Top Five Reasons Why I Won't be at the State Fair this Year: for Blog Action Day

By Marcie Barnes

Today is blog action day and also opening day for the North Carolina State Fair. Since the theme for blog action day 2009 is "climate change" and the theme for the state fair this year is "a whole lotta happy" - I would like to point out how climate change makes me a whole lotta sad, and how big agriculture in America, and at the state fair, has totally taken over, for the worse.

I wrote a post a couple years ago about the fair expressing my concern over the - unhealthiness of it all mostly for people - here I'll try to concentrate on how unhealthy it is for the planet.

#5: Lack of places to recycle: On the state fair's Green NC page, they admit that the fair "has some work to do before [it] can be a truly 'green' event." They then go on to boast about the four, yes, a whopping four recycling stations that appeared at the fair for the first time last year. By the way, throwing aluminum cans in the trash has been illegal in NC since 1991 and apparently 2008 was the first fair in more than ten years where recycling bins were available for the public to use. What in the world happened? In any case, there should be a place to recycle next to each and every trash can. This fair brochure (.pdf) says there are 500 trash cans, and only four recycle centers? People are waaay too lazy to seek out recycle centers, even if they do care, if you make it 125x easier to toss in the trash. How about retrofitting 250 of those trash cans into recycle cans?

#4: Deep fried, everything: It's even the name of the state fair's blog. OK, I know people love fried, but really, do you have to promote it? With heart disease and stroke being the biggest killers of Americans, isn't it about time to stop promoting foods that clearly play a role in such diseases? Just around the corner there are hundreds of local farmers showing off their livestock and produce, but where is the booth where I can buy some of their apples and pumpkin pie? (And I mean out in the open, not tucked away in a building or specialty tent. Why don't they get the prime spots?) According to the video on this page there are just shy of 500 "commercial vendors" at the fair, and they are looking for more "unique" vendors. How about inviting your farmers to provide us with local NC snacks, instead of looking for the next most unhealthy thing on a stick? Oh, and what does this have to do with climate change? A lot. Giving space to the big fair-traveling vendors from all over the country only adds to pollution, and the entire "big ag" food system is a huge contributor to global warming, especially meat production.

#3: Crowds: I have to admit, Iím a bit claustrophobic. In 2005 I literally had a panic attack when the crowd got extremely thick around sundown. I think it was probably a factor of the daytime people and the nighttime crowd all being there at the same time. I decided to look into the attendance figures over the years to see how much the fair has grown. Well, according to their own numbers...not very much.

Here is a chart I made plotting population growth numbers from 1980-present for NC, Wake County, and the state fair: (red line: NC blue line: fair green line: Wake County)

Then, I took the NC population data out so you could get a close-up look at an odd trend:

(blue line: fair green line: Wake County)

Apparently, the population of Wake County has nearly tripled, while the state fair attendance numbers have not even gotten close to doubling. In addition, the total "population" of the fair used to be double that of Wake County, and now they are about the same. At the same time, the total population of the state has increased by three million. Anyone else find that odd? In any case, I appreciate that the fairgrounds were recently expanded to help alleviate crowding, but I don't have any desire to get caught in another squishy and potentially dangerous situation. I spoke to someone at the Raleigh Fire Marshal's office to ask about the occupancy limits for the outdoor areas of the fair, and was told they have no jurisdiction because it's on state property. I am waiting to hear back from the NC Fire Marshal's office on this, and will update when I have more information. What does this have to do with climate change? Well, ok, it's mostly about safety but also the ramifications of an event so large, all the people driving to it, and the pollution and trash it creates.

#2: Rides / electricity usage: I didn't even bother to ask how much electricity the state fair uses each year, but it's got to be a huge amount. In an area where our power company gets a percentage of its power from coal sourced from mountain top removal, I just can't justify taking a joy ride powered by coal operations that have clogged and polluted towns in the mountains and also not so far away from Raleigh.

#1: Chickens, pigs, and cows - oh my: Another disclosure: I'm a vegetarian. But my husband and son still eat some meat. Not so much after seeing the documentary Food, Inc. You see, nearly all food in grocery stores, most restaurants, and foodservice trucks come from a giant food system designed to get your food to you as cheaply as possible, and in large part, due to the government subsidies on corn and fuel. What's wrong with that? When it comes to animals, including poultry, beef and pork (a huge polluting industry in NC) - you can rest assured that those animals were raised in very confined spaces, generally treated poorly, loaded with antibiotics to keep them from getting sick due to the poor nature of their diets (almost always corn to fatten them in the cheapest way possible), possibly suffering injury and physical mutilation by other animals or the farmer (in attempt to stop some behaviors going on due to the crowding), slaughtered and processed on a fast-moving assembly line manned by cheap (and yes, many illegal) workers. These kinds of operations cause all kinds of pollution in addition to all the air pollution from the transport of animals from 'farm' to slaughter to processing to distribution to store shelf.

Yes, the fair has a lot of "work to do before [it] can be a truly 'green' event." Getting local farmers into the vendor mix would be a huge step towards alleviating some of these problems, along with some serious energy conservation measures and movement towards clean energy sources.

