A Weighty Issue
copyright © 2009 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org On February 15th, Barry boarded the plane. He was deep in thought and noticed few of the people around him. The prior evening had been exceptional. This sensitive man celebrated Valentine's Day with friends, with family, and best of all with himself, a person he had grown to love and respect, an individual he barely knew for all of his life, himself. More recently, Barry had become a more balanced individual. He is now constantly on the move, not merely in a physical sense, but in a more real manner. The successful businessman, the sensational father, the phenomenal friend, the scholar who climbed the career ladder well, in the not so distant past, never felt truly fulfilled. Now, he thought of himself as a work in progress, a being who has transitioned beyond his wildest dreams. Yet, he trusted there were still many roads to travel. He wondered; would he make it. On this day, unbeknownst to him, Barry would find his answer. Yet, he would also be prompted to ask more questions. As he approached the plank, Barry became aware of those near him. He began to ponder the persons in his presence. He observed, in appearance, many of the passengers, were as he once was. Only two short years ago, he was among them. He was an obese American, one of the almost 90 million exceptionally overweight citizens. Then, when he thought of his weight, and all the ill effects his bulk caused he felt hopeless. Over time Barry has lost most of his bulge, today he again felt the pain of excessive pounds. The plane full of people was too heavy to fly out as scheduled. The weight of the aircraft dictated a necessary change. The flight pattern would need to be altered. Customarily, jets left to the East. Aircraft passed over a power plant before the highest speed and preferred altitude was reached. As a precautionary measure, a plane as heavy as the one Barry now sat on could not be allowed to soar low over an electrical grid. Were the airbus to crash, surely, it would explode. Sparks would set off fires. Everyone on the plane would be killed. Over the intercom, the pilot proclaimed, excessive weight could be a deadly issue. The crew and air traffic controllers would do what was needed to ensure safe travel. The plump passengers would not be publicly embarrassed. Nor would any commuter be forced to feel responsible for the situation. No one person or his or her poundage would be singled out. Politely, the pilot presented the problem and assured all abroad, he and the tower had taken great care to secure a suitable solution. The plane would take an alternative route over water, and all would be well. Barry reflected on what the aviators feared might be the future of those persons anxious to depart from south Florida. He thought of how similar this situation was to his past. The once rotund man understood. In his own life, when he carried extra pounds, there was much he could not do safely. Then, just as he did now, Barry accepted what was an awkward truth. In the initial moments, while on the taxiway, Barry was patient. He endured as he had for most of his years. Adjustments would be made. Hours later, he, and the others would move forward, albeit a little more slowly than they would have was the plane not redirected. Barry and the more bulbous passengers were comforted by the care and attention to detail. A safe runway for departure, given its current weight, was all those on the aircraft wanted. Had the plane or more accurately the people on it, been a bit lighter the whole adjustment and delay would never have happened. Nonetheless, what was, was, and that was alright for those aboard this plane, or at least it had been Nearly forty minutes earlier, the formerly corpulent Barry was among the hordes of people who boarded the aircraft. Barry noticed a family, or three persons familiar with each other, were as he once was. Each weighed over 275 pounds. He thought; "There but for the grace of G-d go I." Barry noticed others of various sizes and shapes, all large. Yet, he thought nothing of their conditions or circumstances at the time they entered the plane. He had other thoughts on his mind. He wanted to return home. Cuddle with the kitties. Clean his house, Prepare for a busy workweek. Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness were his only concern as the Valentine's Day holiday week ended. The more he had learned to accept himself as a unique and complete person, the less he allowed food sand drink to be his distraction. He felt no need to dive into the free chips or cocktails the airlines offered. Barry realized other sought solace in these complimentary sweets. People seemed pacified by food and the opportunity for greater folly. Funny, Barry thought, in the past, if a plane were stuck on the ground, during last night's Valentine's Day festivities, or on any other occasion he too would have ingested chocolates as he suspected most on this plane would do. On a day devoted to travel, as this one was, or on an evening dedicated to love, as last night was, Barry, his beloved, or the big woman who sat beside him on a 737, might have exchanged, "Sweets for the sweet." Thoughts of his blood-sugar and the adult onset diabetes that became his life long ago would have been ignored. A meal, a chance to steal a bit of snack time, life might be an excuse to celebrate togetherness. One little innocent confection could do no harm. Not too long ago, Barry may have sipped an alcoholic nectar with those he cares for and who are fond of him. Intoxicating beverages that build blubber certainly would have passed his lips. He might have believed as many he knows still do. People are less inhibited when drunk with delight. Intimacy is more possible when the fruit from the vine imbibed. Many courses of flavorful fattening foods, a meal fit for royalty, surely would have graced a Valentine's Day table. Today, on his tray table, condiments would have collected. The best way to the heart is through the stomach. The airlines knew that. Perhaps, that is why the flight attendants walked through the cabin with baskets of peanuts and crackers. No one would be upset by the delay if hunger was staved. Surely, 24 months earlier, Barry would have been content to wait as long as the food kept coming. He too might not have thought of a potential crash or the hazards of a weighty plane. Barry pondered. Possibly, for most of this crowd on the plane, his past habits were their present reality. Up until recently, Barry believed the pounds poured on to him as if by osmosis. He did not deliberately seek out sweets, starches, or saturated fats. They found him. His refrigerator was full with what he saw in the markets. Grocery stores were stocked with gooey goodies. Restaurants served sumptuous delicacies. Friends and family feasted upon fodder, all of it filling. Wherever Barry went, it seemed he needed to only look at food, and the weight gain would follow. Today, while on an airplane immobilized by the load it carried, he thought of his earlier bulk and that of others. Barry empathized. He felt the pain of those who carry unwanted pounds. He understood the challenges. It is difficult to develop new habits or to think you can rise above the clouds when you are fat and forlorn. Barry recalled how he had accepted much that was dealt to him when he was flabby. What else could he do? Not long ago, his options were limited, or so he believed. With much encouragement from the one he shared his Valentine's Day with this year, last year, and on the February 14th before that, he learned to believe in possibilities, in his own ability to eat, drink, and move through life differently. His best friend had also faced weighty issues in her lifetime. His life-partner's lengthy struggle with food, folly, and an inability to move forward was one he witnessed firsthand. Barry watched the woman he knew so well work through her inertia. She languished, anguished, and ultimately left her hefty sense of helplessness behind. Her efforts helped Barry to believe that his life could be better. It was not so long ago, Barry began to exercise, to eat healthy foods, to free himself from the habits that hurt him. Were he a plane, in the past, Barry's weight would have grounded him. Today, Barry knew he could not do as he had done years earlier. He would not stay motionless. Nor would he say nothing of the circumstances. He would not resign himself as the load of commuters had. He wondered whether his own history taught him that extra weight need not be a reality. A heavier load need not be a burden to be endured. Unlike the 100 plus others, who seemed settled with the fact that they could not leave the ground, at least not for another two hours, Barry was not. Just as he had decided not to settle for a life in which he battled his bulge, Barry concluded he would speak to the Captain. He would ask the pilot to invite ten to fifteen passengers to leave the aircraft. If this number deplaned, the usual traffic pattern could be put in place. The persons who remained on the vehicle could travel safely and in a timely manner. Those who voluntarily exited would not only receive recompense, they would also be assured a safer travel on a lighter plane. Once Barry voiced his willingness to make a change, to lighten the load, and to leave the aircraft, he was able to garner support from other travelers. The pleased pilot said he would return to the terminal and allow the few to exit. The crew was grateful for the diversion. They knew how the temperature and the tempers of those stuck on a plane, still, on the tarmac could rise. The persons who stayed on the plane were elated. Fat though most of these may have been, at least they would be able to move a bit more freely through the air with thanks to the benevolence of one who used to be as they were. Barry pondered the parallels as he walked through the airport. He had hours to wander and muse as he waited for the next flight. Determined not to be idle; a circumstance he disdained since he lost his own excessive weight, Barry walked. As he strolled, he realized he would need to find nourishment. His breakfast would not hold him through the day and into the evening when he would again board a plane. As he unsuccessfully searched for other than starchy, fatty, sugary foods in the airport, he became frustrated. Barry realized there was not a restaurant in the building that carried healthy victuals. He rented a handcart, placed his luggage on it, and briskly sauntered to another terminal. He had time. Besides, it was good to be able to move about and enjoy the sunlight. As he ambled about, Barry thought of how obesity affects the life of a plane or person. He saw the many who sat stationary in the terminal. Most of these individuals were chubby just as those on the plane were. Barry realized he had been so concerned with his own weight issues he had not noticed what now seemed obvious. In America, overweight was the new normal. This point became more real as a security guard approached him. The officer told Barry he appeared suspicious. Who was he to walk around the airport, to move about so freely? People did not do that, not today, and certainly not in a terminal. Barry shared the story of the plane too heavy to fly the normally prescribed route. He explained it would be hours before he could board the next flight. Barry said he last ate very early in the morning. He was desirous of fruit, or some healthy food to eat. The sentinel said, Barry was to do as the others, more weighty passengers had. Sit. Be still. Pack on the pounds. Build the bulge, and be satisfied with confections, soda filled with high fructose corn syrup, and starchy foods. The security guard assured Barry, there was no fresh produce to be had on the premises. "I have some Valentine's Day candy," the official said. "Here, have a piece." Barry smiled. He said, "No thank you." He walked on and wondered. When is weight an issue for an individual, a culture, a country, or better still, why is it not? References for a weighty reality . . . Before the plane left the gate, Barry marveled; he had grown, and not in width. No longer was his priority to please others, even at his own expense. Barry believes now, as he always did. It is best never to cause harm, not to others or to himself. Self-sacrifice was once the way Barry barricaded himself. He hid his emotions, his feelings, in truth, his fears. When with others, he acted as though he was empathetic. The people pleaser wanted to be identified as benevolent. In a desire to avoid more authentic associations, Barry binged on food. Early in his life, he grew fat. Better to blame his weight for what he could not do, then place the onus on others.
