By Lisa Frack, EWG Social Media Manager

Of course you don't serve your kids Twinkies or Chips Ahoy! cookies for breakfast. But many of us are serving our kids just as much - or more - sugar every day in the good ol' American cereal bowl (see how bad it really is in our new report, Sugar in Children's Cereals). And even as they're busily adding sugar to their products, cereal makers are in Washington, lobbying hard to block proposed federal voluntary guidelines that would limit marketing of their cereals to kids.

We think the guidelines don't go far enough (they propose a voluntary cap of 26 percent sugar in cereals, while we prefer a mandatory 15 percent limit), but if these companies get their way (which they seem to do rather often), these ridiculously sugary cereals (10 worst listed here) will keep their kids'-eye-level place on your grocery store shelves.

They just don't belong there.

All you have to do is take a look at the growing list of news stories, cable TV shows, blogs and terrific images about our sugary cereals report (see some of our favorites below) to grasp that people are reacting to this information.

Why is this news?

As one EWG Facebook commenter - and many friends - asked, "Is this actually a surprise to anyone?"

To which we say: yes and no:

• Yes, to people who assume that if it's on the shelf and marketed to kids, surely someone out there must have made sure it's not - at the very least - outrageously unhealthy (they'd be wrong, of course).
• Yes, to people who pay no attention to nutrition labels.
• Yes, to people who grew up eating these cereals and still draw on that experience.
• Yes, to people who shop at grocery stores that don't offer healthier options.
• Yes, to people who give in to their kids' whining and look the other way.
• Yes, to people who think it can't be that bad.
• Yes, to people who assume that the front-of-the-box marketing claims (Vitamin A! Vitamin C!) are closely regulated.
• Yes, to people whose kids see the TV ads - far too often.
• Yes, to people who are short on time.
• Yes, to people who believe what they read on the Froot Loops web site, where the URL makes the intent quite clear: http://www.frootloops.com/healthymessage/index.html.

But we also say no:

• No, to those of us who are label readers.
• No, to us Grape Nuts and Amaranth Flakes types.
• No, to people who understand the link between sugar consumption and childhood obesity and Type II diabetes.
• No, to health-conscious parents.
• No, to folks who know to shop around for lower-sugar breakfast options.
• No, to people who say no to cold cereal in the morning altogether.

But we'd wager that the yeses outweigh the nos.

Something bigger going on here

Beyond the simple facts here - that kids' cereals are loaded with ludicrous amounts of sugar and the companies want to keep it that way because they sell so very well - there's something far bigger going on. This solid information (which EWG compiled from cereal makers themselves), and the humorous images of cookie-filled bowls that go with it, reflect the sordid food system that we've allowed to thrive while our bad health gets worse.

So while we do suggest that you not eat these desserts cereals, which some call "food" and our government lamely allows, we hope it's obvious that many of us want something completely different. For now, some big, rich companies and their lobbyists are standing in the way - and the time has come for them to STEP ASIDE and let the eaters prevail. We're not going to take it anymore. And we get the feeling that you're not, either.

It's Time: Stand up for your food rights

It may be old news to many (especially EWG fans!) that there's a whole lot of sugar in kids' cereals, but the intense coverage and reaction to our report speaks volumes, doesn't it? It tells us loud and clear that the food movement's moment has arrived. Let's take advantage of it. You can start right now by signing EWG's petition to turn the farm bill (it's up for renewal in 2012) into a healthy food bill.

What we want isn't that complicated. We want REAL food, not manufactured "food." Period.

Here's some of the great coverage of our sugary cereals report:

• CNN
• EcoCentric
• The Food Network
• Huffington Post
• Los Angeles Times
• Yahoo Shine!

By Jane Houlihan, EWG V-P for Research

If there's one thing we at Environmental Working Group love, it's a good book - especially about the issues we work on. Honestly, there are so many good ones.

So when I started putting together my holiday shopping lists, I asked my coworkers for their recommendations. As I expected, the books they've been reading this year are as amazing as they are - I couldn't wait to share them with you.