I've been going to the state fair every year since I was a young girl. I'd really love to see it return to an event that truly is about NC farms, not big agriculture.

Mass Pollution & Illegal Pig Slaughtering Compliments of Smithfield Foods

By Marcie Barnes

**See update/edit after 4th paragraph regarding pig slaughter method.**

I'm not going to get into a lot of detail about why I've never been able to stomach pork very well. And I'm not going to preach to those of you who eat it. Instead I'm going to ask you to carefully consider what it is that you are putting in your mouth and how your dollars spent on this factory-farmed product impact the environment and your health.

This 2006 article from Rolling Stone sums up all of Smithfield Foods' dirty little secrets quite well. The subtitle tells us that "America's top pork producer churns out a sea of waste that has destroyed rivers, killed millions of fish and generated one of the largest fines in EPA history. Welcome to the dark side of the other white meat."

And as I suspected, the Chairman of Smithfield Foods, according to the article, is reaping the benefits in his "multimillion-dollar condo on Park Avenue in Manhattan and conveys himself about the planet in a corporate jet and a private yacht." (The article also notes that "the 500,000 pigs at a single Smithfield subsidiary in Utah generate more fecal matter each year than the 1.5 million inhabitants of Manhattan.")

If that's not disturbing enough, I realized after watching the documentary film Food, Inc. (please follow that link and search for showtimes near you) that they are slaughtering their pigs in an illegal manner -- at least at the Tar Heel, NC slaughterhouse where a worker filmed undercover footage for the documentary. (The Tar Heel facility is the largest slaughterhouse in the world, by the way). What appeared to be groups of a dozen or so pigs crushed to death by machine (which was the same observation made in this movie review) is a far cry from the terms of the Humane Slaughter Act of 1958.

**Update: I just got off the phone with a USDA official here in NC and he said they are not crushing the pigs, but rather containing them in a CO2 "tank" and it's the CO2 that kills them, although he admits it still "hurts" (he's apparently accidently gotten a lungful before). He also said there is an inspector whose sole job is "humane slaughtering" - he inspects that facility - asked to speak to him as well - and I am waiting for his call. Stay tuned.** 28JUL09

From the Wikipedia entry: "According to the law, animals should be stunned into unconsciousness prior to their slaughter to ensure a quick, relatively painless death." The pigs in the footage I saw were clearly, awake, walking, and "terrified" according to movie reviewer Brian Clark Howard.

Just last year, an undercover People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) investigator filmed a Sampson County employee mistreating pigs at another slaughterhouse. Consequently, the worker was charged with 6 counts of animal cruelty. What, I wonder, is the penalty for crushing approximately 35,000 pigs to death every day, possibly since 1992?

What you can do: Stop purchasing factory-farmed meat. This is found in fast food, most restaurants, and in most of the packaged meats in grocery stores. Instead, vote with your dollars by supporting local farmers who treat their livestock humanely. I just found this local, grass-fed ground beef at WholeFoods for $4.99/lb - which meant my husband's burger meat cost a whopping $1.75:

If you still think it's too expensive, simply cut your meat consumption by 1/3 or more and you'll be doing your body and the environment a big favor.

From the USDA's guidelines: "The gas must be administered in a way that produces surgical anesthesia quickly and calmly, with a minimum of excitement and discomfort to the animals"

Is that really what is happening? Send messages to:
Smithfield: http://www.smithfieldfoods.com/contact
Their rep, Paula Deen: @Paula_Deen (on twitter)
PETA: http://www.peta.org/about/c-report_cruelty.asp (The Smithfield plant is on Hwy 87W in Tar Heel, NC)

HFCS at WholeFoods? Say it Ain't So!

By Marcie Barnes

One of the things I really like about Whole Foods and other stores like it is the fact that I don't have to do so much label-reading.

I admit after some searching I find I am not the first person to make this discovery. But how many also had the general impression that there were no HFCS (High-fructose corn syrup) products at Whole Foods?

I knew that Earth Fare had a non-HFCS policy. Unfortunately, I assumed Whole Foods did as well. A huge benefit, for me at least, in shopping in these earth and health-friendly stores is the comfort in knowing they choose to sell products good for us, and the planet.

I could not find such a policy on Whole Foods' site, someone please point me there if there is one. I did find this tweet, however, that explains "none of our 365 products contain HFCS and only a small % of our branded products do, unlike in other stores."

Other tweets explain that "HFCS isn't on our unacceptable ingredient list, but you'll still find it's the exception, not the convention in our stores."

Here is what I found:



This is a shrimp tray, with cocktail sauce included. The HFCS (and more corn syrup later) is in the sauce. What baffles me, in part, is why it seems that the cocktail sauce was portioned out from a bottled shelf brand that has HFCS, when there is an organic 365 brand available without HFCS. Furthermore, I think it might be even simpler (and cheaper) for the kitchen to mix some 365 organic ketchup with a little grated horseradish, and voila! Cocktail sauce.

