Column #32

Natural and synthetic chemicals are equally likely to be positive in animal cancer tests. ... at the low doses of most human exposures the comparative hazards of synthetic pesticide residues are insignificant. (“Dietary pesticides (99.99% all natural” by Bruce N. Ames, Margie Profet, and Lois Swirsky Gold, published in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, USA, 1990).

The study points out that because food studies emphasize the detection of synthetic chemicals such as insecticides, herbicides, fungicides, and industrial pollutants, the natural chemicals in plants that are also pesticides and pollutants have been ignored. Therefore most studies skew the perception of toxicity hazards for humans because of an imbalance of data.

In a joint study (“Nature's chemicals and synthetic chemicals: Comparative toxicology”), Ames makes another point: The toxicology of synthetic chemicals is compared to that of natural chemicals, which represent the vast bulk of the chemicals to which humans are exposed. It is argued that animals have a broad array of inducible general defenses to combat the changing array of toxic chemicals in plant food (nature's pesticides) and that these defenses are effective against both natural and synthetic toxins.

Ames’ point underscores the reality that natural toxins are more prevalent, therefore a greater concern. But offsetting that are the “inducible general defenses” of animals (including people) to combat both natural and synthetic toxins.

For years I’ve stated that if all of the food in America had been “organic” and people had made the same food choices during the past 60 years, the incidences of chronic disease would be the same as they are today. That’s because the inherent chemistry of each food overwhelms all other chemicals.

This is why professional nutritional studies do not emphasize “organic” foods. Professionals know it’s the inherent chemistry of each food rather than possible pesticides that impact health. They know EPA standards for pesticides are very low, in fact much lower than natural levels of pesticides in plants. Therefore they emphasize minerals, vitamins, fatty acids, and other aspects of food because those are the factors that determine whether or not a body is being fed properly for optimum health.

Unfortunately the public is bombarded with “organic” propaganda. All too often people have little interest in nutrition because they assume their health issues are due to pesticides, hormones, GMOs, and other dangers. They fail to realize the importance of food chemistry and its overriding impact on health.

When it comes to nutrition, the chemistry of food is what has the greatest impact on health and/or chronic disease. The essential chemical balance is derived from the green leaf, the only sustainable life form because it gets its energy directly from the sun. The green leaf must be at the bottom of the food chain. Deviations from the green leaf towards fruit, even some vegetables, nuts, grain (including seeds) do not offer the chemistry that adequately supports life. It’s the same with grain-fed, farm-raised, vegetable-fed meats. They will not provide adequate nutrition.

As I continue to say, the proper diet for optimizing health is composed of green leafy vegetables, grass-fed meat, Omega-3 meat, and wild-caught seafood. “Organic” is misleading.

To your health.

Ted Slanker

Ted Slanker has been reporting on the fundamentals of nutritional research in publications, television and radio appearances, and at conferences since 1999. He condenses complex studies into the basics required for health and well-being. His eBook, The Real Diet of Man, is available online.

For additional reading:

Dietary pesticides (99.99% all natural)

Chemical carcinogenesis: Too many rodent carcinogens

Nature's chemicals and synthetic chemicals: Comparative toxicology

Natural Pesticides from Plants

Danger, Natural Pesticides

Synthetic v. Natural Pesticides in The New York Times

Myth busting: Are synthetic pesticides, used with some GMOs, more dangerous than natural ones?

The Colossal Hoax Of Organic Agriculture  in Forbes Magazine