Gonna Quit going to see Doctors...

Yep, I'm thinking to quit going to see any doctors. (No, not really, it's just a negative thought wave I was having.) It seems every time I go, they find more problems, with some now showing up as severe.

I am a firm believer that we are all responsible for the consequences of our actions (including what and how we choose to eat), and I'm no different than anyone else in the aspect of how those choices affect us individually. However, I DO wish I had been better informed years ago about what consequences our food choices have on our health.

My food choices have been great for the last several years, but not so for the first 60 years of my life. (I think I can thank mis-information, advertising and greed for that.) I cannot change the earlier damage that's just now showing up, although hopefully I CAN keep it from getting worse by continuing a healthy, real food diet. I also hope I can pass along lots of healthy food information!

My young (under age 40) primary care physician will not agree with all my food choices, but I have to remember she's a product of what she was taught in medical school, which generally has little emphasis (if any) on good nutrition. She has already recommended a low- to almost non-fat diet and we know the brain thrives on saturated fats!

Medical schools teach how to treat or cure diseases, not how to prevent them. I simply cannot buy the concept of a low-fat diet (and those are too high in bad fats anyway), the excessive sugars found in many fruits and grains, and "foods" filled with fake chemical ingredients... vs. the real foods Nature intended.

Undeclared Aspartame in milk, yogurt?

The International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) and the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF) filed a petition with the FDA on 20 February 2013 to alter the definition of "milk" to secretly include chemical sweeteners like aspartame and chlorine-containing sucralose without them being listed on the label.

The full text of the Petition to Amend the Standard of Identity for Milk and 17 Additional Dairy Products may be found in the Federal Register here. Scroll down to "Food and Drug Administration, Proposed Rules" for the PDF.

The petition requests that FDA similarly amend the standards of identity for 17 other milk and cream products. Those standards (referred to as the “additional dairy standards”) are as follows:

Acidified milk (§ 131.111)
cultured milk (§ 131.112)
sweetened condensed milk (§ 131.120)
nonfat dry milk (§ 131.125)
nonfat dry milk fortified with vitamins A and D (§ 131.127)
evaporated milk (§ 131.130)
dry cream (§ 131.149)
heavy cream (§ 131.150)
light cream (§ 131.155)
light whipping cream (§ 131.157)
sour cream (§ 131.160)
acidified sour cream (§ 131.162)
eggnog (§ 131.170)
half-and-half (§ 131.180)
yogurt (§ 131.200)
lowfat yogurt (§ 131.203)
nonfat yogurt (§ 131.206)

According to Natural News: DFA and NMPF argue that nutrient content claims such as "reduced calorie" are not attractive to children, and maintain that consumers can more easily identify the overall nutritional value of milk products that are flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners if the labels do not include such claims. Further, the petitioners assert that consumers do not recognize milk -- including flavored milk -- as necessarily containing sugar. Accordingly, the petitioners state that milk flavored with non-nutritive sweeteners should be labeled as milk without further claims so that consumers can "more easily identify its overall nutritional value."

This is all being done to "save the children," we're told, because the use of aspartame in milk products would reduce calories.

In other words, hiding aspartame from consumers by not including it on the label actually helps consumers, according to the IDFA and NMPF!

Yep, consumers are best served by keeping them ignorant. If this logic smacks of the same kind of twisted deception practiced by Monsanto, that's because it's identical: the less consumers know, the more they are helped, according to industry. And it's for the children, too, because children are also best served by keeping them poisoned with aspartame.

Consumers have always been kept in the dark about pink slime, meat glue, rBGH and GMOs in their food. And now, if the IDFA gets its way, you'll be able to drink hormone-contaminated milk from an antibiotics-inundated cow fed genetically modified crops and producing milk containing hidden aspartame. And you won't have the right to know about any of this!

The FDA confirms this "secret" status of aspartame, stating, "If the standard of identity for milk is amended as requested by petitioners, milk manufacturers could use non-nutritive sweeteners in flavored milk without a nutrient content claim in its labeling."

The FDA is requesting public comments until May 25, 2013 on this dangerous proposed rule. Click here for instructions.

Institutional Food and Pink Slime

I had the unfortunate experience for 2-3 weeks of "Meals on Wheels" about 5 years ago when I was recuperating from surgery. It was disgusting stuff, like all institutional food, whether for nursing homes, hospitals, or school cafeterias. I hope to die quickly so never have to eat that crap again!

I read Water for Elephants last week while sitting in waiting rooms for medical appointments. The main character Jacob says: "I am ninety. Or ninety-three. One or the other." At the beginning of Water for Elephants, he is living out his days in a nursing home, hating every second of it, but especially the institutional "food". (The book is mainly flashback stories about his days working in a circus as a young man, and is an interesting look at circus life.)

Remember Pink Slime (lean, finely textured beef)? Well.... it's coming back, sort of anyway, possibly from a new player: Cargill. When the reports about it from ABC News surfaced last spring, many institutional customers stopped buying the stuff, forcing one of its main makers, Beef Products International, to shut down three of its four plants.

"But now pink slime, or at least the company most associated with it, is back yet again, and with a vengeance. The Twitterverse is atwitter with news that BPI is launching a $1.2 billion defamation suit against ABC News and three whistleblowers—two federal employees and a former BPI worker —who spoke to the news network. 

ABC News is calling the suit "frivolous,"  AP reports, and that seems right. All ABC and the whistleblowers did was to describe in detail how the stuff is made. You can't convincingly blame the messenger because you don't like how the message went over with the public.

Meanwhile, Cargill, the vast agribiz company, is quietly contemplating ramping up its own production of "lean, finely textured beef." A company spokesperson recently told the trade journal Food Navigator (registration required) that it had done focus groups on the stuff shortly after the media storm last spring, and found that concern over it was already "in consumers' rearview mirror and fading fast." The spokesperson added that some of its customers—big institutional buyers of ground beef—have expressed interest in buying pink slime again. Cargill is even prepared to start labeling products containing the elixir with the phrase, "includes finely textured beef," it told the trade journal.

