USDA Deregulates GM Alfalfa

http://blog.wholefoodsmarket.com/2011/01/urgent-action-needed-to-support-organics-and-non-ge-crops/

The USDA is considering only two options:

1) fully deregulate GM alfalfa OR
2) conditionally deregulate it by placing certain rules and restrictions on growing GM alfalfa that would minimize or limit contamination of non-GM crops (including organic).

Far as I can tell from what available online, the only advantage of growing the GM alfalfa is that one can eliminate all non-GM plant life on the field by spraying the herbicide Roundup.  According to Gurain-Sherman* using Roundup does not increase yields significantly, even over the short term. In the long run, weeds will become resistant to Roundup, either through naturally occurring mutations or through borrowing the Roundup Ready gene from GM crops. Herbicide resistance has already become a large problem in some locations (http://huerto-de-altamira.blogspot.com/2010/09/herbicide-resistant-pigweed-jobs-for.html)


*Gurain-Sherman,D. 2009. Failure to yield: evaluating the performance of genetically engineered crops. Cambridge (MA): Union of Concerned Scientists.

Dangers of Consuming Genetically Modified Organisms

American Academy of Environmental Medicine:

http://www.aaemonline.org/gmopost.html

Excerpt:

There is more than a casual association between GM foods and adverse health effects. There is causation as defined by Hill's Criteria in the areas of strength of association, consistency, specificity, biological gradient, and biological plausibility.⁵ The strength of association and consistency between GM foods and disease is confirmed in several animal studies.^{2,6,7,8,9,10,11} 

Specificity of the association of GM foods and specific disease processes is also supported. Multiple animal studies show significant immune dysregulation, including upregulation of cytokines associated with asthma, allergy, and inflammation. ^6,11 Animal studies also show altered structure and function of the liver, including altered lipid and carbohydrate metabolism as well as cellular changes that could lead to accelerated aging and possibly lead to the accumulation of reactive oxygen species (ROS). ^7,8,10 Changes in the kidney, pancreas and spleen have also been documented. ^6,8,10 A recent 2008 study links GM corn with infertility, showing a significant decrease in offspring over time and significantly lower litter weight in mice fed GM corn.⁸ This study also found that over 400 genes were found to be expressed differently in the mice fed GM corn. These are genes known to control protein synthesis and modification, cell signaling, cholesterol synthesis, and insulin regulation. Studies also show intestinal damage in animals fed GM foods, including proliferative cell growth9 and disruption of the intestinal immune system.⁶ 

Regarding biological gradient, one study, done by Kroghsbo, et al., has shown that rats fed transgenic Bt rice trended to a dose related response for Bt specific IgA. ¹¹ 

Also, because of the mounting data, it is biologically plausible for Genetically Modified Foods to cause adverse health effects in humans. 

In spite of this risk, the biotechnology industry claims that GM foods can feed the world through production of higher crop yields. However, a recent report by the Union of Concerned Scientists reviewed 12 academic studies and indicates otherwise: "The several thousand field trials over the last 20 years for genes aimed at increasing operational or intrinsic yield (of crops) indicate a significant undertaking. Yet none of these field trials have resulted in increased yield in commercialized major food/feed crops, with the exception of Bt corn."¹²However, it was further stated that this increase is largely due to traditional breeding improvements. 

Therefore, because GM foods pose a serious health risk in the areas of toxicology, allergy and immune function, reproductive health, and metabolic, physiologic and genetic health and are without benefit, the AAEM believes that it is imperative to adopt the precautionary principle, which is one of the main regulatory tools of the European Union environmental and health policy and serves as a foundation for several international agreements.¹³ The most commonly used definition is from the 1992 Rio Declaration that states: "In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation."¹³ 

Cost of Homemade vs Canned Soup

I've been eating Tasty Classics soups for $0.25 per serving, but this is because it was on sale for $0.50 per can. There was a recall of some of the Tasty Classics soup because of possible botulism contamination. I don't know if they'e now stopped making the soup, or if my local grocery store got hold of a large lot of it for almost nothing.

