GERMANY: While Some Waste, Others Feast – IPS ipsnews.net

GERMANY: While Some Waste, Others Feast – IPS ipsnews.net.

GERMANY
While Some Waste, Others Feast

Julio Godoy

HAMBURG, Jan 20 (IPS) – Shortly before midnight last Saturday, Alexander, a 24-year-old law student, stepped out of his small apartment in Hamburg and set off for a jaunt around the local supermarkets to pilfer their garbage containers.

Alex, who did not want his family name to appear in the newspapers, dines almost exclusively on the food that other Germans – from individual families to grocery stores, restaurants and supermarkets – throw away.

“Of course I do this because I (get to) eat for free,” Alex told IPS. “But I also do it out of a deep conviction that throwing away food other people can eat is irresponsible and immoral.”

According to a 2011 study by the Food and Agricultural Organisation (FAO), the average German citizens throws away roughly 105 kilogrammes of edible food each year.

While this phenomenon of waste arises partly from concerns over the aesthetics of food, many experts have linked the rampant dumping of edibles to consumers’ misunderstanding of the expiration data printed on food packages and bottles.

For instance, supermarkets and grocery stores ‘sort out’ potatoes that are too large, cucumbers that are “too bent” and cheese and yoghurt supposedly about to expire for dumping.

“Ever more people expect food in large assortments and of the best quality,” said Claus Herda, director of Hamburger Tafel (“Hamburg’s Table”), a humanitarian organisation that collects food for the poorest inhabitants of this affluent German city, located some 300 kilometres west of Berlin.

“If one supermarket does not provide such quality and variety, consumers go elsewhere to buy their groceries,” Herda added.

He told IPS that practically every German consumer misinterprets the so-called “best before date” printed on all food containers as a warning instead of a suggestion.

This behaviour forces the stores’ management to eliminate foodstuffs considered ‘unattractive’, even if they are still edible. As a result, thousands of tonnes of apples, bananas, milk, coffee, yoghurt, sugar and cheese rot in enourmous garbage containers all over the country.

Alex calls this throw-away mentality “outright insanity. I no longer pay for food. When I see what other people throw away, I realise the craziness of our affluent society.”

Twenty-eight-year-old Berlin resident Raphael Fellmer also benefits from the wasteful behaviour of his society. He and his companion Nieves, along with their four-month old daughter Alma Lucia, eat only ‘sorted out’ food.

“We only eat organic food thrown away by specialised stores,” Fellmer told IPS. “We do not spend a cent on food.”

Three to four times a week, mostly around midnight, Fellmer tours the nearby supermarkets. His equipment consists of nothing more than a head-lamp, a pair of gloves, a big rucksack and a bicycle.

“I usually collect more food than my family can actually eat,” he told IPS. “You just open the container and a mountain of edible food emerges in front of you.”

During the interview, Fellmer brewed a mug of organic coffee from Nicaragua. “I just got it from the store across the street,” he said. “It is even marked ‘fair trade’.”

“The sugar, also organic, comes from Madagascar,” he added.

Fellmer commented that such details illustrate “the sanctimony of many self-proclaimed (ethical) consumers in this rich society. You simply do not transport organic coffee and sugar across the world to throw it away here only because the ‘best before’ date suggests that the goods may be too old to be consumed,” Fellmer stressed.

The act of collecting thrown away food has become so widespread that people like Alex and Raphael have even coined a new verb – containern, meaning “looting food containers” – and have created Internet networks to spread the news about the best locations from which to collect dumped groceries.

In response to what the food retail industry has dubbed ‘looting’, supermarkets and grocery stores are now locking up their garbage containers. Many companies have even hired security personnel to keep away the looters.

Other food producers have found more creative ways to recycle food and avoid throwing it away. In the Western city of Duesseldorf, a bakery chain used to toss up to 12 tons of bread every month.

“I was deeply unhappy with this waste,” Roland Schueren, owner of the bakery chain, told IPS. “Now, we burn the old bread as (fuel) for our backing ovens. If all bakeries in the country did the same, Germany would save enormous amounts of energy and could spare one or two nuclear power plants.”

