Posted on

Food’s Huge Stake in Global Tariff Battle

President Trump called April 2, 2025, “Liberation Day,” citing a national emergency from the continuing trade imbalance between the United States and 185 countries, out of 195 in the world. The President announced an aggressive program of tariff increases and especially aggressive reciprocal tariffs against those countries deemed to have unacceptably inequitable trade relationships with the United States.

The reasons behind Liberation Day seem obvious enough. The United States had a trade deficit in goods – meaning more in the value of imports than in exports – of an estimated $1.2 trillion in 2024.  The Trump Administration’s objective is to bring jobs back to the U.S. and rebalance those tariffs that are higher in other countries than we have here. The largest deficits were with China ($295 billion), Mexico ($172 billion), and Vietnam ($123 billion). (Estimates of the deficits vary slightly among different sources but generally align with these numbers.)

The other compelling reason was the tariff imbalance.  For instance, the EU remains a major customer for U.S. agricultural exports but responded to the initial U.S. tariff action on steel and aluminum by announcing plans in March for their own aggressive tariffs on imports, affecting an estimated $20 billion in U.S. products, on top of $9 billion in tariffs on aluminum and steel from the United States. Targets include soybeans, beef, sugar, dairy and pork – including a tariff of 25 percent on corn, and as yet undetermined level for soybeans.

Trying to follow the evolving tariff proposals is like watching a jigsaw puzzle being assembled in real time—with new pieces added every day, and no one quite sure what the final picture will be.

Current trade situation 

Over the past year, the EU has purchased roughly 3.4 million tons of U.S. corn, mainly for use in their livestock feeding. Total 2024 sales of U.S. corn to the EU were valued at $359 million. The EU soy market is even larger, with imports of U.S. soybeans, meal and oil worth roughly $3 billion and accounting for over 10 percent of all U.S. soy exports.

U.S. agricultural exports to the EU have long faced significant roadblocks as EU legislators sought to protect their rural and farming sector. Phytosanitary standards and other food-safety claims have been used to prohibit or prescribe the food products allowed to be imported, on top of protective tariff levels from 6 to more than 30 percent.

The red numbers are nothing new.  In the month of February 2025, we had a deficit of $122.7 billion — a stark contrast to the last time we had a trade surplus of $15.9 billion back in 1975.  Coupled with rising federal deficits, the trade imbalance has been a thorny fiscal issue policymakers have been reluctant to tackle, due largely to the enormous implications for the national economy and the global international economic system. Presidential candidate Trump promised to take action, and President-elect Trump lived up to his word.

In the weeks since Liberation Day, the promised tariffs have roiled the international trade system and entire economic order. Critics quickly questioned the value of imposing such tariffs on two of the country’s most important trading partners.  The Administration and tariff supporters promptly noted that the highest agricultural trade deficits are with Mexico ($18.8 billion) and Canada ($12.5 billion).

In 2024, the United States is now on pace to reach a $39 billion agricultural trade deficit, the worst in our history.

This 2024 deficit is larger than any trade surplus year besides 2011.

– Andrew Rechenberg, Coalition for a Prosperous America, January 16, 2025

As might well be expected with such a dramatic step, the tariff announcement quickly produced more questions than clear answers. When would they actually begin? What products might be exempt? What are the chances for bilateral trade agreements to avoid or moderate the actual tariffs? The roster of questions continues to grow, with increasing uncertainty apparent in markets worldwide. 

How will tariffs affect farmers & producers?

Put agriculture at the top of the list of those seeking answers. Farmers still must make plans – on what to plant, what inputs, such as fertilizer coming from Canada, are needed and available (and at what price), how to anticipate market volatility and structure the marketing plans they need to find profitability amid low commodity prices and still-high input costs.

How do farmers weather the possible loss of key export markets, especially for soybeans, right now and potentially well into the future?  The U.S. currently exports approximately 50% of the soybean crop to other countries, China as the primary one.

Food manufacturers, distributors and retailers wonder about the reliability of supplies of all sorts of products, coffee, fish, spices and an extensive list of important items whose foreign origins are normally invisible to the consumer.  How much of a cost increase can I absorb, and how much must I pass along to the next link in the marketing chain?

But we don’t have to panic about our fruits and vegetables as they are USMCA compliant and not subject to the new tariff rates.  For example, the U.S. imports about 59% of fresh fruit and 35% of vegetables from other countries, notably Mexico, Guatemala, Costa Rica, and Canada.  Well, maybe we can panic about tomatoes — now a casualty of the trade war, a 10% increase in the price of tomatoes is a possibility for the 70% of tomatoes brought in from Mexico.

What do corn, soybeans, and China have to do with tariffs?

Exports around the world are a large portion of demand for US agricultural products. They help balance the trade deficit. The U.S. has spent a lot of time and effort to expand market access.  As a result, just about 65% of US soybean production is exported in the form of seed or finished products like soybean oil, soybean meal, meat, and biofuels.  About 30 percent of corn is exported in the form of grain or finished products like ethanol, meat, and dried distiller’s grains feed.

The top three countries targeted for tariffs to date: Mexico, Canada, and China, are also our top three markets for agricultural exports at $30.3 billion, $28.3 billion, and $24.7 billion, respectively, in 2024.

– Betty Resnick, Economist, American Farm Bureau Federation, March 18, 2025

For agriculture, this is much about China.

Before the US-China trade war began in 2017, 40-50% of all global soy going into China was from the US and Brazil was 50%; now (2024) 20% of China’s soy comes from the US, 70% is Brazilian origin. The US has lost ground in China due to the growth in Brazil.

China’s place atop the list of countries facing the highest reciprocal tariffs has attracted extensive attention. The American Farm Bureau estimates that the cumulative tariffs imposed by China on U.S. agricultural products will climb to 71.5 percent for soybeans. As the New York Times observed, “More than half of U.S. soybean exports went to China last year, but the price just went up 135 percent under the tariffs China installed in response to President Trump’s 145 percent tax on Chinese imports.”

Relief for farmers?

USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins has been engaged with various leaders across the agricultural sector, discussing how to deal with the potentially adverse economic effects of the tariff action. Officials acknowledge the need to offer assistance, but details on just how much aid to provide, how to deliver it, and most of all how to pay for it still are under discussion.

Producers received an estimated $28 billion in financial support during the 2018 trade disputes. Officials worry that the price tag could be even higher this time around. Commodity prices remain well below estimated costs of production and input prices, while a bit lower this year, nonetheless still represent a substantial expense.

Worries about supplies of fertilizers such as potash from Canada and other suppliers also remain, despite progress in carving out some tariff exemptions.  Moreover, unlike the last time around, when the dispute centered on China, the global extent of the proposed tariffs also will affect the ability to market to other customers around the world, especially many of the key traditional markets facing tariffs above 10 percent.

Some officials continue to argue that income from the tariffs will help provide additional funds, but that income has yet to be realized. Hopes to fund the economic support through USDA’s Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) are also being discussed. But the actual amount of money available under the CCC’s $30 billion authority is still in question.

The prospect of approaching Congress for additional funds poses big political issues, as both the House and Senate work to resolve an already contentious budget blueprint – not to mention how taxpayers would respond to spending more for farm relief amid the drive for spending cutbacks and fiscal balance.

And the consumer?

The effort to address the long-standing problem of the trade imbalance won’t come without a cost to the American consumer, at least as the negotiations needed for resolution of the problem play out and global markets stabilize.

According to the political website The Hill, the Tax Foundation estimates the tariffs could result in a de facto tax increase of $1,900 for each U.S. household in 2025, unless the issue is resolved quickly.  That figure includes the added cost of everything subject to the tariffs, not just food.

