By Donna Smith
Main Street, USA - Nurses call their neighbors and their elected officials to come to Main Street on September 1, even as many of the elected officials continue chiding one another about returning to DC.
Main Street is where the damage has been done and is being felt most deeply; DC is where deals are cut to protect Wall Street with breath-taking regularity. This is not a time when political posturing for some distant election cycle by those largely insulated from the harsh financial realities they helped create ought to take precedence over the real-time, real-life needs of millions.
Lives depend on it; jobs depend on it; communities depend on it. 170,000 Registered Nurse members of National Nurses United throughout America have come together to re-build Main Street. We need you on our side. So, on Thursday, September 1, the nurses of National Nurses United will gather in more than 60 communities from Maine to Texas, and Massachusetts, Pennsylvania,Minnesota, Michigan, Florida, Illinois, California and beyond to call on the nation's elected officials to chose to protect and repair Main Street and stop cow-towing to Wall Street. Find an action on a Main Street near you and join in.
Wednesday, 31 August 2011
US Food Supply in Serious Jeopardy after Obama's Decision
By Merlyn Seeley
According to Jeffrey Smith, The leading consumer advocate promoting healthier, non-GMO choices, "The person who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history has just been made the US food safety czar. This is no joke." Michael Taylor, the man that was once Monsanto's lawyer then became part of Monsanto and headed up the "GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) movement" has just been basically appointed over your food.
Obama has done it again, he appointed this man to be senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA. That means the same company that produces the world's most deadly substance (Round-up) and the man that is behind getting GMO foods on the market shelves is now in charge of the US's food production. You will be eating this man's creation instead of nature's creation. Think obesity, food allergens, allergies, incurable diseases, sugar diabetes, cancer and unheard of diseases are bad now?
Just wait till this man steps up and makes your entire table of food genetically modified. Already there is un-tested corn, soy beans, rapeseed, honey, cotton, rice sugar cane, tomatoes, canola, potatoes, flax, papaya, squash, tobacco, meat, peas, sugar beets, vegetable oil, and dairy products just to name a few on the shelves that are all genetically modified. That means if you are eating the GMO versions of those listed there, you are not eating real food people.
You are eating chemicals, man-made crap that is destroying the earth and your body slowly. GMO's are responsible for cancer, obesity where the numbers are not in the 70 percent range for the whole US, and other incurable diseases just to name a few cons. There are no pros to mention, only the FDA and Monsanto can name their pros, that is money, money, money. Why did our president that is appointed to protect the US from harm and make good decisions for our country just appoint the devil to be in charge of your food?
According to Jeffrey Smith, The leading consumer advocate promoting healthier, non-GMO choices, "The person who may be responsible for more food-related illness and death than anyone in history has just been made the US food safety czar. This is no joke." Michael Taylor, the man that was once Monsanto's lawyer then became part of Monsanto and headed up the "GMO (Genetically Modified Organism) movement" has just been basically appointed over your food.
Obama has done it again, he appointed this man to be senior advisor to the commissioner of the FDA. That means the same company that produces the world's most deadly substance (Round-up) and the man that is behind getting GMO foods on the market shelves is now in charge of the US's food production. You will be eating this man's creation instead of nature's creation. Think obesity, food allergens, allergies, incurable diseases, sugar diabetes, cancer and unheard of diseases are bad now?
Just wait till this man steps up and makes your entire table of food genetically modified. Already there is un-tested corn, soy beans, rapeseed, honey, cotton, rice sugar cane, tomatoes, canola, potatoes, flax, papaya, squash, tobacco, meat, peas, sugar beets, vegetable oil, and dairy products just to name a few on the shelves that are all genetically modified. That means if you are eating the GMO versions of those listed there, you are not eating real food people.
You are eating chemicals, man-made crap that is destroying the earth and your body slowly. GMO's are responsible for cancer, obesity where the numbers are not in the 70 percent range for the whole US, and other incurable diseases just to name a few cons. There are no pros to mention, only the FDA and Monsanto can name their pros, that is money, money, money. Why did our president that is appointed to protect the US from harm and make good decisions for our country just appoint the devil to be in charge of your food?
Tuesday, 30 August 2011
Fukushima Radiation Alarms Doctors
By Dahr Jamail
Scientists and doctors are calling for a new national policy in Japan that mandates the testing of food, soil, water, and the air for radioactivity still being emitted from Fukushima's heavily damaged Daiichi nuclear power plant.
"How much radioactive materials have been released from the plant?" asked Dr Tatsuhiko Kodama, a professor at the Research Centre for Advanced Science and Technology and Director of the University of Tokyo's Radioisotope Centre, in a July 27 speech to the Committee of Health, Labour and Welfare at Japan's House of Representatives.
"The government and TEPCO have not reported the total amount of the released radioactivity yet," said Kodama, who believes things are far worse than even the recent detection of extremely high radiation levels at the plant.
There is widespread concern in Japan about a general lack of government monitoring for radiation, which has caused people to begin their own independent monitoring, which are also finding disturbingly high levels of radiation.
Kodama's centre, using 27 facilities to measure radiation across the country, has been closely monitoring the situation at Fukushima - and their findings are alarming.
According to Dr Kodama, the total amount of radiation released over a period of more than five months from the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster is the equivalent to more than 29 "Hiroshima-type atomic bombs" and the amount of uranium released "is equivalent to 20" Hiroshima bombs.
Kodama, along with other scientists, is concerned about the ongoing crisis resulting from the Fukushima situation, as well as what he believes to be inadequate government reaction, and believes the government needs to begin a large-scale response in order to begin decontaminating affected areas.
Scientists and doctors are calling for a new national policy in Japan that mandates the testing of food, soil, water, and the air for radioactivity still being emitted from Fukushima's heavily damaged Daiichi nuclear power plant.
"How much radioactive materials have been released from the plant?" asked Dr Tatsuhiko Kodama, a professor at the Research Centre for Advanced Science and Technology and Director of the University of Tokyo's Radioisotope Centre, in a July 27 speech to the Committee of Health, Labour and Welfare at Japan's House of Representatives.
"The government and TEPCO have not reported the total amount of the released radioactivity yet," said Kodama, who believes things are far worse than even the recent detection of extremely high radiation levels at the plant.
There is widespread concern in Japan about a general lack of government monitoring for radiation, which has caused people to begin their own independent monitoring, which are also finding disturbingly high levels of radiation.
Kodama's centre, using 27 facilities to measure radiation across the country, has been closely monitoring the situation at Fukushima - and their findings are alarming.
According to Dr Kodama, the total amount of radiation released over a period of more than five months from the ongoing Fukushima nuclear disaster is the equivalent to more than 29 "Hiroshima-type atomic bombs" and the amount of uranium released "is equivalent to 20" Hiroshima bombs.
Kodama, along with other scientists, is concerned about the ongoing crisis resulting from the Fukushima situation, as well as what he believes to be inadequate government reaction, and believes the government needs to begin a large-scale response in order to begin decontaminating affected areas.
Why Music Needs to Get Political Again
By Billy Bragg
How ironic that The Clash should be on the cover of the NME in the week that London was burning, that their faces should be staring out from the shelves as newsagents were ransacked and robbed by looters intent on anarchy in the UK. Touching too, that the picture should be from very early in their career - Joe with curly blond hair - for The Clash were formed in the wake of a London riot: the disturbances that broke out at the end of the Notting Hill Carnival of 1976.
At the time, the press reported it as the mindless violence of black youth intent on causing trouble; now we look back and recognise that it was the stirrings of what became our multicultural society - the moment when the first generation of black Britons declared that these streets belonged to them too.
The Notting Hill Riots of 35 years ago created a genuine 'What The Fuck?' moment - the first in Britain since the violent clashes between mods and rockers in the early 60s. While west London burned, the rest of society recoiled in terror at the anger they saw manifested on the streets of England. In the aftermath, severe jail sentences were handed down and police patrols stepped up in areas where there was a large immigrant population. Sound familiar?
But something else happened too - in the months that followed, bands appeared that sought to make sense of what went down on that hot August night. Aswad, Steel Pulse and Misty in Roots were among the reggae bands that stepped forward to speak for the black community.
How ironic that The Clash should be on the cover of the NME in the week that London was burning, that their faces should be staring out from the shelves as newsagents were ransacked and robbed by looters intent on anarchy in the UK. Touching too, that the picture should be from very early in their career - Joe with curly blond hair - for The Clash were formed in the wake of a London riot: the disturbances that broke out at the end of the Notting Hill Carnival of 1976.
At the time, the press reported it as the mindless violence of black youth intent on causing trouble; now we look back and recognise that it was the stirrings of what became our multicultural society - the moment when the first generation of black Britons declared that these streets belonged to them too.
The Notting Hill Riots of 35 years ago created a genuine 'What The Fuck?' moment - the first in Britain since the violent clashes between mods and rockers in the early 60s. While west London burned, the rest of society recoiled in terror at the anger they saw manifested on the streets of England. In the aftermath, severe jail sentences were handed down and police patrols stepped up in areas where there was a large immigrant population. Sound familiar?
