Blech. I am SO sick of stuffing myself full of high fat foods. This is the second and last 'loading' day. I don't think I'll have a bit of trouble sticking to my first Very Low Calorie Day [VLCD] tomorrow. Not at all. All I can say is when I step on that scale Tuesday morning, I had BETTER have lost some weight.
Tomorrow for lunch [first time I can eat for the day] is 3.5 oz of shrimp scampini, 3.5 oz of grilled fresh asaragus, 3.5 oz of fresh spinach with 1 large tomato. I made a dressing with lemon juice + apple cider vinegrette + stevia. Snack will be 6 large strawberries with stevia. Dinner will be um....something with chicken. I forget.
Looking forward to where I'll be at this time next week. :>
Still bummed about having to toss out my broccoli sprouts.
Sunday, March 28, 2010
Saturday, March 27, 2010
HCG - Day 1
Hcg and B-12 and Silver Colloidal arrived yesterday. I sit here with the first dose under my tongue as I type this. No real flavor. Maybe a touch citrus if you had to define it. The hcg dosage is very low, the B-12 is cool, and the colloidal is a healthy preservative.
So the first two days are 'loading' days, which means eat all day long foods with high fat content to load and prepare my body to begin to kick in releasing all those not normal fats when I begin the very low calorie days [VLCD] -- 500 cl/day. Actually, I'm kinda freaked out about eating high fats. I may have some weight to lose, but I mostly eat the good fats. Like the ones found in avocados, coconut oil, etc.
I'm going to use the online Calorie Counter to do my tracking. They have some great analysis charts, and since I'm a visual person, that should make my boat float.
My one regret....I still have broccoli sprouts I haven't eaten yet. I wonder if you can freeze them? :/
So the first two days are 'loading' days, which means eat all day long foods with high fat content to load and prepare my body to begin to kick in releasing all those not normal fats when I begin the very low calorie days [VLCD] -- 500 cl/day. Actually, I'm kinda freaked out about eating high fats. I may have some weight to lose, but I mostly eat the good fats. Like the ones found in avocados, coconut oil, etc.
I'm going to use the online Calorie Counter to do my tracking. They have some great analysis charts, and since I'm a visual person, that should make my boat float.
My one regret....I still have broccoli sprouts I haven't eaten yet. I wonder if you can freeze them? :/
Thursday, March 25, 2010
Bees in Trouble - and so are we
Please do not anyone tell me our foods are not laced with dangerous chemicals. These poor bees. I have seen shows on this, and it is so sad for the owners of these bee farms. They LOVE their bees and when they arrive at their destination - the majority of them are dead. Just awful...
"Your item was processed through and left our NASHUA, NH 03063 facility on March 24, 2010. The item is currently in transit to the destination."
Yes. It's true. I am going to do the hcg diet. Stuff is on the way, and I am sitting on the edge of my chair waiting for this to arrive. I will start immediately. I am that psyched.
Trust me. Initially I was like no...way...ever. That is until my husband lost 47 lbs, his co-workers are losing like mad, and now my SIL is doing it! But the thing that really made me do a 180 is when I asked my doctor about this nonsense. He stood up, unbuckled his belt [I was a little worried here], pull out the waistline of his suit pants, and proclaimed "16 lbs in a month -- it works". Okay. Got me.
Stay tuned..... :D
Sunday, March 21, 2010
Dont' be fooled by the Savannah bourbon snifter...this is my breakfast -- and it definately does not have bourbon in it! But what it does have in it is 100 times more awesome. See what you think:1-1/2 c almond milk
2 T coconut oil
2 T HEAPING cacao
a few leftover cacao nibs I had sitting around :>
a decent squirt of agave
and, believe it or not, aI dollop of brewer's yeast
Num. Num. Num.
These are my broccoli seeds that are just starting the sprouting process! Aren't they C-U-T-E?! :D I don't mind that the sprayer head is bunching them up. They will grow....because they're alive! They're alive! Bwahhahaha....
Six days later.....here they are! Even cuter! Broccoli sprouts are an awesome live food. Check this out: Nutritional info: Vitamins A, B, C, E and K Calcium, Iron, Magnesium, Phosphorus, Potassium, Zinc Carotene, Chlorophyll Amino Acids Trace Elements Antioxidants Protein: 35%. I eat this by the finger full. I eat them on top of my almond buttered bread. I swear that, although it's not like a caffeine rush or anything, my energy stays steady. Which for someone that has adrenal issues, is cool beans!
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Can you still benefit from canned or bottled green tea?
All teas need to be freshly steeped in order for you to receive the most benefits from them. In addition, the steeping process itself is very important, and different steeping methods have been compared in research studies investigating the health benefits of green tea.
Much of the research on green tea has focused on its polyphenol content. Many different kinds of polyphenols are found in green tea, and these polyphenols will become increasingly present in the tea water the longer a tea is steeped. (This principle holds true for green tea, white tea, black tea, and oolong tea.) Catechins, theaflavins, and thearubigins are among the best studied of the green tea polyphenols that are known to increase in the tea water as steeping times increase.
Given an equal amount of steeping time, loose leaf teas do a better job of passing on their polyphenol content than bagged teas because loose leaf teas expose their whole leaves to the steeping water during the entire steeping time. Bagged teas, by contrast, may float on top of the steeping water and expose less of the tea leaves directly to the water. (You can improve this situation by allowing the tea bag to bob down into the water from time to time during the steeping process.)
When you brew tea yourself, you can control this steeping process in a way that will maximize the polyphenol content of your tea. When you buy a bottled tea, however, you may or may not get a tea that has been carefully brewed. In addition, you are likely to get a tea that includes other ingredients and is not simply 100% brewed tea.
In 2005, the Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University issued a report showing that many bottled teas contained polyphenol content 10 to 100 times lower than freshly and carefully brewed teas. Differences between bottled tea and freshly brewed tea were attributed to steeping process, amount of actual tea found in the bottled products, and presence of non-tea ingredients in the bottled teas, including sugar. In addition, bottled tea companies were sometimes found to use powdered rather than brewed tea in their products.
If you do choose to make bottled tea a regular part of your diet, be sure to find a manufacturer who produces a high-quality bottled beverage. You can find unsweetened, organic green teas in bottled form in some natural foods stores and on the Internet; these teas will provide you with health benefits closer to those offered by freshly and carefully steeped tea.
-- George Mateljan
Much of the research on green tea has focused on its polyphenol content. Many different kinds of polyphenols are found in green tea, and these polyphenols will become increasingly present in the tea water the longer a tea is steeped. (This principle holds true for green tea, white tea, black tea, and oolong tea.) Catechins, theaflavins, and thearubigins are among the best studied of the green tea polyphenols that are known to increase in the tea water as steeping times increase.
Given an equal amount of steeping time, loose leaf teas do a better job of passing on their polyphenol content than bagged teas because loose leaf teas expose their whole leaves to the steeping water during the entire steeping time. Bagged teas, by contrast, may float on top of the steeping water and expose less of the tea leaves directly to the water. (You can improve this situation by allowing the tea bag to bob down into the water from time to time during the steeping process.)
When you brew tea yourself, you can control this steeping process in a way that will maximize the polyphenol content of your tea. When you buy a bottled tea, however, you may or may not get a tea that has been carefully brewed. In addition, you are likely to get a tea that includes other ingredients and is not simply 100% brewed tea.
In 2005, the Linus Pauling Institute at Oregon State University issued a report showing that many bottled teas contained polyphenol content 10 to 100 times lower than freshly and carefully brewed teas. Differences between bottled tea and freshly brewed tea were attributed to steeping process, amount of actual tea found in the bottled products, and presence of non-tea ingredients in the bottled teas, including sugar. In addition, bottled tea companies were sometimes found to use powdered rather than brewed tea in their products.
If you do choose to make bottled tea a regular part of your diet, be sure to find a manufacturer who produces a high-quality bottled beverage. You can find unsweetened, organic green teas in bottled form in some natural foods stores and on the Internet; these teas will provide you with health benefits closer to those offered by freshly and carefully steeped tea.
-- George Mateljan
Monday, March 15, 2010
Avocados
Did you know that the fats in avocados are actually good for you? If you have been confused about whether you should eat avocados because of their high fat content, let us help you put this issue to rest. Yes, avocados are high in fat, but their monounsaturated fats, like those found in olive oil, are heart-healthy and can actually help reduce blood cholesterol levels. Plus, research has shown that people on a calorie-restricted diet can enjoy avocados and still reach their weight loss goals. In fact, the American Heart Association encourages substituting the monounsaturated fats found in avocados, nuts and olive oil for many of the fats more commonly used by consumers. Researchers are also finding that some of the phytonutrients (phyto = plant) found in avocados may also help reduce cholesterol levels. So, remember that all fats are not created equal, and enjoy the delicious taste of avocados and their heart-healthy monounsaturated fats.
-- George Mateljan
-- George Mateljan
Friday, March 12, 2010
Lentil Sprouts!
Yeah baby. Day 1. Sprouts away!
