Category Archives: Oral Hygiene

Fluorination of Public Drinking Water Health Risk for Intolerant

Leave a reply
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Last Updated: 22 July 2020 by Marc Woodard

In order to determine whether adding chemical fluoride to our public drinking water is safe, necessary or even beneficial for dental health it is wise to first understand its origins and industrial use history. Yes, I did say chemical, as it is not well known to most that fluoride added to 90% of many public’s drinking water sources is hydrofluoric acid and once used to manufacture uranium and plutonium bomb-grade nuclear weapons. Today it is used within multiple manufacturing firms and known to be one of the most caustic industrial chemicals on planet earth.

Fluoride is also the active toxin in rat and cockroach poisons. What other industries are dependent on fluoride in the marketplace you ask? Semiconductors, refining high octane gas, fluorocarbons and chlorofluorocarbons in refrigerants to cool our foods and to keep us cool; fluorescent light bulbs, herbicides, plastics and of course, it’s added to many toothpaste brands.

… “What other industries are dependent on fluoride in the marketplace you ask? Semiconductors, refining high octane gas, fluorocarbons and chlorofluorocarbons in refrigerants” …

It was the same A-bomb scientist of the day that produced the evidence against fluoride injuries to civilians through litigation; which also happens to be the same person that showed low doses of this chemical consumed by humans to be safe. This fact in itself should cause one to further re-think the benefits of water fluorination within the political and health and educational etc., industrial sectors of special interests.

… “It is not well known to most that the fluoride added to 90% of many public’s drinking water sources is hydrofluoric acid and once used to manufacture uranium and plutonium bomb-grade nuclear weapons.“

Fifty years ago the government introduced fluoride into our public water facilities claiming it would reduce cavities in our children’s teeth. Of course in the same breath, one must understand with the dawn of the nuclear age, then came the age of nuclear downsizing and excess chemical reserves. Chemical companies were hungry to continue generating revenues by finding other uses for fluoride. The excess chemical surplus no longer useful for nuclear enrichment found its way into our drinking water; much like Monsanto’s artificial sweetener was first redeveloped for something other than its intended use… “Schlatter had synthesized aspartame as an intermediate step in generating a tetrapeptide of the hormone gastrin, for use in assessing an anti-ulcer drug candidate. He discovered its sweet taste when he licked his finger, which had become contaminated with aspartame, to lift up a piece of paper” [Google 2020].

If you don’t know about Monsanto’s Aspartame, simply type it into a search engine: illness and disease followed by the words: artificial sweetener… greatly responsible for childhood obesity and cancer and other health risks. And why the FDA protects and promotes these chemical products within our consumer marketplaces.

Like non-essential fluoride in our drinking water… Another unnecessary food chemical with a sorted history is Monsanto’s Aspartame… this artificial sweetener is in many of our soda and juice drinks. Including: many types of processed baked foods and other deserts.

Dental organizations, special interests groups, governmental and other advocates sell communities on the ideal, that when fluoride is adjusted and controlled in our drinking water it is safe and good for us. I’ve found much positive data on fluorinated water and children’s dental health care to support this argument. However, I’ve also found just as much data showing when fluoride is added to public drinking water “it is not healthy for the entire population.” And even when looking over our children’s dental benefits – controlling levels of daily fluoride intake for public water facilities personnel is very difficult to sustain, if not impossible. There is also much research data on fluorinated water. Showing no chemical difference between natural occurring fluorides found in nature’s water shed vs. public drinking water with added fluoride. Our bodies do need this trace mineral in minuet amounts…

“may be our governments feel an obligation to ensure we receive this very beneficial trace mineral requirement in greater amounts… and at tax payer’s expense.”

If “receiving a beneficial trace mineral requirement [fluoride]” was so important, then why wouldn’t public health officials also require other nonessential [fluoride is not considered an essential mineral] minerals our bodies need in our public water supply to ensure good teeth and bone health? I.e., why not add calcium, magnesium, phosphorus minerals for good dental and bone health. So what makes fluoride a required non-essential mineral?

Some of the selling points used to sway voters, fluoride in public drinking water is a good ideal… it will promote “among other things,” less sick days, greater productivity and less dental care. So one has to ask, why fluorinate public water at all if you can simply absorb it through the foods, supplements, drinks and proper dental hygiene as opposed to subjugating a populace to a questionable and unnecessary chemical additive in our drinking water?

What do you think motivates government and the dental industry to promote a seemingly unnecessary chemical “proven to cause health risks for some adults?” And if nature provides the trace mineral fluoride in organic and processed foods, and in bottled drinks, why the continued push to add it to our public water supply? Thinking a little further on topic, how could any agency accurately determine the necessary and proper amount of hydrofluoric acid to be added to a water source and make it safe for everyone? Are there any “for sure” good answers?

