Seven Tips for Healthier Hearts
http://www.naturalnews.com/025723.html
by Reuben Chow
(NaturalNews) Based on statistics published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 652,091 Americans died of heart disease in 2005. This was supposedly more than a quarter of all American deaths (27.1%), and applied almost equally to both men and women. In view of this heart wrenching epidemic, what simple steps can you take to drastically cut your risk of being hit by this ailment? A study conducted at the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health has zoomed in on three "do's" and three "don'ts" for protection.
Do Not Smoke
Chemicals found in cigarettes increase blood pressure, lower levels of high density lipoprotein cholesterol (HDL cholesterol, the supposed "good" cholesterol), and also harm your blood vessels. All these damage cardiovascular health and contribute significantly to your risk of being hit by a heart attack.
And of course, it's not just about the heart - smoking is bad for just about every part of your body. In order to obtain and maintain good health, smoking is one of the first habits which must be kicked.
Do Not Drink Excessively
Drinking too much alcohol can cause elevated blood pressure and weight again; these, too, mean poorer heart health. And if you drink heavily on a long-term basis, you are at increased risk for cardiomyopathy, where your heart becomes enlarged and permanently damaged. These apply to beer, hard liquor, and even wine.
Do Not Keep Too Much Air In That Spare Tire
Recent research has linked belly fat to increased risk of heart disease. For example, one recent study discovered that every two additional inches translated to an added heart disease risk of almost 20%. Again, it is not just about the cardiovascular system - belly fat has been linked to premature death, too.
Get a Risk Assessment
Another suggestion put forth by the researchers is for you to assess your risk of heart disease, in particular through important numbers like your blood pressure, cholesterol levels, etc. Your family doctor could do the job, or the website HeartDecision.org can be used from the comfort of your own home. This website was launched by Dr Jon Keevil, a medical professor from the university.
Cut Your Weight
Obesity is linked to a whole host of serious diseases, including heart problems. The researchers do not want you to experiment with fad diets or to starve yourself. "The question really comes down to the type and amount of food you're eating. Not every diet is designed to help you have a healthy heart. Healthy diets are low in red meat, fried foods and sweets. They emphasize fruits, vegetables, nuts, whole grain, fish and poultry," said Dr Matt Wolff, the chief of cardiovascular medicine at University of Wisconsin Hospital and Clinics.
Exercise!
Exercise is the only way to get the heart pumping hard and working out, which is key to long-term good cardiovascular health. Like all muscles in the body, the heart loses its strength without regular use. If you can manage it, some vigorous exercise is useful, although moderate physical activities like walking have also been shown to have beneficial effects.
When it comes to cardiovascular health, there are numerous studies showing the massive importance of exercise. In fact, a recent study which was funded by the US government showed that even heart failure patients will benefit from a certain amount of exercise. Read more about that study at http://www.naturalnews.com/024996.html.
Consume a Healthy Diet
Although it is indirectly implied and mentioned above, it is still very surprising that consuming a healthy diet is not a specific recommendation of the Wisconsin study. With that in mind, here is a quote from a study conducted by Canadian researchers, which found that people who ate a lot of fried foods and meat had a 35% higher risk of getting acute heart attacks, as compared to those who were "prudent" eaters:
"What we found was that the prudent diet, which is very simple - lots of fruits and vegetables, less fried food and red meat - was protective. It was protective in every part of the world, in men and women, old and young - everybody. And the degree of protection was quite substantial," said Dr Salim Yusuf, a professor of medicine at McMaster University and director of the Population Health Research Institute at Hamilton Health Sciences, the leader of that study.
Conclusion
So there you have it - seven important suggestions to make your heart happy and healthy. These tips also come with a very useful side effect - better health and vitality all round. That is way better (and cheaper) than what any heart drug can offer.
Sources
Study offers heart-healthy advice for living longer (http://www.estacadanews.com/feature...)
Heart Disease Facts and Statistics (http://www.cdc.gov/heartDisease/sta...)
In any diet, fried food, meat raise heart-attack risk: Study (http://www.canada.com/Health/diet+f...)
http://www.naturalnews.com/024996.html
Thursday, February 26, 2009
How to Slash World Cancer Rates By 90 Percent: Healthy Foods, Exercise and Vitamin D
How to Slash World Cancer Rates By 90 Percent: Healthy Foods, Exercise and Vitamin D
http://www.NaturalNews.com/025730.html
by Mike Adams
(NaturalNews) Although you won't hear this from the cancer industry or the drug companies that profit from cancer, there's an easy, low-cost and remarkably safe way to slash cancer rates around the world by about one-third, says the World Cancer Research Fund: Promote healthy foods and exercise! (http://www.wcrf-uk.org)
According to research just released by the WCRF, simple changes in diet and exercise can prevent nearly 40 percent of breast and pancreatic cancers, 36 percent of lung cancers, over 60 percent of mouth cancers, a quarter of kidney cancers and 45 percent of bowel cancers.
Remarkably, these results were achieved without any mention of vitamin D! By adding vitamin D to the mix, which by itself has been demonstrated to prevent an astonishing 77 percent of all cancers (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html), cancer prevention rates approaching 90 percent overall can be easily achieved.
This report also did not mention eliminating dangerous cancer-causing chemicals from the diet, such as sodium nitrite found in processed meats (hot dogs, sausage, bacon, etc.) and artificial chemical sweeteners. It also did not take into account the health benefits of avoiding cancer-causing chemicals in personal care products such as shampoo, antibacterial soap, common fragrance products, hand lotions and so on (choose 100% natural, USDA-certified organic versions of these products to avoid the toxic chemicals).
Avoiding mammograms, which harm ten women for every one that it helps (http://www.naturalnews.com/020829.html), also greatly reduces the risk of breast cancer. A much safer alternative is to use breast thermograms, which offer far more accurate detection without the dangerous radiation.
If you take all lifestyle changes into account, achieving a 90 percent reduction in overall cancer rates is quite readily achievable.
Low cancer rates means low profits for the cancer industry
This is terrible news for the cancer industry, which preys on cancer patients and exploits them for profit. As of today, the cancer industry still refuses to teach women about vitamin D. This includes all the pink ribbon cancer non-profit groups, by the way, who simultaneously claim to be searching for "the cure" even while insisting there is no such thing as a cure. Prevention of cancer isn't even on their radar. After all, if 9 out of 10 women never even got breast cancer, these groups would lose their power (and their jobs).
The success of the cancer industry depends entirely on the population remaining ignorant about cancer prevention strategies that are cheap, safe and remarkably effective.
Mammogram and chemotherapy pushers want women to believe cancer is inevitable -- a genetic defect they have no control over. What they refuse to admit (publicly, at least) is that the expression of so-called "cancer genes" is almost entirely controlled by lifestyle choices. Thus, even a woman whose mother and grandmother had breast cancer can reduce her risk of breast cancer to near zero by simply changing her lifestyle choices, starting with dietary choices and healthy sunlight exposure (for vitamin D).
http://www.NaturalNews.com/025730.html
by Mike Adams
(NaturalNews) Although you won't hear this from the cancer industry or the drug companies that profit from cancer, there's an easy, low-cost and remarkably safe way to slash cancer rates around the world by about one-third, says the World Cancer Research Fund: Promote healthy foods and exercise! (http://www.wcrf-uk.org)
According to research just released by the WCRF, simple changes in diet and exercise can prevent nearly 40 percent of breast and pancreatic cancers, 36 percent of lung cancers, over 60 percent of mouth cancers, a quarter of kidney cancers and 45 percent of bowel cancers.
Remarkably, these results were achieved without any mention of vitamin D! By adding vitamin D to the mix, which by itself has been demonstrated to prevent an astonishing 77 percent of all cancers (http://www.naturalnews.com/021892.html), cancer prevention rates approaching 90 percent overall can be easily achieved.
This report also did not mention eliminating dangerous cancer-causing chemicals from the diet, such as sodium nitrite found in processed meats (hot dogs, sausage, bacon, etc.) and artificial chemical sweeteners. It also did not take into account the health benefits of avoiding cancer-causing chemicals in personal care products such as shampoo, antibacterial soap, common fragrance products, hand lotions and so on (choose 100% natural, USDA-certified organic versions of these products to avoid the toxic chemicals).
Avoiding mammograms, which harm ten women for every one that it helps (http://www.naturalnews.com/020829.html), also greatly reduces the risk of breast cancer. A much safer alternative is to use breast thermograms, which offer far more accurate detection without the dangerous radiation.
If you take all lifestyle changes into account, achieving a 90 percent reduction in overall cancer rates is quite readily achievable.
Low cancer rates means low profits for the cancer industry
This is terrible news for the cancer industry, which preys on cancer patients and exploits them for profit. As of today, the cancer industry still refuses to teach women about vitamin D. This includes all the pink ribbon cancer non-profit groups, by the way, who simultaneously claim to be searching for "the cure" even while insisting there is no such thing as a cure. Prevention of cancer isn't even on their radar. After all, if 9 out of 10 women never even got breast cancer, these groups would lose their power (and their jobs).
The success of the cancer industry depends entirely on the population remaining ignorant about cancer prevention strategies that are cheap, safe and remarkably effective.
Mammogram and chemotherapy pushers want women to believe cancer is inevitable -- a genetic defect they have no control over. What they refuse to admit (publicly, at least) is that the expression of so-called "cancer genes" is almost entirely controlled by lifestyle choices. Thus, even a woman whose mother and grandmother had breast cancer can reduce her risk of breast cancer to near zero by simply changing her lifestyle choices, starting with dietary choices and healthy sunlight exposure (for vitamin D).
Common Mouthwash Products Boost Risk of Oral Cancer by 900 Percent
Common Mouthwash Products Boost Risk of Oral Cancer by 900 Percent
http://www.naturalnews.com/025729.html
(NaturalNews) The use of mouthwashes that contain alcohol as an ingredient can drastically increase a person's risk of cancers of the mouth, head and neck, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Australia's University of Melbourne and University of Queensland School of Dentistry.
Researchers studied use of mouthwash among 3,210 people and compared it with rates of mouth, head and neck cancers.
"We see people with oral cancer who have no other risk factors than the use of [mouthwash containing alcohol], so what we've done is review all the evidence," said lead researcher Michael McCullough, chair of the Australian Dental Association's therapeutics committee,
The researchers found that all participants who used an alcohol-containing mouthwash at least once per day had a significantly increased risk of cancer, independent of other risk factors such as smoking or drinking alcoholic beverages. Among those who both used alcohol-containing mouthwash and regularly drank alcoholic beverages, the risk of cancers of the larynx, pharynx or oral cavity was five times that of people who drank but did not use mouthwash. The risk of cancer in people who smoked and used alcohol-containing mouthwashes was an astonishing nine times that of non-mouthwash-using smokers.
"Since this article, further evidence has come out," McCullough said. "We believe there should be warnings. If it was a facial cream that had the effect of reducing acne but had a four to fivefold increased risk of skin cancer, no one would be recommending it."
The body breaks down alcohol, also known as ethanol, into a carcinogenic compound called acetaldehyde. The researchers note that due to the way that mouthwash is swished around, acetaldehyde may thereby accumulate in the oral cavity.
In addition, the researchers believe that alcohol makes mucus membranes more permeable to other chemicals, allowing nicotine and other carcinogens increased access to the body's tissues.
Sources for this story include: news.scotsman.com.
http://www.naturalnews.com/025729.html
(NaturalNews) The use of mouthwashes that contain alcohol as an ingredient can drastically increase a person's risk of cancers of the mouth, head and neck, according to a study conducted by researchers from the Australia's University of Melbourne and University of Queensland School of Dentistry.
Researchers studied use of mouthwash among 3,210 people and compared it with rates of mouth, head and neck cancers.
"We see people with oral cancer who have no other risk factors than the use of [mouthwash containing alcohol], so what we've done is review all the evidence," said lead researcher Michael McCullough, chair of the Australian Dental Association's therapeutics committee,
The researchers found that all participants who used an alcohol-containing mouthwash at least once per day had a significantly increased risk of cancer, independent of other risk factors such as smoking or drinking alcoholic beverages. Among those who both used alcohol-containing mouthwash and regularly drank alcoholic beverages, the risk of cancers of the larynx, pharynx or oral cavity was five times that of people who drank but did not use mouthwash. The risk of cancer in people who smoked and used alcohol-containing mouthwashes was an astonishing nine times that of non-mouthwash-using smokers.
"Since this article, further evidence has come out," McCullough said. "We believe there should be warnings. If it was a facial cream that had the effect of reducing acne but had a four to fivefold increased risk of skin cancer, no one would be recommending it."
The body breaks down alcohol, also known as ethanol, into a carcinogenic compound called acetaldehyde. The researchers note that due to the way that mouthwash is swished around, acetaldehyde may thereby accumulate in the oral cavity.
In addition, the researchers believe that alcohol makes mucus membranes more permeable to other chemicals, allowing nicotine and other carcinogens increased access to the body's tissues.
Sources for this story include: news.scotsman.com.
Monday, February 23, 2009
"Grow It Yourself: Save Money, Help Earth, and Improve Your Quality of Life" by Heather Havey, M.A.
Grow It Yourself: Save Money, Help Earth, and Improve Your Quality of Life by Heather Havey, M.A.
(NaturalNews) The Telegraph reported that "26% [of residents in Britain] are growing their own fruit and vegetables" [1]. One-quarter of British populations now choose gardening at home in order to improve their quality of life during difficult times. As a result, this has helped many UK residents to considerably reduce their grocery bills. Cuba is another example. In the 1990s, desperate economic circumstances forced Cubans to adopt local, urban, organic farming practices [2]. As of 2008, at least 1/3 of the land in their country is used to organically grow produce [3, 4]. As a result, Cuba leads the world in organic agriculture. Also, most Cubans ride bicycles. We can follow these examples in our own homes. Growing food has many benefits. It can save each family a lot of money. It reduces our carbon footprint and overall energy expenditure. It helps us to combat the world food crisis. It benefits health and well-being. It can help wildlife. By increasing food sources, it can also save lives.
Growing food at home saves money.
We face ever-larger economic struggle around the world today. States and even nations are filing bankruptcy. Many families have lost their homes. Even more have lost their jobs. Gas prices shift up and down. More people will likely lose their jobs or homes. Nearly every family is affected. The world food crisis is growing. Also, increasing storm activity from global warming increases food prices even more [5]. These storms are predicted to escalate as global warming advances. All of these factors can increase our cost-of-living as well as the cost of food.
One money-saving solution is to grow food at home (and buy from local farmers). Seeds can be purchased online or in nurseries and gardening centers. Often, also, local farmers may sell seeds. A package of seeds can grow quite a few plants. The cost is a couple of dollars plus water, sun, minerals (good soil) and some tender-loving care. If you prefer, you can also buy pre-sprouted plants for several dollars.
Let us look at one example: broccoli. Fifteen broccoli plants can bear at least twenty to thirty heads of broccoli. Once the main head is harvested, new florets will grow. Simply cut off the flowers so the plant does not harden and go to seed. For a few months, these plants will provide your entire family and also even a neighbor or friend with plenty of broccoli. Broccoli leaves, also, make delicious salad greens. They can be juiced with apple, ginger, and/or other greens to make a delicious drink.
Another way to save money is to save your own seeds. When you eat fruits or vegetables, simply pull out the seeds, save them, and sprout them. Nearly everything will grow. Avocadoes, papayas, starfruits, and many others do very well when sprouted from home.
We face global food, energy, weather, biological, and peace challenges today.
Earth faces a number of growing crises today. These include population explosion, peak oil, world food shortages, rising economic instability, steadily-increasing unemployment, global warming, global dimming, and mass extinction, among others. Nearly every family has been affected by one or many of these issues. Some experts even predict a 49% chance that our whole civilization may collapse [6, 7]. In light of these predictions, growing your own food makes more and more sense.
When you grow produce or buy from local farmers, you drive less. Also, you do not support long-distance hauling of food items. The current average distance that food travels after harvest is 1500 miles [8]. In some cases it is much further. When you grow food yourself, also, you do not use new plastic bags. Each year, over 500 billion plastic bags are produced in the world [9]. These bags will not decay for over 1,000 years in many cases. Each year, at least 100,000 mammals and birds die from these plastic bags [10]. This includes even whales. Last year, an alligator was found dead with 25 plastic bags in its stomach.
Also, if you grow or buy organic produce, then you are not supporting the petroleum and pesticide industries. Most fertilizers and pesticides are made from petroleum products [11]. All of these aspects reduce your own carbon footprint. This in turn helps with global warming.
When you grow food at home, also, you increase the amount of food in the world. It may seem trivial upon first glance, but consider the numbers. If even 5% of the U.S. population grew some food, then 15.3 million more people would be adding food to the world supply [14].
Each time you feed a neighbor or friend, you are helping to decrease world hunger. Each time you buy local or grow your own food, also, you decrease world hunger and save precious resources.
Improve the beauty and quality of life within your own yard.
A yard filled with fruit and nut trees, vegetables, flowers, and other plants is far more beautiful to behold than a bare lawn. Also, leaves protect soil and prevent the sun from leaching out nutrients or water. Shrubs, trees, and plants protect small animals and beneficial insects. The plants also help to hold in moisture, preventing drought and loss of minerals. This will reduce your need to water or maintain your lawn.
If you protect birds, bees, and bats, then these animals will also aid your garden. Bees love flowers, so plant many flowers. Birds benefit from feeders filled with organic birdseeds. They will eat certain insects that desire to eat your vegetable leaves (for example: caterpillars). Also, bats eat mosquitoes and other insects. To protect bats, build a bat house and hang it 15-20 feet high on a nearby tree or in the middle of a field [12].
Nature is designed so perfectly to maintain and protect itself. The concept of the modern "lawn" needs to be abandoned out of compassion for Earth and wellness in general. The modern lawn is extremely harmful to the Earth and its inhabitants. Earth is naturally dense, diverse, beautiful and filled with many forms of life that maintain and protect each other. The lawn, on the other hand, represents the absolute loss of soil health, minerals in the soil, beneficial insects in soil and air, land mammals, plant diversity, and so on. It is essentially a deserted, poisoned wasteland that has been stripped of life.
Please choose the diverse beauty of gardens, trees, shrubs, and flowers over a lawn.
Where can I grow plants?
Plants are very easy to grow, and many can be grown in a pot by a window or with a grow light inside your home. Outdoor gardening options are also very diverse and can be fun to explore. You can grow food in any container, even a small cup. Also, you can grow plants in raised beds outside, in an old bathtub, in hanging baskets, used bottles, or in any container that will hold the plant in place.
What is best to grow?
Gardening varies widely according to weather patterns, seasons, and geographical region. There are certain crops, in general, that tend to be the easiest to grow. These include:
* salad greens (lettuces, arugula, swiss chard, collard greens, spinach)
* nightshade vegetables (squashes, peppers, tomatoes),
* root vegetables (radishes, potatoes)
* cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts)
* fruits and nuts,
* herbs (parsley, basil, thai basil, oregano, rosemary)
* berries (strawberries and blueberries)
* green beans
How do I grow food?
