What The F is wrong with Texas Animal Shelters

(from Change.org)

It seemed like a story with the potential for a happy ending. Sara Legvold fell in love with a female Chihuahua at the Garland, Texas animal shelter. "I saw that little Chihuahua, and it broke my heart," said Levgold. "I said, 'I gotta get that little thing out of there.'" She planned to adopt her. Yet this story's ending was tragic, not happy. According to The Dallas Morning News, "less than a day after the dog, Blackie, was listed by the shelter as available, she was euthanized because of her aggressive tendencies."

(full story here)

Remember that story I posted at the end of July? Remember that it was a shelter in Dallas? Now Garland (which is a suburb of Dallas.) While I am pretty sure that stories like this go unreported all the time in various cities in the US, why does it feel that more of them come from Texas or of southern states than really need to? This sickens me and appalls me.

Some collected facts (with charts) about Obesity in the US

More facts located here

The Shame of being from Texas

This is from Change

Dallas Animal Services has been having ongoing problems with its air-conditioning. As you might imagine, a building full of animals in the Texas summer heat is pretty uncomfortable (and potentially dangerous). It gets even less pleasant when there's a dead cat stuck in the wall.

Last month, a cat escaped from his cage at the Dallas shelter. It happens. The cat apparently climbed into the ceiling. That happens, too. It can be hard to find a cat who doesn't want to be found. But then the cat wound up trapped in the wall, where shelter workers could hear him trying to get free. It took several days for him to die in there.

As if the thought of this poor cat slowly dying in the walls wasn't bad enough, here's the worst part: He could have been rescued. How do I know that? Because when the stench of the cat's carcass made things unpleasant, it was removed. Apparently it wasn't a high priority for shelter staff to get the cat out of the walls when he was struggling and crying, but as soon as he started to smell, they were getting him out of there, even if it was Mission Impossible.

Sources told CBS 11 that managers were well aware of the missing cat trying to free himself from the wall. The district attorney's office is investigating who knew about the cat, and when, to determine whether cruelty charges can be filed.

Jonnie England, a member of the Dallas Animal Shelter Commission, said "If these allegations are true, these are the people who are charged with protecting and caring for animals in the city of Dallas. This is a level of callousness and unconcern and incompetence that is just stunning."

England has also been outspoken about the chronic ventilation problems at the shelter, saying that between the broken air conditioner and vents clogged with dirt and debris, there's a risk of spreading disease in addition to heat-related problems. It's good to know that the animals in Dallas have a champion, because if the city's "shelter" is allowing animals to die within its walls (literally), the animals need someone looking out for them.

The Dallas Animal Shelter Commission needs to replace the managers and staff responsible for this negligence with compassionate leaders who know the meaning of the word "shelter," and can give the city's animals the safety and care that they deserve.

If you'd like to contact the Dallas Animal Shelter Commission, please do so here:

Dallas Animal Services and Adoption Center

Phone: 214-670-8246

1818 N. Westmoreland Road
Dallas, Texas 75212

USDA Admits Link Between Antibiotic Use by Big Ag and Human Health

Can't get much more blatant than that now can we?

From Huffington Post:

At a hearing of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee on Wednesday, July 14, 2010, a representative of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) finally caught up with the rest of the world -- and his peers at the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) -- and admitted that the use of antibiotics in farm animal feed is contributing to the growing problem of deadly antibiotic resistance in America.

Dr. John Clifford, Deputy Administrator for Veterinary Services for the USDA's Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) read from his previously submitted testimony that the USDA believes it is likely that U.S. use of antibiotics in animal agriculture does lead to some cases of resistance in humans and the animals.

Why is this news? Because the USDA has been continually playing the Three Wise Monkeys game -- it sees no evil, hears no evil and speaks no evil -- when it comes to deadly consequences to humans of the non-therapeutic use of antibiotics in farm animals. In fact, Dr. Clifford looked as if he'd been given a choice between testifying or having his eye poked out with a stick and he lost the toss.

Others, though, readily stepped up to the plate. Despite the feeble nature of the recent FDA Guidance to Industry on farm animal antibiotics, Dr. Joshua Sharfstein, Principle Deputy Commissioner of the FDA, was clear in his testimony that the overall weight of evidence supports the conclusion that using antibiotics for production purposes in livestock farming (as growth promoters and to prevent rather than treat illness) is not in the interest of protecting and promoting public health.

Dr. Sharfstein also turned away a challenge from Representative John Shimkus (R-IL 19) about the soundness of the science upon which his findings rest. Mr. Shimkus, obviously unhappy with Dr. Sharfstein's testimony, badgered him to come up with up a U.S. peer-reviewed study (which Dr. Sharfstein did -- a 2003 Institute of Medicine study) and then questioned the veracity of the findings. Dr. Sharfstein assured Mr. Shimkus that the Institute has a peer-review process in place and reminded him that "the Institute is considered our nation's leading scientific expert ... "

Dr. Ali Khan, Assistant Surgeon General and the Deputy Director of the National Center for Emerging and Zoonotic Infectious Diseases (NCEZID), Center for Disease Control and Prevention, testified that there is unequivocal and compelling evidence that the use of antibiotics in farm animals leads to drug resistance that has an adverse impact on public health. He also faced questions from a visibly agitated Mr. Shimkus, who kept dismissing studies by the World Health Organization and others to request "real science," which, from his posturing, is evidently only that which supports Big Ag.

Mr. Shimkus played his role as Big Ag's Mouthpiece admirably. He questioned every statistic, slide, study, expert, institution, report or person cited that didn't agree with an antibiotic free-for-all in the farmyard. "So far there's nothing that links use in animals to a buildup of resistance in humans," he stated, recklessly ignoring all published science since 1968 and the testimony of the doctors his government has charged with protecting health, while making sure he gave Big Ag a clear, concise statement around which it can issue an indignant press release.

So let's recap -- the USDA, however grudgingly, is finally admitting the link between the use of subtherapeutic antibiotics in farm animal feed and human drug resistance; the FDA is impressed enough with the "weight of the evidence" to begin calling for changes in how antibiotics are used in farm animal production; and the CDC feels the evidence is "unequivocal and compelling," yet there are still those calling for "real science?"

Well how about the March 22, 2010, report from the Duke Infection Control Outreach Network that a superbug call C. difficile is multi-drug resistant and on the rise? Is that real science or should we conduct more studies and perhaps hold a few more hearings?

We don't need more hearings, we need action. H.R. 1549, Preservation of Antibiotics for Medical Treatment Act, continues to languish in committee while a few elected officials spend the taxpayer's time and money to pretend the science they are calling for doesn't already exist in mountains.

In the coming days, I expect that Big Ag will marshal their forces and come out with its own brand of science and experts to refute all testimony that threatens its profit margin. Of course, what I'm really waiting for is the day the Subcommittee calls on one of the dozens and dozens of AWA farmers to relate how changing from confined to pasture-based farming has eliminated the need for subtherapuetic and most therapeutic antibiotics because their animals and their farms are safe and healthy to begin with.

No Charges for Man Who Abused Cows

MARYSVILLE, Ohio — The owner of a central Ohio farm won't face charges in connection with a video showing cattle being beaten and poked with pitchforks, a prosecutor announced Tuesday.

A Union County grand jury decided not to indict Gary Conklin of Plain City after investigators and veterinarians studied the video and concluded Conklin acted appropriately, County Prosecutor David Phillips said.

An animal welfare group secretly recorded the video in late April, saying it showed cattle being abused at Conklin Dairy Farms. The farm fired an employee who has since pleaded not guilty to 12 counts of animal cruelty.

Phillips said the video posted on YouTube used out-of-context scenes to create a false perception that Conklin was involved in the abuse, but investigators and grand jurors saw the original video.

"They saw the unedited video of Mr. Conklin's actions, not the highly inflammatory version released on YouTube by Mercy for Animals," Phillips said in a statement.

The group Tuesday said the decision not to charge Conklin has failed concerned citizens and animals that deserve protection, giving Conklin Farms "a free pass" for animal abuse. "Mercy For Animals was the only true watchdog and defender the animals at Conklin Dairy Farms had," said Daniel Hauff, the group's director of investigations. "The dairy industry and local law enforcement had all failed to detect the abuse or hold the abusers accountable."

Phillips said the grand jury also considered charges against another farm employee, the undercover worker who made the video, and Mercy for Animals officials, but decided there wasn't enough evidence. Phillips said the abuse allegations should have been reported immediately to authorities.

