Finding ecological products in UK that are organic or biodegradable


Waitrose is your #1 stop for local & organic food

An interesting store for online orders that I tried once:

You should also register an account at Ocado. They have the *best* delivery service in the world.

Nice website to compare food from supermarkets:

Bedding Sheets and Towels $ $$$ $$



Cleaning Products

Air quality monitors for London

Annual map ***

Raw data :


Description of air quality monitoring in London

Debunking the myth that soya is good for health

[Warning: work in progress, still in review mode]

Soybean the “cheap protein”

Soy is very cheap to produce1,2 and offers a good amount of proteins3. From a business point of view this is great. From a health and social point of view, you will see later that it is rather a failure.

My opinion on soy

Soy is not a “healthy” food. It is a source of cheap proteins with a good marketing machine behind it. Twelve years ago I studied soy plants and found that it was defending itself very well from insects with the various toxins it could produce. My thought then was that it should not be consumed on the long-term. I was pretty sad hearing people telling me proudly they were drinking soy-milk with health-related considerations.

In the last few years I’ve seen circulating more and more scientific studies indicating that soy was indeed not that healthy, confirming my suspicions. Although the content below will reflect a pretty bad view of soybeans, it is by no mean evil and I wouldn’t be afraid to eat some. But I would not eat it on a regular basis year after year or consider it as a health-food.

Natural plant defenses and toxins in soy

<< Unfermented soy contains “anti-nutrients” including estrogens, goitrogens, oxalates, phytates, protease inhibitors, saponins and soyatoxin. >>4

<< The protease inhibitors in soybeans are not only more numerous than those found in other beans and foods, but more resistant to neutralization by cooking and processing. >>5,6 Protease inhibitor can be a problem on the long-term.

There is also a toxin in soy called soyatoxin that was found in 1994 and that was found to be highly toxic to mice. The researchers concluded that it is <<important to gather more information concerning its nutritional value, and to develop ways to counteract any detrimental effects. >>7

I could do to same for most plants, and this alone should not be a basis for indicating if it is “healthy” or not. What we need is scientific studies on humans that shows what happens when you eat the whole food (and not just an extracted single-component) over a long period of time. This is what I have gathered in the next sections !

Scientific studies on soy

Brain aging and midlife tofu consumption.
<< CONCLUSIONS: In this population, higher midlife tofu consumption was independently associated with indicators of cognitive impairment and brain atrophy in late life. >>

Soy food and isoflavone intake in relation to semen quality parameters among men from an infertility clinic. << CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that higher intake of soy foods and soy isoflavones is associated with lower sperm concentration. >>

Bad science in pro-soy articles

Let’s go directly on the Soyfoods Association of North America website in a page where science is supposed to be found, let say in the Men’s health page where there is a lot of references (viewed on August, 2014). It says << Human studies have found that males who consume soy have not had changes in sperm count, sperm quality or sperm motility. >> However if you take the time to look at the fourth reference (Chavarro JE, Toth TL, Sadio SM, Hauser R. Soy food and isoflavone intake in relation to semen quality parameters among men from an infertility clinic. Hum Reprod 2008;23:2584-90.) which talks about semen quality, you will see the following conclusion in the cited study (which is the same study I previously cited in the previous paragraph!!) : << CONCLUSIONS: These data suggest that higher intake of soy foods and soy isoflavones is associated with lower sperm concentration. >> (Chavarro JE & al).

Be careful about industry-funded articles. In general these tactics could be used :

  • Reduce the research scope, for example by reducing the length of the study to a few months.
  • Testing a single nutrient in an in-vitro research, e.g. on isoflavones instead of long-term study of complete soy on human. And than extrapolating (without any scientific data) that the full product is good and should be recommended by health pratitionners.
  • Extrapolate or distort references, for example by saying something is safe while the reference still shows in the conclusion that more work needs to be done, or like in the example given above about article on the Soyfoods Association of North America website, you can just take a small sentence out of a research and disregard the conclusion. For example a study that says it did not find change in sperm mobility but found that sperm concentration was lower. Then the industry just says that sperm mobility is unchanged “forgets” to mention about the sperm concentration.
  • Cite other studies made by the industry and camouflage it with a lot of other real scientific studies on facts about your product. Thus having a fresh new scientific paper on the subject that looks authentic. It is like money laundering, but for science paper. One can fund a study, then produce a multiple of articles citing again and again this study along with other real studies.

