A CALL TO ARMS
By Steve Kay, Editor & Publisher, Cattle Buyers Weekly, Petaluma, CA
Delivered to the National Meat Association’s annual convention, February 21, 2008
U.S. animal agriculture is under attack as never before in its long history. Today, it is inhumane handling of spent dairy cows. Tomorrow, it will be hogs lying prone in a truck because of mild heat stress. The livestock industry must urgently work together to get out front of the next “expose”. It must ask itself: What will the next HSUS video show? For there will be more.
I was in Virginia last Friday addressing cattlemen there. I congratulated them on keeping their beef cow herds largely intact after their terrible drought last year. I also suggested they keep their leanest cows that aren’t in the best of shape at the back of the farm, well away from anyone who might film them.
Then on Tuesday, I joined a media teleconference hosted by the Humane Society of the United Sates, during which Representative Rosa De Lauro of Connecticut said the Westland/Hallmark episode clearly showed that the U.S. food safety system is collapsing. Representative George Miller of California and HSUS President Wayne Pacelle made similarly emotive comments.
That was all to be expected. What disappointed me was the total absence of any kind of response or rebuttal statements by USDA or the industry. So all the media stories I read Wednesday morning were totally unbalanced. Ordinary Americans might therefore reasonably believe that the food they eat has become less safe, when, as we know, the opposite is true.
My point is: The U.S. meat and livestock industry urgently needs an industry-wide public relations body or mechanism to monitor and respond to every challenge to and claim about industry practices and other issues as they arise. If the Secretary of Agriculture is unwilling to immediately rebut such outrageous accusations from members of Congress, then someone representing this vital sector of the U.S. economy must. It seems that, once upon a time, the American Meat Institute performed this function, at least to some extent. But AMI now appears to be MIA, missing in action.
As Kirk Ferrell of the National Pork Producers Council told NMA’s Government Relations Committee yesterday afternoon, there is a war going on. It is a war for the hearts and minds, and I would add the stomachs, of all Americans.
We can all sit back and say: “Well, Americans will always eat meat and poultry products.” That’s true but it is missing the point. If the industry continues to allow the HSUS and others to make all the plays, the industry will have forced on it more and more legislative and regulatory restrictions that will make it even harder for many of you to stay in business. A downsizing of the American meat industry will mean consumers will simply eat more imported products.
The beef industry is already downsizing at the packing plant and cattle feedlot levels because of shrinking cattle numbers in North America. I would be horrified if further downsizing occurs because the industry did not come together and act very rapidly to tell its story, be it on animal welfare or food safety, in a forceful, factual way.
To do that, the industry must speak with one voice. It needs to have one or more highly credible spokesmen or women who can articulate to the American public that much of what HSUS and other industry critics are saying today, and will say tomorrow, is simply not true.
The industry should also consider an extensive campaign to educate members of Congress with the facts as to food safety, animal welfare and other management practices in the industry.
The industry must also take steps to anticipate what targets might be next and work to get ahead of any future attacks, be they on confined animal feeding operations, the use of growth promotants and other pharmaceutical tools that cattle and hog producers use, the castrating of male cattle and hogs, and other animal husbandry practices.
The enemies of U.S. animal agriculture have identified themselves and have revealed their tactics. It is time for the meat and livestock industry to draw up its battle plan and counter-attack.
Subscribe To Loos Tales Daily information
Posts
All Comments
Friday, March 07, 2008
Marketing Trends
National Meat Association March 3, 2008
I’m mad as hell and I’m not gonna to take this anymore!!(Peter Finch from the movie Network)
As I listened to Steve Kay in the PDQ session at the recent NMA Annual Convention, I caught his clarion call for action and it has incensed and infused me. He was excoriating those anti meat activists who, to paraphrase Steve, are hell bent on putting those of us who derive our living from meat related activities out of business. Steve is that parakeet in the mine warning us all that we had better do something soon or we may be out of business before we know it. Maybe it is a bit belated, but I am now incensed with the methods those, who would attempt to take away my rights, use and I am infused with a passion to not only expose them but better yet show our consumers that the anti-meat, anti-animal-agriculture activists are wrong.
The People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have the right to say what they believe. In fact, there are many of us who donned our nation’s military uniforms to protect their rights. However, they don’t have the right to use methods that, in my opinion, are repugnant and have become an anathema. In my attempt to get a better idea of their espoused “rights,” I visited the PETA website . The first answer listed to their rhetorical question, “Why animal rights?” is “Animals are not ours to eat.” They go on to say that, “. . . animals are not ours to use, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment or abuse in any way. . .” All of these are sentiments that smack of a fuzzy feel-good aura difficult to counter without coming off as a cold-hearted, brutal killer of animals. More about heart below.
Those of us in the meat business produce a healthy, wholesome human food, and for our work, we neither deserve the abuse from the PETAs of the world nor expect the praise of others. We not only provide good food, but among many other things, we are a source of jobs and contribute to stewardship of the environment all of which improve our society. We simply do our job of humanely raising animals and processing them into meat products for human consumption. Such is an honorable profession, which, as I say, does not deserve to be painted with a brush of scorn that PETA and others so liberally apply. They use the term “factory farming” as their euphemism for all animal agriculture practices without regard to their “humaneness” to galvanize others less informed to be against agribusiness.
However, is PETA the only anti-animal agriculture group deserving of our scrutiny? Well, I discovered another one called Animal Place of Vacaville, CA . They, too, promote an anti-meat agenda, but do it, in my opinion, in a more insidious manner. Their tactic is to promote their agenda with children. They justify their agenda with statements like, “Counter agribusiness's relentless conditioning of young children, which serves to dull their natural feelings of empathy and curiosity about farmed animals.” They do it by promoting 5 H instead of 4 H and in their words, “This campaign asks kids to add a 5th H "Humane Choices" - to their 4-H projects. Those animals whom (sic) they have cared for since birth and grown to love will not have to be subjected to the ultimate betrayal of trust by being sold for slaughter. The kids will not have to continue the process of desensitization which makes the betrayal easier each year.” Their stated goal in their words again, “Animal Place is committed to promoting compassion for all species and educating the public about the unjustifiable cruelty of factory farming and the far reaching benefits of veganism.”
These two organizations have every right to promote their agendas, as I said earlier. We, in the meat industry, also have every right to counter their methods with the truth about how we raise and process animals for food. However, the marketing lesson I am advocating is that such an effort must be as well orchestrated as those of PETA and Animal Place. This marketing campaign, and that is exactly what it is, should be education of not only consumers but also children and young adults as after all they are the future consumers. It should be a joint effort of all meat industry groups.
