This is Part 2 of The Toxin Report by Dr Steve Nugent. If you somehow missed Part 1 it should be easy to find on The Health Gazette site.
The report is a collection of health related facts that should be quite thought provoking. Part 2 is the shortest so let’s continue with this middle part now.
THE NUGENT TOXIN REPORT Presented by Dr. Steve Nugent (Continued: Part 2 of 3)
ORGANIC
The legal definition of organic is: Something composed, at least in part, of carbon molecules. This includes anything that is alive or was once alive. Under the legal definition, your leather pumps or wingtips qualify as organic. Organic does not necessarily mean clean or nutritious. Except in California, it is legal to spray with the most dangerous pesticides and still call the produce organic. California stipulates only that the pesticides found must not have been placed there ‘on purpose.’
TOXINS IN YOUR TAP
It is estimated that 90% of all pharmaceutical drugs ingested are not metabolized, and leave the body in urine or feces.
Pharmaceutical drugs are now showing up in our tap and ground water!!! The first drug was found by accident. Scientists doing their routine tap water tests for pesticides in Berlin, Germany, found Clofibric Acid, a cholesterol-lowering drug. The instruments that found it were calibrated to identify pesticides!!… The scientists did not recognize the pattern, so they took it to a toxicology lab, which readily identified it.
Many other drugs have since been found in our wells and ground water: – Lipid lowering drugs – Analgesics – Chemotherapeutic drugs – Antibiotics – Hormones = 2E..Just to name a few
A summary article on 100 cities found identical results (Chemosphere, January1998).
Antibiotics: Stuart Levy, Director of the Center for Adaptation Genetics and Drug Resistance at Tufts University in Boston, MA, states:
"Our concentration of antibiotics is 1000 times higher than in Germany, high enough to affect the growth of E- Coli. This may be causing the bacteria to become medication resistant."
E-Coli has been discovered in the drinking water of some major and minor US cities.
Estrogen: Shane Snyder of Michigan State University found enough estrogen (mostly from birth control pills) in Lake Mead to cause male fish to produce female egg protein, and to attempt to lay eggs that they were not equipped to lay. Disbelieving the results, Mr. Snyder repeated his tests 30 times.
Acceptable levels of chemicals and pollutants are a lot lower than you have been told. High acceptable levels are allowed because no one knows how to solve the problem. "The amount of estrogen needed to feminize a human embryo, essentially turning a baby boy into a baby girl, is the same ratio as one drop of gin in 700 railway cars of tonic water. ", Orlando Sentinel 2/98
Breast reduction surgery is at a peak in teenage and young adult males.
Male fertility has significantly decreased in the last 20 years.
No filtering system on the market today removes pharmaceutical drugs from drinking water – none!!!
CLIMBING HEALTH STATISTICS:
– ALL degenerative diseases are on the rise.
– Disease is regularly occurring at younger ages.
– Infants and children are contracting catastrophic illnesses at increasing rates.
– In the last 20 years, in spite of billions of dollars spent on research, cancer has moved from the number 8 killer of Americans to the number 2 killer.
– In 1900, 5% of the US population died of heart disease, cancer, or diabetes. Today, 95% of us will die from any combination of these causes. Do we really want to just keep doing what 95% of us are doing?
In the next and final part of this report Dr Nugent presents ways of dealing with the challenges that toxins present.
I received an email that contains a fascinating collection of facts that I thought you might like to see. It is rather long so I won’t post it all and I will also break it up into three parts. It was compiled by Dr Nugent.
Dr. Steve Nugent practiced as a Naturopathic physician in Detroit Michigan for 22 years. His excellent clinic was nicknamed the Last Chance Clinic. His reputation drew patients from miles away, who often arrived after their own physicians had given up hope. While no clinic has a 100% cure rate, many of Dr. Nugent’s patients entered on gurneys and exited on foot. Dr. Nugent was the past President of the American Naturopathic Medical Association (ANMA).
Here’s Part 1.
THE NUGENT TOXIN REPORT Presented by Dr. Steve Nugent
GLOBAL TOXINS
Without exception, every North American now has in his or her tissues 300-500 known toxins that were not in existence before 1940. So, where has all the poison come from? Shortages of natural materials during WWII prompted the creation of synthetic chemicals. For example, scientists developed nylon when they ran out of silk for parachutes. Natural rubber ran in short supply, so they developed synthetic rubber. A shortage of butter produced oleomargarine. Plastics were developed during this time period.
