Articles | The Cycle Project

Archive for the ‘Articles’ Category


Is Diet Soda Dying Off, or Will We Continue To Be Harmed By It? Huge Study links Aspartame to Major Problems; Sales Drop

As concerns about health epidemics plague the nation, demand and sales of diet soda have plunged as consumers try to make better choices. As we reported yesterday, aspartame (the main sweetener for diet soda) is one of the most dangerous ingredients used in our food supply, causing seizures and a host of other health issues.

In a new study done over ten years and sampling 60,000 women, it was shown that women who drink two or more diet drinks a day have much higher cardiovascular disease rates and are more likely to die from the disease.

30 percent more likely to have a heart problems…

In the largest study done of it’s kind, The University of Iowa concluded:

Compared to women who never or only rarely consume diet drinks, those who consume two or more a day are 30 percent more likely to have a cardiovascular event [heart attack or stroke] and 50 percent more likely to die from related disease.

This is one of the largest studies on this topic, and our findings are consistent with some previous data, especially those linking diet drinks to the metabolic syndrome, says Dr. Ankur Vyas, the lead investigator of the study.

The association persisted even after researchers adjusted the data to account for demographic characteristics and other cardiovascular risk factors, including body mass index, smoking, hormone therapy use, physical activity, energy intake, salt intake, diabetes, hypertension, high cholesterol, and sugar-sweetened beverage intake.

On average, women who consumed two or more diet drinks a day were younger, more likely to be smokers, and had a higher prevalence of diabetes, high blood pressure, and higher body mass index.

Soda sales slipping…

Thankfully this study comes on the heels of reports of already slipping sales of diet soda, one of the largest aspartame markets.

According to Time Magazine:

One reason for the decline could be a growing awareness of the obesity epidemic in the US and growing health concerns surrounding sugar-sweetened beverages. According to Reuters, industry experts say the beverage industry is shrinking under the scrutiny. Even diet-branded drinks have suffered a loss of sales with concerns over artificial sweeteners.

Whatever the reason for the decline, this new study should only add fuel to the movement away from artificial sweeteners. There are plenty of natural sweeteners that people can choose that are much healthier than aspartame. Click here for a practical guide to natural sweeteners.

Another important note is that the overall sales of soda going down also means that less people are being exposed to (mostly GM) high fructose corn syrup which carries a whole host of health risks as well.



Editors note: Click here to Find a Local Farmer


Gluten: The New Fad Malady?

In one of the best examples of science working, a researcher who provided key evidence of (non-celiac disease) gluten sensitivity recently published follow-up papers that show the opposite.

The first follow-up paper came out last year in the journal Gastroenterology. Here’s the backstory that makes us cheer:

The study was a follow up on a 2011 experiment in the lab of Peter Gibson at Monash University. The scientifically sound — but small — study found that gluten-containing diets can cause gastrointestinal distress in people without celiac disease, a well-known autoimmune disorder triggered by gluten.

They called this non-celiac gluten sensitivity.

Gluten is a protein composite found in wheat, barley, and other grains. It gives bread its chewiness and is often used as a meat substitute. If you’ve ever had “wheat meat,” seitan, or mock duck at a Thai restaurant, that’s gluten.

Gluten is a big industry: 30% of people want to eat less gluten. Sales of gluten-free products are estimated to hit $15 billion by 2016.

Although experts estimate that only 1% of Americans — about 3 million people — suffer from celiac disease, 18% of adults now buy gluten-free foods.

Since gluten is a protein found in any normal diet, Gibson was unsatisfied with his finding. He wanted to find out why the gluten seemed to be causing this reaction and if there could be something else going on. He therefore went to a scientifically rigorous extreme for his next experiment, a level not usually expected in nutrition studies.