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 15, 2009 at 11:00 AM in Addiction, Americana, Anorexia Nervosa, Bulimia, Childhood Obesity, Diet, Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Food and Drink, Food Folly, Habits, Health | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Where Is the Beef? Where Are the Bees? Planet in Peril
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
Late in January 2008, Americans read the startling news, Video Reveals Violations of Laws, Abuse of Cows at Slaughterhouse. Tears were shed by some; most turned away. The footage was too graphic. Countless wished to remain removed from a reality they do not wish to witness. Reports, of brutal treatment towards beefy cattle, were received by many as is steak on a plate. Those who eat the meat think it sad that a cow must be sacrificed in order to fill a human stomach. Nonetheless, numerous persons believe man kills "lower" forms of life; that is the natural order.
After the revelation, not much changed. Throughout the nation people continued as they had. Weeks passed. Those categorized as the highly intelligent, and humane, had greater concerns than cattle or the cruelty inflicted upon these beast. Matters of consequence were and are far more critical than fallen cows. Decision-makers at the morally condemned abattoir understood the more crucial issue would be public relations. If earnings are to be maintained and profits sustained some action must be taken. The reputation of the business was at stake [steak]. Embarrassed by the audio-visual documentation of doings within the plant, Chief Executives at the Westland - Hallmark Meat Company, ordered the Largest Recall of Ground Beef ever.
The meat packaging plant issued a warning. Consumers were asked to return a full 143 million pounds plus, of beef. Meat produced over the last two years was included in the cautionary measures.
More than a third of the 143 million pounds of California beef recalled this week went to school lunch programs, with at least 20 million pounds consumed, Agriculture Department officials said Thursday.About 50 million pounds of the meat went to schools, said Eric Steiner, deputy administrator of special nutrition programs for the department's Food and Nutrition Service.
Of that amount, about 20 million pounds has been eaten, 15 million pounds is on hold at storage facilities and 15 million pounds is still being traced, he said.
Conceivably, the scope was too broad. Consumers became frightened. The public panicked Parents feared for the children. Schools worried; as recipients and distributors of large quantities of the beef would they be liable.
As awareness increased for the possibly tainted beef, an anxious public cried, "How many people need to get sick, or die, before Congress starts to repair and modernize the nation’s food safety system?" Americans remembered other recent recalls and clamored, someone must be held accountable. People blamed the Bush Administration for this "turn" of events. Periodicals offer resounding criticisms. No one spoke of the duplicity. Why is it considered cruel to abuse the animal you are prepared to kill?
Instead of strengthening the government’s regulatory systems, the Bush administration has spent years cutting budgets and filling top jobs with industry favorites. The evidence of their failures keep mounting: contaminated spinach, poisoned pet food, tainted fish.
There was and is much to speak of, more to scrutinize. Infected food can cause death. Yet, no one places the onus on those who passively accept food industry standards, the American people. The official word of the Federal Food and Drug Administration, which relaxed regulations decades ago, escapes censure as well. Citizens no longer recall that this branch of government loosened standards, and allowed the industry to define what might be acceptable fodder.
[In] 1958, the definition of pantry goods had changed substantially. New food products and a newly competitive refrigerated and frozen goods industry that developed in the domestic marketplace after World War II had literally redefined the household pantry. As the number of new processed and fabricated foods grew, the government spent less time issuing refined standards for products such as raisin bread and egg bread, and more time establishing new standards for products such as frozen orange juice, frozen "TV" dinners, frozen breaded shrimp, freeze dried coffee, and "instant chocolate drinks." As soon as the Food Additives Amendment was in place, FDA began to experiment with less restrictive food standards than the strict "recipe standards" that had predominated in the standards program.In 1961, FDA first deviated from the recipe approach when it issued standards for "frozen raw breaded shrimp" which simply provided for the use of "safe and suitable" batter and breading ingredients, rather than listing all optional ingredients individually. A legal definition of "safe and suitable" was later codified and used to allow "safe and suitable preservatives" or "safe and suitable emulsifiers."
This action was taken at the bequest of businesses. Food producers found the shift necessary. Congress never challenged the move or the measure. Communities nationwide did not question the wisdom of this action. Just as Americans accept that we must kill animals and eat them in order to survive, we also understand that when definitions or circumstances make our daily life more convenient, that cannot be all bad. Even the skeptical among us have faith no business or government agency would intentionally harm patrons, the people, or the planet.
Hence, as long as industry is regulated, and the government classifies food, or chemical substitutes as safe, there is no reason to question what appears on American plates. Events such as the one at this particular slaughterhouse are an anomaly.
Americans trust they system and did as they characteristically do. They heard the warnings and worried not. Authorities would take care of the situation. We will survive. The world is a wondrous place.
Humans rather not reflect on the possibility the treatment of cows relates to a broader reality. The planet is in peril. Downer cows lifted so that they might be butchered for food, speaks of more than a single slaughterhouse or situation. Yet, Americans and other world inhabitants do not wish to discuss what is.
This story is not merely about how humans murder another mammal with malice, or how the master of the universe, man, with his magnificent mind rationalizes what he knows to be morally wrong. This tale offers a reflection too long ignored. Humans hungry, and habitual in nature, do not chew on the thought . . .
The food chain is a complex balance of life. If one animals source of food disappears, such as from over fishing or hunting, many other animals in the food chain are impacted and may die.
Man in his infinite wisdom has altered the balance of nature. People do not consider, what they have done to the animals, insects, all the inhabitants they classify as lesser beings. Humans do not wish to acknowledge they have killed off many species. One extinction leads to another, then another, and finally, if we follow the chain, to total inhalation. A productive planet can die just and its inhabitants without insight might perish sooner than later.
Perchance, nature will remind those hard of heart. Kill fellow organisms, murder the mortal, and Mother Nature will politely, slowly, and subtly punish you for your selfish aggressions.
The lovely lady who breathes life into man and beast tries to tell man-kind [sic], be cautious. Earth, in all her elegance gives humans brains enough to realize life on this planet is pained. The treatment of cattle helps to explain how man threatens Earth.
Humans brutally slaughter the cattle and the cows return the favor. Life is cyclical. Relationships are symbiotic. Try as man might to control Mother Nature, he cannot combat the fluid energy that created him.
The livestock sector emerges as one of the top two or three most significant contributors to the most serious environmental problems, at every scale from local to global.
Livestock’s long shadow, a report released by the Livestock, Environmental, and Development [LEAD] initiative tells a tale of woe that is worrisome. Worldwide, man, in his zeal to eat the flesh of cattle, degrades the land, changes the climate, pollutes the air and water, causes water shortage, and engenders loss of biodiversity. The adage, 'kill or be killed' might be better stated, 'slay and be slain.'
The livestock sector is by far the single largest anthropogenic user of land. The total area occupied by grazing is equivalent to 26 percent of the ice-free terrestrial surface of the planet. In addition, the total area dedicated to feedcrop production amounts to 33 percent of total arable land.In all, livestock production accounts for 70 percent of all agricultural land and 30 percent of the land surface of the planet. Expansion of livestock production is a key factor in deforestation, especially in Latin America where the greatest amount of deforestation is occurring – 70 percent of previous forested land in the Amazon is occupied by pastures, and feedcrops cover a large part of the remainder.
About 20 percent of the world’s pastures and rangelands, with 73 percent of rangelands in dry areas, have been degraded to some extent, mostly through overgrazing, compaction, and erosion created by livestock action. The dry lands in particular are affected by these trends, as livestock are often the only source of livelihoods for the people living in these areas.
A society dependent on meat production destroys the delicate balance that sustains life on this globe. Yet, to look at cows in the field, one would never know. Most who see cattle graze feel a sense of serenity. Few of us consider cows in the countryside a problem. After all, we were raised to appreciate these animals for what they provide.
Americans, carnivores and omnivores that we are, can claim, 'Look at all that life.' Few satiated humans whose stomach bulge, state, 'Look at all that death and destruction.' Climate change, as it slowly creeps into consciousness, does not startle us as it might. Humans barely notice the nuances.