The Atlanta Federal Reserve estimates tariffs of 25 percent for Mexico and Canada on products ranging from beef, pork, grains, potatoes and canola oil (Canada) and vegetables, fruit, beverages and spirits (Mexico) could result in an increase of 1.63 percent in costs.

Threats to impose a 20.9 percent tariff on tomatoes from Mexico when the existing tomato import agreement expires in July could lead to a noticeable jump in prices, according to the Fresh Produce Association of the Americas.

While most economists seem to agree higher tariffs mean higher prices, few agree on exactly how much of an increase to expect. They point to the open question of how much of the higher costs portions of the food chain are willing to absorb and how much they feel compelled to pass along.

The answer may be some time coming, and still subject to further decisions and actions taken by the Trump Administration in refining and finalizing its trade strategy.

Posted on

Are Girl Scout Cookies Safe?

Click Play to listen to our generated podcast. Click on links for transcript and our full podcast library. 

Imagine you are “Emily”, a mom of two children in Ohio, who stumbled across a viral post warning that Thin Mints contained glyphosate—a chemical often dubbed a “probable carcinogen”—her heart sank. She had just stocked up on boxes from her daughter’s troop. Was she unknowingly feeding her family something dangerous?

If you’ve felt the same moment of panic scrolling through headlines or mom blogs, you’re not alone. In February 2025, a report citing trace levels of glyphosate, also known as RoundUp, and heavy metals in Girl Scout Cookies exploded across social media. The headlines were dramatic, but the data? Not so much.

How Did Glyphosate Get into Girl Scout Cookies?

First, it’s important to understand that glyphosate isn’t added to cookies. It gets there in ways that are both natural and inevitable in modern agriculture.

“Farmers don’t sprinkle glyphosate into cookie dough,” says an expert we spoke to who is a former USDA National Program Leader for Food Safety and a scientist with a background in pesticide toxicology. “It ends up there through pre-harvest applications, environmental drift, and trace exposure in processing equipment.”

Here’s why glyphosate gets detected on food and ag products:

  • Pre-harvest desiccation: About 30% of farmers apply glyphosate shortly before harvest to dry out wheat and oats evenly. This ensures a uniform, high-quality yield.
  • Environmental spread: Glyphosate can move through wind and water—just like pollen. Even non-treated fields can receive low levels from nearby farms.
  • Cross-contamination: Milling and baking equipment may retain microscopic residues from previous processing cycles.

Still, our expert emphasizes, “Glyphosate is very unstable. It breaks down during processing. By the time it’s made into cookie dough and baked, most of it is likely destroyed.”

The Math behind the Scare: How Much is Too Much?

Let’s talk numbers, because context matters:

  • EPA’s Acceptable Daily Intake (ADI): 1.75 mg/kg body weight/day
  • For a 130-lb child: That’s 103 mg/day of glyphosate
  • Thin Mints tested at: ~0.28 parts per million = 0.00896 mg per 4-cookie serving
  • Glyphosate per cookie: ~0.00224 mg

Therefore, to hit the EPA’s daily limit, you’d need to eat: 103 ÷ 0.00224 = ~46,116 Thin Mints—in one day. How small is that? Our experts states:

“Ten years ago, we were measuring parts per million. Now we’re detecting parts per trillion—or even quadrillion. That’s like finding a single drop of dye in an Olympic-size swimming pool.”

That’s the level of sensitivity that triggered these headlines—not a real health risk.

Why Glyphosate is Still Essential to Farming—and the Planet

The Thin Mint headlines may be new, but glyphosate conversations are years old.

What often gets lost is why glyphosate exists in the first place—and why it’s still used.

  • Reduces tilling: By replacing mechanical weed removal, glyphosate helps preserve topsoil, reduce erosion, and limit greenhouse gas emissions.
  • Increases yield: Without glyphosate, crops are more vulnerable to weeds, pests, and droughts.
  • Helps feed the world: According to a 2022 review published in Frontiers in Agronomy, glyphosate contributes to global food security by improving land efficiency and lowering the environmental footprint of food production.

“There is no scalable alternative right now,” says our expert. “Without glyphosate, prices go up, food waste goes up, and more land gets cleared to compensate for lost yield.”

What about Heavy Metals?

Heavy metals like lead, cadmium, arsenic, and mercury are naturally found in soil and water. Plants absorb them just as they absorb nutrients. This applies to conventional and organic crops alike.

You’ll find trace heavy metals in:

  • Root vegetables like sweet potatoes and carrots (especially the skin)
  • Leafy greens like spinach, kale, and chard
  • Grains, especially brown rice and oats
  • Seafood, like tuna and swordfish, which can be high in mercury

The problem isn’t the presence—it’s repeated, high-level exposure over time, like eating the same thing for lunch every day, or having the same vegetable for dinner 3 nights a week. This is especially true for young children.

How to Minimize Heavy Metal Exposure:

  • Eat a varied diet: Don’t rely on the same foods daily, especially high-risk ones like rice-based snacks, sweet potatoes, or leafy greens from the same source.
  • Peel root vegetables: The skins can concentrate heavy metals—especially important for baby food.
  • Rinse produce: Washing removes soil particles that may carry heavy metal dust. Adding some vinegar to the wash increases efficiency.
  • Limit certain fish: Mercury-heavy fish like swordfish and king mackerel should be eaten sparingly, especially by pregnant women and children.

“Our testing has evolved to detect incredibly small quantities,” our expert explains. “Now we know more about what’s in our food—but we also need to know how to interpret it.”

What are the FDA and EPA Doing?

While headlines often spark fear, it’s important to recognize the behind-the-scenes work being done to keep our food supply safe.

Both the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) play critical roles in protecting public health by monitoring, regulating, and reducing exposure to potentially harmful substances like heavy metals and pesticide residues.

Their efforts don’t just stop at setting limits—they’re advancing research, guiding manufacturers, and adjusting policies based on emerging science. Here’s how each agency is working to ensure transparency, safety, and continual improvement in the foods we eat every day.

FDA: Closer to Zero Program

This program targets lead, arsenic, cadmium, and mercury in foods consumed by infants and children. Their strategy is to:

  • Set action levels (e.g. 10 parts per billion for lead in infant cereals)
  • Guide manufacturers to reformulate and reduce toxic element exposure
  • Continuously monitor, analyze, and revise safety thresholds

The FDA acknowledges that no amount of lead is safe for children—and they’re working across the industry to minimize it.

EPA: Pesticide Residue Oversight

The EPA’s most recent glyphosate review found:

  • No cancer risk at dietary exposure levels
  • Glyphosate is safe when used according to label instructions
  • Ongoing studies are evaluating glyphosate’s metabolites for future review

These programs ensure consumers aren’t left in the dark—they offer transparency, data, and science-backed policy updates.

Here’s What Emily Can Do

Emily is not alone in wanting to keep her kids safe. The good news is, staying informed and proactive doesn’t have to be overwhelming. One of the most effective things you can do is encourage variety in your family’s diet.

“People get into food ruts,” explains our expert. “And that’s where exposure builds. If you eat spinach, carrots, and brown rice every day, you’re not getting balance—you’re increasing your risk.”

Rotating your produce, trying different whole grains, and switching up your protein sources helps minimize the accumulation of any one type of contaminant. In short, dietary diversity is a powerful form of protection.

It’s also important to rinse all fruits and vegetables—yes, even the organic ones.