“If dental prevention is paramount why won’t parents take the responsibility to ensure their children are brushing their teeth with proper dental products if that’s what they need?”

Don’t we as parents, health and dental organizations and our schools have some responsibility to educate on good dental hygiene and promote good eating habits? Or is it our government’s responsibility to use our tax dollars to supplement our dental health? I’ve got a better ideal, why not use those tax dollars to subsidize low income families with a preventative dental care plan? Wouldn’t that be less costly to the tax payer and less health risk for those intolerant of fluoride.

Although proponents of fluorinated public drinking water say they are simply adding and adjusting the fluoride levels in our drinking water “safely” as prevention against childhood cavities, others have questionable arguments and reasonable concerns… what are safe levels for a medically diverse and aging and intolerant population(s)?

Again, if it’s not a water quality issue, then what’s the overriding reason to add this chemical to our public drinking water? Proponents of fluorinating our water further argue, fluoride is a mineral found within our soils and plants and is naturally occurring within our tooth enamel and bone and helps the body to resist disease. Is it reasonable to assume fluorinated water would be healthy for everyone?

As you further study this topic it is easy to make a positive, or negative health benefit and/or risk argument. However, the sum of the whole arguments fall apart rather rapidly once you begin to dissect the entire cause and effect found within case studies connected to fluorinated water intolerances within the body.

In the early stages of childhood development, fluoride additives may hold greater dental benefits vs. health risk for the younger demographic.

Even though municipal water experts tell us they can control the levels of fluoride injection into our drinking water at safe levels, you are beginning to understand this is not the whole picture. This is because public water specialists cannot control the sensitivities for those intolerant of any flouride entering body.

Increased flouride absorption tend to be more problematic as the body ages, and/or in combination with immune or other ill-health problems. Our children are also not immune to over fluorination health risks. They are simply least likely to experience health problems because of their younger metabolisms and stronger immune systems.

Even though numerous professionals within hundreds of organizations speak out against public water fluorination: e.g., biochemists, oral medicine, gemology, physiology, orthopedic, podiatrist, toxicologists, EPA, nutritionists, medical associates, Nobel laureates, oncologists, epidemiologists, etc., it has been stated “Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time.’ And that more people have died in the last 30 years from cancer connected with fluoridation than all the military deaths in the entire history of the United States” [EPA scientist Dr. Robert Carton (Downey, 2 May 99) and Dean Burk, PhD National Cancer Institute, Fluoridation a Burning Controversy].

“Fluoridation is the greatest case of scientific fraud of this century, if not of all time.’ And that more people have died in the last 30 years from cancer connected with fluoridation than all the military deaths in the entire history of the United States”

Most don’t understand, not only should we be concerned about drinking water and toothpaste, but also environmental pollutants derived from major industries where fluoride is a critical chemical ingredient in the production of aluminum to pesticides.  Within the last 15-20 years a dental revolution against public water fluorination occurred through the discovery of dental fluorosis. Dental fluorosis is a sign of excessive exposure to too much fluoride.

“Although the proponents for public water fluorinations key talking point is tooth decay prevention, there is just as much evidence to support the undeniable health risks to children” (Brunelle 1987; Heller 1997; Khan 2005).

“One of the greatest concerns is the risk of bone cancer (osteosarcoma) and impacts on the thyroid function and lowered IQ’s” (NRC 2006). And the American Dental Association (ADA 2006) recommends if you can’t avoid fluorinated public water consider, use fluoride-free bottled water for infant formulas!

Signs of dental fluorosis include whitish flecks, spots mainly on the front teeth, or dark spots and stripes (most severe case). If you display these signs then it would be wise to remove this chemical from your diet. Your teeth are a sure sign that your protein enzymes have become mutated to a point that causes one to age at an accelerated rate. If enough enzyme proteins change, or become foreign to the body the body begins to die exponentially! Ill-health risks can occur within the immune, respiratory, digestive systems; thyroid, brain, liver and kidney functions and blood circulation. Other autoimmune problems due to over exposure of fluorides: arteriosclerosis, asthma, lupus and arthritis.

The National Institute for Dental and Craniofacial Research recommends that if children between the ages of 6 months to 16 years of age should need fluoride for dental prevention and it is not supplied within a public drinking water source… parents should seek dental advise and/or fluoride supplement if needed.

Dr. Alesen (Former president of the California Medical Association) cites: “without a shadow of doubt dozens of International studies show us how Fluoride disrupts the bone building process by creating a ‘calcium out of solution’ situation has caused thousands of relational cases of skeletal thinning fractures, ‘rubber bones,’ osteoporosis, anemia, rickets, calcium stones and crystal buildup in organs and joints.”