With rising temperatures, rising sea levels, melting icecaps and glaciers, shifting ocean currents and weather patterns, climate change is the most serious challenge facing the human race. The livestock sector is a major player, responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher share than transport.The livestock sector accounts for 9 percent of anthropogenic CO2 emissions. The largest share of this derives from land-use changes – especially deforestation – caused by expansion of pastures and arable land for feedcrops. . . .
It is probably the largest sectoral source of water pollution, contributing to eutrophication, “dead” zones in coastal areas, degradation of coral reefs, human health problems, emergence of antibiotic resistance, and many others. The major sources of pollution are from animal wastes, antibiotics and hormones, chemicals from tanneries, fertilizers and pesticides used for feedcrops, and sediments from eroded pastures.
Global figures are not available but in the United States, with the world’s fourth largest land area, livestock are responsible for an estimated 55 percent of erosion and sediment, 37 percent of pesticide use, 50 percent of antibiotic use, and a third of the loads of nitrogen and phosphorus into freshwater resources.
The brown-eyed beauties are not the problem. It is man who has chosen to cultivate a crop of beef that destroys the planet. Humans, intent on self-service kill the cattle brutally, and will ultimately kill themselves if they continue to ignore the signs. Currently, the extinction of bee colonies throughout the planet is not considered a priority; yet, it is more evidence that something has gone wrong. As absurd as it may seem some researchers claim cell telephones emit radiation and this effects the honeybees ability to navigate. Others argue, that theory is preposterous. Numerous refute claims they deem science fiction.
Nevertheless, honeybees are the most important insects in the human food chain. Little buzzers are the principal pollinators of hundreds of fruits, vegetables, flowers, and nuts. In the last three scores years, or more, the number of bee colonies has declined. In October 2007, as honey bee colonies collapsed, a study by the National Academy of Sciences, Colony Collapse Disorder and Pollinator Decline, suggests American agriculture may place too great a reliance on one type of pollinator, the honeybee. Other investigations focus on the reason for the threat of an apparent bee colony collapse.
Genetic testing at Columbia University has revealed the presence of multiple micro-organisms in bees from hives or colonies that are in decline, suggesting that something is weakening their immune system. The researchers have found some fungi in the affected bees that are found in humans whose immune systems have been suppressed by the Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome or cancer.“That is extremely unusual,” Dr. Cox-Foster said.
Meanwhile, samples were sent to an Agriculture Department laboratory in North Carolina this month to screen for 117 chemicals. Particular suspicion falls on a pesticide that France banned out of concern that it may have been decimating bee colonies. Concern has also mounted among public officials.
“There are so many of our crops that require pollinators,” said Representative Dennis Cardoza, a California Democrat whose district includes that state’s central agricultural valley, and who presided last month at a Congressional hearing on the bee issue. “We need an urgent call to arms to try to ascertain what is really going on here with the bees, and bring as much science as we possibly can to bear on the problem.”
Science is endorsed as the solution. However, the discipline remains part of the problem. Man cannot study as quickly as Mother Nature moves. Anthropoids do not understand that nature is fluid, chaotic, and not easily categorized. It cannot be controlled, but it can be corrupted. What humans have yet to comprehend is the effect they have on what they have and have not discovered.
Life on Earth is in the early stages of the worst mass extinction since the end of the Cretaceous. Many species are likely go extinct before they are even discovered and named by biologists. Of the estimated 10 to 20 million species living on Earth, only 10 percent have been described in the past 250 years. Dr. Edward O. Wilson, Professor Emeritus at the Museum of Comparative Zoology, Harvard University, proposes that the remaining 90 percent must be described in one-tenth that time to save millions of species from extinction.
According to Doctor Wilson, a renowned expert on biodiversity, megafauna are dying out. The tuatara, the lizard-like reptile on New Zealand, the kagu, a crane-like bird with a big plume of feathers in New Caledonia an island in the south Pacific, the Sumatran rhino and the hairy rhinoceros of Europe "were wiped out before humans even had a conscience." If we continue to consume or 'control' as we do, complete extinction may be inevitable, with thanks or no thanks to the knowledge gained by the study of the physical world.
The statistics are staggering. Annihilation in the animal kingdom is ample. If we were only assess to what is observable among the insect community, we might realize there is reason to be startled. A known fact is, in America alone, 27 states have experienced bee colony collapse. Countries abroad document the same disorder.
Bee Alert Technology Inc., a company monitoring the problem. A recent survey of 13 states by the Apiary Inspectors of America showed that 26 percent of beekeepers had lost half of their bee colonies between September and March. . . .These bees may suffer from a diet that includes artificial supplements, concoctions akin to energy drinks and power bars. In several states, suburban sprawl has limited the bees’ natural forage areas.
So far, the researchers have discounted the possibility that poor diet alone could be responsible for the widespread losses. They have also set aside for now the possibility that the cause could be bees feeding from a commonly used genetically modified crop, Bt corn, because the symptoms typically associated with toxins, such as blood poisoning, are not showing up in the affected bees. But researchers emphasized today that feeding supplements produced from genetically modified crops, such as high-fructose corn syrup, need to be studied.
The food now available to the honey bees harms them. The fodder that humans ingest is arguably not healthy. The analysis absent in each of these scenarios, stories of beef and bees, is how humans destroy the gift of life. In our fervor to fulfill self, we sacrifice our souls. Man, in his infinite desire to control and consume, alters crops, raises cattle only to satisfy a stomach too large, and gratify a spirit too small. Humans hurt honeybees, the helpers of every man, woman, and child. All suffer at the hands of those beings who pride themselves on having a brain; yet have forgotten what it might mean to have a heart.
The Beef, The Bees, The Brutality . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 23, 2008 at 01:00 PM in Abuse, Environment, Ethics, Ethics and Profits, Farming Business, Food Folly, Global Village, Global Warming, Humans, Self-Destructive, Nature, Nature or Nurture | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Fragrances and Food; The Way to a Heart is Through the Stomach and Nose
copyright © 2008 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
We met in December. The year was 2007. He was a friend of my cousin's. The two were best of buds; they still are. Cousin Paul has known James for decades. Jim moved to my hometown only months earlier. He felt alone. James longed for a friend, locally. Paul introduced us on the Internet. After my relative played the mediator, the man in the middle, the means for a message, he asked if he might share our electronic mail addresses. James and I each consented, and from then on, we exchanged epistles directly.
In letters, we liked each other. Admittedly, for us, the electronic medium was limited. We decided to share a drink together; although I let him know, I only imbibe water. James said that was not a problem. We arranged to get together at Starbucks. The coffee shop was near to his home and mine. Neither of us wished to share where we lived exactly. We were hesitant, cautious, or just not willing to chance the unknown.
Today, speed dates are popular. For some, a minute or two is more than enough to determine whether he or she is the "one." Some believe in love at first sight. They know immediately when Miss or Mister Right walks through the door. From across a crowded room eyes meet, sparks fly; for many providence steps in. Cupid's arrows are manifest destiny.
A gallant gent may meet a genteel girl and the two will gallivant forever. If a lady were to encounter a extraordinary lad in the last month of the year, by Valentine's Day, perchance the two would be wed. That is unless she eats garlic onions, or spicy foods.
James enjoyed our first encounter. He took pleasure in our later luncheon. My cousin's best friend looked forward to our every conversation. The more we chatted the more he longed to converse, connect, and commune in every way possible. This fine fellow spoke of copulation often. While he had been with others at the time of our introduction, he did not feel as close to them as he did to me. James spoke of our shared energy, enthusiasm, interests, and the excitement he felt in my presence. Nonetheless, one day, as he readied to rally at my home he decided he could not do it.
The smell of my well-seasoned skin was just too much for this lovable man. James diet is bland in comparison to mine. He did not wish to tell me I could not dine as I do. He did not wish to end our relationship per se; James just needed to create a physical distance. All the while, he reminded me of how much he loved me and always will. Certain he did not want to think of a time when we would not be emotionally together, James concluded, at least for a time, he needed to occupy a separate physical space. Perhaps, we could see each other and just not share a repast.
In the Twenty-First Century, the dynamics of dating are more complex. People are sensitive. The personal preferences of one person may offend another. Individuals are vocal.
Sharing meals has always been an important courtship ritual and a metaphor for love. But in an age when many people define themselves by what they will eat and what they won’t, dietary differences can put a strain on a romantic relationship. The culinary camps have become so balkanized that some factions consider interdietary dating taboo.No-holds-barred carnivores, for example, may share the view of Anthony Bourdain, who wrote in his book “Kitchen Confidential” that “vegetarians, and their Hezbollah-like splinter faction, the vegans ... are the enemy of everything good and decent in the human spirit.”
Returning the compliment, many vegetarians say they cannot date anyone who eats meat. Vegans, who avoid eating not just animals but animal-derived products, take it further, shivering at the thought of kissing someone who has even sipped honey-sweetened tea.
Ben Abdalla, 42, a real estate agent in Boca Raton, Fla., said he preferred to date fellow vegetarians because meat eaters smell bad and have low energy.