Whereas BPI famously uses ammonia to kill the pathogens lurking in the meat scraps that go into pink slime, Cargill uses citric acid, Food Navigator reports. That strikes me as a bit more palatable than ammonia." Source

Speaking out of both sides of the mouth

The most important opportunity to affect the control the Corporate Agribusiness has over our foods is Proposition 37 on the California ballot in November. Prop. 37 is the Right to Know (what's in our food), mandating GMO labelling.

All Proposition 37 does is require clear labels letting consumers know if foods are genetically modified. We already have food labels showing nutrition, allergy information and other facts consumers want to know. This measure simply adds information telling us if food is produced using genetic engineering, which is when food is modified in a laboratory by adding DNA from other plants, animals, bacteria or viruses.    

I think the California vote on Prop. 37 is perhaps even more important that the Presidential vote. After all, no matter who is elected President, he will still have 535 Voting Members of Congress to deal with anything he wants to change or accomplish. However, if Prop. 37 passes, it will ultimately inform every one of us in the U.S. who purchases food because it will be too costly and cumbersome for corporations to have different food labels for foods sold in different states.

Most of us imagine that anything "organic" (by Law non-GMO) would automatically be on the side to defeat the proposition, yet many large corporations that produce or market organic foods have helped put over $26 MILLION into the war chest to defeat the initiative. How can these corporations market some foods as good for us, yet refuse to label what's in the other foods they market?

        Kellogg’s (Kashi, Bear Naked, Morningstar Farms);
        General Mills (Muir Glen, Cascadian Farm, Larabar);
        Dean Foods (Horizon, Silk, White Wave);
        Smucker’s (R.W. Knudsen, Santa Cruz Organic);
        Coca-Cola (Honest Tea, Odwalla);
        Safeway (‘O’ Organics);
        Kraft (Boca Burgers and Back to Nature);
        Con-Agra (Orville Redenbacher’s Organic, Hunt’s Organic, Lightlife); and
        PepsiCo (Naked Juice, Tostito’s Organic, Tropicana Organic).

On the other hand, there are many smaller organic leaders supporting the Proposition. By enlarging the poster above, you can see the companies donating to the cause. Please support them and their products when possible!  

The current Administration has deregulated more genetically modified foods than ever. From plums to alfalfa and even sugar beets. But it's not just that so many crops are modified (93% of all soy, 86% of corn, and 93% of canola seeds are now genetically modified) it's that there's currently no labeling system in place so that we know what we're buying. 

We are one of the few industrialized nations that doesn't require labeling of GMO foods. In the past year alone 19 U.S. states have attempted to pass GMO labeling laws, but each time Monsanto and biotech lobbyists have threatened to sue. Only Alaska, with its huge wild salmon industry, has passed a biotech seafood labeling law.

Most of us would like to believe that our foods come from nature, but that's far from the case. In 40 countries, including Australia, Japan and all European Union nations, there are significant restrictions or outright bans on the production of GMOs because they are not considered proven safe.

Update: Giant pesticide and big food companies have so far donated more than $37 million to defeat Yes on 37 to label GMOs in California. Earlier this spring, the Grocery Manufacturers of America (GMA), of which Monsanto is a leading partner, declared that defeating Prop 37 was its single highest priority for 2012.

Monsanto just funneled another $2.9 million dollars to defeat California’s Prop 37 to label genetically engineered foods. This comes on top of their $4.2 million dollar pledge only weeks ago and brings Monsanto’s combined total to more than $7.1 million dollars!  That’s a huge pile of cash and it’s dedicated to only one thing – denying us the Right to Know what’s in our food.

My Question: Did Monsanto just kick in more $$ because they are concerned the People might actually WIN??

.

The War on American Soil

Yes, there really IS a war on American soil, and it's about our Rights to real food... and being force-fed adulterated and nutritionally unhealthy foods instead. This war on our right to control what we eat could grow into a major conflict, and the Feds have already brandished guns on food raids.

I ended up being admitted to my local hospital 2 weeks ago, with what they thought were cardiac problems. Immediately they put me on a "heart-healthy, low-sodium diet", and if I had been there long enough I might have starved. It wasn't the lack of salt on the foods, but that most of the foods were inferior to the point of absurdity. In fact, one meal had canned green beans (commercially canned) that were so full of sodium I couldn't eat them. So much for a low-sodium diet. The only exception was a cup of fresh sliced apples with a few grapes for contrast. The other cooked fruit dishes (and juice cups) were so high in sugar (or some kind of sweetener) I gagged. No wonder we have an obesity epidemic, and skyrocketing diabetes.

The "butter" for my hospital wonderbread toast was Promise®, which is 60% GMO vegetable oils, water, whey from milk, with some chemicals and chemical vitamins added. How healthy is that? They gave me a list of foods to avoid, like processed cheese and hot dogs. Hell, I already avoid all those foods, and most intelligent people know they are not "real food".

I've been thinking about the control the government is trying to take on all of our foods. What started as a "war on drugs" 40 years ago has mushroomed into the government believing it has the authority to control everything we put into our bodies. (They only control alcoholic beverages and cigarettes to collect tax on it, not how much anyone consumes.) The war on drugs isn't being won either, and they are putting more pressure on controlling foods and supplements. Their propaganda machine (the CDC, Center for Disease Control, government owned and operated) has been working overtime, to the extent that almost everyone "buys" it, even doctors. "If the CDC says it's so, then it must be."

I do understand the need for some controls for food safety, like imported supplements of unknown safety, and particularly those foods that come from factory farms like milk, beef, pork, eggs and chicken. Some of those facilities are so foul that I won't eat anything from there no matter how safe they try to make it.

No milk comes from a factory farm that isn't pasteurized by law (cooked to destroy all pathogens but the cooking also destroys healthy nutrients like essential fatty-acids, enzymes and vitamins). The CDC says raw milk is unhealthy, but their own data from 1993-2006 shows on average 76,000,000 food-borne illnesses per year and only 116 of those were from raw milk.

A presidential election is coming in the fall, and I'll bet my last fiat dollar that food rights are never mentioned. I'll also bet that sooner or later, mothers are going to wise-up about nutrition and wage war on the government control of real food.

