Vegetarian fare at White House save for the prawns

November 24th, 2009 SindhToday

Washington, Nov 25 (IANS) Save for an option of green curry prawns, President Barack Obama offered his guests an all-vegetarian fare at his first state dinner in honour of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh who one newspaper had described as an “abstemious vegetarian.”

Dubbed by some as Washington’s most elite social event since his Jan 20 inauguration, the Tuesday dinner also featured fresh arugula from the White House garden and entertainment by Oscar winners A.R. Rahman and Jennifer Hudson.

The food and wines on the menu:

- Potato and eggplant salad
- White House arugula with onion seed vinaigrette
- 2008 sauvignon blanc, Modus Operandi, Napa Valley, Calif.
- Red lentil soup with fresh cheese
- 2006 Riesling, Brooks “Ara,” Willamette Valley, Ore.
- Roasted potato dumplings with tomato chutney, chick peas and okra or green curry prawns, caramelized salsify with smoked collard greens and coconut-aged basmati
- 2007 grenache, Beckmen Vineyards, Santa Ynez, Calif.
- Pumpkin pie tart, pear tatin, whipped cream and caramel sauce
- Sparkling chardonnay, Thibaut Janisson Brut, Monticello, Va.
- Petits fours and coffee
- Cashew brittle
- Pecan pralines
- Passion fruit and vanilla gelees
- Chocolate-dipped fruit [LM1]

.

Source: http://www.sindhtoday.net/news/1/75213.htm

.

FYI: Prawns = Shrimp.

.

Feeding a More Diverse Market

Aaron Houston for The New York Times
FLAVORS OF HOME Evergreen Farm, owned by Sun Yi and Chong Il Kim, grows Korean pears on trees supported by trellises.

By KEVIN COYNE
Published: August 21, 2009


Hamilton Township




Aaron Houston for The New York Times












Aaron Houston for The New York Times
It also produces white peaches.











THE pear trees are trained to grow up and over the long rows of trellises that stretch across this old soybean farm near Trenton, and as they have matured in the dozen years since Chong Il Kim planted them, they have formed a leafy arch just tall enough to let his maroon Ford pickup pass beneath.

Mr. Kim, 59, bounced gently along behind the wheel one recent morning, the shady aisle reaching ahead of him like the nave of a church. The round, green Korean pears he was inspecting were approaching the size of tennis balls. In a matter of weeks, they would be worth as much as $3 apiece to fans of Asian fruit, who find nothing to match their flavor in domestic varieties.

“Looks good so far,” Mr. Kim said, and when he reached the end of one corridor of pears, he turned and drove slowly down another, enveloped by his crop. From the distance beyond a tall tree line rose a steady hum: the river of traffic along the New Jersey Turnpike, which marks the western border of his 140-acre orchard. “This is good here, better than California.”

Elsewhere on Evergreen Farm, other fruits were ripening, too. The plums were ready to pick, and the season’s first customers had arrived for them the previous Sunday. The peaches would soon be ripe, then the grapes and the apples. But the pears are the marquee fruit here — covering about 70 percent of the orchard and, since it opened to the public three years ago, luring a steady stream of mostly Asian customers with the chance to pick for themselves a taste of their old home.

“When someone’s going to eat one for the first time, I say, ‘Just close your eyes and imagine you’re tasting a melon from another planet,’” said Dan Ward, a fruit specialist with the Rutgers New Jersey Agricultural Experiment Station. “‘Sprightly’ is the word I sometimes use to describe the sensation of that first bite. It releases a lot of juice in your mouth.”

Korean pears are rounder, greener, crisper, sweeter, juicier (“sparkly” is another adjective Mr. Ward likes) than the more familiar varieties, and closer in texture to an apple. They are also much costlier: a serve-to-guests luxury, not a brown-bag-lunch commodity, the kind of specialty crop for a specialty market that has altered New Jersey’s agricultural landscape in recent years.

Every license plate in New Jersey is a reminder of the state’s historical role as the market garden for New York and Philadelphia, before suburbanization gobbled up the fields, and refrigerated transport allowed produce to travel here from distant locations. Sweet corn and tomatoes still define summer in the state, but they have been joined by cilantro, bok choy, calabaza, jalapeños and Mr. Kim’s pears.

“Those are the kind of crops that really are well suited to New Jersey,” Mr. Ward said. “Niche-marketed crops with high value that really have an advantage in being produced locally.”

As the state’s population has diversified, so has its diet and its produce-buying, according to a three-year federally funded study about ethnic agriculture by a group of Rutgers researchers. “One of the surprising results of our survey was that the four key groups, which represent several million people on the East Coast, spend much more of their food dollar on fresh produce compared to the average American,” said Bill Sciarappa, a Rutgers extension agent in Monmouth County, referring to the shopping habits of those with Puerto Rican, Mexican, Asian Indian and Chinese ancestry.

And they’ll go farther to get it. “They’ll travel 20 miles to get their specific fruit or vegetable,” Mr. Sciarappa said.

When the pears are ready at Evergreen Farm, by early to mid September, the customers soon follow, Korean and Chinese mostly, from as far as Virginia and Connecticut. Asked how many pears the farm sells in a year, the general manager, Alexander Joo, said, “That’s confidential.”

“A lot of people come,” said Mr. Joo, 39, a former Seventh-day Adventist minister. (Mr. Kim is also a Seventh-day Adventist, so the farm is closed on Saturdays, the denomination’s Sabbath.) “They come a long way to be here, so they bring food, have picnics.”

Mr. Kim grew up on his father’s orchard an hour south of Seoul, and came to the United States in 1986 in search of more land and new markets. “Too cold,” he said of the first place he tried, Middletown, N.Y. “For Korean pears, it can’t be too cold.”

Shamong, in Burlington County, was more hospitable. Mr. Kim and his wife, Sun Yi, spent 10 years on 10 acres there, planting some of the first Korean pear trees in the state, before shifting the operation to this Mercer County community in 1997. New Jersey no longer budgets enough to fund comprehensive crop counts, but Mr. Ward of Rutgers estimates that there are 200 acres of Asian pear in the state, with more than half of them at Evergreen, the largest grower and — on Sundays in the last weeks of summer and the first of fall, when the cars and buses start streaming in from the neighboring Turnpike — certainly the busiest.

“Almost harvest time,” Mr. Kim said as he bumped slowly beneath another verdant arbor of pears, and the river of traffic rolled by in the distance.

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

A sampling of farms that grow produce favored by different ethnic groups and that allow customers to pick their own. Always call ahead to see what’s ready.


EVERGREEN FARM
1023 Yardville-Allentown Road, Hamilton Township; evergreenfarm.us; (609) 259-0029. Closed Saturdays.
Korean pears, Korean peaches and grapes, Chinese cabbage, jujube fruit.


DEWOLF’S FARM
58 West Colliers Mill Road, New Egypt; (609) 758-2424.
Bitter melons, cilantro, Asian long beans, Thai peppers, jute leaves, Thai eggplants, bitter balls (African eggplant), sweet potato leaves.


HALLOCK’S U-PICK FARM
38 Fischer Road, New Egypt; http://www.hallocksupick.com/; (609) 758-8847.
Jamaican hot peppers, bitter balls, kittley (Jamaican eggplant), water greens, sweet potato leaves, jute leaves.



Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/23/nyregion/23dinenj.html

.

Do Grown-Ups Really Need to Drink Milk?

By Ari LeVaux, AlterNet. Posted July 22, 2009.

Despite what the food pyramid says, we don't need milk after we're babies. Maybe it's time to wean ourselves from cows and grow up

Should grown-ups be drinking milk at all, much less the milk of another species?

Mammals are named after the milk-producing glands that developed as a way to feed babies, but only humans continue drinking mammary secretions after infancy -- and no other species drinks the milk of another. Today, dairy consumption is at the center of several interconnected social, economic, and health crises. Maybe it's time to reconsider our relationship with dairy.

"Every time the milk truck pulls in, more money leaves the farm," says Philip Ranny, a seventh-generation Vermont dairy farmer so in debt he's decided to sell his herd. Across the country, farmers are going bankrupt, cashing in their IRAs, and selling their herds to slaughter because a crash in the price of milk has left them earning less for their milk than it costs to produce it.

And while wholesale prices have dropped by half, retail prices have remained relatively steady. That's been good business for distributors like Dean Foods, which controls about 70 percent of the milk production in Vermont. Its dairy subsidiary reported $182 million in operating income in the first quarter of 2009, 39% more than it earned in the first quarter of 2008, when wholesale milk prices were strong.

Increased supply and decreased demand are both weighing on the price. One factor that affects both sides of the equation is rBGH, a genetically engineered hormone that increases milk production when injected into cows. While rBGH has helped increase supply by boosting production, it's hurt demand by shutting export markets like Canada and the EU, which don't allow milk from rBGH cows for health concerns.

So controversial even Monsanto got out of the business (selling the patent to drug maker Eli Lilly), rBGH causes increased levels of carcinogenic Insulin-like Growth Factor (IGF-1) in milk. Due to domestic consumer rejection of rBGH milk, many retailers, like Starbucks and Chipotle's, have pledged not to use rBGH in their products. When large distributers pool milk from rBGH and non-rBGH cows, it disqualifies the whole lot from export.

Public fear of rBGH has helped sales of organic milk, which is required by law to be rBGH-free. But organic dairies have problems of their own.