No matter how delightful a mate may be, if she eats meat, or finds a meal of fish repugnant a male suitor may not pursue her. If a woman thinks a man prefers a menu that is ethically loathsome, she will say so. Even those trained to understand, may not empathize at all.
Lisa Romano, 31, a vegan and school psychologist in Belleville, N.Y., said she recently ended a relationship with a man who enjoyed backyard grilling. He had no problem searing her vegan burgers alongside his beef patties, but she found the practice unenlightened and disturbing.Her disapproval “would have become an issue later even if it wasn’t in the beginning,” Ms. Romano said. “I need someone who is ethically on the same page.”
While some eaters may elevate morality above hedonism, others are suspicious of anyone who does not give in to the pleasure principle.
James did not quibble with my decision to avoid caffeine or alcohol. He did not question my desire to shun sugars. It made sense to this sweet man that I do not dine on meat, fish, chicken, or potatoes. James did not find fault with my wish to preclude processed foods from my diet. I did not consider his choices flawed. For me, people eat as they do. I delight in my entrees and worry not of what others consume. I understand change comes from within. I have no desire to transform another; nor do I wish to be converted.
As with other differences couples face, tolerance and compromise are essential at the dinner table, marital therapists said. “If you can’t allow your partner to have latitude in what he or she eats, then maybe your problem isn’t about food,” said Susan Jaffe, a psychiatrist in Manhattan.Dynise Balcavage, 42, an associate creative director at an advertising agency and vegan who lives in Philadelphia, said she has been happily married to her omnivorous husband, John Gatti, 53, for seven years.
“We have this little dance we’ve choreographed in the kitchen,” she said. She prepares vegan meals and averts her eyes when he adds anchovies or cheese. And she does not show disapproval when he orders meat in a restaurant.
“I’m not a vegangelical,” she said. “He’s an adult and I respect his choices just as he respects mine.”
In a former relationship, Eric and I were as Dynise Balcavage and John Gatti are. Never once was food an issue. I cooked meat for Eric with little hesitation. Admittedly, I would pay more for chicken parts. I could not bring myself to cut into the flesh and bone of one of G-d's creatures. When liver was prepared, I could not season the slices. In truth, my eyes could not gaze upon the bloody organ. Eric would place the animal protein in the bag I prepared with flour and spices. Then, he would lay the organ into the heated pan. Only after the meat was seared, could I continue to cook the "delicacy."
However, while I do not define myself by what I eat, I can no longer look at animal flesh on a plate and feel the same emotional distance I once did. While I still do not struggle with what another ingests, I do not believe that I would be so willing to bake, broil, or boil a bird, cook or carve a piece of beef, slice or dice a chop of pork. Perhaps, I have changed, even if ever so slightly.
I cannot be certain whether trends transform a person, age alters an individual, or if experience hardens hearts. Perhaps, ancient hurts hinder us. In an era where divorce defines the population, people have become more discriminating. James was married twice. I am the daughter of divorced parents. In America today, our experiences are common and likely shape us. The subtle nuances of companionship possibly affect the stomach and the nose..
Children watch Mom and Dad coo, only to see them separate. The pain of parents parting can cause a stomachache. Teens remember when their parents were romantic, rather than full of rage when together. As an adolescent reflects on unity he or she ponders, 'This stinks!' Adults cannot forget the one who broke his or her spirit. Habits of lover were appreciated. Slowly, but surely, all that seemed beautiful left a lover nauseous. The scent of one who was adorned becomes a reminder of all that was lost. Closeness can be sickening. Smells and tastes are no longer savored.
Nonetheless, people wish to believe passion is pure, adoration is in the air, and that special someone is just around the corner. Hence, we look, and look, and hope to find our Valentine. Restaurateurs rely on the human desire to love and be loved.
Valentine's Day ranks second only to Mother's Day at restaurants."It's something that restaurants all over the country . . . look forward to," said Steve Chucri, president and CEO of the Arizona Restaurant Association.
Thirty-five percent of Americans dine out on Valentine's Day, close to the 38 percent on Mother's Day.
Of those who dine out, 80 percent pay an average bill of $62. The remaining 20 percent spent more than $100 in 2006, the most recent year for which figures are available, according to Sherry Gillespie, the association's marketing manager.
Those spending $62 are paying $20 or $25 more than usual, Chucri said.
"I think people go out and spend more because they enjoy the day," he said. "They might get that bottle of wine instead of a glass of wine. Or they might get an appetizer and a dessert."
Pleasure or the want of it can be blissful. James and I experienced that from the first. The conversation, started and stayed interesting. We were authentically animated. He thinks I am saucy and sweet, but perhaps a bit too spicy. Like or unlike millions, James does not revel in the smell of natural seasoning. At one point he explained, "I think you are great. I enjoy your company. I yearn to be with you and would be if only you would stop eating garlic, onions, and spicy foods for three days."
While intellectually James does not object to my nutritional regime or my being as I am, his stomach and nose struggle to follow his fondness. Delicate scents do not disguise the aroma of peppers. A bouquet of cologne does not cover the odor of onions. From food to fragrances, friendships are fragile.
Perfume has long been an aphrodisiac decanted sparingly from an iconic glass bottle. But for Leslie Ware, a fashion editor at a quarterly magazine in Huntsville, Ala., fragrance has worked its magic in the opposite direction, as a romantic deal breaker.Several years ago, Ms. Ware was engaged to a gentleman who did not like Trish McEvoy 9, the fruity vanilla blend she had been wearing for seven years.
“He thought I smelled like a traveling carnival, the kind where they sell corn dogs, because I guess the smell was reminiscent of cotton candy,” Ms. Ware, 28, said. “This was the demise of Trish No. 9.”
It was a bad omen.
Soon after, Ms. Ware said she broke up with the perfume-averse boyfriend. She has not worn fragrance since.
A more recent boyfriend fared no better after he bought Ms. Ware what she called “an old-lady perfume” against her wishes.
“It made me mad,” she said. “I told him not to bother buying me fragrance since I am picky, and now I have a $125 bottle of perfume sitting in a closet.”
Just as stomachs lead many men, and women, noses help navigate these same individuals through the maze of ardor. When we wish to give to one we love, money is no object. The cost of the gift does not deter a admirer. Nor does the price impress the person who receives a present. There is much to love, and more to learn if we wish to create a bond that lasts.
This Valentine's eve women will not douse themselves in fragrances and men will be reminded not to buy perfumes as they did in the past. Colognes and toilette water are not collected as they were years ago.
[M]ore women are forgoing scent altogether. Last year, about 15 percent of women said they did not wear fragrance, up from 13 percent in 2003, according to a survey of 9,800 women conducted by NPD.“That may sound like a small number, but nationally that translates into two million more women who are saying ‘I don’t wear fragrance,’ ” said Karen Grant, the senior beauty industry analyst at NPD. “Eighty-five percent of women are still buying fragrance, but an increasing number tell us they are wearing fewer scents, less frequently or not at all.”
Fragrance fatigue is probably inevitable, with heavily fruited scents wafting out of everything from dishwashing liquids to hotel linens to candle displays at the mall. But perfume aversion seems to be tapping into a larger societal phenomenon that may have its origins in bans on cellphones and cigarettes: the idea that the collective demands of the public space trump one’s personal space.
“People are shying away from fragrances not for the traditional reasons that you’d expect, that it is too expensive or that they are wearing alternative products like body sprays or lotions,” Ms. Grant said. “Many people said it bothers them that fragrance has an effect on other people, that they are trying to be considerate by not overcoming others with scent.”
Indeed, Rochelle R. Bloom, the president of the Fragrance Foundation, an industry trade group, said that people who worry that their fragrance may offend others simply may be wearing perfume improperly.
It is not difficult to hurt the feelings of another. People are sensitive souls. Stomachs ache. Noses run. Hearts hurt. Cupid's arrows are curved; however, they can be straightened.
But sometimes couples can reach olfactory accord. Last fall, Robert Flood, a retired technology platform tester in Allen, Tex., worried how to tell his wife of 25 years, Amy, that he could not abide her new perfume, Elizabeth Taylor’s Passion.“It was very atrocious, at least to me,” Mr. Flood, 52, said in a phone interview last week.
The couple later worked out a compromise so that he would not be discomfited should her scent again stray into his air space. Henceforth, each will choose a fragrance for the other to wear.
“On Valentine’s Day, we will go to one of her favorite stores and she will buy me English Leather and I will buy her Jean Naté, which is the fragrance she was wearing when we had just met and she was 17 going on 18,” Mr. Flood said. “We are not smelling the perfume so much as the memories.”
Indeed, for the Floods, fragrance brings with it the Proustian power of recall. One could argue that those who forgo perfume now may inadvertently diminish at some future date the textural memories of relationships past.
Perchance, passion is more than a perfume or a pound of flesh. Spice may not be the cumin poured into the curried dish. The flavors that create true fondness are not found in the pantry or the powder room. The zest and zing that brings zeal into a relationship does not originate during a meal. A scent will not make heartstrings sing.
