the unknowing victims

It is one thing, as an adult, to eat unhealthfully.

I figure you are of an age where you can make a decision for yourself on what you choose to put in your body. However, I also believe, by doing so, you give big food companies carte blanche to put whatever they what in that food because.  You are making a ‘vote’ by spending money on a Big Mac or a Coke or Crispy Creme.  If you aren’t going to hold them accountable by not speaking up, that is your choice.  You are an adult human and I trust you to make a decision for yourself.

I do not, and will never, believe the same thing for a child.

A child is completely dependent on its parent to make a wise and safe choice for its well-being.  I also feel it is the responsibility of a company to make good choices when they are creating convenient food, marketed to a parent, for the betterment of their children.

Sadly, a list came out today that makes it seem as though at least some companies have no care for the health of our children.

Dietitians Name Five Worst Packaged Kids Meals via the Cancer Project

The thing that is upsetting is that Lunchables, the dominant force in convenient school kids meals, tops the list.

Lunchables Maxed Out Ham and Cheddar Cracker Combo topped the list because it has 22 grams of fat, 50 milligrams of cholesterol, and 1,600 milligrams of sodium—more salt than younger children should consume in an entire day.

The report found that most packaged lunchbox meals have little or no fiber and are high in fat, sugar, sodium, and cholesterol. Many also contain processed meats, which are linked to increased cancer risk later in life.

And while these foods may be convenient, they are foods that are hard on your child’s body.  Currenty, the United States sees a 60% obesity rate in children and “adult onset diabetes” is being seen in children as young as eight.

I know that it may be hard to find the time to make a lunch.  Or, maybe your child is a picky eater.  I don’t know what the various reason may be.  But, I do know that I find it hard to justify giving your kids a meal that may cause long term health problems.  A parents job is to create an environment where their children are well taken care of, not subjected to disease and malnuriishment for the rest of their lives.

Children are the victims of the bad decisions parents are making, around the country.  I fully believe that if we want to create a sustainable future, we have to stop this behavior of performing a genocide on our youth.  Even if we, as a species, are able to survive and adapt to changes in the weather, are we going to have individuals that are healthy enough to reproduce and provide for the next generations.

by Shelley Boyle

397

That is the current level of CO2 in the arctic atmosphere.
Early last year, James Hansen from NASA told us all that we had to be at 350.  Pre-industrial levels were 280.  What are we doing wrong? And, when are people going to figure this out.

“It is not the level of CO₂ that is the problem, because the earth will adapt. What is very worrying is the speed of change. Levels [here] are now increasing 2-3ppm a year.

“The rate of increase is much faster than only 10-20 years ago. You can almost see the changes taking place. Never before have CO₂ levels increased so fast,” he said.

The global annual mean growth rate for 2007 was 2.14ppm – the fourth year in the past six to see an annual rise greater than 2ppm. From 1970 to 2000, the concentration rose by about 1.5ppm each year, but since 2000 it has risen to an average 2.1ppm.

I think this is an important time to bring up rates of evolution as compared to rates of environmental change.

The Industrial Revolution started int he late 1800′s, really taking off in the early 1900′s.  So let’s say.. and to be generous… 150 years?  It has taken us 150 years to increase the CO2 in our atmosphere by 100+ppm.

With that change, we have seen ice caps melting, animal extinction, sea level rising, increased temperature, drought, snow storms… essentially a complete destabilization of the climate.

In contrast… DNA evidence indicates that modern humans originated 200,000 years ago.  We diverged from Homo sapiens neanderthalensis approximately 500,000 years ago.  What I am trying to clarify is that human evolution occurs over multiple reproductive generations.  For a genetic mutation to be expressed in a population to show a complete adaptation to an environmental change takes thousands of years.  Tens of thousands of years.

Why would an intelligent Homo sapien sapien…. you or even your child… think that we could easily adapt to the changes of the planet?  The quote above is accurate… “the earth will adapt”. The probability that modern humans and this society will continue is actually quite low.  Quite low.

For another perspective on this same subject… may I please invite you to go HERE for a compelling essay.

bearing the burden

I do not have the answer for how to fix this.  And, that is the sad, unfortunate truth of much of what I write.

We have created a society where it is valued to smear products on our face, put chemicals in our food and homes, and where we walk through god knows what being emitted from business and cars.  As a result, our bodies get beaten up by this stuff.