He also said authorities were monitoring threats being made against the Conklin family and farm and warned they could result in prosecution.

Gary Conklin said in a statement it was gratifying that no else was charged. But he said the family remains saddened by the abuse shown in the video and said it doesn't reflect the farm's commitment to animal care.

Here is the "highly imflammatory" and "out-of-context" video that everyone on YouTube saw:

I don't know about you, but the first few seconds of this video looks like "cruel and unusual" punishment to me. Context or not. Acts of violence against another living creature is just that ... violence. Abuse is abuse, there is no "context."

If you take a club and beat a man who was entering your home, it does NOT take away from the fact that you were beating him. Your reasons may be justified but the act is still what it is. I can hardly think though that any cow, under ANY circumstance, would warrant having their heads trampled, stomped or kicked.

BP Burning sealife

BP just can't stay off my radar these days. It seems that they're grossly incompetent in just about any way that a major corporation can be incompetent. I can only imagine how many stories like this the "media blackout" are filtering out.

From Change

It’s not just oil going up in flames in the controlled burns BP has been setting off in the Gulf of Mexico. According to eyewitnesses, sea turtles and other marine life trapped in the oil slick are being burned alive — and BP is preventing rescuers from saving the creatures’ lives.

The Los Angeles Times reported last week that converging ocean currents are collecting long clusters of sargassum seaweed along with the spilled oil, creating 30-mile-long "islands of death." The booms trailing BP ships indiscriminately gather up the oil and seaweed (as well as whatever critters have the misfortune to be clinging to it), which is then torched. The 100-foot flames mark an area referred to as the "burn box."

Since April, more than 5 million gallons of oil have been ignited in more than 165 burns. No statistics are available as to the number of turtles and other marine creatures trapped and ignited in those burns. BP executives must be breathing a huge collective sigh of relief over that.

The Times story follows a team of turtle researchers as they cruise near Deepwater Horizon, shadowing the boom boats’ paths in an effort to save any turtles before they are incinerated. Not that the poor creatures have a chance for survival anyway.

"We've seen the oil covering the turtles so thick they could barely move, could hardly lift their heads," said Blair Witherington, a research scientist with the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission. As for their almost certain death by either suffocation or fire, he conceded, "I won't pretend to know which is the nastiest."

In one case, the crew watched helplessly as a long, thick clump of seaweed was gathered by BP boats and burned — seaweed they were sure was full of sea turtles.

"In a perfect world, they'd gather up the material and let us search it before they burned it," Witherington said. "But that connection hasn't been made. The lines of communication aren't there." At least the team was able to save 11 turtles that day, all of them coated with oil.

Read the rest of the article here

Here's how to help:

* The National Wildlife Federation is working with the Coalition to Restore Coastal Louisiana, and is encouraging anyone in the southern Louisiana area looking to help to reach out through its website;
* The International Bird Rescue and Research Center has sent a team of specialists to the region to help with any oiled wildlife. If you spot oiled wildlife, call the Wildlife Reporting Hotline at 866-557-1401. Please note that oiled birds (or any other oiled wildlife) should not be captured, but reported to the hotline;
* The National Audubon Society is recruiting volunteers to be trained to respond to the oil spill. They are also encouraging members of the public to contact the Interior Department and encourage them to halt the expansion of offshore oil drilling in the eastern United States;
* Alabama residents are asked to contact the Mobile Bay National Estuary Program at 251-431-6409;
* Or contact the Mobile Baykeeper at 251- 433-4229 to volunteer anywhere along the Gulf Coast;
* Save Our Seabirds is a Florida bird rescue group that is looking for volunteers as its response team prepares to help oiled wildlife. To help, call 941-388-3010;

Oil, Joe Barton and the shame of being from Texas

First let me say that I was going to write about the despicable behaviour of Joe Barton last week when he "apologized" to BP, but I thought twice about that. Let me say this though, I love Texas and I love a lot of things about this state but the political environment stinks to high heaven. Readers of this blog (all 3 of you) have seen that I've posted things on here from time to time that, personally, make me hang my head in shame. People need to realize that politics, suffering and stupidity walk hand in hand (at least in Texas.)

This article is from Change

As if the millions of gallons of oil hemorrhaging into the Gulf of Mexico weren't bad enough, it appears that there is at least some evidence that the solution is almost as bad for animals in the affected areas. At issue is a chemical called Corexit, an oil dispersant.

Now, it's hard to tell you a lot about Corexit, for a couple of reasons. First, we're talking about some pretty hardcore chemistry (key ingredients include things like 2-Butoxyethanol, propylene glycol, and dioctyl sodium sulfosiccinate), and, more importantly, Corexit's makers don't really want you to know a lot about the stuff, since it's a proprietary mixture. The ingredient list was kept secret until last week, when the EPA finally revealed it and scientists could start trying to figure out exactly how the chemicals will impact wildlife.

What we do know about Corexit is plenty though. We know, for instance, that on May 20, the EPA ordered BP to find a better, less toxic alternative to Corexit, and BP more or less refused. We also know that the two flavors of Corexit are but two options out of eighteen on the EPA's list of approved dispersants.

Most importantly, perhaps, we know what Corexit does, at least according to people like Joe Taylor, an environmental engineer in Daphne, Alabama. Taylor told his local TV news that Corexit basically makes oil sink from the surface down to the ocean depths, where it depletes oxygen levels. That, according to Taylor, kills of plankton, with resulting trauma all the way up the food chain.

And finally, we know that, according to the New York Times, "other U.S. EPA-approved alternatives have been shown to be far less toxic, and in some cases, nearly twice as effective."

So why the slavish devotion to Corexit? You might suspect, given BP's past history, it has something to do with lining their own corporate pockets. You would be right about that.

First of all, BP is already in pretty deep with Corexit; they've used between 800,000 and 1 million gallons so far. Nalco Holding Company, who makes Corexit, estimates that they could sell as much as $40 million worth of the chemical for use in the Gulf. And this stuff isn't cheap.

But, more insidious by far are the connections between Nalco and the oil industry, and specifically BP. Nalco exists, in its current iteration, thanks to a joint venture with Exxon in the mid-1990's. And, Nalco's board has more than a few oil-industry insiders, including at least one executive with over a decade of service to — guess who? — BP.

Basically, BP is getting a free pass to continue to help out their friends, while putting Gulf wildlife — even the ones who survive or avoid the oil itself — at risk.

Deepwater Spill Analysis (with oceanographic map)

Oceanographic Analysis for Deepwater Horizon Spill Dated June 8th  

Animal Abuse at Cal-Cruz Hatcheries

Warning: This video is graphic and disturbing

New Report Says FDA Needs Revamping

(From Change.org)

As if we needed any more evidence that the food safety system in this country is dysfunctional, a new report found that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is — wait for it — unequipped to handle problems with the food supply and in need of major revamping.

The report was issued yesterday by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) and the National Research Council at the request of Congress. Authors recommend that the FDA take a risk-based, proactive approach to food safety at every stage of production, provide standards for inspections, and have mandatory recall authority over the roughly 80 percent of the nation's food supply it's responsible for overseeing.

"FDA uses some risk assessment and management tactics," said committee chair Robert Wallace, "but the agency's approach is too often reactive and lacks a systematic focus on prevention. Our report's recommendations aim to help FDA achieve a comprehensive vision for proactively protecting against threats to the nation's food supply."

Oh, and to do that, Congress is going to need to enact legislation that is unsurprisingly similar to the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, which has already passed the House of Representatives and has been pending in the Senate for seven months now. Congress asked for an expert opinion, and now they have it. It's time for them to act.

In a written statement, FDA commissioner Dr. Margaret Hamburg concluded that "the report clearly highlights the need for enactment of pending legislation that provides much-needed authorities and resources to assist in our efforts to ensure the safety of our nation's food supply."

There's nothing particularly new or shocking within this report. For anyone who even casually follows food safety issues, everything about this report should be familiar. What is perhaps most shocking is how painfully clear it is that our food safety system is broken. While a viable solution is within reach, the Senate refuses to take the necessary action. How many more Americans must die or become ill before the Senate reads the writing on the wall?

One simple vote could transform our nation's food safety system. Sure, it won't be perfect, and certain interests groups have legitimate concerns about the pending legislation's potential impacts. But it will be a positive step for consumers, food producers, and our country. Tell your senators to bring S. 510, the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, to the floor for a full vote.

