Categories
Activism Consuming Less Environmentalism Real Food vs. Fake Food Sustainability

ConAgra: Bad Food, Bad Policies

ConAgra is one of the most irresponsible companies that one can find on Wall St. From fighting GMO labeling to abusing labor and the environment they have done it all. But now ConAgra is on the ropes. They have stretched themselves thin and they are weak with debt and shrinking sales.

cagchartNow is the time to organize an all out boycott, not just from those of us that call ourselves environmentalists, but from everyone who will listen.

In 2002, ConAgra, together with other major food and beverage companies including PepsiCo, General Mills, Kelloggs, Sara Lee, and H. J. Heinz Co., spent millions to defeat Oregon Ballot Measure 27, which would have required food companies to label products that contain genetically modified ingredients.

A 2006 report by CERES, a non-profit organization that works to address global climate change and other sustainability issues, titled “Corporate Governance and Climate Change: Making the Connection,” measures how 100 leading global companies are responding to global warming. Companies in the report were evaluated on a 0 to 100 scale. ConAgra scored a total of 4 points, the lowest of any of the food companies rated.

And that’s not all ConAgra does with major labor and safety violations over the years, and of course corruption. Multinational Monitor, a corporate watchdog organization, named ConAgra one of the ‘Top 100 Corporate Criminals of the 1990s’.

So as you can see they are not a responsible company and are actively contributing to slowing or stopping agriculture reforms.

ConAgra brands to avoid:

Categories
Agriculture Anti-Monsanto GMO crops Organic Gardening Real Food vs. Fake Food

Can organic crops compete with industrial agriculture?

organicharvest

A systematic overview of more than 100 studies comparing organic and conventional farming finds that the crop yields of organic agriculture are higher than previously thought. The study, conducted by UC Berkeley researchers, also found that certain practices could further shrink the productivity gap between organic crops and conventional farming.

 

The study, to be published online Wednesday, Dec. 10, in the Proceedings of the Royal Society B, tackles the lingering perception that organic farming, while offering an environmentally sustainable alternative to chemically intensive agriculture, cannot produce enough food to satisfy the world’s appetite.

“In terms of comparing productivity among the two techniques, this paper sets the record straight on the comparison between organic and conventional agriculture,” said the study’s senior author, Claire Kremen, professor of environmental science, policy and management and co-director of the Berkeley Food Institute. “With global food needs predicted to greatly increase in the next 50 years, it’s critical to look more closely at organic farming, because aside from the environmental impacts of industrial agriculture, the ability of synthetic fertilizers to increase crop yields has been declining.”

The researchers conducted a meta-analysis of 115 studies — a dataset three times greater than previously published work — comparing organic and conventional agriculture. They found that organic yields are about 19.2 percent lower than conventional ones, a smaller difference than in previous estimates.

The researchers pointed out that the available studies comparing farming methods were often biased in favor of conventional agriculture, so this estimate of the yield gap is likely overestimated. They also found that taking into account methods that optimize the productivity of organic agriculture could minimize the yield gap. They specifically highlighted two agricultural practices, multi-cropping (growing several crops together on the same field) and crop rotation, that would substantially reduce the organic-to-conventional yield gap to 9 percent and 8 percent, respectively.

The yields also depended upon the type of crop grown, the researchers found. There were no significant differences in organic and conventional yields for leguminous crops, such as beans, peas and lentils, for instance.

Continue reading at UC Berkeley.

 

Categories
Real Food vs. Fake Food

The Microwave: Is it Hurting our Healthy Efforts?

 

 

The safety of cooking in a microwave has been a debate that’s gone on for as long as I can remember. Some claim there is absolutely no danger, as long as the seals are all intact, others claim that radiation leaks out and helps cause cancer (heck, the same waves come from our cell phones and our WiFi. We are screwed!)

 

This article –clickable– (a really depressing read, but worth checking out) discusses the suspected dangers of microwaves, and also states we may be zapping nutrients right out of food when we cook with microwaves. UGH. In fact, the article states we are ‘violently ripping the molecules in food apart, rendering some nutrients inert, at best, and carcinogenic at its worst’


Um, Yikes?