Since those early years, the chemical revolution has continued. The scientist often becomes excited about what he can do with his chemicals, without considering the long-term affects the chemicals may have on one’s quality of life or the environment. They ask, "Can I?", rather than "Should I?".
As a result…
— Toxins are everywhere. The problem is not confined to North America, although the studies have been done in the USA and Canada. Because of the nature of wind, rain and weather, we know that the entire planet is surrounded with toxins. Almost every known toxin and farm pesticide on the planet can be found in places as remote as the North Pole. Scientists doing studies there drilled through the polar ice cap, sank a camera through the pole, and found nearly a foot of brownish greenish goop that, similar to many industrial chemicals, refused to freeze. Contained in the muck were DDT, dioxin, and PCB’s as well as hundreds of other chemicals. Ours is a closed eco-system….which we cannot escape.
— The studies identify up to 500 toxins. It should be known that the instruments were calibrated for up to a maximum of 500 toxins. These tests are quite expensive. If they had been calibrated for more, it is certain that they would have found more.
— Farmers who handle pesticides without using masks, protective clothing or washing their hands become very sick with undiagnosable ‘syndromes.’ Visits to multiple physicians and/or clinics, including the Mayo Clinic can prove fruitless and frustrating. However, routine blood tests reveal a pattern of toxicity to those physicians alert to the clues. A diagnosis of toxicity can be definitively made by toxicology tests, after which monitored detoxification and nutritional support is indicated.
— Recommendation: Purchase the ugly produce! If the insects liked it, it was clean.
THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONNECTION
The following maps, when overlaid, demonstrate an eerie and uncanny relationship between illness and death and our environment:
1. Highest rate of death per 100,000 people from any cause.
2. All cancers: Total mortality rate in deaths per 100,000. The entire Northwest quadrant of Nevada boasts the highest rates of thyroid cancer worldwide, due to residual radiation from atomic test detonations done in the 1940s. Radiation does not go away until the very long half-life has expired.
3. Industrial Air Emissions-Suspected Carcinogens (Tons per year). We are exposed to small but cumulative amounts, and these amounts are added to storage in our fat cells.
4. Industrial Air Emissions-Hazardous Chemicals (Tons per year). These are the chemicals that ‘only’ cause fatigue, asthma, allergies, etc. Most of these are completely transparent. We recognize the brown dome over LA when we approach LAX from the air. However, these chemicals are invisible and are present globally, even in pristine blue skies.
5. Cancer mortality (represented in red) and Suspected Carcinogens (blue). Their overlay was illustrated in purple, a close to total overlay.
6. Total mortality, Industrial Air Emissions and Suspected carcinogens overlaid. Again, lots of purple. The pressure against our health is growing.
7. Hazardous (nuclear) waste is mixed into crop fertilizers in the states of Washington, Oregon, California, Kansas, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Georgia and Wyoming. The idea is to diffuse it over many miles in such small quantities as to be completely harmless, say the proponents of this policy. However, radiation does not go away until its half-life has expired. Additionally, radiation exposure is cumulative. Little amounts will eventually have serious effects on health. Little amounts placed on the fields every year are adding up. – Leukemia is induced by radiation. – California is the largest producer of produce for the entire USA. – Oklahoma is experiencing a high rate and regularity of mutations in animals.
TOXINS IN YOUR HOME
Measurable levels of toxins are 5 times higher in our homes than they are outdoors.
The February 1998 issue of Scientific American stated that indoor toxins are 3-5 times more dangerous than those found outdoors.
If you can’t pronounce it, you probably shouldn’t be putting it into or next to your body.
Some sources of indoor toxins:
– Dry cleaning fluid (do you ventilate your closets?)- causes cancer in lab animals.
– Mothballs and moth crystals-contain paradichlorobenzene, which causes cancer in lab animals. Ever wonder why a moth won’t go near mothballs? They are poisonous! Use cedar instead, which is natural and effective.
– Toilet bowl cleaners or deodorizers contain the same poison as mothballs. Do we really need blue toilet water?
– Dry ink toners: copy machines, faxes, laser printers. When heated, dry toners release formaldehyde and styrene gas into the air. Exposure can cause cancer and induce asthma, allergies and fatigue. Those who sag against the office water cooler at the end of the day feeling exhausted and drained may have had a hard day. Or, they could have experienced an overexposure to their office equipment!