For a follow-up paper, 37 self-identified gluten-sensitive patients were tested. According to Real Clear Science’s Newton Blog, here’s how the experiment went:

Subjects would be provided with every single meal for the duration of the trial. Any and all potential dietary triggers for gastrointestinal symptoms would be removed, including lactose (from milk products), certain preservatives like benzoates, propionate, sulfites, and nitrites, and fermentable, poorly absorbed short-chain carbohydrates, also known asFODMAPs. And last, but not least, nine days worth of urine and fecal matter would be collected. With this new study, Gibson wasn’t messing around.

The subjects cycled through high-gluten, low-gluten, and no-gluten (placebo) diets, without knowing which diet plan they were on at any given time. In the end, all of the treatment diets — even the placebo diet — caused pain, bloating, nausea, and gas to a similar degree. It didn’t matter if the diet contained gluten. (Read more about the study.)

“In contrast to our first study … we could find absolutely no specific response to gluten,” Gibson wrote in the paper. A third, larger study published this month has confirmed the findings.

It seems to be a “nocebo” effect — the self-diagnosed gluten sensitive patients expected to feel worse on the study diets, so they did. They were also likely more attentive to their intestinal distress, since they had to monitor it for the study.

On top of that, these other potential dietary triggers — specifically the FODMAPS – could be causing what people have wrongly interpreted as gluten sensitivity. FODMAPS are frequently found in the same foods as gluten. That still doesn’t explain why people in the study negatively reacted to diets that were free of all dietary triggers.

You can go ahead and smell your bread and eat it too. Science. It works.








Vermont Lawmakers Pass Country’s First No-Strings-Attached GMO Labeling Law

On APril 16, 2014, by a vote of 28-2, the Vermont state Senate passed H.112, a bill to require mandatory labeling of foods sold in Vermont that contain genetically modified organisms (GMOs). The bill also makes it illegal to call any food product containing GMOs “natural” or “all natural.” Unlike bills passed last year in Maine and Connecticut, which require four or five other states to pass GMO labeling laws before they can be enacted, Vermont’s law contains no “trigger” clauses, making it the first “clean” GMO labeling law in the country.

The bill now goes back to the House which is expected to agree to the Senate’s amendments, then to Gov. Peter Shumlin who is expected to sign it.

Ronnie Cummins, national director of the Organic Consumers Association (OCA), issued the following statement:

Today’s victory in Vermont has been 20 years in the making. Ever since genetically modified crops and foods entered the U.S. food supply in the early 1990s, without adequate independent pre-market safety testing and without labels, U.S. consumers have fought to require the labeling of foods containing GMOs.

Consumer demand for mandatory labeling of GMOs spawned a national grassroots movement that has persevered despite hundreds of millions of dollars spent by the biotech and food industries to lobby state lawmakers in Vermont, and to fund anti-labeling campaigns in California (2012) and Washington State (2013).

Today, consumers and a number of principled legislators in Vermont made it clear to Monsanto, Coca-Cola and other opponents of consumers’ right to know: We will not back down. This movement is here to stay.

We expect that Monsanto will sue the state of Vermont in order to prevent enactment of H.112. We also expect that Monsanto will lose, and the law will go into effect on schedule, on July 1, 2016.

We expect that the Grocery Manufacturers Association, a multi-billion lobbying group representing more than 300 food, pesticide and drug makers, will try to pass their “Safe and Accurate Food Labeling Act of 2014,” introduced last week by Rep. Mike Pompeo (R-Kan.), intended to strip Vermont, and all other states, of their right to pass GMO labeling laws. And we expect that Congress will not pass this law, dubbed the DARK (Deny Americans the Right to Know) Act, which seeks to deny consumers the right to know if their food has been genetically engineered, and deny states the right to enact laws designed to protect public health.

Vermont’s landmark victory today will force food companies to either label GMOs in all states, or reformulate their products to be GMO-free in order to avoid stating “this product was produced using genetic engineering” on their packaging. When Oregon passes a citizens’ ballot initiative to label GMOs in November, as we believe it will, the biotech and food industries will have lost, beyond the shadow of a doubt, their battle to keep consumers in the dark.