Most canned soup costs $0.50 per serving or more.

I found this interesting post on the Julie At Home blog. It compares the cost of homemade with canned soups.
http://juliemcm.blogspot.com/2010/11/canned-soup-vs-homemade-cost-comparison.html

Based on Julie's comparison, the cost of homemade soup is significantly lower than the cost of canned soup, and the homemade version tastes better as well.

Here is another of Julie's comparisons of homemade vs purchased prepared foods: http://juliemcm.blogspot.com/2010/11/7-foods-you-waste-your-money-on.html

The Gardens in Winter

My nephew, who lives in Brooklyn, was going to visit San Antonio tomorrow but is stuck at JFK. Due to the blizzard, all flights have been canceled, the streets are closed, and trains are not running. There are even people stuck on trains.

Here in central Texas, it's a sunny, spring-like day. The recent foggy nights followed by rain have made the winter grass grow. I have not written about my gardens lately, because I have been too sad. A promoter from Houston got several hundred thousand dollars from European investors and drilled an oil well on the land next to mine, into the shale that lies just beneath the sandstone. They used hydraulic fracturing ("fracking") to break up the shale, which frees the oil so it can be pumped up. The methane that comes up with the oil in this area is what's called "sour gas" -- that is to say, it has a high sulfur content. So now, every north wind brings the smell of hydrogen sulfide. I have not had the water tested yet. The well operator assured me that they were casing the well with concrete down to 700 feet, which is below the level of the water. The theory is that this will keep oil, gas, and fracking fluid from entering the aquifer.

When I bought this land, I knew that it was in an oil field. Also, I benefit from oil and natural gas on a regular basis, to run my vehicle, to heat my house, to ship my food to the store, to operate the machinery to grow and harvest the food, to produce fertilizers and pesticides (to the extent I do not use "organic" food and fabrics), to create plastics and synthetic fibers. As I look around the room where I now sit, few of the objects in the room would be here without oil. So it would be wrong for me to feel angry. Instead, I am sad about the choices we humans have made, to trade our land and water for oil. According to the information I can find online, most of the oil used in the U.S. (the largest oil consumer of any nation in the world) is used for transportation and shipping. In fact, it looks as though more than half the oil purchased in the U.S. is used to make gasoline to run cars. Only a small fraction is used for shipping goods. I have not found a carefully researched table about where people go when they're burning all that gasoline, but based on observation, I'd expect to find that most of the gasoline used in cars is to go to and from work and to shop.  So we could make a huge dent in the amount of oil used simply by living close to where we work and shop. Changing zoning laws to allow businesses and homes to coexist should significantly reduce oil consumption. In addition, I imagine it would make life far more pleasant for most people. I've always arranged to live close enough to my work place to walk or ride a bicycle, because I hate driving cars through rush-hour traffic, or riding in buses or trains. I especially enjoy walking, just going out the door and walking to work. I'm definitely no saint, though. I walk to work because I enjoy doing it, not specifically to reduce oil consumption. If the weather is rainy, I drive. If I need to take home a lot of paperwork, I drive. Not to mention driving between San Antonio and the country place once each week and driving 30 miles to buy milk.

Anyway, I have been so sad about the oil well next door that I have not felt like writing. But I'm not one for feeling sad without thinking of things to do to remedy the situation. Sometimes, that means actively doing something, such as moving. It would certainly be easy enough for me to move. I still own the land at Altamira, just a couple of miles from here as the crows fly.  But in the present case, I've decided to change my point of view, rather than moving. It will be an interesting challenge to make beautiful gardens in the midst of ugliness. I will put plant living windbreaks that will absorb at least some of the hydrogen sulfide. If the ground water has been contaminated, I will install a rainwater collection system.

I will get guineas to eat the grasshoppers and use Nolo bait in the spring.

With respect to excessive driving ... most people will probably stop doing it when the price of gasoline goes up to $6 or $7 per gallon, or they will shift to engines or motors that do not burn oil. It will be interesting to see what happens next.

