Which foods accumulate the highest levels of industrial toxins?
Dioxins in the Food Supply
Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.
Every five years, our government measures the amount of dioxins in our food supply. Dioxins are toxic waste pollutants spewed out into the atmosphere that accumulate in the fatty tissues of humans, and food animals consumed by humans. The most significant exposure to dioxin-like compounds is thought to be dietary intake of animal and fish products. But which ones are the worst?
Using data from the EPA published last year, is there more toxic waste in beef, cheese, chicken, eggs, fish, lamb, or pork? When you hear toxic waste and diet, the first thing we should think of is fish—and indeed that was by far the worst. But what’s second worst?
Second only to fish in terms of dioxin levels: eggs, with cheese the runner-up. That’s why we’ve got to be careful. If you’re breastfeeding, for example, then you can reduce infant exposure by avoiding fish. But if you replace that fish with some other food group containing chemicals—like the dioxins in dairy products—then you might not be doing your baby any favors. And we now know that eggs have about three times as much as dairy.
This may explain this new study, “Egg Consumption and the Risk of Cancer”, which found that just a half an egg a day or more was associated with about twice the odds of getting mouth cancer, throat cancer, esophageal cancer, and voice box cancer; three times the odds of getting colon cancer; about twice the odds of rectal cancer and lung cancer; three times the odds of getting breast cancer—just eating a half an egg a day or more. And about twice the odds of prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and all cancers combined.
This is from a study last year that measured the amounts of PCBs, DDT, and other dioxins and pesticides inside people’s bodies. Both male and female, infants, children, teens, adults, and the elderly. The red line represents what the EPA considers to be the level at which there’s significantly increased cancer risk. Was there any age group that exceeded that level? Let’s look at the results: every single age group.
Ten times that benchmark level of PCBs—the red bar, especially in the bodies of young children. And DDT levels right about at that cancer level across the board. How are we still exposed to DDT? Wasn’t it banned decades ago after Silent Spring came out? Yes, but it’s still polluting the environment. As the CDC points out, we’re primarily exposed through meat, fish, and dairy, though, thankfully, the levels in the U.S. continue to decline.
A commentary in a journal called Reproductive Toxicology last year summarized the rather grim situation. Contemporary reproductive-aged women and their offspring are facing an unprecedented onslaught of toxicant exposures from myriad sources in their day-to-day life. And it’s not just cancer we’re worried about.
Increasing evidence suggests that maternal exposure to toxic chemical compounds may be associated with various birth defects, pediatric problems, skewed gender ratios, lethal cancers in children and teens, psychosexual challenges, as well as reproductive and hormonal dysfunction in later life.
The author concludes: “…I anticipate that future generations of scientists will look back with disbelief at a medical culture that permitted poisoning of reproductive aged women and ignored ramifications to unborn children.”
Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.
- D. Aune, E. De Stefano, A.L. Ronco, P. Boffetta, H. Deneo-Pellegrini, G. Acosta and M. Mendilaharsu. Egg consumption and the risk of cancer: a multisite case-control study in Uruguay. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 10(5):869-76, 2009.
- S. J. Genuis. Nowhere to hide: Chemical toxicants and the unborn child. Reprod. Toxicol., 28(1):115-116, 2009.
- United States Department of Agriculture. Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds in the U.S. Domestic Meat and Poultry Supply. 2009.
- Lorber M, Patterson D, Huwe J, Kahn H. Evaluation of background exposures of Americans to dioxin-like compounds in the 1990s and the 2000s. Chemosphere. 2009 Oct;77(5):640-51. Epub 2009 Sep 4.
- Centers for Disease Control. Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. 2009.
Below is an approximation of this video’s audio content. To see any graphs, charts, graphics, images, and quotes to which Dr. Greger may be referring, watch the above video.
Every five years, our government measures the amount of dioxins in our food supply. Dioxins are toxic waste pollutants spewed out into the atmosphere that accumulate in the fatty tissues of humans, and food animals consumed by humans. The most significant exposure to dioxin-like compounds is thought to be dietary intake of animal and fish products. But which ones are the worst?
Using data from the EPA published last year, is there more toxic waste in beef, cheese, chicken, eggs, fish, lamb, or pork? When you hear toxic waste and diet, the first thing we should think of is fish—and indeed that was by far the worst. But what’s second worst?
Second only to fish in terms of dioxin levels: eggs, with cheese the runner-up. That’s why we’ve got to be careful. If you’re breastfeeding, for example, then you can reduce infant exposure by avoiding fish. But if you replace that fish with some other food group containing chemicals—like the dioxins in dairy products—then you might not be doing your baby any favors. And we now know that eggs have about three times as much as dairy.
This may explain this new study, “Egg Consumption and the Risk of Cancer”, which found that just a half an egg a day or more was associated with about twice the odds of getting mouth cancer, throat cancer, esophageal cancer, and voice box cancer; three times the odds of getting colon cancer; about twice the odds of rectal cancer and lung cancer; three times the odds of getting breast cancer—just eating a half an egg a day or more. And about twice the odds of prostate cancer, bladder cancer, and all cancers combined.
