Saturday, April 30, 2016

Farmed Salmon — One of the Most Toxic Foods in the World?

An Inside Look Into the Fish Industry Reveals Disturbing Facts That Could Threaten Your Health

April 30, 2016 | 


By Dr. Mercola
Nicolas Daniel’s documentary “Fillet-Oh-Fish” takes a critical look at the fish industry, featuring exclusive footage from fish farms and factories across the globe. Many still have a rather romanticized view of fishing, but when it comes to large-scale food production, the picture is actually rather grim.
Today’s fisheries are faced with a range of severe problems, from overfishing to chemical pollution and genetic mutation from toxic exposures. As noted by the producers of the film, “through intensive farming and global pollution, the flesh of the fish we eat has turned into a deadly chemical cocktail.”1
Despite that, the fish business is booming, in part due to efforts to keep the dirty underbelly of modern fisheries from public sight.Aquaculture promotes itself as a sustainable solution to overfishing. But in reality, fish farms actually cause more problems than they solve. There’s really little difference, in terms of environmental pollution, between land-based feedlots and water-based ones.

Farmed Salmon — One of the Most Toxic Foods in the World?

The film starts off in Norway, looking at the chemicals used in fish farms. Kurt Oddekalv is a respected Norwegian environmental activist, and he believes salmon farming is a disaster both for the environment and for human health.
Below the salmon farms dotted across the Norwegian fjords, there’s a layer of waste some 15 meters high, teeming with bacteria, drugs, and pesticides. In short, the entire sea floor has been destroyed, and since the farms are located in open water, the pollution from these farms is in no way contained.
A salmon farm can hold upwards of 2 million salmon in a relatively small amount of space. These crowded conditions result in disease, which spreads rapidly among the stressed salmon.
According to Oddekalv, sea lice, Pancreas Disease(PD)2 and Infectious Salmon Anemia Virus (ISA) have spread all across Norway, yet consumers are not informed of these fish pandemics, and sale of these diseased fish continue unabated.
A number of dangerous pesticides are used in an effort to stave off disease-causing pests, one of which is known to have neurotoxic effects. Fish has always been considered a health food, but according to Oddekalv, today’s farmed salmon is one of the most toxic foods in the world!
Toxicology researcher Jerome Ruzzin has confirmed Oddekalv’s claims. He’s tested a number of different food groups sold in Norway for toxins, and indeed, farmed salmon contains the greatest amount of toxins of them all, and by an incredibly large margin.
Overall, farmed salmon is five times more toxic than any other food product tested. In animal feeding studies, mice fed farmed salmon grew obese, with thick layers of fat around their internal organs. They also developed diabetes.
Ruzzin notes that a theory gaining traction is that rising rates of obesity is related to the increasing number of toxins and pollutants we’re exposed to through our environment and food. In light of his own studies, Ruzzin has stopped eating farmed salmon.

Genetic Mutations and Other Crazy Facts

Besides keeping pests like sea lice in check, the pesticides used also affect the fish’s DNA, causing genetic mutations. Disturbing examples of deformed cod are shown in the film.
What’s even more disturbing is that, according to Oddekalv, about 50 percent of farmed cod are deformed in this fashion, and female cod that escape from farms are known to mate with wild cod, spreading the genetic mutations and deformities into the wild population.
Farmed salmon suffer less visible but equally disturbing mutations. The flesh of the farmed salmon is “brittle,” and breaks apart when bent — a highly abnormal feature.
The nutritional content is also wildly abnormal. Wild salmon contains about 5 to 7 percent fat, whereas the farmed variety can contain anywhere from 14.5 to 34 percent.
Many toxins accumulate most readily in fat, which means even when raised in similarly contaminated conditions, farmed salmon will contain far more toxins than wild.
Shockingly, research reveals that the most significant source of toxic exposure is not actually the pesticides or the antibiotics, but the dry pellet feed! Pollutants found in the fish feed include dioxins, PCBs, and a number of different drugs and chemicals.

What Makes the Fish Feed so Toxic?