To grow food, simply drop one or two seeds into a dixie cup half filled with peat or seed-starting soil. While the seeds sprout, it is best to keep them indoors in warm, controllable conditions. Water them only every few days. The idea is to keep them moist but not fully wet. Baby sprouts could damp off if they are watered too much. This means basically that they could bend over and die from root-rot. If desired, keep a grow light on them. When they are a few weeks old, begin to acclimate them to the outdoors. After a week of increasing their exposure to sun and wind, then plant them in a pot or in a raised bed outdoors. From here, give them periodic water, sunshine, and natural compost to enrich their nutrients.
"What if I do not have a green thumb?"
If you have no desire to grow food or you lack a green thumb, then you can still help. Eat food from your neighbor`s garden and buy your food from local farms and community gardens.
Where can I learn more?
Nearly every state has a Master Gardener`s program [13]. These offer free information on organic gardening that is specially-suited to your region. They consist mostly of volunteers who love gardening and farming, and they are happy to help. Also, local farmers and CSA`s (Community Supported Agriculture) often can provide you with helpful tips as well as their favorite books. Evening classes, weekend workshops at farms, and college courses also help. Some recommended books to get you started include:
American Horticultural Society, and Alan R. Toogood. Plant Propagation. New York: DK Pub, 1999.
Flowerdew, Bob. The No Work Garden: Getting the Most Out of Your Garden for the Least Amount of Work. London: Kyle Cathie, 2004.
Hamilton, Geoff. Organic Gardening. RD home handbooks. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader`s Digest Association, 1992.
Happy Gardening!
"Earth laughs in flowers." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
Resources
1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardenin...
2. An excellent documentary film that I highly recommend is The Power Of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil http://www.powerofcommunity.org
3. http://www.coxwashington.com/hp/con...
4. http://www.projectcensored.org/top-...
5. One of many examples: Emanuel, Kerry. "Increasing Destructiveness of Tropical Cyclones over the Past 30 years." Nature. Volume 1436, 4 August 2005, pages 686-688.
6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnZg...
7. http://www.naturalnews.com/025662.html
8. http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubs...
9. http://www.britannica.com/blogs/200...
10. See, for example: http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubs...
11. This calculation is based on a U.S. estimated population of 306,000,000.
12. http://www.eparks.org/wildlife_prot...
13. For a complete list of Master Gardener programs: http://www.ahs.org/master_gardeners...
(NaturalNews) The Telegraph reported that "26% [of residents in Britain] are growing their own fruit and vegetables" [1]. One-quarter of British populations now choose gardening at home in order to improve their quality of life during difficult times. As a result, this has helped many UK residents to considerably reduce their grocery bills. Cuba is another example. In the 1990s, desperate economic circumstances forced Cubans to adopt local, urban, organic farming practices [2]. As of 2008, at least 1/3 of the land in their country is used to organically grow produce [3, 4]. As a result, Cuba leads the world in organic agriculture. Also, most Cubans ride bicycles. We can follow these examples in our own homes. Growing food has many benefits. It can save each family a lot of money. It reduces our carbon footprint and overall energy expenditure. It helps us to combat the world food crisis. It benefits health and well-being. It can help wildlife. By increasing food sources, it can also save lives.
Growing food at home saves money.
We face ever-larger economic struggle around the world today. States and even nations are filing bankruptcy. Many families have lost their homes. Even more have lost their jobs. Gas prices shift up and down. More people will likely lose their jobs or homes. Nearly every family is affected. The world food crisis is growing. Also, increasing storm activity from global warming increases food prices even more [5]. These storms are predicted to escalate as global warming advances. All of these factors can increase our cost-of-living as well as the cost of food.
One money-saving solution is to grow food at home (and buy from local farmers). Seeds can be purchased online or in nurseries and gardening centers. Often, also, local farmers may sell seeds. A package of seeds can grow quite a few plants. The cost is a couple of dollars plus water, sun, minerals (good soil) and some tender-loving care. If you prefer, you can also buy pre-sprouted plants for several dollars.
Let us look at one example: broccoli. Fifteen broccoli plants can bear at least twenty to thirty heads of broccoli. Once the main head is harvested, new florets will grow. Simply cut off the flowers so the plant does not harden and go to seed. For a few months, these plants will provide your entire family and also even a neighbor or friend with plenty of broccoli. Broccoli leaves, also, make delicious salad greens. They can be juiced with apple, ginger, and/or other greens to make a delicious drink.
Another way to save money is to save your own seeds. When you eat fruits or vegetables, simply pull out the seeds, save them, and sprout them. Nearly everything will grow. Avocadoes, papayas, starfruits, and many others do very well when sprouted from home.
We face global food, energy, weather, biological, and peace challenges today.
Earth faces a number of growing crises today. These include population explosion, peak oil, world food shortages, rising economic instability, steadily-increasing unemployment, global warming, global dimming, and mass extinction, among others. Nearly every family has been affected by one or many of these issues. Some experts even predict a 49% chance that our whole civilization may collapse [6, 7]. In light of these predictions, growing your own food makes more and more sense.
When you grow produce or buy from local farmers, you drive less. Also, you do not support long-distance hauling of food items. The current average distance that food travels after harvest is 1500 miles [8]. In some cases it is much further. When you grow food yourself, also, you do not use new plastic bags. Each year, over 500 billion plastic bags are produced in the world [9]. These bags will not decay for over 1,000 years in many cases. Each year, at least 100,000 mammals and birds die from these plastic bags [10]. This includes even whales. Last year, an alligator was found dead with 25 plastic bags in its stomach.
Also, if you grow or buy organic produce, then you are not supporting the petroleum and pesticide industries. Most fertilizers and pesticides are made from petroleum products [11]. All of these aspects reduce your own carbon footprint. This in turn helps with global warming.
When you grow food at home, also, you increase the amount of food in the world. It may seem trivial upon first glance, but consider the numbers. If even 5% of the U.S. population grew some food, then 15.3 million more people would be adding food to the world supply [14].
Each time you feed a neighbor or friend, you are helping to decrease world hunger. Each time you buy local or grow your own food, also, you decrease world hunger and save precious resources.
Improve the beauty and quality of life within your own yard.
A yard filled with fruit and nut trees, vegetables, flowers, and other plants is far more beautiful to behold than a bare lawn. Also, leaves protect soil and prevent the sun from leaching out nutrients or water. Shrubs, trees, and plants protect small animals and beneficial insects. The plants also help to hold in moisture, preventing drought and loss of minerals. This will reduce your need to water or maintain your lawn.
If you protect birds, bees, and bats, then these animals will also aid your garden. Bees love flowers, so plant many flowers. Birds benefit from feeders filled with organic birdseeds. They will eat certain insects that desire to eat your vegetable leaves (for example: caterpillars). Also, bats eat mosquitoes and other insects. To protect bats, build a bat house and hang it 15-20 feet high on a nearby tree or in the middle of a field [12].
Nature is designed so perfectly to maintain and protect itself. The concept of the modern "lawn" needs to be abandoned out of compassion for Earth and wellness in general. The modern lawn is extremely harmful to the Earth and its inhabitants. Earth is naturally dense, diverse, beautiful and filled with many forms of life that maintain and protect each other. The lawn, on the other hand, represents the absolute loss of soil health, minerals in the soil, beneficial insects in soil and air, land mammals, plant diversity, and so on. It is essentially a deserted, poisoned wasteland that has been stripped of life.
Please choose the diverse beauty of gardens, trees, shrubs, and flowers over a lawn.
Where can I grow plants?
Plants are very easy to grow, and many can be grown in a pot by a window or with a grow light inside your home. Outdoor gardening options are also very diverse and can be fun to explore. You can grow food in any container, even a small cup. Also, you can grow plants in raised beds outside, in an old bathtub, in hanging baskets, used bottles, or in any container that will hold the plant in place.
What is best to grow?
Gardening varies widely according to weather patterns, seasons, and geographical region. There are certain crops, in general, that tend to be the easiest to grow. These include:
* salad greens (lettuces, arugula, swiss chard, collard greens, spinach)
* nightshade vegetables (squashes, peppers, tomatoes),
* root vegetables (radishes, potatoes)
* cruciferous vegetables (broccoli, cauliflower, Brussels sprouts)
* fruits and nuts,
* herbs (parsley, basil, thai basil, oregano, rosemary)
* berries (strawberries and blueberries)
* green beans
How do I grow food?
To grow food, simply drop one or two seeds into a dixie cup half filled with peat or seed-starting soil. While the seeds sprout, it is best to keep them indoors in warm, controllable conditions. Water them only every few days. The idea is to keep them moist but not fully wet. Baby sprouts could damp off if they are watered too much. This means basically that they could bend over and die from root-rot. If desired, keep a grow light on them. When they are a few weeks old, begin to acclimate them to the outdoors. After a week of increasing their exposure to sun and wind, then plant them in a pot or in a raised bed outdoors. From here, give them periodic water, sunshine, and natural compost to enrich their nutrients.
"What if I do not have a green thumb?"
If you have no desire to grow food or you lack a green thumb, then you can still help. Eat food from your neighbor`s garden and buy your food from local farms and community gardens.
Where can I learn more?
Nearly every state has a Master Gardener`s program [13]. These offer free information on organic gardening that is specially-suited to your region. They consist mostly of volunteers who love gardening and farming, and they are happy to help. Also, local farmers and CSA`s (Community Supported Agriculture) often can provide you with helpful tips as well as their favorite books. Evening classes, weekend workshops at farms, and college courses also help. Some recommended books to get you started include:
American Horticultural Society, and Alan R. Toogood. Plant Propagation. New York: DK Pub, 1999.
Flowerdew, Bob. The No Work Garden: Getting the Most Out of Your Garden for the Least Amount of Work. London: Kyle Cathie, 2004.
Hamilton, Geoff. Organic Gardening. RD home handbooks. Pleasantville, N.Y.: Reader`s Digest Association, 1992.
Happy Gardening!
"Earth laughs in flowers." -Ralph Waldo Emerson
Resources
1. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/gardenin...
2. An excellent documentary film that I highly recommend is The Power Of Community: How Cuba Survived Peak Oil http://www.powerofcommunity.org
3. http://www.coxwashington.com/hp/con...
4. http://www.projectcensored.org/top-...
5. One of many examples: Emanuel, Kerry. "Increasing Destructiveness of Tropical Cyclones over the Past 30 years." Nature. Volume 1436, 4 August 2005, pages 686-688.
6. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bnZg...
7. http://www.naturalnews.com/025662.html
8. http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubs...
9. http://www.britannica.com/blogs/200...
10. See, for example: http://www.leopold.iastate.edu/pubs...
11. This calculation is based on a U.S. estimated population of 306,000,000.
12. http://www.eparks.org/wildlife_prot...
13. For a complete list of Master Gardener programs: http://www.ahs.org/master_gardeners...
Friday, February 20, 2009
Recipes: Raw Cauliflower Curry with sweet sauce
Zoe’s Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce has to be the best raw food recipe I have found. It is SOOOO good!
Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce- Raw Vegan
This is slightly adapted from the samosa recipe in “Raw food real world” Sarma M. and Matthew Kenney.
You can make Indian crepes or even tortilla type breads and wrap the curry it up to make samosas with it, or just eat it with the sauce as it is.
Ingredients:
1 cauliflower, florets only
1 tablespoon garam masala
1 tablespoon special curry blend (hot and spicy Indian type) or substitute garam masala with a little hot red chili pepper.
1 tablespoon fresh ginger
1 teaspoon salt
1 cup fresh peas
1 handful fresh coriander (cilantro)
12 dates
1 tablespoon raw olive oil
1 banana
1 teaspoon ground cumin
1 teaspoon fresh ginger
½ small red hot chilli pepper, de seed
1 cup water
¾ cup pine nuts
Preparation:
Pulse the cauliflower a few times in the food processor so it is like rice.
In your blender add: pine nuts, water, 1 tablespoon garam masala, special curry blend, salt, and ginger. Blend until smooth like heavy thick cream. Have a taste.
Mix the cream with the cauliflower, add the peas and the coriander and stir in by hand, or with your hands like I do!
To make the sweet sauce:
Puree in your blender: dates, olive oil, banana, cumin, 1 teaspoon ginger, chilli pepper, salt.
Put a few dollops of the sweet sauce on top of the cauliflower curry. Try it without the sweet sauce, some prefer it that way.
Tonight I’m going to try it with Roshi’s Kofta. I loved his kofta recipe but not the curry sauce. I think it will taste excellent with a little of Zoe’s sauce.
Roshi’s Kofta Koftas: - Raw Vegan
* 1 1/2 handfuls walnuts
* 1/2 tsp cumin
* 1/2 tsp coriander
* 1 tsp Nama Shoyu/Bragg’s Liquid Aminos
* 1 large soft date
Pulse walnuts, cumin, coriander and nama shoyu in food processor until walnuts are in small pieces. Mash mixture together and roll into little balls
Meal Plan:
Breakfast- large green juice, blueberries and strawberries
Lunch- Not sure yet… but some sort of salad
Dinner- Samosa (Zoe’s recipe above wrapped in collard greens), Malai Kofta (using Zoe’s Curry and Roshi’s Kofta).
Yesterday:
Breakfast- mixed fruit
Lunch- Zoe’s Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce
Dinner- (it was so good I had it again!) Zoe’s Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce, with a large piece of Naan. (naan not raw)
Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce- Raw Vegan
This is slightly adapted from the samosa recipe in “Raw food real world” Sarma M. and Matthew Kenney.
You can make Indian crepes or even tortilla type breads and wrap the curry it up to make samosas with it, or just eat it with the sauce as it is.
Ingredients:
1 cauliflower, florets only
1 tablespoon garam masala
1 tablespoon special curry blend (hot and spicy Indian type) or substitute garam masala with a little hot red chili pepper.
1 tablespoon fresh ginger
1 teaspoon salt
1 cup fresh peas
1 handful fresh coriander (cilantro)
12 dates
1 tablespoon raw olive oil
1 banana
1 teaspoon ground cumin
1 teaspoon fresh ginger
½ small red hot chilli pepper, de seed
1 cup water
¾ cup pine nuts
Preparation:
Pulse the cauliflower a few times in the food processor so it is like rice.
In your blender add: pine nuts, water, 1 tablespoon garam masala, special curry blend, salt, and ginger. Blend until smooth like heavy thick cream. Have a taste.
Mix the cream with the cauliflower, add the peas and the coriander and stir in by hand, or with your hands like I do!
To make the sweet sauce:
Puree in your blender: dates, olive oil, banana, cumin, 1 teaspoon ginger, chilli pepper, salt.
Put a few dollops of the sweet sauce on top of the cauliflower curry. Try it without the sweet sauce, some prefer it that way.
Tonight I’m going to try it with Roshi’s Kofta. I loved his kofta recipe but not the curry sauce. I think it will taste excellent with a little of Zoe’s sauce.
Roshi’s Kofta Koftas: - Raw Vegan
* 1 1/2 handfuls walnuts
* 1/2 tsp cumin
* 1/2 tsp coriander
* 1 tsp Nama Shoyu/Bragg’s Liquid Aminos
* 1 large soft date
Pulse walnuts, cumin, coriander and nama shoyu in food processor until walnuts are in small pieces. Mash mixture together and roll into little balls
Meal Plan:
Breakfast- large green juice, blueberries and strawberries
Lunch- Not sure yet… but some sort of salad
Dinner- Samosa (Zoe’s recipe above wrapped in collard greens), Malai Kofta (using Zoe’s Curry and Roshi’s Kofta).
Yesterday:
Breakfast- mixed fruit
Lunch- Zoe’s Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce
Dinner- (it was so good I had it again!) Zoe’s Cauliflower Curry with Sweet Sauce, with a large piece of Naan. (naan not raw)
Thursday, February 19, 2009
Plastic Bags and Animals: Making the Wild Safe For Wildlife
Gregory McNamee - January 27th, 2009
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/01/plastic-bags-animals-making-the-wild-safe-for-wildlife/
The news comes with depressing regularity. A whale dies in an urban harbor and, on being autopsied, reveals a stomach full of plastic, the most abundant detritus of civilization. Remarks a British marine biologist, “We have recorded plastic bags in the Bay of Biscay [in western Europe] over 120 miles from shore in waters over 4,000 meters in depth. Beaked whale species in particular are highly susceptible to swallowing plastic bags as they are believed to strongly resemble their target prey, squid. Other species of large whales, which take large mouthfuls of water during feeding, also take in plastic bags by accident and hence are also at risk.”
Elsewhere, a flamingo strangles itself on a bag, unable to twist its way out of the entangling plastic. A platypus suffers deep cuts from a plastic bag entwined around its body, while a pelican dies after consuming plastic bags while diving for fish. Calves, turtles, dolphins, seals—the list of victims goes on. Another scientist has recorded 170 kinds of land animals and birds injured by plastics washed up on British beaches, joining myriad aquatic species who suffer the effects of discarded bags in the environment.
The bad news continues. In November 2008 in Australia, a 10-foot-long crocodile tagged as part of a government wildlife-tracking program turned up dead, having consumed 25 plastic shopping and garbage bags. Whitey, as the crocodile was dubbed, had been relocated to a popular tourist destination called Magnetic Island, and authorities at first feared that he had died as a result of eating garbage left behind by visitors. Said Keith Williams of the group Australian Seabird Rescue, however, “Whitey probably was picking up plastic long before [being moved].”
Indonesian boy collects plastic bags from a polluted river in Jakarta; Jurnasyanto Sukarno—CorbisPlastics take hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of years to break down in most environments, such that it is not a stretch to imagine a single bag killing more than one animal over a very long lifetime on land and sea. And while the statistics are incomplete, some conservationists estimate that at least 100,000 mammals and birds die from them each year, felled by the estimated 500 billion and more plastic bags that are produced and consumed around the world; the numbers of fish killed by them are unknown, but they are sure to number in the millions.
Word of that devastation is spreading, and countries around the world have taken measures to limit or ban the use of throwaway plastic bags. The first to do so was Bangladesh, which banned plastic bags in 2002; following a particularly damaging typhoon, authorities discovered that millions of bags were clogging the country’s system of flood drains, contributing to the destruction.
In the same year, Ireland took another approach and instituted a steep tax on plastics. According to the country’s Ministry of Environment, use fell by 90 percent as a result, and the tax money that was generated funded a greatly expanded recycling program throughout the country. In 2003 the government of Taiwan put in place a system by which bags were no longer made available in markets without charge, and carryout restaurants were even required to charge for plastic utensils.
Larger economies have joined the cause. Australia has called for a voluntary ban, and thus far consumption of the bags has fallen markedly as 90 percent of the country’s retailers have signed on to the program. In 2005, French legislators imposed a ban on all nonbiodegradable plastic bags, to go into effect in 2010. Italy will also ban them that year, and China has already prohibited bags less than 0.025 millimeters thick. “Our country consumes a huge amount of plastic shopping bags each year,” a spokesperson for China’s State Council said on announcing the ban last May. “While plastic shopping bags provide convenience to consumers, this has caused a serious waste of energy and resources and environmental pollution because of excessive usage, inadequate recycling and other reasons.”
