|
This is the weblog of
Raymond Powers.
Here I will be sharing what I find of import, humor, concern, inspiration and on the transformational edge
|
A Quote:
A different world cannot be built by indifferent people.
|
Raymond lives in Ojai, where the time now is:
02:47AM
Unique Readers:
Primarily
Public Domain
Everything I've written here, except my copyrighted
essays, poetry, lyrics, and music is hereby placed in the public
domain. The quotes from other people's writings, and the pictures
used might or might not be copyrighted, but are considered fair
use. Thus the license here would best be described as:
Primarily Public
Domain.
Please ask permission if there is any question in
regards to public domain usage.
|
Syndication:
![[Valid RSS]](http://www.worldtrans.org/pic/valid-rss.png "Validate my RSS feed")
WebLog Resources:
NCN NewsLogs
Weblogs.com
blo.gs
Technorati
Organica
DayPop
Blogdex
PopDex
Blogging Ecosystem
BlogTree
BlogStreet
BlogWise
BlogChalking
Wander-Lust
|
| Saturday, June 4, 2005 |  |
|
|
|
4 Jun 2005 @ 18:17
Organic Conumers Association website.
National Campaign Demands Safeway & Other Supermarkets Inform Consumers of Mercury Contamination in Seafood
CONTACT: Turtle Island Restoration Network
Andy Peri, M.A.
PO Box 400 * Forest Knolls, CA * 94933 Turtle Island Restoration Network
Phone: 415-488-0370 x104
Email: andy@tirn.net
Campaign Launched to Compel Safeway to Post Seafood Mercury Warnings
Safeway's "Ingredients for Life" marketing campaign targeted SAN FRANCISCO, CA This week, with the placement of a full page ad in the New York Times, an environmental organization launched a new campaign aimed at national grocer retailer Safeway for its failure to warn customers nation-wide about mercury-contaminated seafood. The campaign was launched in the wake of stalled talks with upper Safeway management, which recently ended in a stalemate. Turtle Island Restoration Network is asking Safeway to expand its mercury-in-seafood health warning signs to all of its 1,802 Safeway-owned stores throughout the United States and Canada.
"Safeway should be taking a leadership role and live up to its new 'Ingredients for Life' marketing campaign by posting signs in their stores throughout the nation," says Andy Peri, Public Health Analyst for Turtle Island Restoration Network. Is mercury-contaminated fish an ingredient for Olife¹ or an ingredient for illness and possible death?² Most of California's Safeway stores have warning signs at fish counters where high-mercury fish such as swordfish, shark and tuna are sold- but only in California as required under Proposition 65. Outside of California, however, Safeway is not willing to post the inexpensive warning signs.
Steven Burd, CEO of Safeway, confronted by Peri at last week¹s Safeway¹s stockholders meeting, responded that there has been a lot of media attention on the issue, suggesting that additional warning signs aren¹t needed. ³Safeway is spending over $100 million dollars to promote its ³Ingredients for Life² marketing campaign but refuses to spend pennies per store to post warning signs where mercury contaminated fish is being sold. Mr. Burd knows better than anybody the importance of getting a marketing message out; his suggestion that a few news articles have adequately educated Safeway customers about the dangers of mercury lacks integrity. Safeway's lack of meaningful action is certain to result in more Safeway customers, especially children, being poisoned by mercury."
Seafood consumers have written thousands of emails, letters and faxes to Safeway's CEO, Steven Burd asking him to require mercury warning signs nationwide, but the requests have not been acknowledged by Safeway management and to date, no action has been taken.
Fish collected at Safeway stores by Turtle Island Restoration Network in 2004 revealed 78% of samples exceeding the FDA's action level of 1 part per million mercury with samples reaching as high as 1.5 parts per million, 50% higher the FDA action level. Even fish with levels of mercury below the FDA action level can cause significant harm to both children and adults.
The FDA warns women of childbearing age and mothers not to eat swordfish at all. Despite this fact, Safeway does not feel compelled to remove mercury-tainted fish or meaningfully warn customers of the dangers of eating swordfish and other fish that are high in mercury like shark and albacore tuna. In a March 2004 joint advisory, the FDA and EPA warn women of childbearing age and mothers to not eat swordfish, shark, king mackerel and tilefish and to limit their consumption of albacore tuna because they contain high levels of mercury.
If a 120 pound women were to consume 8 ounces of swordfish containing 1.5 parts per million mercury she would be exposed to more than 860% of what the FDA and EPA considers safe. Such a diet high in mercury-contaminated fish would put a nursing baby or a child in the womb at significant risk of neurological damage. Children are not the only populations at risk from methylmercury, however.
A new report by the Research Institute of Public Health in Finland shows a significant increase of coronary heart disease, cardiovascular disease and heart attacks in men with elevated mercury levels.
Fish consumers can protect themselves from mercury-contaminated fish by using an online mercury calculator at [link] The calculator allows consumers to choose the lowest mercury fish while avoiding fish with the highest levels of mercury-contamination.
³This ad is just the beginning of our campaign to alert the public to threats from eating contaminated seafood being purchased as supermarkets
|
|
|
|
4 Jun 2005 @ 05:36
Organic Conumers Association website.
Santa Cruz Fuels Up With an Urban Crop, Waste Cooking Oil
SANTA CRUZ, California, June 2, 2005 (ENS) - A group of business and government organizations in Santa Cruz is using a $75,000 grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to convert restaurant wastes into biodiesel fuel for area transit systems.
The grant went to Ecology Action of Santa Cruz, which has teamed up with city of Santa Cruz, the Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transportation District and the Santa Cruz Chapter of the California Restaurant Association. The project also includes a waste vegetable oil collector and Pacific Biodiesel, Inc. a biodiesel producer and supplier.
Restaurants generate large amounts of waste vegetable oil which can be readily converted into biodiesel fuel suitable for all diesel vehicles. The biodiesel fuel produced by the project will be distributed and sold to local public sector fleets such as Santa Cruz Metropolitan Transportation District.
The group also plans to use the EPA grant to demonstrate the economic viability of a community biodiesel collection, production and distribution chain using locally generated waste vegetable oil something that is currently underutilized.
³We are excited to be simultaneously encouraging alternative fuel use, reduced air pollution, and increased diversion of wastes from landfills,² said Jeff Scott, director of the Waste Division in the EPA¹s Pacific Southwest office. ³We hope this community-based project will be a model ultimately replicated across the country.² While many public diesel fleet operators want to switch to biodiesel, current high costs and low availability limits its market share. This pilot project focuses on places without ready access to an affordable agricultural crop as the primary feedstock for biodiesel.
Project participants will collect local waste oil and process it into biodiesel for distribution and sale to local public sector fleets. Biodiesel and biodiesel blends can be used without modifying existing diesel engines. Waste minimization will be achieved by recycling the waste cooking oil. Air quality will be enhanced by burning biodiesel in place of petroleum diesel fuel, which will reduce particulate, and carbon dioxide, and carbon monoxide emissions.
Water quality will be improved because the increased market value of waste cooking oil decreases the likelihood of its improper disposal into sewers, storm drains and waterways, reducing watershed and storm runoff pollution. Restaurants and hotels in the United States produce over three billion gallons of waste cooking oil annually, the majority of which is disposed of in sewers and landfills. According to the EPA, waste oil dumped into sewers blocks drains and pipes and causes 40 percent of sewer spills.
|
|
| Friday, June 3, 2005 | |
|
|
|
3 Jun 2005 @ 02:31
Associated Press Covers the Organic Body Care Controversy
Organic No More--Lotions, soaps won't carry "USDA Organic" label
By LIBBY QUAID
Associated Press Writer 06-01-2005
WASHINGTON (AP) _ If you want a lotion, soap or lip balm free of chemicals and synthetics, you'd better read the fine print. The Agriculture Department is taking its round, green "USDA Organic" label off personal care products and cosmetics.
When it created the seal in 2002, the primary intent was to certify the organic claims made by food producers, such as meat from animals that free of antibiotics and not confined indoors, or vegetables grown without pesticides.
But the department also opened the door to making a wide range of other products eligible for the label: cosmetics and personal care items, pet food, dietary supplements, textiles like cotton T-shirts and fish.
"The feeling was, if your product was composed of agricultural ingredients, and you thought you could get certified, you were welcome to try," said Barbara Robinson, head of the department's National Organic Program.
Three years later, the department decided it had gone too far.
In April, it began telling companies their cosmetics and other personal care products can't be government-certified as organic, after all.
Fish and pet food are also off the table, but only for now. The department is creating task forces to make rules for certifying them. Still being decided is whether dietary supplements can use the seal.
"As time went by, and legal counsel in the department and senior policy officials took a closer look, they determined that wouldn't really stand up in a court of law," Robinson said.
That's bad news to Nancy Piersel of Finland, Minn. She looks for the organic seal because she has a disorder called multiple chemical sensitivity, which causes allergy-like symptoms when she's exposed to many substances.
The seal "gave me more confidence to try that product," said Piersel, 48. She makes her own lip gloss and, before the seal became available, would call companies to find out more about ingredients before buying something new.
"I have to be very careful about what I use, because my skin reacts to a lot of things. I get rashes and burning, itching _ the same kind of thing you'd get if you had a bad skin reaction to any product," Piersel said. "Now that I won't have those labels, I'll have to do more digging."