Over the last few years, a group of women gave blood samples to determine the amounts of chemicals the body stores from exposure.  The thing that is important to know about these women is that they all work for various environmental agencies.  The significance is that these women, we can assume, are aware of toxic exposure in face products, make-up, non-organic foods, etc., and probably try very hard to stay away from those ingredients.  However, each of these women had anywhere from 25-45 foreign chemicals in their bloodstream.

Can you imagine what is in the blood stream of someone who is unaware?  Imagine the person who is heavily marketed to by various corporations.  Or, imagine the low income worker who is trying to scrape by a living and doesn’t have the priveledge of trying to stay away from this stuff.  And, then imagine a society that then will not give them healthcare when they get disease after disease from exposure.

It really is a shame.  The only thing we can do is stop using certain products ourselves and try to educate and advocate for as many people as possible so these chemcials are illeminated from the mainstream consumer goods.

good information about the flu, from cdc

This at least seems valid and sound.

I know we are all done with this flu…. we are all sick of hearing about it.  Even the media is moving onto more attention grabbing topics.

I wanted to draw your attention to this interview through Grist.  Not only is it from someone that seems rational but it confirms what the media is not telling you: that, yes, indeed, this has its genetic origins in the grand old U.S. of A.

HERE is the interview.

it’s not just the food that is bad

It seems it may be in the wrapper, too.

There is a class of chemical called C8 or PFOA (perfluorooctanoic acid) which is used in some manufacturing processes and has been found in items like stain resistant carpeting and cookware.  It has been found in the bloodstream of peoples living in the areas which it is made and is known to cause a host of issues like cancer and infertility.

This has always been seen as a problem only to those people who have worked or lived by DuPont plants, as they are the primary manufacturer.  Because of the chemical being seen in large groups of people outside that area, scientists took a look to see where else it may be coming from.  And, they found out.

The chemical is used in the production of food wrappers, which is then leached into the food you eat, according to the Charleston Gazette.

Previous research by Tim Begley of the U.S. Food and Drug Administration found that chemicals used to make food wrappers grease proof could migrate into some foods.

The new study examined a group of chemicals called polyfluoroalkyl phosphoric acid diesters, or diPAPs, which are used in food wrapper coatings.

Researchers found the chemicals in the low-parts per billion range, providing a much clearer link between consumer products and human exposure.

Obviously, I feel this is just one more reason to stay away from fast food, or other such items.  Although, not as prevalent as Bisphenol-A or phthalates, this is still a chemical that causes irreprable damage to the body.  More studies will be conducted, and you can be sure a marketing campaign for DuPont will ignite touting the benefits fo PFOA…. in the meantime, you might want to be wary of what your food comes in.

nafta may allow for toxic pesticide

For months there has been extensive research and findings on hormone altering chemicals.  Whether we are talking about Bisphenol-A, phthalates, or any other endocrine disrupting chemical, they are all dangerous and they are all affecting our children, and more than that, our male children.

Canada has been a leader in banning these chemicals from being used in products.  But one such ban is causing legal issues that I think no one was quite expecting.  

Quebec has placed a ban on a common pesticide, 2,4-D, made by Dow Chemical.  In response, Dow is suing Quebec under the North American Free Trade Agreement and asking for millions of dollars in damages, according to Miller-McCune.  Dow claims that “the ban lacks scientific support and amounts to an “expropriation” of its business in the province (several Dow products contain 2,4-D).”

There are many legal complications to this case.  For example, at one time, every country found no proof of harm being caused by these chemicals and do those studies count as equally as the current studies which are conclusively finding the opposite to be true.  And, then there is another dilemma, does NAFTA override what a country’s elected officials vote on.  

This is a case that will determine future rules, regulations, and authority amongst countries to determine what is right for its people.  Its criticality is immeasurable.

paradox lost

Many of the climate change deniers point to the Antarctic to prove their point.  You see, it is actually having an ice increase, while the arctic is suffering its worse losses.  So, John Turner of the British Antarctic Survey has set his sights on figuring out why this may be the case.  

And, in an ironic twist, it seems the hole in the ozone is the culprit… but it isn’t going to last. Weather patterns in the Antarctic have changed due to the hole as a result warmer air is blowing over the western part of the continent and colder air is on the east.

this makes me sad

I don’t know about you, but when I was growing up the scariest thing I had to worry about was earthworms on the ground by the jungle gym.  Or maybe, if there were a smog alert and I wouldn’t be able to go play in the pool.