Upcoming Grocery Costs

Corn "Futures"

Yep, we all know grocery costs will be up this year due to the widespread drought in the US. Corn is in almost everything for sale at the supermarket even if it doesn't look like corn. Never mind the cost of bread, or wheat flour...

What I don't understand is how much food prices are affected by Gamblers... those guys who play the "Futures" market, and "wouldn't know a corn stalk from a hoe handle". (See Source for quote)

Right now the highs in corn prices are over $8 a bushel, wheat over $9, soybeans over $17 and all three are expected to keep on climbing. These are unprecedented historic highs, as speculators (read: Gamblers) react (and likely overreact) to coming shortages.

Furthermore this year more acres have been put into corn than any time since the 1930s, and lots of that increase went on land too poor to grow profitable corn in any year. It was planted solely with the idea of taking advantage of the high prices. The risk is covered by subsidized crop insurance, another example of [our] money being used to encourage bad farming.

Source

The War on Front Yards

Can you believe this gorgeous vegetable garden in Quebec is illegal? The owners have until July 24th to dismantle it or face legal action.

Something is very wrong in the world when crappy foods and hunger abound, and yet this kind of thing is allowed to happen.

Source

Indentured Politicians - What's in it for Them??

I came across an interesting term recently, new to me but maybe not to you. It really explains a LOT! The term is "Indentured Politicians". Does that need any explanation? LOL.

But just in case it needs explanation, "indentured politicians" are those who "owe favors" to the big contributors to their election campaigns, and the politicians return the "favor" by voting in favor those contributors when new laws (and other regulatory federal legislation) come up for votes, rather than voting the requirements of the population they are charged to represent. I'm posting my thoughts about this here because I believe it explains why the regulatory agencies for our food systems have gone bonkers.

When it takes millions of dollars (or sometimes billions of dollars depending on the office sought) to be successful in a political campaign, is it any wonder why big corporations see an advantage to finance a candidate who will favor the corporation's interests in future legislation?

One interesting question I have, is why a candidate will spend millions of dollars campaigning for a position that pays far less than they spend to get there? What else is in it for them? The current salary (2011-2012) for rank-and-file members of the House and Senate is $174,000 per year. House Representatives are elected for a 2 year term, and Senate representatives for 6 years.

In order for a member of the House of Congress to qualify for a pension, they would have to be elected 3 times, for a total 6 year payout of $1,044,000, which is far less total salary than what they spent to get it. A Senator only has to serve 1 term (6 years) to qualify for a pension; same pay for 1 Senate term of 6 years that a Congressional Representative gets for 3 terms (6 years, $1,044,000), far less than either spent to get there.

So, where's the payoff for election to federal office, when you consider cost to get there versus salary once there? It certainly IS NOT in the salary, and probably not even in Employee Benefits, although the overall "esteem" of the Office no doubt strokes their ego. That STILL doesn't cut it in the money balance.

• In a complex system of calculations, administered by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management, congressional pay rates also affect the salaries for federal judges and other senior government executives.
• During the Constitutional Convention, Benjamin Franklin considered proposing that elected government officials not be paid for their service. Other Founding Fathers, however, decided otherwise.
• From 1789 to 1855, members of Congress received only a per diem (daily payment) of $6.00 while in session, except for a period from December 1815 to March 1817, when they received $1,500 a year. Members began receiving an annual salary in 1855, when they were paid $3,000 per year. ($3,000 of 1855 dollars would be worth: $78,947.37 in 2012)

Please note that Members of Congress have to serve at least 5 years to receive a pension.

The amount of a congressperson's pension depends on the years of service and the average of the highest 3 years of his or her salary. By law, the starting amount of a Member's retirement annuity may not exceed 80% of his or her final salary. (80% of the current pay of $174,000 is $139,200. I could live on that!)

President's Salary
Effective January 1, 2001, the annual salary of the president of the United States was increased to $400,000 per year, including a $50,000 expense allowance. Please note that the Presidential salary doubled in 2001.

The increase was approved as part of the Treasury and General Government Appropriations Act (Public Law 106-58), passed in the closing days of the 106th Congress.

"Sec. 644. (a) Increase in Annual Compensation.--Section 102 of title 3, United States Code, is amended by striking '$200,000' and inserting '$400,000'. (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall take effect at noon on January 20, 2001."

Vice President's Salary
The salary of the vice president is currently (for 2011) $230,700. (BTW, who IS our VP [yes, I do know his name] and what does he do? I never see his name in the news.)

Presidential Retirement and Maintenance
Under the Former Presidents Act, each former president is paid a lifetime, taxable pension that is equal to the annual rate of basic pay for the head of an executive federal department -- $199,700 in 2011 -- the same annual salary paid to secretaries of the Cabinet agencies.

Each former president and vice president may also take advantage of funds allocated by Congress to help facilitate their transition to private life. These funds are used to provide suitable office space, staff compensation, communications services, and printing and postage associated with the transition. As an example, Congress authorized a total of $1.5 million for the transition expenses of outgoing president George H.W. Bush and Vice President Dan Quayle.

So, where IS the payoff? It sure doesn't appear to favor Joe Citizen who voted for Representation in Congress.

Tipping Points in Food Wars, and Choice

I often wonder if there will be a point where public outcry against GMO's will tip the balance in our favor. Surely that should have happened by now because 93% of Americans are said to be in favor of GMO labeling, but maybe that "tipping point" is only measured by the ballot box? If that's the sole indicator, we are in trouble because authenticated reports of electronic manipulation/fraud of cast ballots are all over the internet, and there is no way to know if the pronounced results of any counted ballots is truly real or not.

Right now, the fate of GMO labeling in the US rests largely in the hands of voters in California, IF they can get GMO labeling on the November ballot... and IF we can believe the ballot counts. California is the 8th largest economy in the world, and the 5th largest supplier of food in the world.

Ballot initiatives are simple in theory, but obscenely expensive in practice because they often rely heavily on television. Companies like Monsanto clearly have the dollars to spend on lobbying against the initiative. A 2004 GMO-labeling ballot initiative attempt in Oregon failed when supporters put up only $100,000 compared to the $5.5 million that came form a group calling themselves “Coalition Against the Costly Labeling Law” which included Monsanto, DuPont, Croplife, and Conagra, to name a few.

