What Does All This Mean?

So What’s Really Going on Here?

By now are you as confused, concerned and even as outraged about these startling subjects as we are? Have any of the nutritional, food or medical industries, or even the general media, attempted to bring this disturbing information to the attention of parents and the rest of the public? As you read these summaries did you at several points find yourself thinking, “Why have I never heard of the concerns voiced in this research before now??”Just how many additional research studies would we have to dig up and contribute to this perfusion in order to sufficiently make the case that nutritional science needs to wake up and enter into fresh discussion about what actually constitutes “proper” nutrition and supplementation, especially for infants and growing children?From one of the most recent research studies we have cited, which was completed by the OEHHA division of the California State Environmental Protection Agency, we present this table below that was reproduced from OEHHA’s report with data therefore as current as November 2010 (highlighting added by us).

Adequate Intakes and Tolerable Upper Intake Levels for Manganese for Different Age Groups

 

Group

Adequate Intake (AI)

(mg/day)

Tolerable Upper Intake

Level (UL) (mg/day)

  Infants, 0-6 months

0.003

“not possible to establish”

  Infants, 7-12 months

0.6

“not possible to establish”

  Children, 1-3 years

1.2

2

  Children, 4-8 years

1.5

3

  Boys, 9-13 years

1.9

6

  Boys, 14-18 years

2.2

9

  Girls, 9-13 years

1.6

6

  Girls, 14-18 years

1.6

9

  Men, 19 to >70 years

2.3

11

  Women, 19 to >70 years

1.8

11

  Pregnant women, 14-18 years

2

9

  Pregnant women, 19-50 years

2

11

  Lactating mothers, 14-18 years

2.6

9

  Lactating mothers, 19-50 years

2.6

11

 

It is totally unfathomable and inexcusable to us that in the face of all the historic evidence of documented damage, and at the very least “concern”, expressed in the endless research studies that have been undertaken over decades, only a very few of which are we presenting on this website, the Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) for manganese intake for infants ages 0-12 months, is still expressed in such current reference works as “not possible to establish”.

It seems to be asserted with some confidence that for children 1-3 years of age, the UL is a total intake of 2 mg per day, yet are we to understand that no such upper limits have been established for infants? Are we to accept that modern science seems to believe that an “Adequate Intake” for a 6-month old is only three thousands of a milligram per day, but no such guidance can be provided for safe upper thresholds for that same infant, as is designated for all older stages of life??

Whatever the reasoning or offered rationale, this situation leaves a ridiculous gap in standards for nutrition and supplementation that provides no useful guidelines for parents, medical professionals and food and supplement producers. As we have demonstrated, many baby formulas alone can contribute per day far in excess of the established Adequate Intake of manganese for an adult, let alone an infant. Obviously something has to be done here immediately.

May we respectfully propose our informed suggestions?

Manganese is considered a “trace” mineral that is unarguably required for various body functions and healthy aspects of development and proper growth. It would appear that almost any infant, child or even adult that eats any variety of fruits and vegetables, receives far more than currently deemed “adequate”.

Therefore since the broad consensus from overwhelming research is that manganese deficiencies are very rarely if ever detected, but manganese excesses are somewhere between highly-suspect to widely agreed upon threats for neurological toxicity, then why even consider fortifying foods and dietary supplements with manganese, even in the slightest, until more conclusive studies are able to readdress accurate UL levels for all age groups?

Can we at very least start advising the makers of baby formulas, baby foods, parenteral nutrition solutions and other forms of early nutrition that the UL doses for infants should understandably not exceed the established UL value for a 1 year old? How about for a 2 year old?  Would taking that simple measure alone be judged “unreasonable” considering all the plentiful and disturbing data as displayed only in part here?

We know that it would be unreasonable to attempt to attribute all the broad implications that we suggest from only a single or even a handful of the research studies we have cited. But how many reports from all around the globe need to end with the cautionary warnings to the effect, “Far more research needs to be undertaken on these subjects that may indeed have far-reaching nutritional and health impact…”, before the nutritional and heath communities at large start looking twice at the big picture that comes into focus here?

Could it be that a major reason that conclusive studies have apparently not been pursued on these disturbing subjects affecting primary global health is that because there is far more desire and funding available for research that has the potential to yield proprietary drugs, than there is to better understand the influences and proper implementation of generic nutrients such as minerals and anti-nutrients such as phytate? Your guesses are as good as ours at this point.

 

Our Priority Goals for this Important Educational Project of the NoHarm Foundation –

  1. The broad dissemination of public and professional education on these subjects that will have to suffice until the time of broad institutional changes as below

 

  1. Help facilitate the reassessment and lowering of standard reference guidelines for Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) and Tolerable Upper Intake Level (UL) values for Mn, first and especially for infants and young children, which would result in lower fortification of Mn in dietary supplements and processed foods and lead to reduced potentials for undesirable nutrient stacking and cumulative regular ingestion of Mn

 

  1. Help facilitate the reassessment and lowering of Mn content of parenteral nutrition solutions produced and administered for intravenous infant and adult indications

 

  1. In the continuing absence of a consistent testing biomarker, aid the creation of early detection home-use and clinical-use strategies to identify potential instances of manganese excess for rapid reversal with dietary intervention prior to allowing long term negative symptoms and/or the consideration of more extraordinary treatment measures

 

The world is obviously growing very frustrated and weary of the lack of performance and effective answers for their growing numbers of children afflicted with autism and many related disorders. Please help us with continuing and advancing this global project and in locating the missing pieces that collaborative research is surely capable of revealing in rapid fashion.

Anyone who can appreciate what we have accomplished in forwarding this research and project independently must be able to easily envision how if only a small fraction of the energy and resources around autism research are redirected into this productive channel, the opportunity exists to rapidly bring real and affordable help, potentially for a large majority of the millions currently affected, and to promptly take steps to start reversing the out-of-control trends in new incidences.

Will greater circulation and appreciation of this previously ignored information rapidly lead to productive advancements in nutritional guidelines, supplements, food processing and labeling? Not likely, as significant change always takes some time. But here’s what can change, and overnight – You now have new information and knowledge, and as they say, knowledge is power. And you can immediately start applying that knowledge to improve the nutrition to benefit the health and development of your own family.

The food and nutrition industries respond to changing market demand. As an example, it wasn’t very long ago that there was no such thing as a processed food labeled “gluten free“, and now they’re showing up everywhere. Why? Simply because people gained new information and education and then started to demand such foods and labeling disclosure.

In the meantime, you can do your best to eat real foods – whole foods, and to avoid packaged and processed foods, whenever and wherever possible. That’s the very best way to keep track of what you and your family are actually consuming. A little more expensive? Possibly. A little more time in preparation? Definately. But you’ll find that the blessings for your entire family will be plentiful, revealed in relatively short time, and achieved with no harm.

 

Thank you for your consideration.