In the United States, however, measures to ban or curtail the use of plastic bags have met with official resistance. With its powerful lobby, the plastics industry argues that jobs will disappear—and the industry employs some two million workers, at least in good times—if the trade in plastic bags is reduced. But these are not good times, bans or no, and critics point out that Americans alone throw out at least 100 billion bags a year, the equivalent of throwing away 12 million gallons of oil, which seems an intolerable waste.
Thus, even in the United States, the no-bags campaign is gaining ground. During its 2008 session, the New York State Legislature passed legislation requiring the “reduction, reuse, and recycling” of checkout bags. The previous year, the city of San Francisco banned plastic bags altogether, at least the flimsy ones of yore. National Public Radio reported a few months later that the ban had been a boon for local plastics manufacturers, who have been introducing heavy-duty, recyclable, and even compostable bags into the marketplace.
“I’m Not a Plastic Bag” bag for sale at a supermarket—Mario Tama/Getty Images.And New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has lately been talking of imposing a citywide tax of six cents for every plastic bag dispensed—one source of quick revenue in tight times, at least until consumers catch on and stop paying the surcharge by carrying their own shopping bags. Just so, speaking directly to our wallets, more and more grocery stores in the United States are offering small incentives to customers who do so. Trader Joe’s, a popular California-based chain, offers such customers raffle tickets for free groceries, while Albertson’s, another chain, gives a small cash credit.
Could the plastic grocery bag one day be a relic, like the eight-track tape and the Model A? Given current trends, it seems a very real possibility—and that is a most welcome development for wildlife around the world.
* * *
Images: A cow eats a plastic bag from the River Ganges in India; hundreds of cows die annually from choking on plastic bags containing vegetable waste—Rajesh Kumar Singh/AP Images; Indonesian boy collects plastic from a raft in a polluted river in Jakarta—Jurnasyanto Sukarno—epa/Corbis; “I’m Not a Plastic Bag” bag for sale at a supermarket—Mario Tama/Getty Images.
http://www.britannica.com/blogs/2009/01/plastic-bags-animals-making-the-wild-safe-for-wildlife/
The news comes with depressing regularity. A whale dies in an urban harbor and, on being autopsied, reveals a stomach full of plastic, the most abundant detritus of civilization. Remarks a British marine biologist, “We have recorded plastic bags in the Bay of Biscay [in western Europe] over 120 miles from shore in waters over 4,000 meters in depth. Beaked whale species in particular are highly susceptible to swallowing plastic bags as they are believed to strongly resemble their target prey, squid. Other species of large whales, which take large mouthfuls of water during feeding, also take in plastic bags by accident and hence are also at risk.”
Elsewhere, a flamingo strangles itself on a bag, unable to twist its way out of the entangling plastic. A platypus suffers deep cuts from a plastic bag entwined around its body, while a pelican dies after consuming plastic bags while diving for fish. Calves, turtles, dolphins, seals—the list of victims goes on. Another scientist has recorded 170 kinds of land animals and birds injured by plastics washed up on British beaches, joining myriad aquatic species who suffer the effects of discarded bags in the environment.
The bad news continues. In November 2008 in Australia, a 10-foot-long crocodile tagged as part of a government wildlife-tracking program turned up dead, having consumed 25 plastic shopping and garbage bags. Whitey, as the crocodile was dubbed, had been relocated to a popular tourist destination called Magnetic Island, and authorities at first feared that he had died as a result of eating garbage left behind by visitors. Said Keith Williams of the group Australian Seabird Rescue, however, “Whitey probably was picking up plastic long before [being moved].”
Indonesian boy collects plastic bags from a polluted river in Jakarta; Jurnasyanto Sukarno—CorbisPlastics take hundreds, perhaps even thousands, of years to break down in most environments, such that it is not a stretch to imagine a single bag killing more than one animal over a very long lifetime on land and sea. And while the statistics are incomplete, some conservationists estimate that at least 100,000 mammals and birds die from them each year, felled by the estimated 500 billion and more plastic bags that are produced and consumed around the world; the numbers of fish killed by them are unknown, but they are sure to number in the millions.
Word of that devastation is spreading, and countries around the world have taken measures to limit or ban the use of throwaway plastic bags. The first to do so was Bangladesh, which banned plastic bags in 2002; following a particularly damaging typhoon, authorities discovered that millions of bags were clogging the country’s system of flood drains, contributing to the destruction.
In the same year, Ireland took another approach and instituted a steep tax on plastics. According to the country’s Ministry of Environment, use fell by 90 percent as a result, and the tax money that was generated funded a greatly expanded recycling program throughout the country. In 2003 the government of Taiwan put in place a system by which bags were no longer made available in markets without charge, and carryout restaurants were even required to charge for plastic utensils.
Larger economies have joined the cause. Australia has called for a voluntary ban, and thus far consumption of the bags has fallen markedly as 90 percent of the country’s retailers have signed on to the program. In 2005, French legislators imposed a ban on all nonbiodegradable plastic bags, to go into effect in 2010. Italy will also ban them that year, and China has already prohibited bags less than 0.025 millimeters thick. “Our country consumes a huge amount of plastic shopping bags each year,” a spokesperson for China’s State Council said on announcing the ban last May. “While plastic shopping bags provide convenience to consumers, this has caused a serious waste of energy and resources and environmental pollution because of excessive usage, inadequate recycling and other reasons.”
In the United States, however, measures to ban or curtail the use of plastic bags have met with official resistance. With its powerful lobby, the plastics industry argues that jobs will disappear—and the industry employs some two million workers, at least in good times—if the trade in plastic bags is reduced. But these are not good times, bans or no, and critics point out that Americans alone throw out at least 100 billion bags a year, the equivalent of throwing away 12 million gallons of oil, which seems an intolerable waste.
Thus, even in the United States, the no-bags campaign is gaining ground. During its 2008 session, the New York State Legislature passed legislation requiring the “reduction, reuse, and recycling” of checkout bags. The previous year, the city of San Francisco banned plastic bags altogether, at least the flimsy ones of yore. National Public Radio reported a few months later that the ban had been a boon for local plastics manufacturers, who have been introducing heavy-duty, recyclable, and even compostable bags into the marketplace.
“I’m Not a Plastic Bag” bag for sale at a supermarket—Mario Tama/Getty Images.And New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg has lately been talking of imposing a citywide tax of six cents for every plastic bag dispensed—one source of quick revenue in tight times, at least until consumers catch on and stop paying the surcharge by carrying their own shopping bags. Just so, speaking directly to our wallets, more and more grocery stores in the United States are offering small incentives to customers who do so. Trader Joe’s, a popular California-based chain, offers such customers raffle tickets for free groceries, while Albertson’s, another chain, gives a small cash credit.
Could the plastic grocery bag one day be a relic, like the eight-track tape and the Model A? Given current trends, it seems a very real possibility—and that is a most welcome development for wildlife around the world.
* * *
Images: A cow eats a plastic bag from the River Ganges in India; hundreds of cows die annually from choking on plastic bags containing vegetable waste—Rajesh Kumar Singh/AP Images; Indonesian boy collects plastic from a raft in a polluted river in Jakarta—Jurnasyanto Sukarno—epa/Corbis; “I’m Not a Plastic Bag” bag for sale at a supermarket—Mario Tama/Getty Images.
McKibben outlines climate change effects
http://www.wickedlocal.com/lexington/news/lifestyle/columnists/x82779428/350-McKibben-outlines-climate-change-effects
350: McKibben outlines climate change effects
By Global Warming Action Coalition
Thu Feb 19, 2009, 06:00 AM EST
Lexington - In a recent letter, author and Lexington native Bill McKibben began: “Act now, we’re told, if we want to save the planet from a climate catastrophe. Trouble is, it might be too late. The science is settled, and the damage has already begun. The only question now is whether we will stop playing political games and embrace the few imperfect options we have left.”
The letter addresses seven widely held misconceptions about climate change.
A synopsis of the first three misconceptions — Scientists Are Divided, We Have Time, and Climate Change Will Help as Many Places as It Hurts — ran in this column Feb. 5.
Here is the letter in its entirety.
1. Scientists are divided. There has been astounding consensus throughout the scientific community that global warming is real, dangerous, and caused by humans. Although the details of future forecasts remain unclear, there’s no serious question about the general shape of what’s to come.
By September 2007, there was 25 percent less ice in the Arctic Ocean than ever measured before. By the end of the summer season in 2008, so much ice had melted that both the Northwest and Northeast passages were open.
Scientists are breathless. The computer models said this shouldn’t have happened until sometime late in the 21st century. Even skeptics can’t dispute such alarming events.
2. We have time. The melting Arctic ice will help speed up global warming. The white ice that reflects 80 percent of incoming solar radiation back to space is being replaced with blue water that is absorbing 80 percent of the sunshine. As northern permafrost thaws, huge amounts of methane gas (an even more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide) long trapped below the ice are escaping into the atmosphere.
Economist Rajendra Pachauri said recently that we must begin to make fundamental reforms by 2012 or watch the climate system spin out of control; NASA scientist James Hansen, who blew the whistle on climate change in the late 1980s, has said that we must stop burning coal by 2030. Period.
The Copenhagen climate change talks set to take place in December 2009 couldn’t be more urgent. At issue is the level of carbon dioxide in the air.
Hansen argues that 350 parts per million is the highest level we can maintain “if humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted.” We’re already past that mark — carbon dioxide levels are currently about 387 parts per million and growing.
Global warming suddenly feels less like a huge problem, and more like an Oh-My-God Emergency.
3. Climate change will help as many places as it hurts. Recent models are showing that after a certain point almost everyone on the planet will suffer. Crops might be easier to grow in some places for a few decades as the danger of frost recedes, but over time the threat of heat stress and drought will almost certainly be stronger.
A 2003 Pentagon report forecasts the possibility of violent storms across Europe, megadroughts across the Southwest United States and Mexico, and unpredictable monsoons causing food shortages in China.
The scenario suggests that as the planet’s carrying capacity shrinks, an ancient pattern of desperate, all-out wars over food, water, and energy supplies will reemerge. Warfare may again come to define human life.
4. It’s China’s fault. China has overtaken the U.S. as the world’s biggest carbon dioxide (CO2) producer, and everyone has read about the pace of power plant construction there. But a lot of that CO2 was emitted to build products for Western consumption.
Furthermore, China has four times the population of the U.S., and per capita it’s really the only way to think about these emissions. By that standard, each Chinese person now emits just over a quarter of the CO2 that each American does.
Not only that, CO2 lives in the atmosphere for more than a century. China has been at it in a big way less than 20 years, so it will be many, many years before the Chinese are as responsible for global warming as Americans.
Also, unlike many counterparts in the U.S., Chinese officials have begun a concerted effort to reduce emissions in the midst of their country’s staggering growth. China now leads the world in the deployment of renewable energy — barely a car made in the U.S. meets China’s tougher fuel-economy standards.
Climate change is neither any one country’s fault, nor any one country’s responsibility. It will require sacrifice from everyone.
Call it a Marshall Plan for the environment, which makes eminent moral and practical sense and could probably be structured so as to bolster emerging green energy industries in the West.
5. Climate Change is an environmental problem. While environmentalists were the first to sound the alarm, CO2 is not like traditional pollutant. There’s no Clean Air Act that can solve it.
We must make fundamental transformations in shifting away from fossil fuels to something else. For the U.S., it’s at least as much a problem for the Commerce and Treasury departments as it is for the Environmental Protection Agency. And because every country on Earth will have to coordinate, it’s far and away the biggest foreign policy issue we face.
6. Solving it will be painful. How painful addressing climate change will be depends. On one hand, you’re talking about transforming the backbone of the world’s industrial and consumer system. That’s certainly expensive.
On the other hand, if you manage to convert to solar or wind power, you’d save a lot of money on fuel.
And then there’s the growing realization that green energy could help pull us out of our current economic crisis — bigger than IT and biotech combined.
And what’s the cost of doing nothing? One renowned economist concluded that the costs of climate change could eventually reach the combined costs of both world wars and the Great Depression. For one thing, the increased costs of natural disasters begin to compound.
In essence, we’ve already done too much damage and waited too long to have any easy options left.
7. We can reverse climate change. The warming is happening faster than we expected, and the results are more widespread and more disturbing. None of that is going to stop, even if we do everything right from here on out. The only question now is whether we can hold off catastrophe.
It won’t be easy, because the scientific consensus calls for roughly 5 degrees more warming this century unless we do just about everything right. And if our behavior up until now is any indication, we won’t.
Bill McKibben is the author of 10 books, including “The End of Nature” and “Deep Economy,” and is a long-time advocate for taking action to halt global warming. A former staff writer for The New Yorker, he writes regularly for Harper’s and The Atlantic Monthly, among other publications. Brought to you by the Lexington Global Warming Action Coalition.
350: McKibben outlines climate change effects
By Global Warming Action Coalition
Thu Feb 19, 2009, 06:00 AM EST
Lexington - In a recent letter, author and Lexington native Bill McKibben began: “Act now, we’re told, if we want to save the planet from a climate catastrophe. Trouble is, it might be too late. The science is settled, and the damage has already begun. The only question now is whether we will stop playing political games and embrace the few imperfect options we have left.”
The letter addresses seven widely held misconceptions about climate change.
A synopsis of the first three misconceptions — Scientists Are Divided, We Have Time, and Climate Change Will Help as Many Places as It Hurts — ran in this column Feb. 5.
Here is the letter in its entirety.
1. Scientists are divided. There has been astounding consensus throughout the scientific community that global warming is real, dangerous, and caused by humans. Although the details of future forecasts remain unclear, there’s no serious question about the general shape of what’s to come.
By September 2007, there was 25 percent less ice in the Arctic Ocean than ever measured before. By the end of the summer season in 2008, so much ice had melted that both the Northwest and Northeast passages were open.
Scientists are breathless. The computer models said this shouldn’t have happened until sometime late in the 21st century. Even skeptics can’t dispute such alarming events.
2. We have time. The melting Arctic ice will help speed up global warming. The white ice that reflects 80 percent of incoming solar radiation back to space is being replaced with blue water that is absorbing 80 percent of the sunshine. As northern permafrost thaws, huge amounts of methane gas (an even more potent greenhouse gas than carbon dioxide) long trapped below the ice are escaping into the atmosphere.
Economist Rajendra Pachauri said recently that we must begin to make fundamental reforms by 2012 or watch the climate system spin out of control; NASA scientist James Hansen, who blew the whistle on climate change in the late 1980s, has said that we must stop burning coal by 2030. Period.
The Copenhagen climate change talks set to take place in December 2009 couldn’t be more urgent. At issue is the level of carbon dioxide in the air.
Hansen argues that 350 parts per million is the highest level we can maintain “if humanity wishes to preserve a planet similar to that on which civilization developed and to which life on Earth is adapted.” We’re already past that mark — carbon dioxide levels are currently about 387 parts per million and growing.
Global warming suddenly feels less like a huge problem, and more like an Oh-My-God Emergency.
3. Climate change will help as many places as it hurts. Recent models are showing that after a certain point almost everyone on the planet will suffer. Crops might be easier to grow in some places for a few decades as the danger of frost recedes, but over time the threat of heat stress and drought will almost certainly be stronger.
A 2003 Pentagon report forecasts the possibility of violent storms across Europe, megadroughts across the Southwest United States and Mexico, and unpredictable monsoons causing food shortages in China.
The scenario suggests that as the planet’s carrying capacity shrinks, an ancient pattern of desperate, all-out wars over food, water, and energy supplies will reemerge. Warfare may again come to define human life.
4. It’s China’s fault. China has overtaken the U.S. as the world’s biggest carbon dioxide (CO2) producer, and everyone has read about the pace of power plant construction there. But a lot of that CO2 was emitted to build products for Western consumption.
Furthermore, China has four times the population of the U.S., and per capita it’s really the only way to think about these emissions. By that standard, each Chinese person now emits just over a quarter of the CO2 that each American does.
Not only that, CO2 lives in the atmosphere for more than a century. China has been at it in a big way less than 20 years, so it will be many, many years before the Chinese are as responsible for global warming as Americans.
Also, unlike many counterparts in the U.S., Chinese officials have begun a concerted effort to reduce emissions in the midst of their country’s staggering growth. China now leads the world in the deployment of renewable energy — barely a car made in the U.S. meets China’s tougher fuel-economy standards.
Climate change is neither any one country’s fault, nor any one country’s responsibility. It will require sacrifice from everyone.
Call it a Marshall Plan for the environment, which makes eminent moral and practical sense and could probably be structured so as to bolster emerging green energy industries in the West.
5. Climate Change is an environmental problem. While environmentalists were the first to sound the alarm, CO2 is not like traditional pollutant. There’s no Clean Air Act that can solve it.
We must make fundamental transformations in shifting away from fossil fuels to something else. For the U.S., it’s at least as much a problem for the Commerce and Treasury departments as it is for the Environmental Protection Agency. And because every country on Earth will have to coordinate, it’s far and away the biggest foreign policy issue we face.
6. Solving it will be painful. How painful addressing climate change will be depends. On one hand, you’re talking about transforming the backbone of the world’s industrial and consumer system. That’s certainly expensive.
On the other hand, if you manage to convert to solar or wind power, you’d save a lot of money on fuel.
And then there’s the growing realization that green energy could help pull us out of our current economic crisis — bigger than IT and biotech combined.
And what’s the cost of doing nothing? One renowned economist concluded that the costs of climate change could eventually reach the combined costs of both world wars and the Great Depression. For one thing, the increased costs of natural disasters begin to compound.
In essence, we’ve already done too much damage and waited too long to have any easy options left.
7. We can reverse climate change. The warming is happening faster than we expected, and the results are more widespread and more disturbing. None of that is going to stop, even if we do everything right from here on out. The only question now is whether we can hold off catastrophe.
It won’t be easy, because the scientific consensus calls for roughly 5 degrees more warming this century unless we do just about everything right. And if our behavior up until now is any indication, we won’t.
Bill McKibben is the author of 10 books, including “The End of Nature” and “Deep Economy,” and is a long-time advocate for taking action to halt global warming. A former staff writer for The New Yorker, he writes regularly for Harper’s and The Atlantic Monthly, among other publications. Brought to you by the Lexington Global Warming Action Coalition.
8 Reasons to Kiss More
Eight Reasons to Kiss More! (And They’re ALL Great for Your Health!)
by www.SixWise.com
http://www.sixwise.com/Newsletters/2009/February/18/Eight-Reasons-to-Kiss-More.htm?source=nl
More than 90 percent of human societies kiss, perhaps signaling that this ancient expression of love is practiced for good reason. Of course kissing feels good, and inherently we like the way it makes us feel close to our partner, but a kiss impacts us on a far deeper, more primal level than you might expect.
For starters, a kiss may invoke a gut feeling or intuition in women, who often say they can tell if a relationship is going to work out after the first kiss, and certainly after the first night of kissing, according to Michael Cane, author of The Art of Kissing.
But the benefits of kissing stretch far beyond that, and can benefit not only women, but also men, and apply no matter what stage your relationship is at. So, in case you’re looking for more good reasons to make kissing a regular part of your life, here are eight great ones.
1. Ease stress. A new study by scientists from Lafayette College found that kissing decreases levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, which indicates that a good smooch may ease your stress.
