The Natural Solutions Foundation, the leading Global Health Freedom organization, is proud to present this information to you. We protect your right to know about – and to use – natural ways to maintain and regain your health, no matter where in the world you live. Among your freedoms is the right to clean, unadulterated food free of genetic manipulation, pesticides, heavy metals or other contaminants and access to herbs, supplements, frequency devices and other means as therapies that may benefit or to protect your well-being without drugs and other dangerous interventions, if you choose.

For more information on our global programs, including the International Decade of Nutrition, and our US based ones, please visit us at www.HealthFreedomUSA.org and www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org and join the free email list for the Health Freedom eAlerts to keep you in the loop, informed and active defending your right to make your own decisions about your health and wellbeing!
Our activities are supported 100% by your tax deductible donations. Please give generously (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) to the Natural Solutions Foundation. Thank you for your support.
Feel free to disseminate this information as widely as possible with full attribution.
Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima

Rima E. Laibow, MD

Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org

Organic sounds quite nice: clean, pure and healthy. I think of it as a social and biological value system manifested in food and soap and face cream. In point of fact, as the USDA has taken pains to point out, it is a legal definition and nothing more.

I think it is something more: it is a way to avoid most pesticides, eat food that is 90% or more GM free (the US, alone among nations, allows 10% contamination with GM “Frankenfoods” in what it will allow to be called “Organic” while most other countries insist on no more than 0.09% contamination, a 111 fold increase in permitted contamination).

And I would hope that “Organic” is a meaningful certification system, backed by the supposed integrity of the United States Government, upon which the consumer can rest because they can trust a nation as mighty, as committed to the rule of law as the US, as gigantically powerful as the US in setting global agricultural policy, through Codex and elsewhere, to protect me from contamination and deceitful practices including contamination of my organic purchases with known carcinogens, right? After all, when the US passed a law which said that no state (read California, Colorado, Pennsylvania) could have a law more stringent than the US Government’s own standards, part of the argument for that law was that the resources of the Federal Government were so much more powerful and vast than those of any State that it could do the best job possible of assuring standards we could rely upon when we looked for “Organic” products. OF course, that would mean that you could rely on the presence of the word “Organic” to mean that the product was, in fact, tested by some government agency and found to be, in fact, in compliance with the standards for Organic products.

Remember, the chemical found in this study is approved for use by Codex Alimentarius. In fact, when I did a search on the Codex Alimentarius website for Ethylene Oxide, the result was “Too Many Results!”. Codex Alimentarius>Food Additives> Residue Limits gave the same result: “Too Many Results!”. Searching for Standards and Standard Measurements yielded the same frightening results: the stuff is absolutely ubiquitous. Food Additives> Guidelines – same results. Food Additives> Advisory and Other Texts> same results. When I searched Ethylene Oxide > Organic > Food Additives > Recommended Codes of Practice > Certification I got the same answer: “Too Many Results!”

Checking in the official Codex Alimentarius

Guidelines for the Production, Processing, Labeling and Marketing of Organically Produced Foods

we find no mention of either Ethylene Oxide or 1,4-Dioxane so either the search engine is malfunctioning or there are really too many results to list. Hmmm.

Either way, however, it’s bad, bad stuff and has no place in food or preparations that we come in contact with, let alone in Organic ones!

Here is what the World Health Organization has to say in a Technical Monograph about Ethylene Dioxide:

Summary
Ethylene oxide is a colourless, highly reactive gas at room temperature and pressure. Almost all of ethylene oxide produced is used in the manufacture of ethylene glycol, but some amount is used as a sterilant for health care materials and other heat-sensitive products. Ethylene oxide is an alkylating agent and forms protein and DNA adducts. [Meaning that it changes the DNA and protein in the body, which is where part of its ability to cause cancer comes from – REL ] Based on studies in animals, cancer is considered the critical end-point for effects of ethylene oxide on human health for long-term exposure of the general population. [Meanng that what happens when you are exposed to it is that your chances of getting cancer from it go up. – REL]

http://www.who.int/bookorders/anglais/detart1.jsp?sesslan=1&codlan=1&codcol=38&codcch=54

In the following report on the important study commissioned by the Organic Consumer’s Association of natural and organic products, the level and frequency of contamination with 1,4-Dioxane, a known carcinogen, is shocking. Companies like JASON Pure Natural & Organic; Giovanni Organic Cosmetics; Kiss My Face; Nature’s Gate Organics all were found to be marketing products containing the deadly chemical despite their self-styled “Organic” status – for which you pay extra, of course. Shame on them!

