While the FDA maintains that GMO ingredients are no more harmful than other ingredients CA residents have amassed enough signatures to get the ‘labeling’ law on their Nov. ballot…three cheers for them.
The FDA maintains that GMOs are innocent so to speak while there is a plethora of scientific evidence that condems them to the sewer, which in my opinion is where they figuratively belong. I simply can’t say enough, nor can anyone else, about the dangers these nasties impose on our health and environment.
When will we learn that you can’t have government agencies/politicians and the like funded by the very companies that need regulation in the worst kind of ways. One in particular comes to mind, Monsanto! Yes, I am one of the millions against Monsanto!
Let’s stay tuned to the vote in CA. The reasons being brought forth for not requiring labeling, beyond the stance that GMOs are safe, are the liklihood of frivolous lawsuits etc. I would ask you to define frivolous. While I am sure there could be some stupid lawsuits filed, I would also warrant that the majority would be bona fide!
These GMOs have been around far too long and have not only contaminated our ‘heirloom’ crops but have contaminated our entire political/judicial system! We can theoretically recover from the latter but no one can see a full recovery of the integrity of our crops!
Sad this is I say!
With Greece wanting out of the EC and further economic woes hitting all the ‘PIGGS’, some are reporting that the Euro has collapsed, at least unofficially.
A bit of background: MSM has reported that there have been huge capital outflows from Greece, in the billions per day and now Spain. It isn’t like this is just falling from the sky unannounced. Remember Ireland, Italy and Portugal all have been in the news with bailouts of some sort over the past year or two. The press has played this well, sort of like the frog in water who slowly dies as the water begins to heat up and boil.
Now it appears we might have hit critical mass with the problems in the EC. The Bailouts will continue to happen as we see more and more capital outflows, they will continue to get larger and larger as the liquidity issues mount. Much like the U.S. the ‘quantative easing(printing money) will be to infinity.
Which brings me to the point of this piece, as more money is printed and less and less economic activity there to back it up we will begin to see inflation hit the goods and services that we use on a daily basis. Moreover, the typical assets like real estate will most likely not enjoy such price inflation as no one will have the buying power to afford such purchases and without buyers prices will not rise as will prices in basic commodities, such as food and gas.
The governments are trying to fill the financial hole created by the banks and their insane lending and ‘betting'(read derivative) practices which have still not come to full force. We have been given a small insight into the destructive power of these instruments in the recent JP Morgan debacle, losing 2 billion in one 3 month period. There are trillion upon trillions of these dangerous bets floating around the world. When the music stops, we will all pay!
How can you prepare for this catastrophe should it come to pass (again many are saying that it is coming to pass right now!)?
I for one own some gold and silver, probably not enough but some. Many survivalists disagree with this strategy saying you can’t eat or drink the metals. I agree there but also see them as a short term solution to the things that I might need but haven’t seen that need yet. I do own quite a bit of storable foods, all organic, non-GMO foods that are high in nutrition. I urge everyone to educate themselves on the value of nutrition versus calories. Both are necessary but good nutrition is critical. Water is another necessity and I am fortunate enough to live very close to a river and own a gravity filter system to clean it up.
I hope everyone is somewhat prepared, if not physically mentally for what appears to be coming over the horizon. Stay Strong!
That aresenic is being seen in potentially higher concentrations in brown rice syrup does not surprise me in the least. Rice in general is know to contain arsenic in very low concentrations. Once you process anything, including rice, you can concentrate any bad stuff within the new processed product.
Thus our stance that the consumption of any processed product, especially a highly processed product such as brown rice syrups and such, is not a particularly good thing to do healthwise. Best to keep your diet to raw vegetables, lightly cooked if necessary, organic proteins and raw juices. That would be optimum. If you use that as the base of your diet and add a few processed products as possible you will be better off.
It is a razor’s edge and you must know yourself and just be aware of what you put into your body.
The article that came out today can be found by clicking here.
Mostly a PR stunt, although with good intentions, the push to reduce child obesity has very few teeth. I feel that the institutions that are responsible (yes large corporations vie daily to influence the RDA of foods etc that are introduced into our schools) for the foods in our schools are interested mostly in profits and have little regard for the health of our children.
