Tuesday, November 24, 2009
Monday, November 23, 2009
Is My Kidney Stone Stuck In My Ureter
PARABENS OKAY?
Lately, looking at some herbal products, I saw that many creams and tricks to be marked without parebeni.
From there the will to understand why this term is highlighted. Do not think that parabens are toxic?
premise that philosophy is that if ONE THING YOU CAN NOT SWALLOW WITHOUT SUFFERING DAMAGES, EVEN LESS IS BETTER THEN SPALMARSELA upon (our skin absorbs all the substances it comes into contact, then it's like the swallows). But try to be objective anyway.
First we must say that parabens are many and the main ones, or at least those that examine here are four: Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Butylparaben.
are most widely used in cosmetics such as creams, deodorants, shampoo, but maybe not everyone knows, are also used as additives food.
are preservatives and fungicides. But
briefly analyze one by one.
methylparaben (E 218)
paraben From the first, there may be a bit 'of contradictions, but it seems that this anti-irritant and antibacterial agent is considered a safe substance.
Despite this, however a small group of people have shown allergic reactions to this drug even though pairs like the one for those with sensitive skin.
http://www.ehow.com/about_4691068_what-is-methylparaben.html
Ethylparaben (E 214)
paraben Of this you have very little information around, but seems to be similar to the level methylparaben toxicity, ie little or absent.
Propylparaben (E219)
This preservative, however, is another story than the previous ones.
It is easier for this substance is irritating, and can particularly affect the eyes, skin, respiratory and intestinal tracts through, respectively, ingestion and inhalation.
addition, together with butyl paraben, studies have shown a potential risk to male fertility because it seems that both interfere with the reproductive cycle with the elimination of the sperm.
http://www.ehow.com/about_5375955_propylparaben-dangerous.html
Butylparaben (E 216)
More or less the same as shown above, propylparaben.
Butylparaben
However, please note that a study of tissue taken from women with breast cancer, found in 18/19 (the information on these two data range) of 20 samples, the presence of parabens. This probably can not prove a link between breast cancer and parabens but it certainly shows that they are accumulated in our bodies, and thus not ejected. This is not a good sign, especially as these preservatives may cause a slight impairment of the endocrine system.
As usual, when in doubt, I prefer BEWARE with parabens from deodorants.
Main:
http://www.eves-best.com/the-danger-of-parabens.htm
http://www.farmacovigilanza.org/cosmetovigilanza/news/0507-01.asp
http://www.iss.it/inte/aspe/cont.php?id=72&lang=1&tipo=5
http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/SelectedCosmeticIngredients/ucm128042.htm
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753820_1178620761956.htm
Lately, looking at some herbal products, I saw that many creams and tricks to be marked without parebeni.
From there the will to understand why this term is highlighted. Do not think that parabens are toxic?
premise that philosophy is that if ONE THING YOU CAN NOT SWALLOW WITHOUT SUFFERING DAMAGES, EVEN LESS IS BETTER THEN SPALMARSELA upon (our skin absorbs all the substances it comes into contact, then it's like the swallows). But try to be objective anyway.
First we must say that parabens are many and the main ones, or at least those that examine here are four: Methylparaben, Ethylparaben, Propylparaben, Butylparaben.
are most widely used in cosmetics such as creams, deodorants, shampoo, but maybe not everyone knows, are also used as additives food.
are preservatives and fungicides. But
briefly analyze one by one.
methylparaben (E 218)
paraben From the first, there may be a bit 'of contradictions, but it seems that this anti-irritant and antibacterial agent is considered a safe substance.
Despite this, however a small group of people have shown allergic reactions to this drug even though pairs like the one for those with sensitive skin.
http://www.ehow.com/about_4691068_what-is-methylparaben.html
Ethylparaben (E 214)
paraben Of this you have very little information around, but seems to be similar to the level methylparaben toxicity, ie little or absent.
Propylparaben (E219)
This preservative, however, is another story than the previous ones.
It is easier for this substance is irritating, and can particularly affect the eyes, skin, respiratory and intestinal tracts through, respectively, ingestion and inhalation.
addition, together with butyl paraben, studies have shown a potential risk to male fertility because it seems that both interfere with the reproductive cycle with the elimination of the sperm.
http://www.ehow.com/about_5375955_propylparaben-dangerous.html
Butylparaben (E 216)
More or less the same as shown above, propylparaben.
Butylparaben
However, please note that a study of tissue taken from women with breast cancer, found in 18/19 (the information on these two data range) of 20 samples, the presence of parabens. This probably can not prove a link between breast cancer and parabens but it certainly shows that they are accumulated in our bodies, and thus not ejected. This is not a good sign, especially as these preservatives may cause a slight impairment of the endocrine system.
As usual, when in doubt, I prefer BEWARE with parabens from deodorants.
