You searched for PFAS - Amazing Health Advances

Bacteria Found to Eat Forever Chemicals & Even Some of Their Toxic Byproducts

The AHA! Team — Mon, 24 Mar 2025 05:36:09 +0000

University at Buffalo via EurekAlert! – University at Buffalo study shows that strain taken from contaminated soil breaks apart the strong carbon-fluorine bonds of PFAS, as well as some of the shorter-chain PFAS left behind In the quest to take the “forever” out of “forever chemicals,” bacteria might be our ally. Most remediation of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) involves adsorbing and trapping them, but certain microbes can actually break apart the strong chemical bonds that allow these chemicals to persist for so long in the environment. Now, a University at Buffalo-led team has identified a strain of bacteria that can break down and transform at least three types of PFAS, and, perhaps even more crucially, some of the toxic byproducts of the bond-breaking process. A strain of bacteria that can break down and transform at least three types of PFAS Published in this month’s issue of Science of the Total Environment, the team’s study found that Labrys portucalensis F11 (F11) metabolized over 90% of perfluorooctane sulfonic acid (PFOS) following an exposure period of 100 days. PFOS is one of the most frequently detected and persistent types of PFAS and was designated hazardous by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency last year. The F11 bacteria also broke down a substantial portion of two additional types of PFAS after 100 days: 58% of 5:3 fluorotelomer carboxylic acid and 21% of 6:2 fluorotelomer sulfonate. The bond between carbon and fluorine atoms in PFAS is very strong “The bond between carbon and fluorine atoms in PFAS is very strong, so most microbes cannot use it as an energy source. The F11 bacterial strain developed the ability to chop away the fluorine and eat the carbon,” says the study’s corresponding author, Diana Aga, PhD, SUNY Distinguished Professor and Henry M. Woodburn Chair in the Department of Chemistry, within the UB College of Arts and Sciences, and director of the UB RENEW Institute. Unlike many prior studies on PFAS-degrading bacteria, Aga’s study accounted for shorter-chain breakdown products — or metabolites. In some cases, F11 even removed fluorine from these metabolites or broke them down to minute, undetectable levels. “Many previous studies have only reported the degradation of PFAS, but not the formation of metabolites. We not only accounted for PFAS byproducts but found some of them continued to be further degraded by the bacteria,” says the study’s first author, Mindula Wijayahena, a PhD student in Aga’s lab. The work was supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences, part of the National Institutes of Health. Other collaborators include the Catholic University of Portugal, the University of Pittsburgh and the Waters Corp. Picky eaters learn to like PFAS PFAS are a group of ubiquitous chemicals widely used since the 1950s in everything from nonstick pans to fire-fighting materials. They’re far from the meal of choice for any bacterium, but some that live in contaminated soil have mutated to break down organic contaminants like PFAS so that they can use their carbon as an energy source. “If bacteria survive in a harsh, polluted environment, it’s probably because they have adapted to use surrounding chemical pollutants as a food source so they don’t starve,” Aga says. “Through evolution, some bacteria can develop effective mechanisms to use chemical contaminants to help them grow.” The bacterial strain used in this study, F11, was isolated from the soil of a contaminated industrial site in Portugal and had previously demonstrated the ability to strip fluorine from pharmaceutical contaminants. However, it had never been tested on PFAS. Collaborators from the Catholic University of Portugal placed F11 in sealed flasks with no carbon source aside from 10,000 micrograms per liter of PFAS. Following incubation periods of between 100 to 194 days, the samples were then shipped to UB, where analysis revealed that F11 had degraded some of the PFAS. The elevated levels of fluoride ions detected in these samples indicated that F11 had detached the PFAS’ fluorine atoms so that the bacteria could metabolize the carbon atoms. F11 was not only chopping PFOS into smaller pieces, but also removing the fluorine from those smaller pieces “The carbon-fluorine bond is what makes PFAS so difficult to break down, so to break them apart is a critical step. Crucially, F11 was not only chopping PFOS into smaller pieces, but also removing the fluorine from those smaller pieces,” Wijayahena says. Some of the metabolites left behind still contained fluorine, but after being exposed to PFOS for 194 days, F11 had even removed fluorine from three PFOS metabolites. “As a caveat, there could be other metabolites in these samples so miniscule that they elude current detection methods,” Aga says. Making PFAS a desirable menu item While UB researchers say their study is a good start, they caution that the F11 took 100 days to biodegrade a significant portion of the supplied PFAS, and there were no other carbon sources available for consumption. The team now plans to research how to encourage F11 to consume PFAS faster, even when there are competing energy choices that could increase their growth rate. “We want to investigate the impact of placing alternative carbon sources alongside the PFAS. However, if that carbon source is too abundant and easy to degrade, the bacteria may not need to touch the PFAS at all,” Aga says. “We need to give the F11 colonies enough food to grow, but not enough food that they lose the incentive to convert PFAS into a usable energy source.” Eventually, F11 could be deployed in PFAS-contaminated water and soil. This might involve creating conditions to grow the strain within activated sludge at a wastewater treatment plant, or even injecting the bacteria directly into the soil or groundwater of a contaminated site, a process called bioaugmentation. “In wastewater- activated sludge systems, you could accelerate removal of undesired compounds by adding a specific strain to the existing bacterial consortium in the treatment plants,” Aga says. “Bioaugmentation is a promising method that has not yet been explored for PFAS remediation in the environment.” Journal Science of The Total Environment DOI 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2024.178348 Method of Research To read the original article about Bacteria Found to Eat Forever Chemicals click here.

