Most of my favorite factoids about obesity are historical ones, and they don't make it into the new, four-part HBO documentary on the subject, The Weight of the Nation. Absent, for instance, is the fact that the very first childhood-obesity clinic in the United States was founded in the late 1930s at Columbia University by a young German physician, Hilde Bruch. As Bruch later told it, her inspiration was simple: she arrived in New York in 1934 and was "startled" by the number of fat kids she saw - "really fat ones, not only in clinics, but on the streets and subways, and in schools."

What makes Bruch's story relevant to the obesity problem today is that this was New York in the worst year of the Great Depression, an era of bread lines and soup kitchens, when 6 in 10 Americans were living in poverty. The conventional wisdom these days - promoted by government, obesity researchers, physicians, and probably your personal trainer as well - is that we get fat because we have too much to eat and not enough reasons to be physically active. But then why were the PC- and Big Mac - -deprived Depression-era kids fat? How can we blame the obesity epidemic on gluttony and sloth if we easily find epidemics of obesity throughout the past century in populations that barely had food to survive and had to work hard to earn it?

These seem like obvious questions to ask, but you won't get the answers from the anti-obesity establishment, which this month has come together to unfold a major anti-fat effort, including The Weight of the Nation, which begins airing May 14 and "a nationwide community-based outreach campaign." The project was created by a coalition among HBO and three key public-health institutions: the nonprofit Institute of Medicine, and two federal agencies, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the National Institutes of Health. Indeed, it is unprecedented to have the IOM, CDC, and NIH all supporting a single television documentary, says producer John Hoffmann. The idea is to "sound the alarm" and motivate the nation to act.

Scientists are reporting a possible link between the use of sunscreen containing a certain ingredient that mimics the effects of the female sex hormone estrogen and an increased risk of being diagnosed with endometriosis, a painful condition in which uterine tissue grows outside the uterus.

They describe the report, published in ACS' journal Environmental Science & Technology, as the first to examine whether such a connection may exist.

Kurunthachalam Kannan and colleagues explain that some sunscreens and other personal care products contain benzophenone (BP)-type ingredients that are very effective in blocking potentially harmful ultraviolet rays from the sun. Small amounts of BPs can pass through the skin and be absorbed into the blood, where they mimic the effects of estrogen. Endometriosis, which affects up to 1-in-10 women of reproductive age, needs estrogen to develop. Despite those facts, scientists until now had not checked for a connection between the use of BP sunscreens and the likelihood of being diagnosed with endometriosis.

A study from Rush University Medical Center suggests that greater purpose in life can help stave off the harmful effects of plaques and tangles associated with Alzheimer's disease. Plaques and tangles disrupt memory and other cognitive functions.

"Our study showed that people who reported greater purpose in life exhibited better cognition than those with less purpose in life even as plaques and tangles accumulated in their brains," said Patricia A. Boyle, PhD.

"These findings suggest that purpose in life protects against the harmful effects of plaques and tangles on memory and other thinking abilities. This is encouraging and suggests that engaging in meaningful and purposeful activities promotes cognitive health in old age."

Yet another item to toss from your home is one that has become regarded as the best method of cooking out there - non-stick cookware. Using non-stick cookware sure makes cooking easier and more convenient, but is the average person aware of the harm revolving around this cookware? Unlike iron or ceramic pots and pans, this type of cooking vesicle can transmit a toxic chemical through the air that you breathe in. Before continuing to use non-stick cookware, be aware of the many non-stick cookware dangers.

Chemical Compounds: PFOS, PFOA, and PTFE

Most notable of the non-stick cookware dangers, chemical compounds known as perfluorinated compounds are emitted from using this cookware. Once the compounds become heated, they are considered to be a potentially deadly vapor gas if taken in too quickly. Perfluorinated compounds are amongst many non stick surfaces, as well as in popcorn packaging, french fry boxing, candy bar wrappers as well as other various food items. It is best to stay away from anything that may contain perfluorinated compounds in them.

Along with PFOAs, another toxic chemical known as polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE) are actually capable of killing birds. The chemical responsible for the biological damage, which has been shown to cause many problems in animals, has been found in the bloodstream of 95 percent of Americans.

