HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » HuckleB » Journal
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 24 Next »


Profile Information

Member since: 2002
Number of posts: 29,469

Journal Archives

Spain diphtheria update: 1st case in 30 years dies


"n an update to a report at the beginning of June, Spanish National Radio reports (computer translated) the 6-year-old boy from Olot with diphtheria admitted to the Hospital Vall d’Hebron in Barcelona died Saturday.

The child, whose parents refused to vaccinate, has been admitted since May 30 in intensive care.


According to the Minister of Health of the Generalitat, Boi Ruiz, the child’s death from diphtheria will hopefully serve for the emergence of a “collective reflection” on the need for the population to be vaccinated.

Ruiz said that the main cause of death was diphtheria, and that the child would not have fallen ill if she had been vaccinated."


Let the Repugs Rant About Same Sex Marriage. It Will Only Hurt Them.


More and more Americans favor same sex marriage every year. If the fools want to rant and rave, well, I'll point how silly they are, but they are only shooting their stupid selves in their stupid feet.

That is all.

CBC Radio: Science Under Siege, Parts 1, 2, and 3.

Are we living through an Anti-Scientific Revolution? Scientists around the world are increasingly restricted in what they can research, publish and say -- constrained by belief and ideology from all sides. Historically, science has always had a thorny relationship with institutions of power. But what happens to societies which turn their backs on curiosity-driven research? And how can science lift the siege? CBC Radio producer Mary Lynk looks for some answers in this three-part series.

Science Under Siege, Part 1: Dangers of Ignorance - airs Wednesday, June 3
​Explores the historical tension between science and political power and the sometimes fraught relationship between the two over the centuries. But what happens when science gets sidelined? What happens to societies which turn their backs on curiosity-driven research?

Science Under Siege, Part 2: The Great Divide - airs Thursday, June 4
Explores the state of science in the modern world, and the expanding -- and dangerous -- gulf between scientists and the rest of society. Many policy makers, politicians and members of the public are giving belief and ideology the same standing as scientific evidence. Are we now seeing an Anti-Scientific revolution? A look at how evidence-based decision making has been sidelined.

Science Under Siege, Part 3: Fighting Back - airs Friday, June 5
Focuses on the culture war being waged on science, and possible solutions for reintegrating science and society. The attack on science is coming from all sides, both the left and right of the political spectrum. How can the principle of direct observation of the world, free of any influence from corporate or any other influence, reassert itself? The final episode of this series looks at how science can withstand the attack against it and overcome ideology and belief.

Good stuff!

Great discussion that started from this original piece at Food And Farm Discussion Lab!


Over and over again, those supposed benefits have not proven to be what proponents claim them to be.

Can you provide a consensus peer reviewed research that supports your claims?

Also, I didn't write this particular piece, so you might want to make your responses more appropriate.



A Plea for Culinary Modernism: The obsession with eating natural and artisanal is ahistorical...

The obsession with eating natural and artisanal is ahistorical. We should demand more high-quality industrial food.

"Modern, fast, processed food is a disaster. That, at least, is the message conveyed by newspapers and magazines, on television cooking programs, and in prizewinning cookbooks.

It is a mark of sophistication to bemoan the steel roller mill and supermarket bread while yearning for stone­ ground flour and brick ovens; to seek out heirloom apples and pumpkins while despising modern tomatoes and hybrid corn; to be hostile to agronomists who develop high-yielding modern crops and to home economists who invent new recipes for General Mills.

We hover between ridicule and shame when we remember how our mothers and grand­mothers enthusiastically embraced canned and frozen foods. We nod in agreement when the waiter proclaims that the restaurant showcases the freshest local produce. We shun Wonder Bread and Coca-Cola. Above all, we loathe the great culminating symbol of Culinary Modernism, McDonald’s — modern, fast, homogenous, and international.

Like so many of my generation, my culinary style was created by those who scorned industrialized food; Culinary Luddites, we may call them, after the English hand workers of the nineteenth century who abhorred the machines that were destroying their traditional way of life. I learned to cook from the books of Elizabeth David, who urged us to sweep our store cupboards “clean for ever of the cluttering debris of commercial sauce bottles and all synthetic flavorings.”



A very strong, important read, even if it is 15-years-old. It's time to check the BS on food issues, and get to the evidence that matters.

Why I’d Rather Be a Team Big Dissident, Than a Team Small Cheerleader (On making positive changes.)