Main:
http://www.eves-best.com/the-danger-of-parabens.htm
http://www.farmacovigilanza.org/cosmetovigilanza/news/0507-01.asp
http://www.iss.it/inte/aspe/cont.php?id=72&lang=1&tipo=5
http://www.fda.gov/Cosmetics/ProductandIngredientSafety/SelectedCosmeticIngredients/ucm128042.htm
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753820_1178620761956.htm
Saturday, November 7, 2009
Denise Milani Similar Models
SCALDIAMOCI THOUGHTS
in the best way to start the post dedicated to the place I love, MILAN (And others), it seems to me right away from Don Bosco (MMBrenta area).
There, in fact, did the library SCALDAPENSIERI-BOOKS FOR BOYS, by the will of the brave and amazing CRISTINA ZEPPINI, a pixie-haired red and soft as we know, even though she is so determined to pass himself off as a simple librarian, an artist, educator and actress, but if sentiste only a moment to speak, the more certainly believe my version since it has the ability to enchant and pamper you just crossed the threshold of the library.
After a few years, the library becomes the new SCALDAPENSIERI, expanding to 10 November 2007, with the entrance into society MAXIMUM ZERBELLONI also a fan of music theater and dad, well, books!
now also has a significant proportion of books for adults, but retains its historic identity of library SPECIALIZED FOR CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS, by the tremendous reception of the two that immediately thrusts you into dreamy timeless atmosphere that only books are able to give you, leaving open mouth with the snot nose, just like a child in front of the candy bar (at least to me, does this effect).
What is really amazing this library, however, what really sets it apart from all others, as well as highly competent owners, is that it has become a real gathering place for families, in a neighborhood that has been neglected for too long and now has found a concrete point of reference.
SCALDAPENSIERI go to the new, in fact, not just go buy a book, but separate from the newspaper to stop for a pleasant conversation, be in the presentations of emerging writers, publishers discover small, have the opportunity to participate in theater workshops, literary and music, and much more. It simply means to be rich.
(and then the Christian will always find, and I always say, the right book for you, the avid reader or not!)
That's why I really love this place. You always feel at HOME.
I therefore invite you all to fiondarvici and as the owner says to "touch, browse, smell, observe, read" the books that you will find it is the only way you can tell if a particular book is really for you. Tell the truth, where else will allow such a familiarity with the books?
And I challenge those who are not even going very fond of the printed and bound. You will be amazed: P
Main
http://www.nuovascaldapensieri.it/?page=7Z
in the best way to start the post dedicated to the place I love, MILAN (And others), it seems to me right away from Don Bosco (MMBrenta area).
There, in fact, did the library SCALDAPENSIERI-BOOKS FOR BOYS, by the will of the brave and amazing CRISTINA ZEPPINI, a pixie-haired red and soft as we know, even though she is so determined to pass himself off as a simple librarian, an artist, educator and actress, but if sentiste only a moment to speak, the more certainly believe my version since it has the ability to enchant and pamper you just crossed the threshold of the library.
After a few years, the library becomes the new SCALDAPENSIERI, expanding to 10 November 2007, with the entrance into society MAXIMUM ZERBELLONI also a fan of music theater and dad, well, books!
now also has a significant proportion of books for adults, but retains its historic identity of library SPECIALIZED FOR CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS, by the tremendous reception of the two that immediately thrusts you into dreamy timeless atmosphere that only books are able to give you, leaving open mouth with the snot nose, just like a child in front of the candy bar (at least to me, does this effect).
What is really amazing this library, however, what really sets it apart from all others, as well as highly competent owners, is that it has become a real gathering place for families, in a neighborhood that has been neglected for too long and now has found a concrete point of reference.
SCALDAPENSIERI go to the new, in fact, not just go buy a book, but separate from the newspaper to stop for a pleasant conversation, be in the presentations of emerging writers, publishers discover small, have the opportunity to participate in theater workshops, literary and music, and much more. It simply means to be rich.
(and then the Christian will always find, and I always say, the right book for you, the avid reader or not!)
That's why I really love this place. You always feel at HOME.
I therefore invite you all to fiondarvici and as the owner says to "touch, browse, smell, observe, read" the books that you will find it is the only way you can tell if a particular book is really for you. Tell the truth, where else will allow such a familiarity with the books?
And I challenge those who are not even going very fond of the printed and bound. You will be amazed: P
Main
http://www.nuovascaldapensieri.it/?page=7Z
Sunday, November 1, 2009
Does Black Gold And A Bright Red Gothic
# 1 ASPARTAME-E951
This post is a bit 'Lunghin, the I admit. But aspartame is a prime example of how the process is "enabling" of food additives (and how they experience, unfortunately, many power plays).
Aspartame is an artificial sweetener food additive that has created quite a few storms between the scientific communities.
was discovered in 1965 by James M. Schlatter, a chemist of GD Searle & Company (USA), which, after thorough this compound, has submitted to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration).
