Natural Communities Magazine A magazine devoted to the local natural wellness culture.

Archive for November, 2008

Fish Farming Fallacies

Wednesday, November 19th, 2008

Enjoy that wild salmon, it could be extinct— or at least unobtainable— in your lifetime.  This is the message I get the more I look into it. It’s one reason why I write on the behalf of wild salmon, because it is so good as a food, and such an inspiring work of nature, but it is becoming so rare. What would the Pacific Northwest, my home, be like without it? The rivers would seem barren. The orcas in the ocean would starve and diminish. The Web of Life would fray badly.

And it is fraying now.

What are the alternatives?

Declining ocean fish stocks have led to a rapid growth in fish farming. Let’s see how that’s working out.
Think farmed fish are the answer? Think again:

The total world aquaculture production contributes to the global fish supply. Aquaculture is one of the fastest growing food sectors, with production increasing from 10 million tonnes in 1990 to 29 million tonnes in 1997 (FAO, 1999). More than 220 species of finfish and shellfish are farmed today.

However, carnivorous farmed fish are fed on high levels of fish meal and fish oil and require a fish biomass input superior to the fish biomass produced. For the ten species of fish most commonly farmed , an average of 1.9kg of wild fish is required for every kilogram of fish raised. Unfortunately, there is an increase in the production trend of carnivorous fish (such as salmon or shrimp), rather than herbivorous or filter feeder fish. Small pelagic fish mainly provide the fish meal and fish oils used for aquaculture feed. Aquaculture’s growing needs increase pressures existing on wild fisheries for small pelagic fish, which already suffer from overexploitation and are strained by climate changes resulting from the El Niño warming effect.

Pelagic fish are oily fish that live in the deep sea. This group includes herring, sardines and anchovies. Perfectly good fish in their own right, less likely to contain heavy metals as do the larger predator species, and in my opinion what we should be eating instead of tuna and farmed salmon.

Fish as food and fish food; a redundant article perhaps but I feel the need to show how the message is coming in from many authoritative sources:

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - One-third of the world’s ocean fish catch is ground up for animal feed, a potential problem for marine ecosystems and a waste of a resource that could directly nourish humans, scientists said on Wednesday.

The fish being used to feed pigs, chickens and farm-raised fish are often thought of as bait, including anchovies, sardines, menhaden and other small- to medium-sized species, researchers wrote in a study to be published in November in the Annual Review of Environment and Resources.

These so-called forage fish account for 37 percent, or 31.5 million tons, of all fish taken from the world’s oceans each year, the study said. Ninety percent of that catch is turned into fish meal or fish oil, most of which is used as agricultural and aquacultural feed.

Ellen Pikitch, executive director of the Institute for Ocean Conservation Science and a professor at Stony Brook University in New York, called these numbers “staggering.”

A recent study (pdf) on salmon mortality in the Columbia and Fraser Rivers has put the spotlight on the effects of farmed salmon lice that infest wild smolts coming out of the Fraser. A 2005 study found a correlation between proximity of fish farms and lice infestation. The fish farm industry refutes that and says that it is closely monitoring lice in its rearing pens. They apply lice killer, how and how much, I don’t know, and what effect the chemicals have on the fish and on fish-as-food I don’t know. But it’s troubling.

Ocean Fish in Steep Decline Fish farming get its food from the oceans. This fact leads one to ask how the sources of the world’s wild fish are doing. Bummer.

A bleak warning from the UK:

A hidden catastrophe is unfolding off the coasts of Britain which could leave our seas filled with only algae and jellyfish, a leading conservation organisation warns today. The Marine Conservation Society says severe overfishing is the biggest environmental threat facing Britain and is having a profound effect on marine ecosystems. The warning comes in Silent Seas, a report released as the government prepares its marine bill for parliament.

The report comes the day after the International Council for the Exploration of the Seas, which advises Europe’s politicians on fish stocks, warned that parts of the North Sea should be closed to mackerel fishing because stocks of the species could be on the brink of collapse.

Simon Brockington, head of conservation at the MCS, said: “There’s a moral imperative: we simply shouldn’t be living in such a way that drives species to extinction.”

What’s even worse is how the food-fish are obtained: trawling, where the ocean floor is scoured of everything, brought to the surface, picked through for say, shrimp, and then the other 95% of sea life, now dead, are thrown back.

