DAY TO DAY OPINION & ANALYSIS OF THE ISSUES THAT PERTAIN TO OUR HEALTH AND WELL BEING
Tuesday, April 2, 2013
1998 INTERVIEW WITH DR. JOHN COLQUHOUN - NEW ZEALAND MAN WHO REGRETS HIS ROLE BRINGING FLUORIDE TO NZ SCHOOLS
John Colquhoun, BDS, PhD 1924 - 1999
A dentist and historian, John Coquhoun lived in Auckland, New Zealand while pursuing a career as a researcher, dental practitioner and public health official. He graduated from the University of Otago in New Zealand in 1948 with a Bachelor of Dental Surgery degree and received his diploma for education in Sydney. After 7 years service in the national School of Dental Service, as a teacher and administrator, he entered private practice. In 1971, he became Principal Dental Officer for the Auckland Health District. During this period he carried out research in both dentistry and Auckland social history.
Until 1980, Colquhoun was a keen advocate of water fluoridation. In that year, he was sent on a world study tour by the New Zealand Department of Health for the purpose of investigating recent research into fluoridation. Upon his return he was appointed to the post of Chairman of the Fluoridation Promotion Committee of the New Zealand Dental Health Foundation.
After returning from his study tour, Dr. Colquhoun reported the new discovery (for 1980) that dental decay was declining in "western" counties, with or without fluoridation, and that the differences between decay rates in fluoridated versus non-fluoridated locations were much less than had been claimed would occur.
Nonetheless, like many of his professional colleagues of the day, Colquhoun was very reluctant to admit that fluoridation was a failure. He advocated, and his superiors agreed to a new approach based on the belief that fluoridation still provided a marginal benefit. Colquhoun felt he was reinforced in that belief by his superiors' claim that new statistics, collected for all New Zealand School Dental Service patients (98% of the childhood population) revealed such a benefit.
He was shocked to discover, when the statistics were sent to him, that they revealed no such benefit. In fact, in most Health Districts the percentage of children who were "caries-free" was higher in the non-fluoridated areas of New Zealand.
Colquhoun disagreed sharply with his superiors' action in circulating a document, "overview of fluoridation statistics," which omitted the Health District statistical information on fluoride and "disgracefully doctored" the remaining statistics, claiming that a marginal benefit existed.
When, in addition, he discovered that dental fluorosis prevalence (a sign of fluoride toxicity) was much higher than expected in fluoridated areas, Colquhoun publicly changed his stance on fluoridation in 1983.
Dr. Colquhoun continued his research, which contributed to the earning of a Doctor of Philosophy degree in 1987, and was appointed to the post-doctoral position of Honorary
Research Fellow of the University of Auckland. In 1992 he became editor of the Journal of the International Society for Fluoride Research (Fluoride), a position which provided a good overview of fluoride research in different academic disciplines.
Dr. Colquhoun passed away peacefully in his home on March 23rd, 1999 at the age of 75, remaining intellectually active almost until his final moments.
ETHICAL DONATORS, COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUAL AND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE, AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL.
FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
Fluoride,
Fluoride toxicity,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health
MATT CUTTS: TAKING A WEEK OFF FROM THE INTERNET
by Matt Cutts on December 30, 2012
in 30 days
This month I’m going to try to unplug from Twitter and most news. I’m also going to cut down on replying to email.
I’m going to start out with a week without internet. Harper Reed called it a “reading vacation” and I can’t wait to curl up with a few books.
Is there something you’ve always wanted to learn or try? Why not give it a shot for 30 days and see how it goes?
http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/taking-a-week-off-from-the-internet/
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUALAND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Headline News,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health
Thursday, March 28, 2013
A LIST OF ACID / ALKALINE FORMING FOODS
Found this online and decided to share.