Soy and cancer

You would need to be pretty wacko to believe that there is a link between cancer and soy. It is a plant from nature that has been eaten for thousands of years and human studies have not found a link between cancer and soy. On the contrary, Asian studies showed that soy was beneficial against cancer. However studies in the US have not shown this beneficial trend. I didn’t find the explanation why, but my hypothesis – for what it is worth – is that either (i) Asians handle soy better and/or (ii) the soy in the US is different. I will add a personal thought that it is time that scientists begin using organic versus non-organic version of food during testing to eliminate the effect of pesticide residues. My source is directly from which I believe we can trust to be impartial toward the industry and in the best interest of the fight against cancer :
<< (…) a recent study combined data from 14 epidemiologic studies on this topic and found that in Asian countries, women who ate the most (compared to the least) soy isoflavones had a 24% lower risk of developing breast cancer, while there was no association in Western countries such as the U.S. >> and << Bottom line: Even though animal studies have shown mixed effects on breast cancer with soy supplements, studies in humans have not shown harm from eating soy foods. Moderate consumption of soy foods appears safe for both breast cancer survivors and the general population, and may even lower breast cancer risk. Avoid soy supplements until more research is done. So, enjoy your occasional tofu stir-fry or tofu burger – they are unlikely to increase your risk of breast cancer and, on balance, are some of the healthier foods you can eat! >>

How soy is used

Nearly all soybeans are processed for their oil. What remains is high-protein fibers9.

83% of the worldwide production of soy is used to feed animals10.

This means they first extract the oil, then process the rest into protein meal. If you think about it for a minute, that means most of the soy proteins sold on the market have residues from the oil extraction process.

More bedtime reading can be found there :

The truth is out there

The DARK Side Of Soy – America’s Favorite ‘Health’ Food by Kaayla T. Daniel

Should we worry about soya in our food? by Felicity Lawrence

The Shadow of Soy Or, How I Stopped Loving and Learned to Worry About the Bean by Sean Carson

Soy Protein Sucks! by Author L Rea


My goal is to tell you that putting the same thing in your diet weeks after weeks, for more than a year is generally not a good idea unless it is really really good – and soybean is not in that category. In fact among all the studies I read I did not read a single thing that would make soybean stand out from a health point of view. It does stand out from an economical point of view and industrial alternative to petroleum in the production of goods. The only good thing I saw was in fermented soybean.



1. United States Department of Agriculture, Impacts of Higher Energy Prices on Agriculture and Rural Economies. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed 3rd August 2014]. (Figure 2.1 and 2.2)

2. Big Picture Agriculture, How Higher Energy Prices Will Affect U.S. Agricultural Production. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed 1st August 2014].

3. Xun Yao Chen, Why growing corn and soybean demand helps fertilizer stocks. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed 22th August 2014]

4. Cary Neff, The Benefits of Fermented Soy. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed 22th August 2014].

5. Kaayla Daniel, Plants Bite Back. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed 22th August 2014].

6. Daniel, Kaayla T. The Whole Soy Story (New Trends, 2005) 195-212.

7. Vasconcelos IM, Trentim A et al. Purification and physiochemical characterization of soyatoxin, a novel toxic portein isolated from soybeans (Glycine max), Arch Biochem Biophys, 1994, 312, 2, 357-366.

9. North Carolina Soybean Producers Association, How Soybeans are Used. [Online]. Available from: [Accessed 22th August 2014]

10. My calculation is as follow : 85% is crushed into meal, and 98% of this meal is fed to animals: 0.85 * 0.98 = 0.833, thus 83%. Raw numbers from :

Important studies on Organic food

Although from a rational point of view, growing organic is the only way that make sense, the majority of the population still don’t know what organic really is. In our mind, the way food is grown is not representative of reality.

