Glass Popsicle Molds - Solved!

I haven't made popsicles in forever. The plastic molds went out with the recycling quite awhile ago and since then I've periodically researched for other alternatives without much fruition. But now that our living room AC is broken, I think I'm a bit more motivated!

There are food grade silicone ones available on Amazon, but to be honest I am still a bit leery of those. I heard that there is a company coming out with stainless steel soon. And I also read that using small glass jars from jam is a way to make your own molds. Unfortunately, I do not buy jam and or have any jars that small. Freezing glass can lead to the container cracking if it is not thick enough, like Pyrex or good mason jars. So I was not sure how to proceed with the glass idea. I thought for sure if I waited long enough a company would come out with glass molds. Still waiting!

But today in Ikea I came across these little 2oz glass cups called "Pokal". They were $3, so I thought why not? I did a test freeze with water when I got home. When the water was a bit solid, I put the pop stick in so it would stand up straight. And an hour or so later- voila! Perfect! You would just have to let the popsicle thaw a tiny bit to ease it out of the cup. I think I will buy another set so I will have 12 in all. They are perfect child-size pops. An adult might want two!

In the last edition of the Weston Price quarterly ( "Nourishing Traditions") there was an article about making nourishing popsicles. I am so on it ;)

Curing Oral Thrush in Babies Naturally

Recently, when checking to see if any new teeth were coming through, I noticed white spots in my son's mouth. Funny, I thought- do teeth come in THAT far back? And then it hit me, those were not teeth at all, but spots of oral thrush. He also had a coating of white on his tongue, upon further examination.

And then I proceeded to get nervous! I had heard more than once that a baby passing oral thrush to the mother is just hell for a nursing. I was so afraid that I would contract the thrush and the pain would be so bad that I would have to quit nursing. It sent me into a nervous tizzy! Not being able to nurse was not a road I wanted to go down since my son depends both nutrionally and emotionally on breastfeeding. So losing all of my bearings I called his doctor and got a prescription for Nystatin. I actually filled it. But then my husband brought me back to reality and said, "He doesn't need that medicine- you didn't even TRY to cure it naturally."

"True," I admitted, "OK, I'll figure out what to do."

As I gulped down my fear of burning nipples, I canvased the Internet for something I could try out. First I tried homeopathy. Kali muriaticum (Kali-mur) is the treatment for thrush. To be honest, I didn't notice any difference. So I started taking Culturelle and giving it to my son as well. Probiotics are very helpful in reigning in any sort of yeast imbalance.

In the meantime, before I nursed I made sure everything was clean by washing with water and vinegar. I knew it was a also key to keep the nursing area dry- so I made sure to change breast pads frequently. Yeast breed in moist areas, so I made sure the drier the better.

Upon more reading I came upon another treatment idea- grapefruit seed extract. It really did the trick! I used about 10 drops per ounce of water and swabbed it in his mouth every waking hour or so for probably 5 days. It wasn't easy to swab- I basically used a cotton ball and squeezed the concoction in his mouth until he got used it and kind of opened up. I don't blame him- it's very sour! But it did work- and I was all too glad!

Everything cleared up totally in about a week and the Nystatin went in the garbage- waste of a copay, but made me feel good that I was able to conquer the thrush naturally. Thanks to my husband who so patiently reminded me to try the natural first amid my fears :)

Some good links to read about oral thrush in babies:

http://www.drjaygordon.com/development/bf/thrush.asp
http://www.askdrsears.com/html/8/t083100.asp
http://www.kellymom.com/bf/concerns/thrush/thrush-resources.html

The Judgement On Vaccines Is In ???

Excellent article by Jim Carrey!

The Judgement On Vaccines Is In ???

Recently, I was amazed to hear a commentary by CNN's Campbell Brown on the controversial vaccine issue. After a ruling by the 'special vaccine court' saying the Measles, Mumps, Rubella shot wasn't found to be responsible for the plaintiffs' autism, she and others in the media began making assertions that the judgment was in, and vaccines had been proven safe. No one would be more relieved than Jenny and I if that were true. But with all due respect to Ms. Brown, a ruling against causation in three cases out of more than 5000 hardly proves that other children won't be adversely affected by the MMR, let alone that all vaccines are safe. This is a huge leap of logic by anyone's standards. Not everyone gets cancer from smoking, but cigarettes do cause cancer. After 100 years and many rulings in favor of the tobacco companies, we finally figured that out.