2. Get the benefits of meditation. "It [Kissing] stops the buzz in your mind, it quells anxiety, and it heightens the experience of being present in the moment. It actually produces a lot of the physiological changes that meditation produces," Joy Davidson, PhD, psychologist and clinical sexologist in Seattle, told WebMD.
3. Encourage bonding for men. Kissing raises levels of oxytocin, a chemical that affects bonding, in men. Researchers from Lafayette College concluded that kissing may therefore make men more interested in bonding.
4. Keep your teeth healthy. The extra saliva from a kiss helps to wash bacteria off your teeth, which may help break down plaque.
5. Boost your immunity. Though this hasn’t been scientifically proven, experts such as Helen Fisher, PhD, professor of anthropology at Rutgers University in Newark, N.J., believe sharing germs with someone adds to your own internal defense system.
6. Exercise the muscles in your face. A French kiss that involves a lot of tongue action exercises up to 29 muscles in your cheeks and jaw, which could potentially help your face stay young-looking.
7. Burn calories. A passionate kiss burns two calories a minute, which is double your metabolic rate!
8. Stimulate your brain. "When you kiss an enormous part of your brain becomes active," Fisher told the Associated Press. This can lead to feelings of euphoria and well-being, or increase your sex drive.
The Power of a Kiss
Interestingly, while a good kiss can lead to all of the benefits above and more, a bad kiss can signal to partners that they’re not meant to be.
"A kiss is a mechanism for mate assessment," Fisher said in a Reuters article.
She believes that kissing activates chemicals that stimulate different areas of your brain used for mating and reproduction. These include:
1. Sex drive: Tied to testosterone, which is present in saliva. "We do have evidence that saliva has testosterone in it. And there is also evidence that men like sloppier kisses, and more open-mouthed kisses. That suggests to me they are unconsciously trying to transfer testosterone to trigger the sex drive in women," Fisher told Reuters.
2. Romantic or passionate love: Motivates people to focus on one mate.
3. Attachment: This helps couples stay together and raise a child.
And this is only the beginning. Researchers have only skimmed the surface of the art or science of kissing, known as philematology, and time will likely reveal even more fascinating insights into the deceptively simple act of a kiss.
"I think we will find all kinds of chemical systems are at play in courtship that we are not aware of," Fisher said in Reuters.
by www.SixWise.com
http://www.sixwise.com/Newsletters/2009/February/18/Eight-Reasons-to-Kiss-More.htm?source=nl
More than 90 percent of human societies kiss, perhaps signaling that this ancient expression of love is practiced for good reason. Of course kissing feels good, and inherently we like the way it makes us feel close to our partner, but a kiss impacts us on a far deeper, more primal level than you might expect.
For starters, a kiss may invoke a gut feeling or intuition in women, who often say they can tell if a relationship is going to work out after the first kiss, and certainly after the first night of kissing, according to Michael Cane, author of The Art of Kissing.
But the benefits of kissing stretch far beyond that, and can benefit not only women, but also men, and apply no matter what stage your relationship is at. So, in case you’re looking for more good reasons to make kissing a regular part of your life, here are eight great ones.
1. Ease stress. A new study by scientists from Lafayette College found that kissing decreases levels of cortisol, a stress hormone, which indicates that a good smooch may ease your stress.
2. Get the benefits of meditation. "It [Kissing] stops the buzz in your mind, it quells anxiety, and it heightens the experience of being present in the moment. It actually produces a lot of the physiological changes that meditation produces," Joy Davidson, PhD, psychologist and clinical sexologist in Seattle, told WebMD.
3. Encourage bonding for men. Kissing raises levels of oxytocin, a chemical that affects bonding, in men. Researchers from Lafayette College concluded that kissing may therefore make men more interested in bonding.
4. Keep your teeth healthy. The extra saliva from a kiss helps to wash bacteria off your teeth, which may help break down plaque.
5. Boost your immunity. Though this hasn’t been scientifically proven, experts such as Helen Fisher, PhD, professor of anthropology at Rutgers University in Newark, N.J., believe sharing germs with someone adds to your own internal defense system.
6. Exercise the muscles in your face. A French kiss that involves a lot of tongue action exercises up to 29 muscles in your cheeks and jaw, which could potentially help your face stay young-looking.
7. Burn calories. A passionate kiss burns two calories a minute, which is double your metabolic rate!
8. Stimulate your brain. "When you kiss an enormous part of your brain becomes active," Fisher told the Associated Press. This can lead to feelings of euphoria and well-being, or increase your sex drive.
The Power of a Kiss
Interestingly, while a good kiss can lead to all of the benefits above and more, a bad kiss can signal to partners that they’re not meant to be.
"A kiss is a mechanism for mate assessment," Fisher said in a Reuters article.
She believes that kissing activates chemicals that stimulate different areas of your brain used for mating and reproduction. These include:
1. Sex drive: Tied to testosterone, which is present in saliva. "We do have evidence that saliva has testosterone in it. And there is also evidence that men like sloppier kisses, and more open-mouthed kisses. That suggests to me they are unconsciously trying to transfer testosterone to trigger the sex drive in women," Fisher told Reuters.
2. Romantic or passionate love: Motivates people to focus on one mate.
3. Attachment: This helps couples stay together and raise a child.
And this is only the beginning. Researchers have only skimmed the surface of the art or science of kissing, known as philematology, and time will likely reveal even more fascinating insights into the deceptively simple act of a kiss.
"I think we will find all kinds of chemical systems are at play in courtship that we are not aware of," Fisher said in Reuters.
Is It Possible to be a Conscientious Meat Eater?
Is It Possible to Be a Conscientious Meat Eater?
By Sunaura Taylor and Alexander Taylor, AlterNet
February 18, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/environment/127280/?page=entire
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/127280
http://www.alternet.org/story/127280/
[Read 243 comments:
http://www.alternet.org/environment/127280/?page=entire#comments ]
You may have noticed an onslaught of articles recently on what is being coined as the "new meat movement." The most recent is an article in Newsweek, "Head To Hoof: A butcher helps lead a new carnivore movement."
These articles almost all support the idea that cruelty to animals is wrong and that factory-produced meat is unjustifiably bad for the environment. However, they are not opposed to meat in and of itself, they are simply opposed to industrial meat.
These "conscientious omnivores," believe it is possible, and preferable, to eat meat the old-fashioned way -- on small, sustainable and local farms, with farmers who love their animals and perhaps even have pet names for them.
The backlash against industrial meat has been brewing for many reasons. Ever-increasing knowledge of the industry's effect on the environment, human starvation and animal welfare, is making it harder for even the most ardent omnivore to consume meat without guilt.
The much-quoted report by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, "Livestock’s Long Shadow -- Environmental Issues and Options" (Nov. 29, 2006), did a lot to raise awareness about the animal industry's devastating effects on the planet and global warming.
More and more, people are also realizing the troubling connections between human starvation and eating animal products. It takes approximately 16 pounds of grain and 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat (thus feeding one or two people on meat versus approximately 16 people on grain). Much of this grain is grown in developing countries, where a large percentage of their land is used for cattle-raising for export to the United States, instead of being used to grow staple crops, which could feed local people directly. In a world where a child starves to death every 2 seconds, it seems impossible to justify such waste.
The animal industry is partly responsible for the destruction of the Amazon and other forests, for our world's diminishing water supply, for the release of huge amounts of greenhouse gases, and basically every other environmental problem. People are also more readily accepting that the animals themselves deserve a life free from cruelty and that factory farms give them anything but.
Vegans and vegetarians have been saying many of these things for years, but it seems that people have only started listening now that there is simultaneously a proposed solution to this problem: "happy meat."
"Local," "grass-fed," "sustainably produced," "humanely raised" and "free-range" are just a few of the benevolent-sounding phrases that greet conscientious shoppers in the meat department. Animal-rights activists jokingly call these products "happy meat."
Many of these products tout pictures of smiling pigs, happy farmers in green pastures and stickers that say "humane." For many people who care about the environment and animal welfare, choosing to eat "humanely raised" meat seems like an option that honors traditional farmers and diets while also solving the ethical problems of environmental degradation and animal suffering.
But it solves neither of these problems. This meat is high-priced, and its production is an even less-efficient use of land and resources. It is often marketed as luxurious, an indulgence to be lingered over. It is inherently not adaptable to a national or international solution. Local organic meat is for an elite few, and not a practicable alternative to the massive crisis of industrial meat production.
For the first time in history, an entire civilization consumes meat as a staple. How can America truly produce enough of this "happy meat" (not too mention happy milk and happy eggs), to feed this country even a fraction of the animal products we currently consume?
Truth be told, this meat is a marketing gimmick, an ideological pose, which assuages the ethical compulsions of those who consume it even though it does nothing to kick America's cheap meat habit, and perhaps contributes to the growing international fetishization of meat as a class signifier.
Articles on the "new meat movement" never pose questions like, "could all of America's animal products be grown locally?" And they never mention what the vast majority of Americans who can't afford the prized local animal products will be consuming if all factory farms shut down -- they'd be vegan.
These farms are described as ethical because of the fact that they are small, sustainable and have kinder animal-husbandry practices. As many people have pointed out, these farms can individually produce meat in a way that is arguably just as "green" as eating vegan.
However, it is an inherent part of the ethical foundation of these farms that they cannot produce on a massive scale. As we've seen numerous times, the organic farms that do try to do this, very often become virtually no better than factory farms, despite the labels they often still get to keep.
For example, many cage-free or free-range chickens still live in devastating conditions -- they simply aren't technically kept in cages in the first case, or, in the latter case, are kept in huge, crowded and perpetually dark buildings, with a single opening leading to a few square yards of bare earth.
The question of methane pollution may also make it hard to raise animals on a massive scale, regardless of whether the farms could be sustainable in other ways.
The question is not, "are a few people eating local, sustainable, free-range pork worse environmentally than a few people eating vegan?" The question needs to be, "can we feed the world's entire growing population sustainable animal products?" I have never once seen this question addressed in one of these "new meat" articles.
But all of this is in many ways ignoring an even more complex question. Do humans even have the right to make other living beings into objects of production that we can kill even when it is unnecessary to do so, merely for our pleasure?
The words "animal rights," "vegetarian," and "vegan" are some of the most mocked and emotionally loaded terms in our language, even in very liberal circles. One has to wonder if a multibillion dollar meat industry hasn't had a part in making these words and the ideals behind them seem so laughable to so many people.
Soy has become the new evil food, and it is often said that vegans and vegetarians are hypocrites because they eat processed foods that are bad for the environment, and their diets are pretentious.
In fact, many of the studies that show negative effectives of soy are funded by the meat industry, and it is often ignored that the reason soy is so damaging environmentally is because the vast majority of it is grown to feed factory farm animals -- this is the soy that is destroying the rain forest.
It's flattering that people think that the demands of vegans could be the cause of such huge global effects. However, it is not the small number of vegans and vegetarians who are misusing soy -- it is the meat industry and the millions of omnivores who eat their products.
Eating vegan and vegetarian does not mean you eat processed food. It also does not mean you eat soy (many vegans simply do not like soy products or are allergic to them). There is nothing pretentious, hard, unhealthy or processed about eating vegetables, grains and legumes grown locally.
If people could put aside their biases against these terms, they'd see that the animal-rights position is based on very rational argument. The concept of equality itself rests on the ability to feel suffering. There is no other standard by which to base equality that does not leave out some subset of human being. If equality is based on intelligence or ability to plan for the future, than babies and many developmentally disabled people would not be included.
However, if the concept of equality is based on suffering, then it is impossible to not include animals in our moral framework. This does not mean that animals are equal to human beings in every way, it simply means that we all have an interest in not suffering, and so to cause unnecessary suffering is unethical.
Oddly, this is something that the vast majority of Americans already agree with -- it is wrong to cause unnecessary suffering to animals. Rutgers University Professor Gary Francione calls this a "moral schizophrenia." We see that unnecessary suffering is wrong -- which is a large part of why there even is a movement of "conscientious omnivores" -- and yet we refuse to see meat eating as unnecessary, even though nutritionists agree that the consumption of animal products is not necessary to our health.
Some people argue that equality should only include human beings, for no other reason than for that fact that they are human. Historically, this is very similar to sexist and racist philosophies that argued that only white men should be treated equally for no other reason than the color of their skin and their gender.
Physiologically and neurochemically, we are all very similar to the chicken killed at the local farm. We all exhibit similar signs of distress and fear. Chemically, our brains are mostly the same, obviously with differences in physical scale and complexity. Why not assume what appears to be pain is pain and that fear is fear? There is no reason, except for pride, to doubt animals have a rich inner experience.
Many people within this "new meat movement" argue that it is suffering, not killing, that is unethical. Can unnecessary killing ever be completely separated from suffering? Besides the obvious difficulty in assuring a life and death free from trauma, there are the FDA regulations, which send all larger meat animals to the same slaughterhouses that are used for factory-farmed animals -- facilities notorious for the suffering of both the animals and the employees.
Even if the animals die quickly on their home farm, what justifies this killing? Having foreknowledge of death is not a prerequisite for the right to live, or else killing an infant would not seem unethical. How are we justified in ending a life of happy contentment to satisfy a passing craving?
Meat is deeply American, connected to our culture, tradition and comfort. Many of these articles on the "new meat movement" emphasize a returning to historical practices. They romanticize the idea of the family farm of 100 years ago. I have even seen many references to getting in touch with your inner caveman through local meat.
Culture and tradition are never sufficient justification to continue unethical practices -- if they were, we would still have slavery and public torture. Traditions have to adapt with our changing values and ethics, although these changes may be uncomfortable and unwelcome.
If we agree that institutions causing animal suffering are wrong, they shouldn't be maintained merely to avoid the potential effects their abolition will have on ranchers, butchers and small farmers.
"But animals eat other animals. Eating meat is natural," some say. Appealing to nature as a justification for ethical belief is a fallacy, and it has been used historically to justify every conservative power structure. Other animals, with no alternative sustenance, having no language and being isolated in themselves, do not seem to be appropriate role models for our ethical lives.
We are animals that have evolved to recognize other beings' subjectivity, to experience empathy, and who have advanced beyond the necessity of violence to supply ourselves with food. We, uniquely, choose what we eat.
Veganism versus vegetarianism is about minimizing suffering. It is impossible to produce eggs and milk without vast amounts of killing. Veganism is about nonviolence. Veganism is more broadly sustainable, less economically divisive and less cruel than eating local meat and other animal products. There is no truly sustainable and humane way to feed all Americans even a fraction of the amount of animal products they currently consume.
An acre of land used for grass-fed beef could feed 10 times as many people if used for crops. Animals will always be bad protein converters, and the world’s population will continue to grow and be hungry. Veganism recognizes that compassion is not a limited resource. Veganism is not an asceticism. It is not a form of self-denial. Vegans do not claim to be ethically perfect.
Agriculture is, and always will be, a messy business -- there will most likely always be some level of exploitation and misguided or inefficient methods. Perhaps, as the cynical jibe goes, even the plants feel pain. That is not an argument for the continued exploitation of animals, who demonstrate clear analogs to the states which in humans recognize as indicating suffering. Vegans actively try to stop as much known suffering as possible.
Veganism is humanitarian. Becoming vegan is good for the planet and for hungry people around the globe. It is perhaps the only practicable solution to the global food crisis. It does not indicate a preference for animals over people. It is egalitarian as it does not create a class system of food access.
"Conscientious omnivores" may believe that they are eating in a radical and ethical way. However, if one really examines the issues and thinks beyond their taste buds, it has to be agreed that animal products are dangerous for the planet and always cause unnecessary suffering.
What is radical is kindness and nonviolence. We hope most people would agree that these are certainly worthy things to work toward.
Sunaura Taylor is an artist, writer and activist in Oakland, Calif. Alexander Taylor studies philosophy and ethics in Athens, Ga.
By Sunaura Taylor and Alexander Taylor, AlterNet
February 18, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/environment/127280/?page=entire
http://www.alternet.org/module/printversion/127280
http://www.alternet.org/story/127280/
[Read 243 comments:
http://www.alternet.org/environment/127280/?page=entire#comments ]
You may have noticed an onslaught of articles recently on what is being coined as the "new meat movement." The most recent is an article in Newsweek, "Head To Hoof: A butcher helps lead a new carnivore movement."
These articles almost all support the idea that cruelty to animals is wrong and that factory-produced meat is unjustifiably bad for the environment. However, they are not opposed to meat in and of itself, they are simply opposed to industrial meat.
These "conscientious omnivores," believe it is possible, and preferable, to eat meat the old-fashioned way -- on small, sustainable and local farms, with farmers who love their animals and perhaps even have pet names for them.
The backlash against industrial meat has been brewing for many reasons. Ever-increasing knowledge of the industry's effect on the environment, human starvation and animal welfare, is making it harder for even the most ardent omnivore to consume meat without guilt.
The much-quoted report by the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization, "Livestock’s Long Shadow -- Environmental Issues and Options" (Nov. 29, 2006), did a lot to raise awareness about the animal industry's devastating effects on the planet and global warming.
More and more, people are also realizing the troubling connections between human starvation and eating animal products. It takes approximately 16 pounds of grain and 2,500 gallons of water to produce 1 pound of meat (thus feeding one or two people on meat versus approximately 16 people on grain). Much of this grain is grown in developing countries, where a large percentage of their land is used for cattle-raising for export to the United States, instead of being used to grow staple crops, which could feed local people directly. In a world where a child starves to death every 2 seconds, it seems impossible to justify such waste.
The animal industry is partly responsible for the destruction of the Amazon and other forests, for our world's diminishing water supply, for the release of huge amounts of greenhouse gases, and basically every other environmental problem. People are also more readily accepting that the animals themselves deserve a life free from cruelty and that factory farms give them anything but.
Vegans and vegetarians have been saying many of these things for years, but it seems that people have only started listening now that there is simultaneously a proposed solution to this problem: "happy meat."
"Local," "grass-fed," "sustainably produced," "humanely raised" and "free-range" are just a few of the benevolent-sounding phrases that greet conscientious shoppers in the meat department. Animal-rights activists jokingly call these products "happy meat."
Many of these products tout pictures of smiling pigs, happy farmers in green pastures and stickers that say "humane." For many people who care about the environment and animal welfare, choosing to eat "humanely raised" meat seems like an option that honors traditional farmers and diets while also solving the ethical problems of environmental degradation and animal suffering.
But it solves neither of these problems. This meat is high-priced, and its production is an even less-efficient use of land and resources. It is often marketed as luxurious, an indulgence to be lingered over. It is inherently not adaptable to a national or international solution. Local organic meat is for an elite few, and not a practicable alternative to the massive crisis of industrial meat production.
For the first time in history, an entire civilization consumes meat as a staple. How can America truly produce enough of this "happy meat" (not too mention happy milk and happy eggs), to feed this country even a fraction of the animal products we currently consume?
Truth be told, this meat is a marketing gimmick, an ideological pose, which assuages the ethical compulsions of those who consume it even though it does nothing to kick America's cheap meat habit, and perhaps contributes to the growing international fetishization of meat as a class signifier.
Articles on the "new meat movement" never pose questions like, "could all of America's animal products be grown locally?" And they never mention what the vast majority of Americans who can't afford the prized local animal products will be consuming if all factory farms shut down -- they'd be vegan.