Which goes to the discomfort I very quickly began to feel almost as soon as I started to identify myself with the Food Movement. I am greatly inspired by a lot of the animating spirit of the movement. I’m an environmentalist. I’m naturally inclined to root for the small guy. I’m critical of capitalism. I think the Standard American Diet is a national disgrace. All of that means that I want to see big improvements in our environmental impacts and big improvements in diet related health outcomes, especially for low income citizens. I don’t just want to read stories about cool projects that people are doing. I want to see significant improvements in CDC numbers on diabetes, heart disease and low income life expectancy.

As much as farmer’s markets, CSAs, and co-op stores appeal to me, they can’t achieve the scale of changes that I want to see. To me reforming our food system means improving industrial agriculture, not trying to replace it. I’m interested in what a left/progressive response to the major issues in industrial ag looks like. How are our labor laws failing farm workers? Which best practices need to be better integrated into current systems? How can we extend school lunch reform into every cafeteria? What are the proper regulatory responses to antibiotics in meat production, water pollution from agricultural sources, soil erosion, greenhouse gases? We live in an industrial society, with the population largely centered in cities. Just as we don’t expect our phones, or cars, or sneakers, or medicine to be locally made by small producers, we can’t expect our food to come from those kinds of producers in way that approaches the scale that we consume.

On issues like healthcare and energy, liberals and progressives quite clearly see reform as meaning setting standards for the industry as well as encouraging scalable new approaches that can have major impacts. No one is proposing replacing our healthcare system with a ragtag network of scrappy community clinics.
Healthcare reform means reforming the healthcare industry, not de-industrializing it. Why wouldn’t we approach the food system the same way? Where the Food Movement is pushing for evidence based regulatory reform, I’m there, all the way. Where they are pushing for improvements in school lunches at the local and federal level, I’m there. Where the Food Movement stands with farm workers and fast food workers for better pay and working conditions, I’m with them.

But, I also see a lot of projects and attention given to projects that can only amount to becoming rounding errors. In fact, it sometimes seems like antagonism towards scalablity is the price of admission. Farmer’s markets are great cultural assets for a community, the can be smart place making and economic development moves for local governments. But in a country of 314 million people, in a 15.6 trillion dollar economy, they will always be a rounding error in the food system. I’m more interested in seeing supermarket chains that serve the triple bottom line."

A great little piece in response to the content of a rather good book. This conversation point could be pushed into every area. It's an important conversation to have, IMO.

A report on the bad behavior of some of the March Against Monsanto "protesters."


A much better report on these "protests."


And one more piece on the topic:

Positive Agriculture Practices Get A Voice, If Even A Quiet One.

Science Drama at March Against Myths about Modification, and My Showdown with Zen Honeycutt

"Sometimes science can be boring, or at least seem less-than-riveting to the general public. There are a lot of dry methodologies, frequent snafus, those pesky problems of having to reproduce results, and don’t forget peer review and meta-analyses. Though scientific advances are certainly exciting to many who follow them closely, the process from bench to discovery can seem dry.

Science activism on the other hand is anything but boring. Indeed, this past weekend proved to be a veritable soap opera. Here’s my recap of the highlights from Saturday May 23rd, the day of the third annual worldwide March Against Monsanto (MAM), and the first annual counter-protest against the anti-biotech group’s misinformation mongering. We at March Against Myths about Modification (MAMyths) were buzzing with excitement leading up to our first worldwide event, and were thrilled that it made far more of an impact than we anticipated. Bill Nye even showed up and took a picture with our MAMyths member Chauncey in NYC! MAMyths events happened in 13 locations around the world. My co-founders and I took to the street in Chicago, in the name of science and biotechnology. We were happy to give media interviews, and there was at least one documentary film crew we spoke with.


The overarching theme that emerged across the country and the world was that MAM protesters were unreasonable, angry, rude, and irrational, while MAMyths members were approachable, civil, and rational. We held signs like “Facts, not fear!” and “GMOs saved the Hawaiian Papaya,” and “Farmers never sued for cross-pollination.” In contrast, their signs were full of expletives and deluded messaging like, “Fuck Monsanto,” “OMG, GMO, WTF,” and even anti-vax signs, middle finger images, and chemtrail conspiracies.

Skepchick friend Kevin Folta wrote in his blog, “The pictures from the scenes across the nation showed small clusters of MAMyths supporters out with signs, standing up for science. The best part was their apparent softness, the repeated theme, “Ask me about GMOs.” These were scientists, and science fans, out sharing science, and there is some real magic in helping people understand facts instead of fear. It was outreach in action at ground zero of insanity, a potential to reach those that cannot be reached and hopefully influence the folks in the middle.”



Yes, this is a watershed moment for everyone who cares about using the scientific method to make the world a better place.


Go to Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 ... 24 Next »