Plus, if you shop for great books through our special Amazon links (below), your purchase will do some good because you'll be supporting EWG at the same time - no matter what you purchase.

Whether you're shopping for someone trying to live greener, an aspiring chef or a new parent, we've got you covered. I hope you find these suggestions as interesting and inspiring as I did.

Cookbooks:

Ken loves cooking from Sheryl Crow's If It Makes You Healthy: More Than 100 Delicious Recipes Inspired by the Seasons.

Director of Technology Chuq Yang makes dinner almost nightly from Mark Bittman's How to Cook Everything, Completely Revised 10th Anniversary Edition: 2,000 Simple Recipes for Great Food.

Other favorites from our office chefs? Myra Goodman's The Earthbound Cook: 250 Recipes for Delicious Food and a Healthy Planet and Laurie David's The Family Dinner: Great Ways to Connect with Your Kids, One Meal at a Time.

Green living:

When our Social Media Manager Lisa Frack is getting ready for a special occasion, she turns to Corey Colwell-Lipson's Celebrate Green for fun and sustainable ideas.

With the love of good food and a good story in mind, Chief of Staff Heather White recommends Thomas McNamee's Alice Waters and Chez Panisse, the biography of Alice Waters.

Ken enjoyed reading Dr. Andrew Weil's latest, Spontaneous Happiness.

As EWG's Senior Vice President of Research and director of our Skin Deep Cosmetics Database, I recommend Stacy Malkan's Not Just a Pretty Face: The Ugly Side of the Beauty Industry for anyone who wants to know more about the safe cosmetics movement.

Director of our California office and a Senior Scientist, Renee Sharp can't get enough of the science behind Elizabeth Grossman's Chasing Molecules: Poisonous Products, Human Health, and the Promise of Green Chemistry.

Editor-in-chief Elaine Shannon found Carol Deppe's The Resilient Gardener: Food Production and Self-Reliance in Uncertain Times to be a fascinating read by an expert gardener and scientist.

As a mom trying to raise her kids sustainably, Foundation Coordinator Nicole Oliver turns to Peggy O'Mara's Natural Family Living: The Mothering Magazine Guide to Parenting.

Healthy eating and food policy:

For an eye-opening look at the food industry and the healthy eating movement, Ken always recommends Marion Nestle's Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health.

Vice President for Media Relations Alex Formuzis loves Michael Pollan's newly illustrated Food Rules: An Eater's Manual.

Alan Bjerga's Endless Appetites: How the Commodities Casino Creates Hunger and Unrest got glowing reviews from both Press Secretary Sara Sciammacco and Senior Communications and Policy Advisor Don Carr.

Senior Food and Agriculture Analyst Kari Hamerschlag couldn't put down Oran Hesterman's Fair Food: Growing a Healthy, Sustainable Food System For All.

Senior Scientist David Andrews discovered why there was so much media attention when he read Sarah Wu's Fed Up with Lunch: The School Lunch Project: How One Anonymous Teacher Revealed the Truth About School Lunches - And How We Can Change Them!

Legal Fellow Etan Yeshua - a true tomato lover - recommends Barry Estabrook's Tomatoland: How Modern Industrial Agriculture Destroyed Our Most Alluring Fruit.

With so much media attention on childhood nutrition, Director of Development Jocelyn Lyle picked up Susan Levine's School Lunch Politics: The Surprising History of America's Favorite Welfare Program.

With all these ideas, your holiday shopping is practically done! And don't forget to grab a good read for yourself - which topic are you ready to learn more about?

[Thanks to flickr and jimmiehomeschoolmom for the great holiday gifts pic]

Second of a two-part blog on health concerns tied to natural ingredients.

By Swati Sharma, MS, EWG Research Assistant

"Natural" and homemade cosmetics and cleaning products aren't by definition safer than mainstream products. EWG takes a closer look at two common plant-based ingredients - tea tree and lavender oils - and finds that the science is still evolving and safety can't be assumed.