Although I wanted to find a positive reason to be a proponent of fluorination of public drinking water, I could find no good reason to support a public policy I was not 95% confident was a health benefit to all. If anyone does a little research over the Internet, they’d likely come up to the same conclusions… unless your special interest or livelihood revolves around the chemical flouride or dental, etc., industry, you’d likely not be in favor of cholorinating a public water source once fully informed.

Although flournation proponents claim there is a dental prevention, cost and good bone health benefit, including less time lost from school and work and may be true for a minority… . In my opinion are dwarfed by the negative health risk and costs on the older population and those allergic and/or intolerant to dietary flourides. I think one could make a better argument there’s a greater than 50% chance a majority of a population’s health is harmed [short and long term] by public water flourination policies.

Consider when you hear a pro-rally cry for public water fluorination. Recall that almost every form of processed foods and drinks consumed has been most assuredly manufactured with fluorinated water. There is no way to know exactly how much fluoride each one of us is receiving daily and more so if it’s added to our public water supply [“the summation of the whole chemicals injested appears to equate to increased health risk”].

“Some sample label ingredients read: Active ingredient Sodium Fluoride ‘Warning’ Keep out of reach of children. If accidentally swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center immediately. The reason this label warning is on the toothpaste is because if a 20lb child happened to swallow a tube of this toothpaste it could kill that child!”

Other Consumer Safety Knowledge: Also check your toothpaste labels. Some sample label ingredients read: Active ingredient Sodium Fluoride “ Warning“ Keep out of reach of children. If accidentally swallowed, get medical help or contact a Poison Control Center immediately. The reason this label warning is on the toothpaste is because if a 20lb child happened to swallow a tube of this toothpaste it could kill that child! Another reason why an overwhelming portion of the populace is concerned about a chemical in their public water source… so poisonous that the FDA requires a product warning label to consumers.

My Opinion: Parents should work with their dental specialists to provide supplement fluoride for children that need it. And our government should only ensure they provide quality drinking water to the public without unnecessary chemical fluorination. Why? because this chemical additive does not benefit the sum of the whole population. If anything, it appears to increase health risk to a majority of the population… moreso, than it provides a dental prevention benefit for youth and the adult population.

References,

Acu-Cell Nutrition.  Fluoride, Fluorine and Chloride, Chlorine.

Delta Dental. Vitamins and Minerals Play Important Roles in Bone Health.

Environmental Working Group. Fluoride and Dental Health. 

Glaros, William P., D.D.S., INC. Better Health through Fine Dentistry. Is Fluoride Really Good for Your Teeth? 1 September 2011.

Google search, 2020.

Healthvermont.gov. Department of Health, Agency of Human Services. Fluoride.

Murray, Rich. How Aspartame Became Legal. The Timeline. 24 December 2002.

NIDCR.gov. National Institute of Dental and Craniofacial Research.

Prevent Disease.Com. How dangerous is Fluoride to your Health?

Author: Marc T. Woodard, MBA, BS Exercise Science, ARNG, CPT, RET. 2014-20 Copyright. All rights reserved, Mirror Athlete Inc., www.mirrorathlete.org, Sign up for your Free eNewsletter.

How to Identify Home Products that Cause Illness and Disease

Leave a reply
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail

Updated: 24 Aug 2018

I’ve known for years the chemicals in our consumer marketplace and environment has a direct correlation with disease and rising mortality rates. Through epidemiological, disease prevention and mortality rate studies and World Health Organization reports, etc., a direct connection with consumer products is found to have an effect on health and longevity. And that connection is the Westernized cultures who produce the pathological causing pollutant and chemical contaminants that attack cellular integrity by their oxidant agents.

Healthy longevity is important especially if we hope to enjoy retirement with our loved ones.
Healthy longevity is important especially if we hope to enjoy retirement with our loved ones.

Through the advancements of modern medicine a decline in mortality rates occurred – benefiting an increase in average lifespan during the early-mid-20th century. However the data today shows a reverse in trend. The marketplace in the later 20th and early 21st century changed by introducing thousands of toxic chemical contaminants into the food chain, water and air we breathe.

The global data shows a direct correlation to man’s manipulation of our food chain for sake of profit. As a result cancer is on the rise and so is every other major medical problem including diabetes, arthritis, heart, circulatory and autoimmune disease to name a few. At this rate our children and their children will live shorter lifespans than previous generations and suffer unnecessary pain and costs that need not be.

Many of the statistical bullet points below were relative in 2007 when this article was first published. And just as relative and concerning today… mortality rates and disease is not decreasing. And occurring in an advanced culture where modern medicine should be reducing these things – It’s not.

Previous and Updated Consumer Statistical Facts,

It is a fact, cancer mortality rates throughout the globe have increased over the last decade. 7.6 million People died of cancer in the world during 2007. 13% of all deaths are due to cancer (American Cancer Society).

Since then, cancer cases have risen globally. Unfortunately Cancer is among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality worldwide, with approximately 14 million new cases and 8.2 million cancer related deaths in 2012 [World Health Organization, 2015] and (Woodard, 2015).