Simply to offer past tense reasons for the Hallmark/Westland debacle and how this could never happen again, we must instead insure that it never happens again. At the same time, we must show how it has never happened in other plants and how wholesome, nutritious and healthy our meat products are. Anything less shows no heart.
Mack H. Graves of Latigo, Inc., a meat and poultry marketing and management consulting company, who serves as CEO of Panorama Meats, Inc. wrote this Marketing Trends. You may reach him at his office phone: 303-699-7795,
Mobile: 303-882-5453, fax: 303-699-7206 or e-mail him at LatigoMack@cs.com.
National Meat Association March 3, 2008
I’m mad as hell and I’m not gonna to take this anymore!!(Peter Finch from the movie Network)
As I listened to Steve Kay in the PDQ session at the recent NMA Annual Convention, I caught his clarion call for action and it has incensed and infused me. He was excoriating those anti meat activists who, to paraphrase Steve, are hell bent on putting those of us who derive our living from meat related activities out of business. Steve is that parakeet in the mine warning us all that we had better do something soon or we may be out of business before we know it. Maybe it is a bit belated, but I am now incensed with the methods those, who would attempt to take away my rights, use and I am infused with a passion to not only expose them but better yet show our consumers that the anti-meat, anti-animal-agriculture activists are wrong.
The People for Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) have the right to say what they believe. In fact, there are many of us who donned our nation’s military uniforms to protect their rights. However, they don’t have the right to use methods that, in my opinion, are repugnant and have become an anathema. In my attempt to get a better idea of their espoused “rights,” I visited the PETA website . The first answer listed to their rhetorical question, “Why animal rights?” is “Animals are not ours to eat.” They go on to say that, “. . . animals are not ours to use, wear, experiment on, use for entertainment or abuse in any way. . .” All of these are sentiments that smack of a fuzzy feel-good aura difficult to counter without coming off as a cold-hearted, brutal killer of animals. More about heart below.
Those of us in the meat business produce a healthy, wholesome human food, and for our work, we neither deserve the abuse from the PETAs of the world nor expect the praise of others. We not only provide good food, but among many other things, we are a source of jobs and contribute to stewardship of the environment all of which improve our society. We simply do our job of humanely raising animals and processing them into meat products for human consumption. Such is an honorable profession, which, as I say, does not deserve to be painted with a brush of scorn that PETA and others so liberally apply. They use the term “factory farming” as their euphemism for all animal agriculture practices without regard to their “humaneness” to galvanize others less informed to be against agribusiness.
However, is PETA the only anti-animal agriculture group deserving of our scrutiny? Well, I discovered another one called Animal Place of Vacaville, CA . They, too, promote an anti-meat agenda, but do it, in my opinion, in a more insidious manner. Their tactic is to promote their agenda with children. They justify their agenda with statements like, “Counter agribusiness's relentless conditioning of young children, which serves to dull their natural feelings of empathy and curiosity about farmed animals.” They do it by promoting 5 H instead of 4 H and in their words, “This campaign asks kids to add a 5th H "Humane Choices" - to their 4-H projects. Those animals whom (sic) they have cared for since birth and grown to love will not have to be subjected to the ultimate betrayal of trust by being sold for slaughter. The kids will not have to continue the process of desensitization which makes the betrayal easier each year.” Their stated goal in their words again, “Animal Place is committed to promoting compassion for all species and educating the public about the unjustifiable cruelty of factory farming and the far reaching benefits of veganism.”
These two organizations have every right to promote their agendas, as I said earlier. We, in the meat industry, also have every right to counter their methods with the truth about how we raise and process animals for food. However, the marketing lesson I am advocating is that such an effort must be as well orchestrated as those of PETA and Animal Place. This marketing campaign, and that is exactly what it is, should be education of not only consumers but also children and young adults as after all they are the future consumers. It should be a joint effort of all meat industry groups.
Simply to offer past tense reasons for the Hallmark/Westland debacle and how this could never happen again, we must instead insure that it never happens again. At the same time, we must show how it has never happened in other plants and how wholesome, nutritious and healthy our meat products are. Anything less shows no heart.
Mack H. Graves of Latigo, Inc., a meat and poultry marketing and management consulting company, who serves as CEO of Panorama Meats, Inc. wrote this Marketing Trends. You may reach him at his office phone: 303-699-7795,
Mobile: 303-882-5453, fax: 303-699-7206 or e-mail him at LatigoMack@cs.com.
The newest phenomenon: Global Cooling
Last week I was granted the opportunity to speak at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. It was, in many respects, a very eye opening experience. First of all, you need to know that these were not all agricultural students - a dozen or so “concerned citizens” did show up and were quite vocal. They were vocal about the environmental degradation we as humans are causing through food production, transportation and just living, period. In fact, a couple of them were emphatic that the world is only years away from complete ruination. But then again why wouldn’t they think that? Have you listened to “the news” lately? “Global warming is altering this. Global warming is causing that”. The one that really gets my goat is when a presidential hopeful makes the statement that “our planet is in peril”.
The concept of global warming has become big business. We are reminded every day that we must be stripped of our consumer choices because the planet is in peril. We must enact tougher new environmental regulations because the planet is in grave danger. As it turns out, this may be the biggest fund-raising scam the globe has ever seen. If global warming weren’t a fear-mongering sales pitch, how would a past vice president have sold enough copies of his movie to pay the outrageous electric bill he runs up every month on his Tennessee mansion?
I would hate to think that an actual scientific conference has just taken place in New York City and you didn’t hear about it but the odds are good that it won’t make the prime time news. The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change took place March 2-4, 2008 and 100 environmental scientists from around the world gathered to share some startling facts.
Guess what they revealed. From the mid 1970’s until 1998 the earth’s temperatures did indeed rise. However, in the past ten years there has been zero net gain on temperature increase and, in fact, the evidence shows that the earth has cooled during that decade. Furthermore, these real experts presented evidence that humans are responsible for less than a fraction of 1% of the effects from greenhouse gases. Even more startling would be the fact that greenhouse gases have not caused planet warming but rather any temperature increase was caused by the sun.
Whether Global Warming is the world’s largest hoax or not, we as short time occupants are obligated to use our God-given cranial matter to protect the environment. Just as livestock producers study and determine the best manner in which to handle the nutrients produced by their operations and reapply them to the land, everyday citizens also have an obligation to make decisions that are best for future generations.
As we reflect back to the thought processes of some of the Cornell students last week, I don’t believe for a minute that what I experienced there is unique. In fact, I believe the greater the divide between the global consumer and land, the greater the perceived concern for the land. That is simply because they don’t have hands-on experience of helping to care for the land as most farmers do. I can tell you that it was an eye-opener for the ag kids on campus to hear their fellow students verbalize dire concern about what is happening to our world allegedly because of farmers. It is one thing to read it in a paper or hear it on the news but it is a completely different thing to hear one of your peers blame your industry for the demise of the world as we know it.
