Many consumers avoid products that contain bisphenol-A (BPA) because the estrogen-imitating chemical has been linked to an array of health effects in people and animals. But new research published Thursday suggests that an ingredient that has replaced BPA in many items may have a similar effect on the heart.

BPA-free labels have been popping up on many plastic bottles, cash register receipts, food packaging, and other products.

Although the label implies a sense of safety, "our research suggests that BPS and potentially other BPA substitutes aren't necessarily free of health problems," said Hong-Sheng Wang, a professor of pharmacology at the University of Cincinnati College of Medicine.

A new study finds the chemical war against cholesterol using statin drugs was justified through statistical deception and the cover up of over 300 adverse health effects documented in the biomedical literature.
Better safe than sorry, right? This is the logic that defines the grasp that the pharmaceutical company has on our psyche. Perhaps your mother, father, brother, and boyfriend have been recommended cholesterol-lowering medication, just to help hedge their bets around a possible chest-clutching demise. In fact, recent guidelines have expanded the pool of potential statin medication recipients, so that there are very few of us who seem to be walking around with acceptable levels of artery clogging sludge.

But how is it that drug companies got a foothold? How have they convinced doctors that their patients need these medications, and need them now? They are banking (literally) on the fact that you haven't brushed up on statistics in a while.

It turns out that a common sleight of hand in the medical literature is the popularization of claims around "relative risk reduction" which can make an effect appear meaningful, when the "absolute risk reduction" reveals its insignificance. In this way, 100 people are treated with statin medications to offer 1 person benefit, and the change from a 2% to a 1% heart attack rate is billed a 50% reduction rather than a 1% improvement, which is what it actually is.

The missing link behind what causes gluten intolerance and celiac disease, and why prevalence of these two autoimmune conditions has risen dramatically over the past several decades seemingly without cause, may have more to do with how conventional wheat is grown in the U.S. today rather than what it contains naturally.

Like with the massive rise in autism spectrum disorders, the scientific community is trying to explain away the near-tripling of celiac cases over the past 20 years as being a result of improved detection and diagnosis techniques. Many people simply weren't aware that the condition existed back in the 1990s, some scientists claim, dismissing any other outside causes.

But the evidence increasingly points to the chemicals applied to modern wheat crops, primarily in the U.S., as a major driver behind this epidemic of supposed gluten allergies. Monsanto's Roundup herbicide, which contains glyphosate, is often applied to conventional wheat crops at the end of their life cycle, leaving behind residues of the chemical formula on the wheat consumed by millions.

This little-known process, which was recently brought to light by The Healthy Home Economist, allows farmers to harvest wheat early and produces a slightly higher yield. But the consequence is contaminated wheat, which ends up being made into breads, cakes, crackers and other consumer products.

U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) data from 2012, the latest available, reveals that 61 percent of winter wheat, 97 percent of spring wheat, and 99 percent of durum wheat grown in the U.S. is treated with Roundup just prior to harvest. This is up from 47 percent of winter wheat, 91 percent of spring wheat and 88 percent of durum wheat treated in 1998.

According to one U.S. wheat farmer, the application of Roundup to wheat plants at over 30 percent kernel moisture results in the plants actually abosrobing Roundup and distributing it into wheat kernels. These kernels are later ground into wheat flour, which is then processed and turned into various wheat-containing foods consumed by millions of Americans.

"Consumers eating products made from wheat flour are undoubtedly consuming minute amounts of Roundup," said wheat farmer Keith Lewis, as quoted on the Wheat Belly blog, about this completely unlicensed practice.

Researchers have identified an association between persistent insomnia and increased inflammation and mortality.

Scientists from the University of Arizona found that people who suffer from persistent insomnia are at greater risk of death than those who experience intermittent insomnia.

Their study has been published in The American Journal of Medicine.

Experts say that although about 20 percent of U.S. adults are affected by insomnia, only half (10 percent) suffer from persistent (or chronic) insomnia.

"We hypothesized that insomnia that was persistent over eight years, rather than intermittent insomnia, was associated with death independent of the effects of sedatives, opportunity for sleep (to distinguish it from sleep deprivation), and other confounding factors in a representative sample of the general adult community," explained lead investigator Sairam Parthasarathy, M.D., associate professor of medicine at the University of Arizona College of Medicine-Tucson.

Hello, and welcome to the second article in our new series on natural pet health (as featured on SOTT Radio Network's Health and Wellness Show). Previous articles in this series:

SOTT Exclusive: Natural Pet Health: Top 10 issues facing pet owners when it comes to your pets' well-being

In this article we are going to talk about nutrition, or how to feed your dog or cat (or both) in a way that will contribute to their healthy and long life. But before we go into the proper way of feeding your pets, let's talk about dry food first, and why it's the worst food you could give to them.

What is dry food?

It's a highly processed mix, dried and ground to powder, that is comprised of various animal meats from cattle, swine and chicken, or restaurant waste and out-of-date supermarket meat, and yes, even so-called road kill or cows that died on the farm but never reached the slaughter house. It also includes non-meat parts, such as intestines, lungs, spleens, unborn fetuses, diseased or parasitized livers, cut-away tumors, and other parts unsuitable for human consumption.

