Tag Archives: food

TED Talk: Follow the Mercury Trail From Sea Floor to Dinner Table

Photo via TED Mission Blue We know the ocean is in a bad way — polluted, acidifying, losing its most vital fish stocks and marine life…the list goes on. And we know these facts change how we’re able to enjoy seafood and swim in its waters. But exactly how intricately linked is our health to that of the ocean? In an incredible TED talk from the Mission Blue Voyage, marine biologist Stephen Palumbi discusses how the toxins and pollutants at the bottom of the food chain end up on our dinner plates. Learn what you need to know about safe seaf… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Read this article:
TED Talk: Follow the Mercury Trail From Sea Floor to Dinner Table

AnnaLynne McCord’s Latch On Sister Flexin’ of the Day

When I was 18 or 19 I used to go to a strip club. It was the only stripclub I could afford. One of those two dollar to get in, 8 dollar pitcher of beer, all you can eat buffet places that made 10 dollars go a very long way. I’d get full and drunk all while looking at pussy. Sure the pussy wasn’t fucking luxurious top notch stripper pussy and was more the kind of pussy you’d be scared to get near your food, but it was still fucking pussy. The person who did the hiring there, must have had a fetish for female body builders because at any given time, there would be at least one muscular girl…the kind you’d be scared of coming face to face with her dick shaped steroid clit…but for some reason people would go nuts with ever push-up, chin up or sit up her naked, ripped body did on stage….so I assume at least one of you likes seeing AnnaLynne McCords latch-on sister flexing…not that you know who AnnaLynne McCord or her latch-on sister are, which is okay, because either will her fans in the next 6-8 months when she’s forced to go back to her hometown after burning through all her 90210 revival money and not being able to find other work cuz she fucking sucks….and based on her sister’s look, I’m assuming she does too, because anything that gets her any form attention and out of her sister’s 90210 shadow is good enough for her… Pics via Fame

Visit link:
AnnaLynne McCord’s Latch On Sister Flexin’ of the Day

Secret Police in unmarked vans snatch and grab at G20 Toronto 06.27.2010

This is footage of reported secret police snatch and grab outside the Mass Detention center in Toronto. added by: toyotabedzrock

All McNuggets not created equal…

U.S. McNuggets not only contain more calories and fat than their British counterparts, but also chemicals not found across the Atlantic. CNN investigated the differences after receiving a blog comment asking about them. American McNuggets (190 calories, 12 grams of fat, 2 grams of saturated fat for 4 pieces) contain the chemical preservative tBHQ, tertiary butylhydroquinone, a petroleum-based product. They also contain dimethylpolysiloxane, “an anti-foaming agent” also used in Silly Putty. By contrast, British McNuggets (170 calories, 9 grams of fat, 1 gram of saturated fat for 4 pieces) lists neither chemical among its ingredients. “I would certainly choose the British nuggets over the American” says Ruth Winter, author of “A Consumer’s Dictionary of Food Additives.” McDonald’s says the differences are based on the local tastes: In the United States, McNuggets are coated and then cooked, in the United Kingdom, they are cooked and then coated. As a result, the British McNuggets absorb less oil and have less fat. “You would find that if you looked at any of our core food items. You'd see little, regional differences,” says Lisa McComb, who handles global media relations for McDonald's, which has more than 32,000 restaurants in 117 countries. “We do taste testing of all our food items on an ongoing basis.” One apparent difference is only a matter of labeling, according to McComb. U.K. McNuggets list ground celery and pepper, which are labeled simply as “spices” in the United States, she says. Marion Nestle, a New York University professor and author of “What to Eat,” says the tertiary butylhydroquinone and dimethylpolysiloxane in the McNuggets probably pose no health risks. As a general rule, though, she advocates not eating any food with an ingredient you can’t pronounce. Dimethylpolysiloxane is used as a matter of safety to keep the oil from foaming, McComb says. The chemical is a form of silicone also used in cosmetics and Silly Putty. A review of animal studies by The World Health Organization found no adverse health effects associated with dimethylpolysiloxane. TBHQ is a preservative for vegetable oils and animal fats, limited to .02 percent of the oil in the nugget. One gram (one-thirtieth of an ounce) can cause “nausea, vomiting, ringing in the ears, delirium, a sense of suffocation, and collapse,” according to “A Consumer’s Dictionary of Food Additives.” In 2003, McDonald’s launched smaller, all-white-meat McNuggets after a federal judge dubbed the food “a McFrankenstein creation of various elements not utilized by the home cook.” Among the ingredients that remained in the new McNuggets: tBHQ and dimethylpolysiloxane. Christopher Kimball, the founder and publisher of Cook’s Illustrated magazine and host of the syndicated cooking show America’s Test Kitchen, says he suspects these chemicals are required for the nuggets to hold their shape and texture after being extruded into nugget-shaped molds “The regulations in Europe, in general, around food are much stricter than the U.S.,” …Kimball says… added by: eden49