Everyone is so concerned with water pollution that we restrict the flow of natural nutrients into streams and rivers. We lose sight of the fact that nitrates and phosphorus are nutrients that are essential for life. In my lifetime, I believe we will see the day that we will have to add both of these nutrients into fresh bodies of water because we have created too sterile of an environment for the creatures that need to live in the water. Of course, too much of any nutrient is not a good thing but if it is essential for life you must have access to it. Life without the sun is not possible either, but too much sun can kill you.
At the end of the day my only wish is that every citizen of the United States truly understood that the agricultural portion of our planet has never been in better hands. The soil and water are cleaner and safer now than they have ever been. The only way the cycle of life will continue is if we, as humans, continue to implement conservation practices into the conversion of natural resources into the essentials of life for humans beings. Come to think of it, other than fundraising, egos may be the biggest problem we face. Some among us can’t come to grips with the concept that, as humans, we are just a little blip in the big picture of the universe instead of totally in charge of it all!
Last week I was granted the opportunity to speak at Cornell University in Ithaca, NY. It was, in many respects, a very eye opening experience. First of all, you need to know that these were not all agricultural students - a dozen or so “concerned citizens” did show up and were quite vocal. They were vocal about the environmental degradation we as humans are causing through food production, transportation and just living, period. In fact, a couple of them were emphatic that the world is only years away from complete ruination. But then again why wouldn’t they think that? Have you listened to “the news” lately? “Global warming is altering this. Global warming is causing that”. The one that really gets my goat is when a presidential hopeful makes the statement that “our planet is in peril”.
The concept of global warming has become big business. We are reminded every day that we must be stripped of our consumer choices because the planet is in peril. We must enact tougher new environmental regulations because the planet is in grave danger. As it turns out, this may be the biggest fund-raising scam the globe has ever seen. If global warming weren’t a fear-mongering sales pitch, how would a past vice president have sold enough copies of his movie to pay the outrageous electric bill he runs up every month on his Tennessee mansion?
I would hate to think that an actual scientific conference has just taken place in New York City and you didn’t hear about it but the odds are good that it won’t make the prime time news. The 2008 International Conference on Climate Change took place March 2-4, 2008 and 100 environmental scientists from around the world gathered to share some startling facts.
Guess what they revealed. From the mid 1970’s until 1998 the earth’s temperatures did indeed rise. However, in the past ten years there has been zero net gain on temperature increase and, in fact, the evidence shows that the earth has cooled during that decade. Furthermore, these real experts presented evidence that humans are responsible for less than a fraction of 1% of the effects from greenhouse gases. Even more startling would be the fact that greenhouse gases have not caused planet warming but rather any temperature increase was caused by the sun.
Whether Global Warming is the world’s largest hoax or not, we as short time occupants are obligated to use our God-given cranial matter to protect the environment. Just as livestock producers study and determine the best manner in which to handle the nutrients produced by their operations and reapply them to the land, everyday citizens also have an obligation to make decisions that are best for future generations.
As we reflect back to the thought processes of some of the Cornell students last week, I don’t believe for a minute that what I experienced there is unique. In fact, I believe the greater the divide between the global consumer and land, the greater the perceived concern for the land. That is simply because they don’t have hands-on experience of helping to care for the land as most farmers do. I can tell you that it was an eye-opener for the ag kids on campus to hear their fellow students verbalize dire concern about what is happening to our world allegedly because of farmers. It is one thing to read it in a paper or hear it on the news but it is a completely different thing to hear one of your peers blame your industry for the demise of the world as we know it.
Everyone is so concerned with water pollution that we restrict the flow of natural nutrients into streams and rivers. We lose sight of the fact that nitrates and phosphorus are nutrients that are essential for life. In my lifetime, I believe we will see the day that we will have to add both of these nutrients into fresh bodies of water because we have created too sterile of an environment for the creatures that need to live in the water. Of course, too much of any nutrient is not a good thing but if it is essential for life you must have access to it. Life without the sun is not possible either, but too much sun can kill you.
At the end of the day my only wish is that every citizen of the United States truly understood that the agricultural portion of our planet has never been in better hands. The soil and water are cleaner and safer now than they have ever been. The only way the cycle of life will continue is if we, as humans, continue to implement conservation practices into the conversion of natural resources into the essentials of life for humans beings. Come to think of it, other than fundraising, egos may be the biggest problem we face. Some among us can’t come to grips with the concept that, as humans, we are just a little blip in the big picture of the universe instead of totally in charge of it all!
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Trent,
I am pretty much an all beef all the time type of consumer. Your recent video on YouTube re: beef and the environment is troubling. I have had my ears up for many years on the subject and, contrary to your stated experience, rarely hear anybody claiming that our beef industry is the biggest CO2 producer in the US. It seems like I might have heard a few comments like that back in the ‘70’s but not since that time. I occasionally do hear our approach to beef producing is a significant contributor of CO2 which fits with the facts of the 2% that you quote--two% of the amount of CO2 the USA produces is, in fact, a huge number. I cannot imagine what is gained by your exaggerating the truth to the point that most readers know that it is just not true at a glance? When you do that, the informed people you are trying to convert, sway, or inform just turn a deaf ear to anything that follows and your whole purpose of informing them about the virtues of the beef industry is defeated.
Beef is environmentally friendly because of the large segment of the beef production chain--from conception to the entrance gate of a feedlot--that is almost entirely based on native or low input domesticated perennial forage plants growing on land that cannot produce plant materials for human consumption in a truly sustainable and environmentally safe fashion. As you well know, whenever animals start consuming materials from land that can safely produce plant crops that humans can eat the degree of environmental friendliness decreases. It is not fiction that beans from a given acreage can feed more people than can be fed if the beans are fed to beef animals and the beef is consumed by people. Personally, I don’t like beans but that does not make the feedlot to slaughter segment of the beef industry more environmentally friendly, sustainable, or ecologically efficient than using the same land to produce human edible protein as you have claimed. I agree with you on how much more efficiently we raise beef today than in the past and we should be proud of it and make it known to the public. I also agree with you about implants. And, I think beef producers should be especially proud of the way they have incorporated a vast variety of processing byproducts into high quality beef feed.