So what’s wrong with the fish feed? Why is it so toxic? In one Norwegian fish pellet plant, the main ingredient turns out to be eel, used for their high protein and fat content, and other fatty fish from the Baltic Sea.
That’s where the problem begins, as the Baltic is highly polluted. Some of the fish used have toxic levels of pollutants, which then simply get incorporated into the feed pellets.
In Sweden, fish mongers are now required to warn patrons about the potential toxicity of Baltic fish. According to government recommendations, you should not eat fatty fish like herring more than once a week, and if you’re pregnant, fish from the Baltic should be avoided altogether.
Swedish Greenpeace activist Jan Isakson reveals some of the sources of all this pollution. Just outside of Stockholm, there’s a massive paper mill on the bank of the Baltic that generates toxic dioxins.
Nine other industrialized countries surrounding the Baltic Sea also dump their toxic waste into this closed body of water. Dioxins bind to fat, which is why herring, eel, and salmon are particularly vulnerable, and end up accumulating higher amounts than other fish.
As a result of being deemed unfit for human consumption, some of these fatty fish are now primarily used as fish food. In this way, toxicity in the farmed salmon is allowed to build up even higher than in the wild.

One of the Best Kept and Most Dangerous Secrets of the Fish Industry

But there’s yet another problem, and it stems from the manufacturing process of the pellets. The fatty fish are first cooked, resulting in two separate products: protein meal and oil. While the oil has high levels of dioxins and PCBs, the protein powder further adds to the toxicity of the end product.
To the protein powder, they add an “antioxidant” called ethoxyquin. According to the filmmaker, this is one of the best kept secrets of the fish food industry. Ethoxyquin was developed by Monsanto in the 1950s — as a pesticide. Its use is strictly regulated, so why is it being added to fish pellets?
A couple of years ago, a Swiss anti-fraud laboratory was surprised to find extremely high levels of ethoxyquin in farmed fish — some 10 to 20 times higher than the 50 mcg per kilo allowed in food in the European Union — and that discovery began to unravel the secret. Ethoxyquin was designed for use on fruits and vegetables, but the fish feed industry discovered another novel use for it — they add it to the feed to prevent the fats from oxidizing and going rancid.
However, the fish feed manufacturers never informed health authorities of their use of the chemical. As a result, the EU strictly regulates ethoxyquin levels in fruits, vegetables, and meat — there are even standards for kangaroos and reptiles — but not for the fish people consume. What’s more, the effects of this chemical on human health have never been established.
The one and only study ever done on ethoxyquin and human health was a thesis by Victoria Bohne, Ph.D. a former researcher in Norway who made a number of disturbing discoveries, including the fact that ethoxyquin can cross the blood brain barrier, and may have carcinogenic effects. Bohne, as many other researchers who have made unpopular findings, was pressured to leave her research job after attempts were made to falsify and downplay her findings.
Others have linked the secret use of ethoxyquin in Norwegian fish farming, and the lack of scientific investigation into its effects, to the Norwegian Minister of Fisheries and Coastal Affairs, Lisbeth Berg-Hansen, who also happens to be a major shareholder in a commercial salmon farm, and has held many high-ranking positions within the fishing industry.

The Rise of Panga Exploited Fish Consumption

In France, fish consumption has more than doubled in the past five decades, now surpassing consumption of both beef and chicken. To meet demand, fish is being imported from around the globe. Rarely will you find a fish caught off the coast of France. Nearly half of all fish sold in France is raised in fish farms. Lesser known and less expensive species have also been brought to market.
Panga, which is now one of the 10 most consumed fish in France, was relatively unknown a decade ago. Its low price has also made panga a top seller in the school system. The questions asked in the film are, how can this farmed fish be sold at such low prices, and what’s actually in these fish that children are now eating on a regular basis?
The investigation begins in southern Vietnam, where panga is part of the culinary tradition. However, behind this cultural image, there’s a more disturbing reality. Over the past 15 years, panga exports have become a major source of income for the region. In fact, 95 percent of the global production of panga comes from southern Vietnam, and this success has resulted in both environmental and human exploitation.
Farmed panga grow twice to four times as fast compared to those in the wild, allowing them to reach adult size in about six months. The fish are then harvested and processed, which includes washing the fillets in big vats filled with water and polyphosphates — chemical additives that facilitate freezing.
The chemical also allows the fish to soak up water, which artificially increases their weight. After this process, the fish lack both taste and odor, and will take on the flavor of whatever spices you add to it during cooking.