The harsh chemical that our food grows in is in fact chemical warfare weapon designed during the war and later converted to agriculture products. In fact, since the beginning of agriculture, food could have been considered organic – it is just since 50 years ago that food production changed to use chemicals design to kill life. Moreover, the fertilizer used are derived from petroleum. Genetically modified seeds are pushed without long-term safety research – in fact the only long-term (2-years) study that I know on GMO shows clear link with cancer and has been debated. Following that study, more countries started their own private study on GMO safety and in 2016 we should see the results.

This page is for all of us who still don’t know the difference between the quality of products labelled organic versus conventional ones. You will be shocked !

Going organic for one week reduce by 89% the pesticide exposure

Source :;ID=e3hoqm8befvj1 A study from Australia shows again that indeed there is a difference between Organic versus Conventional products. Yes organic is better than conventional. Yes it is worth to pay more : << Conventional food production commonly uses organophosphate pesticides, which are neurotoxins that act on the nervous system of insects – and humans – by blocking an important enzyme, >> Dr Oates said. The amount of six organophosphate residues were being monitored in urine sample. It dropped by 89% in adults after only one week on a diet of at least 80% organic. Imagine 100% !

GM food toxins found in the blood of 93% of unborn babies

Source : Independent doctors at the Department of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, at the University of Sherbrooke Hospital Centre in Quebec, Canada

Pete Riley said: << This research is a major surprise as it shows that the Bt proteins have survived the human digestive system and passed into the blood supply – something that regulators said could not happen. >>

Sub-lethal exposure to neonicotinoids impaired honey bees winterization before proceeding to colony collapse disorder

After what seemed like 5 years of waiting for the answer, we get another study confirming that neonicotinoids are responsible for the mass dying of bees. Of course organic products do not have anything to do with neonicotinoids.

Source :


Le café va sauver le monde

Le café renferme bien plus de potentiel que sont “bon” goût et ses effets sur le mental. En effet une fois le grain utilisé, il peut être réutilisé en combustible propre1!

Toutefois il est un peu prétentieux de dire que le café va sauver le monde car l’industrie de cultivation du café est un exemple parfait de capitalisme détruisant les vies de millions de personnes. Même le café provenant de sources “équitables” n’offrent pas le salaire minimum dans la plupart des cas2. Il y a beaucoup de chemin à faire.



I always say “Give me a million dollar and I will craft you a study that concludes whatever you want” ! That is right, just having a scientific studies with result does not mean anything anymore. By who it is funded, how was the data collected and are the conclusions unbiased ?

Science has evolved so much that now we can even get the results we want out of a study. Science got to a point where it can be an art in marketing and not just pure unbiased research. We excel in careful selection of study length, in imaginative reasons to drop specific subjects that are not pointing at our desired conclusion, or simply choosing carefully the parameters that will make our point stand out. It is possible to get the conclusion you require, in exchange for a lump sum of money.

Famous now for its environmental faux-pas, the Concervative party of Stephan Harper didn’t like an European study on the environmental value of the tar-sand derived petroleum. So it decided to produce a study that would show otherwise and opened a public offering to produce an “independent” study on that matter. You don’t like someone else study.. no problemo, buy your own! (With taxpayer money if you can…)

<< Selon le journaliste scientifique Stéphane Foucart, du journal Le Monde, ceux-ci, confrontés aux faits, utilisent le discours scientifique comme un instrument de propagande pour instiller le doute. Ces mêmes procédés qui ont eu cours pour le tabac, l'amiante, le réchauffement climatique, le déclin des abeilles, le bisphénol A, les OGM. >>

On other side of things, Monsanto got approved almost worldwide GM crops based on 3-months studies. We now know from a french study that health problems in laboratory rats fed GM crops begins after 3 months. Furthermore, it causes sterilization after 3 generations (from another study). The 3-months studies from Monsanto are a HUGE scam that got bought by top world leaders, which makes me realize that to be able to accept a scientific studies, you should be a scientific yourself, not a politician.

And this goes on even on the medical field where pharmaceutical companies produce lots of scientific studies. This is definitely causing some bias.

Well what should you remember from all this : even scientific studies can be flawed. That fact that science backs something doesn’t means it is true. It might be true, or might just not be. Don’t give your trust so easily.

