The Survive and Thrive Boomer Guide

Eating organic food for a week can reduce pesticide levels in the body, study shows

I’m a big proponent of organic foods. My dad, Minor H. Slingsby, died of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. He was a farmer. I didn’t know non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma was linked to pesticide exposure when my dad was diagnosed with the disease. None of his doctors in Central Washington state said anything about it. I learned about the connection when listening to a National Public Radio story. It said the children of farmworkers were being diagnosed with high levels of non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma because they were in fields sprayed with pesticides with their parents.

I buy most of my food at my local food co-op, with as much as possible of it being organic. I have immune system problems, so organic food is helpful to me.

This recent study adds to the evidence of how organic food benefits people.

A study done at the University of California found that eating organically-grown food for one week can significantly reduce the levels of pesticide in the body. Researchers found the levels of toxins decreased by an average of 60.5 percent after six days of eating organic food.

USDA rule speeding up pork lines and reducing inspectors should be set aside, consumer group and union argue

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s rule lifting the lid on line speeds and reducing the number of government safety inspectors by 40 percent at pork slaughter and processing plants should be set aside, lawyers from Public Citizen and United Food and Commercial Workers said in a lawsuit filed Monday in federal court.

Thousands of commenters told the USDA during the rulemaking process that the rule would endanger the lives and safety of consumers and workers. Comments also offered dozens of peer-reviewed studies and expert analyses showing that the USDA’s changes would put plant workers, who already are in one of the most dangerous jobs in America, at increased risk of injuries.

In its final rule, the USDA didn’t dispute this evidence. Instead, the agency refused to consider the impact of its actions on worker safety, despite having considered it in the past, and said that the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration should consider worker injuries instead.

How the meat industry pressures federal regulators for less inspection, which compromises the safety of the food supply – Part 3

This is the third article in a three-part series on meat inspection. Part 1 reports on tours I took of two beef facilities, a slaughterhouse and a meat processing plant. Part 2 includes interviews with those who favor and oppose new USDA inspection procedures and proposals that reduce the amount of inspection from federal meat inspectors. The articles were written when I was a consumer food columnist for The Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Washington. The articles were rejected by newspaper editors and never published.

It was a huge surprise this spring when I read articles that the Trump administration was proposing rules for pig slaughter that would speed up production lines, giving less time to spot contamination, and permit pork processing plants to operate with fewer federal inspectors, putting more of the responsibility to ensure food safety on the companies themselves.

These were among proposals made under the Reagan administration in 1984 to cut costs that I wrote about.

How the meat industry pressures federal regulators for less inspection, which compromises the safety of the food supply – Part 2

This is the second article in a three-part series on meat inspection. The article was written in 1984 and submitted to The Spokesman-Review in Spokane, Washington, where I worked as a consumer food columnist, but it was never published. I’m posting the article on my blog to show that the meat industry has been pressuring federal regulators for decades to reduce inspection by government inspectors.

Article 1 in the series, “How the Meat Industry Pressures Federal Regulators for Less Inspection, Which Compromises the Safety of the Food Supply – Part 1,” describes my tours of Washington Beef’s slaughterhouse in Toppenish and processing plant in Union Gap.

Article 2 includes interviews with those who favor and oppose the new USDA inspection procedures.

Consumer Reports replies to Impossible Foods’ criticism of its article on the company’s beef substitute burger

Photo: Sarah Stierch

On Monday, I went with a group of colleagues to a local restaurant for a meeting. The menu said you could get an Impossible Burger for $2 more in any of its burger options. Knowing I was going to post the Consumer Reports reply to Impossible Foods’s article about them, I wanted to try one. However, I was told the Impossible burger wasn’t available. The company hasn’t been able to keep up with production to meet all the new demand. Disappointing.

Here’s the Consumer Reports statement on Impossible Foods’ beef with its critique:

In response to Consumer Reports’ recent article “Meat Gets A Makeover” focusing on plant-based alternatives to traditional beef burgers, Rachel Konrad – Impossible Foods’ PR chief – published an inflammatory and misleading attack on the motivations and methods behind our coverage of the safety of a key ingredient in the Impossible Burger. Oddly enough, she seems out for blood about an article that very fairly compares several plant-based alternatives based on taste, safety, and environmental impact.