 

Where do you stand? I cringed while reading the article, and I admit–I looked at my little magical zapping oven and wondered for a moment if I was doing more harm than good by using it.

 

In those romantic homesteading daydreams I get, the ones where I’ve cut out as many gadgets as possible and live as simply as I can, I imagine warming up my leftovers on my woodstove. My imaginary woodstove that keeps our house warm with imaginary wood stacked out back. Much like Jenna Woginrich (hero of mine) describes in her latest book:

“If I have any leftovers from last night’s dinner, I don’t fuss with the stove in the kitchen. I just slide the crock of mac-n-cheese or leftover soup into the Bun Baker’s lower oven. Soon it’ll be warming up with the same energy source I knew so intimately back in June, when I was out there splitting that seasoned locust, sweat running out of my pores like out of a tap.”

 

Ahhhh, if only my imaginary woodstove were real. Someday, maybe.

 

But honestly. Even if I had my warm, dreamy woodstove right now, how hard would it be to give up my microwave? This family gave up their microwave and is not looking back. I give them kudos, definitely. Would I be able to? Okay, wrong question–of course I’d be able to. But would I want to take away that convenience?

 

I cook for 5 in our family, plus however many daycare children I have for the day (in the summer, this can be up to 7 extra kids). Breakfast, lunch, supper. The food for all these mouths, for the majority of meals, comes from one kitchen. One little kitchen with a half-broken stove, a few helpful gadgets, and a trusty microwave.

 

In my quest to prepare healthier food, the microwave really has fallen by the wayside quite a bit. We don’t really buy prepackaged microwave meals or snacks. However, I DO rely on our microwave to make eating healthy easier.

 

 

  • Steamed veggies, like broccoli? 2 minutes and splash of water in a bowl, compared to at least 10 minutes and a cup of water on the stove. Ok, so according to the scary article, I’m just ripping the nutrients in my broccoli apart, so there’s that…

 

 

  • Coffee cold? 30 seconds in the microwave. (I know I’m not the only one who gets busy and sometimes reheats coffee 3 or more times…)

 

 

  • Brown Bag Popcorn? Yes, please! We don’t want the nasty chemical stuff, but don’t always have time for stovetop.

 

  • Frozen harvest. Yes, I could think ahead and set out my frozen tomatoes the night before, but when I have a pot of chili that needs glut sauce right now, at the last minute, thawing the hard-as-a-rock-container in the microwave for a couple minutes is a huge help.

 

  • Breakfast. Oh my goodness, breakfast. Egg casserole made ahead and rewarmed, and plain old rolled oats with raisins are two things specifically. When we are rushed in the morning already, I wonder if we’d rely on crappy food if we didn’t have the microwave to help us make something more healthy, quickly.

  • Lunch. Same as breakfast…oh my goodness. So many lovely foods prepared ahead and frozen, easily rewarmed in the microwave. Soups do fine warmed up from the freezer in a pot, but little squares of casseroles or pastas just warm up so much better in the microwave!

 

I’m racking my brain, and I guess those really are the top reasons that would make giving up my microwave so difficult. To me, they are huge.

 

Am I just being whiny? Last fall our microwave broke, and we were so used to the ease and convenience of having one, those few days until we could buy a new one were like torture. So many more dirty dishes and pans, longer time spent cooking things on the stove. Leftovers dried out warmed in the oven. I’m sure, given enough time without, we would adjust. But I think I would fight it and complain every step of the way.

 

Do you still have a microwave, or have you done without? I’m so curious how many people have decided that it’s one modern convenience they just don’t need…or maybe are afraid to use.

 

 Originally posted at LittleBigHarvest
Categories
Activism Agriculture Anti-Monsanto Environmentalism GMO crops Real Food vs. Fake Food

Monsanto Exec. Wins World Food Prize For Creating GMO's

WFPLogo

In a seemingly crazy decision, a Monsanto executive is winning this year’s “Nobel Prize of agriculture” the formerly prestigious World Food Prize, and he is getting it basically for creating GMOs. Awarding it for this harmful science legitimizes the sort of rampant genetic modification Monsanto pioneered, and helps validate a ruthless business model that impoverishes farmers and monopolizes our food.

