1. No plastic containers in microwave.

2. No water bottles in freezer.

3. No plastic wrap in microwave.

Johns Hopkins has recently sent this out in its newsletters. This information is being circulated at Walter Reed Army Medical Center as well.

Dioxin chemicals causes cancer, especially breast cancer.

Dioxins are highly poisonous to the cells of our bodies. Don’t freeze your plastic bottles with water in them as this releases dioxins from the plastic.

Recently, Dr. Edward Fujimoto, Wellness Program Manager at Castle Hospital, was on a TV program to explain this health hazard. He talked about dioxins and how bad they are for us.

He said that we should not be heating our food in the microwave using plastic containers. (no, NO)

This especially applies to foods that contain fat. He said that the combination of fat, high heat, and plastics releases dioxin into the food and ultimately into the cells of the body.

Instead, he recommends using glass, such as Corning Ware, Pyrex or ceramic containers for heating food. (my friend Mahlon, while struggling for a convenient microwave alternative for popcorn, rid himself of the beast recently. KUDO’s) You get the same results, only without the dioxin. So such things as TV dinners, instant ramen and soups, etc., should be removed from the container and heated in something else.

Paper isn’t bad but you don’t know what is in the paper. It’s just safer to use tempered glass, Corning Ware, etc.

He reminded us that a while ago some of the fast food restaurants moved away from the foam containers to paper. The dioxin problem is one of the reasons.

Also, he pointed out that plastic wrap, such as Saran, is just as dangerous when placed over foods to be cooked in the microwave. As the food is nuked, the high heat causes poisonous toxins to actually melt out of the plastic wrap and drip into the food. (can anyone say Ewwwww!)

Best advice: Dump the microwave. Even if you use all the above precautions, it still morphs your food.

• Leave a comment... (5)

What do the human body and the planet earth have in common?

Water. If the human body has about two-thirds water, our planet has about 70% of it, which establishes the fact that water constitutes a major portion in both body masses. And that is what’s alarming. If 70% of the earth’s surface is made up of water, then humankind should have been very wary of anything that would pollute this major portion of the planet. Alas, the human race has done otherwise. Water pollution is now a global problem.

Today, water pollution is rampant and the chief source of water pollution is the human race. We are the very ones that need water most and, yet, we have polluted it, even to the brink of extinction.

There are many types of water pollutants but these can be segregated into four classifications: natural, agricultural, municipal and industrial pollutants. Natural water pollutants could include all the natural phenomena that happen from time to time such as volcanic eruptions, earthquakes that cause major upheavals in the ocean floor and storms that cause flashfloods. Even global warming could be qualified as a cause of water pollution.

Agricultural pollution consists mainly of poultry and other agricultural animal wastes that are carelessly thrown off to bodies of water near farms. It could also be the fertilizers or pesticides that are used to make better crops, which erode into lakes, rivers or streams. Municipal wastes are those that come from residential areas. This is the liquid waste that households throw into bodies of water. Industrial pollution consists of all the wastes that major industrial firms chuck into the waters. This last classification is the most severe and most rampant among the three - and it is also the one that has caused the most damage. Industrial waste could include contaminants that are hard to take off from the waters once they spread - petroleum from oil spills or nuclear wastes.

The bodies of water in the world are in catastrophic danger, what with all the industries in the world today, plus our individual wastes all put together! No wonder mankind now drinks from bottles instead of just scooping water from running streams. The effects of water pollution to humanity is staggering. But we should also consider all the other life forms that suffer - the fishes and other animals such as birds, and plants. And what happens when humans eat the very fishes that live in polluted waters? Do you still want that answered?

But where there is life, there is hope. There is something that we can do - you can do - to save the only planet that we have. You could be an advocate, in your own simple way, of retrieving the lost beauty of oceans, lakes, rivers and streams. Here is a list that might get you to consider in fighting water pollution:

1. Primarily, you should prevent water pollution. Just like an illness, it is much simpler to prevent its occurrence rather than to cure. Begin at your own home. Make sure that you conserve water. You can never imagine the water shortages that happen all over the globe. So if you have a constant supply of water at home, use it wisely.
2. Plant trees (if circumstance would allow you). Having more trees or plants in your yard would prevent pollutants from flowing freely into nearby bodies of water. Since they keep the soil from eroding, water pollution or, at least, the quality of the water is improved.
3. Do not throw any form of garbage into any body of water. Sign up for any organization that aims in cleaning up beaches (or lakes, or streams). Be an active member of such organizations.
4. Never throw water pollutants down your sink or toilet bowl. Make sure to dispose wastewater properly. Think of the many septic tanks that contribute to water pollution. Now, ‘get the picture?