Environmental Pollution Poses Risks

Many panga farms are plagued with disease, courtesy of the polluted waters in which they’re raised. Mekong River, where many panga farms are located, is one of the most heavily polluted rivers in the world. In 2009, the World Wide Fund for Nature placed panga on their “red” list of products that pose a danger to environmental and human health.
Millions of Vietnamese households dump their waste directly into the Mekong River each day. Pesticides used in rice cultivation also migrate into this waterway. Green algae and bacteria release toxins into the water and reduce oxygen levels in the water, which adds further stress on the fish’s immune systems, making them more prone to disease.
To address disease, farmers add industrial quantities of drugs into their fish ponds, including a wide array of antibiotics. The side effect is drug resistance, which forces the farmers to keep increasing the dosages. The panga are not the only thing affected by this strategy, of course. Antibiotics spread through the river systems, are absorbed into the fish’s tissues and excreted through feces, which redistributes the drugs into the environment — and to those who eat the fish.

Are You Eating Fish, or Fish Waste?

Fish can be one of the healthiest foods you can eat, but in the industrial age you have to be ultra careful about choosing the right type of fish. If you needed another reason to avoid processed foods, watch this film to the end, where it describes how fish waste has become a “highly valued commodity” used in processed foods. At less than 15 cents per kilo, these fish heads and tails, and what little meat is left over after filleting, is a real profit maker.
Virtually nothing actually goes to waste anymore. Fish skins are recycled for use in the cosmetics industry. The remainder of the fish waste is washed and ground into a pulp, which is then used in prepared meals and pet food.
Since food manufacturers are not required to tell you their products contain fish pulp rather than actual fish fillet meat, this product offers a high profit margin for food manufacturers. One tipoff: if the product’s list of ingredients includes a fish without specifyingthat it’s made with fillet of fish, it’s usually made with fish waste pulp.
Fish fraud is also commonplace. Investigations have shown that 1 in 3 fish labels are false or misleading. Typically, an inexpensive fish is mislabeled as a more expensive one. Some farmed fish are also passed off as wild. Since traceability is more complex in the processed food industry, due to the mixing of ingredients, that’s where most of the fish fraud occurs. It’s somewhat more difficult to pass off fillets of fish as another species, although that also occurs.

Best Seafood Options: Wild Alaskan Salmon, Sardines and Anchovies

It’s become quite clear that fish farms are not a viable solution to overfishing. If anything, they’re making matters worse, destroying the marine ecosystem at a far more rapid clip to boot ... So what’s the answer? Unfortunately, the vast majority of fish — even when wild caught — is too contaminated to eat on a frequent basis. Most major waterways in the world are contaminated with mercury, heavy metals, and chemicals like dioxins, PCBs, and other agricultural chemicals that wind up in the environment.
This is why, as a general rule, I no longer recommend getting your omega-3 requirements from fish. However, I do make two exceptions. One is authentic, wild-caught Alaskan sockeye salmon; the nutritional benefits of which I believe still outweigh any potential contamination.
The risk of sockeye accumulating high amounts of mercury and other toxins is reduced because of its short life cycle, which is only about three years. Additionally, bioaccumulation of toxins is also reduced by the fact that it doesn't feed on other, already contaminated, fish.
Alaskan salmon is not allowed to be farmed, and is therefore always wild-caught. My favorite brand is Vital Choice Wild Seafood and Organics, which offers a nice variety of high-quality salmon products that test high for omega-3 fats and low for contaminants. Canned salmon labeled "Alaskan salmon" is a less expensive alternative to salmon fillets. 
The second exception is smaller fish with short life cycles, which also tend to be better alternatives in terms of fat content, such as sardines and anchovies, so it's a win-win situation — lower contamination risk and higher nutritional value. A general guideline is that the closer to the bottom of the food chain the fish is, the less contamination it will have accumulated. Just make sure they’re not from the Baltic Sea.
Other good choices include herring and fish roe (caviar), which is full of important phospholipids that nourish mitochondrial membranes.