 

Then there’s the question of if or when Right to Know legislation passes, whether it’ll be held up in court when Big Ag lawyers drag it there... which is probable. Their argument will likely be that food labeling belongs in the federal domain and should not be a state issue. And of course, we know who's money is most influential in the federal domain.

For the average consumer like me, that leaves only a few safe food choices: grow my own from certified (and possibly even organic) non-GMO seed; buy grass-fed meat from local farmer's who also use only safe seed to grow their produce; and do NOT buy any processed foods or foods requiring any label at all, because surely GMO's are hiding there in chemical terms. 

Although I do not buy into the mania of many of the Survivalist's groups about hording foods, I do think it is prudent to have provisions against possible disasters from storms, drought, etc. However, since President Obama signed the new Executive Order "National Defense Resources Preparedness" on March 16, 2012, I'm having second thoughts about what edibles I grow in my garden, since my gardens are up for grabs under the new E.O. I am also a little concerned by the E.O. because by it, only Obama can decide what constitutes a "state of emergency". 

My personal "state of emergency" is now the gasoline prices hitting $4 a gallon plus most foods from the grocery store being harmful to my health. I wonder what the President really considers a "state of emergency"?

This year in my garden, I am leaning strongly towards including a lot of edible weeds and other foodstuffs that most would not recognize as edible, yet will nourish me. Are they gonna come and dig up my dandelions? LOL

 

Are You (Unintentionally) Supporting Monsanto??

Are you unintentionally supporting Monsanto? It's that time of year to buy garden seeds, and I was surprised to find out the names of some of the seed companies that Monsanto owns, and for whom Monsanto packages seed. Granted, these may not be GMO seeds (yet) but I hate putting a single penny in Monsanto's pocket. 

I was surprised to see the now very popular onion, "Candy" is a Monsanto-owned seed as is the popular cherry tomato, Sweet Million. I was also surprised to read that Jung Seed, R.H. Shumway, Vermont Bean Seed and Totally Tomatoes are among the Monsanto-owned seed companies.

Several years ago, Monsanto bought Seminis (a seed company that has 40% of the US seed market), and more recently bought De Ruiter Seeds (one of the top vegetable breeders in the world). Monsanto is now in the vegetable seed business for the first time, and it's in big time. More than 55 percent of store bought lettuce, 75 percent of U.S. tomatoes, and 85 percent of peppers now originate through Monsanto's fingers. (Source) Our salad plate is now being dished out by Monsanto!

Although Monsanto has yet to release many genetically modified vegetables into the market, they spend almost 2 million dollars a day on research and development, so GM vegetables are probably not very far away. (Monsanto currently holds the technology for more than 90 percent of the world’s genetically engineered crops, and they also hold thousands of U.S. seed patents without mentioning their alleged theft of heirloom seeds world-wide.) If you see PVP (Plant Variety Protection) listed after a seed or plant name, that means the seed or plant carries a U.S. patent, and Monsanto could own it. Some are listed below... check with the seed companies for others.
 

It's best to remember that Monsanto sells seeds in huge quantities to distributors (even if not Monsanto-owned), who in turn break down the huge bulk units and resell smaller bulk units to seed companies who package them in small seed packs, often with a different 'name' for the same vegetable. So, you may be supporting Monsanto just by purchasing repackaged seeds from "Aunt Sally's Seed Company" (a fictitious seed company used here only for illustration!). Some companies who have signed the Safe Seed Pledge (which only says they are not GMO seeds) may be selling Monsanto seed. The best bet is buying OP (open pollinated), heirloom and/or organic seeds. If you are in doubt about a particular seed, ask the company selling it!

For an alternative way to shop for seed, visit the non-profit Organic Materials Review Institute (OMRI) Organic Seeds Database which lists certified "final handlers" for organic seed. List is by produce. Pick a vegetable and find a seller. Also, Here's a list by region of safe-seed companies, and notes about each company.

Listed below are some Monsanto-owned seed companies, and then a list of some Monsanto-owned seed varieties by name. If you buy from ANY of these companies, or buy any of the varieties listed, you are putting money in Monsanto's pockets. Monsanto says this on their website: "Monsanto offers the world’s vegetable growers more than 4,000 distinct seed varieties representing more than 20 species. Monsanto’s vegetable seed business serves open-field and protected culture customers through its brands: Seminis, De Ruiter Seeds and regional brands."

Here are some of the brand names that Monsanto owns and 'packages' their seeds as:

American Seeds

Asgrow

Campbell

DeKalb

De Ruiter

Diener Seeds

Fielder's Choice

Fontanelle

Gold Country Seed

Hawkeye

Heartland

Heritage Seeds

Holdens

HPS Seed

Hubner Seed

icorn

Jung Seed

Kruger Seeds

Lewis Hybrids

Peotec

Poloni

Rea Hybrids

R.H. Shumway

Seeds of the World

Seminis

Seymour's Selected Seeds

Specialty

Stewart

Stone Seed

Totally Tomatoes

Trelay

Vermont Bean Seed Company

Western Seeds

(Source) 

Here are a few of the variety names owned by Monsanto (there were links where one could click on a type for more of any variety name, but the Seminis website Administor has blocked the links).
Edit: I discovered you can go to this page and find the variety names of many of the Seminis seeds; I have not found a similar site for De Ruiter seeds.

Beans: Brio, Eureka, EZ Gold, Goldrush, Kentucky King, Lynx, Xera...
 

Broccoli: Captain, Heritage, Liberty, Packman, more...
 

Carrot: Nutri-Red, Sweet Sunshine, Karina, Chantenay hybrids, Chantilly, Lariat
 

Cauliflower: Cheddar, Fremont, Minuteman, more...
 

Cucumber : Babylon, Dasher II, Daytona, Homemade Pickles, Speedway, Sweet Slice, Yellow Submarine, Sweeter Yet...link to De Ruiter cucumber list...
 