Don't get me wrong, I love Whole Foods (I was actually there a couple days ago because I was in a bad mood and being there cheers me up :)) I just find it odd that they (my local Cary, NC store, by the way) would package up some shrimp with HFCS sauce and showcase it in the seafood section.

I was actually curious about Whole Foods non-top ranking in Greenpeace's recent Seafood Scorecard report. More on that coming up. Stay tuned.

What do you think? Should HFCS be on the unacceptable list at Whole Foods? I think so, especially considering recent news regarding mercury in HFCS.

Main photo credit goes to boeke on Flicker. Shrimp photo is mine.

Yes! President Obama's Ocean Policy & Much News on Global Warming

By Marcie Barnes

What's Going On

I joined twitter in February. I've been following a lot of "green" people, groups, and organizations. Yesterday, I was in a really down mood after watching the film HOME on youtube (what a beautiful film, with a great ending - please set aside an hour and a half to watch it!). It was just hard to watch the beauty and life on this earth being destroyed by man.

Today, I was delighted to see tweet after tweet about our government, our people, our leader -- all working together to reverse this horrible problem!

Now, what I'm talking about is a general problem with pollution and general disregard for the Earth by humans, coupled with the whole global warming crisis. Now for those of you still caught in "global warming denial," this is the way I look at it: let's just go ahead and say that humans are not causing global warming. Fine. I've been watching footage of icecaps melting (both inland and at the poles) and if we start to lose the hundreds or thousands of species that live in these areas, it quite frankly could be the beginning of the destruction of the food chain and loss of a beautiful part of our ecosystem as well. Who cares what the cause is? We need to do all we can to reverse the problem, and hey, let's try reducing "industrial age emissions" just in case.

In my last post I was happy to receive a comment from Anthony Pickles, a Web Editor for the documentary The End of the Line. Please take a moment to watch the trailer on their website and make a pledge to only eat seafood that isn't harming the earth, threatening species, or hurting you!

Twitter gem #1 comes from planetgreen.discovery.com - news about President Obama's Ocean Policy, which is a "soon-to-be-crafted, first-ever national ocean policy that will sustainably manage our country’s oceans" ~~~~hallelujah~~~~! The article suggests that you hop on over to the White House web site and send Mr. Obama a thank you note.

Next gem comes from worldwildlife.org -- an interactive climate map and summary of the "The U.S. Global Change Research Program report “Global Climate Change Impacts in the United States." One of the most striking conclusions from this report is this: "Threats to human health will increase. Health impacts of climate change are related to heat stress, waterborne diseases, poor air quality, extreme weather events, and diseases transmitted by insects and rodents."

What You Can Do

1) The Natural Resources Defense Council has a handy-dandy online form you can use to automatically send a message to your lawmakers. This one is specifically in reference to the American Clean Energy and Security Act. Go here, now, fill out the form, and send.

2) Sandy at Green Eco Voice posted an excellent summary of what the average person can do to help. My favorite part: "You can become an extraordinary hero! Practice modesty and courage everyday. Become a leader for social change beginning in your home and your community. Personal actions defeat feelings of hopelessness and you can and will 'Help Save Our Planet'!" Oh, and the movie trailer made me shed a tear - how did I miss that movie???

In Conclusion & More Breaking News

This quote on worldwildlife's article really echoes my sentiments about these issues: “Climate change and what we do about it is going to transform the world much more rapidly than people realize. It’s my goal to get us moving to a world we will want, not one we’ll regret leaving for our children and grandchildren.” - Richard Moss, WWF's Vice President and Managing Director for Climate Change

And today from the White House blog: "An important element of this new report, apart from that it is deliberately written in plain language so we can all read and understand the science in it, is that it dives down in the various regions of the U.S. and provides much more regional detail about possible impacts than ever before – critical information for an effective response. It also breaks down the potential climate change impacts by economic and social sectors, most of which transcend regional boundaries, such as water, energy, health, transportation, and agriculture – all vital components of a healthy and stable society."

Thanks to all the tweeps who helped point me to all this information on twitter: @greenbiztweets(via@NRDC), @thegoodhuman(via @sampsa & @WWFUS), @gristvia@ClimateChangeUS & @whitehouse), and @PlanetGreen

Cell Phone/Wifi Radiation and Your Health

By Marcie Barnes

Summarized from an assignment I completed for:
JOMC 710 "Computing Concepts and Issues: Power Tools for the Mind"
Professor Deb Aikat, Ph. D
April 9th, 2009
University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill

THE ISSUE

Most of us are familiar with the possible dangers of radiation from things such as nuclear power plants, microwave ovens, x-rays, and power lines. New technology has introduced a few more devices that have entered the debate over what levels of radiation are harmful: the cell phone, and more recently, the wireless network. Because cell phones are used by 83% of Americans, and by some for the majority of their day, exposure to cell phones and the radiation they omit should be a top-of-mind issue. Similarly, wireless networks, commonly known as wifi, are popping up all over the country and the world, including public schools, in order to connect laptop and web-enabled phone users to the Internet. Both of these technologies may be causing a greater health risk via the radiation they emit.