From 1965 to 1982 over 4 million distinct chemical compounds were formulated by corporations. And at least 250,000 new formulations created annually since then.

Approximately 6,000 chemicals are added to our foods (Woodard 2015). And the FDA has no knowledge of 1000 of them or effect on cellular health. And fewer than half the other 4000 chemicals have not been tested by the FDA (Marler 2013).

700 chemicals have been found in drinking water.

Over 500 chemicals can be found under kitchen sinks or laundry rooms in American homes.

Over 800 neurotoxin chemical compounds are used in cosmetic-perfume industries.

How many store bought products are chemically influenced by man?
How many store bought products are chemically influenced by man?

Seventy percent of our daily calories now consist of processed foods high in trans-fat, sugar, salt, other strange chemical preservative and processing additives, etc., that lack organic nutrients.

But if we care about people dying before their lives are really over or having to endure preventable suffering, and our neighbors racking up huge medical costs that we all share, then that space on our plates for processed food shouldn’t be anywhere near 70 percent. Perhaps closer to 20 or 30 percent. It’s only then that we can call our food supply truly safe (Marler 2013).

310,000 Americans go to early graves due to processed food diets that cause heart and diabetes disease, etc., including cancer.

For example, food preservative BHA is a known carcinogen found in many processed foods we consume daily: McDonald’s sausages, an ingredient found in Gatorade, Tang, DiGiorno Pepperoni Pizza, breakfast steak, bread making, etc., (Marler 2013).

3000 annual deaths and 130,000 food borne illness are reported by hospitals.

Bottled water, how pure is it? Studies show not much better than local drinking water.

There’s a lot of man-made toxic chemicals in the air we breathe, water we drink from plastic containers and foods we eat.

Many health conscientious consumers don’t consider the cosmetic and hygiene products they use every day.

To provide awareness to common toxic home care products with known carcinogens, to identify them in your house you can perform a home toxic product identification challenge. Then you decide if you want to keep the products or replace them with an organic home cleaning, laundry and hygienic product line. When you remove known toxic chemicals from your home, less stress is put on the autoimmune system which mitigates and relieves ill-health conditions.

Look no further than your kitchen cleaning, or bathroom hygiene cabinets. Simply select a shampoo, toothpaste or common home cleaning product and look for 1 or all 3 toxic ingredients listed below. The 3 chemical and toxic ingredients I chose out of hundreds of unsafe chemicals consumers unknowingly consume daily: Propylene Glycol, SLS (sodium laurylsulfate) and DEA (Diethanolamine).

Replace toxic hygienic product with green products to reduce health risk.

Below I’ve provided a short descriptor of each disease causing chemical ingredient found within common home use consumer products. Keep in mind, I’ve only listed 3 absorbed through the skin, inhaled or ingested. And barely scratched the surface or impressed upon the fact, there’s thousands of chemicals and toxins we take in daily found in our air, water and food.

Propylene Glycol – What’s Anti-Freeze doing in our shampoos, deodorants, cosmetics, lotions, toothpastes and pet food, etc.? Yes the main ingredient is Anti-freeze, Propylene Glycol. Topical application to injured skin or intravenous administration has sometimes been associated with lactic acidosis, Comas, Seizures & Renal Failure. Linked to: Central Nervous System Effects, Metabolic Effects & Poisoning (Walker 2015).

SLS (sodium laurylsulfate) – What are concrete floor cleaner, engine degreaser and car wash detergents doing in hundreds of other personal home care and cleaning products, such as bath & body products, etc.? The main ingredient is SLS. SLS (sodium laurylsulfate) acts as a detergent. Used in the laboratory as a membrane destabilizer & solubilizer of proteins and lipids, causing potential harm to skin and eyes. Young eyes may not develop properly if exposed to SLS because proteins are denatured (Walker, 2015).

DEA (Diethanolamine) – What is a known cause, or contributor to cancer, or of being potentially dangerous or hazardous to our health doing in shampoos, conditioners, bubble baths, lotions, cosmetics, soaps, laundry and dish washing detergents?

The main ingredient within many bath and body and cosmetic products is DEA, a known cancer causing ingredient. The California Center for Environmental Health (CEH) performed independent testing of 98 personal care products and found “products testing high in DEA and Cocamide DEA used to thicken hair, was listed a known carcinogen last year. Many personal care products with DEA in them is manufactured and sold by many major retailer brands consumers know and trust. Just to name a few Colgate, Palmolive, Colomer and Paul Mitchell.

Major retailers known to sell, or have sold products with toxic chemical ingredients include: “Walmart, Trader Joe’s, Pharmaca and Kohls and a store brand children’s bubble bath from Kmart and a children’s shampoo/conditioner from Babies R Us were also found with cocamide DEA. Falsely labeled organic products from Organic by Africa’s Best also tested for high levels of the cancer-causing chemical (CEH previously won a legal settlement with this company requiring it to end its use of phony organic labels) (Center for Environmental Health 2013).