About 20 large industrial dairies, milking 1,500-7,000 cows each, produce roughly 40% of the nation's organic milk. Under the Bush administration, USDA repeatedly looked the other way as large corporate agribusinesses violated federal standards while jumping on the organic bandwagon.

The poster child for this regulatory failure is Aurora Farms, which operates five factory farms in Colorado and Texas and supplies the store-brand organic milk to Wal-Mart, Target, Safeway, Costco and other national chains. In 2007, Aurora was found to have "willfully" violated numerous organic regulations by USDA investigators, but the company appallingly mild sanctions -- including zero dollars in fines -- from USDA appointees who rejected staff recommendations calling for revocation of Aurora's organic certification.

On July 16 in West Salem, Wisconsin, nearly 200 organic dairy farmers and supporters gathered at the La Crosse County Fair to grab the attention of one of the fair's marquee attendees, USDA chief Tom Vilsack. They urged Vilsack to take action against factory farms that are saturating the organic market with non-organic milk, taking advantage of organic's price advantage without incurring the expenses associated by following the rules -- like feeding certified organic grain to their cattle.

"I commit to you that we will enforce the rules," Vilsack told the crowd. But even if Vilsack becomes the guardian angel of organic dairy, the elephant in the room that nobody wants to talk about will continue farting its dairy-fueled stink-bombs.

A recent episode of the Diane Rehm Show, a nationally broadcast left-leaning radio program, assembled a politician, a dairy industry advocate, a farm advocate, and a USDA undersecretary to discuss problems facing dairy. Most of the conversation focused on federally-funded bailout options for the dairy industry, but one caller made a futile attempt to frame the problem in a larger context. Voicing concerns that milk isn't good for adults and that dairy production creates a lot of greenhouse gas, she was disconnected mid-sentence.

After a moment of audible snickers among the guests, Ruth Saunders of the International Dairy Foods Association gave a limp response: "the dietary guidelines for Americans have always had as one of their key recommendations three daily servings [of dairy]."

Saunders didn't mention that these recommendations largely exist because of intensive lobbying efforts by organizations like hers. But scientific research that's not in the pocket of Big Dairy tells a different story. According to the Journal of the American Dietetic Association, "approximately 75% of the world's population loses the ability to completely digest lactose after infancy." And Harvard researcher Ganmaa Davaasambuu, M.D., Ph.D., has found that dairy intake correlates with ovarian cancer, testicular cancer, prostate cancer, breast cancer, and other so-called "hormone-dependent" tumors because of the high levels of estrogen in cows' milk -- especially in milk from pregnant cows, which are routinely milked in large dairy operations.

Meanwhile, the disconnected caller had a valid point about the cattle industry's greenhouse gas emissions, which constitute 2% of the national output. When fed soy-rich diets, as most large dairy herds are, cows belch methane, which traps 20 times more atmospheric heat than carbon dioxide.

While the lifestyle-changing crisis afflicting dairy farmers is creating heartbreaking stories, perhaps for the greater good this is an opportunity in disguise. There are other ways to make a living off the land, and instead of federal price supports, maybe that money should be spent on re-tooling dairy farms. Despite what the food pyramid says, we don't need milk after we're babies. Maybe it's time to wean ourselves from cow tits and grow up.

If not quitting cold turkey, perhaps we should turn it down a notch or two and consider limiting dairy products to special occasions, rather than as a daily staple. If we return the dairy industry to it's small-scale, alfalfa-fed roots, where producers have personal and respectful relationships with their animals and make fine artisanal products like cheese or yogurt, perhaps there's a place for such delicacies. A splash of cream in your coffee, or a pad of butter in your mushrooms, might not kill the world. But maybe the days of standing in front of the open fridge chugging milk from the bottle will come to an end.

Source: http://www.alternet.org/healthwellness/141469/do_grown-ups_really_need_to_drink_milk/?page=entire

.

Chocolate, Cheese, Meat, and Sugar -- Physically Addictive Foods

Neal Barnard MD discusses the science behind food additions. Willpower is not to blame: chocolate, cheese, meat, and sugar release opiate-like substances. Dr. Barnard also discusses how industry, aided by government, exploits these natural cravings, pushing us to eat more and more unhealthy foods. A plant-based (vegan) diet is the solution to avoid many of these problems. Neal Barnard is the founder of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM).

'>http://

No rushing a good vegan restaurant

Owners Nira Minniefield (left) and Eshe Armah stand in front of their soon-to-be-opened Natural Life Café on South Arlington Street.

MARIA ZILBERMAN
Daily Record Business Writer
June 8, 2009 7:59 PM


The café was scheduled to open last week, but the owners postponed the debut so they could finish acquiring the necessary building permits, a process that might have gone faster had they chosen to take out loans, Armah said. They hope to be open within a month, she said.

However, the self-described “eco-entrepreneur moms” have opted to follow what they call their “lunch money plan,” squeezing any spare money they have into the project and calling on friends and family when they need help with manual labor, such as laying tile and grout work.

So far, they have invested $10,000 into the project, a number that could double before the restaurant is fully operating, Armah said.

“We’re totally doing this grassroots. We have events and cater
events when we have higher expenses,” she said.

Minniefield also continues to work full-time as a computer engineer with Allegis Group in Hanover.

The restaurant is an outgrowth of Lunch by Nature Inc., a catering service started seven years ago by Minniefield when she became disturbed by the amount of fried food pumped at children by school cafeterias.

A mother of three, she had some success catering, but has not reached her long-term goal of taking over as a school lunch provider.

Now, the goal is becoming more attainable because the café will house the commercial grade kitchen necessary to do school catering, Minniefield said.

“We want to be open for the start of the school year because we want to start courting principals and letting them know we offer school services,” she said.

Though the restaurant owners do not have a background in food, both are family cooks and have an equally important resource available to them: their children, who serve as taste testers.

“Kids are our target customers, and we’re just bringing their parents along for the ride,” Minniefield said.

The Natural Life Café began publicity efforts on May 24, selling their signature apple lemonade, Omni and Herbi sandwiches, and grilled corn on the cob, at the Sowebohemian Arts Festival, an annual festival in the Hollins Market neighborhood.

Darren Brown, co-owner of Sweet Tooth Dessert Shop on Hollins Street, said he expects the café to fill a lunch-time void in the area, which lacks a healthy food venue, he said. The Bistro, the restaurant that used to be in Natural Life’s space, was also a locally owned business.

“The good thing is that I know people enjoyed having a nice little neighborhood restaurant like that,” he said.

Though they have concerns about opening a restaurant in a tough economy, the pair said they are confident they are filling a need in the Hollins Park neighborhood and are thinking of ways to make their food affordable to as many people as possible, such as through a dollar menu, they said.

The restaurant’s mission extends past providing healthy food that children like. The owners are seeking out environmentally and socially conscious suppliers, such as Vanguard Ranch in Gordsonville, Va., which will be the café’s source of produce. They are also planning to host rejuvenation retreats, a series of outdoor day or weekend trips for families.

“It’s about building relationships among human beings and being good to one another,” said Minniefield, echoing the restaurant’s motto, “Real food changes people.”

While the cost of opening a restaurant can vary drastically, the passion behind Natural Life is also necessary for its survival, said Paul Hartgen, president and CEO of the Restaurant Association of Maryland.

“If they made the choice to open a business now, they’re probably looking at everything with a much different set of lenses than someone who opened five years ago,” said Hartgen, who emphasized the importance of cautiously deciding how money is allocated.

The restaurant will be open for breakfast and lunch and will serve wraps, soups and salads ranging from $3.50 to $7. It will feature indoor seating for 20, as well as outdoor seating once permits are acquired.

Source:http://www.mddailyrecord.com/article.cfm?id=11689&type=UTTM

.

.

.

The Food Pyramid

The Vegan Food Pyramid

.

.

.

Where's the Beef? Ghent Goes Vegetarian

By EBEN HARRELL Eben Harrell – Wed May 27, 12:10 pm ET


Last year, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, suggested that the most useful step ordinary citizens could take to help combat climate change would be to stop eating meat. In Belgium, an entire town is taking his advice to heart. The Flemish city of Ghent has designated every Thursday as "Veggiedag" - Veggie Day - calling for meat-free meals to be served in schools and public buildings, and encouraging vegetarianism among citizens by promoting vegetarian eateries and offering advice on how to follow a herbivorous diet.


Veggie Day is not compulsory, says the city's vice-mayor, Tom Balthazar, because such a draconian measure would be impossible to enforce, even in environmentally friendly Ghent, a picturesque town of 230,000 where bicycles lay scattered against spired churches in the largest car-free city center in Belgium. "We wanted our goal to be easily achievable - it's not hard to skip meat one day a week," he says. "And we wanted it to be something the population could rally behind. If you give people the correct information about meat, it becomes an easy ethical decision." (Watch an interview with PETA founder Ingrid Newkirk.)


According to the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization, meat production accounts for 18% of annual greenhouse-gas emissions - more than transportation, which accounts for roughly 14%. Each year, millions of acres of rain forest are cleared for cattle ranchers and suppliers of animal feed, further accelerating climate change. Then there are the urgent human-health issues: the world feeds much of its grain to cattle and other animals even as millions of people starve. Those wealthy enough to consume fatty animal products are themselves at higher risk of certain health problems, including heart disease and some cancers. (See pictures of the U.N.'s efforts to feed the people of Uganda.)