So far, this enormous waste of edible food has not led to substantial political change. The ministry for consumer protection announced in late 2011 that a new study would be carried out this year “to exactly quantify the dimensions of the problem,” according to one spokesperson.

The spokesperson also praised the policy of “best before date” labelling as “a great political accomplishment, since it (alerts) the consumer to the precise freshness of the foodstuff.”

However, the spokesperson admitted that the misinterpretation of the data “has led to waste. We will revise this.”

Germany’s wasteful behaviour is not unique in the industrialised world. According to the FAO study quoted above, roughly one third of the food produced in the world for human consumption every year gets lost or wasted.

Consumers in rich countries waste almost as much food (222 million tonnes) as the entire net food production of sub- Saharan Africa (230 million tonnes), according to FAO research.

The study suggested that the supermarkets’ tactic of encouraging consumers to buy more than they need is a huge factor leading to the mountains of waste that accumulate outside food retail stores, especially the so-called “buy three, pay two” marketing policy.

The study also suggests that consumers in countries such as Germany be taught that throwing food away “needlessly is unacceptable”, and be made aware that “given the limited availability of natural resources it is more effective to reduce food losses than increase food production in order to feed a growing world population.”

(END/2012)  Article Link: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=106503

Soluble Fiber – How Soluble Fiber Can Lower Cholesterol

Soluble Fiber – How Soluble Fiber Can Lower Cholesterol.

Insoluble or Soluble Fiber: Which Lowers Cholesterol?

Studies Show That Soluble Fiber May Help Lower Cholesterol More

By , About.com Guide

Updated May 27, 2009

About.com Health’s Disease and Condition content is reviewed by the Medical Review Board

There are two types of fiber: soluble fiber and insoluble fiber. While both of these are important to include in your diet, studies have shown that one type of fiber can also help to lower your cholesterol1.We have already known some of the other heatlhy benefits that fiber has to offer. It helps with normal bowel function and it adds bulk to foods to make you feel fuller. However, there is evidence of another, essential benefit that fiber may have is that it can improve your heart health.

Types of Fiber

Although there are several forms of fiber, they can be classified into two major groups: soluble fiber2 and insoluble fiber3. While both are good for the body, only one group has been shown to be beneficial in lowering your cholesterol.Soluble fiber4 can be dissolved in water and forms a gel-like consistency in the digestive tract. On the other hand, insoluble fiber5 cannot be dissolved in water, so it passes through the digestive tract relatively unchanged. When it comes to your heart health, it appears that only soluble fiber is beneficial in lowering your cholesterol. In fact, studies have shown that consuming 10 to 25 grams soluble fiber a day can lower cholesterol by 18%.

However, it appears to only lower your “bad” cholesterol (LDL6) –- your “good” cholesterol (HDL7) and triglycerides8 are only minimally, if at all, affected by soluble fiber. Additionally, insoluble fiber does not appear to affect cholesterol levels, but it is important in maintaining a healthy colon.

Where Can I Get Soluble Fiber?

A variety of foods contain soluble fiber. By consuming the recommended amounts of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and legumes in the Food Pyramid, you should be able to obtain the recommended amount of soluble fiber each day.While fiber supplements9 can be used to fulfill this requirement, it is not recommended that you use them as substitute for eating a healthy diet10. Fruits and vegetables also contain important nutrients, such as vitamins, that cannot be obtained through a fiber supplement.

Sources:

Rolfes SR, Whitney E. Understanding Nutrition, 3rd ed 2005.

Poli A, Marangoni F, Paoletti R, et al. Non-pharmacological control of plasma cholesterol levels. Nutr Metab Cardiovas Dis 2008; 18:S1-S16.

Brown L, Rosner B, Willett WW, et al. Cholesterol-lowering effects of dietary fiber: a meta-analysis. Am J Clin Nutr 1999; 69:30-42.

Third Report of the National Cholesterol Education Program (NCEP) Expert Panel on Detection, Evaluation, and Treatment of High Blood Cholesterol in Adults (PDF)11, July 2004, The National Institutes of Heath: The National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute.