But something else happened too - in the months that followed, bands appeared that sought to make sense of what went down on that hot August night. Aswad, Steel Pulse and Misty in Roots were among the reggae bands that stepped forward to speak for the black community.
Monday, 29 August 2011
Forget Potatoes: Idaho Now Grows CAFOs
By Twilight Greenaway
When the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act (Proposition 2) passed in California in 2008, it granted laying hens nominally more space in their cages.
Proponents of humane animal husbandry cheered the fact that these birds would now have a little more room to stretch their wings. But industrial egg producers -- claiming their costs would go up -- threatened to leave the state before 2015, when key portions of the law go into effect.
Hope those disgruntled egg producers like potatoes. Perhaps sensing an opportunity, Idaho lawmakers passed a series of laws more or less inviting the poultry industry to their state. In this High Country News article (subs. req'd), Grist contributor Stephanie Ogburn tracks the state's Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) laws and their repercussions throughout the state, and asks: Is Idaho a new haven for CAFOs?
Idaho's dairy industry (which surpassed potato production in 1997) has already ballooned out of control: In 1991, 2,000 dairies produced 3 billion pounds of milk; now a mere 650 dairies produce 11 billion pounds of milk.
How exactly did they usher in so many changes so fast? According to Ogburn, Idaho lawmakers started out by restricting public comment on CAFOS in 2000. They followed that by altering water rights laws, passing legislation ominously nicknamed the "CAFO Secrecy Bill" (which blocked oversight of CAFO manure-management plans by making them "proprietary"), and amending the state's Right to Farm law to prohibit local governments from regulating agricultural facilities as nuisances. The latter also barred neighbors from filing complaints using the nuisance law.
When the Prevention of Farm Animal Cruelty Act (Proposition 2) passed in California in 2008, it granted laying hens nominally more space in their cages.
Proponents of humane animal husbandry cheered the fact that these birds would now have a little more room to stretch their wings. But industrial egg producers -- claiming their costs would go up -- threatened to leave the state before 2015, when key portions of the law go into effect.
Hope those disgruntled egg producers like potatoes. Perhaps sensing an opportunity, Idaho lawmakers passed a series of laws more or less inviting the poultry industry to their state. In this High Country News article (subs. req'd), Grist contributor Stephanie Ogburn tracks the state's Confined Animal Feeding Operation (CAFO) laws and their repercussions throughout the state, and asks: Is Idaho a new haven for CAFOs?
Idaho's dairy industry (which surpassed potato production in 1997) has already ballooned out of control: In 1991, 2,000 dairies produced 3 billion pounds of milk; now a mere 650 dairies produce 11 billion pounds of milk.
How exactly did they usher in so many changes so fast? According to Ogburn, Idaho lawmakers started out by restricting public comment on CAFOS in 2000. They followed that by altering water rights laws, passing legislation ominously nicknamed the "CAFO Secrecy Bill" (which blocked oversight of CAFO manure-management plans by making them "proprietary"), and amending the state's Right to Farm law to prohibit local governments from regulating agricultural facilities as nuisances. The latter also barred neighbors from filing complaints using the nuisance law.
Dramatizing Obama's Climate Dilemma
By Mark Engler
President Obama now has a clear choice on climate change. Major energy corporations are seeking to build a 1700-mile oil pipeline from Canada's tar sands to refineries in Texas. The Keystone XL Pipeline would itself carry social and environmental costs: cutting through fragile ecosystems, creating risk of spills, and negatively affecting indigenous communities. But, most significantly, it would be a boon to efforts to exploit the tar sands.
The Canadian tar sands are a particularly dirty source of fossil fuels that could produce egregious carbon emissions. As Elizabeth Kolbert reported at the New Yorker:
Because tar-sands oil is so heavy, it has to be very heavily processed, which requires tremendous amounts of energy, usually in the form of natural gas. It's been estimated that, on what's known as a well-to-tank basis, tar-sands oil is responsible for eighty percent more greenhouse-gas emissions than ordinary crude.
Prominent climate scientist James Hansen has argued (in a now oft-quoted statement) that "if the tar sands are thrown into the mix, it is essentially game over" for the climate.
Before the end of the year, Obama's State Department must choose whether to approve or deny the pipeline project. To dramatize the president's choice, environmentalists have commenced two weeks of civil disobedience. On August 20 they began daily waves of sit-ins in front of the White House. As of this writing, near the end of week one, 322 people have been arrested.
Billed as the "biggest civil disobedience action in the environmental movement for many years," the two weeks of sit-ins and arrests in summer-recessed Washington, D.C., have thus far had difficulty in creating the tension that, at times, allows acts of civil disobedience to explode into mass public spectacles. The protests have not had a single, climactic date around which many thousands might mobilize. And since the deadline by which Obama must make his call is months away, administration officials have been able to drag their feet.
President Obama now has a clear choice on climate change. Major energy corporations are seeking to build a 1700-mile oil pipeline from Canada's tar sands to refineries in Texas. The Keystone XL Pipeline would itself carry social and environmental costs: cutting through fragile ecosystems, creating risk of spills, and negatively affecting indigenous communities. But, most significantly, it would be a boon to efforts to exploit the tar sands.
The Canadian tar sands are a particularly dirty source of fossil fuels that could produce egregious carbon emissions. As Elizabeth Kolbert reported at the New Yorker:
Because tar-sands oil is so heavy, it has to be very heavily processed, which requires tremendous amounts of energy, usually in the form of natural gas. It's been estimated that, on what's known as a well-to-tank basis, tar-sands oil is responsible for eighty percent more greenhouse-gas emissions than ordinary crude.
Prominent climate scientist James Hansen has argued (in a now oft-quoted statement) that "if the tar sands are thrown into the mix, it is essentially game over" for the climate.
Before the end of the year, Obama's State Department must choose whether to approve or deny the pipeline project. To dramatize the president's choice, environmentalists have commenced two weeks of civil disobedience. On August 20 they began daily waves of sit-ins in front of the White House. As of this writing, near the end of week one, 322 people have been arrested.
Billed as the "biggest civil disobedience action in the environmental movement for many years," the two weeks of sit-ins and arrests in summer-recessed Washington, D.C., have thus far had difficulty in creating the tension that, at times, allows acts of civil disobedience to explode into mass public spectacles. The protests have not had a single, climactic date around which many thousands might mobilize. And since the deadline by which Obama must make his call is months away, administration officials have been able to drag their feet.
Sunday, 28 August 2011
New WikiLeaks Cables Show US Diplomats Promote Genetically Engineered Crops Worldwide
By Mike Ludwig
Dozens of United States diplomatic cables released in the latest WikiLeaks dump on Wednesday reveal new details of the US effort to push foreign governments to approve genetically engineered (GE) crops and promote the worldwide interests of agribusiness giants like Monsanto and DuPont.
The cables further confirm previous Truthout reports on the diplomatic pressure the US has put on Spain and France, two countries with powerful anti-GE crop movements, to speed up their biotech approval process and quell anti-GE sentiment within the European Union (EU).
Several cables describe "biotechnology outreach programs" in countries across the globe, including African, Asian and South American countries where Western biotech agriculture had yet to gain a foothold. In some cables (such as this 2010 cable from Morocco) US diplomats ask the State Department for funds to send US biotech experts and trade industry representatives to target countries for discussions with high-profile politicians and agricultural officials.
Truthout recently reported on front groups supported by the US government, philanthropic foundations and companies like Monsanto that are working to introduce pro-biotechnology policy initiatives and GE crops in developing African countries, and several cables released this week confirm that American diplomats have promoted biotech agriculture to countries like Tunisia, South Africa and Mozambique.
Dozens of United States diplomatic cables released in the latest WikiLeaks dump on Wednesday reveal new details of the US effort to push foreign governments to approve genetically engineered (GE) crops and promote the worldwide interests of agribusiness giants like Monsanto and DuPont.
The cables further confirm previous Truthout reports on the diplomatic pressure the US has put on Spain and France, two countries with powerful anti-GE crop movements, to speed up their biotech approval process and quell anti-GE sentiment within the European Union (EU).
Several cables describe "biotechnology outreach programs" in countries across the globe, including African, Asian and South American countries where Western biotech agriculture had yet to gain a foothold. In some cables (such as this 2010 cable from Morocco) US diplomats ask the State Department for funds to send US biotech experts and trade industry representatives to target countries for discussions with high-profile politicians and agricultural officials.
Truthout recently reported on front groups supported by the US government, philanthropic foundations and companies like Monsanto that are working to introduce pro-biotechnology policy initiatives and GE crops in developing African countries, and several cables released this week confirm that American diplomats have promoted biotech agriculture to countries like Tunisia, South Africa and Mozambique.
Friday, 19 August 2011
Legalizing Marijuana Would Hinder the Multi-Billion Dollar Empire of Mexican Drug Cartels
By Jonathan Benson
The prohibition of marijuana in the US has led to an "underground" cannabis industry in Mexico run primarily by violent gangster cartels like the ones wreaking havoc at the southern borders of Texas, Arizona, and California.