Eat Less Meat .. Save the Planet

(From Change.org)

Last week, the United Nations issued a dramatic report calling on the world to reduce its consumption of animal products. According to the U.K. Guardian, the U.N. believes a "global shift towards a vegan diet is vital to save the world from hunger, fuel poverty and the worst impacts of climate change."

As the U.N. report makes clear, animal agriculture is extremely wasteful: "Animal products, both meat and dairy, in general require more resources and cause higher emissions than plant-based alternatives." According to Time, "worldwide livestock farming generates 18 percent of the planet's greenhouse gas emissions — by comparison, all the world's cars, trains, planes and boats account for a combined 13 percent of greenhouse gas emissions." More than half of all the food grown globally goes to feeding farm animals. And, according to Professor Edgar Hertwich, the lead author of the report, "Animal products cause more damage than [producing] construction minerals such as sand or cement, plastics or metals. Biomass and crops for animals are as damaging as [burning] fossil fuels."

Alas, in many places, people are eating more meat, not less. "Meat consumption per capita in China rose by 42 per cent over eight years from 1995 to 2003," says Sangwon Suh of the University of California, Santa Barbara. As a nation becomes richer, its citizens become more carnivorous, and the Earth suffers the consequences.

Sadly, it comes as no surprise that the U.N. report doesn't address the more than 55 billion animals killed worldwide every year in factory farms and slaughterhouses. If you're looking for something about the moral and ethical issues involving eating animals, you won't find it in this dry, academic report. Nor will you find anything health benefits of a meat-free diet. And, as Erik Marcus at Vegan.com notes, "The number of times this 112-page report uses the words vegan or vegetarian: zero."

Many will resist the United Nations' call to consume fewer animal products. Yet it is now obvious that a vegetarian or vegan diet is about more than saving the animals. It's about saving the
planet.


Here's the report:

Priority Products and Materials Report Full

These images speak for themselves

Angry BP Art

BP is in Full Media Lockdown over Gulf Spill

Here is a picture that neither the President saw, nor does BP want you to see. this picture is a rotting dolphin corpse that was dragged from the gulf."When we found this dolphin it was filled with oil. Oil was just pouring out of it. It was the saddest darn thing to look at."



I will be posting more later because TRUST me ... there is more and plenty to be angry about.

7 Tips for a low budget vegetarian diet

(From Savvy Vegetarian)

Here are 7 tips for eating a healthy vegetarian diet on a budget:

1. A pressure cooker to cook beans, soups and other foods - one of the best vegetarian investments you’ll ever make, and will save you TONS of Time. A good one costs about $120, and will last 20 years or more. We recommend the Fagor brand. Are you due for a gift from someone who can afford it?

2. Crockpots or slowcookers are also great time savers, and inexpensive. Put supper on to cook, leave the house for the day, and come home to a cooked meal. What a brilliant invention! It’s handy to have both 4 – 6 qt, and 8 – 10 qt. sizes.

3. Get a good chef’s knife with a sharpener, to chop veggies, and learn how to use it. Otherwise prepping veggies is time consuming and difficult, the main reason most people can’t be bothered. But being a healthy vegetarian means eating vegetables! A good chef’s knife will last your lifetime, and you can get a 1st class knife for around $30. My favorite is Victorinox – it’s one of the best & cheapest, recommended by Cook’s Illustrated.

4. Have at least one excellent all purpose vegetarian cookbook, with a large, informative ingredient section, nutrition information, cooking methods, and a vast array of delicious recipes for a varied vegetarian diet. Find used books in excellent condition online for half the price. See SV cookbook reviews.

5. Make extra, and freeze for later: beans, grains, soups, stews, breads, etc,. Not quite as nutritious or tasty as freshly made, although far better than most of the alternatives. Most of us can’t tell the difference, and don’t have time to cook three meals a day from scratch!

6. If your budget allows, buy bread, yogurt, sprouts, and other basics, such as canned beans, tomatoes, and frozen veggies like peas, corn, or spinach, to supplement what you make yourself. You’ll pay more, but the time saved for other activities, such as earning money, may be worth it to you. Getting these things through a food co-op, or shopping sales, will save quite a bit, but the trade off again, is your time.

7. Shop Around For Fruits & Veggies: Prices can vary widely for produce from store to store. The cheapest fruits and vegetables are usually in season, and they also happen to be the freshest and healthiest. Basics like cabbage and carrots are always cheap and nutritious. Apples oranges & bananas are the least expensive fruits in winter. When foods like asparagus or peaches are in season, they’re relatively cheap, so go for the treats! Shop carefully at the local farmer’s market, and if you can, grow some of your own veggies – super cheap, but again, the trade-off is your time.

The Truth about Hamburger

For those of you who enjoyed a hamburger over Memorial Day, here are some facts for you:

One hamburger can contain the meat of hundreds of different cows, even from different slaughterhouses. Most beef cattle spend the last months of their lives at feed lots.

At the feed lot, cattle are pumped full of hormones, antibiotics, and fattening feed. Their feed is corn-based, but often contains the meat of pigs, chickens, and turkeys. It also legally can contain road kill and euthanized cats and dogs, as well as fecal waste from cattle, pigs, or chickens. As cows are designed to eat grass, they need roughage in order to digest their food. Plastic pellets are often used instead of natural fiber.

After a few weeks on the feedlot, cattle are sent to the slaughterhouse. The cattle are stunned before they are hung upside down and bled to death. The stunning process often does not render them unconscious and they remain kicking as a knife is stuck in their throat.

Beyond the cost to the animals, there's also the environmental impact of a hamburger. The manufacture of a single hamburger takes enough fossil fuel to drive a small car 25 miles. According to The Rainforest Action Network, 55 square feet of rainforest are destroyed for the production of every hamburger.

What's the harm in one hamburger? Well, if you ask Stephanie Smith, a lot. Stephanie Smith was a former dance instructor, and thanks to one hamburger, she will never walk again. Stephanie ate a largely vegetarian diet, rarely eating hamburgers. But the one she happened to eat was contaminated with fecal matter, which carries E.coli bacteria. She suffered seizures after eating the burger and was kept in a medically induced coma for three months. She is now paralyzed, with cognitive problems and kidney damage. Stephanie's case against beef producer Cargill Inc. was settled earlier this month.

Natural Resources Used Up in Food Production-

User of more than half of all water used for all purposes in the U.S.: animal agriculture
Amount of water used in production of the average cow: sufficient to float a destroyer
Gallons of water needed to produce a pound of wheat: 25
Gallons of water needed to produce a pound of California cow meat: 5,000
Years the world's known oil reserves would last if every human ate a meat-centered diet: 13
Years they would last if human beings no longer ate meat: 260
Calories of fossil fuel expended to get 1 calorie of protein from beef: 78
To get 1 calorie of protein from soybeans: 2

Amount of meat imported to U.S. annually from Central and South America: 300,000,000 pounds.

A new report authored by an Ohio State University professor estimates food-borne illnesses cost the U.S. $152 billion each year in health care and other losses.

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) estimates that foodborne diseases cause approximately 76 million illnesses, 325,000 hospitalizations, and 5,000 deaths in the United States each year.

For every foodborne illness case that is reported, as many as 40 more illnesses are not reported or lab-confirmed.

More than 30 million people in the United States are likely to be particularly susceptible to foodborne disease. Very young, elderly, and immune-compromised persons experience the most serious foodborne illnesses.

It is estimated that chronic, secondary complications resulting from foodborne illness occur in 2-3 percent of cases.

The Economic Research Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates the annual costs of medical care, productivity losses, and premature deaths due to foodborne illnesses caused by the five major pathogens to be $6.9 billion.

Still need more convincing?

Phyllis K. Fong, the Agriculture Department's inspector general, looked at how beef is tested for harmful substances.

According to her new report, inspectors charged with checking cattle for disease and meat for contaminants were, "unable to determine if meat has unacceptable levels of... potentially hazardous substances [and do] not test for pesticides... determined to be of high risk."

The inspectors also failed to test beef for 23 pesticides, the report says.

The study -- entitled the National Residue Program for Cattle Audit Report -- says there are no standards for how much of certain dangerous substances, such as copper and highly toxic dioxin, is too much for someone to eat.?? As a result, meat containing these substances has gotten into the nation's food supply, it finds.