In my opinion we need to focus more on nutrition and less on profitability. Source more fresh produce for local schools from local growers when possible. Take out the vending machines, do away with canned and processed foods offering ONLY ORGANIC FOODS AND NO GMOs!
Junk food widely available at U.S. elementary schools despite anti-obesity push
By Dina ElBoghdady, Published: February 6
Nearly half of elementary school children can buy junk food at school, a trend that contributes to the childhood obesity epidemic and underscores the need for federal regulation of school snacks, according to a study published Monday in a pediatric journal.
The study, funded by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, comes as federal regulators are crafting a proposal that would set new nutrition standards for foods and beverages sold in vending machines, snack bars and elsewhere in schools.
The proposal will not cover foods that are part of the federally subsidized school meal program. That program was revamped recently by the Obama administration and requires participating school cafeterias to start serving twice as many fruits and vegetables, more whole grains and less sodium and fat when the next school year begins.
Consumer advocates are hoping for an equally dramatic change in so-called “competitive foods” that are sold outside the school meal program. They say these foods, including potato chips and cookies, are widely available but barely regulated in schools.
Federal law bans only a small subset of competitive foods, such as sodas and certain types of candy, from being sold in cafeterias during mealtime. But those products are available to kids in other venues at school, even during lunch, according to the study, which was published in the Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine. Such foods also include sandwiches, pizza and other a la carte items that are not federally reimbursed.
“Really, it’s a very weak regulation at this point,” said Lindsey Turner, lead author of the study and a health psychologist at the University of Illinois at Chicago. “We’re at a time of transition and opportunity for these competitive foods.”
The study, based on mail-back surveys from about 3,900 public and private elementary schools nationwide, found that about half of the students could buy foods in one or more competitive venues during the 2009-10 school year. Access to these foods did not change significantly during the 2006-07 through 2009-10 school years.
The study highlighted “striking” regional differences. About 60 percent of public elementary school kids had access to sugary snacks in the South, where childhood obesity rates are the highest. This compares with 24 percent in the West and 30 percent in the Midwest. But fruits and vegetables also were more available in the South.
The study assessed only access to snacks, not consumption or the link to obesity. It cited a separate 2009 study, however, in the Journal of the American Dietetic Association showing that 29 percent of elementary school students consumed competitive foods, usually unhealthy ones. A separate study strongly linked the availability of unhealthy foods and drinks in competitive venues with greater calorie intake.
In early 2010, the American Beverage Association said that its members had voluntarily reduced the calories in drinks shipped to schools by 88 percent. Its members also stopped offering full-calorie soft drinks in elementary school vending machines.
Jim McCarthy, president of the Snack Food Association, said he had not seen this week’s study. But the group’s members, including Frito-Lay and Kraft, have been voluntarily reducing fats, sodium and sugars in their products for at least six years, he said. Last week, the chairman and highest-ranking Democrat on the House agriculture committee wrote a letter urging Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack to make sure that the final proposal is consistent with the standards set for the federally funded school meal program.
If you haven’t taken a look at the school menu lately you might want to have a look. Then ask yourself, honestly, is that a healthy way to eat…for anyone?
On January 31, 2012, a hearing on GMO’s was held in United States District Court for the Southern District of New York. On the evening news you often times see convicted former Wall Street financiers walking out of the doors of this courthouse in New York City. This court is the setting for a major legal battle which will impact all grain farmers in the United States.
The Organic Seed Growers and Trade Association squared off against Monsanto.
The case, at the moment, goes off on a legal issue of whether the organic farmers have standing to bring a declaratory judgment action against Monsanto. Simply, the question is whether the organic farmers have suffered harm which allows them to get their case before a court for a possible trial.
The case involves 96 plaintiffs claiming that “Society stands on the precipice of forever being bound to transgenic agriculture and transgenic food. Coexistence between transgenic seed and organic seed is impossible because transgenic seed contaminates and eventually overcomes organic seed.”
No big surprise, Rick Santorum’s stance on Health care with a profit motive is a bit off base, in my opinion.
