| Tuesday, August 16, 2005 |  |
| Alternative Media Amplifies as Mainstream Gatekeepers Decline | 1 comment |
| 16 Aug 2005 @ 05:12 Website Traffic Shows People Are Turning from Corporate Media to Alternative Internet Sites for Their News Alternative Media Amplifies as Mainstream Gatekeepers Decline Paul Joseph Watson & Alex Jones August 7 2005 [link] The number of individuals worldwide who acknowledge that there is a hidden hand shaping world events is growing at a faster rate than ever before. This is directly due to the burgeoning power of the alternative media and the declining influence of the establishment media. Mainstream media has been caught so many times colluding with government in order to sell major domestic and foreign policy initiatives on a foundation of lies. People are voting with their feet and turning away from the mainstream and seeking the truth. The alternative media is by no means perfect, we make mistakes just as the mainstream does. The difference is that the alternative media actively attempts to tell the truth rather than actively attempting to hide it or misdirect the reader. Furthermore, when we make a mistake we also make the retraction clear, rather than burying it in small type on page 27. The consistent reports of reducing newspaper subscribers is mirrored on the Internet, as alternative news websites begin to surpass big city newspapers in readership. Using the Alexa web rankings as a benchmark, we compared a number of popular alternative websites to big city newspaper websites. The results are very encouraging. The Alexa system has several different filters for measuring traffic to a particular site but the base number appears at the top of the page for every website URL. The lower the number, the more visitors the website gets. For example, Yahoo.com is number one. Let's take a look at two major market big city newspapers, the Las Vegas Sun and the Daily Oklahoman. The Sun comes in at 13,699. The Oklahoman comes in at 10,312. Bear in mind that the websites for these kind of newspapers are run by a staff of anything from five to twenty people. And that's just the people putting the website together. If you add in the writers who contribute then the number is even greater. Alternative media websites like Prison Planet.com, WhatReallyHappened.com and Rense.com are run by two people apiece, and in some cases just one. If the journalists who wrote for the establishment papers went back to the old school mentality of muck-raking journalism then more people would read their articles. The fact that the raw truth is infinitely more popular means more and more of these establishment journalists are having to move further over to our side and be more honest in their reporting. Prison Planet.com comes in at 11,655, but the very latest figures show our traffic trend to be around 8,000-9,000. This means that more people are reading Prison Planet.com than are reading Oklahoma's biggest newspaper online. Furthermore, a paper like the Oklahoman has many different sections, for example classifieds, which attract people for different reasons than just wanting to read the news. Our websites are solely focused on news. So if you compared the websites just on people who visited to read the news, we'd be even further ahead. Papers like the Austin Chronicle are way behind alternative media sites like WhatReallyHappened.com and Rense.com. We are not bragging, we are simply pointing out the good news. The numbers continue to trend in our favor. At 3,732, Rense.com is bigger than the vast majority of mainstream news websites. Only internationally renowned outlets like BBC, New York Times and Washington Post are bigger. See how far a growing alternative media site like Raw Story, which is little over a year old, is ahead of one of Wes Virginia's biggest newspapers. It is time for the alternative media to have the credibility afforded to it that it deserves. If the establishment media continue to dismiss the alternative as badly researched, minority appeal, conspiracy mongering, then they only continue to insult and alienate the general public. People instinctively know deep down that there is something very wrong with this world and that the truth behind modern day developments is being purposefully shielded from them by media conglomerations owned by faceless corporations in league with Kafkaesque authorities. This is why the establishment is trying to shut down the alternative media by controlling and regulating the Internet. Laws passed in the aftermath of the London bombings talk of targeting 'extremist' websites who indirectly support terrorism. When the definition of extremism and supporting terrorism is disagreeing with the government's official story behind an act of terrorism, then they have carte blanche to silence anyone they choose. The fact that one blog is created every second and that a sizeable portion of those are political has the elitists very worried. This is why you should continue to support alternative media and oppose those who wish to see it disappear forever. Copyright © 2002-2005 Alex Jones More > |
| Diet & Lifestyle Changes Can Reduce Incidence of Prostate Cancer | 1 comment |