The report says the health danger to people who eat this beef is a "growing concern," and calls for better coordination among the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service, the Environmental Protection Agency and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to ensure the safety of the country's meat supply.

Yearly:

20,000 others suffer from poisoning by E.coli 0157-H7, the mutant bacteria found in contaminated meat that generally leads to lifelong physical and mental health problems. A more thorough meat inspection with new technologies could eliminate most instances of contamination--so would vegetarianism.

Facts speak for themselves.

Health Related Foodborne Illness Costs Report.pdf 1

Paula Deen ... Responsible for teaching your children how to cook?

Health food activists in Savannah are questioning the local school system's decision to partner with Paula Deen on a new culinary arts program.

According to a recent report by Georgia Public Broadcasting, some parents are horrified that the celeb chef responsible for the cookbook selected as the past decade's "unhealthiest" by a group of physicians will be steering the curriculum for high schoolers enrolled in the Paula Deen Academy of Culinary Arts.

A spokeswoman for Savannah's Brighter Days Natural Foods was unaware of the controversy when reached by phone, but wondered why the schools didn't pick a nutritionist as a consultant. According to Audrey Biloon, there's no shortage of talented Savannah chefs who don't bathe their vegetables in bacon grease or fry balls of butter. "You don't have to eat a high-fat diet in the South," Biloon contends.

Although a spokesperson for the Savannah-Chatham County Public School System didn't respond to repeated requests for comment, a release issued by the system quotes the high school's executive director as saying "Paula Deen is an internationally recognized chef with the expertise and ability to connect our students to opportunities within the culinary arts industry. We are honored and pleased that this program will be unique in that it is the only culinary arts school partnership with Paula Deen."


Paula Deen Academy students, who will earn culinary arts certificates along with their high school diplomas, will follow a curriculum based on state guidelines, American Culinary Federation standards and Deen's recommendations.

Eating Liberally Austin

I had said several weeks (or was it months) ago that I was starting a local Austin chapter of Eating Liberally and it has come to pass. We'll be having our first meeting tomorrow night (May 19th) here in Austin at Get Sum Dim Sum. We even have our own Facebook page. So if you're out and about tomorrow for dinner and have no idea of where to go or what to do, drop by and say hi :)

Fast Cheap And Easy

(This is from Huffington Post)

I can honestly say I've never gotten more mileage out of the word bullshit than I did last week at the IACP conference in Portland, Oregon. But I have to clarify that when I called bullshit, I wasn't responding to Karen Page personally--she was simply voicing what everyone seems to believe and propagate: that we all lead such busy lives that we have no time to cook.

To repeat: bullshit. Maybe you don't like to cook, maybe you're too lazy to cook, maybe you'd rather watch television or garden, I don't know and I don't care, but don't tell me you're too busy to cook. We all have the same hours every day, and we all choose how to use them. Working 12-hour days is a choice.

Tell me, do you ever hear this? "You know, this month, I really wished I'd had more time, because I believe in paying taxes. I was just too busy." Or, "I've got this cancer on my forehead but I've just been too busy to have it removed." Or, "You know how hard it is to get your kid into kindergarten in Manhattan; if only I weren't been so busy."

We don't blow that stuff off, do we? But the processed food companies make it easy to blow off cooking for ourselves. And we do so at our peril. This is why I responded to Karen as I did. America is too stupid to question whether something is good for it or not ("Marge, it says snack well right on the box!"). And in the very same way we believe that idiocy, we believe these very same companies telling us how wonderful our lives will be if we buy this low-fat Lean Cuisine because it will save us so much time, only 3 minutes! Used to take seven! You've got four extra minutes to play with!

This is not a judgment against people who eat Lean Cuisines. If you're happy eating them and life couldn't be better for you, I'm not going to say a word. I just don't want to hear it's because you don't have the time to cook real food.

Since the food industry began, they've been pushing for faster and faster cooking times--that's what they were selling, not food you enjoy or that makes you feel good. That's what they want people to value. For decades, not only have the multinational food corporations been selling us speed, so have the media. The media embraced it. "That's what people want!" argue editors and publishers I've spoken with.

Magazines, newspapers, and television shows bombard us with quick and easy meals. Have been for decades. Have we gotten any better, any happier, any healthier? Some people have. But not because they learned how to spend less time cooking. It's likely because they learned to spend more time cooking. And the rest of the country has only gotten fatter, sicker and sadder, to the point that the government feels it needs to step in and regulate the food.

Part of the problem is the magazine editors and television producers drumming us over the head with fast and easy meal solutions at home. It's the wrong message to send. These editors and producers and publishers are backing the processed food industry, propelling their message. What I say to you magazine editors and producers, to you Rachael Ray and you Jamie Oliver and your 20 minutes meals: God bless you, but you are advertising and marketing on behalf of the processed food industry.

Quick, fast, and easy isn't the point. Good is the point. Makes you feel good is the point. I am not saying spend three hours making a chicken galantine. I am saying put a chicken in the oven with some cut up potatoes for an hour. Yes, a whole hour! If you're inclined to enjoy some carnal exertions with your partner during that hour, that chicken will be all the more appreciated. But if there's laundry to be done, if there are kids who need help with their geometry, then do that.

In an hour, all who are eating, help set the table, fill some glasses, take out the plates. Make the time. In the same way that you make time to buy shoes for the kids, clean the bathroom, pay your bills--make time to be together over food that makes you feel good when you've finished eating it. Quick and easy won't get you anywhere. Quick and easy will only frustrate you and make you feel like you're failing. You want quick and easy? That's what take-out's for. Nothing wrong with it. Pizza, I love to come home with a couple beautiful pies from Marotta's down the street and open a nice bottle of wine.

But I know for a fact that spending at least a few days a week preparing food with other people around, enjoying it together, is one of the best possible things in life to do, period. It's part of what makes us human. It makes us happy in ways that are deep and good for us. Fast and easy has nothing to do with it.

Supreme Court to Rule on GM Crops

The Supreme Court is scheduled to hear oral arguments Tuesday involving a federal judge's temporary ban on a breed of pesticide-resistant alfalfa, setting the stage for the court's first-ever ruling on genetically modified crops.

Legal experts do not expect a blockbuster decision on the merits of regulating modified plants such as Monsanto Co.'s Roundup Ready alfalfa, but the case, Monsanto Co. v. Geertson Seed Farms, has drawn widespread interest because the justices could issue a ruling that would raise or lower the threshold for challenges under the National Environmental Policy Act.

Environmental groups, which frequently use the statute to bring lawsuits against government agencies and industry groups, "don't expect anything good" to come from the Supreme Court's eventual decision, said David Bookbinder, chief climate counsel at the Sierra Club. It seems that some of the justices are "on a kick to gut NEPA remedies," he said earlier this year during a panel discussion on environmental law at Georgetown University.

See the full story here.

Countdown to Earth Day

Time, once again, to go out and try to give the planet a big hug. Do your part, do what you can. Make this day a day of setting goals, try to come up with a plan to start reducing your carbon footprint. Take meat off of your table 1 day a week, reduce the amount of plastic that you use. Learn more about what's going on around the world here

Record number of food stamp recipents

The economy is really hard on everyone right now, and here's another example:

About 39.4 million Americans, the most ever, received food stamps in January, the government said.

The number of recipients was up 22% from a year earlier, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The total of Americans getting the subsidy has hit records for 14 consecutive months.

With that said ... because we know that most food subsidies cover mass produced, factory farmed goods, can you see the health care crisis becoming worse?

Here's a really great article about obesity, healthcare and poverty:

Some highlights include:

According to the US Agriculture Department, between 1985 and 2003, the cost of fruits and vegetables rose by 120%. While the cost of soft drinks, sweets, sugars and sweets rose by less than 50%.

A 2006 study by the Colorado Health Foundation titled the “Income, Education and Obesity” found that 25% of Colorado children living in low-income households with an average income of $25,000 or less were obese compared to 8% of the children in households with an income of $75,000 or more who were obese.

While I'm not purely suggesting that lower income families are breeding obese children or that lower income families are "fat and lazy," what I am suggesting is that the issues with food, scarity and proper nutrition are an ever looming issue now exacerbated by a declining economy and a shrinking middle class.