For these reasons, says Tobias Leenaert, co-director of Ethical Vegetarian Alternative, a nonprofit funded by the regional Flemish government, "it's almost impossible to be against meat reduction. You can argue against vegetarianism, but not against cutting back on meat." That's a view that is gaining traction among those who hope to reshape meat consumption from an animal rights issue into an environmental and public health one. The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore, for example, recently spearheaded a "meatless Mondays" campaign in which it and 28 other public health schools run local outreach programs that promote a meat-free start to the week. Germany's federal environment agency issued an advisory earlier this year urging Germans to return to prewar norms of eating meats only on special occasions. And Leenaert says that since Ghent's Veggie Day was launched on May 13, environmental health officers from several other cities - including SÃo Paulo, with a population of 13 million - have expressed interest in mimicking the program.


But instituting such well-intentioned programs can be difficult, as I discovered during a trip to Ghent on its most recent Veggie Day on May 21. While most restaurants owners and residents I spoke to had heard of Veggie Day, few had any plans to embrace the concept. A local rib shack, Amadeus, was doing brisk business, and many people openly ate hot dogs on the street. Wim De Kinder, owner of the upscale Traiteur Grimod delicatessen, said he tried to introduce vegetarian fare two years ago after learning of the environmental cost of livestock production, but he couldn't shift enough product to make it profitable. "I can't be expected to make a loss for the sake of principle, however worthy," he says. (Read "Should We All Be Vegetarians?")


And it's clear that Ghent still has some ways to go in its promotion of a healthy lifestyle, even among the city's enlightened vegetarians. "I already follow a vegetarian diet for health reasons," insists Mareije Vanneck, 29, as she sucks on a cigarette. Lees Molenschot, a 64-year-old pensioner sitting in a local pub, says he eats only one meal a day, and always without meat, before adding, "I start out with a coffee in the morning, then five or six beers during the day, maybe some JÄgermeister, and then at 6 I make a healthy meal of vegetables in olive oil."


But Leenaert of Ethical Vegetarian Alternative says Ghent's public education program is still young. The city council has yet to mail out the 90,000 leaflets it has printed for residents explaining the global benefits of reducing meat consumption, and Veggie Day has yet to roll out in local schools, which will happen when they reconvene in September. He points out that there are historical antecedents for meat-free days, and that it is only recently that people have come to expect meat to be a daily ritual. For centuries in Catholic Europe, for example, citizens forsook meat on Fridays, fast days and Lent. Leenaert, a committed vegan, says governments may have to lay down such restrictions in the coming years as more people in the developing world become wealthy enough to eat meat, but room for livestock diminishes. He hopes, however, that the joint challenges of feeding the world and tackling climate change can be met without curbs on personal choice. "I have big dreams. I dream not of restrictions, but of a critical mass of enlightened citizens who become vegetarians by choice. Maybe that dream starts here in Ghent."


Source: http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20090527/wl_time/08599190095800


P.S. Bolds added

13 Breathtaking Effects of Cutting Back on Meat

By Kathy Freston, AlterNet. Posted April 22, 2009.

The meat industry contributes to land degradation, climate change, air pollution, water shortage and pollution, and loss of biodiversity.

My first post on the effect of eating meat on the environment provoked quite a bit of discussion, so in honor of Earth Day, I thought I should follow up with more information about how our natural resources (e.g., air, water, and soil) are depleted and devastated by animal agriculture.

Of course, Earth Day is also a good time to remember that animal agriculture only exists at astronomical levels because people are purchasing vast quantities of chicken, beef, pork, and fish. The market for meat (i.e., we, the consumers) drives the depletion and destruction.

Excrement produced by chickens, pigs, and other farm animals: 16.6 billion tons per year -- more than a million pounds per second (that's 60 times as much as is produced by the world's human population -- farmed animals produce more waste in one day than the U.S. human population produces in 3 years). This excrement is a major cause of air and water pollution. According to the United Nations: "The livestock sector is... the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, 'dead' zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance and many others."

Water used for farmed animals and irrigating feed crops: 240 trillion gallons per year -- 7.5 million gallons per second (that's enough for every human to take 8 showers a day, or as much as is used by Europe, Africa, and South America combined). According to the UN: "[t]he water used by the sector exceeds 8 percent of the global human water use." As just one example, "[O]n average 990 litres of water are required to produce one litre of milk." So drinking milk instead of tap water requires almost 1,000 times as much water.

Emissions of greenhouse gases from raising animals for food: The equivalent of 7.8 billion tons of carbon dioxide per year, according to the UN report. Concludes the UN: "The livestock sector is... responsible for 18% of greenhouse gas emissions." That's about 40 percent more than all the cars, trucks, planes, trains, and ships in the world combined (transport is 13%). And "The sector emits 37% of anthropogenic methane (with 23 times the global warming potential-or GWP-of CO2)... It emits 65% of anthropogenic nitrous oxide (with 296 times the GWP of CO2). These figures are based on the power of these gases over 100 years; in fact, over 20 years-a more important timeframe for dealing with global warming-methane and nitrous oxide are 72 times and 289 times more warming than CO2. And Dr. Rajendra Pachauri, Chair of the IPCC (which shared the Nobel Peace Prize with Al Gore) has been saying that the 18% figure is probably an underestimate.

It takes more than 11 times as much fossil fuel to make one calorie of animal protein as it does to make one calorie of plant protein.

Soil erosion due to growing livestock feed: 40 billion tons per year (or 6 tons/year for every human being on the planet-of course if you don't eat meat, none of this is attributed to you; if you're in the U.S. where we eat lots more meat than most of the world, your contribution is many times greater than 6 tons/year). About 60% of soil that is washed away ends up in rivers, streams and lakes, making waterways more prone to flooding and to contamination from soil's fertilizers and pesticides. Erosion increases the amount of dust carried by wind, polluting the air and carrying infection and disease.

Land used to raise animals for food: 10 billion acres. According to the UN: "In all, livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of the planet." And "70 percent of previous forested land in the Amazon is occupied by pastures, and feedcrops cover a large part of the remainder." And "About 20 percent of the world's pastures and rangelands, with 73 percent of rangelands in dry areas, have been degraded to some extent, mostly through overgrazing, compaction and erosion created by livestock action."

According to the UN, animal agriculture is a leading case of water pollution. The main water pollutants in the US are sediments and nutrients. Animal agriculture is responsible for 55 percent of the erosion that causes sedimentation, and for a third of the main nutrient pollutants, nitrogen and phosphorous. On top of that, animal agriculture is the source of more than a third of the United States' water pollution from pesticides, and half of its water pollution from antibiotics.

Livestock are also responsible for almost two-thirds of anthropogenic ammonia emissions, which contribute significantly to acid rain and acidification of ecosystems.

Grain and corn raised for livestock feed that could otherwise feed people, according to the UN: 836 million tons per year (note that the more commonly used figure, 758 million tons, is metric). That's more than 7 times the amount used for biofuels and is much more than enough to adequately feed the 1.4 billion humans who are living in dire poverty, and the number doesn't even include the fact that almost all of the global soy crop (about 240 million tons of soy) is also fed to chickens, pigs, and other farmed animals.

An American saves more global warming pollution by going vegan than by switching their car to a hybrid Prius.

Razing the Amazon rainforest for pasture and feed crops: 5 million acres of Amazon per year. Former Amazon rainforest converted to raising animals for food since 1970 is more than 90% of all Amazon deforestation since 1970.

According to the UN: "Indeed, the livestock sector may well be the leading player in the reduction of biodiversity..." And "[l]ivestock now account for about 20 percent of the total terrestrial animal biomass, and the 30 percent of the earth's land surface that they now pre-empt was once habitat for wildlife." And "Conservation International has identified 35 global hotspots for biodiversity, characterized by exceptional levels of plant endemism and serious levels of habitat loss. Of these, 23 are reported to be affected by livestock production. An analysis of the authoritative World Conservation Union (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species shows that most of the world's threatened species are suffering habitat loss where livestock are a factor."

United Nations scientists, in their 408-page indictment of the meat industry, sum up these statistics, pointing out that the meat industry is "one of the ... most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global," including "problems of land degradation, climate change and air pollution, water shortage and water pollution, and loss of biodiversity."

Perhaps it's time to explore vegetarianism. Click here for tips. Happy Eating!

Source: http://www.alternet.org/water/137737/13_breathtaking_effects_of_cutting_back_on_meat/?page=entire

Promote Healthful Living

I beseech you therefore, brethren, by the mercies of God, that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, which is your reasonable service. Rom. 12:1.

It is impossible for a man to present his body a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable to God, while continuing to indulge habits that are depriving him of physical, mental, and moral vigor. Again the apostle says, "Be not conformed to this world: but be ye transformed by the renewing of your mind, that ye may prove what is that good, and acceptable, and perfect, will of God." Rom. 12:2.

We are in a world that is opposed to righteousness or purity of character, and especially to growth in grace. Wherever we look, we see defilement and corruption, deformity and sin. How opposed is all this to the work that must be accomplished in us just previous to receiving the gift of immortality! God's elect must stand untainted amid the corruptions teeming around them in these last days. Their bodies must be made holy, their spirits pure. If this work is to be accomplished, it must be undertaken at once, earnestly and understandingly. The Spirit of God should have perfect control, influencing every action.