The truth is that no one without a vested interest in the profitability of vaccines has studied all 36 of them in depth. There are more than 100 vaccines in development, and no tests for cumulative effect or vaccine interaction of all 36 vaccines in the current schedule have ever been done. If I'm mistaken, I challenge those who are making such grand pronouncements about vaccine safety to produce those studies.

If we are to believe that the ruling of the 'vaccine court' in these cases mean that all vaccines are safe, then we must also consider the rulings of that same court in the Hannah Polling and Bailey Banks cases, which ruled vaccines were the cause of autism and therefore assume that all vaccines are unsafe. Clearly both are irresponsible assumptions, and neither option is prudent.
In this growing crisis, we cannot afford to blindly trumpet the agenda of the CDC, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) or vaccine makers. Now more than ever, we must resist the urge to close this book before it's been written. The anecdotal evidence of millions of parents who've seen their totally normal kids regress into sickness and mental isolation after a trip to the pediatrician's office must be seriously considered. The legitimate concern they and many in the scientific community have that environmental toxins, including those found in vaccines, may be causing autism and other disorders (Aspergers, ADD, ADHD), cannot be dissuaded by a show of sympathy and a friendly invitation to look for the 'real' cause of autism anywhere but within the lucrative vaccine program.

With vaccines being the fastest growing division of the pharmaceutical industry, isn't it possible that profits may play a part in the decision-making? That the vaccine program is becoming more of a profit engine than a means of prevention? In a world left reeling from the catastrophic effects of greed, mismanagement and corporate insensitivity, is it so absurd for us to wonder why American children are being given twice as many vaccines on average, compared to the top 30 first world countries?

Paul Offit, the vaccine advocate and profiteer, who helped invent a Rotavirus vaccine is said to have paved the way for his own multi-million dollar windfall while serving on the very council that eventually voted his Rotavirus vaccine onto our children's schedule. On August 21, 2000 a congressional investigation's report titled, "Conflicts in Vaccine Policy," stated:

It has become clear over the course of this investigation that the VRBPAC and the ACIP [the two main advisory boards that determine the vaccine schedule] are dominated by individuals with close working relationships with the vaccine producers. This was never the intent of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires that a diversity of views be represented on advisory committees.

Isn't that enough to raise questions about the process of choosing the vaccine schedule?

With many states like Minnesota now reporting the number at 1 in 80 children affected with autism, can we afford to trust those who serve two masters or their logic that tells us "one size fits all" when it comes to vaccines? Can we afford to ignore vaccines as a possible cause of these rising numbers when they are one of the fastest growing elements in our children's environment? With all the doubt that's left hanging on this topic, how can anyone in the media or medical profession, boldly demand that all parents march out and give their kids 36 of these shots, six at a time in dosage levels equal to that given a 200 pound man? This is a bias of the most dangerous kind.

I've also heard it said that no evidence of a link between vaccines and autism has ever been found. That statement is only true for the CDC, the AAP and the vaccine makers who've been ignoring mountains of scientific information and testimony. There's no evidence of the Lincoln Memorial if you look the other way and refuse to turn around. But if you care to look, it's really quite impressive. For a sample of vaccine injury evidence go to www.generationrescue.org/lincolnmemorial.html.

We have never argued that people shouldn't be immunized for the most serious threats including measles and polio, but surely there's a limit as to how many viruses and toxins can be introduced into the body of a small child. Veterinarians found out years ago that in many cases they were over-immunizing our pets, a syndrome they call Vaccinosis. It overwhelmed the immune system of the animals, causing myriad physical and neurological disorders. Sound familiar? If you can over-immunize a dog, is it so far out to assume that you can over-immunize a child? These forward thinking vets also decided to remove thimerosal from animal vaccines in 1992, and yet this substance, which is 49% mercury, is still in human vaccines. Don't our children deserve as much consideration as our pets?

I think I'd rather listen to the more sensible voice of Dr. Bernadine Healy, former head of the National Institute of Health, who says:

Listen to the patients and the patients will teach...I think there is an inexcusable issue, and that's the lack of research that's been done here...A parent can legitimately question giving a one-day old baby, or a two-day old baby [the] Hepatitis B vaccine that has no risk for it [and] the mother has no risk for it. That's a heavy-duty vaccine given on day two [of life]. I think those are legitimate questions.

