 |
|||
|
.
Regional Farm & Food Project June 2006 News If you think the people need to take back the power, these news stories should interest you! 10 news stories...
1. Rise in Rate of Twin Births May be Tied to Dairy Case New York Times, May 30, 2006, by Nicholas Bakalar American women who eat dairy products appear to be five times as likely to give birth to fraternal twins as those who do not, according to a new study, and one explanation may lie in dairy products from cows injected with synthetic growth hormone. Dr. Gary Steinman, an assistant clinical professor of obstetrics at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine, reached that conclusion by looking at the medical records of 1,042 mothers who were vegans consuming no dairy products and comparing them with those of mothers who regularly ate dairy products. His findings appear in the May issue of The Journal of Reproductive Medicine. Eating dairy products increases blood levels of insulinlike growth hormone, or I.G.F., and it is this increased hormone level that is associated with increased rates of multiple ovulation. In a study published in 2000 and cited in the findings, vegan women had concentrations of I.G.F. that were 13 percent lower than those in women who regularly consumed dairy products. Multiple births are associated with increased health risks for mothers and infants, but Dr. Steinman said he was not prepared to use these findings as the basis for advising women about diet before pregnancy. "Since this is the first time diet has been implicated in an important role for determining twinning rate," Dr. Steinman said in an e-mail message, "it must be confirmed by others before rigid recommendations can be made concerning health care." Insufficient diet in general lowers the rate of twin births, but Dr. Steinman said he had found evidence that the rate was directly related to levels of growth hormone. "The more I.G.F., the more the ovary is stimulated to release additional eggs at ovulation," he said. Animal studies, in rats and mice as well as in cattle, have convincingly demonstrated that increased serum levels of growth hormone are associated with increased ovulation. All cow's milk has bovine growth hormone in it, naturally produced by the animal's pituitary gland. Many dairy farmers inject their cattle with recombinant bovine somatotropin, a synthetic version of the naturally occurring hormone. This increases size and milk production, but it has another effect: cows with higher growth hormone levels produce more twins. The consumption of any dairy products increases blood levels of insulinlike growth hormone in humans, and consuming milk from cows that have been injected with synthetic growth hormone can have a correspondingly larger effect. About one-third of American dairy cows are in herds where the hormone is used, said a spokesman for Monsanto, the only manufacturer of synthetic bovine growth hormone in the United States. The evidence that eating dairy products increases the chances of multiple ovulation is suggestive, but not conclusive. Many factors, dietary and other, affect the rate of twin births. A study this month in Lancet, for example, suggests that the B vitamin folic acid may increase the survival of embryos in in vitro fertilization procedures, resulting in more twin births. Fraternal twins run in families, so genetics also plays an important role. And the recent rise in the birth rate of twins is at least partly attributable to delayed childbearing, as older mothers are more likely to have twins. The rate of twin births has also increased significantly since 1975, when assisted reproductive technology came into wide use. But these factors alone, Dr. Steinman said, do not explain the continuing increase in the rates in the United States since 1994, when recombinant bovine somatotropin was approved for sale. In 2003, the United States had 3 sets of twins per 100 live births -- more than twice the rate of Britain, where growth hormone injection is banned. (Triplets and higher multiple births raise this figure to 3.18.) Dr. Steinman suggested that one significant reason for the large difference was the recombinant bovine somatotropin. "I am not claiming to be the first to show that variations in dietary amounts can affect the twinning rate," Dr. Steinman said. "What is new is specifying what in the diet may have this effect and how." http://www.nytimes.com. Copyright 2006 The New York Times Company. 