I nominate each of these companies for the Natural Solutions Foundation Hall of Shame and, at the same time, nominate the Organic Consumers Association for our Hall of Fame for doing the study and making it public.

By the way, consumers have driven the outstanding growth of the organic food sector (20-24% growth annually while the conventional food sector is generally flat) because they believe that such food is better for them. Michael Pollan, in The Omnivore’s Dilemma, a truly outstanding book, discusses the good, the bad, the ugly, the questionable and the perplexing in organic. But, all in all, fewer pesticides, fewer contaminants and , perhaps most of all, no GM Frankenfood would make the financial premium for organic worth it, at least to consumers who realize that GM foods are dangerous and their dangers are ignored by our government. Genetically modified foods (GM) were first defined as identical to the foods they resemble, real foods, that is, by George H. W. Bush who declared them to be equivalent. That led to the FDA deciding that no safety testing or data was required for any patented food to be introduced into the diet of the American (or any other ) people and that food would be sold to them without any labeling to make it clear that they were eating food which, although it could be patented, was administratively declared to be identical. I actually do not get that at all: if a plant or animal is so distinctive that a patent can be granted to give exclusive ownership to the company that holds that patent, what makes it identical to a food that cannot be patented because the world owns it?

Following that logic, of course, cloned, patented meats and milk are identical because the FDA said they are and consumers have no right to know what they are eating because, according to the FDA, they would not be able to tell the difference.

So the USDA, which houses the progressively more emasculated National Organics Standards Board (http://www.ams.usda.gov/nosb/) certifies products “Organic” and assures us that they are free of carcinogenic chemicals. In fact, we have a weak agency which is better than nothing and the words “organic” and “natural” without certification mean exactly that: nothing. My advice: Don’t buy them. Don’t use them.
Period.

Note that Cummins and Steinman say: All USDA Certified brands tested in this study were 1,4-Dioxane-free, including: Dr. Bronner’s, Sensibility Soaps (Nourish), Terressentials. All German Natural “BDIH” Certified brands tested were found to be 1,4-Dioxane-free: Aubrey Organics, Dr. Hauschka.

This kind of information deserves to be shared. Please share it widely and, while you are at it, take a moment to ask the people you share it with to join the hundreds of thousands of supporters of the Natural Solutions Foundation by signing up for the free, secure information-packed Health Freedom eAlerts at http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=187. And don’t forget to make your tax deductible donation now. Recurring donations are a huge help. Give what your heart and your head tell you is right: click here (http://drrimatruthreports.com/index.php?page_id=189) to support the Natural Solutions Foundation. Please do it now, while you are thinking about it.
Natural Solutions: We are more than just talk: We are the most effective health freedom voice in the world!

Yours in health and freedom,
Dr. Rima
Rima E. Laibow, MD
Medical Director
Natural Solutions Foundation
www.HealthFreedomUSA.org
www.GlobalHealthFreedom.org
Ronnie Cummins, 218-226-4164 (Organic Consumers Association)
David Steinman, 310-455-8952

Carcinogenic 1,4-Dioxane Found in Leading ‘Organic’ Brand Personal Care Products
USDA Certified Products Test Dioxane-Free

ANAHEIM, CALIFORNIA – March 14 – A newly released study commissioned by the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), a watchdog group with over 500,000 members, and overseen by environmental health consumer advocate David Steinman (author of The Safe Shopper’s Bible), analyzes leading “natural” and “organic” brand shampoos, body washes, lotions and other personal care products for the presence of the undisclosed carcinogenic contaminant 1,4-Dioxane. A reputable third-party laboratory known for rigorous testing and chain-of-custody protocols, performed all testing.