Wednesday, April 27, 2016

Sugar can cause brain damage, claim scientists (but salmon reverses it)

Sugar can cause brain damage, claim scientists (but salmon reverses it)


Soft drinks and sugar
 Fructose is found in high quantities in soft drinks 

Bad news for people with a sweet tooth - a new study suggests that sugar can damage the brain.
ADVERTISING
Researchers at the University of California in Los Angeles found that fructose - a type of sugar naturally found in fruits and vegetables, but also present in soft drinks and sweets - damages brain cells and can lead to a wide range of diseases, from diabetes and heart disease to Alzheimer's and ADH.
The scientists fed a group of rats for six weeks with fructose-spiked water (the equivalent to about a litre of soft drinks a day for humans). Then they put them in a maze, alongside rats which had drank only water. The rats which had consumed fructose took twice as long to navigate the maze as the water-only group, despite the same level of training - suggesting that their memories had been impaired.
Sugar
The study suggests that fructose damages brain cells and can lead to a wide variety of diseases CREDIT: ALAMY

There was however one positive outcome of the experiment:  an omega-3 fatty acid called  docosahexaenoic acid, or DHA, appeared to reverse the dangerous changes produced by fructose.
A third group of rats which were fed a flaxseed-oil extract rich in omega-3s as well as the fructose water managed to navigate the maze  almost as quickly as the water-only group.
Salmon
Salmon is very high in DHA CREDIT: ALAMY
DHa is found naturally in fish (especially salmon), nuts, and certain vegetables.
"DHA changes not just one or two genes; it seems to push the entire gene pattern back to normal, which is remarkable," said Xia Yang, a senior author of the study.

Tuesday, March 29, 2016

Japan's high life expectancy linked to diet, study finds

Japan's high life expectancy linked to diet, study finds

The study assessed the diets of tens of thousands of men and women 
The high life expectancy enjoyed in Japan is largely down to the nation's healthy diet, according to a new study.
The population of the island nation, which has one of the lowest mortality rates in the world, eat diets high in certain carbohydrates, vegetables, fruits as well as fish and meat. Such foods make for a diet low in saturated fats, processed foods and high in carbohydrates gained from both rice and vegetables. 
food-spinner-japan.jpg
The Japanese government's official advice on food (BMJ)
The Japanese government outlined a recommended food guide for the nation in 2005.  Around a decade later, researchers at the National Centre for Global Health and Medicine in Tokyo investigated how following the food guide affected the country’s mortality rate.
Such participants were less likely to have cerebrovascular vascular disease: a term used to describe conditions caused by problem with blood supply to the brain. 
The study concluded: “Our findings suggest that balanced consumption of energy, grains, vegetables, fruits, meat, fish, eggs, soy products, dairy products, confectionaries, and alcoholic beverages can contribute to longevity by decreasing the risk of death, predominantly from cardiovascular disease, in the Japanese population.” 
James DiNicolantonio, a cardiovascular research scientist at St. Luke’s Mid America Heart Institute who was not involved in the study, told the Huffington Post: “We can learn a lot about how to be healthy from the Japanese, and it really comes down to ‘eat real food’ and ‘exercise.”
He added that the combination high quality foods low in saturated fats was particularly important. 

Monday, February 29, 2016

New Studies Prove ORGANIC and GRASS-FED Are WORTH the PRICE

New Studies Prove Organic and Grass-Fed Are Worth the Price

February 29, 2016 | 

By Dr. Mercola

According to a Consumer Reports cost analysis,1 some organic foods can cost as much as 47 percent more than conventional varieties. The question is, do the benefits of organics outweigh the added expense?
A number of studies2 have confirmed that eating organic reduces your toxic load, as synthetic pesticides are not permitted in organic farming, and it’s a well-established fact that toxic chemicals have the capacity to harm your health.
A 2014 analysis3,4,5,6,7 of 343 studies also found that, in addition to having fewer pesticide residues, organic food crops also have about half the amount of cadmium,8 a toxic metal and a known carcinogen.  More recent research again highlights the benefits of organic foods — such as fewer pesticides and higher amounts of nutrients — confirming there is indeed a difference, and that this difference may very well be worth the added expense if you’re concerned about your health, and the health of our environment.