We had is easy.

Kids nowadays…. well, this report just makes me sad:

No Kidding, One in Three Children Fear Earth Apocalypse, via TreeHugger

 

There’s a new bogeyman lurking in the closet, and this one isn’t imaginary. Us. One out of three children aged 6 to 11 fears that Ma Earth won’t exist when they grow up, while more than half—56 percent—worry that the planet will be a blasted heath (or at least avery unpleasant place to live), according to a new survey.

Commissioned by Habitat Heroes and conducted by Opinion Research, the telephone survey polled a national sample of 500 American preteens—250 males and 250 females.

On a sliding scale of anxieties, minority kids have it worst; 75 percent of black children and 65 percent of Hispanic children believe that the planet will be irrevocably damaged by the time they reach adulthood.

Can you imagine?  I can only think it is awful to feel that scared about your future and then have to be dependent on your parents to turn it around for you.  Most parents worry about grounding their kids and what impression that will leave…I laugh at the thought of some kid in therapy 30 years from now saying… “if only they had saved the world”… 

 

But seriously, guys…. if only we would save the world

as if they aren’t bother some enough

So, you just get to your desk, whether at home or work.  You open up your email to see that you have 22 new messages… and, then you see that 15 of them are span and you have to go through the process of delete, delete…. de… lete.

It is annoying and a waste of time.  

But there are indications that it is also a harm on our planet, according to The San Francisco Chronicle:

 

A report being released Wednesday by security company McAfee Inc. finds that spammers are a scourge to your inbox and the environment, generating an astounding 62 trillion junk e-mails in 2008 that wasted enough electricity to power 2.4 million U.S. homes for a year.

The “Carbon Footprint of E-mail Spam Report” estimated the computational power needed to process spam — from criminals tapping their armies of infected PCs to send it, Internet providers transmitting it, and end users viewing and deleting it.

The report concluded that the electricity needed to process a single spam message results in 0.3 grams of carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere — the equivalent of driving 3 feet in a car.

So, the next time you get spam… just get more mad thinking that the energy could have been used to power your home.  oh. well.

two things about the ocean

So first, comes a report that if we continue to burn fossil fuels at our current rate, the acidification of the ocean is a certainty and a “planet changer“.  One reason is because the coral life is expected to die off within the half century.

The ocean absorbs about 1/4 of the CO2 released into the atmosphere by human activities each year, which tempers the effect of this greenhouse gas on our climate. Carbonic acid is formed when the CO2 is dissolved in the seawater, which lowers the pH (increases the acidity). An acidic ocean reduces the rate at which corals can produce their skeletons and at which other marine organisms can build their shells. And so many other marine organisms are affected by anything that takes a toll on the corals. It’s estimated that the global economy based on coral (and other related marine life) is about $16 trillion per year.

On the heels of that report, comes this report where the EPA is looking into the idea that ocean acidification is a violation of the Clean Water Act.

 

The United States Environmental Protection Agencyannounced steps to protect U.S. waters from the threat of ocean acidification under the Clean Water Act. Today, EPA issued a notice of data availability to be published in the Federal Register that calls for information and data on ocean acidification that the agency will use to evaluate water-quality criteria under the Clean Water Act.

The notice responded to a formal petition and threatened litigation from the Center for Biological Diversity that sought to compel the agency to impose stricter pH criteria for ocean water quality and publish guidance to help states protect American waters from ocean acidification. EPA’s notice marks the first time that the Clean Water Act will be invoked by the agency to address ocean acidification.

“Ocean acidification is likely the greatest threat to the health of our oceans and is occurring at a frightening rate,” said Miyoko Sakashita, an attorney with the Center for Biological Diversity’s oceans program. “The federal government has finally acknowledged that ocean acidification is a threat; now it must take the next step and fully implement the Clean Water Act to protect our nation’s waters from ”the other CO2 problem.”

 

All I want to say about this is that this is BIG, HUGE news.  Can you imagine if they find it is in violation and the limitations and restirictions that will then be enforced by everyone from big corporations to the US Navy.  

I like this Lisa Jackson….

« Previous Page — Next Page »