This is from a study last year that measured the amounts of PCBs, DDT, and other dioxins and pesticides inside people’s bodies. Both male and female, infants, children, teens, adults, and the elderly. The red line represents what the EPA considers to be the level at which there’s significantly increased cancer risk. Was there any age group that exceeded that level? Let’s look at the results: every single age group.
Ten times that benchmark level of PCBs—the red bar, especially in the bodies of young children. And DDT levels right about at that cancer level across the board. How are we still exposed to DDT? Wasn’t it banned decades ago after Silent Spring came out? Yes, but it’s still polluting the environment. As the CDC points out, we’re primarily exposed through meat, fish, and dairy, though, thankfully, the levels in the U.S. continue to decline.
A commentary in a journal called Reproductive Toxicology last year summarized the rather grim situation. Contemporary reproductive-aged women and their offspring are facing an unprecedented onslaught of toxicant exposures from myriad sources in their day-to-day life. And it’s not just cancer we’re worried about.
Increasing evidence suggests that maternal exposure to toxic chemical compounds may be associated with various birth defects, pediatric problems, skewed gender ratios, lethal cancers in children and teens, psychosexual challenges, as well as reproductive and hormonal dysfunction in later life.
The author concludes: “…I anticipate that future generations of scientists will look back with disbelief at a medical culture that permitted poisoning of reproductive aged women and ignored ramifications to unborn children.”
Please consider volunteering to help out on the site.
- D. Aune, E. De Stefano, A.L. Ronco, P. Boffetta, H. Deneo-Pellegrini, G. Acosta and M. Mendilaharsu. Egg consumption and the risk of cancer: a multisite case-control study in Uruguay. Asian Pac J Cancer Prev. 10(5):869-76, 2009.
- S. J. Genuis. Nowhere to hide: Chemical toxicants and the unborn child. Reprod. Toxicol., 28(1):115-116, 2009.
- United States Department of Agriculture. Dioxins and Dioxin-Like Compounds in the U.S. Domestic Meat and Poultry Supply. 2009.
- Lorber M, Patterson D, Huwe J, Kahn H. Evaluation of background exposures of Americans to dioxin-like compounds in the 1990s and the 2000s. Chemosphere. 2009 Oct;77(5):640-51. Epub 2009 Sep 4.
- Centers for Disease Control. Fourth National Report on Human Exposure to Environmental Chemicals. 2009.
Comparte "Dioxins in the Food Supply"
Términos
Puedes compartir este material en la red o impreso bajo nuestra licencia Creative Commons. Deberás atribuir el artículo a NutritionFacts.org y agregar la liga a nuestro sitio en tu publicación
Si se realizan cambios en el texto o video original, se debe indicar, razonablemente, lo que ha cambiado en relación con el artículo o el video.
No se puede usar nuestro contenido para propósitos comerciales.
No puede aplicar términos legales o medidas tecnológicas que restrinjan a otros a hacer cualquier cosa permitida aquí.
Si tienes alguna duda, por favor Contáctanos
Título
Dioxins in the Food Supply
LicenciaCreative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International (CC BY-NC 4.0)
URLNota del Doctor
More on dioxins in these videos:
Dioxins in U.S. Farm-Raised Catfish
Counteracting the Effects of Dioxins Through Diet
Diabetes and Dioxins
California Children Are Contaminated
And check out my other videos on industrial toxins.
For more context, check out my associated blog posts: EPA dioxin limit has National Chicken Council worried products could be declared “unfit for consumption”; Harvard’s Meat and Mortality Studies; Poultry and Penis Cancer; Breast Cancer and Diet; Fukushima Radiation and Seafood; Male Fertility and Dietary Pollutants; and How Chemically Contaminated Are We?
If you haven’t yet, you can subscribe to my videos for free by clicking here.
Video anterior
Siguiente video
respuestas a
Comment Etiquette
On NutritionFacts.org, you'll find a vibrant community of nutrition enthusiasts, health professionals, and many knowledgeable users seeking to discover the healthiest diet to eat for themselves and their families. As always, our goal is to foster conversations that are insightful, engaging, and most of all, helpful – from the nutrition beginners to the experts in our community.
To do this we need your help, so here are some basic guidelines to get you started.
The Short List
To help maintain and foster a welcoming atmosphere in our comments, please refrain from rude comments, name-calling, and responding to posts that break the rules (see our full Community Guidelines for more details). We will remove any posts in violation of our rules when we see it, which will, unfortunately, include any nicer comments that may have been made in response.
Be respectful and help out our staff and volunteer health supporters by actively not replying to comments that are breaking the rules. Instead, please flag or report them by submitting a ticket to our help desk. NutritionFacts.org is made up of an incredible staff and many dedicated volunteers that work hard to ensure that the comments section runs smoothly and we spend a great deal of time reading comments from our community members.
Have a correction or suggestion for video or blog? Please contact us to let us know. Submitting a correction this way will result in a quicker fix than commenting on a thread with a suggestion or correction.
View the Full Community Guidelines