This About.com page has been optimized for print. To view this page in its original form, please visit: http://cholesterol.about.com/od/cholesterolnutrition101/a/fiber2.htm

©2012 About.com, Inc., a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.

Children’s Medicines Coated With Brain-damaging Aluminum

naturalnews.com
Originally published January 30 2012
Children’s medicines coated with brain-damaging aluminum
by S. D. Wells

(NaturalNews) Aluminum Lake food coloring, used to heavily coat liquid medicines for children, contains dangerous amounts of aluminum and harmful synthetic petrochemicals. These “petrochemicals” are carcinogens containing petroleum, antifreeze and ammonia, which cause a long list of adverse reactions. Aluminum poisoning can lead to short and long term central nervous system (CNS) damage, such as memory impairments, autism, epilepsy, mental retardation, and dementia.

Research shows that just 4ppm of aluminum can cause the blood to coagulate. This is what causes Alzheimer’s Disease and has been documented to inhibit learning. Aluminum consumption can also be associated with the development of bone disorders, including stress fractures.

Also known as tartrazine, FD&C Yellow Aluminum Lake is a chemical concoction derived from coal tar. It is known to be a reproductive toxin. All artificial colors contain Aluminum Lake, so when your child gets to pick between red, blue or green medicine, they’re really choosing which poison they get to consume. Several chemically enhanced food colorings contain ammonia and therefore produce compounds proven to cause various cancers in animal studies, according to CSPI, the Center for Science in the Public Interest. (http://www.cspinet.org/reports/chemcuisine.htm)

Most widely used food colors* and their damaging actions:

Blue #1: Research shows it causes kidney tumors in mice.

Blue #2: Research shows even higher incidence of tumors, specifically gliomas in male rates (a type of tumor that starts in the brain or spine).

Red #2: Toxic to rodents, even at modest levels, and causes tumors of the bladder.

Red #3: FDA recognized it in 1990 as a cause of thyroid cancer in animals. It was banned in cosmetics, but still allowed in food and medicine.

Red #40: Most popular dye of all. Debilitates the immune-system in mice. Allergic reactions common.

Green #3: Causes bladder and testes tumors.

Yellow #5: Affects behavior and induces severe hypersensitivity reactions.

Yellow #6: Causes adrenal tumors in animals. (*colors used in this post for effect only, not for actual identification)

(READ FULL ARTICLE)

Nourishing the Planet | Labels Matter

Labels Matter | Nourishing the Planet.

Jan 18
Labels Matter

Nourishing the Planet GE, GMO

Check out this latest video from the Just Label It! campaign to encourage the U.S. Food and Drug Administration to label genetically engineered food. Labels Matter, part of a new project by director of Food, Inc., Robert Kenner, tells the story of three consumers who share a belief in the right to know what goes in the production of their food.

Click here to watch the video and here to sign the petition.

Pneumonia bug evolves to evade vaccine: study

Pneumonia bug evolves to evade vaccine: study

Sun, Jan 29, 2012

Bugs that cause childhood pneumonia and meningitis have evolved to evade vaccines by swapping bits of their genome with other bacteria, according to a study published Sunday.

The findings, published in Nature Genetics, show how quickly these life-threatening pathogens can disguise themselves with borrowed genetic decoys, and how hard it is for medicine to keep up.

Diseases caused by Streptococcus pneumoniae are thought to kill over a million young children around the world each year.

Vaccines that protect against these so-called pneumoccoccal infections are designed to recognise a material on the outer surface of a bacterium’s cell called polysaccharide.

Each of over 90 kinds, or “serotypes”, of these bacteria have a different polysaccharide coating.

In 2000, a vaccine that targeted seven serotypes proved highly effective when introduced in the United States. The same formula — which also prevented transmission from children to adults — was adopted in Britain.

Over time, however, the vaccine worked less well, so researchers led by Rory Bowden at the University of Oxford set out to discover why.

Combining cutting-edge genetic analysis with epidemiology, which examines how disease spreads, they found that the deadly pathogens escaped detection by swapping genes with other, slightly different, bacteria.