An excellent Nat Geo article describes a harrowing decline in valauble food species, exemplified by the crash of the bluefin tuna

Once, giant bluefin migrated by the millions throughout the Atlantic Basin and the Mediterranean Sea, their flesh so important to the people of the ancient world that they painted the tuna’s likeness on cave walls and minted its image on coins.

But, uh oh, bluefin tuna makes the best sushi.

Over the past decade, a high-tech armada, often guided by spotter planes, has pursued giant bluefin from one end of the Mediterranean to the other, annually netting tens of thousands of the fish, many of them illegally. The bluefin are fattened offshore in sea cages before being shot and butchered for the sushi and steak markets in Japan, America, and Europe. So many giant bluefin have been hauled out of the Mediterranean that the population is in danger of collapse. Meanwhile, European and North African officials have done little to stop the slaughter.

My big fear is that it may be too late,” said Sergi Tudela, a Spanish marine biologist with the World Wildlife Fund, which has led the struggle to rein in the bluefin fishery. “I have a very graphic image in my mind. It is of the migration of so many buffalo in the American West in the early 19th century. It was the same with bluefin tuna in the Mediterranean, a migration of a massive number of animals. And now we are witnessing the same phenomenon happening to giant bluefin tuna that we saw happen with America’s buffalo. We are witnessing this, right now, right before our eyes.”

And that is just one species.

Popular species such as cod have plummeted from the North Sea to Georges Bank off New England. In the Mediterranean, 12 species of shark are commercially extinct, and swordfish there, which should grow as thick as a telephone pole, are now caught as juveniles and eaten when no bigger than a baseball bat. With many Northern Hemisphere waters fished out, commercial fleets have steamed south, overexploiting once teeming fishing grounds.

Africa’s and Asia’s surrounding seas are in steep decline. It’s happening eveywhere. Bringing the crisis home, here’s a bit of the fraying fabric that strikes the hearts of many in the Pacific Northwest. San Juan Islands orcas starving for lack of food.

Right now, looking at the mess we’re in in every direction, I’m beginning to get overwhelmed by how bad it is on every front. Economy, energy, food, climate, species extinction, population… population? No one talks about that anymore. I wonder though, when we will….

I’ll leave it here.

UPDATE: Here’s more on farmed fish problems. Farmed fish have been shown to produce sea lice that harm wild stocks, and the Canadian government has taken this and other farmed fish issues seriously. Last week a production quota scandal arose over Canadian farmed fish.

A central-coast salmon-farming operation has drawn the wrath of environmentalists for violating its licence by pumping out unsustainably high numbers of fish. Living Oceans Society said Monday it was “appalling” that government documents show Mainstream Canada salmon farm sites in the Broughton Archipelago produced as much as twice the tonnage allowed in their licences.

Production limits are supposed to minimize the impact that animal waste from fish farms will have on the local environment, reduce the risks of hyper-concentrations of sea lice, and minimize the health risks that overcrowded sea pens would pose to the fish themselves.

Source: www.organicconsumers.org

Young Children Now Being Targeted For Statin Drug Use

Tuesday, November 18th, 2008

In an immediately controversial document, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) has recommended that children as young as eight be treated with cholesterol-lowering statin drugs.

The AAP’s Committee on Nutrition released the guidelines as part of a clinical report on childhood cardiovascular health, published in the journal Pediatrics. It emphasized reducing the risk of lifetime cardiovascular disease by means of lifestyle interventions and cholesterol screening starting from a young age.

Currently, young children are only given statins if they suffer from genetic disorders such as familial hypercholesterolemia. But the report recommends that children as young as eight should be considered for treatment with cholesterol drugs if they have LDL (“bad”) cholesterol levels of 190 milligrams per decaliter or higher. It also recommends that children who have a family history or more than two other cardiovascular risk factors should be considered for treatment if their levels are 160 milligrams per decaliter or higher, as should diabetic children with LDL levels of 130 milligrams per decaliter and up.

We know that in adults, decreasing cholesterol and giving some of those drugs decreases risk of heart disease or death,” said AAP panel member Dr Nicolas Stettler, of the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia. “So there’s really no reason to think that would be any different in children.”