The health reform is one branch of the great work which is to fit a people for the coming of the Lord. . . . Men and women cannot violate natural law by indulging depraved appetites and lustful passions, without violating the law of God. Therefore He has permitted the light of health reform to shine upon us, that we may realize the sinfulness...

To make natural law plain, and to urge obedience to it, is a work that accompanies the third angel's message. . . . He [God] designs that the subject shall be agitated, and the public mind deeply stirred to investigate it; for it is impossible for men and women, while under the power of sinful, health-destroying, brain-enervating habits, to appreciate sacred truth. . . .

He who cherishes the light which God has given him upon health reform, has an important aid in the work of becoming sanctified through the truth, and fitted for immortality.

Maranatha, E. G. W., pp. 119.

Vegetarians 'get fewer cancer'

Almost a third of adults in the study were vegetarian

Page last updated at 00:27 GMT, Monday, 16 March 2009

A vegetarian diet may help to protect against cancer, a UK study suggests.

Analysis of data from 52,700 men and women shows that those who did not eat meat had significantly fewer cancers overall than those who did.

But surprisingly, the researchers also found a higher rate of colorectal cancer - a disease linked with eating red meat - among the vegetarians.

Writing in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition the team said the findings were worth looking into.

Although it is widely recommended that people eat five portions of fruit and vegetables a day to reduce their risk of cancer and other diseases, there is very little evidence looking specifically at a vegetarian diet.

It suggests there might be some reduction in cancers in vegetarians and fish-eaters and we need to look carefully at that

Professor Tim Key, study leader

In the latest study, researchers looked at men and women aged 20 to 89 recruited in the UK in the 1990s.

They divided participants into meat-eaters, fish-eaters, vegetarians and vegans.

During follow-up there were fewer cancers than would be expected in the general population - probably because they were a healthier than average group of people.

But there was a significantly lower incidence of all cancers among the fish-eaters and vegetarians compared with the meat eaters.

'Confusion'

For colorectal cancer, however that trend was reversed with vegetarians having a significantly higher incidence of the condition than the other groups.

The researchers were surprised at the finding, which contradicts previous evidence linking eating lots of red meat with the disease.

Study leader Professor Tim Key, a Cancer Research UK epidemiologist at the University of Oxford, said no previous study had looked at diet in this way and there had been a lot of confusion about the issue.

"It's interesting - it suggests there might be some reduction in cancers in vegetarians and fish-eaters and we need to look carefully at that."

He added: "It doesn't support the idea that vegetarians would have lower rates of colorectal cancer and I think it means we need to think more carefully about how meat fits into it."

More work is needed to unpick the links between diet and cancer but such studies are incredibly hard to do, he said.

Dr Joanne Lunn, a senior nutrition scientist at the British Nutrition Foundation, said the findings highlight the fact that cancer is a complex disease and many different lifestyle factors play a part in determining a person's risk.

"An interesting observation was that the vegetarians had a higher rate of colorectal cancer than the meat-eaters.

"When you look at the detail of their diets, the meat-eaters, to which the vegetarians in this group were compared, are eating only moderate amounts of meat each day - well within the recommendations.

"Both groups are also just about meeting the recommendation to eat at least 5 portions of fruits and vegetables a day."

.

Source:http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7942479.stm

.

The Pig and You!

THE PIG AND YOU!

By

Doro Stell, A.R.C.A.

A FEW years ago we lived in a Devon rnarket-town. Our farrner-landlord and his two sons were their own rnilk roundsmen, and one day the farmer told us of the following incident:

Just a little way down the road in which we lived there had stood an old toll-bar cottage and, before it was pulled down, the sole occupant had been an old country woman. She had been in the habit of putting her jug or her basin on the door-step in readiness for the early morning call of the milkman - this, of course, before bottled milk was the regular thing. One day this old woman hailed our landlord as he was passing her garden and told him that she had nearly lost the milk of the day before. It appeared that when she went to get it from the door-step, she found a large rat upside down in the milk. 'E was dead when I pulled 'im out' she said, 'and 'alf the milk 'ad spilled over. But I managed to save enough for me cups of tea.'

Presumably the reaction of readers will be similar to that of our own when this incident was related to us! -

'Ugh! how horrible! Fancy drinking milk which had had nearly the whole body of a rat in it! Makes one squirm to think of it!'

But why squirm? Why feel any repulsion? Why shouldn't the old lady have drunk the milk and eaten even the rat itself?

This article is addressed mainly to those who would be designated 'Christian' but we pray that it will come into the hands of non-Christians or those who are very lukewarm. The above true story, however, is related chiefly for the benefit of Christians who believe God's Word, (the Bible) and in particular for those Christians who say the Scriptural Food Laws are not meant for the present day as we are now under grace and not under law. These good people usually quote such portions of Scripture as these: - 'Unto the pure all things are pure:' (Titus 1:15), 'I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean of itself: but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean.' (Romans 14:14). 'For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.' (Romans 14:17) 'Eat such things as are set before you;' (Luke 10:8), and who cite the dream of St. Peter when he saw the sheet let down from heaven filled with all manner of animals, and was commanded by the Lord, 'Rise, Peter; kill, and eat.' (Acts 10:13) Therefore, to these Christians we repeat why should not the old lady have eaten even the rat itself? If all things are pure, then the rat must be pure. If nothing is unclean of itself, then the rat must be clean and eaten with thanksgiving. There is a flaw in the argument somewhere, is there not? Let us be honest! We know full well that the rat is not pure, that it is not clean rather it is a filthy flea-ridden scavenger, living in sewers and eating from cesspools. Was St. Paul wrong then? Was he mistaken in supposing all things to be pure? St Paul was not wrong, but there can be a very wrong meaning put upon his words if the circumstances attending their utterance are disregarded. We will be frank. The true story of the old woman and the rat has been related to 'scotch' at the outset, the idea that because St. Paul made the statements quoted, and our Lord told St Peter to rise and eat, that there is now no need to keep the Bible Food Laws. The God Who allowed the existence of the rat, allowed the existence of the pig also (and this article is essentially concerning the pig) and neither is ever referred to in His Word as human food.

Space will not allow a discourse concerning all of the creatures which are forbidden for food, nor those that are permitted. The sincere reader is asked to turn to Leviticus, chapter eleven, and also to Deuteronomy, chapter fourteen, and to study carefully, for himself, the whole question of the Divine dietary laws.



THE PIG

The writer is by no means alone in proclaiming the fact that pig or swine is unfit for human food. Thank God, there are many who, led by His guidance and His Word, have long since ceased to eat the forbidden thing themselves or to pass it on to others. We give some examples before dealing with medical and scientific aspects.

Another farmer friend, whose income was largely derived from pig farming, became so convinced of the necessity to keep the Food Laws of the Almighty and merciful God - the only Saviour of mankind - that he disposed of all his pig stock. His wife was distressed, to see him throw away this main source of income and Christian though she was, tried to persuade him to keep the animals. He was, nevertheless, persuaded rather by the Word of God. In a very short time, while still farming in the clean way, an entirely additional source of income presented itself and he was rewarded for his act of obedience. Would that all Christians would obey rather than argue, where the commandments of the Lord are concerned! Untold suffering over the years would have been avoided - pain, crying, anguish, mourning - but 'No'!

In another case, a dear Christian, a hospital sister, was guided by the Almighty, though not, at the time mindful of the Old Testament Laws. During her studies she saw so much of the uncleanness of the pig, that she knew that she could neither eat it again herself, nor willingly pass it on to others. Later, when the Lord led her into a deeper study of the Scriptures, she did not argue against the keeping of the Food Laws - she saw, at least dimly, that which the Creator knew so clearly, that pig, as food, in an abomination in every sense of the word.

In Isaiah 55:8 and 9 we see something of Divine, compared with human, knowledge:

'For My thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways My ways, saith the LORD. For as the heavens are higher than the earth, so are My ways higher than your ways, and My thoughts than your thoughts.'

In Leviticus, chapter eleven, and in other parts of the Bible, He reveals a little to us of His thoughts concerning pig-eating. It is forbidden in His dietary laws for Israel.

'And the swine ... he is unclean unto you. Of their flesh shall ye not eat, and their carcase shall ye not touch; they are unclean to you'.

The eating of pig brought God's severe reprimand upon disobedient and idolatrous Israel '... which eat swine's flesh and broth of abominable things is in their vessels;' (Isaiah 65:4). The LORD shows that in His kingdom, he that offers an oblation will be as if he had offered swine's flesh. The implication here is this; that the Saviour, having paid the supreme sacrifice, once and for all, is despised by any who still offer an oblation as though His sacrifice had been ineffective. Though the oblation may have been right in pre-Calvary days, yet so heinous would it be in the kingdom age, that it would be on a par with offering the worst of all abominations - swine's blood. (Isaiah 66:3). According to Isaiah 66:17 the eating of swine's flesh is named with other idolatrous practices which will meet the full punishment of the Lord at His coming.

The New Testament story of the prodigal son tells of how, when the young man had spent all his money on riotous living and was destitute, he had to take on one of the meanest jobs a man could have - he was sent into the fields to feed swine.

Our Lord, Who would never waste human food, (John 6:12-13) nevertheless destroyed the swine. (Luke 8:26-39).

It is of interest to note that it was St Luke, the 'Beloved Physician', who, under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, recorded these incidents concerning swine - NOT, let it be it noted, concerning an item of human food.