Dr. Healy is also calling for a long overdue study of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated. Dr. Frank Engly, a researcher and microbiologist who served on the boards of the CDC, FDA and EPA during the 70s and 80s, warned:

The CDC cannot afford to admit thimerosal is toxic because they have been promoting it for several years...If they would have followed through with our 1982 report, vaccines would have been freed of thimerosal and all this autism as they tell me would not have occurred. But as it is, it all occurred.

In all likelihood the truth about vaccines is that they are both good and bad. While ingredients like aluminum, mercury, ether, formaldehyde and anti-freeze may help preserve and enhance vaccines, they can be toxic as well. The assortment of viruses delivered by multiple immunizations may also be a hazard. I agree with the growing number of voices within the medical and scientific community who believe that vaccines, like every other drug, have risks as well as benefits and that for the sake of profit, American children are being given too many, too soon. One thing is certain. We don't know enough to announce that all vaccines are safe!

If the CDC, the AAP and Ms. Brown insist that our children take twice as many shots as the rest of the western world, we need more independent vaccine research not done by the drug companies selling the vaccines or by organizations under their influence. Studies that cannot be internally suppressed. Answers parents can trust. Perhaps this is what Campbell Brown should be demanding and how the power of the press could better serve the public in the future.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jim-carrey/the-judgment-on-vaccines_b_189777.html

Throwing in the Towel

At a play date today there was conversation of how many wipes we moms go through. That made me think to write about my recent personal campaign around the house of trying to stop using paper products. I haven't told anyone about it until now.

I am on about my 5th pack of wipes since my son was born 15 months ago- they are for travel and emergencies. But then again I do not use regular wipes when I change him. Before he was born I cut up old tee shirts into large squares and use those as wipes which get washed with his diapers. They don't add anything extra to the laundry since they're so light and small, but do save me a lot of money and are obviously chemical-free (to wet them I use a spray bottle with water).

I thought to myself, if I can use these tee shirt wipes for my son's bottom, maybe I can use them for us instead of toilet paper! Crazy ideas are nothing new to me, but I decided to wait a bit on chucking the toilet paper. And instead tried to use A LOT less for each trip. Getting rid of toilet paper seemed like a great idea, but not something I could tackle at the very minute.

So I began to do other things around the house to cut out paper products. I took out those cloth napkins that were suppose to be for guests but somehow never made it to the table. And I just never bought any more paper napkins. Easy! Why didn't I do this before?

Next I let my paper towels go. I didn't run out to Costco for the gigantic bundle. I bought a small, unbleached recycled role from Whole Foods for nasty emergencies- think raw meat on the floor or the like. What I did to replace the paper towels was use a big stack of washcloths I had on hand for any type of mess. For instance, when my son finishes eating a meal, I wipe his hands and face with the cloth. Then I rinse it and wash the table, his high chair tray, another rinse, and finally the floor. (I use a vinegar/water mixture in a spray bottle for all surfaces.) Then I do a final rinse and hang the cloth to dry somewhere in my kitchen. When it's dry I toss it in the laundry basket. I go through a few in a day- no big deal!

I also thought about tissues. I decided I could use facecloths for every day use too (the occasional nose drip or small area to clean is no big deal...don't some people use handkerchiefs on a regular basis?). They could go right in with the laundry. But I thought I should keep box of unbleached recycled tissues on hand in case of a big, nasty cold. Luckily those are very far and few in between so I figured this way I would not really be using many tissues either.

Now, I haven't had the guts to get rid of the toilet paper yet. But maybe sometime in the future. I am at least considering using it only for #2 and using tee shirt wipes for #1. I wonder, is there anyone out there that actually does this because I'd love to know more about the logistics!

The way I see it: if you can't convince yourself that using cloth wipes, napkins, papertowels, tissues and toilet paper is greener, then don't do it for the environment, do it for your wallet. Imagine if you never bought these items again (or at least fewer of them) how much you'd save! Really- it's quite a bit!