For a list of brands and retailers that sell DEA personal care products, click on CEH link below.

Still need more proof. Check the back of your household cleaning, or hygiene product bottles. Pick an ingredient name you can’t pronounce or don’t understand its meaning. Type this name into an Internet search engine. You’ll see it is a man-made chemical product and it is not organic. I’m willing to bet you have at least 1 of 3 listed chemical ingredients in one or more of your favorite personal use and home cleaning products. Most likely exposed daily to all 3 and other toxic chemicals too numerous list.

If you are using products with ingredients you can’t pronounce, or understand their origins, these almost always are man-made chemical ingredients.

Take advantage of seasonal farmers markets.

The best advice I can give you is to begin replacing all home cleaning and personal care products with clean green home and hygiene products and eat as fresh organic foods as possible. Also cut down on processed and convenience food consumption.

The chemicals we use to clean our homes and foods we consume are at war with our bodies. And I’ve not even brought up the air we breathe and water we drink. To get more insight on these consumer topics of interest please click on the following MirrorAthlete article links: How Sick Buildings Effect Lives and Is Fluoride in Our City Water Needed or Safe.

It is more important than ever to remove the toxic household products and heavily processed foods from our plates. Consume as many fresh fruits and vegetables daily as possible. As a health insurance policy add a daily multi-vitamin and mineral supplement to provide an anti-oxidant boost to immune system. This will help shield cellular health by protecting it from free radical damage caused by product and environmental oxidant damage and environmental stress taken in daily.

Without preventative health measures in our Westernized culture the aging process will advance with insidious disease and shorten lifespans.

Still need more proof, simply visit our Word Press publication site at MirrorAthlete Fitness Secrets, scroll down on our home screen page, find Topic Category and select Cancer or Product Toxins or Consumer Safety. Or type in Topic of Interest in the site articles search box next to Topic Category.

Helpful Reference Links,

Center for Environmental Health (CEH). Study Finds Cancer-Causing Chemical in Nearly 100 Shampoos and Soaps. EcoWatch. 29 August 2013. http://ecowatch.com/2013/08/29/cancer-causing-chemical-in-shampoos/

Marler, Alan. Our Unsafe Food Supply Is Killing Us. The Daily Beast. 1 March 2013. http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/01/our-unsafe-food-supply-is-killing-us.html

Walker, Dani. Toxins in Personal Care Products. Powered by WordPress. 2015. http://daniwalker.com/toxins-in-personal-care-products/

Woodard, Marc. Doomed to Get Cancer. MirrorAthlete Fitness Secrets. 22 Feb 2015. http://www.mirrorathlete.org/?p=24

Author: Marc T. Woodard, MBA, BS Exercise Science, ARNG, CPT, RET. 2015 Copyright. All rights reserved, Mirror Athlete Inc., www.mirrorathlete.org, Sign up for your Free eNewsletter.

Chronic Disease Caused by Consumer Demand

Leave a reply
Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
Traveling and enjoying good company keeps a mind and body fit healthy. Astoria OR, column.
Traveling and enjoying good company keeps a mind and body healthy. Marc at the Column, Astoria OR.

One of the first articles I wrote in November 2007 was inspired by a network news and publications article titled “Is Cancer in Your Tub?” What caught my attention were two glycol ether solvents used in everyday household, food and hygiene products. Also a key ingredient used in anti-freeze. Well I knew I didn’t want to drink or eat anti-freeze, so this caught my eye.

The thing I didn’t put into perspective back then was how consumer products were made and the impact they had on our health. Then I began asking questions like, why are unnatural and unnecessary chemicals added to our consumer products.

For example, why would an anti-freeze ingredient be in our home cleaners, hygiene and food products? “Glycol ethers are a group of solvents based on alkyl ethers of ethylene glycol or Propylene Glycol (PG) commonly used in paints and cleaners. These solvents typically have a higher boiling point, together with the favorable solvent properties of lower-molecular weight ethers and alcohols” [Wikipedia 2016].

AntiFreeze
Note the main Ingredient: ethylene glycol and Warning Label.
Note the main Ingredient: ethylene glycol and Warning Label.

“Ethylene glycol are still used in anti-freeze preparation, household, automotive cleaners, laundry cleaners, etc. Propylene glycol is also used in many of the same consumer products, such as home cleaners, hair, cosmetics, creams, lotions, soaps, shampoos, toothpaste, pet foods, deodorants, etc.” (GoodGuide 2011). The list of products containing both glycol ethers is long.