2. More Twins for Starbucks Customers! During the week of June 19th-25th, people across the country will flyer their local Starbucks, asking them to stop using milk produced with artificial growth hormones, also known as rBGH or rBST. These leafleting events are part of Food & Water Watch's campaign, in conjunction with the Meatrix II and the Organic Consumers Association, urging Starbucks to buy rBGH-free milk. RBGH is an artificial, genetically engineered hormone injected into cows to make them produce more milk. This practice harms cows and may pose harm to humans. Cows injected with these artificial hormones are more likely to get painful udder infections, as well as other health problems. These udder infections are treated with common antibiotics, including penicillin and others used to treat people. This increased use of antibiotics is a concern because antibiotic use in animal agriculture has been strongly linked to antibiotic- resistant infections in people. Additionally, giving cows rBGH increases another powerful hormone (IGF-1) in the cow and the cow's milk. Too much IGF-1 in people is linked to breast, prostate, and colon cancer. While it's not definitively clear that rBGH use in cows would increase cancer rates in people, why should consumers take this unnecessary risk just to increase more milk per cow? HOW YOU CAN HELP
Starbucks is the industry leader in coffee specialty retail, and it promotes itself as a socially responsible corporation. In fact, Starbucks buys 2% of the entire world's coffee beans, and thus has a huge impact on the market. If Starbucks stops using milk made with artificial hormones, it will greatly impact the dairy industry, and send a strong message about public opposition to this harmful product. Tell Starbucks to buy better milk! GOT QUESTIONS? 3. Citizens Score One, Corporations Zero In states across the country Tuesday, primary elections named candidates for Congress, governorships and other important offices. But the most interesting, and perhaps significant, election did not involve an individual. Rather, it was about an idea. In Northern California's Humboldt County, voters decided by a 55-45 margin that corporations do not have the same rights -- based on the supposed "personhood" of the combines -- as citizens when it comes to participating in local political campaigns. Until Tuesday in Humboldt County, corporations were able to claim citizenship rights, as they do elsewhere in the United States. In the context of electoral politics, corporations that were not headquartered in the county took advantage of the same rules that allowed individuals who are not residents to make campaign contributions in order to influence local campaigns. But, with the passage of Measure T, an initiative referendum that was placed on the ballot by Humboldt County residents, voters have signaled that they want out-of-town corporations barred from meddling in local elections. Measure T was backed by the county's Green and Democratic parties, as well as labor unions and many elected officials in a region where politics are so progressive that the Greens -- whose 2004 presidential candidate, David Cobb, is a resident of the county and a active promotor of the challenges to corporate power mounted by Democracy Unlimited of Humboldt County and the national Liberty Tree Foundation -- are a major force in local politics. The "Yes on T" campaign was rooted in regard for the American experiment, from its slogan "Vote Yes for Local Control of Our Democracy," to the references to Tuesday's election as a modern-day "Boston Tea Party," to the quote from Thomas Jefferson that was highlighted in election materials: "I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations which dare already to challenge our government to a trial by strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." Just as Jefferson and his contemporaries were angered by dominance of the affairs of the American colonies by King George III and the British business combines that exploited the natural and human resources of what would become the United States, so Humboldt County residents were angered by the attempts of outside corporate interests to dominate local politics. Wal-Mart spent $250,000 on a 1999 attempt to change the city of Eureka's zoning laws in order to clear the way for one of the retail giant's big-box stores. Five years later, MAXXAM Inc., a forest products company, got upset with the efforts of local District Attorney Paul Gallegos to enforce regulations on its operations in the county and spent $300,000 on a faked-up campaign to recall him from office. The same year saw outside corporations that were interested in exploiting the county's abundant natural resources meddling in its local election campaigns. That was the last straw for a lot of Humboldt County residents. They organized to put Measure T on the ballot, declaring, "Our Founding Fathers never intended corporations to have this kind of power." "Every person has the right to sign petition recalls and to contribute money to political campaigns. Measure T will not affect these individual rights," explained Kaitlin Sopoci-Belknap, a resident of Eureka who was one of the leaders of the Yes on T campaign. "But individuals hold these political rights by virtue of their status as humans in a democracy and, simply put, a corporation is not a person." Despite the logic of that assessment, the electoral battle in Humboldt County was a heated one, and Measure T's passage will not end it. Now, the corporate campaign will move to the courts. So this is only a start. But what a monumental start it