Day 3. Look at these little buggers! Definately LIVE food. And these are really good on toast with something sticky to keep em from rolling off -- like...um.. almond butter! Ah.Yeah.Baby! I'm about to use some of these mixed with an avocado to make a spread for crackers. I'll post how that turns out. :D
Day 3. Look at these little buggers! Definately LIVE food. And these are really good on toast with something sticky to keep em from rolling off -- like...um.. almond butter! Ah.Yeah.Baby! I'm about to use some of these mixed with an avocado to make a spread for crackers. I'll post how that turns out. :D
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
How to purchase fresh nutrient-rich vegetables while still staying on my relatively restricted budget
Here are some suggestions for how to reduce the costs associated with purchasing nutrient-rich vegetables:
Since the price of vegetables varies depending on the area in which you live, I would suggest that you see which vegetables are less expensive in your local market, and then look in the World's Healthiest Foods book or website to check the nutritional value of those vegetables. If the vegetable(s) in question are not featured in the book or website, you can also look them up on the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference located at http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/, which is free and easy to use.
When vegetables are in season, they are usually less expensive and can also be counted on to taste better. This seasonal aspect of vegetables can be confusing, however, since most grocery stores are filled year-round with vegetables that are not truly seasonal.
That is why looking for local farmers' markets near your home is a great way to buy vegetables seasonally. Vegetables sold at these kinds of markets are very likely to have been grown within driving distance of your home. This usually guarantees that they are fresher, and because of the reduced transportation costs, they are usually less expensive. Many farmers' markets also have organic vegetables available. If you live in a more rural area and have access to transportation, you could also check to see if there are any local farms that have farm stands.
Finally, if you cannot find fresh vegetables that fit your budget, you should consider purchasing frozen vegetables. Frozen organic vegetables are getting easier and easier to find, and there are a surprising number of nutrients that stay fairly stable during the freezing process. While not as good as fresh vegetables, the frozen variety are far better from a nutritional standpoint than most people expect, and, particularly when organic, can make a very nourishing alternative.
-- George Mateljan
Since the price of vegetables varies depending on the area in which you live, I would suggest that you see which vegetables are less expensive in your local market, and then look in the World's Healthiest Foods book or website to check the nutritional value of those vegetables. If the vegetable(s) in question are not featured in the book or website, you can also look them up on the USDA National Nutrient Database for Standard Reference located at http://www.nal.usda.gov/fnic/foodcomp/search/, which is free and easy to use.
When vegetables are in season, they are usually less expensive and can also be counted on to taste better. This seasonal aspect of vegetables can be confusing, however, since most grocery stores are filled year-round with vegetables that are not truly seasonal.
That is why looking for local farmers' markets near your home is a great way to buy vegetables seasonally. Vegetables sold at these kinds of markets are very likely to have been grown within driving distance of your home. This usually guarantees that they are fresher, and because of the reduced transportation costs, they are usually less expensive. Many farmers' markets also have organic vegetables available. If you live in a more rural area and have access to transportation, you could also check to see if there are any local farms that have farm stands.
Finally, if you cannot find fresh vegetables that fit your budget, you should consider purchasing frozen vegetables. Frozen organic vegetables are getting easier and easier to find, and there are a surprising number of nutrients that stay fairly stable during the freezing process. While not as good as fresh vegetables, the frozen variety are far better from a nutritional standpoint than most people expect, and, particularly when organic, can make a very nourishing alternative.
-- George Mateljan
Tuesday, March 2, 2010
Major Air Guitar Here...
Paste this link in your browser:
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1610699488?bctid=31812464001
http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1610699488?bctid=31812464001
Hearty Green Soup
Okay. Does this look gross to you? Well, typically it wouldn't have ANYTHING on the top of the soup, but since the recipe called for 1/2 c of tomatoes, I just threw the leftovers on top. Plus, I had some mung beans I needed to use up. And man oh man is this good. Surprised? Me kinda too.
Here it is:
1 avocado
1/2 c tom, chopped
Blend these two items together. Add some H2O if you need to. I definitely needed to; about a cup's worth. Then add,
2 romaine leaves, minced. [Minced? Bah. I chopped em.]
1/4 c parsley
1 T green powder - out so omitted
1/2 stalk celery, chopped
pinch of sea salt
squeeze of fresh lemon juice. [Only had the organic jar kind, so I 'squeezed' some out of it.]
This is a do OVAH! You'll love this if you love avocados, for sure! :D
Monday, March 1, 2010
Garlic! Bring it on!
Did you know that the unique sulfur compounds found in garlic promote antioxidant activity and function as powerful antibacterial and antiviral agents? These compounds, such as allicin, help reduce blood pressure, decrease LDL cholesterol and join forces with the vitamin C present in garlic to help kill harmful microbes and protect against colon cancer (1 oz of garlic contains 15% of the daily value for vitamin C). Along with its potent sulfur-compounds, that one ounce of garlic also delivers 18% DV for vitamin B6 and 24% DV for manganese. And if you are concerned about the carcinogenic chemicals that can result from cooking meat at high temperatures, add some garlic to your meal to help protect against these harmful compounds.
Sunday, February 28, 2010
Spinach!
Did you know that spinach is not only a rich source of vitamins and minerals, but researchers have identified carotenoids and at least 13 different flavonoid phytonutrients in spinach that act as powerful antioxidants? Antioxidants combat the free radicals that cause oxidative damage to both cells and DNA. When the researchers at the USDA Agricultural Research Service's Human Nutrition Research Center on Aging at Tufts University tested various fruits and vegetables for their antioxidant capabilities, spinach ranked second only to kale among the vegetables tested. The various flavonoids in spinach have been shown to possess anti-inflammatory, anti-mutagenic, and anti-carcinogenic properties, while its carotenoids, such as zeaxanthin and lutein, help fight prostate cancer and protect against eye diseases, such as age-related macular degeneration and cataracts. Since carotenoids are fat-soluble, they are not well absorbed unless fat is also consumed — a good reason to add extra flavor and nutrition to spinach by dressing it with extra virgin olive oil.
From George again... :>
From George again... :>
Sunday, February 21, 2010
Thursday, February 18, 2010
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
Can beans help lower my cholesterol levels?
All beans and legumes, without question, can be heart-healthy parts of a balanced diet and helpful in lowering cholesterol levels. There are several aspects of this beans-and-cholesterol equation, however, that may have been misunderstood amidst all of the popular press writing about diet, heart health, and cholesterol.
One of those potential areas of misunderstanding involves amount. How many beans does it take to reduce cholesterol? And how great a reduction in cholesterol levels can you expect from eating beans? Research in this area is clear and consistent: you can expect to get a 5-15% reduction in your LDL-cholesterol level when you change your diet to include about 1.5 cups of cooked legumes 4 days per week or more over the course of several months. This same level of bean intake can also be expected to lower your risk of coronary heart disease, on average, by between 10-20%.
While there are many benefits from eating beans, their exact role in your overall health will depend upon your other risk factors (both dietary and lifestyle) and your existing cholesterol levels. The American Heart Association describes an LDL-cholesterol level of 130-159 milligrams per deciliter as "borderline high," levels of 160-189 as "high," and levels above 190 as "very high." Even though a 5-15% decrease in your LDL level would be desirable if your LDL cholesterol was in the very high range, it would not drop your LDL level below the "high range" under any circumstance.
A second area of potential misunderstanding involves nutritional factors in beans and legumes that are actually responsible for cholesterol reduction. Original studies in this area focused heavily on the soluble fiber content of beans as the primary reason for cholesterol reduction. Beans are definitely very good sources of dietary fiber, including water-soluble fibers like pectins, gums, and mucilages. However, these fibers are not the only mechanism-and may not even be the primary mechanism-through which beans help reduce LDL cholesterol levels. Proteins, isoflavones, saponins, and other phytonutrients are all under active investigation as bean components that may play key roles in cholesterol reduction and protection against heart disease.
George Mateljan
One of those potential areas of misunderstanding involves amount. How many beans does it take to reduce cholesterol? And how great a reduction in cholesterol levels can you expect from eating beans? Research in this area is clear and consistent: you can expect to get a 5-15% reduction in your LDL-cholesterol level when you change your diet to include about 1.5 cups of cooked legumes 4 days per week or more over the course of several months. This same level of bean intake can also be expected to lower your risk of coronary heart disease, on average, by between 10-20%.
While there are many benefits from eating beans, their exact role in your overall health will depend upon your other risk factors (both dietary and lifestyle) and your existing cholesterol levels. The American Heart Association describes an LDL-cholesterol level of 130-159 milligrams per deciliter as "borderline high," levels of 160-189 as "high," and levels above 190 as "very high." Even though a 5-15% decrease in your LDL level would be desirable if your LDL cholesterol was in the very high range, it would not drop your LDL level below the "high range" under any circumstance.
A second area of potential misunderstanding involves nutritional factors in beans and legumes that are actually responsible for cholesterol reduction. Original studies in this area focused heavily on the soluble fiber content of beans as the primary reason for cholesterol reduction. Beans are definitely very good sources of dietary fiber, including water-soluble fibers like pectins, gums, and mucilages. However, these fibers are not the only mechanism-and may not even be the primary mechanism-through which beans help reduce LDL cholesterol levels. Proteins, isoflavones, saponins, and other phytonutrients are all under active investigation as bean components that may play key roles in cholesterol reduction and protection against heart disease.
George Mateljan
Monday, February 15, 2010
Brussel Sprouts! Yeah Baby!