These farms are described as ethical because of the fact that they are small, sustainable and have kinder animal-husbandry practices. As many people have pointed out, these farms can individually produce meat in a way that is arguably just as "green" as eating vegan.
However, it is an inherent part of the ethical foundation of these farms that they cannot produce on a massive scale. As we've seen numerous times, the organic farms that do try to do this, very often become virtually no better than factory farms, despite the labels they often still get to keep.
For example, many cage-free or free-range chickens still live in devastating conditions -- they simply aren't technically kept in cages in the first case, or, in the latter case, are kept in huge, crowded and perpetually dark buildings, with a single opening leading to a few square yards of bare earth.
The question of methane pollution may also make it hard to raise animals on a massive scale, regardless of whether the farms could be sustainable in other ways.
The question is not, "are a few people eating local, sustainable, free-range pork worse environmentally than a few people eating vegan?" The question needs to be, "can we feed the world's entire growing population sustainable animal products?" I have never once seen this question addressed in one of these "new meat" articles.
But all of this is in many ways ignoring an even more complex question. Do humans even have the right to make other living beings into objects of production that we can kill even when it is unnecessary to do so, merely for our pleasure?
The words "animal rights," "vegetarian," and "vegan" are some of the most mocked and emotionally loaded terms in our language, even in very liberal circles. One has to wonder if a multibillion dollar meat industry hasn't had a part in making these words and the ideals behind them seem so laughable to so many people.
Soy has become the new evil food, and it is often said that vegans and vegetarians are hypocrites because they eat processed foods that are bad for the environment, and their diets are pretentious.
In fact, many of the studies that show negative effectives of soy are funded by the meat industry, and it is often ignored that the reason soy is so damaging environmentally is because the vast majority of it is grown to feed factory farm animals -- this is the soy that is destroying the rain forest.
It's flattering that people think that the demands of vegans could be the cause of such huge global effects. However, it is not the small number of vegans and vegetarians who are misusing soy -- it is the meat industry and the millions of omnivores who eat their products.
Eating vegan and vegetarian does not mean you eat processed food. It also does not mean you eat soy (many vegans simply do not like soy products or are allergic to them). There is nothing pretentious, hard, unhealthy or processed about eating vegetables, grains and legumes grown locally.
If people could put aside their biases against these terms, they'd see that the animal-rights position is based on very rational argument. The concept of equality itself rests on the ability to feel suffering. There is no other standard by which to base equality that does not leave out some subset of human being. If equality is based on intelligence or ability to plan for the future, than babies and many developmentally disabled people would not be included.
However, if the concept of equality is based on suffering, then it is impossible to not include animals in our moral framework. This does not mean that animals are equal to human beings in every way, it simply means that we all have an interest in not suffering, and so to cause unnecessary suffering is unethical.
Oddly, this is something that the vast majority of Americans already agree with -- it is wrong to cause unnecessary suffering to animals. Rutgers University Professor Gary Francione calls this a "moral schizophrenia." We see that unnecessary suffering is wrong -- which is a large part of why there even is a movement of "conscientious omnivores" -- and yet we refuse to see meat eating as unnecessary, even though nutritionists agree that the consumption of animal products is not necessary to our health.
Some people argue that equality should only include human beings, for no other reason than for that fact that they are human. Historically, this is very similar to sexist and racist philosophies that argued that only white men should be treated equally for no other reason than the color of their skin and their gender.
Physiologically and neurochemically, we are all very similar to the chicken killed at the local farm. We all exhibit similar signs of distress and fear. Chemically, our brains are mostly the same, obviously with differences in physical scale and complexity. Why not assume what appears to be pain is pain and that fear is fear? There is no reason, except for pride, to doubt animals have a rich inner experience.
Many people within this "new meat movement" argue that it is suffering, not killing, that is unethical. Can unnecessary killing ever be completely separated from suffering? Besides the obvious difficulty in assuring a life and death free from trauma, there are the FDA regulations, which send all larger meat animals to the same slaughterhouses that are used for factory-farmed animals -- facilities notorious for the suffering of both the animals and the employees.
Even if the animals die quickly on their home farm, what justifies this killing? Having foreknowledge of death is not a prerequisite for the right to live, or else killing an infant would not seem unethical. How are we justified in ending a life of happy contentment to satisfy a passing craving?
Meat is deeply American, connected to our culture, tradition and comfort. Many of these articles on the "new meat movement" emphasize a returning to historical practices. They romanticize the idea of the family farm of 100 years ago. I have even seen many references to getting in touch with your inner caveman through local meat.
Culture and tradition are never sufficient justification to continue unethical practices -- if they were, we would still have slavery and public torture. Traditions have to adapt with our changing values and ethics, although these changes may be uncomfortable and unwelcome.
If we agree that institutions causing animal suffering are wrong, they shouldn't be maintained merely to avoid the potential effects their abolition will have on ranchers, butchers and small farmers.
"But animals eat other animals. Eating meat is natural," some say. Appealing to nature as a justification for ethical belief is a fallacy, and it has been used historically to justify every conservative power structure. Other animals, with no alternative sustenance, having no language and being isolated in themselves, do not seem to be appropriate role models for our ethical lives.
We are animals that have evolved to recognize other beings' subjectivity, to experience empathy, and who have advanced beyond the necessity of violence to supply ourselves with food. We, uniquely, choose what we eat.
Veganism versus vegetarianism is about minimizing suffering. It is impossible to produce eggs and milk without vast amounts of killing. Veganism is about nonviolence. Veganism is more broadly sustainable, less economically divisive and less cruel than eating local meat and other animal products. There is no truly sustainable and humane way to feed all Americans even a fraction of the amount of animal products they currently consume.
An acre of land used for grass-fed beef could feed 10 times as many people if used for crops. Animals will always be bad protein converters, and the world’s population will continue to grow and be hungry. Veganism recognizes that compassion is not a limited resource. Veganism is not an asceticism. It is not a form of self-denial. Vegans do not claim to be ethically perfect.
Agriculture is, and always will be, a messy business -- there will most likely always be some level of exploitation and misguided or inefficient methods. Perhaps, as the cynical jibe goes, even the plants feel pain. That is not an argument for the continued exploitation of animals, who demonstrate clear analogs to the states which in humans recognize as indicating suffering. Vegans actively try to stop as much known suffering as possible.
Veganism is humanitarian. Becoming vegan is good for the planet and for hungry people around the globe. It is perhaps the only practicable solution to the global food crisis. It does not indicate a preference for animals over people. It is egalitarian as it does not create a class system of food access.
"Conscientious omnivores" may believe that they are eating in a radical and ethical way. However, if one really examines the issues and thinks beyond their taste buds, it has to be agreed that animal products are dangerous for the planet and always cause unnecessary suffering.
What is radical is kindness and nonviolence. We hope most people would agree that these are certainly worthy things to work toward.
Sunaura Taylor is an artist, writer and activist in Oakland, Calif. Alexander Taylor studies philosophy and ethics in Athens, Ga.
Is Your Computer Printer Hazardous to your Health?
Is Your Computer Printer Hazardous to Your Health?
by www.SixWise.com
http://www.sixwise.com/Newsletters/2009/February/18/Is-Your-Computer-Printer-Hazardous-to-Health.htm?source=nl
Sitting next to a laser printer could be akin to having your desk next to a chain smoker, researchers from the Queensland University of Technology in Australia revealed in 2007.
Their groundbreaking study found 30 percent of the laser printers they tested released tiny particles of toner-like material into the air, in concentrations ranging from low to high. The particles were described as "causing lasting damage on the scale of inhaled cigarette smoke,” and breathing in these tiny particles has been linked to respiratory illness, heart disease, lung disease and cancer.
"Even very small concentrations can be related to health hazards," said author Lidia Morawska, director of the International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health at Queensland University of Technology in the San Francisco Chronicle. "Where the concentrations are significantly elevated means there is potentially a considerable hazard."
Alarmingly, the researchers found laser printers could increase particulate matter in the air by up to 400 percent.
The printers in the original study were manufactured by common names including Hewlett-Packard, Toshiba, Ricoh and Canon -- and all used toner instead of ink. What was mysterious about the study’s findings, however, was why certain printers emitted high levels of particles, while others were relatively low.
Now, a follow-up study by the same group of researchers may have discovered the reason for the discrepancy.
They tested two printers from the same manufacturer, one of which may emit 100,000 percent more particles into the air than the other. What they found was that a reaction between the air and organic compounds on the paper and from the toner was producing the toxic emissions -- and the temperature of various components within the printer was responsible for the increased levels.
The researchers concluded that printer companies should investigate the temperature issue in order to make their laser printers safer, but for now potentially dangerous versions still remain on the market.
What Can You do if You Work Near a Laser Printer?
Although Hewlett-Packard has dismissed the idea that printer emissions are a public health risk, you may still want to take some precautions.
Because of their small size, ultra-fine particles in the air are especially dangerous.
"Ultra-fine particles are of most concern because they can penetrate deep into the lungs where they can pose a significant health threat," Morawska told TheAge.com.
"These [printer] particles are tiny like cigarette smoke particles and, when deep inside the lung, they do the same amount of damage … The health effects from inhaling ultra-fine particles depend on particle composition, but the results can range from respiratory irritation to more severe illness such as cardiovascular problems or cancer,” she continued.
Your risk of exposure, the researchers found, depends largely on the office building's ventilation system, which is why we highly recommend taking matters into your own hands and purifying your office air yourself.
The PIONAIR Smarte Pointe Air Treatment System, which Sixwise.com highly recommends, uses photocatalysis, which is designed to oxidize organic odors, germs, and fungi. The PIONAIR technology creates ultraviolet light rays, safe levels of ozone, and passive negative ions as part of your air treatment.
The SMART POINTE uses the same technology as the original PIONAIR system, with the added benefit of actively generated negative ions. These actively generated negative ions clear the air of particulate FASTER than the original PIONAIR system. Therefore, the PIONAIR SMART POINTE is effective against particulate such as pollen, dust, pet dander, and smoke, AS WELL AS mold, mildew, organic odors, and chemical vapors (such as formaldehyde).
The Pionair 350 Unit covers 150 to 350 sq. ft., and is perfect for a typical office. If you have a large office space, Pionair's 750 Unit covers 350 to 750 sq. ft., and if you work in a large, open environment, we recommend our largest Pionair, the 1500 Unit, which covers 750 to 1500 sq. ft.
Particularly if you work in a large space along with other workers, you may want to talk to your employer about getting one or more Pionair Units to clean the area’s air.
Keeping Your Office Air Pure is Essential to Good Health
Most Americans spend up to 90 percent of their time indoors and many spend most of their working hours in an office environment, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
EPA studies show that indoor air can sometimes have higher levels of pollutants than outdoor air, and these indoor pollutants can increase your risk of illness.
“Several studies by EPA, states, and independent scientific panels have consistently ranked indoor air pollution as an important environmental health problem. While most buildings do not have severe indoor air quality problems, even well-run buildings can sometimes experience episodes of poor indoor air quality,” the EPA writes on their Web site.
Your office manager or employer should be proactively thinking about your office environment’s air quality.
“Many common products used in offices, like solvents, adhesives, cleaners, and pesticides can give off pollutants and odors, as can office equipment such as copiers, printers, and fax machines,” writes the EPA. “If any of these items are used in the office environment, adequate and sometimes separate ventilation should be provided. If your organization engages in activities that may generate pollutants, such as photographic or printing processes, exhaust ventilation will be especially important.”
The EPA recommends that all office managers do the following to improve indoor office air:
* Maintain a good working relationship with building management on indoor environmental issues.
* Place office furniture and equipment with air circulation, temperature control, and pollutant removal functions of the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) system in mind.
* Coordinate with building management in instances when responsibility for design, operation, and maintenance of the ventilation system is shared.
* Establish an effective smoking policy that protects nonsmokers from involuntary exposure to secondhand smoke.
* Avoid procedures and products that can cause indoor air quality problems.
* Integrate indoor air quality concerns into your purchasing decisions.
* Work with the building manager to ensure use of only necessary and appropriate pest control practices, and nonchemical methods where possible.
* Work with building management and the contractor before you remodel or renovate to identify ways of keeping building occupant exposure to pollutants to a minimum and to ensure that the air distribution system is not disrupted.
* Encourage building management to develop a preventive indoor air quality management program following guidance issued by EPA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).
Further, EVERYONE who works in an office environment can help improve air quality with these tips from the EPA:
* Do not block air vents or grilles.
* Comply with the office and building smoking policy.
* Water and maintain office plants properly.
* Dispose of garbage promptly and properly.
* Store food properly.
* Avoid bringing products into the building that could release harmful or bothersome odors or contaminants.
* Notify your building or facility manager immediately if you suspect an indoor air quality problem.
by www.SixWise.com
http://www.sixwise.com/Newsletters/2009/February/18/Is-Your-Computer-Printer-Hazardous-to-Health.htm?source=nl
Sitting next to a laser printer could be akin to having your desk next to a chain smoker, researchers from the Queensland University of Technology in Australia revealed in 2007.
Their groundbreaking study found 30 percent of the laser printers they tested released tiny particles of toner-like material into the air, in concentrations ranging from low to high. The particles were described as "causing lasting damage on the scale of inhaled cigarette smoke,” and breathing in these tiny particles has been linked to respiratory illness, heart disease, lung disease and cancer.
"Even very small concentrations can be related to health hazards," said author Lidia Morawska, director of the International Laboratory for Air Quality and Health at Queensland University of Technology in the San Francisco Chronicle. "Where the concentrations are significantly elevated means there is potentially a considerable hazard."
Alarmingly, the researchers found laser printers could increase particulate matter in the air by up to 400 percent.
The printers in the original study were manufactured by common names including Hewlett-Packard, Toshiba, Ricoh and Canon -- and all used toner instead of ink. What was mysterious about the study’s findings, however, was why certain printers emitted high levels of particles, while others were relatively low.
Now, a follow-up study by the same group of researchers may have discovered the reason for the discrepancy.
They tested two printers from the same manufacturer, one of which may emit 100,000 percent more particles into the air than the other. What they found was that a reaction between the air and organic compounds on the paper and from the toner was producing the toxic emissions -- and the temperature of various components within the printer was responsible for the increased levels.
The researchers concluded that printer companies should investigate the temperature issue in order to make their laser printers safer, but for now potentially dangerous versions still remain on the market.
What Can You do if You Work Near a Laser Printer?
Although Hewlett-Packard has dismissed the idea that printer emissions are a public health risk, you may still want to take some precautions.
Because of their small size, ultra-fine particles in the air are especially dangerous.
"Ultra-fine particles are of most concern because they can penetrate deep into the lungs where they can pose a significant health threat," Morawska told TheAge.com.
"These [printer] particles are tiny like cigarette smoke particles and, when deep inside the lung, they do the same amount of damage … The health effects from inhaling ultra-fine particles depend on particle composition, but the results can range from respiratory irritation to more severe illness such as cardiovascular problems or cancer,” she continued.
Your risk of exposure, the researchers found, depends largely on the office building's ventilation system, which is why we highly recommend taking matters into your own hands and purifying your office air yourself.
The PIONAIR Smarte Pointe Air Treatment System, which Sixwise.com highly recommends, uses photocatalysis, which is designed to oxidize organic odors, germs, and fungi. The PIONAIR technology creates ultraviolet light rays, safe levels of ozone, and passive negative ions as part of your air treatment.
The SMART POINTE uses the same technology as the original PIONAIR system, with the added benefit of actively generated negative ions. These actively generated negative ions clear the air of particulate FASTER than the original PIONAIR system. Therefore, the PIONAIR SMART POINTE is effective against particulate such as pollen, dust, pet dander, and smoke, AS WELL AS mold, mildew, organic odors, and chemical vapors (such as formaldehyde).
The Pionair 350 Unit covers 150 to 350 sq. ft., and is perfect for a typical office. If you have a large office space, Pionair's 750 Unit covers 350 to 750 sq. ft., and if you work in a large, open environment, we recommend our largest Pionair, the 1500 Unit, which covers 750 to 1500 sq. ft.
Particularly if you work in a large space along with other workers, you may want to talk to your employer about getting one or more Pionair Units to clean the area’s air.
Keeping Your Office Air Pure is Essential to Good Health
Most Americans spend up to 90 percent of their time indoors and many spend most of their working hours in an office environment, according to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).
EPA studies show that indoor air can sometimes have higher levels of pollutants than outdoor air, and these indoor pollutants can increase your risk of illness.
“Several studies by EPA, states, and independent scientific panels have consistently ranked indoor air pollution as an important environmental health problem. While most buildings do not have severe indoor air quality problems, even well-run buildings can sometimes experience episodes of poor indoor air quality,” the EPA writes on their Web site.
Your office manager or employer should be proactively thinking about your office environment’s air quality.
“Many common products used in offices, like solvents, adhesives, cleaners, and pesticides can give off pollutants and odors, as can office equipment such as copiers, printers, and fax machines,” writes the EPA. “If any of these items are used in the office environment, adequate and sometimes separate ventilation should be provided. If your organization engages in activities that may generate pollutants, such as photographic or printing processes, exhaust ventilation will be especially important.”
The EPA recommends that all office managers do the following to improve indoor office air:
* Maintain a good working relationship with building management on indoor environmental issues.
* Place office furniture and equipment with air circulation, temperature control, and pollutant removal functions of the heating, ventilating, and air conditioning (HVAC) system in mind.
* Coordinate with building management in instances when responsibility for design, operation, and maintenance of the ventilation system is shared.
* Establish an effective smoking policy that protects nonsmokers from involuntary exposure to secondhand smoke.
* Avoid procedures and products that can cause indoor air quality problems.
* Integrate indoor air quality concerns into your purchasing decisions.
* Work with the building manager to ensure use of only necessary and appropriate pest control practices, and nonchemical methods where possible.
* Work with building management and the contractor before you remodel or renovate to identify ways of keeping building occupant exposure to pollutants to a minimum and to ensure that the air distribution system is not disrupted.
* Encourage building management to develop a preventive indoor air quality management program following guidance issued by EPA and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH).
Further, EVERYONE who works in an office environment can help improve air quality with these tips from the EPA:
* Do not block air vents or grilles.
* Comply with the office and building smoking policy.
* Water and maintain office plants properly.
* Dispose of garbage promptly and properly.
* Store food properly.
* Avoid bringing products into the building that could release harmful or bothersome odors or contaminants.
* Notify your building or facility manager immediately if you suspect an indoor air quality problem.
US Eyes Mercury Pact, Reversing Bush Policy
U.S. eyes mercury pact, reversing Bush policy
'Most important global chemical issue,' Obama official says at global talks
The Associated Press
Mon., Feb. 16, 2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225387/print/1/displaymode/1098/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225387/
NAIROBI, Kenya - The new U.S. government abruptly reversed years of Bush administration policy Monday by calling for a legally binding international treaty to reduce mercury pollution, which a senior American diplomat called the most important chemical problem in the world today.
Some 6,000 tons of mercury enter the environment each year, about a third generated by power stations and coal fires. Much settles into the oceans where it enters the food chain and is concentrated in predatory fish like tuna.
Children and fetuses are particularly vulnerable to poisoning by the toxic metal, which can cause birth defects, brain damage and peeling skin.