If two are to enjoy as one they must be responsive and receptive to what is not visible to the eye or smelled by the snout. Memories made and remembered satiate more than a stomach and flood more than a muzzle. This Valentine's Day may be the time to steam sweet nothings and sniff a bit of fresh air. Hugs, kisses, and Happy Valentine's Day.
Sweetness and Spice Sources . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on February 14, 2008 at 05:30 PM in "Take me as I am!", Approval or Love, Compassion, Conflict, Complex, Dreams Live and Die , Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Empathy and Evolution, Food Folly, Looking at Life, Looking for Love, Marital Status, Quality of Life | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
California Slaughterhouse; Human Cruelty Exposed
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
What if you were born to the world, hopeful, and full of life, only to be immediately separated from your mother and father. What if you never felt the warmth of a parent's love or the sun on your skin? Imagine, instantaneously, after birth you were placed in a restrictive room with no space in which to spread out. Your arms and legs frozen from confinement. You are squeezed into a sealed cage, placed in a pen with other little beings. In this crate, you are forced to eat food not to your liking.
From what you observe, there are hundreds of other orphaned newborns in this dark and dank dwelling. The stench in the warehouse that you call home causes you to gag. Some of the other occupants are diseased. A few have already passed. Dead bodies, trampled by the live who are trapped with them, smell of decay. Bugs eat at the flesh.
The lack of involvement or intellectual stimulation is the reason you go mad. Stressed, strained and in both physical and emotional pain, when you are provided an exit, you know not what to do. You lash out, become aggressive, only to be poked and prodded into submission. Your one day of freedom is not more than a funeral march.
A gun is placed at your head. A round is fired. You bleed, but do not die quickly or quietly enough for the killer who wants your flesh. Tired and trying to survive, someone grabs your legs, and ties them together. Your beautiful body, one never before able to stretch out fully, is now hung from a great height. A knife enters your sphere of vision, and your throat is slashed.
Soon your remains, or those of another species whose life was as awful as your own will be served up as nutritious meals on a child's school lunch program.
Warning: This video contains graphic and disturbing footage.
In it, an HSUS investigator describes his experience working undercover in a slaughterhouse.Cheap Meat Working in a Slaughterhouse
Video footage was released in the Twenty-First Century, in January of the New Year 2008. In a civilized society, carnivores and omnivores show they are more concerned with what fills their stomachs and satchels of silver and gold then how there wants are satisfied.
In a culture, gone awry, animals are treated with malice. Dairy cows, cattle bred for beef are brutally beaten and murdered. Laws against cruelty do nothing to deter malicious behavior.
[W]orkers at a California slaughterhouse delivering repeated electric shocks to cows too sick or weak to stand on their own; drivers using forklifts to roll the "downer" cows on the ground in efforts to get them to stand up for inspection; and even a veterinary version of waterboarding in which high-intensity water sprays are shot up animals' noses -- all violations of state and federal laws designed to prevent animal cruelty and to keep unhealthy animals, such as those with mad cow disease, out of the food supply.Moreover, the companies where these practices allegedly occurred are major suppliers of meat for the nation's school lunch programs, including in Maryland, according to a company official and federal documents.
An undercover investigator for an animal welfare group, wore a customized video camera under his clothes. This affords us an opportunity to see what no one should have to witness, and what need never occur. This lover of animals, mammals, man, and all beings who breathe worked at the abattoir last year.
His or her efforts provide evidence that anti-cruelty and food safety regulations do not discourage or prevent unnecessary and inhumane abuse. The current standards are derisory.
Nevertheless, this footage reveals the Agriculture Department must inspect animal environments more thoroughly and enforce the rules with greater rigor. The Humane Society of the United States, which coordinated the project, explained there is ample need to improve the laws and to better conditions for our four legged friends.
"These were not rogue employees secretly doing these things," the investigator said in a telephone interview on the condition of anonymity because he hopes to infiltrate other slaughterhouses. "This is the pen manager and his assistant doing this right in the open."The investigator and Wayne Pacelle, president of the Humane Society, said the footage was taken at Hallmark Meat Packing in Chino, Calif. Hallmark sells meat for processing to Westland Meat Co. in Chino, according to Westland President Steve Mendell, who is also Hallmark's operations manager.
Over the past five years, Westland has sold about 100 million pounds of frozen beef, valued at $146 million, to the Agriculture Department's commodities program, which supplies food for school lunches and programs for the needy, according to federal documents.
In the 2004-05 school year, the Agriculture Department honored Westland with its Supplier of the Year award for the National School Lunch Program.
In an interview, Mendell expressed disbelief that employees used stun guns to get sick or injured animals on their feet for inspection.
"That's impossible," he said, adding that "electrical prods are not allowed on the property."
Asked whether his employees use fork lifts to get moribund animals off the ground, he said: "I can't imagine that."
Asked whether water was sprayed up animals' noses to get them to stand up, he said: "That's absolutely not true."
"We have a massive humane treatment program here that we follow to the n{+t}{+h} degree, so this doesn't even sound possible," Mendell said. "I don't stand out there all day, but to me it would be next to impossible."
However, after a moment or two, as we watch the video, we recall, when humans are involved, merciless, heartless, callous, and sadistic practices are always possible. Carnivores sharpen your teeth. Salivate and contemplate; the sweet tender baby you are about to eat, was once prey at the hands of a person who cared not. The quality of your meat is no better than the quality of how the life was sacrificed for your stomach.
References, Resources, Food For Thought . . .
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on January 30, 2008 at 06:30 PM in Abuse, Ethics, Farming Business, Food Folly, Lawbreakers | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Americans Have No Choice; A Diet of Fats, Salts, Sugars
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
'Tis the season to be jolly. From Thanksgiving Day to the dawn of the New Year, Americans are encouraged to eat. He, she, you, and I are expected to fritter our fears away. We will worry not of weight gain, heart attacks, coronary artery disease, strokes, or diabetes. Citizens in celebration will gorge on and gulp down millions of morsels. Americans will eat, drink, and be merry with reckless abandon. There are some expressed concerns for food safety, especially after a year of scares; however, for the most part we will dine with delight.
Then, come the First of January we will do as we did last year and the year before, we work to munch more wisely. Most of us will make a conscious effort to decrease the fats, salts, and sugars in our daily diet. Individuals throughout the country will convince themselves it is only a matter of self-control. We can eat well if we decide to. Citizens in the USA believe what they ingest, how, and when is a choice. In the land of the free, and home of the brave, we boldly do, as we desire. Here, in America, there are food choices galore, or so we are led to believe.
However, since the late twentieth century Americans have actually had a very limited selection. They, we, are not free to dine as we might. Our menu is extremely restricted. We can chew on Acidulants, enriched Baking Aids and Mixes, luscious Cocoa and Chocolate, chemical Emulsifiers, Texturants, and Stabilizers, refined Flours, "organic" Nutrition Ingredients, [meager when available], processed Oils and Fats, palatable Protein Products, and "naturally" Sweeteners. If we wish to ingest more wisely, we can; that is, if we are up to the challenge. In the States, the Recommended Daily Allowance is wrought with ruse.
The public professes they want no government in their lives, or more importantly, on our dinner plates. Yet, Americans accept that administrative authorities must regulate to ensure that what we eat is truly safe. Federal Officials are necessary and tolerated in moderation. Indeed, Americans actually appreciate the Food and Drug Administration.
According to a survey of 30 federal agencies being released today, consumers asked about the FDA's performance believe that food labeling is useful, clear and understandable, that consumer alerts of food safety issues are useful, and that customers trust FDA to ensure food safety in the future . . .The survey asked about the usefulness and clarity of food labeling; customer awareness and the effectiveness of inspecting, testing, and labeling efforts; and the usefulness of consumer alerts; meats and poultry are regulated by USDA.
In addition to consumers' positive views of the food label and FDA's ability to ensure that food is safe, the survey also indicated that the FDA should increase public awareness of actions to ensure food safety and focus on awareness efforts during consumer alerts.
Despite the claims of contentment, for the most part Americans resent government influence in their daily lives. Americans are independent minded mavericks. Granted, we are grateful for the small favors the Food and Drug Administration affords us; however, we want no more assistance than we deem suitable. Citizens in this country are selectively scrupulous.
Americans prize and advocate a free enterprise system. We want the freedom to decide for ourselves what is best. Where food is concerned, citizens of this civilized nation want to preserve their right to choose. We welcome the rise of an innovative industrialist who might introduce an ingredient into the mix. A crunchier cookie, a sweeter soda, tastier tenderloins, a savory sauce, and a flavorful fondue, all are appreciated in abundance.
Cakes, cookies, crackers, pies, bread, potato chips, corn chips, popcorn, salad dressing, breakfast cereal, margarine, and animal products all taste good to the average American.. Regardless of the warnings, that each of these manufactured or mechanically prepared foods contain trans-fatty acids, are high in sodium, and are filled with high fructose corn syrup, those in the Western World continue to consume these tidbits with fervor.
Intellectually, we may know trans-fatty acids, salts, and sugars are hazardous to our health. We sacrifice some. Nonetheless, we do so slightly or on occasion. Mostly we gorge, gulp, guzzle and stuff our gullet with these gems and then die.