Eggplant: Black Beauty, Dancer, Fairy Tale, Gretel, Hansel, Tango, Twilight...De Ruiter Eggplants...
 

Lettuce: Baby Star, Blackjack, Esmeralda, Lolla Rossa, Monet, Red Butterworth, Red Sails, Red Tide, Summer time...

Melons: Alaska, Bush Whopper, Casablanca, Dixie Jumbo, Early Crisp, Stars and Stripes, Sugarnut, more...

Okra: Cajun Delight

Onion: Arsenal, Candy, Hamlet, Mars, Red Zeppelin, Superstar, many more...

Peppers: Aristotle, Biscayne, Camelot, Caribbean Red, Cherry Bomb, Dulce, Early Sunsation, Fat and Sassy, King Arthur, Northstar, Red Knight, Serrano del Sol, Sahuaro, Super Chili, Valencia, many more including De Ruiter pepper varities...

Pumpkin: Buckskin Pumpkin, Orange Smoothie, Prizewinner, more...

Spinach: Bolero, Cypress, Melody, Unipack 151, many more...

Squash: Autumn Delight, Blackjack, Bush Delicata, Butterstick, Daisy, Early Butternut, Fancycrook, Gold Rush, Latino, Lolita, Patty Green Tint, Really Big Butternut, Seneca (all), Sungreen, Sunny Delight, Table Ace...

Tomato: Baby Girl, Big Beef, Beefmaster, Beaufort, Celebrity, Favorita, First Lady I and II, Early Girl, Geronimo, Golden Girl, Maxifort, Pink Girl, Sunguard, Sun Chief Sweet, Sweet Million, Trust... and more De Ruiter tomato varieties...

Watermelon: Bambino, Crimson Glory, Royal Flush, Royal Star, Stargazer, Starbright, Stars and Stripes, Tiger Baby, Yellow Doll

Many Thanks for the compilation of the above information all in one place to Inspiration Green.

"Pink Slime" in Hamburger, what about Chicken???

This is mechanically separated chicken, an invention of the late 20th century. This particular paste, chicken -- is the main ingredient in chicken nuggets, chicken hot dogs, chicken bologna, and an ingredient in things like pepperoni, salami, jerky etc, etc. Mechanically separated chicken is also treated with ammonia for sterilization purposes, just as is Pink Slime. If you see the words 'finely textured' before the name of the meat, this is what you are eating...

Someone figured out in the 1960′s that meat processors can eke out a few more percent of profit from chickens, turkeys, pigs, and cows by scraping the bones 100% clean of meat. This is done by machines, not humans, by passing bones leftover after the initial cutting through a high pressure sieve. The paste you see in the picture above is the result.

The industry calls this method AMR – Advanced Meat Recovery.

The definition of "meat" was amended in December 1994 to include any "meat" product that is produced by advanced meat/bone separation machinery. "This meat is comparable in appearance, texture, and composition to meat trimmings and similar meat products derived by hand." This machinery separates meat from bone by scraping, shaving, or pressing the meat from the bone without breaking or grinding the bone. Product produced by advanced meat recovery (AMR) machinery can be labeled using terms associated with hand-deboned product (e.g., "pork trimmings" and "ground pork").

Mechanically Separated Meat (MSM)
Mechanically separated meat is a paste-like and batter-like meat product produced by forcing bones, with attached edible meat, under high pressure through a sieve or similar device to separate the bone from the edible meat tissue.

Mechanically Separated Poultry (MSP)
Mechanically separated poultry is a paste-like and batter-like poultry product produced by forcing bones, with attached edible tissue, through a sieve or similar device under high pressure to separate bone from the edible tissue. Mechanically separated poultry has been used in poultry products since the late 1960's. In 1995, a final rule on mechanically separated poultry said it was safe and could be used without restrictions. However, it must be labeled as "mechanically separated chicken or turkey" in the product's ingredients statement. 

The final rule became effective November 4, 1996. Hot dogs can contain any amount of mechanically separated chicken or turkey.
Source

Are you really comfortable now with the meats the supermarkets are selling, or those in the fast food drive-throughs? Actually I do not blame them in general... they just buy a product they are told is edible (and aren't we all gullible?), and sell it to us. I blame the USDA and FSIS for allowing the corporate pressures and financial contributions of BigAg to determine what we eat.

Hyperpalatable Industrial Foods

They really do a good job, don't they, those scientists who create the taste and smell of adulterated food to seem real and delicious? As another blogger says, we are "Seduced by Foods".

Research and Development teams have done studies and conducted taste panels that have found "sweet" sells. The more they sell sweet stuff, the more people come to expect it. Sweet is found in loads of savory items too, not just sweet items. Tomato sauces, crackers, salad dressings, mustards, coated chicken products, sausages, and more. Many of our fresh products are also enhanced with sugar, like Butterball turkey, pumped brined pork loins, stewing hens. Our palates are being distorted by sweet.

As much as I am aware of the "deceptions" the food scientists have created, and as much as I am aware of the nutritive value in real foods, there are still times when I am lured by barely detectable smells and/or my mental images into thinking a fast food meal like a Big Mac, a taco supreme, or a take-out pizza* would hit the spot! Taste-wise I'm sure it would, thanks to those scientists who work hard to manufacture chemicals that tease our taste buds, and addict us to their pseudo foods. It is a very difficult temptation to resist! 

The tongue can detect five tastes: sweet, salty, sour, bitter and umami (savory). While you are probably familiar with the first four, umami is a taste that is relatively new to the Western palate, although the Japanese have known about it for decades. Umami is based on the detection of glutamate, and many foods naturally contain glutamate, although it is often added as well. You have probably heard of MSG: monosodium glutamate is the lab-derived chemical that enhances tastes. It makes things taste more like what they are (or should be). While umami is a taste that is hard to define, it is sometimes described as “meaty.”

The sense of small is probably the oldest and the least understood of our five senses. During evolution it has kept its connections with the parts of the brain, which grew to be the sorting house for our emotional responses, intimately linking the odors of things to our emotions. Think of the smell of BBQ coming from a grill at the BBQ joint down the street. Do you notice they have the grill/smoker outside or even vented outside, all the better to send those lovely smells in the air and capture us for a sale? It's an emotional response, our involuntary response to those smells wafting in the air. Researchers say 80 percent of the flavors we taste come from what we smell.

