By Sandra Steingraber
The following was a speech given by Sandra Steingraber for the Don't Frack New York Rally in Albany, August 27, 2012.
On this day, 53 years ago, a pregnant college student walked into a hospital in rural Illinois and gave birth to a child.
And then she walked out. By herself.
The baby she left behind became a ward of the state. Three months later a family was found for it.
That child was me.
This story carries three messages. The first is for Governor Cuomo. At the Democratic Committee Policy Conference last week, the governor affirmed his belief in the essential value of government, calling it "the vehicle for the community." I am Exhibit A for that noble idea.
Sometimes the vehicle for community means finding a home for an abandoned child.
Sometimes the vehicle for community means saying NO to a carcinogen-dependent industry that seeks to use our towns as their factory floor, offering temporary riches for a few and permanent pollution for all.
Governor Cuomo: The state of Illinois once protected me. Now I want you to protect my two children. Governor Cuomo, say NO.
Showing posts with label Industry. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Industry. Show all posts
Monday, 17 September 2012
Wednesday, 17 August 2011
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."
Thursday, 9 June 2011
Natural and Organic Products Industry Sales Hit $81 Billion
BOULDER, Colo.-- Natural Foods Merchandiser magazine's 2010 Market Overview reports healthy growth for the natural and organic products industry. With more than $81 billion in total revenue last year, the industry grew 7 percent over 2009, showing that consumers are spending again and that the natural products industry is healthy and growing.
Natural Foods Merchandiser's 2010 Market Overview is a comprehensive report detailing sales results for the natural and organic products industry. In addition to overall spending figures, the Market Overview also reports product segment sales, average sales per store and overall business statistics for natural products retailers.
Market research found that certain categories experienced double-digit growth. Dairy and produce, for example, grew 12 percent and 13 percent, respectively, over the previous year. "Double digit growth in 2010 is impressive," said Carlotta Mast, Editor-in-Chief of Natural Foods Merchandiser magazine. "These numbers demonstrate that shoppers are returning to natural products stores for everyday groceries," she said. The pet products category boasted 10 percent growth last year, as Americans continue to feed their furry friends food fit for a king. In the supplements aisle, sports nutrition products grew a whopping 22.2 percent, a reflection of new and innovative products on the market and the improving economy. Digestive aids and vitamin D continued on their upward trajectories in 2010.
Also included in the Market Overview is the Gourmet Guide, which shows that specialty natural products sales grew 15.6 percent in natural products stores last year. "The lines between natural and gourmet are blurring, as more natural retailers stock specialty products that meet their stringent ingredient and packaging standards," Mast said.
Natural Foods Merchandiser's 2010 Market Overview is a comprehensive report detailing sales results for the natural and organic products industry. In addition to overall spending figures, the Market Overview also reports product segment sales, average sales per store and overall business statistics for natural products retailers.
Market research found that certain categories experienced double-digit growth. Dairy and produce, for example, grew 12 percent and 13 percent, respectively, over the previous year. "Double digit growth in 2010 is impressive," said Carlotta Mast, Editor-in-Chief of Natural Foods Merchandiser magazine. "These numbers demonstrate that shoppers are returning to natural products stores for everyday groceries," she said. The pet products category boasted 10 percent growth last year, as Americans continue to feed their furry friends food fit for a king. In the supplements aisle, sports nutrition products grew a whopping 22.2 percent, a reflection of new and innovative products on the market and the improving economy. Digestive aids and vitamin D continued on their upward trajectories in 2010.
Also included in the Market Overview is the Gourmet Guide, which shows that specialty natural products sales grew 15.6 percent in natural products stores last year. "The lines between natural and gourmet are blurring, as more natural retailers stock specialty products that meet their stringent ingredient and packaging standards," Mast said.
Friday, 29 October 2010
Meat Industry Protests Over Restricting Use of Antibiotics in Animals
For decades, factory farms have used antibiotics even in healthy animals to promote faster growth and prevent disease that could sicken livestock held in confined quarters.