| 16 Aug 2005 @ 05:10 Diet & Lifestyle Changes Can Reduce Incidence of Prostate Cancer From Environment News Service Lifestyle, Diet Shown to Stop or Reverse Prostate Cancer SAN FRANCISCO, California, August 11, 2005 (ENS) - The first randomized, controlled trial showing that lifestyle changes may affect the progression of any type of cancer shows that men with early stage prostate cancer who make intensive changes in diet and lifestyle may stop or perhaps even reverse the progression of their illness. The study was directed by Dean Ornish, MD, clinical professor, and Peter Carroll, MD, chair of the Department of Urology, both of the University of California, San Francisco, and the late William Fair, MD, chief of urologic surgery and chair of urologic oncology, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. The research team studied 93 men with biopsy-proven prostate cancer who had elected not to undergo conventional treatment. The participants were randomly divided into either a group who were asked to make comprehensive changes in diet and lifestyle or a comparison group who were not asked to do so. Participants in the lifestyle-change group were placed on a vegan diet consisting primarily of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes supplemented with soy, vitamins and minerals. They participated in moderate aerobic exercise, yoga/meditation, and a weekly support group session. A registered dietitian was available for consultation, and a nurse case manager contacted the participants once a week for the first three months and weekly thereafter. After one year, the researchers found that levels of a protein marker for prostate cancer called PSA decreased in men in the group who made comprehensive lifestyle changes but increased in the comparison group. There was a direct correlation between the degree of lifestyle change and the changes in PSA. Also, they found that serum from the participants inhibited prostate tumor growth in vitro by 70 percent in the lifestyle-change group but only nine percent in the comparison group. Again, there was a direct correlation between the degree of lifestyle change and the inhibition of prostate tumor growth. None of the lifestyle-change participants had conventional prostate cancer treatments such as surgery, radiation, or chemotherapy during the study, but six members of the comparison group underwent conventional treatments because their disease progressed. Patients in the lifestyle-change group also reported marked improvements in quality of life. According to Carroll, "This study provides important new information for men with prostate cancer and all men who hope to prevent it. This is the first in a series of trials attempting to better identify the exact role of diet and lifestyle in the prevention and treatment of prostate cancer." "Changes in diet and lifestyle that we found in earlier research could reverse the progression of coronary heart disease may also affect the progression of prostate cancer as well. These findings suggest that men with prostate cancer who undergo conventional treatments may also benefit from making comprehensive lifestyle changes," said Ornish, who is also founder and president of the non-profit Preventive Medicine Research Institute. "This adds new evidence that changing diet and lifestyle may help to prevent prostate cancer." Dr. Ornish is author of five books, including the best seller "Dr. Dean Ornish's Program for Reversing Heart Disease." Ornish's program is the first to offer documented proof that heart disease can be halted, or even reversed, simply by changes in lifestyle. The researchers are continuing to follow these patients to determine the effects of their changes in diet and lifestyle on morbidity and mortality. Study findings are published in the September issue of the "Journal of Urology." The research was funded by the Department of Defense via the Henry Jackson Foundation, the Prostate Cancer Foundation, the National Institutes of Health, the UCSF Prostate Cancer Specialized Program of Research Excellence, the Buckshaum Family Foundation, Highmark, Inc., the Koch Foundation, the Ellison Foundation, the Fisher Foundation, the Gallin Foundation, the Resnick Foundation, the Safeway Foundation, the Walton Family Foundation and the Wynn Foundation. More > |
| Feds Subsidizing Obesity, not fruits and vegetables | 1 comment |
| 16 Aug 2005 @ 05:08 Feds Subsidizing Obesity, not fruits and vegetables [link],1,3504849.story?coll=sns-ap-healthmen-headlines Feds Aren't Subsidizing Recommended Foods By LIBBY QUAID Associated Press Writer 11:56 PM PDT, August 10, 2005 WASHINGTON — The government says half your diet should be fruits and vegetables, but it doesn't subsidize the farmers who grow them. Instead, half of all federal agriculture subsidies go to grain farmers, whose crops feed animals for meat, milk and eggs and become cheap ingredients in processed food. What's wrong with that? "Obesity. That's clearly the problem, if you look at the outcome in today's society," said Andy Fischer, executive director of the Community Food Security Coalition, a Venice, Calif., advocacy group. Two-thirds of Americans are overweight or obese. People clearly are getting the calories they need and more, but they're not getting enough nutrition, diet and disease experts say. The government's new food pyramid, unveiled in April by the Agriculture Department, aims to improve the nation's health. It recommends that people eat fewer calories and more fruit, vegetables, lowfat milk and whole grains. It also tells people to avoid foods made with partially hydrogenated oils and sweeteners. Federal farm programs, on the