Technology and Vegetariansim

So with all of the technology that's available out there now I'm happy to show off this little app for your Ipod touch, Ipad or Iphone:

http://www.vegetarianscanner.com/

I didn't have anything to do with it's production but I still think it's a cool thing. It's $1.99 and should come in handy when you're looking through ingredient lists at the grocery store.

Alternet explains how Jamie Oliver's Food Revolution Failed

After two months, kids hated the new meals, milk consumption plummeted, and many students dropped out of the school lunch program altogether.

Read the full article here

Report Shows Cruelty at Top Egg Producers

From the Humane Society of the US Website:

In February and March 2010, an HSUS investigator worked inside four different factory farms, owned by two of the nation's largest egg producers. The scope of suffering that the investigator revealed was staggering.

This is not a matter of a couple of rotten eggs, but rather standard industry practices that are simply rotten. As investigation after investigation has shown, this cruelty is pervasive throughout the entire battery-cage egg industry. It's time for an end to cage confinement of laying hens.

The video can be found here.

I highly recommend that you read the report and watch the video.

(I published this to Scribd but keep getting an error so here's the URL: http://www.scribd.com/doc/29607348/Report-2010-Iowa-Egg )

Shooting the pets that don't get adopted

This extraordinarily cruel and inhumane treatment is how homeless pets are handled in Hinckley, Utah. Cats and dogs are held for only 72 hours in the local "shelter" and then taken to a nearby open sewer pit where they are shot. If they run out of bullets the animals are run over by a vehicle. The mayor of the community says it’s efficient and cost-effective, and perfectly legal. Neighbors have reported that the pets are not always dead when they’re thrown in the pit and some have crawled onto nearby properties to die a slow, painful death.

Go to Change.org and sign the petition.

Fatty Foods Are Addictive

(From Health.com) Scientists have finally confirmed what the rest of us have suspected for years: Bacon, cheesecake, and other delicious yet fattening foods may be addictive.

A new study in rats suggests that high-fat, high-calorie foods affect the brain in much the same way as cocaine and heroin. When rats consume these foods in great enough quantities, it leads to compulsive eating habits that resemble drug addiction, the study found.

Doing drugs such as cocaine and eating too much junk food both gradually overload the so-called pleasure centers in the brain, according to Paul J. Kenny, Ph.D., an associate professor of molecular therapeutics at the Scripps Research Institute, in Jupiter, Florida. Eventually the pleasure centers "crash," and achieving the same pleasure--or even just feeling normal--requires increasing amounts of the drug or food, says Kenny, the lead author of the study.

"People know intuitively that there's more to [overeating] than just willpower," he says. "There's a system in the brain that's been turned on or over-activated, and that's driving [overeating] at some subconscious level."

In the study, published in the journal Nature Neuroscience, Kenny and his co-author studied three groups of lab rats for 40 days. One of the groups was fed regular rat food. A second was fed bacon, sausage, cheesecake, frosting, and other fattening, high-calorie foods--but only for one hour each day. The third group was allowed to pig out on the unhealthy foods for up to 23 hours a day.

Not surprisingly, the rats that gorged themselves on the human food quickly became obese. But their brains also changed. By monitoring implanted brain electrodes, the researchers found that the rats in the third group gradually developed a tolerance to the pleasure the food gave them and had to eat more to experience a high.

They began to eat compulsively, to the point where they continued to do so in the face of pain. When the researchers applied an electric shock to the rats' feet in the presence of the food, the rats in the first two groups were frightened away from eating. But the obese rats were not. "Their attention was solely focused on consuming food," says Kenny.

In previous studies, rats have exhibited similar brain changes when given unlimited access to cocaine or heroin. And rats have similarly ignored punishment to continue consuming cocaine, the researchers note.

The fact that junk food could provoke this response isn't entirely surprising, says Dr.Gene-Jack Wang, M.D., the chair of the medical department at the U.S. Department of Energy's Brookhaven National Laboratory, in Upton, New York.

"We make our food very similar to cocaine now," he says.

Coca leaves have been used since ancient times, he points out, but people learned to purify or alter cocaine to deliver it more efficiently to their brains (by injecting or smoking it, for instance). This made the drug more addictive.

According to Wang, food has evolved in a similar way. "We purify our food," he says. "Our ancestors ate whole grains, but we're eating white bread. American Indians ate corn; we eat corn syrup."

The ingredients in purified modern food cause people to "eat unconsciously and unnecessarily," and will also prompt an animal to "eat like a drug abuser [uses drugs]," says Wang.

The neurotransmitter dopamine appears to be responsible for the behavior of the overeating rats, according to the study. Dopamine is involved in the brain's pleasure (or reward) centers, and it also plays a role in reinforcing behavior. "It tells the brain something has happened and you should learn from what just happened," says Kenny.

Overeating caused the levels of a certain dopamine receptor in the brains of the obese rats to drop, the study found. In humans, low levels of the same receptors have been associated with drug addiction and obesity, and may be genetic, Kenny says.

However, that doesn't mean that everyone born with lower dopamine receptor levels is destined to become an addict or to overeat. As Wang points out, environmental factors, and not just genes, are involved in both behaviors.

Wang also cautions that applying the results of animal studies to humans can be tricky. For instance, he says, in studies of weight-loss drugs, rats have lost as much as 30 percent of their weight, but humans on the same drug have lost less than 5 percent of their weight. "You can't mimic completely human behavior, but [animal studies] can give you a clue about what can happen in humans," Wang says.

Although he acknowledges that his research may not directly translate to humans, Kenny says the findings shed light on the brain mechanisms that drive overeating and could even lead to new treatments for obesity.

"If we could develop therapeutics for drug addiction, those same drugs may be good for obesity as well," he says.

I'm finally back.

Sorry everyone ... I've been away for a while. I had to travel to Southern California for a few days for my job but now I'm back, it's the start of a new week and I'll be posting more soon. Also, if you're a regular reader of this blog, you may remember me mentioning that there was going to be an Austin chapter of Eating Liberally. That is a go and our first meeting will be May 20th. I haven't secured a time yet and once I do, I'll be posting the blog address, the time, the date and the location. I will also be updating my twitter with goings-ons as well as adding a new facebook page JUST for the Eating Liberally organization. Then I have another surprise, I'll be making vegan doughnuts soon for sampling. If you're local and would like to try some, let me know and I'll be giving them out on a first come, first e mail basis. The first batch will be apple cider with vanilla and chocolate frosting. So as you can see .. a lot has been happening in my corner of the world but as I said, I'll be updating the blog, twitter and facebook with all of my happenings, so be on alert.

Doug

Meatless Mondays and Taiwan

From Change

The China Post reports that Taiwan's Ministry of Education is calling on elementary and junior high schools to provide one vegetarian lunch per week to students. The goal is to promote healthy lifestyles and help reduce global warming. According to Deputy Minister of Education Lin Tsong-ming, if everyone in the country adopted one meat-free day, carbon emissions could be reduced by 161,000,000 kg.

Will the call for a weekly vegetarian lunch in Taiwan's schools result in the same kind of weird madness as Meatless Monday has caused in the U.S.? It's doubtful.

Taiwan, like many Asian countries, has a history of vegetarianism. Many of the nation's Buddhists avoid meat completely, and vegetarian restaurants are plentiful. According to Taiwan Today, "From high-end restaurants to street vendors, there are more than 4,000 vegetarian establishments on the island catering to some 1.7 million non-meat eaters, as well as a huge variety of edibles available at supermarkets and other food outlets." It is estimated that 14 percent of Taiwanese are either "occasional or committed" vegetarians, as opposed to only about 3 percent of Americans.

The popularity of meat-free eating no doubt explains why Taiwan has what has been called the world's strictest laws on labeling vegetarian foods. Previously, Taiwan had two labeling categories to identify the content of vegetarian food. But a law that took affect in summer of 2009 added three more categories. According to Earth Times, the earlier labeling "only indicates whether food is pure vegetarian or contains no meat but egg and milk. Now added are categories separating egg and milk as well as vegan."

The call for vegetarian lunches in the schools is a recent one, so it's impossible to tell at this point whether some Taiwanese Glenn Beck (if there is such a thing) will get all up in arms about the issue. Probably not. The people of Taiwan have been eating meat-free meals since before America was a nation. I don't think they will get that upset about their kids eating one vegetarian meal a week at school.

