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'?

It's Vitamin D, Stupid

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

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.

Erm...



I don't even know where to begin..l

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.

I crack myself up...

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

HAPPY BIRTHDAY ADAM!


Who needs cake? Pie! Although, kind of ruined the presentation when Mom inadvertently blew out a few of the candles. /sigh


Helmet cam


Kewl, right?


A Goofball for....

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!!!

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.