<?xml version="1.0" encoding="iso-8859-1"?>
<!-- generator="FeedCreator 1.7.2" -->
<rss version="2.0">
    <channel>
        <title>MedWorm Tags: environmental working group</title>
        <description>MedWorm provides a medical RSS filtering service. Over 6000 RSS medical sources are combined and output via different filters. This feed contains the latest medical blog items that have been tagged with 'environmental working group'.</description>
        <link><![CDATA[http://www.medworm.com/rss/search.php?qu=%22environmental+working+group%22&t=%22environmental+working+group%22&r=Exact&o=d&f=tag]]></link>
        <lastBuildDate>Sat, 03 Sep 2011 02:23:54 +0100</lastBuildDate>
        <item>
            <title>Innovative Skincare May Not Be What It Seems</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=4040804&amp;cid=t_178325_160_f&amp;fid=36189&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.skinmdblog.com%2F284%2Finnovative-skincare-may-not-be-what-it-seems%2F</link>
            <description>Many so called “Innovative” skincare products contain ingredients that the Environmental Working Group suggests we should avoid.
The EWG provides information to help consumers protect the health of their skin and the environment.  They would love to see major changes in the cosmetic industry, but change is slow to come.
One of the compounds that should be avoided according to the EWG is glycolic acid, because it is a strong irritant.  Like ethylene glycol and some other chemicals, it converts easily into oxalic acid, which is a known toxin, unsafe for consumption.
The reason glycolic acid is included in many brands of anti-aging serums has to do with its ability to weaken the binding lipids responsible for holding the skin’s cells together.
The skin’s cells naturally slough off t...</description>
            <author>Skin MD</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=4040804</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 07 Oct 2010 01:27:15 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">4040804</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Food And Pesticides: The Dirty Dozen</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3807396&amp;cid=t_178325_87_f&amp;fid=39187&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fgetbetterhealth.com%2Ffood-and-pesticides-the-dirty-dozen%2F2010.07.31</link>
            <description>The Environmental Working Group (EWG) is a non-profit focused on public health. We know that the long-term consequences of eating chemicals from pesticides used on our foods is damaging to our health.
The EWG analyzed data from the FDA and found that people who eat five fruits and vegetables a day from the &amp;#8220;Dirty Dozen&amp;#8221; are eating 10 pesticides a day. We want people to eat more fruits and vegetables, but NOT to ingest more chemicals. Rinsing reduces but does not eliminate pesticides. So what&amp;#8217;s the answer? Rinse completely and buy the &amp;#8220;Dirty Dozen&amp;#8221; foods organic whenever possible. (more&amp;#8230;)