One more Scripture - Our Lord said:

'Neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet, and turn again and rend you.' (Matt. 7:6).

No sane person would cast pearls or any other precious thing in front of pigs, and there is a deeper meaning in our Lord's remark. Holiness and precious things are not compatible with swine, yet thousands cast their pearls of health - God-given health-before swine, by the eating of, and taking into their bodies, this abomination. Ill-health (of a great variety of types), and disease eventually rend so many of them. Sin is the transgression of the Law of God and that Law says that disobedience will bring 'every sickness and every plague.' Many people build themselves a refuge wall of excuse for disobedience: 'Thousands live long lives and never come to harm even though they eat pig!' We ourselves knew an old lady who was still doing the family baking when she was a hundred years old. She lived until one month short of her 102nd birthday, and never, to our knowledge, had any illness. She cooked with, and ate, the pig in all its 'tasty' components, being, we are certain, entirely ignorant of the Divine Law forbidding it. But had she been aware and fed her family accordingly, her daughter might not have died through internal disease at quite an early age. Reasons could be put forward as to why some pay the penalty and others appear not to do so. We, however, take the stand that obedience is the first and foremost essential, and when we know, then it is ours to obey.

Charles Kingsley said: 'Believe the whole Bible. Believe what you can by reason, and what you cannot believe by reason, believe by faith.' If we truly believe, then we accept that that which God calls an abomination, is an abomination.

Habits, especially concerning that which we enjoy eating, die hard, and those readers who still feel that they should eat pig (bacon for breakfast, lard for cooking, sausage for a quick savoury, etc.) would, we believe, do very well to consider facts now to be related.

CASE HISTORY

We have before us a copy of the Nursing Mirror for 3rd June, 1960 - in which is related the case history of a little girl suffering from epileptictype defective muscular control. As an introduction to the case there is a short description of the Taenia Solium (common tape worm) found in the intestines of human beings. The eggs of this worm develop inside the pig and the adults have been found alive four weeks after the pig has been killed. Cold storage does not kill these worms. The Nursing Mirror states, 'If there is brain involvement with cysticerci (larva stage of the tape worm) it may give rise to epileptic fits.'

The child whose case history is given, had shown various symptoms before being admitted to hospital. These had included attacks of pain, numbness in left arm and leg; vomiting; and twitching on left side of face. In hospital she was ataxic at times. (Ataxia, ataxy is defective muscular control, resulting in irregular and jerky movements). After thorough examination and various tests, it was decided to give operative treatment. A total of thirty tapeworms in larvae state were found lying over the cortex, that is, the grey 'matter' of the brain, and the majority of these were so embedded that it was impossible to remove them. A few were attached to the dura, that is the outer membrane of the meninges which surrounds the brain and spinal cord, and these were removed. After dealing with the treatment given over some weeks, this case history concludes with a forecast of the probable course of the disease. We quote from the article: '... the likelihood of recurrent attacks in the future is highly possible, and these will increase in both degree and frequency.' Commenting on this case, a Nursing Sister has volunteered her opinion that the cysticerci would enlarge and multiply, and the child would in time be beyond medical or surgical help.

MENINGITIS

We know personally a family who are very happy in all but one thing. The loss of a little boy at the age of four caused them great sorrow. He died from meningitis. In this case, unlike the one just related, we know nothing of the medical findings - if even the brain was laid bare and examined for instance - but we do know that because of the nature of the family business, this little lad was often given various parts of the pig for food. Having no light on the subject, ignorant of the Bible Food Laws, the mother would give the boy bacon, ham sandwiches, etc; and feel that he was being well fed. When the illness came it developed quickly-and killed him.

We were speaking at a meeting in the North of England to which the general public was admitted. In answering a question, we pointed out that - according to some sources - pig must be cooked almost black before there can be certainty that the pests within have been destroyed. A retired farmer in the audience, feeling very strongly on the matter, jumped to his feet and called 'Madam Speaker, you are not exaggerating. As far as the pig is concerned, and some fish that are without Fins and scales, "their worm dieth not".' He went on to say that if he had unwittingly eaten any of them, and had discovered it in time, he would wish to take something to cause him to vomit it up, rather than that it should enter his system. He repeated 'Their worm dieth not'.

TAPEWORM or CESTODA

This can develop into a worm of great length. We have seen a cat, whose entire life had been spent on a pig farm, discharge a white segmented tapeworm about a foot long. On occasions this little animal had shed live segments of the worm - some very small, some larger - and worm powders gave only short-lived relief. Each segment of a tapeworm can contain both a male and a female productive organ. Incidentally, on this particular farm, we have seen the farmer deworming every piglet born. 'All pigs must be dewormed', he told us. Unfortunately the pig is soon infected again.

Chambers's Encyclopaedia, Vol. 3, page 245, speaking of the dangerous pork tapeworm (T. sollum) says this may grow to two to six yards long. 'These... plainly visible, and usually detected by the meat inspector; if not detected, these are killed by adequate cooking ...''The pig is a dirty feeder; if infected, it is usually heavily infected ...' Italics are ours.

We feel led to tell of a young man from a family well known to us, who, at one time enjoyed bacon, pork, etc., and was rather inclined to smile at the non-pig eaters. While doing a temporary maintenance job in a sausage factory he paused in his work and watched some girls who were busy handling pig carcases apparently throwing away certain parts. Suddenly he saw movement in these parts which were heaped on the floor, some portions detaching themselves and moving about. Fascinated, he asked the girls the meaning of this. He was told that the movement was caused by live and active worms in the raw flesh. Later, he was able to take home, in a screw-top jar some of these same pig worms. A member of the family told us, 'My brother actually saw the worms coming out of every pig!' This young man is now a rabid non-pig eater. The writer, incidentally, has seen an X-ray of a completed sausage in which a three inch worm was nestling. By the timely detection someone had been spared that one!

TRICHINOSIS

The effects of this disease are wide-spread and hard to diagnose, the symptoms varying from so-called rheumatism, muscular paralysis, anaemia, and internal bleeding - and even blindness. As recently as two months before the compiling of this article, the findings of a group of medical experts at New York Hospital, Cornell Medical Centre, concerning trichinosis, have revealed a really very shocking state. The Lord would surely look upon this as a great abomination, but even man - enlightened - can see that it is 'shocking'. Referring to the group's survey the Science Editor of the paper, the New York Herald Tribune, citing one of the scientists, describes the situation as a national disgrace. He points out that trichinosis strikes about one out of every four persons at some time in their life. The bug itself is transmitted to the human being as a worm. (We may add from other sources as a very minute worm, so please, reader, do not think that you could see it as you were about to partake!) He states that a single teaspoonful of inadequately cooked pork may contain thousands of these worms, both male and female. Once inside the digestive system, the worms develop into adults and mate. Each pregnant female gives birth to thousands of live young worms which gnaw through the small intestine and then travel via the bloodstream to the muscles where they form cysts. (This information is from the Prophetic News Herald, December, 1964, and is quoted in the magazine Kingdom Digest).

If any readers are suffering from any of the complaints mentioned so far, they may not be able to say that they have never eaten pig, but they CAN say that from this day forward they will not touch the unclean thing. Bacon, pig-cheek, pork, ham, etc. cooked in the usual way, may often be cooked inadequately.

Chambers's Encyclopaedia, Vol. 14, page 742, under the general heading Worm Infestation in Man says, 'Trichinellia spiralis, the cause of trichinosis, is normally a parasite of the pig or the rat.'

There are many kinds of worms and parasites transmitted to man and the symptoms of their presence are almost as varied. There is only one answer to this - strict hygiene and strict obedience.

CANCER

We wonder what would be the result if cancer research workers turned their attention to the creatures forbidden as food by the Divine Physician? This scourge might at last begin to be arrested and perhaps it would then be felt that enormous amounts of money had been wasted in following clues of the lesser important or even wrong type. It has to be admitted, that in spite of all research to date, cancer is getting a stronger hold upon mankind. It is perhaps, true that cancers may be caused by more than one means. Lack of certain minerals in some of the victims may be one of them. There is proof enough that much lung cancer has been caused by smoking - though smokers themselves and those with vested interests may seek to deny this. Although it may not yet be fully established that there is a direct relationship between pig-eating and cancer or between shell-fish consumption and this disease, we suggest that the eating of forbidden things is likely to be the greatest factor of them all. We relate the following in support of this contention.

In a London Teashop:

After a meeting in South London, the writer and others decided to have 'a cuppa and a natter'. At another table sat a dear Christian who had been to the same meeting. He was a master grocer from Wales. He came over and joined the main group and soon the conversation turned to the Food Laws of the Bible. 'Nearly every pig has a cancer' said our friend, and he proceeded to tell us where it is generally located. 'I know' he said, 'that the Bible forbids the eating of pig, but I am so fond of it, and I am afraid that I give in and eat it frequently, in spite of the fact that I know that it has these diseases.' We all felt sad - a man so kind, so Christian, we just wished that he would be more concerned to keep the Law. Very shortly after this encounter we learned that he had died - and the cause of death was cancer.