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY
MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING
OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL
WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUALAND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT
COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
http://rense.com/1.mpicons/acidalka.htm
| Your body pH affects everything... | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Balancing the pH is a major step toward well-being and greater health. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
The pH scale is from 0 - 14
Human blood pH should be slightly alkaline ( 7.35 - 7.45 ). Below or above this range means symptoms and disease. A pH of 7.0 is neutral. A pH below 7.0 is acidic. A pH above 7.0 is alkaline. An acidic pH can occur from, an acid forming diet, emotional stress, toxic overload, and/or immune reactions or any process that deprives the cells of oxygen and other nutrients. The body will try to compensate for acidic pH by using alkaline minerals. If the diet does not contain enough minerals to compensate, a build up of acids in the cells will occur. An acidic balance will: decrease the body's ability to absorb minerals and other nutrients, decrease the energy production in the cells, decrease it's ability to repair damaged cells, decrease it's ability to detoxify heavy metals, make tumor cells thrive, and make it more susceptible to fatigue and illness. A blood pH of 6.9, which is only slightly acidic, can induce coma and death. The reason acidosis is more common in our society is mostly due to the typical American diet, which is far too high in acid producing animal products like meat, eggs and dairy, and far too low in alkaline producing foods like fresh vegetables. Additionally, we eat acid producing processed foods like white flour and sugar and drink acid producing beverages like coffee and soft drinks. We use too many drugs, which are acid forming; and we use artificial chemical sweetners like NutraSweet, Spoonful, Sweet 'N Low, Equal, or Aspartame, which are poison and extremely acid forming. One of the best things we can do to correct an overly acid body is to clean up the diet and lifestyle. To maintain health, the diet should consist of 60% alkaline forming foods and 40% acid forming foods. To restore health, the diet should consist of 80% alkaline forming foods and 20% acid forming foods. Generally, alkaline forming foods include: most fruits, green vegetables, peas, beans, lentils, spices, herbs and seasonings, and seeds and nuts. Generally, acid forming foods include: meat, fish, poultry, eggs, grains, and legumes. Shifting Your pH Toward Alkaline... This chart is for those trying to "adjust" their body pH. The pH scale is from 0 to 14, with numbers below 7 acidic ( low on oxygen ) and numbers above 7 alkaline. An acidic body is a sickness magnet. What you eat and drink will impact where your body's pH level falls. Balance is Key !!! How To Test Your pH Level... Click Here | Understanding pH Level... Click Here This chart is intended only as a general guide to alkalizing and acidifying foods.
Here's a chart that ranks foods from most alkaline to most acidic.
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
http://rense.com/1.mpicons/acidalka.htm
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Headline News,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health
Monday, March 18, 2013
SLEEPING FOR LESS THAN SIX HOURS MAY CAUSE EARLY DEATH, STUDY FINDS
Researchers find 'unequivocal' link between lack of sleep and increased risk of premature death
| Sleeping consistently for less than six hours a night has been linked to an increased risk of early death. Photograph: Isopress/Rex Features |
Sleeping consistently for less than six hours a night may cause an early death, but too much sleep
could also mean problems, according to a study that claims to have
found unequivocal evidence of the potential harm from abnormal sleep
patterns.
The research, by academics in the UK and Italy, analysed data from 16 separate studies across Europe, the US and Asia over 25 years, covering more than 1.3m people and more than 100,000 deaths.
It found that those who generally slept for less than six hours a night were 12% more likely to experience a premature death over a period of 25 years than those who consistently got six to eight hours' sleep. Evidence for the link was unequivocal, the researchers concluded.
The study, published in the scientific journal Sleep, was carried out by a team from the University of Warwick and the Federico II University medical school in Naples.
It also concluded that those who consistently sleep more than nine hours a night can be more likely to die early. Oversleeping itself is not seen as a risk but as a potential indicator of underlying ailments.
"Whilst short sleep may represent a cause of ill health, long sleep is believed to represent more an indicator of ill health," said Professor Francesco Cappuccio, who led the study and is head of the Sleep, Health and Society programme at the University of Warwick.
"Modern society has seen a gradual reduction in the average amount of sleep people take, and this pattern is more common amongst full-time workers, suggesting that it may be due to societal pressures for longer working hours and more shift-work. On the other hand, the deterioration of our health status is often accompanied by an extension of our sleeping time.