Pesticide residues and naturally occurring heavy metals can cling to soil dust on the surface of produce. Washing them thoroughly helps reduce that exposure.

And when it comes to processed treats, like cookies or cereal bars, the key is moderation.

They’re meant to be enjoyed as occasional snacks, not everyday staples. They shouldn’t be vilified, but they also shouldn’t crowd out nutrient-dense whole foods.

Navigating the Noise: Trust Science, Not Clickbait

“Don’t get your science from TikTok,” our expert says bluntly.

Instead, rely on reputable, evidence-based sources like FDA and EPA reports, peer-reviewed research in journals such as Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, Frontiers in Agronomy, and Food Chemistry, and organizations like the National Institutes of Health, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA), and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO/WHO).

Be skeptical of dramatic headlines or social media posts that lack proper sourcing. Context matters—trace detection does not mean danger. And beware of comparisons between food safety limits and water safety standards, which have entirely different risk profiles and thresholds. Understanding that distinction is key to separating fear from fact.

Remember, here’s what we know:

  • Glyphosate is heavily regulated, essential for sustainable agriculture, and used in ways that significantly reduce environmental harm.
  • The trace amounts found in food—especially in Girl Scout Cookies—are nowhere near harmful.
  • Our testing capabilities are more sensitive than ever, but that doesn’t mean our food is more dangerous—it just means we know more about it.
  • The real focus should be on reducing overall processed food consumption and embracing a diet built on whole, varied, nutrient-dense foods.

Emily’s concern is valid. But panic isn’t the answer—context, science, and variety are.

Posted on

Transcript: Are Girl Scout Cookies Safe?

 

Click here to read the original post.

You know, when you’re scrolling online, maybe late at night, and a headline just grabs you. Well, lately, especially if you look forward to Girl Scout cookie season like I do. You might have seen these posts from February 2025.

The glyphosate claims and heavy metals, too. It definitely makes you pause before grabbing another cookie.

It absolutely does. And look, that’s a normal reaction when you hear pesticides, heavy metals, especially with food.

Yeah. Food for your family, right? Caution flags go up immediately. It’s understandable.

Okay. So, let’s really dig into that because that’s what we’re doing today. This deep dive. We’re looking past the, you know, the social media noise. Trying to get to the science of it.

Yes. What’s actually going on with these cookies? Our mission here is to sort the facts from the fear, understand the science, and figure out if there’s anything we genuinely need to worry about. Exactly. We’re not trying to dismiss anyone’s concerns, but we want to give it some real context, you know, based on the data we have.

Context, right? Science, not just scary headlines.

So, you can make up your own mind without hopefully needless panic.

Okay, first big one. Glyphosate. How on earth does that stuff get into a cookie? The idea someone’s adding it in is well, it’s weird, right? And that’s the first uh really critical point. It’s not an ingredient. Nobody is like one expert said, spring sprinkling glyphosate into cookie dough.

Instead, if it’s there at all, it’s in these tiny tiny trace amounts and it gets there indirectly through the farm ingredients.

Okay, indirectly. How? Break that down.

Well, there are basically three main ways this can happen. First is something called preharvest desiccation.

So maybe about 30% of farmers, give or take, might spray glyphosate on crops like wheat or oats right before harvest.

Why would they do that?

It helps everything dry down evenly. You get a more uniform crop, better yield, makes harvesting more efficient.

Okay. So, it’s used on the ingredients. What’s path number two?

Second is just um environmental spread. Think of it like pollen. Glyphosate can drift on the wind, get into water sources. So, even if one farm doesn’t use it, tiny amounts might just be present in the environment from nearby areas. It’s hard to avoid completely sometimes.

Okay. Like background noise almost. Yep. Makes sense. And the third way,

Cross contamination. Tiny microscopic residues might linger on milling equipment, maybe baking equipment, even after cleaning,
from processing other stuff before.

Exactly. Though, it’s also worth mentioning glyphosate isn’t super stable. It tends to break down, especially with heat, like, you know, baking.

Baking probably helps break it down. So, these are really small indirect routes, not someone dumping it in the mixer.

Correct. That feels a bit better already, doesn’t it?

It does. But then you see the numbers they throw around in those posts, parts per per million.

Yeah, sounds bad. Let’s talk about the actual amounts.

Yeah, the numbers. This is where context is absolutely everything. So, the EPA, Environmental Protection Agency, they set something called an acceptable daily intake or ADI. That’s the amount they estimate you could consume every single day for your whole life and not expect any harm. For glyphosate, that ADI is 1.75 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day.

Okay? 1.75 mg per kilogram. Let’s make that real. Say someone who weighs, I don’t know, 130 lbs. That’s about 70 kilos, right?

Right. 70 kg. So for that person, the daily acceptable intake would be, let’s see, 70* 1.75 about 103.25 milligrams of glyphosate per day.

Over 100 milligrams a day. Okay. Now, what did they find in the thin mints?

The test showed around. 28 parts per million. That sounds like a number, but let’s translate it. In a standard serving, say four cookies,
which is, let’s be honest, the starting point.

Ah, maybe. But in those four cookies, that translates to about 0.00896 milligrams of glyphosate total.

Okay. My brain hurts, but that sounds incredibly tiny compared to the 103 mg daily limit.

Exactly. So, let’s do the fun math. How many of those single cookies would that 70 kilo person need to eat in one day to hit their 103.25 mg limit?

Uh-oh. This is going to be big, isn’t it? works out to something like 46,116 thin mints.

46,000 in one day. Okay. Right. Nobody is eating 46,000 thin mints. I think even I have my limits.

Precisely. It puts the risk into perspective. And there’s another piece to this. Our testing technology is just ridiculously good now.

It’s better than it used to be.

Oh, way better. We used to measure in parts per million. Now we can often detect parts per trillion, even parts per quadrillion. Think of like an Olympic swimming pool being able to detect one single drop of dye in all that water. That’s the kind of sensitivity we’re talking about.

So, the headlines might pop up just because we can find these microscopic traces now, not because there’s suddenly more of it or it’s dangerous.
That’s a huge part of it. The sensitivity drives the detection, which can drive the headlines even if the actual health risk hasn’t changed or is negligible at those levels.

That analogy helps a lot. It’s not necessarily more stuff in the food. We just have sharper eyes scientifically speaking.

You got it. Okay. So, maybe we should switch slightly talk about why farmers use glyphosate in the first place. It’s easy to just focus on the scary headlines.

Good point. They aren’t just spraying it around for fun, presumably. What are the benefits?

Well, it actually plays a pretty big role in modern farming. A key thing is it allows for less tilling of the soil.

Less digging up the fields. Why is that good?

Tilling can lead to soil erosion, loss of top soil, big problems. By using glyphosate to handle weeds, farmers can use no till or reduce tail methods that helps preserve the soil, reduces erosion. And it can even mean lower greenhouse gas emissions from farming operations.

Yeah, that’s a side you don’t hear much about in the scary posts.

Not usually. No. Plus, it helps increase crop yields. Better weed control means more food grown on the same land. That’s vital for, you know, feeding everyone. Global food security.

So, it’s tied into bigger issues, efficiency, sustainability.

Absolutely. There was a review in a journal, Frontiers and Aron. me back in 2022 that really laid out its importance. And frankly, as the expert we looked at said, there isn’t really a scalable alternative right now that does the same job with the same benefits, especially the reduced tilling part.

So, if we just banned it, we’d likely see higher food prices, probably more food waste from lower yields, maybe needing to clear more land for farming. It’s complicated.

Definitely more complex than just weed killer bad.