Luckily, for all of us, there were concerned lawmakers out there that have made legislations on water pollution. The U.S. alone has several anti-water pollution laws such as the Federal Water Pollution Control Act of 1972, The Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974, and the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act, which was amended in 1988. These laws prevent further damage to U.S. waters.

Although water pollution is an extensive problem, bridling it is still possible. And everything begins with each and every individual in each and every home. And yes, that population includes YOU.

For more information go to: Facts About Water Pollution

• Leave a comment... (0)

I’m sorry, this is going to be a rant, I’ll just tell you right now…. I’m kind of frustrated.

Phil Nail, was quoted in an article at Top Hosts as saying… “… and buying green credits doesn’t make your company green” Errrrr And, according to AISO’s website, many of the so-called green Web hosts out there don’t run any environmentally friendly technologies at all, but instead buy RECs as a marketing tactic in hopes of making you think they’re helping the environment…. I say, with friends like that, who needs enemies?

Well, I run a green web hosting service and we buy REC’s. I recycle religiously, I garden my own food, I buy local when I can’t get what I need or don’t have room to grow. I bicycle when I could drive, I buy sustainable organic and fair trade as much as is humanly possible. I accept all the bags of leaves and grass clippings I can get from all the neighbors in my town, and I do my best to research where the money from my green tags is going. What more could one want from a small company? Should I not BE a small business because I can’t afford a windmill of my own or the solar panels that should run a green hosting business. The individual that I buy my hosting from is a greenie too, the way he lives, etc… in the backwoods… How could we collectively be better role models? Last I checked, being poor didn’t make one bad, and being rich didn’t make one better. I mean, is THAT what this is all about… egads, big business?

While I would give my eye teeth to host all my thirty some sites and those of all my clients on truly solar/wind powered servers, AISO makes it cost prohibitive for me to do so. (they are over ten times more expensive as all my hosting expenses put together, including our green tags) there is an addon price for every service I need. As a reseller who hosts design clients, I have little choice but to buy energy credits to help make a difference. (Just like I use electricity in my home until I can come up with the fundage to install solar panels) Researching where that money is going can be a full time job, but it’s a step in the right direction. If Mr. Nail would create a program that is as affordable as it is green, we’d see a HUGE difference in the number of truly industrious and sincere site owners that wish to participate in sustainable technology.

As it is right now, I don’t think that saying, “… these so called green web hosts” and “… and buying green credits doesn’t make your company green” is helpful at all. Not to mention the fact that it is counterproductive. (and YES, buying green tags for home and office in addition to all other sustainability practices makes us GREEN) Those comments don’t take into consideration those very small and home based businesses that are making every attempt to be sustainable in their business practices doing everything they can from recycling at the office and at home, buying sustainable products to gardening their own food and/or buying local.

I agree with Michael Bloch’s (from ThinkHost) opinion of the situation much more…

“Around the world, there’s an awful lot of data center infrastructure already in place and while it would be nice to have solar panels and wind turbines directly powering each one of them, it’s horribly expensive at this point, somewhat wasteful of current infrastructure and is going to be some time coming.”

“The purchase of green tags is a great way for hosting providers to do something environmentally positive right now by ensuring the equivalent power that they use is fed into a grid somewhere from renewable sources such as solar and wind (these are the offsets we use). It’s a big picture concept and a practice that should be encouraged rather than being seen as the poor cousin to direct renewables powering.”