The department's reversal also is frustrating to companies that spent money and time to put the seal on their products. An Agriculture Department-authorized agent must certify a company before it can use the seal or label something "100 percent organic" or "organic."
David Bronner, president of Dr. Bronner's Magic Soaps, said his company spent some $100,000 to ensure that his soaps, lotions and lip balms met the standards for using the seal.
Bronner said consumers are confused by the myriad products that claim to have "organic" or "natural" ingredients. The USDA seal guaranteed his products are free of chemicals and synthetic ingredients, he said.
"Everyone in the world's making an organic claim," Bronner said.
"We're not doing tricks. We actually work really hard to make real, organic ingredients. The National Organic Program is what consumers trust."
Organic means a product contains all-natural, non-synthetic substances that are grown without using conventional pesticides or fertilizer, biotechnology or radiation. And it means meat and dairy products have come from animals raised on organic feed, given access to the outdoors and never given antibiotics or growth hormones.
The Organic Consumers Association, to which Piersel belongs, is asking the Agriculture Department to take another look at removing its seal from personal care products.
The association says the reversal hurts small companies in particular, because the seal is part of a marketing program that gives them an edge. Bigger companies can't find the volume of organic ingredients they would need to make certified organic shampoo or other products, the group says.
Beyond that, the group argues that personal care products use the same ingredients as those in organic food.
"Certified organic olive oil does not magically become non-organic if it is used as a massage oil instead of on a salad," said Ronnie Cummins, executive director of the association.
Robinson, however, said the department won't change its mind again without an act of Congress. The 1990 law creating the organic program _ the Organic Foods Production Act _ was not intended to cover products besides food, she said.
"This is USDA _ I don't know anything about the cosmetics industry, or toothpaste, or body lotions and hand cream," Robinson said.
___
On the Net:
National Organic Program
Organic Trade Association
Organic Consumers Association More >
|
|
|
|
3 Jun 2005 @ 02:27
Certified Fair Trade Products Spreading Across USA
Spring 2005 FAIR TRADE HAPPENINGS Coffee Ice Cream Brings Fair Trade Label Into Frozen Foods Ben and Jerry's, a well-known US ice cream company, continues its 27-year commitment of supporting positive social and environmental change by recently introducing three ice cream flavors made with Fair Trade Certified coffee extract. Ben and Jerry's is the first ice cream maker in the US to introduce coffee flavors made with Fair Trade Certified coffee.
This AP story ran in newspapers across California, Nevada and Vermont.
New Product Launch - Saaaa-weet!
We are proud to announce that TransFair USA has officially started to certify sugar for the US market. In Europe, demand for Fair Trade Certified sugar expanded by roughly 220% in 2003, from 650 tons to 1430 tons. In the US, the launch of Fair Trade Certified sugar represents a new direction in the growth of Fair Trade products and relationships. Fair Trade Certified sugar is available from Costa Rica, Malawi, Paraguay, Peru, and the Philippines.
We have three sugar licensees: Alter Eco (boxes of sugar), Equal Exchange (sugar packets), and Wholesome Sweeteners (packets, bulk, and boxes). You can expect to see the product on retail shelves in the US this June.
Shop Otil you Drop Costco is currently offering three Kirkland Signature Fair Trade Certified coffee blends. Look for House Blend, Decaf or Espresso at a Costco near you!
Target Stores has launched four FTC coffee blends under its Archer Farms label. Over 1350 Target stores will carry one or more of these FTC coffees. Also, look for FTC coffees in the following grocery chains: Giant Eagle (150 stores in Western Pennsylvania, Ohio, W. Virginia and Maryland), Farm Fresh (40 stores in Virginia) and Gordmans (190 stores in the Midwest) Additionally, in the first quarter of 2004, TransFair added 20 new coffee roasters to our ever-growing list of licensed partners.
Peru goes Bananas Aproeco, a Peruvian Fair Trade coffee and mango producing group, has just completed it's first harvest of organic Fair Trade bananas, to be shipped to the East Coast and Midwest. This is the first time members of Aproeco have planted, harvested and packed bananas. Bravo, APROECO!
FRIENDS OF FAIR TRADE Kickin' Campus Campaigns:
Do YOU know of a campus Fair Trade campaign? Let us know! We'll be happy to highlight it in the next edition of the Fair Trade Beat.
* The Students for Peace and Justice at Suffolk University in Boston, MA are proud to announce that the largest and most frequented cafeteria on campus will serve only locally roasted 100% Fair Trade Certified coffee from the worker-owned Equal Exchange roaster starting 4/05. In the words of one student leader, "Though this is a small victory for our world community and us in general, we feel as though it's just one small step forward toward that greater realization of a more just world we all strive to achieve."
* Efforts to raise awareness and get more Fair Trade on campus are also underway at St. Norberts College in De Pere, WI, Northeastern University in Boston, MA, Lehigh University in Bethlehem, PA, American University in Washington, DC, and Luther College in Decorah, IA.
* At California Polytechnic State University in CA, students in the Food Science and Nutrition Department have developed Fair Trade Certified chocolates for sale on campus and in local grocery stores and markets. For details, click here Catholic Relief Services Expands Fair Trade Coffee Program The CRS Fair Trade Program now partners with 14 Fair Trade coffee companies throughout the United States to connect more than 67 million Catholics to the growing Fair Trade movement. These 14 unique companies are all united by their deep commitment to the farmers who grow the coffee they sell. They are also united by their commitment to CRS for every pound of coffee purchased through the CRS Fair Trade Program, participating companies will donate a percentage to support CRS's Fair Trade work on behalf of low-income farmers overseas.
CRS has also announced it will launch the CRS Fair Trade Chocolate Program in September 2005! The program will be designed to support school and parish fundraisers, and will feature Fair Trade Certified Divine chocolate bars already available through the Work of Human Hands catalog. Visit www.crsfairtrade.org for more information.
United Students for Fair Trade, Presente! 35 students from 20 different schools and 10 states turned up for the Specialty Coffee Association of America Conference in Seattle this April.
In the words of one USFT organizer, "On the SCAA exhibition floor we were able to meet and talk with many people about what we do and why we do it.
Students reported that the weekend was very motivating and provided them with lots of new information and ideas that they will take back to their campuses. It was a great chance for students new to the Fair Trade movement to meet other students and get a good inside look at the heart of the movement - its successes as well as obstacles. Plus, we had a lot of fun and built many new relationships that will be assets as we further our individual and communal work."
|
|
|
|
3 Jun 2005 @ 02:23
Food Crisis in Zimbabwe Threatens Millions of Lives
By Marceline Ndoro
BUHERA, Zimbabwe, June 1, 2005 (ENS) - Signs of despair and looming starvation are evident almost everywhere in Zimbabwe's countryside, which is suffering from the government¹s destruction of commercial agriculture and a third successive year of drought.
Normally at this time, as the short southern winter begins, people would be completing the harvest of maize, the staple food, and be preparing to deliver their produce to the sole legal grain buyer, the government's Grain Marketing Board.
However, driving down the dusty roads of Buhera, Chivhu and Chihota - some 100 miles south of the capital Harare - the grim sight is of formerly rich commercial farms overgrown by weeds, dotted by occasional peasant plots of maize that have wilted for lack of rain, fertilizer, machinery and fuel to till the soil properly.
Undernourished child stands in the midst of a ruined grain field that will yield no food. (Photo courtesy FAO) Millions of people will be lucky to harvest more than a few cobs.
Normally, at times of past shortages, people turned to international food aid for survival.
Mbuya [Grandma] Matizamusha of Buhera district says her only hope lies with food aid, and she hopes distribution will start soon.
Dressed in what could easily be mistaken for rags, leaning against an unused cart for support and looking at the withered maize on her tiny plot, Matizamusha opened her dry lips, but at first nothing came out. She paused, looked up and shook her head in resignation.
Tears swelled in her eyes as she pointed her bony fingers at something else that in the past would have been her salvation.
She was pointing at seven graves. Her children had all died of AIDS-related
illnesses.
"Who do I turn to now?" she asked. "All my children are lying there in their graves. Those are the only people who would have helped me. At my age, where do I go? I think I am going to die from hunger. Please tell President [Robert] Mugabe to help us. We don't have anything to eat. We are suffering." But before the March parliamentary election, Mugabe said - despite all the evidence to the contrary - that the country possessed abundant food reserves and did not need international help. Zimbabweans would "choke" on any food that was "foisted" upon them, he claimed.
Mugabe's ZANU PF government had promised a record grain harvest of 2.4 million metric tons. The result is expected to be scarcely 600,000 tons, a shortfall of some 1.2 million tons from what is needed to provide minimal food requirements for the next 12 months.
Map of Africa with Zimbabwe shown in gold. (Map courtesy USAID) With the general economy in freefall, there are no foreign exchange reserves to buy food. Mugabe recently had to pay debts to the South African electricity giant Eskom in gold bars to prevent the cutting of power supplies.
CLICK TO READ More >
|
|
|
|
3 Jun 2005 @ 02:21
New Zealand Organic Movement Slams Government for Siding with US on GMO Issue
Press Release: Soil and Health Association June 2, 2005
Soil & Health Association of New Zealand (Est. 1941)
Publishers of ORGANIC NZ
The Soil and Health Association of New Zealand wants to know when the government is going to stop suppressing New Zealand's organic producers.