FIVE FEARS OF THE ISSUE

1) General decline in public health: There are a bevy of research-proven illnesses attributed to overexposure to radiation, including: asthma, sleep disorders, anxiety disorders, attention deficit disorder, autism, multiple sclerosis, ALS, Alzheimer's disease, epilepsy, fibromyalgia, chronic fatigue syndrome, cataracts, hypothyroidism, diabetes, malignant melanoma, cancer, heart attacks and strokes (including in young people) and "radio wave sickness". The more people are exposed to these devices and the towers associated with them, the higher the chances are that illness may ensue at some point.

2) Forest die-off, reproductive failure and population decline - these things have been found in many species of birds, as well as ill health and birth deformities in farm animals near microwave towers. Possible implications could include disruption of the food chain that could lead to extinction, contaminated food supply via direct exposure or from the birth defects and degradation of the animal's genetic material.

3) Privacy concerns - Some people are beginning to feel "invaded" by the proliferation of microwave radiation in our cities and towns, and even some of the most rural areas are no longer safe havens for those who may choose to live or spend time away from towers. Lawsuits could become more prevalent if more people fall ill and the link between radiation from wireless devices and illness is proven.

4) Major loss of productivity and well-being - Non-diagnosed, symptomatic effects of radiation sickness including things such as nausea, headache, fatigue, weakness, and depression could vastly effect the productivity and well-being of Americans.

5) Increased risk for children and teens - Those who are using these devices at a faster and faster pace are those perhaps most susceptible -- most likely because of their thinner skulls and developing tissues. This youtube video shows a study done in 1997 that reveals the higher amount of penetration in children: (Paul Fitzgerald: EMF expert and founder of the Research Center for Wireless Technology)


HELPFUL RESOURCES

1) Cell Phone Radiation News Bureau
http://cprnews.com/World-News

2) Electromagnetic Frequencies Blog
http://cellphonesafety.wordpress.com".
3) Wikipedia Entries on Mobile Phone Radiation and Health and Wireless Electronic Devices and Health
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_radiation_and_health
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wireless_electronic_devices_and_health

4) Techdirt.com
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20061212/080748.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080728/1034471811.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20080325/002149639.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20071203/003533.shtml
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20070725/095038.shtml

5) C-Net's Quick Guide: Cell Phone Radiation Levels
http://reviews.cnet.com/cell-phone-radiation-levels

6) The dangers of Wi-Fi radiation
http://www.guardian.co.uk/technology/blog/2007/may/21/thedangersof
7) 5 tips to limit your cell phone risk
http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/07/31/ep.cell.phones.cancer/index.html

POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS

*Air on the side of caution - Use an earpiece instead of holding the device to your head, particularly for longer conversations. Bluetooth devices are a better alternative to holding the phone up to your head, but a wired headset with a ferrite bead or a hollow-tube device are the expert's choice. Keep conversations to a minimum. This simple yet effective piece of advice can save you quite a bit of radiation. Think back to the days when cell calls were .80/minute, and this one's easy to do. Avoid long conversations in locations, such as rural areas or enclosed areas, where a cell phone's network signal is weak. A weak signal makes the phone emit more power so it can connect to a faraway cell tower.

* If you buy your preteen or young teenager a phone, make sure he or she follows the above precautionary measures. Parents should be vigilant about their children's using speakers or hands-free devices, and about limiting the number of calls and amount of time their children spend on the phone. A comprehensive list of strategies (for both young and old) is found here: http://planetgreen.discovery.com/food-health/reduce-your-risks-from-cellpho.html

* File complaints to the Federal Trade Commission, the nation's consumer protection agency, and your local government officials about your concerns about lack of space to go to be "free" of technology radiation.

Posted via email from Marcie's posterous

The Great Importance of Antioxidants & Detox

By Marcie Barnes

(photo credit goes to ~Dezz~ on Flickr -->)

Antioxidants – one of those buzzwords you hear in advertising a lot. I think we've heard it so much that it's one of those terms that sort of goes in one ear and out the other. Same with "detox".

The other night, my husband asked me exactly how (why) Cancer forms in our bodies, since we've recently discovered our 16-year old dog has tumors.

So, I started doing some research. I found a very interesting (albeit complicated) graphic from a study called "The role of phytochemicals in inhibition of cancer and inflammation":

(Click the image for larger version)

(By the way, phytochemicals are plant-based chemical compounds that contain antioxidants.)

Let's just concentrate on the blue "clearance" box at the top right. In order to "clear" our blood of carcinogens, there is only one path: detoxification. Another health buzzword that perhaps we should be paying more attention to: detox. There are, of course, many products on the market that promise to detox you, but the fact of the matter is, you can easily get the antioxidants you need for detox in everyday food – in particular fresh, local fruits and vegetables!