Bible Study Class:

We attended a Bible Study group and one day we were asked to give a short talk on any subject connected with God's Word. The Food Laws were selected. After the meeting, a gentleman came up to the front and said very emphatically that he could not agree that these laws were meant for to-day. 'I eat anything I fancy,' he said. 'All I have to do is to ask God to bless it to my use. This He does and, therefore, it can do me no harm.' A few weeks later his wife called to see us. 'I have come to tell you that my husband is very ill in hospital. They thought he had a duodenal ulcer, but when they were about to operate they found cancer so malignant and of such long standing that it is too late to do anything for him.' This dear man passed away a few weeks later. He, too had felt so sure that now we are under grace and not under law, and may, therefore, eat anything we fancy. Alas! he did not see-and there are many other sincere Christians who do not see-that God never blesses for human food that which He has forbidden to be eaten.

FINAL THOUGHTS

The Word of God does not 'beat about the bush.' Unnecessary and meaningless phrases are never used. In Exodus 15:26, we read:

'... If thou wilt diligently hearken to the voice of the LORD thy God, and wilt do that which is right in His sight, and wilt give ear to His commandments, and keep all His statutes, I will put none of the diseases upon thee, which I have brought upon the Egyptians: for I am the LORD that healeth thee.'

Again, in Deuteronomy 7:11 and 15:

'Thou shalt therefore keep the commandments, and the statutes, and the judgements, which I command thee this day, to do them. And the LORD will take away from thee all sickness, and will put none of the evil diseases of Egypt, which thou knowest, upon thee; but will lay them upon all them that hate thee.'

The warning concerning disobedience can be read in Deuteronomy 28:58-60:

'If thou wilt not observe to do all the words of this law that are written in this book, that thou mayest fear this glorious and fearful name, THE LORD THY GOD; Then the LORD will make thy plagues wonderful, and the plagues of thy seed, even great plagues, and of long continuance. Moreover He will bring upon thee all the diseases of Egypt, which thou wast afraid of; and they shall cleave unto thee.'

What were these diseases of Egypt which would be the reward of disobedience to an all-wise and loving God? Information in Chambers's Encyclopaedia under the heading: 'Worm Infestation in Man' - to which reference has already been given, may enlighten us to some extent. '...and our knowledge of the existence and effects of such parasites goes back in the case of man, to Egyptian papyri of about 1500 B.C., which contain accounts of an anaemia-producing disease, so clearly described as to leave little doubt that its cause was ancylostomiasis. Today one of the great medical problems of Egypt is the control of the helminth infection, schistosomiasis. That this is no new problem is proved by the finding of schistosome eggs in the sections cut out from the tissues of the preserved pharaohs ...' Reference to a medical dictionary shows that 'ancylostomiasis' or 'ankylostoma' is hook-worm disease.'Helminth' is a worm infecting the intestines.

Howard B. Rand in his book Digest of the Divine Law makes the following comments: 'Wherever there is disease and sickness among His people ... they are refusing to keep and administer His laws. Multitudes continue to live in pain and suffering, while countless numbers have gone to untimely graves for national failure to keep and administer the law and observe the requirements for continued and uninterrupted health. Certain fundamental laws are given in the Bible, which, if kept, would give that health and vigour so characteristic of the life of Moses. Moses died at the age of one hundred and twenty years and the record states, 'His eye was not dim nor his natural force abated.' (Deut. 34:7)

A friend in the medical world has stated, 'If people would only realise that even if the worm dies or is removed, the damaged tissues probably remain inflamed and are certainly open to invasion by other organisrns or germs, producing further forms of disease, possibly malignant growths also.'

Reader, this article is written for your good and for the happiness of those you love. It is written pleadingly, but One greater than all pleads far more deeply, and with wisdom that is INFINITE:

'If ye love Me, keep My commandments.' .

.

Source: http://www.ensignmessage.com/archives/pig.html

..

Burger King Serves Up Cultural Imperialism

Burger King Serves Up Cultural Imperialism

By Jon Steinman, Deconstructing Dinner. Posted December 30, 2008.


BK's new advertising campaign proudly celebrates the cultural imperialism that Americans have become so famous for.


Perhaps you've already heard the buzz. In late November, Burger King launched a marketing gimmick called Whopper Virgins. The campaign would be waged via the Internet as well as a series of television ads directing people to the Whopper Virgins Web site.

Whopper Virgins is the product of American PR firm Crispin-Porter and Bogusky. The company employed a film crew to travel the globe and introduce BK's famous Whopper hamburger to people in some of the world's most far-flung places. Inuit of Greenland, Transylvanian farmers and the Hmong of Thailand were among those targeted for the experiment.

It was hoped that Americans would be fascinated to see the reactions of such "foreign" people tasting the homogenous staple of American fast food -- the hamburger.

In some cases, participants were also engaged in a taste test to compare the McDonald's Big Mac with the BK Whopper.

While it was likely not the intention of BK or its hired PR firm, the Whopper Virgins campaign has revealed the sheer ignorance of Western culture and has managed to proudly celebrate the cultural imperialism that North Americans have become so famous for.

Located on the campaign's Web site is an approximately 7-minute video that showcases the film crew's Whopper expedition.

In the early stages of the film, a member of the crew is recorded expressing his excitement at the de-virginizing of the Hmong people: "They've never seen such a foreign piece of food before," he proclaims. "They didn't know how to pick it up."

Maybe I'm being picky here, but of course the Hmong of Thailand have not seen a "foreign" piece of food before, that's what makes it "foreign"!

I'd be curious to observe whether or not this member of the film crew would be as amazed with himself upon being presented with a bowl of salted crickets (insects being a staple of many cultures) only to then realize he doesn't know how to use the chopsticks placed beside the bowl. Hmm, that could make a good film!

The Whopper Virgins film continues with an animated map of the world and a diagram of where the film crew (and Whoppers) will be travelling to. The same person who was shocked to see people who had never seen a hamburger is heard narrating in naïve wonder: "You're going to go all around the world and find people that are really off the grid, who perhaps don't have televisions, who don't have access to restaurants and what-not, who really live outside of things."

"Outside of things?"

And what would the Hmong, Inuit and Transylvanians think of these half-witted Americans trucking Whoppers around for the purpose of producing a marketing gimmick?

I seriously question just who of those represented in the film are "living outside of things."

Of course, the spreading of their brand around the world has long been the objective of BK.

BK restaurants number 11,900 and are dispersed throughout 69 countries, with 34 percent of the outlets outside of the United States. So in the case of Whopper Virgins, BK is simply celebrating the global influence the company has exerted thus far.

However, I consider it a fair assumption that while North Americans may well be aware of the downsides to cultural imperialism, our continued support and participation in this longstanding phenomenon does not seem to be abating. Perhaps the widespread viewing of the Whopper Virgins film will succeed in showcasing exactly how our Western culture can so easily pollute and patronize other cultures.

As one case in point, when the film moves to the Inuit of Greenland, an older member of the community is seen unwrapping his first-ever Whopper. The wrapper is swiftly discarded in what was likely the first piece of non-reusable food waste that he's ever been responsible for.

Many critics of Whopper Virgins have suggested that the gimmick was purposefully designed to create controversy. I would disagree.

The orchestral music played throughout the duration of the film is suggestive that what the film crew and staff are doing is a noble cause and a sign of American superiority. The music is so epic in tone, that in many respects, the handing over of Whoppers to "foreigners" evokes an image that introducing a Whopper to a Whopper Virgin is akin to a gift from God.

In the end, I propose that Whopper Virgins ranks as one of the greatest displays of unintelligence ever seen in the world of marketing and not because of the content of the film, but because of the name of the campaign.

"Virgin" is often used to depict purity and something uncorrupted. By choosing the title "Whopper Virgins," BK has indirectly admitted that the introduction of the Whopper to people who have never tried one amounts to corrupting what was once pure.

I for one agree with Burger King.

Listen to the podcast here.

Source: http://www.alternet.org/workplace/116085/burger_king_serves_up_cultural_imperialism/

Irish won't halt beef sales despite dioxin scare

Cattle stand in a field near Virginia, Ireland, Tuesday, Dec. 9, 2008. Ireland announced Tuesday it has found illegal levels of dioxins, the chemicals that are devastating its pork industry, in cattle, but insisted its beef was safe to eat. (AP Photo/Peter Morrison)

Tuesday, December 09, 2008
By SHAWN POGATCHNIK, Associated Press Writer

DUBLIN, Ireland — Irish officials confirmed Tuesday that cattle at three farms have tested positive for dioxin _ the cancer-causing chemical that has contaminated its pork industry _ but insisted the country's beef posed no real risk to health.

Ireland has already ordered the withdrawal and destruction of all pork products produced since Sept. 1, a sweeping move the government says should reinforce _ not undermine _ international confidence in Ireland's food exports.

But Agriculture Minister Brendan Smith said the government decided not to recall any Irish beef products at home or abroad because, unlike the contamination of pork products, the level and extent of dioxin found so far in cattle is much lower.

Smith said the cattle with excessive dioxin levels were "technically noncompliant, but not at a level that would pose any public health concern." Still, he said Ireland would prevent the movement of any cattle or beef from the three farms in question.

Alan Reilly, deputy director of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, stressed that the dioxin levels found in the most contaminated cattle were just two to three times European Union safety limits, whereas pigs at nine dioxin-threatened Irish farms recorded dioxin levels 80 to 200 times too high.

"There's a huge difference between 200 times above a legal limit, and two to three times," Reilly said.

The government declined to say whether any cattle from the three farms had produced beef that went to foreign markets. Reilly said most of the beef produced since September was still in storage, being aged to improve its tenderness and taste.