Our sense of taste is also triggered by sight. Ever notice the ads for foods on TV look SO juicy and tempting? Enough so that we have an emotional response that even overrides the reality of the supposedly same thing we are actually served. We salivate and feel the taste of a preferred food before even touching it. In the end, we believe more in what we see than in our other senses.

I have to constantly remind myself that those "almost foods" or "food-like products" come packaged with "micronutritional" malnutrition, and they can bring on (among other things) thyroid dysfunction, insulin resistance, and poor gut flora... all of which can lead to obesity. So many processed foods aren't really food, but nutritionally lacking "food-like products" engineered to stimulate us to eat more, buy more, and ensure that big food conglomerates turn a profit.

When most Americans eat a "hamburger", it isn't really meat they are eating. It's a "flavorless, factory-formed protein matrix for sugar and soy oils engineered to induce higher consumption".  Source

* I do eat pizza... but home-made, with real aged raw-milk cheese rather than pseudo "processed" cheese... tomato sauce from my garden without any artificial ingredients; true pepperoni that even real Italians would recognize rather than that imitation stuff made just for pizzas; fresh organic vegetables (onion, peppers) and mushrooms for toppings, and NO GMO soy or canola anywhere in sight.

My hamburgers are local grass-fed beef, and the condiments are lacto-fermented, home-made without all that sugar, although I think you can now buy good quality condiments with a dedicated search. I did look in the natural foods store yesterday for a mayonnaise without GMO soy or canola oil. None to be found.

Permaculture??

Bill Mollison and his student (at the time) David Holmgren did a great thing when they developed philosophy of Permaculture in the 1970's. It's a topic that greatly interests me because it's as much about us, and how we treat each other and our planet, as it is about growing things. The more I learn about gardening, the more I realize how my garden is connected to everything (just like my self and my body), and how we/it all has to work together to succeed and survive.

But really, what IS Permaculture? For years I have heard that word, and read a smattering about it online here and there, but not enough to make any real sense to me until I read Toby Hemenway's Gaia's Garden last year. That book gave me a basis for understanding permaculture, at least in a general way, and I'm now firmly convinced that permaculture is the very best, and perhaps the only way to get us out of the mess we've gotten ourselves into.

Albert Einstein said, "We cannot solve the significant problems we face at the same level of thinking we were at when we created them."

"Permaculture is a philosophy of working with, rather than against nature; of protracted and thoughtful observation rather than protracted and thoughtless labour; of looking at plants and animals in all their functions, rather than treating any area as a single-product system."
~ Bill Mollison (from the permaculture.net website)

This definition of permaculture expresses a basic concept in permaculture - examining and following nature's patterns. Permaculture advocates designing human systems based on natural ecosystems. Permaculture draws from several other disciplines including organic farming, agroforestry, sustainable development, and applied ecology.  But, there are many other definitions of permaculture, just as there are many definitions of sustainable living.

The actual term permaculture is a contraction of the words "permanent," "agriculture,” and “culture.” Although the original focus of permaculture was geared towards sustainable food production, the philosophy of permaculture has expanded over time to encompass economic and social systems. It is a dynamic movement that is still evolving. For example, some practitioners are integrating spirituality and personal growth work into the framework of permaculture.

At the very core of premaculture are Ethics, sadly lacking in today's BigAg in my opinion.

The three philosophical ethics of permaculture (in simple form) are:

1. Care of the earth means that our number one priority is taking care of the earth, making sure we don't damage its natural systems so all life systems can continue and multiply.

2. Care of the people means meeting people's needs (having equal access to resources) so that people's lives can be sustained and have a good quality of life as well, but without damaging the earth.

3. Accepting (or setting) limits to population and consumption is realizing that as a human species we cannot continue to increase and also sustain the planet. By governing our own needs, we can set aside resources for the 2 principles above.

I think those are some really exacting standards... but as we begin to embrace them, some wonderful things happen even on a small scale.

"Care of the Earth" happens in both big and small ways, and not just in growing things. I like Hemenway's distinction of horticulture vs. agriculture. He points out that the etymology of  horticulture is the Latin hortus, meaning garden, while the etymology of agriculture is the Latin ager, meaning field. The big difference in planting huge fields and planting gardens could be considered as a part of permaculture.

I remember when I was reading The Celestine Prophecy back in the early 1990's, how one of the Insights was what happened to the plants when he talked to them. They flourished! That's just a tiny personal bit of "care of the earth" although permaculture goes much deeper. What happens when we give plants the real food they need, rather than a chemical soup which ends up harming our ecosystems like our soils and waterways? What happens when we put plants in nifty little plant communities with many diverse neighbors, and each plant contributes something to the success of the whole?

"Care of the Earth" is about what products we use and discard like trash. I fight daily to get my family here to consider the effects of all the cleaning chemicals they use, when hydrogen peroxide and baking soda would suffice. We live on a now almost-dead creek (from pollution); our creek waters flow down to the Holston River where they eventually join up with the French Broad River near Knoxville; there they become the beginning of the Tennessee River... and then they travel together along to the Ohio River and finally join and mingle with the Mighty Mississippi near Cairo, Illinois, and eventually end up in New Orleans and the Gulf of Mexico with the massive floating dead zones created by the polluted rivers. Every individual along the many miles of this creek, and all the rivers downstream, could change some of the dying creeks and rivers by simple "Care of the Earth".

Another biggie is what we allow commercial enterprises do to our Earth... fracking, strip mining, mountaintop removal, nuclear power plant waste products that are hazardous for 10,000+ years... and GMO's. (A bit of scientific research about GMO's show that they reduce sperm count from the get-go; lab tests in rats show GMO's render complete sterility in 3 generations... if you think about it, that's really population control, without consent.)

"Care of the Earth"  is also how we manage our finite resources (oil, natural gas, the metals we mine, water, and the topsoil we wash away) so that we can continue to exist, and still leave some resources for our children and grandchildren. (We should all work on becoming more realistic about what our basic "needs"  vs. "wants" really are.)