Not only is the government holding back serious support to the environmentally sustainable organic sector, but it kicks it in the guts with its attack on the international GE liability provisions of the Cartogena Protocol, said Soil & Health Co-chair and spokesperson Steffan Browning. Strong liability provisions are essential to safeguarding organic production from GE contamination. Soil & Health had submitted to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade ahead of MFAT¹s destructive trip to the Montreal Cartogena talks.
"It is embarrassing to know that the USA puppeteers have the New Zealand knowledge wave government¹s support for limited to zero liability for GE. So much for our Clean Green image." The Soil and Health Association of New Zealand and BioGro are members of IFOAM (International Federation of Organic Agricultural Movements), the principle international organic umbrella group.
IFOAM calls for strict liability to be imposed for the introduction of GMOs. To insure that the costs of injuries resulting from defective products are borne by the manufacturer that put such products on the market rather than by the injured persons who are powerless to protect themselves, strict liability for GMOs is warranted.
Strict liability ensures that organic farmers and consumers receive protection from problems of proof inherent in pursuing negligence, placing the burden of loss on manufacturers rather than injured parties who are powerless to protect themselves. IFOAM applauds the inclusion of a GMO liability regime in the Cartagena Protocol on Biosafety, an idea that originated from African nations and other Third World nations, and is opposed by the USA and Canada. [ May 30, 2005 ] New Zealand has added to a list of liability options under consideration at Montreal, ranging from legally binding agreement to a combination of binding and non-binding agreement.
"NZ Foreign Affairs added a number 6 no instrument, that is no agreement, and that has to be one of the biggest pokes in the eye to any non GE producer, organic or conventional," said Soil & Health¹s Steffan Browning. Environment Minister Marian Hobbs' knows full well that there are gaps in liability provision and New Zealand has already suffered from GE
contamination.
Added to this poke at organic viability is Government's lack of progress in the funding of the new organic sector organisation Organics Aotearoa New Zealand (OANZ). OANZ is to be the sectors collective voice, something that the government has supported in concept. Now that the structure is resolved, Government money is nowhere to be seen and appears to have been continually tagged to the progress of State Owned Enterprise, Agriquality¹s level of involvement in OANZ and the sectors meeting purely commercial models.
Soil & Health had looked to the budget in hope that the government would do something meaningful for the organic sector as an example of government commitment to sustainability in NZ.
Clearly Governments commitment to sustainability is veneer thin, according to Steffan Browning.
"While the dairy giants call for even higher production from over exploited animals and soils, our rivers and lakes are becoming increasingly polluted, yet organics has solutions. Government knows this and pays lip service to the sustainability problems but ignores the real solution. By giving the new organic sector organisation, OANZ, a real boost, New Zealands primary production can begin to address sustainability problems while maintaining economic viability."
To operate in a truly sustainable way with out fear of GE contamination is surely the desire of most of New Zealand producers and the sooner the better that organics is supported to show the way, said Soil & Health spokesperson Steffan Browning
|
|
| Tuesday, May 31, 2005 | |
|
|
|
31 May 2005 @ 17:32
Agricultural College in Ontario Switching to All Organic Training for Students
By TOM VAN DUSEN, Ottawa Sun
ALFRED -- Ontario's only French-language agricultural college may finally have been granted its educational raison d'etre.
For most of its 24-years, Alfred College has relied on the language difference for validation. Now innovative programming is about to carve it a distinctive niche in the province and beyond.
Under the guidance of its managing authority, Guelph University, Alfred is in the process of becoming the first agricultural education centre in North America devoted to organic research.
It's part of the small college's determination to offer courses relevant to a cross-section of society, says Alfred director Gilbert Heroux.
"We want to establish the college as an important player in preparing tomorrow's specialists, be it in organic agriculture, environmental management or food safety," Heroux said.
The director emphasized programs are being added without a reduction in emphasis on conventional farming, which remains a mainstay in the region.
The job of transferring Alfred's 40 head of Holsteins and its 250 acres of feed crops from conventional to organic management has gone to Charles Goubau, an Alfred staffer since the college's creation.
Goubau will be assisted by barn manager Louis Brunet, a retired conventional farmer. Francois Labelle, an organic producer, is in charge of acquiring certification, while Dr. Simon Lachance will oversee research projects.
An advisory committee composed of Alfred staff, Kemptville College reps, the production sector and the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture and Food is helping with the transition. On the financial side, some $40,000 from OMAF and about $74,500 from federal agency FedNor is facilitating the shift.
"I love a challenge," Goubau said.
The implementation date for the change is September, although the full transition will take about two years.
INCREASING DEMAND
"There are a few centres in Europe specializing in organic ... but not yet in Canada or the U.S.," said Goubau.
Organic milk isn't about the cows themselves, it's about the feed and medication that go into them. Right now, subjects are Holsteins but other breeds could eventually be added, Goubau said.
A conventional farmer on his own time, Goubau expects to learn new practices to apply to his operation.
He noted the increasing demand for organic food products in Ontario makes the shift a timely one: "Right now, Ontario has to bring in organic milk from Quebec to meet the demand."
Echoing Heroux, Goubau and Brunet said it's important for students to realize they'll still get traditional schooling in agriculture from the college since many of the management techniques used in both the organic and conventional streams overlap.
"For example, all farmers are already trying to use less antibiotics," Goubau said. "So, antibiotic-free treatment isn't a huge stretch for the conventional types."
|
|
|
|
 31 May 2005 @ 17:31
Women Are the Driving Force for the $15 Billion Organic Market
Britt Mackenzie is making an effort to be healthy. The 29-year-old
Bridgeport woman tries to buy organic foods when she can, particularly
fruits and vegetables. She and her husband, whom she said is "really into
this," don't have a grand reason for including organic items in their diets.
Their reasoning is simple, she said. "It doesn't have as many chemicals,"
Mackenzie said. "It's just better for you." She isn't the only one making
the switch to more natural foods. Sales of organic products reached $12.7
billion in 2004, and have shown a steady growth rate of 20 percent per year
over the past dozen years, according to the Organic Trade Association, a
1,600-member trade organization based in Massachusetts. Organic products
also are becoming a more common sight, not just in specialty shops like
Nature's Way, but also in large chain supermarkets, such as Shaw's.
The OTA defines "organic" foods using the guidelines of the Organic Foods
Production Act, established by the United States Department of Agriculture.
In general, the act defines organic foods as those produced largely without
chemicals, such as pesticides and hormones.
The OTA doesn't keep track of what percentage of organic sales are to
female customers, but spokeswoman Holly Givens guesses it's a large number.
In general, women do the shopping for their families, so if anybody's
bringing home pesticide-free veggies and hormone-free milk products, it's
the women, Givens said. "We know that women have significant influence over
what comes into their homes," she said.
Women also tend to be health conscious, Givens said, and it's usually some
sort of health event < be it an allergy, an illness or even the birth of a
child < that leads people to turn to organic produce.
However, area nutritionists are torn over the health benefits of eating
organic. Nimesh Bhargava, chief clinical nutrition manager at St. Vincent's
Medical Center in Bridgeport said that, purely by not including pesticides,
organic produce is healthier than its chemically enhanced counterparts.
There's also been some evidence to suggest that foods not treated with
chemicals contain more nutrients, Bhargava said, although, he adds, "we need
more information to support those claims."
Linda Drake, director of the University of Connecticut's nutrition
education program, doesn't believe that there's definitive evidence that
organic produce is more nutritious.
"There's a lot of conflicting research," she said. "Some resources say that
organic foods, particularly vegetables, have more nutrients."
However, Drake said, other resources indicate that the benefits of organic
foods are minimal. Still, she said, the lack of pesticides understandably
makes organic foods appealing to consumers, particularly families.
Though Drake said conventionally raised produce generally follows FDA
guidelines, and isn't usually harmful, "some people don't want any chemicals
used on their foods." Yet, both those in the organic food industry and those
who buy organic food say health is the main reason women buy natural
products.
For Dolores Gray, owner and founder of Nature's Way, health issues led her
to do more than shop for natural foods. Gray started the store more than 30
years ago because her children had a variety of health problems.
She went to conferences, learned about nutrition, and opened the store,
which now sells a variety of natural products, including foods. In addition
to its produce, the store carries a variety of other organic items,
including organic hot dogs.
Gray and other staff at the store agreed that all of Nature's Way's
departments are equally popular among female customers.
Nature's Way Vitamin Manager Mary Legg said that roughly 75 percent of the
store's customers are women, who shop at the store for many of the same
reasons that Gray opened it. "Food is family," Legg said. "A lot of the
time, women come in here with children with allergies [and buy organic foods
for them]."
Officials at other area natural foods stores agreed that women likely are
the driving force behind the organic food boom, and that children are
probably the reason why. Like Nature's Way, Mrs. Green's, a natural food
store in Fairfield has a largely female clientele. Manager J.D. Smith
estimates that 85 to 90 percent of the store's customers are women. The
store carries a variety of organic products, including fruits and vegetables
and dairy. "The number one reason [women shop organic] is the children,"
Smith said. "People are going to take care of their children before they
take care of themselves."