La sélection de semance est une des première étape lors de la création d’un jardin. Il faut proner les semences ancestrales certifiées biologique afin de n’avoir aucun coating pesticideux sur les graines, aucune modifications génétiques douteuse et surtout sans envoyer notre argent à Monsanto.

Achetons-donc vos graines de bonne sources! Pour ceci l’article écrit par Sarah, sur le blog The Healthy Home Economist est très utile car en effet à cause du monopole du marché des semences par les compagnie de produits chimique, il est de plus en plus difficile de trouver des semances qui n’encourage pas des compagnie comme Monsanto.

Vous pouvez lire l’article en anglais à :

Quelques points intéressant :

La carte des compagnie utilisant les semances:

La liste des compagnies qui ne sont pas affilié à Monsanto:
[UPDATE 08.Aug.2013]: Le site plus haut n’est plus disponible, voici donc la liste des compagnie Canadiennes qui y était présente

Canadian Seed Companies:
Annapolis Valley Heritage Seed Company
Brother Nature
Cubit’s Organics
Full Circle Seeds
Greta’s Organic Garden
Heritage Harvest Seeds (ships to Canada only)
Hope Seeds
Incredible Seeds
Richters Herbs
Salt Spring Seeds
Seeds of Victoria
Solana Seeds
Stellar Seeds
Terra Edibles
The Cottage Gardener

[UPDATE 08.Aug.2013] Voici une autre liste disponible :


By Francois Oligny-Lemieux
Bolton-Est, 2013

Guérison de la sclérose en plaques

[Note de l’auteur: Je ne suis pas docteur en médecine et cet article ne peut être pris comme une recommendation médicale. Par contre il est basé sur le travail de médecins et je vous recommande d’apporter ces informations à votre médecin traitant pour dicussion]

Vous saviez que la sclérose en plaques est une maladie qui peut être guérit (rémission complète), et ce même pour la forme progressive qui est la forme la plus grave! On crois souvent que cette maladie ne peut être que stoppé ou ralenti (site web canoe-santé, section “Traitements”).

Le Dr. Jean Seignalet en France a développé un régime avec suppléments basés sur les travaux de Kousmine et Swank. Sur 46 cas avec un recule de 2 à 10 ans, le Dr. Jean Seignalet en France à obtenu 13 rémissions complètes, le reste ont eu des améliorations et seulement 1 cas n’a pas répondu. Donc 97% des patients on vu leur condition améliorée. Vous pouvez voir sont traitement à la page 252 de la 5ieme édition de son livre “L’Alimentation ou la troisième médecine”.

Le problème avec cette méthode est qu’elle ne rapporte pas d’argent aux compagnies pharmaceutiques et qu’elle demande un effort considérable du côté du patient.

Le Dr. Jean Seignalet ajoutait des corrections alimentaires importantes en plus des médicaments normalement prescrit. Il se faisait courrament référer des patients par ses collègues lorsque tout semblait désespéré. Il se ramassait donc souvent avec les cas les plus compliqués. Parlez-en à votre médecin, il sera bien content de voir que vous prenez votre guérison à coeur.


Francois Oligny-Lemieux
Bolton-Est, 2013

Yes, believe it or not, from the comfort of our home, we are living in the sixth vague of massive extinction. As you are taking your morning coffee, eggs n’ muffin next to a hot fire, a vague of massive extinction of species is undergoing. The last vague of massive extinction took away the dinosaurs !!

Now that deserve a little coverage, doesn’ it?

The most severe mass extinction occurred at the end of the Permian period when 96% of all species perished.

What could be causing this massive extinction. We’ve all heard of these issues years after years : loss of habitat (forests), increase in water pollution (accumulation of hundred of toxic substance found in rivers, lakes and seas around the world), military activities and radars underwater1. And what else we are unaware of? Even humans have hundred of toxic substance found in their fat cells and urine. Imagine what these chemicals would do to a much weaker organism.

Increase in temperature by 1 or 2 degree does not by itself cause massive extinction. But the combination of multiple effects can put species at risk and on top of that if you add heat-wave or rapid temperature drop, you ca (that is just an example).

