A friend recently bought a vehicle equipped with Onstar. It’s an excellent tool and safety device, no doubt, and although I don’t have a vehicle that includes this service, it sounds interesting. I also don’t have a portable GPS – Global Positioniing System for satellite ground navigation. But do I really need it? Getting lost and trying to find my way around is nearly the only exciting thing that happens to me anymore and one of the only sports where I can still compete. I have a pigeon's sense of direction. Margaret, my wife, calls me The Pathfinder.
Mine and Margaret’s biggest monthly outlay is electronic communications including a cable TV and internet provider, plus MLB.TV package, cell phones and land phone line, etc. This world is becoming so technical what with Handheld PC/Phones, GPS’s in cars, cell phones, OnStar, etc. what’s next, personal satellites? And what if you prefer that Big Brother and the Brownshirts don’t know exactly where you are? What if you cherish privacy and your freedom? (BTW, Big Brother and the Brownshirts would be a great name for a rock band. )
That’s right – freedom. Freedom from TV, Computers, cell phones, GPI devices (Ground Point Indicators), etc. Have we become slaves to technology (the correct answer is yes)? Are our lives truly richer for all the microwaves, shortwaves , etc. that bombard our bodies and our brains every second of our lives? Or is there a danger? Has anyone ever read The Zapping of America?
I have one friend of substantial means who refuses to have cable TV, a computer or a cell phone and I’m beginning to see the value of this decision. He refuses to succumb to herd mentality in other ways as well. He values his freedom and his privacy. He is also environmental/energy conscious and a conservative in the original sense of the word. Women in huge SUV’s with a cell phone permanently attached to their ear is his biggest peeve.
How many of us are addicted and have lost the biggest percentage of our lives to the computer? And how many people have lost their lives to vehicle accidents caused by cell phones? Five young female students died just last week. There are two deaths that are glaring examples right here in our community just in the last couple months.
And what happens when these systems fail? What happens if an enemy targets the critical communications satellites we rely on now for nearly everything? Is there one survival system now integral to that communications system that is not threatened as a result? Food supply and distribution? Fuel and transportation? Emergency healthcare? Water? You name it.
Remember this. When the Native Americans were introduced to and became reliant on the technology brought by European invaders, over a few short decades they lost the ability to produce weapons and other essentials. Their survival skills diminished dramatically and they became almost totally reliant on trade goods and food produced by others. They were enslaved by an advanced technology and unable to survive without it. You’ve been warned.
I recently wrote that an old friend who lives in San Francisco has neither cell phone nor computer and still relies on a “rotary” dial phone. How retro is that?
I can dig it. I’ve got one of the old replicas hooked up in a spare bedroom. It’s the pedestal kind with the speaker cone and the ear piece separate – remember? Our number when I was a tad was BR (Bridge) 2439 or something like that. I can’t recall. Remember Junior Sample’s used car lot number from Hee Haw? BR-549. It spawned a popular country group by the same name.
Speaking of old cord sets, my son lives in a rural area with spotty cell coverage and recently when their power failed so did their cordless land line phones and their cells wouldn’t connect. Everyone should have one of the old cord phones available for power failures. Those will still work when the power is off since they are powered by a low voltage signal that comes through the phone line..
It also helps to have a battery operated radio, a gas or kerosene lamp or both, and a small gas camping stove. Of course that list should include extra white or bottle gas. We also include a gas powered generator which is very nice when the power fails during either cold or hot weather. But those are all examples of advanced technology.
Technology is not all bad and might make life easier and more conveinient on some levels but when you become so reliant on it that you can no longer provide for your basic survival needs for lack of an energy source - you are in big trouble when you lose that energy source through accident or when those who control the source decide to hold you hostage.
Sort of like the gasoline situation we now face. If there ever was a mass war and global shutdown of food and energy distribution, the Amish with their horses and wagons and self-sufficient lifestyles would look like the smartest and most blessed people on earth.