The clientele at the Westport branch of Wild Oats Natural Marketplace, a
chain store that features a wide selection of organic products, is also
overwhelmingly female, said Tess Abalos, the Westport store's community
marketing coordinator. She said that not only does family figure largely in
female customers' decision to go organic, it also was her main motivation
for eating healthier.
"My personal entree into organic shopping came with produce and dairy,"
said Abalos, who has a 10-year-old daughter. "I [especially] didn't want her
to have traditional dairy that may have been injected with hormones."
Joanne Orenstein, 46, of Trumbull, gives similar reasons for her decision
to shop organic. The mother of three, ranging in age from nine to 15,
belongs to a food co-op that features a lot of organic foods, and shops for
organic items at the specialty supermarket Trader Joe's on occasion.
Orenstein said she shops organic partly because she doesn't like the idea
of her family eating foods packed with chemicals.
"I think everything is so toxic," she said. "I don't want to eat
pesticides, or meats shot up with hormones. I don't want my children to be
ingesting that."
Mackenzie and the other women interviewed at Nature's Way last week weren't
shopping for children, but they had their reasons for going organic. Take
Gloria Meyers, 64, of Monroe. A few years ago, she was diagnosed with
osteoporosis, which she took as a sign to change the way she ate. "It was
like a wake-up call to think about nutritional supplements and healthy
foods," she said.
Since then, Meyers has made a number of lifestyle changes, and one of them
is purchasing organic produce.
She's been shopping organic for four years now and, in addition to other
modifications, such as taking nutritional supplements, feels this new habit
has improved her health. "I seem to have much more energy," Meyers said.
Kandy Ray, of Milford, shops organic for herself and her husband, who is
slowly getting used to the idea.
Ray has been on a strictly organic diet for the past six months, and ate
some natural foods before that. She said she made the switch "because of all
the garbage they put in [non-organic] food."
She likes eating foods without so many harmful chemicals, she said, and she
can taste and feel the difference. "It's better," Ray said. "It tastes
better. You feel better physically. [The fruits and vegetables] don't look
perfect, but they taste great." More >
|
|
| Friday, May 27, 2005 | |
|
|
|
27 May 2005 @ 17:56
Small Farmers Say USDA Has Stolen the Word "Organic"
The San Antonio Current
05/26/2005
Food & Drink
What's in a word?
By Brian Chasnoff
Small farmers say USDA has stolen the word 'organic' Jacque Gates runs a small organic farm on the outskirts of Lockhart. She grows squash, onions, peppers, tomatoes, and cucumbers that she sells in the River Valley Farmer's Market down the road in Bastrop. A self-proclaimed "fanatic" when it comes to the rigors of organic farming, Gates labors under a comprehensive notion of her chosen trade.
"How an organic farmer thinks of 'organic' is how the entire cycle works and how I fit into it," she says. "It's not just that I use organic amendments. I use drip tape to conserve water. I use compost to enrich my soil. I use mulch. It's a whole cycle."
As Gates enters her fourth year as a conscientious organic farmer, the U.S. Department of Agriculture enters its third year as official arbiter of what it means to be organic. Since October 2002, producers and handlers have been required to obtain certification from a USDA-accredited agent to sell, label, or represent their products as organic. While some see federal regulation as an effective way to encourage producers to adopt more consistently healthful practices, others, such as Gates, consider it a hostile takeover.
"As soon as [the USDA] took over the program, immediately Congress began trying to weaken the restrictions," says Gates. "I just have a bad feeling that pretty soon the word won't mean anything."
What to look for when buying organic food: ? "100% Organic" means all ingredients are organic. ? "Organic" means a minimum of 95% of ingredients are organic. ? "Made with organic ingredients" means 70% to 94% of the product is organic. ? Multi-ingredient foods, such as breakfast cereal, with less than 70% organic ingredients may not use the organic label, but can list specific organically produced ingredients on the side panel of the package. ? "Natural" and "organic' are not interchangeable, but that and other quality claims such as free-range, hormone-free, and non-GM can still appear on labels.
The National Organic Program is a voluminous list of criteria specifying allowed and prohibited substances, land-management practices, livestock standards, and labeling requirements. Prior to the law, a guiding light for the organic movement was the California Organic Foods Act, a state guideline program passed in 1990 that comprised the first organic standards in the nation. Congress passed the Organic Food Production Act the same year and lawmakers wrangled over the official national standards for nearly a decade before the National Organic Program finally went into effect in October
2002. Until then, certification requirements around the nation lacked consistency, with state and private certifiers using different standards. Some organic farmers, like Gates, believe the National Organic Program's uniform standards came at too high a price. In particular, Gates is concerned about a provision of the law that states "organic is not synonymous with GM-free." The USDA's website specifies that the "adventitious presence of a genetically modified or genetically engineered substance ... does not affect the status of the certified operation and does not necessarily result in loss of organic status for the organic product." "That's such bullshit," says Gates.
Leslie McKinnon, coordinator of the Organic Certification Program for the Texas Department of Agriculture, says there are grounds for such standards."Because of the reality of the way pollen travels on the wind, it is unrealistic to take a zero-tolerance approach," she says. The law, says McKinnon, is "practice-based"; it is enforced only when a producer intentionally violates its standards. In determining whether the presence of GM substances or "products of excluded methods" in crops is intentional, certifiers consider the specific measures taken by producers to prevent their presence. At the same time, the USDA's website states that "buffer zones should not be sized at distances that attempt to achieve a zero tolerance for prohibited substances."
Dan Gillotte, general manager of the Wheatsville Food Co-op in Austin, sympathizes with certain provisions of the National Organic Program that allow producers some leeway, such as its tolerance of 5 percent non-organic ingredients in certified organic products. (The California Organic Foods Act also allowed 5 percent non-organic ingredients in certified organic foods; the National Organic Program actually strengthened the requirements for the "made with organic" label, increasing COFA's minimum of 50 percent organic ingredients to 70 percent.)
"The consumer might want 100 percent organic, but the reality is there are manufacturing concerns," says Gillotte. "If [certain companies] couldn't get [the organic label], then they wouldn't make any of the ingredients organic, so it's more beneficial that 95 percent of the ingredients are organic than to not have the product be organic at all."
Producers and handlers certainly benefit from certification. Gillotte says 2005 is already Wheatsville's "best sales year ever," and he attributes the store's unparalleled performance to a booming demand for organic foods. Wheatsville is not alone. According to a 2004 Manufacturer Survey by the Organic Trade Association, U.S. organic food sales have grown between 17 and 21 percent each year since 1997.
Gillotte says some of his store's best-selling foods are produced by leading organic manufacturers such as Muir Glen and Cascadian Farms, a trend that points to another contentious issue in the saga of organic certification: the industrialization of the organic movement. Despite Gillotte's general acceptance of the National Organic Program, he acknowledges it can often marginalize small, local farmers like Gates. "Sometimes [the National Organic Program's standards] tell farmers what they can't do, but [does not] tell them what they should do."
- Steve Bridges
"The scale becomes problematic," Gillotte says. "If you can have a 1,000-acre organic tomato farm, you're going to get some economies of scale that the guy who has a 10-acre farm is never going to have." For example, says Gillotte, larger-scale producers can apply fixed costs such as those spent on machinery to a larger quantity of crops, enabling them to charge less for their products. Because small farmers often cannot afford annual certification, which costs about $535 per 100 acres, they are unable to market their products as organic and compete with the larger producers. Another aspect of the National Organic Program is that it doesn't provide a way for "fanatics" like Gates to certify to a higher standard than the federal government requires, therefore making it impossible for the consumer to distinguish between foods produced according to strict organic standards and those produced at the minimum of the national requirements.
"Sometimes [the National Organic Program's standards] tell farmers what they can't do, but [does not] tell them what they should do," says Steve Bridges, president of the Texas Organic Farmers and Gardeners Association, who likens federal regulation of organic farming to a corporate takeover. He says the encroachment of big business will further debilitate the standard. "As you get more corporate interest in being organic, they're going to seek to weaken the rules."
Bridges sees more ominous developments on the horizon. He says that at a recent organic research workshop held in Austin, some scientists espoused the seeming paradox of genetic modification in organic foods. "They think technology can help organics," he says.
To counter what critics such as Bridges and Gates consider a growing threat to organic production and to from those just meeting the minimum of the National Organic Program's standards, some farmers have adopted alternative food labels that indicate local or GM-free production. To use the word "organic" without federal certification, however, would bring a $10,000 fine.
"That's why so many small farmers are disappointed in all this," says Bridges. "Because they've stolen the word from us." ?
By Brian Chasnoff
©San Antonio Current 2005
|
|
|
|
27 May 2005 @ 17:54
Hawaii Puts the Brakes on Two New GMO Crops
For more on what's happening in Hawaii see the GMO Free Hawaii
------
1.UH vows to hold off genetic tests with Hawaiian taro
Researchers will consult with native Hawaiians on cultural concerns
By Diana Leone
Star Bulletin
Hawaiian varieties of taro will not be used in any University of Hawaii genetic engineering research until native Hawaiians advise scientists about cultural concerns, a university dean said yesterday.
The promise is an attempt to stave off controversy and foster dialogue between the university and the native Hawaiian community, said Andrew Hashimoto, dean of the College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources. The dialogue is expected to take place through a process being organized by the Royal Order of Kamehameha on all islands.
