Detoxify Your Home

Your home is your sanctuary. Your own small piece of the world in which you spend most of your time, recuperating from and preparing for the outside world.

There have been so many developments in recent years, designed to help us run our lives a little more conveniently; and we have invited them into our homes with open arms. The trouble is, many of these items – plastics, disinfectants, mobile telephones, wireless everything – are brand new developments; and so we are unsure of the long-term effects that they may have on our health.

In this article, I present some of the facts that are not generally publicised, so that you can be aware of the potential risks that certain every-day items and technologies may pose to you and your family, and go some way toward striking a good balance between convenience and limiting exposure to toxic elements.

Five Tips: Avoid Most Toxins In Your Home

1. As much as possible, eat organic or wild produce. This will help you reduce your exposure to pesticides, fertilizers, hormones and steroids. Click here to read more about organic food, including a list of priority produce. Eat wild-caught fish as farmed is often contaminated with mercury and PCBs. Eating these foods will also keep you on nutritious, whole foods and clear from processed, prepackaged foods which contain any number of additives. A balanced diet of whole foods should help protect your health in general too. 

2. Switch over to natural brands of toiletries such as shampoo, toothpaste, antiperspirants and cosmetics. These products contain Phthalates, which are known to be powerful and cumulative endocrine (hormone) disrupters. These chemicals are also passed in high levels from parents to children.  

• Fragrance-free, vegetable-oil-based soaps are a healthy choice
• Organic almond oil or shea butter makes an excellent moisturiser
• Select from a truly natural range such as this  
• Search the internet or local bookshop for more interesting recipes to make your own natural cosmetic products. Some of them really are good enough to eat! 

Be aware that many of the products presented as natural and healthy are not so - check the ingredients thoroughly. The Environmental Working Group has a great safety guide (www.ewg.org/skindeep) to help you find personal care products that are free of phthalates and other potentially dangerous chemicals.

3. Replace plastic and Teflon in your kitchen with ceramic or glass. Store your food and beverages in glass rather than plastic, and avoid using plastic wrap and canned foods (which are often lined with BPA-containing liners). Certainly do not heat foods up anywhere near plastic.

4. Replace as many cleaning products as possible with natural alternatives. Bleach, window cleaner, furniture polish, air fresheners, synthetic fragrances (e.g. fabric softeners) and carpet cleaners are all linked to skin problems, asthma, wheezing, lower than normal lung function. Most detergents are formulated from petrochemicals and contain other toxins. Avoid products that come in a spray, as more of the product becomes airborne and is breathed in.  

• A simple solution of 1 part water to 1 part vinegar will clean most things in the home (the smell disappears when the vinegar dries), and you can add your favourite essential oils - we recommend tea tree or lavender.
• Wash your clothes with a natural alternative such as soapnut shells. Half a cup of vinegar can be added to the rinse cycle as a fabric softener (it also helps break down laundry detergent).
• Neat vinegar can be used to clean the toilet bowl. 
• Lemon juice can be used to dissolve soap scum and hard water deposits, as well as to shine brass and copper.
• Mix 1 cup olive oil with a half cup of lemon juice and you have a furniture polish for your hardwood furniture.
• Baking soda can be used to scrub surfaces in much the same way as commercial abrasive cleansers and it's also a great as a deodorizer.  
• Lemon juice can be mixed with vinegar and/or baking soda to make cleaning pastes.
• Air your house well at every opportunity (in a five-year study, the EPA found significantly higher concentrations of 20 toxic compounds inside homes than outdoors).     

There are plenty more wonderful ideas and recipes, have a search online to replace any specific products.

5. Look for "green," toxin-free alternatives in lieu of regular paint, furniture, vinyl floor coverings, synthetic carpeting, and shower curtains.  

• Paints, varnishes and glues can release VOC's (Volatile Organic Compounds) for months or years. Look for low (or zero) VOC paints.  
• Goods made from plywood, pressed wood, particle board and medium density fiberboard, which are used in most furniture today, are generally treated with formaldehyde, a carcinogen that can emit fumes for as long as five years. Look for whole wood, glass, metal or chrome.  
• Cushions and mattresses are often made from polyurethane foam or plastic as well as any fabric with acrylic, polyester or polyvinyl chloride, all of which can be toxic to the respiratory system. Most of these goods, along with clothing and linens, have probably been treated with flame-retardant chemicals, which can be toxic. In general, try to purchase clothing, sheets and mattresses made of natural materials, such as unbleached cotton, wool, horse hair, and hemp as opposed to synthetics which are made with chemicals. Of course, organic natural fibres are best

All of this information comes with the additional note that with any new product or process, nobody can possibly say that there is no threat to health. Anybody who does probably stands to benefit from it. It's amazing that so many chazardous chemicals are allowed to be used in every-day items. We would always advise you to trust your instincts and use time-tested products and materials.