Propylene glycol is also used as a food stabilizer in many processed foods as I’m now more familiar. And the FDA stands by their PG approval-to-market SAFE for human consumption like tens of thousands of other consumer chemicals. “The Food and Drug Administration has classified Propylene Glycol as “generally recognized as safe,” which means that it is acceptable for use in flavorings, drugs, and cosmetics, and as a direct food additive. According to the World Health Organization, the acceptable dietary intake of propylene glycol is 25 mg of propylene glycol for every kilogram (kg) of body weight” (ATSDR 2015).

Ageless MirrorAthlete also covers the connection between consumer products, target origins, treatments, illness and disease.

“The unique qualities of PG is it provides unique inherent properties with regard to holding/attracting both water- and oil-based substances. In food, it is used to retain food color pigments and provide for homogeneous distribution within the mixture.”

It is also used as a “solvent and carrier for flavor and color in food and beverage manufacturing processes, for drinks, biscuits, cakes, sweets. ‘Thickener, clarifier and stabilizer in food and beverage such as beer, salad dressings or baking mixtures” (PO/PG 2016).

PG is also used as the main liquid component of e-cigarettes. For example, “PG exposure per puff of the Ruyan® e-cigarette. The cartridge of the Ruyan® e-cigarette contains approximately 1g [or 1000mg’s] of PG, of which 0.9 g is extractable from the pad. The concentration of PG in the mouth from one drag of the Ruyan® e-cigarette (900 mg per cartridge, 300 puffs = 3mg) is 3 mg per mouthful.”

It should also be noted within the report there is an Inhalational Minimal Risk Levels (MRLs). “No MRLs for acute- or chronic-duration inhalation exposure to propylene glycol were derived because data are insufficient. And this report also highlights Carcinogenicity. Stating “There is no evidence that PG is a carcinogen.”

But a SAFE use contradiction is also apparent within the same report. “MRLs of acute- or chronic duration inhalation data are insufficient (Laugesen 2008). Or to better clarify and understand the meaning of this statement, “absent of long-term risk data on health OR “No Evidence for lack of long term data.”

To better relate to the FDA approval process, think about it this way.

Most FDA approvals are based on animal studies of relatively short duration. Whereas the data is extrapolated to make relative to human metabolism, weight, environment, habits, dosage, frequency, per capita… etc. One last point to make, we are humans, not rodents. So one must ask, how relevant are these studies to human DNA and disease? And how much pressure is there to release and approve a new product to market? And once released don’t industries have something to loose should an approved SAFE chemical be recalled from the marketplace? The answers to these questions are economically and politically by design and connected. The short of it is, It’s all about special interest power, control and money!

To date, I was curious to see if GP was removed, banned or listed as a health risk on any consumer product. Of course I wasn’t surprised to find anything of the kind.  However glycol ethers may be the least of consumer product toxin worries.

Prior to reading that November 2007 publication, consumer safety advocates warned the world years earlier of carcinogenic household items. For instance, on February 23 a “1998 CBS’s morning talk show, This Morning reported the findings of a study from the US Department of Health and Human Services’ National Toxicology Program that sent shock waves throughout the cosmetics and personal care products industries.”

Personal hygiene should be replaced with green products to reduce health risk associated accumulative daily toxin uptake.
Personal hygiene and home cleaners can be replaced with green products to reduce health risk associated with daily toxin uptake.

Fast forward: the moment of truth, our everyday household items have carcinogenic toxins as exposed by various laboratory controlled studies. They “confirm serious health issues with long term use of our FDA Qualified “SAFE” products! (Young 2011).” Shocker? Not at all. Simply look at the billions of dollars industries spend and profits made. Changing this economic course would be an act of God.]

During 2007 I also procured brochures from author Debra Lynn Dadd, “Please Protect Yourself from Household Toxics. I handed them out to clients for consumer safety information and audit of household products.

Clients audited bathroom and laundry cabinets. They replace all cleaning and hygiene products with natural/organic products.
Clients audited bathroom hygiene and laundry cabinets. They replaced toxic products with natural/organic ones.

I recommended my clients audit and remove toxic home products and go green. In the process I advised them to keep diaries of certain medical symptoms which had abated after removal of certain consumer products after reading Dadd’s article.

She stated, “While certain people may be more sensitive than others, and some chemical(s) may bring on reactions only after many years of repeated exposure, I discovered household cleaning and bathing chemicals may bring on reactions only after many years of repeated exposure.”

Many of the home use product(s) that increased certain health risks listed in the brochure were cancer, birth defects, genetic changes, heart disease. Literally any symptom imaginable both physical and psychological could be linked to a common household product.

“Scientist admit these toxic chemicals can lodge in our endocrine system contributing to thyroid problems, diabetes, weight gain, and infertility. At greatest risk are fetuses, children, the elderly, and those who are already ill, but these chemicals are threatening the health of everyone, every day” (Barry 2013).