Food Safety ... Not So Safe

(From Yahoo News)

FRESNO, Calif. – The knives at the slaughterhouse weren't properly sanitized, a government investigator said, and employees at the meatpacking plant didn't know how to test the carcasses of days-old veal calves for a dangerous pathogen. Food safety conditions were so poor at the Vermont processing facility that it should close before someone got sick, officials warned.

Instead, the plant stayed open for months. It wasn't until an undercover video surfaced with images of calves being kicked, dragged and skinned alive that the federal government ordered Bushway Packing Inc. to close last November for the inhumane treatment of animals.

Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack at that time called the abuse "inexcusable," and vowed to redouble efforts to enforce laws aimed at protecting farm animals.

A report by the Government Accountability Office released last week, however, found that while stringent animal protections may be on the books, the federal government is doing a lax job of enforcing them.

Rep. Dennis Kucinich, an Ohio Democrat who has held hearings on the issue, said animal treatment is key to food safety.

"How can the public have confidence in the safety of the food they eat if inspections at plants aren't consistent or in some cases, if they're not happening at all," Kucinich said. "There is a direct connection between humane animal handling and food safety."

The U.S. Department of Agriculture did not return calls from The Associated Press seeking further comment, but said in a written response to the GAO that it planned to use auditors' findings and recommendations to improve efforts to enforce humane slaughtering laws.

In May 2008, the Agriculture Department banned the slaughter of cows too sick or weak to stand, because so-called "downer" cows pose an increased risk for mad cow disease, E. coli and other infections.

That change came in the wake of the nation's largest beef recall, after the Humane Society of the United States released another video in early 2008 showing the abuse of downers at the Chino, Calif.-based Westland/Hallmark Meat Co.

Nearly two years later, the report released by the GAO, the investigative arm of Congress, found that the Agriculture Department's Food Safety and Inspection Service still has no standardized method for determining how many times a sick animal can be stunned before it constitutes "egregious" abuse.

Enforcement of humane slaughtering laws was so inconsistent that the two busiest meatpacking districts, in Des Moines and Chicago, did not suspend a single plant from 2005 through 2007, a period when 10 other districts together suspended 35, according to the GAO.

Meatpacking industry officials said leaving so much up to the discretion of individual inspectors and veterinarians also puts companies in a tight spot, because they can't anticipate how strictly the rules will be enforced.

"You want consistent enforcement in your everyday life and we're no different," said James Hodges, executive vice president of American Meat Institute, the nation's oldest and largest meat and poultry trade association. "We were the first organization to develop animal handling guidelines in the plants, but that doesn't mean everyone in the system pays attention."

The meatpacking industry has long opposed animal welfare advocates' efforts to draw a link between the treatment of farm animals and public health. The industry contends consumers shouldn't be worried about eating contaminated meat.

Kucinich, the chairman of the House Oversight and Government Reform subcommittee that is monitoring USDA's oversight efforts, quizzed Obama administration officials at a hearing last week about how they planned to improve the agency's enforcement standards.

"We are deeply committed to the humane handling of livestock," Agriculture Deputy Under Secretary Jerold Mande testified. "If (companies) don't have control of their humane handling processes it raises the question of how they can have control of their food safety processes."

Dean Wyatt, a USDA veterinarian who witnessed the mishandling of calves at Bushway Packing in Grand Isle, Vt., said the two processes were intertwined, and that his supervisors should have listened to his warnings before the video recorded by the Humane Society of the United States surfaced.

Three times last year, he called for the plant to suspend operations for abuse of male veal calves, including an incident in which a weak and injured calf was dragged across a holding pen. But after each suspension his supervisors allowed the plant to reopen, he said.

An enforcement investigator from the Albany district office also found 23 violations of food safety laws there, including improper E. coli testing procedures and faulty sanitizing processes for slaughter knives, according to e-mails provided by Wyatt. But FSIS supervisors in Albany later ordered those noncompliance records to be rescinded even though officials "could not determine if the food produced and shipped by the establishment is safe," the e-mails show. The USDA did not immediately comment on the incident.

Peter Langrock, a Middlebury, Vt. lawyer who represents Bushway, said company officials had worked to correct problems and hope to reopen the facility and enter into a consent decree with the USDA to settle a criminal investigation in the next few weeks.

"These are really good country farmers who never intended in any way to inhumanely handle an animal," Langrock said. "This was a case of somebody looking only to find problems."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------

This is the same plant that a report back in 2009 said this:

U.S. Department of Agriculture records show Bushway Packing Inc. of Grand Isle was shut down for a day in May and again in June after an inspector cited it for inhumane treatment of animals.

But remember ... these are just really good country farmers and pointing out that they're breaking a law ... well that's just "somebody looking ... to find problems."

Austin turning Town Lake into a No Kill Shelter

Here's the story from KVUE news:



Austin City Council Thursday approved a plan that will begin to turn the Town Lake Animal Center (TLAC) into a no-kill shelter.

The vote was months in the making. In November, the council agreed to create a city animal advisory committee. Thursday morning, council members met again to approve the plan that committee developed.

Dozens of people showed up at Austin City Hall to support the plan. It gives the Town Lake Animal Center two years to ensure that 90 percent of the animals at the shelter leave the shelter alive.

It's a process advocates say is long overdue.

“We should not be so behind in the nation we should be leading the nation in no-kill. We have so many animals that can get homes and we have the homes available -- there absolutely are,” said Idette Quintana.

Last year, shelter officials say they euthanized 32 percent of the more than 2,200 animals at TLAC. Twenty-two percent of the animals were adopted.

The proposed plan the council approved Thursday morning does not include budget details. The committee will meet again to determine the exact costs and savings that the program will provide.

Mayor Pro-Tem Mike Martinez also requested a regular update from the shelter in the implementation process.

The State of Food in the US

Just some facts for you to think about before you go shopping for food:

- Four companies process more than 85% of U.S. beef cattle.
- Two companies sell 50% of U.S. corn seed.
- One company controls 40% of the U.S. milk supply.
- Five firms dominate the grocery sector, ensuring that low prices paid to farmers aren't passed along to consumers at the store.

I'll be posting more on the WONDERFUL news about Austin becoming a No Kill City as soon as a news report runs with the story. This vote happened earlier today and there are no news stories reporting it right now.

I'll also be posting more on the information above along with a petition that you can sign urging Congress to break up the Big Ag control of our food supply. I'll update both stories either today or tomorrow.

Austin is one step closer to becoming a No Kill City

The City Council of Austin unanimously passed the resolution today to make Austin a No Kill City. Thank you City Council members of Austin.

Stephen Colbert on Pringles Recall

Consumer Alert - Pringles

The Colbert Report	Mon - Thurs 11:30pm / 10:30c
www.colbertnation.com
Colbert Report Full Episodes Political Humor Skate Expectations

Plastics Kill

Rise Above Plastics

Help to Make Austin A No-Kill City

From Fix Austin:

This is perhaps the biggest news in the No Kill world since Reno, NV, went No Kill in 2007. This Thursday, March 11, the Austin City Council will decide whether Austin, Texas, will join the ranks of America's No Kill cities. The Council is considering a plan of proven methods to produce No Kill success: (1) low-cost and free spay-neuter programs; (2) a comprehensive adoption program including off-site adoptions; (3) keeping open the downtown shelter once the city's new shelter opens outside of the city center; and (4) a large-scale foster program.

The No Kill plan has now been posted on the City Council's website in Agenda Item #21.

If you want to help make Austin a No Kill City, we ask that you please send an e-mail to the Austin City Council members asking them to pass the plan. Their e-mails are: lee.leffingwell@ci.austin.tx.us, mike.martinez@ci.austin.tx.us, laura.morrison@ci.austin.tx.us, chris.riley@ci.austin.tx.us, randi.shade@ci.austin.tx.us, bill.spelman@ci.austin.tx.us, and sheryl.cole@ci.austin.tx.us.

THANK YOU for your help!

The FixAustin.org Team

Salmonella Outbreaks Cause Recall

WASHINGTON — A wide range of processed foods – including soups, snack foods, dips and dressings – is being recalled after salmonella was discovered in a flavor-enhancing ingredient.

Food and Drug Administration officials said Thursday that the ingredient, hydrolyzed vegetable protein, is used in thousands of food products, though it was unclear how many of them will be recalled. The FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention said no illnesses or deaths have been reported.

The officials said the recall, which dates to products manufactured since Sept. 17, is expected to expand in the coming days and weeks. It only involves hydrolyzed vegetable protein manufactured by Las Vegas-based Basic Food Flavors Inc., which did not return a call for comment Thursday.