A recall of Irish beef would do even greater damage to Ireland's recession-hit economy than its emergency shutdown Saturday of the pork industry. Ireland has 69,000 beef farms but just 400 pig farms.

Ireland exports 85 percent of its beef to about 35 other countries, chiefly in Europe, a trade valued at more than euro1.5 billion ($2.2 billion). Irish pork generates only a third as much money and reaches 25 other countries. In both cases, neighboring Britain is Ireland's major customer.

Irish investigators have traced the source of the contamination to a single animal-food maker, Millstream Power Recycling Ltd., which used an oil-fired burner to dry out-of-date bread, dough and confectionary.

The Agriculture Department says Millstream _ which has been shut down pending investigations by the government and police _ was using a kind of oil that should never be used around food, creating fumes that infused the food with dioxins. It also failed to get the appropriate oil-burning permit from the Irish Environmental Protection Agency.

Authorities say Millstream supplied oil-tainted feed to at least nine pig farms and 45 cattle farms in the Republic of Ireland, and nine pig farms and 10 cattle farms in the British territory of Northern Ireland.

Tuesday's test results that confirmed too-high levels of dioxin in cattle at three Irish farms also cleared eight others of contamination. The Irish government declined to specify when results on the 34 other cattle farms would be confirmed.

But Reilly said he expected the number of total positive results to be in similar proportion to Tuesday's findings. This would mean about a quarter, or nine, more cattle farms could test positive for excessive dioxin.

He noted the cattle ate much less of the Millstream product than the pigs, because cows still eat mostly grass in the fall while pigs rely on man-made fodder.

In Northern Ireland, meanwhile, authorities announced Tuesday that none of the pig farms that received the Millstream product actually used it, which means its pork products can return immediately to store shelves and export markets. But Northern Ireland's agriculture minister, Michelle Gildernew, said she was still awaiting test results later this week on the 10 suspect cattle farms.

International research shows that dioxins, a family of chemicals that can accumulate and be retained for years in body fat, can lead to an increased risk of cancer.

Irish authorities, however, point to Europe's last major dioxin scare _ in Belgium in May 1999, when thousands of farms were closed after dioxin-contaminated animal feed tainted meat, eggs and dairy products _ to show that short-term exposure should not pose a risk.

"We're dealing in broad terms with the same exposure levels as in Belgium, where the follow-up showed no impact on public health," said Ireland's chief medical officer, Dr. Tony Holoran.

He stressed that, even if anyone ate both the dioxin-tainted beef or pork daily for the past three months, it still wouldn't be enough to cause a health problem.

"The risks are extremely low from any exposure that may occur. People do not need to seek any direct medical advice. We do not expect to see symptoms occurring as a result of this," Holoran said.

(This version CORRECTS ADDS background on beef industry, source of Irish contamination and Europe's last dioxin scare in 1999, corrects spelling of surname to Reilly sted O'Reilly.)

Copyright 2008 The Associated Press.

Source: http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Dec09/0,4670,EUIrelandTaintedMeat,00.html

Whole Foods Market Announces $425 Million Equity Investment by Leonard Green & Partners, L.P.

Nov 5 05:29 PM US/Eastern

AUSTIN, Texas, Nov. 5 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Whole Foods Market, Inc. (Nasdaq: WFMI) announced today an agreement to sell Series A Preferred Stock due 2020 to Green Equity Investors V, L.P., an affiliate of Leonard Green & Partners, L.P. for $425 million. This amount equates to an ownership interest, assuming conversion of the preferred stock to common stock, of approximately 17% at this time.



"We are pleased that Leonard Green & Partners, L.P., one of the most experienced and successful investors in the retail industry, has decided to make such a significant investment in Whole Foods Market. We view it as a strong vote of confidence in our business model and our long-term growth prospects, despite the current economic environment," said John Mackey, chairman, chief executive officer, and co-founder of Whole Foods Market. "This investment, combined with our strong cash flow from operations, gives us the financial flexibility to manage through these difficult economic times while continuing to prudently invest in our long-term growth."


"Whole Foods Market is an exceptional company that has revolutionized how consumers shop for natural and organic products," said Jonathan Sokoloff, Managing Partner of Leonard Green & Partners, L.P. "We are pleased to make this investment and look forward to a partnership with the board and management team to drive long-term growth, profitability and value for all shareholders."



The preferred stock has an 8% dividend, payable quarterly in cash or by increasing the liquidation preference, at the option of the Company, and will be convertible, under certain circumstances, to common stock at an initial conversion price of $14.50 per share. This represents a premium of approximately 32% to yesterday's closing sale price of Whole Foods Market's common stock of $10.99. After three years, the dividend will be reduced to: (i) 6% if the common stock closes at or above $17.75 per share for at least 20 consecutive trading days, or (ii) 4% if the common stock closes at or above $23.13 per share for at least 20 consecutive trading days.



Whole Foods Market may redeem the preferred stock after five years at a premium of 4%, declining ratably to par by the eighth year. In addition, at any time, Whole Foods Market may, upon 30 days notice, redeem the preferred stock if the common stock closes at or above $28.50 per share for at least 20 consecutive trading days. Whole Foods Market may also convert the preferred stock into subordinated convertible notes having economic terms similar to the preferred stock under certain circumstances.



The transaction is expected to close within thirty days, subject to the receipt of customary regulatory approvals.



In connection with the preferred stock investment, Jonathan D. Sokoloff and Jonathan A. Seiffer of Leonard Green & Partners, L.P. intend to join the board of directors of Whole Foods Market.



Goldman, Sachs & Co. served as financial advisor and Dechert LLP served as legal advisor to Whole Foods Market in this transaction. Latham & Watkins LLP served as legal advisor to Leonard Green & Partners, L.P.



About Whole Foods Market

Founded in 1980 in Austin, Texas, Whole Foods Market (www.wholefoodsmarket.com) is the world's leading natural and organic foods supermarket and America's first national certified organic grocer. In fiscal year 2008, the Company had sales of approximately $8 billion and currently has 278 stores in the United States, Canada, and the United Kingdom. Whole Foods Market employs more than 50,000 Team Members and has been ranked for eleven consecutive years as one of the "100 Best Companies to Work For" in America by FORTUNE magazine.



About Leonard Green & Partners, L.P.

Leonard Green & Partners, L.P. is a private investment firm established in 1989 which manages approximately $9 billion of equity capital. The firm's investments are focused primarily on North American companies in a range of industries including retail, consumer products, distribution, media, business services and healthcare. Significant investments include The Brickman Group, The Container Store, David's Bridal, Jetro Cash and Carry, Neiman Marcus Group, Petco Animal Supplies, The Sports Authority, The Tire Rack and Tourneau.



Forward-looking statements

The following constitutes a "Safe Harbor" statement under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Except for the historical information contained herein, the matters discussed in this press release are forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties, which could cause our actual results to differ materially from those described in the forward-looking statements. These risks include but are not limited to general business conditions, the successful integration of acquired businesses into our operations, changes in overall economic conditions that impact consumer spending, including fuel prices and housing market trends, the impact of competition, changes in the Company's access to available capital, the successful resolution of ongoing FTC matters, and other risks detailed from time to time in the SEC reports of Whole Foods Market, including Whole Foods Market's report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2007. Whole Foods Market undertakes no obligation to update forward-looking statements.



The shares of Series A Preferred Stock have not been registered under the Securities Act of 1933 and may not be offered or sold in the United States absent registration or an applicable exemption from registration requirements.



The Company will host a conference call today to discuss this announcement in conjunction with its earnings announcement at 4:00 p.m. CT. The dial-in number is 1-800-862-9098, and the conference ID is "Whole Foods." A simultaneous audio webcast will be available at www.wholefoodsmarket.com.


Contact: Cindy McCann VP of Investor Relations 512.542.0204



SOURCE Whole Foods Market, Inc.
Copyright 2008 PR Newswire. All Rights Reserved.

Source: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=prnw.20081105.DA44191&show_article=1&catnum=0

China's contaminated food scandal widens

A worker among stacks of eggs at a plant in suburban Beijing. (Andy Wong/The Associated Press)

By David Barboza

Friday, October 31, 2008

SHANGHAI: Chinese regulators said Friday that they were widening their investigation into contaminated food amid growing signs that an industrial chemical called melamine has leached into the nation's animal feed supplies, posing health risks to consumers.

The announcement came after food safety tests this week found that eggs produced in three provinces in China were contaminated with melamine, which is blamed for causing kidney stones and renal failure in infants. The tests have led to recalls of eggs and consumer warnings.

The reports are another serious blow to China's agriculture industry, which is already struggling to cope with its worst food safety scandal in decades after melamine-tainted milk supplies sickened more than 50,000 children, caused at least four deaths and led to global recalls of goods produced with Chinese dairy products this autumn.

Companies all over the world that import from China are now beginning to test for melamine. If animal feed supplies are tainted, an even wider array of foods could come under scrutiny for contamination, everything from pork and chicken supplies to bread, cookies, eggs, cakes and seafood.

While China is not a major exporter of dairy products, it has one of the world's fastest-growing dairy industries and it is also one of the world's largest exporters of food and food ingredients, including meats, seafood, beverages and vitamins.

Government investigators have attributed the dairy scandal to a group of rogue milk and melamine dealers whom they accuse of intentionally adding melamine, which is commonly used to produce plastic and fertilizer, to milk supplies as cheap filler in order to save money.