The post Bacteria Found to Eat Forever Chemicals & Even Some of Their Toxic Byproducts appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Are You Aware That You’re Inhaling Toxic Chemicals When You Wear a Face Mask?

The AHA! Team — Fri, 30 Aug 2024 08:55:30 +0000

Olivia Cook via Natural News – Wearing face masks has become a global norm following the onset of the Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, with many governments around the world often mandating these coverings for people in public. But recent research reveals concerning findings about their safety. Masks, especially surgical and reusable FFF types have been found to emit potentially harmful chemical compounds. A study published in Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety in April 2024 highlighted that masks could release up to almost 5,400 microplastic particles in 24 hours, with surgical masks emitting more than 3,150 microfibers in under an hour. Masks could release up to almost 5,400 microplastic particles in 24 hours Researchers from Germany and Switzerland reviewed 24 studies, involving more than 630 masks, including cloth, N95 and surgical varieties. They discovered that 63 percent of the masks released alarming amounts of microplastics and nanoplastics, organophosphate esters and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons compared to other mask types. (Related: N95 masks expose wearers to dangerous levels of toxic cancer- and seizure-causing compounds, study finds.) Meanwhile, surgical masks were linked to higher emissions of heavy metals, phthalates and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) similar to textile masks. Some of the detected substances, such as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS), titanium dioxide (TiO2) and VOCs, were found to exceed safe exposure limits. A 2022 study published in Nature also raised concerns about TiO2, a potential carcinogen, urging stricter regulations. Study finds plasticizers, heavy metals, PFAS and VOCs in face masks A recent study published in Environment International examined four types of face masks to identify the presence of 31 plasticizers and to assess how much of these compounds could be inhaled during use. Plasticizers are plastic-derived substances added to materials during the manufacturing process to make them softer and more flexible. Although all mask types had similar overall plasticizer levels, the study found that surgical and FFF2 masks commonly used in Europe have the highest plasticizer release rates at almost four percent and nearly five percent, respectively. The Environmental and Water Chemistry for Human Health group conducted the research at the Institute of Environmental Assessment and Water Research in Barcelona, Spain. The researchers highlighted that most face masks are made from synthetic materials, like polypropylene, polystyrene terephthalate and polyester, with plasticizers added to enhance fire resistance, flexibility and softness. Heavy metals, PFAS and VOCs were found in others. To simulate real-life mask use, the researchers conducted inhalation experiments using paper mache dummy heads. Higher temperatures – resembling human breath – led to increased release of plastic additives. Release rates varied significantly, ranging from 0.1 percent to 95 percent, depending on the compound and mask type. Notably, organophosphate esters and phthalates showed average release rates of 1.0 percent and 1.2 percent, respectively. Surgical and FFF2 masks had the highest overall release rates, while reusable masks showed the lowest at 0.6 percent. N95 masks had a 1.2 percent release rate. One concerning finding was a surgical mask that released 95 percent of a compound called acetyl tributyl citrate, a potential endocrine disruptor. Surgical and FFF2 masks had the highest overall release rates While the released plasticizer levels remained below established safety thresholds, the researchers emphasized that face masks represent an additional exposure pathway. The study warns that even at low levels, exposure to plasticizers poses genotoxic (DNA damage), immunotoxic (affects the immune system) and teratogenic (causes birth defects) risks, especially for vulnerable groups, such as children and pregnant women. Additionally, plasticizers have been linked to declining sperm counts and potential fertility issues, raising concerns about their impact on future generations. Watch the following video showing how disposable surgical face masks are made of synthetic fibers that can enter the body. This video is from the Daily Videos channel on Brighteon.com. Sources include: TheEpochTimes.com ScienceDirect.com 1 Nature.com ScienceDirect.com 2 ScienceDirect.com 3 Brighteon.com To read the original article, click here: https://www.naturalnews.com/2024-08-15-dangerous-chemicals-inhaling-when-wearing-face-masks.html

The post Are You Aware That You’re Inhaling Toxic Chemicals When You Wear a Face Mask? appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Tricks: How Brands Manipulate Lab Tests to Deceive Consumers