"Consistently sleeping six to eight hours per night may be optimal for health. The duration of sleep should be regarded as an additional behavioural risk factor, or risk marker, influenced by the environment and possibly amenable to change through both education and counselling as well as through measures of public health aimed at favourable modifications of the physical and working environments."
The study noted that previous research into lack of sleep had shown it was associated with ailments including heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, and diabetes.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/05/sleep-study-premature-death
The research, by academics in the UK and Italy, analysed data from 16 separate studies across Europe, the US and Asia over 25 years, covering more than 1.3m people and more than 100,000 deaths.
It found that those who generally slept for less than six hours a night were 12% more likely to experience a premature death over a period of 25 years than those who consistently got six to eight hours' sleep. Evidence for the link was unequivocal, the researchers concluded.
The study, published in the scientific journal Sleep, was carried out by a team from the University of Warwick and the Federico II University medical school in Naples.
It also concluded that those who consistently sleep more than nine hours a night can be more likely to die early. Oversleeping itself is not seen as a risk but as a potential indicator of underlying ailments.
"Whilst short sleep may represent a cause of ill health, long sleep is believed to represent more an indicator of ill health," said Professor Francesco Cappuccio, who led the study and is head of the Sleep, Health and Society programme at the University of Warwick.
"Modern society has seen a gradual reduction in the average amount of sleep people take, and this pattern is more common amongst full-time workers, suggesting that it may be due to societal pressures for longer working hours and more shift-work. On the other hand, the deterioration of our health status is often accompanied by an extension of our sleeping time.
"Consistently sleeping six to eight hours per night may be optimal for health. The duration of sleep should be regarded as an additional behavioural risk factor, or risk marker, influenced by the environment and possibly amenable to change through both education and counselling as well as through measures of public health aimed at favourable modifications of the physical and working environments."
The study noted that previous research into lack of sleep had shown it was associated with ailments including heart disease, high blood pressure, obesity, and diabetes.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2010/may/05/sleep-study-premature-death
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUALAND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Headline News,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health,
Natural News
Sunday, March 10, 2013
THE TRUTH ABOUT DIET SODA AND DIABETES: DIET SODA INCREASES THE RISK OF DIABETES
by Sandeep Godiyal
(NaturalNews) Sodas have a reputation for being among the worst drinks available health-wise. For one, these drinks contain loads of sugar, which makes frequent consumption of these drinks a potential trigger for diabetes mellitus, one of the most dreaded diseases of our time. Because of this, people are making a switch to diet soda products. But studies show that replacing soda with their diet variants doesn't necessarily decrease the risk. In fact, the opposite just might be true. Does diet soda increase the risk of diabetes?
Sugar, while it is an essential ingredient for a lot of physiological processes, is known to have a lot of negative effects to the body when consumed in excess. And with the modern eating habits and the rise of processed food, people are unwittingly putting excess sugar in their system. The increase in sugar consumption by the general public is directly proportional to the rate of obesity. In addition, it can contribute to the worsening of particular ailments such as diabetes.
Because of growing awareness to these health issues, diet variants of soda (which uses artificial sweeteners such as aspartame) are becoming very popular additions to supermarket shelves and family diets. They are very popular for what they are, having no sugar, and therefore no calories. The presence of such drinks had people going on a diet and/or those suffering from diabetes dancing with joy. But if recent studies are to be heeded, people may have to think twice before picking up that diet soda can, bottle, or glass.
This may seem to be a curious statistic, but different studies done by reputable researchers reveal that those who drank "light" sodas actually increased their risk of contracting Type II diabetes. The odds of acquiring diabetes for diet drinkers are actually higher than those who drink regular soda. These results are found to be consistent, even when measured on an "equal-serving" basis. And what's even more bothersome is that there's a craving effect associated with these drinks (more on that later). According to studies, people who frequently consume diet soda take them at almost twice the amount compared to those who drink regular soda or fruit juice.