Did you know that the phytonutrients found in cruciferous vegetables, such as Brussels sprouts, cabbage, broccoli, and kale, actually signal our genes to increase production of enzymes involved in detoxification? For about 20 years, we've known that many phytonutrients work as antioxidants to disarm free radicals before they can damage DNA, cell membranes and fat-containing molecules such as cholesterol. Now, research is revealing that phytonutrients in cruciferous vegetables, like Brussels sprouts, work at a much deeper level. The phytonutrients in crucifers initiate an intricate dance inside our cells in which gene response elements direct and balance the steps among dozens of detoxification enzyme partners, each performing its own protective role in perfect balance with the other dancers. The natural synergy that results optimizes our cells' ability to disarm and clear free radicals and toxins, including potential carcinogens— one reason why cruciferous vegetables appear to lower our risk of cancer more effectively than any other vegetables or fruits. So, while Brussels sprouts may be miniature in size, they are giants when it comes to helping to protect cellular structures and DNA from the damage caused by free radicals.
5-Minute Brussels Sprouts [from George Matejin]
Even if you have not been a fan of Brussels sprouts, I think you will love this Healthiest Way of Recipe. It not only has great flavor, takes little time to prepare, but one serving provides 870% of the daily value (DV) for health-promoting vitamin K, 326% DV for vitamin C and 40% DV for vitamin A. And they only take minutes to prepare. Enjoy!
Prep and Cook Time: 15 minutes
Ingredients:
1 lb Brussels sprouts
Mediterranean Dressing
3 TBS extra virgin olive oil
2 tsp lemon juice
2 medium cloves garlic, chopped or pressed
Sea salt and black pepper to taste
Optional: 1 TBS dijon mustard, 1 TBS minced parsley
5-Minute Brussels Sprouts [from George Matejin]
Even if you have not been a fan of Brussels sprouts, I think you will love this Healthiest Way of Recipe. It not only has great flavor, takes little time to prepare, but one serving provides 870% of the daily value (DV) for health-promoting vitamin K, 326% DV for vitamin C and 40% DV for vitamin A. And they only take minutes to prepare. Enjoy!
Prep and Cook Time: 15 minutes
Ingredients:
1 lb Brussels sprouts
Mediterranean Dressing
3 TBS extra virgin olive oil
2 tsp lemon juice
2 medium cloves garlic, chopped or pressed
Sea salt and black pepper to taste
Optional: 1 TBS dijon mustard, 1 TBS minced parsley
Sunday, February 14, 2010
Snow in GA!
This was the view from my house on Friday. Ahhhhh. The snow DOES blanket the earth with a quiet that I miss from my home in MN. There is a peace that hushes even the birds, and a cleanliness that the untrodden, sparkly snow shows off so that it is almost a sin to walk upon it...
Sunday, February 7, 2010
Are the outside leaves of romaine lettuce better for you than the hearts?
No, the outside leaves of romaine lettuce are not significantly better for you than the hearts. There are many varieties of romaine lettuce found in the marketplace. Some of these varieties are selected for their special ability to produce a true "heart" with a core group of younger leaves. Other varieties are selected for their more uniform development of a lettuce head. All varieties of romaine lettuce are healthy and nourishing. I greatly encourage purchase of organic lettuce, however, in order to avoid unwanted pesticide residues in the lettuce and to optimize the nutrient content. It's worth pointing out that the romaine hearts are usually more durable, will last longer in your refrigerator and stay fresh for a longer period of time than the outer leaves.
One difference that you can often notice between the outer leaves of romaine lettuce and the hearts is their shade of green. Since the outer leaves have more exposure to sunlight, they will develop more chlorophyll than the hearts, and you will see this additional chlorophyll reflected in a richer shade of green. (The hearts still contain plenty of chlorophyll-just less than the outer leaves.) Chlorophyll is a pigment with definite health-supportive properties, although I have yet to see any research that suggests the amount of chlorophyll found in the outer leaves of romaine lettuce is more health-supportive than the amount found in the hearts.
--George Matejan
One difference that you can often notice between the outer leaves of romaine lettuce and the hearts is their shade of green. Since the outer leaves have more exposure to sunlight, they will develop more chlorophyll than the hearts, and you will see this additional chlorophyll reflected in a richer shade of green. (The hearts still contain plenty of chlorophyll-just less than the outer leaves.) Chlorophyll is a pigment with definite health-supportive properties, although I have yet to see any research that suggests the amount of chlorophyll found in the outer leaves of romaine lettuce is more health-supportive than the amount found in the hearts.
--George Matejan
Monday, February 1, 2010
Sunday, January 31, 2010
Sunday, January 24, 2010
Friday, January 22, 2010
Are colored potatoes healthier than white potatoes? Hmmm...
The differences in color between varieties of potatoes are basically differences in carotenoid and flavonoid content. Virtually all types of potatoes provide significant amounts of approximately seven to ten nutrients. While Americans are accustomed to potatoes with a white inside, potatoes in other parts of the world more commonly have starchy yellow insides. In the U.S. we call potatoes with yellow insides "specialty potatoes." However, worldwide they are the norm rather than the exception.
All colorful potatoes provide carotenoids (and some also provide flavonoids) that white potatoes do not. Carotenoids and flavonoids are pigments, and according to nutritional research, they provide us with many health benefits, including cancer protection. For example, the darker the starchy yellow flesh of a yellow potato, the greater quantity of carotenoids, including beta-carotene (and, in some cases, lutein) that is present. The blue in blue potatoes comes from their flavonoid content. Both the flavonoids found in blue potatoes and the carotenoids found in yellow potatoes help promote good health!
Some carotenoid- and flavonoid-rich potatoes currently available in different regions of the U.S. include: Yukon Gold (currently the best-selling yellow potato in the U.S. marketplace), Michigold, Donna, All Blue (also called "Purple Marker"), Purple Viking, Saginaw Gold, Red Gold, Rose Gold, and Ruby Crescent.
The presence of carotenoids and flavonoids, however, does not affect the carbohydrate content of potatoes. Potatoes all contain about one gram of carbohydrate for every four calories—they're basically all-carbohydrate when it comes to calorie content.
Technically, you'll get more fiber and minerals per bite from smaller potatoes of any kind, since they have more surface area (skin) per amount of starchy inside (total volume). The three to seven grams of fiber contained in a medium-sized potato are mostly in the skin, so consider enjoying it as well as the potato's insides the next time you cook some spuds. Of course, unless your potato is an organically grown one, you'll be getting most of the pesticide residue here—in the skin—as well, which is one of the reasons I am a big advocate for purchasing potatoes (and other foods) that are organically grown. Although there are some differences among potatoes, if you are seriously looking to lower carbohydrate intake, you need to switch to a different category of vegetable, like the leafy green vegetables.
George Mateljan
All colorful potatoes provide carotenoids (and some also provide flavonoids) that white potatoes do not. Carotenoids and flavonoids are pigments, and according to nutritional research, they provide us with many health benefits, including cancer protection. For example, the darker the starchy yellow flesh of a yellow potato, the greater quantity of carotenoids, including beta-carotene (and, in some cases, lutein) that is present. The blue in blue potatoes comes from their flavonoid content. Both the flavonoids found in blue potatoes and the carotenoids found in yellow potatoes help promote good health!
Some carotenoid- and flavonoid-rich potatoes currently available in different regions of the U.S. include: Yukon Gold (currently the best-selling yellow potato in the U.S. marketplace), Michigold, Donna, All Blue (also called "Purple Marker"), Purple Viking, Saginaw Gold, Red Gold, Rose Gold, and Ruby Crescent.
The presence of carotenoids and flavonoids, however, does not affect the carbohydrate content of potatoes. Potatoes all contain about one gram of carbohydrate for every four calories—they're basically all-carbohydrate when it comes to calorie content.
Technically, you'll get more fiber and minerals per bite from smaller potatoes of any kind, since they have more surface area (skin) per amount of starchy inside (total volume). The three to seven grams of fiber contained in a medium-sized potato are mostly in the skin, so consider enjoying it as well as the potato's insides the next time you cook some spuds. Of course, unless your potato is an organically grown one, you'll be getting most of the pesticide residue here—in the skin—as well, which is one of the reasons I am a big advocate for purchasing potatoes (and other foods) that are organically grown. Although there are some differences among potatoes, if you are seriously looking to lower carbohydrate intake, you need to switch to a different category of vegetable, like the leafy green vegetables.
George Mateljan
Saturday, January 9, 2010
Friday, January 8, 2010
Here's my new [well...used...Ebay -- these things are frackin expensive! saved $70 big ones] automatic sprouter.
I have NO idea what I am doing.
First seed I tried were sesame seeds. I finally figured out that the reason they weren't sprouting was because they were hulled and I needed to use un-hulled seeds.
Now I am trying out barley. It's day 3, or something, and they have like 1/2 inch tails. So something is happening! It's exciting and I have no life!
The instructions that came with this sprouter were limited, and the info online hit and miss.
Yesterday I decided to add the extra tray on top of each 'bin', which places them on top of the existing seeds. I read that I was supposed to do it that way. Then today I took one out of one of the bins and left the other in the other one. I'm afraid the little tails will be squished between the trays.
Like I said. I have no idea what I'm doing.........