Remarkably, the exchanged genetic material came from precisely that part of the genome responsible for making the cell’s coating — the area targeted by the vaccine.

The bacteria, in other words, had kept their virulence intact but changed their outward appearance.

“Imagine that each strain of the pneumoccoccus bacteria is a class of schoolchildren all wearing the school uniform,” explained Bowden.

“If a boy steals from the corner shop, a policeman — the vaccine — can easily identify which school he belongs to by his uniform.”

But if the boy swaps his sweater with a friend from another school, Bowden continued, the policeman will no longer know where to look and the thief, like the bacteria, will escape.

The researchers identified several such “recombined” serotypes resistant to the vaccine, and one in particular that had spread across the United States from east to west over several years.

They also observed — for the first time outside a laboratory — that the bugs were able to swap several parts of their respective genomes at once.

“This is of particular concern, as recombination involving multiple fragments of DNA allows rapid and simultaneous exchange of key regions of the genome within the bug, potentially allowing it to quickly develop antibiotic resistance,” the researchers said.

In both the United States and Britain, the original vaccine has now been replaced with a new one that targets 13 rather than seven of the telltale serotypes.

But the scientists caution that the bacteria will continue to morph into new forms.

“The current vaccine strategy … is extremely effective,” co-author Bernard Beall, a scientist at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention in Atlanta, said in a statement.

“However, our observations indicate that the organism will continue to adapt to this strategy with some measurable success.”

Reducing Exposure to Dirty Electricity

Reducing Exposure to Dirty Electricity — The Healthy Home Economist
http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/reducing-exposure-to-dirty-electricity/
January 29, 2012

Electricity was originally intended as a “clean” and safe source of power for homes and businesses through standard usage of the steady electrical frequency of 60 oscillations per second, or 60 Hertz (Hz).

Modern energy efficient devices, electronics, and other reasons such as earth currents can cause significant deviance from the 60 Hz frequency, however, and this pulsed exposure to spiking and unsafe frequencies of electromagnetic radiation (EMFs) on overloaded wires is what has become known as “dirty electricity”.

Exposure to dirty electricity has the potential to cause and exacerbate existing health problems in some people. It is not something that can be smelled, touched, seen, or felt and yet it is very real and very problematic for those who experience it on a daily basis.

The health effects of dirty electricity were first identified as early as the 1950′s in rural areas when the behavior and feeding patterns of animals were negatively affected by stray voltage caused by poor grounding and lack of utility infrastructure.

In humans, symptoms of exposure to dirty electricity can include:

Headaches
Difficulty sleeping
Body aches and pains
Ringing in the ears (tinnitus)
Chronic Fatigue Syndrome
Worsening of symptoms from multiple sclerosis or ALS (Lou Gehrig’s Disease)

(READ FULL ARTICLE)

No Granola is Good Granola

No Granola is Good Granola.

No Granola is Good Granola — The Healthy Home Economist

January 29, 2012
Pin It

Several readers have emailed me recently inquiring about how to best go about making homemade granola.

One reader carefully soaked his rolled oats for 24 hours in water with an acidic medium and then dehydrated before mixing with the other ingredients and toasting in the oven.

Another reader used sprouted, organic rolled oats and baked in a 200F oven with various other ingredients to make her favorite version of homemade granola.

While both of these approaches to making granola are certainly a huge improvement over any of the granolas to be had at the store, the fact is that even organic granola made with rolled oats that have been sprouted or soaked is not an easily digestible food.

The proteins in grains are extremely difficult to digest and have the potential to cause health problems over the long term, which is why traditional societies took such great pains to soak, sprout, or sour leaven them before consuming.

Not only did traditional peoples soak, sprout, or sour leaven their grains, they also thoroughly cooked them as the final preparation step before eating.

The dry heat of an oven is simply not sufficient to complete the breakdown of anti-nutrients in oats to render even homemade granola a nutrient dense, easily digestible food.