What are the reasons behind this startling statistic? Studies have shown that those who consume products made with artificial sweeteners such as aspartame have a higher affinity for sugar. That is, those who are exposed to higher amounts of aspartame actually crave for more sugary items, leading to binges that can further increase the risk of contracting diabetes and other health complications.
Last but not least, even though aspartame doesn't contain any sugar, it had some physiological effects similar to sugar, thus increasing blood sugar levels and eventually insulin levels. It's this sudden increase in insulin production that leads to desensitization to insulin, the main symptom of Type II diabetes.
And while the risk of Type II diabetes in frequent diet soda drinkers is still under debate and investigation, what cannot be disputed is its role in other related diseases. For one, it has a direct role in the proliferation of metabolic disorder. Such a syndrome greatly increases the risk of having Type II diabetes, hypertension, central obesity, and other nasty physiological and physical risks.
It can be argued that studies have shown that as long as you keep a generally healthy lifestyle (eating healthy foods, having consistent exercise, etc.), you can avoid the health risks presented by too much consumption of diet soda. But as analysts of any craft would tell you, statistics don't lie. If you do not want to acquire Type II diabetes (among other health problems) later in life, it's better to avoid consuming diet soda instead of playing the odds.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com
http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-statistics/
http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/type-2/?loc=DropDownDB-type2
http://www.naturalnews.com/039155_diet_soda_diabetes_artificial_sweeteners.html
(NaturalNews) Sodas have a reputation for being among the worst drinks available health-wise. For one, these drinks contain loads of sugar, which makes frequent consumption of these drinks a potential trigger for diabetes mellitus, one of the most dreaded diseases of our time. Because of this, people are making a switch to diet soda products. But studies show that replacing soda with their diet variants doesn't necessarily decrease the risk. In fact, the opposite just might be true. Does diet soda increase the risk of diabetes?
Sugar, while it is an essential ingredient for a lot of physiological processes, is known to have a lot of negative effects to the body when consumed in excess. And with the modern eating habits and the rise of processed food, people are unwittingly putting excess sugar in their system. The increase in sugar consumption by the general public is directly proportional to the rate of obesity. In addition, it can contribute to the worsening of particular ailments such as diabetes.
Because of growing awareness to these health issues, diet variants of soda (which uses artificial sweeteners such as aspartame) are becoming very popular additions to supermarket shelves and family diets. They are very popular for what they are, having no sugar, and therefore no calories. The presence of such drinks had people going on a diet and/or those suffering from diabetes dancing with joy. But if recent studies are to be heeded, people may have to think twice before picking up that diet soda can, bottle, or glass.
This may seem to be a curious statistic, but different studies done by reputable researchers reveal that those who drank "light" sodas actually increased their risk of contracting Type II diabetes. The odds of acquiring diabetes for diet drinkers are actually higher than those who drink regular soda. These results are found to be consistent, even when measured on an "equal-serving" basis. And what's even more bothersome is that there's a craving effect associated with these drinks (more on that later). According to studies, people who frequently consume diet soda take them at almost twice the amount compared to those who drink regular soda or fruit juice.
What are the reasons behind this startling statistic? Studies have shown that those who consume products made with artificial sweeteners such as aspartame have a higher affinity for sugar. That is, those who are exposed to higher amounts of aspartame actually crave for more sugary items, leading to binges that can further increase the risk of contracting diabetes and other health complications.
Last but not least, even though aspartame doesn't contain any sugar, it had some physiological effects similar to sugar, thus increasing blood sugar levels and eventually insulin levels. It's this sudden increase in insulin production that leads to desensitization to insulin, the main symptom of Type II diabetes.
And while the risk of Type II diabetes in frequent diet soda drinkers is still under debate and investigation, what cannot be disputed is its role in other related diseases. For one, it has a direct role in the proliferation of metabolic disorder. Such a syndrome greatly increases the risk of having Type II diabetes, hypertension, central obesity, and other nasty physiological and physical risks.
It can be argued that studies have shown that as long as you keep a generally healthy lifestyle (eating healthy foods, having consistent exercise, etc.), you can avoid the health risks presented by too much consumption of diet soda. But as analysts of any craft would tell you, statistics don't lie. If you do not want to acquire Type II diabetes (among other health problems) later in life, it's better to avoid consuming diet soda instead of playing the odds.