Chemicals in the Home

There are about 75,000 chemicals regularly manufactured and imported by UK industries and of the 3,000 high-volume chemicals used, about half have no basic toxicity information available. So no one knows whether commonly used chemicals all around you – in your food, water, and air – are really safe. Ten of the most common environmental toxins in our homes are…

1. PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls): This industrial chemical has been banned in the UK for decades, yet is a persistent organic pollutant that’s still present in your environment. It has been linked to cancers, and impaired fetal brain development. Farm-raised salmon and other farm-raised fish are a source of PCBs. They are fed meals of ground-up fish that have absorbed PCBs from the environment. For this reason they should be avoided - try to buy fish caught in the wild. PCBs were also used in adhesives, paints and plastics until the Seventies.

2. Pesticides: According to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), 60 percent of herbicides, 90 percent of fungicides and 30 percent of insecticides are known to be carcinogenic. Pesticide residues have been detected in 50 percent to 95 percent of foods. Exposure to agricultural pesticides increases the risk of lymphoma, a blood cancer associated with the immune system, by as much as 65 per cent. Cancers, Parkinson’s disease, miscarriage, neural and nerve damage, autism, birth defects, and blocked the absorption of food nutrients have been linked with pesticides. Food (fruits, vegetables and commercially raised meats and dairy products) is the major source of pesticides, as well as exposure to bug sprays. Try to buy organic produce, local if possible. You can find more information on organic food - including a list of the most important foods to buy if you are on a restrictive budget - in this article.

3. Mold and other Fungal Toxins: One in three people have had an allergic reaction to mold. Mycotoxins (fungal toxins) can cause a range of health problems with exposure to only a small amount. Exposure has been linked to cancer, heart disease, asthma, multiple sclerosis, and diabetes. Risk of exposure generally comes from contaminated buildings, food like peanuts, wheat, corn and alcoholic beverages.

4. Phthalates: These chemicals are used to lengthen the life of fragrances and soften plastics. Although the plastics industry insists that they are safe, in 2005 European Union regulators banned their use in children’s toys. Professor Richard Sharpe of the Medical Research Council believes chemicals called phthalates are feminising boys and increasing male infertility, birth defects and testicular cancer. Phthalates mimic the female hormone oestrogen. However, phthalates are still widely used. Endocrine system damage (phthalates chemically mimic hormones and are particularly dangerous to children) is another major danger of Phthalate exposure. Pthalates are contained in most cosmetic products and moisturizers; as well as plastic wrap, plastic bottles, plastic food storage containers. All of these can leach phthalates into our food. They are also found in shoes, shower curtains, plastic furniture, vinyl floor coverings and many other household goods.

5. VOCs (Volatile Organic Compounds): VOCs are a major contributing factor to ozone, an air pollutant. According to the EPA, VOCs tend to be even higher (two to five times) in indoor air than outdoor air, likely because they are present in so many household products. Dangers of exposure include cancer, eye and respiratory tract irritation, headaches, dizziness, visual disorders, thickening or arteries, and memory impairment. VOCs are generally found in drinking water, carpet, paints, deodorants, cleaning fluids, varnishes, cosmetics, dry cleaned clothing, moth repellents, and air fresheners.

6. Dioxins: Chemical compounds formed as a result of combustion processes such as commercial or municipal waste incineration and from burning fuels (like wood, coal or oil). Dangers of Dioxins include cancer, reproductive and developmental disorders, chloracne (a severe skin disease with acne-like lesions), skin rashes, skin discoloration, excessive body hair, and mild liver damage. Exposure generally comes from animal fats: over 95 percent of exposure comes from eating commercial animal fats, so seek out grass-fed, naturally raised, organic animal foods instead.

7. Asbestos: This insulating material was widely used from the 1950s to 1970s. Problems arise when the material becomes old and crumbly, releasing fibers into the air. Dangers of exposure include cancer, scarring of the lung tissue, and mesothelioma (a rare form of cancer). Exposure comes from insulation on floors, ceilings, water pipes and healing ducts from the 1950s to 1970s.