Believe me folks I am no socialist/communist etc…I believe in free enterprise. However, the health care system (I am not a proponent of Obamacare either! Quite the opposite) as we know it today is broken and we must look at all potential components of this disaster.
In my opinion, the take over of our health care system by Wall Street is a huge factor is why it isn’t working. You can call that profit driven…in my opinion profits are not the culprit, AVARICE IS!
Wall Street doesn’t care about the citizens, only profits. Capitalism with Compassion is a good thing in this case folks…to drive our health care system based solely on the ability to make a ton of dough seems wrong to me as it reflects on who can get health care and the quality of same.
Change is required, period.
Santorum defends drug companies in health care speech
CNN’s Adam Aigner-Treworgy
Woodland Park, Colorado (CNN) – In what his campaign billed as a “major speech on health care,” Rick Santorum found himself Wednesday defending a profit-driven health care system to a woman who said her son requires expensive medication to stay alive.
The former Pennsylvania senator also detailed the deficiencies he sees in his rivals’ health insurance records.
Follow the Ticker on Twitter: @PoliticalTicker
One of the feistiest exchanges came in response to a young child’s question on the cost of medical care in America. Urged on by his mother, a boy asked what Santorum would do to lower medical costs, but before he could finish his question, the candidate said such things should be left up to the market.
“We can make medicine cheaper by using markets,” Santorum said. “That’s how you make medicine cheaper is that you have free people going out there and competing against each other and competition drives up quality and drives down costs.”
As Santorum was outlining his small-government, free-market approach to rising health care costs, another woman chimed in that she can no longer afford medication she desperately needs because the cost has become so exorbitant.
“The only reason new drugs are developed is because Americans actually do pay for the cost of that research,” Santorum said. “And so when you say oh, I’ll go and get my drugs in Canada, that’s great. Go get your drugs in Canada and if everybody did that, you’d have no new drugs. You have that drug and maybe you’re alive today because people have a profit motive to make that drug.”
Using a somewhat confusing metaphor, Santorum tried to explain the need for a profit motive by comparing health care consumption to technology consumption.
“People have no problem going out and buying an iPad for $900,” he said. “But paying $900 for a drug, they have a problem with it. It keeps you alive. Why? Because you have been conditioned to thinking that health care is something that you should get and not have to pay for. Drug companies, health care companies need to have a profit motive, because if they don’t, then how are we going to regulate costs? We are gonna ration care.”
The mother of the original questioner tried once more to plead her case, explaining that she’s paid $1.3 million a year to keep her son alive, and while she’s willing to go bankrupt for her child, it pains her to see his friends die in the hospital because their parents cannot afford the treatment.
Finding himself in the unenviable position of defending oft-derided drug companies, Santorum stuck to his guns.
“He’s alive today because drug companies thought that they would make money in providing that care and if the drug company didn’t think they could make any money by providing that care, I hate to put it in these terms, but that drug wouldn’t be here,” he said, adding that he sympathized with the mother, “we either believe in markets or we don’t.”
Asked by a reporter after the event about what alternatives people in such tough circumstances have, Santorum suggested that charity was a better option than government intervention.
“Even in the tough cases, even at the ones that pull at your heart strings, we’ve got to believe in people and markets and churches and families and charity instead of government, and that’s what I believe” he said.
Earlier in his remarks, while highlighting the similarities between the health care plan Mitt Romney passed in Massachusetts and the controversial plan passed by President Obama, Santorum came out against the widely-popular provision that requires insurance companies to offer plans regardless of preexisting conditions.
“I have family members who have preexisting conditions, and I’m not for preexisting condition clauses,” Santorum said.
To justify his position, he described a hypothetical situation wherein healthy Massachusetts residents opt not to buy insurance, instead paying a fine. Then when they get sick, they purchase insurance, immediately dropping it again once they get better.
“What happens to the cost of health insurance,” Santorum asked the crowd, many of whom answered that costs would rise. “There’s a reason for preexisting conditions clauses. You want people to get insurance, and if they don’t, then they shouldn’t be free riding on everybody else. That’s exactly what’s going to happen with Obamacare.”