These cartels reap anywhere from $1 to $20 billion a year illegally selling marijuana to Americans, but advocates of reform and legalization say the crime and terror associated with the illicit drug trade would largely end if marijuana was simply decriminalized.
Just a few weeks ago, Mexican soldiers burned a 300-acre field of marijuana some 200 miles south of San Diego, Calif., near Tijuana, Mex. Operated by drug cartels, the field contained a potential yield of around 120 tons of marijuana, which is worth about $160 million, according to reports. And back in October, soldiers performed another burning on 134 metric tons of vacuum-packed marijuana discovered in the same region.
The constant pursuit of cartels that grow and sell marijuana, as well as raids and burnings of marijuana fields, have led to massive cartel backlash. After the Tijuana raid and burning in October, for instance, cartels murdered 13 recovering drug addicts at a rehabilitation center.
The prohibition of marijuana in the US has led to an "underground" cannabis industry in Mexico run primarily by violent gangster cartels like the ones wreaking havoc at the southern borders of Texas, Arizona, and California.
These cartels reap anywhere from $1 to $20 billion a year illegally selling marijuana to Americans, but advocates of reform and legalization say the crime and terror associated with the illicit drug trade would largely end if marijuana was simply decriminalized.
Just a few weeks ago, Mexican soldiers burned a 300-acre field of marijuana some 200 miles south of San Diego, Calif., near Tijuana, Mex. Operated by drug cartels, the field contained a potential yield of around 120 tons of marijuana, which is worth about $160 million, according to reports. And back in October, soldiers performed another burning on 134 metric tons of vacuum-packed marijuana discovered in the same region.
The constant pursuit of cartels that grow and sell marijuana, as well as raids and burnings of marijuana fields, have led to massive cartel backlash. After the Tijuana raid and burning in October, for instance, cartels murdered 13 recovering drug addicts at a rehabilitation center.
Vitamins for Vegetarians
By Ask Umbra
Q. Dear Umbra,
Hi. I am an ovo-lacto vegetarian. I am worried that due to my diet I may be lacking in omega 3 fatty acids. I was wondering if you could recommend a vegetarian-friendly omega-3 vitamin and also a daily multivitamin. I also wanted to make sure that vitamins aren't bad for the environment before I start buying them. Any help or guidance you could give would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
nellatterb
I am flattered that you've come to me for guidance. However, Grist's highly trained legal department (which really only consists of this yellow legal pad I just found) would like me to remind you that your friendly neighborhood Umbra is neither a doctor nor a nutritionist, and to consult the proper degree-wielding personnel (look for the ones deep in debt with beaming extended family members).
Now that's out of the way! So you're trying to eat a well-rounded, meatless-but-egg-and-dairy-inclusive diet. I've heard lovely things about cod liver oil as a source of vitamin D and those elusive omega-3s, but as it involves, you know, a fishy's liver, it's out. Fortunately, certain plant and nut oils also contain this nutritional gem. To wit, it reportedly "lowers triglycerides, reduces the risk of death, heart attack, dangerous abnormal heart rhythms, and strokes in people with known cardiovascular disease, slows the buildup of atherosclerotic plaques ('hardening of the arteries'), and lowers blood pressure slightly." So sayeth the Mayo Clinic.
Q. Dear Umbra,
Hi. I am an ovo-lacto vegetarian. I am worried that due to my diet I may be lacking in omega 3 fatty acids. I was wondering if you could recommend a vegetarian-friendly omega-3 vitamin and also a daily multivitamin. I also wanted to make sure that vitamins aren't bad for the environment before I start buying them. Any help or guidance you could give would be greatly appreciated.
Thanks,
nellatterb
New York, NY
I am flattered that you've come to me for guidance. However, Grist's highly trained legal department (which really only consists of this yellow legal pad I just found) would like me to remind you that your friendly neighborhood Umbra is neither a doctor nor a nutritionist, and to consult the proper degree-wielding personnel (look for the ones deep in debt with beaming extended family members).
Now that's out of the way! So you're trying to eat a well-rounded, meatless-but-egg-and-dairy-inclusive diet. I've heard lovely things about cod liver oil as a source of vitamin D and those elusive omega-3s, but as it involves, you know, a fishy's liver, it's out. Fortunately, certain plant and nut oils also contain this nutritional gem. To wit, it reportedly "lowers triglycerides, reduces the risk of death, heart attack, dangerous abnormal heart rhythms, and strokes in people with known cardiovascular disease, slows the buildup of atherosclerotic plaques ('hardening of the arteries'), and lowers blood pressure slightly." So sayeth the Mayo Clinic.
Thursday, 18 August 2011
Upcoming Northern California Millions Against Monsanto Events
As part of OCA's Millions Against MonsantoTruth-in-Labeling Campaign we are encouraging activists in our network to plantheir own campaign events with others in their area. This email is to informyou that there is an upcoming event near you, organized by grassroots organizerswho care about the GE-labeling issue as much as you do.
Food Activist Pamm Larry, who is spearheading the effort to get GMO Labeling onthe California Ballot in 2012 (labelGMOs.org), is speaking at a series ofinformational events in your area. The goal is to pass a voterinitiative on the November 2012 ballot that would require all foods containingGMOs to be labeled.
These meetings are for activists to come together to learn about theinitiative, how we suggest being activists in your community and organizinginto a new cohesive group. We will be asking for folks to think aboutcommittees they want to be on and assign a point person.
Food Activist Pamm Larry, who is spearheading the effort to get GMO Labeling onthe California Ballot in 2012 (labelGMOs.org), is speaking at a series ofinformational events in your area. The goal is to pass a voterinitiative on the November 2012 ballot that would require all foods containingGMOs to be labeled.
These meetings are for activists to come together to learn about theinitiative, how we suggest being activists in your community and organizinginto a new cohesive group. We will be asking for folks to think aboutcommittees they want to be on and assign a point person.
The Sustainable Seafood Myth
By Brendan Smith
Stroll by any Whole Foods seafood counter and you will see color-coded fish: Green for fully sustainable, yellow for partially sustainable, and red for fish threatened by overfishing or grown on polluting fish farms. Buy a "green" fish and you eat guilt free, confident that you are doing your part to save the ocean and its inhabitants.
Put down your fork -- Whole Foods is not telling you the whole story. The dirty little secret of their seafood rating system is that it ignores the largest and most imminent threat to our oceans: greenhouse-gas emissions. Even if every human on the planet miraculously decided to buy only seafood stamped with the Whole Foods seal of "sustainablity," marine species will still be doomed.
This is not a secret threat: Just last month, the International Program on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) -- a consortium of 27 of the top ocean experts in the world -- declared that effects of climate change, ocean acidification, and oxygen depletion have already triggered a "phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history."
Stroll by any Whole Foods seafood counter and you will see color-coded fish: Green for fully sustainable, yellow for partially sustainable, and red for fish threatened by overfishing or grown on polluting fish farms. Buy a "green" fish and you eat guilt free, confident that you are doing your part to save the ocean and its inhabitants.
Put down your fork -- Whole Foods is not telling you the whole story. The dirty little secret of their seafood rating system is that it ignores the largest and most imminent threat to our oceans: greenhouse-gas emissions. Even if every human on the planet miraculously decided to buy only seafood stamped with the Whole Foods seal of "sustainablity," marine species will still be doomed.
This is not a secret threat: Just last month, the International Program on the State of the Ocean (IPSO) -- a consortium of 27 of the top ocean experts in the world -- declared that effects of climate change, ocean acidification, and oxygen depletion have already triggered a "phase of extinction of marine species unprecedented in human history."
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
House Backs Debt Deal, but 95 'Conscience' Democrats Vote 'No'
By John Nichols
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi reportedly told members of the House Democratic Caucus to vote their "individual consciences" when they were asked to approve the debt-ceiling deal cobbled together by the Obama White House and Congressional Republicans.
Consciences divided evenly, with ninety-five Democrats opposing the compromise agreement while ninety-five supported it in a Monday evening vote that saw the measure pass primarily on the basis of Republican backing -despite the fact that this was a deal promoted aggressively by a Democratic White House.
The final tally was 269 in favor, 161 opposed.
Republicans generally backed the deal, with 174 voting "yes" while sixty-six voted "no."
Democrats were far more closely divided, with widespread opposition to what Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison, D-Minnesota, described as a violation of "core Democratic ideals."
While Pelosi cast her own viote in favor of the agreement, she did not "whip" her fellow Democrats to back the deal during a marathon caucus meeting Monday. The former speaker outlined the consequences of a default by the federal government if an agreement to raise the debt ceiling is not reached. But North Carolina Congressman G.K. Butterfield, who attended the caucus session said Pelosi avoided pressuring House Democrats to fall in line with the Democrats in the White House. "She told us to leave it to our individual consciences," Butterfield told reporters.