The AHA! Team — Thu, 22 Aug 2024 03:09:52 +0000

Patrick Tims via NaturalHealth365 – Social scientists unanimously agree that we have rapidly transitioned from a high-trust society to one where trust is nearly nonexistent. Social change, economic uncertainty, and ongoing tech disruptions have eroded trust in both institutions and individuals. If you trust brands to be honest about food, beverages, and other consumer products, it’s time to reconsider your mindset. Brands are going to great lengths to manipulate lab tests and deceive consumers. Can you trust your favorite brands? Uncovering the deception in lab reports Brands creatively manipulate studies to persuade consumers to spend their hard-earned money on dangerous and faulty products. Comparing independent lab results with those disclosed by brands reveals the true extent of the disconnect. Lab test manipulation aims to confuse consumers so that as many products as possible can be sold. Spot checks on a wide array of consumer studies have found discrepancies in test results across several product lines. Brands’ lab tests are clearly biased, while independent testing reveals the truth. Every consumer should be aware that there is no truly independent third-party test lab when a brand’s money is involved. Any study sponsored or influenced by a brand is tainted by a conflict of interest. How brands exploit detection limits to mislead consumers One tactic brands use is labeling lab reports as “non-detect,” which means that the lab did not find the substance in question at levels above a certain threshold. However, this term can be misleading. In many cases, the detection limits (the smallest amount of a substance a lab can reliably identify) used by these brand-sponsored labs are higher than those used by independent labs. This difference in detection limits causes discrepancies in the reported results, especially in measurements like parts per million (ppm) for specific particles. Brands can manipulate the detection limits so that any substance present below a certain level is reported as “non-detect.” This allows them to claim that their products are free of harmful substances, even when they are not. These “non-detect” lab reports are then used to mislead consumers about the safety and quality of their products. For example, some brands refuse to test for substances like Teflon (a brand name for a type of chemical known as PTFE) or PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), which are harmful chemicals often found in consumer products. Independent labs, on the other hand, do test for these chemicals, including fluorine, which is a marker for the presence of Teflon. Fluorine that bonds to carbon creates Teflon, a substance often associated with non-stick surfaces. To further obscure the presence of these chemicals, some brands use qualifiers like “intentionally added” to suggest that harmful substances were not deliberately included in the product. This qualifier is a way for companies to avoid full transparency about how PTFE and other harmful chemicals end up in products used by consumers. Additionally, some brands employ different testing methods that conveniently result in “non-detects,” even when the products contain harmful chemical compounds. This exploitation of detection limits and selective reporting creates a false sense of security for consumers, making it crucial to compare brand-sponsored lab results with those from independent labs. Brand testing quantity and frequency are also questionable Brands and testing labs often refuse to disclose the number of tests conducted to detect specific chemicals or components. It’s possible to test a product thousands of times and obtain a single result showing non-detect for the desired chemical or component. The brand can then legally use that single test result in its advertising, presenting it as the truth when it is far from it. Consumers remain unaware of the actual number of tests conducted to achieve the intended result. For example, in makeup testing, brands can cherry-pick samples that do not test positive for heavy metals, fluorine, or other harmful components. These selectively chosen lab results are then presented to the public as evidence of the supposed absence or near-absence of dangerous chemicals. Similar practices occur with other consumer products, such as lotions and lubricants. The moral of the story: Don’t take the brand’s word for it In today’s low-trust environment, it’s more important than ever to be skeptical of brand claims, especially when it comes to product safety and quality. Instead of accepting these claims at face value, take the time to compare them with independent lab results and unbiased product reviews. By digging deeper and questioning the information brands provide, you can make more informed decisions and protect yourself from potentially harmful products. Remember, your health and safety are worth the extra effort. Trust, but verify – and prioritize transparency and independent verification over slick marketing claims when in doubt. Sources for this article include: Mamavation.com To read the original article click here.

The post Tricks: How Brands Manipulate Lab Tests to Deceive Consumers appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Breakfast: Smoked Salmon Benedict with Olive Oil & Avocados Recipe