Santorum said this similarity between “Obamacare” and “Romneycare” would mean that “Barack Obama, in a debate or in this election, is going to destroy Mitt Romney on the issue of health care.” Both plans are wrong, he argued, because both represent top-down management of an issue that should be left up to families.
I don’t have insurance and haven’t had for many years now and thank God I haven’t really required any for my kids or wife or myself. We try to live a healthier lifestyle from that promoted on TV…junk food, visual garbage and mindless chatter. Organic food, herbal supplements and exercise is a common theme around here.
I don’t deny that there are others that have had the misfortune of falling ill and requiring intensive western medical treatments and they are probably financially ruined, even with insurance. This is just one of the reasons we have to see a rational change in the system, our minds and hearts.
I hope that you ladies are aware that Heart Problems are just as common among Women as Men! The warning signs are virtually the same as for men and birth control pills can lead to heart/blood pressure issues as well.
If you think you have a family history and/or lifestyle that might indicate heart problems I would highly suggest that you take some preventive measures to mitigate any current and/or future problems.
I advocate a highly natural approach, combining herbs and proper foods known to reduce/mitigate issues. Hey even Dr. Oz is talking about these issues now and advocating natural treatments. Of course, if you are in a serious symptomatic condition go to the hospital or doctor. Western medicine can get you over an immediate crisis if necessary.
Don’t forget to excercise often. Cardio exercise, walking even, will definitely imporve your cardiac outlook!
Heart disease just as common in women
If you’re a woman, you may not believe you’re as vulnerable to a heart attack as men – but you are. In some instances, women may not notice the signs of heart attack. They may think that other health problems are causing their symptoms or that the symptoms will go away on their own. As a result, women don’t always receive medical care quickly enough to prevent complications or death from a heart attack.
Today, we know that heart disease affects as many women as men. In fact, heart disease is the number one cause of death in Canada for women over the age of 55 and almost as many women as men die from heart attacks.
To support you and your family in preventing or in managing heart disease, Agassiz Community Health, together with its partners, will be hosting a public information day on Tuesday, February 14 from 10 a.m. to 2 p.m. at the District of Kent Fitness/Activity Centre located at 6660 Pioneer Avenue in Agassiz. You will be able to have your blood pressure tested, observe exercise classes in session, have access to advice from health professionals, and gather important information to take home and read.
Not too long ago, heart disease was considered predominantly a man’s disease. Men were the breadwinners and their hard work sometimes led to chest pain and heart attacks. Women, on the other hand, had “female problems” and heart disease was not one of them. Symptoms reported by women that would have been considered signs of heart disease in men were often dismissed as meaningless or even fictitious. As a consequence, until recently, research on heart disease focused mainly on men.
From those studies emerged the “classic” symptoms of heart attack: chest pain (a painful, crushing feeling behind the breastbone), tingling down the arm (usually the left arm), accompanied by shortness of breath, sweating, nausea indigestion-like symptoms and clammy skin.
In the past, it was believed that women and men had different warning signs of heart attack. This may not be the case. Both women and men may experience typical or non-typical symptoms such as pain in the arm, throat, jaw or pain that is unusual, pain that may feel like burning, squeezing, heaviness, tightness or pressure, difficulty breathing, nausea, vomiting, sweating, fear, anxiety, and denial. Although women may describe their pain differently from men, nevertheless, the most common symptom in women and men is still chest pain.
So what puts women at risk for heart disease and heart attacks? Some of the risk factors like age, gender, family history of heart disease, or ethnicity cannot be controlled. But, there are risk factors like high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, diabetes, being overweight, excessive alcohol consumption, lack of exercise, smoking, and stress which can be controlled.
While these risk factors are the same as those for men, there are unique aspects related to women’s heart health:
• Role of estrogen — During a woman’s reproductive life cycle, about age 12 to 50, the naturally-occurring hormone estrogen provides a protective effect on women’s cardiovascular health. However, estrogen’s protective effect can change depending on a variety of factors.
• Birth control pills — In a small percentage of women, oral contraceptives increase the risk of high blood pressure and blood clots. This risk is increased by smoking and other existing risk factors.