"Bone Builder Cocktail"
3 kale leaves
2 collard green leaves - didn't have so um didn't add
handful parsley
3 carrots
1 apple
1/2 green pepper - used red instead
Juice everything using carrots and apples to help push through the greens, and you get 211 calories and 6,639 RE vit A!, 5.6 g protein!, 110 mg vit C! 212 mg calcium!, 102 mg magnesium!@, 1,384 mg potassium! plus carb, thiamine, riboflavin, niacin, iron, etc.
Dude. Awesome.
Truthfully, for me, a 3 stars out of a possible 4. But still a do-over. Also added Brewer's Yeast.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
Saturday, January 2, 2010
Creamy Pineapple
1/2 pineapple1/2 bag frozen mango
1 c fresh blueberries
1/2 c Greek vanilla yogurt
...all organic
Juice first three, then stir in yogurt. Does it look like I par took prior to snapping of this pic? Well, duh. And yum! The serving size for this was for two, but I drank it all before I realized that. Heh. [I also added a bit of Brewer's yeast.]
This came from The Juicing Bible, which was a Christmas gift to me from my son. Great book.
The mystery juice
I took this pic before the holidays, and for the life of me, cannot remember what I juiced. Looks good though, doesn't it? :>
Tilapia has been growing in popularity...
According to the American Tilapia Association, it is currently the 6th most popular seafood consumed in the United States. It is a low-calorie, low-fat fish with a light, mildly sweet flavor, which can be prepared many different ways. Since the tilapia you purchase is very likely to have been farmed, I do believe it is important to purchase either organically farmed tilapia, or tilapia that have been farmed in the United States. Other countries that are large exporters of tilapia-including China, Indonesia, Thailand, the Philippines, and Egypt-do not appear to have the same quality control systems in place to assure you of high-quality fish. For more detailed information in this area, you can visit the Monterey Bay Aquarium's Farmed Tilapia Report.
-- George Mateljan
-- George Mateljan
Thursday, December 31, 2009
Why is range-fed and grass-fed meat and poultry better?
The natural behavior of cows, chickens turkeys, pigs, and other animals commonly eaten for food in the United States is to live outdoors and to consume food that is part of the natural habitat. For example, in the case of ruminant animals like cows, there is a long history of development in which the digestive system of the cow has adapted to foraging and consumption of plants often referred to as "forages." These plants include many grasses and legumes.
When cows are fed in a non-natural way, digestive tract problems can develop, and medications may be needed to offset problems caused by the cows' non-natural diet. For example, when being raised to provide non-organic beef, it is not unusual for a cow to be fed more than 10 pounds of corn per day. Since the cow's digestive system is poorly matched to this large volume of grain in the daily diet, it is placed at risk for certain problems including bursting of the stomach from excessive amounts of gas that can be produced by fermentation of grain. In the case of non-organic beef, medications that prevent gas formation (like poloxalene) may be given to cows on a preventive basis as part of their standard diet to prevent this gas formation. However, the routine administration of a medication like poloxalene cannot be carried out in the raising of certified organic beef. Research studies have made it clear that cows remain healthier when they are fed and raised in a natural way. Healthier cows also mean healthier meat for all individuals who include meat in their diet.
One great benefit of grass feeding is the increased presence of omega-3 fatty acids in beef provided by grass-fed cattle. I've seen two studies on Australian beef that clearly document this trend, which stems from the natural presence of alpha-linolenic acid (also known as ALA, the omega-3 fatty acid that serves as the building block for all other omega-3 fats) in pasture grasses and legumes. While more complicated omega-3 fats like EPA (eicosapentaenoic acid) and DHA (docosahexaenoic acid) are not present in pasture crops, these critical omega-3 fats are produced in the cow's body from the ALA present in the pasture plants and you can receive substantial amounts of EPA and DHA from pasture-fed beef along with its ALA. These amounts are still very low, however, in comparison with the far greater amount of EPA and DHA provided by an equivalent amount of an omega-3-containing fish like salmon. The amount of ALA in grass-fed beef is also very much lower than the amount of ALA provided by plant foods like flaxseeds and walnuts, which are rich in this omega-3 fatty acid.
I want to point out that the purchase of certified organic beef, poultry, and other meats does not guarantee range-feeding. Unfortunately, the livestock living conditions spelled out in the National Organics Program only includes "access to the outdoors" and "access to pasture" and does not specify any required period of time for natural outdoor living. Nor does it require any amount of foraging crops in the diet. For this reason, you'll need to look for the terms "range-fed" or "grass-fed" on the label in addition to the organic certification. Organic meat that is not labeled either "range-fed" or "grass-fed" is still a very good option for you in the market, but if organic combined with range-fed or grass-fed is available, I encourage you to consider that combination as your best option.
--George Mateljan
Saturday, December 26, 2009
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
Trapped in Traditional Thought by Scott McKain
In this recent blog, McKain points out that a thirty second spot on the number one television show, "NCIS" costs $133,304 while a thirty second spot on "Grey's Anatomy" costs $240,462. Given the fact that "NCIS" has four million more viewers than "Grey's Anatomy", why would the ads cost less for "NCIS"?This contradiction points to the traditional agency approach and thinking when it comes to what population segments to target. The demographics for "Grey's Anatomy" are younger and the agencies believe that younger viewers will be more easily influenced and become brand loyal over time. McKain points to the fact that his brand choices during his younger years have indeed changed over time. In his younger years, he drove a Chevy and now he drives a BMW, he drank Pepsi and now drinks Diet Coke, he listened to a Sony Walkman and now listens to an iPod, etc.Matt Thornhill, in his book, Boomer Consumer, states that Baby Boomers are no where near done consuming. They will be buying things marketed to them for the next 20 years. And they represent a very large segment of the population. He also points out that with age comes wisdom and that Boomers are not particularly brand loyal. They are ripe for conversion, if a product appeals to their needs.So why should the advertisers and ad agencies focus more on Boomers than the younger generations? Let's start with the fact that Baby Boomers spend $2 trillion a year on consumer products and services. That is $400 billion more annually than their younger generation counterparts. Baby Boomers represent one of every three adults in America. Almost 80 million Americans are Boomers!Boomers like to travel, they buy lots of tech gadgets, they are still buying cars and homes, they are into fitness, and they eat out regularly. Given that a large portion of the Boomers are empty nesters with disposable income, they should be the prime targets of the marketers and advertisers in this country. And even the Boomers who aren't empty nesters, keep their kids clothed, fed and supplied with plenty of music and electronics.Baby Boomers control 70% of the wealth in America. So why don't the advertisers and ad agencies target them more? It is beyond comprehension. And as a Boomer, believe me when I say, we would really prefer fewer advertisements about erectile dysfunction and bladder issues. Keep in mind, Baby Boomers on average feel like they are 14 years younger than their actual age. Treat them as seniors or older Americans and you won't sell them anything.Use words like mature or senior in your ad and the Baby Boomers will tune you out in a New York minute. So if you expect to capture their attention, don't try to take them back to the sixties or seventies or use age related content. Most Boomers still believe that they are young and vital. Treat them as such and you will be more successful. Don't over do it, though. If you treat them like twenty or thirty year olds, then you will miss the boat and waste your ad dollarsThe characters portraying Boomers in advertisements should be cool, hip, and youthful, not grandpa or grandma. Baby Boomers remain idealistic, eager to embrace change, and believe in self empowerment. Don't expect them to march in lockstep or be influenced or persuaded by traditional approaches. If an ad agency expects keep its clients, it had better begin targeting this segment of the population and use non-traditional, innovative approaches when designing the campaigns.Finally, when creating the ads, the agency should understand that Boomers are more receptive to the ads that tell a story. Boomers expect the ad to appeal to their generation, so make sure you personalize the pitch to them. When using personalities in an ad, ensure that the Boomers can identify and relate to the personalities. Be sure to include a "what's in it for me" connection. Follow these simple rules, create a compelling ad and you should be able to capture this lucrative market segment.
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
I agree with the majority of what this article says...
Tuesday, December 15, 2009
Ditch the Climate Change Debate by Ron Jones
A recent editorial cartoon that I ran across cleverly expressed a great deal of my own thoughts around the climate change debate. The cartoonist (Joel Pett, Lexington Herald-Leader) depicts an obviously unconvinced audience member at a presentation where benefits of clean energy are being displayed on the stage screen. The attendee is shown demanding an answer to a question similar to the following:
"What if it turns out that climate change is all a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"
The presenter he is questioning has a list of goals on the screen including:
• Energy Independence
• Preserve Rainforests
• Sustainability
• Green Jobs
• Livable Cities
• Renewables
• Clean Water, Air
• Healthy Children
In a single frame, and with surgical irony, the cartoonist has masterfully steered us to the question I have been asking myself and others for a long time, which is essentially, why are we not able to shift the dialog onto a productive level that leaves the polarization and bickering behind so we can just get started on the enormous task of cleaning up the mess we've been helping to make?
We don't have to reach some final, indisputable conclusion on the "climate" debate to know that there are plenty of good reasons to take steps to replace 18th and 19th century technologies and the polluting energy sources that have been fueling them.
The answer must reside somewhere deep in human nature. There seems to be an irresistible force of passion that makes us dig in our heels and refuse to budge when we feel strongly about something. In this case, it doesn't really matter if we're talking about those who view "climate change" or "global warming," as some prefer to refer to it, as the great challenge of our time or those who are absolutely convinced that it is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.
