Posts tagged ‘food’

New plan may tax U.S. drivers for every mile traveled, says Transportation Secretary Roy LaHood

New plan may tax U.S. drivers for every mile traveled, says Transportation Secretary Roy LaHood (NYDailyNews)

What the…!?!

I can not believe this! How dare they! Do they know how many small businesses depend on driving to meet/have appointments with their clients? Small businesses that are struggling badly already!!

How dare they even consider this. It was bad enough when it was gas prices out of sight. But this is unbelievable. More TAX! More TAX that will not only hurt the small businesses in this country but every other American when they go to buy ANYTHING that is delivered to the grocery store, retail outlets, gas stations, shipping for packages, etc. etc. etc. … the list goes on forever!

Not to mention the curbing of individual freedoms with excessive taxation. How many people will be able to travel after this goes into effect? How many children and grand children will see their grand parents and vice versa after all the toll of this goes into effect.

Do they not remember what happened when there were extremely high gas prices? Or are they so beyond the pay level of the average American family to even have a clue how the rest of the country survives?

This is President Obama’s answer? This is the ‘leaders’ of various States answer?

Go back to the drawing board. Start cutting salaries of elected officials. That would likely take care of it right there.

Between everything else that’s been going on and this I am thoroughly disgusted.

New Study of Splenda and Sucralose Reveals Shocking New Information About Potential Harmful Effect on Humans

New Study of Splenda and Sucralose Reveals Shocking New Information About Potential Harmful Effect on Humans (Mercola.com)

James Turner, the chairman of the national consumer education group Citizens for Health, has expressed shock and outrage after reading a new report from scientists outlining the dangers of the artificial sweetener Splenda (sucralose).

In animals examined for the study, Splenda reduced the amount of good bacteria in the intestines by 50 percent, increased the pH level in the intestines, contributed to increases in body weight and affected P-glycoprotein (P-gp) levels in such a way that crucial health-related drugs could be rejected.

The P-gp effect could result in medications used in chemotherapy, AIDS treatment and treatments for heart conditions being shunted back into the intestines, rather than being absorbed by the body.

According to Turner, “The report makes it clear that the artificial sweetener Splenda and its key component sucralose pose a threat to the people who consume the product. Hundreds of consumers have complained to us about side effects from using Splenda and this study … confirms that the chemicals in the little yellow package should carry a big red warning label.”

Much more in the article in Dr. Mercola’s Comments. Must read.

Here’s just a couple of Dr. Mercola’s Comments from the article:

It’s very important to realize that Splenda (sucralose) is actually NOT sugar, despite its marketing slogan “Made from sugar, so it tastes like sugar”. Rather it’s a chlorinated artificial sweetener in line with aspartame and saccharin, and with detrimental health effects to match.

Splenda was approved by the FDA in 1998 as a tabletop sweetener and for use in products such as baked goods, nonalcoholic beverages, chewing gum, frozen dairy desserts, fruit juices, and gelatins. Sucralose is also permitted as a general-purpose sweetener for all processed foods.

The approval was given after the FDA supposedly reviewed more than 110 animal and human safety studies, but as you’ll soon find out, out of these 110 studies, only two were human studies, and the longest one was conducted for four days!

From the GlobeNewsWire article,

Turner said, “This report followed accepted policies and procedures and the results make clear the potential for disturbing side effects from the ingestion of Splenda. It is like putting a pesticide in your body. And this is at levels of intake erroneously approved by the Food and Drug Administration. A person eating two slices of cake and drinking two cups of coffee containing Splenda would ingest enough sucralose to affect the P-glycoprotein, while consuming just seven little Splenda packages reduces good bacteria.” Although the effect of consuming Splenda does not result from a one time use, the side effects do occur after accumulated use. Turner also noted unmistakable evidence that Splenda is absorbed by fat, contrary to the claims of Johnson & Johnson.

Turner announced, “We are calling today on the FDA to immediately accept our petition filed over a year ago and initiate a review of its approval of sucralose and to require a warning label on Splenda packaging cautioning that people who take medications and/or have gastrointestinal problems avoid using Splenda. The new study makes it clear that Splenda can cause you to gain weight and lose the benefits of medications designed to improve and protect your health. The FDA should not continue to turn a blind eye to this health threat.”

Mercury in Some High Fructose Corn Syrup?!

Mercury in Some High Fructose Corn Syrup?

The new report comes from researchers including David Wallinga, MD, director of the IATP’s food and health program. They bought 55 products that list high-fructose corn syrup first or second on their list of ingredients, which means high-fructose corn syrup was a leading ingredient in those products.

Wallinga’s team sent samples of those products to a commercial lab, which checked the levels of total mercury in each sample.

“Overall, we found detectable mercury in 17 of 55 samples, or around 31%,” write Wallinga and colleagues.

On the second page,

Erickson didn’t comment specifically on Wallinga’s study. Instead, her statement focuses on a new study published online in Environmental Health, which shows mercury in some samples of commercial high-fructose corn syrup tested in 2005.

“This study appears to be based on outdated information of dubious significance,” Erickson states. “Our industry has used mercury-free versions of the two re-agents mentioned in the study, hydrochloric acid and caustic soda, for several years.”

Wallinga agrees about the technological shift away from mercury. “If you just look within the confines of the U.S., yes, about 90% of production now is not using mercury,” says Wallinga. “The problem is that we don’t actually know where our companies are buying their high-fructose corn syrup from … it’s a global industry.”

“For me, the take-home message is really that this is a totally avoidable, unnecessary exposure to mercury,” says Wallinga. “We’ve got a safer, more efficient technology for making these chemicals that are part of the ingredients used to manufacture high-fructose corn syrup.”