Sources for this article include:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com
http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/diabetes-statistics/
http://www.diabetes.org/diabetes-basics/type-2/?loc=DropDownDB-type2
http://www.naturalnews.com/039155_diet_soda_diabetes_artificial_sweeteners.html
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUALAND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Headline News,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health,
Natural News
Thursday, March 7, 2013
CAN MILK SWEETENED WITH ASPARTAME STILL BE CALLED MILK?
Allison Aubrey
March 06, 2013
Eric Miller/AP
The dairy industry has a problem. Despite studies demonstrating milk's nutritional benefits, people are drinking less and less of it.
Even children are increasingly opting for water or other low-cal options — including diet soda and artificially sweetened sports drinks.
So how can milk — especially school kids' favorite, chocolate milk — compete in the low-cal arena? The dairy industry has a strategy: Swap the sugar that's added to flavored milks for a zero-calorie sweetener such as aspartame (or other options such as plant-based stevia).
Now, in order to pull this off, the dairy industry has some regulatory hoops to jump through. Currently, if dairy producers want to add an artificial or no-cal sweetener, the resulting beverage is no longer allowed to be called milk (it wouldn't meet the FDA's technical definition of milk).
So the dairy industry is petitioning the Food and Drug Administration to change the standard of what qualifies as milk. The industry wants the iconic MILK label to remain on the front of the package, without any mention of the reduced calories — or the added artificial sweeteners (at least, not on the front label). And the FDA has opened up this petition for public comment.
"Kids don't like the term 'low-calorie,' " says Greg Miller of the National Dairy Council. "It's a turnoff."
Some school districts have banned flavored milk because of the high-calorie content. And some studies suggest that when you take chocolate milk out of schools, consumption of milk declines. During a phone interview, Miller told The Salt that the industry's petition is aimed at offering school districts a lower-calorie milk option that kids will actually want to drink.
Miller says the petition does not seek to change existing regulations that require added sweeteners (such as aspartame or stevia) to be named in the list of ingredients — usually found on the back of a container.
"We are not trying to be sneaky," Miller says.
But so far, lots of folks seem skeptical of the plan.
More than 90,000 people have joined a new online petition organized by SumOfUs.org, a consumer advocacy group, opposing the dairy industry's petition.
And nutrition experts are weighing in, too, including Barry Popkin of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who has studied the links between sugary drinks and obesity. If the goal is to reduce the amount of calories that kids get from sweetened beverages, then removing sugar from flavored milk is one option, he says.
"If the option is flavored (milk) with diet (sweetener) vs. regular sugar, then diet (sweetener) is favored," he wrote to us in an email.
But he says there's no evidence that kids need flavored milk, such as chocolate milk. "It has not been shown to increase milk intake," he says. The dairy industry disagrees.
And the dairy industry's petition is also facing opposition from school food advocates.
"I think it's unconscionable," says school chef Ann Cooper, who's been working to reform the way kids eat at school. She argues that parents and students will have a hard time discerning what's in the milk.
"This is nothing but a marketing ploy by the dairy industry to support milk sales," Cooper tells The Salt via email. "We all need to let the USDA know that we oppose 'hiding' ingredients in milk as a way to increase profits for the dairy industry!"
As a mom, I understand why parents want to know whether the chocolate milk their kids are being served at school contains artificial sweeteners such as aspartame.
And the question lots of parents are asking is one of transparency: Can we really expect kids to read the fine print on the back of the bottle to know what they're getting?
But Miller says if school districts were to choose to add a non-caloric sweetener to chocolate milk, parents would not be left in the dark. School administrators would likely inform parents of the change by putting it on menus, websites and newsletters.
What do you think?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/03/06/173618723/can-milk-sweetened-with-aspartame-still-be-called-milk?utm_source=NPR&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=20130306
| Morgan Barnett, 7, drinks from containers of 1 percent milk and chocolate milk during lunch at a school in St. Paul, Minn., in 2006. |
Even children are increasingly opting for water or other low-cal options — including diet soda and artificially sweetened sports drinks.