8. Toxic Metals: Metals like arsenic, mercury, lead, aluminum and cadmium, which are prevalent in many areas of our environment, can accumulate in soft tissues of the body. Dangers of exposure include cancer, neurological disorders, Alzheimer’s disease, foggy head, fatigue, nausea and vomiting, decreased production of red and white blood cells, abnormal heart rhythm, and damage to blood vessels. The major sources are drinking water, fish, vaccines, pesticides, preserved wood, antiperspirant, building materials (lead paint and lead piping), dental amalgams, and chlorine plants.

9. Chloroform: This colorless liquid has a pleasant, nonirritating odor and a slightly sweet taste, and is used to make other chemicals. It’s also formed when chlorine is added to water. Dangers of exposure include cancer, potential reproductive damage, birth defects, dizziness, fatigue, headache, and liver and kidney damage. Air, drinking water and food can contain chloroform.

10. Chlorine: This highly toxic, yellow-green gas is one of the most heavily used chemical agents. Dangers of exposure include sore throat, coughing, eye and skin irritation, rapid breathing, narrowing of the bronchi, wheezing, blue coloring of the skin, accumulation of fluid in the lungs, pain in the lung region, severe eye and skin burns, lung collapse, reactive airways dysfunction syndrome (RADS) (a type of asthma). Major sources include household cleaners, drinking water (in small amounts), air when living near an industry that uses chlorine in industrial processes (such as a paper plant), and tap water in your shower/bath. The chlorine in swimming pools can also trigger asthma and lung damage.

Clearly it would be very difficult to cut out any potential exposure to these 10 toxins. Which is fine because a healthy body is somewhat equipped to deal with toxins. But if you glance through the major sources, you should be able to identify a few simple ways to check and limit your exposure without major inconvenience.

Special care should be taken to avoid early life exposure to these toxins. Children are at particular risk because they have an immature and porous blood-brain barrier, which allows greater chemical exposures to reach their developing brain. Children also have lower levels of some chemical-binding proteins, according to Environmental Working Group, which allows more of a chemical to reach their organs, while systems that detoxify and excrete chemicals in adults are not fully developed. Experts believe rising rates of birth defects, asthma, neuro-developmental disorders and other serious diseases in children are a result of these early chemical exposures. The EWG found that blood samples from newborns contained an average of 287 toxins, including mercury, fire retardants, pesticides, and Teflon chemicals. Of the 287 chemicals that were detected in umbilical cord blood, we know that 180 cause cancer in humans or animals, 217 are toxic to the brain and nervous system, and 208 cause birth defects or abnormal development in animal tests. The dangers of pre- or post-natal exposure to this complex mixture of carcinogens, developmental toxins and neurotoxins have never been studied.

Food Storage

Bisphenol A, commonly abbreviated as BPA, is a building block of several important plastics and plastic additives. It has been suspected of being hazardous to humans since the 1930s. In 2008, after several governments issued reports questioning its safety, some retailers have removed products containing it from their shelves. A 2010 report from the FDA raised further concerns regarding exposure of fetuses, infants, and young children. A study last year found that BPA can lead to heart disease, diabetes and liver problems in adults, and previous research has linked BPA to:

• Structural damage to the brain
• Hyperactivity, increased aggressiveness, and impaired learning
• Increased fat formation and risk of obesity
• Altered immune function
• Early puberty, stimulation of mammary gland development, disrupted reproductive cycles, and ovarian dysfunction
• Changes in gender-specific behavior, and abnormal sexual behavior
• Stimulation of prostate cancer cells
• Increased prostate size, and decreased sperm production
• Diabetes
• Heart disease
• Liver damage

Of 115 published animal studies, 81 percent found significant effects from even low-level exposure to BPA. As it stands, BPA is one of the world’s highest production-volume chemicals and has already been detected in the urine of 95 percent of people tested. Every-day products that contain BPA include:

• Plastic water or milk bottles
• Plastic microwavable plates, ovenware, and utensils
• Tooth sealants
• Canned foods and drink cans (most have plastic lining in the cans)
• Baby toys, bottles, pacifiers, and cups

It would be advisable to avoid these items wherever possible – particularly when children are exposed to them. Additionally, if you microwave the containers or bottles, or place hot liquids or food into them, BPA is released 55 times more rapidly. Acidic liquids such as juices also increase the rate of leeching. So it is definitely worth avoiding using plastic containers for these things – I certainly advise against heating anything up in plastic (of cling-film); particularly in the microwave!