Daniel Reifsnyder, the deputy assistant secretary of state for environment and sustainable development, told a gathering of global gathering of environmental ministers in Nairobi, Kenya, that the U.S. wants negotiations on limiting mercury to begin this year and conclude within three.
"We're prepared to help lead in developing a globally legally binding instrument," he said. "It is clear mercury is the most important global chemical issue facing us today that calls for immediate action."
The statement represented a "a 180-degree turnaround" from policy under the Bush administration, said Michael Bender, co-coordinator of the Zero Mercury Working Group, a global coalition of 75 environmental organizations working to reduce mercury exposure.
'Like night and day'
"The change is like night and day. The Bush administration opposed any international legal agreements on mercury and President (Barack) Obama is in office less than one month and is already supporting a global agreement," he said.
Bender said his group has had more discussions over mercury control in the past two weeks than they have in the last eight years and that the U.S. government included many of their ideas in the proposal they are presented in Nairobi.
Mercury is also widely used in chemical production and small-scale mining. The toxin can travel thousands of miles through the air or water.
America's Food and Drug Administration advises expectant mothers to limit weekly consumption to six ounces of albacore tuna or 12 ounces of "light" tuna, the health effects of which are still being scientifically debated. California authorities have been locked in a five year legal battle to force tuna companies to paste warning labels on their product about potentially harmful mercury levels.
Despite the warnings, there's often little public knowledge of the dangers of mercury in seafood. In the American state of Idaho, a food bank distributed as much as 96 ounces of fish in family food baskets last summer. That's 48 times more than a child weighing less than 30 pounds is advised to eat monthly, according to the Health and Welfare advisory.
There is even less awareness in developing countries, where small-scale miners use mercury to pan for gold and fishermen eat contaminated fish or sell it to chic sushi restaurants.
"Murky? Maki?" asked Peter Omoga, manager at a Japanese restaurant in the Kenyan capital, when asked about mercury levels by an Associated Press correspondent tucking into a sushi feast.
Half of emissions from coal plants
While substitutes exist for almost all industrial processes that require mercury, more than 50 percent of mercury emissions come from coal-fueled power plants, complicating efforts to regulate it in countries that rely on coal for power.
A U.S.-drafted proposal obtained by The Associated Press would form a negotiating committee in conjunction with the U.N. environment program to help countries reduce their mercury use, clean up contaminated sites and find environmentally sound ways to store mercury. The European Union has already banned mercury exports starting in 2011. The U.S. has a similar ban that will be effective 2013, legislation that was sponsored by Obama when he was a U.S. senator.
Advocacy groups that have been working on getting such a global pact passed welcomed the U.S. policy change, saying it could encourage other countries such as Canada to make a similar change. Bender said mercury levels in the world had increased two to three times over the past 200 years.
"Given that the United States has pushed the door of resistance in a sense, that will lead others to follow," said Susan Egan Keane of the Washington, D.C.-based Natural Resources Defense Council.
'Most important global chemical issue,' Obama official says at global talks
The Associated Press
Mon., Feb. 16, 2009
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225387/print/1/displaymode/1098/
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/29225387/
NAIROBI, Kenya - The new U.S. government abruptly reversed years of Bush administration policy Monday by calling for a legally binding international treaty to reduce mercury pollution, which a senior American diplomat called the most important chemical problem in the world today.
Some 6,000 tons of mercury enter the environment each year, about a third generated by power stations and coal fires. Much settles into the oceans where it enters the food chain and is concentrated in predatory fish like tuna.
Children and fetuses are particularly vulnerable to poisoning by the toxic metal, which can cause birth defects, brain damage and peeling skin.
Daniel Reifsnyder, the deputy assistant secretary of state for environment and sustainable development, told a gathering of global gathering of environmental ministers in Nairobi, Kenya, that the U.S. wants negotiations on limiting mercury to begin this year and conclude within three.
"We're prepared to help lead in developing a globally legally binding instrument," he said. "It is clear mercury is the most important global chemical issue facing us today that calls for immediate action."
The statement represented a "a 180-degree turnaround" from policy under the Bush administration, said Michael Bender, co-coordinator of the Zero Mercury Working Group, a global coalition of 75 environmental organizations working to reduce mercury exposure.
'Like night and day'
"The change is like night and day. The Bush administration opposed any international legal agreements on mercury and President (Barack) Obama is in office less than one month and is already supporting a global agreement," he said.
Bender said his group has had more discussions over mercury control in the past two weeks than they have in the last eight years and that the U.S. government included many of their ideas in the proposal they are presented in Nairobi.
Mercury is also widely used in chemical production and small-scale mining. The toxin can travel thousands of miles through the air or water.
America's Food and Drug Administration advises expectant mothers to limit weekly consumption to six ounces of albacore tuna or 12 ounces of "light" tuna, the health effects of which are still being scientifically debated. California authorities have been locked in a five year legal battle to force tuna companies to paste warning labels on their product about potentially harmful mercury levels.
Despite the warnings, there's often little public knowledge of the dangers of mercury in seafood. In the American state of Idaho, a food bank distributed as much as 96 ounces of fish in family food baskets last summer. That's 48 times more than a child weighing less than 30 pounds is advised to eat monthly, according to the Health and Welfare advisory.
There is even less awareness in developing countries, where small-scale miners use mercury to pan for gold and fishermen eat contaminated fish or sell it to chic sushi restaurants.
"Murky? Maki?" asked Peter Omoga, manager at a Japanese restaurant in the Kenyan capital, when asked about mercury levels by an Associated Press correspondent tucking into a sushi feast.
Half of emissions from coal plants
While substitutes exist for almost all industrial processes that require mercury, more than 50 percent of mercury emissions come from coal-fueled power plants, complicating efforts to regulate it in countries that rely on coal for power.
A U.S.-drafted proposal obtained by The Associated Press would form a negotiating committee in conjunction with the U.N. environment program to help countries reduce their mercury use, clean up contaminated sites and find environmentally sound ways to store mercury. The European Union has already banned mercury exports starting in 2011. The U.S. has a similar ban that will be effective 2013, legislation that was sponsored by Obama when he was a U.S. senator.
Advocacy groups that have been working on getting such a global pact passed welcomed the U.S. policy change, saying it could encourage other countries such as Canada to make a similar change. Bender said mercury levels in the world had increased two to three times over the past 200 years.
"Given that the United States has pushed the door of resistance in a sense, that will lead others to follow," said Susan Egan Keane of the Washington, D.C.-based Natural Resources Defense Council.
Make your own reusable grocery bags
Make Your Own Reusable Grocery Bags
Monday February 16, 2009
http://frugalliving.about.com/b/2009/02/16/make-your-own-reusable-grocery-bags.htm?nl=1
These days it seems every grocery store and discounter has gotten in on the reusable grocery bag crazy, and while the .99 that they typically charge for the bags may not seem like a lot, this frugalite knows that they can be made for less. Give it a try:
Make a T-Shirt Tote Bag
http://frugalliving.about.com/od/craftsgifts/ss/TShirt_Tote_Bag.htm
How to Make a Sweater Bag
http://frugalliving.about.com/od/craftsgifts/ss/Sweater_Bag.htm
Monday February 16, 2009
http://frugalliving.about.com/b/2009/02/16/make-your-own-reusable-grocery-bags.htm?nl=1
These days it seems every grocery store and discounter has gotten in on the reusable grocery bag crazy, and while the .99 that they typically charge for the bags may not seem like a lot, this frugalite knows that they can be made for less. Give it a try:
Make a T-Shirt Tote Bag
http://frugalliving.about.com/od/craftsgifts/ss/TShirt_Tote_Bag.htm
How to Make a Sweater Bag
http://frugalliving.about.com/od/craftsgifts/ss/Sweater_Bag.htm
Monday, February 16, 2009
Out of Sight, Out of Mine: Ocean Dumping of Mine Wastes
Out of Sight, Out of Mine: Ocean Dumping of Mine Wastes
by Robert Moran, Amanda Reichelt-Brushett, and Roy Young
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6011
Beginning in 1996 and continuing through at least mid-2004, the Newmont Minahasa Raya gold mine dumped 2,000 tons per day of wastes into the tropical, coral-rich waters of Buyat Bay, off the island of Sulawesi, Indonesia-waters that previously had been the main source of food and income for local families. Soon stories began circulating that the fish were disappearing and that those remaining had deformities. Villagers also complained of strange skin rashes, tumors, and other forms of disease, all of which they claimed started after the waste disposal began. An independent team of scientists was commissioned by the Indonesian government to review the information and concluded that contamination by the mine had occurred. Newmont Mining Corporation, the U.S.-based parent company, commissioned its own studies and continually claimed that the data showed no water contamination-although they neglected to mention that these very studies clearly revealed the
polluting of bay sediments by mercury, arsenic, antimony, and other metals and the likely uptake of these pollutants by bottom-dwelling organisms.
Buyat stories appeared everywhere in the media throughout the Pacific and quickly were investigated by the New York Times. Soon the Indonesian government arrested the head of Newmont Minahasa Raya and five other employees. A series of lawsuits followed. In 2007, an Indonesian court found both Newmont and its local director not guilty of the alleged crimes, but the state prosecutor subsequently appealed the ruling to the Indonesian Supreme Court. Some villagers were relocated in response to fears about the alleged contamination, but the claims and counterclaims have left the villagers confused and the issue hanging. Meanwhile, Newmont received permission from the Indonesian government to commence operating a copper-gold mine, Batu Hijau, which dumps up to 160,000 tons per day of wastes off the coast of another Indonesian island, Sumbawa-70 to 80 times the volume of waste disposed into Buyat Bay.
by Robert Moran, Amanda Reichelt-Brushett, and Roy Young
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6011
Beginning in 1996 and continuing through at least mid-2004, the Newmont Minahasa Raya gold mine dumped 2,000 tons per day of wastes into the tropical, coral-rich waters of Buyat Bay, off the island of Sulawesi, Indonesia-waters that previously had been the main source of food and income for local families. Soon stories began circulating that the fish were disappearing and that those remaining had deformities. Villagers also complained of strange skin rashes, tumors, and other forms of disease, all of which they claimed started after the waste disposal began. An independent team of scientists was commissioned by the Indonesian government to review the information and concluded that contamination by the mine had occurred. Newmont Mining Corporation, the U.S.-based parent company, commissioned its own studies and continually claimed that the data showed no water contamination-although they neglected to mention that these very studies clearly revealed the
polluting of bay sediments by mercury, arsenic, antimony, and other metals and the likely uptake of these pollutants by bottom-dwelling organisms.
Buyat stories appeared everywhere in the media throughout the Pacific and quickly were investigated by the New York Times. Soon the Indonesian government arrested the head of Newmont Minahasa Raya and five other employees. A series of lawsuits followed. In 2007, an Indonesian court found both Newmont and its local director not guilty of the alleged crimes, but the state prosecutor subsequently appealed the ruling to the Indonesian Supreme Court. Some villagers were relocated in response to fears about the alleged contamination, but the claims and counterclaims have left the villagers confused and the issue hanging. Meanwhile, Newmont received permission from the Indonesian government to commence operating a copper-gold mine, Batu Hijau, which dumps up to 160,000 tons per day of wastes off the coast of another Indonesian island, Sumbawa-70 to 80 times the volume of waste disposed into Buyat Bay.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
Yoga Diet - Fasting the Yoga Way
Yoga Diet - Fasting the Yoga Way
http://www.abc-of-yoga.com/diet/fasting.asp
While there is a Yoga way of eating, there is also a Yoga way of not eating. This refers to Fasting. This is done by yogis as a form of physical cleansing or purification. Since we make our digestive system work several times a day, it's also a good idea to give it some rest. This will allow our digestive system to recover from the abuse: from eating too much, eating unhealthy foods or eating at the wrong time. It also allows us to get rid of toxins in our body.
Simply put, Fasting is abstinence from food. However, a careful approach must be taken. Here are some guidelines on how to start fasting:
Start with a single-day fast. This will give you an idea on how Fasting feels like. This one-day fast is supposed to make you feel that Fasting is not hard at all, that you can go on for a longer period of time.
If you are the type of person who eats 3 full meals a day and snacks in between, starting the fast may be a bit tougher. What you can do is eat just one full meal (composed of grain and vegetables) per day around lunch time, while taking in water or juice on other times of the day. Once you get the hang of eating less food in a day, you can proceed to the single-day fast.
Decide on what type of fast you are going to follow. It can either be a water fast, a fruit juice fast or a vegetable juice fast. Once you've decided, stick to it (most people would recommend juice fasts). For a water fast, drink around 7 glasses of clear water per day. For juice fasts, drink the same amount of fruit or vegetable juice. Drink slowly so as to absorb the Prana from them.
From the single-day fast, the goal is to move on to more days of Fasting. But if you find Fasting for more than 3 days difficult, you can eat light foods like vegetables and soups for one day and go back to Fasting the next day. Try to go for a series of 3-day fasts with 1 day of light food in between them. Eventually, you'll be able to go on to 5-day fasts or even longer.
Usually, the first 2 or 3 days of the longer fasts are the most difficult. You will experience headaches, vomiting, and even an increase in irritability. Breathing problems may also occur. Overcome these by practicing Pranayama.
Fasting should not be an excuse to do some mild exercise. Take a walk every day, but avoid strenuous activities like jogging. Practice Asanas and give time for Meditation. Fasting should not also prevent you from accomplishing your daily tasks. Don't just lie down doing nothing just because you are fasting.
Only after about 3 days of Fasting will you begin to see its benefits: increased mental energy, enhanced concentration and improvement in some senses. That is why longer fasts are required for the ultimate Fasting experience.
Breaking the Fast
This is perhaps the most difficult part of the fast. You cannot break it drastically because once your body tastes food, it will crave for more. It can also lead to sickness. A good idea to start the break is to do it in the evening, so as to allow the food to go through your system while you sleep at night. Also remember to chew your food thoroughly, since the digestive system has been at rest, to make the process of digestion easier.
For a two-day fast, follow these steps:
Day 1: Fresh fruit and a teaspoon of natural yogurt for digestion
Day 2: Salads
Day 3: Steamed vegetables with light grain
Day 4: Gradually return to your normal diet.
If you fasted for 4 days, just double the number of days for each step. Do the same adjustment for longer fasts. Avoid tea, coffee, alcohol, and seasoning while breaking the fast. Just remember not to overeat or mix too much food types on your first day of food. Do everything slowly but surely.
Most of us may think that Fasting is hard. But if we are well-prepared, then it should not be a big deal at all. Aside from the tips mentioned above, mental determination is also important. Otherwise, you will give up on it easily. As a health guideline, consult your physician before changing your diet or food patterns. You might have a health condition which can get worse when you change your diet.
Fasting is beneficial physically, mentally, and spiritually. And good physical, mental and spiritual health is what Yoga is all about.
http://www.abc-of-yoga.com/diet/fasting.asp
While there is a Yoga way of eating, there is also a Yoga way of not eating. This refers to Fasting. This is done by yogis as a form of physical cleansing or purification. Since we make our digestive system work several times a day, it's also a good idea to give it some rest. This will allow our digestive system to recover from the abuse: from eating too much, eating unhealthy foods or eating at the wrong time. It also allows us to get rid of toxins in our body.
Simply put, Fasting is abstinence from food. However, a careful approach must be taken. Here are some guidelines on how to start fasting:
Start with a single-day fast. This will give you an idea on how Fasting feels like. This one-day fast is supposed to make you feel that Fasting is not hard at all, that you can go on for a longer period of time.
If you are the type of person who eats 3 full meals a day and snacks in between, starting the fast may be a bit tougher. What you can do is eat just one full meal (composed of grain and vegetables) per day around lunch time, while taking in water or juice on other times of the day. Once you get the hang of eating less food in a day, you can proceed to the single-day fast.
Decide on what type of fast you are going to follow. It can either be a water fast, a fruit juice fast or a vegetable juice fast. Once you've decided, stick to it (most people would recommend juice fasts). For a water fast, drink around 7 glasses of clear water per day. For juice fasts, drink the same amount of fruit or vegetable juice. Drink slowly so as to absorb the Prana from them.
From the single-day fast, the goal is to move on to more days of Fasting. But if you find Fasting for more than 3 days difficult, you can eat light foods like vegetables and soups for one day and go back to Fasting the next day. Try to go for a series of 3-day fasts with 1 day of light food in between them. Eventually, you'll be able to go on to 5-day fasts or even longer.
Usually, the first 2 or 3 days of the longer fasts are the most difficult. You will experience headaches, vomiting, and even an increase in irritability. Breathing problems may also occur. Overcome these by practicing Pranayama.
Fasting should not be an excuse to do some mild exercise. Take a walk every day, but avoid strenuous activities like jogging. Practice Asanas and give time for Meditation. Fasting should not also prevent you from accomplishing your daily tasks. Don't just lie down doing nothing just because you are fasting.
Only after about 3 days of Fasting will you begin to see its benefits: increased mental energy, enhanced concentration and improvement in some senses. That is why longer fasts are required for the ultimate Fasting experience.
Breaking the Fast
This is perhaps the most difficult part of the fast. You cannot break it drastically because once your body tastes food, it will crave for more. It can also lead to sickness. A good idea to start the break is to do it in the evening, so as to allow the food to go through your system while you sleep at night. Also remember to chew your food thoroughly, since the digestive system has been at rest, to make the process of digestion easier.
For a two-day fast, follow these steps:
Day 1: Fresh fruit and a teaspoon of natural yogurt for digestion
Day 2: Salads
Day 3: Steamed vegetables with light grain
Day 4: Gradually return to your normal diet.
If you fasted for 4 days, just double the number of days for each step. Do the same adjustment for longer fasts. Avoid tea, coffee, alcohol, and seasoning while breaking the fast. Just remember not to overeat or mix too much food types on your first day of food. Do everything slowly but surely.
Most of us may think that Fasting is hard. But if we are well-prepared, then it should not be a big deal at all. Aside from the tips mentioned above, mental determination is also important. Otherwise, you will give up on it easily. As a health guideline, consult your physician before changing your diet or food patterns. You might have a health condition which can get worse when you change your diet.
Fasting is beneficial physically, mentally, and spiritually. And good physical, mental and spiritual health is what Yoga is all about.
Friday, February 13, 2009
Give Your Partner a Healthy and Heavenly Valentine's Day
Give Your Partner a Healthy and Heavenly Valentine's Day
by Heather Havey, M.A. © 2009
Valentine's Day is the perfect opportunity to shower your partner with affection, attention, joy, and fun. Couples who play together stay together. Everytime you give your partner positive and joyful experiences, you improve your intimacy and deepen your connection. Valentine's Day is a great day to practice. For this article, I will reference your partner as a "she" regardless of gender. This is simply for ease of explanation.
Step One: Make her a fresh juice.
Fresh organic juice made by hand will energize you both. She will appreciate the gesture. Make her whatever juices she most loves and enjoys. Some examples include:
* A tall glass of orange or apple juice
* Green juice (ex: spinach, parsley, lettuce, apple, carrot, beet; spinach adds a chocolate-like flavor)
* Pineapple, parsley, granny smith apple, and romaine lettuce
* A tall glass of coconut water
Step Two: Blindfold her and take her to her favorite place.