So how can milk — especially school kids' favorite, chocolate milk — compete in the low-cal arena? The dairy industry has a strategy: Swap the sugar that's added to flavored milks for a zero-calorie sweetener such as aspartame (or other options such as plant-based stevia).
Now, in order to pull this off, the dairy industry has some regulatory hoops to jump through. Currently, if dairy producers want to add an artificial or no-cal sweetener, the resulting beverage is no longer allowed to be called milk (it wouldn't meet the FDA's technical definition of milk).
So the dairy industry is petitioning the Food and Drug Administration to change the standard of what qualifies as milk. The industry wants the iconic MILK label to remain on the front of the package, without any mention of the reduced calories — or the added artificial sweeteners (at least, not on the front label). And the FDA has opened up this petition for public comment.
"Kids don't like the term 'low-calorie,' " says Greg Miller of the National Dairy Council. "It's a turnoff."
Some school districts have banned flavored milk because of the high-calorie content. And some studies suggest that when you take chocolate milk out of schools, consumption of milk declines. During a phone interview, Miller told The Salt that the industry's petition is aimed at offering school districts a lower-calorie milk option that kids will actually want to drink.
Miller says the petition does not seek to change existing regulations that require added sweeteners (such as aspartame or stevia) to be named in the list of ingredients — usually found on the back of a container.
"We are not trying to be sneaky," Miller says.
But so far, lots of folks seem skeptical of the plan.
More than 90,000 people have joined a new online petition organized by SumOfUs.org, a consumer advocacy group, opposing the dairy industry's petition.
And nutrition experts are weighing in, too, including Barry Popkin of the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, who has studied the links between sugary drinks and obesity. If the goal is to reduce the amount of calories that kids get from sweetened beverages, then removing sugar from flavored milk is one option, he says.
"If the option is flavored (milk) with diet (sweetener) vs. regular sugar, then diet (sweetener) is favored," he wrote to us in an email.
But he says there's no evidence that kids need flavored milk, such as chocolate milk. "It has not been shown to increase milk intake," he says. The dairy industry disagrees.
And the dairy industry's petition is also facing opposition from school food advocates.
"I think it's unconscionable," says school chef Ann Cooper, who's been working to reform the way kids eat at school. She argues that parents and students will have a hard time discerning what's in the milk.
"This is nothing but a marketing ploy by the dairy industry to support milk sales," Cooper tells The Salt via email. "We all need to let the USDA know that we oppose 'hiding' ingredients in milk as a way to increase profits for the dairy industry!"
As a mom, I understand why parents want to know whether the chocolate milk their kids are being served at school contains artificial sweeteners such as aspartame.
And the question lots of parents are asking is one of transparency: Can we really expect kids to read the fine print on the back of the bottle to know what they're getting?
But Miller says if school districts were to choose to add a non-caloric sweetener to chocolate milk, parents would not be left in the dark. School administrators would likely inform parents of the change by putting it on menus, websites and newsletters.
What do you think?
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thesalt/2013/03/06/173618723/can-milk-sweetened-with-aspartame-still-be-called-milk?utm_source=NPR&utm_medium=facebook&utm_campaign=20130306
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUALAND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Headline News,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health,
Natural News
Wednesday, March 6, 2013
CHILDREN ARE HAVING THEIR IMAGINATIONS DESTROYED BY IPADS AND VIDEO GAMES
Claire Perry, the Prime Minister's adviser on childhood, has made the headlines by criticising a "treadmill" culture in which parents pressurise children to achieve. In an interview with the Times, she said that “It's usually the mother that is orchestrating all of that and doing all the driving. We have created rods for our own back. Children need time to be bored.” She is not wrong. But although this is certainly true of a certain kind of highly aspirational, affluent family, it is far from universal. The most insidious problem lies elsewhere.