Research with infant twins shows that environmental conditions determine testosterone levels.

By comparing the testosterone levels of five-month old pairs of twins, both identical and non-identical, University of Montreal researchers were able to establish that testosterone levels in infancy are not inherited genetically but rather determined by environmental factors.

"Testosterone is a key hormone for the development of male reproductive organs, and it is also associated with behavioural traits, such as sexual behaviour and aggression," said lead author Dr. Richard E. Tremblay of the university's Research Unit on Children's Psychosocial Maladjustment. "Our study is the largest to be undertaken with newborns, and our results contrast with the findings gained by scientists working with adolescents and adults, indicating that testosterone levels are inherited." The findings were presented in an article published in Psychoneuroendocrinology on May 7, 2012.

The researchers took saliva samples from 314 pairs of twins and measured the levels of testosterone. They then compared the similarity in testosterone levels between identical and fraternal twins to determine the contribution of genetic and environmental factors. Results indicated that differences in levels of testosterone were due mainly to environmental factors. "The study was not designed to specifically identify these environmental factors which could include a variety of environmental conditions, such as maternal diet, maternal smoking, breastfeeding and parent-child interactions."

A new study published in the Journal of Applied Toxicology has raised some disturbing possibilities regarding the dangers of common hormone-mimicking preservatives found in thousands of consumer products on the market today.¹

Titled "Parabens detection in different zones of the human breast: consideration of source and implications of findings," researchers discussed the role that parabens -- a class of estrogen-mimicking chemicals widely used in drugs, foods and cosmetics -- may have in breast cancer and childhood disease.

The report focused on the findings of The Genesis Breast Cancer Prevention Centre at the University Hospital of South Manchester NHS Foundation Trust published last month (March, 2012), which discovered five paraben esters in human breast tissue samples collected from 40 mastectomies from women with primary breast cancer.² The report revealed three things:

• 1) The ester form of parabens found within the breast tissue samples indicated a dermal route of exposure, as would occur through skin care products and underarm deodorants.
• 2) The paraben residues were found at concentrations up to 1 million times higherthan the estrogen (estradiol) levels naturally found in human breast tissue.
• 3) Propylparaben was found in the highest concentration in the underarm area (axilla), where underarm deodorants are most used and breast cancer prevalence is at its highest.

Bacteria, viruses and parasites cause around two million cases of cancer in the world each year, experts believe.

Of the 7.5 million global deaths from cancer that occurred in 2008, an estimated 1.5 million may have been due to potentially preventable or treatable infections.

Scientists carried out a statistical analysis of cancer incidence to calculate that around 16 per cent of all cancers diagnosed in 2008 were infection-related.

The proportion of cancers linked to infection was three times higher in developing than in developed countries.

Key cancer-causing infectious agents include human papillomavirus (HPV), the gastric bug Helicobacter pylori and the hepatitis B (HBV) and C viruses.

These four were together believed to be responsible for 1.9 million cases of cancer, mostly gastric, liver and cervical cancers.

Cervical cancer accounted for around half of infection-related women's cancers. In men, more than 80 per cent of infection-related cancers affected the liver, stomach and colon.

As a child, there was nothing I liked about going to the dental dispensary, with the possible exception of the large tropical fish aquarium in the waiting room. This was a distraction to what was coming: three hours in a vast hall containing a double line of black dental chairs and a matching double line of white-clad dental students. And that, as a six-year-old, is where I first met fluoride on a regular basis. After a free cleaning and checkup (the reason my cost-conscious parents had me go there, and the reason it literally took three hours to complete), fluoride was applied to my teeth with a swab. I remember both the smell (acrid) and the taste (astringent). I actually looked forward to the fluoride treatment, simply because it was the last thing they did to me before I was allowed to leave. Did it work? Probably not. In addition to my regular topical fluoride treatments, I lived in a city with fluoridated water and was raised on fluoridated toothpaste. And I had a mouthful of amalgam by high-school graduation. Controversy? What Controversy?