To illustrate the point there is a story I like to tell about being in the recording studio when a storm caused the power to go off. Hargus "Pig" Robbins, a well known blind piano player here in Nashville, was on the keyboards and when the windowless studio went black it was like being in a cave. We were all helpless. After about fifteen minutes the drummer on the session, Buddy Harmon, called out to Pig saying he had to piss and would Pig please lead him to the restroom. It was funny at the time but is a prime example of how helpless we can all become when the tecnology we come to depend on is suddenly taken away or witheld to hold us hostage.
Better get out your old scout manual and start learning how to survive with just sticks and rocks and the animal and plantlife at hand - just in case.
Tuesday, July 31, 2007
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Martin Luther King and JFK Spoke Truth
This is an excerpt from a Martin Luther King publication.It is just as true today.
In 1957 a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution. During the past ten years we have seen emerge a pattern of suppression which now has justified the presence of U.S. military "advisors" in Venezuela. This need to maintain social stability for our investments accounts for the counter-revolutionary action of American forces in Guatemala. It tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Colombia and why American napalm and green beret forces have already been active against rebels in Peru. It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken -- the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment.
I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
In 1957 a sensitive American official overseas said that it seemed to him that our nation was on the wrong side of a world revolution. During the past ten years we have seen emerge a pattern of suppression which now has justified the presence of U.S. military "advisors" in Venezuela. This need to maintain social stability for our investments accounts for the counter-revolutionary action of American forces in Guatemala. It tells why American helicopters are being used against guerrillas in Colombia and why American napalm and green beret forces have already been active against rebels in Peru. It is with such activity in mind that the words of the late John F. Kennedy come back to haunt us. Five years ago he said, "Those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable."
Increasingly, by choice or by accident, this is the role our nation has taken -- the role of those who make peaceful revolution impossible by refusing to give up the privileges and the pleasures that come from the immense profits of overseas investment.
I am convinced that if we are to get on the right side of the world revolution, we as a nation must undergo a radical revolution of values. We must rapidly begin the shift from a "thing-oriented" society to a "person-oriented" society. When machines and computers, profit motives and property rights are considered more important than people, the giant triplets of racism, materialism, and militarism are incapable of being conquered.
Monday, July 02, 2007
A Little Poison In Your Diet - What Can It Hurt?
I recently received and email being circulated on the internet entitled “Cancer Warnings from John Hopkins”. It warned against microwaving food in plastic storage and packing containers and also using plastic wrap to cover food in the microwave. I sent it out to my friends list.
Someone in the first group I received it from countered with an email providing a link to Snopes.com that states this concern is false - but I disagree.
I’m the one who always advises that we should all check out any undocumented claim or “urban legend” that circulates on the internet and almost always relies on Snopes to provide the truth. In this case, I think Snopes got it wrong by not explaining that this is in fact partially true or is at the very least undetermined. While it may be false that this warning came from John Hopkins or that dioxins are released, it is not false that heated plastic constitutes a health hazard. And while we are on the subject of microwaves, there is still a concern that microwaves themselves are advcersely effecting your health.
Snopes has called the email claim false that plastics used in microwaves might cause cancer and their refute quotes Dr. Halden of John Hopkins as saying, “This is an urban legend. There are no dioxins in plastics. In addition, freezing actually works against the release of chemicals. Chemicals do not diffuse as readily in cold temperatures, which would limit chemical release if there were dioxins in plastic, and we don’t think there are.” Halden says “we don’t think there are” dioxins in plastic. He hedges because he doesn’t know. But if you do a little research you will find that dioxins are in fact used in the production of many plastics.
But, he doesn't refute the fact that heating food in plastics can affect your health, only that he doesn't think dioxins are released. Halden states, “In general, whenever you heat something you increase the likelihood of pulling chemicals out. Chemicals can be released from plastic packaging materials like the kinds used in some microwave meals.”