Clogged arteries might cause our demise. A heart attack could end our life. Obesity may do us in. Still we say, we rather eat fats and be happy.
Scientific evidence shows that consumption of saturated fat, trans fat, and dietary cholesterol raises low-density lipoprotein (LDL), or "bad cholesterol," levels, which increases the risk of coronary heart disease (CHD). According to the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute of the National Institutes of Health, more than 12.5 million Americans have CHD, and more than 500,000 die each year. That makes CHD one of the leading causes of death in the United States.
People say they might as well enjoy now. After all, we will all pass eventually. An additional year or two will not make a difference. The quality of our life is what matters. Besides, any true danger is moderated by the system.
In this agri-industrialist nation, we trust that if a corporation wishes to make a profit, they must and will keep the consumer in mind. That construct alone will guarantee quality. When it does not, then, the government will step in to preserve safety . . . well sort of.
Years ago, Josh joyfully ingested his early morning Egg McMuffin ™ in a Fifth Avenue McDonalds. As he ate, he read the news. An article in The New York Times, screamed for his attention. Hold That Fat, New York Asks Its Restaurants. He thought of how much he loves his partially hydrogenated oil filled foods. Joshua would not wish to be deprived of the greasy flavors that warm his belly. The young gent contemplated what might this announcement mean to him. Then, Joshua concluded, he need not worry. At least Gotham City officials give restaurateurs a choice. Proprietors will cater to what the their customers crave; thus, the world will continue to turn as it has.
Months later, a content Joshua sat in his overstuffed chair and snacked on a bag of Doritios®. He could not imagine a life more complete. Suddenly, that tranquil sense of calm disappeared. A radio announcer declared our democratic right to choose would be constrained. The broadcaster bellowed, New York City Plans Limits on Restaurants’ Use of Trans Fats. The earlier "request" had done nothing to reduce usage of the hazardous oils.
The Board of Health vote comes a year after it conducted an unsuccessful campaign to persuade restaurants to eliminate trans fats from their recipes voluntarily. It said yesterday that despite mass mailings about the hazards of trans fats and training programs for 7,800 restaurant operators, about half the city’s restaurants continued to serve trans fats, about the same as before the campaign.Trans fats, derived from partially hydrogenated oils, became popular in the 1950’s as an alternative to the saturated fats in butter. They allow fast-food restaurants to use frying oil for longer periods and make crunchier cookies and flakier piecrust. They also have a longer shelf life than butter, olive oil, corn oil or other alternatives.
Joshua became extremely concerned. He exclaimed aloud, "What is this a Police State?" Eatery entrepreneurs have a right to serve what they believe is best. Customers can digest what they think delicious, or at least they could in some municipalities. In time, concern for the health of a crowded community increased. Last year, during the holiday season, a peaceful Josh took in the decorations in his favorite restaurant. He dined with delight. After he ate, Joshua released his belt buckle. A friend seated across from a full and sleepy Josh inquired, had he heard, New York Bans Most Trans Fats in Restaurants.
The usually quiet chap was aghast. Now officials in this cosmopolitan metropolis had gone too far. How and why would a municipality choose to restrict what the people consume? Josh began to ponder how all this change might affect him personally. He thought of the mashed potatoes and gravy, he consumed only moments ago. Would he be deprived of such tasty fare in the future?
Certainly, the potatoes would not taste as sumptuous if they were prepared differently. Joshua reveled in the delicacy just as he had been for decades. The recipe as is, is wonderful, this fit fellow thought. Joshua belched. Then he pondered; the dozen or so doughy delights he digested moments earlier. These goodies would never be the same. Joshua dreamt of the cookies, cakes, and creams he just ordered for desert. The word "Ridiculous!" rolled trippingly off his tongue,
"No one has the right to tell me what I can consume. It is my life, my body, and I will take care of it as I see fit." In a huff he continued, "I eat a little bit of everything; it is called a well-balanced diet." "No matter what we gulp down or scarf up, it all turns into sugar once in our blood stream." "All food is natural." This news is preposterous." "Who has the authority to tell us what to eat or drink?" The government is already too involved in our lives. "Let them eat what they like and I will munch on what brings me pleasure." Does the Constitution not grant us liberty and the pursuit of happiness? "I want to be left alone, to be free to be me."
Joshua grappled with what seemed inevitable change in his diet. He wondered, "What is all the fuss about trans-fatty acids? Are there not more important issues of concern?" Almost immediately, he received an answer. Another blow brought Joshua to his knees. A condiment that he was certain could cause no harm was listed as injurious to his health.
It was not an e coli spinach scare that altered his awareness. Salt shocked his sensibilities. What could be more safe than salt? For goodness sake, this savory substance sits on his dinner table.
A hulk of a man, Josh knew, to spill salt is an ominous sign. He understood, since the beginning of time, people believed if they were to waste the commodity considered as valuable as gold, certain misfortune would follow them into the future. Still, this gent never thought there was anything to fear from the sodium substance. Such mythical legends have lived long. As Joshua mulled over the latest revelation, he laughed, he acted as though he believed if he were to carry salt, or throw the small white crystals over his shoulder, he would be assured the best of luck.
A jovial Josh has long assumed the want of good will was the reason we poured the crystalline element on every entrée. Good flavor or good fortune; both together might be wondrous. This healthy man was aware the traditional use of this prized substance is in question. However, he never imagined, the Food and Drug Administration would contemplate a serious and severe crackdown on the zesty zinger of a spice. Yet, as Joshua perused the paper and listened to radio and television reports he learned . . .
Putting the Pinch on Salt, Medical Groups at Odds Over Proper Solution to Sodium Problems
By Carla Williams
ABC News Medical Unit
Nov. 29, 2007The U.S. Food and Drug Administration is holding a public hearing today to determine whether to place federal limits on the salt content of processed foods, such as canned soups and breakfast cereals.
The hearing comes at a time when medical experts are becoming increasingly concerned over the amount of salt contained in many foods on grocery store shelves, including products not normally associated with salt.
For example, said Dr. Randall Zusman, associate professor of medicine at the Harvard Medical School, a bowl of one popular cereal brand may pack more of a sodium punch than many consumers realize.
"One cup of Cheerios -- frequently advertised as heart healthy -- has 300 milligrams of salt," he explained.
"No one eats only one cup, so two to three cups each morning would be nearly 50 percent of your daily allotment. Yet, the FDA allows Cheerios to be advertised as a healthy alternative."
But while most agree that the excess salt in the diets of many Americans poses significant health risks, experts in the medical community remain divided over what should actually be done to address the problem.
Some agree with advocacy groups and believe that the FDA should require stricter labeling for manufactured foods. Such labeling could take the form of warnings placed prominently on the packaging of high-sodium foods.
But others think the focus on salt regulation is misdirected and say that the FDA should address more harmful elements of the American diet and lifestyle, such as obesity.
The American Dietetic Association, for one, has spoken out in favor of stricter product labeling to tackle the problem.
My goodness; Cheerios, a food that Americans such as Josh ate to protect themselves from a coronary crisis may actually place them at risk for a heart attack. What, and whom, can we trust. Do we do as we are told or as the specialists do?
Physicians often gobble just as regular folk do. We have seen stout surgeons, rotund nurses, hefty dieticians, and even a lean doctor dine on junk. Our spouse may insist we eat healthy; yet, he or she does not. Acquaintances swig and swallow whatever they wish. No one seems to suffer serious repercussions at less not while in our range of vision. Thus, we conclude there is little reason to change. People are just overly cautious. Certainly, federal, state, and city officials are wary without cause.
A mild mannered Joshua was familiar with the cautionary tone of doctors. He heard his wife whisper her concerns. For years, medical professionals and his Mom expressed their angst when they discussed his fervent application of this sour, yet sharp, condiment. Josh reduced his use; although admittedly he wondered whether there was reason to do so. Oh, sure, Joshua saw the advice columns. Caveats called him, or at least those who love him suggested he read the literature.
University of Maryland Medical Center, expert on hypertension, Dr. Stephen Havas, states, high-salt diets cause 150,000 premature deaths in the United States each year. Heart attacks, coronary artery disease, and strokes are the frequently result from obesity, high blood pressure, and the perilous pre-hypertension. Each of these afflictions can be traced to the intake of salt. Havas declared there is an imperative need for the Federal Health authorities to reduce sodium consumption.
However, contrary to what this and other physicians think wise, most persons in this civilized country retain the attitudes of their ancestors. Americans are as the rugged individualists, or at least, Joshua was and is. Our countrymen can take whatever is dished out. Salty, sweet, or saturated in oils, citizens of this wild and western nation have the stomach for it.
Americans are independent and we like it that way. No government agency, guy, or gal in a white lab coat will tell US what to eat. They certainly will not dictate to Joshua what he eats. In truth, the Food and Drug Administration does not tell us what is best to consume. Nor do they closely monitor corporate claims; although they would wish us to believe they do. Joshua trusted that his food was safe with thanks to this industry watchdog.