is! Sopoci-Belknap was absolutely right when she portrayed Tuesday's vote as nothing less than the beginning of "the process of reclaiming our county" from the "tyranny" of concentrated economic and political power. Surely Tom Paine would have agreed. It was Paine who suggested to the revolutionaries of 1776, as they dared challenge the most powerful empire on the planet, that: "We have it in our power to begin the world over again. A situation similar to the present hath not happened since the days of Noah until now. The birthday of the new world is at It is time to renew the American experiment, to rebuild its battered institutions on the solid foundation of empowered citizens and regulated corporations. Let us hope that the spirit of '76 prevailed Tuesday in Humboldt County will spread until that day when American democracy is guided by the will of the people rather than the campaign contribution checks of the corporations that are the rampaging "empires" of our age. John Nichols is the Washington Correspondent for The Nation. 4. Canadians Call for Halt to Security & Prosperity Partnership and Replacement of NAFTA At a recent press conference in Ottawa, legislators and civil society networks from Canada, the U.S. and Mexico unveiled a collective plan to bring an end to deep integration and replace NAFTA with a people-centred trade model. “We must reshape trade agreements in North America to ensure rising standards of living for our peoples,” says U.S. Congresswoman, Marcy Kaptur (Democrat, Ohio). According to trade critic, Peter Julian, “there is no doubt that under NAFTA most Canadians are poorer. We have been fighting to make adjustments and now it is clear that NAFTA has to be replaced. It is not working for the vast majority of inhabitants of North America. It has failed on the bottom line.” In anticipation of the March 2007 “Three Amigos Summit” that will be held in Ottawa, a newly formed citizens group will create a North American secretariat and introduce simultaneous legislation in Mexico, the U.S and Canada to replace NAFTA. It will build opportunities for public engagement on the issue of continental integration. Rosario Quispes of RMALQ describes the Security & Prosperity Partnership, as “a distorted, more dangerous version of NAFTA.” “We need to work together to stop the Security & Prosperity Partnership because the negotiations have been anti-democratic, without transparency and promise to benefit only the business elite of the region,” says Victor Suarez, Member of the Mexican Parliament (Partido de la Revolución Democratica, D.F.). Civil society groups applaud participating parliamentarians for involving the public - Something the governments of the three states have failed to do. “We want to work to with civil society to develop another model of integration that will ensure prosperity for all," says Bloc Québécois MP, Pierre Paquette. For more information, please contact: 5. Wild, Free Birds Not to Blame, by Jennifer Wilkins Reuters recently reported that a mild form of avian flu was discovered at a live-bird market in Camden County, N.J. Although not the deadly H5N1 strain found to date only in Southeast Asia, Africa and Europe, the incident has heightened concern over the vulnerability of America's $29 billion poultry industry. And for good reason. America is a nation of chicken eaters. Average per capita chicken consumption more than doubled between 1970 and 2004, from 27 pounds to 59 pounds a year, outpacing turkey and pork, and rapidly gaining on beef. We need to harness our concern about avian flu to think critically about how all this chicken we love to eat is produced. Chances are, the chicken served at your local restaurant, fast food outlet and child's school, or sold in your supermarket spent its short life cooped up with 20,000-40,000 fellow broilers in a "growout" house. Such operations typically are managed by a farmer under contract with one of a handful of poultry corporations. As long as strict bio-security protocol is followed and eggs and chicks used in these systems are not coming from infected regions of the world, these operations will remain safe. An alternative to this dominant production method is one that more and more Americans are voting for with their food dollars. Citing reasons including taste, health, animal welfare and the impacts of industrial farming, more people are seeking "free-range" or "pastured" poultry. These birds spend much of their lives outdoors in smaller, more genetically diverse flocks. For the moment, evidence that wild birds have infected free-range chickens with the deadly H5N1 virus is lacking. Yet governments worldwide and in some states are recommending restrictions or closure of backyard and free-range poultry production. "Chicken Little" is under attack. GRAIN, an international, nongovernment organization that promotes agricultural biodiversity, claims there is little science-based evidence to support these policies. Data in its report, Fowl Play, suggest it is the highly self-regulated transnational