On June 26, 1974, the FDA allowed the use of aspartame in beverages alone, immediately sparking a petition of signatures on the part of Dr. Olney and lawyer Jim Turner to recall that decision.
This led, three years later, the FDA to initiate an investigation on the survey and data collected by Searle, by entrusting the investigation to the U.S. ATTORNEY OFFICE.
The first odd thing was born here. The then chief of detectives of the Attorney was hired seven months later at the law offices of Searle.
The investigation continued, however, managed to publish a report in which errors were reported in the documents about Searle's aspartame, but could not be completed because of budget constraints and time (time-barred, we would say today XD).
We must, then, wait until 1980 because aspartame is given the green light also food and, specifically, at the time of the then U.S. president Ronald Reagan who gave the charge to a certain Arthur Hull Hayes to review the position of aspartame. It was he, in fact, give consent to which this substance could also be used safely in food and beverages only.
The second curious thing is born from here. It is assumed by many that Hayes had some friends with Donald Rumsfeld, then President of GD Searle.
There must also be said, however, that on the other hand, many believed that the suspect was on the toxicity of aspartame only a ploy by some to bring down the shares of Searle and then removing them, a slice of the market for the benefit of others.
Even in this respect was an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. I tried to go on your site and know how it is going to end, or if these assumptions was affirmative or negative, but, ahem .. there are a lot of documents, all in English and I should put there to groom for a while ' time, which tempts me not at all = __ =
The waters have remained more or less quiet until 2006 when the Ramazzini Foundation in Bologna found (I quote from Wikipedia), "the increased incidence of lymphomas and leukemias in female mice after intake of low doses of aspartame. "
The documents of the Foundation, together with all previous records of past investigations have been retouched concerned from EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) which responded that (I quote from the website of EFSA) "there was a need to review the outcome of the previous risk assessment and confirming the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for aspartame of 40 mg / kg bodyweight (bw ) "
This dose, it is worthwhile to keep in mind because you can not understand how this could, in my opinion, be checked because the producers BY LAW, DO NOT have any obligation to write the label ingredients, the measurement 'of aspartame inherent in their products (!!).
report here more faithfully and in detail by the EFSA's website, the findings that led to its decision about aspartame:
* The increased incidence of lymphomas / leukemias in treated rats was unrelated to aspartame, due to the high background incidence of chronic inflammatory changes in the lungs and the lack of a positive dose-response relationship. It is known that these tumors may develop in response to abnormal hyperplasia of lymphoid organs in the lungs of rats infected with diseases respiratory disease. The most plausible explanation of the results of this study with respect ailinfomi and leukemia is that they have developed in a colony suffering from chronic respiratory disease. The slight increase in the incidence of these tumors in rats fed aspartame is considered to be a fortuitous result of the ERF study and can therefore be ignored.
* The preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the renal pelvis, ureter and bladder observed mainly in female rats along with renal calcification were most probably related to treatment, at least at higher doses. It is widely recognized that this is an effect due to the high dose of irritant chemicals or chemicals responsible for the calcification of the renal pelvis as a result of imbalances in calcium metabolism, to the rat. The Panel considers that these effects are of no relevance to humans.
* The data on total malignant tumors are not sufficient to demonstrate a carcinogenic potential of aspartame. In the opinion of the Panel that the aggregation of all cancers or all of the animals suffering from malignant tumors for statistical purposes is not justified, since, as stated above, the lymphomas and leukemias, first , and renal tumors, on the other hand, should be excluded from the analysis.
* Concerning the malignant schwannomas, the Panel notes that the number of tumors is low, the dose-response relationship, while showing a positive statistical trend in males, is very flat over a wide range dosages, there is also uncertainty about the diagnosis of these tumors. The Panel concludes that this result can be fully assessed only after an independent review of all histopathologic preparations of the nervous system of the ERF study and if appropriate, also of historical controls.
highlights once again how, at the end of the day, totally unnecessary animal testing, since, it seems to me in the eyes of all, can not lead to any results, but only certain food interests of either party. This, of course, is a general discussion and does not refer necessarily to the case mentioned in this post.
Well, what to say. It 'amazing how a little thing that is part of our daily lives of consumers, that hides a troubled history.
If I made any mistakes or inaccuracies, please let me know.
Main and sources used
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753820_1178620765743.htm
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame
http: / / www.ramazzini.it/fondazione/newsDetail.asp?id=18
http://www.disinformazione.it/aspartame5.htm
http://italia.aspartame.info/Default.asp 
This post is a bit 'Lunghin, the I admit. But aspartame is a prime example of how the process is "enabling" of food additives (and how they experience, unfortunately, many power plays).