Often hailed as the Nobel Prize of food, the World Food Prize has received as much attention this week for its ties to industrial agriculture and genetically modified (GM) crops as it has for honoring those who feed the poor. The WFP has been a magnet for worldwide criticism since June, when it announced its laureates.One of them was Robert Fraley, an executive at the biotech corporation Monsanto, which has been at the center of a number of controversies over GM crops. Fraley shared the honor with Syngenta scientist Mary-Bell Chilton and Plant Genetic Systems co-founder Marc Van Montagu, fellow pioneers in the development of high-yield GM crops resistant to disease, pests and harsh climates.

Oh but we are not done yet! The founder of Syngenta, the same biotech giant joining Bayer in suing Europe to keep selling bee-killing pesticides, will also win the prize,and with it, a share of the $250,000 prize money. This prize has legitimized GMO’s and bee killers.

Winning this prize will encourage the wider use of genetically engineered crops and be a huge obstacle to those fighting to investigate the long-term effects of its GMO’s, which is exactly what Monsanto wants.

From 1999 to 2011, Monsanto donated $380,000 (PDF) to the World Food Prize Foundation in addition to a $5 million contribution in 2008 to help renovate the Hall of Laureates, a public museum honoring Borlaug. The donations have prompted accusations that Monsanto essentially bought Fraley’s award — a charge denied by the foundation.

Rat-Tumor-Monsanto-GMO-Cancer-Study-3-Wide

The picture above is from a study that was published in The Food & Chemical Toxicology Journal.

The study was led by a man named Gilles-Eric Seralini from the University of Caen and it was the first ever study to examine the long-term effects of eating GMOs.

Some quotes from the report:

“The animals on the GM diet suffered mammary tumors, as well as severe liver and kidney damage. The researchers said 50 percent of males and 70 percent of females died prematurely, compared with only 30 percent and 20 percent in the control group.”

“Scientists found that rats exposed to even the smallest amounts, developed mammary tumors and severe liver and kidney damage as early as four months in males, and seven months for females.”

You might want to think twice when choosing food and seeds, and also before trusting the World food prize.
Does it sound like this man deserves an award?
Some more sources to check out.
http://www.thegrocer.co.uk/topics/technology-and-supply-chain/monsanto-weedkiller-and-gm-maize-in-shocking-cancer-study/232603.article
 http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2205509/Fresh-fears-GM-foods-French-study-finds-rats-fed-controversial-crops-suffered-tumours-multiple-organ-failure.html
The international journal of biological sciences:
 http://www.biolsci.org/v05p0706.htm
And if you live in California – Prop 37 is still pushing to label these foods:
http://www.carighttoknow.org/

 

Categories
Activism Environmentalism GMO crops Real Food vs. Fake Food

March Against Monsanto Planned Worldwide 10/12/13

Photo by: Meghann Prouse
Photo by: Meghann Prouse

March Against Monsanto.

Today I talked to Jenn a co-organizer of March Against Monsanto, a grassroots action group based in St. Louis Missouri, but with chapters and solidarity marches in cities from Boston to LA, Minneapolis to Miami and all over the world. Monsanto’s US headquarters is based in St. Louis, In fact more than 400 marches will take place on Saturday October 12th, with future marches planned in the spring. The last march in spring of 2013 millions of people all around the world took part.

So why are so many people marching against Monsanto? My personal reasons are clear, after our dog recently died due to Roundup exposure, but why would millions march against this company?

According to Jenn; “Our big goal is to raise awareness of GMO’s and Monsanto’s crimes”

“Our biggest problem is industry funded Monsanto science. There is a ton of science that proves how dangerous GMO’s and Monsanto’s products are.”
In 1996 the New York Attorney General fined Monsanto $50,000 for false claims and extracted a promise from Monsanto to never again advertise in the state that Roundup is safe. This is just one example in the last 20+ years where deceptive advertising and lobbyists smear and stretch the truth until forced to do otherwise. In addition to this the EPA has thrown out several studies over the years finding them flawed. While that is a good thing the time it take to form and start a new study can be long, and the companies involved are allowed to use and sell their products in the meantime.