High-ranking government officials, including the head of the nation's quality watchdog, have been fired in the wake of the recalls and Beijing has acknowledged that "lax regulation" contributed to the scandal.

But interviews Friday, and during the past year, with several chemical dealers who sell melamine suggest that melamine scrap, the substantially cheaper waste left after producing melamine, has been added to animal and fish feed in China for years.

"I heard some melamine dealers still sell to animal feed producers," said Qin Huaizhen, manager of Gaocheng Kaishun Chemical in the city of Shijiazhuang, though he insisted he has never sold melamine to animal feed producers. "In Shandong Province many animal feed manufacturers buy melamine scrap."

Two other melamine dealers in east and south China said that only after the recent dairy scandal did government regulators crack down on the sale of melamine to animal feed producers, even though it was banned as an animal feed additive in July 2007..

Concerned that the food safety crisis could escalate, Shanghai and other cities are now testing a wide variety of food products for melamine, including fish and livestock feed.

Hong Kong food safety officials were the first to announce that eggs imported from China were also contaminated with high levels of melamine.

Now, state-run newspapers are publishing editorials in China calling for a full investigation into the use of melamine in food and feed.

Food safety experts, though, are perplexed as to how melamine was allowed to seep into China's food supplies after melamine-tainted animal feed exports from China were blamed last year for sickening dogs and cats in the United States, touching off an international trade and food safety disputes.

The pet food case led to a massive recall around the world and sparked a lengthy food safety crackdown in China, as regulators closed thousands of illegal or substandard food factories and slaughterhouses.

Still, the Chinese government never made it clear last year or even this year how extensively it had tested its own food supply for melamine, even though some melamine dealers acknowledged last year that it was commonly sold into the food and feed market. Regulators in Beijing largely blamed the pet food case on a pair of small exporters, who regulators said shipped feed contaminated with melamine in order to save money.

Several farmers and melamine scrap dealers said in interviews last year that melamine had been used for years in animal feed, particularly fish feed, and many producers believed melamine scrap was not toxic and would not be harmful to humans.

Melamine dealers say the government crackdown on the sale to feed producers only occurred this year, after the Sanlu Group dairy company announced that its infant milk formula was tainted with melamine. That announcement in September triggered a nationwide recall and government announcements that other major dairy brands were also selling melamine-contaminated milk.

"Before the Sanlu scandal, we were not banned from selling melamine to anyone. I had heard melamine dealers sell melamine to animal feed companies and food companies; it was common before the Sanlu scandal," Niu Qinglin, manager of Hebei Jinglong Fengli Chemical, said in a telephone interview Friday.

Niu, however, said he never sold melamine or melamine scrap to food or feed producers. And he noted that regulators had moved in on the trade. "Now, the government regulates that melamine cannot be sold to any animal feed manufacturers or food processing companies," he said.

Chen Yang contributed research in Shanghai.

Source: http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=17419948

FDA Unleashes Mass Irradiation of Spinach, Lettuce and Other Vegetables

by Mike Adams (see all articles by this author) (NaturalNews)

The FDA has announced that beginning today, spinach and lettuce sold across the United States may now be secretly irradiated before it reaches grocery store shelves. What's "secret" about it? The FDA previously decided that irradiation warning stickers would not be required on any food items because it would be "too confusing to consumers." (The word IRRADIATION apparently has too many letters to be understood to food buyers.) Thus, irradiated foods will not be labeled as such, and consumers are going to be left in the dark about all this (except for those who actually eat the irradiated food, in which case they will glow in the dark).The FDA, of course, insists that the levels of irradiation used to kill e.coli will have no effect whatsoever on the nutritional value of the food. This astonishing statement comes from an agency that doesn't believe food has any nutritional value in the first place, so lowering the value to zero by destroying all the phytonutrients does not, in the opinion of the FDA, alter its nutritional value at all. Thus, destroying all the anti-cancer nutrients in a head of broccoli merely brings that broccoli into "compliance" as a non-functional food, according to the FDA.Radiation, of course, destroys delicate phytochemicals in plants -- the very phytochemicals protecting consumers against cancer, heart disease, high cholesterol, inflammation and other diseases. Microwaving broccoli, for example, destroys up to 98% of its anti-cancer nutrients. (The FDA has not yet acknowledged this scientific fact, either.) In a similar way, irradiating food destroys much of its nutritional content, including vitamins, carotenoids, anthocyanins and other delicate protective nutrients that are right now providing the last, desperate nutritional defense against the American diet of meat, milk, fried foods and processed junk.Irradiating fresh produce will leave the U.S. population is a state of extreme deficiency in protective plant-based nutrients.
Does the FDA plan to destroy the health of the U.S. population?Many people suspect that's what the FDA really wants. A nutritionally-deficient, disease-ridden population would mean a windfall of profits for the FDA's buddies in Big Pharma -- the folks who sell patented medications at monopoly prices. With the food supply destroyed by radiation, ordinary people would have virtually no remaining sources of protective phytonutrients!In promoting this food radiation policy, the FDA has accomplished what all the terrorists in the world could not: The mass irradiation of the U.S. food supply -- much like setting off a dirty bomb over the nation's farms (but with less radiation). This destruction of the nutritional value of the food supply is a far greater threat to the health of the U.S. population than any terrorist event, including 9/11. And yet it is being done by our own people, TO our own people, by a lawless agency that answers to no one. FDA officials are not voted into office by the People; they are appointed by politicians. They answer to no one, they refuse to follow federal law, and they operate as tyrants over a quarter of the U.S. economy.And now they have taken it upon themselves to destroy the national food supply.We should be more than just alarmed -- we should be outraged! The FDA has committed an act of war against the People. With this decision, the FDA has firmly positioned itself as an enemy of the People, and a bringer of death and disease to the nation. Why are our elected representatives in Washington allowing this madness?Think about this: If the FDA has its way:• All your food will be irradiated, pasteurized or killed• All your children will be vaccinated• All your medicine will be based on pharmaceuticals• All your free speech about health will be suppressed• All informative labeling on food and supplements will be outlawed• Growing and selling non-irradiated garden vegetables will become a crime!
Today it's spinach and lettuce; tomorrow it's all fresh produceDon't think the FDA will stop with spinach and lettuce, either. They're already talking about irradiating tomatoes, peppers and onions. Before long, radiation could become mandatory for ALL fresh produce, and all the fresh fruits and vegetables that are supposed to contain health-protecting nutrients will be transformed into sterile, inert plant mass with no health benefits at all. (Brilliant scam, huh?)This is by design. I believe the FDA wants the American public to be sickened and diseased. Why else would they ban Free Speech about healing foods like cherries, broccoli and garlic? Why would they outlaw the selling of herbs and nutritional supplements that claim to treat and prevent disease? The FDA wants you to be sick, enslaved and medicated, and irradiating the food supply is the quickest way to accomplish that.He who controls the food controls the People.He who destroys the food can profit from the People's sickness.
The FDA's crimes against humanityIn pushing this radiation agenda, the FDA is committing a crime against humanity -- a nutritional atrocity that violates fundamental human rights. And yet the FDA's top decision makers continue to operate with zero oversight and zero accountability. They make decisions in a corporate-sponsored vacuum, absent any input from reasonable, health-conscious consumers or scientists. And because they have been granted tyrannical powers by Congress, the FDA operates above the law.It is not subject to any laws whatsoever; not even the U.S. Constitution which is supposed to protect the People's right to "Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness" (as stated in the Declaration of Independence).The mass irradiation of the food supply is a violation of the "Life" part of that phrase, wouldn't you agree? If we can no longer buy nourishing foods with their nutrients intact, then we are all doomed to degenerative disease and death... but not before paying out our life savings to doctors, drug companies and hospitals. That's the evil genius of the food irradiation plot: It kills you slowly, at just the right pace to drain your bank account before you expire from malnutrition.I truly believe this irradiation of the food supply is the beginning of the end of America. No nation can survive the destruction of its food supply. The FDA is dooming America to a slow, painful, medicated death. In a generation, this nation will be lost, destroyed from within by short-sighted tyrants who violated nature and left the People to rot.

What you can do right now to fight this latest transgression by the FDA

For starters, you can:1) Grow your own food. A little gardening is good. Grow whatever you can, even if it's just a few kitchen herbs.2) Buy your food at farmer's markets, coops and CSAs. See http://www.localharvest.org/csa3) Ask your grocery store if they are buying irradiated spinach. If they don't know, demand they find out!4) Raise hell with your Senators and Congresspeople, demanding they pass new laws protecting consumers from the FDA and its plot to destroy the nutritional value of the food supply.Also, listen to two podcasts I've posted on this topic. The first was recorded several months ago, where I publicly predicted the FDA would do exactly what we're seeing right now. Listen to that podcast here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Podcasts.html#52The second podcast was just posted today. I recorded it right before writing this article. It goes into much greater detail about the FDA's plot to destroy the health of the U.S. population. You can listen to that here: http://www.naturalnews.com/Index-Podcasts.html#61Finally, don't stand for this food supply madness! Raise your voice. Write your local paper, call your representatives in Washington and tell them you strongly oppose the irradiation of the food supply. Teach people about phytonutrients. And stay tuned to NaturalNews as we continue to cover this important story.The FDA has gone mad. Criminally mad. It is an agency that will literally kill you if given the chance, and it is up to all of us to stop this madness before we lose our health, our children and our very nation.

Source: http://www.naturalnews.com/z023945.html