But critics have questioned this logic, saying that there is not enough data to know if statins are safe or effective in children.

The same drug often acts very differently among different age groups.

The guidelines are based on expert opinion, and they don’t have the level of evidence to support them that I would like to see,” said Thomas B. Newman, of the University of California, San Francisco. “We don’t know at what level of cholesterol and what age the benefits of medication exceed the risks and costs. We don’t know what it means to be on these medications for decades, and we don’t know whether there’s an advantage to starting this young versus starting as an adult.”

Sources for this story include: www.foodnavigator-usa.com; www.ama-assn.org.

Source: www.naturalnews.com

Scrub Your Butt Soap Co.

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Rochester, MN.
www.scrubyourbutt.com
 877-805-4382

Organic Valley

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Lafarge, WI
 www.organicvalley.coop

One Sun Bakery

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Lafarge, WI.
www.onesunfarm.com
 608-637-6895

Hawks View Cottages & Lodges

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Fountain City, WI.
www.hawksview.net
 866-293-0803

Herring Exterior Design

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Rochester, MN
herringexteriordesign.com
kyle@herringexteriordesign.com
 877-450-9815

Stephen Colbert Takes Aim at the Statin Drug Fraud (video)

Monday, November 17th, 2008

Check out this hilarious Stephen Colbert video on the new statin drug push by Big Pharma. Hilarious!

http://www.naturalnews.com/024821.html

Source: www.naturalnews.com

The FDA is Running an Extortion Racket

Saturday, November 15th, 2008

The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is running a criminal extortion racket designed to shift money from health supplement companies to the pockets of top FDA contractors. At least three different companies have been targeted for extortion by U.S. Food and Drug Administration employees.

The FDA extortion racket works like this: FDA employees use keyword-scanning software to scan the Web pages of natural health product and supplement companies. They look for terms like cancer, cures, treatment, remedies and other “forbidden” words.

FDA employees then review the discovered pages to determine if they contain any words that might inform consumers of the health benefits of the nutritional products — or links that point Web users to scientific articles from peer-reviewed medical journals that explain the health benefits of specific foods, supplements or nutrients. Companies are even targeted for simply posting customer testimonials, even when those testimonials make absolutely no health claims.

When offending words or links are found by the FDA, they contact the company and warn them to remove all information and links from their websites. Cherry products, for example, cannot link to scientific articles explaining the simple biological fact that cherries ease inflammation in human beings. Such links are considered “drug claims” by the FDA.

If the company being targeted refuses to fully comply with the FDA’s requests, the FDA then threatens the company principals with arrest and seizure unless they agree to pay hundreds of thousands of dollars to top FDA contractors and sign a “consent decree” where the company “admits” to committing various crimes.

The FDA employees or contractors receiving the extorted money, it is claimed, are being paid to “review web pages” to make sure they don’t contain anything that might inform consumers about the scientifically-validated benefits of the health products being sold.


Sources:   Natural News October 21, 2008

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

Mike Adams did a fine piece explaining how the FDA has been targeting supplement makers for some time, claiming it’s all in the interest of public safety. But it doesn’t take much investigation to realize what’s really going on: the FDA isn’t interested in protecting you — they’re interested in protecting the pharmaceutical industry.

And in doing so, they are intimidating, censoring and threatening to imprison supplement companies that attempt to explain the health benefits of their products.

Why are they doing this? Because the FDA is financially supported by the drug companies in the form of user fees for drug approval, and they will stop at nothing to protect the hand that feeds it.

Though it may sound incredulous that a public health agency would go so far as to try and bankrupt supplement makers, this practice is already occurring.

Last June the FDA announced new standards for dietary supplements that were intended to improve consumer safety. In reality, the 800-page rule surrounds the dietary supplement industry with regulations and requirements in excess of those imposed on the drug industry, and up to 50 percent of small companies will simply not be able to afford to comply.

Now they are going after the companies that are still around and threatening to arrest them if they don’t sign a tyrannical Consent Decree, which means the company “admits” to various “crimes” and gives the FDA the right to:

  • Cease product manufacturing, processing, or distribution
  • Recall the product (at the company’s expense)
  • Charge the company $100 per hour for travel time and other work of FDA employees (with NO limit)
  • Charge the company for FDA employee hotel rooms and storage fees for all products seized by the FDA

So you can see how a small-scale supplement company could easily be run out of business with these types of fees. You may be thinking, well what types of “crimes” did the supplement makers do to deserve this? You’ve got to hear this ….