Earlier this week, we took a close look at tea tree oil - its uses, and some potential health concerns we should all keep in mind as the popularity of this natural ingredient skyrockets in both store-bought and homemade cosmetics and cleaning supplies. Today, we examine lavender oil and provide some suggested precautions when using either of these oils or products that contain them.

Lavender Oil
Lavender oil is widely used in consumer products as a fragrance (all that lavender soap!). In fact, it is the third most commonly used fragrance in U.S. cosmetic products. Lavender is also frequently used to relieve pain and anxiety and as an antiseptic, due to its antifungal and antibacterial properties.

Despite its ubiquity in cosmetics, researchers in Japan who compared eight essential oils found that lavender caused the greatest number of skin allergies. Several other studies have also linked allergic reactions to lavender oil. Linalool and linalyl acetate, major components of lavender oil, were found to react with oxygen in the air, forming allergens that can cause contact dermatitis. Furthermore, tests have found that lavender may be toxic to human skin cells. All this is to say that the soothing scent of lavender in your soap or lotion may not be welcome if you happen to be allergic to this naturally derived compound!

Do these oils disrupt hormones? We don't know.
An intensely debated study published in The New England Journal of Medicine in 2007 suggested that topical use of tea tree and lavender oil could possibly disrupt sex hormones in people, causing estrogenic and anti-androgenic effects. The study was a case report of three boys who had abnormal breast development after applying products containing lavender oil, and in one case, tea tree oil. When the boys stopped using the products, their breast development subsided. The researchers concluded that, "The medical community should be aware of the possibility of endocrine disruption and should caution patients about repeated exposure to any products containing these oils."

Drawing a definitive conclusion on the basis of any one case study with such a small number of patients is notoriously difficult. Further, the study did not provide specific product names or full lists of ingredients, so the influence of other chemicals can't be ruled out. While the study provoked intense curiosity and discussion, no additional case reports have surfaced to corroborate its findings. The European Commission's Scientific Committee on Consumer Products (SCCP), evaluating tea tree oil found the connection "implausible," saying that the hormonally active components of tea tree oil don't penetrate the skin. We've got our eyes peeled for any studies that support or refute this potential health concern.

In the meantime, here are some tips for today:

Take-home tips on tea tree and lavender oil
• "Natural" does not necessarily mean safe: High doses of some naturally occurring compounds can be toxic.
• Given the evolving state of the science, EWG does not suggest that you stop using tea tree and lavender oil. However, it's definitely a good idea to try a new product on a small area of skin first to see if you're allergic is - and go easy on intensive, full-body applications.
• We do suggest you limit use of products containing tea tree or lavender oil that are old or have been exposed to light, since air and sunlight break down ingredients in these oils over time, producing more potent allergens.
• Spray cleaners, air fresheners and spray cosmetics expose the user and people nearby to lavender and tea tree oil via inhalation. With little or no data on the health effects of inhaling these compounds, such products should be used in well-ventilated areas and kept away from children.

Parting advice: Whether you're making your own products or heading for those advertised as green and "natural," make informed choices. Picking products based on front-label ad claims or natural-sounding names doesn't guarantee you a safe product. Know what you're buying. It's safer that way.

[A big thanks to flickr CC and jaybergesen for the beautiful lavender field pic.]

By Lisa Frack, EWG Social Media Manager

We parents give a lot of orders.

"Put your pajamas away. Clear the table, please. Don't pull the cat's tail!"

But in her new book, Raising Elijah: Protecting Our Children in an Age of Environmental Crisis, it's Sandra Steingraber who gives the orders - to us parents. But she has just one, albeit a big one: Save the planet - for your kids' sake.

Oh, OK, Sandra, I'll cross that one off my "to do" list next week! But seriously, she believes that we parents are the only ones who can and will do what it takes to turn things around for ol' Mother Earth - like fight for clean air, safe drinking water, and non-toxic consumer products - because our kids' health depends on it. Plus, becoming a parent often creates an environmentalist, so there are a lot of us.