other hand, aim to maintain the financial health of American agriculture. Subsidies encourage an abundant supply of corn, wheat, rice and soybeans. Much of the corn and soybeans is fed to livestock. Some also is turned into nutrition-poor ingredients in processed food for people. For example, toaster pastries contain partially hydrogenated soybean oil that gives them a flaky texture, and they contain high-fructose corn syrup to sweeten their fruit filling. That translates to lots of calories, lots of artery-clogging fat and little or no fiber. Such foods are becoming progressively cheaper, while the price of fruit and vegetables is rising, said Adam Drewnowski, professor of epidemiology at the University of Washington. "If we tell a family, you really ought to be eating more salads and fresh fruit, and this is a low-income family, we're essentially encouraging them to spend more money," Drewnowski said. Many groups are pushing to link farm programs, which are due for an overhaul in 2007, more closely to government nutrition goals. "Here we are as a society, talking constantly about obesity and diets, and yet our farm policies are not structured to encourage the kind of diet that the food pyramid suggests we should adopt," said Ralph Grossi, president of American Farmland Trust, a Washington-based group that advocates conservation on farm and ranch land. Here is what the food pyramid says you should eat, based on a 2,000-calorie daily diet: * 3 cups of fat-free or lowfat milk or cheese. * 2 1/2 cups of vegetables. * 2 cups of fruit. * 6 ounces of grains. * 5 1/2 ounces of meat or beans. Your plate would look quite different if it matched farm subsidies. Estimated to cost $17 billion this year, according to the Congressional Budget Office, the breakdown of farm subsidies includes: * $7.3 billion for corn and other feed grains. * $3.5 billion for cotton. * $1.6 billion for soybeans. * $1.5 billion for wheat. * $1.5 billion for tobacco. * $686 million for dairy. * $626 million for rice. * $271 million for peanuts. CLICK TO READ More > |
| Americans are tossing $100 Billion of Food a Year | 0 comments |
| 16 Aug 2005 @ 05:07 Americans are tossing $100 Billion of Food a Year FOOD WASTE COSTING ECONOMY $100 BILLION, STUDY FINDS Scripps Howard News Service, Lance Gay, August 10, 2005 [link] It's just a matter of time before those staggering hikes in oil prices are translated into higher costs for food, reflecting the higher costs farmers pay for running diesel harvesters and using oil-based fertilizers and pesticides. Timothy Jones, a University of Arizona archaeologist, says that makes the results of his studies of how much food is lost and thrown away very timely. For the last eight years, Jones has spearheaded a government-financed study that has documented how more than 40 percent of food grown in the United States is lost or thrown away - at a cost of at least $100 billion annually to the economy and over-taxing the soil and environment. He said Americans - from the farm to the kitchen - aren't aware of the huge amounts of food losses, and cooks often don't think about the food they waste. Jones said even the experts were wrong - by a factor of two, in fact - in guessing how much food is lost through the food chain, and he said at least half of the food discarded isn't really bad and could have been safely consumed. "We've lost touch with food," said Jones at his Tucson office of the Bureau of Applied Research in Anthropology. "People are totally unaware of food; it's true of everybody from the citrus industry to the person who takes a plate of spaghetti and meatballs they could have kept and instead throw it away." Jones said Americans believe in the myth that food is cheap and plentiful. But he argued it's not cheap considering the labor and effort taken to grow it, and the costs of fuel to harvest and bring it to market. He also argued that there are no easily used lands left for new farms, and there are environmental costs from depleting soils and soil erosion that comes with intensive farming. The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that about 12 percent of today's average household budget goes to buying food, but Jones said those estimates were made before the price of oil tripled from $20 a barrel last year to more than $60 a barrel currently. Those oil-price increases, he said, will soon be translated into higher costs for food as oil is used not only to make diesel for tractors and harvesters, but also is the base from which fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides are made. "I think we're looking at 15 to 20 percent of household budgets in a few years because of these energy costs," he said, pointing out that people can save money by throwing less away. The food industry is increasingly aware of the costs of throwing away products headed for the market, which is affecting profit margins. "Huge, staggering dollars are lost" to discarded produce, said Ron McCormick, vice president for produce for the giant supermarket chain Wal-Mart. He said it's not unusual for boxes of perishable produce to be misplaced in huge warehouses even while shelves in stores are empty and customers have to shop elsewhere. McCormick said Wal-Mart is relying on new radio-controlled frequency chips to sort out its backroom problems and to try to ensure that a stream of fresh produce is always available for sale. There are also large losses