Hope your Thanksgiving was full of just food and your Buy Nothing Day went well!
Dream BIG!
Read the Article:
11/23/12
10/20/12
CA Prop 37 -- More complicated than you think
Boy was I thrown through a loop today when two out of three professors on a panel at school advised voting NO on CA Proposition 37! This information came just a week or so after visiting farmer and local hero Steve Sprinkel who advocated so heavily for it. Must investigate further...
There are other lists of the pros and cons of this issue but I wanted to focus on the grey areas raised by this initiative in the panel today:
-Labeling a GMO isn't a yes or no question. Prop 37 would instate a zero tolerance policy about GMOs, however in Europe their GMO labeling has some leeway which makes it loads easier on the farmers. The range of appropriate and inevitable GMO cross over and influence should be accounted for in this bill.
-Biologically, eating GMOs have not been shown to cause use harm, but also doesn't come highly recommended. In other words there are no clear risks, it just seems like not a wise thing to do. Other things have shown higher risk: mercury and arsenic.
-Labeling GMOs would probably decrease the number of GMOs sold which would in turn reduce the amount of pesticides used in production which does have clear health benefits for those living near the farms.
-The bill doesn't enforce labeling of meats that were fed with GMOs (what 90% of GMO products are used for)
-The bill is not clear on who the enforcement of this regulation would be set on. Some think it is set on the manufactures, which would be relatively easy for them to do, but others think that the regulation would be forced on the individual grocery stores, which seems impractical and unnecessary.
-On the Farmer side those who stand to be hurt the most from this legislation are the small scale conventional farmers while the small organic farmers will benefit the most. This is why you see advertisements from "small farmers" both in favor and against the bill.
-Ultimately I think that most other voters and I will think about how this bill will affect ourselves. Personally, I want to be able to walk thought my grocery store and know what food is genetically modified or not, so I will vote yes on Prop 37.
-Labeling a GMO isn't a yes or no question. Prop 37 would instate a zero tolerance policy about GMOs, however in Europe their GMO labeling has some leeway which makes it loads easier on the farmers. The range of appropriate and inevitable GMO cross over and influence should be accounted for in this bill.
-Biologically, eating GMOs have not been shown to cause use harm, but also doesn't come highly recommended. In other words there are no clear risks, it just seems like not a wise thing to do. Other things have shown higher risk: mercury and arsenic.
-Labeling GMOs would probably decrease the number of GMOs sold which would in turn reduce the amount of pesticides used in production which does have clear health benefits for those living near the farms.
-The bill doesn't enforce labeling of meats that were fed with GMOs (what 90% of GMO products are used for)
-The bill is not clear on who the enforcement of this regulation would be set on. Some think it is set on the manufactures, which would be relatively easy for them to do, but others think that the regulation would be forced on the individual grocery stores, which seems impractical and unnecessary.
-On the Farmer side those who stand to be hurt the most from this legislation are the small scale conventional farmers while the small organic farmers will benefit the most. This is why you see advertisements from "small farmers" both in favor and against the bill.
-Ultimately I think that most other voters and I will think about how this bill will affect ourselves. Personally, I want to be able to walk thought my grocery store and know what food is genetically modified or not, so I will vote yes on Prop 37.
10/7/12
FOOD and ECONOMIC JUSTICE
Silver Lake Assembly member Mike Gatto recently pushed AB 1616 through the California Assembly, called the Food Saftey: Cottage Food Opperations Bill.
Current law, "prohibits food stored or prepared in a private home from being used or offered for sale in a food facility." People saw this as a safety measure, but many other countries (and 30 other states) have thriving home/restaurant businesses that offer economic opportunities to those who may not have the means to rent out commercial kitchens which can include a thousand dollar deposits on top of hourly fees.
However, AB 1616 loosens the rules by classifying private homes as food facilities aka cottage food operations. There are still some regulations though the new law will, "require a cottage food operation to meet specified requirements relating to training, sanitation, preparation, labeling, and permissible types of sales and would subject a cottage food operation to inspections under specified circumstances."
The type of goods permissible under the law would not be allowed to contain any meat or cream and would still be subject to proper labeling but can be sold in restaurants, stores, or directly to consumers.
The bill fits into two national food trends: local and healthy. Allowing home goods to be sold more widely can reduces the reliance on larger companies which often load their products with harsh chemicals including preservatives.
Read more about this in this LA Times article.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/28/business/la-fi-homemade-food-20120829
Current law, "prohibits food stored or prepared in a private home from being used or offered for sale in a food facility." People saw this as a safety measure, but many other countries (and 30 other states) have thriving home/restaurant businesses that offer economic opportunities to those who may not have the means to rent out commercial kitchens which can include a thousand dollar deposits on top of hourly fees.
However, AB 1616 loosens the rules by classifying private homes as food facilities aka cottage food operations. There are still some regulations though the new law will, "require a cottage food operation to meet specified requirements relating to training, sanitation, preparation, labeling, and permissible types of sales and would subject a cottage food operation to inspections under specified circumstances."
The type of goods permissible under the law would not be allowed to contain any meat or cream and would still be subject to proper labeling but can be sold in restaurants, stores, or directly to consumers.
The bill fits into two national food trends: local and healthy. Allowing home goods to be sold more widely can reduces the reliance on larger companies which often load their products with harsh chemicals including preservatives.