The benefit: cheaper, more plentiful meat for consumers.
But a firestorm has erupted over a federal proposal recommending antibiotics only when animals are actually sick. Medical and public health experts in recent years said overuse and misuse of antibiotics posed a serious public health threat by creating new strains of bacteria that are difficult to treat - both in animals and humans.
"Over time, we have created some monster bugs," said Russ Kremer, a Bonnots Mill, Mo., farmer who speaks nationally about the threat to the food supply.
"It is truly harmful to everyone to feed antibiotics to animals just for growth promotion and economic gain."
The meat industry argues that the draft guidelines from the Food and Drug Administration are premature because a clear link has not been shown between antibiotics in livestock and health problems in humans.
"What FDA is doing, trying to restrict the use of antibiotics and require additional veterinary oversight, goes beyond where the science, their own science, has gone," said Kelli Ludlum, congressional relations director for the American Farm Bureau.
The benefit: cheaper, more plentiful meat for consumers.
But a firestorm has erupted over a federal proposal recommending antibiotics only when animals are actually sick. Medical and public health experts in recent years said overuse and misuse of antibiotics posed a serious public health threat by creating new strains of bacteria that are difficult to treat - both in animals and humans.
"Over time, we have created some monster bugs," said Russ Kremer, a Bonnots Mill, Mo., farmer who speaks nationally about the threat to the food supply.
"It is truly harmful to everyone to feed antibiotics to animals just for growth promotion and economic gain."
The meat industry argues that the draft guidelines from the Food and Drug Administration are premature because a clear link has not been shown between antibiotics in livestock and health problems in humans.
"What FDA is doing, trying to restrict the use of antibiotics and require additional veterinary oversight, goes beyond where the science, their own science, has gone," said Kelli Ludlum, congressional relations director for the American Farm Bureau.
Wednesday, 27 October 2010
In "The Polluters," Benjamin Ross and Steven Amter Call Out Chemical Industry
With nearly 5 million barrels of BP's crude having gushed into the Gulf of Mexico for months on end, the summer of 2010 will long be remembered for environmental catastrophe. News of the oil spill came close on the heels of the Upper Big Branch coal mine explosion that killed 29 miners in West Virginia -- the nation's worst mining disaster in some four decades. In both cases, most of us couldn't help but wonder how things have gone so terribly wrong. How could corporate safeguards have failed so miserably? How could government regulators have been so feckless? As such questions linger, along comes "The Polluters," a remarkably timely, extensively researched and accessible book offering a fresh perspective as we search for answers.
Most works on U.S. environmental history begin with the watershed publication in 1962 of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring," the federal Clean Water Act of 1963 or perhaps the crescendo of public engagement on the issue that culminated in the first Earth Day in 1970 and the formation that year of the Environmental Protection Agency. But Benjamin Ross and Steven Amter, two scientists with a small environmental consultancy in Washington and an expansive interest in the history of pollution, take a different approach. Intrigued and presumably frustrated in their professional work by the gaps and limitations in current environmental regulation, the two spent the past decade delving into governmental and corporate archives to exhume the roots of today's environmental regulatory framework.
"The Polluters" documents with well-chosen detail how the chemical industry managed for decades -- since before the 1930s administration of Herbert Hoover -- to avoid and forestall federal environmental legislation despite the increasingly glaring need for it. We meet a rogues' gallery of stridently laissez faire industry executives aware of the pollution they are creating but allergic to federal oversight, along with craven and corrupt regulators unable or unwilling to protect the public.
The authors show how companies blocked the discovery of environmental problems associated with their products and practices, and how research that might have found these problems was "starved of funds." When alarming findings did emerge, such as the threat of lung disease from coal dust or the risk of cancer from vinyl chloride.