The AHA! Team — Wed, 05 Jun 2024 08:41:28 +0000

Dr. Don Colbert – Delicious Beyond Keto Recipe for a Strong Immune System This time of year, we all start thinking about our immune systems. How can we stay healthy for the next 6-7 months? How can we avoid sickness and boost immunity? There are a lot of ways to support your immune system, and some of them are as easy as the foods we choose each day. Our recipe today, delivers delectable flavors for a strong immune system. Eat it for breakfast, or any time of day. It’s low carb, high nutrient, and delicious. Here’s how to make this Beyond Keto recipe and why it’s time to be picky about what foods we put in our bodies. Choose healthy foods for a strong immune system! Delicious Strong Immune System Breakfast: Smoked Salmon Benedict with Olive Oil & Avocados Ingredients 2 large eggs (local, free-range, organic if possible) 1 slice Keto bread or English muffin, cut in half (optional) 1 tablespoon cream cheese (optional) 2 ounces smoked salmon (salmon lox) 2 teaspoons capers Thinly sliced red onion Fresh ground black pepper Extra Virgin Olive Oil 1/4 med avocado, sliced thin (optional) Lemon Hollandaise Sauce 2 large egg yolks (local, free-range, organic if possible) 2 tablespoons water 2 tablespoons butter 2 teaspoons fresh lemon juice A pinch of salt Instructions Start with the Hollandaise sauce: Place egg yolks and water in a small skillet. Increase heat to medium-high Hold the pan 2 inches above the heat surface and whisk the eggs until they are foamy and warm. Add the butter while still holding pan, and whisk until the mixture becomes thick. Add lemon juice and salt. Whisk to mix well. Set aside on the counter. Toast bread. Spread cream cheese on bread. Place a medium pot, filled with water on the stove over high heat. Bring to a boil. Once boiling, reduce heat to a simmer. Crack one egg and add at a time. Allow eggs to cook for 4 minutes. Remove eggs with a slotted spoon and place on bread. Pour hollandaise sauce over eggs, top with onions, capers, black pepper, and avocado. Drizzle olive oil over the entire dish. Nutrition Info (serves 1): 530 calories, 50 grams fat, 4 grams net carbs (7 grams total, 3 grams fiber), 28 grams protein Immune Boosting Breakfast Superfoods 1. Eggs Eggs provide one of the best, most bioavailable, proteins known to man. When you’re interested in boosting your immune system, it’s important to eat adequate protein. This only requires a small amount at each meal. Egg proteins also support fat metabolism, carbohydrate metabolism, the immune system, hormones, cellular growth and repair, and more (1). 2. Salmon In addition to providing great protein, salmon offers one of the most potent compounds to fight inflammation and support the immune system. The omega-3 fats in salmon are true superfood compounds. They increase the production of anti-inflammatory hormones. This in turn, relieves the immune system by reducing its reaction to inflammation. Omega-3 fats are known to support eye, brain, cardiovascular, and cellular health (2). 3. Olive Oil Extra virgin olive oil boasts a great immune-boosting compound: oleocanthal. Studies show that oleocanthal specifically contains disease-fighting antioxidants, anti-cancer compounds, anti-inflammatories, and compounds that support heart health. It is potent and reduces inflammation in similar strength to some medications, like ibuprofen (3). Additionally, it provides both antibacterial and anti-viral action (4). 4. Avocados Avocados are another anti-inflammatory food that supports your immune system. It has fats called phytosterols. Phytosterols fight inflammation associated with arthritis while avocados’ polyhydroxylated fatty alcohols (PFAs) reduce inflammation in other ways. Additionally, oleic acid supports digestive tract and brain health to directly boost the immune system (5). 5. Red Onions Red onions are a wonderful food to support your immune system. They contain antioxidants that fight cell-damaging free radicals, are antibacterial and contain anti-cancer compounds. 6. Lemon Juice Lemon juice is a good source of vitamin C, and vitamin C is a strong immune-supporting antioxidant. In addition, lemon juice contains antibacterial compounds that fight bacteria in the entire digestive tract, from mouth to intestines (6). 7. Black Pepper Black peppercorns are a humble, inexpensive, amazing superfood. They support your immune system with potent antioxidants like piperine and anti-inflammatory compounds. Black peppercorns have healthy effects and fight cellular overgrowth (7). Want More Beyond Keto Strong Immune System Tips? This is just one part of a strong immune system plan. Here are some more tips to check out: The Best Supplements to Support a Strong Immune System 15 Strong Immune System Foods How a Healthy Weight Supports a Strong Immune System 12 Easy Daily Habits for a Strong Immune System Bottom Line It’s a great time to do everything you can to have a strong immune system. Throughout your day, eat foods that support your immune system with great superfood ingredients. Try our delicious Beyond Keto breakfast (any time of day)! It will satisfy your taste buds and body with nourishing ingredients. To read the original article click here.

The post Breakfast: Smoked Salmon Benedict with Olive Oil & Avocados Recipe appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Seafood Problem: Surprising Dangers of Excessive Consumption