To solidify the promise, Hashimoto signed a one-page statement about the university's intentions with taro research yesterday at a taro patch at the UH Center for Hawaiian Studies.
"We have encountered perceptions in the community that CTAHR's taro research focuses entirely on genetic engineering and that the college sells or gives away genetically engineered taro huli (shoots). These perceptions are incorrect," the statement said.
"The CTAHR scientists currently involved in genetic engineering research on taro have no plans to modify Hawaiian taro varieties."
The only ongoing genetic engineering of taro at the UH is of a Chinese variety and is being done only in a lab setting, not in greenhouses or open fields, Hashimoto said.
Genetic engineering involves the placement of a gene from one species of plant or animal into a different species. For example a disease-resistant gene in rice could be added to taro. Genetic engineering is much faster than traditional cross-breeding, Hashimoto said.
Opponents of genetic engineering worry that open-field test crops could escape test plots and affect native plants or other nongenetically engineered crops nearby, said Kat Brady of the environmental group Life of the Land.
But for taro, the cultural factor is an additional concern.
The connection between Hawaiians and taro goes beyond its historical use as a staple food to a "mystical, mythological parable that all Hawaiians are attached," said kumu John Lake, who chanted in Hawaiian, then spoke in English at yesterday's event.
"Kalo (taro) is intrinsically part and parcel of Hawaiians and of ohana," he said.
In Hawaiian mythology, the gods Wakea and Ho'ohokukalani's first child, Haloanakalaukapalili, was stillborn. When he was buried in the ground, he became the first taro plant, said Nalei Kahakalau, a teacher at the Big Island public charter school Kanu O Ka Aina.
The couple's next child, Haloa, was the founder of the Hawaiian people, according to the legend.
Visiting students from the Big Island charter school chanted about the legend for those attending the event.
The prospect of genetically altering taro is "kind of scary," said Ernest Tottori, president of Honolulu Poi Co., one of the islands' largest taro growers and processors.
For example, taro is known to be tolerated by people with allergies to wheat and rice, but Tottori asked what if it lost that quality under genetic engineering?
"You want to be very cautious about anything like that," he said.
...
VOICE CONCERNS
Anyone with concerns about genetic engineering of Hawaiian taro varieties can contact William Souza, of the Royal Order of Kamehameha, at 282-6005, or Andrew Hashimoto, dean of the University of Hawaii College of Tropical Agriculture and Human Resources, at 956-8234.
------
State Rejects Proposal For Genetically Engineered Algae Hawaii Channel,
May 24, 2005
The Hawaii Channel
HONOLULU -- A local biotechnology company's plans to grow a genetically engineered strain of algae ran into a roadblock Tuesday.
Mera Pharmaceuticals wanted to bring the algae to its facilities in Kailua-Kona, to see if it can be grown in large quantities.
The company needed approval from the state Board of Agriculture to bring the algae to the islands. Mera said the algae can be grown to develop therapeutic drugs for such conditions as herpes and tumors.
Company officials said it would not be able to harm the environment if samples got out of its facility.
"The proof is in the pudding. Algae did not escape and invade an environment. It's very tough for them. It's actually very tough to grow them in large scale," said Dr. Miguel Olaizola of Mera Pharmaceuticals.
However, opponents are not convinced.
"Really they haven't had a good look yet at whether this can escape into the wild, whether it can survive in the wild, in fresh water, and whether there might be any health or environmental concerns, any impacts," project opponent Elisha Goodman said.
The board voted 6-3 against the company's request. Mera has applied to bring seven other algae strains to Hawaii Islands. The board expects to handle that issue at a later meeting.
|
|
|
|
27 May 2005 @ 17:50
Demand for Organic Dairy Products in USA Exceeds Supply--New Farmers Needed
MADISON, Wis. Consumer demand for organic dairy products has eclipsed industry expectations growth predictions that once seemed overly optimistic are lower than actual growth. Yet, despite the market potential, organic companies are failing to cash in on the demand. There simply is not enough organic milk to keep the shelves fully stocked.
Steve Pechacek, president and general manager of Organic Family LLC, which does business as Organic Choice, says he is short approximately 384,000 pounds of milk this week.
"We're doing the best we can, but it's hard," says Pechacek. "This week I had orders for eight additional loads that I don't have." Headquartered in Prescott, Wis., Organic Family works with 12 milk processing plants and primarily ships its milk to the East Coast. Pechacek says he easily could sell an additional 720,000 pounds of organic milk per week.
Teresa Marquez, chief marketing executive for Organic Valley Family of Farms, LaFarge, Wis., says her company expected sales to increase by 20 percent in 2004. Instead, it had a 36 percent increase in sales.
"It really has taken us by surprise," says Marquez. "We really felt that the 20 to 30 percent growth would kind of slow down. The whole sector is meeting maybe 85 percent of the demand." Marquez says companies are focusing on filling basic demand for fluid milk, cheese and yogurt, but because of low supply are missing out on the opportunity to diversify their organic products. For example, Marquez says demand for organic infant formula is high.
Bruce Ellis, CEO of Wisconsin Organics, says his company is dealing with the shortage of organic milk by limiting company growth. If supply were unlimited, Ellis says his company could "certainly grow several hundred times." In addition to capping company growth, Ellis says Wisconsin Organics is exploring buyout options of existing organic dairy companies and looking for traditional farms willing to transition to organic. However, despite the promise of a higher and more stable premium for organic milk, farmers are hesitant to go organic.
The problem seems to be in the transition period. Transitioning to organic production is an expensive process and farmers do not begin receiving a higher premium until their milk is certified organic.
Ellis says organic feed costs 40 to 50 percent more than conventional feed. Federal law requires that cows be fed organic feed for a year before their milk will be considered organic.
In addition, farmers who save money by growing feed on their own land are subject to a longer certification process. Stephen Walker, certification program manager, Midwest Organic Services Association (MOSA), says 95 percent of the farms he works with grow feed on their own land. If they have used prohibited substances such as herbicides or pesticides, the land will not be certified organic for an additional three years. The cows must be fed the organic feed for an additional year.
Pechacek says that for many of the farmers he talks to, four years is too long to wait for a higher premium.
"Unfortunately conventional farming has left so many in dire straits that they have a real hard time getting through transition," says Pechacek. "I've known farmers that even though they made the transition it was too late. Financially they couldn¹t hold on due to debt load." Ellis adds that small farms may not be able to cash in on the organic market because they may not have the cash reserves or the option to take out a loan to pay for the transition period.
"Anybody with 200 cows or under is going to have a heck of a time when it comes down to expense," says Ellis. "Smaller dairy farms will not be able to afford it and once again the family farmer is on the outside looking in." Faye Jones, executive director, Midwest Organic Sustainable Education Service Inc. (MOSES), Spring Valley, Wis., educates farmers about going organic and says the transition period is a "big problem." "But a farmer will know the price he's going to be getting and know its going to be stable and that¹s a big incentive," adds Jones.
Marquez says the challenge now is to convince farmers that going organic is a good business decision. She notes that the farmers who had an ideological motivation to produce organic milk have already transitioned, leaving farmers who "don¹t know how to do it and don't see the value in it." "But they look at the premiums, especially in dairy, and they think about it," adds Marquez.
Organic Valley recently started a "Transition to Organic Fund" which supplies financial assistance to farmers who transition to organic. The company hopes that offering assistance will convince dairy farmers that are unsure about organic to sign on.
But as good as the organic market is now, farmers are rightfully concerned about how the market will perform one to three years from now.
"For everybody that's the No. 1 question, "how long is this going to last?" says Pechacek. "I think all indicators point to the position that it is going to continue to grow." Ellis says he expects organic dairy products to transcend the classification as niche or specialty products and become a commodity in the dairy sector.
"I can see where organic dairy could easily become 25 percent of the dairy industry," says Ellis.
|
|
| Wednesday, May 25, 2005 | |
|
|
|
25 May 2005 @ 17:57
San Diego Going Local and Organic
http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/metro/louv/20050524-9999-lz1e24louv.html
Making San Diego an 'edible' city UNION-TRIBUNE May 24, 2005
Nancy Hughes envisions San Diego as America's first "edible city." Those of us with no palate for stucco may find that hard to swallow. But there it is, the incredible edible city.
Under Mayor Dick Murphy, Hughes is chairwoman of San Diego's Community Forest Advisory Board. As winds shift at City Hall, her attention has turned toward her budding nonprofit group, San Diego Urban Farms. Its goals are to set aside tracts of land inside city limits for organic urban farming and to create a regional agriculture policy that would emphasize locally grown food for local consumption.
Such a policy, she believes, would save energy, create jobs and produce more healthful, better-tasting food.
The average foodstuff, she argues, now travels over 1,500 miles from farm to table. "Why are San Diegans eating tomatoes from Florida when we are blessed with a year-round growing season?" she asks.
Good question. Still, Hughes' dream of an edible city sounds a lot like the marginalized community gardens movement of decades past until you consider the booming organic food industry and add another ingredient: the percolating Slow Food movement.
This movement was launched in 1986 by Carlo Petrini, an Italian who took one look at a new McDonald's restaurant being built at St. Peter's Square in Rome and decided the way to fight fast food was with better taste. He created the first Slow Food campaign in northern Italy, to protect "the pleasures of the table from the homogenization of modern fast food and life."