Okay. What about the other thing mentioned, heavy metals, right? Heavy metals: lead, cadmium, arsenic, mercury. This is a bit different. These are naturally occurring elements.

Natural. So, not from pesticides or farming chemicals.

Mostly not. No, they’re just in the soil in the water. Plants absorb them as they grow, just like they absorb nutrients. And this happens whether the crop is grown conventionally or organically.

Oh, interesting. So, organic doesn’t automatically mean no heavy metals.

Correct. You find trace amounts in lots of common foods, root vegetables like carrots, sweet potatoes, especially in the skin, leafy Greens like spinach, grains, brown rice, and oats can sometimes pick up arsenic from the soil.

Wow. Okay. Even seafood, right? Mercury.

Yep. Certain fish like tuna, swordfish can accumulate mercury from the water. It’s pretty widespread in trace amounts.

So, if it’s natural and in lots of foods, when does it become a concern? Is it the amount?

It’s about the amount and the frequency. The real concern is repeated highle exposure over a long time consistently. eating large amounts of foods that happen to be higher in a specific metal. And this is especially important for little kids. Their bodies are still developing. They’re more sensitive.

So again, it’s not about the occasional cookie setting off alarm bells.

Not usually. No, it’s the overall dietary pattern. And there are things you can do to minimize exposure.

Like what what’s practical?

The biggest thing is eating a varied diet. Don’t eat the exact same things every single day. Mix it up. Rotate your foods.

Makes sense. Reduces the chance of getting too much of any one thing.

Exactly. Also, peeling root vegetables, especially if you’re making baby food, can help since metals sometimes concentrate in the skin.

Okay, peeling carrots and potatoes. Easy enough.

Rinsing all your produce while even organic helps wash off any lingering soil which might contain metals. A little vinegar in the water can help too. And then, yeah, limiting those high mercury fish, particularly for pregnant women and young children. Standard advice there.

These are all pretty sensible things. And again, our fancy testing plays a role here, too, right? Right. Finding these natural traces.

Totally like the experts said, we can just see so much more now. We have more information than ever. The trick is interpreting it correctly. Finding a trace amount isn’t the same as finding a dangerous amount.

Context. Again, it always comes back to context. Are the regulators like watching this stuff? FDA, EPA.

Oh yeah, definitely. Both the FDA and EPA are heavily involved. The FDA has this program called Closer to Zero.

Closer to zero for what?

Specifically targeting lead. arsenic, cadmium, and mercury in foods for babies and young kids. They set action levels like for lead in infant cereal, it’s 10 parts per billion. Okay?

They guide manufacturers on how to reduce levels, then monitor foods, and the FDA is clear. There’s really no safe level of lead for kids. So, the goal is always to get it as low as possible, push it closer to zero.

That’s good to know they’re actively working on it for the most vulnerable group. Yeah. What about the EPA side for pesticides like glyphosate?

The EPA regulates pesticides. Their latest big review on glyphosate concluded it doesn’t pose a cancer risk from dietary exposure at the levels we see. They say it’s safe when used correctly following the label and they keep studying it including its breakdown products the metabolites. So these agencies provide oversight data updates. It’s an ongoing process, right? It’s not static. Science evolves.

Okay, so let’s pull this all together for the listener. What are the practical takeaways here? If you’re that person who saw the scary post, what should you do?

I think the biggest practical advice is is focus on variety for the whole family. Avoid getting stuck in a food rut eating the same few things constantly. Mix up the fruits, veggies, grains.

Exactly. Rinse your produce thoroughly. All of it. And yeah, processed treats like cookies. Enjoy them, sure, but in moderation. Part of a balanced diet, not the main course.

And maybe the best advice we heard, that quote.

Ah, yes. Don’t get your science from Tik Tok or, you know, unsourced social media posts in general.

Absolutely. Go to the credible sources, FDA reports, EPA assessments. Look for peer-reviewed studies and journals. The outline mentioned comprehensive reviews in food science and food safety, frontiers in aronomy, food chemistry. Look at established health organizations, NIH, WH, EFSA in Europe.

Be skeptical of stuff without sources or that sounds super dramatic, right? And be careful comparing things like food safety limits to say drinking water standards. They’re set differently for different reasons. Apples and oranges sometimes.

Okay, so let’s try try to summarize the absolute key points.

Okay. One, glyphosate is regulated. It plays a role in modern farming and the trace levels found in foods like these cookies are considered safe by regulatory bodies.

Two, we can test for really tiny amounts. Now, that doesn’t mean food is suddenly dangerous. It means we have more sensitive tools and more data. Context matters.

And three, the best strategy for overall food safety and health isn’t obsessing over trace amounts in one specific food. It’s focusing on a varied balanced diet rich in whole foods and moderating the processed stuff.

So for everyone listening, yeah, those concerns you felt totally valid starting point, but the answer seems to be context, science, and variety, not panic.
Well put. It’s about informed choices, not fear-based ones.

So enjoy a thin mint or several, just maybe not 46,000.

Probably a good guideline. Enjoy them in moderation as part of that bigger picture of a healthy, varied diet.

All right. And maybe a final thought to leave everyone with. Now that you’ve got this deeper understanding of the science and the regulation around this food scare, what other food topics might deserve the same kind of careful look beyond the headlines?

That’s a good question. Staying curious, staying critical. That’s always a healthy approach to what we eat.

Posted on

How Toxic is Glyphosate?

Glyphosate is the most controversial pesticide in the world, even though it is the most studied and generally deemed as safe by many governmental bodies across the globe. Once again, it is currently in the spotlight because U.S. Secretary of Health & Human Services, Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., has opposed herbicides, particularly glyphosate.

However, the science is not confirmed and there is no consensus among the scientific community that, if used properly, will cause human health issues.

Research has also shown that if your skin is exposed to it, only 2% is absorbed.  And if, by chance you drink it, eat it, or inhale it, only 30% will be absorbed and you will eliminate it within 48 hours and 100% of any remaining residue will be gone within seven days. Is this absorption enough to be detrimental to human health?

What is Glyphosate?

Glyphosate, commonly known as Roundup, is one of the most popular and widely used herbicides on the farm and at home.

It doesn’t just kill weeds; it kills anything green, including farm crops such as corn, soybeans, cotton, canola, sugar beets, and alfalfa. These crops have all been genetically modified so that the farmer can spray glyphosate after the crop emerges from the ground and kill the weeds, but not the crop.

Glyphosate works by disrupting the shikimic acid pathway. This process allows plants to make certain proteins that they need for their growth. Humans and mammals get their amino acids by eating protein, while plants make them on their own.

When glyphosate is sprayed onto a plant, it is absorbed through the leaves, drops down into the roots and disrupts the plant’s ability to absorb nutrients from the soil. Thus, the plant cannot make its own proteins and dies.

Advantages of Glyphosate

  • Inexpensive and less toxic: The farmer only needs a small amount, about the size of a can of soda, per acre. Because so little is used, glyphosate is inexpensive compared to other herbicides. Also, glyphosate is less toxic than alternatives such as dicamba and atrazine.
  • Increased Yield: Weeds compete with crops for sunlight and soil nutrients. By killing the weeds, the crops can thrive, thus increasing farmers’ yields while reducing crop losses. Without glyphosate, there would not be as much food produced as there is today. The farmer can also farm more acreage, thus producing a larger harvest and increased profits.
  • Regenerative Agriculture: No-till farming means that the farmer doesn’t have to turn over the soil to kill the weeds. This also helps with climate change adaptability. No till farming gives farmers a great advantage as it preserves soil moisture, prevents erosion, reduces fuel consumption, reduces GHGs by ‘less iron on the ground’ and benefits insect diversity. No till farming also preserves the beneficial soil microbiota that provide nutrients for plants. Before glyphosate, no till was not very successful as the weeds took over the field.