It seems that those who have taken a passionate stand either way are prepared to fight over this for as long as takes, and unfortunately, the fact that people in both camps seem determined to drive to an "all or nothing" resolution keeps getting in the way of potential progress on the things we could agree on.
Even the most hardcore climate skeptics don't try to make their case by denying or stating opposition to goals like those listed by the cartoonist, they just refuse to go there. At the same time, their counterparts, who are every bit as passionate in their insistence that mankind's activities are at the center of all the problems in the world, often appear to be pushing for absolute and immediate solutions with little or no willingness to explore common ground. The net result is an ongoing bitter conflict that is often stalled by distractions leaving those of us in the middle stranded and feeling like we can't do anything meaningful to influence the outcome.
I am personally convinced that we are indeed witnessing measurable levels of global climate change. I only make this statement based on personal observation and certainly not because I believe the reports of governments, including our own, or the findings of scientists I have never met. I have reached my conclusion because I have observed certain evidence with my own eyes. I've visited glaciers from Alaska to New Zealand that are receding at unprecedented and alarming rates. I have flown over millions of acres of America's western forests and seen the beetle kill that is resulting from milder winter temperatures to the detriment of not only the trees, but also virtually every species in that ecosystem.
What I have no way of verifying on my own is how much of this shift is attributable to the activities of the human species. I seriously doubt that it is the primary factor. Both sides of this debate agree that the scale and complexity of the Earth's atmosphere and its global climate have seen numerous dramatic shifts to one extreme or the other over time.
What I do know is that I have seen the contrast between the air in Beijing and other cities in the Northern Hemisphere with that of still pristine regions of the South Pacific. The calamity is there for anyone who is interested to see. I have also fished a variety of streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs throughout North America where the fish populations face collapse from human-caused pollution and where signs are posted to warn against consuming the fish that are there.
Put simply, we have used our one and only planetary home and all of its natural systems as a garbage dump of one kind or another for practically all of recorded human history. Sadly, the situation has only worsened over the last few centuries as we made industrial "advances" and as human population has swelled. We have treated it like a trash can and no matter how big the can is, it can only hold so much. We are reaching that point and before it's too late we need to revise our practices. It's time to clean up our act and "create a better world"—whether global warming is a hoax or not.
Ditch the Climate Change Debate by Ron Jones
A recent editorial cartoon that I ran across cleverly expressed a great deal of my own thoughts around the climate change debate. The cartoonist (Joel Pett, Lexington Herald-Leader) depicts an obviously unconvinced audience member at a presentation where benefits of clean energy are being displayed on the stage screen. The attendee is shown demanding an answer to a question similar to the following:
"What if it turns out that climate change is all a big hoax and we create a better world for nothing?"
The presenter he is questioning has a list of goals on the screen including:
• Energy Independence
• Preserve Rainforests
• Sustainability
• Green Jobs
• Livable Cities
• Renewables
• Clean Water, Air
• Healthy Children
In a single frame, and with surgical irony, the cartoonist has masterfully steered us to the question I have been asking myself and others for a long time, which is essentially, why are we not able to shift the dialog onto a productive level that leaves the polarization and bickering behind so we can just get started on the enormous task of cleaning up the mess we've been helping to make?
We don't have to reach some final, indisputable conclusion on the "climate" debate to know that there are plenty of good reasons to take steps to replace 18th and 19th century technologies and the polluting energy sources that have been fueling them.
The answer must reside somewhere deep in human nature. There seems to be an irresistible force of passion that makes us dig in our heels and refuse to budge when we feel strongly about something. In this case, it doesn't really matter if we're talking about those who view "climate change" or "global warming," as some prefer to refer to it, as the great challenge of our time or those who are absolutely convinced that it is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on mankind.
It seems that those who have taken a passionate stand either way are prepared to fight over this for as long as takes, and unfortunately, the fact that people in both camps seem determined to drive to an "all or nothing" resolution keeps getting in the way of potential progress on the things we could agree on.
Even the most hardcore climate skeptics don't try to make their case by denying or stating opposition to goals like those listed by the cartoonist, they just refuse to go there. At the same time, their counterparts, who are every bit as passionate in their insistence that mankind's activities are at the center of all the problems in the world, often appear to be pushing for absolute and immediate solutions with little or no willingness to explore common ground. The net result is an ongoing bitter conflict that is often stalled by distractions leaving those of us in the middle stranded and feeling like we can't do anything meaningful to influence the outcome.
I am personally convinced that we are indeed witnessing measurable levels of global climate change. I only make this statement based on personal observation and certainly not because I believe the reports of governments, including our own, or the findings of scientists I have never met. I have reached my conclusion because I have observed certain evidence with my own eyes. I've visited glaciers from Alaska to New Zealand that are receding at unprecedented and alarming rates. I have flown over millions of acres of America's western forests and seen the beetle kill that is resulting from milder winter temperatures to the detriment of not only the trees, but also virtually every species in that ecosystem.
What I have no way of verifying on my own is how much of this shift is attributable to the activities of the human species. I seriously doubt that it is the primary factor. Both sides of this debate agree that the scale and complexity of the Earth's atmosphere and its global climate have seen numerous dramatic shifts to one extreme or the other over time.
What I do know is that I have seen the contrast between the air in Beijing and other cities in the Northern Hemisphere with that of still pristine regions of the South Pacific. The calamity is there for anyone who is interested to see. I have also fished a variety of streams, rivers, lakes, and reservoirs throughout North America where the fish populations face collapse from human-caused pollution and where signs are posted to warn against consuming the fish that are there.
Put simply, we have used our one and only planetary home and all of its natural systems as a garbage dump of one kind or another for practically all of recorded human history. Sadly, the situation has only worsened over the last few centuries as we made industrial "advances" and as human population has swelled. We have treated it like a trash can and no matter how big the can is, it can only hold so much. We are reaching that point and before it's too late we need to revise our practices. It's time to clean up our act and "create a better world"—whether global warming is a hoax or not.
Sunday, December 13, 2009
Where are regulations regarding organic foods heading?
It's important for all of us to be aware that the USDA's process for certifying organic foods is constantly evolving. Already, the organics process has seen proposals to allow genetically engineered food and irradiated food within the scope of certified organic labeling. Proposals to allow sewage sludge in the cultivation of organic food have also been introduced. Thanks to widespread public involvement, including letter writing and in-person testimony, none of these proposals were adopted and certified organic food is still free from genetic engineering, irradiation, and sewage sludge. However, many changes will continue to be proposed. For example, much current debate is focused on a proposal to allow organic certification of fish and shellfish products, and the details of this process are still being discussed and formulated. For more information about current issues in organic labeling, or to become more involved in public comment opportunities related to organic regulations, you can visit the National Organics Program (NOP) website. The NOP Newsroom can be a good place to start to learn about recent notices and announcements related to proposed changes in the organic certification process.
George Mateljan
George Mateljan
Where can we find the best source of antioxidants?
There is only one place outside the body where we can count on finding the health-promoting combinations of antioxidants that are necessary for optimal health. That place is a balanced diet containing natural, whole, minimally processed and organically grown foods. The reason is simple. We need more than just vitamin E, vitamin C, beta-carotene, glutathione, or other single nutrients for our antioxidant health. We need all of the food components that provide natural colors and flavors to food, the flavonoids and carotenoids and other types of pigments that can only be found in whole natural foods. You cannot get a complete antioxidant team when you take a dietary supplement, no matter how high in quality. Nor can you get a complete antioxidant team when you eat processed foods with artificial flavors and colorings in place of natural flavonoids and carotenoids. It takes a whole, natural foods diet to provide you with genuine antioxidant teamwork. That's one reason I feel so strongly about the value of the World's Healthiest Foods.
George Mateljan
George Mateljan
Key Lime Pie -- in the raw :>
Okay. No way does this look like the traditional key lime pie. Well. The truth is, whenever I make these 'raw' recipes, the NEVER work out, or look like, how they're supposed to!
All that said, ladies and gentlemen, I am here to tell you that I have sneaked a nibble or two or three while preparing said raw key lime pie -- and it is scrumptious!
Crust: coconut, macadamia nuts, walnuts, sea salt, medjol dates
Filling: avocados, lime juice, honey, blueberries, kiwi
Crust is frozen for 20 min and then filled and then in freezer for at least 2 hours.
I will be tasting this later today, and I cannot wait. The flavors will be outstanding.
Visually though...not so much.
Graffiti Boys..
When you graffiti outside my office door like this...well...on some level I don't mind so much. :>
Friday, December 11, 2009
"Climategate"
December 10, 2009SummaryIn late November 2009, more than 1,000 e-mails between scientists at the Climate Research Unit of the U.K.'s University of East Anglia were stolen and made public by an as-yet-unnamed hacker. Climate skeptics are claiming that they show scientific misconduct that amounts to the complete fabrication of man-made global warming. We find that to be unfounded:* The messages, which span 13 years, show a few scientists in a bad light, being rude or dismissive. An investigation is underway, but there's still plenty of evidence that the earth is getting warmer and that humans are largely responsible.* Some critics say the e-mails negate the conclusions of a 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, but the IPCC report relied on data from a large number of sources, of which CRU was only one.* E-mails being cited as "smoking guns" have been misrepresented. For instance, one e-mail that refers to "hiding the decline" isn't talking about a decline in actual temperatures as measured at weather stations. These have continued to rise, and 2009 may turn out to be the fifth warmest year ever recorded. The "decline" actually refers to a problem with recent data from tree rings.