Duh! Even Dr. Halden, who states cooking in plastic does not release dioxins and he “doesn’t think” there are dioxins in plastic, goes on to say “Having said this, there is another group of chemicals, called phthalates that are sometimes added to plastics to make them flexible and less brittle. Phthalates are environmental contaminants that can exhibit hormone-like behavior by acting as endocrine disruptors in humans and animals. If you heat up plastics, you could increase the leaching of phthalates from the containers into water and food.” Why didn’t Snopes point this out? Were they only concerned with dioxins?
According to the Food and Drug Administration, freezing and microwaving plastic food containers and wraps are safe. They say although small amounts of chemicals used to make certain plastics may leach into food; any chemicals that do leach into food are within safe limits.
Oh, I see. And who do you think it was that came to that conclusion? I'm sure it was the lobbyists and the chemists that work for the chemical and plastics industry that were asked by the government, by the Food and Drug Administration, to assure the public there is no danger from using their products. They responded and the Food and Drug Administration has passed this industry conclusion along to us – the concerned public. Oh, there may be a few carcinogens here and there that will be released but "trust us" they say, these chemicals that enter your body are within safe limits.
Where and how many times have we heard that before?
Firstly, their research people are biased. They get paid support corporate decisions and to deliver good news. Do you know how long a chemist would stay employed by his employer if he told them their product is endangering the health of consumers and it can’t be fixed? Even prominent university research scientists have been found guilty of forging research data that hides the truth so they can continue to get federal grants (our tax dollars) to keep their job and continue their research.
And when they talk about safe amounts what about safe amounts for infants? Who recalls the findings that low levels of bisphenol-A in plastic baby bottles were linked to reproductive abnormalities?
If you as a consumer don’t believe that you and your children’s health is being compromised every day of your life by manufacturers and puveyors of products, especially those in the pharmaceutical and food production and distribution industry, you are living in a fool’s paradise. The sources and exposures are too numerous to cover here.
Getting back to heating food in the microwave oven, common sense should tell anyone who has smelled burning plastic, technically educated or not, that plastics are toxic and that any form of chemicals entering your body is harmful in some way. The claim in the email that freezing water in plastic containers releases dioxins doesn’t make sense – but eventhough, I’m not certain. Usually lowering the temperature of anything makes it more inert. Raising the temperature causes the atom structure all materials to become more active, liberating components and eventually changing composition, breaking up completely, usually transported by the surrounding air and suffusing into nearby or equally heat-excited substances.
I worked in and was trained in quality control and research laboratories when I worked for Monsanto Company and was exposed to a plethora of dangerous chemicals and production processes. I have a feel for the processes and the manner in which chemicals react and have experienced first hand how people’s health can be affected. While it is second nature for me, I suppose people who have no chemistry or physics background often just don’t have a clue.
Regardless, why would anyone compromise their health for a little convenience? Only because they’ve been led down a rosy path by the pied pipers of industry. Anyone who has worked for a large corporation knows how the corporate hierarchy tells lies and spins things in their favor.
As a member of Monsanto’s management team I observed first hand how this company compromised their responsibility for safety of employees and routinely and knowingly broke laws and regulations regarding pollution control – all in the name of profits for those at the top and for corporate growth - which are one and the same. When I expressed concern that we might be producing a product whose residues and by-products could be very harmful to the environment and a health hazard to people who came in contact with them, I was told that’s not my concern and that future science would learn to deal with it.
As St Paul said in the Bible (and you know I’m not a crazed Christian just because I quote him) “love of money is the root of all evil”. You must note, he didn’t say money is evil, only love of it; the insatiable drive to get more and more. I think I have actually witnessed the presence of evil in the eyes of greedy people.
I’m currently re-reading a book entitled “Our Kind” by Marvin Harris, an anthropologist that goes into how the barter system most likely arose. They have observed female pigmy chimps in the wild that trade sex for food and theorize that’s how early man began what has evolved into the economic system of commerce we know today. However back then, when homo sapien was first developing, this form of prostitution was dignified and had a positive outcome for the group. Today’s uber-greed has spawned industrial and commercial forms of prostitution that are infused with evil and without conscience. This out-of-control greed sacrifices the less wealthy members of the group for the benefit and upkeep of the wealthiest.