The Story Gets Even More Outrageous …

One company being targeted by the FDA is the FruitFast company, which was forced to sign an FDA document and admit to “misbranding” their “drug.”

Well, their “drug” is cherry juice concentrate, and their “misbranding” was an entirely true statement that the juice concentrate helps to eliminate gout.

The FDA ruled that this claim made the cherry juice an “unapproved drug” and this is what gave them license to target the company.

The fact that the FDA feels it necessary to take time and money going after a cherry juice company, while continually allowing and defending such known toxic products as bisphenol A, flu shots and aspartame, shows what this fraudulent “bought-and-paid-for” agency has truly come to.

It comes down to basic rights.

Should a company be allowed to state true, factual evidence and scientific research that supports their product, be it cherry juice or a bicycle helmet?

Of course.

And should a government agency have the right to threaten and extort money from companies who do so? Not in a supposedly “just” society. Yet this is going on all over the United States.

There are Ways You Can Help

You can help stop the FDA from targeting supplement manufacturers by signing the petition at www.reformFDA.org.

The petition, sponsored by the American Association of Health Freedom, is devoted to ending the FDA’s power and influence over the health of the U.S. population. You can also contact your Congressperson or Senator, and tell them you support Freedom of Speech rights for supplement companies.

You can also tell Congress that you support the Health Freedom Protection Act, a bill introduced by U.S. Rep. Ron Paul that would prevent the FDA from censoring truthful claims about the curative or preventative effect of dietary supplements.

It takes only about 10 percent of the population to become aware of the injustices going on in the health care arena, and voice their opinions as such, to prompt real change. So if you feel strongly about this issue, please do your part to let your feelings be heard, and encourage those in your circle to do so as well. Together we can make a difference.

Source: www.mercola.com

Bottled Water Not So Pure

Friday, November 14th, 2008

Bottled water isn’t necessarily any purer than the water you get from your tap — it’s just more expensive.

The Environmental Working Group tested 10 major bottled-water brands. Thirty-eight low-level contaminants turned up in the water, with each brand containing an average of eight chemicals. Disinfection products, caffeine, Tylenol, nitrate, industrial chemicals, arsenic and bacteria were all detected.

Two brands contained disinfection byproducts at levels that exceeded California’s bottled-water standards, and bottles of Wal-Mart’s Sam’s Choice bought in the Bay Area contained trihalomethanes, which have been linked to cancer and miscarriages.

In fact, the Wal-Mart water and a brand sold on the East Coast by the Giant supermarket chain were “chemically indistinguishable from tap water.”


Sources:

Dr. Mercola’s Comments:

The United States sold 2.6 billion cases, not bottles, of bottled water in 2006, according to Beverage Digest, which equates to U.S. consumers spending about $15 billion on bottled water in one year. Worldwide sales top out at more than $35 billion.

However, the market for bottled water may be drying up. Brands like Aquafina and Poland Spring are now experiencing a sales drought. After almost a decade of triple and then double-digit growth, sales volume grew less than 1 percent for the first half of 2008, Beverage Digest reports.

Personally, I feel this is good news. Not only is paying for bottled water like paying for gravity, but the plastic chemicals leaching out of the bottles have now been proven highly toxic to your body, and our landfills are overflowing with plastic bottles that do not biodegrade. Last but not least, paying premium prices for bottled water, thinking it’s more pure than your local water supply, has also been proven to be a complete fallacy.

The Questionable Safety of Bottled Water

The fact that water is bottled is NOT an assurance of purity. In fact, about 40 percent of bottled water IS regular tap water, which may or may not have received any additional treatment.

Most municipal tap water — though generally far from pure — must actually adhere to stricter purity standards than the bottled water industry.

In a previous study, a third of more than 100 bottled water brands tested for contaminants were found to contain chemicals like arsenic and carcinogenic compounds at levels exceeding state or industry standards for municipal water supplies.