Aspartame is an artificial sweetener food additive that has created quite a few storms between the scientific communities.
was discovered in 1965 by James M. Schlatter, a chemist of GD Searle & Company (USA), which, after thorough this compound, has submitted to the FDA (Food and Drug Administration).
On June 26, 1974, the FDA allowed the use of aspartame in beverages alone, immediately sparking a petition of signatures on the part of Dr. Olney and lawyer Jim Turner to recall that decision.
This led, three years later, the FDA to initiate an investigation on the survey and data collected by Searle, by entrusting the investigation to the U.S. ATTORNEY OFFICE.
The first odd thing was born here. The then chief of detectives of the Attorney was hired seven months later at the law offices of Searle.
The investigation continued, however, managed to publish a report in which errors were reported in the documents about Searle's aspartame, but could not be completed because of budget constraints and time (time-barred, we would say today XD).
We must, then, wait until 1980 because aspartame is given the green light also food and, specifically, at the time of the then U.S. president Ronald Reagan who gave the charge to a certain Arthur Hull Hayes to review the position of aspartame. It was he, in fact, give consent to which this substance could also be used safely in food and beverages only.
The second curious thing is born from here. It is assumed by many that Hayes had some friends with Donald Rumsfeld, then President of GD Searle.
There must also be said, however, that on the other hand, many believed that the suspect was on the toxicity of aspartame only a ploy by some to bring down the shares of Searle and then removing them, a slice of the market for the benefit of others.
Even in this respect was an investigation by the Securities and Exchange Commission. I tried to go on your site and know how it is going to end, or if these assumptions was affirmative or negative, but, ahem .. there are a lot of documents, all in English and I should put there to groom for a while ' time, which tempts me not at all = __ =
The waters have remained more or less quiet until 2006 when the Ramazzini Foundation in Bologna found (I quote from Wikipedia), "the increased incidence of lymphomas and leukemias in female mice after intake of low doses of aspartame. "
The documents of the Foundation, together with all previous records of past investigations have been retouched concerned from EFSA (European Food Safety Authority) which responded that (I quote from the website of EFSA) "there was a need to review the outcome of the previous risk assessment and confirming the acceptable daily intake (ADI) for aspartame of 40 mg / kg bodyweight (bw ) "
This dose, it is worthwhile to keep in mind because you can not understand how this could, in my opinion, be checked because the producers BY LAW, DO NOT have any obligation to write the label ingredients, the measurement 'of aspartame inherent in their products (!!).
report here more faithfully and in detail by the EFSA's website, the findings that led to its decision about aspartame:
* The increased incidence of lymphomas / leukemias in treated rats was unrelated to aspartame, due to the high background incidence of chronic inflammatory changes in the lungs and the lack of a positive dose-response relationship. It is known that these tumors may develop in response to abnormal hyperplasia of lymphoid organs in the lungs of rats infected with diseases respiratory disease. The most plausible explanation of the results of this study with respect ailinfomi and leukemia is that they have developed in a colony suffering from chronic respiratory disease. The slight increase in the incidence of these tumors in rats fed aspartame is considered to be a fortuitous result of the ERF study and can therefore be ignored.
* The preneoplastic and neoplastic lesions of the renal pelvis, ureter and bladder observed mainly in female rats along with renal calcification were most probably related to treatment, at least at higher doses. It is widely recognized that this is an effect due to the high dose of irritant chemicals or chemicals responsible for the calcification of the renal pelvis as a result of imbalances in calcium metabolism, to the rat. The Panel considers that these effects are of no relevance to humans.
* The data on total malignant tumors are not sufficient to demonstrate a carcinogenic potential of aspartame. In the opinion of the Panel that the aggregation of all cancers or all of the animals suffering from malignant tumors for statistical purposes is not justified, since, as stated above, the lymphomas and leukemias, first , and renal tumors, on the other hand, should be excluded from the analysis.
* Concerning the malignant schwannomas, the Panel notes that the number of tumors is low, the dose-response relationship, while showing a positive statistical trend in males, is very flat over a wide range dosages, there is also uncertainty about the diagnosis of these tumors. The Panel concludes that this result can be fully assessed only after an independent review of all histopathologic preparations of the nervous system of the ERF study and if appropriate, also of historical controls.
highlights once again how, at the end of the day, totally unnecessary animal testing, since, it seems to me in the eyes of all, can not lead to any results, but only certain food interests of either party. This, of course, is a general discussion and does not refer necessarily to the case mentioned in this post.
Well, what to say. It 'amazing how a little thing that is part of our daily lives of consumers, that hides a troubled history.
If I made any mistakes or inaccuracies, please let me know.
Main and sources used
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/EFSA/efsa_locale-1178620753820_1178620765743.htm
http://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame
http: / / www.ramazzini.it/fondazione/newsDetail.asp?id=18
http://www.disinformazione.it/aspartame5.htm
http://italia.aspartame.info/Default.asp
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)