The AHA! Team — Fri, 17 May 2024 08:08:42 +0000

Patrick Tims via NaturalHealth365 – While seafood is well-known for its various health benefits, such as its rich omega-3 fatty acids and essential nutrients, there are risks associated with its consumption that may not be widely recognized. Recent research published in Exposure and Health reveals a significant concern: underestimating exposure to PFAS through seafood. PFAS, or per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, are synthetic chemicals found in various consumer products – and apparently in your seafood. This discovery highlights the need for further investigation and awareness regarding the potential health risks associated with high-seafood diets. Researchers’ startling discovery of PFAS in seafood The study aimed to assess seafood consumption patterns among New Hampshire residents and the associated PFAS exposure. The researchers conducted a population-based survey involving 1,829 adults and children aged 2-11 in June 2021. The survey collected data on seafood consumption frequency, portion sizes, types, and sources. After determining the most commonly consumed seafood species, the researchers purchased these species from a seafood market in Portsmouth, NH. They then analyzed the purchased seafood for 26 different PFAS compounds to quantify their presence. The researchers calculated hazard quotients for PFAS compounds with available health guidance values to assess the potential health risk posed by seafood consumption. Key findings from the study include: Among adults, 95% reported consuming seafood within the last year, with shrimp, haddock, salmon, and canned tuna being the most frequently consumed types. Based on consumption frequencies and meal sizes, the researchers estimated daily seafood consumption rates for adults (median: 33.9 g/day) and children (median: 5.0 g/day), which were somewhat higher than national estimates for the Northeastern US. PFAS were detected in shrimp and lobster purchased from the local market, with median concentrations ranging from below the detection limit to 1.74 ng/g for shrimp and 3.30 ng/g for lobster. Hazard quotients suggested that high seafood consumers may be exposed to PFAS concentrations that potentially pose a health risk. Is your favorite seafood safe from PFAS contamination? The plight of shellfish living along the seafloor is tragic as they become the unwitting carriers of higher PFAS levels. These contaminants are then ingested by larger fish like salmon and tuna, endangering our favorite seafood choices. The presence of PFAS in our seafood not only raises alarm about its safety but also serves as a stark reminder of the broader issue of environmental contamination. It’s a call to action for stronger regulations to shield our food supply from harmful chemicals, urging us to advocate for sustainable fishing practices and rigorous monitoring of seafood safety standards to safeguard public health. Protect your health by minimizing PFAS exposure In the battle to minimize exposure to PFAS, it’s crucial to recognize that while it may be impossible to completely eliminate these chemicals from seafood and consumer products, there’s hope for change. Public health guidelines need to be revamped to reduce PFAS exposure, especially in coastal areas like New England, where industries have contaminated countless fish with these “forever chemicals.” While avoiding seafood altogether is an option, it would leave a significant gap in essential lean protein and omega-3 fatty acids, which are crucial for human health. As a consumer, you can take steps to minimize PFAS exposure. For instance, avoid freshwater fish, especially those caught in or near urban areas where PFAS are prevalent. Additionally, opt for alternatives to nonstick cookware, as they often contain PFAS. Transitioning to ceramic pots and pans can significantly reduce PFAS exposure while still allowing for efficient cooking. While it may not be practical to create your own backyard pond stocked with untainted fish, you have the power to make informed choices that protect your health and the environment. Sources for this article include: Link.springer.com Medicalxpress.com To read the original article click here.

The post Seafood Problem: Surprising Dangers of Excessive Consumption appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Toxic PFAS Detected: Band-Aid and Other Brands Under Scrutiny

The AHA! Team — Thu, 09 May 2024 20:06:31 +0000

Patrick Tims via NaturalHealth365 – Prepare for an eye-opening insight into the world of first aid. The very bandages we depend on to heal wounds may harbor a concerning (toxic) secret. Recent investigations have brought Band-Aid and other leading brands under scrutiny, revealing the presence of toxic PFAS chemicals. PFAS, known as per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances, have been used for decades in commercial products for their stain-resistant, oil-resistant, grease-resistant, and water-resistant properties. These synthetic compounds, which have been present in consumer products since the 1950s, raise significant questions about potential health implications. PFAS are in more than two dozen commonly used bandages The bandage analysis was conducted at a lab certified by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to the findings, 26 out of 40 tested bandages showed organic fluorine levels above 10 parts per million (ppm). Furthermore, among bandages marketed for black and brown skin tones, 63% exhibited traces of PFAS “forever chemicals,” with 10 out of 16 tested bandages surpassing the 10 ppm threshold. The detected ranges of organic fluorine, serving as an indicator for PFAS, varied from 11 ppm to 328 ppm. Bandages containing PFAS are problematic because they are placed on top of open wounds, which allows for direct entry into the bloodstream. However, bandage makers have not taken steps to remove PFAS from bandages in response to calls for materials without PFAS. Organic fluorine is a threat to the body’s immune system The presence of organic fluorine in the referenced bandages signals the existence of “forever chemicals,” scientifically proven to diminish immune system function and impair cognitive abilities. Furthermore, these chemicals disrupt the body’s endocrine system, leading to unhealthy hormonal responses, and are linked to reduced fertility and increased cancer risk. Researchers from North Carolina State University’s Center for Environmental & Health Effects of PFAS highlight fluoropolymers as a common type of PFAS contributing to bandage toxicity. PFAS can also be found in other consumer products such as dental floss, fast food packaging, deodorant, and contact lenses. Notably, 3M, the manufacturer of Sticky Notes, has announced plans to discontinue the use of PFAS in its products by the end of next year. Scientists are not completely clear as to whether topical exposure to PFAS is at the same risk level as other forms of exposure. However, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health has determined topical PFAS exposure is as dangerous as ingestion through water or food. According to Mamavation, PFAS have been found in popular bandages such as the aforementioned Band-Aid and those made by CVS Health and Equate. However, there are some bandages on the market, including those made by Tru Colour and 3M, that do not contain organic fluorine. Of the 18 brands analyzed, 65% contained harmful chemicals. Aside from the aforementioned Band-Aid brand bandages, the following brands’ bandages also contain organic fluorine: Equate First Honey Manuka CVS Health Care Science Curad Assorted Rite Aid First UP & UP Solimo (Amazon) Bypass the bandage brands listed above in favor of safer and healthier brands, including: Dry See Thin Dealmed Flexible Browndages Rite Aid Smart-Flex Sterile bandages Each of these safer bandages has fewer than 100 ppm of organic fluorine, meaning they pose minimal threat to human health. The cream of the crop with zero organic fluorine includes 3M Micropore, FEBU organic bamboo, Tru Colour, Trutone, Welly, and Patch Bamboo. Sources for this article include: Childrenshealthdefense.org Mamavation.com To read the original article click here.