I also cited an AARP Bulletin from May 2008, Vol.49 No. 4, titled “Hazards at Home,” within that original 2007 article by Reed Karaim. Making similar statements as Debra Lynn Dadd. Karaim followed suit, “older people are more likely to have conditions – such as cardiovascular disease, cancer, respiratory disease and diabetes. Adding to the collective demographic concern; older people are more like infants and children in their ability to fend off toxic assaults says Sandra Steingraber, the author of Living Downstream: “An Ecologist Looks at Cancer and the Environment.”

What's in your Laundry Room?
What’s in your Laundry Room?

Within the same Bulletin a statement of stern warning is made over the use of home “Cleaners – Chemicals to avoid in cleaners, says McRandle (Paul McRandle, Deputy Editor at the National Geographic Green Guide), “run from ammonia, which is known to trigger asthma, elements in chlorine bleach, which is a lung irritant and will kill you if you swallow it, to things like glycol ethers, which are used to dissolve grime and dirt, and can cause nerve damage” (Karaim 2008).

PG is still listed safe by the FDA. However, I’ve no doubt science will prove the long-term PG health risk effects through e-cig smoker data. By studying habits of consumption, dose, toxicity and patients presenting similar cause and effect symptoms, diagnosis, treatment and disease connections, and discovery commonalities will occur over time.

Convenience does not come without a health risk price.
Convenience does not come without a health risk price.

The most disheartening and overwhelming reality is there are more chemicals used in foods and household products than ever before. Including expanded use of glycol ethers in foods. Also “Of the more than 80,000 chemicals currently used in the United States, most haven’t been adequately tested for their effects on human health” (NRDC 2016).

It appears most likely disease is linked to a cocktail of multiple consumer products, not just one. “Chemicals found in household products may be causing significant increases in cancers, diabetes, obesity and falling fertility, the European Environment Agency has warned. ‘In recent decades, there has been a significant growth in many human diseases and disorders including breast and prostate cancer, male infertility and diabetes. ‘Many scientists think that this growth is connected to the ‘rising levels of exposure’ to mixtures of some chemicals in widespread use” (Smith 2012).

“Some of the most pervasive chemicals are used in plastic products, and are known as endocrine disruptors. Convenience food products are bagged, bottled and plastic lined canned containers.”

Almost all food and drink containers have varying levels of toxins that leach into consumables.
Almost all food and drink containers have varying levels of toxins that leach into consumables.

“On February 19, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced a report co-produced with the United Nations Environment Program (UNEP), titled: State of the Science of Endocrine-Disrupting Chemicals.” Concern over the increase of chemical use in convenience foods, household and personal use products.

My takeaway and interpretation of past and current trends, scientific studies and consumer health risk and industrial data; these chemicals are destroying or mutating DNA within cellular structures of endocrine [hormone] and neurological function leading to serious and chronic disease.

“The report suggests a ban of endocrine-disrupting chemicals (EDCs) may be needed to protect the health of future generations. ‘Health risks include: Non-descended testes in young males, breast cancer in women, prostate cancer in men, developmental effects on the nervous system in children, attention-deficit hyperactivity in children, thyroid cancer” (Mercola 2013).

“In some ways, our ancestors had it easy. Because they didn’t have chemically treated food and chemically enhanced kitchenware, their diets and cooking practices exposed them to fewer toxic hazards” (Breast Cancer Fund 2016).

Unfortunately Big-Ag, food processors and manufactures see a huge demand for convenience products with chemicals that make our foods smell, and taste and look more appetizing with long storage life. Including cheap and toxic convenient household and hygiene products. We’re addicted to all of them. As long as consumer convenience demand and profits are high and long term health risk is not connected to an FDA approved SAFE chemicals the environmental toxin uptake and increase of insidious disease won’t be in decline anytime soon.

Nothing has changed much after years of health risk warnings from consumer safety advocates, epidemiologists and independent lab studies, etc. Unnecessary food chemicals are used in our consumer products and are on the rise… so is disease.

Big Ag-Corps may appear green. Health conscious consumers should qualify... was the product produced by a certified organic farm?
Big Ag-Corps may appear green. Health conscious consumers should seek to qualify the quality of product on labels… I.e., was the product produced by a certified organic farm?

The big winners are Chemical, Pharmaceutical, Big-Ag and Health Care industries. To include a plethora of consumer product and processor manufactures. Why do I list Health care services and Big-Pharm industries?

Treating acute and chronic disease is big business. Cures are not.

If it’s not about profits, what is it? I’d say the answer is 2-fold. Customers need and want lower convenience cost products. And industries are more than happy to continue providing cheap consumer product that meet demand and rake in huge profits at the expense of our health.

Until consumer demand changes toward healthier products there are things you can do to reduce unhealthy foods, drink, household cleaners and environmental toxins.

Recommendations,

What can you do to protect your family?