On Twitter recently, someone asked the question "Why do people doubt science?" Accompanying the tweet was a link to an article in National Geographic that implied people who are suspicious of vaccines, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), climate change, fluoridated water and various other phenomena are confused, adhere to conspiracy theories, are motivated by ideology or are misinformed as a result of access to the 'University of Google.' The remedy, according what is said in the article, is for us all to rely on scientific evidence pertaining to these issues and adopt a 'scientific method' of thought and analysis and put irrational thought processes to one side.

Who tweeted the question and posted the link? None other than Robert T Fraley, Monsanto's Vice President and Chief Technology Officer.

In the early 80s' the world was shocked by headlines reporting violence against abortion clinics, staff and doctors by religious fundamentalist groups. The first such reported case was the kidnapping of Hector Zevallos, an abortion clinic owner and operator, and his wife, by three men identifying themselves as the Army of God. Zevallos and his wife were held for eight days. Since that time, there have been further kidnappings, bombings of clinics, murders and attempted murders of staff and supporters, hundreds of death threats and over 150 cases of assault and battery by anti-abortion activists. The violence has since spread from the United States to Canada, Australia and New Zealand.

And the violence continues today, with the 2012 bombings of a Planned Parenthood clinic in Grand Chute, Wisconsin and the firebombing of the Ladies Clinic in Pensacola, Florida, the site of the 1994 murder of Dr. John Britton and his attendant James Barrett and a previous bombing on Christmas Day, 1984 (the quartet of perpetrators later calling the bombing "a gift to Jesus on his birthday").

The actions of these Pro-Lifer terrorists leave many people confused. How can anyone care so much about a cause like pro-life versus pro-choice that they are prepared to carry out violent attacks and protests, death threats and smear campaigns? How can one's fundamentalism lead one to take such seemingly contradictory actions - to kill in order to uphold the "thou shalt not kill" commandment?

But such is the mindset of the religious terrorist. One becomes so wrapped up in their cause, no matter how misguided, that these seeming contradictions don't hold any water. It's what's commonly referred to as "being a complete whackjob".

Mercury Toxicity: Has it caused one of the worst health crises in American history?

"We found out that the Thimeresol would be toxic down to - not grams, not mg's, not mcgs, but nano grams - parts per billion - which was almost unbelievable. This was published in the American Journal Medical Society, in the New York Academy Sciences and in the Journal For the Chemical Speciality Manufactures Association and it didn't make waves, there wasn't even a ripple - no one seemed to care." - Dr Frank P Engley PhD - Blue Ribbon Panel Member 1948 AMA meeting regarding Thimeresol's concerns

During the past two decades, the diagnosis of autism occurring in children has risen dramatically from 1 in 10,000 to 1 in 68 and our scientific community is no closer to determining a cause. But one thing they automatically do is emphatically deny a possible link between autism cases and something found in our vaccines.

What we eat is a much more intricate subject that it might first appear.

Behind the labels are many troubling issues... and GMOs are just the tip of the iceberg.

The London Guardian carried this interest piece revealing how so much of our foods - even the most natural in appearance - are engineered, manufactured and packaged with invisible processing 'ingredients' derived from sophisticated lab processes.

Now, as the food manufacturing industry is keeping up with consumer demand, scary sounding and artificial looking ingredients are increasingly fading from food packages. But as the London Guardian makes clear in this expose from a food ingredients exposition, it is not always because the quality or ingredients improved, but instead because the industry has embarked upon a "clean label" initiative to derive substitutes that fly under the radar of current regulations or - like 'extract of rosemary' - sound benign compared with previous industry solutions like butylhydroxyanisole (BHA), which has been classified as a 'reasonably anticipated human carcinogen,' despite assurances by many that it is safe in small doses.

During the recent measles outbreak, the mainstream media blamed the epidemic solely on non vaccinated children, even though people who were vaccinated caught the disease and some vaccines have proven to be inefficient in the past. Without the slightest nuance, the mainstream media constantly portrays people reluctant to accept just any vaccine as "anti-vaxers", irresponsible and misinformed people, relying on irrational fears and the one and only "fraudulent" Andrew Wakefield study linking autism to vaccines. (Watch Lina B. Moreco's documentary Shots in the Dark, which features Dr. Wakefield and thankful parents of his young patients with autism.)

In reality, many so-called "anti-vaxers" are not ALL totally against vaccines. While some people may be totally against any kind of vaccination, many, including doctors and health specialists, question certain vaccines, ingredients in the vaccines and/or the vaccination schedule. This is not based on a survey but on my own perception resulting from the fair amount of articles on vaccines and the pharmaceutical industry that I've read over the last five years as a journalist. There are a large number of doctors and health specialists who have done truly independent research and who criticize vaccination based on scientific studies and solid evidence.

Why is the media so keen on portraying Big Pharma critics as crazy, uneducated, unscientific and irresponsible people?

Dr Marcia Angell worked for over two decades as editor of The New England Journal of Medicine. She was fired after criticizing the pharmaceutical industry, which had exerted an overriding and negative influence on the scientific literature. She said:

"It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published."

Numerous journalists say the same goes for the mainstream media.