– Glues for wallpaper and countertops.
– Toxins in your shower: chloroform gas forms by heating chlorinated water.
– Pesticides tracked into and trapped in carpets. Levels of pesticides outside are typically measured at around 10 nanograms/cubic meter. Indoors they are about 240 nanograms/cubic meters!! Pesticides are slightly sticky. If the pile on your carpet is high, it traps and stores more poison. Scientists found minimal trapping of poisons in those homes with very low pile, linoleum or wood floors.
Of 178 homes tested, all had 8 pesticides and 11 other poisons in the carpet. Lead and aluminum were also found. Most of this is tracked into the house on shoes/feet. Simply placing a carpet outside, or taking one’s shoes off at the front door dropped the exposure factor by a level of 6.
Levels were high enough in all 178 homes to trigger a federal investigation, had they been federally funded sites.
Infants get up to 100 milligrams of personal toxic dust from carpets daily. This is five times higher than what they pick up from outdoors. At the same time, we are seeing an appalling rise in childhood diseases.
– DDT has been illegal in the USA and Canada for the last 25+ years. However, the law neglected to make it illegal to make DDT. The USA is its chief manufacturer and we sell it to nearly every country in the world. We then purchase fruits and vegetables from countries where it is perfectly legal to spray it, hmmmmm….. Another study found that 90 of 362 homes tested positive for DDT indoors.
Well that will do for Part 1. It should give you plenty to think about. I’ll post part 2 tomorrow. Stay well.
The vitamin-like anti-oxidant CoQ100, a powerful natural nutrient, lowers your risk of breast cancer, shrinks metastatic breast tumors, protects your organs from the damaging effects of chemotherapy, and may increase your chances of surviving breast cancer. And yes, these claims are well supported by quality research findings.
Ubiquinone, otherwise known as Coenzyme Q10 or CoQ10, is found in every cell in your body. It is absolutely essential for energy production in your cells. Research shows CoQ10 levels in tumors are much lower than in normal tissues. When CoQ10 is given to breast cancer patients, some spectacular results have been seen.
In a 1994 study in Denmark, 32 patients with high risk breast cancer were treated with antioxidants (vitamin C and E, selenium and beta carotene), essential fatty acids (gamma linolenic acid and omega-3 fatty acids) and 90 mg of CoQ10. Breast cancer tumors shrank in six of the 32 patients. The researchers then tested what would happen with an increased dose of CoQ10.
They increased the daily dose of CoQ10 to 390mg in just one of these 6 patients. In just one month the tumor in this patient had become so small, the researchers couldn’t feel it anymore. A mammogram done a month later showed the tumor had completely disappeared. These researchers then gave another patient with breast cancer 300mg of CoQ10 a day and her tumor disappeared. In the 18 months the patients were treated, none of them died or showed further signs of metastases. On the basis of statistical data the expected number of women who would have died, based on the stage of their tumor, was 4.
Encouraged by these results, the researchers continued their study of CoQ10 in breast cancer patients and published a report the following year. Three hundred and ninety milligrams of CoQ10 was given to each breast cancer patient every day. One patient was a 44 year old woman whose breast cancer had spread to her liver causing numerous tumors. After taking the CoQ10 for a short while, all the metastatic tumors disappeared. Another patient with metastatic breast cancer tumors to the lining of her lung was given CoQ10 and 6 months later, her doctors could no longer find any of her tumors.
Chemotherapy can cause organ damage, especially to the liver, heart and kidneys, because it doesn’t just target cancer cells, it also kills normal healthy cells. CoQ10 has been found to help prevent organ damage caused by chemotherapy and may also increase survival.
Certain drugs like Adriamycin, a potent cytotoxic drug, commonly damage important heart cells. In elderly patients with heart disease, the damage caused by Adriamyin can be fatal. CoQ10 is normally found in high concentrations in the heart. Adriamycin causes those levels to go down. When patients on Adriamycin are given CoQ10, it prevents CoQ10 levels from going down in the heart and protects heart cells from being damaged.