The agency said Thursday it collected and analyzed samples at the Las Vegas facility after one of the company's customers discovered the salmonella, an organism that can cause serious and sometimes fatal infections in young children and others with weakened immune systems. The FDA then confirmed the presence of a strain of salmonella in the company's processing equipment.

Jeffrey Farrar, associate commissioner for food protection at the FDA, said Thursday that many products that contain the ingredient are not dangerous because the risk of salmonella is eliminated after the food has been cooked. Many of the foods involved in the recall are ready-to-eat items that are not cooked by the consumer.

"At this time we believe the risk to consumers is very low," Farrar said.

A list of more than 50 recalled foods on the FDA Web site includes several dips manufactured by T. Marzetti, Sweet Maui Onion potato chips manufactured by Tim's Cascade Snacks, Tortilla Soup mix made by Homemade Gourmet and several prepackaged "Follow Your Heart" tofu meals manufactured by Earth Island.

The FDA said the contamination was discovered by a new tracking system implemented to improve tracing of foodborne illnesses.

Department of Ag Whistleblower speaks on CNN

A Department of Agriculture veterinarian alleges officials at the agency failed to act on reports of illegal and unsafe slaughterhouse practices and just didn't want to deal with the trouble.

"They said there was no way that I could have seen what I actually did see. In the end, they told me I either had to transfer or I would be terminated. I was told to immediately leave the plant, to never come back, " Dr. Dean Wyatt testified on Capitol Hill today about one such incident.

Wyatt said he saw clear violations of food safety violations, such as butchering of calves that were too weak or sick to stand.

When meat from sick animals gets in the food supply that's how you can get sick. Food-borne illnesses cost the U.S. $152 billion a year, according to a new study released today by a former Food and Drug Administration economist.

The research suggests 76 million food-related illnesses each year, leading to 325,000 hospitalizations and 5,000 deaths.

Eating Locally won't save the Planet ... and here's why

From Forbes Magazine - 2007 (emphasis added is mine)

Buy local, shrink the distance food travels, save the planet. The locavore movement has captured a lot of fans. To their credit, they are highlighting the problems with industrialized food. But a lot of them are making a big mistake. By focusing on transportation, they overlook other energy-hogging factors in food production.

Take lamb. A 2006 academic study (funded by the New Zealand government) discovered that it made more environmental sense for a Londoner to buy lamb shipped from New Zealand than to buy lamb raised in the U.K. This finding is counterintuitive--if you're only counting food miles. But New Zealand lamb is raised on pastures with a small carbon footprint, whereas most English lamb is produced under intensive factory-like conditions with a big carbon footprint. This disparity overwhelms domestic lamb's advantage in transportation energy.

New Zealand lamb is not exceptional. Take a close look at water usage, fertilizer types, processing methods and packaging techniques and you discover that factors other than shipping far outweigh the energy it takes to transport food. One analysis, by Rich Pirog of the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, showed that transportation accounts for only 11% of food's carbon footprint. A fourth of the energy required to produce food is expended in the consumer's kitchen. Still more energy is consumed per meal in a restaurant, since restaurants throw away most of their leftovers.

Locavores argue that buying local food supports an area's farmers and, in turn, strengthens the community. Fair enough. Left unacknowledged, however, is the fact that it also hurts farmers in other parts of the world. The U.K. buys most of its green beans from Kenya. While it's true that the beans almost always arrive in airplanes--the form of transportation that consumes the most energy--it's also true that a campaign to shame English consumers with small airplane stickers affixed to flown-in produce threatens the livelihood of 1.5 million sub-Saharan farmers.

Another chink in the locavores' armor involves the way food miles are calculated. To choose a locally grown apple over an apple trucked in from across the country might seem easy. But this decision ignores economies of scale. To take an extreme example, a shipper sending a truck with 2,000 apples over 2,000 miles would consume the same amount of fuel per apple as a local farmer who takes a pickup 50 miles to sell 50 apples at his stall at the green market. The critical measure here is not food miles but apples per gallon.

The one big problem with thinking beyond food miles is that it's hard to get the information you need. Ethically concerned consumers know very little about processing practices, water availability, packaging waste and fertilizer application. This is an opportunity for watchdog groups. They should make life-cycle carbon counts available to shoppers.

This is a simplistic analysis. Obviously buying local from a factory farm isn't helping change how food grows. Searching and buying local from farmers who raise grass-fed/pasture raised animals does....

Until our food system becomes more transparent, there is one thing you can do to shrink the carbon footprint of your dinner: Take the meat off your plate. No matter how you slice it, it takes more energy to bring meat, as opposed to plants, to the table. It takes 6 pounds of grain to make a pound of chicken and 10 to 16 pounds to make a pound of beef. That difference translates into big differences in inputs. It requires 2,400 liters of water to make a burger and only 13 liters to grow a tomato. A majority of the water in the American West goes toward the production of pigs, chickens and cattle.

The average American eats 273 pounds of meat a year. Give up red meat once a week and you'll save as much energy as if the only food miles in your diet were the distance to the nearest truck farmer.

If you want to make a statement, ride your bike to the farmer's market. If you want to reduce greenhouse gases, become a vegetarian.

Well stated indeed.

Vegan Cheeze

There is much to be said for vegan cheese. Most of it bad. I've tried several different types over the years and been sadly disappointed by most of them, BUT if you want to get to try some pretty decent vegan cheese, Chicago Soy Diary makes a vegan alternative called Teese. They're giving away free product. All you have to do is go here give them your e mail address and they give you a coupon you can print and take to your favourite purveyor of all things vegan.

Religious Group wants to Stone Killer Whale to Death

From the Huffington Post:

The American Family Association, a religious right group, is urging that Tillikum (Tilly), the killer whale that killed a trainer at SeaWorld Orlando, be put down, preferably by stoning. Citing Tilly's history of violent altercations, the group is slamming SeaWorld for not listening to Scripture in how to deal with the animal:
Says the ancient civil code of Israel, "When an ox gores a man or woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner shall not be liable." (Exodus 21:28)

However, the group is going further and laying the blame for the trainer's death directly at the feet of Chuck Thompson, the curator in charge of animal behavior, because, according to Scripture,
But, the Scripture soberly warns, if one of your animals kills a second time because you didn't kill it after it claimed its first human victim, this time you die right along with your animal. To use the example from Exodus, if your ox kills a second time, "the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:29)

SeaWorld has no plans to execute Tilly.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

I've said this before and I'll say it again, as long as people continue to treat captive wild animals like domesticated ones, this will continue to happen. Remember ... they are still WILD animals and can and will kill.

Animal Stewardship

I didn't write this but I feel that this is a very important message in dealing with animal advocacy:

I hope animal advocates will allocate a lot more resources to farmed animal issues because 99 percent of exploited animals are dying to be eaten. Here are some things I've learned about practical advocacy. Nothing is cheaper than teaching by example. Since we are the ambassadors for animals and people don't separate the message from the messenger, we need to be and look like the kind of people other people will want to be and look like - "he looks great and he's vegan!"

I used to say I would "die" for animals but wasn't even willing to wear a nice shirt for animals - my identity was more important to me than being an effective advocate. To be effective we need to be as close to other people as we can. Lecturing on diglycerides to people who are gnawing on an animal's leg bone, giving them lists of 100 ingredients to boycott, is not effective. We should applaud people for even small steps, which for them may be big steps, like being vegetarian 3 days a week or choosing a "free-range" egg over a battery-hen's egg. Imagine if we could bring each person down from consuming 300 eggs a year to 200 - what a downturn for the egg industry! At the same time, we should not encourage people to substitute one animal for another - that's not progress. Here's a list of some of the cheapest, easiest ways to promote veganism:
* Leafleting on busy street corners and campuses.
* Letters to the editor and op-eds.
* Library displays including free literature: many libraries are delighted to have attractive free displays.
* Feed-Ins - choose a place to feed people delicious vegan "chicken nuggets," say, and bring the box.
* Restaurant Outreach: going to restaurants and getting one or more vegan meals on the menu; getting your local deli to carry mock turkey and ham; getting the meat distributor to carry mock meats to receptive outlets. These are all things that COK has done, and does, success-fully in Washington DC. It works better than picketing the meat distributor.
* Put videos on cable access: it's usually free and people watch!