And for more reading concerning the topic, this is a great article.

http://www.care2.com/greenliving/paper-towels-and-napkins-vs-cloth.html

I also wanted to add a fun and useful quiz that my friend sent me to rate your body's exposure to toxic chemicals- although I see some blips (for instance, they ask if you use shampoo- not what kind you use...that sort of thing), I think it's a really good baseline for everyone to go by. Makes you think, hmm am I exposing myself to that?

http://www.facebook.com/l.php?u=http%3A%2F%2Fextras.insidebayarea.com%2Fbodyburden%2Fbodyburden.html&h=5a7aa3a4976c98e519294f40f82a9132

The No-Microwave Challenge

Have you ever stopped to think that your microwave might be dangerous? I had been having doubts for some time, but microwaves are so convenient I sort of ignored the issue. Then after my son was born, I decided it was too important to pass by any longer. And so I faced up to the white box in the kitchen that made my food taste so very strange and spongy, yet nice and hot. I did a lot of reading on the issue, and of course there are two sides to every story. But to be feel good about myself, I needed to be safe and not sorry. Microwaves use radiation to cook and the bottom line is that was not natural to me. There is certainly much information out there to explain why this unnatural cooking means is hazardous to us. One article I liked very much is the following by Mercola. While I do not agree with all his views, I think this is a telling read:

http://www.mercola.com/article/microwave/hazards.htm

After my mind was made up and my husband agreed, I was not sure what to do with the microwave, but I decided that I could not trash it. What if there were some unfortunate people out there that did not even own a stove? I know, a bit of a stretch, but still. So I put it up for free on Craigslist. A lady contacted me and said hers had broken and she did not have enough money for a new one- she had a whole story. You get the idea. She came, my husband brought it down for her and she asked him, " Why are you getting rid of this?"

He couldn't exactly say, "Well, we don't want cancer". So he errred and ummed and the lady said, "Are you going green?"

"Yes, that's it," said my relieved husband. And she proceeded to tell him that before she saw my ad, she posted looking for a free microwave and another woman wrote her to tell her she should not get one because they are dangerous. Well, at least she was previously warned!

So here I am, microwave free. It's been a year, at least, and we are very glad that we gave the microwave the old heave-ho. I am no longer worried about radiation due to the microwave (just don't get me started on cell phones, wireless Internet or the like) and my food no longer tastes like mushy cardboard. It does not take much more time to heat up food in a pan or in the toaster oven as I feared. Yet I do feel like food preparation is much more mindful this way. And that's the way I like it.

So can you do it? Try the no-microwave challenge for a week or so and see how you fare. You may just realize that you no longer need your microwave either. Or maybe that with all the potential dangers that it was never worth it in the first place!

Not Going At It Alone

In my day to day activities I talk to a lot of moms. Friends, family, mothers in my son's playgroup, members of the Yahoo groups I belong to- even the occasional random person at the supermarket. All moms, all from different walks of life, yet it seems natural living is important to many of them.

One thing I hear frequently is "I want to do (fill in the organic, natural thing), but my husband...."
Ah...but my husband! My husband says it's too expensive to eat organic. My husband thinks OTC cold medicine is just fine. My husband won't change a cloth diaper. So it got me wondering where it leaves moms who want to change things, but are running up against some resistance- or at least not getting the support they need. (Surely this could be the opposite scenario too- I merely encounter moms reguarly, not dads!)

Of course each husband is to be dealt with differently, but I thought, what kind of general advice could I give a mom who was having this kind of issue? I have a husband who happily got rid of our microwave, changes cloth diapers and encourages all his friends to get them, scrubs the bathroom tub with baking soda while commenting on how natural cleaning products are the best and brings raw milk (he calls it "real milk") and raw honey to the office in glass containers for his tea. But it was NOT always this way. My husband used to smoke, eat indiscriminately and had no penchant for natural living.

So I tried to remember, how did things get to where they are today? That experience could servce as general advice to others. Yes, it was me who began talking about change. I think that was the first step. I would talk to my husband about different things I was learning (bringing up the topics whenever I could) and sent him articles- whether on the benefits of organic food, raw milk, the dangers of vaccines...anything to get his mind moving in the right direction. And little by little he himself would talk about something HE saw in the news or hear from someone. This information push was a big help in changing his mindset. Because he was never against natural living- it just wasn't something on his radar.

The next thing I did was take things step by step. People (especially some men, I think!) don't like change. So when I wanted to get rid of as much plastic in our house as I could, I slowly replaced it with glass. Or when I wanted us to stop eating processed food for the most part, I didn't empty the cabinets all in the same day. I think by taking things one at a time, my husband wasn't overwhelmed and in fact he probably didn't notice mostly.