Fake Food Fight
by Paula Kurtzweil"It is true that you may fool all the people some of the time; you can even fool some of the people all the time; but you can't fool all of the people all of the time."
--Abraham LincolnWhen it comes to fraudulent food in the marketplace, Lincoln's sage observation has certainly rung true. In the Food and Drug Administration's experience, when hucksters try to cheat Americans out of millions of dollars of genuine foods, their schemes are ultimately exposed by a sharp-eyed consumer, a competitive industry, or FDA itself.
Known as economic adulteration of food, this practice involves using inferior, cheaper ingredients to cheat consumers and undercut the competition. And even though the 1938 Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act specifically bans it, economic adulteration persists, challenging FDA's resourcefulness to remain vigilant against it.
In recent years, FDA has sought and won convictions against companies and individuals engaged in making and selling bogus orange juice, apple juice, maple syrup, honey, cream, olive oil, and seafood.
According to Martin Stutsman, a consumer safety officer in FDA's Center for Food Safety and Applied Nutrition, FDA relies heavily on industry and consumers to help identify instances of economic fraud.
What businesses will not do for money. Artificial adulterants put much dough in many a breadbox. The Food and Drug Administration discovered some producers sold, what they said was pure orange juice; however, the beverage was loaded with corn syrup or beet sugar. Dairy cream was, in fact, corn oil. Corn syrup passed for honey. Bottles of horseradish were actually containers of potato starch. Salt mixed into water was advertised as milk. Scallops, an expensive delicacy on occasion was found to be water worked into sodium tripolyphosphate (STP).
The fake foods, [mixtures of trans fatty acids, salts, and sugars] may yield temporary financial benefits. However, what qualifies for natural, and approved, fodder feeds fills more pockets than the illegal imitations ever did. Corn syrup found in a product labeled pure orange juice is considered an adulterant. However, when the same sweetener is listed on a can of orange flavored juice the Food and Drug administration thinks that fine.
There is a delicate balance between healthy and harmful sustenance. Equilibrium is difficult to maintain when the scales are tipped in favor of corporate influences. For many in the Food and Drug Administration dough is more flavorful than moral fiber might be.
Former FDA Investigator Exposes Aspartame As Deadly Neurotoxin That Never Should Have Been Approved
Can Republish, Namaste, Vol 6, Issue 1,UKMany policies, I found out, were not made to protect the public health, but rather, to provide leverage at appropriation time before Congress, and to protect the industry and their political government. This is especially true when they were paid for their 'services' by the pharmaceutical or chemical industries. This is what I call 'social cancer'.
Many systems for protecting the public health are (were) less than effective . . . making very little difference on public health issues. Much of it was for 'show' and for funding. It was the folks in Rockville and Washington who made the final decisions on how to play most of these issues out. Unfortunately for us, it was not to favor the public health processes. The entire process reeks of political and corporate influence.
If Americans had the time or energy to do more than eat what is easily available they might notice how ubiquitous industry is in our diets. Advertisers have captured our attention.
"Shouldn't your baby be a Gerber baby?" "Trix are for kids." "Keebler. Uncommonly Made, Uncommonly Good." "Mmm Mmm good. That’s what Campbell’s Soup is; Mmm good." "Subway. Eat fresh." "Taco Bell. Think Outside the Bun." "McDonalds. I'm lovin' it," and you do, we do. We are trained to eat prepared foods from birth. At Burger King, we can have it our way. At Kentucky Fried Chicken, we can trust it is finger lickin’ good. At Subway, we can "Eat fresh." If only we knew what that was.
Manufacturers and marketers choose what we consume. High fructose corn syrup is an ingredient is most American food. Many Americans, sadly, a vast majority, do not even know what unprocessed fruits and vegetables truly taste like. Apples? That is the crisp, wet fare under the caramel. Tomatoes top pizza. Strawberries and cherries await your bite when you sink your teeth into that piece of bittersweet chocolate. Squash and pumpkins grace the doorstep during the Fall holidays. Spinach is for cartoon characters. Potatoes, yum-yum. This starchy crop, when deep-fried is absolutely ambrosia.
Even when we think we are ingesting only wholesome fare, surprise, we discover, there is more to the meal than meets the eye. The local bakery still creates healthy doughy fare. The smell of fresh baked flour and yeast reminds us that quality food does exist. Have you read the ingredients on baked goods? Let us consider the plainest of plain preparations, a bagel. The elements that go into this not so enticing ring of dough are numerous. Unbleached flour (wheat flour, malted barley flour), water, dough conditioner (sugar, salt, malted barley flour, molasses, mono & diglycerides, ascorbic acid, L-cysteine, azodicarbonamide, enzyme, ammonium chloride, DATEM, potassium iodate, brown sugar, yeast.
As we study the marketplace we realize, what satisfies our senses is not so sensible.
In the 1980s, manufacturing methods improved, prompting a boost in production of high-fructose corn syrup and a drop in price to just pennies below that of refined sugar. "While that may not sound like much to the average consumer, when you consider how many pounds [the soft drink industry buys], it was millions of dollars if not hundreds of millions of dollars in savings," says Drew Davis, NSDA's vice president for federal affairs.The switch made economic sense and, as Davis notes, "back then, there was no suggestion that high-fructose corn syrup was metabolized differently" than other sugars. More recent research suggests, however, that there may be some unexpected nutritional consequences of using the syrup. "Fructose is absorbed differently" than other sugars, says Bray. "It doesn't register in the body metabolically the same way that glucose does."
For example, consumption of glucose kicks off a cascade of biochemical reactions. It increases production of insulin by the pancreas, which enables sugar in the blood to be transported into cells, where it can be used for energy. It increases production of leptin, a hormone that helps regulate appetite and fat storage, and it suppresses production of another hormone made by the stomach, ghrelin, that helps regulate food intake. It has been theorized that when ghrelin levels drop, as they do after eating carbohydrates composed of glucose, hunger declines.
Fructose is a different story. It "appears to behave more like fat with respect to the hormones involved in body weight regulation," explains Peter Havel, associate professor of nutrition at the University of California, Davis. "Fructose doesn't stimulate insulin secretion. It doesn't increase leptin production or suppress production of ghrelin. That suggests that consuming a lot of fructose, like consuming too much fat, could contribute to weight gain." Whether it actually does do this is not known "because the studies have not been conducted," said Havel.
Another concern is the action of fructose in the liver, where it is converted into the chemical backbone of trigylcerides more efficiently than glucose. Like low-density lipoprotein -- the most damaging form of cholesterol -- elevated levels of trigylcerides are linked to an increased risk of heart disease. A University of Minnesota study published in the American Journal of Clinical Nutrition in 2000 found that in men, but not in women, fructose "produced significantly higher [blood] levels" than did glucose. The researchers, led by J.P Bantle, concluded that "diets high in added fructose may be undesirable, particularly for men."
Other recent research suggests that fructose may alter the magnesium balance in the body. That could, in turn, accelerate bone loss, according to a USDA study published in 2000 in the Journal of the American College of Nutrition.
We can thank the Food and Drug Administration for our fodder, and we can express our gratitude to Archers Daniel Midland, the mother or father of invention. A financial crisis in the parent company led the this corporation to merge and grow beyond their wildest dreams and ours.
In 1971 [Archer Daniels Midland] purchased Corn Sweeteners, Inc., producer of high-fructose syrups, glutens, oil, and caramel color. Corn Sweeteners brought good returns for Archer Daniels Midland and increased the company's finished-food capabilities.
Currently we can find Archer Daniels in most every "finished-food" option. Bread and brews are loaded with high fructose corn syrup. Cereals, before the flakes are frosted, are filled with the fluid. Spaghetti sauce is supplemented. The sugary additive makes up a substantial portion of this tomato-based product. Sodas are essentially high fructose corn syrup, as is . . . [name your food of choice.] While high fructose corn syrup is good for earnings, it endangers human health.
Loading high fructose corn syrup into increasingly larger portions of soda and processed food has packed more calories into us and more money into food processing companies, say nutritionists and food activists. But some health experts argue that the issue is bigger than mere calories. The theory goes like this: The body processes the fructose in high fructose corn syrup differently than it does old-fashioned cane or beet sugar, which in turn alters the way metabolic-regulating hormones function. It also forces the liver to kick more fat out into the bloodstream.The end result is that our bodies are essentially tricked into wanting to eat more and at the same time, we are storing more fat.
Sheer will power must be our guide, for certainly the Food and Drug Administration does not point us in the direction of good health. Nor do the conglomerates have our best interests at heart. Most Americans believe given a choice, people buy what they sense their body craves. Unfortunately, few acknowledge that certain foods create a chemical reaction that fools the physiology and the psyche.