It's important to show people exactly what happens to animals as a result of meat, dairy, and egg consumption. Even if we don't do undercover investigations ourselves, we should use the footage that COK and other groups provide. We must show people that meat means misery. The least we can do is to bear witness. As I lie in my comfortable bed at night, I think of the hens on wire mesh floors with no comfort ever. People should know exactly why we are so adamant about standing up for animals.

Eating Liberally

If you read my blog even somewhat routinely, you'll see that I've not been posting a lot lately. Well friends ... there's a reason. Myself and my friend are starting a local chapter of Eating Liberally. If you're not familiar with them, you can check them out here. Right now there are only 4 chapters in the US, we'll be making #5. We're going to focus on things like ethical eating, promoting farmers markets, attempting to connect veggie/vegan friends and organizations ... oh yeah and eating lots of good veggie/vegan food. I'll be pitching the group on here and on twitter once the group is up and live. Stay tuned!

More about breeding Pain Free Animals

(It seems that I'm not the only one outraged at this idea. This is from a blog called Animal Sanctuary)

Washington University philosopher and vegetarian, Adam Shriver, in Neuroethics proposes that if society is unwilling to shift to a vegetarian diet then nonhuman animals should be genetically modified to fit our cognitive dissonance over eating them. Specifically, an argument is made that we could down a guilt-free slab of cow flesh if we just made sure the cow felt no pain. "NewScientist" recently published an article discussing the issue.

Pain is an integral aspect of human and nonhuman life. It is one way in which we relate and react to the world around us. But it is not the only way nor is it, in our view, the most important way.

Eliminating pain in farmed animals does not eliminate the horror of cutting a life short for a moment of gustatory pleasure. It does not address the rich, intricate social and emotional worlds of farmed animals. In fact, it further reduces them to simple, sensory beings who have no other moral worth than how much pain they feel.

Look at this picture of Summer and Freedom. This is a moment. This is a connection being made, a touch, togetherness. They are not reaching out to one another because of nociceptors or synapses, they are doing so because it is part of being bovine. It is who they are and how they relate to each other. Even if they could not feel pain, this moment would have occurred. They would still groom one another, frolick in the fields, seek out each other's companionship, call to one another. Nothing about who they are would change, so why would our perception magically shift from discomfort at ending their lives to a strange joy at comfortably being able to eat their flesh?

Or take Arturo and Cleo. Their lives are filled with a language we only vaguely understand. He is unwavering in his patience with Cleo and so many other hens. When faced with a new, young hen, he did not pick on her as so many of the other hens and roosters did but instead called her over for some of his food. He knows what camaraderie and sharing means, even if it is strictly from an avian perspective. Cleo revels in dust baths and sun bathes and cavorting with her friends. These behaviors and feelings do not cease because pain sensation stops. Their desire to retain their light, their life does not go away because pain is not experienced. They (and us) have so many enriching experiences that have little to do with physical hurt.

These are two small examples of how farmed animals are more than just pain reflexes. To think that by removing their natural, physical experience of pain means they stop feeling joy, stop talking with their kin, stop forming relationships, stop bickering, stop wanting to live is the height of arrogance on our part. It would not excuse their slaughter. The reality still remains - we do not need their flesh, milk or eggs to survive. We just do not. Let's stop trying to make it easier on our conscience to kill these animals and start directing that into positive energy, into doing something good for them and us - choosing a plant-based diet.

Removing the Human from Humanity

This is from the Huffington Post:

The New York Times had a very interesting Op-Ed Friday, which took an unusual approach to the concern that factory farms are inhumane. Adam Shriver, a doctoral student in the philosophy-neuroscience-psychology program at Washington University, makes the argument that the key to raising more humane meat isn't changing the methods by which they are raised, but to genetically engineer them so they feel less pain from their conditions.
We are most likely stuck with factory farms, given that they produce most of the beef and pork Americans consume. But it is still possible to reduce the animals' discomfort -- through neuroscience. Recent advances suggest it may soon be possible to genetically engineer livestock so that they suffer much less.

Shriver's Op-Ed raises several questions. Is the most appalling part about factory farms -- where animals are fed unnatural diets, live in filthy conditions, and are subject to preemptive antibiotics -- is that they are suffering? Confined Animal Feedlot Operations are responsible for huge amounts of waste, which threaten groundwater, air quality and can pose public health risks. Meat production is also responsible for more greenhouse gas emissions than all modes of transportation. Would genetically engineering animals so they suffer less help factory farms flourish, without addressing the environmental risks they pose? Is genetically engineering our food supply to appeal to a moral conscience about suffering appropriate?

____________________

Forgive the rant ahead:

Let me tell you who a question like this is aimed at, people like Anthony Bourdain, like the people on Food Network, like Foodies or anyone else who wants to be insulated from the fact that eating animals is blantently ONE word. MURDER. If you want to feel good about eating food, guess what, raise it yourself OR buy from vendors or farmers that you know, but DO not try to get me to sign on to a idiotic idea like this. This question keeps appearing, so my faithful readers, I see it coming. Monsanto will try to do it within the next 15 years or Cargill or Smithfield Farms but of course, if that happens HOW are they going to prove it to us? By slaughtering an animal in public so that we can see that we've removed ALL traces of pain? What about the fear? Can you remove that too? Then what about our consciousness in dealing with the fact that these are LIVING, BREATHING, SENTIENT beings. This idea disgusts me and there is NO higher level of distaste that I can issue towards it.

What Is Love

(From Change.org)

A recent poll of 24,000 people in 23 countries showed that 1 in 5 adults would choose their pets over their partners on Valentine's Day. But despite our strength in numbers, animal lovers, especially activists, are often treated like traitors by those who aren't "animal people."

We're accused of caring for animals at the expense of caring for people, because our passion for animal issues allegedly detracts from all of the humans in need. But choosing to spend a Hallmark Holiday with your loyal nonhuman companion instead of your spouse isn't the same as turning your back on your own species.

Here are seven reasons why animal welfare is human welfare:

1) Animal abuse is never just animal abuse. It's an early indicator of child abuse, domestic violence, and other sociopathic behaviors. Not only is animal abuse a warning sign, but it's often directly used to threaten or intimidate a person, such as pets who are harmed as a form of psychological abuse in domestic violence situations.

2) Factory farming is a major contributor to climate change. Animal agriculture is responsible for as much as 50 percent of greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans. A significant reduction in animal consumption and better conditions for the remaining farm animals will have a huge impact in stabilizing the climate, which (in case you missed it) affects the future of human civilization as we know it.

3) Animal testing is outdated. The sooner the scientific community stops re-creating ineffective, inhumane animal tests and starts investing in non-animal research methods, the sooner we'll have human-relevant results.

4) Pet owners are major players in the economy. A $45 billion industry is a big slice of the economy, and it's one that keeps growing. That means job security and community development. Pet consumers also have the purchase power to have a positive influence on the market, such as helping drive a green economy.

5) Protecting wildlife is protecting the planet. There's a certain balance to the world we inhabit, where predators and prey keep each other's population in balance, and natural areas (a.k.a. habitats) keep global warming and other natural disasters at bay. As we drive species to extinction, we lose a piece of what makes the world inhabitable for humans.

6) Animals are an important part of your community. Love 'em or hate 'em, your community is full of animals. Irresponsible pet owners are a drain on municipal budgets through animal control and a threat to public health with disease and dog bite risks. Ineffective laws, such as breed specific legislation, are costly to the community, in terms of both public health risks and finances. It's also expensive to care for animals in shelters. So, the advocates that push for responsible pet ownership and animal adoption are making your community a better place to live.

7) Animals make people happy. Companion animals have been proven to reduce stress and relieve depression. The role that pets play in happiness is more than just a matter of mood; it's about quality of life. Domestic violence victims will delay seeking help for fear of putting their pets in danger. When natural disaster strikes, restoring animals is a major step toward restoring lives, whether you're in New Orleans, where Hurricane Katrina survivors needed the emotional support of their pets after losing their homes, or you're in Haiti, where earthquake victims rely on livestock for food and income.

For extra credit, I'll refer back to a post on Malcolm Gladwell's essays on the human-canine connection. Gladwell (like others before him) has written several fascinating articles about interactions with dogs that provide valuable insight into the human condition.

For the 21 percent of the population choosing to spend today with their companion animals instead of a spouse, and for the untold number whose hearts are with the suffering animals of the world, happy Valentine's Day.