Consider the case of Danny Kitchen, the five-year-old boy who ran up a bill for £1,710.43 on his parents' iPad. Every parent knows how easy it is: children have a magnetic attraction to anything with a screen, and an uncanny way of squirrelling phones and iPads away when you're back is turned. And they seem to have been hard-wired with all the skills they need to pick up any piece of technology and start playing a game on it. There but for the grace of God, eh, mums and dads?
Maybe. But the question that's bothering me is the one that nobody seems to be asking. What was a five-year-old doing playing a game called Zombies vs Ninjas in the first place? The fact that this hasn't raised a single eyebrow is a depressingly accurate sign of the times. While a small demographic of parents may drive their children to breaking point, the majority tend to stick a screen in their hands and tell them to get on with it. This should cause Mrs Perry – and the rest of us – far greater concern.
I have written recently about the mystifying way in which schools have embraced screen technology without giving it the slightest thought, working on the unexamined assumption that the more digitised the classroom the better. Many parents are just as bad. It is, of course, very tempting for a harassed mum to give her child an iPad to keep him quiet. But this is a Faustian pact. Such a short term fix can have nasty results in the long term, if children lose the ability to play imaginary games and entertain themselves when boredom strikes.
A child who can only be content with a screen in hand is an accident waiting to happen. With their capacity for creative and multisensory play stunted by a blaring gadget, they will develop into a different and terrifying breed of adult. (Especially when that screen is used for horrible games like Zombies vs Ninjas.) This parenting style has become hugely dominant in recent years, to the extent that it is rarely challenged. We're looking at evolutionary backsliding, people.
And that is not all. When not exposed to screens, many children are simply thrust into one commercially designed environment after another, all of which seem intended to deaden the imagination. On the weekend I found myself in the particular circle of hell that is a "soft play centre". If you don't know what that means, count yourself lucky. In a side-room, a little girl was having a sixth birthday party for about fifteen other girls. Every single one was wearing a "princess dress", gaudy pieces of nylon often produced by Disney that make children look like so many Easter eggs. Or Barbie Dolls. Every single one was wearing plastic jewellery and make-up, and stuffing brightly-coloured sweets into their mouths. The birthday girl was sitting on a bulbous plastic throne. This was the second party to be held there that day; as soon as their time was up they were shepherded out, and the stage was re-set for another group of girls in pink nylon. As the first group left, many of them were already playing on iPads and phones. It was like a battery farm producing the cretins of the future.
Of course, television and video games have a place. For older children, certain games in particular can be immensely creative and stimulating, if played in moderation. The problem is that many parents have little concept of moderation, and even less insight into the basic necessities of childhood. Britain's children are growing up swamped in a toxic combination of endless screentime, tacky and tedious toys, sexualised clothing, gender stereotyping and unhealthy foods. This is the real problem, not the mothers who panic if their baby gets an A minus in Greek.
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/jakewallissimons/100205016/children-are-having-their-imaginations-destroyed-by-ipads-and-video-games/
ETHICAL DONATORS AND COMMUNITY MEMBERS REQUIRED, TO FILL THIS SPACE WITH YOUR POLITICAL SLOGANS, ADVERTISING OFFERS, WEBSITE DETAILS, CHARITY REQUESTS, LECTURE OPPORTUNITIES, EDUCATIONAL WORKSHOPS, SPIRITUALAND/OR HEALTH ENLIGHTENMENT COURSES.
AS AN IMPORTANT MEMBER OF THE GLOBAL INDEPENDENT MEDIA COMMUNITY,MIKIVERSE HEALTH HONOURABLY REQUESTS YOUR HELP TO KEEP YOUR NEWS,DIVERSE,AND FREE OF CORPORATE, GOVERNMENT SPIN AND CONTROL. FOR MORE INFO ON HOW YOU MAY ASSIST, PLEASE CONTACT: themikiverse@gmail.com
Labels:
100% Australian Independent Media,
mikiverse,
Mikiverse 9/11,
Mikiverse Banks,
Mikiverse Headline News,
Mikiverse Health,
Mikiverse Law,
Mikiverse Politics,
Mikiverse Spirit,
Natural Health,
Natural News
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)