Since then, Slow Food conviviums (from the Latin word for feast or entertainment) have sprouted around the world. The organization now boasts 83,000 members worldwide (nearly 5,000 in California). These folks do more than pay dues. Last year, Slow Food held a gathering in Europe that attracted 4,888 farmers from 128 nations.
Scott A. Murray of Vista was a U.S. delegate to that gathering. Murray, who owns a small, highly specialized organic farm (producing 26 types of lettuce in the winter, along with a variety of herbs) helps lead Slow Food San Diego, with 320 members.
"The Slow Food movement is made up of people dedicated to reawaking the enjoyment of food, buying higher quality, fresher food closer to home instead of trucked across the country, slowing down the preparation of our meals and enjoying our food more," he says.
San Diego may well be primed to take advantage of the growing hunger for authentic, locally grown food. This may come as a surprise to those of us who hang out in the frozen food department, but our county is the nation's seventh most agricultural county, if measured by the number of its farms many of which are just a few acres.
"In this county, we export 95 percent of the food we produce in the county, and we import 95 percent of what we consume," Marray says. "That doesn't make sense."
But something's happening out there. In the two decades that Murray has been involved in local agriculture, the number of farmers markets (where people can buy fresh, locally grown produce) in the county has grown from a single market to 28.
Immigration is one reason for example, Vietnamese farmers growing specialty foods for Vietnamese communities. But the main stimulant is the hunger for slow pleasure in a too-fast world. "People are rediscovering the pleasure of eating a peach ripened on the tree instead of one that was shipped hard," says Murray.
Increasingly, he focuses on education. For example, Slow Food San Diego is currently raising money to help bring organic farming and agriculture education to Escondido's 240-acre San Pasqual Academy, a residential education campus for foster teens.
Meanwhile, back at the edible city, the potential for the growth of urban agriculture may be greater than it seems.
A report by Rutgers University and members of the Community Food Security Coalition's North American Initiative on Urban Agriculture charts the national trend: Across the country, "significant amounts of food" are cultivated by entrepreneurial producers, community gardeners, backyard gardeners, food banks in vacant lots, parks, greenhouses, roof tops, balconies, window sills, ponds, rivers and estuaries.
A third of the 2 million farms in the United States alone are located within metropolitan areas and produce 35 percent of U.S. vegetables, fruit, livestock, poultry, and fish.
"The potential to expand urban production is enormous," according to the report. Add one more ingredient: growing concern about community food security: "Times of war and conflict render tenuous our dependence on distant food sources, especially in this post-9/11 world," according to the report.
But enough with fear already. Pleasure's more the point that and a connected community. That's how Murray and Hughes see the issue. Now all we need is a Slow City movemen
|
|
|
|
25 May 2005 @ 17:44
Seven Reasons Why Kids Should Drink Organic Milk
From: SOURCE Organic Valley Family of Farms
Web Site: http://www.organicvalley.com http://www.drgreene.com
In Recognition of June Dairy Month
LA FARGE, Wis., May 23 /PRNewswire/ -- Organic milk, produced without synthetic chemicals, hormones or antibiotics, is the best choice for kids And families, according to Dr. Alan Greene, one of the nation's leading pediatricians. Sought after for the wealth of information he gives parents At DrGreene.com, Greene is a pediatrician at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital, Stanford University clinical assistant professor of pediatrics, father of four and author of McGraw-Hill's "From First Kicks to First Steps."
In recognition of June Dairy Month, Dr. Greene is offering the following seven reasons why families who drink milk should choose organic:
1. Produced without antibiotics. "Antibiotic overuse is a major public health problem. One of the main places where antibiotics are used today is in agriculture. Organic milk comes from organic cows that have not been treated with antibiotics, so it doesn't contribute to the growing problem of bacterial resistance."
2. Produced without synthetic hormones. "Hormones are powerful. Even trace amounts can cause dramatic changes in living beings. When you choose organic milk, you know that added synthetic hormones are not stimulating the cows' milk production."
3. Produced without harmful pesticides. "Agricultural pesticides are now widespread. They can even be measured in raindrops falling from the sky, fog rolling over the hills, 'fresh' snow, and in water we drink. Organic agriculture reduces pesticide exposure because it comes from organic cows that are fed food grown without chemical pesticides."
4. High in Conjugated Linoleic Acids (CLAs). "CLAs are important 'good fats' that have been linked to decreased heart disease and diabetes. In fact, in the May 9 issue of the Archives of Internal Medicine, researchers from Massachusetts General Hospital and the Harvard School of Public Health reported low-fat dairy products, including milk, might lower the risk of type 2 diabetes in men.
"Milk made from cows who pasture has higher CLA content. Since many organic farmers rely upon pasturing and give their cows fresh green grass whenever weather permits, organic milk often has a high CLA content."
5. Excellent source of calcium. "Most of America's school children are failing to get the calcium they need each day for their growing bodies. Kids 4-8 years old need 800 mg per day. Kids 9-18 need 1,300 mg of calcium per day. Organic milk contains about 300 mg per eight-ounce glass and is one great way to help kids get the calcium they need. Organically flavored milks, such as chocolate and strawberry, are popular options for kids, too"
6. Organic milk is wholesome. "Organic milk is a natural, whole food beverage - unlike most beverages promoted for kids that are packed full of artificial chemical ingredients. Many of them contain high fructose corn syrup, aspartame and/or artificial chemical dyes."
7. It's the right thing to do. "Unlike factory cows, organic cows must have access to open air. Organic cows from some dairy farms are allowed to graze freely in organic pasture when it is in season. This kind of farming is kind to animals, supportive of wildlife, healthy for rural communities, respectful of our air, water and soil, and healthy for children."
"Parents need to practice the precautionary principle when it comes to the foods they feed their families," advised Greene. "This is especially true when it comes to eating higher on the food chain where pesticides and other toxins are stored in fatty tissue. By choosing organic milk, butter, and cheese, however, families can avoid this exposure."
About Alan Greene, M.D.
Dr. Alan Greene, a practicing pediatrician, father of four, and spokesperson for Organic Valley Family of Farms, has devoted himself to freely giving real answers to parents' real questions. His answers combine cutting edge science and practical wisdom with warm empathy and a deep respect for parents, children and the environment. Dr. Greene's Web site, [link] , was selected in July 2004 by the Wall Street Journal as one of the best health sites. He is also the Pediatric Expert for Yahoo! and for ParentsAction.org. Dr. Greene teaches at the Stanford University School of Medicine, and is an attending pediatrician at Stanford's Lucile Packard Children's Hospital. He is a senior fellow at the University of California San Francisco's Center for the Health Profession and is a board member of the Organic Center for Education and Promotion.
On June 18, 2005 Greene will hold "The First Kicks Celebration," a one-day event in Woodside, Calif. for moms and dads to-be, which is sponsored by Organic Valley. For more information, visit [link] . To register, email FirstKicksCelebration@DrGreene.com or call (925) 964-1793.
Organic Valley: Independent and Farmer-Owned
Organic Valley is one of America's leading national organic brands and is the largest independent and farmer-owned organic dairy cooperative in the United States. Organized in 1988, the cooperative represents nearly 700 farmers in 20 states. It owes its success to staying independent and true to its mission: keeping small and mid-sized farmers farming.
As stewards of the earth who use nature as their teacher, Organic Valley farmers produce more than 130 delicious organic products. Look for their organic milk, soy, cheese, butter, spreads, creams, eggs, produce, juice and meats in food cooperatives, natural foods stores and supermarkets throughout the country. For further information, contact Organic Valley at 1-888-444-MILK or visit [link] .