Perhaps if a person has an iron gut, then homemade granola that is soaked or sprouted might work on occasion.  The reality is that most people have sensitive guts anymore due to several generations of children raised on antibiotics and processed foods.   Most people have some sort of digestive sensitivity to grains even if there are no grain allergy symptoms present.

I know for me, I bloat terribly if I eat homemade granola that has been soaked even though I have no grain allergies and my digestion is in pretty decent shape.  I actually digest unsoaked but thoroughly cooked oatmeal better than soaked and toasted granola, lesson being that the final cooking step is very important!

I have only made granola for my family once or twice but stopped long ago after observing the indigestibility of consuming this very non-traditional food even when seemingly prepared in a traditional fashion.

So, do your digestion a favor and opt out of any grain based granola entirely – even if homemade, organic, and soaked and/or sprouted.

But don’t hesitate to use soaked or sprouted grains that are fully cooked for all your other dishes and baked goods!  For a video tutorial plus written recipe on how to make a cold breakfast cereal that is a very digestible alternative to granola, click here.

Sarah, The Healthy Home Economist

Source:  Nourishing Traditions, p. 454

Picture Credit 

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

Pin It

Tagged as: granola not healthy, homemade granola, is granola healthy

Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

ANH-USA: No Science for You!

- Welcome to the Alliance for Natural Health – USA – http://www.anh-usa.org -

No Science for You!

Posted By ANH-USA On January 24, 2012 @ 3:00 pm

HR3699 [1]Congress wants to limit your access to research—even though your tax dollars paid for it. If this bill passes, you’ll learn only what mainstream medicine wishes you to know. Action Alert! [2]

In 2008, the National Institutes of Health required that all federally funded research publications be made openly available. PubMedCentral [3] (PMC) is a free full-text archive of biomedical and life sciences journal literature at the National Institutes of Health’s National Library of Medicine.

The publishers of the journals weren’t so happy with this new arrangement—they were afraid no one would pay for their publications if the research results were immediately accessible. So the government agreed to give them a full year of journal sales before their research papers had to be posted on PMC, which lets them keep their subscriber base. Journal subscriptions to educational and medical institutions are expensive—and they’re big business.

But even this generous arrangement isn’t good enough for the Association of American Publishers (AAP). The trade group liked the old rules, where they could sell the tax-funded research back to the taxpayers. So the AAP got two members of Congress, Rep. Carolyn Maloney (D-NY) and Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA), to introduce HR 3699 [4], the Research Works Act, just before the end of 2011.

This bill would prevent the NIH or any other agency from causing or even allowing private-sector research work to be disseminated online without prior consent of both the publisher and the study authors—even if the funding came from our tax dollars.

The AAP weren’t the only publishers involved. Elsevier—the Reed Elsevier Publishing Group, a multinational company that publishes around 2,000 journals and close to 20,000 books and major reference works—happens to be in Rep. Carolyn Maloney’s district, and Elsevier employees made campaign contributions to both Issa and Maloney [5]. (Apparently, it only takes $10,500 to buy two members of Congress.)

Said contributors all work for Tom Reller, vice president for global corporate relations at Elsevier. Interestingly, an email about the bill from Rep. Maloney to one of her critics contained language that was nearly identical [6] to language used by Reller when he was defending the same bill! Are members of Congress employing lobbyists as ghostwriters now?

This is about access to peer-reviewed scientific information—research that we pay for with our tax money. If this bill passes, Americans who want to read the results of federally funded research will have to buy access to each journal article individually—at a cost of $15 or $30 apiece. In other words, as the New York Times recently noted [7], taxpayers who already paid for the research would have to pay again to read the results.

Access to peer-reviewed scientific research is essential if you are to make informed choices regarding your family’s health—especially if you choose complementary and alternative medicine. Good research will let us choose wisely when it comes to questions of treatment modalities, vaccines, diet, nutrition, and medicine. Right now, supplement companies aren’t even allowed to tell you about the science behind their products [8], so we must get the scientific information directly from the source.

But that’s just the problem: consumers, integrative doctors, and small businesses might not have the funds to access all these scientific journals—which means your access to the science behind natural products will be limited to what mainstream medicine may wish you to know.