With the House vote done, the Senate will be vote Tuesday on the deal, which proposes radical cuts in federal programs-cuts that some fear will ultimately threaten Medicare and other Democratic "legacy" programs-in return for raising the nation's debt ceiling.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi reportedly told members of the House Democratic Caucus to vote their "individual consciences" when they were asked to approve the debt-ceiling deal cobbled together by the Obama White House and Congressional Republicans.
Consciences divided evenly, with ninety-five Democrats opposing the compromise agreement while ninety-five supported it in a Monday evening vote that saw the measure pass primarily on the basis of Republican backing -despite the fact that this was a deal promoted aggressively by a Democratic White House.
The final tally was 269 in favor, 161 opposed.
Republicans generally backed the deal, with 174 voting "yes" while sixty-six voted "no."
Democrats were far more closely divided, with widespread opposition to what Congressional Progressive Caucus co-chair Keith Ellison, D-Minnesota, described as a violation of "core Democratic ideals."
While Pelosi cast her own viote in favor of the agreement, she did not "whip" her fellow Democrats to back the deal during a marathon caucus meeting Monday. The former speaker outlined the consequences of a default by the federal government if an agreement to raise the debt ceiling is not reached. But North Carolina Congressman G.K. Butterfield, who attended the caucus session said Pelosi avoided pressuring House Democrats to fall in line with the Democrats in the White House. "She told us to leave it to our individual consciences," Butterfield told reporters.
With the House vote done, the Senate will be vote Tuesday on the deal, which proposes radical cuts in federal programs-cuts that some fear will ultimately threaten Medicare and other Democratic "legacy" programs-in return for raising the nation's debt ceiling.
California Prescription Pot Industry Looks to Self-Regulate for Orgainc Production
By Donna Jones
WATSONVILLE -- Want to buy organic carrots? No problem. Organic strawberries? Widely available. Organic honey? Try your local grocery store. But organic medicinal marijuana? Doesn't exist - at least not in any official sense.
Organic crops and products are certified by private agencies through the United States Department of Agriculture - a program developed after decades of advocacy by organic farmers and their allies. Pot - medicinal or otherwise - need not apply.
"What the USDA doesn't recognize as a legal crop we can't certify because we're certifying to their standards," said Jane Wade, development specialist at Santa Cruz-based California Certified Organic Farmers, the largest organic certification agency in the country. "That leaves medical marijuana out in the cold." It also leaves consumers interested in making sure they're not ingesting pesticides or other toxins along with their chosen pain reliever in a quandary.
Wade, who gets calls about organic marijuana certification "a few times a month," said people are frustrated by her response.
"They ask 'why can't you fix this,'" she said.
Wade said California Certified Organic Farmers worked for nearly three decades to get the USDA program in place. She suggested the medical marijuana community can take action as well.
"The path is already trodden," Wade said. "As long as they don't call it organic, there's no reason they can't adopt the rules already in place."
WATSONVILLE -- Want to buy organic carrots? No problem. Organic strawberries? Widely available. Organic honey? Try your local grocery store. But organic medicinal marijuana? Doesn't exist - at least not in any official sense.
Organic crops and products are certified by private agencies through the United States Department of Agriculture - a program developed after decades of advocacy by organic farmers and their allies. Pot - medicinal or otherwise - need not apply.
"What the USDA doesn't recognize as a legal crop we can't certify because we're certifying to their standards," said Jane Wade, development specialist at Santa Cruz-based California Certified Organic Farmers, the largest organic certification agency in the country. "That leaves medical marijuana out in the cold." It also leaves consumers interested in making sure they're not ingesting pesticides or other toxins along with their chosen pain reliever in a quandary.
Wade, who gets calls about organic marijuana certification "a few times a month," said people are frustrated by her response.
"They ask 'why can't you fix this,'" she said.
Wade said California Certified Organic Farmers worked for nearly three decades to get the USDA program in place. She suggested the medical marijuana community can take action as well.
"The path is already trodden," Wade said. "As long as they don't call it organic, there's no reason they can't adopt the rules already in place."
Tuesday, 16 August 2011
Taxpayers Money Used by Indentured Politicians to Subsidize Ingredients Such as Corn Syrup in Junk Foods
In 2009, the U.S. federal government paid $12.3 billion to America's farmers. Even as farmers profit from increased demand, the government remains a major player in the food business.
The Atlantic has put together a list of the top nine products that the government most heavily subsidizes:
Corn
Wheat
Soybeans
Rice
Beer
Milk
Beef
Peanut Butter
Sunflower Oil
Corn, at the top of the list, raked in over $77 billion from the government between 1995 and 2010, and the subsidies have only been going up. There's a common belief that healthy food is inherently more expensive, and thus can only be for the wealthy. But in fact, healthy food could easily be more affordable for everyone, if not for agribusiness CEOs, their lobbyists and the politicians in their pockets.
Lawmakers whose campaigns are underwritten by agribusinesses use billions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize the commodities that are the key ingredients of unhealthy food -- corn, soybeans, wheat, etc. This manufactured price inequality helps junk food undersell nutritious food.
The Atlantic has put together a list of the top nine products that the government most heavily subsidizes:
Corn
Wheat
Soybeans
Rice
Beer
Milk
Beef
Peanut Butter
Sunflower Oil
Corn, at the top of the list, raked in over $77 billion from the government between 1995 and 2010, and the subsidies have only been going up. There's a common belief that healthy food is inherently more expensive, and thus can only be for the wealthy. But in fact, healthy food could easily be more affordable for everyone, if not for agribusiness CEOs, their lobbyists and the politicians in their pockets.
Lawmakers whose campaigns are underwritten by agribusinesses use billions of taxpayer dollars to subsidize the commodities that are the key ingredients of unhealthy food -- corn, soybeans, wheat, etc. This manufactured price inequality helps junk food undersell nutritious food.
Monday, 15 August 2011
Just How Bad Is the Artificial Sweetener Aspartame?
By Dr. Mercola
Americans drink more soda than anyone else on the planet -- well over 700 eight-ounce servings each year, on average, and an increasing amount of it is diet soda.
They might be more reluctant to do so if they knew about the safety questions still surrounding aspartame. A number of scientists responding expressed major concerns about aspartame's safety at the time of its approval, and even more indicated areas where they believed more research is needed on aspartame to resolve their concerns -- research on areas such as neurological functions, brain tumors, seizures, headaches, and adverse effects on children and pregnant women.
Americans drink more soda than anyone else on the planet -- well over 700 eight-ounce servings each year, on average, and an increasing amount of it is diet soda.
They might be more reluctant to do so if they knew about the safety questions still surrounding aspartame. A number of scientists responding expressed major concerns about aspartame's safety at the time of its approval, and even more indicated areas where they believed more research is needed on aspartame to resolve their concerns -- research on areas such as neurological functions, brain tumors, seizures, headaches, and adverse effects on children and pregnant women.
Organic Farmers Can Sue Conventional, GMO Farmers whose Pesticides 'Trespass' and Contaminate Their Fields
By Ethan A. Huff
Purveyors of conventional and genetically-modified (GM) crops -- and the pesticides and herbicides that accompany them -- are finally getting a taste of their own legal medicine. Minnesota's Star Tribune has reported that the Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled that a large organic farm surrounded by chemical-laden conventional farms can seek damages for lost crops, as well as lost profits, caused by the illegal trespassing of pesticides and herbicides on its property.
Oluf and Debra Johnson's 1,500-acre organic farm in Stearns County, Minn., has repeatedly been contaminated by nearby conventional and GMO farms since the couple started it in the 1990s. A local pesticide cooperative known as Paynesville Farmers Union (PFU), which is near the farm, has been cited at least four times for violating pesticide laws, and inadvertently causing damage to the Johnson's farm.
The first time it was realized that pesticides had drifted onto the Johnson's farm in 1998, PFU apologized, but did not agree to pay for damages. As anyone with an understanding of organic practices knows, even a small bit of contamination can result in having to plow under that season's crops, forget profits, and even lose the ability to grow organic crops in the same field for at least a couple years.
Purveyors of conventional and genetically-modified (GM) crops -- and the pesticides and herbicides that accompany them -- are finally getting a taste of their own legal medicine. Minnesota's Star Tribune has reported that the Minnesota Court of Appeals recently ruled that a large organic farm surrounded by chemical-laden conventional farms can seek damages for lost crops, as well as lost profits, caused by the illegal trespassing of pesticides and herbicides on its property.
Oluf and Debra Johnson's 1,500-acre organic farm in Stearns County, Minn., has repeatedly been contaminated by nearby conventional and GMO farms since the couple started it in the 1990s. A local pesticide cooperative known as Paynesville Farmers Union (PFU), which is near the farm, has been cited at least four times for violating pesticide laws, and inadvertently causing damage to the Johnson's farm.
The first time it was realized that pesticides had drifted onto the Johnson's farm in 1998, PFU apologized, but did not agree to pay for damages. As anyone with an understanding of organic practices knows, even a small bit of contamination can result in having to plow under that season's crops, forget profits, and even lose the ability to grow organic crops in the same field for at least a couple years.