These things are all intertwined and they all must work synergistically as must we who are all, in our own spheres, striving to effectively promote public awareness. I can understand attacking those that are proven to only trying to ride an economical ‘green’ wave, but those sort of sweeping statements really leave out the conscientious small business, which in my humble opinion is the backbone of all larger ones. I don’t mind paying a bit more for sustainable technology, but not more than ten times more. Sorry, those condescending statements just really rubbed me the wrong way this morning. I’m going out to the garden and work off some of this steam…

• Leave a comment... (2)

Global Green USA has collaborated with Starbucks and Tree Media on thelaunch of a new online game called Planet Green Game. The game is designed to educate players about climate change in a fun and engaging way, and to encourage individuals to become part of the solution in their own lives. The game and related website also provide simple tools and links to advocate action by elected officials, business and community leaders. I made a score of 7850… what can you do? Check it out!

http://planetgreengame.com

• Leave a comment... (0)

So how much money was invested by governments during the 1970s to scare-monger the population about Global ‘Cooling’? Good question. During the 1970s about $5 billion [in today’s money] was paid by governments in Europe and North America to various government-dependent institutes, to not only study, but broadcast the impending ice age. Now just 30 years later the same cycle repeats, except that the monies involved have increased by a factor of 20 - and this is only the beginning

Global cooling funding was just a warm up exercise using some chump change to get ready for the big Globaloney warming scam. Back in the Bee Gees era, ice sheets in major cities were supposed to be just as common as Gay Pride parades or Muslims protesting this or that infidel desecration of their wonderful, peaceful, ‘faith’, are in our modern megalopolises. Now 30 years on we go from icicles to the toasted oven effect. While Globaloney scams are inconvenient truths for citizens who bear their costs and psychological effects, they are very convenient forms of government, political and activist, power-mongering.

Nicely greased on public money, what were the ‘Cooling’ institutes unanimous conclusion during the era of bad clothes and big hair? After 10 years of public grants, the establishment of various ‘Environmental Protection Agencies’, and the giving of grants to scientists to scare up some doom and gloom, by 1975 the toiling citizen-slave was being screamed at by governments and their institute-dependents about the coming end of civilization – circa 1980 thanks to a coming ice age. Such blather was taught in high school with little children brow beaten about the deleterious effects of putting out a bag of garbage since humanity’s reckless consumerism was destroying earth. Nothing like brainwashing the young to support the cult.

This Global cooling scaremongering had it purposes. It allowed governments to construct regulatory agencies, increase taxation on various goods, and create unaccountable bureaucracies that doled out money to government friendly and activist supporting friends. This created government dependent allies, including scientists, institutes and university research groups who would be out of business if not the for the business of scare-mongering and who could be called upon to rush to the barricades to defend various government-sensitive initiatives. Nothing breeds friends more than the handing out of unaccountable and non-transparent public money grants.

The erection of eco-friendly institutes and funding schemes and the sloshing around of millions only made it a matter of time before Global cooling [or whatever scam was appropriate] would find its way into the media as a ‘truth’. With all that cash scientists and research institutes had to justify the grants and if government was concerned about the impending ice age, then so be it. So they went after the media and the political class with great effect. Nary a politician or media pundit was a Global cooling denier in 1974. Just as today nary a socialist or Marxist deep thinker denies warming.

Notice the language from an erstwhile Global cooling believer, Time Magazine June 24, 1974: ‘Whatever the cause of the cooling trend, its effects could be extremely serious, if not catastrophic. Scientists figure that only a 1% decrease in the amount of sunlight hitting the earth’s surface could tip the climatic balance, and cool the planet enough to send it sliding down the road to another ice age within only a few hundred years.’

This article goes on to link Global cooling with the annihilation of agriculture; famines; and millions of dead.

Notice the language from an erstwhile Global warming true-believer, Time Magazine, March 26 2006; ‘Melt enough Greenland ice, and you reach the point at which you’re not simply dripping meltwater into the sea but dumping whole glaciers. By one recent measure, several Greenland ice sheets have doubled their rate of slide, and just last week the journal Science published a study suggesting that by the end of the century, the world could be locked in to an eventual rise in sea levels of as much as 20 ft.’

This article goes on to link the destruction of ice sheets with agricultural annihilation, climactic upheaval, famines and millions of dead.