Bear in mind that even if BPA does get removed from food and beverage containers, this does not mean plastic is safe again. There are other chemicals lurking in plastic that you’re better off avoiding. Here is just a short list of them from The Ecology Center in Berkeley, California:

• Salad dressing and cooking oil bottles: This plastic container is made from PVC (polyvinyl chloride), which leaches plasticizers (lead, cadmium, mercury, phthalates and the carcinogen, diethyl hexyphosphate) into your food.
• Drink bottles, water bottles, peanut butter jars and cooking oil bottles: Made from PET (polyethylene terephthalate), they leach acetaldehyde — a probable human carcinogen, according to the EPA — into your food and drinks.
• Meat trays, foam take-out food containers and cups, foam packing materials: Made from polystyrene (PS), these materials leach styrene, which can damage your nervous system, into your food.

Phthalates, or “plasticisers,” are a group of industrial chemicals used to make plastics like polyvinyl chloride (PVC) more flexible and resilient. They’re also one of the most pervasive of the endocrine disrupters. These chemicals have increasingly become associated with changes in development of the male brain as well as with genital defects, metabolic abnormalities and reduced testosterone in babies and adults. Phthalates are found in, among other things:

• Processed food packaging
• Hoses
• Raincoats
• Shower curtains
• Vinyl flooring and wall coverings
• Lubricant and adhesives
• Detergents
• Beauty products like nail polish, hair spray, shampoo, deodorants, and fragrances
• Toys

Conclusion

With an ever increasing number of "low cost" and convenience products making their way into our homes, it is getting more difficult to avoid exposure to toxins, the cumulative effect of which could go some way toward explaining the rising numbers of certain maladies.

Again, the purpose of this article is not to scare, but to inform. With this information in hand, you can take reasonable steps toward reducing exposure to toxins in your home - if you choose. You probably won't be able to eliminate all of these things from your home, and you probably don't need to. Simply being aware of some of the small steps you can take will make life that little bit easier on your body and you will feel better as a result. If you are eating well, exercising, resting enough and dealing with other stresses then your body is perfectly capable of doing the rest.

Further Reading

• Click here to read a report from The Scientific American about BPA (in plastic containers and bottles - including baby bottles)
• Click here for a Time list of common household toxins
• Click here for an article by The Ecologist on improving your indoor air quality
• Click here for a Californian report on toxic baby furniture    
• Click here for an article on the subject from Cancer Active, a cancer charity

info@theblueberryclinic.co.uk

www.theblueberryclinic.co.uk
Copyright Joe Summerfield 2011

Setting The Record Straight: Organic Foods

Organic foods have made the headlines again last week, as Which? published a study suggesting that Organic food may not taste better or contain as many nutrients as conventionally grown food. The Telegraph reports: click here. You’ll probably remember that organic food was “debunked” in 2009 when a review of studies concluded that organic food had no nutritional benefit – and the FSA agreed. While these kinds of headlines are apparently delicious for a certain kind of person, they can leave a bitter taste for the rest of us. Have we been duped? Is “organic” just another premium pricing tool? Read on to get to the bottom of these studies and make an informed decision about your food.

What Does Organic Mean?

To qualify for organic status, farmers must adhere to strict limits on artificial fertilisers and pesticides. Instead of using these, pests and diseases are controlled using wildlife. For example, clover is grown to boost nitrogen in the soil in place of fertilisers. In the case of livestock, high standards of animal husbandry must be adhered to and all poultry must be free-range. Drugs, antibiotics and wormers are allowed only in emergencies and genetically modified animal feed is banned. This is all monitored by – and producers are licensed by – The Soil Association.

Historically, this is how food has been produced – there was no need for the differentiation indicated by the “organic” label before intensive industrial methods and artificial chemicals made their way into food production. Only in the later part of the 20th century did farmers start regularly using new, and often untested, synthetic chemicals to increase crop yields. In the 1980s, as public interest grew over animal welfare and the use of chemicals, demand grew for a return to a more ecological style of farming. Since then, organic food production has increased by about 20% a year – a rate of growth way ahead of the rest of the food industry. In the past five years sales of organic food in Britain almost doubled, from less than £900m in 2003 to about £2 billion last year (although they are believed to have dipped in the recession).