Sunday, 14 August 2011
Imperial Psychosis: We Pour Trillions into Empire While Gutting Programs Americans Depend On
By Tom Engelhardt
By now, it seems as if everybody and his brother has joined the debt-ceiling imbroglio in Washington, perhaps the strangest homespun drama of our time. It's as if Washington's leading political players, aided and abetted by the media's love of the horserace, had eaten LSD-laced brownies, then gone on stage before an audience of millions to enact a psychotic spectacle of American decline.
And yet, among the dramatis personae we've been watching, there are clearly missing actors. They happen to be out of town, part of a traveling roadshow. When it comes to their production, however, there has, of late, been little publicity, few reviewers, and only the most modest media attention. Moreover, unlike the scenery-chewing divas in Washington, these actors have simply been going about their business as if nothing out of the ordinary were happening.
On July 25th, for instance, while John Boehner raced around the Capitol desperately pressing Republican House members for votes on a debt-ceiling bill that Harry Reid was calling dead-on-arrival in the Senate, America's new ambassador to Afghanistan, Ryan Crocker, took his oath of office in distant Kabul. According to the New York Times, he then gave a short speech "warning" that "Western powers needed to 'proceed carefully'" and emphasized that when it came to the war, there would "be no rush for the exits."
By now, it seems as if everybody and his brother has joined the debt-ceiling imbroglio in Washington, perhaps the strangest homespun drama of our time. It's as if Washington's leading political players, aided and abetted by the media's love of the horserace, had eaten LSD-laced brownies, then gone on stage before an audience of millions to enact a psychotic spectacle of American decline.
And yet, among the dramatis personae we've been watching, there are clearly missing actors. They happen to be out of town, part of a traveling roadshow. When it comes to their production, however, there has, of late, been little publicity, few reviewers, and only the most modest media attention. Moreover, unlike the scenery-chewing divas in Washington, these actors have simply been going about their business as if nothing out of the ordinary were happening.
On July 25th, for instance, while John Boehner raced around the Capitol desperately pressing Republican House members for votes on a debt-ceiling bill that Harry Reid was calling dead-on-arrival in the Senate, America's new ambassador to Afghanistan, Ryan Crocker, took his oath of office in distant Kabul. According to the New York Times, he then gave a short speech "warning" that "Western powers needed to 'proceed carefully'" and emphasized that when it came to the war, there would "be no rush for the exits."
US of Austerity: What $570 Billion Cuts Will Do to Our Water, Air, the Jobless, Children, the Elderly, and the Poor
By Andt Kroll
The debt ceiling deal hammered out by President Barack Obama and congressional leaders and passed in the House on Monday afternoon makes deep, painful, and lasting cuts throughout the federal government's budget. What's on the chopping block? The numbers tell the tale.
The Obama-GOP plan cuts $917 billion in government spending over the next decade. Nearly $570 billion of that would come from what's called "nondefense discretionary spending." That's budget-speak for the pile of money the government invests in the nation's safety and future-education and job training, air traffic control, health research, border security, physical infrastructure, environmental and consumer protection, child care, nutrition, law enforcement, and more.
The White House's plan would slash this type of spending nearly in half, from about 3.3 percent of America's GDP to as low as 1.7 percent, the lowest in nearly half a century, says Ethan Pollack, a senior policy analyst at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. Pollack's calculations suggest the cuts in Obama's plan are almost as deep as those in Rep. Paul Ryan's slash-and-burn budget, which shrunk non-defense discretionary spending down to just 1.5 percent of GDP. The president has claimed that the debt deal will allow America to continue making "job-creating investments in things like education and research." But on crucial public investment, Obama's and Ryan's plans are next-door neighbors. "There's no way to square this plan with the president's 'Winning the Future' agenda,"Pollack says. "That agenda ends."
The debt ceiling deal hammered out by President Barack Obama and congressional leaders and passed in the House on Monday afternoon makes deep, painful, and lasting cuts throughout the federal government's budget. What's on the chopping block? The numbers tell the tale.
The Obama-GOP plan cuts $917 billion in government spending over the next decade. Nearly $570 billion of that would come from what's called "nondefense discretionary spending." That's budget-speak for the pile of money the government invests in the nation's safety and future-education and job training, air traffic control, health research, border security, physical infrastructure, environmental and consumer protection, child care, nutrition, law enforcement, and more.
The White House's plan would slash this type of spending nearly in half, from about 3.3 percent of America's GDP to as low as 1.7 percent, the lowest in nearly half a century, says Ethan Pollack, a senior policy analyst at the left-leaning Economic Policy Institute. Pollack's calculations suggest the cuts in Obama's plan are almost as deep as those in Rep. Paul Ryan's slash-and-burn budget, which shrunk non-defense discretionary spending down to just 1.5 percent of GDP. The president has claimed that the debt deal will allow America to continue making "job-creating investments in things like education and research." But on crucial public investment, Obama's and Ryan's plans are next-door neighbors. "There's no way to square this plan with the president's 'Winning the Future' agenda,"Pollack says. "That agenda ends."
Saturday, 13 August 2011
Hazards of Monsanto's New SmartStax Genetically Engineered Corn
By Lucy Sharratt
This year, we are eating from the first harvest of Monsanto's eight-trait "SmartStax" genetically modified (GM) corn. Approved in 2009 and grown for the first time in North America last year, the new GM corn appears as processed food ingredients and feed for dairy and meat animals.
Canada's approval of SmartStax corn exposed just how little Health Canada cares to investigate the potential risks of GM crops and foods - in the case of SmartStax, not at all. Now the process to approve SmartStax in Europe has identified many of the risk issues being ignored on both sides of the ocean. Confidential industry summaries of data as well as critiques by European experts show more studies must be done to determine any potential health and environmental risks.
No risk assessment in Canada
In July 2009, Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences announced they had received approval in Canada and the US to introduce their new eight-trait GM corn SmartStax (it combines technologies from both companies). However, Health Canada did not actually assess SmartStax for human health safety. Because the individual eight GM traits were previously approved in separate crops, Canadian regulators decided there was nothing new in combining the eight together. Health Canada assumed the corn was a harmless amalgam of GM traits and did not even issue any paperwork to rubberstamp its approval.
This year, we are eating from the first harvest of Monsanto's eight-trait "SmartStax" genetically modified (GM) corn. Approved in 2009 and grown for the first time in North America last year, the new GM corn appears as processed food ingredients and feed for dairy and meat animals.
Canada's approval of SmartStax corn exposed just how little Health Canada cares to investigate the potential risks of GM crops and foods - in the case of SmartStax, not at all. Now the process to approve SmartStax in Europe has identified many of the risk issues being ignored on both sides of the ocean. Confidential industry summaries of data as well as critiques by European experts show more studies must be done to determine any potential health and environmental risks.
No risk assessment in Canada
In July 2009, Monsanto and Dow AgroSciences announced they had received approval in Canada and the US to introduce their new eight-trait GM corn SmartStax (it combines technologies from both companies). However, Health Canada did not actually assess SmartStax for human health safety. Because the individual eight GM traits were previously approved in separate crops, Canadian regulators decided there was nothing new in combining the eight together. Health Canada assumed the corn was a harmless amalgam of GM traits and did not even issue any paperwork to rubberstamp its approval.
Not Your Grandma's Strawberries
By Natalie Jones
In 1950, your parents, grandparents, or a perhaps a younger version of you could eat a handful of string beans -- about three-and-a-half ounces -- and get about 9 percent of the calcium you needed for the day. Almost 50 years later, in 1999, the amount of calcium in string beans dropped by 43 percent, leaving you with only 5 percent of your daily calcium. You could eat more string beans -- except you might not want to, because they wouldn't be as flavorful as in the past. So you could eat more of other vegetables, but it's likely other vegetables wouldon't have as much calcium or flavor as they used to, either. And it's not just calcium: Preliminary research shows that many vegetables have lost significant amounts of nutritional value.
Donald Davis, a scientist retired from the University of Texas at Austin, and his colleagues published a study in 2004 comparing U.S. Department of Agriculture data on vegetable nutrients from 1950 to data from 1999, and found notable decreases, particularly for key nutrients like calcium, iron, phosphorus, riboflavin, and ascorbic acid.
Davis believes that the primary reason for the decrease is selective breeding: As growers and researchers have spent the last 50 years trying to produce varieties of crops that yield more fruit, they've been ignoring the effects on nutrient content. Davis cites a few studies that compared high-yield varieties to non-high-yield varieties in the same soil and growing conditions, and found decreased nutrient content in the former.
"It's early evidence, but that's very powerful evidence because the soil is the same; the only difference is the genetics of the plant," Davis says.
The studies show that as fruits and vegetables get bigger and more plentiful, nutrients get diluted. Some high-yield varieties are "dwarf" plants, meaning the plants themselves are smaller. But plants draw in and store minerals in their stalks, and when it comes time to create a fruit or vegetable, the plants extract the minerals and transform them into beneficial nutrients in the fruit. A lack of storage space for nutrients in the stalk translates to a loss of nutrients in the fruits. (Because taste is so subjective, not much research has been done flavor loss in high-yield varieties. But some people anecdotally claim that flavors in high-yield varieties also seem diluted compared to heirlooms -- varieties that have been passed down, unaltered, through generations.)