Organics Have Fewer Pesticides, Higher Amounts of Valuable Nutrients

While conventional and organic fruits and vegetables contain similar levels of many nutrients, there are a few key differences.  
Previous research, such as the meta-analysis studies cited above, have shown that organic fruits and vegetables contain anywhere from 18 to 69 percent more antioxidants than conventionally-grown varieties — many of which have been linked to health benefits and disease prevention in clinical studies.
Antioxidants are a very important part of optimal health, as they can control how fast you age by fighting free radicals. So the fact that organic foods contain far higher levels vouches for the stance that organic foods are healthier in terms of nutrition, in addition to being much lower or free of pesticides. Organic foods also frequently contain higher amounts of vitamins and minerals, and in the case of meat and dairy, higher levels of healthy fatty acids as well. For example:
  • A 2010 PLOS ONE study,9 which was partially funded by the USDA, found that organic strawberries were more nutrient-rich than non-organic strawberries
  • True organic free-range eggs are more nutritious than commercially raised eggs, typically containing about two-thirds more vitamin A, two times moreomega-3, three times more vitamin E, and as much as seven times more beta carotene10
  • Organic milk and meat from cows raised primarily on pasture have also been repeatedly shown to be higher in many nutrients, including vitamin E, beta-carotene, and CLA
  • Organic milk also contains about 25 percent less omega-6 fats and 62 percent more omega-3 fats than conventional milk11,12

New Research Confirms Clear Health Benefits of Organic Milk and Meat

Most recently, research13,14,15 published in the British Journal of Nutrition found clear differences between organic versus conventional milk16 and meat.17 Said to be the largest study of its kind, the researchers analyzed 196 and 67 studies on milk and meat respectively.
Echoing previous studies, the largest difference in nutritional content was its fatty acid composition, certain essential minerals, and antioxidants. According to Chris Seal, Ph.D. professor of Food and Human Nutrition at Newcastle University:18
“Omega-3s are linked to reductions in cardiovascular disease, improved neurological development and function, and better immune function.
Western European diets are recognized as being too low in these fatty acids and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) recommends we should double our intake.
But getting enough in our diet is difficult. Our study suggests thatswitching to organic would go some way towards improving intakes of these important nutrients.” [Emphasis mine]

Grass-Fed Versus Conventional Meat and Milk

According to the review on milk, half a liter (16.9 ounces) of organic full fat milk will provide you with an estimated 39 milligrams (mg) or 16 percent of the recommended daily intake (RDI) of very long-chain (VLC) omega-3 (EPA, DPA, and DHA), compared to 25 mg (11 percent) from conventional milk.
As noted in the study,19 VLC omega-3s have been linked to a number of health benefits, including “improved fetal brain development and function, delayed decline in cognitive function in elderly men and reduced risk of dementia (especially Alzheimer’s disease).”
Organic milk also contains lower levels of omega-6, providing a healthier ratio between the two fatty acids. Compared to conventional milk, organic milk was also found to contain:
  • Higher levels of vitamin E
  • Higher concentrations of iron
  • Higher levels of antioxidant carotenoids
  • 40 percent more conjugated linoleic acid  (CLA), which has been found to have a wide array of important health benefits, from fighting cancer to decreasing insulin resistance and improving body composition

Other Factors to Consider With Drinking Milk

While these differences in omega-3 content are indeed significant, the absolute value of mg is relatively low considering there are only about 10 mg long-chain VLC omega 3 per glass of milk. 
It is unwise for most to drink much more milk than that due to the non-fiber carbs, like galactose, that it is in milk. Each cup of milk has 12 grams of non-fiber carbs. While one or two glasses would be fine, drinking four would exceed the recommended amount of non-fiber carbs for most people. Conventional milk was also found to contain 74% more iodine than organic milk, which may be detrimental or beneficial depending on how much iodine you get from other sources.
One-half liter, or just over two cups, of conventional milk provides as much as 88 percent of the RDI of iodine, compared to 53 percent from organic milk. As noted by co-author Gillian Butler:20
“There is a relatively narrow margin between dietary Iodine deficiency (<140 and="" day="" excessive="" g="" intakes=""> 500 µg/day) from our diet which can lead to thyrotoxicoxis … Optimising iodine intake is therefore challenging, since globally there seems to be as much concern about excessive rather than inadequate intake.”