Ethoxylation, a cheap short-cut companies use to provide mildness to harsh ingredients, requires the use of the cancer-causing petrochemical Ethylene Oxide, which generates 1,4-Dioxane as a by-product. 1,4-Dioxane is considered a chemical “known to the State of California to cause cancer” under proposition 65, and has no place in “natural” or “organic” branded personal care products. 1,4-dioxane is also suspected as a kidney toxicant, neurotoxicant and respiratory toxicant, among others, according to the California EPA, and is a leading groundwater contaminant. Although previous studies have revealed 1,4-Dioxane is often present in conventional personal care products, this new study indicates the toxin is also present in leading “natural” and “organic” branded products, none of which are certified under the USDA National Organic Program. The products/brands tested are listed on the attached page with the level of 1,4-Dioxane detected, if any, along with ethoxylated ingredients listed on the label.
Some of the Leading Brands Found to Contain 1,4-Dioxane: JASON Pure Natural & Organic; Giovanni Organic Cosmetics; Kiss My Face; Nature’s Gate Organics.

Both the OCA and Steinman are calling for misleadingly labeled “Organic(s)” brands which include ethoxylate ingredients or otherwise utilize petrochemicals in their ingredients, to drop all organic claims from their branding and labeling. “The practice of ethoxylating ingredients or using other petroleum compounds must end for natural personal care, and is that much more outrageous in so-called ‘organics’ brand products,” says Ronnie Cummins, Executive Director of the OCA. “At a time when our nation is dangerously dependent on foreign oil and attempting to wean itself off unnecessary dependence on petroleum-based ingredients in major consumer products for national security reasons, it is self-defeating that we are literally bathing ourselves and our children in toxic petroleum compounds,” says Steinman. “But consumers should also take heart in the emergence of a growing number of companies who’ve received the message and who are seeking to completely avoid petrochemicals in their cosmetic and personal care products. Your best bet is to purchase products whose ingredients you can pronounce or better yet are certified under the USDA National Organic Program.”

Brands Found not to Contain 1,4-Dioxane: All USDA Certified brands tested in this study were 1,4-Dioxane-free, including: Dr. Bronner’s, Sensibility Soaps (Nourish), Terressentials. All German Natural “BDIH” Certified brands tested were found to be 1,4-Dioxane-free: Aubrey Organics, Dr. Hauschka.

A visit to any health food store unfortunately reveals the majority of products in the personal care section with “organic” brand claims are not USDA certified, and contain only cheap water extracts of organic herbs and maybe a few other token organic ingredients for organic veneer. The core of such products are composed of conventional synthetic cleansers and conditioning ingredients usually made in part with petrochemicals. According to market statistics, consumers are willing to pay significantly more for products branded “natural” or “organic” which they believe do not contain petrochemical-modified ingredients or toxic contaminants like 1,4-Dioxane.

To avoid 1,4-Dioxane, the OCA urges consumers to search ingredient lists for indications of ethoxylation including: “myreth,” “oleth,” “laureth,” “ceteareth,” any other “eth,” “PEG,” “polyethylene,” “polyethylene glycol,” “polyoxyethylene,” or “oxynol,” in ingredient names. In general, the OCA urges consumers to avoid products with unpronounceable ingredients. “When it comes to misbranding organic personal care products in the US, it’s almost complete anarchy and buyer beware unless the product is certified under the USDA National Organic Program,” says Cummins.

The study builds on the extensive survey conducted by Steinman for his book Safe Trip to Eden (Perseus Books 2007), in association with the Campaign for Safe Cosmetics, the Breast Cancer Fund and the Environmental Working Group, which found that many mainstream children’s bubble bath and shampoo products contain dangerous amounts of this undisclosed carcinogen.