CoQ10 is fat soluble so it is better absorbed when it is in fats or oils. So, for example, when CoQ10 comes in a soy oil suspension contained in a soft shell capsule, it is better absorbed than if it is in a dry tablet or capsule. Tablets are fine, it just means that you will need a higher dose of the dry form of CoQ10 compared to the oil suspension to get the same levels in your body.
Christine Horner, MD is a board certified and nationally recognized surgeon, author, professional speaker and a relentless champion for women’s health. She spearheaded legislation in the 1990s that made it mandatory that insurance companies pay for breast reconstruction following mastectomy. She is the author of the new book, Waking the Warrior Goddess: Dr Christine Horner’s Program to Protect Against and Fight Breast Cancer.
According to Dr Horner, for prevention, 30-100 mg per day is the recommended dose. If you have breast cancer, you’ll need to take more. Research shows about 300-390mg a day is very effective. A study from the University of Scranton found bio-grown CoQ10, prepared from whole food cultures, may be the most well absorbed and metabolized form of CoQ10. It was found to have 20 times more antioxidant activity than the standard preparation of CoQ10. Since more CoQ10 is biologically available in this form, only 22mg are required a day. Please work with your doctor when taking this supplement, preferably a naturopathic doctor.
Recently I read an article in the Irish Examiner. It was an interesting article with a clear line of argument. It started well, with an attention-grabbing scenario relating an all-too-common story of pharmaceutical company immorality. Here is the beginning of the article.
By Terry Prone
A PHARMACEUTICAL company comes up with a new treatment. Puts it on the market. Doctors prescribe it. It becomes hugely popular. It earns enormous amounts of money for its manufacturers.Then lethal side effects surface and it emerges that the drug company knew about them. It was aware, for a while, that hundreds of people have become very ill as a result of taking the tablets, and a fair few have actually popped their clogs. But the drug company has convinced itself that these are but anomalies, and so does not feel an overwhelming need to tell the regulators or stick one of those off-putting health warnings on each package. They keep it a secret. Their share price stays buoyant.
Eventually, of course, it stops being a secret. When this happens, as it has, more than once in recent days, the drug company gets smacked around by the FDA and other authorities, gets class action lawsuits in droves, gets fined, gets more column inches of godawful coverage than it could ever have imagined, pays out millions if not billions in damages, and is likely to take a hit on its share value.
Public sympathy for its travails is limited, because people feel the manufacturer had to have known that such egregious concealment of data was going to damage the public good and kill off a proportion of the citizens.
Transparency and openness are the way to go. The public’s right to know is paramount. The more people know, the more in control they are. Good information flow saves lives and contributes to general well-being.
Now up to this point all was well, Terry certainly had crafetd his story effectively if his intention was to capture attention and have readers follow him down the column. Then, alas, all went pear-shaped, as they say. The argument leaped to conclude that the media is culpable in publishing stories about false health claims, since people may think they’re true and in taking the wrong action, actually do themselves harm. He states: "We rightly punish drug companies when their concealment of data COULD cost hundreds of lives. But we don’t punish those who disseminate misleading material that WILL cost thousands of lives."
What Terry found so upsetting was reporting of claims by one man to have cured his HIV without drugs. It turned out that he probably never had HIV at all but had been given a false positive result in his blood test.
Well Terry, I understand what you are trying to say, but you are seriously misguided. Perhaps you have lost a friend to AIDS or have some other personal tragedy that troubles you so. But the reality is that drug company behavior DOES cost thousands of lives AND causes untold unnecessary illness.
The suggestion that the media does the wrong thing is another matter. The media certainly isn’t perfect and many people have legitimate complaints to make about the way the media covers or fails to cover various matters. Should we therefore shoot the messenger? I think not. Let’s hope that various social forces will work together to educate or even reform the media, but imperfect as it is, its role in a pluralist and democratic world is far too important.
Furthermore, I would suggest that the attention-grabbing scenario Terry chose to use ought not be trivialized or easily dismissed. Don’t be distracted from the very real ugliness of the way many people in so-called Big Pharma behave. Let us hope that the media will continue to report on those discoveries, for everyone’s sake.
It took 10 years for 38 synthetic substances to make their way into products labeled "USDA Organic", when the Ag Approps amendments kick in, that number could leap to over 500 with the stroke of the Secretary’s pen.
Below are the parts of the Organic Food Production Act relating to organic labeling with the new amendments in bold.