How Your Food Is Grown Matters

Studies such as these drive home the point that HOW food is raised does make a difference. You simply cannot cut corners during production without impacting the quality of the food — and by extension, human health. As noted by co-author Professor Carlo Leifert, who participated in both the 2014 analysis of food crops and the current review of milk and meats:
 “People choose organic milk and meat for three main reasons: improved animal welfare, the positive impacts of organic farming on the environment, and the perceived health benefits ...
Several of these differences stem from organic livestock production and are brought about by differences in production intensity, with outdoor-reared, grass-fed animals producing milk and meat that is consistently higher in desirable fatty acids such as the omega-3s, and lower in fatty acids that can promote heart disease and other chronic diseases ....
We have shown without doubt there are composition differences between organic and conventional food. Taken together, the three studies on crops, meat and milk suggest that a switch to organic fruit, vegetables, meat and dairy products would provide significantly higher amounts of dietary antioxidants and omega-3 fatty acids ...
[T]he fact that there are now several mother and child cohort studies linking organic food consumption to positive health impacts shows why it is important to further investigate the impact of the way we produce our food on human health.”

Research Gives Thumbs Up to Organic Farming

A related study21 published in Nature Plants looked at the benefits of organics versus conventional in terms of four key sustainability metrics. As noted by Time Magazine,22 they found that “organic offers a lot of good that outweighs its sticker shock.”
Co-author John Reganold, Ph.D. a professor of Soil Science and Agroecology at Washington State University, notes that in the 1980s when organic farming first began, very little research existed and many claimed it was too inefficient to feed a growing population.
Today, at least 1,000 studies have looked at the benefits and differences between organic and conventional farming, and the current study analyzed data that have emerged in the past 40 years, with a focus on how organic farming impacts sustainability in terms of:
  • Productivity
  • Environmental impact
  • Economic viability
  • Social well-being
Overall, the study found that organic farms are more profitable,23,24 earning farmers anywhere from 22 to 35 percent more than their conventional counterparts, and more environmentally friendly. They also produce equally or more nutritious foods with fewer or no pesticide residues. Organic agriculture also provides unique benefits to the ecosystem, as well as social benefits.
According to Reganold:
“If I had to put it in one sentence, organic agriculture has been able to provide jobs, be profitable, benefit the soil and environment and support social interactions between farmers and consumers. In some ways, there are practices in organic agriculture that really are ideal blueprints for us to look at feeding the world in the future. Organic may even be our best bet to help feed the world in an increasingly volatile climate.”

Organic Farms Fare Better During Droughts, and Use Less Energy

Results vary when it comes to yield. Some farmers report dramatic yield increases after switching to an organic biodynamic system that builds the soil, but in this particular study, they found organic yields tend to be on average 10 to 20 percent lower than conventional. However, organic farms were found to be at a distinct advantage during droughts. As reported by Time:
“Reganold found one scenario where the research shows that organic yields are consistently greater than conventional: during periods of drought. Organic soil is built up with organic material, which can hold onto water, he says. That means that by the time a farmer plants and grows a crop, the plant has access to more water, so yields increase.
For every inch of rainwater soaked up by soil, a plant can produce another 7 to 8 bushels of wheat, Reganold says.
Organic farming typically uses less energy, too. ‘When you look at ecosystem services, organic agriculture really shines,’ he says. ‘The value they bring in areas like biodiversity, pollination, soil quality — if you were to put an economic value on those, and some researchers have, then it more than makes up for the higher price or price premium of organic food.”