One thing that always amuses and amazes me is that beef producers and organizations do not brag about the environmental friendliness of their product as compared to that of pork and poultry products which comes from animals whose life-time diets come primarily from land that could safely grow human consumable protein that doesn’t need to be transformed by an animal.. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Jerry Dodd
Lawton, Oklahoma 73505
I am pretty much an all beef all the time type of consumer. Your recent video on YouTube re: beef and the environment is troubling. I have had my ears up for many years on the subject and, contrary to your stated experience, rarely hear anybody claiming that our beef industry is the biggest CO2 producer in the US. It seems like I might have heard a few comments like that back in the ‘70’s but not since that time. I occasionally do hear our approach to beef producing is a significant contributor of CO2 which fits with the facts of the 2% that you quote--two% of the amount of CO2 the USA produces is, in fact, a huge number. I cannot imagine what is gained by your exaggerating the truth to the point that most readers know that it is just not true at a glance? When you do that, the informed people you are trying to convert, sway, or inform just turn a deaf ear to anything that follows and your whole purpose of informing them about the virtues of the beef industry is defeated.
Beef is environmentally friendly because of the large segment of the beef production chain--from conception to the entrance gate of a feedlot--that is almost entirely based on native or low input domesticated perennial forage plants growing on land that cannot produce plant materials for human consumption in a truly sustainable and environmentally safe fashion. As you well know, whenever animals start consuming materials from land that can safely produce plant crops that humans can eat the degree of environmental friendliness decreases. It is not fiction that beans from a given acreage can feed more people than can be fed if the beans are fed to beef animals and the beef is consumed by people. Personally, I don’t like beans but that does not make the feedlot to slaughter segment of the beef industry more environmentally friendly, sustainable, or ecologically efficient than using the same land to produce human edible protein as you have claimed. I agree with you on how much more efficiently we raise beef today than in the past and we should be proud of it and make it known to the public. I also agree with you about implants. And, I think beef producers should be especially proud of the way they have incorporated a vast variety of processing byproducts into high quality beef feed.
One thing that always amuses and amazes me is that beef producers and organizations do not brag about the environmental friendliness of their product as compared to that of pork and poultry products which comes from animals whose life-time diets come primarily from land that could safely grow human consumable protein that doesn’t need to be transformed by an animal.. Seems like a no brainer to me.
Jerry Dodd
Lawton, Oklahoma 73505
Friday, November 30, 2007
NEWS RELEASE
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
101 S Webster, PO Box 7921,
Madison, WI 53707Phone: (608) 266-6790 TDD: (608) 267-6897dnr.wi.gov www.wisconsin.gov
DATE: For Release: Thursday, Nov. 29, 2007
CONTACT: John Shenot, DNR, 608-267-0802Laurie Fischer, Dairy Business Association, 920-491-9956
SUBJECT: Dairy Business Association signs Green Tier Charter with Department of Natural Resources
MADISON – The Dairy Business Association (DBA) is helping dairy producers and processors make America’s Dairyland a bit greener by signing the industry’s first charter with the Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Green Tier program.
DNR Secretary Matt Frank and association executive director Laurie Fischer signed the charter today in Madison at DBA’s Business Conference. Green Tier is Wisconsin’s innovative program for organizations that voluntarily pledge to go beyond environmental compliance.
“Wisconsin should be proud of DBA’s commitment to helping dairy producers and processors achieve environmental excellence,” DNR Secretary Matt Frank said. “Dairy farms are a cornerstone of Wisconsin’s history and it’s encouraging to know that Wisconsin dairy producers and processors will continue to make exceptional dairy products while pursuing superior environmental performance.”
The charter is a partnership effort between DNR and the Dairy Business Association’s Green Tier Advancement Project. The goal of the Green Tier Charter is to provide opportunities for Wisconsin dairy producers and processors to achieve superior environmental performance by providing resources and support in the development, implementation and auditing of Environmental Management Systems (EMS), an eligibility requirement for participation in Green Tier. DNR was recently awarded a $275,000 grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to help off-set the initial costs of developing, implementing and auditing EMS’s for prospective Charter participants.
“By leveraging the dairy industry’s commitment to environmental excellence, DBA hopes to work with DNR and the dairy industry to provide additional financial incentives for participating in Green Tier,” DBA Executive Director Laurie Fischer said.
DBA President Jon Vrieze added the charter “paves the way for a new future between DNR, dairy producers and processors.
“Wisconsin has long been the leader on environmental issues and Wisconsin’s dairy industry is an important partner in informing and solving many of the issues Wisconsin faces,” he said. “Participation in Green Tier doesn’t mean simply checking a box; it requires real commitments that will require considerable effort on the part of producers.”
The development of the charter was made possible by the support and contributions of numerous individuals and organizations, including: Kenn Buelow (Holsum Dairy), Karl Klessig (Saxon Homestead Farm), Liz Doornink (Jon-De Farm), John Vrieze (Baldwin Dairy), DNR Runoff Management Program, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, and the Wisconsin Agricultural Stewardship Initiative. Grants from the Wisconsin Department of Administration’s Coastal Management Program and the Joyce Foundation were also instrumental to successfully completing this agreement.
Dairy producers and processors who are interested in learning more about the opportunities available to Green Tier participants, or the charter should contact DBA or visit DNR’s Green Tier web page at http://greentier.wi.gov.
30
Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources
101 S Webster, PO Box 7921,
Madison, WI 53707Phone: (608) 266-6790 TDD: (608) 267-6897dnr.wi.gov www.wisconsin.gov
DATE: For Release: Thursday, Nov. 29, 2007
CONTACT: John Shenot, DNR, 608-267-0802Laurie Fischer, Dairy Business Association, 920-491-9956
SUBJECT: Dairy Business Association signs Green Tier Charter with Department of Natural Resources
MADISON – The Dairy Business Association (DBA) is helping dairy producers and processors make America’s Dairyland a bit greener by signing the industry’s first charter with the Department of Natural Resources’ (DNR) Green Tier program.
DNR Secretary Matt Frank and association executive director Laurie Fischer signed the charter today in Madison at DBA’s Business Conference. Green Tier is Wisconsin’s innovative program for organizations that voluntarily pledge to go beyond environmental compliance.
“Wisconsin should be proud of DBA’s commitment to helping dairy producers and processors achieve environmental excellence,” DNR Secretary Matt Frank said. “Dairy farms are a cornerstone of Wisconsin’s history and it’s encouraging to know that Wisconsin dairy producers and processors will continue to make exceptional dairy products while pursuing superior environmental performance.”
The charter is a partnership effort between DNR and the Dairy Business Association’s Green Tier Advancement Project. The goal of the Green Tier Charter is to provide opportunities for Wisconsin dairy producers and processors to achieve superior environmental performance by providing resources and support in the development, implementation and auditing of Environmental Management Systems (EMS), an eligibility requirement for participation in Green Tier. DNR was recently awarded a $275,000 grant from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to help off-set the initial costs of developing, implementing and auditing EMS’s for prospective Charter participants.