In 1950, your parents, grandparents, or a perhaps a younger version of you could eat a handful of string beans -- about three-and-a-half ounces -- and get about 9 percent of the calcium you needed for the day. Almost 50 years later, in 1999, the amount of calcium in string beans dropped by 43 percent, leaving you with only 5 percent of your daily calcium. You could eat more string beans -- except you might not want to, because they wouldn't be as flavorful as in the past. So you could eat more of other vegetables, but it's likely other vegetables wouldon't have as much calcium or flavor as they used to, either. And it's not just calcium: Preliminary research shows that many vegetables have lost significant amounts of nutritional value.
Donald Davis, a scientist retired from the University of Texas at Austin, and his colleagues published a study in 2004 comparing U.S. Department of Agriculture data on vegetable nutrients from 1950 to data from 1999, and found notable decreases, particularly for key nutrients like calcium, iron, phosphorus, riboflavin, and ascorbic acid.
Davis believes that the primary reason for the decrease is selective breeding: As growers and researchers have spent the last 50 years trying to produce varieties of crops that yield more fruit, they've been ignoring the effects on nutrient content. Davis cites a few studies that compared high-yield varieties to non-high-yield varieties in the same soil and growing conditions, and found decreased nutrient content in the former.
"It's early evidence, but that's very powerful evidence because the soil is the same; the only difference is the genetics of the plant," Davis says.
The studies show that as fruits and vegetables get bigger and more plentiful, nutrients get diluted. Some high-yield varieties are "dwarf" plants, meaning the plants themselves are smaller. But plants draw in and store minerals in their stalks, and when it comes time to create a fruit or vegetable, the plants extract the minerals and transform them into beneficial nutrients in the fruit. A lack of storage space for nutrients in the stalk translates to a loss of nutrients in the fruits. (Because taste is so subjective, not much research has been done flavor loss in high-yield varieties. But some people anecdotally claim that flavors in high-yield varieties also seem diluted compared to heirlooms -- varieties that have been passed down, unaltered, through generations.)
Friday, 12 August 2011
Commission Aims to Produce Clear Course of Action on Sustainable Food System
The Consultative Group on International Agricultural Research (CGIAR)-a consortium of international research centers focused on sustainable agricultural development-has launched a new initiative focused on agriculture's contribution to food security in the context of climate change: the Commission on Sustainable Agriculture and Climate Change. "The food system is really not sustainable," says Professor Sir John Beddington, U.K. Government Chief Scientific Adviser and Chair of the Commission. "What is happening is it's getting big subsidies of fossil fuels, it is over-exploiting water.
Denmark's Road Map for Fossil Fuel Independence by 2050
Last year, the Danish Commission on Climate Change Policy found that Denmark can remove fossil fuels entirely from its energy system-including transport-by 2050 without introducing nuclear energy or carbon capture and storage. In response, the Danish government immediately adopted the goal of becoming independent of fossil fuels by 2050. Removal of fossil fuels would bring Denmark in line with the EU policy goal of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by 80-95 percent by 2050. This report represents the first, comprehensive national analysis for achieving independence from fossil fuels. While the report's recommendations are specific to the current Danish situation, the approach used in the analyses is generic and can be of use to other nations. Perhaps the most striking finding of all is that the overall cost of achieving fossil fuel independence is only marginally more (on the order of 0.5 percent of GDP in 2050) than predicted total energy-related expenditure in a "business-as-usual" scenario. This near equivalence in cost is due primarily to expected increases in the price of fossil fuels.
The Danish Commission on Climate Change Policy reported in 2010 that Denmark could be independent of fossil fuels by 2050 with a concomitant greenhouse gas emission reduction on the order of 80 percent compared to 1990 emissions. The commission defined independence from fossil fuels as no use of fossil fuels for energy in Denmark. Import of energy based on fossil fuels was allowed but the total amount of renewable energy produced in Denmark must, as a yearly average, be at least equal to Danish energy demands. According to data from 2009, the most recent available, renewable energy sources supply 18 percent of gross energy production in Denmark, with biomass being, by far, the largest contributor.1 Approximately 3 percent of the gross energy supply comes from wind, while approximately 20 percent of the electricity is produced from wind power. Nevertheless, the commission concluded that it is realistic to assume that 100 percent of Denmark's energy needs in 2050 can be covered by electricity generated from renewable sources, such as wind, solar, geothermal, and wave. The commission's relatively optimistic assessment is based on an assumption of significant technological development with respect to both electric vehicles and "smart grids" (energy systems that can defer some degree of energy demand to periods when excess energy is produced).
The Danish Commission on Climate Change Policy reported in 2010 that Denmark could be independent of fossil fuels by 2050 with a concomitant greenhouse gas emission reduction on the order of 80 percent compared to 1990 emissions. The commission defined independence from fossil fuels as no use of fossil fuels for energy in Denmark. Import of energy based on fossil fuels was allowed but the total amount of renewable energy produced in Denmark must, as a yearly average, be at least equal to Danish energy demands. According to data from 2009, the most recent available, renewable energy sources supply 18 percent of gross energy production in Denmark, with biomass being, by far, the largest contributor.1 Approximately 3 percent of the gross energy supply comes from wind, while approximately 20 percent of the electricity is produced from wind power. Nevertheless, the commission concluded that it is realistic to assume that 100 percent of Denmark's energy needs in 2050 can be covered by electricity generated from renewable sources, such as wind, solar, geothermal, and wave. The commission's relatively optimistic assessment is based on an assumption of significant technological development with respect to both electric vehicles and "smart grids" (energy systems that can defer some degree of energy demand to periods when excess energy is produced).
Thursday, 11 August 2011
The Fires This Time: In Coverage of Extreme Weather, Media Downplay Climate Change
By Neil deMause
On April 14, a massive storm swept down out of the Rocky Mountains into the Midwest and South, spawning more than 150 tornadoes that killed 43 people across 16 states (Capital Weather Gang, 4/18/11). It was one of the largest weather catastrophes in United States history-but was soon upstaged by an even larger storm, the 2011 Super Outbreak that spread more than 300 tornadoes across 14 states from April 25 to 28 (including an all-time one-day record of 188 twisters on April 27), killing 339 people, including 41 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (CNN, 5/1/11).
It was an unprecedented string of severe weather: By mid-June, more than 1,000 tornadoes had killed 536 people (NOAA, 6/13/11), nearly as many deaths as in the entire preceding decade. And it was only natural to ask: Were we seeing the effects of climate change?
Most scientists would say yes, or at least "probably." The Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change, a global scientific body that has been a target of conservatives despite a record of soft-pedaling its findings to avoid controversy (Extra!, 7/8/07), warned on February 2, 2007, "It is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent." (In science-speak, "very likely" refers to a certainty of greater than 90 percent, and is as near as you get to a definitive conclusion.) Other forecasts (e.g., Environment America, 9/8/10) have projected that wet regions will receive record rainfall thanks to increasing evaporation, while dry ones get record drought, as climate patterns shift to accommodate the new normal.
Yet despite these dire predictions, U.S. media were hesitant to investigate the links between climate change and this spring's extreme weather. Much coverage settled for the cheap irony of contrasting extreme phenomena, as when NBC's Saturday Today show meteorologist Bill Karins (6/11/11) quipped:
Feast or famine's been the rule this spring. The northern half of the country, we've dealt with the heavy rain, the record snow pack that's now melting in the northern Rockies. That's causing the flooding. The southern half of the country, you would love some of that rain.
On April 14, a massive storm swept down out of the Rocky Mountains into the Midwest and South, spawning more than 150 tornadoes that killed 43 people across 16 states (Capital Weather Gang, 4/18/11). It was one of the largest weather catastrophes in United States history-but was soon upstaged by an even larger storm, the 2011 Super Outbreak that spread more than 300 tornadoes across 14 states from April 25 to 28 (including an all-time one-day record of 188 twisters on April 27), killing 339 people, including 41 in Tuscaloosa, Alabama (CNN, 5/1/11).
It was an unprecedented string of severe weather: By mid-June, more than 1,000 tornadoes had killed 536 people (NOAA, 6/13/11), nearly as many deaths as in the entire preceding decade. And it was only natural to ask: Were we seeing the effects of climate change?
Most scientists would say yes, or at least "probably." The Intergovernment Panel on Climate Change, a global scientific body that has been a target of conservatives despite a record of soft-pedaling its findings to avoid controversy (Extra!, 7/8/07), warned on February 2, 2007, "It is very likely that hot extremes, heat waves and heavy precipitation events will continue to become more frequent." (In science-speak, "very likely" refers to a certainty of greater than 90 percent, and is as near as you get to a definitive conclusion.) Other forecasts (e.g., Environment America, 9/8/10) have projected that wet regions will receive record rainfall thanks to increasing evaporation, while dry ones get record drought, as climate patterns shift to accommodate the new normal.