Disadvantages of Glyphosate

  • Glyphosate kills all plants: If it is sprayed near a non-GMO plant or crop, it will kill the plant or crop along with the weeds.
  • Run-off: Glyphosate binds tightly to the soil, making it unlikely to reach deeper groundwater. However, since it lasts in the soil for 8 days, it can still run-off to a nearby watershed, along with the soil.
  • Weed Resistance: Approximately 20+ weeds have developed resistance to glyphosate. Users must go to other, potentially more toxic, herbicides to mix with it to eliminate weeds.
  • Trace amounts in food: Trace amounts have been found in various foods, which raises concerns for human health. To dry out wheat and oats before harvest, about 30% of farmers spray it to speed up the drying process. Trace amounts get into the processing facilities that make cookies, breads, etc. However, since we do not have a shikimic pathway, our bodies flush these trace amounts through via our urine. And we would have to eat about 1,000 loaves of bread a day to have a negative health effect.
  • Health concerns while using: Even though the EPA and other organizations generally consider glyphosate safe when used as directed, some studies have linked it to non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma. Workers in the fields often don’t use masks or protective equipment. After long periods of spraying, they could have health issues.

What do Governmental Organizations Say?

Most governing bodies across the globe do not find conclusive evidence showing negative effects. However, some have based on animal studies.

Here are a few examples:

  • The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) summarized the impact of glyphosate on human health. They found no risks to concern, no indication that children are more sensitive to glyphosate, no indication that it is an endocrine disruptor, and no evidence that glyphosate causes cancer in humans.
  • The European Union, European Chemicals Agency and the European Food Safety Authority showed that there is currently no scientific or legal justification for a ban. This was last reviewed in 2023 and will be reviewed again in 2033.
  • The World Health Organization’s International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) states that glyphosate is ‘probably carcinogenic to humans’ based on limited evidence of cancer in humans but sufficient evidence in experimental animals or strong evidence of a carcinogenic mechanism.
  • Health Canada found that, ‘when used according to the label instructions, products containing glyphosate are not expected to pose risks of concern to human health or the environment.’ They also monitor the compliance rate of food residues to their residue standards. They found a 4% compliance rate.

What Do Scientists Say?

We spoke to three scientists to hear their views on Glyphosate.

While there were different views on its effect on soil health, all agreed that it is the least toxic of the herbicides on the market.

They also all agreed that if you use it at home with safety glasses, rubber gloves, boots, you will have little risk or exposure; it is the farm workers in the fields spraying all day long without protective wear who are most at risk for non-Hodgkin’s lymphoma.

Dr. Ila Cote is a toxicologist with expertise in environmental risk assessment and the interface of science and public policy. Her research focuses on causes of cancer and respiratory diseases and development of risk assessment approaches.

I first asked her if she uses it in her yard to kill weeds. She said yes. “It is not a very toxic chemical.” She went on to say that “unprotected farm workers will experience the highest risk.”

Dr. Cote agrees with the IARC when it comes to concerns about cancer:

“I am not as convinced that glyphosate does not pose a substantial risk to public health. Part of the problem is something can be of relatively low risk but if that risk is applied to everyone the increased numbers of cancers attributable to that risk can be substantial.”

– Dr. Ila Cote

Dan Wysocki is an Extension Soil Scientists at Oregon State University and past Regional Director at Soil and Water Conservation Society. He stated studies that showed it was safe for humans and the environment.

“I ask the thousands of farmers I speak with: ‘what would happen if you didn’t use glyphosate?’ There would be more tillage and more tractors emitting GHGs and disturbing the soil. Prior to biotechnology for glyphosate resistant crops, there were suites of chemicals used on these crops, and they were generally more toxic and applied more frequently and in greater amounts than glyphosate.

I am more worried about soil run-off into the watersheds than I am about glyphosate in the environment. If soil leaves the farm, so do the nutrients and the soil health. Eroding soil creates more risk than glyphosate does in the watershed.”

– Dan Wysocki

Ken Roseboro, Editor of The Organic & Non-GMO Report, has covered the controversy over glyphosate herbicide for 15 years as a journalist, noting research and various studies on its negative environmental and human health impacts, especially on farm workers and groundskeepers.

“Regenerative agriculture is the long-term solution. A lot of farmers who are doing great work on this and have found that their synthetic inputs have significantly decreased. Their yield drops initially, but as soil health increases, yields have been just as competitive as conventional agriculture.”

– Ken Roseboro

What is next?

There is no doubt about controversy surrounding glyphosate.

This is only exasperated by the class action lawsuit toward Monsanto, now Bayer. Approximately 10,000 plaintiffs have sued Monsanto for their physical and emotional injury after using glyphosate either on the field or as Roundup for several years. We would like to remind the reader that when a company reaches a settlement, often it is not because they are guilty but to reduce millions in legal fees.

In any case, the poison is in the dose.

Trace amounts found in food or water probably won’t harm you and your body will flush it out. If you use it in your yard, wear a mask and gloves. If you are a farm worker spraying it all day long, wear a mask, gloves, eye protection, and maybe even protective clothes. Those of us who do not use it and randomly ingest trace amounts are not at risk.

Regenerative agriculture sounds like an easy solution, but it has varying degrees of effectiveness depending on the crop, the farm, the location, the weather patterns, and the soil.  It includes cover crops. For example, where oats were used as a cover crop, farmers were able to reduce their synthetic inputs by 50%.

Technology is now playing a role in helping farmers control their weeds.

Consider these examples a demonstration of ways that farmers and companies are implementing technology to merge precision agriculture with regenerative agriculture:

John Deere has a new See & Spray technology where their tractors can identify and spray a particular weed and not the entire crop. This brings precision ag to a whole new level.

One farmer invented Greenfield Robotics, an AI powered robot that identifies weeds and picks them, thus reducing herbicides in the field.

Seeing significant opportunity in this regenerative ag-focused technology, Chipotle, the fast casual restaurant, has backed and invested in this company.

 

Posted on

What Does it Mean to be Healthy?

In the U.S., we spend almost $5 trillion on healthcare, 17.6% of our GDP — that’s $14,750 per person. And we are not healthy: 40% of Americans are obese, 39% will develop cancer in their lifetime, and 12% are diagnosed with diabetes. This sounds dismal.

What is Health?

The answer might seem obvious, but each of us is unique.

For me, a healthy body means doing activities with my children and not getting left behind. It also means keeping in shape so when my grandchildren are old enough, so I won’t be left behind then, either.  For Hayley, it means cultivating energy, stamina, nutrition, joy, and emotional well-being to care for her family and being a great friend. For Hillary, a mom in her forties, her focus is now on longer-term goals, such as increasing muscle mass and bone density.

And for Garland, health is defined as having the physical stamina and mental energy to continue interacting positively with his wife, family and friends, and with as many of the the people around me as he can; and still being able to give strength, experience and capabilities to make small but meaningful contribution to the well-being of the world.

As Garland eloquently puts it,

“Without our health, we simply take from the world around us when simple humanity demands that we give more than we take.”

But at the end of the day, how do we know we are healthy?  Achieving health is a lifestyle.  It is not just taking multiple supplements or running a marathon.  It is not just avoiding red dye and eating only plants.  There are people who eat no processed foods, compete in triathlons, eat all the ‘right’ supplements and still die of heart disease or cancer.