poultry industry and illegal smuggling that aid global spread of the disease. Last year, the Food and Agriculture Organization stated, "To date, extensive testing of clinically normal migratory birds in the infected countries has not produced any positive results for H5N1." The New York Times recently reported it is unlikely wild birds were responsible for early 2006 cases of avian flu in Nigeria -- none of the thousands of samples from African wild birds destined for Europe tested positive for H5N1. Mild forms of avian flu, as found in New Jersey, have not been shown to evolve to highly pathogenic forms in free-range operations. However, the GRAIN report cites studies suggesting that if a large confined flock is infected with a mild strain of the virus, its potency can evolve rapidly toward more pathogenic and transmissible forms, "capable of jumping species and spreading back into wild birds." It is vital that global and domestic regulation does not thwart backyard and pastured poultry production. Not only have these systems shown a resilience against disease, they enhance biodiversity, provide environmental and health benefits, increase food security and keep farm families on the land. As food citizens, we must think critically about what is at stake when regulators restrict how poultry can be raised. We can use purchasing power to support all farmers and keep production systems that are good for the environment and us. We need to resist losing our heads and jumping on the blame-the-wild-bird-and-roaming- chicken bandwagon. Jennifer Wilkins is a Food and Society Policy Fellow at Cornell University. Last month's column, which came out on May 7th, on the topic of "food miles" can be accessed at: http://timesunion.com/AspStories/story.asp?storyID=479022&category=JWILKINS&BCCode=&newsdate=6/5/2006 * * * 6. Thank You for Eating Deadly Food Are we sustainable ag folks just a bunch of carrot huggers trying to save precious little landscapes and boutique farms to please elitist eaters? Some people think so. If you want to hear the other side of the story, check out this big food website. Got antibiotics? http://www.bestfoodnation.com 7. USDA Announces Small Meat Plant Outreach Program The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) announced a new outreach plan designed to improve food safety programs at small and very small meat, poultry and egg plants. The program features a toll-free phone number and web page to assist small plants by providing improved access to technical resources, including scientific validation materials and education and training information. In addition, FSIS employees will begin to meet proactively with small and very-small plants to obtain more information about their specific needs, the effectiveness of agency programs designed to assist them and to provide joint training sessions for plant employees and FSIS employees. Small and very small plants comprise about 90 percent of the approximately 6,000 federally inspected meat, poultry and egg product plants in the United States. A small plant has between 10 and 500 employees and generates more than $2.5 million in annual sales. A very-small plant employs fewer than 10 people or generates less than $2.5 million in annual sales. The small plant and very-small plant outreach page can be access at: www.fsis.usda.gov/News_&_Events/NR_053106_01/index.asp. 8. Funding for Organic Farmers One Eighth the Cost of White House Party Web Note by Ronnie Cummins Congress has passed an amendment to the Agricultural Appropriations Bill that will increase federal funding for organic agriculture research from $1.8 million per year to $5 million (as a reference point, eight times that amount was spent on Bush's last inaugural party). Although this allocation is better than nothing, organic subsidies and program funds are ridiculously small, given the USDA's annual $90 billion budget and the $25 billion in annual crop subsidies allocated to chemical intensive farms and genetically engineered crops. According to the Organic Consumers Association's National Director, Ronnie Cummins, "Since organics represent 2.5% of all grocery sales, $15 billion in annual sales, we deserve at least 2.5% of all USDA program monies." Since the yearly budget of the USDA is $90 billion (yes billion, not million) this expanded allocation for organic farming research (from last year's paltry $1.8 million to $5 million) is not exactly a Great Leap Forward for organics, the fastest growing, healthiest, and most sustainable component of American food and farming. This is a perfect example of why the nation's 50 million organic consumers have got to get better organized and make our message heard in Washington. Organics represents 2.5% of all grocery sales, and we deserve at least 2.5% of all USDA program monies. For example conventional agriculture got $23 billion in crop subsidies last year, while organic crops got little or nothing. The major reason there is a greater demand for organics today than there is a domestic supply, is because the USDA offers no subsidies to help American family farmers and ranchers make the transition to organic--unlike Europe, where this type of subsidy is common. To see OTA's organic appropriations recommendations for the Fiscal Year 2007, go to http://www.ota.com/Appropriations2007.html. Organic Trade Association, P.O. Box 547, Greenfield, MA 01302. 