The post Toxic PFAS Detected: Band-Aid and Other Brands Under Scrutiny appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Gut Flora Disruption in Infancy Linked to Autism & ADHD

The AHA! Team — Thu, 09 May 2024 20:05:19 +0000

Linköping University via News-Medical – Disturbed gut flora during the first years of life is associated with diagnoses such as autism and ADHD later in life. This is according to a study led by researchers at the University of Florida and Linköping University and published in the journal Cell. The study is the first forward-looking, or prospective, study to examine gut flora composition and a large variety of other factors in infants, in relation to the development of the children’s nervous system. The researchers have found many biological markers that seem to be associated with future neurological development disorders, such as autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, communication disorder and intellectual disability. “The remarkable aspect of the work is that these biomarkers are found at birth in cord blood or in the child’s stool at one year of age over a decade prior to the diagnosis,” says Eric W Triplett, professor at the Department of Microbiology and Cell Science at the University of Florida, USA, one of the researchers who led the study. 16,000 children born in 1997-1999, representing the general population, have been followed from birth into their twenties The study is part of the ABIS (All Babies in Southeast Sweden) study led by Johnny Ludvigsson at Linköping University. More than 16,000 children born in 1997-1999, representing the general population, have been followed from birth into their twenties. Of these, 1,197 children, corresponding to 7.3 percent, have been diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder, ADHD, communication disorder or intellectual disability. A large number of lifestyle and environmental factors have been identified through surveys conducted on several occasions during the children’s upbringing. For some of the children, the researchers have analysed substances in umbilical cord blood and bacteria in their stool at the age of one. “We can see in the study that there are clear differences in the intestinal flora already during the first year of life between those who develop autism or ADHD and those who don’t. We’ve found associations with some factors that affect gut bacteria, such as antibiotic treatment during the child’s first year, which is linked to an increased risk of these diseases,” says Johnny Ludvigsson, senior professor at the Department of Biomedical and Clinical Sciences at Linköping University, who led the study together with Eric W. Triplett. Children who had repeated ear infections during their first year of life had an increased risk of being diagnosed with a developmental neurological disorder later in life. It is probably not the infection itself that is the culprit, but the researchers suspect a link to antibiotic treatment. They found that the presence of Citrobacter bacteria or the absence of Coprococcus bacteria increased the risk of future diagnosis. One possible explanation may be that antibiotic treatment has disturbed the composition of the gut flora One possible explanation may be that antibiotic treatment has disturbed the composition of the gut flora in a way that contributes to neurodevelopmental disorders. The risk of antibiotic treatment damaging the gut flora and increasing the risk of diseases linked to the immune system, such as type 1 diabetes and childhood rheumatism, has been shown in previous studies. “Coprococcus and Akkermansia muciniphila have potential protective effects. These bacteria were correlated with important substances in the stool, such as vitamin B and precursors to neurotransmitters which play vital roles orchestrating signaling in the brain. Overall, we saw deficits in these bacteria in children who later received a developmental neurological diagnosis.” -Angelica Ahrens, Assistant Scientist in Eric Triplett’s research group at the University of Florida and first author of the study The present study also confirms that the risk of developmental neurological diagnosis in the child increases if the parents smoke. Conversely, breastfeeding has a protective effect, according to the study. In cord blood taken at the birth of children, the researchers analysed the amounts of various substances from the body’s metabolism, such as fatty acids and amino acids. They also measured some harmful substances that come from outside, such as nicotine and environmental toxins. They compared substances in the umbilical cord blood of 27 children diagnosed with autism with the same number of children without a diagnosis. Children who were later diagnosed had low levels of several important fats in the umbilical cord blood It turned out that children who were later diagnosed had low levels of several important fats in the umbilical cord blood. One of these was linolenic acid, which is needed for the formation of omega 3 fatty acids that are anti-inflammatory and have several other effects in the brain. The same group also had higher levels than the control group of a PFAS substance, a group of substances used as flame retardants and shown to negatively affect the immune system in several different ways. PFAS substances can enter the body via drinking water, food and the air we breathe. It is not certain that the relationships that the research team found in the Swedish children can be generalised to other populations, but these issues need to be studied in other groups as well. Another question is whether gut flora imbalance is a triggering factor or whether it has occurred as a result of underlying factors, such as diet or antibiotics. However, even when the researchers accounted for risk factors that might affect the gut flora, they found that the link between future diagnosis remained for many of the bacteria. This indicates that some of the differences in gut flora between children with and without future diagnosis are not explained by such risk factors. The research is at an early stage and more studies are needed, but the discovery that many biomarkers for future developmental neurological disorders can be observed at an early age opens up the possibility of developing screening protocols and preventive measures in the long term. The study has been funded with support from, among others, JDRF, Horizon Europe, Barndiabetesfonden (the Swedish Child Diabetes Foundation), Forte and the Swedish Research Council. Source: Linköping University Journal reference: Ahrens, A. P., et al. (2024). Infant microbes and metabolites point to childhood neurodevelopmental disorders. Cell. doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2024.02.035. To read the original article click here.