We certainly cannot predict disease, but what we can do understand is that a healthy life is a mindset for living each day to our full potential.

Three Measurements of Health

To simplify things, we began with the most basic ways to find out your current health status. We found just three items you can tick off to help determine whether you are on the right track to achieving longevity.

While these seemingly have nothing to do with specific foods, these exercises have everything to do with what you eat.

If you are obese, weak, and not flexible, these measurements will be hard to achieve.  If you eat a balanced healthy diet of fresh vegetables, fruits, healthy fats and protein, exercise regularly, and get enough sleep, you will most likely complete these exercises. From there, you can determine that you can toward reaching your healthy goals for your age.

What is your VO2 Max?

Peter Attia, MD, who wrote Outlive: The Science and Art of Longevity, points to VO2 max as the best predictor of longevity.

It is not just a measurement for athletes, but a cardiovascular indicator for everyone.

VO2 Max is the maximum amount of oxygen your body can absorb and use during exercise. When you breathe, your lungs take in oxygen and deposit it into the bloodstream. Your heart and blood vessels take the oxygen-rich blood and send it to your muscles, which use it to work hard and contract.

Oxygen is also necessary for your cells to create ATP, your cell’s energy engine. This molecule found in our cells provides energy for cellular functions, nerve impulse transmission, and protein synthesis.  Basically, the more efficiently you use oxygen, the more ATP your muscles produce.

In a study of over 100,000 individuals, there was a clear trend between VO2 max levels and mortality risk.

The results showed that higher VO2 max levels were associated with lower all-cause mortality risk, with the most significant difference observed between the lowest fitness group and the other groups.

The most precise way to measure your VO2 max is to go to a lab where you run or bike with a Darth Vader-looking mask.  You can search Fitnescity for a location or ask your doctor. Fitness trackers also measure it, but they are not as accurate.

Improving Your VO2 Max

While VO2 max naturally declines with age, you can improve or maintain it with regular exercise, particularly high intensity interval training, which is also good for your brain.

Can you hang?

Hanging from a bar measures your grip strength, which measures your overall muscle ratio – a good indicator of overall fitness.

We use our hands for virtually everything: weight training, gardening, opening jars, vacuuming, cooking, pulling suitcases through long airports…the list is endless.

If your grip is strong, it means that your arm and shoulders are strong and that you have been exercising. If you are exercising, you probably have an appropriate BMI and body fat percentage.

Interestingly, according to a meta-analysis published in NIH, a decline in grip strength can lead to heart disease, arthritis, osteoporosis, Type 2 diabetes, and certain cancers.

“Not enough can be said about the importance of grip strength as you age. It’s one of the strongest physical associations with longer life”. 

– Peter Attia, MD

Attia says that a 40-year-old woman should be able to hang for 1 minute 30 seconds and a man for 2 minutes.

Can you stand up and sit down without your hands?

Kelly and Juliet Starrett wrote the book, Built to Move, outlining ten essential habits to help you move freely and live fully.  One of their mobility tests is your ability to get up and down off the floor without assistance.

In a joint study published in a 2014 European Journal of Preventive Cardiology, researchers observed and scored 2,002 men and women ages 51-80 on how well they performed the sit and rise test. The more the subjects had to use their hands, the lower the score. The bottom 8% of performers had a lower survival rate.

“It is well known that aerobic fitness is strongly related to survival, but our study also shows that maintaining high levels of body flexibility, muscle strength, power-to-body weight ratio and co-ordination are not only good for performing daily activities but have a favorable influence on life expectancy.”

– 2014 European Journal of Preventive Cardiology

What do these tests have to do with food?

A healthy lifestyle can sound complicated but basically it boils down to two things: move a lot and eat well.

We have all heard that ‘sitting is the new smoking’.  If you are sedentary, your body is not strong, flexible, and can efficiently burn calories. Your risk of cardiometabolic disorders just goes up. Many of us who must sit at our desks a lot of the day try to stand up every 45 minutes and move around.

Fat doesn’t make you fat — sugar makes you fat. Eating well really means eating fruits and vegetables, healthy fats, protein, and staying away from sugar. Excess sugar is what gets stored as fat, not necessarily excess healthy fats.

The Lancet documented 5,800 deaths and 4,800 cardiovascular disease events.  They found that higher saturated and unsaturated fat intake was associated with lower risk of stroke and not associated with cardiovascular disease mortality.  Whereas high carbohydrate intake (sugars) was associated with a higher risk of mortality.

Posted on

Fighting Fear of Our Food System

SPOILER ALERT: Your food is safe. We have one of the safest food systems in the world. In fact, we’re here updating and reposting this from several years ago with the continued, glowing outlook of our system.

Unfortunately, the news cycle hasn’t changed much either…some might say it’s gotten worse.  Just turn on any screen and get ready for a barrage of fear.  It’s nearly impossible to escape the constant avalanche of reports targeting a threat or cause for worry.

And if I don’t already fear the food, some people want me to feel guilty for not just what I eat, but almost for even eating at all.  

My So-Called Wrongdoings

Think I’m crazy?  Sit down in your local diner and order a meal.  Let’s go for comfort food: meatloaf, mac and cheese, and a side salad with Thousand Island dressing.  Oh, and some apple pie with ice cream for dessert.  A glass of ice water with lemon, and maybe a nice cup of really good coffee to cap things off.

So what have I just done here?  How does this food get me into a maze of controversies about human, animal and environmental welfare? 

Let’s look at it piece by piece, or bite by bite, if you prefer.

Let’s start with the meatloaf…

It’s hamburger, plus some breadcrumbs, some spices and maybe a few chunks of peppers or mushrooms.  Maybe I sprinkle some salt and pepper on it, and a touch of ketchup, just for flavor.

  • Should I be eating beef at all? It takes lots of water and feed grains to bring an animal to market.  It gave off a lot of greenhouse gas while it fattened up, too.  It may have been finished off for market confined in a feedlot, and maybe injected with antibiotics at some point.  It certainly didn’t enjoy the trip to the processing plant.  Dietitians tell me too much red meat will clog my arteries, or at least contribute to those extra pounds I seem to carry these days. And if I eat it more than five days a week, I might get Alzheimer’s.
  • I probably didn’t need all that salt, either. It could kick up my blood pressure.
  • And what was in those breadcrumbs? Were they from stale old bread they had lying around?  Was it made from GMO crops?  If so, should I worry?
  • What about those peppers and mushrooms? How do I know they were grown responsibly, without taking up too much water, or using too much fertilizer and pesticides?  And were the people who picked them paid fairly and treated well?
  • Did they add an egg to the meatloaf? My mom used to do that. But if they did, was that egg from a happy, free-range chicken? Was it fed antibiotics? How much cholesterol does the egg add?
  • Ketchup…organic tomatoes, or mass-produced in a hothouse or grown hydroponically in an indoor farm somewhere?  Picked by whom?  Were they paid fairly?  And using how much added sugar? What is ascorbic acid, or citric acid anyway, and why in the world is it in there?

Now I’m afraid to even think about the mac & cheese…

  • What grain did they use to make the macaroni? Is it also a GMO crop?
  • Is the cheese really cheese? What kinds of preservatives, colorings, flavorings and anti-coagulants are squirming around in there, just waiting for me to eat them up?

As for the salad…

  • Where in the heck did this Romaine lettuce come from? Should I worry about food poisoning?
  • And what about the tomato, and the cucumber, and that reddish stuff that looks like an onion…is it local? How did it get here?  How many hands have actually touched the food I’m about to eat?  Who checked to make sure it’s clean, fresh and safe?
  • As for the dressing, did it come out of a bottle or a 20-gallon vat somewhere?