Some of the ones this study mentions are: prunes, raisins, blueberries, blackberries, strawberries, raspberries, red bell pepper, plums, onion, brussels sprouts, broccoli, beets…the list goes on. That said, if you're one of those people who just can't stomach a lot of fruits and veggies, please do invest in a good supplement. And don't forget the antioxidant-rich teas such as green tea (not from a bottle) and my favorite, yerba maté, which I am finding available at more and more places including Kroger. (Note: maté may contain a small amount of carcinogens because the leaves are smoked, but the high antioxidant content far and away makes up for it, in my opinion.)

Now, on the more daunting bottom half of this graphic. I'm not even going to bother to try and explain all of this, other than to say there seem to be no good paths after the carcinogen turns into an "Ultimate Carcinogen". There is a place where Apoptosis, or cell death, occurs, which appears to be a good thing in this graphic, but it doesn't say how that happens. Anyway, All kinds of scary things are going on now that detox has not occurred – DNA Damage, Inflammation, and ultimately carcinogenesis – yes, the creation of cancer.

This graphic gave me and my family pause. Get your fresh fruits and veggies in your diet, please.

What's In That Food? Part Three: Locally-grown Strawberries & Pesticides - Lots of Them!

By Marcie Barnes

Strawberry season is in full-swing across the nation, and if you're like me, you love going out to the strawberry fields to pick some of that sweet, juicy, healthy goodness from the plants. And of course, you can't help but eat a few yourself….if you're a kid, probably more than a few. But there's a dark side to the local strawberry patch. Most strawberries are grown commercially. And that means they use nitrogen-based fertilizers and pesticides. Lots of pesticides.

This article gives lots of shocking tidbits, such as the fact that 371 pesticides are approved by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for use on strawberries. Recent data from foodnews.org shows that strawberries rank high on the list for produce found to have high levels of pesticides still on them once they arrive on the store shelf. Which makes me wonder how much they are washed. In any case, Dr. Green gives more scary detail on the types of pesticides found in this 'Report Card' on Pesticides in Strawberries. A little more research yielded another interesting factoid: a new hand lotion has been developed to protect workers picking in strawberry fields from absorbing pesticides into their skin "Arrangements were made to test urine samples of a small group of workers before, during and after picking strawberries in a field that had been sprayed with malathion 7-10 days earlier. Malathion is commonly used to control pests that can damage the fruit as it becomes ready for harvest."

Wikipedia states that "Malathion itself is not toxic; however, absorption or ingestion into the human body readily results in its metabolism to malaoxon, which is toxic in high amounts. Chronic exposure to low levels of malathion have been hypothesized to impair memory, but this is disputed. There is currently no reliable information on adverse health effects of chronic exposure to malathion". the list of pesticides found on strawberries here contains some additional really scary contenders in the pesticide arena. I want to know, what is being done to protect the consumers (mainly children) who go into these fields to pick and eat?

I don't think it's a huge deal that our son had quite a few of these likely pesticide-laden berries in the field, because he is very healthy, but I was sure to take the rest of our bounty home and wash them very thoroughly. Even then, because we do not peel strawberries, I bet there was a lot of residue left. I'm off to try and find a local, organic source for my produce. Unfortunately, as this article points out, the Farmer's Market probably is full of commercial growers as well…I guess I'll be growing my own garden and joining an organic CSA in the fall, because in addition to all this, "organic strawberries ripen more leisurely, with more time to soak up nutrients from sun and soil." This statement has been backed up (**finally**) by solid research showing that organic produce is indeed healthier for you.

----------

End of the series, for now. Would you like to see this as a regular feature? Leave a comment!

Photo credit goes to: me! That's our son holding a basket of likely pesticide-laden strawberries. They were yummy :) :P

What's In That Food? Part Two: Green Tea With More Sugar and Chemicals Than You Should Care For.

By Marcie Barnes

Borrowing again from a slide out of a gallery published by AOL, I wanted to alert you to something that bothers me - the new Green Tea product from Lipton. I saw a billboard for it recently that said something like "citrus + green tea antioxidants = yummy" - and I couldn't help but wonder how much corn syrup was going in along with that. Take a look at the ingredients, of course, HFCS is the second ingredient, after water:

Water, high fructose corn syrup, citric acid, green tea, sodium hexametaphosphate, ascorbic acid, honey, natural flavors, phosphoric acid, sodium benzoate, potassium sorbate, calcium disodium edta, caramel color, tallow 5, blue1.

Then, I heard someone make the claim that there was more sugar in this product than in a can of coke - so I decided to find out for myself. I had to do a little math because, of course, Coca-Cola claims the serving size on a 12 oz. can is actually 8 oz., as if you will drink 2/3 and stop. So, there are 27g of sugar in an 8 oz. serving which would equal 36g in a full can. The Lipton Green Tea has 21g of sugar in an 8oz serving which would equal 28g in a full can, so not exactly a true claim, however, I suppose if you drank a full 20 oz. bottle (I haven't seen many cans of this stuff around) you'd be closer to the range of a coke.

