glycol ether, all of which have a different toxicity. Some researchers/writers do not distinguish between them.

Propylene glycol alginate combines propylene glycol with free alginic acid which is isolated from brown algae by a process involving washing out undesirable salts, an alkaline salt extraction procedure, clarifying and treating with mineral salts. There is no chronic toxicity information available but this chemical is permitted in foods.

Propylene glycol ethers are eye irritants, experimental teratogens, have dangerous reproductive effects and are ingestible poisons.6 Propylene glycol ethers are commonly used as co-solvents (aids in mixing oil and water) in cleaning products. They demonstrate easy absorption into the skin and have been suspected of liver and kidney abnormalities.7 They’re used in cleaning because they increase the uptake of oils. Propylene glycol ether has also been noted as an experimental carcinogen in animal tests.

Propylene glycol has been reported as a problem if you already have liver or kidney problems. It is also a problem in cosmetics in areas of low humidity less than 65% because of the potential to remove water from your skin. This is not what you want in a moisturiser. A clinical review published in the American Academy of Dermatologists journal of January 1991, shows propylene glycol to cause a significant number of skin reactions and it is named as a primary irritant to the skin even in low levels of concentration. It can be dangerous to children in large oral dosage (79g/Kg) because it behaves like a general anesthetic causing seizures and changes in the surface EEG. Although cosmetics are not intended for oral use, this effect has caused problems because 1. children eat them 2. propylene glycol is often one of the largest ingredients by volume.23

Mineral Oil aka petrolatum, paraffin

Mineral Oil forms an occlusive barrier on the skin, effectively preventing the skin from breathing and function normally. This barrier can inhibit the skins’ own NMF (Natural Moisturising Factor), which may lead to excessive dryness and/or fluid retention. Many years ago, mineral oils were the preferred base oils of aromatherapists, as they were considered non-toxic, cheap and easily able to pick up the smell of essential oils. They are still widely used in ‘baby oils’ and moisturising creams. Despite the name, mineral oils are manufactured from crude petrol. According to the International Agency for Research into Cancer in Geneva, they are probably carcinogenic as ‘analyses of mineral oils used for medicinal and cosmetic purposes reveal the presence of several carcinogenic polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons which are in the Eighth Report on Carcinogens, including benzo[b]fluoranthene, benzo[k]fluoranthene, and benzo[a]pyrene.’9 They’re noted as a human teratogen by inhalation which has caused testicular tumours in the foetus. They are also skin and eye irritants and may be implicated in aspirational pneumonia.6

Parabens

The most frequently used chemicals in cosmetics aside from water. They are used as preservatives and antibacterials. Because of their frequent use as preservatives for other ingredients, such as surfactants, they are not listed on all labels that contain them. Unless ingredients are labelled UP, they are probably preserved with parabens. There are 4 main paraben types which are methyl, ethyl, propyl and butyl paraben. They were considered innocuous until quite recently. Research in the UK 21 at Brunel University established that the oestrogen mimicing effect of parabens (known since 1938) could be responsible for upsetting the oestrogen balance in animals including humans. Upsetting the oestrogen balance is considered to have significant effects including lowered sperm counts, breast cancer, osteoporosis, and autoimmune disease. The response to this study from the cosmetic industry association in Europe, (COLIPA) was that the findings were irrelevant as they believed that parabens didn’t penetrate the skin. There is no scientific validity to this claim. Skin penetration is affected by many factors such as heat, hydration, occlusion and chemical synergies.

Parabens are also noted as a cause of allergic dermatitis. Methylparaben has been noted as a suspected mutagen. It is also moderately toxic by ingestion. Parabens are also suspected allergens.6 The Brunel University group published this statement as part of their research findings: “Given their use in a wide range of commercially available topical preparations, it is suggested that the safety in use of these chemicals should be reassessed, with particular attention being paid to estimation of the actual levels of systemic exposure of humans exposed to these chemicals. The acquisition of such data is a prerequisite to the derivation of reliable estimates of the possible human risk of exposure to parabens.”

Lanolin

Used in all types of cosmetics. Lanolin is a natural wax coating on sheep wool and is removed by boiling the wool and collecting the wax. It has long been noted as an allergen, and it is now also adulterated with chemical pesticides and fertilisers. Note: sheep are dipped in pesticides and eat grass grown with fertilisers. The result is contamination with a multitude of dangerous organophosphates and other carcinogens and neurotoxins. Diazinon was found in 84% of samples taken in a test sampling that included dieldrin and DDT and over a dozen other pesticides.15 Diazinon is a neurotoxic contact poison which easily penetrates the skin barrier. As a consequence of the widespread contamination, lanolin shouldn’t be used unless it is purified and cosmetics with lanolin should be avoided unless the label states that the lanolin is purified. Especially do not use lanolin on cracked nipples of nursing mothers. The toxins will transmit straight to the baby.

Artificial Fragrance

Fragrance on a product label could mean anything but it is usually synthetic as essential oils are listed for marketing points. Unless an essential oil is specified, it’s odds on to be synthetic. If essential oils are specified, it’s likely they are very cheap commercial grades. For instance, most commercial bergamot oil has 5% real bergamot and 95% synthetic limonenes. Consider that next time you buy a cheap bergamot. Many fragrances both synthetic and natural can have a cumulative effect that can cause skin problems. In addition, synthetic fragrances often contain hundreds of ingredients including carcinogens such as methyl chloride. Because fragrance manufacturers do not have to disclose the ingredients in fragrances, or test for toxic synergies, there is no way of knowing whether they are safe or not.

Colours

Many of these colours are made from coal tars or are aluminium lakes, and it’s very doubtful if any of them are safe. All coal tars colours have been found to be carcinogenic in varying degrees. They’ve also been found to cause nausea, mood swings, headaches and fatigue. Dyes derived from precipitating soluble colours with aluminum and other chemicals, are termed ‘lakes’ and can be neurotoxic. Both lakes and coal tar dyes can be stored in our organs and fatty tissues. Although the toxicity of oral ingestion of colours in lipstick has been widely reported, research at the University of Pittsburg indicates that up to twice as much toxic material can be absorbed into the bloodstream through the skin as opposed to the oral route. So colours can be a problem area with shampoos, eye colouring, mascara and nail varnishes.

Colouring agents are becoming very controversial in all western countries, principally through the US public environmental watchdog groups (notably Ralph Nader’s) who fund private court actions against the use of known carcinogens and neurotoxins. These actions have seen colours regularly de-listed because of their toxicity. Unfortunately, government agencies, primarily the FDA (The Food and Drug Agency) in the USA, are the ones fighting the de-listings. Colours are allowed even though they are toxic because of a 1938 amendment to the pure Foods Act of 1901 which specifically excludes them from scrutiny. This is why they are still legal and why consumer groups have to privately go to court to prevent their use on a colour by colour basis. Note: There are ‘so called natural’ companies selling lipsticks with what they claim are annatto colours. When confronted with the fact that annatto colours are water soluble and not suitable for lipstick, these companies admit that they are precipitated with aluminium to form the neurotoxic lake’ colours’ referred to above.

from http://www.mvskincare.com.au/advice/ingred_hitlist.asp

Posted in Detox, Did You Know?, Hidden Dangers, Nutrition, Supplements | Tagged: , , , , , | Leave a Comment »