• Pregnancy — Over the nine months of gestation, women may develop certain conditions like pre-eclampsia and gestational diabetes that might put them at higher risk of heart disease.
• Menopause — The overall risk of heart disease may increase due to the reduction of the hormones estrogen and progesterone produced by the body.
• Cholesterol — After menopause, as natural estrogen levels drop, more and more women tend to develop high cholesterol.
• Triglycerides — They are the most common type of fat in the body. A high triglyceride level often goes with higher levels of total cholesterol and LDL (“bad” cholesterol), lower levels of HDL (“good” cholesterol) and an increased risk of diabetes. Research suggests that having high triglycerides may increase the risk of heart disease.
For women, knowing about the risks of heart disease and recognizing the signs of a heart attack is critical. But, what is even more important is understanding that you can take steps to prevent heart disease. That means eliminating – or at least – minimizing the risk factors you can control by stopping smoking, becoming physically active, eating a diet rich in fruits and vegetables, maintaining a healthy weight, controlling diabetes, high blood pressure and cholesterol levels, and following your doctor’s recommendations.
Some women believe that making just one healthy change will take care of all of their heart disease risk. To protect your heart, it is vital to make changes that address each risk factor you have – each has the individual potential to greatly increase a woman’s chance of developing heart disease. You can make the changes gradually, one at a time. But making them is very important. The take-away message? Be aware of your risk factors and take them seriously. The actions you take now to lower your risk may just save your life.
– Submitted by Agassiz Community Health
You might try the Enerfood, Heart toner and some other food and herbal based products offered by EnerHealth botanicals!
Well what can I say? We have been telling everyone for years that sugar is not a good substance to put in your bodya and now the Univ. of CA is saying it should be as highly regulated as alcohol. Perhaps a bit of a stretch on the regulation end of it, but the fact is that the stuff is toxic to your body.
If people just stopped consuming anything with sugar, aspartame, high fructose corn syrup as ingredients just imagine the changes we would see. I predict that physical maladies of all kinds would drop dramatically, thus reducing health care costs and we would then not even need a ‘National Health Care’ system….miraculous it would be!
The article below came from Yahoo news…
Sugar Should Be Regulated As Toxin, Researchers Say
LiveScience.comBy Christopher Wanjek | LiveScience.com – Wed, Feb 1, 2012
A spoonful of sugar might make the medicine go down. But it also makes blood pressure and cholesterol go up, along with your risk for liver failure, obesity, heart disease and diabetes.
Sugar and other sweeteners are, in fact, so toxic to the human body that they should be regulated as strictly as alcohol by governments worldwide, according to a commentary in the current issue of the journal Nature by researchers at the University of California, San Francisco (UCSF).
The researchers propose regulations such as taxing all foods and drinks that include added sugar, banning sales in or near schools and placing age limits on purchases.
Although the commentary might seem straight out of the Journal of Ideas That Will Never Fly, the researchers cite numerous studies and statistics to make their case that added sugar — or, more specifically, sucrose, an even mix of glucose and fructose found in high-fructose corn syrup and in table sugar made from sugar cane and sugar beets — has been as detrimental to society as alcohol and tobacco.
Sour words about sugar
The background is well-known: In the United States, more than two-thirds of the population is overweight, and half of them are obese. About 80 percent of those who are obese will have diabetes or metabolic disorders and will have shortened lives, according to the UCSF authors of the commentary, led by Robert Lustig. And about 75 percent of U.S. health-care dollars are spent on diet-related diseases, the authors said.
Worldwide, the obese now greatly outnumber the undernourished, according to the World Health Organization. Obesity is a public health problem in most countries. And chronic diseases related to diet such as heart diseases, diabetes and some cancers — for the first time in human history — kill more people than infectious diseases, according to the United Nations.
Less known, and still debated, is sugar’s role in the obesity and chronic disease pandemic. From an evolutionary perceptive, sugar in the form of fruit was available only a few months of the year, at harvest time, the UCSF researchers said. Similarly, honey was guarded by bees and therefore was a treat, not a dietary staple. [6 Easy Ways to Eat More Fruits & Veggies]
Today, added sugar, as opposed to natural sugars found in fruits, is often added in foods ranging from soup to soda. Americans consume on average more than 600 calories per day from added sugar, equivalent to a whopping 40 teaspoons. “Nature made sugar hard to get; man made it easy,” the researchers write.