It is products that currently are labeled "USDA Organic" that are affected. Under USDA National Organic Program regulations (below, after the code), these products were only required to contain 95% organic ingredients and they could contain certain synthetic ingredients on the National List. In Harvey, a recent 1st Circuit case, the court ruled that these regulations would have to be changed to bring them into compliance with the OFPA which specifically forbade anyone to "add any synthetic ingredient during the processing or any postharvest handling of the product" and, for the handling of organic agricultural products, required each National List item be one that is "non-synthetic but is not organically produced."
Now, with the new Ag Approps changes to the OFPA, the law forbids one to "add any synthetic ingredient NOT APPEARING ON THE NATIONAL LIST during the processing or any postharvest handling of the product" and it strikes the requirement for the handling of organic agricultural products that a National List item be one that is "non-synthetic but is not organically produced." In this respect, the changes restore the pre-Harvey status quo (the 38 synthetic ingredients).
However, there is one way in which the new OFPA amendments on synthetics go far beyond "pre-Harvey":
(1) They radically alter the way synthetic ingredients are added to the List.
For the first time, the Secretary will have the power to expedite petitions for access to the list of substances that are commercially unavailable in organic form. Right now there are 38 synthetic substances on the National List that have been carefully reviewed and approved by the National Organic Standards Board over the past ten years. Eight more synthetic substances have been reviewed and approved by the NOSB and are awaiting USDA authority to be placed on the National List. The industry has requested that 517 more synthetic substances be approved. In all likelihood, this new power granted to the Secretary will be the opening of the floodgate to these hundreds of synthetic ingredients being allowed in products labeled "USDA Organic."
7 U.S.C.A. § 6510(a)(1)
(a) In general
For a handling operation to be certified under this chapter, each person on such handling operation shall not, with respect to any agricultural product covered by this chapter–
(1) add any synthetic ingredient NOT APPEARING ON THE NATIONAL LIST during the processing or any postharvest handling of the product;
7 U.S.C.A. § 6517(c)(1)(B)
(c) Guidelines for prohibitions or exemptions
(1) Exemption for prohibited substances
The National List may provide for the use of substances in an organic farming or handling operation that are otherwise prohibited under this chapter only if–
(A) the Secretary determines, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, that the use of such substances IN ORGANIC PRODUCTION AND HANDLING OPERATIONS–
(i) would not be harmful to human health or the environment;
(ii) is necessary to the production or handling of the agricultural product because of the unavailability of wholly natural substitute products; and
(iii) is consistent with organic farming and handling;
(B) the substance–
(i) is used in production and contains an active synthetic ingredient in the following categories: copper and sulfur compounds; toxins derived from bacteria; pheromones, soaps, horticultural oils, fish emulsions, treated seed, vitamins and minerals; livestock parasiticides and medicines and production aids including netting, tree wraps and seals, insect traps, sticky barriers, row covers, and equipment cleansers; OR
(ii) is used in production and contains synthetic inert ingredients that are not classified by the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency as inerts of toxicological concern; AND
(iii) is used in handling and is non-synthetic but is not organically produced; and
(C) the specific exemption is developed using the procedures described in subsection (d) of this section.
* * *
(d) Procedure for establishing National List
(1) In general
The National List established by the Secretary shall be based upon a proposed national list or proposed amendments to the National List developed by the National Organic Standards Board.
(2) No additions
The Secretary may not include exemptions for the use of specific synthetic substances in the National List other than those exemptions contained in the Proposed National List or Proposed Amendments to the National List.
(3) Prohibited substances
In no instance shall the National List include any substance, the presence of which in food has been prohibited by Federal regulatory action.
(4) Notice and comment
Before establishing the National List or before making any amendments to the National List, the Secretary shall publish the Proposed National List or any Proposed Amendments to the National List in the Federal Register and seek public comment on such proposals. The Secretary shall include in such Notice any changes to such proposed list or amendments recommended by the Secretary.
(5) Publication of National List
After evaluating all comments received concerning the Proposed National List or Proposed Amendments to the National List, the Secretary shall publish the final National List in the Federal Register, along with a discussion of comments received.