Yet despite these dire predictions, U.S. media were hesitant to investigate the links between climate change and this spring's extreme weather. Much coverage settled for the cheap irony of contrasting extreme phenomena, as when NBC's Saturday Today show meteorologist Bill Karins (6/11/11) quipped:
Feast or famine's been the rule this spring. The northern half of the country, we've dealt with the heavy rain, the record snow pack that's now melting in the northern Rockies. That's causing the flooding. The southern half of the country, you would love some of that rain.
'Legal' drug addict
Josh says he gets sweats and a sense of going mad if he stops taking his prescription drugs
"Being addicted is hellish. When I get up in the morning I need to take my meds so I can function, so I can be a whole person."
Josh, 50, was first prescribed a benzodiazepine, a tranquiliser, as a hyperactive eight-year-old and has been addicted ever since.
He is among the 1.5m people across the UK the All Party Parliamentary Group on Involuntary Tranquilliser Addiction (APPGITA) estimates are addicted to this group of drugs, which are also known as 'benzos'.
Benzos include diazepam and temazepam, and are commonly prescribed by GPs for a range of conditions such as anxiety and insomnia.
They act by enhancing the effect of a brain chemical transmitter called gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA), which depresses or calms the central nervous system, slowing down mental activity to cause relaxation and sedation.
But some experts say that coming off benzos can be harder than stopping taking heroin.
"I estimate about 20-30% (of people) who are on benzos have problems coming off, and about a third have very distressing symptoms," says Professor Malcolm Lader of the Institute of Psychiatry.
"The anxiety comes back or sleeplessness comes back and they feel physically ill.
"Then they get bizarre symptoms.
"Essentially, the brain wakes up and then over-wakes, sounds appear louder, lights appear brighter, and they feel unsteady. It's then they're in a bad withdrawal state."
Continue reading the main story“Start QuoteIt's an issue that's fallen through the cracks, it's a silent addiction”End QuoteAnne MiltonPublic health minister for England Josh has tried to stop taking the drug many times."You sweat, hot and cold sweats, you get diarrhoea and a sense of going mad," he says.
"It's horrendous. I've never found a cut-off point where I've said, 'It's better', because the symptoms persist.
"The longest time I've been off benzos was eight weeks.
"I know that sounds like a short time but I can assure you that eight weeks is a really long time to be experiencing those symptoms every day, and they don't get better.
"And without the support, in the end my body said, enough, I must take a tablet, I can bear this no longer."
Lack of servicesThe support Josh longs for is the kind that is already provided in drug addiction centres for users of heroin and cocaine.
"We didn't wake up and say, 'Lets get addicted'," says Josh.
"We got addicted involuntarily and those who have been brave enough to try and address our addiction and have failed, we're still as stuck in that cycle.
Continue reading the main story“Start QuoteWe're volunteers in all this. Where are the services to help these people?”End QuoteBarry HaslamTranx addiction support group "Please help us. Give us some support. Don't abandon us now."Tranx, a support group based in Oldham, Manchester, run by ex and partially-withdrawn addicts, is unique in bringing together two charities - one with NHS funding - to provide two nurses.
"In Oldham I've seen six suicides and 50 attempted suicides," says Barry Haslam, who runs the support group, and is himself a former benzo addict.
"One weekend there were people wanting to commit suicide on the Friday, Saturday and Sunday night. It's just so sad there's nothing out there.
"We're volunteers in all this. Where are the services to help these people?" he says.
But as Professor Malcolm Lader, of the Institute of Psychiatry says: "The facilities are simply not available."
He adds: "The great scandal is addicts are referred to illegal drug addiction centres, and they're sat next to an illegal drug user who's been injecting heroin, and of course a housewife who's been prescribed by her doctor will be very upset by this."
Anne Milton, England's public health minister, admitted to BBC Radio 4's Face the Facts that there there had been some denial of the problem, but added the Department of Health is trying to "get a grip" of it and provide help for those who want to withdraw.
"I'm taking this very seriously, it's an issue that's fallen through the cracks, it's a silent addiction. Not many people know about it.
"We want to make sure training and awareness is raised so GPs can prescribe well, and then we've got to make sure we've got the right services in place to help them enjoy lives as they should be able to."
Rise in prescriptionsThe potential dangers of withdrawing from benzos have long been known.
Wednesday, 10 August 2011
Child health
Ali and Battul Agha and their youngest son Rayan are taking part in the project
"There is particular interest in the first origins of early development of disease - in the womb and the first couple of years of life - and these seem to predict who gets sick later on in life."
The Born in Bradford families reflect the city's ethnic diversity and around half of them are from an Asian background, a community that has some distinct health problems.
For example, around a quarter of Asian adults in Bradford are diabetic, while another quarter are pre-diabetic, putting them at high risk of developing the disease.
Battul Agha is one mother for whom diabetes is a serious worry.
Her son Rayan is one of the Born in Bradford children, but his mum says diabetes has already affected the family.
"I had gestational diabetes while I was pregnant but generations have got it - my children's grandparents, my own grandparents, my mum, some uncles have even developed it.
"So therefore we are particularly cautious about the children's health and what we feed them. We try and give them as much exercise as we can - lots of outdoor time and a healthy lifestyle."
So now the last families have been recruited, the hard work for the researchers begins.
Over the coming years they will track lives of thousands of children across Bradford and hope to provide some clues about the illnesses that affect many more millions of adults.
My tortured liver
Liver disease is now the country's fifth biggest killer and cases of alcoholic liver disease in the under-30s have risen by half in the past 10 years, says the Department of Health. The coalition wants a "drink strategy" with input from both the health lobby and the drinks industry, but can they work together?
Tuesday, 9 August 2011
Too few tonsillectomies 'risks health'
Doctors are seeing more cases of tonsillitis There has been a significant fall in the number of people having their tonsils removed in the UK over recent years, partly as a backlash against the procedure's overuse and, more recently, as a cost-saving exercise for the cash-strapped NHS.
But in this week's Scrubbing Up, consultant ENT surgeon Andrew McCombe, honorary secretary of ENT UK, warns the cuts have gone too far and patients are paying the price.
Tonsillectomy - cutting out the two lumps of lymphoid tissue found at either side of the back of the throat - is an operation that was described first over 3,000 years ago.
Its popularity grew throughout the ages and became so favoured in the UK that in the 1950s over 200,000 were performed in any given year.
Certainly, this rate was too high and surgeons set about refining the indications for carrying out this potentially risky operation, reserving it only for those patients most likely to benefit.
However, over the last 15 years the rate of tonsillectomy has continued to fall, so much so that we are now in danger of too few procedures being carried out.
Out of vogueIn 1994-95 some 77,600 tonsillectomies were carried out in the UK. By 2009 this had dropped by 37% to 49,000.
At the same time, we are seeing increasing rates of diseases and conditions that tonsillectomies can prevent or cure, like infections, and even cancer, of the tonsils.
The number of people who develop cancer of the tonsils is still small, but it has certainly jumped significantly.
In 2000-01, there were 30,942 tonsil-related admissions for emergency medical treatment. By 2008-09, the figure had risen to 43,641, an increase of over 41% in 8 years.
The economic impact of tonsillitis is considerable. Overall, 35m days are lost from school or work each year due to sore throats in the UK.
Memory is 'team effort' by brain
Researchers say the study uncovered an important brain circuit .
The hippocampus, perirhinal cortex and medial prefrontal cortex all have specific roles in memory processing.
But University of Bristol researchers say the hippocampus is crucial for remembering an object's location.
An Alzheimer's expert say it provides another insight into the brain.
Working on rats, the team of neuroscientists carried out experiments to examine the role of hippocampus in recognition memory tasks.
In other experiments they also looked at how the hippocampus interacts with two other regions of the brain, namely the perirhinal or prefrontal cortex.
These experiments revealed that neither "object-in-place" or "temporal order recognition" memories could be formed if communication between the hippocampus and either the perirhinal cortex, or the prefrontal cortex, was broken.
Continue reading the main story“Start QuoteBrain processes can suffer as normal people age, because we are busy, don't have time...”End QuoteDr Clea WarburtonUniversity of Bristol Dr Clea Warburton, co-author of the study and reader in cognitive neuroscience at the University of Bristol, said the study had discovered an important brain circuit."In normal day to day life we are all collecting information within this brain circuit, which may involve other bits of the brain too.
"If we recognise somebody in the supermarket but can't remember their name it may be because we are used to seeing them somewhere else, like work."
Dr Warburton said this failure of memory can happen for a number of reasons.
"Processes can suffer as normal people age, because we are busy, don't have time or because one bit of the brain circuit is breaking down.
"Then we need to use strategies for processing information better.
"We could repeat the name aloud when we are introduced to someone new or encode a feature of their face or hair - something which will help us encode it more deeply in our memory."
The researchers said their findings could have implications for understanding memory and treating people with memory disorders.