“By leveraging the dairy industry’s commitment to environmental excellence, DBA hopes to work with DNR and the dairy industry to provide additional financial incentives for participating in Green Tier,” DBA Executive Director Laurie Fischer said.
DBA President Jon Vrieze added the charter “paves the way for a new future between DNR, dairy producers and processors.
“Wisconsin has long been the leader on environmental issues and Wisconsin’s dairy industry is an important partner in informing and solving many of the issues Wisconsin faces,” he said. “Participation in Green Tier doesn’t mean simply checking a box; it requires real commitments that will require considerable effort on the part of producers.”
The development of the charter was made possible by the support and contributions of numerous individuals and organizations, including: Kenn Buelow (Holsum Dairy), Karl Klessig (Saxon Homestead Farm), Liz Doornink (Jon-De Farm), John Vrieze (Baldwin Dairy), DNR Runoff Management Program, the Department of Agriculture, Trade and Consumer Protection, and the Wisconsin Agricultural Stewardship Initiative. Grants from the Wisconsin Department of Administration’s Coastal Management Program and the Joyce Foundation were also instrumental to successfully completing this agreement.
Dairy producers and processors who are interested in learning more about the opportunities available to Green Tier participants, or the charter should contact DBA or visit DNR’s Green Tier web page at http://greentier.wi.gov.
30
Tuesday, November 27, 2007
Trent,
Hello, high school classmate! I read your November 13, 2007 Loos Tales article and wanted to respond. I know your passion and enthusiasm and first want to tell you how proud I am of you for traveling, learning, discussing and speaking out to protect the rights of small farms. You are inspirational and I applaud your efforts!
My son has raised chickens on our small Iowa farm for four years and started his own small egg business. He has learned much about chickens and business that has enhanced his love of poultry and helps to teach him responsibility. This summer he went to Iowa State Fair having the honor to present his 4-H Educational Presentation entitled “Everyone Eats Eggs.” Garrett researched all the variation of egg carton terms and the facilities that raise them. It is confusing. Iowa is the number one egg producing state in the United States and currently has most of the factory farms raising hens in open-range conditions. His presentation was well received with the most questions from the audience. This proves that people are interested and starting to care more about their food and where it comes from. I understand fully what some people are saying about the housing of chickens in the large warehouses. There are many ways of raising chickens in better conditions. The better the conditions for the chicken, the better quality of eggs we as consumers eat.
However, for every person who wants to complain about conditions of the chickens in large factory farms and blame big companies for their involvement, I would encourage them to first analyze their own buying habits. Each one of us is supporting these larger egg factories when we purchase cheap eggs in the grocery stores. Until more people are willing to be responsible for their own actions and start being more informed about the industry, then I don’t understand how they can justify blaming other companies for the huge demand of human consumption of eggs and chickens.
In less than half a decade ago, most every small farm raised their own chickens for their food and eggs. The extra eggs they did not use were sold to make money for the family. You can’t drive across Iowa anymore and see many animals outside. Most everyone eats eggs and eggs are in most everything people eat, but eggs are a subject that most people know little about anymore. Chickens are truly amazing animals that we all depend on every day. The sad truth is that most people don’t want to be inconvenienced with raising their own chickens. Small farmers are dwindling and large factory farms had to move in to meet the continual demand of the people. Unfortunately with this transition, it caused fewer people to realize how much work it takes to raise these animals, and many people think only about animals when they buy their products in the grocery store. They have lost the precious connection between animals and humans.
So I will encourage everyone to think about where they buy their food and I hope to motivate people to start raising their own animals. Their time with animals will be far more rewarding than writing letters complaining to large corporations - that are only trying to meet the demands of people and have many other things to worry about than giving a chicken a good home.
Not telling you anything that you don’t already know, Trent. If you can use any of this to reunite the connection with animals and humans, than I am all for it!
Thanks,
Jayne Murfin-Clampitt
Independence, Iowa
(319)290-6934
clampittcreations@trx.net
“Teach your children that we have taught our children that the earth is our mother. Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of earth…All things are connected.” – Chief Seattle, 1854...Read his entire speech at: http://www.kyphilom.com/www/seattle.html
Hello, high school classmate! I read your November 13, 2007 Loos Tales article and wanted to respond. I know your passion and enthusiasm and first want to tell you how proud I am of you for traveling, learning, discussing and speaking out to protect the rights of small farms. You are inspirational and I applaud your efforts!
My son has raised chickens on our small Iowa farm for four years and started his own small egg business. He has learned much about chickens and business that has enhanced his love of poultry and helps to teach him responsibility. This summer he went to Iowa State Fair having the honor to present his 4-H Educational Presentation entitled “Everyone Eats Eggs.” Garrett researched all the variation of egg carton terms and the facilities that raise them. It is confusing. Iowa is the number one egg producing state in the United States and currently has most of the factory farms raising hens in open-range conditions. His presentation was well received with the most questions from the audience. This proves that people are interested and starting to care more about their food and where it comes from. I understand fully what some people are saying about the housing of chickens in the large warehouses. There are many ways of raising chickens in better conditions. The better the conditions for the chicken, the better quality of eggs we as consumers eat.
However, for every person who wants to complain about conditions of the chickens in large factory farms and blame big companies for their involvement, I would encourage them to first analyze their own buying habits. Each one of us is supporting these larger egg factories when we purchase cheap eggs in the grocery stores. Until more people are willing to be responsible for their own actions and start being more informed about the industry, then I don’t understand how they can justify blaming other companies for the huge demand of human consumption of eggs and chickens.
In less than half a decade ago, most every small farm raised their own chickens for their food and eggs. The extra eggs they did not use were sold to make money for the family. You can’t drive across Iowa anymore and see many animals outside. Most everyone eats eggs and eggs are in most everything people eat, but eggs are a subject that most people know little about anymore. Chickens are truly amazing animals that we all depend on every day. The sad truth is that most people don’t want to be inconvenienced with raising their own chickens. Small farmers are dwindling and large factory farms had to move in to meet the continual demand of the people. Unfortunately with this transition, it caused fewer people to realize how much work it takes to raise these animals, and many people think only about animals when they buy their products in the grocery store. They have lost the precious connection between animals and humans.
So I will encourage everyone to think about where they buy their food and I hope to motivate people to start raising their own animals. Their time with animals will be far more rewarding than writing letters complaining to large corporations - that are only trying to meet the demands of people and have many other things to worry about than giving a chicken a good home.
Not telling you anything that you don’t already know, Trent. If you can use any of this to reunite the connection with animals and humans, than I am all for it!