Additionally, while the EPA requires large public water supplies to test for contaminants up to several times a day, the FDA requires private bottlers to test for contaminants only once a week, once a year, or once every four years, depending on the contaminant.

Fluoride (a highly toxic bone poison that should be avoided at all costs) is usually present in both tap water and filtered bottled water. And the toxic metal antimony (a silvery white metal of medium hardness) has also been found in many commercially bottled water brands.

Pharmaceutical drugs are now also showing up both in tap water and bottled water. But at least you can filter most drugs out of your tap water by installing a good water filter…

But perhaps even worse than some of the above contaminants are the disinfection byproducts, such as trihalomethanes, which the Environmental Working Group also found in samples of bottled water.

Water Treatment — Creating Safe Drinking Water, or Creating Poisons?

Chlorine, chloramines, and chlorine dioxide are some of the more common disinfection techniques used at water treatment facilities today. The primary reason for adding chlorine to water is to make it safe to drink by killing or inactivating harmful microorganisms that cause diseases such as typhoid, cholera, dysentery, and giardiasis.

Unfortunately, over the years scientists have discovered that byproducts form when these disinfectants react with natural organic matter like decaying vegetation in the source water.

The most common disinfectant byproducts formed when chlorine is used are:

  • trihalomethanes (THMs)
  • haloacetic acids (HAAs)

Trihalomethanes include four different chemicals: chloroform, bromoform, bromodichloromethane, and dibromochloromethane. The EPA regulates these compounds. The maximum annual average of THMs in your local water supply cannot exceed 80 ppb (parts-per-billion).

The maximum annual average of HAAs permitted by EPA regulations is 60 ppb.

Trihalomethanes (THMs) are Cancer Group B carcinogens, meaning they’ve been shown to cause cancer in laboratory animals. They’ve also been linked to reproductive problems in both animals and humans, and human studies suggest that lifetime consumption of chlorine-treated water can more than double the risk of bladder and rectal cancers in certain individuals.

One such study found that smoking men who drank chlorinated tap water for more than 40 years faced double the risk of bladder cancer compared with smoking men who drank non-chlorinated water.

A second study found that rates for rectal cancers for both sexes escalated with duration of consumption of chlorinated water. Individuals on low-fiber diets who also drank chlorinated water for over 40 years more than doubled their risk for rectal cancer, compared with lifetime drinkers of non-chlorinated water.

Disinfectant byproducts can also wreak havoc with your health even if you don’t ingest the chlorine-treated water. A study published in the Journal of Environmental Sciences earlier this year found that swimming in a chlorinated pool presented an unacceptable cancer risk.

They concluded that the cancer risk of trihalomethanes from various routes in descending order was:

1. skin exposure while swimming
2. gastro-intestinal exposure from tap water intake
3. skin exposure to tap water
4. gastro-intestinal exposure while swimming

But the cancer risk from skin exposure while swimming was 94.18 percent of the total cancer risk resulting from being exposed to THMs!

THMs formed in chlorinated swimming pools have also been linked to spontaneous abortion, stillbirths and congenital malformations, even at lower levels.

Your Healthiest Water Options

Your best bet for ensuring good health (and protecting the environment), is to filter your own water at home using a reverse osmosis filter.

Do not make the mistake of thinking you can tell if your water is safe or not by the way it looks, tastes, or smells. Some contaminants in water are so harmful they’re measured in “parts per million,” or as in the case of disinfection byproducts, “parts per billion.”

This means that just a drop of these poisons added to several gallons of water can be harmful to your health.

Keep in mind also that installing a filter to purify your drinking water alone may not be enough. Since your skin absorbs both water and chemicals — as illustrated in the study on swimming pool contamination and cancer risk mentioned above — you could still be exposing yourself to dangerous levels of contaminants when you:

1. Shower or bathe
2. Wash your hands
3. Wash laundry
4. Rinse fruits and vegetables
5. Wash dishes, glasses, and other utensils

I have been working on coming up with some solid recommendations for specific water filtration systems for the past seven years. I continue to do research. There are many great options out there but I am looking for the best value, and highest quality, which provides an enormous challenge. However, I am getting closer, and I’m hopeful to provide a GREAT solution in the near future as I have finally been able to locate a water expert I can trust.  I found the person who invented the reverse osmosis filter for NASA.

Source:  www.mercola.com