Zebra-Scented Collars On Cattle Prevent Sleeping Sickness – Impacts On Land Use Are Good & Bad

Tanzanian Zebra . Image credit: National Geographic, excerpted. Researchers at the International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology have developed a cattle collar which will be tested on Masai herds subject to the biting tsetse fly, and hence prone to catching sleeping sickness — “up to three million cattle die each year from the disease.” SciDevNet reports that there could be conservation benefits if the c… Read the full story on TreeHugger

Follow this link:
Zebra-Scented Collars On Cattle Prevent Sleeping Sickness – Impacts On Land Use Are Good & Bad

Taylor Momsen’s Upskirt Pictures of the Day

I think these pictures were expected. You see, if you’re a budding popstar in training who hasn’t turned 18 yet, there are standards you need to meet to get noticed, and those standards are being a little fucking slut about the shit, because guys are fucking perverts and seeing underage girls slutty get us excited cuz we’re not allowed to take nude pictures of them, unless we are Perez Hilton, in which case Kiddie Porn laws don’t apply, or in the UK and Canada where you don’t need pictures because you’re already trying to convince them to have anal for the first time, cuz by 17 you already know that pussy’s been visited a few times, because this is a new generation….an generation who thinks wearing Garter Belts like a secretary trying to seduce her boss in the 50’s since at 15…something I’ve never been able to convince my wife to wear…but that’s because she is so fat garters don’t come in her size, so I had to try to improvise with Bungee cord and a tarp and it turns out that lingerie designing isn’t really my strength, but getting excited about lingerie is, and here are the pictures of Taylor Momsen trying to be a rockstar, reminding us that hormones in the food have done some pretty amazing things to this generation. except maybe for getting their periods at 9, because the whole fun in fucking a teen is not being able to get them pregnant….but beggars can’t be choosers…if you know what I mean and if you don’t, you’re an idiot…cuz I’m trying to say young pussy is good when half naked, period or not. Here is Taylor Momsen doing whatever it is she is that she does at the Warped tour showing panty. To See The Rest of the Pictures – Follow This Link GO

Original post:
Taylor Momsen’s Upskirt Pictures of the Day

Kathleen Parker Uses Her WaPo Column to Play Up Her Humility…and Her New Lucrative Star Turn on CNN

Naturally, Kathleen Parker used her Sunday space on the Washington Post to do what every other Parker column in The Washington Post has sought to do: prepare for the next career step. That would mean proclaiming her humility, shock and/or horror that she would get a nightly prime time hour on CNN, defending/excusing Eliot Spitzer, and declaring that she’s keeping her syndicated column (after all, the ratings might not be promising). Her tender solicitations for Spitzer and his genius in tackling Wall Street are the pink-nausea-pill part: He was prescient about Wall Street, in other words, long before the recent financial crisis. Who wouldn’t be interested in what he has to say about financial reform today? I’m not defending Spitzer or condoning his behavior. [Ahem, yes, you are.] Ultimately, I decided that his obvious intelligence, insights and potential contributions outweighed his other record. As far as I’m concerned, especially given that he has resigned from public office, the flaws that brought Spitzer down are between him and his family. Like most Americans, I believe in redemption. In the Parker career plan, then, this is the motto: I don’t believe in the creepy G-O-D people who are ruining the Republican Party with their “oogedy-boogedy armband religion” of redemption, but I do believe in the redemption of people who can be my meal ticket on CNN at “almost $700,000 a year.” In addition to that number, the New York Post also reported that former CNN host Connie Chung dumped on the new project: “It’s sadly comical…and this is terribly disillusioning. Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert will give you more solid journalism than this program could possibly give.” Ouch. Parker’s Sunday column-slash-commercial has moments that are beyond parody. Mrs. Parker writes from “The Bunker,” and she is so writerly and anti-social that “Except when out for interviews and reporting, I mostly keep the company of one tiny blind poodle recently adopted from a shelter.” (Please report this to the NutraSweet Toxicity Information Center.) She loves shelter dogs, and those drooling, cheating politician dogs.    But the commercial continues. You’ll love this CNN show, she promises, because it will be like a “very interesting dinner party” (without the food or drinks). She is overcoming her quiet life with the Bunker and the poodle to be the Republican version of Alan Colmes:  That relatively quiet life is about to end, and I leave it with a mixture of excitement and trepidation. The trepidation is no mystery. It is the same for me as it would be for you. The excitement has to do with trying something new and challenging, as well as having resources at my disposal to explore the issues that really matter. For me those are the things we consider on our deathbeds — not who is up or down on a given day but how we have occupied our allotted space. Did we leave it better or worse? Did we cause someone to smile or laugh? Although the show is still in development, we intend to include regular contributors and guests selected in part from our own Rolodexes. Think of it as eavesdropping on a very interesting dinner party. It will be “interesting” because it won’t be a “food fight.” I’m sure that’s what CNN promised with the last several failed shows in the 8 pm hour. At this point, they ought to promise that watching Eliot and Kathleen fight will be almost as interesting as Mr. and Mrs. Spitzer fighting. If you’re going to build a show around shameless tabloid adultery, you ought to go whole-hog. But Mrs. Parker is above all that. In fact, she’s above the demeaning sphere of television:  I’m on record about my general dislike of the food-fight mentality of most television programming, which we hope to avoid. I’ve also expressed my kinship with aborigines who believe that the camera steals the soul. I think they’re on to something. If she really believed her own sales talk, she would have turned down the job, and the embarrassing you’ll-love-Eliot talk that comes with it. The first time I attacked Parker for selling out the conservative side to get on TV, she e-mailed me protesting that she wasn’t doing this to appear on the Chris Matthews Show, which she then began regularly doing. I would hope she’s beyond pretending now that she’s not selling out to get on liberal TV.