Then there is BigAg, with their/our dependence on the rapidly depleting supplies of fossil fuels. The majority of the food we eat world-wide is produced by BigAg, unless we somehow manage to supplement it with a fruit-nut-veggie patch in our yards or our neighborhoods. Having a garden, even if it's just potted tomatoes on a balcony, IS one way we can start to make changes, and assure some nutritionally good foods in our households as we do. (There are many other ways, but a garden is a good one.) Permaculture can be a pathway because it can teach us, among other things, how to increase yield while eliminating dependence on man-made chemical fertilizers. We just have to learn to do as Nature does!

 "Care of the People" is a vast challenge, and is more than just not making war on them, or even just feeding them. Most of us mentally divide "us" and "them", and we weep and gnash our teeth at problems that happen within our immediate family and those we know and care about, whether it's a health problem, an auto accident, or job loss. Of course, we also lament the loss of hundreds of thousands of lives in a catastrophe half way around the world, but it is a detached kind of lament and doesn't really touch us, deep down on some emotional level, like those at home do.

So, when we move manufacturing (sweatshops?) to foreign countries out of our view, we can act detached from the abuses. We prohibit DDT here in the US but sell it overseas, and we can pretend we have eliminated that particular toxin, even though it comes back to us in/on imported foods.

Here's a very simplistic "care of the people" test just in your own personal surroundings... If you work in a large office or plant, very likely there is a person you pass often, with just a cursory nod or "Hello". The next time you pass that person, stop and make a personal comment to them, something like "that color looks good on you"... or "hey, that's a great tie/tattoo/haircut"... just anything more personal than the previous impersonal nods. Watch the reaction... the whole energy pattern changes for the better.

"Accepting Limits to population and consumption"... Years ago, the Chinese limited the number and gender of live children a couple could have. It brought fierce turmoil to their people. But I think we all really KNOW in our hearts the world cannot continue to sustain the projected increase in world population. A big question for everyone is: are you willing to limit your number of children/grandchildren? Or is that just the responsibility of "others" in poorer nations?

But it's NOT just limiting population; it's about limiting resources so everyone has a fair share.

I personally believe that the principles of permaculture could cure the planet from the all the damage conventional chemical agriculture has wrought, and maybe save us from extinction.

The permaculture ideas I know about are wonderful, and I have adopted some of the food forest ideas, which are partially from the Permaculture crowd and partially from others... and they all pretty much follow the Wiki definition, "Permaculture is a theory of ecological design which seeks to develop sustainable human settlements and agricultural horticultural systems, by attempting to model them on natural ecosystems." 

I'd love to take a PDC but it is not likely; the charges for the PDC course vary considerably with location. Here in Virginia and nearby North Carolina, the going rate is well in excess of $1,000... while a friend in upstate New York can find the same PDC certificate course for under $300. I think the design concepts are important, especially the ecological ones, but I want lots of practical information applicable to my situation, too.

I must say, though, that if I had the opportunity (and the money) to take a PDC course from one of the established Permaculture giants like Geoff Lawton or Toby Hemenway, I'd do it in a heartbeat.

If money is an issue, as it is for me, there are some good alternatives to learning about permaculture other than taking a PDC. Unfortunatey for us in the US, much of the available information is for tropical climates, but that is beginning to change as the concepts are becoming more widely known across the US and Canada. There are some permaculture forums on the internet, and several blogs that focus on various aspects of permaculture.

If you learn easily from books, you can buy  Bill Mollison's Permaculture: A Designer's Manual; it sells for around $110. It is the definitive Permaculture design manual in print since 1988, and it is the text book and curriculum for the 72-hour Certificate course in Permaculture Design (PDC). Written for teachers, students and designers, it follows on and greatly enlarges on the initial introductory texts, Permaculture One (1978) and Permaculture Two (1979, currently OOP) both of which are still in demand over twenty years after publication. Very little of the material found in the Designer's Manual is reproduced from the former texts. It covers design methodologies and strategies for both urban and rural applications describing property design and natural farming techniques.

An excellent book if you are just starting out is Gaia's Garden (by Toby Hemenway) for around $20.

Another alternative is to investigate the work of Sepp Holzer, an Austrian man who has done some remarkable things in Natural Farming, much like the great natural farming pioneer, Masanobu Fukuoka. The Holzer Permaculture is a branch of permaculture developed by Sepp independently from the mainstream Permaculture. It is particularly noteworthy because it grew out of practical application and absolutely detached from the scientific community.

By the way, there has been lots of contention over who if anyone controls the legal rights to the word "Permaculture", meaning is it trademarked or copyrighted, and if so, who holds the legal rights to the use of the word. For a long time Bill Mollison claimed to have copyrighted the word permaculture, and his books reflected that on the copyright page, saying "The contents of this book and the word PERMACULTURE are copyright." These statements were largely accepted at face-value within the permaculture community. However, copyright law does not protect names, ideas, concepts, systems, or methods of doing something; it only protects the expression or the description of an idea, not the idea itself. Eventually Mollison acknowledged that he was mistaken and that no copyright protection existed for the word "permaculture". Source

"Specialty Crops" and the Farm Bill

In trying to understand how and why our government has allowed so much adulteration of my food supply, I finally had to start following the money. A lot of the money comes from Farm Bill subsidies...and the Farm Bill must be the recipient of the most expensive lobbying in our history, outside of maybe the presidential campaigns!

I bet you have never read any portion of the Farm Bill. It's not an easy task, reading through the Farm Bill. The last one, passed in 2008 (good for 5 years) weighed in at 1,770 pages. I wonder if even those that write it have a clear, full picture of all of it... too many fingers in the pie. I certainly don't understand much of it, yet it affects us all, daily. 

There are, however, some glaring facts and omissions, plus at least one or two really good programs. 