Thanks,
Jayne Murfin-Clampitt
Independence, Iowa
(319)290-6934
clampittcreations@trx.net
“Teach your children that we have taught our children that the earth is our mother. Whatever befalls the earth befalls the sons of earth…All things are connected.” – Chief Seattle, 1854...Read his entire speech at: http://www.kyphilom.com/www/seattle.html
Monday, November 12, 2007
Bill Nienhueser from Concordia, MO showed up during the 4th Annual Houston E. Mull cattle drive and wanted to ride "11" the pink mule. Even though the shadows in this picture make him look black she had a pink mane and tail. Bill is 88 years old and I was very reluctant to let him get on 11. He told me I was one of 11 survivors in my unit on D-Day you think I am afraid of this pink mule?
My thanks to Bill and all other WWII veterans for their efforts. The statistics say we are losing 1000 of them every day. I hope you take the chance to visit with every WWII veteran you get the opportunity to do so.
Okay here I am riding "11" carrying the U.S. Flag that flew at the U.S. Embassy in Baghdad, Iraq on Oct. 1, 2007. I carried that flag 30 miles leading the Cattle Drive reminding everyone of the efforts the United States take to protect our freedom.
Here is the real price of freedom for 228 years
WAR OF THE REVOLUTION 19 Aril 1775 - 20 September 1783
Participants: 250,000 :: POWs: 18,152 :: MIAs: 1,426 :: Deaths In Service: 6,824
WAR OF 1812 18 June 1812 - 24 December 1814
Participants: 286,730 :: POWs: 20,000 :: MIAs: 695 :: Deaths In Service: 2,260
MEXICAN WAR 24 April 1846 - 2 February 1848
Participants: 78,718 :: POWs: 20,000 : : MIAs: 695 :: Deaths In Service: 2,260
INDIAN WARS US Date 1815 - December1890
Participants: 106,000 :: POWs: Many, few survived :: MIAs: Many :: Deaths In Service: 1,000
Aboriginal American Date 1540 - 2004
Participants: Unknown, in the millions :: POWs-MIAs: Unknown - Aboriginal Americans are the longest held documented POWs, serving into the 20th Century in excess of 28 years :: Deaths In Service: Millions
CIVIL WAR 12 April 1861 - 26 May 1865
Union Participants: 2,213,365 :: Union POWs: 194,743 :: Union Deaths In Service: 364,511
Confederate Participants: 1,082,119 :: Confederate POWs: 214,865 :: Confederate Deaths In Service: 134,563
SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR 21 April 1898 - 12 August 1898
Participants: 260,000 :: POWs: 8 :: MIAs: 72 Deaths In Service: 2,446
WORLD WAR I 6 April 1917 - 11 November 1918
Participants: 4,743,826 :: POWs: 7,470 :: MIAs: 116,708 :: Deaths In Service: 116,708
WORLD WAR II 7 December 1941 - 2 September 1945
Participants: 16,353,659 :: POWs: 124,079 :: MIAs: 30,314
Deaths in Service: Disputed Numbers - All References Provided
Military:
• Info. Please: 291,557 KIA + 113,842 other causes = 405,399
• DoD: 291,557 KIA + 113,842 other = 405,399
Civilian:
• Britannica: 6,000
U.S. Merchant Marine: 8,300 mariners killed at sea, at least 1,100 died from wounds. Total killed estimated 9,300. [http://www.usmm.org/ww2.html]
• All (undifferentiated):
• Messenger: 300,000
COLD WAR 2 September 1945 - 21 August 1991
Participants: Classified :: POWs: Classified :: MIAs: 343 :: Deaths In Service: Classified :: Deaths In Service: 407,316 ERA
KOREAN WAR 25 June 1950 - 27 July 1953
Participants: 5,764,143 :: POWs: 7,140 :: MIAs: 8,177 :: Deaths In Service: 36,940
SECOND INDOCHINA WAR (Vietnam)08 July 1959 - 27 January 1973
Active Duty: 9,087,000 :: In-Country: 2,594,000 :: POWs: 2,583 :: MIAs: 3000-6000 :: Deaths In Service: 58,486
USS PUEBLO 23 January 1968 - 23 December 1968
Incident Personnel: 82 :: POWs: 82 :: POW Deaths In Incident: 1
GRENADA 25 October 1983 - 2 November 1983
Participants: 2,700 :: POWs: Unknown :: MIAs: 4 :: Deaths In Service: 20
USS STARK 17 May 1987
Participants: Unknown :: MIAs: 1 :: Deaths In Service: 36
PERSIAN GULF WAR 16 January 1991 - 27 February 1991
Participants: 650,000 :: POWs - MIAs: 52 :: Deaths In Service: 255
SOMALIA 02 December 1992 - 15 September 1994
Participants: Classified :: POWs: 6 :: MIAs: 2 :: Deaths In Service: 44
Operation Iraqi Freedom - as of 26 AUG 07
OFFICIALLY US MISSING in IRAQ - 13
2 Military -
11 Civilians
Additionally, 4 Civilian Contractors working for a private security firm were abducted when their convoy was attacked late Fall 2006.
KIA and Non-Combat Deaths 3,722 Identified
Civilian Contractor Casualties - 900+
Operation Enduring Freedom - as of 26 AUG 07
MIA/DUSTWUN - 0
KIA and Non-Combat Deaths 424 Identified
Persian Gulf War 1991: 3 Officially Unaccounted-For,
12 Unofficially Unaccounted-For
Other personnel also remain unaccounted-for in Iraq, 9 of 14 crewmembers of the Spirit '03 loss incident. As well as the A-6 loss with Barry Cook and Robert Dwyer who was lost with his F/A 18. At the conclusion of the Persian Gulf War 1991, all were classified as KIA/BNR. Michael Scott Speicher's status was later upgraded twice... to MIA in 2001 and to Missing/Captured in 2002.
President Bush has even stated that more than just Speicher remain unaccounted-for from the first war with Iraq. His remarks last National POW-MIA Recognition Day - "Nearly 60 years after the end of World War II, the fate of more than 78,000 Americans who fought in that conflict remains unknown. More than 8,100 from the Korean War are missing, more than 120 from the Cold War, more than 1,900 from the Vietnam War, and three from the Gulf War. These Americans, who dedicated their lives to preserving and protecting our freedoms, will never be forgotten."