Conventional Farming Has Led to Dramatic Decline in Nutrient Content

It’s important to remember that the nutrient content of foods has dramatically declined across the board since the introduction of mechanized farming in 1925. For example, as explained by August Dunning, chief science officer and co-owner of Eco Organics, in order to receive the same amount of iron you used to get from one apple in 1950, by 1998 you had to eat 26 apples.
Other data25 reveal that between 1950 and 1999, levels of protein, calcium, phosphorus, iron, riboflavin (vitamin B2) and vitamin C levels in 43 different vegetables and fruits significantly declined. Another analysis of nutrient data from 1975 to 1997 found that, on average:
  • Calcium levels in 12 fresh vegetables dropped 27 percent
  • Iron levels dropped 37 percent
  • Vitamin A levels dropped 21 percent
  • Vitamin C levels declined by 30 percent
Taste has also diminished, although you’d have to be middle-aged to recall that foods used to taste differently. One of the primary reasons food doesn’t taste as good as it used to is related to the deterioration of mineral content. The minerals actually form the compounds that give the fruit or vegetable its flavor. All of these issues go back to the health of the soil in which the food is grown.26
Healthy soils contain a large diversity of microorganisms, and it is these organisms that are responsible for the plant’s nutrient uptake, health, and the stability of the entire ecosystem. The wide-scale adoption of industrial farming practices has decimated soil microbes responsible for transferring these minerals to the plants.
In 2009, the American Association for the Advancement of Science featured a presentation on soil health and its impact on food quality,27,28 concluding that healthy soil indeed leads to higher levels of nutrients in crops. Agricultural chemicals destroy the soil by killing off its microbial inhabitants, and this destructive trend is perhaps one of the most important factors when considering the value and necessity of organic farming.
If we do not change, we will eventually reach a point of no return, where soils will be too depleted to grow food. And then what will we do? Conventional may be more efficient, and may provide somewhat greater yields in some cases, but in the long term it’s unsustainable. Estimates suggest we have only about 55 to 60 years’ worth of productive topsoil left!29

Other Benefits of Organic Pastured Meat and Eggs

Your best bet for finding healthy food is to grow your own. If that is not possible then connect with a local farmer that raises crops and animals according to organic standards. In the case of eggs, what you’re looking for is eggs from pastured, free-range hens. The Cornucopia Institute’s egg report and organic egg scorecard ranks 136 egg producers according to 28 organic criteria.
Regarding meat, keep in mind that organic grass-fed and grass-finished meats have other nutritional benefits beyond being higher in healthy fats; they’re also free of antibiotics and other drugs used in concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs). With antibiotic-resistant disease being a major public health hazard, buying organic meats is an important consideration in more ways than one.
Unless labeled as grass-fed, virtually all the meat you buy in the grocery store is CAFO beef, and tests have revealed that nearly half of the meat sold in U.S. stores is contaminated with pathogenic bacteria — including antibiotic-resistant strains. Grass-fed beef is not associated with this high frequency of contamination, and their living conditions have everything to do with this improved safety.

Sustainable Food Sources

In the U.S., the following organizations can help you locate farm-fresh foods, including grass-fed meat, dairy, free-range eggs, and fresh organic produce:
Weston A. Price FoundationWeston A. Price has local chapters in most states, and many of them are connected with buying clubs in which you can easily purchase organic foods, including grass fed raw dairy products like milk and butter.
Grassfed ExchangeThe Grassfed Exchange has a listing of producers selling organic and grass-fed meats across the U.S.
Local HarvestThis website will help you find farmers' markets, family farms, and other sources of sustainably grown food in your area where you can buy produce, grass-fed meats, and many other goodies.
Farmers' MarketsA national listing of farmers' markets.
Eat Well Guide: Wholesome Food from Healthy AnimalsThe Eat Well Guide is a free online directory of sustainably raised meat, poultry, dairy, and eggs from farms, stores, restaurants, inns, and hotels, and online outlets in the United States and Canada.
Community Involved in Sustaining Agriculture (CISA)CISA is dedicated to sustaining agriculture and promoting the products of small farms.
FoodRoutesThe FoodRoutes "Find Good Food" map can help you connect with local farmers to find the freshest, tastiest food possible. On their interactive map, you can find a listing for local farmers, CSAs, and markets near you.
The Cornucopia InstituteThe Cornucopia Institute maintains web-based tools rating all certified organic brands of eggs, dairy products, and other commodities, based on their ethical sourcing and authentic farming practices separating CAFO "organic" production from authentic organic practices.