Don’t eat undercooked beef or soft cheeses made from raw milk, consumer group advises, because inspection laws allow meat and poultry contaminated with salmonella to be sold to the public

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention issued a report Thursday describing an ongoing investigation into an outbreak of illnesses caused by a multi-drug resistant strain of Salmonella Newport. Between June 2018 and March 2019, the CDC identified 255 cases in 32 U.S. states, which resulted in at least 60 hospitalizations and two deaths. The investigation is continuing, and agencies are recommending that consumers avoid undercooked beef and soft cheeses made with raw milk.

Consumer advocates are concerned that the outbreak may spread, because food safety regulators continue to allow companies to sell beef contaminated with the strain of Salmonella Newport in the outbreak, said Thomas Gremillion, director of food policy at the Consumer Federation of America.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Safety Inspection Service has detected the outbreak strain, or “closely related” strains, in three samples at one or more Texas slaughter and processing facilities. However, under current regulations, the agency doesn’t consider beef containing these pathogens to be adulterated, or prohibit it from being sold to consumers.

Algae contaminating the nations lakes, rivers, but little is being done to protect the public, environmental group says

Federal and state tests have found dangerous toxins, common in outbreaks of blue-green algae, in hundreds of lakes, rivers, and other bodies of water nationwide. However, little is being done to notify and protect Americans, according to an analysis from the Environmental Working Group.

Algae blooms often are triggered by agricultural chemicals that run off fields into bodies of water. The “algae,” photosynthetic microorganisms, are not all toxic. However, some of these bacteria produce poisonous chemicals called cyanotoxins, including those known as microcystins. 

“The bottom line is, if you test for microcystins, you’ll probably find them,” said Soren Rundquist, EWG’s director of spatial analysis. “Hundreds of lakes and other resources Americans rely on for tap water and recreation are contaminated – sometimes even when there is no visible toxic algae bloom.”

States sue EPA over pesticide that harms children

Six state attorneys general filed a lawsuit Wednesday in federal court against the Trump administration’s Environmental Protection Agency for continuing to allow chlorpyrifos, a pesticide that harms children’s neurological development, to be used on food. The states are challenging the EPA’s decision, because it hasn’t made a determination, as is required by law, that the pesticide is safe.

“Chlorpyrifos is extremely dangerous, especially to the health of our children,” said New York Attorney General Letitia James. “Yet, the Trump Administration continues to ignore both the science and law, by allowing this toxic pesticide to contaminate food at unsafe levels. If the Trump EPA won’t do its job and protect the health and safety of New Yorkers, my office will take them to court and force them to fulfill their responsibilities.”

Scientific evidence shows that even small doses of chlorpyrifos can damage parts of the brain that control language, memory, behavior, and emotion. Studies have found that exposure to chlorpyrifos impairs children’s IQs.

How government regulations help consumers

Conservatives rail against government regulations, and the Trump administration is doing its best every day to cut government regulations that corporations hate.

However, government regulations help consumers. A report by the Coalition for Sensible Safeguards lists 10 worker, health, safety, and transportation standards that could help consumers this summer.

“Summer is supposed to be when we take time off from work to spend with family and friends, enjoy picnics, barbeques and cookouts, lay out by the pool, head to the beach, take road trips across the country or fly to far-flung places,” the report says. “But what happens if you’ve been deprived of the wages needed to take time off or travel, if road trips, flights and tour boats are potentially dangerous, if it’s way too hot to work or play outside, and there’s a good chance the food and water may be hazardous to your health? Suddenly, summertime looks less like a dreamy vacation and more like a scorching hot nightmare.”

The regulations discussed in the report are:

Plan to relocate USDA research agencies opposed by food safety groups

Members of the Safe Food Coalition are asking Congress to stop the efforts to diminish the impact of key research agencies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, including moving two of them out of Washington, D.C.

The USDA has announcement of a list of finalists for the proposed relocation of the Economic Research Service or ERS and the National Institute of Food and Agriculture or NIFA.

The Trump Administration has repeatedly proposed dramatic budget cuts to research budgets for the two USDA research agencies. The president’s 2020 budget eliminates the entire ERS budget for food safety research, which was $2.1 million. Congress, however, has maintained its funding for ERS’ agricultural and food safety research, and it continues to support NIFA’s research agenda.