It never ceases to amaze me that people will avert their eyes or delude themselves when they see injustice and dishonesty in business or politics as long as they see themselves profiting as a result. How does one rationalize profiting from behavior that causes suffering and pain to others? What makes some people feel a sense of guilt for such behavior while others somehow reason they are not guilty? What is it about the lust for wealth and the lifestyle it allows that will cause people to sell their soul to the devil – even if it’s just one little piece at a time?
Those who produce consumer products are all guilty of exposing us to disease and hazards of one type or another but they always play it down in their favor. They are fond of claiming that the danger that haunts their products is either not there or are is there but in such small quantity it can’t hurt you. They also like to claim we are exposed to these same hazards by Mother Nature. For example, they like to point out that each of us already carries a certain body burden of dioxins regardless of how and what we eat. If you look hard enough, they say, you’ll find traces of dioxins in pretty much every place on earth. They remind us that Paracelsus, the famous medieval alchemist, declared: “it’s the dose that makes the poison”, meaning any chemical can be toxic if you eat, drink or absorb too much of it.
Maybe so, but who the f--- wants the heavily stock optioned corporate executives of General Foods to decide what dose is okay for us and our children to absorb on a daily basis?
Not me!
Someone in the first group I received it from countered with an email providing a link to Snopes.com that states this concern is false - but I disagree.
I’m the one who always advises that we should all check out any undocumented claim or “urban legend” that circulates on the internet and almost always relies on Snopes to provide the truth. In this case, I think Snopes got it wrong by not explaining that this is in fact partially true or is at the very least undetermined. While it may be false that this warning came from John Hopkins or that dioxins are released, it is not false that heated plastic constitutes a health hazard. And while we are on the subject of microwaves, there is still a concern that microwaves themselves are advcersely effecting your health.
Snopes has called the email claim false that plastics used in microwaves might cause cancer and their refute quotes Dr. Halden of John Hopkins as saying, “This is an urban legend. There are no dioxins in plastics. In addition, freezing actually works against the release of chemicals. Chemicals do not diffuse as readily in cold temperatures, which would limit chemical release if there were dioxins in plastic, and we don’t think there are.” Halden says “we don’t think there are” dioxins in plastic. He hedges because he doesn’t know. But if you do a little research you will find that dioxins are in fact used in the production of many plastics.
But, he doesn't refute the fact that heating food in plastics can affect your health, only that he doesn't think dioxins are released. Halden states, “In general, whenever you heat something you increase the likelihood of pulling chemicals out. Chemicals can be released from plastic packaging materials like the kinds used in some microwave meals.”
Duh! Even Dr. Halden, who states cooking in plastic does not release dioxins and he “doesn’t think” there are dioxins in plastic, goes on to say “Having said this, there is another group of chemicals, called phthalates that are sometimes added to plastics to make them flexible and less brittle. Phthalates are environmental contaminants that can exhibit hormone-like behavior by acting as endocrine disruptors in humans and animals. If you heat up plastics, you could increase the leaching of phthalates from the containers into water and food.” Why didn’t Snopes point this out? Were they only concerned with dioxins?
According to the Food and Drug Administration, freezing and microwaving plastic food containers and wraps are safe. They say although small amounts of chemicals used to make certain plastics may leach into food; any chemicals that do leach into food are within safe limits.
Oh, I see. And who do you think it was that came to that conclusion? I'm sure it was the lobbyists and the chemists that work for the chemical and plastics industry that were asked by the government, by the Food and Drug Administration, to assure the public there is no danger from using their products. They responded and the Food and Drug Administration has passed this industry conclusion along to us – the concerned public. Oh, there may be a few carcinogens here and there that will be released but "trust us" they say, these chemicals that enter your body are within safe limits.
Where and how many times have we heard that before?
Firstly, their research people are biased. They get paid support corporate decisions and to deliver good news. Do you know how long a chemist would stay employed by his employer if he told them their product is endangering the health of consumers and it can’t be fixed? Even prominent university research scientists have been found guilty of forging research data that hides the truth so they can continue to get federal grants (our tax dollars) to keep their job and continue their research.