So in a mere 30 years the so-called ‘scientific consensus’ goes from worrying about deepening ice sheets in Greenland, to the home of Eric the Red becoming the new swanky Cote D’azur and Caribbean vacation competitor. That seems intelligent.

What about the hated eco-holocaust denying, SUV toting Americans? In 2007 those neo-fascist-corporatist-oil mongering-blood on his hands-Bush and co. will only give out $7 billion to eco-institutes to study and advocate Global warming along with only $16 billion to fund ‘alternative’ sources. How dare they be so stingy!

In the past 10 years in the US, Europe and from the ever-honest and dependable UN, only $100 billion has been given out in grants, funding and government sponsored program money to government friendly institutes and fear mongerers to ring the bell about impending doom and eco-hysteria. Come on boys, surely that is not enough! If you love mother earth, show us the money!

Of course approximately zero cash is given out to scientists who question the nonsense of Globaloney warming. That seems fair to the impartial observer.

With all that money available to be cashiered what do you think the market effect is on institutes and scientists? Gee let me think. Hold on I think I can do this math.

Option 1. I can become a cult believer, have influence over government policy, make a load of cash, get published, have media interviews and have hot chicks recognize me in swanky bars.

Option 2. I can be a real scientist, dispute the unscientific basis behind Global warming, ask for grant money to dispassionately analyze climate cycles, receive no money, be a nobody and get attacked by the media for being a holocaust-eco warming denier and killer of mother Gaia, and eventually get fired for being ‘unorthodox’.

Maybe I will take a pass on Option 2 and go for the gold.

Yet the media is usually full of teen-age angst over Exxon or some other evil ‘corporation’ spending a few nickels to try and get some balanced coverage of climactic cycles. A Marxist group with the Orwellian name ‘Union of Concerned Scientists’ who sided with the Soviets; warned against military strength during the Cold War; and have advocated that the modern world is untenable, were crying about Exxon supposedly giving a paltry $19 million in the past 10 years to public policy institutes that promote climate holocaust ‘denial’.

Sorry but such nickels and dimes don’t stand a chance against big government’s BILLIONS. In any event Exxon gives out annually, tens of millions to the eco-cult Globaloney warming true believers, and along with BP spends hundreds of millions on alternative energy development. This hardly sounds like a capitalist cabal intent on putting a large carbon footprint on the pretty little heads of the eco-cult.

How many stories have you read about the $100 billion funding of the eco-doom and gloom gang? Not many. But chances are that the pathetic $19 million, 10-year Exxon funding story was near the front page of your local newspaper and highlighted on your liberal media news show. For the record the Union of Concerned non-Scientists is one of the top five recipients of U.S. public money to study Global warming [see George C. Marshall Institute 2005 study.]

And therein lies the problem. I could take the Globaloney Warming ‘millions-will die in famines-the modern world is a crock-white civilization is to blame theory’; a little more seriously if the mouthpieces were independent voices of scientific repute, glorying in the scientific method, and impartially observing reality. The implementation of Francis Bacon’s ideals would impress me more than the hysterics of an old 1970s government-style and funded scam. But apparently humans need to believe in cults – even government inspired ones.

The current eco-cult is a government funded nightmare. The hundreds of billions that will be poured into the cult would be better off spent to clean up streams; reduce particulate pollution; improve garbage incineration and removal; or even provide hydro and clean water to struggling villages in Africa. But that is too rational.

Pouring monies into the sewer of arrogant, dissident and self-loathing institutes and academics is a crime and a fraud. Instead of helping literally millions of people with concrete measures, the eco-cult and its Marxist minions are engaged in a huge lie to destroy wealth; lower living standards and accrete power. It is a disgrace built on the backs of taxpayers, created through the dishonesty, power-mongering, arrogance and ignorance of elites.

I wonder what all these deep thinkers will say in 20 years after the earth’s temperature has noticeably cooled. They will probably say something intelligent like, ’see told you so, Global warming caused Global cooling, now we need more billions to deal with the threat of a new ice age.’ Or some such anti-rational mystical Globally warmed over cart load of fertilzer enhancer.

Sources:
http://www.aip.org/history/climate/Govt.htm

By:

Sustainable Living Articles @ http://www.articlegarden.com

• Leave a comment... (0)