December 26 Low-Cost Healthy Meals

Breakfast: cup of milk $0.5

Snack: V8 juice $0.3

Lunch: Baked tuna steak with crushed pecan crust  $4.50
asparagus $0.88  Cost of meal: $5.38

Dinner: lentil soup $1; fresh spinach $0.45; grapefruit $0.05; cup of milk $0.5 Cost of Meal: $2.00

Snack: 2 large raw carrots $0.06

Bedtime snack: 2 oz cheese $0.25

Total Cost of Meals: $8.49  (I could have had approximately the same nutrients by eating canned tuna instead of fresh tuna steak, and the cost would have been about $1 instead of $4.50. The total cost of meals for the day would have been $4.99, which, I believe, is still about $0.49 cents above the daily budget for the Texas Food Stamp Challenge  http://www.news8austin.com/content/top_stories/274948/austinites-take-on-the--food-stamps-challenge-)  However, some of my other days have been below the $4.50 per day budget, so maybe I'm still within budget. Not that I set out to take the Food Stamp Challenge, but it's interesting to see how well one can eat within the budget. I could have brought today's meals within the $4.50 budget by making my own lentil soup instead of buying the relatively expensive Amy's brand soup, and by eating canned tuna instead of fresh.

Kristi Willis of Austin Farm to Table came up with some wonderful recipes, all within the food stamp budget and all healthy. She prepared food as though she were cooking for a family, and stored the leftovers in her freezer. http://www.austinfarmtotable.com/2010/05/hunger-awareness-dinner-5-green-chile.html

Christmas Day Low Cost Healthy Diet

Breakfast: egg $0.15 (I'm guessing, since I got the egg from my hens); sausage $0.70; grapefruit $0.05; coffee $.05
Total cost of meal: $0.95 Time to prepare 5 minutes

Lunch: yogurt & berry smoothie - 1 cup yogurt $1; backberries $2; a little vanilla; some stevia
Total cost of meal: $3 Time to prepare: 4 minutes to prepare, 2 minutes to wash food processor

Snack: 1 oz cheese  $0.13

Dinner: Chicken broth $0.50; fresh spinach $0.45; pecans (free); lettuce and tomato salad with croutons $0.6; cup of milk $0.5
Total cost $2.05

Snack: grapefruit $.05

Bedtime snack: banana $.05

Total cost of meals for the day: $6.23
I did not add up the protein for the day, because it's clear I'm getting plenty of protein. Today was the most expensive day so far, because of the berry smoothie. Blackberries are not in season anywhere nearby; the ones I ate were shipped from central Mexico. Also, the yogurt I used was a relatively expensive brand.

The milk I drank was also relatively expensive. I do not like the taste of pasteurized homogenized milk, so I found the Strykly farm, 30 miles away from my country place where one can buy fresh raw milk for $5 per gallon. The reason one has to go to the farm to buy the milk is that it is illegal to sell raw milk in retail stores. This is unfortunate, but probably necessary in an economy where most milk is sold through large dairies that purchase the milk from many different farmers, not all of whom take good care of their cows. The Strykly's Jersey cows appear to be well-loved and well cared for, and the facility where the milk is bottled is clean and pleasant. http://www.texascheese.com/milk.htm  This is the sort of place where, if no one is around when you go by to pick up milk, you take what you want from the cooler and leave your money on the desk. It's cheering to know that such places still exist.

I do not have enough knowledge about the health benefits of raw vs pasteurized milk to have a confident opinion. I believe there have been a couple of studies that showed a negative correlation between drinking raw milk and suffering from asthma. Here is one of them: http://www.scribd.com/doc/36759777/Asthma-Raw-Milk   I used to raise goats for milk. I would have them tested for brucellosis every year, but I never worried about  getting brucellosis from them, because I knew them personally and would know if any one of them was ill. I think the same is true for small dairies where the owners are in direct contact with the cows every day.

Nesting Boxes

http://henpals.mybisi.com/