|
|
|
|
 25 May 2005 @ 17:42
EXPLOSIVE MONSANTO DOCUMENTS REVEAL SERIOUS HAZARDS OF GENETICALLY ENGINEERED CORN
A May 22 headline news story in the London Independent has rocked Monsanto and the biotech industry and fueled the controversy over the safety of genetically engineered food. The story reveals that internal Monsanto documents, reviewed by EU scientists, show serious health damage to laboratory animals fed Monsanto's new genetically engineered "rootworm-resistant" corn. Rats who consumed the mutant corn developed smaller kidneys and exhibited blood abnormalities. Scientists say these are "red flags" for immune system damage and/or cancer tumor promotion. Although the EU will now undoubtedly ban Monsanto's new GMO corn, this same rootworm-resistant corn is already being grown and consumed on a major scale in the United States. Monsanto has denied that the corn can harm humans, but nonetheless refuses to turn over its data to the media, claiming that the lab studies are "Confidential Business Information." Learn more and take action: http://www.organicconsumers.org/monlink.htm
__________________________________
CALIFORNIA MAN'S DEATH MAY BE LINKED TO MAD COW DISEASE
The USDA has recently been accused of been covering up cases of mad cow disease for over a decade. Now a deceased California man's family and doctor have announced they believe Patrick Hicks, aged 49, died late last year from variant Creutzfeldt Jakob disease, or vCJD. The fatal disease is contracted from eating beef contaminated with the mad cow disease. Dr. Ron Bailey, a neurologist at Riverside Medical Center, believes this will be the first documented case of vCJD in the U.S., and in order to bypass the hand of the USDA, is sending brain samples overseas for testing to an independent laboratory. Over 150 Europeans have already died from vCJD, with thousands more believed to be incubating the disease. http://www.organicconsumers.org/madcow/CAman051605.cfm
__________________________________
EUROPE DEBATES THE MOST MASSIVE CHEMICAL BAN IN HISTORY
The European Parliament is set to debate new regulations that would dramatically increase the number of banned chemicals in the EU. The law would require manufacturers of some 30,000 currently legal chemicals to provide scientific evidence that their products are safe for human health and the environment. If the legislation passes, it would have a major impact on thousands of chemicals and products manufactured and sold in the U.S. Despite much weaker regulations in the U.S. many American companies have no choice but to adhere to European regulations given that the EU, with 25 countries and 460 million people, represents an even larger market than the U.S. http://www.organicconsumers.org/Politics/strict051805.cfm
__________________________________
AVIAN INFLUENZA DEEMED MOST SERIOUS GLOBAL HEALTH THREAT
World Health Organization Director, General Lee Jong-Wook opened the 58th World Health Assembly last week by saying avian influenza is the most serious health threat facing the world. "The timing cannot be predicted, but rapid international spread is certain once the pandemic virus appears," Lee said. "This is a grave danger for all people in all countries." Lee strongly advised leaders of every nation to implement, as a top priority, systems for responding to the onset of the virus. http://www.organicconsumers.org/Politics/avian051805.cfm
__________________________________
CORPORATE DOLLAR OVERPOWERS SCIENCE...AGAIN
The American Diabetic Association (ADA) is suddenly countering decades of scientific studies that have consistently linked diets high in sugar to diabetes. In a May 16 interview, Richard Kahn, the chief scientific and medical officer with the ADA said "What is the evidence that sugar itself has anything to do with diabetes? There is no evidence." Coincidentally, last month, the ADA announced a "three-year, multi-million dollar alliance" with Cadbury Schweppes, which is the third largest producer of soft drinks in the world. http://www.organicconsumers.org/school/diabetes051705.cfm
__________________________________
BILL SAYS SODA POP IN SCHOOLS IS GOOD
The Oregon Senate Education Committee has rewritten a law that would have banned soft drinks from vending machines in the state's schools. In a complete turnabout, the new law actually gives the green light to sugary beverages in schools. Lawmakers instrumental in the rewrite process claim the change of heart has nothing to do with the fact that the Oregon Soft Drink Association, a powerful industry lobby group opposed to banning junk foods in schools, contributed $91,000 to their election campaigns in 2004. http://www.organicconsumers.org/school/coke050905.cfm
__________________________________
REMOTE CONTROL HUNTING
Texas entrepreneur John Lockwood, whose new internet business advertises a "real time on-line hunting and shooting experience," has spurred emergency proposed legislation in 14 states. Lockwood's website charges a monthly fee to subscribers who can then sit at their computers, anywhere in the world, watch live web cameras situated on Lockwood's game farm, and remotely shoot guns at real-life animals with the click of a mouse. Animal rights groups, the National Rifle Association and legislators across the U.S. are teaming up to pass laws that would ban such activity, referencing dangers of the spread of remotely fired guns, while Lockwood argues that this is a more ethical way of harvesting food than buying factory farm meats from the slaughterhouse. http://www.organicconsumers.org/corp/hunt.cfm
__________________________________
NEW "MONSANTO LAWS" AIM TO MUTE COMMUNITY RIGHTS
Responding to the growing number of localities whose citizens are voting to regulate or even ban genetically engineered crops, the biotech industry, led by Monsanto and Syngenta, has brought new legislation to ten states in the U.S. that would remove the rights of communities to have any control of agricultural regulations in their area. On one side of the issue, citizens and farmers in counties that have banned GE crops, like Mendocino, Calif., say they have a right to protect their predominantly organic county from contamination by GE pollen from neighboring crops. On the other side of the issue, the biotech industry is investing tens of millions of dollars to remove these local rights, saying anti-GE citizens and farmers "lack the education to make these kinds of decisions." http://www.organicconsumers.org/monsanto/laws052005.cfm
|
|
| Tuesday, May 24, 2005 | |
|
|
|
24 May 2005 @ 19:47
Urban Agriculture & Farmers Markets Key to Big Cities
Seattle Times
5/23/05
Neal Peirce / Syndicated columnist Time is ripe for urban agriculture Is America ready for a metropolitan agriculture policy? Is the time ripe to take some of the billions in subsidies now flowing to big commodity-crop operators and focus instead on sustainable farm production in and around the citistate regions where 80 percent of us live?
Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., and the man who founded Congress' Livability Caucus, argues that with half of federal farm subsidies currently "flowing to six states to produce 13 commodities that in the main we don't need, like corn, wheat, cotton, and rice," there's a dramatically superior alternative. We should, says Blumenauer, "use that money to build sustainable agriculture, create a farmer's market in every community, help farmers protect our land and water, preserve our viewsheds, foster land banks and control erosion."
Historically, he argues, our metropolitan regions weren't just centers of commerce but areas of fertile fields, often in lush river valleys. Even today, they have some of America's best land for sustainable agriculture. "With small diversions from the agriculture bill," argues Blumenauer, "we could provide grants for communities to develop year-round farmers' markets" and help local producers provide fresh vegetables and fruits, high-quality cheeses, honeys, nuts and more.
It's not hard to dismiss Blumenauer's idea. Small-scale agriculture has been losing out to big (and increasingly subsidized) farm operations for decades. This winter, the Bush administration quickly retreated from its proposal to significantly trim payouts to the mega-producers.
As for our food-raising-and-distribution system, the story is familiar: Big agribusiness processes commodities often high in sugar and fat, raises poultry, beef and pork in factory-like facilities, ships the shrink-wrapped products up to thousands of miles to supermarkets, and relies heavily on flashy packaging and advertising. How could anyone even loosen that hammerlock?
A bunch of reasons, it turns out.
First, millions of Americans are looking for fresher and more flavorful food alternatives - the very kind of product, from fresh East Coast summer corn to Montana cherries to South Dakota's new organically raised cattle on state-certified farms - that local farmers most reliably produce and deliver.
A second factor driving the fresh-foods drive: health concerns. It's true, not everyone catches on: a May 13 USA Today "cover story" celebrated such fat-drenched excesses as Hardee's 1,420-calorie burger. The article's explicit, unproven assumption: French fries, greasy burgers and heavy cheese-laden pizza please the tongue; salads and fresh vegetables and similar foods don't - and therefore don't sell well.
What's missing from that argument, aside from the horrendous health-system costs of fat-laden diets, is how delicious healthy "thousands-mile fresher" foods can be. Against the trend of chains such as McDonalds, Domino's or Taco Bell taking over school-lunch operations, several hundred school districts throughout the nation have adopted forms of a "farm-to-school" program to introduce locally grown farm products. When combined with nutrition education, farm visits, school gardens and classroom instruction, reports the Community Food Security Coalition, "children can develop healthy eating habits that will last a lifetime."
Matching that trend is the fast-growing national interest in organic foods free of artificial fertilizers and pesticides. The economic secret to building up local agriculture, says Schumacher, is some form of prepaid contract that schools, hospitals, government cafeterias, restaurants, even private individuals can enter into with local farm producers. The challenge - even beyond retargeted farm subsidies - is a way to deliver economic security to small producers adrift in a world of industrialized, high-risk agriculture.
The famed Wal-Mart slogan notwithstanding, says Blumenauer, lower prices for consumers often incur alarming costs in terms of transportation, congestion, air pollution and security. "What happens if your food supply chain is trucks that have to travel 2,000 miles? And then diesel prices triple, or there's a security issue? Or you're relying on such a few huge meat-processing factories and there's a tainted meat problem? How secure is that?"
The smart regions, says Blumenauer, will be those that get their act together to promote local food production, a critical step in a perilous global economy to bolster physical health, conserve open lands, save dollars and assure new self-sufficiency. More >
|
|
|
|
24 May 2005 @ 19:44
Organic Food Pioneer Paul Keene Dies at Age 94
Washington Post
Organic Food Pioneer Paul Keene Dies at 94
By Patricia Sullivan Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, May 19, 2005; Page B05
Paul Keene, 94, one of the founders of the U.S. organic food movement, died April 23 at Messiah Village Nursing Home in Mechanicsburg, Pa., not far from the farm where he launched the modern commercial market for natural foods.
No cause of death was reported.
Mr. Keene, the owner of Walnut Acres Farm in Penns Creek, Pa., turned from teaching college mathematics to coaxing earthworms and beneficial insects back into the depleted soil. In the rich organic earth that resulted, he grew crops that he processed and sold through his own mail-order catalogue. Before it was sold in 2000, the business had annual sales of $10 million.
|
|
| Monday, May 23, 2005 | |
|
|
|
23 May 2005 @ 17:33
Mother Earth News: Organic Seeds Are Becoming More Available
An article in the current issue of Mother Earth News reports that organic and heirloom variety garden seeds are becoming more widely available.
There's an increase in the number of specialty companies that focus on organic or heirloom vegetable seed, and large, mainstream seed companies are now adding some of these products to their offerings. The article features some seed company veterans and newcomers, discussing their offerings and operations, and offers an "Honor Roll" of sustainable seed companies.