You know, I used to love my apple pie…

Now I’m feeling a little squeamish about it!

  • Who is this mysterious Mrs. Smith, and just where is this bucolic Pepperidge Farm, anyway? How do I know it wasn’t some team of minimum-wage newbies on an assembly line churning out my mass-produced pie?
  • Just where did these apples come from?  How much sugar is in there?  Or is it high fructose corn syrup?  Or maybe some alternative sweetener made from the leaves of a plant the Aztecs once used to smoke to get high?  Is the crust an actual food, or maybe some form of biodegradable, flavor-enhanced cellulose?
  • The ice cream isn’t really helping, either. Did the cows who supplied the milk have drugs used on them to stimulate more milk production?  Were they treated humanely?  How was the milk handled?  How much sugar went into the mix in making this?  How much artificial flavor?

Maybe a sip of water will help calm me down…

But wait a minute.

  • Did this come out of the tap, or from a bottle? What kind of pipes are in the city’s water system?  Who checks the water for contamination, and for what kind, and when? And are there microplastics?  Will I get cancer from drinking this water?
  • And what about that slice of lemon? Did anybody wash that lemon before they cut it up?  How long has it been lying around waiting to be plunked into somebody’s water, or iced tea, or finger bowl?  Where did it come from, anyway?

Let’s just forget about the coffee…and the sugar or artificial sweetener I put in it, or the milk.  I no longer care where the coffee beans came from, or who picked them, or much of anything else.  I certainly don’t care if the milk came from a cow or an almond.  I don’t even want to think about how much energy was needed to cook all this, or to heat the hot water they will use to wash up.

Wasteful Worries

Now my appetite is pretty much gone, thanks to all this thinking I’ve been doing.  So what do I do with all this left-over food on the plate?

  • If I don’t do something with it, they will just scrape it off into the garbage and send it to the local landfill. It will decompose slowly, I suppose.  But while it does, it will generate still more greenhouse gas.  Food waste in landfills already accounts for 7 percent of all greenhouse gas emissions worldwide.  My contribution here could pollute the water table, if the landfill isn’t up to spec.  Am I more responsible for global warming if I eat this food, or if I throw it out?
  • Maybe the diner will call the local food bank and make sure the left-overs go to good use – you know, for a needy person, or a soup kitchen, or something like that.

Or maybe I just stop eating.

Phew….I just woke up from my nightmare.

But this sounds ridiculous, doesn’t it?

However, this is just a superficial look at some of the issues that surround the food we eat these days.

Actually, there are a great many more than these to consider….real, serious issues that people in the food sector wrestle with every day in trying to satisfy the public demand for safe, sustainable food.

OK, Now Here’s the Good News…

Educating worried consumers on our food system is one of the big reasons why we created this blog, so you’re in luck.

People want to know more about our food system: where their food comes from, how it is produced, how it is delivered, how we keep it safe and make it as wholesome as possible, and more.  We all need to know, and, frankly, we should know.  And thankfully, farmers have a great story to tell.

There is no way to adequately describe the commitment, the resilience, the innovative and entrepreneurial spirit of the men and women who produce, farm, ranch, and those who manufacture the food products, and those who prepare the food we need and want.

We look forward to continued innovation and advancement in our established food system. And what we hear is loud, clear and unequivocal faith in the future of food.

“This growing fear has the potential to sideline, deter, critical technologies that we already use, and derail technologies in the pipeline, that we already know how to achieve.”

– Former U.S. Secretary of Agriculture, Sonny Perdue

Never underestimate our farmers & food producers

When commitment, capability and capital converge combine with their oversight, look out. All things are possible — including food that people don’t fear, and a food system that doesn’t induce guilt.

If you want to learn more about how our food is grown, food safety, and food waste, take a look at these posts for more information. We hope this collection of posts puts your mind at ease so you can rightfully enjoy your food produced by some of the hardest-working people in the world:

Farming and production:

Food safety:

Food waste:

Government resources:

Maybe our food system isn’t perfect yet. We need all the intelligence and technologies possible to feed a growing population while regenerating the land.

We’re doing a better job today than we did yesterday, and we’ll do a better job tomorrow than we do today.

Indeed, it’s a great big world of possibilities — except maybe for a decent-tasting diet cola.

Posted on

Media Madness and the Search for Truth

How far down the rabbit holes of news and media do you want to go? The depths seem endless, especially as we approach another election.

Thankfully, our dear friend and media savant, Garland West, sheds some much needed insight to light a path of rationality back into our overzealous media consumption habits.

Now, it’s up to us to put Garland’s wisdom into good use so we may become well-informed, rational and responsible citizens.

Posted on

Transcript: What Does it Mean to be Healthy?

This podcast is based on this post. 

All right, welcome back everyone. Ready for another deep dive?

Definitely always up for a good deep dive.

Awesome. So, today we’re tackling something that feels, I don’t know, super basic, but also kind of mysterious.

Oh, like why?

Health. I mean, we all want it obviously. But what does it actually mean to be healthy? It’s a big question.

It really is. And it gets even more complicated when you think about this. Uh the US spends something like $5 trillion every year on healthcare.

Crazy, right? But are we really the healthiest nation out there? I’m not so sure.

Right. You’d think with all that spending, we’d be like the gold standard of health, which is exactly why this article, uh, what is health totally caught my eye. That one too is pretty interesting.

Goes way beyond just eating your veggies and hitting the gym. You know, it even suggests there are some like unexpected ways to measure how healthy we are.

Yeah. And that’s important because even people who seem to be doing all the right things can still have health issues. So, what’s this article say? Is it like whole lifestyle thing?

That’s exactly it. It’s like health as a way of life, a mindset almost.

And get this, it uses these three kind of unusual measurements to get a more complete picture.

Oh, okay. I’m intrigued. What are they? Laid on me.

All right, get ready. V2 max, grip strength, and the sit and rise test.

Hm, interesting. Some of those ring a bell, but honestly, can those really tell us how healthy we are? Like really?

That’s what I was wondering, too. So, let’s break them down one by one. Maybe we’ll be surprised. Starting with V2 max. Any idea what that even is?

V2 max. Well, basically, it measures how much oxygen your body can use when you’re exercising. Like really pushing yourself.

So, like how efficiently your lungs and heart are working together.

Exactly. The more oxygen you can use, the better shape your heart and lungs are in. And studies have shown that a higher V2 max is actually linked to, well, living longer. The article mentioned this one study that followed over a 100,000 people. And guess what? Those with higher V2 max scores had a lower risk of dying.

Wow. Okay, now you’ve got my attention.

So, how do you even measure this V2 max thing? Do you have to like go to a lab and run on a treadmill with tubes and stuff?

Well, yeah, that is the most accurate way. You’re right. But some fitness trackers are getting pretty good at estimating it these days, too. And the really cool part, you can actually work on improving your V2 max.

Oh, for real? I’m all ears. How do you do that?

High intensity interval training or HIIT is one of the best ways. You know those workouts where you’re going all out for short bursts and then you get a little break.

Oh, yeah. I’ve heard about those. They sound intense. But what makes them so good for V2 max specifically?

Well, because they push your cardiovascular system to the max. Literally. Like boot camp for your heart and lungs. makes them stronger and more efficient. And get this, there’s research that suggests HIIT can even help your brain function, too.

Seriously, that’s wild. Okay, I am definitely intrigued by this whole V2 max thing now. All right, let’s move on to the next one. This uh grip strength measurement. This one honestly has me a little stumped. How how strong your grip is tell you anything about your overall health? It just seems so random.