Most works on U.S. environmental history begin with the watershed publication in 1962 of Rachel Carson's "Silent Spring," the federal Clean Water Act of 1963 or perhaps the crescendo of public engagement on the issue that culminated in the first Earth Day in 1970 and the formation that year of the Environmental Protection Agency. But Benjamin Ross and Steven Amter, two scientists with a small environmental consultancy in Washington and an expansive interest in the history of pollution, take a different approach. Intrigued and presumably frustrated in their professional work by the gaps and limitations in current environmental regulation, the two spent the past decade delving into governmental and corporate archives to exhume the roots of today's environmental regulatory framework.
"The Polluters" documents with well-chosen detail how the chemical industry managed for decades -- since before the 1930s administration of Herbert Hoover -- to avoid and forestall federal environmental legislation despite the increasingly glaring need for it. We meet a rogues' gallery of stridently laissez faire industry executives aware of the pollution they are creating but allergic to federal oversight, along with craven and corrupt regulators unable or unwilling to protect the public.
The authors show how companies blocked the discovery of environmental problems associated with their products and practices, and how research that might have found these problems was "starved of funds." When alarming findings did emerge, such as the threat of lung disease from coal dust or the risk of cancer from vinyl chloride.
Saturday, 23 October 2010
Beef Industry Woes May Mean Poorer Meat
In this Great Plains ranching town, cowboys still lasso steers as part of their daily routine and cattle producers like Bob Sears still take pride in the long tradition of raising American beef.
But Sears and many other ranchers say the market for domestic meat has withered to the point where they often receive only a single reasonable bid for their animals - a trend that could eventually mean lesser-quality meat on dinner tables across the United States.
The struggle to get a competitive price, they say, is helping to push thousands of producers out of business and might put pressure on others to sell sicker, weaker cows with less tender, less flavorful meat and smaller rib-eyes, for example.
"When the marketplace is not profitable, the only recourse a producer has is to cut the cost and try to produce more pounds with less money," said Bill Bullard, chief executive officer at R-CALF USA, a Montana-based trade group that represents cattle producers.
The cash market for domestic beef has been declining slowly for years. But The Associated Press interviewed cattle producers in the nation's big ranching states who reported having no choice but to sell the vast majority of their cattle to one buyer.
Producers almost never criticize the industry's leading meatpackers because the companies are valued customers. An AP analysis of shipping logs and sales receipts confirmed their accounts.
"There's actually no market. You either give them to these guys, or you have no market," said Sears, who ran one of Nebraska's biggest feedlots until declaring bankruptcy in March.
The complaints have also drawn the interest of federal regulators, who are investigating possible antitrust violations in the meatpacking industry.
Sears and other cattle producers suspect meatpackers are quietly cooperating to keep prices low in an area that stretches from Kansas to Nebraska and South Dakota, the region that dominates U.S. cattle production.
But Sears and many other ranchers say the market for domestic meat has withered to the point where they often receive only a single reasonable bid for their animals - a trend that could eventually mean lesser-quality meat on dinner tables across the United States.
The struggle to get a competitive price, they say, is helping to push thousands of producers out of business and might put pressure on others to sell sicker, weaker cows with less tender, less flavorful meat and smaller rib-eyes, for example.
"When the marketplace is not profitable, the only recourse a producer has is to cut the cost and try to produce more pounds with less money," said Bill Bullard, chief executive officer at R-CALF USA, a Montana-based trade group that represents cattle producers.
The cash market for domestic beef has been declining slowly for years. But The Associated Press interviewed cattle producers in the nation's big ranching states who reported having no choice but to sell the vast majority of their cattle to one buyer.
Producers almost never criticize the industry's leading meatpackers because the companies are valued customers. An AP analysis of shipping logs and sales receipts confirmed their accounts.
"There's actually no market. You either give them to these guys, or you have no market," said Sears, who ran one of Nebraska's biggest feedlots until declaring bankruptcy in March.
The complaints have also drawn the interest of federal regulators, who are investigating possible antitrust violations in the meatpacking industry.
Sears and other cattle producers suspect meatpackers are quietly cooperating to keep prices low in an area that stretches from Kansas to Nebraska and South Dakota, the region that dominates U.S. cattle production.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