Fill her day with delight. Take her to her favorite places. What does she love to do? Read poetry by a lake. Kayak down a river. Walk along the beach. Go surfing. Plant trees. Build a garden. Attend a planetarium show. Have a fun-filled afternoon doing things that she really loves. If a bathing suit or certain equipment is required, provide it for her.
Step Three: Pack refreshing treats that she will enjoy.
Prepare her healthy snacks that will give her energy and make her feel refreshed. Do not choose things that will make her sleepy, unless you would like for her to take a nap. Ideas include orange and grapefruit slices, cherries, strawberries, and blueberries. You can also choose tropical fruits such as kiwi or papaya. She may also enjoy heart-shaped slices of mango, pineapple, and coconut. Bring water to drink. You can slice starfruits and hand her star-shaped, rose-scented, delicious bites.
Step Four: Attend a partner yoga class together.
Yoga will refresh your mind and body. Partner yoga is fun. It also allows two people to gently touch each other in a healing and appreciative way. If you have good teachers, it will be a true adventure! Sharing an activity like yoga will help you both to feel energized, relaxed, and close.
Step Five: Draw her a warm bath with herbs and bath oils
She may be ready to relax after a yoga workout, so draw her a bath. Light candles. Choose soy-based candles that are made with essential oils. Do not choose artificially-scented candles. For her bath, pour in flower petals and her favorite essential oils. Excellent choices include lavender, ginger, citrus, or rose oil. Pick her favorite pajamas (or buy her some) and place them out for her to wear.
Step Six: Make her a healthy dessert.
Choose a dessert that is healthy, delicious, and very easy to prepare. One example is a raw, organic strawberry "pie" (softer than most pies). You will need a heart-shaped container, dates, walnuts, honey, strawberries, a kiwi, psyllium powder, and a bunch of basil. To make the crust, simply blend a few dates with a cup of walnuts and two tablespoons of honey. You can add water if it is too thick. To make the filling, blend the strawberries with a few tablespoons of psyllium powder. If you desire, you can add a banana or dates also. Spread the pie crust into your container. Pour the filling on the "crust." Cover the top of the pie with thinly-sliced strawberries, kiwi, and basil. The combination is delicious. You may want to eat it together right out of the heart-shaped container.
Step Seven: Chocolate Heaven.
If she loves chocolate, pull out a champagne glass. Blend the water and meat of two young coconuts, 4 tablespoons of cacao powder, and four or so tablespoons of cold water. Simply pour this mixture into two champagne glasses. If desired, you can add some vanilla as well.
Enjoy your chocolate heaven drinks. Sit back in pajamas, enjoy your chocolate heaven drinks, curl up, and watch her favorite movies.
Step Eight: Love.
Scientists and many couples throughout time have proven that playfulness and thoughtfulness really improve a couple's happiness. Give her joy. Give her delight. Enjoy each other. Practice this on Valentine's Day and also everyday. The couple who plays together stays together. Happy Valentine's Day.
by Heather Havey, M.A. © 2009
Valentine's Day is the perfect opportunity to shower your partner with affection, attention, joy, and fun. Couples who play together stay together. Everytime you give your partner positive and joyful experiences, you improve your intimacy and deepen your connection. Valentine's Day is a great day to practice. For this article, I will reference your partner as a "she" regardless of gender. This is simply for ease of explanation.
Step One: Make her a fresh juice.
Fresh organic juice made by hand will energize you both. She will appreciate the gesture. Make her whatever juices she most loves and enjoys. Some examples include:
* A tall glass of orange or apple juice
* Green juice (ex: spinach, parsley, lettuce, apple, carrot, beet; spinach adds a chocolate-like flavor)
* Pineapple, parsley, granny smith apple, and romaine lettuce
* A tall glass of coconut water
Step Two: Blindfold her and take her to her favorite place.
Fill her day with delight. Take her to her favorite places. What does she love to do? Read poetry by a lake. Kayak down a river. Walk along the beach. Go surfing. Plant trees. Build a garden. Attend a planetarium show. Have a fun-filled afternoon doing things that she really loves. If a bathing suit or certain equipment is required, provide it for her.
Step Three: Pack refreshing treats that she will enjoy.
Prepare her healthy snacks that will give her energy and make her feel refreshed. Do not choose things that will make her sleepy, unless you would like for her to take a nap. Ideas include orange and grapefruit slices, cherries, strawberries, and blueberries. You can also choose tropical fruits such as kiwi or papaya. She may also enjoy heart-shaped slices of mango, pineapple, and coconut. Bring water to drink. You can slice starfruits and hand her star-shaped, rose-scented, delicious bites.
Step Four: Attend a partner yoga class together.
Yoga will refresh your mind and body. Partner yoga is fun. It also allows two people to gently touch each other in a healing and appreciative way. If you have good teachers, it will be a true adventure! Sharing an activity like yoga will help you both to feel energized, relaxed, and close.
Step Five: Draw her a warm bath with herbs and bath oils
She may be ready to relax after a yoga workout, so draw her a bath. Light candles. Choose soy-based candles that are made with essential oils. Do not choose artificially-scented candles. For her bath, pour in flower petals and her favorite essential oils. Excellent choices include lavender, ginger, citrus, or rose oil. Pick her favorite pajamas (or buy her some) and place them out for her to wear.
Step Six: Make her a healthy dessert.
Choose a dessert that is healthy, delicious, and very easy to prepare. One example is a raw, organic strawberry "pie" (softer than most pies). You will need a heart-shaped container, dates, walnuts, honey, strawberries, a kiwi, psyllium powder, and a bunch of basil. To make the crust, simply blend a few dates with a cup of walnuts and two tablespoons of honey. You can add water if it is too thick. To make the filling, blend the strawberries with a few tablespoons of psyllium powder. If you desire, you can add a banana or dates also. Spread the pie crust into your container. Pour the filling on the "crust." Cover the top of the pie with thinly-sliced strawberries, kiwi, and basil. The combination is delicious. You may want to eat it together right out of the heart-shaped container.
Step Seven: Chocolate Heaven.
If she loves chocolate, pull out a champagne glass. Blend the water and meat of two young coconuts, 4 tablespoons of cacao powder, and four or so tablespoons of cold water. Simply pour this mixture into two champagne glasses. If desired, you can add some vanilla as well.
Enjoy your chocolate heaven drinks. Sit back in pajamas, enjoy your chocolate heaven drinks, curl up, and watch her favorite movies.
Step Eight: Love.
Scientists and many couples throughout time have proven that playfulness and thoughtfulness really improve a couple's happiness. Give her joy. Give her delight. Enjoy each other. Practice this on Valentine's Day and also everyday. The couple who plays together stays together. Happy Valentine's Day.
Greatest Gift that you can Give those you Love
© 2009 Peace Through Kindness * Text by Lalita
Send this as an ecard: http://www.ourbelovedearth.com/…s/ily.html
Send this as an ecard: http://www.ourbelovedearth.com/…s/ily.html
Chai Tea: A Quick History of this Popular Ancient Beverage
Chai Tea: A Quick History of This Increasingly Popular Ancient Beverage
by www.SixWise.com
http://www.sixwise.com/Newsletters/2009/February/11/Chai-Tea-A-Quick-History.htm?source=nl
In the United States, chai (rhymes with “pie”) tea typically refers to the milky, spicy and slightly sweet tea beverage that has skyrocketed in popularity in recent years. If you want to be in the know, ordering a chai tea is redundant, because “chai” is the word for tea in several different languages, so you’re actually ordering a “tea tea.”
The variety most Americans refer to as chai is actually called masala chai, which originated in India many centuries ago and means “spice tea.” Though there is no one exact recipe for masala chai (each region and household in India has its own), it is generally made of the following:
* A strong black tea
* Heavy milk
* Spices such as cardamom, cinnamon, ginger, cloves, and pepper
* Sweetener, such as honey
Traditionally, masala chai is made by boiling loose tea leaves, then adding in freshly ground spices, milk and honey or other sweetener. Some say that this version of spiced tea was originally created in order to mask the poor quality of tea available in India while it was colonized by Great Britain. It’s said that the British kept the high-quality tea for themselves and gave the lower quality tea to the native people.
Today, chai vendors known as “chai wallahs” are common in many areas of India, and as Americans might gather to chat in a coffee shop, Indians often gather at a chai wallah to take a break from their days.
Is Chai Good for You?
Masala chai is said to produce a warming, soothing sensation as well as support digestion. Modern-day versions vary as to the health benefits they offer, depending on which particular ingredients are used. However, traditional masala chai is composed of numerous beneficial ingredients, such as:
* Black tea: Studies have shown that regularly drinking three or more cups of black tea a day can support your heart health, and a study in the European Heart Journal also found that drinking black tea improves the ability of arteries to relax and expand to keep blood pressure healthy. However, adding milk to the tea, as is common in chai, blocked this impact.
There is some debate as to whether or not adding milk to tea cancels out its beneficial properties. According to the Indian Tea Association, a UK study published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that a standard addition of 10-15% milk did not influence tea’s antioxidant properties.
* Ginger: The active ingredient in ginger is gingerol, a compound that's thought to relax blood vessels, stimulate blood flow and relieve pain. It's commonly used as a digestive aid and contains compounds that ease motion sickness and nausea and inhibit vomiting.
* Cinnamon: Cinnamon is a powerful antioxidant. A study in the Journal of Nutrition found that out of all spices, cinnamon is one of the richest sources of disease-fighting antioxidants. It also has anti-clotting and anti-inflammatory properties, which help prevent unwanted clumping of blood platelets. And, it may help boost brain function and control blood sugar.
* Cloves: The active compound in cloves, eugenol, combines with other clove components to make this pungent spice highly anti-bacterial. It's also anti-inflammatory and the compound has been studied for use in preventing toxicity from environmental pollutants and joint inflammation.
How to Make Your Own Chai
Here at Sixwise.com we absolutely love Ajmera’s Xpress Chai. It’s creamy and delicious, and like its name implies, takes just an instant to make. The chai packets are great for taking to work or when you’re in a hurry, as you simply add hot water and your cup of tasty chai is ready.
That said, making masala chai at home is fairly simple, once you’ve gathered up the ingredients. Here’s a delicious recipe that takes just a few minutes from start to finish:
Indian Masala Chai
Ingredients:
* 4 tsp loose tea, usually black
* 1 piece of dry ginger
* 3 cardamom pods, crushed
* 3 whole cloves
* 1 piece of cinnamon stick
* 'Milk' and sugar to taste
Preparation:
* Chop up ginger into fine pieces and break up cinnamon stick.
* Bring 2 cups of water to a boil, then add tea leaves and all the spices.
* Let everything brew at boiling for 30 to 45 seconds.
* Remove from heat, then let steep at room temperature for another minute.
* Strain out the tea and pieces of spice.
* Serve hot and fragrant, with only a touch of milk or sugar.
Serves 4
Recipe Source: Indiacurryrecipes.com
When you make this tea, make sure to take the time to really savor its flavors. We recommend sipping it while reading a really good book or chatting with really good friends.
by www.SixWise.com
http://www.sixwise.com/Newsletters/2009/February/11/Chai-Tea-A-Quick-History.htm?source=nl
In the United States, chai (rhymes with “pie”) tea typically refers to the milky, spicy and slightly sweet tea beverage that has skyrocketed in popularity in recent years. If you want to be in the know, ordering a chai tea is redundant, because “chai” is the word for tea in several different languages, so you’re actually ordering a “tea tea.”
The variety most Americans refer to as chai is actually called masala chai, which originated in India many centuries ago and means “spice tea.” Though there is no one exact recipe for masala chai (each region and household in India has its own), it is generally made of the following:
* A strong black tea
* Heavy milk
* Spices such as cardamom, cinnamon, ginger, cloves, and pepper
* Sweetener, such as honey
Traditionally, masala chai is made by boiling loose tea leaves, then adding in freshly ground spices, milk and honey or other sweetener. Some say that this version of spiced tea was originally created in order to mask the poor quality of tea available in India while it was colonized by Great Britain. It’s said that the British kept the high-quality tea for themselves and gave the lower quality tea to the native people.
Today, chai vendors known as “chai wallahs” are common in many areas of India, and as Americans might gather to chat in a coffee shop, Indians often gather at a chai wallah to take a break from their days.
Is Chai Good for You?
Masala chai is said to produce a warming, soothing sensation as well as support digestion. Modern-day versions vary as to the health benefits they offer, depending on which particular ingredients are used. However, traditional masala chai is composed of numerous beneficial ingredients, such as:
* Black tea: Studies have shown that regularly drinking three or more cups of black tea a day can support your heart health, and a study in the European Heart Journal also found that drinking black tea improves the ability of arteries to relax and expand to keep blood pressure healthy. However, adding milk to the tea, as is common in chai, blocked this impact.
There is some debate as to whether or not adding milk to tea cancels out its beneficial properties. According to the Indian Tea Association, a UK study published in the European Journal of Clinical Nutrition found that a standard addition of 10-15% milk did not influence tea’s antioxidant properties.
* Ginger: The active ingredient in ginger is gingerol, a compound that's thought to relax blood vessels, stimulate blood flow and relieve pain. It's commonly used as a digestive aid and contains compounds that ease motion sickness and nausea and inhibit vomiting.
* Cinnamon: Cinnamon is a powerful antioxidant. A study in the Journal of Nutrition found that out of all spices, cinnamon is one of the richest sources of disease-fighting antioxidants. It also has anti-clotting and anti-inflammatory properties, which help prevent unwanted clumping of blood platelets. And, it may help boost brain function and control blood sugar.
* Cloves: The active compound in cloves, eugenol, combines with other clove components to make this pungent spice highly anti-bacterial. It's also anti-inflammatory and the compound has been studied for use in preventing toxicity from environmental pollutants and joint inflammation.
How to Make Your Own Chai
Here at Sixwise.com we absolutely love Ajmera’s Xpress Chai. It’s creamy and delicious, and like its name implies, takes just an instant to make. The chai packets are great for taking to work or when you’re in a hurry, as you simply add hot water and your cup of tasty chai is ready.
That said, making masala chai at home is fairly simple, once you’ve gathered up the ingredients. Here’s a delicious recipe that takes just a few minutes from start to finish:
Indian Masala Chai
Ingredients:
* 4 tsp loose tea, usually black
* 1 piece of dry ginger
* 3 cardamom pods, crushed
* 3 whole cloves
* 1 piece of cinnamon stick
* 'Milk' and sugar to taste
Preparation:
* Chop up ginger into fine pieces and break up cinnamon stick.
* Bring 2 cups of water to a boil, then add tea leaves and all the spices.
* Let everything brew at boiling for 30 to 45 seconds.
* Remove from heat, then let steep at room temperature for another minute.
* Strain out the tea and pieces of spice.
* Serve hot and fragrant, with only a touch of milk or sugar.
Serves 4
Recipe Source: Indiacurryrecipes.com
When you make this tea, make sure to take the time to really savor its flavors. We recommend sipping it while reading a really good book or chatting with really good friends.
Neutralizing Acidosis and Bone Loss Among Mature Adults
Neutralizing Acidosis And Bone Loss Among Mature Adults
ScienceDaily
Feb. 11, 2009)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090131124439.htm
A new study funded in part by the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) suggests that neutralizing an acid-producing diet may be an important key to reducing bone breakdown, or "turnover," while aging. The study comes on the heels of several ARS-reported studies suggesting that consuming more-than-recommended amounts of calcium may not be the main answer to protecting bone.
The study was led by physician and nutrition specialist Bess Dawson-Hughes at the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University, Boston, Mass. ARS is a scientific research agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Fruits and vegetables are metabolized to bicarbonate and thus are alkali-producing. But the typical American diet is rich in protein and cereal grains that are metabolized to acid, and thus are acid-producing. With aging, such diets lead to a mild but slowly increasing metabolic "acidosis."
The researchers conducted a placebo-controlled study involving healthy male and female volunteers aged 50 or older. Key measurements were taken at the beginning and end of the intervention, which lasted three months.
A group of 78 volunteers had been provided either of two bicarbonates—potassium or sodium—along with their usual diet and exercise regimes. Key bone mineral nutrients were controlled to reduce variation in study outcomes. The bicarbonate groups consumed an amount of bicarbonate equivalent to about 9 servings of fruits and vegetables daily. This allowed the researchers to look at possible acid-neutralizing effects from an adequate, not high, alkali load.
The results showed that the 78 volunteers in the bicarbonate groups had significant reductions in biomarkers that are associated with bone loss and fracture than the 84 in the no-bicarbonate, or control, group.
The authors concluded that increasing the alkali content of the diet, for example by consuming more fruits and vegetables, merits further study as a safe and low-cost approach to improving skeletal health in older men and women.
The research was published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism.
Adapted from materials provided by USDA/Agricultural Research Service
http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/main.htm
ScienceDaily
Feb. 11, 2009)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/01/090131124439.htm
A new study funded in part by the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) suggests that neutralizing an acid-producing diet may be an important key to reducing bone breakdown, or "turnover," while aging. The study comes on the heels of several ARS-reported studies suggesting that consuming more-than-recommended amounts of calcium may not be the main answer to protecting bone.
The study was led by physician and nutrition specialist Bess Dawson-Hughes at the Jean Mayer USDA Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University, Boston, Mass. ARS is a scientific research agency in the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Fruits and vegetables are metabolized to bicarbonate and thus are alkali-producing. But the typical American diet is rich in protein and cereal grains that are metabolized to acid, and thus are acid-producing. With aging, such diets lead to a mild but slowly increasing metabolic "acidosis."
The researchers conducted a placebo-controlled study involving healthy male and female volunteers aged 50 or older. Key measurements were taken at the beginning and end of the intervention, which lasted three months.
A group of 78 volunteers had been provided either of two bicarbonates—potassium or sodium—along with their usual diet and exercise regimes. Key bone mineral nutrients were controlled to reduce variation in study outcomes. The bicarbonate groups consumed an amount of bicarbonate equivalent to about 9 servings of fruits and vegetables daily. This allowed the researchers to look at possible acid-neutralizing effects from an adequate, not high, alkali load.
The results showed that the 78 volunteers in the bicarbonate groups had significant reductions in biomarkers that are associated with bone loss and fracture than the 84 in the no-bicarbonate, or control, group.
The authors concluded that increasing the alkali content of the diet, for example by consuming more fruits and vegetables, merits further study as a safe and low-cost approach to improving skeletal health in older men and women.
The research was published in the Journal of Clinical Endocrinology and Metabolism.
Adapted from materials provided by USDA/Agricultural Research Service
http://www.ars.usda.gov/main/main.htm
DIY Valentine's Gift - Chocolate Dipped Strawberries
DIY Valentine’s Gift: Chocolate-Dipped Strawberries
11 Feb 2009 02:01 PM PST
Chocolate-Dipped Strawberries are a luxurious Valentine’s Day treat — but they’re also expensive. Save money by making yours at home!
One of the most popular Valentine’s goodies is chocolate dipped strawberries. Very few people can resist fat, juicy strawberries covered in decadent chocolate. Purchasing chocolate dipped strawberries in a bakery or gourmet shop can be quite expensive, especially when they are atop a cake. This Valentine’s Day, why not plan a delicious dinner at home and finish it off with some chocolate covered strawberries for dessert!