The OCA has worked closely over the past several years with the pro-labeling grassroots movement in Vermont. Today we congratulate Vermont activists for their passionate pursuit of this law, Vermont lawmakers for having the courage to pass the law, and Vermont citizens for being the first in the country to have the benefit of GMO labels on their food. And we reaffirm our commitment to work with Oregon and other states to pass similar laws, and to fight any and all attempts by industry and/or Congress to overturn these laws.

Source: Organic Consumers Association


TCP Logo NEW FB - jpg


Lance Armstrong Names Names Under Oath

Lance Armstrong named names and provided additional new details about his doping practices when he was compelled to respond to questions under oath in a recent lawsuit – his first publicly revealed answers under oath since his famous confession to Oprah Winfrey in January 2013.

The answers came last November but weren’t made public until Wednesday, when they were obtained by USA TODAY Sports after being filed in federal court by an attorney for former cycling teammate Floyd Landis as part of another lawsuit.

When asked who provided him with performance-enhancing drugs during his cycling career, Armstrong replied with four names: trainer Pepi Marti, Dr. Pedro Celaya, Dr. Luis Garcia del Moral and Dr. Michele Ferrari, all part of Armstrong’s cycling entourage.

When asked who delivered the drugs he used to cheat in races, Armstrong replied with more names: masseuse Emma O’Reilly, bike mechanic Julien de Vriese and Philippe Maire, who has previously been described as “Motoman,” a motorbike courier.

Almost all of the names Armstrong mentions have at various times denied involvement in or knowledge of doping, including team manager Johan Bruyneel.

“Johan Bruyneel participated in or assisted with Armstrong’s use of PEDs, and knew of that use through their conversations and acts,” Armstrong states.

Armstrong also replied that he generally paid for the substances he used. “There may have been additional persons, but Armstrong does not recall any others at this time,” he answered.

In another response, Armstrong stated, “Armstrong would typically supervise his own use of PEDs, but on certain occasions, the use of PEDs was supervised by Dr. Celaya, Dr. del Moral, or Dr. Ferrari.”

Armstrong said he recalled using the blood booster EPO at the Tour de France as early as 1995. In his answers, he again denied cheating during his comeback years in 2009 and 2010.

After several years of denials, Armstrong admitted in 2013 in his televised interview with Winfrey that he had doped during all of his Tour de France victories from 1999 to 2005. He did not name names in that interview or get into detail about how he obtained the drugs or who else knew about it.

But he was compelled to give these written answers last fall in a lawsuit filed against him by Acceptance Insurance, which sought to recover $3 million from him for bonuses paid to him for winning the Tour de France from 1999 to 2001. One day before he was scheduled to give a deposition in that case in November, Armstrong reached an undisclosed settlement to end it and cancel the deposition.

BACKGROUND: Armstrong settles Acceptance Insurance case

LANCE’S LIFE: One year after the Oprah interview

The answers were not available in the public court record until Wednesday, when attorneys for former cycling teammate Floyd Landis filed them as an exhibit in Landis’ separate federal whistleblower lawsuit against Armstrong. Landis’ attorney filed the answers in support of his motion to compel discovery materials from Thomas Weisel, the financier of Armstrong’s U.S. Postal Service cycling team.

As previously reported by USA TODAY Sports, Armstrong replied in his written answers from November that he believed that “Mr. Weisel was aware of doping on the USPS team.” Weisel has denied the allegation.

Armstrong also refers to his cycling team’s general mananger, Mark Gorski, and former cyclist Chris Carmichael in his answers in the Acceptance case.

“As for Mr. Gorski, it is Armstrong’s belief that he was aware of doping by the USPS team,” Armstrong states. “Mr. Armstrong told Chris Carmichael in 1995 of his use of PEDs.”

Armstrong also was asked to name every person or entity he has paid to keep his doping secret.

“Armstrong has not paid or offered to pay someone to keep his or others’ doping a secret,” he stated. “However, Armstrong has, on occasion, provided benefits or made contributions to many people and institutions, some of whom may have been aware of, or suspected Armstrong’s use of performance-enhancing drugs and banned methods. Armstrong never provided any such benefits or contributions with the intent for it to be a payoff to keep doping a secret.”