But just because she thinks we're the answer doesn't mean she takes her orders lightly. She understands the dilemma of modern-day parents well (she's a working mom with two kids under 10, after all, and travels frequently to boot). She understands that some of us are just plain too overwhelmed with our 5 million other parental duties to, say, reverse climate change (even for our kids), and others of us are so well informed about the sorry state of the environment that we suffer from something she aptly calls "well-informed futility."

Just like it sounds, well-informed futility is basically the feeling that there are so many big, complex issues to solve - over which we feel precious little control - that we run from them all because anything we might do would be futile. Sound familiar? Steingraber herself says it best: "I am a conscientious parent. I am not a HEPA filter." Nor should we be. Nor, sadly, can we be. It's just bigger than any one of us. But not bigger, Steingraber posits, than all of us. And I agree.

If we took all the energy we spend on navigating our world to protect our children (like, say, avoiding BPA, PVC and pesticides, seeking out toys and food that are healthy and safe) and redirected that energy toward overhauling ineffective environmental protections, we could get somewhere. As Sandra sees it, our hyperactive efforts to prevent harm at home are akin to building a fallout shelter instead of pursuing disarmament. And make no mistake: She believes we need disarmament.

That said, Steingraber does offer up some "fallout shelter" steps for us personal action types, not just to appease us and certainly not to distract us. To the contrary, she suggests that some personal greening actions are in fact "symbolic starting points for heroism." Say what? Think gateway drug: you start with one of these little ideas, and before you know it, you're marching on Congress - or at least calling them - preferably in droves. Here are her top three steps to get you started on the path to environmental heroism:

1. Plant a garden.
2. Mow grass without the assistance of fossil fuels.
3. Replace the clothes dryer with a drying rack or clothesline.

Why these, you ask? Either you've "been there, done that" or it's just too hard; or you can't quite fathom why a woman calling on parents to singlehandedly save the Earth settled on these three relatively minor actions (compared to, say, selling the car and walking everywhere - with two kids and your groceries!). Sandra's solid reasoning shows how she thinks; she writes:

The acquisition of new personal habits and new skills can change our thinking. It compels us to ask new questions. They are daily reminders that we urgently need new choices within new systems. They are harbingers. They signal our eagerness to embrace much bigger changes. They bear witness to our children that we are willing to exert energy, that we are not cynical, that we respect the right to inherit a habitable planet.

Her call to action may feel overwhelming and burdensome (aren't we pretty busy raising the next generation, after all?). But Steingraber knows that, and she encourages us to shrug it off, as heroes would - and she has me convinced:

Okay, so you're all laughing anyway - half of you because, given how far down the road of climate change we are already, you find these gestures pathetic and inconsequential, and the other half because, given how far down the road of frantic exhaustion working parents are, you find these gestures unrealistic and excessive. But it's in the nature of heroes to shrug off snickering. Keep reading.

Here are some things you can do with Raising Elijah - soon:

• Buy the book.
  
• Read it.
  
• Give it to a fellow parent when you're done.
  
• Share it on social media (your "friends" will thank you!).
  
• Choose it for your book group.

By Rebecca Sutton, PhD, EWG Senior Scientist

Fabric softeners contain toxic ingredients that are bad for your health and the environment. EWG recommends that laundry doers just say no.

Fabric softeners and dryer sheets are relative newcomers to the laundry room. They were designed to make our clothes feel a little softer and less staticky - and to line the cleaning products industry's pockets. Most also blast our clothing with potent fragrances.

We took a closer look at the chemistry of common fabric softeners, and we don't like what we see (or smell).

How do fabric softeners work?
Manufacturers market liquid or dry crystal fabric softeners for washing machine rinse cycles and dryer sheets for the dryer. A few laundry detergents claim to have a bit of softening built in, though that "Touch of Downy" may not make much of a difference in the way clothes feel.