What can I say. I like sponge Bob. But this ones not made out of plastic toxins.
What can I say. I like sponge Bob. Although he is likely made out of plastic toxins… Just don’t let your children use these cute spongy critters as pillows [avoid material-to-skin contact irritants]
  1. Don’t give plastic toys to small children unless marked BPA or Phthalates free.  “On October 15, 2007, California governor Arnold Schwarzenegger signed into law AB 1108 (also known as the California Toxic Toys Bill), making California the first state in the country to ban the use of phthalates from children’s products” (West 2016).

2. Eat less processed and convenience foods and consume more whole foods.

3. Purchase organic green home cleaners, cosmetics and personal hygiene products.

4. Wear PPE (Personal Protective Equipment) e.g. gloves, mask, boots, hoodie, pants, long sleeve shirts, apron when using non-green cleaning products.

5. Read food, home cleaning products and hygiene labels – if you can’t pronounce the ingredients, it’s most likely a chemical preservative, additive, stabilizer, dye, solvent, etc., of varying toxic quality. Go Green and Organic as often as possible and available.

Purchase green-organic when possible..
Purchase natural/organic when possible..

6. Don’t consume the same drinks and foods every day, especially convenience and fast foods.

7. Consume plenty of fruits, vegetable and water.

8. Infrequently purchase water, juice, sodas and foods stored in plastics and cans. Glass is the best container to store foods and drinks.

9. Check dates of frozen foods and use within a 30 day window.

10. Vent and circulate fresh outdoor air throughout the home by leaving windows cracked ¼ open. Clean HVAC systems and ductwork per manufacturer recommendation.

11. Become a conscientious consumer safety advocate and practitioner and family educator of green/natural products.

12. Become a voice and vote for safe consumer products. Use your 1st Amendment rights to petition government and special interests to win voter-consumer choice. Be an advocate, or support to ban, or remove certain toxic ingredients from consumer goods and services. Or call for label laws that inform shoppers of toxic ingredients known to cause cancer and other chronic disease.

Conclusion,

If consumers don’t demand the marketplace change; then realize… cost and convenience has greater value to a majority – than do long term health risk concerns and realities. With this continued reality it should be no surprise when the next generations does not value healthy lifestyle…. but instead succumbs to disease and sustains the increasing health care costs.

We have no one to blame but ourselves.

Marc T. Woodard, MBA, BS Exercise Science, ARNG, CPT, RET. 2016 Copyright. All rights reserved, Mirror Athlete Inc., www.mirrorathlete.org, Sign up for your free monthly newsletter.

References,

ATSDR. “Public Health Statement for Propylene Glycol.” ATSDR. Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, 21 Jan. 2015. Web. 20 May 2016.

Barry, R. M. “Please…Protect Yourself from Household Toxics Pamphlet by Debra Lynn Dadd.” Melaleuca Cleaning Products. RM Barry Publications, 2005-13. Web. 20 May 2016.

Breast Cancer Fund. “Chemicals in Food.” Breast Cancer Fund. Breast Cancer Fund, n.d. Web. 20 May 2016.

GoodGuide. “What Kinds of Consumer Products May Contain This Chemical?” ETHYLENE GLYCOL — Consumer Products. GoodGuide, 2011. Web. 20 May 2016.

Karaim, Reed. “Hazards at Home.” AARP Bulletin Today. AARP, May 2008. Web. 20 May 2016.

Laugesen, Murray. Safety Report on the Ruyan® E-cigarette Cartridge and Inhaled Aerosol. Rep. Christchurch, New Zealand: Health New Zealand, 2008. Print.

Mercola, Dr. Joseph. “Common Household Chemicals Linked to Human Disease.” The Huffington Post. TheHuffingtonPost.com, 8 July 2013. Web. 20 May 2016.

NRDC. “Health, Toxic Chemicals.” NRDC. Natural Resources Defense Council, 2016. Web. 20 May 2016.

PO/PG. “Food, Taste, Fun and Convenience.” – Propylene Glycol. PO/PG Sector Group of Cefic, Brussels, n.d. Web. 20 May 2016.

Smith, Graham. “Chemicals in Household Items Are ‘causing Huge Increase in Cancer, Obesity and Falling Fertility'” Mail Online. Associated Newspapers, 11 May 2012. Web. 20 May 2016.

West, Larry. “Toxic Toys: Chemicals in Toys Endanger Children.” About.com News & Issues. About.com, n.d. Web. 20 May 2016.

Young, Dr. “Is Cancer in Your Tub.” Is Cancer in Your Tub. Dr. Young, 19 Jan. 2011. Web. 20 May 2016.

Marc T. Woodard, MBA, BS Exercise Science, ARNG, CPT, RET. 2016 Copyright. All rights reserved, Mirror Athlete Inc., www.mirrorathlete.org, Sign up for your Free eNewsletter.