Dr Simon Ridley, head of research at Alzheimer's Research UK, said it was too early to say how the findings could help research into Alzheimer's disease and other forms of dementia.
"It is important that we understand the complexities of the brain and this discovery brings another insight.
"We desperately need new preventions and treatments to defeat dementia but research funding lags far behind other serious diseases - with 820,000 people affected across the UK, substantial investment is needed now."
Monday, 8 August 2011
Why some people have no fingerprints
Some people are born without fingerprints
A study published in the American Journal of Human Genetics looked at one Swiss family, many of whom have no fingerprints.
By analysing their DNA, researchers identified the SMARCAD1 gene.
Researchers said "virtually nothing" was known about how the gene functioned in the skin.
Normally fingers are covered with ridges called dermatoglyphs which are fully formed before birth.
Passport problemsOnly four families have been diagnosed with the fingerprint-less condition known as adermatoglyphia.
It is more popularly referred to as "immigration delay disease" due to problems patient say they have getting through airports.
In this study, researchers from the Tel Aviv Sourasky Medical Center in Israel looked at the genetic code of 16 members of a family. Seven had fingerprints, nine were born without.
They found that a shorter version of the SMARCAD1 gene was expressed in the skin and that patients who did not have fingerprints had mutations in the gene.
The lead researcher Professor Eli Sprecher said: "Our findings implicate a skin-specific version of SMARCAD1 in the regulation of fingerprint development.
"Little is known about the function of full-length SMARCAD1 and virtually nothing regarding the physiological role of the skin-specific version of the gene".
Full length SMARCAD1 is thought to control the activity of other genes.
He added: "As abnormal fingerprints are known to sometimes herald severe disorders, our finding may also impact the understanding of additional diseases affecting not only the skin."
Pull plug on NHS e-records, say MPs
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
Andrew Lansley says the IT system is being changed "to one genuinely led by the NHS organisations themselves" Ministers should consider pulling the plug on the central part of the NHS IT programme in England, MPs say.Sunday, 7 August 2011
Young 'more likely to reach 100'
By 2066 it is estimated there will be at least half-a-million people aged over 100 Today's 20-year-olds are three times more likely to live to 100 than their grandparents and twice as likely as their parents, official figures show.
And a baby born in 2011 is almost eight times more likely to reach their 100th birthday than one born 80 years ago.
A girl born this year has a one-in-three chance of reaching 100 years old and boys have a one-in-four chance.
The Department for Work and Pensions has issued the figures based on Office for National Statistics predictions.
MRSA rates fall to record level
7 days quiz
Which puppet has been implicated in an assault?
Most PopularShared 1: How can a Church have an atheist clergy? 2: Rowan Atkinson injured in crash 3: Bear kills 'UK tourist' in Norway 4: Swede admits atomic test 'crazy' 5: 'Water-flow signs' found on Mars Read 1: Bear kills 'UK tourist' in Norway 2: Blue tit 'eaten' by killer plant 3: Europe adds to global shares rout 4: Rovers boss angry over Westlife 5: Rowan Atkinson injured in crash 6: Girlfriend 'killed in sex game' 7: Stock market turmoil 8: Quiz of the week's news 9: How can a Church have an atheist clergy? 10: Incest man and daughter sentenced Video/Audio 1: Latest BBC reports on global shares falls Watch 2: BBC News Channel Watch 3: Signs of flowing water on Mars Watch 4: Attack on cyclist captured on film Watch 5: Rowan Atkinson on Top Gear Watch 6: 'A naivety about incest'Saturday, 6 August 2011
NHS trusts warn over waiting time
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
Dr David Bennett: "The focus is entirely on making sure if there are problems that they get fixed" Continue reading the main storyRelated StoriesWaits rise 'leaves NHS creaking'Long NHS waits 'on the increase'NHS chiefs' waiting times warning Some of the top-performing NHS trusts in England are warning they may fail to hit waiting time targets this year, official documents show.Annual plans from foundation trusts show one in six predicts it will struggle to see patients needing non-emergency operations in time.
Similar numbers expressed concern about A&E waiting times, the review by regulator Monitor showed.
The government said foundation trusts should keep waiting times down.
Foundation trusts are the top-performing organisations in the NHS in England. So far 96 hospital trusts have been granted the status - just under half of the total number in the health service.
Growing concernsBut the review of their annual plans by Monitor showed even these trusts were struggling to keep pace with demand and the need to make savings.
Sixteen trusts declared a risk of non-compliance for the 18-week limit for elective care, such as knee and hip replacements.
The warning comes amid growing concerns about the length of time hospitals are keeping patients waiting.
Continue reading the main story“Start QuoteWe are very clear with foundation trusts that savings cannot be made by compromising on quality”End QuoteDr David BennettMonitor The NHS has been told it should see 90% of in-patients within 18 weeks - the 10% leeway is allowed to reflect the fact that some patients may wait longer for valid personal or medical reasons.Overall that figure is still being met, according to latest statistics, but that masks what is happening behind the scenes with growing evidence that long waits are on the rise and particular problems in certain specialities.
The Monitor review also revealed another 14 foundation trusts were worried about whether they would be able to keep to the four-hour A&E target.
More than 20 trusts also claimed they may run into financial difficulties in the coming year.
The names of the trusts were not being disclosed by Monitor, but the regulator warned the situation may even be worse if the winter was particularly harsh.
Monitor chairman Dr David Bennett added: "The challenge of reducing costs must be met, but it is essential that good patient care is at the heart of this.
"We are very clear with foundation trusts that savings cannot be made by compromising on quality."
A spokesman for the Department of Health agreed standards should not slip.
"Foundation trusts must demonstrate that they are improving outcomes for patients and managing their finances effectively as well as ensuring that waiting times are kept low."
Stem cell sperm 'fertility hope'
The scientists were able to coax stem cells into early sperm cells
Japanese researchers successfully implanted early sperm cells, made from the stem cells, into infertile mice.
The working sperm which they made was then used to father healthy, and crucially fertile, pups, Cell journal reports.
A UK expert said it was a significant step forward in infertility research.
'Landmark achievement'The Kyoto University team were able to turn mouse embryonic stem cells into early sperm cells called primordial germ cells (PGCs).
When these were transplanted into infertile mice, the animal played "host" as the stem cells developed into normal-looking sperm. This was then used to successfully fertilise eggs.
Continue reading the main story“Start Quote"This has huge implications for furthering our understanding of how sperm are made, but may also one day lead to a clinical application whereby we could make sperm for infertile men."”End QuoteDr Allan Pacey,University of Sheffield These eggs were then transplanted into a female mouse and healthy offspring were born who grew into fertile male and female adult mice.The team, led by Mitinori Saitou, suggest the same procedure could be carried out using stem cells derived from adult skin cells.
Dr Jane Stewart, a spokeswoman for British Fertility Society and consultant gynaecologist at Newcastle Fertility Centre said the ability to generate gametes (reproducing cells) or gamete producing cells in the lab would be a "landmark achievement in the understanding and potentially treatment of fertility problems".
She added: "This publication in an animal model marks a further step towards this goal.
"However, as the authors clearly point out, much work remains to be done before we have a full understanding of such biological processes and indeed the implications of undertaking them in the lab."
Dr Allan Pacey, senior lecturer in Andrology at the University of Sheffield said: "Many research groups have attempted to re-create the process of sperm production in the laboratory using stem cells as the starting material.
"This has huge implications for furthering our understanding of how sperm are made, but may also one day lead to a clinical application whereby we could make sperm for infertile men."
But he added: "Sadly, so far, none of the attempts to make sperm from embryonic stem cells have been hugely successful, although we have learned much about some of the cellular processes involved.
"Furthermore, most of the attempts to use sperm-like cells have lead to the birth of unhealthy offspring which have quickly died."
But he said the Kyoto paper was "quite a large step forward" in developing a process by which sperm could be made for infertile men, perhaps by taking as a starting point a cell from their skin or from something like bone marrow.
He added: "Clearly more work needs to be done to refine this process, but it's hugely exciting."
Friday, 5 August 2011
Heart test 'saves babies' lives'
Please turn on JavaScript. Media requires JavaScript to play.
The test that could spot heart defects in newborn babies A study of 20,055 newborns, published in The Lancet, showed testing oxygen in the blood was more successful than other checks available.The researchers have called for the oxygen test to be used in hospitals across the UK.
The British Heart Foundation said the test could "make a real difference" as cases go unnoticed.
Congenital heart defects - such as holes between chambers in the heart and valve defects - affect around one in every 145 babies.
They are detected by ultrasound during pregnancy or by listening to the heart after birth, however, the success rate is low.
Decades oldDoctors at six maternity hospitals in the UK used pulse oximeters - a piece of technology which has been around for 20 years - to detect levels of oxygen in the blood.
If the levels were too low, or varied between the hands and feet, more detailed examinations took place.
The test takes less than five minutes and it found 75% of the most serious abnormalities. In combination with traditional methods, 92% of cases were detected.
While some defects are inoperable, advances in surgery mean most can be corrected.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