TCP Logo NEW FB - jpg


Top 8 Foods & Herbs For Healing Cancer

cancerWith 44% of men and 39% of women now being diagnosed with cancer, it has become more important than ever to understand the foods that will not only nourish your body, but also detoxify it of any cancer causing agents. Here are some of the most potent cancer destroying foods and herbs.

Sea Vegetables

Kelp, kombu, and nori are three of the more common sea vegetables with remarkable effects on cancer. They are one of the richest and most bioavailable sources of iodine, a substance lacking in the average diet that is implicated in many patients with breast and ovarian cancer.

They are also rich in calcium and potassium, as well as all minerals, which assist in promoting a very alkaline environment, which makes it very difficult for existing cancer to survive.


Chlorella and spirulina are two of the most potent algae and are proven cancer fighters.

Due to their incredible detoxification action (including binding to and eliminating heavy metals) and immune boosting properties (by promoting production of healthy gut flora and fighting candida overgrowth), they are a must have when healing cancer.

Cruciferous Vegetables

Cruciferous vegetables like broccoli, cauliflower, and cabbage have been linked to lower cancer risks and have the ability to halt growth of cancer cells for tumors in the breast, uterine lining, lung, colon, liver, and cervix.

It appears that a phytochemical called sulforaphane can stimulate enzymes that detoxify carcinogens before they damage cells, as well as indole 3-carbinol and crambene, which are also suspected of activating detoxification enzymes.

Medicinal Mushrooms

Medicinal mushrooms such as reishi and chaga have had a number of bioactive molecules, including anti-tumor agents, identified in their structure. These bioactive compounds include polysaccharides, alkaloids, tocopherols, phenolics, flavonoids, carotenoids, folates, ascorbic acid enzymes, and organic acids.

Studies show that long-term consumption of reishi prevents tumor proliferation and growth by increasing the level of antioxidants in an individual’s blood plasma while boosting the immunity of those suffering from advanced stage cancer.

Aloe Vera

Research shows strong immunomodulatory and anti-tumor properties for polysaccharides in aloe vera, which means it boosts immune system function and destroys cancer tumors.

A study in International Immunopharmacology showed that aloe vera polysaccharides exhibited potent macrophage activating activities including producing increased volumes of nitric oxide, which has anti-tumor potential.


The hemp plant contains some of the most balanced and richest sources of oils on the planet, with an ideal ratio of 3:1 for omega 6 to omega 3. Hemp seed oil also contains 80% essential fatty acids, the highest of any plant.

Essential fatty acids are fundamental to immune function due to their antioxidants and anti-inflammatory fatty acids, which helps oxidize the cells and restores health at a cellular level. Since cancer cannot survive in a highly oxygenated environment, the superb EFA content in hemp makes it a great option for healing cancer.


A double blind, randomized study with over 3000 human subjects for seven clinical years showed that cancer risk was cut by 60% for those with the highest intake of allium containing vegetables, including aged garlic.

The miracle nutrient appears to be the enzyme alliinase (a nutrient in the Allium genus) which produces the anti-cancer compounds. The key is to crush it and let it sit for 15 minutes in order to release these anti-cancer compounds.


The Life Extension Foundation has conducted extensive research into the anti-cancer properties of turmeric and found that it targets 10 causative factors involved in cancer development, including DNA damage, chronic inflammation, and disruption of cell signaling pathways.

Hundreds of studies have also shown that curcumin is a potent anti-cancer food that blocks cancer development in a number of unique ways.

I hope this inspires you to trust nature, so we can start to reverse these scary statistics.

Sources for this article include:

Source: Natural News


TCP Logo NEW FB - jpg


Is This The Best They Could Do?

You all know I Love and Respect Richard Simmons for his importance to the world of training.  But, HOW IN THE NAME OF ZEUS’ BUTTHOLE is this supposed to make anyone want to subscribe to Obamacare?  While this is supposed to inspire the younger generation to run of a sign up, I can imagine the only impact it has is laughter, or perhaps some crazy drinking game.