Finding Great Garden Seeds
More >
|
|
|
|
23 May 2005 @ 17:15
NewFarm.org Lists Campus Courses & Programs on Organic Agriculture at U.S. Colleges
New Farm Posts 'Farming for Credit' Page The New Farm Web site has launched a "Farming for Credit" page that focuses on sustainable agriculture on campus. The new pages houses a directory that offers information on 54 student farm programs. It features profiles the best sustainable and organic ag programs at community colleges, universities, and high schools across the country. The page also includes links to a discussion forum for students and faculty?a place where they can share stories, ask questions, talk about challenges and network with other student farmers and faculty advisors.
URL: Campus Courses
|
|
| Saturday, May 21, 2005 | |
|
|
|
21 May 2005 @ 22:35
The rape of the rainforest... and the man behind it
By Michael McCarthy and Andrew Buncombe
20 May 2005
It is stark. It is scarcely believable. But the ruthless obliteration of the Amazon rainforest continues at a headlong rate new figures reveal - and today we reveal the man who more than any other represents the forces making it happen.
He is Blairo Maggi, the millionaire farmer and uncompromising politician presiding over the Brazilian boom in soya bean production. He is known in Brazil as O Rei da Soja - the King of Soy.
Brazilian environmentalists are calling him something else - the King of Deforestation. For the soya boom, feeding a seemingly insatiable world market for soya beans as cattle feed, is now the main driver of rainforest destruction.
Figures show that last year the rate of forest clearance in the Amazon was the second highest on record as the soy boom completed its third year. An area of more than 10,000 square miles - nearly the size of Belgium - was cut down, with half the destruction in the state of Mato Grosso, where Mr Maggi, whose Maggi Group farming business is the world's biggest soya bean producer, also happens to be the state governor.
Mr Maggi sheds no tears over lost trees. In 2003, his first year as governor, the rate of deforestation in Mato Grosso more than doubled.
In an interview last year he said: "To me, a 40 per cent increase in deforestation doesn't mean anything at all, and I don't feel the slightest guilt over what we are doing here. We are talking about an area larger than Europe that has barely been touched, so there is nothing at all to get worried about."
Many people violently disagree. The survival of the Amazon forest, which sprawls over 4.1 million sq km (1.6 million sq miles) and covers more than half of Brazil's land area, may be the key to the survival of the planet. The jungle is sometimes called the world's "lung" because its trees produce much of the world's oxygen. It is thought nearly 20 per cent of it has already been destroyed by legal and illegal logging, and clearance for cattle ranching. But the soya boom has dramatically stepped up the pace of destruction.
It began on the back of the BSE crisis in Britain, when the feed given to cattle suddenly became a matter of intense public concern. Cattle feed producers around the world switched to soya as an untainted source.
The boom was intensified by the fact that Brazil - in contrast to the US and Argentina - did not go down the GM route in its agriculture, so when most European countries went GM-free, it was from Brazil that they sought their soya bean supplies. Europe now imports 65 per cent of its soya from Brazil. A further impetus to the boom is coming from China, whose emerging middle class wants to eat more and more meat - so the demand for animal feed is soaring.
The soya boom is bitterly criticised by environmentalists. "It is turning the rainforest into cattle feed. It is gross," said John Sauven, head of the rainforest campaign for Greenpeace UK.
It first showed up in the deforestation figures in 2003, when after falling or staying steady for eight years, the rate of destruction leapt by 40 per cent in a single year, from 18,170 sq km to 25,500 sq km.
Since then the rate has stayed at its new high level, with 24,597 sq km cut down the next year, and, as the figures released yesterday by the Brazilian environment ministry showed, from satellite photos and other data, no less than 26,130 sq km of rainforest was cut down in the 12 months to August 2004. This was a further leap of 6 per cent on the year before and caused immense dismay, not least because President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva's government adopted an action plan last year to protect the Amazon. The Environment Minister, Marina Silva, who is from the Amazon state of Acre, said the figure was high, but promised the country would "work to fight this in a structured way, with lasting and effective action, involving all sectors".
Greenpeace's Amazon co-ordinator Paulo Adario said the scale of the destruction was a tragedy, and showed that deforestation was "not a priority for the Lula government".
Mr Maggi, whose company grossed $600m last year, does not see the future as one of restricted soya plantings. He has called for a tripling of the amount of land planted with soybeans during the next decade in Mato Grosso, and his company announced last year that it intended to double the area it has in production.
How demand for soya drives the destruction
The production of soya beans is now a vital industry for Brazil. Agribusiness is the country's number one export earner, and soya is the principal commodity. The current government under President Lula actively promotes soya export as a means to earn foreign exchange for debt payments.
From the 1960s, the Brazilian government promoted soya cultivation so Brazil could become self sufficient in vegetable oils. Soya was increasingly planted on large-scale, fully mechanised farms in the south and the states on the Atlantic coast.
In the past, some agro-engineers believed soya would never threaten the rainforest, because of climatic limitations and soil conditions. Soya was thought to be "as adaptable to conditions of the tropical climate as a panda bear to the African savannah".
However, the development of new varieties has enabled the rapid expansion of soya plantations north, into the tropical states where the rainforest is situated.
Between 1995 and 2004, the area cultivated with soya increased by 77 per cent in the centre-west, with Mato Grosso becoming the single biggest producer. Now soya is rapidly advancing from all sides toward the heartland of the Amazon, fuelling massive deforestation.
Two companies dominate Brazil's soya business. Gruppo Maggi, owned by Blairo Maggi, Mato Grosso's governor, is considered to be the world's largest individual soya producer. The number one soy-exporter is the giant US grains business, Cargill.
Michael McCarthy More >
|
|
| Thursday, May 19, 2005 | |
|
|
|
19 May 2005 @ 17:45
Thousands of Local Communities & Regions Have Declared Themselves GMO-Free in Europe
EUROPE'S REGIONS DEMAND "POWER-SHARING" OVER GMO CROP DECISIONS
GMO Free zones reach all time high
From: Assembly of European Regions & Friends of the Earth Europe
17 May 2005
Brussels, 17 May 2005 - European regions have today reiterated their demand to be included in any decisions over the commercial cultivation of genetically modified crops (GM or GMOs) in order for them to enhance and promote quality agriculture and food products.
Over 250 people from across Europe today attended an over-subscribed conference in Brussels to hear regional Ministers and MEP's call for a bigger say in whether GM crops are grown commercially in their region.
The number of European regions and provinces now declaring themselves "GM Free zones", or publicly wishing to restrict GM crops, has climbed to 162. Over 4500 local governments and smaller areas in Europe are similarly calling for restrictions to commercial growing. See this page for a full list.
The conference, Safeguarding Sustainable European Agriculture, set out clearly that regions want to develop quality food products instead of GM foods. These demands are driven by a combination of concerns over the environment, food safety, food quality, the local and regional economy, and consumer and farmer choice. The conference also heard support for the Agriculture Commissioners notion that there is a need for EU-wide legislation for the coexistence of GM, conventional, traditional and organic farming in order to prevent contamination.
The Assembly of European Regions (AER) and Friends of the Earth Europe,
published 10 principles that should be included in any such legislation:
pdf In English
pdf In French
The conference was organised by the AER and Friends of the Earth Europe, and was hosted by Mr Janusz Wojciechowski MEP, with the strong support of Upper Austria and Tuscany.
Mr Janusz Wojciechowski MEP said: "In the New Member States the majority of farms are small family farms, particularly in Poland. For this kind of farming we have the opportunity to produce ecologically and traditionally using natural technologies, which respect environmental and animal welfare standards. GMO and other intensive technologies focus on how to produce more and more products as cheaply as possible. That idea threatens not only human health and environment safety, but also the economical and social interest of millions of small farmers."
Mr Josef Martinz, Carinthian Minister for Agriculture, speaking on behalf of the Assembly of European Regions said: "I kindly ask the European Commission to lay the ground so that it is feasible to produce food without GMOs."
Mr Rudi Anschober, Minister for the Environment and Consumer Protection in
Upper Austria said: " We have led the way in avoiding the commercial cultivation of GM crops and of seeds and plants containing GMOs with a total ban in our whole region by regional law. . Having in mind the right of self-determination, the precautionary and the polluter-pays-principles, Brussels must allow regions to decide their own form of agriculture."
Ms Susanna Cenni, the new Agriculture Minister for Tuscany said: "Tuscany is recognized around the world for its rural culture, quality local products and its special relationship between the environment and its people. These qualities are treasured, especially economically, and the introduction of GMOs could irremediably destroy them. We are strongly determined to defend these qualities from any external factors that could represent a danger for its delicate balance."
Mr Adrian Bebb, GM campaigner for Friends of the Earth said: "The European Commission must wake up to the fact that more and more regions are rejecting the cultivation of genetically modified crops. This is at complete odds with the Commission strategy to force more GM foods and crops into Europe." Pictures of Ministers and a Friends of the Earth giant inflatable tomato will be available after 10.30hrs at:
CONTACT Adrian Bebb, Friends of the Earth Europe, GMO Campaigner
- mobile +49 1609 490 1163
Barbara Thauront, Assembly of European Regions, Head of Press Department
- mobile + 33 6 78 69 52 35
********************************************************************************************************
This GMO news service is underwritten by a generous grant from the Newman's Own Foundation, edited by Thomas Wittman and is a production of the [[link] Farming Association" target="_blank">link]
|
|
<< Newer entries Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Older entries >> |
|
Sounding Circle - Category: Permaculture