As the sign in the picture shows, Monsanto has been victimizing America for profits for a LONG time.
We need a Rachel Carson “Silent Spring” moment here, she fought against DDT, now it’s time for us to pick up the mantle and March Against Monsanto and their proven poisons.

 

 

 

 

Categories
Real Food vs. Fake Food

Six Ways with Sour Cherries

 

My sister-in-law Casey has a really gorgeous sour cherry tree in her front yard. In an attempt to further my foraging skills, I decided I’d pick a whole bunch and figure out what to do with them.

This post is photo-heavy, but I can’t help it! I had fun. The kids had fun. Sour cherries are fun!

If you have a taste for sour, like these two little guys do (they also are big fans of eating lemons), just eat them plain as fast as you can, as a grownup sits nearby patiently trying to pit them for other uses.

 

 

Then, if you are like these sour-loving boys, you must get your friend to try the raw cherries. Just to see his priceless reaction.

 

 

I personally do not have that taste for sour. Which explains why I never took any real interest in sour cherries, despite the tree that has lived in my parents’ yard most of my life (and is now slowly dying). My mom made a few pies this year after my dad got up on his ladder and picked cherries from the side that still looks lively. My dad just doesn’t have the heart to cut the tree down as long as it produces something. Plus, he’d not admit it to just anyone, but I think he feels a real connection to the dozens of trees on his property, many of which he planted himself when I was just a baby.

Wash and Pit your cherries before doing anything else.


I got very quick at pitting the cherries using a frosting decorator thingy. I don’t really have another name for the little doo-dad, but you’ll see it in these pics. I set the ‘thingy’ on a plate, point up, and stabbed each cherry on the stem end. After being stabbed, the pit was easily squeezed out, or if it didn’t pop out, it took a very quick digging motion with my thumb or finger to remove the seed. (Later my mom showed me the hair pin she uses to pit her cherries. Her method makes more sense. I will have to find a hairpin like that.) Or, click here to see someone using a paperclip; another great idea. My method actually worked out pretty well, so it’s a valid option; just find out what is quickest and easiest for you. Pitting cherries is a bit tedious, I won’t lie, but the efforts pay off so tremendously.

 

 

 

 

Okay, take your pitted cherries and make something delicious. If you’re exhausted, freeze the cherries for some future date. Or, take a nap. 🙂  Now on to some fun ways to prepare the cherries:


1). Dried.

 


I actually did this two different times. On my first attempt, I divided the cherries in half before drying; half of them went on the drying rack plain, the other half I cooked for a minute in sugar, then cooled and drained them before laying them on the drying rack. I ran the dryer for way too long, and while the cherries were still edible, they turned out tiny and crisp. The verdict on sweetening the cherries with sugar before drying? I don’t think it’s necessary; the sugared cherries didn’t turn out that much different than the plain. The extra effort didn’t go to waste, however, because I was left with a pint of amazing cherry syrup that went to a couple other uses, as you’ll see later.

 

The second round of dried cherries turned out more plump and chewy (I didn’t bother to sweeten them this time). I had read somewhere to arrange the cherries pits-down, so I did. I made sure to check the dehydrator more often, to prevent little crispy cherries. Can I just take a minute here to say– the thing about drying food is that its so inexact, it drives me insane. I’m constantly checking the food, looking for moisture or lack thereof. I’m never really quite certain when I’ve approached that fine line between safely preserved fruit and …well, jaw-straining leather. Anyway, the second batch turned out wonderfully and after a few days in a container they seemed to lose more moisture. They won’t last long, so I won’t worry too much about if I dried them sufficiently or not.

Though really tart eaten plain, these dried cherries will be great to use in granola and cookies and other baked goodies. We made these cookies here with some of our dried cherries, and we loved them!

If you dry a whole bunch of cherries and want them to last longer, try this:

To vacuum pack the dried cherries, place in canning jars, attach lids loosely and place in

a 325/ oven for 15 minutes. At the end of the 15 minutes, remove and tighten lids. Vacuum packaged cherries will keep longer.

 

2). Cherry Jam

This one is obvious, right? Just like cherry pie filling, if you add enough sugar, these almost-painfully sour babies become a luscious treat. Here are the photos of me and Rylee (and Simon for about 30 seconds during food processor time) making jam. I used a box of pectin and followed the directions–nervously and to a tee. The instructions made jam-making seem like a very exact science. I was convinced the jam would not turn out, especially since when we pulled it out of the canner it still looked like juice in the jars. After a few hours, though, the jam solidified in the jars, and we opened one up for a sample party. DELICIOUS!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

When the work is done, canning tools are great fun. Grab your brother’s head with the jar lifter…

 

…or go lid fishing. Wearing only your underwear, of course.

 

 

3). Cherry Pies

Isn’t cherry pie a given? Now, we didn’t make these, yet. But we have another round of cherries to pick. We are actually hoping to head out to Aunt Casey’s (who lives only a mile or so away from us) to pick another harvest. These mini pies that I found online look just perfect for us.

 

(afternoon update: we headed to the cherry tree today, and were only able to pick about 20 cherries! Suddenly, the cherries seem much more precious to me, as I realize the season is over. If I’d gone just a few days ago, I would have been able to pick another 6-10 pounds. I’m assuming the birds finally found them. Lesson learned: pick the fruit when it’s ready, not when you are ready!)

 

4). Snow Cones

A few weeks ago, we were given an ice shaver. What a great gift! We’ve used it almost every other day already. I’m not thrilled about the ingredients in the store-bought snow cone syrup, though (namely, high fructose corn syrup, which I’ve been trying hard to avoid). The cherry syrup leftover from drying cherries seemed to be calling out for this very purpose. The kids had mixed feelings–half said it was great, half said too sour–but I thought it was amazing. And using the sour cherry syrup made me realize I can try making syrup out of other fruits for our snow cones, and hopefully continue to avoid HFCS. I don’t know if the kids will be willing to give up the shockingly blue snow cone syrup, no matter what delectable homemade flavors we come up with…stay tuned for the outcome on that one. I do have to pick my battles when I’m dealing with up to 10 kids on any given day. 😉

 

 

 

 

 

 

5). Kefir Flavoring

I’m new to making water kefir, but I’m absolutely addicted. I’ve been purchasing milk kefir for quite some time because it just makes me feel good to drink it (seems to help my digestive system and stave of illnesses). I’d never heard of water kefir, however, until Aunt Lori mentioned it on facebook (and then graciously gave me some of her grains so I could start my own). For information on what kefir is and how beneficial it is, click here. I’m still recovering from a soda pop addiction, and the subtle carbonation in the lightly sweet fermented kefir gives me a bit of a fix. Our leftover sour cherry syrup (just a tablespoon) went into this batch, along with some berries, and the flavor was sweet-yet-tangy-and-so-delicious! You could also use juice (below) instead of syrup; just use more, to your taste.

 

 

 

6). Juice

We had watered our leftover syrup down to make the snow cones, and it got me to thinking…hmm, this would make great juice. Sure enough, juice is easily made with sour cherries. Click here to see a method for cherry juice. Or, here’s a simple method: just put 1 1/2 c. cherries and 1 c. sugar into a qt. jar, mashing the cherries up with a spoon a little if you want (pits can stay, which is nice when you’ve pitted hundreds of cherries and just don’t feel like doing ANY more). Fill with boiling water and seal. As it cools, the jar will seal itself, and you can store it. When you are ready to enjoy some cherry juice, break into the jar and strain off the cherries. I haven’t researched this fully yet, but I am assuming if you are planning to store the your juice long-term, you’ll want to process the jars, after filling them, in a canning bath for at least 10 minutes.

 

For my juice seen below, I actually used different measurements due to a lack of cherries: 1 heaping cup of cherries and 3/4 c. sugar. The flavor was perfect. As I was making and drinking the juice, vague nostalgia kept poking around at my senses. I am now certain, as some dusty and sweet memories returned, that my grandma used to make juice with her sour cherries. Among the hundreds of jars lining her basement walls, jars which contained a huge variety of fruits and veggies, there were those mysterious (and somewhat yucky looking) cherry juice jars. I will have to verify this with someone in the family who remembers more clearly, but as I tasted my own cherry juice and memories flooded me I became more certain…yes, I had sipped on this wonderful beverage many, many times at Grandma’s sunny kitchen table.

 

 

 

Noticable volume lost. I had to drink some before getting a pic.

 

There are definitely WAY more than just 6 things to do with sour cherries. To think– I never gave this tart little fruit much credit. I’m finding that a lot of people who don’t have access to sour cherries consider them a delicacy and would love to be able to experiment with them like I have. Now that this year’s cherry season seems to be coming to an end, I realize how precious it is to harvest and use/preserve the fruit while it’s there. Next year, if I’m so lucky to come upon such a bounty again, I’ll freeze whatever I don’t immediately use or preserve.

Click here to see some interesting desserts besides just pie.

Click here for more interesting recipes. If you scroll down on that link, you’ll find a ‘no recipe cherry jam’ that uses lemon juice instead of pectin. I’m going to have to try it!

Just google “sour cherries” or “tart cherries” and be ready to find a lot of great ideas. 🙂

 

Categories
Real Food vs. Fake Food Uncategorized

75 Percent of all ‘Honey’ Sold in Stores Contains no Honey at All

Just because those cute little bear-shaped bottles at the grocery store say “honey” on them does not necessarily mean that they actually contain honey. A comprehensive investigation conducted by Food Safety News (FSN) has found that the vast majority of so-called honey products sold at grocery stores, big box stores, drug stores, and restaurants do not contain any pollen, which means they are not real honey.

For the investigation, Vaughn Bryant, one of the nation’s leading melissopalynologists, or experts in identifying pollen in honey, and director of the Palynology Research Laboratory at Texas A&M University, evaluated more than 60 products labeled as “honey” that had been purchased by FSN from ten states and the District of Columbia.

Bryant found that 76 percent of “honey” samples purchased from major grocery store chains like Kroger and Safeway, and 77 percent of samples purchased from big box chains like Sam’s Club and Wal-Mart, did not contain any pollen. Even worse were “honey” samples taken from drug stores like Walgreens and CVS, and fast food restaurants like McDonald’s and KFC, 100 percent of which were found to contain not a trace of pollen.

 

The full FSN report with a list of all the pollen-less “honey” brands can be accessed here:
 

http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/…

So what is all this phony honey made of? It is difficult to say for sure, as pollen is the key to verifying that honey is real. According to FSN, much of this imposter honey is more likely being secretly imported from China, and may even be contaminated with antibiotic drugs and other foreign materials.

Most conventional honey products have been illegally ultra-filtered to hide their true nature

According to FSN, the lack of pollen in most conventional “honey” products is due to these products having been ultra-filtered. This means that they have been intensely heated, forced through extremely tiny filters, and potentially even watered down or adulterated in some way prior to hitting store shelves.

 

The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) holds the position that any so-called honey products that have been ultra-filtered are not actually honey. But the agency refuses to do anything to stop this influx of illegitimate “honey” from flooding the North American market. It also continues to stonewall all petitions to establish a national regulatory standard for verifying the integrity of honey.

Ultra-filtering eliminates and destroys all medicinal properties of honey

Assuming that there is any real honey at all in the phony honey products tested by FSN, the removal of pollen and other delicate materials via ultra-filtering renders them medicinally dead. Raw honey is a health-promoting food that can help alleviate stomach problems, anemia, allergies, and other health conditions. Ultra-filtered honey is nothing more than a health-destroying processed sugar in the same vein as white table sugar or high fructose corn syrup.

The good news is that all of the honey products FSN tested from farmers markets, food cooperatives, and “natural” stores like Trader Joe’s and Whole Foods, were found to contain pollen and a full array of antioxidants and other nutrients. Local beekeepers are another great source of obtaining raw, unprocessed, real honey.

Be sure to read the entire FSN report at:
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2011/…

Source:

http://www.naturalnews.com