Factchecker.org
Factchecker.org
Thursday, December 10, 2009
What's the problem with refined grains?
When it comes to grains, most people also eat far too many refined grains. Extensive processing of grains can leave very little in the way of nutritional value. It can also leave grain products that are rich in the simpler carbohydrates and elevate blood sugar levels in a problematic way. Refined grain flours are usually defined in terms of "percent extraction." Wheat flour is 60% extraction when only 60% of the original whole grain remains in the flour, and the other 40% has been removed. Most of the wheat flour products in the United States have been made from 60% extraction flour. Unfortunately, over half of the original nutrients in whole wheat are lost from 60% extraction flour because extraction involves the removal of the germ and bran, which are the primary sites for nutrient storage in the grain. There is absolutely no doubt in my mind that refined grain products cannot serve as the basis of a healthy diet.
George Matlin
George Matlin
Sunday, December 6, 2009
What type of cookware should I use for microwave cooking?
Pyrex, a special type of glass known as thermal shock resistant glass, is a cookware material we like, especially if you have decided to do microwave cooking. Pyrex is a fairly stable material that includes both boron and silicon, two minerals not present on the 2007 ATSDR (Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry) priority toxin list.
We are highly concerned about migration of plastics from containers into food. Therefore, we would suggest avoiding its use in cooking situations including in the microwave. (For the same reasons we would avoid using "boil-in-a-bag" type vegetables.)
The George Mateljan Foundation, a not-for-profit foundation with no commercial interests, is a new force for change to help make a healthier you and a healthier world.
We are highly concerned about migration of plastics from containers into food. Therefore, we would suggest avoiding its use in cooking situations including in the microwave. (For the same reasons we would avoid using "boil-in-a-bag" type vegetables.)
The George Mateljan Foundation, a not-for-profit foundation with no commercial interests, is a new force for change to help make a healthier you and a healthier world.
Wednesday, December 2, 2009
New study finds synthetic musks in umbilical cord blood.
Today, Campaign for Safe Cosmetics founding member Environmental Working Group released a new study that found 232 chemical contaminants in umbilical cord blood samples from 10 newborn American babies. Among the findings: two synthetic musks, components of fragrance, were found in 7 of the 10 cord blood samples.
Artificial musks commonly added to fragrances and personal care products can be absorbed through skin or inhaled, and concentrate and persist in our bodies - so our many small exposures can add up fast. Synthetic musks have also been found in human breast milk and fatty tissues, and are ubiquitous in wastewater and rivers.
The cosmetics industry and other industries that use "fragrance" in their products use a whopping 9,000 tons of synthetic musk annually, despite the fact that little is known about the safety of these chemicals. Unfortunately, preliminary research raises concerns: musks may disrupt hormones and are toxic to aquatic life.
Because of a loophole in labeling law, the ingredients in "fragrance" are considered trade secrets, so companies don't have to tell us what's in scents - often dozens or even hundreds of synthetic chemical compounds like synthetic musks and other ingredients linked to harm.
Biomonitoring studies like this one make clear that chemicals - many of which have never been tested for long-term safety or are known to be harmful - used in everyday products are ending up in our bodies and in our ecosystem. At the same time, cancer, infertility, and behavioral and developmental illnesses linked to many of these chemicals of concern are on the rise.
As consumers and citizens, we can fight the fragrance loophole. Here are three ways you can make a difference:
Contact the manufacturer of a cosmetic product in your bathroom that lists "fragrance," "perfume" or "musk" on the ingredient label, and ask the maker to use non-toxic ingredients and fully disclose all ingredients on products labels. Click here for contact info, talking points and a short response form so you can let us how your conversation went!
This holiday season, choose gifts free of synthetic fragrance. Consult the list of companies that have signed the Compact for Safe Cosmetics, and use EWG's Skin Deep database to run an "advanced search" of products without synthetic fragrance.
Check out our DIY cosmetics recipes for creative, fresh gifts for you and yours!
Thank you for making a difference in 2009, whether you wrote a letter to a company or Congress, contacted the FDA or switched out your old products for safe alternatives. You're a vital part of our work for safer cosmetics and smarter laws that protect our health.
Artificial musks commonly added to fragrances and personal care products can be absorbed through skin or inhaled, and concentrate and persist in our bodies - so our many small exposures can add up fast. Synthetic musks have also been found in human breast milk and fatty tissues, and are ubiquitous in wastewater and rivers.
The cosmetics industry and other industries that use "fragrance" in their products use a whopping 9,000 tons of synthetic musk annually, despite the fact that little is known about the safety of these chemicals. Unfortunately, preliminary research raises concerns: musks may disrupt hormones and are toxic to aquatic life.
Because of a loophole in labeling law, the ingredients in "fragrance" are considered trade secrets, so companies don't have to tell us what's in scents - often dozens or even hundreds of synthetic chemical compounds like synthetic musks and other ingredients linked to harm.
Biomonitoring studies like this one make clear that chemicals - many of which have never been tested for long-term safety or are known to be harmful - used in everyday products are ending up in our bodies and in our ecosystem. At the same time, cancer, infertility, and behavioral and developmental illnesses linked to many of these chemicals of concern are on the rise.
As consumers and citizens, we can fight the fragrance loophole. Here are three ways you can make a difference:
Contact the manufacturer of a cosmetic product in your bathroom that lists "fragrance," "perfume" or "musk" on the ingredient label, and ask the maker to use non-toxic ingredients and fully disclose all ingredients on products labels. Click here for contact info, talking points and a short response form so you can let us how your conversation went!
This holiday season, choose gifts free of synthetic fragrance. Consult the list of companies that have signed the Compact for Safe Cosmetics, and use EWG's Skin Deep database to run an "advanced search" of products without synthetic fragrance.
Check out our DIY cosmetics recipes for creative, fresh gifts for you and yours!
Thank you for making a difference in 2009, whether you wrote a letter to a company or Congress, contacted the FDA or switched out your old products for safe alternatives. You're a vital part of our work for safer cosmetics and smarter laws that protect our health.
Saturday, November 28, 2009
.JPG)
.JPG)
.JPG)
Monday, November 9, 2009
Labeling packaged food...
"When I shop these days, I can't help but notice the number of competing health logos on packaged foods. As you are lured to purchase "natural," "smart choice" or "high fiber" foods, their meanings have become fuzzy and unreliable. Labeling that was initially intended to aid consumers to make healthier food choices has turned into a nightmare of confusion and even distrust.
According to our Breakthrough News for this week, in the United States, health and nutrition statements on our prepackaged foods have never depended on genuine, overall food quality. It goes on to say that a kid's ready-to-eat cereal can contain over 2 teaspoons of sugar per cup, have sugar as its number one ingredient, and still claim "now provides fiber." A good example of this is the recent labeling of Froot Loops as nutritious enough to sport a big checkmark on the front of boxes signifying that choosing the cereal was indeed smart.
When people ask me what makes the World's Healthiest Foods so special, one of my first answers is "because they are nutrient-rich." That's why I was so heartened by the potential use of a new research tool developed by researchers at Nutrition Impact, which measures nutrient-richness and overall food quality to lead the way in providing reliable food labeling for consumers.
Nutrient-richness takes into consideration the number and quantity of nutrients in relation to the number of calories a food contains, so we are never just focusing on one nutrient. That's why a food such as romaine lettuce, which contains only 16 calories in a two cup serving but supplies a good, very good, or excellent source of almost 20 nutrients, is one of the most nutrient-rich of the World's Healthiest vegetables."
-- The George Mateljan Foundation
According to our Breakthrough News for this week, in the United States, health and nutrition statements on our prepackaged foods have never depended on genuine, overall food quality. It goes on to say that a kid's ready-to-eat cereal can contain over 2 teaspoons of sugar per cup, have sugar as its number one ingredient, and still claim "now provides fiber." A good example of this is the recent labeling of Froot Loops as nutritious enough to sport a big checkmark on the front of boxes signifying that choosing the cereal was indeed smart.
When people ask me what makes the World's Healthiest Foods so special, one of my first answers is "because they are nutrient-rich." That's why I was so heartened by the potential use of a new research tool developed by researchers at Nutrition Impact, which measures nutrient-richness and overall food quality to lead the way in providing reliable food labeling for consumers.
Nutrient-richness takes into consideration the number and quantity of nutrients in relation to the number of calories a food contains, so we are never just focusing on one nutrient. That's why a food such as romaine lettuce, which contains only 16 calories in a two cup serving but supplies a good, very good, or excellent source of almost 20 nutrients, is one of the most nutrient-rich of the World's Healthiest vegetables."
-- The George Mateljan Foundation
Sunday, November 8, 2009
Friday, November 6, 2009
Zesty Cranapple
1/2 c cranberries - organic OF COURSE! Doh! A handfull of red grapes - better for you than the green ones, 1/2 lemon - well, I used bottled juice - sue me, 2 apples - ORGANIC.
Now does this not look GOOOOD? 206 calories, Vit A, D, E, folic acid, potassium, and a bunch of other stuff.