PMC compiles entire studies and has 2.3 million articles going back to 1965. It allows patients, physicians, students, teachers, and advocacy organization like ANH-USA to read about and cite the discoveries that our tax dollars paid for—to keep you informed in these pages, we may review as many as a hundred studies every year. If we needed to pay a publishing company every time we viewed a study which taxpayers have already paid for, we’d be giving thousands of dollars to a publishing company every year instead of protecting your access to natural health.

So what can you do? Two things will make a huge difference!

  • First, help us gain co-sponsors for the Free Speech about Science Act (FSAS) [9]. This landmark legislation enables the natural health products community to share peer-reviewed scientific findings about natural health products with the public. The problem, of course, is that if it becomes more difficult for supplement companies and consumers to access the scientific studies themselves, the entire point of FSAS is effectively undermined.
  • The second step is to ask Congress to defeat this new Research Works Act. Please send your message today and explain why limiting access to the results of important studies—which your tax dollars have already paid for—is such a terrible idea. Take action immediately! [2]

Welcome to the Alliance for Natural Health – USA: http://www.anh-usa.org

URL to article: http://www.anh-usa.org/no-science-for-you/

Copyright © 2010 Alliance for Natural Health – US. All rights reserved.

CSPI Action Alert Re: FDA Sodium Levels In Food

Center For Science in the Public Interest. Take Action
actionalertbanner.jpg
Halimah,The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is calling for public comments to help determine if it will take the necessary steps to reduce sodium levels in our food supply.  Please send a message today to tell the FDA to make sodium reduction a top national public health priority!  The deadline to submit your comments to the FDA is this Friday, January 27, 2012.

Today’s average daily sodium consumption for all adults is an astounding 4,000 milligrams (mg).  According to the 2010 Dietary Guidelines, almost half of all Americans should consume no more than 1,500 mg per day.  It is not hard to see why health experts agree that Americans are consuming far too much sodium.  High levels of sodium consumption contribute to hypertension and an increased risk of stroke and cardiovascular disease.  Reducing per capita intake of sodium in half would save 150,000 lives per year and billions in health care costs.

Send your message to the FDA today!

Sincerley,

Michael F. Jacobson
Executive Director

The Medicinal Marvel That Is Flaxseed

The Medicinal Marvel That Is Flaxseed

January 22, 2012

 

Flaxseed has remarkable therapeutic properties, with over 50 potential applications in the prevention and treatment of disease, as documented in the peer-reviewed biomedical literature itself*

Flaxseed’s role in breast cancer is one of the more compelling areas of research, considering this is the #1 form of cancer afflicting women today, and that most women still equate “prevention” with subjecting themselves to annual breast screenings involving highly carcinogenic 30 kVp gamma rays — overlooking entirely the role of diet, as well as avoidable chemical exposures. (More on this topic)

Given that flaxseed already has an exceptional nutritional profile, there are a broad range of reasons to incorporate it into the diet, even if only as a nourishing food. The main reason why the public is so enthralled by flaxseed (and rightly so!) is for its relatively high levels of omega-3 fatty acids, and the density of soothing, mucilaginous fiber it contains. Now, an accumulating body of scientific research reveals flaxseed’s hitherto secret ‘second life’ as a medicinal powerhouse, confirming how timelessly true was Hippocrates proclamation that food is also medicine.

In 2005, the journal Clinical Cancer Research published a placebo-controlled study involving patients who received a 25 gram flaxseed-containing muffin over the course of 32 days. After observing a reduction in tumor markers and an increase in programmed cell death (apoptosis) in the flaxseed-treated patients, the authors concluded: “Dietary flaxseed has the potential to reduce tumor growth in patients with breast cancer.”

Additional animal research supports flaxseed’s role in suppressing human breast cancer. In immunosuppressed mice (thymus removed), flaxseed and an extract of pure secoisolariciresinol diglucoside from flaxseed was capable of suppressing the estrogen-fed (estradiol-17 beta) growth of transplanted human breast cancer tumors.

(Read more)

« Older entries

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 62 other followers