in restaurant salad and buffet bars. Mickey Dedajic, an 18-year-old immigrant who lived off rotting potatoes and rice during the siege of Sarajevo more than a decade ago, said he's astonished at the waste of food in America after working as a waiter and bus boy at an Alexandria, Va., hotel. "Most of the time we run out of food, and there's more food in the garbage than on the buffet," he said. "People just aren't thinking about it." While previous USDA studies looked at plate waste to judge the amount of food discarded, Jones examined garbage from stores and people who volunteered for the study all over the country, weighing the discarded materials and segregating it into food categories. The losses from households were an eye-opener, he said. About 14 percent of the garbage involved perfectly good food that was in its original packaging and not out of date. "I just don't understand this," said Jones. He suggested that bulk purchases at discount stores are resulting in people having too much food they are not used to keeping, and so are just throwing unopened portions away. About 34 percent of discarded edible food was dry-packaged goods, and 19 percent canned goods that keep a long time. Another surprise from the study involved losses at fast-food restaurants, which publicly boast of their efficiency. Almost 10 percent of the food in fast-food restaurants was thrown out, the study found. Jones said this was due to the inadequacies of refrigerators in stores. He said the fast-food industry moved to a "just-in-time" delivery system from company-owned regional warehouses in the last decade, instead of relying on local suppliers. But Jones said many fast-food stores had difficulties adjusting the delivery of food supplies in time for customers lining up in the drive-through lanes, and the individual stores lacked adequate refrigerators to store supplies. The study found that large fast-food chains were more efficient than smaller chains. At some of the smaller chains, up to 50 percent of food was discarded. Jones concluded this high loss was due to high turnovers of novice store managers, who ordered too much food and misjudged how many customers they would have. More than a quarter of the food prepared at convenience stores is discarded. Jones explained this is usually pizza or hot dogs that are cooked and kept under hot lights or on a grill until they are sold, or look unappetizing. He said the massive waste costs the fast-food industry $30 billion to $35 billion a year and could be solved by redesigning stores to include proper storage areas and refrigerators. "By spending $50 million to $60 million, they could save $5 billion," he said. Jones said the industry has made strides in storing and transporting fresh produce from the farm to the store with little losses. But Jones said that, at the farm level, the waste involved in putting together pre-prepared salads and sliced carrots has boosted produce losses from 3 percent to 10 percent. And his surveys found that about 10 percent of the broccoli, cauliflower and celery crops are left rotting in the fields. About 29 percent of the citrus crop is lost each year, largely because of the neglect of oranges. Just reducing waste by a quarter would mean a $25 billion injection into the economy, Jones said. |
| Should Factory-Style Dairy Farms Be Able to Call Themselves Organic? | 0 comments |
| 16 Aug 2005 @ 05:05 Should Factory-Style Dairy Farms Like Horizon & Aurora Be Able to Call Themselves Organic? News Advisory Date: 8/12/2005 Re: Key Organic Farm Decision The Organic Pasture Debate The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) will likely make a key organic farm management determination at its August 15-17 meeting in Washington, D.C. At issue is the requirement that dairy cows and other ruminants obtain a significant portion of their annual feed from grazing on pasture. Organic family-scale dairy farmers from across the country are coming to the meeting to voice their support for a proposed guidance document that requires significant pasturing for ruminants. The document has already won unanimous support from the NOSB¹s livestock committee. A controversy was sparked earlier this year when The Cornucopia Institute filed formal complaints with the USDA against management practices on three of the nation¹s largest organic dairy farms. The group charged that the operations were confining 3000-5000 milk cows into small dry-lots, with little or no access to pasture, as a way of allowing them to more intensively milk their herd while skirting organic production requirements. All three farms sell all or some of their milk to Dean/Horizon, the nation¹s largest distributor of organic dairy products. In addition, a number of private label products contain milk from these "factory farms". The NOSB meeting is being held at The Mandarin Oriental Hotel, 1330 Maryland Avenue, SW, Washington, DC beginning at 10:30am on Monday, the 15th. Public testimony from farmers and concerned consumers will be heard in the afternoon. More background on this issue as well as the formal complaints filed by The Cornucopia Institute can be viewed on the organization¹s website, located at www.cornucopia.org. For additional information, contact Mark Kastel at608-625-2042 or Will Fantle at 715-839-7731. The Cornucopia Institute kastel@cornucopia.org 608-625-2042 Voice P.O. Box 126 Cornucopia, Wisconsin 54827 www.cornucopia.org |