The post Gut Flora Disruption in Infancy Linked to Autism & ADHD appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

Can ‘Forever Chemicals’ Be Destroyed? Promising Research Says Perhaps!

AHA Publisher — Fri, 04 Nov 2022 07:00:15 +0000

Leah Zerbe, MS, NASM-CPT, NASM-CES via Dr. Axe – A new analysis by Consumer Reports found that toxic “forever chemicals” still lurk in supermarket and fast food containers, despite mounting public health outcries to remove it. Used for its grease-proof properties, food packaging like paper wrappings and cardboard boxes are often coated with the nonstick chemical to keep it from seeping through and getting on your hands and clothing. That may sound like a good thing at first glance, but it readily migrates into food, and there’s now plenty of evidence linking this chemical class to a host of health woes. The Consumer Reports update is the latest evidence showing that this “unbreakable” chemical is ubiquitous — it’s even found in burger wrappers and salad bowls! Other recent reports show that “forever chemicals” linked to immune system damage, cancer, liver damage, decreased fertility and thyroid disruption are routinely detected in everyday products like yoga pants, bedding, tablecloths and more, too. The worst part of all of this is that this chemical application really isn’t necessary in the first place. And it’s so widespread that, today, PFAS contamination is found inside most of us, too. However, there is some good news. Researchers have found that a common ingredient in soap may help destroy these dangerous “forever chemicals.” According to Science: Researchers led by William Dichtel and Brittany Trang, chemists at Northwestern University, studied numerous recipes involving DMSO. One combined a little bit of the solvent with sodium hydroxide, a common component of soap, in water. When the team heated the mix to boiling temperature, it readily degraded one of the largest subsets of PFAS compounds. The researchers noted it does not work for all PFAS but does for some. What Are Forever Chemicals? Types of forever chemicals are known as PFAS. They are per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances with the following properties: water-resistance heat-resistance oil-resistance Even the American Chemistry Society admits: “The chemistry that makes them so useful also makes them stick around in the environment and in us — and that could be a bad thing.” PFAS are used commonly in: fire-fighting foams rain coats shoes and boots nonstick cookware stain-proof carpeting and clothing fast-food packaging (which means there are forever chemicals in food) Due to their persistence and widespread use, forever chemicals are now also a tap water toxicity problem. Just like phthalates, another widespread chemical group, it seems PFAS started off as a good thing, but without proper testing for long-term impacts on human and environmental health, we unleashed a monster. Test Findings Consumer Reports tested more than 100 food packaging products from restaurant and grocery chains. PFAS contamination was detected in at least some packaging from every single chain tested. The dangerous grease-proof chemical turned up in things like: French fry cartons and bags Molded fiber salad bowls Sandwich wrappers Paper bags for chips Single-use paper plates And more Even companies that have vowed to eliminate PFAS wrappers tested positive at low levels, likely because the “forever chemical” is widespread in the environment now and contamination is inevitable. PFAS contamination is in the air, water, soil (and inside of us!) due to sending it to landfills, incinerating it (often in Black and Brown neighborhoods, which is an environmental justice issue), and runoff pollution that winds up in crops. Working within the U.S.’s weak chemical regulation system also means that industry is always several steps ahead of public policy. “Trying to ban individual PFAS is an impossible game of whack-a-mole. As soon as one is addressed, industry comes up with another.” Brian Ronholm, Consumer Reports Separate testing by Toxic-Free Future also delivered some key findings recently, including: Out of the “stain-” or “water-resistant” products tested, 72% tested positive for PFAS. These included hiking pants, mattress pads, comforters, rain jackets, tablecloths and napkins. At least one product from each of the 10 retailers tested contained PFAS. Manufacturers are using a mixture of PFAS that includes compounds banned in other countries. Alternatives to PFAS for stain and water resistance are in use. Toxic-Free Future items marketed as stain- and/or water-resistant were free of PFAS. A separate PFAS investigation from Environmental Health News and Mamavation found: Evidence of PFAS in women’s sportswear like yoga pants from popular brands, including Old Navy and Lululemon. 25 percent of the activewear tested positive in an EPA-certified lab for indications of PFAS. Workout leggings and yoga pants tested positive, including brands from Old Navy and Lululemon. Why Are They Dangerous? PFAS chemicals are linked to: Harm to the immune system Reduced vaccine efficacy Reproductive system damage Reduced fertility Lower birth weight Increased risk of certain cancers Metabolism problems Weight gain Impaired healthy cholesterol levels How to Avoid Them If you’re wondering how to avoid forever chemicals, the answer is it’s virtually impossible at this time. Today, PFAS chemicals are even detected in groundwater, tap water, rain water and even the air. They’ve traveled around the atmosphere and rained down on even our most primitive locations all over the planet. It’s no wonder they’re inside of most of us, too. “These toxic chemicals are so ubiquitous that it’s now literally raining PFAS,” said Scott Faber, Environmental Working Group’s senior vice president for government affairs. “While we’re heartened that the Biden administration and the EPA continue to make PFAS a priority, to truly tackle this national PFAS pollution crisis, we need a whole-of-government approach that includes the Department of Defense, the Food and Drug Administration and the Federal Aviation Administration.” Sign here to tell Congress to stop the PFAS contamination crisis. Limit meals of takeout food. If you do get takeout, transfer it out of the packaging as soon as possible. Tell companies like REI to ban the use of PFAS. Avoid nonstick cookware. Opt for PFAS-free outerwear from companies like Patagonia. Check your municipal water tests for PFAS contamination, and form a community group to pressure decision-makers to clean up the problem. Avoid anything labeled as “stain-proof” or “water-proof” unless you can verify the manufacturer used a safer, PFAS-free alternative. Conclusion There are more than 9,000 forever chemicals out there. They are so widespread that 99% of Americans contain PFAS inside of their bodies. Studies show PFAS exposure may cause thyroid issues, weight gain and certain cancers, and high cholesterol is linked to PFAS exposure as well. Watch out for “stain-proof” and “waterproof” claims. Some yoga pants, mattress pads and comforters tested positive. You can do your best to avoid PFAS chemicals, but public health experts say we need stronger laws and a nationwide plan to deal with PFAS pollution. Use this guide for more information on how to protect yourself from this widespread pollution. To read the original article click here.