I know it does seem a bit out there at first glance, right? But grip strength can actually tell you a lot about your muscle mass and strength, particularly in your upper body.

And think about it, we use our grip for so many things. Like carrying groceries, opening jars, you know, even just shaking someone’s hand.

Yeah. We totally take it for granted.

Exactly. And this is where it gets really interesting. Some studies have actually linked a decline in grip strength to an increased risk of health problems as we age.

Like what kind of problems?

Things like heart disease and even some types of cancer, believe it or not.

Whoa. Okay. Okay. I did not see that coming. I guess weaker grip strength could be a sign that someone’s maybe not as active or they’re losing muscle mass which could lead to all sorts of other issues. Right. Exactly. It really shows how different aspects of our health are all connected in ways we might not even realize. Oh, and the article even gives some like target numbers for grip strength based on your age. For example, they say a 40-year-old woman should be able to hang from a bar for like a minute and a half.

A minute and a half. I don’t even know if I could do that. All right. This deep dive is making me want to hit the gym like right now. Okay, so you’ve got one more measurement to cover, right? The sit and rise test. What is that exactly and how does that relate to health?

Okay, so it’s actually a pretty simple test. You just sit down on the floor and then stand back up. The catch is you can’t use your hands or arms to help you.

I feel like that would be easy for some people and really tough for others. What makes it so important?

Well, it’s a really good way to assess your mobility and flexibility, which are super important for, you know, staying independent and pre ending falls as we get older. And there was this study, it’s mentioned in the article, that found something pretty amazing. People who had trouble with the sit and rise test actually had lower survival rates over time.

So, being able to move around easily is actually linked to a longer life.

That really makes you think about all the time we spend like sitting at desks and looking at screens.

Does, doesn’t it? This test is kind of like a sneak peek into your overall uh what’s the word? Muscular skeletal health. It shows how well you’ll be able to get around as you get older. And speaking of aging, the article brings up this really big question. How do we age well and stay healthy for as long as possible?

That is the million dollar question, isn’t it? And I’m guessing this article suggests that these measurements can help us do just that.

You got it. It’s all about getting a more complete picture of our health beyond just like weight or blood pressure. But it also points out that health isn’t just about the physical stuff. Our mental and emotional well-being play a huge role too.

That’s true. I mean, you can be physically fit but still struggle with things like stress or anxiety. So, how does the article address that side of things?

Well, it really emphasizes, you know, having a positive mindset, managing stress,

and having those good social connections. It even suggests those things can help boost your immune system, you know, protect you from chronic diseases and all that.

Wow. Really? So, it’s not just what you eat and how much you exercise. It’s about how you think and how you connect with other people too.

Exactly. It’s all connected, right? Physical, mental, emotional. You can’t really separate them.

It’s like a holistic view of health, taking care of the whole person.

Exactly. And that kind of brings us back to those three measurements we were talking about. They’re a good way to like check in with your physical health and maybe see where you can improve, you know.

Okay. I like that. So, let’s get practical for a minute. If someone wants to, you know, boost their scores on those measurements, where should they start?

Well, with V2 max, remember that’s all about how well your body uses oxygen during exercise. And like we said earlier, high intensity interval training, that HIIT stuff can be a real gamechanger.

But for someone who’s never done HIIT before, it seem a little daunting. Any tips for easing into it?

Absolutely. You don’t have to go all out right away. Start with like a shorter workout, maybe 10 or 15 minutes, and slowly increase the intensity and how long you do it as you get more fit. And you can always modify the exercises too.

Like instead of sprinting, maybe you do a fast walk or a light jog.

Right. Right. So, it’s all about finding that starting point that’s challenging but not like impossible and then just pushing yourself a little further each time.

Exactly. And listen to your body. Don’t be afraid to take rest days when you need them.

Good advice. Now, what about grip strength? How can we, you know, pump up those numbers?

There are a few easy exercises that can really make a difference like the dead hang. You just find a bar or something you can grip comfortably and hang there as long as you can. Oh,

Okay. Sounds simple enough.

It is, but trust me, it’s a great workout for your forearms and grip.

How long should someone aim to hang for?

Start with what you can do. Maybe like 10 or 15 seconds and then gradually increase the time. And you can also try different grips like overhand, underhand. Just mix it up a little.

Yeah, variety is the spice of life even when you’re hanging from a bar. Any other exercises?

Farmers carries are another Another great one, farmer’s carries.

What’s that?

It’s just like it sounds. Pick up a weight in each hand and walk with it. You can use dumbbells, kettle bells, even heavy grocery bags if you want. And it works your grip, but also your core, shoulders, back, even helps with your posture.

I’m definitely adding farmers carries to my workout routine. All right, last but not least, the sit and rise test. That one seems like it’s all about flexibility and mobility, right? Any tips for improving in those areas.

Yoga and Pilates are both great for that. Lots of movements that challenge your balance and flexibility and all that.

Yeah, I’ve tried yoga before and I always feel so much better afterward, but it can be intimidating for beginners. What would you say to someone who wants to try it but doesn’t know where to start?

Oh, there are so many beginner friendly classes these days. You can even find videos online that are specifically for the sit and rise test.

And you don’t have to be a yoga master to benefit either. Just taking a few minutes each day to stretch can make a huge difference.

So, it’s all about finding what works for you and making it a regular part of your routine.

Exactly. And that actually brings up a really important point from all of this. You don’t have to make these big crazy changes to live a healthier life, right?

It’s about those small sustainable changes. You know, the little things you can actually stick with and building those habits over time.

Yeah, that’s really encouraging. So, we’ve covered the physical side of things pretty well, but the article also talked about mental and emotional well being. any practical tips for you know taking care of those aspects of health?

One of the simplest things but also one of the most powerful is mindfulness like meditation, deep breathing, even just taking a few minutes to appreciate the little things that can help reduce stress so much and it’s good for your overall well-being.

Oh yeah. Just slowing down and being present in the moment.

Exactly. And another big thing for mental and emotional health is nurturing your social connections, spending time with people you care about. Having meaningful conversations, being part of a supportive community, that can make a huge difference in how happy and resilient you are.

That makes sense, but it’s easy to let those connections slip, especially when life gets busy. Any tips for strengthening those social ties?

Just make an effort to reach out to people, even if it’s just a quick call or text. Join a club or group that interests you. Volunteer. There are tons of ways to connect with others.

Those are great ideas. So, we’ve covered a lot in this deep dive. We’ve talked about those surp rising measurements of health. We’ve discussed practical strategies for improving our physical and mental well-being and we’ve highlighted that, you know, holistic approach. What’s the main takeaway you want listeners to walk away with?

It’s about realizing that health isn’t like, you know, it’s not a finish line you cross. It’s a journey. It’s something you keep working on.

It really is. And it’s different for everyone. There’s no one right way to be healthy.

Exactly. It’s not about being perfect. It’s about finding what works for you. Making choices that make you feel feel good, you know, in every way.

Totally. It’s about pushing yourself, but also being kind to yourself along the way.

Yeah, for sure. And remembering that health is about so much more than how you look. It’s about how you feel physically, mentally, emotionally. It’s about having the energy to do the things you love.

It’s about feeling alive, right? Having that spark. And I think those three measurements, the V2 max, grip strength, sit and rise test, they can really help us see where we’re at on that journey.

Totally. They give us something concrete to track. But it’s not about obsessing over the number. numbers. It’s about using them as a guide to help us live better lives, healthier, and happier.

That makes a lot of sense. Until next time, everyone, stay curious.