In any case, I applaud Lipton for getting more green tea antioxidants out there, but I have to wonder if the HFCS cancels out the benefits. In any case, what about all these other additives? Sodium hexametaphosphate, but it carries a scary warning in the Wikipedia entry: "Some individuals may experience an allergic reaction to the ingestion of sodium hexametaphosphate that may produce mild chest pain. One case of this allergic reaction was reported to have been due to trace amounts of sodium hexametaphosphate found in bottled water." - Eeek. And then we have phosphoric acid (also found in Coke) which is commonly used to remove rust. As with the lye in Cool Whip, I say no thanks!

And the list goes on, Wikipedia also says that sodium benzoate, when combined with ascorbic acid, "may form benzene, a known carcinogen" and also cites studies that link this chemical to ADHD. Next, we have calcium disodium EDTA - more scary stuff to read here - "EDTA has been found to be both cytotoxic and weakly genotoxic in laboratory animals. Oral exposures have been noted to cause reproductive and developmental effects."

And - oh no - tallow? That normally comes from beef and was the ingredient that got McDonald's sued over saying their french fries were vegetarian. Just another sneaky ingredient - I wonder how many vegetarians out there are drinking this?

And finally, Blue #1 - "It has previously been banned in Austria, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Norway, Spain, Sweden, and Switzerland among others but has been certified as a safe food additive in the EU and is today unbanned in most of the countries. In the United States production exceeds 1 million pounds annually, and daily consumption is around 16 mg per person. It has the capacity for inducing an allergic reaction. It is one of the colorants that the Hyperactive Children's Support Group and the Feingold Association recommend to be eliminated from the diet of children."

I understand these chemicals are probably added in very small quantities, but I think they should be completely avoided by children, pregnant women, and other people with sicknesses and the elderly. And just in case, I stay away from them too.

There are some kudos to Lipton (Unilever), for pledging "to transform the tea industry by making it sustainable, changing the lives of the workers for the better along the way...to have all of its Lipton Yellow Label and PG Tips bags sold in Western Europe certified by 2010, and all Lipton tea bags sold globally certified by 2015."

All said, I say brew your own green tea and add your own sweetener. If you are trying to get off of soda (or other bottled/canned drinks) brewing your own tea is a great way to wean yourself off. Simply make a batch to your taste and each time reduce the amount of sweetener. Adding a squeeze of lemon helps improve the taste. You can easily move yourself to just drinking plain water or tea with this method. Eating out? Ask for 1/2 sweet & 1/2 unsweet to start. Green tea is associated with lots of health benefits to include weight loss, so don't pick up the bottle full of corn syrup. You can do it!

Up Next: What's in those yummy in-season strawberries?

What's In That Food? Part One: Cool Whip: Transfat, Corn Syrup & Lye, Oh My!

By Marcie Barnes

I was recently reading one of my favorite blogs, www.thatsfit.com, and came across this reference to a gallery published by their parent company, AOL. I have issues with a few things about this gallery, but let's start with slide #6 - Cool Whip -"it includes questionable ingredients like hydrogenated vegetable oil a known trans fat --and high fructose corn syrup…" says the AOL piece. Indeed, a lot of scary ingredients in this. However, telling people to opt for the "fat-free" version isn't really the best advice.

There is still hydrogenated vegetable oil (trans fat) in the "fat-free" version, they probably just add only enough to get away with calling it "free" under government guidelines. Even then, I'm skeptical - because the ingredients listed on all three kinds - "free", "lite" and "regular" are virtually identical, with the exception of the use of sodium hydroxide in the "free" version - which, my friends, is lye. I see that there are some food applications for lye, but I prefer to stay away from ingredients also used to unclog drains...I don't know about you.

I would recommend buying a regular old can of whipped cream, organic would be better because it would not have corn syrup, and don't feel too bad about it - especially if you're putting it on fresh organic fruit. :)

I found another blogger who has also discovered the stark similarities in ingredients between all three versions of cool-whip. As usual, it's the job of those marketing people to make you feel like you are making an "informed" purchase by putting a bunch of (often misleading) information on the front label. Spend more time reading the back - and save yourself a lot of time by shopping organic products, because they don't contain chemical additives, preservatives or hormones.

Another ingredient found in all three varieties is sorbitan monostearate. I had to do a lot of research to try and figure out exactly what this is, and basically, it's an artificial wax. I say always air on the side of caution when ingesting anything artificial. In addition, I was a bit disturbed by research I kept finding (done in the 60s) where this substance was found to speed tumors in the skin of hamsters (if someone with a scientific background wants to read this and spell it out in layman's terms, that would be great). This page says it also "may increase the absorption of fat-soluble substances".

Again, a great substitute for cool whip would be to go out and buy some organic whipping cream, add a little stevia to sweeten it, and whip it yourself! It's easy, and homemade whipped cream is impressive to friends and family. :)

Up next: Green Tea that's bad for you.

Image Credit goes to: lowjumpingfrog on flickr, who aptly named the photo "Death by Variety".