9. Foreign Market Mistrust of U.S. Ag Products vs. U.S. Farmer Mistrust of U.S. Government The Fiscal Year 2007 Ag Appropriations Bill (H.R. 5384) passed the U.S. House of Representatives May 23 by a vote of 378 to 46. The bill funds USDA and FDA programs related to protecting the food supply, protecting livestock health and funding for nutrition programs. The bill also contains language requiring USDA to issue a formal Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on their development and implementation of the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). This rulemaking will detail information regarding USDA's costs of implementing the system, analyze the economic impact of the NAIS, outline what USDA has learned in its pilot projects, and provide a roadmap for next steps. NCBA was very supportive of this language as a means to make transparent USDA's process for proceeding with the animal ID issue. The Ag Appropriations process now moves to the U.S. Senate for further action, where debate is not expected until mid-June. USAIO Reports Solid Progress On Animal Movement Database (May 22, 2006) - The United States Animal Identification Organization (USAIO) has cleared several technical and procedural hurdles in developing a national animal movement database for use by the nation's livestock producers. The USAIO database is a producer-controlled, multi-species solution for livestock producers participating in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). Producers retain ownership of their data at all times, with state and federal animal health officials having access to the information only when necessary for animal health surveillance. "USDA remains committed to a producer-led solution, while USAIO brings something very important to the animal ID discussion - a simple way for government to access the data it needs while producers continue to own and protect their business information," said Charles Miller, a Kentucky cattlemen and chairman of the USAIO Board of Directors. The USAIO animal movement database will provide tracking and traceback capability at a cost of about 30 cents per head for the life of an animal, regardless of the number of transactions. This represents the database cost only, not on-the-farm costs such as identification tags. But Miller says competition and innovation can help contain these costs and, as a producer-driven group, USAIO works across the industry to minimize the costs and total impact of animal identification on small livestock operations. The database is soon expected to enter the first of three implementation phases, involving about 12 high-volume users. Before moving to Phase Two, USAIO's goal is to successfully record about 1 million movements and transactions. During Phase Two, the volume of events will climb to about 250,000 per month, from a larger group of users. This will ensure that the database is capable of serving all producers that want to utilize the system, with general availability expected in the fourth quarter of 2006. "The animal identification debate often focuses on divisive questions such as government vs. private control, and voluntary vs. mandatory participation," Miller said. "Meanwhile, critical time and opportunities will be lost unless an effective database is developed and made available to producers. That's why USAIO remains focused on solutions, rather than getting sidetracked by these other issues." Michael J. Baker, PhD, PAS Beef Cattle Extension Specialist 607-255-5923 (phone) 607-255-5923 (fax) mjb28@cornell.edu 130 Morrison Hall Cornell University Ithaca, NY 14853 www.ansci.cornell.edu/beef/ 10. Welcome Back Chatham Farmers Market! The Chatham Farmers Market is starting up again! Friday, June 9, will be the first Farmers Market of the season in the Village of Chatham, NY. It will run for three hours, from 4:00-7:00 pm on Friday afternoons/evenings weekly through the growing season, into October. The Farmers Market has moved from the Village Green to a new location. It will be at the site of the future Chatham Real Food Market Co-op, 15 Church Street (Route 203), at the corner of Church Street & Washington Avenue, one block west of the traffic light, the former site of Down the Line equipment rental. Parking for the Farmers Market will be available in the Chatham Bakery parking lot at the intersection. The first Farmers Market coincides with the kick-off of the Membership Campaign for the Co-op! Our goal: 250 founding member-owners in one month! Information, ownership agreements, and tours of the future co-op will be available at the Farmers Market. For more information email realfoodnetwork@taconic.net or call 518-392-3494.
|
||
|
|
|||
 |
|||