Although when it comes to money, husbands notice! So when you really want to start buying organic (or replacing all the Tupperware in your kitchen!), but don't want your bank account to take a steep decline there has to be an action plan. Like a budget. If you already have a food budget (which is just good sense) you can assure your husband that you'll work inside of it to buy organic. If you don't have, it's time to make a budget. Now I can't say my budgeting has always been perfect (some months I go over a little), but I belong to a fruit and vegetable coop (http://www.localharvest.com/ is a great resource for this), I shop wholesale a lot (you'd be surprised at the organic food you can get at Costco), and I have other money saving ways (which I will blog about next, I hope) which reassure my husband that eating well does not mean we'll go broke- in fact I can almost bet I spend less than the "average American" does because processed foods carry such a high price tag (for little or no nutrition, how ironic!). The moral of the money story is by making a budget, you can reassure your husband that not only is eating organic important to you, but so is your family's money.

To carry over from money- living naturally, your family will most likely not get sick as much, therefore decreasing the cost of health care. I find this very true with us. I cannot remember the last time we have seen a doctor (thank God!). You will be saving on copay and medicines, not to mention feeling good on a daily basis. Which I find to be another selling point. My husband always comments on how great he feels because of our lifestyle and how he's never felt better. So capitalize on each little change and how it makes you, him or the kids feel good...eventually you will see even him noticing and commenting.

Then there will come a time when your husband is finally "on board". He will no longer be just a bystander. I think the time frame for each person is different, but the key is not to give up. No one wants to go at it alone and once you have your husband's support in living naturally, it is a wonderful thing. I am often surprised at what an advocate my husband is concerning our lifestyle when I hear him talking to other people- but know it didn't just come out of thin air.

And finally, if you think something needs to be changed to fit your ideals of natural living- just do it. I will push for things I think are important. I have found that my husband later thanks me.

I wonder, what experiences do others have with their husbands concerning this?

UPDATE: My husband read this post and commented, "Is this how to get your husband into natural living or how to brainwash him?!" Ok, I had to laugh! And for the record he maintains that before I was into natural living that he was the one who refused to take synthetic vitamins way back when. So score one for him - and I'm sure there were other incidents, he's a smart guy :)

Babies Know: A Little Dirt Is Good for You

I loved this article and wanted to share it! I laughed to myself as I remembered the first time my son threw his food from the high chair and after being put down, crawled around and proceeded to eat it all off the floor. Now I see he must have been intuitively boosting his immune system- or so I'd like to believe! At the very least, I think it serves all of us parents well to read something like this- so put down the mop and put up your feet tonight instead!

Babies Know: A Little Dirt Is Good for You

NY Times

By JANE E. BRODY
Published: January 26, 2009

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/27/health/27brod.html?_r=1&scp=1&sq=hand%20sanitizer%20kids&st=cse

Ask mothers why babies are constantly picking things up from the floor or ground and putting them in their mouths, and chances are they’ll say that it’s instinctive — that that’s how babies explore the world. But why the mouth, when sight, hearing, touch and even scent are far better at identifying things?

When my young sons were exploring the streets of Brooklyn, I couldn’t help but wonder how good crushed rock or dried dog droppings could taste when delicious mashed potatoes were routinely rejected.

Since all instinctive behaviors have an evolutionary advantage or they would not have been retained for millions of years, chances are that this one too has helped us survive as a species. And, indeed, accumulating evidence strongly suggests that eating dirt is good for you.
In studies of what is called the hygiene hypothesis, researchers are concluding that organisms like the millions of bacteria, viruses and especially worms that enter the body along with “dirt” spur the development of a healthy immune system. Several continuing studies suggest that worms may help to redirect an immune system that has gone awry and resulted in autoimmune disorders, allergies and asthma.

These studies, along with epidemiological observations, seem to explain why immune system disorders like multiple sclerosis, Type 1 diabetes, inflammatory bowel disease, asthma and allergies have risen significantly in the United States and other developed countries.
Training the Immune System

“What a child is doing when he puts things in his mouth is allowing his immune response to explore his environment,” Mary Ruebush, a microbiology and immunology instructor, wrote in her new book, “Why Dirt Is Good” (Kaplan). “Not only does this allow for ‘practice’ of immune responses, which will be necessary for protection, but it also plays a critical role in teaching the immature immune response what is best ignored.”