Environmental Visionaries Part One: Dr. Seuss: We Must Take Care of Our Speck! (And Horton Hears a Homeschool Outcry)

By Marcie Barnes


My family went to see Horton Hears a Who recently. I really appreciate the efforts of the G-rated filmmakers to make these films enjoyable for parents as well as children, and this one really took the prize for me. In large part because of (what I saw as) the important underlying meaning: we could all be floating around inside a universe that is actually the equivalent of a piece of dust in someone else's world - everything could cease to exist at a moment's notice. Life is truly fragile.

The new movie is based on Dr. Seuss' classic tale which was written in 1954. Although there certainly are some departures from the book, Dr. Seuss' general message is still very timely today. More on that later. I did want to address one particular "adaptation" that stood out at me, and as I expected, has caused a bit of a stir in the homeschooling community. Near the beginning of the movie we are introduced to the "villain" - an overbearing kangaroo voiced by Carol Burnett who makes the comment "...that's why my Rudy is pouch-schooled" while observing Horton doing something she didn't agree with. This coupled with the other comments made by the kangaroo throughout the movie about how Horton is "defying authority," "corrupting our children," and "attacking our way of life" - you can see how the pouchschool/homeschool analogy didn't sit well with the homeschool community. Now, I have all kinds of respect for people who choose to educate their own children, mostly because I have very few teaching bones in my body.

That said, there is a stereotype associated with those who choose to homeschool, because of the obvious "snub" at public schools, and most other organized forms of education at large. I've been part of these kinds of debates before (stay at home vs. working moms, etc.) and I tell you, it can get nasty real quick. My take on it is this: we're all mothers and we all do the best we can for our kids. If I had to teach my kid there would be some pretty serious deficiencies - especially in areas such as music and math (which he actually is showing early promise in). Therefore, I am looking forward to creating a balance where we parents step in and fill some of the holes left by the school, and I expect, vice-versa. I plan to write more about this in the future, but for now I invite you to check out Michael Davis' Family Hack blog, in which he documents his travels with his family around the world, among other things. I like to call his education style "worldschooling" - and I think in this day and age it's increasingly important for kids to not be sheltered when comes to education. (and I can get started on my soapbox about sheltering kids from germs too, but not today :)) We live in a diverse world that is constantly blending and getting smaller. We need to teach our kids to be good worldly members and neighbors so we can work together to keep our species alive as long as possible. That doesn't mean they have to become Muslims, but they certainly should learn about Muslims and why they are just as devout in their faith as you may be in yours, just for one example. At the end of the day, the greatest faith is an educated and tested one.

Which brings me back to the big meaning in Horton Hears a Who: what if we really are floating around on a speck in someone else's world? And what if that someone had the power to dunk our speck in a boiling pot of oil (movie) or made part of beezlenut stew (book)? What if that "authority" decided we weren't taking care of our speck anyway, and decided to make our death quick and painless out of mercy? The main theme I want to pull out in this series is this: on the path we are currently following, the demise of the human race is inevitable. The planet cannot sustain what we are doing to it. I think the planet will survive, I think the cockroaches will survive, but I'm not too sure about the humans. We live in a very delicate world.

Oh yeah, and don't forget too: "A person's a person, no matter how small."

Check out the World Clock that shows an approximation on the speed at which we are killing the environment (and other things) and read this article I found today about how global warming is directly impacting our health (let alone the health of the planet.)

Next installment: Don Henley and The Last Resort from 1976.

(Photo credit goes to The Davis Family on flickr.)

Healthy Easter Egg and/or Basket Fillings

By Marcie Barnes

Our son's birthday falls on Easter Monday this year (thankfully this will never happen again) so I am planning a "Healthy Easter Egg Hunt" for him and his guests. A cursory look at Google on this subject matter yields few results, which is a little unsettling. I think it's high-time we start filling those Easter baskets with something other than unhealthy candy. Now, I am sure some of you think I sound like a scrooge, and that's fine :) Our son is allowed to have a little "dessert" after dinner - and for the most part I try to make sure it's high-quality organic (dark) chocolate, with some fresh fruit. In any case, I though I would share with you my list of "healthy" items that will be going into jumbo plastic Easter eggs for the "healthy hunt":

Non-food items:

Play-Doh (make your own or buy the small containers that will fit inside a large egg.) I also found plastic eggs filled with different colors of clay at the dollar store.

Bubbles - most craft stores have those tiny little bubble bottles people buy for weddings that will fit in an egg.

Money - depending on the age of your child - use bills or coins, or even tokens from their favorite arcade.

Magic towels - I found egg-shaped ones at the dollar store.

Other misc. toys - I also found some "stretchy" and "bendy" toy rabbits that would fit in eggs, as well as some small battery-operated musical instruments. See what treasures you can find at your dollar store!

Food items:

Popcorn - I'm not a proponent of the "low fat" label being healthy. But for an egg filling it's probably best to use "dry" popcorn.

Baby Carrots - (in individual packs)

Dwarf Pink Lady apples - or any other fruit you can find that will fit in an egg :) such as:

Clementine oranges - really easy for kids to peel themselves!