With a bit of time and very little difficulty, these can be made at home for considerably less cost. A lot of recipes claim that you can melt chocolate in the microwave for dipping, but I have never had much success with the chocolate staying smooth and creamy. Therefore, I prefer to use a double boiler. Don’t feel intimidated by the thought of using a double boiler — it’s actually quite simple. This article has good instructions on using a double boiler. Additionally, you have to be very careful not to get any moisture into the chocolate or it will break up and get grainy. I usually melt both dark and white chocolate, and alternate dipping the strawberries in each, or dip in dark chocolate, cool, then drizzle with white chocolate. It’s all up to you and your imagination.
Heart Cake with Chocolate Dipped Strawberries
You’ll need:
* 1 lb. strawberries, washed and patted dry
* 12 oz dark chocolate
* double boiler
* wax paper
* toothpicks (optional)
Preparation:
Bring the water to a boil in the double boiler and then turn down so that the water is not boiling when you add the chocolate. Melt the dark chocolate and set aside. Melt the white chocolate and set aside. Holding the strawberry by the stem or using a toothpick, dip the strawberry into the chocolate and place on the wax paper to cool. When you are done, place the strawberries in the refrigerator to set the chocolate.
These can be boxed or placed in cellophane bags for gifts, or placed on a cake for a beautiful dessert.
Trish Robinson is a writer living in Houston, Texas. She writes about various parenting and family issues, and has had articles published in Parenting, Redbook and has previously written for AOL’s “Parent Dish,” and Houston Press.
11 Feb 2009 02:01 PM PST
Chocolate-Dipped Strawberries are a luxurious Valentine’s Day treat — but they’re also expensive. Save money by making yours at home!
One of the most popular Valentine’s goodies is chocolate dipped strawberries. Very few people can resist fat, juicy strawberries covered in decadent chocolate. Purchasing chocolate dipped strawberries in a bakery or gourmet shop can be quite expensive, especially when they are atop a cake. This Valentine’s Day, why not plan a delicious dinner at home and finish it off with some chocolate covered strawberries for dessert!
With a bit of time and very little difficulty, these can be made at home for considerably less cost. A lot of recipes claim that you can melt chocolate in the microwave for dipping, but I have never had much success with the chocolate staying smooth and creamy. Therefore, I prefer to use a double boiler. Don’t feel intimidated by the thought of using a double boiler — it’s actually quite simple. This article has good instructions on using a double boiler. Additionally, you have to be very careful not to get any moisture into the chocolate or it will break up and get grainy. I usually melt both dark and white chocolate, and alternate dipping the strawberries in each, or dip in dark chocolate, cool, then drizzle with white chocolate. It’s all up to you and your imagination.
Heart Cake with Chocolate Dipped Strawberries
You’ll need:
* 1 lb. strawberries, washed and patted dry
* 12 oz dark chocolate
* double boiler
* wax paper
* toothpicks (optional)
Preparation:
Bring the water to a boil in the double boiler and then turn down so that the water is not boiling when you add the chocolate. Melt the dark chocolate and set aside. Melt the white chocolate and set aside. Holding the strawberry by the stem or using a toothpick, dip the strawberry into the chocolate and place on the wax paper to cool. When you are done, place the strawberries in the refrigerator to set the chocolate.
These can be boxed or placed in cellophane bags for gifts, or placed on a cake for a beautiful dessert.
Trish Robinson is a writer living in Houston, Texas. She writes about various parenting and family issues, and has had articles published in Parenting, Redbook and has previously written for AOL’s “Parent Dish,” and Houston Press.
My Vegan Valentine (Vegan, Cooked Recipe)
My Vegan Valentine
A decadent chocolate cake for your sweetie, minus the animal products
By April McGreger
12 Feb 2009
http://www.grist.org/advice/daughter/2009/02/12/?source=daily
In the many years I worked in the restaurant world, Valentine's Day meant whipping up confections for other people's sweethearts. The pressure was steep: People scramble for reservations on the romantic holiday, and desserts are expected to impress.
This year, I'll be at home -- and focusing on a Valentine's Day sweet for my very own Valentine. I knew the dessert would have to be chocolate, and it would be a huge boon if was also dairy-free, because Phil, like millions of others, has difficulty digesting lactose. I also knew that he prefers cakes to pies, puddings, tortes, or even truffles. So I had a place to start, but there were more requirements.
I am a very picky home baker -- lazy even, some might say. I bake professionally, so when I am baking for family I like to keep things simple. I don't like to hear the noise of an electric mixer, so I prefer to stir things together by hand. I don't want to wear my arm out beating egg whites, so I tend to choose batter cakes, which can easily be stirred together. Last, I want something relatively easy because I do not want to spend my whole day "off" on my feet in the kitchen. That's a lot to ask of one dessert, I know.
Frosting on the Cake
I have long had a favorite vegan chocolate batter-cake recipe, so I used it as a starting place. Ten years ago it was simply my favorite easy chocolate cake, before I even noticed that the recipe was vegan. As in many American oil-based cakes, this one leans on baking soda and vinegar for leavening. The recipe is adapted from Fannie Farmer's "Mix-in-the-Pan Chocolate Cake." I have made it so many times, with so many different variations, that my versions barely resemble the original. But the Fanny Farmer backbone remains. To finish, I usually just give it a simple dusting of cocoa powder or powdered sugar. But Valentine's Day was just the challenge I needed to come up with a delicious vegan chocolate frosting to make it special and new.
I generally look down my nose at most vegan desserts because they rely on soy margarine, which is a product that I prefer not to use in my cooking. I am not a fan of the taste of soy margarine or soy milk, and in general, I try to limit my intake of unfermented soy. When you eliminate soy from vegan baking, things get much more complicated. I knew that I could make a ganache glaze with chocolate and coconut milk, but I wanted a cake that was reminiscent of the soft and fluffy chocolate layer cakes of my childhood, with old-fashioned fudge frosting.
I got out my family recipe for fudge frosting, which calls for half and half and butter. I decided that I would use coconut milk in place of the half and half and would try virgin coconut oil in place of the butter. Virgin coconut oil is a product that I have been experimenting with a lot this past year, and I absolutely love the heavenly aroma it lends to baked goods.
Coconuts and Bolts
Coconut oil has begun to reenter our food system after being abandoned in the saturated-fat scare brought to us by intense lobbying from the domestic vegetable-oil industry -- the same campaign that convinced millions to replace traditional fats with partially hydrogenated (and completely unhealthy) vegetable oils. Yet minimally processed tropical oils are healthful, do not contribute to heart disease, and have been used safely for thousands of years.
My first challenge was substituting coconut oil for butter in frosting. I figured I'd have to do some tweaking, because coconut fat is harder at room temperature than butter. But to my surprise, on the first try, it worked like a charm. For the coconut lover, this frosting might even be an improvement on the butter and cream version. Better still, this frosting can be easily whipped up with just a few strokes with a wooden spoon.
Once I knew that a coconut fudge frosting would work, I decided to underscore the coconut flavor in my cake as well by using virgin coconut oil and coconut water in the batter. Two other less processed ingredients that I employed in this recipe were natural, fair-trade cocoa powder and Rapadura, or evaporated cane sugar juice. I've struggled in the past getting Rapadura to melt the way sugar does, so I opted for organic unbleached sugar in the frosting and Rapadura in the cake. Rapadura is high in trace minerals so it has more nutritional value than sugar, but should still be used in moderation.
I used natural, Fair Trade-certified cocoa powder in both the cake and the frosting. Natural cocoa powder has a fruity and complex taste, and I prefer it to Dutch-processed or alkalinized cocoa powder. Dutch-processing of cocoa powder is used to lower bitterness, but the process isn't necessary if the beans used in the cocoa powder are of very high quality.
Finally, because I don't like to have a whole cake around for just my husband and me, I baked the cake in a 9 x 13-inch pan and cut it into heart shapes. I layered the heart-shaped cake with fudge frosting and dusted the top with cocoa powder. Now I can share the love with friends.
Easy, Vegan Chocolate Cake
This recipe makes one 8-inch cake, but here I've called for one thin 9 x 13-inch layer to be cut into heart shapes and layered. You can double this recipe for an 8-inch two-layer cake or a thicker 9 x 13-inch half sheet cake. Experienced cake decorators freeze cake layers prior to decorating them to make them sturdier and easier to handle. This trick helps when cutting the cake layer into shapes, too.
1 cup all purpose flour
1/2 cup whole wheat flour
1 cup Rapadura or sugar
1/3 cup unsweetened natural cocoa powder
1/2 teaspoon sea salt
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 tablespoon apple cider vinegar
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1/3 cup virgin coconut oil, melted and cooled slightly
1 cup of coconut water, or juice (or 3/4 cup water and 1/4 cup coconut milk)*
Preheat the oven to 350 degrees F.
Grease a 9 x 13-inch pan with coconut oil and line the bottom with parchment paper cut to fit the pan snugly.
Mix the dry ingredients in a large mixing bowl. In a smaller bowl, mix together the vinegar, vanilla, coconut oil, and coconut water. Pour the wet ingredients into the dry ingredients and whisk until well blended and smooth.
Pour the batter into the prepared pan and bake for about 20 minutes or until a toothpick or thin knife blade inserted into the middle of the cake comes out clean.
Cool the cake completely on a rack. Then slide a knife around the edges of the cake to loosen it from the pan. Place a half sheet pan or large rectangular cutting board on top of the cake pan. Grasp the sides firmly and quickly flip the cake out onto the board. Peel the parchment paper from the underside of the cake and place the cake in the freezer to firm up, for at least half an hour. When the cake is firm -- don't leave it in too long or it will freeze hard -- cut out the cake into your desired shape. If a heart seems too ambitious, you can simply cut the cake into fourths for a four-layer square cake.
I prefer to frost only in between the layers and dust the top with cocoa powder. If you like more frosting and sweetness, the following recipe makes enough to frost the top and sides as well.
*Coconut water or juice can be purchased at most natural food stores and Latin markets, or can simply be drained out of a whole coconut.
Vegan Coconut Milk Chocolate Fudge Frosting
Vegan chocolate frosting
Make sure you have your cake layers ready to ice before beginning the frosting. It will set up very quickly. If it fully sets up before you finish icing your layers, warm it slightly in a bowl set over simmering water. You can thin it further with a few drops of coconut milk.
1/4 cup virgin coconut oil
1 1/2 cups sugar
1/4 cup unsweetened natural cocoa powder
1/4 teaspoon sea salt
1/2 cup coconut milk
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
Melt the coconut oil in a medium heavy-bottomed saucepan. Stir in the sugar, cocoa powder, and salt.
Add the coconut milk, stir well, and bring the mixture to a boil. Adjust the heat to a steady but gentle boil and cook for 5 minutes, stirring often. The mixture should begin to thicken.
Remove from heat and stir in vanilla. Set the chocolate mixture aside to cool for about 20 minutes.
Beat the frosting until it thickens, about 20 strokes with a wooden spoon. Spread it over your cake layers.
Any leftover frosting can be poured in a pan, allowed to harden, and cut into squares like fudge.
April McGreger is the proprietor of Farmer's Daughter, a farm-driven artisan food business in Carrboro, N.C. She is a leader in her local Slow Food convivium, where she is known to curate field pea tastings and write for the Slow Food Triangle blog. When not in the kitchen, she can usually be found at her local community garden or singing and playing the tenor banjo with her husband Phil.
A decadent chocolate cake for your sweetie, minus the animal products
By April McGreger
12 Feb 2009
http://www.grist.org/advice/daughter/2009/02/12/?source=daily
In the many years I worked in the restaurant world, Valentine's Day meant whipping up confections for other people's sweethearts. The pressure was steep: People scramble for reservations on the romantic holiday, and desserts are expected to impress.
This year, I'll be at home -- and focusing on a Valentine's Day sweet for my very own Valentine. I knew the dessert would have to be chocolate, and it would be a huge boon if was also dairy-free, because Phil, like millions of others, has difficulty digesting lactose. I also knew that he prefers cakes to pies, puddings, tortes, or even truffles. So I had a place to start, but there were more requirements.
I am a very picky home baker -- lazy even, some might say. I bake professionally, so when I am baking for family I like to keep things simple. I don't like to hear the noise of an electric mixer, so I prefer to stir things together by hand. I don't want to wear my arm out beating egg whites, so I tend to choose batter cakes, which can easily be stirred together. Last, I want something relatively easy because I do not want to spend my whole day "off" on my feet in the kitchen. That's a lot to ask of one dessert, I know.
Frosting on the Cake
I have long had a favorite vegan chocolate batter-cake recipe, so I used it as a starting place. Ten years ago it was simply my favorite easy chocolate cake, before I even noticed that the recipe was vegan. As in many American oil-based cakes, this one leans on baking soda and vinegar for leavening. The recipe is adapted from Fannie Farmer's "Mix-in-the-Pan Chocolate Cake." I have made it so many times, with so many different variations, that my versions barely resemble the original. But the Fanny Farmer backbone remains. To finish, I usually just give it a simple dusting of cocoa powder or powdered sugar. But Valentine's Day was just the challenge I needed to come up with a delicious vegan chocolate frosting to make it special and new.
I generally look down my nose at most vegan desserts because they rely on soy margarine, which is a product that I prefer not to use in my cooking. I am not a fan of the taste of soy margarine or soy milk, and in general, I try to limit my intake of unfermented soy. When you eliminate soy from vegan baking, things get much more complicated. I knew that I could make a ganache glaze with chocolate and coconut milk, but I wanted a cake that was reminiscent of the soft and fluffy chocolate layer cakes of my childhood, with old-fashioned fudge frosting.
I got out my family recipe for fudge frosting, which calls for half and half and butter. I decided that I would use coconut milk in place of the half and half and would try virgin coconut oil in place of the butter. Virgin coconut oil is a product that I have been experimenting with a lot this past year, and I absolutely love the heavenly aroma it lends to baked goods.
Coconuts and Bolts
Coconut oil has begun to reenter our food system after being abandoned in the saturated-fat scare brought to us by intense lobbying from the domestic vegetable-oil industry -- the same campaign that convinced millions to replace traditional fats with partially hydrogenated (and completely unhealthy) vegetable oils. Yet minimally processed tropical oils are healthful, do not contribute to heart disease, and have been used safely for thousands of years.
My first challenge was substituting coconut oil for butter in frosting. I figured I'd have to do some tweaking, because coconut fat is harder at room temperature than butter. But to my surprise, on the first try, it worked like a charm. For the coconut lover, this frosting might even be an improvement on the butter and cream version. Better still, this frosting can be easily whipped up with just a few strokes with a wooden spoon.
Once I knew that a coconut fudge frosting would work, I decided to underscore the coconut flavor in my cake as well by using virgin coconut oil and coconut water in the batter. Two other less processed ingredients that I employed in this recipe were natural, fair-trade cocoa powder and Rapadura, or evaporated cane sugar juice. I've struggled in the past getting Rapadura to melt the way sugar does, so I opted for organic unbleached sugar in the frosting and Rapadura in the cake. Rapadura is high in trace minerals so it has more nutritional value than sugar, but should still be used in moderation.
I used natural, Fair Trade-certified cocoa powder in both the cake and the frosting. Natural cocoa powder has a fruity and complex taste, and I prefer it to Dutch-processed or alkalinized cocoa powder. Dutch-processing of cocoa powder is used to lower bitterness, but the process isn't necessary if the beans used in the cocoa powder are of very high quality.
Finally, because I don't like to have a whole cake around for just my husband and me, I baked the cake in a 9 x 13-inch pan and cut it into heart shapes. I layered the heart-shaped cake with fudge frosting and dusted the top with cocoa powder. Now I can share the love with friends.
Easy, Vegan Chocolate Cake
This recipe makes one 8-inch cake, but here I've called for one thin 9 x 13-inch layer to be cut into heart shapes and layered. You can double this recipe for an 8-inch two-layer cake or a thicker 9 x 13-inch half sheet cake. Experienced cake decorators freeze cake layers prior to decorating them to make them sturdier and easier to handle. This trick helps when cutting the cake layer into shapes, too.
1 cup all purpose flour
1/2 cup whole wheat flour
1 cup Rapadura or sugar
1/3 cup unsweetened natural cocoa powder
1/2 teaspoon sea salt
1 teaspoon baking soda
1 tablespoon apple cider vinegar
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
1/3 cup virgin coconut oil, melted and cooled slightly
1 cup of coconut water, or juice (or 3/4 cup water and 1/4 cup coconut milk)*
Preheat the oven to 350 degrees F.
Grease a 9 x 13-inch pan with coconut oil and line the bottom with parchment paper cut to fit the pan snugly.
Mix the dry ingredients in a large mixing bowl. In a smaller bowl, mix together the vinegar, vanilla, coconut oil, and coconut water. Pour the wet ingredients into the dry ingredients and whisk until well blended and smooth.
Pour the batter into the prepared pan and bake for about 20 minutes or until a toothpick or thin knife blade inserted into the middle of the cake comes out clean.
Cool the cake completely on a rack. Then slide a knife around the edges of the cake to loosen it from the pan. Place a half sheet pan or large rectangular cutting board on top of the cake pan. Grasp the sides firmly and quickly flip the cake out onto the board. Peel the parchment paper from the underside of the cake and place the cake in the freezer to firm up, for at least half an hour. When the cake is firm -- don't leave it in too long or it will freeze hard -- cut out the cake into your desired shape. If a heart seems too ambitious, you can simply cut the cake into fourths for a four-layer square cake.
I prefer to frost only in between the layers and dust the top with cocoa powder. If you like more frosting and sweetness, the following recipe makes enough to frost the top and sides as well.
*Coconut water or juice can be purchased at most natural food stores and Latin markets, or can simply be drained out of a whole coconut.
Vegan Coconut Milk Chocolate Fudge Frosting
Vegan chocolate frosting
Make sure you have your cake layers ready to ice before beginning the frosting. It will set up very quickly. If it fully sets up before you finish icing your layers, warm it slightly in a bowl set over simmering water. You can thin it further with a few drops of coconut milk.
1/4 cup virgin coconut oil
1 1/2 cups sugar
1/4 cup unsweetened natural cocoa powder
1/4 teaspoon sea salt
1/2 cup coconut milk
1 teaspoon vanilla extract
Melt the coconut oil in a medium heavy-bottomed saucepan. Stir in the sugar, cocoa powder, and salt.
Add the coconut milk, stir well, and bring the mixture to a boil. Adjust the heat to a steady but gentle boil and cook for 5 minutes, stirring often. The mixture should begin to thicken.
Remove from heat and stir in vanilla. Set the chocolate mixture aside to cool for about 20 minutes.
Beat the frosting until it thickens, about 20 strokes with a wooden spoon. Spread it over your cake layers.
Any leftover frosting can be poured in a pan, allowed to harden, and cut into squares like fudge.
April McGreger is the proprietor of Farmer's Daughter, a farm-driven artisan food business in Carrboro, N.C. She is a leader in her local Slow Food convivium, where she is known to curate field pea tastings and write for the Slow Food Triangle blog. When not in the kitchen, she can usually be found at her local community garden or singing and playing the tenor banjo with her husband Phil.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