			
			*This blog post was originally published at EverythingHealth* (Source: Better Health)</description>
            <author>Better Health</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3807396</comments>
            <pubDate>Sat, 31 Jul 2010 12:00:00 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3807396</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Environmental Working Group Lists Non Organic Fruits and Vegetables With Highest Pesticide Levels</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3621608&amp;cid=t_178325_83_f&amp;fid=34856&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Finsidesurgery.com%2F2010%2F06%2Fenvironmental-working-group-lists-organic-fruits-vegetables-highest-pesticide-levels%2F</link>
            <description>Amy Rosenthal of the Environmental Working Group discusses the &amp;#8220;dirty dozen&amp;#8221; non-organic fruits and vegetables with the highest pesticide residues. (Source: Inside Surgery)</description>
            <author>Inside Surgery</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3621608</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 02 Jun 2010 00:00:48 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3621608</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Vitamin A In Sunscreen Could Give You Cancer: These 21 Natural Sunscreens Won't</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3603556&amp;cid=t_178325_87_f&amp;fid=36050&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fblisstree.com%2Flive%2Fvitamin-a-in-sunscreen-could-give-you-cancer-here-are-21-natural-sunscreens-that-wont%2F</link>
            <description>photo: Thinkstock
The news that retinyl palmitate, a form of Vitamin A found in some sun screens, could actually accelerate the growth of skin cancer has us wondering just what we can safely slather on our faces to protect them from the sun. Just in time for summer, the Environmental Working Group issued a review of 500 sunscreens, and only found 39 to be worthy of recommendation. The Daily Green narrowed down those 39 into 21 great natural sunscreens, all free of retinyl palmitate and oxybenzone, a compound that could disrupt your hormones.
Can&amp;#8217;t find these ones at your local store? Check out our Sunscreen Shopper&amp;#8217;s Checklist before you head out to pick your bottle.
1. Badger&amp;#8217;s Balm SPF 30 Natural Sunscreen, $16
2. Tru Kid &amp;#8220;Sunny Days&amp;#8221; Natural Mineral Sunscre...</description>
            <author>Breastfeeding 1-2-3</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3603556</comments>
            <pubDate>Wed, 26 May 2010 21:27:02 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3603556</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Cancer Panel: Chemicals ‘Grossly Underestimated’ as Carcinogens</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=3560455&amp;cid=t_178325_136_f&amp;fid=37852&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fdonnatrussell.com%2F2010%2F05%2F12%2Fcancer-panel-chemicals-grossly-underestimated-as-carcinogens%2F</link>
            <description>My new post on Politics Daily / Woman Up. Cancer Panel: Chemicals &amp;#8216;Grossly Underestimated&amp;#8217; as Carcinogens.
Just as we&amp;#8217;re once again treated to the sight of volunteers scrubbing oil off wildfowl (ah, memories), along comes the President&amp;#8217;s Cancer Panel report that says we&amp;#8217;re being polluted to death.
And I quote: The &amp;#8220;true burden of environmentally induced cancer has been grossly underestimated.&amp;#8221; According to the report, &amp;#8220;more than 80,000 chemicals are in use, and 1,000-2,000 new chemicals are created and introduced into the environment each year.&amp;#8221; Only a few hundred have been tested for safety.
Says The Washington Post, &amp;#8220;The current system places the burden on the government to prove that a chemical is unsafe before it can be remove...</description>
            <author>Donna Trussell</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=3560455</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 13 May 2010 03:35:39 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">3560455</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>An online tool to rate Cellphone Radiation</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2785884&amp;cid=t_178325_87_f&amp;fid=34872&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.blisstree.com%2Fhealthbolt%2Fan-online-tool-to-rate-cellphone-radiation%2F</link>
            <description>Thinking about buying a new cell phone?
Before you do, you might want to check out the free, user friendly online tool that illustrates the radio frequency emission of more than 1000 phones in the marketplace.
The online tool, created by the Environmental Working Group, offers easy to read graphics which enables consumers to make quick comparision of the radiation levels of cellphones and smart phones.
Radiation is emitted from cell phones each time you talk on or send text message from it. Some phones emit less than others. As to whether or not it is a health risk remains in debate with the phone industry saying ‘no risk’ and researchers around the world still seeking answers.
Given that no one knows for sure, it makes sense to go for a phone with the least amount of radiation emissio...</description>
            <author>Healthbolt</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2785884</comments>
            <pubDate>Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:03:35 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2785884</guid>        </item>
        <item>
            <title>Produce and Pestacides - Ones to Eat, Ones to Watch</title>
            <link>http://www.medworm.com/index.php?rid=2132734&amp;cid=t_178325_167_f&amp;fid=37833&amp;url=http%3A%2F%2Fnutrition.edublogs.org%2F2009%2F01%2F15%2Fproduce-and-pestacides-ones-to-eat-ones-to-watch%2F</link>
            <description>The Environment Working Groups Guide is now in its 5th edition. It features the 12 fruits and veggies with the most and least pesticides so you&amp;#8217;ll know which ones to buy organic, and which conventionally-grown ones are okay when organic isn&amp;#8217;t available.
You can get your own copy of a printer friendly version by visiting the Environmental Working Group&amp;#8217;s website.
Lowest in Pesticides (ones to buy)

Onions
Avocado
Sweet Corn (Frozen)
Pineapples
Mango
Sweet Peas (Frozen)
Asparagus
Kiwi
Bananas
Cabbage
Broccoli
Eggplant

Highest in Pesticides (ones to watch)

Peaches
Apples
Sweet Bell Peppers
Celery
Nectarines
Strawberries
Cherries
Lettuce
Grapes (Imported)
Pears
Spinach
Potatoes

The Full List: 43 Fruits &amp; Veggies 
Note: The Environmental Working Group ranked a total of ...</description>
            <author>Nutrition and Wellness Biology 50</author>
            <type>blogs</type>
        <comments>http://www.medworm.com/rss/comments.php?id=2132734</comments>
            <pubDate>Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:22:32 +0100</pubDate>
            <guid isPermaLink="false">2132734</guid>        </item>
    </channel>
</rss>