This does come with a note that some foods of compromised quality can still be called “organic”. Of course, as the market has grown, large scale producers have found ways of working within the rules while defying the spirit – now some organic vegetables and salads are not grown in soil at all; and some are compromised due to transportation.

The Food Standards Agency – Acting In Our Interests?

The Food Standards Agency (FSA) was set up by the Government in 2000 as an independent department with the objective of protecting public health and the consumer’s interests in food. The first chairman, Sir John Krebs, was supportive of the biotechnology lobby and clearly keen to promote GM as the future of farming. On the day that it was announced that he would become the first head of the FSA, Krebs endorsed GM food in a radio interview, saying all GM products approved for sale in the UK ‘were as safe as their non-GM counterparts’. He then appeared on BBC TV in August 2000, stating that consumers who were buying organic food were “not getting value for money, in my opinion and in the opinion of the FSA, if they think they are buying extra nutritional quality or extra nutritional safety, because we don’t have the evidence.” A month later, the chief executive of the Irish counterpart agency, the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (Dr Patrick Wall), dismissed Kreb’s views as extreme and reminded people to buy organic food because it was more ‘environmentally friendly, more wholesome, and better produced’.

In March 2002, Krebs was again criticized over the organic food issue, this time by John Paterson (a biochemist at Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary), for having attacked organic agriculture “on the basis of very little information”.

Krebs also aligned himself with the Social Issues Research Centre (SIRC), which gets part of its funding from large food companies as well as front organisations for the drinks and pharmaceutical industries. When the science correspondent for Channel 4 News contacted Sir John to query the appropriacy of his involvement with an organisation that had such links, Sir John denied any knowledge of the SIRC’s links and refused to make any comment to camera. You can read more about Sir John Kreb’s background – which includes a healthy dose of badger slaughter – here.

One early review of the FSA’s work, by the Labour peer Baroness Brenda Dean, warned there was a risk of the Agency losing its ‘objectivity’ and ‘rigour’ in its support for GM crops and its opposition to organic production. The departure of Sir John Krebs in 2005 did not bring any change in policy. It’s important to note that it’s worth supporting non-GM food for political reasons. The GM seed market is dominated by one powerful company with aggressive expansion strategies, regarded by many as ruthless. GM seeds are not reusable, so there is the potential for GM seed companies to take control of world food production.

Proving That Organic Is Nonsense… 

With this in mind, let’s look at the study. The Food Standards Agency (FSA) published a report, claiming that a comprehensive review of scientific evidence had shown that people who believe organic food is healthier are wasting their money. “There is no evidence of additional health benefits from eating organic food,” declared Gill Fine, the FSA’s director of dietary health.

Led by Alan Dangour (a public health nutritionist from the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine), researchers sifted through 50 years of studies into organic food, analysing nutritional reviews of fruit, vegetables, dairy products and meat. Dangour’s analysis was narrower in scope than it first appears. The FSADangour concluded that these results were irrelevant.

Peter Melchett, policy director of the Soil Association, said: “I’ve read the report and the devil is in the detail. The detail clearly shows there are real differences in nutrition.” The research recorded that organic vegetables had 53.7% more beta-carotene – which is believed to help protect against heart disease and cancer – as well as 38.4% more flavonoids, 12.7% more proteins and 11.3% more zinc. These records have been ignored by the FSA on the grounds that they are not relevant, “due to the overall level of statistical error in the research”. Melchett points out that “they included ‘shopping basket’ studies, which are very variable and unreliable… If you include such studies, you get lots of variation, allowing you to declare the whole thing statistically insignificant. It is supposed to be a report, not an opinion piece. But it is designed in a way that almost guarantees they are able to claim there is no difference.”
 
One significant study that Dangour excluded from his report is an EU-funded four-year study by Carlo Leifert, professor of ecological agriculture at Newcastle University. Leifert’s study, which involved 31 research and university institutes and was peer-reviewed, found that organic milk contained 60% more antioxidants and healthy fatty acids than normal milk. Results from his crop studies suggest vitamin levels are up to a fifth higher in organic tomatoes, wheat and onions. It was also found that while nutritionally desirable compounds, such as antioxidants and vitamins, were higher in organic crops, and levels of nutritionally undesirable compounds such as toxic chemicals, mycotoxins and metals such as cadmium and nickel, were lower in organic crops.
Leifert himself has claimed that the FSA study was misleading, stating that “they have ignored all the recent literature as well as new primary research which shows the heath advantages of organic… They admit in their own research that some compounds are 50% higher in organic. How can you call that a non-significance?”