As a population we are all aware that something is going bad, but we are so much trying to live our day-to-day chores that our lifestyles don’t allow us to pursue and confront the problem – more over if we do so we are considered dangerous terrorist – like Greenpeace activists.

One of the reason of extinction is water pollution. This is personally the problem that I find the most scary. Look at us human. To get a drink of water, we have to process it because our water has become so much polluted that we cannot drink directly from it. Not long ago, the Roman empire was bringing safe water into its city via aqueduct from natural sources. Take for example the St-Laurence river. There are thousand of manufactures pouring their waste-water into it, some of them neurotoxic substance, some other heavy metals. Yes there are chrome manufacture on the border of the St-Laurence river that throws away heavy metal into it. Native Americans whose diet is primarily fish from those place are dying from cancer and malformations. Image fragile wildlife – they don’t have sanitation equipment.

Moreover, rainfall can carry some of these toxic chemicals into wild forest. For example Atrazine.


At threat are 41 percent of amphibian species, 33 percent of reef-building corals, 25 percent of mammals, 20 percent of plants and 13 percent of birds. 4

Further reading and articles


1. Lethal Sounds – The use of military sonar poses a deadly threat to whales and other marine mammals


3. Coral Reef Loss Suggests Global Extinction Event



Mélatonine pour dormir

Avant d’utiliser des drogues plus fortes pour le sommeil, essayez-donc la mélatonine. Elle a très peu d’effets secondaires1, quasiment aucune dépendances1 et ne perturbe pas les cycles du sommeil2. D’autres médicaments prescrits causes des dépendances et peuvent supprimer certains cycles du sommeil – ce qui à long terme cause des carences. Dans ma famille et parenté, je compte plusieurs personnes qui sont actuellement dépendant des médicaments pour dormir; je trouve ça déplorable car une bonne partie aurait pu s’en sortir avec de la mélatonine seulement – qui est en vente libre. Allez donc faire un tour au Loblaws vous en acheter. C’est très utile lorsque vous voyagez et ne dormez pas bien en dehors de la maison, ou simplement pour le décalage horaire. Malheureusement pas toutes les causes de troubles de sommeil ne sont pas aidés par la mélatonine – celle-ci ayant un effet très doux qu’on ne sent presque pas.


La Mélatonine

Mais qu’est-ce que la mélatonine? C’est une hormone sécrété par le corps qui joue un rôle dans le sommeil. Attention à ne pas se mélanger avec la mélamine (avec quoi vos armoires de cuisines sont peut-être faites), ainsi que la mélanine (qui joue un rôle dans la couleur de votre peau, cheveux et yeux). Comme le corps sécrète déjà de la mélatonine, c’est un composé très sécuritaire à prendre. Notez par contre que comme n’importe quelle supplémentation en neurotransmetteurs, à long terme en utilisation continue (+2 ans) elle rends le cerveau paresseux dans sa production et l’arrêt brusque sera suivit d’une période de réadaptation. Ainsi même si on la dit sans-dépendance, il faut être tenu au courant. De plus elle présente une interaction avec d’autres médicaments. Tout de même je vous conseil d’en parler à votre médecin avant de vous faire prescrire des drogues plus forte pour voir si la mélatonine n’est pas une option intéressante!


Pour qui ?

La sécrétion de mélatonine diminue avec l’âge. C’est pourquoi que les petits jeunes peuvent faire la grâce matiné jusqu’à midi et que les petits vieux sont sur le piton à 6h00 du matin. Les personnes en contact rapproché avec les ondes électro-magnétiques ont aussi des niveaux plus bas de mélatonine3. Ceci est dû à l’action des ondes sur l’équilibre entre la cortisol et la mélatonine. Les niveaux de cortisol (hormone du stress) s’élèvent ce qui cause une diminution du niveau de mélatonine. J’ai remarqué sur moi-même qu’après une exposition à long terme (+3 ans) et le retour à un niveau bas en ondes électro-magnétique, 1 à 2 mois peuvent être nécessaire avant de voir une différence dans le recouvrement des niveaux de mélatonines2.


1. Can you get addicted to melatonin?

2. Self-tests on myself

3. EMR Reduces Melatonin in Animals and People, Dr Neil Cherry, 26th July 2000