Unbelievable. And the companies respond on the second page of the article as well. Must read.

Seems to me that it is time that the majority of people begin to learn the old ways of doing things and take control of their own food chain — Canning, preserving, growing our own food and livestock where possible, etc. We keep learning of more and more dangers due to the global impact on the food chain and corporate endangerment of our nation’s health and welfare. Totally unacceptable.

The price of dissent on global warming

According to Wikipedia, David Belamy is an English botanist, author, broadcaster, and environmental campaigner. He is also a skeptic of anthropogenic global warming.

Bellamy first came to public prominence as an environmental consultant at the time of the 1967 Torrey Canyon disaster. He has written and presented some 400 television programmes on botany, ecology, and environmental issues. Bellamy is the originator, along with David Shreeve and the Conservation Foundation (which he also founded), of the Ford European Conservation Awards and has published over 80 scientific papers and many books.

Recently, he wrote an article, “The price of dissent on global warming (The Australian):”

WHEN I first stuck my head above the parapet to say I didn’t believe what we were being told about global warming, I had no idea what the consequences would be. I am a scientist and I have to follow the directions of science, but when I see that the truth is being covered up I have to voice my opinions.

David Belamy goes on to talk about why he says that.

If you have the time, the comment section is also quite interesting.

Thank you Mike (Staying Alive blog) for bringing to light another great article.

Back in August, I posted an article entitled, “Climatic Cycles … who’d a thunk it” where I share information from the article, “Fire and Ice – Journalists have warned of climate change for 100 years, but can’t decide weather we face an ice age or warming (BMI Special Report)” (And yes, I do think that weather instead of whether is a pun on words.)

Like David Belamy, and many others, I have been very upset about the rain forest being destroyed for many years and the loss of some of the most amazing biodiversity and indigenous culture on the planet. And like anyone with a brain, I am very concerned about pollution (at every level) and what it is doing to our world. And as long as it’s efficient and doesn’t create higher food costs, I am very much in favor of alternative energy solutions.

Recently, I saw a very good timeline on this subject over at The Old Farmer’s Almanac, “Is Global Warming on the Wane?”.

I do think it’s important to get back to basics where we can. Some are better able than others to do so. But to talk about pushing carbon taxes and buying credits to appease the ‘carbon gods’ and make people ‘feel better’ about their so called carbon footprint may be a bit over the edge when there are so many starving people around the world.

And there are real concerns about global companies, like Monsanto that provides a huge percentage of the seeds used around the world, (in 2006 they were reconsidering their 1999 statement on NOT making use of technology (read: patents) to create terminator or suicide seeds), beginning patent war with the world surrounding seeds and techniques for breeding:

Biotech Giant Monsanto Revises Pledge on ‘Suicide Seeds’:

The threat of so-called ‘suicide seeds’ being used in commercial agriculture has become greater following a change of policy by Monsanto, the world’s largest GM seed and chemicals company.

The genetic-engineering giant made a public promise in 1999 not to commercialise ‘terminator technology’ – plants that are genetically modified to produce sterile seeds. Now Monsanto says it may develop the technology after all – suggesting that it would use Terminator seeds in non-food crops such as cotton, tobacco, pharmaceutical crops and grass, and does not rule out other uses in the future. (1)

In response, Greenpeace joined over 300 organisations today to demand that the current global moratorium on terminator technology is maintained, because the use of sterile seeds threatens biodiversity and could destroy the livelihoods and cultures of the 1.4 billion people who depend on farm-saved seed.

More here and here and here and this information on wikipedia:

Throughout 2004 and 2005, Monsanto filed lawsuits against many farmers in Canada and the U.S. The lawsuits have been on the grounds of patent infringement, specifically the farmer’s sale of seed containing Monsanto’s patented genes–which require the farmer initial purchase of the seed and its technology–unknowingly sown by wind carrying the seeds from neighboring crops. These instances began in the mid to late 1990s, with one of the most significant cases being decided in Monsanto’s favor by the Canadian Supreme Court. By a 5-4 vote in late May 2004, that court ruled that “by cultivating a plant containing the patented gene and composed of the patented cells without license, the appellants (canola farmer Percy Schmeiser) deprived the respondents of the full enjoyment of the monopoly.” With this ruling, the Canadian courts followed the U.S. Supreme Court in its decision on patent issues involving plants and genes.

As of February 2005, Monsanto has patent claims on breeding techniques for pigs which would grant them ownership of any pigs born of such techniques and their related herds. Greenpeace claims Monsanto is trying to claim ownership on ordinary breeding techniques.[6] Monsanto claims that the patent is a defensive measure to track animals from its system. They furthermore claim their patented method uses a specialized insemination device that requires less sperm than is typical.[7]

In 2006, the Public Patent Foundation filed requests with the U.S. Patent Office to revoke four patents that Monsanto has used in patent lawsuits against farmers. In the first round of reexamination, claims in all four patents were rejected by the Patent Office in four separate rulings dating from February through July 2007.[8] Monsanto has since filed responses in the reexaminations.

I just think there are much more important things to worry about regarding the environment, governments squandering tax payers’ money (for generations) on a bucket with major holes in it that Ron Paul and other Austrian economists have predicted (thanks Ice – The Ice Blog), and feeding the world’s population by helping them get what’s needed to do it themselves through humanitarian ways (not through taxes at governmental levels, but through charitable/religious organizations that people voluntarily choose to donate to) — rather than worrying about carbon footprints and carbon credits so people can go on doing what they are going to do anyway (but somehow feel better about it because they paid to appease the ‘carbon gods’), and global warming/cooling cycles that are a normal occurrence since the beginning of the world.

Tag Cloud

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 304 other followers

%d bloggers like this: