Archive | Food RSS feed for this section

Tyranny = Raw Milk Producers Being Arrested

11 Sep

Tyranny is all around us – including our food supply and our choice to use natural foods and medicines in our bodies.

Rawsome Foods – a private members-only (co-op) market in Venice, California, is home to place where local community members can purchase raw milk, cheese, yogurt, and kefir.  Apparently the federal government does not have enough to be worried about with the upcoming collapse of the economic system, they have to “protect” consumers from purchasing raw food products that humans have consumed for thousands of years.

The owner, James Stewart, along with two others (Sharon Palmer (of Healthy Family Farms), and Victoria Bloch (local L.A. co-chapter leader for the Weston A. Price Foundation)), were taken away in handcuffs. “The raid was carried out by gun carrying officers of the LA County Sheriff’s Office, the FDA, the Dept. of Agriculture and the Centers for Disease Control“.

The charge?  Conspiracy to sell unpasteurized milk products.  

THINK ABOUT THIS FOR A SECOND.

First of all, it cannot be a conspiracy if it is a private group of knowing citizens deciding for themselves to purchase and consume these products.  Secondly, I cannot believe that our tax-payer money goes towards arresting innocent people who are actually doing good things for their local communities and economies.

I have consumed raw milk (both cow and goat) for over 4 years, and know for a fact that it is actually healthier and more beneficial to our bodies than pasteurized milk.  It really doesn’t matter what I think though, because each of us should have the right to CHOOSE FOR OURSELVES – that is what liberty is – and that is why the government should get its nose out of our choice to consume raw milk.

RESOURCES:

http://communities.washingtontimes.com/neighborhood/omkara/2011/aug/6/rawsome-foods-raided-sad-day-america/

http://www.foodrenegade.com/rawsome-foods-raided-again-by-swat/


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/08/03/rawsome-raid-_n_917540.html

Advertisements

If We Are Eating this $#**, then Can We At Least Have it Labeled?

12 Jun

Trans-fats, artificial chemical sugars, and genetically modified foods are three of my least favorite components of our food supply.  The reason is that, in my opinion, they are not real food and are therefore subject to special labeling requirements so as to warn consumers that they are a part of what one is consuming.  By special, I mean that there should be indication that they are actually there.

As I have talked about before, trans-fats are now required to be labeled, but they allow “.5 grams or less” per serving to be equivalent to “zero grams per serving”.  This is incredibly deceptive – and should not be allowed.  If there are “.5 grams” or “.47 grams”, then, tell people that.  Is that asking too much?

Artificial chemical sugars are continually touted as “safe” by various lobbying groups and governmental agencies.  I believe that other evidence begs to differ, and it seems like slowly but surely more people, scientists, and medical professionals are starting to see an unfortunate correlation between diet sodas and severe health problems.  Thankfully, at least we can see these sugars on most labels.  Sans various bubblegum brands (WHICH OUR KIDS EAT), that now have “Phenylketonurics” in them – but you would never think that.  Take a look – this substance is labeled as being in there, but would you ever think to look in the first place?  Again, this is incredibly deceptive to the consumer.

Lastly, and this is the real kicker – genetically modified substances have been and will continue to be a part of our food supply.  Oh, wait, you didn’t want that?  Well, too late – the people “watching out for us” have already allowed copious amounts of these products into the food supply and into agricultural lands.  I am confidant that the majority of people would not want to consume food where its genetic structure has been altered or spliced with genetic components of other foods, animals, even bacteria.   But, how about we put this to the test – how about we allow people TO CHOOSE for themselves?  How about we label products that have genetically-modified components?  Then if people wanted to eat them they could, and if they didn’t want to, they could CHOOSE NOT TO.

I don’t want to stop these industries and lobbying organizations from doing business and continuing to create products that harm or potentially harm the nation’s food supply – let them try.  What I do want is for people to have the ability to choose for themselves what they are putting into their bodies – and that means labeling and truth in labeling.  Isn’t that a win-win?  Let the big businesses continue to create these awful things, and let people choose whether they want it or not – that is the whole theory of a free market – where the consumer has information to decide for himself or herself what they put into their body, can make their purchase, and can show the market what they like or don’t like.  Or perhaps better yet, show which companies they like or don’t like.

It’s the American way – all I am asking for is a little bit of that thing called “the truth”.

JOIN AN ORGANIZATION FIGHTING BACK FOR REAL FOOD!

Trans-Fats: A Synopsis

30 May

Trans-fats, which generally come from partially hydrogenated oils, are created when the molecular structure of oil is changed (they do this using a metal catalyst).  Trans-fats have been “proven” to be very bad for one’s cholesterol – it actually lowers your good cholesterol while increasing your bad cholesterol.  In addition to this, since it is a chemically-altered fat, there may be additional repercussions on the human body that take a period of time to recognize.  Now, I am not suggesting the scientists who have tested this don’t know everything, but I am hinting that they probably don’t know as much as we would like to think.  Here’s the interesting fact for us to consider – once it once discovered how bad these trans-fats were and there were instituted labeling requirements, all of the foods with trans-fats suddenly had “zero grams trans fats”.  There was no change in price, no change in consistency, no change in anything (including in MARGARINE which is almost pure hydrogenated oils) – but now all of these products which were supposed to be labeled with “trans-fats” no longer had any trans-fats.  Hmmmm.

So, I did some investigating.  It is suggested that someone should not eat no more than 2 grams of trans fats in a day – really, we should not eat any of them, they are not natural and are bad for your body, but let’s pretend we do the minimum.  A serving size, generally NOT what people eat in a day, is extremely small – check out the serving size on a pint of ice cream to see what I mean (most people eat more than the serving size).  The FDA requirements say that if there is LESS THAN .5 GRAMS OF TRANS FAT IN A SERVING SIZE THAT THE LABEL CAN SAY THAT IT HAS ZERO GRAMS OF TRANS FATS.

Do the math.

That means that if it has less than .5 grams per serving, in a small serving size, one can say “zero grams” even though there may be .5 grams per serving.  Now, .5 grams per serving, if eating 2-4 servings, quickly adds up – pretty soon you are at the 3-4 grams PER DAY.

Really, there is no way of really knowing how much we consume because the FDA has now made ‘.5 grams or less’ equal to zero.  This is incredibly unfair to consumers who depend on reading labels to figure out whether or not what they are eating is healthy.

I am not asking us to ban foods with hydrogenated oils, I am not asking that we end the manufacturing of products with trans-fats – all I am asking for is for our accounting of a number to be true – if there are .5 grams, or .4 grams, or .3 grams, etc. – then this should not be equivalent to zero!  The fact that the minimum suggested amount of trans fats is so small – these smaller quantities quickly add up and can have negative impacts on one’s health.

The truth is an important thing – and if we have labeling requirements, then those labels should have the truth on them.

Does Anyone Really Think that Banning Bad Food Creates Health?

11 Apr

Really?

A Chicago school banned home-lunches because the school’s choices are healthier. It is a crime that we even call most of the food that we eat “food”, however, who is to judge? The principal of the school? I think not.

 

It is up to the parents and the students WHAT THEY PUT INTO THEIR BODIES. Healthy or not – it is their individual responsibility and personal choice and natural-born right. Let them consume what they want for their lunches. Let’s ponder the things that we have banned and the effect of the ban…

1.) Alcohol = Prohibition = The Mob (at leas an increase thereof)

2.) Marijuana = Drug War on the Border = Dangerous Drug Lords and Crimes

Both of these ALSO created a black market – do we think that food will be any different? If we really wanted make our kids and students healthier, we would work on supply-based solutions (e.g. providing nutritious, truly “natural” and organic produce, meats, and other treats). Food with nutrients would be a great place to create a positive difference – let the free market help to satisfy this need. There are plenty of farmers and producers (including the upcoming “urban farmers”) who would like to help satisfy this demand for our nation’s kids and students. Our unhealthy choices are a social problem – and it will take something much different than a ban on twinkies to make a difference.

We Americans are stubborn and resilient – people have to change themselves, and it all starts with education and knowledge. Not banning lunches packed at home.

Menthol Cigarettes – Profound Study & Regulation

20 Mar

There is a new study that shows that exposure to menthol cigarettes increases the likelihood that people will smoke cigarettes.

*******

There is also a study that shows when people are exposed to drinking alcohol, that people will likely continue drinking alcohol. In addition to these profound findings that show that people like products that act as drugs and increase their sense of peace and well-being, there are numerous other consumer-products that appear to warrant the same effect on the psyche of people – these can include: coffee, delicious sweet treats of various natures (basically anything with sucrose (C12H22O11 ) (sugar)), Doritos, and bacon. Because of the likelihood of menthol cigarettes increasing people’s probability to smoke, these types of cigarettes are being urged to be taken off the market via our fabulous protector of health, well-being and consumer choice – the FDA.

*******

I, for one, who enjoys the emotional well-being offered by bacon, Doritos, cupcakes, coffee, red wine, and the occasional menthol cigarette, am eternally grateful to the federal government for conducting studies that show that products that change the chemical make-up of one’s brain and cause pleasure are addictive and therefore dangerous and therefore should not be available for purchase.

*******

Awesome.

Published at TishaTCasida.com

RAW MILK – Let ME Decide What Is Dangerous or Not

30 Jan

In Minnesota, several lawmakers are trying to make it easier to purchase raw or unpasteurized milk (yay for representatives making laws to re-create a free market).  Big Dairy (large conglomerates of the food machine that seeks to not allow people to make free choices about what they eat or do not eat) is apparently fighting this.

Believe it or not, modern pasteurization as a process is relatively new in the scheme of human existence (late 1800’s).  That means that for THOUSANDS of years people were consuming raw milk.  Hmmm…

So, if I decide that I like raw milk – I should be able to consume it.  Just like if I would like to consume chocolate, or beer, or lawn clippings for that matter.  I, being an independent and “free” American should be able to make choices about what I do or do not put into my body.  And, I don’t want anyone protecting me from that OR forcing me to be protected.  That is simply wrong.

I believe in the powers of raw milk because I have consumed it for over three years.  I am not afraid of it because I KNOW the people who produce it, that is the best type of check and balance one can have with food – KNOW WHO GREW IT, RAISED IT, OR MADE IT.  Simple.

So, in a perfect world (which I create in my head every morning), people would learn about what they are eating and government would stay out of the process.  Yes, some regulations are absolutely necessary, however, even with all of the protections we already have, there are slip-ups and mistakes and people who get sick and die.  That is a process of life, and we need to understand that – we are human.

And, as a human being exercising a free will to as I like with my body, brain, and soul – I can tell you that raw milk should be able to be bought and sold where we the people demand it.

Don’t Mess With My Doritos

7 Oct

Glenn Beck, today, is talking about the the urging of New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg and New York Governor David Paterson to the USDA to exclude sugary drinks from food stamp eligibility.  Lots of problems with this.

First of all, people on food stamps should be trying to take care of their health anyway.  Now, a lot of people don’t force themselves to make good/positive decisions – does that mean we need to force them?  NO!  NO, because that means that the government has more power and control – ESPECIALLY OVER WHAT PEOPLE EAT!  Dangerous.  Welfare and food stamps are set up to help people and that is fine – at the end of the day, we help ourselves.

Second of all, if there is an issue with obesity, our focus should be on education, not on forcing people to eat better.  It will never happen.  You cannot force people to change personal and dietary habits (unless by force, and that my friends is unconstitutional).  People have to want to change.

Last, WE ARE AMERICANS.  How in the world are we going to let Uncle Sam (e.g. federal government, state government) tell us if we can eat soda, or Oreos, or Doritos, or whatever?  We won’t!  We are more resiliant than that!  Now, I urge us all to take heed and attempt to eat local and organic when we can – but to hell with these men in suits telling us what we can or cannot eat even if we are on some kind of government assistance.  And, even more reason to become more self-sufficient and not depend on those yahoos anyway.

I am a health food nut.  I don’t eat generally eat Doritos.  But the government will never tell me if I can or cannot eat them – over my sugar-filled, Dorito-clenching body.

– Tisha Casida

Access to Local Food

26 Jun

In an AP article, a phenomena and trend which has been taking shape for quite awhile, is highlighted.

That trend is the limited access to food in rural areas (e.g. grocery stores), and the reason has to do with economics.  Smaller operations are generally more costly to run, and larger operations who can utilize the benefits of economies of scale to offer products and services for a lower price – will be able to attract more customers who are looking for cost-savings (especially if facing bad economic conditions).

Government proposals will include spending initiatives, and there are grants and other opportunities for these small grocery stores to try and stay in business.  What is truly sustainable, though, would be for consumers to change their purchasing patterns.  Because if the demand is not there, you cannot subsidize it – it will simply not work in a free market (and we are assuming that we are keeping the free market that we have).

So, if you are reading this and are a consumer and want to make a difference – find local farmers, ranchers, and producers to support, and be willing to spend some extra money to keep them in business.  If we keep our local guys open, and help their businesses to thrive, then eventually we will actually see local food prices decrease, and the wonder and beauty of economics in a free market can once again be realized.

It will take time, it is not easy, and we must all work together.  But it is possible.

– Tisha Casida

BEEF – It’s What for Dinner IF YOU KNOW YOUR PRODUCER

30 May


I stopped eating conventional red meat about 7 years ago (by conventional I mean from a producer that I cannot know, i.e. Tyson).  When mad cow disease (aka: BSE (Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy and Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease, CJD) became an issue, I decided that I did not want to have my brain turn into mush, and that I would rather not eat beef.

But I LOVE A GOOD HAMBURGER AND STEAK, so that led me on a quest to find great beef products produced by farmers and ranchers that I trusted.  Luckily, in Colorado, there are several.

In a recent article I found on Mike Callicrate’s No-Bull website, it became apparent, again, that many people in the United States are still eating and cooking meat that is subpar and even dangerous.  Being a food-snob myself, I still refuse to eat beef from even nice restaurants because they are usually not tasty and the meat comes from huge food conglomerates that use growth hormones, large amounts of antibiotics, and new drugs like Optiflex and Zilmax, which (IN MY HUMBLE OPINION) can have untested and could have unknown results on the body of a human being.

Do you ever feel like a guinea pig?  That is because if you are not becoming more aware of your food supply – YOU ARE.

Never has it been more important to be more sustainable – find ways to purchase food from local farmers and ranchers who you trust, and grow your own food.

Read more about what is happening to beef HERE!

– Tisha Casida