Many researchers are seeing sugar as not just “empty calories,” but rather a chemical that becomes toxic in excess. At issue is the fact that glucose from complex carbohydrates, such as whole grains, is safely metabolized by cells throughout the body, but the fructose element of sugar is metabolized primarily by the liver. This is where the trouble can begin — taxing the liver, causing fatty liver disease, and ultimately leading to insulin resistance, the underlying causes of obesity and diabetes.
Added sugar, more so than the fructose in fiber-rich fruit, hits the liver more directly and can cause more damage — in laboratory rodents, anyway. Some researchers, however, remained unconvinced of the evidence of sugar’s toxic effect on the human body at current consumption levels, as high as they are.
Economists to the rescue
Lustig, a medical doctor in UCSF’s Department of Pediatrics, compares added sugar to tobacco and alcohol (coincidentally made from sugar) in that it is addictive, toxic and has a negative impact on society, thus meeting established public health criteria for regulation. Lustig advocates a consumer tax on any product with added sugar.
Among Lustig’s more radical proposals are to ban the sale of sugary drinks to children under age 17 and to tighten zoning laws for the sale of sugary beverages and snacks around schools and in low-income areas plagued by obesity, analogous to alcoholism and alcohol regulation.
Economists, however, debate as to whether a consumer tax — such as a soda tax proposed in many U.S. states — is the most effective means of curbing sugar consumption. Economists at Iowa State University led by John Beghin suggest taxing the sweetener itself at the manufacturer level, not the end product containing sugar.
This concept, published last year in the journal Contemporary Economic Policy, would give companies an incentive to add less sweetener to their products. After all, high-fructose corn syrup is ubiquitous in food in part because it is so cheap and serves as a convenient substitute for more high-quality ingredients, such as fresher vegetables in processed foods.
Some researchers argue that saturated fat, not sugar, is the root cause of obesity and chronic disease. Others argue that it is highly processed foods with simple carbohydrates. Still others argue that it is a lack of physical exercise. It could, of course, be a matter of all these issues.
Christopher Wanjek is the author of the books “Bad Medicine” and “Food At Work.” His column, Bad Medicine, appears regularly on LiveScience.
My advice is to just stop consuming anything that looks like sugar…try natural, uncooked/unfiltered honey or Coconut Palm Sugar…these should work as well and have some health benefits to boot!
The question is who will grow our food for the next generations? With factory farms creating high barriers to entry, will our family farms just completely die? It is more and more difficult for young people to enter the agricultural arena! Watch and Pass It On: Who Will Grow Food for Future Generations? September 2nd, 2011 To create a revitalized, healthier, and safer U.S. food and farm system we need to cultivate a new generation of farmers and ranchers – and quickly. The current farm population is aging rapidly, and while there are many people that want to farm and ranch they face tremendous obstacles entering this field. In the coming weeks NSAC will be joining members of Congress and other farm groups in introducing a new Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act. This is an extraordinary opportunity to break down barriers to entry and give real support to aspiring farmers across this nation. Watch this new NSAC video, pass it on, and sign up to take action!
This new FEMA commercial is great and alarming. On the one hand it is urging you to be prepared and on the other you have to wonder why it is coming out now…
Is there something coming that ‘they’ don’t want to tell you about? ‘They’ just want to urge you to be prepared, I doubt that. There is something coming and ‘they’ know it!
Don’t be left behind! EnerHealth Botanicals has some great organic storable food and other nutrition products as well as herbal remedies that can make the difference in your life should you come face to face with a survival situation!
Check out the video
Commercial continued: As the small family walks out the door with their grab n go bag, they are met at the sidewalk by ‘FEMA’ trucks (deuce and a halves) staffed by the U.S. military armed with semi automatic weapons ‘ready’ to escort you to a ‘FEMA’ camp…and the small family is so happy to have been ‘SAVED’!!!