Here is the original post:
Kathleen Parker Uses Her WaPo Column to Play Up Her Humility…and Her New Lucrative Star Turn on CNN

Ten Tips For Healthy Eating [Advice]

Fellow Americans: our diet has failed. More than 90% of us eat too much salt . We have to tax ourselves just to stop overdosing on soda . It’s embarrassing. Fear not—an easy guide to eating healthy is just below! More

USA Today Cheers Proposed Financial Protection Agency

Don’t be surprised if you open up the June 24 USA Today and find pom poms in the ‘Money’ section. Reporters-turned-cheerleaders Paul Wiseman, Jayne O’Donnell and Christine Dugas wrote a glowing 38-paragraph story about the proposed Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (BCFP). The story even included a section called “keys to a new agency’s success” with quotes from “experts” at a wide variety of government agencies from the Environmental Protection Agency to the Food and Drug Administration. USA Today’s story began by praising the creation of the EPA in 1970 and the way it hit the ground running by ordered city mayors to clean up their water. They included 10 “expert” voices in favor of government agencies (proposed or current) many of whom were former regulators, against only three voices of opposition – all politicians. “It’s exciting to think about building an agency that could make a real contribution, a real difference in the lives of millions of families,’ Harvard professor Elizabeth Warren told USA Today. Warren “proposed the consumer financial regulator in 2007 and is considered a top candidate to be the agency’s first director,” according to the story. The paper barely mentioned Warren’s pro-regulation history which included compensation limits for large corporations. Warren also chairs the Congressional Oversight Panel that babysits companies bailed out by TARP funds. Only three paragraphs were devoted to opposition to the new government agency. Critics were labeled by USA Today as “Republican” or “financial industry lobbyists.” No economists or academics who oppose additional regulation were consulted. Some of the “keys to success” USA Today offered were “hiring motivated career staffers with diverse talents who will outlast political appointees at the top of the organization” and “making a big splash early on to establish your credibility.” However, William Galston of the liberal Brookings Institute feared that the BCFP would “get their knuckles rapped” if they go to far. “If they make a mistake, it will more likely be on the side of excess. They will go too far and get their knuckles rapped, but I don’t expect them to be asleep at the switch like (BP regulator Minerals Management Service) was,” Galston said. Of course the article failed to mention the past ineffectiveness of government regulators and didn’t mention any details of the Democrat-sponsored “Restoring American Financial Stability Act” other than the proposed BCFP. John Berlau, director of the Center for Investors and Entrepreneurs at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, told the Business & Media Institute the entire bill will have more negative effects on consumers than positive ones. “It will set up a nanny state with unintended consequences,” Berlau said. “You’re punishing the many because of a few stupid people and the costs will just be passed on to consumers.” Brian Johnson, federal affairs manager at Americans for Tax Reform, also criticized the proposal telling BMI that the bill is “one of the first steps towards nationalizing the banking system.” “The BCFP is one of the worst things in this bill,” Johnson said. “They’re operating with a fat budget and can monitor personal transactions and map out grids with purchasing patterns.” This isn’t the first time the media has pulled out its pom poms for liberal reforms or increased financial regulation . Perhaps next time the reporters will save their act for a football halftime show as opposed to a major newspaper. Like this article?   Sign up   for “The Balance Sheet,” BMI’s weekly e-mail newsletter.

Continued here:
USA Today Cheers Proposed Financial Protection Agency

Cul-De-Sacs Make You Fat

Add another to our endless series of things that make you fat, many of which have to do with planning and design. The Harvard Business Review reports on a new study by Lawrence Frank of the University of British Columbia, that analyzed conditions in King County, Washington; he found that residents in neighbourhoods with grids and interconnected streets travelled 26% fewer miles by car than did those who lived in the neighbourhood of cul-de-sacs. … Read the full story on TreeHugger

See the article here:
Cul-De-Sacs Make You Fat