The FSA’s study looked purely at the nutritional content of organic foods; and even then it had to sneak its way out of evidence that was contrary to its cause. The Which? study is just as questionable. Like the FSA’s study, it ignored a host of key benefits of organic food and focused primarily on taste. It was an extremely small and narrow study, which ignored countless variables. Anyone can construct a test to show organic tastes no better than conventional, if they want to, just by selecting the right produce. And although taste isn’t the beginning or the end of the story, we know that our Riverford vegetables taste a whole lot better than what’s on supermarket shelves.

So What Should We Make Of This?!

In the face of the soaring popularity of organic produce – and a general increase in public interest in health and the environment – the food industry, along with pharmaceutical and large biotechnology companies, has been fighting harder than ever to convince the public that mass-produced, chemically-assisted and intensively-farmed products are just as good as organic foods. They propagate the portrayal of organic foods as a fad amongst neurotic consumers.

Even if these studies were reliable, they would still be a distraction from the two key reasons that people eat organic food: uncertainty over pesticides and chemicals; and environmental responsibility. Simon Wright, a food consultant for Organic Fair Plus, says that one of the main reasons that people buy organic is because of concern over chemicals and long-term health. “It’s a cocktail effect,” he said. “A variety of pesticides and other chemicals are applied at legal levels but interacting in a way that’s impossible to predict.” Studies do exist showing that these chemicals have an effect on people but there is no clarity on the full long-term impact. Nobody wants to fund research.

When it comes to the study of the impact of recent developments, impartial science cannot keep up. The industry that creates processed and GM food aims to manipulate nature in ways that usually target a particular simple objective like ‘yield per acre’. Multinational chemical companies do not care about our health. All the time that they push toward their objectives, we must be conscious that we have a different objective – to stay healthy. Can anyone possibly say that ingesting cocktails of chemicals and food that’s been tampered with is safe in the long-term? If so, at what levels? The truth is that best they can do is to indicate that no links with health problems have been made… yet.

Often we will sense by intuition or taste that a food (or our medical treatment or any other issue like this) is not working well for us, yet it will be much later that science recognises or acknowledges that there has been a negative impact. In our view, sense on this matter says: if we choose to use farming methods that work as much in harmony with nature as possible, we are most likely to have food that tastes good, is well suited to our bodies and gives us a sustainable agriculture.

Our advice, if you want the best food, is to know the source (as much as possible) of your organic food; and to buy seasonal produce.

Saving Money on Organics

All of this information comes with a small note that not ALL Organic food represents good value. One issue that's already been identified is that creation of the "Organic" label has given some cynical retailers the opportunity to charge more for produce that is not in the spirit of Organic Food but does comply with the rules. Another thing to watch out for is foods that have been labelled "Organic" when it really doesn't make a difference. People who trust in Organic food can sometimes find themselves spending more money than they have to.

If you'd like to save on your shopping bill, you'll be glad to hear that you do not need to buy any of these things from an Organic producer, according to a report from the Environmental Working Group (full list in "Further Reading"):

Onions	Avocados	Watermelon
Pineapple	Mango	Frozen sweet peas
Asparagus	Kiwi	Cabbage
Eggplant	Cantaloupe

Frozen sweet corn is also on the list but I've removed it to avoid confusion. I don't recommend consuming non-organic corn and even organic corn should be consumed sparingly.

The foods that you really should by Organic are foods that have permeable or edible skins, and/or that are conventionally grown with higher amounts of pesticides.According to the EWG's report, the top twelve foods to buy Organic are:

Grapes	Potatoes	Kale / Collard greens
Cherries	Spinach	Sweet bell peppers
Nectarines	Blueberries	Apples
Strawberries	Peaches	Celery

Further Reading:

The Environmental Working Group Report - 49 common vegetables and fruits in order of toxin content. This will help you prioritise your shopping.
Riverford Organics – UK grower of organic vegetables and distributor of organic veg’ boxes.
The Soil Association Website – full of information on organic foods, techniques and producers; as well as information on supporting organic food production.
The Organic Farmers and Growers Website – more information on organic foods, techniques and producers; as well as information on supporting organic food production from another organic certification body.
WikiLeaks Cables on GM Seeds – a report on WikiLeaks cables pertaining to the use of GM seeds in Europe.

info@theblueberryclinic.co.uk

www.theblueberryclinic.co.uk
Copyright Joe Summerfield 2011