I love how the lady in the background is somehow trying to tie in a plug for getting insurance, but it in no way makes sense, similar to the dance moves and the entire project.   There is an entire 6 hours of performances, special guests and even a World-Record Attempt…of putting the most band-aids on someone’s face…if you have a few hours of your life to waste, or want to create that drinking game and get wasted!  Check it out here.


TCP Logo NEW FB - jpg


Coca-Cola Paid $1 Million To Try And Keep You From Knowing This…

Coca-Cola paid $1 million to make sure you don’t know this.

Coca-Cola paid $1 million to make sure you don’t know this.

Coca-Cola has been having a rough time. The company owns Honest Tea, Odwalla, Powerade, Vitamin Water, Simply Orange, and other products marketed to health-conscious consumers. But it is best known for making Coke, a product that is utterly devoid of nutritional value and is often blamed for contributing to the obesity epidemic — an epidemic that is costing hundreds of billions of dollars and causing hundreds of thousands of deaths each year.

With demand for the company’s carbonated and artificially flavored sugar water declining, hope for Coca-Cola’s profitability has been increasingly resting on the brands it markets as healthier reports that sales of Coca-Cola-owned brands like Honest Tea, Powerade, and Simply Orange are the company’s new profit center.

But there’s a problem.

In October, campaign finance reports revealed that Coca-Cola had secretly contributed more than a million dollars to the fight against GMO labeling in Washington. It took the state’s Attorney General suing the Grocery Manufacturers’ Association (GMA) for what turned out to be an $11 million violation of the state’s campaign finance laws to reveal these secret contributions. But now that the truth has been exposed, some healthy food activists are fighting back.

Andrew Kimbrell, founder of the Center for Food Safety, comments:

Consumers of healthy beverages want to know what’s in their food. By using money from sales of natural brands to secretly fund an anti-choice agenda that deprives consumers of the right to know what they’re eating, Coca-Cola has been betraying the public interest and standing on the wrong side of history.

We at the Food Revolution Network agree. And we have launched a petition on that calls for Coca-Cola to stop funding anti GMO labeling campaigns.

Check out and sign the petition here.

Coca-Cola’s CEO, Muhtar Kent, says, “We have… provided a tremendous amount of choice to people.” But when it comes to the right to know if your food was genetically engineered, Coca-Cola would apparently like to keep you in the dark. According to reports, Honest Tea co-founder Seth Goldman said as recently as September that “after internal discussions,” Coca-Cola wouldn’t be “directly” funding efforts to defeat I-522. Apparently Coca-Cola thought that allegedly illegally laundering money through the Grocery Manufacturers’ Association would keep their involvement a secret.

Honest Tea doesn’t look quite so honest when it’s being used to put an organic face on an alleged money laundering scheme whose goal is keeping you from knowing if your food is genetically engineered.

And what makes matters worse, Honest Tea proudly proclaims throughout their website that they are GMO free — while their parent company is actively working to prevent GMO labeling.

I wrote Coca-Cola asking if they intended to continue funding anti GMO labeling campaigns. The company’s response was to repeat the anti-labeling lobby’s talking points. They told me that Washington’s labeling initiative, I-522, would: “Require tens of thousands of common food and beverage products to be relabeled exclusively for Washington State unless they are remade with higher-priced, specially developed ingredients. The measure will increase grocery costs for a typical Washington family by hundreds of dollars per year.”

These are charges that the nine-time Pulitzer Prize winning newspaper The Seattle Times called “mostly false” and that Consumers Union, publisher of Consumer Reports, flatly rejected.

In short, Coca-Cola not only tried to hide their contributions to the anti-labeling efforts in Washington, but they continue to try to deceive people about the actual realities of GMO labeling.

And they’re using sales of Honest Tea, Odwalla, Powerade, Vitamin Water, Simply Orange, and all their other brands, to finance their agenda.

Fortunately, you don’t have to fall for it.