In the late 1970s, as a young parent, I became aware of the National Fluoridation News, published in the still largely unknown town of Gravette, Arkansas (pop 2,200). For a very small donation, I received a boxful of back issues by return mail. In addition to this generosity, what surprised me about the NFNews was the high caliber of its content. Most of the non-editorial articles were well referenced and the work of well qualified scientists. This was something of a poser, for as a college biology major, I had been thoroughly schooled in the two Noble Truths of Fluoridation: 1) that fluoride in drinking water would reduce tooth decay by 60-65% and 2) that anyone who disagreed with this view was a fool. Yes, I had seen the movie Dr. Strangelove, and yes, I knew how to read an ADA endorsement on a toothpaste label.

Not long after this, my penchant for reading toothpaste labels paid off. There it was, printed right on the back of the tube:

"Children should only use a 'pea-sized' portion of fluoride toothpaste when they brush."

Are we digging our own graves with our teeth? Is the food that we eat every day slowly killing us? When I was growing up, I just assumed that everything in the grocery store was perfectly safe and perfectly healthy. I just assumed that the government and the big corporations were watching out for us and that they would never allow something harmful to be sold in the stores. Boy, was I wrong! Today, the average American diet is extremely unhealthy.

Most of the foods that we all love to eat are absolutely packed with things that will damage our health. Many of the ingredients that make our foods "taste good" such as fat, salt and sugar can be extremely damaging in large amounts. On top of that, most processed foods are absolutely loaded with chemicals and preservatives. The next time you go to the grocery store, just start turning over packages and read the "ingredients" that are being put into our food.

If you have never done this before, you will be absolutely amazed. In many of our most common foods there are "ingredients" that I cannot even pronounce. Sadly, most Americans have no idea that eating a steady diet of these processed foods will likely leave them massively overweight, very sick and much closer to death.

Eating healthy takes more time, more effort and more money than eating poorly does.

Unfortunately, most Americans are content to chow down on foods that are quick to make and that taste good.

In particular, Americans are absolutely addicted to foods that are loaded with sugar and high fructose corn syrup.

When you start looking at food product labels, you will find that either sugar or high fructose corn syrup is in almost everything.

For example, I was absolutely amazed when I learned that most bread sold in our grocery stores contains high fructose corn syrup.

Why in the world would they need to put that into our bread?

Today, Americans are consuming far more sugar and high fructose corn syrup than ever before, and this has many health professionals very alarmed. The following is an excerpt from an article on the website of the Mayo Clinic....

Some research studies have linked consumption of large amounts of any type of added sugar - not just high-fructose corn syrup - to such health problems as weight gain, dental cavities, poor nutrition, and increased triglyceride levels, which can boost your heart attack risk.

But it is not just sweeteners that are a concern.

There are great concerns about much of the meat that we eat as well.

Today, we grow animals much larger than we used to, but it comes at a price.

For example, we pump our cows full of growth hormones and they stand around in piles of their own manure until it is time for them to die.

If many Americans were aware of where the "cheap beef" in their grocery stores really comes from they might just change their eating habits.

Another dramatic change that has happened to our food supply in recent decades has been the rise of genetically modified crops.

In this area, there has been nothing short of a revolution.

It is an awesome fact of nature that we have trillions of organisms within our body - containing completely foreign DNA - some of which break down toxic chemicals that we humans have created to kill other things, but are now killing us, e.g. pesticides.

Who are these strange helpers?

Bacteria!

Wait. Aren't bacteria supposed to harm us? Aren't they the enemy in the endless war against infection?

Well, when our immunity fails, some can grow out of bounds opportunistically. But they respond to the environment within which they are raised, not unlike most other creatures.

Provide organic, wholesome vegetables, for instance, and you have a hotbed of positive activity in your gut. Provide sugar, processed foods and an increasing burden of chemicals and it can get ugly in there!

Also, believe it or not, ancient bacteria teamed up with our cellular ancestors eons ago to produce the energy-producing organelles within our cells called mitochondria.

So, are we really that different from bacteria? No, on some level, we ARE bacteria, spurning some researchers to describe us as "meta-organisms," composed as we are of many different living systems working symbiotically.