The post Can ‘Forever Chemicals’ Be Destroyed? Promising Research Says Perhaps! appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.

3 Ways BIG AG Is Poisoning Our Food Supply

AHA Publisher — Fri, 07 Oct 2022 07:00:29 +0000

Patrick Tims via NaturalHealth365 – Big agriculture is in the spotlight now that the public is learning about how the industry’s cost-cutting ways have resulted in unhealthy food with minimal nutrients, empty calories, and addictive ingredients. It wasn’t long ago when the fruits and vegetables available in local stores were chock-full of vitamins and minerals. Nowadays, the majority of the produce we consume is grown with harmful pesticides. Big Agriculture tech has improved, yet cancer and diseases are still prevalent, creating a progress paradox in desperate need of our collective attention. Today’s toxic food stems from how plants are grown, focusing on phosphate fertilizer. However, consumers are busy to the point that they cannot keep track of Big Agriculture’s practices. So here are the dirty details on the state of the world’s food industry. Phosphate Fertilizer Contains Radioactive Element, Raising Question About Food Safety Though few are aware of it, phosphate fertilizer used by Big Agriculture is slightly radioactive due to its unique component referred to as polonium-210. The problem with using even a small amount of this radioactive element is that it has the potential to be absorbed by the plants we depend on for sustenance and continued health. Rewind to 2015, glyphosate used within the aforementioned fertilizer was formally labeled as a human carcinogen. Glyphosate is tied to many health issues, including damage to the internal organs over time and even cancer. Though the scientific and medical communities are not completely certain phosphate directly causes cancer, it is clear that it is a toxic component that Big Agriculture must address in due time. Industrial Waste, Heavy Metals in Biosolids Linked to Cancer, Organ Damage The word “biosolids” (sewage sludge) certainly sounds intimidating, yet their toxic components are not as complex as they appear on their surface. The fertilizer used to grow crops contains PFAS chemicals. Such chemicals are much more likely to cause health problems, including issues with the thyroid, liver, and other internal organs. Crops serve as the conduit between the toxic components and the consumer, ultimately compromising the human body as time progresses. If BIG AG is going to re-establish a rapport with the public, it will have to address the use of toxic sludge for crop growth in the near future. Unfortunately, industry heads haven’t shown a willingness to alter their ways, meaning toxic sludge will be used to grow the food we need for sustenance until consumers and/or food industry regulators take action. Weed Killer Causes DNA and Pineal Gland Damage and More Though it might be hard to believe, the glyphosate used by farmers and others in the agricultural industry to inhibit weed growth has the potential to cause DNA damage and possibly even damage to the acorn-shaped pineal gland in the center of the brain that might one day be revealed as the spiritual center of the human body. Damage to the pineal gland is tied to neurological problems and gut dysbiosis, diseases ranging from Parkinson’s to anxiety, depression, and even autism. Pineal gland damage might also catalyze the release of a hormone that stimulates the thyroid, potentially setting the stage for hypothyroidism to develop across the aging process. The answer to this quandary is simple: consumers should consider boycotting Big Agriculture in favor of smaller, local farmers who grow organic crops without weed killers and other chemical-laden products. Alternatively, federal regulators could ramp up regulations on Big Agriculture, forcing the industry to clean up its practices and grow healthy and nutritious food that advances the greater good as opposed to corporate profits. Sources for this article include: Citeseerx.ist.psu.edu ChildrensHealthDefense.org To read the original article click here.

The post 3 Ways BIG AG Is Poisoning Our Food Supply appeared first on Amazing Health Advances.