COLOMBIA: 3 Hostages/POWs
Thomas Howes
Marc Gonsalves
Keith Stansell
DOI : 12-13 February, 2003
MIA
SouthEast Asia: 1,773
Korea: 8,100
Cold War: 123
World War II: 78,773
World War I: 4,452
WAR OF THE REVOLUTION 19 Aril 1775 - 20 September 1783
Participants: 250,000 :: POWs: 18,152 :: MIAs: 1,426 :: Deaths In Service: 6,824
WAR OF 1812 18 June 1812 - 24 December 1814
Participants: 286,730 :: POWs: 20,000 :: MIAs: 695 :: Deaths In Service: 2,260
MEXICAN WAR 24 April 1846 - 2 February 1848
Participants: 78,718 :: POWs: 20,000 : : MIAs: 695 :: Deaths In Service: 2,260
INDIAN WARS US Date 1815 - December1890
Participants: 106,000 :: POWs: Many, few survived :: MIAs: Many :: Deaths In Service: 1,000
Aboriginal American Date 1540 - 2004
Participants: Unknown, in the millions :: POWs-MIAs: Unknown - Aboriginal Americans are the longest held documented POWs, serving into the 20th Century in excess of 28 years :: Deaths In Service: Millions
CIVIL WAR 12 April 1861 - 26 May 1865
Union Participants: 2,213,365 :: Union POWs: 194,743 :: Union Deaths In Service: 364,511
Confederate Participants: 1,082,119 :: Confederate POWs: 214,865 :: Confederate Deaths In Service: 134,563
SPANISH-AMERICAN WAR 21 April 1898 - 12 August 1898
Participants: 260,000 :: POWs: 8 :: MIAs: 72 Deaths In Service: 2,446
WORLD WAR I 6 April 1917 - 11 November 1918
Participants: 4,743,826 :: POWs: 7,470 :: MIAs: 116,708 :: Deaths In Service: 116,708
WORLD WAR II 7 December 1941 - 2 September 1945
Participants: 16,353,659 :: POWs: 124,079 :: MIAs: 30,314
Deaths in Service: Disputed Numbers - All References Provided
Military:
• Info. Please: 291,557 KIA + 113,842 other causes = 405,399
• DoD: 291,557 KIA + 113,842 other = 405,399
Civilian:
• Britannica: 6,000
U.S. Merchant Marine: 8,300 mariners killed at sea, at least 1,100 died from wounds. Total killed estimated 9,300. [http://www.usmm.org/ww2.html]
• All (undifferentiated):
• Messenger: 300,000
COLD WAR 2 September 1945 - 21 August 1991
Participants: Classified :: POWs: Classified :: MIAs: 343 :: Deaths In Service: Classified :: Deaths In Service: 407,316 ERA
KOREAN WAR 25 June 1950 - 27 July 1953
Participants: 5,764,143 :: POWs: 7,140 :: MIAs: 8,177 :: Deaths In Service: 36,940
SECOND INDOCHINA WAR (Vietnam)08 July 1959 - 27 January 1973
Active Duty: 9,087,000 :: In-Country: 2,594,000 :: POWs: 2,583 :: MIAs: 3000-6000 :: Deaths In Service: 58,486
USS PUEBLO 23 January 1968 - 23 December 1968
Incident Personnel: 82 :: POWs: 82 :: POW Deaths In Incident: 1
GRENADA 25 October 1983 - 2 November 1983
Participants: 2,700 :: POWs: Unknown :: MIAs: 4 :: Deaths In Service: 20
USS STARK 17 May 1987
Participants: Unknown :: MIAs: 1 :: Deaths In Service: 36
PERSIAN GULF WAR 16 January 1991 - 27 February 1991
Participants: 650,000 :: POWs - MIAs: 52 :: Deaths In Service: 255
SOMALIA 02 December 1992 - 15 September 1994
Participants: Classified :: POWs: 6 :: MIAs: 2 :: Deaths In Service: 44
Operation Iraqi Freedom - as of 26 AUG 07
OFFICIALLY US MISSING in IRAQ - 13
2 Military -
11 Civilians
Additionally, 4 Civilian Contractors working for a private security firm were abducted when their convoy was attacked late Fall 2006.
KIA and Non-Combat Deaths 3,722 Identified
Civilian Contractor Casualties - 900+
Operation Enduring Freedom - as of 26 AUG 07
MIA/DUSTWUN - 0
KIA and Non-Combat Deaths 424 Identified
Persian Gulf War 1991: 3 Officially Unaccounted-For,
12 Unofficially Unaccounted-For
Other personnel also remain unaccounted-for in Iraq, 9 of 14 crewmembers of the Spirit '03 loss incident. As well as the A-6 loss with Barry Cook and Robert Dwyer who was lost with his F/A 18. At the conclusion of the Persian Gulf War 1991, all were classified as KIA/BNR. Michael Scott Speicher's status was later upgraded twice... to MIA in 2001 and to Missing/Captured in 2002.
President Bush has even stated that more than just Speicher remain unaccounted-for from the first war with Iraq. His remarks last National POW-MIA Recognition Day - "Nearly 60 years after the end of World War II, the fate of more than 78,000 Americans who fought in that conflict remains unknown. More than 8,100 from the Korean War are missing, more than 120 from the Cold War, more than 1,900 from the Vietnam War, and three from the Gulf War. These Americans, who dedicated their lives to preserving and protecting our freedoms, will never be forgotten."
COLOMBIA: 3 Hostages/POWs
Thomas Howes
Marc Gonsalves
Keith Stansell
DOI : 12-13 February, 2003
MIA
SouthEast Asia: 1,773
Korea: 8,100
Cold War: 123
World War II: 78,773
World War I: 4,452
Wednesday, October 31, 2007
An acceptable level of death
As I write this it was just announced that Porter Wagner, Country Music Hall of Famer, has died of lung cancer. He died of lung cancer but he was 80 years old. If he enjoyed smoking and lived to be 80 while doing so, I think he must have no complaints. Meanwhile, it was also reported that 3 year old Sebastian Ferrero died Oct. 10 at Shands at the University of Florida Medical Center in Gainesville, two days after a routine test was supposed to help doctors determine why the boy's growth was below average. He was given a drug overdose at 100 times what he should have received. Is this an acceptable death? Not to me.
Let me first remind you that I think it is vital that we continue to fund research and get early diagnosis for all types of cancer. But I also think that, for the most part, we have overlooked the true cause of cancer, living longer. Certainly there are exceptions as both my mother and my sister contracted breast cancer before they reached 35 years of age. I believe the prevalence of cancer is a factor of life span. Recent Mayo Clinic data reveals that some colon cancer is detected in 40 year olds but primarily the disease is found during or after the mid 60’s. Only 17 % of the cancer found in people under the age of 50 is colon cancer.