And yes - dark chocolate - I bought these chocolate-covered cranberries and almonds. This is a yummy way to get powerful antioxidants and phytonutrients from all three of these very heathy foods: cranberries, almonds and dark chocolate.

And here are a couple ideas for next year:

http://www.wellbaskets.com/ceorcheaba.html

http://www.sweetearthchocolates.com/level.itml/icOid/183


Photo credit goes to: joewilsondallas on Flickr. Thanks!

Eat Fat to Lose Fat, Part Deux

By Marcie Barnes

I've been wanting to expound upon my first post about this notion for quite some time, but since my colleague Timothy Ferriss posted this yesterday, I figure "why re-invent the wheel?" I've been a proponent of the "a calorie is not a calorie" mindset for quite some time, and Tim explains it well along with Dr. Michael Eades in the interview.

Basically, although fat is the highest in terms of calorie count by weight, I don't believe the body stores fat as fat. Instead, it uses fats for cell repair/regeneration, etc. That's pretty important stuff. This is also why I think there is an epidemic of psychological disorders in Westernized nations (to include depression and ADHD) - because of the "low fat" diets that have been so popular for years. To clarify: I said I don't believe the body stores the fat you eat, it stores the unused carbohydrates you eat as fat. Why do you think farmers feed their pigs and cows grain in order to fatten them up as quickly as possible for slaughter? If the fat we consume turns to fat, why aren't farmers feeding their livestock….fat? If you're overweight, there's a very good chance your diet consists of too much sugar and other refined white carbs like flour. Think about it.

I am a vegetarian (I do eat dairy and seafood) so I feel compelled to say that while we are essentially promoting a low-carb diet here, that doesn't have to mean eating a lot of meat to compensate for the lack of carbs. My diet largely consists of vegetables, beans, nuts and whole grains. I always choose the full-fat version of dressing (or sour cream or whatnot) and use healthy oils such as olive and coconut liberally (yes, coconut oil is saturated - not all saturated fats are bad, either.) Fats and oils help make you feel full in the same way meats do. And by the way, once you start eating this way on a regular basis, you won't miss the other stuff after awhile. Go cold turkey on the sugar - it can be as addictive as cocaine.

This link will take you to all four fascinating posts by Tim on this important topic.

USDA Organic Seal - Killing hometown organic farms in America?

By Marcie Barnes

My mother is reading the book "Animal, Vegetable, Miracle" for her book club and was telling about a discussion they were having about how the USDA Organic Seal many of us are familiar with is basically too expensive for small farmers to be able to acquire on their products. (See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_certification for specifics on this.) As a result, many farmers who have been proudly calling themselves "organic" for years, could be fined or even shut down for using that term today. This just makes my blood boil. Why, oh why, USDA to you all of the sudden get to define what is or is not "organic"?

Let's take a look at the USDA's Organic Labeling and Marketing Fact Sheet - my favorite quote from this resource is: "Products labeled 'organic' must consist of at least 95 percent organically produced ingredients (excluding water and salt)." (I'm still trying to figure out if this is by weight.) Basically, there is room for 5% of a product to be - whatever? That's kind of scary to me. Furthermore, I found the "list" that defines the kinds of things allowed in the 5% part here - and one of the "criteria" is: " The substance cannot be produced from a natural source and there are no organic substitutes." So basically, they are allowing ingredients because there is no organic counterpart? Hellllllllooooooo?

One of my classmates asked me to write an article defining "organic" last semester. On top of my busy schedule, I have quite frankly been trying to formulate an appropriate definition in my head for months. I realize now that the government has taken over the role of "organic police," I quite frankly want to encourage the world to come up with a new word or phrase to describe food that, as I like to call it, was made the way God intended. Or, maybe it would be better to say "the way Mother Nature intended." A lot of formerly organic farmers are turning to words such as "natural" or "whole" to describe their products, which is unfortunate because of the rising popularity of "organic" products (and the increasing awareness of the word itself) in the public. Ah, the government steps in to try and clarify the definition of a word and causes further confusion. Classic.

I still think choosing a USDA labeled organic product is better than one that is not, but it has become clear to me that this label should signify to the consumer that the product was made by a large manufacturer with enough cash to be able to go through all of the paperwork (among other things) required for the certification, and that it's also likely the cost of the certification is worked into the price you are paying.

For a plethora of reasons, there is one word that is beginning to stand out as the best one to describe how you should eat: local. Find a local farm here and join a CSA (Community Supported Agriculture) program that allows you to buy a "share" of the farm and reap the health benefits of ultra-fresh, tasty, in-season locally-grown produce. There is nothing better in this world than a freshly-picked North Carolina strawberry in May. Well, maybe there is - where do you live and what are you missing out on?

More stories about small farms and their disgust with the USDA Organic program:

http://sugarmtnfarm.com/blog/2007/11/certified-naturally-grown-2007.html

http://www.woodcreekfarm.com/?page=CNG_L.htm

http://www.organicconsumers.org/sos.cfm

http://www.csmonitor.com/2002/1016/p15s02-lifo.html

http://www.animalvegetablemiracle.com/News.html