One leading researcher, Dr. Joel V. Weinstock, the director of gastroenterology and hepatology at Tufts Medical Center in Boston, said in an interview that the immune system at birth “is like an unprogrammed computer. It needs instruction.”

He said that public health measures like cleaning up contaminated water and food have saved the lives of countless children, but they “also eliminated exposure to many organisms that are probably good for us.”

“Children raised in an ultraclean environment,” he added, “are not being exposed to organisms that help them develop appropriate immune regulatory circuits.”

Studies he has conducted with Dr. David Elliott, a gastroenterologist and immunologist at the University of Iowa, indicate that intestinal worms, which have been all but eliminated in developed countries, are “likely to be the biggest player” in regulating the immune system to respond appropriately, Dr. Elliott said in an interview. He added that bacterial and viral infections seem to influence the immune system in the same way, but not as forcefully.
Most worms are harmless, especially in well-nourished people, Dr. Weinstock said.

“There are very few diseases that people get from worms,” he said. “Humans have adapted to the presence of most of them.”

Worms for Health

In studies in mice, Dr. Weinstock and Dr. Elliott have used worms to both prevent and reverse autoimmune disease. Dr. Elliott said that in Argentina, researchers found that patients with multiple sclerosis who were infected with the human whipworm had milder cases and fewer flare-ups of their disease over a period of four and a half years. At the University of Wisconsin, Madison, Dr. John Fleming, a neurologist, is testing whether the pig whipworm can temper the effects of multiple sclerosis.

In Gambia, the eradication of worms in some villages led to children’s having increased skin reactions to allergens, Dr. Elliott said. And pig whipworms, which reside only briefly in the human intestinal tract, have had “good effects” in treating the inflammatory bowel diseases, Crohn’s disease and ulcerative colitis, he said.

How may worms affect the immune system? Dr. Elliott explained that immune regulation is now known to be more complex than scientists thought when the hygiene hypothesis was first introduced by a British epidemiologist, David P. Strachan, in 1989. Dr. Strachan noted an association between large family size and reduced rates of asthma and allergies. Immunologists now recognize a four-point response system of helper T cells: Th 1, Th 2, Th 17 and regulatory T cells. Th 1 inhibits Th 2 and Th 17; Th 2 inhibits Th 1 and Th 17; and regulatory T cells inhibit all three, Dr. Elliott said.

“A lot of inflammatory diseases — multiple sclerosis, Crohn’s disease, ulcerative colitis and asthma — are due to the activity of Th 17,” he explained. “If you infect mice with worms, Th 17 drops dramatically, and the activity of regulatory T cells is augmented.”

In answer to the question, “Are we too clean?” Dr. Elliott said: “Dirtiness comes with a price. But cleanliness comes with a price, too. We’re not proposing a return to the germ-filled environment of the 1850s. But if we properly understand how organisms in the environment protect us, maybe we can give a vaccine or mimic their effects with some innocuous stimulus.”
Wash in Moderation

Dr. Ruebush, the “Why Dirt Is Good” author, does not suggest a return to filth, either. But she correctly points out that bacteria are everywhere: on us, in us and all around us. Most of these micro-organisms cause no problem, and many, like the ones that normally live in the digestive tract and produce life-sustaining nutrients, are essential to good health.

“The typical human probably harbors some 90 trillion microbes,” she wrote. “The very fact that you have so many microbes of so many different kinds is what keeps you healthy most of the time.”

Dr. Ruebush deplores the current fetish for the hundreds of antibacterial products that convey a false sense of security and may actually foster the development of antibiotic-resistant, disease-causing bacteria. Plain soap and water are all that are needed to become clean, she noted.
“I certainly recommend washing your hands after using the bathroom, before eating, after changing a diaper, before and after handling food,” and whenever they’re visibly soiled, she wrote. When no running water is available and cleaning hands is essential, she suggests an alcohol-based hand sanitizer.

Dr. Weinstock goes even further. “Children should be allowed to go barefoot in the dirt, play in the dirt, and not have to wash their hands when they come in to eat,” he said. He and Dr. Elliott pointed out that children who grow up on farms and are frequently exposed to worms and other organisms from farm animals are much less likely to develop allergies and autoimmune diseases.
Also helpful, he said, is to “let kids have two dogs and a cat,” which will expose them to intestinal worms that can promote a healthy immune system.