I am writing this with the understanding that the World Cancer Research Fund is prepared to publish its 2007 report on “Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity and the Prevention of Cancer.” This is an update to its 1997 report and will evaluate some 5,000 to 10,000 new studies on cancer completed over the past 10 years. It may turn out that most interesting component of this study is not which research was included but rather which was omitted. Left out was a Harvard pooling study considered to be the biggest study ever conducted on the association between red meat and cancer. Many of the other pooling studies were published with fewer subjects. Is it possible that results of this study were not included because they found no association or only a statistically insignificant association between red meat consumption and cancer?
We are now beginning to study water and its direct effect of cancer. Every person who has ever contracted cancer drinks water. Let’s take a quick look at recent news reports on other cancer causing agents.
CBS News published a story in December 2005 citing a study, which found a statistical link between the incidence of breast cancer in young women and the use of antiperspirants combined with frequent underarm shaving. "I personally feel there is a very strong correlation between the underarm hygiene habits and breast cancer," said immunologist Dr. Kris McGrath, the author of the study.
However, a woman's risk for breast cancer is associated with lifetime exposure to estrogen.
Lead in lipstick: Red alert or false alarm?
Body Spray Causes Cancer
Perhaps unexpectedly, the risk of developing cervical cancer was twice as high for those who had treatment between 1991-2000 compared with those who had treatment between 1958-70.
Do sweeteners really cause cancer?
Should teen use of tanning beds be regulated by the state?
No one can argue that cancer is touching the lives of every single person in this country and apparently around the world. It is also unarguable that cancer comes from a combination of factors that we still don’t totally understand. Obesity is without a doubt at the top of list but that would put the responsibility on us personally and that is not something we are happy with. We must find lower hanging fruit, something or someone else to blame for cancer. There is not one silver bullet in the prevention of cancer but we each make choices daily that can reduce or increase our risk. Avoiding the sun is unhealthy; overexposure is deadly. You decide what is proper.
The accepted level of death should be the real question we are asking. Right behind heart disease and cancer, medical error is ranked as the third leading cause of death. I value every human life. I recognize that accidents happen but I truly fail to understand why, as a society, we seem to accept the death as a result of medical error more easily than cancer. If you read a recent report in Medical News Today, it says that Medical errors remain a leading cause of death and injury at hospitals nationwide. The study finds that about 1.24 million patient safety incidents occurred between 2002 and 2004, compared with 1.14 million between 2000 and 2002, at a cost of $9.3 billion.
Let’s look at the big picture. We have doubled the life expectancy of a human being in the past 100 years. We have more people than ever recovering from cancers of all types. If we continue to fund research to assist in finding more means of early detection, there is no doubt that what might actually be accomplished is winning the war on cancer. But by all means don’t forget that on the way to the doctor to get a clean bill of health, your risk of death in a motor vehicle accident is 16 in 100,000 annually. But that is also an acceptable death rate in our society.
As I write this it was just announced that Porter Wagner, Country Music Hall of Famer, has died of lung cancer. He died of lung cancer but he was 80 years old. If he enjoyed smoking and lived to be 80 while doing so, I think he must have no complaints. Meanwhile, it was also reported that 3 year old Sebastian Ferrero died Oct. 10 at Shands at the University of Florida Medical Center in Gainesville, two days after a routine test was supposed to help doctors determine why the boy's growth was below average. He was given a drug overdose at 100 times what he should have received. Is this an acceptable death? Not to me.
Let me first remind you that I think it is vital that we continue to fund research and get early diagnosis for all types of cancer. But I also think that, for the most part, we have overlooked the true cause of cancer, living longer. Certainly there are exceptions as both my mother and my sister contracted breast cancer before they reached 35 years of age. I believe the prevalence of cancer is a factor of life span. Recent Mayo Clinic data reveals that some colon cancer is detected in 40 year olds but primarily the disease is found during or after the mid 60’s. Only 17 % of the cancer found in people under the age of 50 is colon cancer.
I am writing this with the understanding that the World Cancer Research Fund is prepared to publish its 2007 report on “Food, Nutrition, Physical Activity and the Prevention of Cancer.” This is an update to its 1997 report and will evaluate some 5,000 to 10,000 new studies on cancer completed over the past 10 years. It may turn out that most interesting component of this study is not which research was included but rather which was omitted. Left out was a Harvard pooling study considered to be the biggest study ever conducted on the association between red meat and cancer. Many of the other pooling studies were published with fewer subjects. Is it possible that results of this study were not included because they found no association or only a statistically insignificant association between red meat consumption and cancer?
We are now beginning to study water and its direct effect of cancer. Every person who has ever contracted cancer drinks water. Let’s take a quick look at recent news reports on other cancer causing agents.
CBS News published a story in December 2005 citing a study, which found a statistical link between the incidence of breast cancer in young women and the use of antiperspirants combined with frequent underarm shaving. "I personally feel there is a very strong correlation between the underarm hygiene habits and breast cancer," said immunologist Dr. Kris McGrath, the author of the study.
However, a woman's risk for breast cancer is associated with lifetime exposure to estrogen.
Lead in lipstick: Red alert or false alarm?
Body Spray Causes Cancer
Perhaps unexpectedly, the risk of developing cervical cancer was twice as high for those who had treatment between 1991-2000 compared with those who had treatment between 1958-70.
Do sweeteners really cause cancer?
Should teen use of tanning beds be regulated by the state?
No one can argue that cancer is touching the lives of every single person in this country and apparently around the world. It is also unarguable that cancer comes from a combination of factors that we still don’t totally understand. Obesity is without a doubt at the top of list but that would put the responsibility on us personally and that is not something we are happy with. We must find lower hanging fruit, something or someone else to blame for cancer. There is not one silver bullet in the prevention of cancer but we each make choices daily that can reduce or increase our risk. Avoiding the sun is unhealthy; overexposure is deadly. You decide what is proper.
The accepted level of death should be the real question we are asking. Right behind heart disease and cancer, medical error is ranked as the third leading cause of death. I value every human life. I recognize that accidents happen but I truly fail to understand why, as a society, we seem to accept the death as a result of medical error more easily than cancer. If you read a recent report in Medical News Today, it says that Medical errors remain a leading cause of death and injury at hospitals nationwide. The study finds that about 1.24 million patient safety incidents occurred between 2002 and 2004, compared with 1.14 million between 2000 and 2002, at a cost of $9.3 billion.
Let’s look at the big picture. We have doubled the life expectancy of a human being in the past 100 years. We have more people than ever recovering from cancers of all types. If we continue to fund research to assist in finding more means of early detection, there is no doubt that what might actually be accomplished is winning the war on cancer. But by all means don’t forget that on the way to the doctor to get a clean bill of health, your risk of death in a motor vehicle accident is 16 in 100,000 annually. But that is also an acceptable death rate in our society.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
As we charge into 2015, there will be nothing more important than stopping the self-destruction from within. The fox is in the hen house and...
