|
Editor
of Author of
|
Welcome to these regular musings, meanderings, wonderings and wanderings by Wendy Priesnitz. Archives - November, 2004 Nuking Our Food – November 26, 2004 The Sierra Club of Canada today held a news conference to point out that draft regulations to expand food irradiation to include ground beef, chicken, prawns and mangoes were published two years ago and consultations were held. They say that Health Canada has yet to respond to the issues raised and “food irradiation has fallen off the radar in Parliament.” They and a variety of other interested groups want to know what is happening behind the scenes and have called on the Health Minister to “return transparency to the regulatory process”. The Sierra Club’s call for an open debate on the issue is echoed in a letter to the Minister that has been signed by groups representing environmental, agricultural, consumer and health civil society. Food irradiation uses nuclear technologies from the Cold War to preserve food by killing fungi, bacteria and insects. It is being promoted to prevent salmonella and other types of food poisoning. It is supposed to increase shelf life and allow food distributors to ship food farther, and supposedly reduce the need for pesticides. (Since the pesticide lobby has been silent on the issue, we have to assume the latter claim isn’t true.) Exposing food to gamma radiation (Cobalt 60 and Cesium 137) has numerous health risks, including the creation of carcinogenic compounds such as benzene, formaldehyde and lipid peroxides as well as unique radiolytic products, the majority of which have not been identified or studied. Irradiation destroys vitamins and minerals including vitamin A, C, E, K, thiamine, B2, B3, B6, B12 and folic acid, as well as bacteria that indicate the expiration of meat, thus removing the indicator to consumers and food service workers that it is not safe for consumption. By allowing food to be shipped from farther away, irradiation indirectly damages the environment and attacks the livelihood of local farmers, distributors and independent retailers. Critics also point out that if food were produced under cleaner conditions, there would be less need for such radical food preservation techniques, and that, in effect, irradiation of ground meat will only decrease the already lax standards under which livestock are raised and slaughtered. There is also, obviously, an occupational hazard to the workers who do the irradiation. When the draft regulations permitting expansion were published at the end of November, 2002, Health Canada quickly organized information sessions on the proposed regulations. But their proximity to Christmas limited the chance for the public to learn about food irradiation and send in their comments. This might be a good time for Canadians to contact their Members of Parliament and ask that the government act as rationally about this health threat as it did earlier this week about trans fats (see my previous blog entry, below). Banning food irradiation wouldn’t make Canada a leader, since countries like Germany, Sweden and New Zealand do not allow food irradiation, but it would be the right thing to do anyway. And it wouldn’t be a huge step; although irradiation of potatoes, onions, wheat and wheat flour and spices are currently allowed in Canada, irradiated foods have not been marketed due to the high cost and the risk of a consumer backlash. As today’s letter to the Health Minister states:
“There are cleaner, safer, and cheaper alternatives to food
irradiation that will ensure food safety, while protecting human health
and the environment.” Banning
Trans Fats – November 24,
2004 Trans fats are ubiquitous in processed food, found in most baked and fried foods, in many so-called “low-fat” products and in prepared foods like fish sticks and frozen waffles. On labeled foods, look for the words “partially hydrogenated”, “hydrogenated” or “shortening”. Some companies seem to see the legislative writing on the wall and are working to eliminate trans fats from their products. For instance, Kraft now markets a trans-fat-free Oreo cookie and Smucker’s has rejigged the brand that used to epitomize trans fats by introducing trans fat-free Crisco shortening. The cooking oils used in restaurants – from fast food outlets through many higher quality places – are a major cause of high trans fat consumption via partially hydrogenated oils. And that makes it harder for consumers to avoid the deadly fat. A California non-profit group called BanTransFats.com, Inc., thinks it can change the situation one restaurant and one city at a time. It has been instrumental in making Tiburon, California, near San Francisco, “America’s First Trans Fat-Free City. The group worked with restaurants owners and managers in Tiburon’s 18 restaurants, and all now use trans fat-free cooking oil for frying. Some critics have been trying to turn this into yet
another rights issue, complaining about the government turning into “food
police” and telling them what to do. Sorry folks, governments have a
role to play in protecting us from harm wrought by conscienceless
corporations who put the health of their bottom line ahead of public
health. Kraft and Smuckers (to name just a few) have been able to find a
replacement for trans fats, given a nudge by consumers and backed up by
legislators. Learning to Use Power for Change – November 18,
2004 But I shouldn’t be surprised. In the same way that children in school are ruled and regulated by a group of friendly “experts”, we are governed by a professional class of politicians. Instead of self-government, we have a representative democracy in which the elite have centralized power, just as power is centralized in school. And that is the way those in charge like it. It is simply easier to tell us what is good for us and perhaps sell us something than to have us meddling in education, politics or economics. In this kind of democracy, a citizen’s role is not to author public policy, but merely to influence or comment on it. The object of political debate in a schooled society is not to discuss but to persuade, in the same way that a child wheedles and pouts and throws a tantrum in order to get her way. Because we have never learned to take the initiative to make change, we resort to criticizing and complaining...or to misbehaving when the teacher is looking the other way. Physical domination because of size, age, gender or some other supposed right has taught us that power flows from the top down. Big kids bully little kids, teachers and principals have power over their students, strong men abuse physically weaker women and children, big countries invade smaller ones and everyone trashes the environment. Most of us accept this distribution of power, as well as its often brutal consequences. Those who do protest are made to feel like rebels and outsiders. Sometimes the protesters are successful. We change a program here, save a building from demolition there, secure some extra funding for our favorite issue, protect a park from a road that is being widened, persuade politicians to amend a few pieces of legislation. But even when these activities accomplish what they were designed to do, they are just fighting symptoms and effects, rather than the root cause, which is misuse of power. We can look at power negatively, or as the ability
to control what happens to us...or at least to work for alternatives.