Fabric softeners and dryer sheets coat our clothes with a subtle layer of slimy chemicals - in fact, that's why they feel a little softer. The most common softening chemicals are called "quats" (short for quaternary ammonium compounds) and include such chemical mouthfuls as diethyl ester dimethyl ammonium chloride, dialkyl dimethyl ammonium methyl sulfate, dihydrogenated palmoylethyl hydroxyethylmonium methosulfate and di-(palm carboxyethyl) hydroxyethyl methyl ammonium methyl sulfate.

Of course, difficult pronunciation does not necessarily mean danger, but in this case it does clarify that we're talking chemicals here, not vague, wonderful softness (as the advertisers would like you to believe). Quats are in many cleaning products, including most antibacterial wipes.

So what's so bad about quats?
The Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics, a leading international authority on asthma, calls these chemicals "asthmagens," substances that can cause asthma to develop in otherwise healthy people. With asthma affecting nearly 1 in 10 American children, it makes sense to avoid exposing kids unnecessarily to asthma-causing chemicals.

Many quats have antibacterial qualities. While it might sound useful to keep clothes germ-free, freshly washed clothes are already plenty clean, and overuse of quats may lead to development of antibiotic-resistant superbugs.

And what about that "fresh, clean scent?"
The mystery mixtures that provide the jolt of fragrance in fabric softeners and dryer sheets can contain hundreds of untested chemicals, including toxic ingredients like phthalates and synthetic musks - both suspected hormone disruptors. Fragrances are among world's top five allergens.

A recent University of Washington study on air contaminants from fragranced consumer goods detected between 18 and 20 chemicals in each of four laundry products - including likely human carcinogens acetaldehyde and 1,4-dioxane, developmental toxicants methyl ethyl ketone and chloromethane, and allergens like linalool. I don't want this in my laundry and my neighbors probably don't want it in the dryer air that vents in their direction. Turns out that air gets contaminated, too.

A few fabric softeners for babies or people with sensitive skin are fragrance-free but still contain quats.

Green options for the wash
To reduce your family's exposure to untested, unnecessary chemicals that can cause asthma, allergies and other health problems, simply skip the fabric softeners and dryer sheets. It's easier, healthier and cheaper to just say no.

If you can't live without that extra softness, try using 1/2 cup of white vinegar per load during the rinse cycle as a natural fabric softener. And while you're at it, hang it out to dry, too - that fresh, outdoor smell might just be better.

Big thanks to Flickr & coda for the very yellow washing machines.

By Rebecca Sutton, PhD, EWG Senior Scientist

Grocery stores dispense them for wiping down carts, gyms, for spiffing up exercise equipment. Some schools hand them out so kids can scrub their desks and ask parents for wipes as back-to-school supplies.

Antibacterial cleaning wipes are everywhere, but are they harmless? Unfortunately, for most popular versions, that's not the case.

Why worry? In a word: Quats
The most common antibacterial agents in cleaning wipes are called "quats" (short for quaternary ammonium compounds) and include such chemical mouthfuls as alkyl dimethyl benzyl ammonium chloride and benzalkonium chloride. Of course, difficult pronunciation does not necessarily equal danger, but in this case we are talking about pesticides that are certainly toxic to bacteria and can affect human health, too.

The American Medical Association discourages the use of antibacterial agents in consumer products because they may encourage the development of "superbugs" - antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Quat-resistant bacteria have been detected in homes routinely cleaned with antibacterial products. These bacteria were also resistant to a number of other important antibiotics, suggesting that regular exposure to quats could create microorganisms difficult or impossible to control with today's antibiotic arsenal.

The Association of Occupational and Environmental Clinics, a leading international authority on asthma, considers these chemicals to be "asthmagens," - substances that can cause asthma to develop in otherwise healthy people. With asthma now affecting nearly one in ten children in the U.S., it makes sense to avoid unnecessary exposures to asthma-causing chemicals, especially for kids.

Hold the fragrance, please!
The mystery mixtures that provide a wipe's burst of fragrance can contain hundreds of untested chemicals, including toxic ingredients like phthalates and synthetic musks - both suspected hormone disruptors. Fragrances are also among the top five allergens worldwide. Just skip them; does a wipe really need a scent?