Read more about this in this LA Times article.
http://articles.latimes.com/2012/aug/28/business/la-fi-homemade-food-20120829
9/15/12
NY Bans Suggary Soda
Following in the footsteps of sugar awareness campaigns and calorie display mandates, New York has become the first city to ban the selling of soft drinks over 16oz according to a Los Angeles Times article. According to one poll, New Yorkers are split 53% to 42% opposed vs in favor of the ban, group that adamantly against the ban and looking to pursue legal action against it are restaurants, delis, cinemas, sports venues, and food trucks. Luckily for Mayor Bloomberg, he chose the right city to implement the ban in as a lower percentage of New Yorkers oppose the ban than a nation wide poll showed.
"Depending on the point of view, the rule is a violation of basic human rights; a measure to protect children from lives of diabetes, heart disease and other ills; an economic misstep; or a necessary move toward curbing New York’s obesity problem." Others opposed to the ruling say that the money spent enforcing could more effectively be used on other projects including after school programs that emphasize education and physical activity or healthy eating.
This is not the first time that Bloomberg has limited or banned items in the guise of public health, ex cigarettes and artificial fats. The implications of the government forcing maximums and limits are scary, but so is the alternative of near a whole population of unhealthy and overweight individuals.
"Depending on the point of view, the rule is a violation of basic human rights; a measure to protect children from lives of diabetes, heart disease and other ills; an economic misstep; or a necessary move toward curbing New York’s obesity problem." Others opposed to the ruling say that the money spent enforcing could more effectively be used on other projects including after school programs that emphasize education and physical activity or healthy eating.
This is not the first time that Bloomberg has limited or banned items in the guise of public health, ex cigarettes and artificial fats. The implications of the government forcing maximums and limits are scary, but so is the alternative of near a whole population of unhealthy and overweight individuals.
9/10/12
My name is Maximus Decimus Meridius
Lagunitas MAXIMUS
Today we review MAXIMUS, a potent IPA from one of our house's favorite breweries. They have been making quite a big splash on the national beer scene, but we are so hip we've been drinking it ever since we were of drinking age. This beer boasts bold flavors and wonderful craftsmanship, we can't wait to guide you towards a great sudsy experience. Oh by the way, our house's favorite show, The Voice, is back on the air tomorrow night. Being the biggest fans has its perks as we were able to get Cee Lo Green's cat Purrrfect the Cat to help us out. Here we go!
Appearance
Dan: Like what pumpkin juice would look like. Ahh the changing seasons.
Purrrfect the Cat: WUT IZ CULORZ?!?
Julia: Grade B syrup.
Noah: Brown muddled with orange, a very pleasant fall color.
Smell
Dan: Light and sweet.
Purrrfect the Cat: TERIYAKI SALMON MEOW MIX!!
Julia: Grizzly bear.
Noah: Sweet and light.
Taste
Dan: Beer to the max. Better once it's been in the air, more rounded.
Purrrfect the Cat: THIS NO FANCY FEAST!!
Julia:
Noah: Sweet, but intense.
Overall
Dan: Good sipper.
Purrrfect the Cat: LITTER BOX POUR!
Julia: Burpppp.
Noah: Packs quite a punch.
Crunkability: 8.2%/$10.50=0.78095238
As the seasons change, this IPA is a great cozy beer that we can safely say brings smiles to our faces. It makes me think of crunching leaves, sweaters, and brisk mornings. I highly recommend this and almost all Lagunitas brews if you desire bold flavors. Enjoy!
#TheVoice #StorageWars #Autumn #ClintEastwood #TasteBros
Today we review MAXIMUS, a potent IPA from one of our house's favorite breweries. They have been making quite a big splash on the national beer scene, but we are so hip we've been drinking it ever since we were of drinking age. This beer boasts bold flavors and wonderful craftsmanship, we can't wait to guide you towards a great sudsy experience. Oh by the way, our house's favorite show, The Voice, is back on the air tomorrow night. Being the biggest fans has its perks as we were able to get Cee Lo Green's cat Purrrfect the Cat to help us out. Here we go!
Appearance
Dan: Like what pumpkin juice would look like. Ahh the changing seasons.
Purrrfect the Cat: WUT IZ CULORZ?!?
Julia: Grade B syrup.
Noah: Brown muddled with orange, a very pleasant fall color.
Smell
Dan: Light and sweet.
Purrrfect the Cat: TERIYAKI SALMON MEOW MIX!!
Julia: Grizzly bear.
Noah: Sweet and light.
Taste
Dan: Beer to the max. Better once it's been in the air, more rounded.
Purrrfect the Cat: THIS NO FANCY FEAST!!
Julia:
Noah: Sweet, but intense.
Overall
Dan: Good sipper.
Purrrfect the Cat: LITTER BOX POUR!
Julia: Burpppp.
Noah: Packs quite a punch.
Crunkability: 8.2%/$10.50=0.78095238
As the seasons change, this IPA is a great cozy beer that we can safely say brings smiles to our faces. It makes me think of crunching leaves, sweaters, and brisk mornings. I highly recommend this and almost all Lagunitas brews if you desire bold flavors. Enjoy!
#TheVoice #StorageWars #Autumn #ClintEastwood #TasteBros
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)