How you doin'?
George Mateljan Article - What does GMO mean?
"GMO" stands for "Genetically Modified Organisms," and in the case of food, it usually refers to foods which have been genetically engineered for reasons unrelated to health or nourishment. You may also see the term "GE foods" (which stands for "genetically engineered" foods) or terms like "genetically altered" or "genetically modified" or "genetically improved" to describe these foods.
The process of genetically modifying foods is very new to the world of agriculture. In 1994, there were zero acres of GE food crops in the entire United States. At present there are more than 100 million acres! The Center for Food Safety, a non-profit public interest and environmental advocacy group headquartered in Washington, D.C., estimates that 70-75% of all grocery store products contain at least one genetically modified ingredient. You have almost certainly already consumed many GE foods, whether you knew it or not!
Uncertain health risks with GE foods
The health risks associated with GE foods have not been clearly identified. However, many scientists have speculated that these foods are more likely to trigger allergic reactions in some people. Additionally, they suggest that they may change the protein composition of foods in a way that could present problems for the body's immune, inflammatory, digestive, and cellular signaling systems.
GE soybeans and GE corn are of special concern
In addition, a 2004 survey conducted by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology determined that 45% of all corn, 85% of all soybeans, and 76% of all cotton produced in the U.S. were genetically engineered. This very high percentage of genetic engineering for corn and soybeans is alarming because corn and soybeans are processed into so many commonly used ingredients in processed and prepackaged foods.
For corn, of course, the most common processing product is HFCS, or high fructose corn syrup. This product is found in literally thousands of processed foods, including sodas, baked goods, and many other foods. Other processed food ingredients that often come from corn include corn syrup, corn syrup solids, malt, maltodextrin, maltose, maltol, ethyl maltol, malt syrup, mannitol, dextrose, dextrin, and polydextrose. Of course, corn starch, corn flour, and corn oil are also corn-based ingredients.
As the most common GE food in the U.S., soybeans can be even more difficult than corn to identify in processed and prepackaged foods. The list of processed food ingredients derived from soybeans is a long one and includes: hydrolyzed vegetable protein (HVP), textured vegetable protein (TVP), textured soy protein (TSP), textured soy flour (TSF), lecithin, meat analogs, isolated soy protein, isolated vegetable protein, soy protein concentrate, and structured protein fiber (SPF). Of course, soy bran, soy fiber, soy nuts, soy oil, soy sauce, soy grits, soy meal are also made from soybeans.
Unless you stick with certified organic foods, you will need to avoid any products with the ingredients listed above if you want to minimize your risk of GE foods. There are simply too much GE corn and soybean crops being raised for you to be sure that your non-organic foods are "GE safe".
Organic will help you avoid GE foods
Since the National Organics Program forbids the genetic modification of foods to be certified as organic, you can go a long way in avoiding GE foods by purchasing organic. For example, a food that is certified as 100% organic cannot contain any of the ingredients listed above if those ingredients have been derived from genetically engineered corn or soy.
"Non-GMO" or ""GMO-free" on food labels
Unfortunately, no labeling laws for GE foods exist in the United States, even though England, France, Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland, China, Indonesia, and over 25 other countries require labeling of GE foods. (Some GE food crops are actually banned in many countries, including England, Japan, Brazil, Norway, India, and Thailand). In the United States, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has generally discouraged the use of terms like "GMO-free" or "non-GMO" on food labels and has expressed concern about these terms as being misleading. From the FDA's perspective, any statement that implies superiority of a "GMO-free" food is misleading because they note that there is no scientific evidence to support any increased health risks associated with GE foods. While I agree that scientific studies are sadly lacking in this area, I also believe that GE foods can logically be expected to bring with them added health risks, and I would like to see all GE foods and non-GE foods clearly labeled for this reason. However, until such labeling is widely adopted, the only way to lower your GMO risks is to stick with certified organic foods. Fortunately, with the exception of water and fish, every single one of the World's Healthiest Foods is available as certified organic!
References
Center for Food Safety. (2008). Genetically engineered food. Campaign report available online at: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/geneticall7.cfm.
Fernandez-Cornejo J and Caswell M. (2006). The First Decade of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin No. (EIB-11) 36pp. Available online at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB11/.
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. (2004). Genetically Modified Crops in the United States. Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington, D.C. Available online at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=17950
The process of genetically modifying foods is very new to the world of agriculture. In 1994, there were zero acres of GE food crops in the entire United States. At present there are more than 100 million acres! The Center for Food Safety, a non-profit public interest and environmental advocacy group headquartered in Washington, D.C., estimates that 70-75% of all grocery store products contain at least one genetically modified ingredient. You have almost certainly already consumed many GE foods, whether you knew it or not!
Uncertain health risks with GE foods
The health risks associated with GE foods have not been clearly identified. However, many scientists have speculated that these foods are more likely to trigger allergic reactions in some people. Additionally, they suggest that they may change the protein composition of foods in a way that could present problems for the body's immune, inflammatory, digestive, and cellular signaling systems.
GE soybeans and GE corn are of special concern
In addition, a 2004 survey conducted by the Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology determined that 45% of all corn, 85% of all soybeans, and 76% of all cotton produced in the U.S. were genetically engineered. This very high percentage of genetic engineering for corn and soybeans is alarming because corn and soybeans are processed into so many commonly used ingredients in processed and prepackaged foods.
For corn, of course, the most common processing product is HFCS, or high fructose corn syrup. This product is found in literally thousands of processed foods, including sodas, baked goods, and many other foods. Other processed food ingredients that often come from corn include corn syrup, corn syrup solids, malt, maltodextrin, maltose, maltol, ethyl maltol, malt syrup, mannitol, dextrose, dextrin, and polydextrose. Of course, corn starch, corn flour, and corn oil are also corn-based ingredients.
As the most common GE food in the U.S., soybeans can be even more difficult than corn to identify in processed and prepackaged foods. The list of processed food ingredients derived from soybeans is a long one and includes: hydrolyzed vegetable protein (HVP), textured vegetable protein (TVP), textured soy protein (TSP), textured soy flour (TSF), lecithin, meat analogs, isolated soy protein, isolated vegetable protein, soy protein concentrate, and structured protein fiber (SPF). Of course, soy bran, soy fiber, soy nuts, soy oil, soy sauce, soy grits, soy meal are also made from soybeans.
Unless you stick with certified organic foods, you will need to avoid any products with the ingredients listed above if you want to minimize your risk of GE foods. There are simply too much GE corn and soybean crops being raised for you to be sure that your non-organic foods are "GE safe".
Organic will help you avoid GE foods
Since the National Organics Program forbids the genetic modification of foods to be certified as organic, you can go a long way in avoiding GE foods by purchasing organic. For example, a food that is certified as 100% organic cannot contain any of the ingredients listed above if those ingredients have been derived from genetically engineered corn or soy.
"Non-GMO" or ""GMO-free" on food labels
Unfortunately, no labeling laws for GE foods exist in the United States, even though England, France, Germany, New Zealand, Switzerland, China, Indonesia, and over 25 other countries require labeling of GE foods. (Some GE food crops are actually banned in many countries, including England, Japan, Brazil, Norway, India, and Thailand). In the United States, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has generally discouraged the use of terms like "GMO-free" or "non-GMO" on food labels and has expressed concern about these terms as being misleading. From the FDA's perspective, any statement that implies superiority of a "GMO-free" food is misleading because they note that there is no scientific evidence to support any increased health risks associated with GE foods. While I agree that scientific studies are sadly lacking in this area, I also believe that GE foods can logically be expected to bring with them added health risks, and I would like to see all GE foods and non-GE foods clearly labeled for this reason. However, until such labeling is widely adopted, the only way to lower your GMO risks is to stick with certified organic foods. Fortunately, with the exception of water and fish, every single one of the World's Healthiest Foods is available as certified organic!
References
Center for Food Safety. (2008). Genetically engineered food. Campaign report available online at: http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/geneticall7.cfm.
Fernandez-Cornejo J and Caswell M. (2006). The First Decade of Genetically Engineered Crops in the United States. U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service, Economic Information Bulletin No. (EIB-11) 36pp. Available online at: http://www.ers.usda.gov/Publications/EIB11/.
Pew Initiative on Food and Biotechnology. (2004). Genetically Modified Crops in the United States. Pew Charitable Trusts, Washington, D.C. Available online at: http://www.pewtrusts.org/news_room_detail.aspx?id=17950
Monday, November 2, 2009
Tomato Salad Express
Here's what you juice together: 2 tomatoes, 1/4 green pepper, handful of parsley and of spinach...and wheat grass - very cool.
Here's where you juice it...
Add a little Hemp powder and badda bing badda boom. This alone takes care of almost 5 of my required daily 10 fruits/vegetables. How you doin' so far?
And no, it's not a Heineken.
Thursday, October 22, 2009
What are the basic organic standards for livestock (animals)?
Quite simply, organic livestock must be fed organic feed.
The NOSB recommends that conventional feed be allowed only if the organic feed supply has been compromised by a national, state or local weather emergency, or by fire or flood on an organic farm.
Growth promoters and hormones, and plastic pellets for roughage in feed are prohibited. Synthetic vitamins and minerals are allowed.