(6) EXPEDITED PETITIONS FOR COMMERCIALLY UNAVAILABLE ORGANIC AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS CONSTITUTING LESS THAN 5 PERCENT OF AN ORGANIC PROCESSED PRODUCT
THE SECRETARY MAY DEVELOP EMERGENCY PROCEDURES FOR DESIGNATING AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS THAT ARE COMMERCIALLY UNAVAILABLE IN ORGANIC FORM FOR PLACEMENT ON THE NATIONAL LIST FOR A PERIOD OF TIME NOT TO EXCEED 12 MONTHS.
7 CFR § 205.600(b)
(b) In addition to the criteria set forth in the Act, any synthetic substance used as a processing aid or adjuvant will be evaluated against the following criteria:
(1) The substance cannot be produced from a natural source and there are no organic substitutes;
(2) The substance’s manufacture, use, and disposal do not have adverse effects on the environment and are done in a manner compatible with organic handling;
(3) The nutritional quality of the food is maintained when the substance is used, and the substance, itself, or its breakdown products do not have an adverse effect on human health as defined by applicable Federal regulations;
(4) The substance’s primary use is not as a preservative or to recreate or improve flavors, colors, textures, or nutritive value lost during processing, except where the replacement of nutrients is required by law;
(5) The substance is listed as generally recognized as safe (GRAS) by Food and Drug Administration (FDA) when used in accordance with FDA’s good manufacturing practices (GMP) and contains no residues of heavy metals or other contaminants in excess of tolerances set by FDA; and
(6) The substance is essential for the handling of organically produced agricultural products.
7 CFR § 205.605(b)
(b) Synthetics allowed:
Alginates.
Ammonium bicarbonate–for use only as a leavening agent.
Ammonium carbonate–for use only as a leavening agent.
Ascorbic acid.
Calcium citrate.
Calcium hydroxide.
Calcium phosphates (monobasic, dibasic, and tribasic).
Carbon dioxide.
Cellulose–for use in regenerative casings, as an anti-caking agent (non-chlorine bleached) and filtering aid.
Chlorine materials–disinfecting and sanitizing food contact surfaces, Except, That, residual chlorine levels in the water shall not exceed the maximum residual disinfectant limit under the Safe Drinking Water Act (Calcium hypochlorite; Chlorine dioxide; and Sodium hypochlorite).
Ethylene–allowed for postharvest ripening of tropical fruit and degreening of citrus.
Ferrous sulfate–for iron enrichment or fortification of foods when required by regulation or recommended (independent organization).
Glycerides (mono and di)–for use only in drum drying of food.
Glycerin–produced by hydrolysis of fats and oils.
Hydrogen peroxide.
Lecithin–bleached.
Magnesium carbonate–for use only in agricultural products labeled "made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))," prohibited in agricultural products labeled "organic".
Magnesium chloride–derived from sea water.
Magnesium stearate–for use only in agricultural products labeled "made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))," prohibited in agricultural products labeled "organic".
Nutrient vitamins and minerals, in accordance with 21 CFR 104.20, Nutritional Quality Guidelines For Foods.
Ozone.
Pectin (low-methoxy).
Phosphoric acid–cleaning of food-contact surfaces and equipment only.
Potassium acid tartrate.
Potassium tartrate made from tartaric acid.
Potassium carbonate.
Potassium citrate.
Potassium hydroxide–prohibited for use in lye peeling of fruits and vegetables except when used for peeling peaches during the Individually Quick Frozen (IQF) production process.
Potassium iodide–for use only in agricultural products labeled "made with organic (specified ingredients or food group(s))," prohibited in agricultural products labeled "organic".
Potassium phosphate–for use only in agricultural products labeled "made with organic (specific ingredients or food group(s))," prohibited in agricultural products labeled "organic".
Silicon dioxide.
Sodium citrate.
Sodium hydroxide–prohibited for use in lye peeling of fruits and vegetables.
Sodium phosphates–for use only in dairy foods.
Sulfur dioxide–for use only in wine labeled "made with organic grapes," Provided, That, total sulfite concentration does not exceed 100 ppm.
Tartaric acid.
Tocopherols–derived from vegetable oil when rosemary extracts are not a suitable alternative.
Xanthan gum.
Above Provided by Organic Consumers Association
The above is certainly something to think about. It appears to be a giant leap backwards. It reminds me of that line from the Peter, Paul and Mary song, "When will they ever learn, when will they ever learn?"
So when is organic not organic? Simple, when it’s in the USA. They call it USDA Organic. Evidently the USDA haven’t the faintest idea what organic means.