And when they talk about safe amounts what about safe amounts for infants? Who recalls the findings that low levels of bisphenol-A in plastic baby bottles were linked to reproductive abnormalities?
If you as a consumer don’t believe that you and your children’s health is being compromised every day of your life by manufacturers and puveyors of products, especially those in the pharmaceutical and food production and distribution industry, you are living in a fool’s paradise. The sources and exposures are too numerous to cover here.
Getting back to heating food in the microwave oven, common sense should tell anyone who has smelled burning plastic, technically educated or not, that plastics are toxic and that any form of chemicals entering your body is harmful in some way. The claim in the email that freezing water in plastic containers releases dioxins doesn’t make sense – but eventhough, I’m not certain. Usually lowering the temperature of anything makes it more inert. Raising the temperature causes the atom structure all materials to become more active, liberating components and eventually changing composition, breaking up completely, usually transported by the surrounding air and suffusing into nearby or equally heat-excited substances.
I worked in and was trained in quality control and research laboratories when I worked for Monsanto Company and was exposed to a plethora of dangerous chemicals and production processes. I have a feel for the processes and the manner in which chemicals react and have experienced first hand how people’s health can be affected. While it is second nature for me, I suppose people who have no chemistry or physics background often just don’t have a clue.
Regardless, why would anyone compromise their health for a little convenience? Only because they’ve been led down a rosy path by the pied pipers of industry. Anyone who has worked for a large corporation knows how the corporate hierarchy tells lies and spins things in their favor.
As a member of Monsanto’s management team I observed first hand how this company compromised their responsibility for safety of employees and routinely and knowingly broke laws and regulations regarding pollution control – all in the name of profits for those at the top and for corporate growth - which are one and the same. When I expressed concern that we might be producing a product whose residues and by-products could be very harmful to the environment and a health hazard to people who came in contact with them, I was told that’s not my concern and that future science would learn to deal with it.
As St Paul said in the Bible (and you know I’m not a crazed Christian just because I quote him) “love of money is the root of all evil”. You must note, he didn’t say money is evil, only love of it; the insatiable drive to get more and more. I think I have actually witnessed the presence of evil in the eyes of greedy people.
I’m currently re-reading a book entitled “Our Kind” by Marvin Harris, an anthropologist that goes into how the barter system most likely arose. They have observed female pigmy chimps in the wild that trade sex for food and theorize that’s how early man began what has evolved into the economic system of commerce we know today. However back then, when homo sapien was first developing, this form of prostitution was dignified and had a positive outcome for the group. Today’s uber-greed has spawned industrial and commercial forms of prostitution that are infused with evil and without conscience. This out-of-control greed sacrifices the less wealthy members of the group for the benefit and upkeep of the wealthiest.
It never ceases to amaze me that people will avert their eyes or delude themselves when they see injustice and dishonesty in business or politics as long as they see themselves profiting as a result. How does one rationalize profiting from behavior that causes suffering and pain to others? What makes some people feel a sense of guilt for such behavior while others somehow reason they are not guilty? What is it about the lust for wealth and the lifestyle it allows that will cause people to sell their soul to the devil – even if it’s just one little piece at a time?
Those who produce consumer products are all guilty of exposing us to disease and hazards of one type or another but they always play it down in their favor. They are fond of claiming that the danger that haunts their products is either not there or are is there but in such small quantity it can’t hurt you. They also like to claim we are exposed to these same hazards by Mother Nature. For example, they like to point out that each of us already carries a certain body burden of dioxins regardless of how and what we eat. If you look hard enough, they say, you’ll find traces of dioxins in pretty much every place on earth. They remind us that Paracelsus, the famous medieval alchemist, declared: “it’s the dose that makes the poison”, meaning any chemical can be toxic if you eat, drink or absorb too much of it.
Maybe so, but who the f--- wants the heavily stock optioned corporate executives of General Foods to decide what dose is okay for us and our children to absorb on a daily basis?
Not me!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)