Organic Livestock Production
Standards for organic livestock production are meant to assure both an organic product to the consumer and living conditions for farm animals that limit stress and promote good health. They address substances used in health care and feeding, as well as herd or flock management and housing.
Livestock includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, fish, wild or domesticated game and horses raised for slaughter or used as draft animals. There are even standards for organic bee-keeping.
Regardless of whether they're raised as breeding stock, as dairy animals, or for slaughter, all livestock is covered by the Act.
The following highlights address some of the questions most frequently asked about the NOSB Recommendations for Organic Livestock Standards.
Housing and Health Care for Organic Livestock
Healthy living conditions and attentive care are considered first steps in the prevention of illness. Therefore, animals must not be overcrowded, and must be allowed periodic access to the outdoors and direct sunlight.
Antibiotics, wormers and other medications may not be used routinely as preventative measures. See The National List for specific details on medications recommended by the NOSB for use in organic livestock health care.
Recordkeeping for Organic Livestock
Records must be kept on all feeding and health care practices for each animal or flock, and there must be a verifiable audit trail to trace any animal or flock back to the farm.
The NOSB recommends that conventional feed be allowed only if the organic feed supply has been compromised by a national, state or local weather emergency, or by fire or flood on an organic farm.
Growth promoters and hormones, and plastic pellets for roughage in feed are prohibited. Synthetic vitamins and minerals are allowed.
Organic Livestock Production
Standards for organic livestock production are meant to assure both an organic product to the consumer and living conditions for farm animals that limit stress and promote good health. They address substances used in health care and feeding, as well as herd or flock management and housing.
Livestock includes cattle, sheep, goats, swine, poultry, fish, wild or domesticated game and horses raised for slaughter or used as draft animals. There are even standards for organic bee-keeping.
Regardless of whether they're raised as breeding stock, as dairy animals, or for slaughter, all livestock is covered by the Act.
The following highlights address some of the questions most frequently asked about the NOSB Recommendations for Organic Livestock Standards.
Housing and Health Care for Organic Livestock
Healthy living conditions and attentive care are considered first steps in the prevention of illness. Therefore, animals must not be overcrowded, and must be allowed periodic access to the outdoors and direct sunlight.
Antibiotics, wormers and other medications may not be used routinely as preventative measures. See The National List for specific details on medications recommended by the NOSB for use in organic livestock health care.
Recordkeeping for Organic Livestock
Records must be kept on all feeding and health care practices for each animal or flock, and there must be a verifiable audit trail to trace any animal or flock back to the farm.
Monday, October 19, 2009
People of Walmart
Okay. This is by FAR the FUNNIEST thing I've seen in awhile. It's a toss up which is funnier, the pics or the captions. Hilarious!
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Thursday, October 15, 2009
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Sunday, September 20, 2009
Yes kiddies...
...this is a PINK Mustang complete, I might add, with PINK bucket leather seats. Some things should NEVER EVER be P-I-N-K!!!
Thursday, September 17, 2009
Wednesday, September 16, 2009
Sunday, September 13, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Tuesday, August 25, 2009
Sunday, August 23, 2009
IRS Debunks the Rich Not Paying Fair Share of Taxes
8/5/09 9:37 AM
July 29, 2009
Tax Burden of Top 1% Now Exceeds That of Bottom 95%
by Scott A. Hodge
Newly released data from the IRS clearly debunks the conventional Beltway rhetoric that the "rich" are not paying their fair share of taxes.
Indeed, the IRS data shows that in 2007—the most recent data available—the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.
Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.
To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent is comprised of just 1.4 million taxpayers and they pay a larger share of the income tax burden now than the bottom 134 million taxpayers combined.
Some in Washington say the tax system is still not progressive enough. However, the recent IRS data bolsters the findings of an OECD study released last year showing that the U.S.—not France or Sweden—has the most progressive income tax system among OECD nations. We rely more heavily on the top 10 percent of taxpayers than does any nation and our poor people have the lowest tax burden of those in any nation.
We are definitely overdue for some honesty in the debate over the progressivity of the nation's tax burden before lawmakers enact any new taxes to pay for expanded health care.
July 29, 2009
Tax Burden of Top 1% Now Exceeds That of Bottom 95%
by Scott A. Hodge
Newly released data from the IRS clearly debunks the conventional Beltway rhetoric that the "rich" are not paying their fair share of taxes.
Indeed, the IRS data shows that in 2007—the most recent data available—the top 1 percent of taxpayers paid 40.4 percent of the total income taxes collected by the federal government. This is the highest percentage in modern history. By contrast, the top 1 percent paid 24.8 percent of the income tax burden in 1987, the year following the 1986 tax reform act.
Remarkably, the share of the tax burden borne by the top 1 percent now exceeds the share paid by the bottom 95 percent of taxpayers combined. In 2007, the bottom 95 percent paid 39.4 percent of the income tax burden. This is down from the 58 percent of the total income tax burden they paid twenty years ago.
To put this in perspective, the top 1 percent is comprised of just 1.4 million taxpayers and they pay a larger share of the income tax burden now than the bottom 134 million taxpayers combined.
Some in Washington say the tax system is still not progressive enough. However, the recent IRS data bolsters the findings of an OECD study released last year showing that the U.S.—not France or Sweden—has the most progressive income tax system among OECD nations. We rely more heavily on the top 10 percent of taxpayers than does any nation and our poor people have the lowest tax burden of those in any nation.
We are definitely overdue for some honesty in the debate over the progressivity of the nation's tax burden before lawmakers enact any new taxes to pay for expanded health care.
Monday, August 17, 2009
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Nora
I've said it 1000 times: cats rule. Let me say it 1001. Dogs could never play the piano because their slobber would ruin the piano keys. Blech.
Saturday, August 15, 2009
Sunday, August 9, 2009
Saturday, August 8, 2009
Unfreekenbelievable
I have said to people before that the government can do what ever it wants whenever it wants to. That the laws that are in place now will simply be revised or removed at the pleasure of the government to serve its needs. Democracy is on fade.....
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
Saturday, August 1, 2009
Slap Chop It Baby
Slap Chop Rap Remix - watch more funny videos
I LUV this guy! Best commercial since Aflac and the E-Trade commercials.
Break-it-down!
Saturday, July 25, 2009
Fireworks
These videos may not seem especially outstanding. But realize that I am shooting this in my lawn chair laying almost prone with my head tilted all the way back and shooting straight up over my head. The fireworks were directly above me.
Before it got too dark to see, we could see the mortor tubes being lit and fired into the air. Cool beans.
As it happened, we ended up seeing three series of fireworks this year. Not planned. But cool none the less. :>
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Land of the Lost
The discription of this movies begins, "Space-time vortexes suck." Hey. This movie sucks. I can't remember the last time I saw a movie this bad. And the fact that this movie was actually done four years ago and Will Ferrell has since then further perfected his craft [which IMO is highly debateable], who cares? The best parts were the previews on TV, and they weren't all that terrific. I can't believe I got suckered and went to this. Too bad. There was a lot of potential here.
Btw. I realized that I don't think I have ever seen the original Land of of the Lost. Am I the only one on the planet then?
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Visiting Mom
Haven't posted in a bit. Stuff. You know...
At Mom's for two weeks. Heading back this weekend. Been busy with yard work: edging the driveway [that was more like taking a shovel and a pick axe to the sod growing over the driveway], cutting overhanging branches off of some trees [you really have no idea how many trees there really are until you start doing this], planting flowers, killing ants [they were living in paradise until I arrived], and sweeping and raking those propellers that sail down from the trees this time of year [this goes back to before with all the trees...the propellers pile up on mounds there are so many...when the wind blows it looks like it's snowing].
The weather has been perfect while where I live it's in the full throws of summer heat. Neener neener. :D
Mom on the other hand is another story. Since Dad died it's a new experience for me to see her this way. It's scary. It stresses me, but I certainly don't complaint because of what she is going through. The depth of despair that comes from another human being is something to behold.
At Mom's for two weeks. Heading back this weekend. Been busy with yard work: edging the driveway [that was more like taking a shovel and a pick axe to the sod growing over the driveway], cutting overhanging branches off of some trees [you really have no idea how many trees there really are until you start doing this], planting flowers, killing ants [they were living in paradise until I arrived], and sweeping and raking those propellers that sail down from the trees this time of year [this goes back to before with all the trees...the propellers pile up on mounds there are so many...when the wind blows it looks like it's snowing].
The weather has been perfect while where I live it's in the full throws of summer heat. Neener neener. :D
Mom on the other hand is another story. Since Dad died it's a new experience for me to see her this way. It's scary. It stresses me, but I certainly don't complaint because of what she is going through. The depth of despair that comes from another human being is something to behold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
![My Honda Shadow VLX 650 [2005-2007]](http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_nUCICQi5pJg/SIOGhMwVKKI/AAAAAAAAAAc/VS8N7KYXrKU/S220/99+VLX001.jpg)
![Naval Petty Officer 2nd Class - CRT [Veteran]](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhzi65mssFSAlTiuYJay3mcpYpzyJzGhKgBYXLDNBoKf6lmsmUroWupwjRHwQMRCuutRVWBh9-y4Yv6m6yIDt760SYJFmE843C4dU85agMX75LEO7b8sasUvcvJmsnY9u1HeJ7EYy_jb7GU/s150/adam+lincoln+mem.jpg)