First, the good: 

Programs like SNAP (formerly called food stamps) are fully funded by the Farm Bill, and the National School Lunch Program and other school-based child nutrition programs get some funding from it,as I understand the inter-agency convolutions. Another small Farm Bill program gives farmer's market vouchers to low-income senior citizens like me. Although the vouchers are cumbersome to use (each voucher is for $5 and no vendor is allowed to give change), I made some use of the $40 I got in vouchers in 2011, probably getting around $20 total in produce for my vouchers. But it wasn't really very fair economically, because our tax dollars paid $40 for my $20 of produce. The vendors should be able to give change, even if if it's just another smaller-amount voucher to use later.

Did you know that the fruit and vegetable products that hit our grocery stores are only considered as "specialty crops" by the USDA, and that is how they are handled by the Farm Bill? Handled only as "bit players" on the sidelines in the Farm Bill.  Only 1% of the Farm Bill goes towards specialty crops.

I don't know about you, but I'd choose to use some of our tax dollars to support local, ethical family farmers who grow my apples, carrots, beans and broccoli. And more specifically, the organic farmers who do not infuse my fruits and vegetables with pesticides and herbicides.

The not-so-good

The products the Farm Bill mainly subsidizes are the five big commodity crops: corn, wheat, rice, soybeans and cotton. The dollar value of the commodity crops the US exported in 2010 was $108,662,000,000, and we subsidized them to grow it. The payments go out regardless of need. In fact, since 1995, a mere 10 percent of all subsidized farms – only the largest and wealthiest operations – have raked in 74 percent of all subsidy payments. The money kept on coming right through the five highest earnings years ever for farm income. (Source)

Commercial corn farmers made a killing in 2011, mainly because they were subsidized to provide corn for the failing ethanol program, feed corn for CAFO's, and of course, for the high fructose corn syrup used in far too many packaged items on the grocery shelves. 

Then there's soy...

Soy is a known obesogen (which leads to weight gain) as well as a known goitrogen (substances that suppress the function of the thyroid gland which also leads to weight gain; think: goiter) and in spite of the rising obesity levels and consequential health care costs in the US, the 2007-2012 Farm Bill allocated $42 billion of our tax money for industrial farmed GMO soy beans. Data from the USDA indicates 94% of all soybean crops in the US are GMO, and the FDA even pushes soy... “Diets that include 25 grams of soy protein a day may reduce the risk of heart disease.” 

Did I miss somewhere that being overweight (thanks in part to chemicals in soy) reduces the risk of heart disease?

There are three problematic monocultures in industrial agriculture: corn, soy, and sugar. U.S. Farm Bill subsidies for these (as well as for other commodity crops) encourage cheap and unhealthy foods and food fillers, sick GMO-fed animals whose meat enters our food system, extreme pesticide use, and damage to soil and water sources. The Commodity Cropism project seeks to expose veiled information about these crops, and provide the public with data left out or obscured by loosely monitored food production and labeling systems.

Monsanto’s GMO Beet sugar seed is now used by 95% of beet farmers (usually under multi-year binding seed contracts they can't get out of), who supplied around 50% of the nation’s sugar in 2011... 64 pounds per person per year, up 28%.

I have read that US foreign aid policies are very often include a clause that requires the receiving nation to accept and use Monsanto GMO seed as a requisite for getting our aid. What's with that??

When was the first food and farm bill signed into law and why?

The first one was signed into law as a temporary measure in 1933 as a way to aid farmers suffering in the Great Depression. Since then it has come before Congress roughly every five years. Nutrition programs were added to the farm bill in the late 1970s to win the support of lawmakers from urban districts. The 2008 Farm Bill had a price tag of nearly $300 billion. It expires in 2012.

Since a lot of the money does go to nutrition programs like SNAP, it’s time to start calling it a "food and farm bill" and to increase investments in healthy food programs. A top priority is to protect food assistance programs for the neediest, especially in the lingering aftermath of the 2008 recession. ... work to improve and expand programs that increase access to healthy foods, strengthen local and regional food systems and provide new markets for diversified, local, sustainable and organic growers and ranchers. (Source)

I'd like to see subsidies (IF THEY ARE REALLY NECESARY) used properly, and not just be "gimmies" for BigAg... and I agree with the Environmental Working Group... I, too would like to see a chunk of the farm subsidy dollars shifted to conservation programs. This would help fund programs that protect soil, water and air quality, preserve wildlife habitat, and conserve energy and water. In my opinion, if we don't conserve what's left (pitiful as it may be) there won't be many future crops.

Update: I wrote this about mid-January 2012, and on Feb. 1 read an interesting article on this general subject by Sharon Astyk that you may wish to read. She does a great job of explaining the cost of a gallon of milk, although there's much more to the article. Click here.

Giving up Sodas

Photo by fimoculous 

The New York Times posted a couple of articles recently about doctors and under-the-table payments. One article is Who Else is Paying Your Doctor? and the other is Drug Firms to Report Money Paid to Doctors. I think that's a good start (at least for reporting), maybe actually enabling us to know who pays our doctors, assuming we can ever find the reports... but I think there's much more to health care than "the doctor".

It seems to me that prevention is the least expensive way to be healthy, and going to doctors for treatments once you become ill is the most expensive. Plus, when something goes wrong (as it eventually will with a poor diet) the doctors may not "cure" you. They may merely prescribe drugs, treatments, or maybe operations that permit you to live with your afflictions. 

It has been five years since I had surgery to remove my gallbladder, but in retrospect I think it could have been prevented if I had known as much about eating right, and real food, as I do now. If so, I wouldn't have had the surgical expense and aftercare, the trauma to my body being cut open, and I sure wouldn't have the resulting adhesions that now double me over occasionally.

Drugs and/or operations are for the most part just crutches after the injury. Eating right is far cheaper in the long run, and the resulting quality of life is far greater... and that's the advantage of prevention over treatment.

The problem is that we are complacent, even with less than optimal health, and no one wants to give up their sodas, diet sodas, artificially sweetened fake coffee creamers, donuts, chips, McD's and other junk food. We even fool ourselves into believing that sweetened fruity, non-fat yogurt is actually healthy! No one wants to increase their food budget with organic salad greens, fruits, vegetables and free-range eggs/meats in place of sodas, chips, donuts, burgers, fries and pizza, even though they would probably come out cheaper without the junk in the grocery line, not even even considering the additional cost of medical care later on.