Click here to add your name to the petition calling Coca-Cola to stop funding anti-labeling campaigns.

Click here to get the Coca-Cola buycott app.


Ocean Robbins is co-author of Voices of the Food Revolution, and serves as adjunct professor for Chapman University and CEO and co-host (with best-selling author John Robbins) of the 100,000+ member Food Revolution Network. Find out more and sign up here.


Source: Huffington Post


Amazing New Bicycle Wheel Might Help Boost Commuter Numbers

I hope this new rear wheel will help encourage some people to get out on a bicycle for commuting, exercise and fun.   Granted, you can’t race a triathlon and its pretty heavy.  The amount of good it could do for people looking to start cycling, or who need a little boost is limitless.


Be Healthy



Amazing Christmas Surprise For Passengers

014410Some Westjet employees pulled off an amazing Christmas surprise for their passengers flying out of Toronto.  Imagine how much better your holidays would be if that was your flight.  (Yes, I realize this is a promo for Westjet…And a genius marketing promo at that.)

Now imagine if the 10 million plus people who have watched this on Youtube practiced some kindness and did something small in an effort to make someone else’s holiday special like Westjet has (and even after the holidays).  It wouldn’t have to be such a large gesture like buying them a phone or TV, but what about smiling at a stranger and wishing them a happy holiday, holding the door for someone with their hands full or even paying for a random stranger’s cup of coffee.

Humanity just might be able to prevail in the midst of all the negativity surrounding us these days.


Happy Holidays


TCP Logo NEW FB - jpg


Setting SMART Goals

We all now how important setting goals is when it comes to accomplishing a task.  They are the carrots on the stick that keep us moving forward.  But what if you’re not setting good goals?  A GOOD GOAL?  You may be asking yourself, “Isn’t any goal a good goal?”  True, anything is better than nothing.  But when it comes to setting goals, there is a way that will improve your chances of accomplishing them.

Instead of setting vague or random goals that may not push you to take action, it is important that you set SMART goals, which will help motivate you to take steps toward achieving them.  So what are SMART goals?

  • Specific
  • Measurable
  • Attainable
  • Realistic
  • Time Sensitive


Specific – Generalities don’t work. The more specific and detailed your goals are, the more you can get emotionally attached to achieving them.  What do you want to accomplish?  Why?  How is this goal going to make you feel once you reach it?
Measurable - ”Getting in better shape” or “Lose a few pounds” are too vague.  Vague goals lead to vague results.  Make sure to set the exact weight you WILL BE, or the dress size you WILL get in to, or how fast you WILL run a mile, etc…Either you are going to hit that number or you won’t. But either way you need to be able to measure what you are going to achieve.
Attainable – If you want to lose 100 lbs, it won’t happen in the next 3 months.  If you are currently a couch potato, running a 7 minute mile isn’t going to happen in 3 months either.  In setting your goals, make sure you push yourself towards a difficult goal that is going to help you get better, but make sure all that effort will allow you to reach the goal in the amount of time you have specified.
Realistic – This one is similar to attainable above.  But take it a step further; make sure the goal you are setting can eventually be reached.  Attainable refers to reaching it within the time specified.  Realistic refers to whether or not you can ever attain it.  For instance, I will NEVER be able to win a gold medal in the Olympics for women’s floor exercise.  I am not a gymnast, a woman, nor will I ever achieve that.  Yes…its a drastic example.  The point is, make sure you will eventually be able to reach the goal you are setting.
Time-Sensitive – Set a due date.  You know what you want to do.  Now set a time you are guaranteeing it will be done by.  And then get to working to make sure it happens.
SO…putting it all together, a good goal could look like:
“Today is January 1, and I weigh 200 pounds.  On or before June 1 at 6am I will weight 184.9 lbs or less.”
“Today is August 1 and I can’t do a single push-up.  By Halloween, I will be able to do 10 real push ups in a row without stopping”
If you have any questions about setting your goals, or want some help in setting your goals, just let me know.  I am here to help in any way I can.
TCP Logo NEW FB - jpg