Greener options for clean hands and surfaces
Regular hand washing - with ordinary soap, not antibacterial versions - is the best way to fight germs and avoid getting sick. Fragrance-free alcohol hand sanitizers are good options when no sink is available (like a school classroom, for example). And because antibacterial pesticides don't always penetrate the dirt and grime that hide germs, routine cleaning with regular - not antibacterial - cleaners is the best way to keep surfaces free of germs. So don't ask kids to clean school surfaces with antibacterial wipes - a quick squirt with soapy water and some elbow grease is healthier.

Where an antibacterial cleaning wipe is necessary, look for alcohol-based wipes, rather than those containing quats. If you don't see these in the cleaning aisle of your grocery or drug store, try the aisle with bandages and antiseptics. And if you do use wipes, pulls them from the container slowly and with a sideways motion - a quick, upward jerk can spray disinfecting chemicals right into your eyes.

PS - Diaper wipes for babies are a whole different ball of wax. The ingredients to avoid there are preservatives (specifically 2-bromo-2-nitropropane-1,3-diol, also known as bronopol) and fragrance. You can find safer, fragrance-free options in EWG's Skin Deep database, or make your own at home using cloth or paper towels (that way you'll know exactly what's in them!).

[Thanks to flickr & SMercury98 for the clean hands pic]

By Alex Formuzis, EWG V-P for Media Relations

Local bok choy and baby spinach, a mesclun mix with mandarin oranges and broccoli florets topped with Asian chicken strips. No, it's not the lunch menu at Chez Panisse, the influential organic restaurant known for serving up healthy and local cuisine. It's part of Monday's lunch menu at 27 Washington, D.C. public school cafeterias.

These lunchrooms are striving to get young people hooked on healthy foods by offering new salad bars to students. The menu changes are part of a campaign launched by Jeff Mills, the food service director for the D.C. school system, to improve the diets of kids, especially those who live in neighborhoods without stores and farm stands selling fresh produce.

According to the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the rates of obesity among American adolescents are highest in D.C., a fact not lost on Mills and his colleagues. In the last two years, several schools have started gardens and removed sugar-laden cereal and flavored milk from the breakfast menu.

An initiative called Let's Move Salad Bars to Schools and its partner organizations, including Whole Foods and United Fresh, funded 15 of the new salad bars in elementary and middle schools. The school system bought a dozen more salad bars for high schools.

Paula Reichel, program coordinator for the school system's Office of Food and Nutrition Services, told Environmental Working Group:

"For high schools, we felt a larger salad bar (10 feet) was needed to support an increased number of students per lunch period and to provide students with more choice and variety."

Reichel also told EWG she and her team are currently working to put salad bars in all remaining schools through the grant DC received from Let's Move Salad Bars to Schools.

"We feel salad bars are a great addition to any cafeteria," Reichel said. "In middle and high school, they serve the purpose of increasing students' access to school meals as well as encouraging more fresh fruit and vegetable consumption and increasing students' food literacy. For the elementary age group, salad bars expose students to new foods and the repeated exposure increases the likelihood they'll try the items in the future."

Chartwells School Dining Services has been contracted by DCPS to help improve the overall food service in the city's schools, including assisting with the salad bar initiative. Margie Saidel, MPH, RF, LDN, VP for nutrition and sustainability for Chartwells is pro-salad bar:

"Chartwells is very happy to be working with Jeff Mills and the District of Columbia Public Schools to implement the new salad bars in schools campaign. Salad bars are a great way to support and promote the dietary guidelines in school-aged children by encouraging students to make half their plate fruits and vegetables. Chartwells is committed to providing a wide variety of fresh and local fruits and vegetables to the students we serve in a variety of formats, including the traditional salad bar as well as other unique methods of service."

The new law is a groundbreaking approach to addressing the obesity crisis facing many of DC's children. It emphasizes nutrition and diet, increasing exercise, health and food education and making schools and classrooms more environmentally friendly.

[Thanks to Flickr and NatalieMaynor for the salad bar pic]