Unfortunately, many of us have never even experienced the kind of
collective power that can be used to build alternative solutions. Our
schooling has led us to misunderstand the difference between the power
to do something and the force that makes us do something. We were told
one too many times to sit in our seats and listen, to put up our hands
when we had to go to the bathroom, to buy what we were offered and that
children should be seen and not heard. Legislating Learning – November 15,
2004 What on earth makes this seemingly intelligent (and
certainly well schooled) man think that kids who want to drop out are learning in the first
place? What makes him think that a law ever made anybody learn? Was this
just a slip of the tongue, or does a head of government really believe
what he said? To his government’s credit, they are apparently considering
the creation of alternative
learning situations for young people (read: a slight spin on school), as
well as co-op programs, and have
already begun promoting apprenticeship programs. But, as Toronto Star
columnist Slinger wrote on Saturday in a very funny
column, why stop people from learning at age 18? If learning is going to
be compulsory, why discriminate based on age? The Trouble With Perfection – November 8, 2004 Spontaneity also dies when we develop the compulsion to do things perfectly (which is a slippery definition at the best of times anyway). Take drawing, singing or playing the piano, for instance. Yes, some people are fabulously talented professional artists and musicians; but we can all draw and make music as a way of expressing ourselves, communicating and just generally enjoying and enhancing our lives. That is, if we don’t become too inhibited to do so because somebody – art critic, teacher, parent, our own low self-esteem inner critic – defines what is good art and tells us we belong in the audience. The road to perfection is littered with landmines
waiting to kill the joy of creativity and spontaneity. Take the kid who
is having fun noodling around on the piano. Somebody thinks that kid
might “make something” of their apparent talent if they are
“serious enough” about doing so. That’s when the budding artist
has to stop playing, get a teacher and start practicing. A rigorous
schedule is followed, there are competitions to take part it, always on
the road to the holy grail of perfection. Yes, there are those talented
exceptions who are eager to hone their special skills, but for the rest
of us, the joy and spontaneity of play can easily flee as a task becomes
goal-oriented. And how sad to be taught that learning is work, that
trial and error is inefficient, that there is something wrong with the
joy of discovery and creation, that the only valid pursuits in life are
those done for reward or for other people’s reactions. Thinking Big – November 4, 2004 Author Kent M. Keith has reclaimed some writing he’d done in university that had taken on a life of its own via the Internet. His ten “Paradoxical Commandments” are thoughts like: “Honesty and frankness make you vulnerable. Be honest and frank anyway.” and “The biggest men and women with the biggest ideas can be shot down by the smallest men and women with the smallest minds. Think big anyway.” and “People are illogical, unreasonable, and self-centered. Love them anyway.” Most of us have self-centered or even narcissistic people in our lives and probably find it a challenge to love them anyway. These folks – Keith calls them “small people” – see things solely in terms of their own power, comfort or convenience. Now, a little self-interest is a good thing, and some people – women who grew up a generation ago, especially – struggle with the problem of being self-sacrificing to a fault. But “small people” believe that what is best for them is also best for their families, organizations or communities. In other words, their lives are no bigger than their immediate wants, needs and fears and they are often threatened by big ideas. The founding fathers of the United States had a big idea
for a democratic country populated with independent individuals. Susan
B. Anthony and Martin Luther King Jr. had big ideas about the equality
of women and blacks. I hope that fear hasn’t permanently sidelined or
skewed those big ideas in America. In a globalized world, the lives of
Americans are, indeed, much bigger than their immediate wants, needs and
fears. Another great American, Henry David Thoreau, asked a pertinent
question: “Could a greater miracle take place than for us to look
through each other’s eyes for an instant?” Good advice for both
those Americans who are happy with the results of the U.S. presidential
election and those in America and the rest of the world who aren’t. Breaking Free of Schools – November 3, 2004 Finding
Your Calling – November 1, 2004 Coincidentally, as I was preparing a feature for an upcoming issue of Life Learning about teens who are pursuing their dreams, I received an email from a young reader who wanted my advice about finding her calling. I suggested she make two lists – one with as many of her dreams as she can think of, and another with her talents, interests and skills – without inhibition or limitation. Then I said she should ask herself two questions: What do I want? How will I know when I get it? I told her that self-awareness is the key, realizing that, many people are not blessed with that until the second half of life! Before editor and essayist Norman Cousins died, he wrote, “The tragedy of
life is not death, rather, it is what we allow to die within us while we
live.” Return
to current weblog copyright © Wendy Priesnitz 2004-200 7 |
Topics & Passions: natural learning ~ What I'm reading:
Runaway by Alice Munro (2004, McClelland & Stewart)
~ What I'm Listening To: Dear
Heather
by Leonard Cohen (Sony BMG) ~ Fav Bookmarks:
Deep Fun ~
|