No mysterious ingredient. The Cadbury's secret is out. Chocolate is drug-like in its effect. Artificial taste explodes in the mouth with crunchy, smooth, sweet flavors, supplying intense pleasure. Every texture and nuance of taste contrived to stimulate your 9,000 taste buds into sending pleasure signals to the brain. The intensified pleasure effect is addictive. We don't care about the additives or empty calories. Chocolate junkies crave a fix, driven by the desire for that chocolate pleasure. Pleasure for which we will pay any price, even our health.Chocolate bars are loaded with salt, sugar, caffeine and fat, up to 300 calories per bar. Like a body demanding heroin for its balance, the body will crave sugar, salt and fat. Take candy from a sugar junkie, and look out! Quitting causes withdrawals. Remove sugar, processed fat or salt from your diet, and you will crave them. You will go through the discomfort of facing withdrawal similar to the withdrawal from drugs.
Humans hunger for sweets. We are extremely fond of fats. Salt is savory. Eons ago, our bodies learned to love what would help us survive in the wild. We needed the weight and the energy. The habits of our ancient ancestors now seem innate. Food and chemical industry leaders know this. They exploit our obsession for the flavors that excites the palette and satisfy the electrical impulses within our gray matter; thus, expanding their profits.
Physiologically we cannot resist. Psychologically, we are easily swayed. Financially, we turn our fate over, and fortunes are made. Most of us forget what we once knew before our brains and bellies were filled with trans-fats, salts, and sugars.
The story of how the most basic questions about what to eat ever got so complicated reveals a great deal about the institutional imperatives of the food industry, nutritional science and — ahem — journalism, three parties that stand to gain much from widespread confusion surrounding what is, after all, the most elemental question an omnivore confronts.Humans deciding what to eat without expert help — something they have been doing with notable success since coming down out of the trees — is seriously unprofitable if you’re a food company, distinctly risky if you’re a nutritionist and just plain boring if you’re a newspaper editor or journalist. (Or, for that matter, an eater. Who wants to hear, yet again, "Eat more fruits and vegetables"?) And so, like a large gray fog, a great Conspiracy of Confusion has gathered around the simplest questions of nutrition — much to the advantage of everybody involved. Except perhaps the ostensible beneficiary of all this nutritional expertise and advice: us, and our health and happiness as eaters.
Hence, dear Josh, if you do not wish to be controlled by the government or the corporate kings and queens, if you wish to eat well, remember, to look beyond what seems to be your freedom to choose. Do not travel to the eateries that serve only what they know will leave you yearning for more. Do not frequent food pantries that prefer you be fat. Venture not into the aisles of processed ambrosia. If you wish to be free from the thought police and those that place temptation on the plate, carefully consider foods that are not fake. You can enjoy real foods, unprocessed provisions, and your health if you truly peruse the labels, make meals from scratch, and ask for more than just the menu when you dine out.
Bon appetite Josh. A happy and healthy holiday, every day to all, and to all a good night.
Satiated, Satisfied, and Sources . . .
- 2007: Let’s Eat, Not Fuss. By Frank Bruni. The New York Times. December 26, 2007
- The Price of Food Safety. The New York Times. December 22, 2007
- Next Year's Diet Books, By Andrea Sachs. Time Magazine. December 10, 2006
- Doritios ®
- Customer Satisfaction Results For The Food And Drug Administration Announced. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services December 13, 1999
- Fake Food Fight. By Paula Kurtzweil. Food and Drug Administration. March April 1999
- McDonald's USA Ingredients Listing for Popular Menu Items. Corporate McDonald's.
- Sugar coated, We're drowning in high fructose corn syrup. Do the risks go beyond our waistline? By Kim Severson. San Francisco Chronicle. Wednesday, February 18, 2004
- pdf Sugar coated, We're drowning in high fructose corn syrup. Do the risks go beyond our waistline? By Kim Severson. San Francisco Chronicle. Wednesday, February 18, 2004
- Former FDA Investigator Exposes Aspartame As Deadly Neurotoxin That Never Should Have Been Approved, Can Republish, Namaste, Vol 6, Issue 1,UK
- Unhappy Meals, By Michael Pollan. The New York Times. January 28, 2007
- pdf Unhappy Meals, By Michael Pollan. The New York Times. January 28, 2007
- Sweet but Not So Innocent? High-Fructose Corn Syrup May Act More Like Fat Than Sugar in the Body, By Sally Squires. Washington Post. Tuesday, March 11, 2003; Page HE01
- pdf Sweet but Not So Innocent? High-Fructose Corn Syrup May Act More Like Fat Than Sugar in the Body, By Sally Squires. Washington Post. Tuesday, March 11, 2003; Page HE01
- New York City Plans Limits on Restaurants’ Use of Trans Fats, By Thomas J. Lueck. New York Times. September 27, 2006
- pdf New York City Plans Limits on Restaurants’ Use of Trans Fats, By Thomas J. Lueck. New York Times. September 27, 2006
- Hold That Fat, New York Asks Its Restaurants, By Marc Santora. New York Times. August 11, 2005
- pdf Hold That Fat, New York Asks Its Restaurants, By Marc Santora. New York Times. August 11, 2005
- New York Bans Most Trans Fats in Restaurants, By Thomas J. Lueck and Kim Severson. New York Times. December 6, 2006
- pdf New York Bans Most Trans Fats in Restaurants, By Thomas J. Lueck and Kim Severson. New York Times. December 6, 2006
- Spinach and E. Coli Outbreak. US Food and Drug Administration.
- pdf Superstitions about Salt. The New York Times. December 31, 1883
- FDA contemplating crackdown on salt, The AMA, which says Americans should consume 50% less sodium, has joined consumer groups asking for government intervention. By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar. Los Angeles Times. November 29, 2007
- pdf FDA contemplating crackdown on salt, The AMA, which says Americans should consume 50% less sodium, has joined consumer groups asking for government intervention. By Ricardo Alonso-Zaldivar. Los Angeles Times. November 29, 2007
- Salt: The Forgotten Killer. Interview by Michelle W. Murray. University of Maryland Medical Center.
- Corporations Control Your Dinner, AlterNet.
- DATEM, Wikipedia.
- Food Ingredients. Archer Daniel Midland
- Vegan Nummies Panera Bread.
- Are We Really Force Fed? By Gard Goldsmith of the Ludwig von Mises Institue. July 30, 2004
- Your Food Addiction is Great for Business. Healthy Recipes.
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on December 26, 2007 at 09:00 AM in Addiction, Advertising, Calories. Cells., Diet, Economics, Ethics and Profits, Food Drug Administration, Food Folly, Health, Soda, Soft Drinks, Sugar, TransFatty Acids, Weight | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Bulimia; Science of the Holiday Season and Food
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
The holiday season is the best and worst of times. It always was. The food is phenomenal. The feelings that fill a heart, mind, or is it my stomach can cause enormous misery. For a person immersed in the rituals of bulimia the latter weeks of the year are better than all others. Opportunities to indulge are ample during the holy days. The selection of food fare is far superior. Scientific research on food reaps ample rewards. The secretive practice of self-imposed solitary confinement causes much angst, or could, if one were not able to find an escape in food.
Fortunately, a bulimic can and does take flight. She or he can sprint to the stores. There selves are filled with cashew nougat cookies. Boxes of these white wonders melted in her mouth. Delicate doughy dinner rolls lined every end display. These delicious buns were strategically placed in case a customer forgot to grab them when in the bread aisle. Buns sold for pennies. Christians, Jews, Gentiles, those who worship Jehovah, Muslims, Agnostics, Atheists, and more must love these doughy delights. While stuffing was a staple, in the winter, the cost was nominal, and the supply was grand. She could fill her shopping cart with boxes a plenty.
In the dairy section, sweet and savory eggnog was available. This liquid ambrosia did not appear before or after the national celebrations. She could hardly wait for the New Year. Grocers would reduce the price on this stock and she would buy all she could. She would place the excess in the freezer and save these for another day. As America celebrated, so too did she. However, her festivity was a bit less conventional.
She needed no lights, no tinsel, or tree. A menorah, or a Kinara were not necessary. An image of the crescent moon, or the five-pointed star, was not important parts of her ceremonial gala. All she needed was food. She no longer required family to enjoy. Food was her kin, her kind of company.
When Bethany was a child, Thanksgiving Day brought songs of the good cheer. Merriment filled the house. Mommy and the little lass would sing all the traditional carols. Dradle, dradle, dradle, I made it out of clay. O Tannenbaum, oh Christmas tree, Sleigh bells ring on a silent night. As December 25th approached, the family dashed through the snow, roasted chestnuts, and pa rum pum pum pumed with the Little Drummer Boy. Her Daddy said the gaiety made no sense to him. Yet, he laughed aloud and reveled in the expressions of glee. Daddy tried not to croon and carol; however, at times he joined in the caroling.
Times were good. The late November dinner was usually turkey. Mashed potatoes and gravy made from scratch graced the table. Home-baked breads also adorned the setting. Daddy carved the meat with studied finesse. Mom dished out the stuffing. Homemade pies and cookies sat in wait. There were many choices. Mommy baked for days on end. Lemon meringue was for Lisa. Bethany preferred pecan pie. Dad did not decide until he was ready for desert. Would he dive into a traditional pumpkin pie or save that slice for another occasion?
In her family, food was considered the means to celebrate life. Mom, Lisa, and Bethany ate when they were happy, dined when they were sad. Each of the ladies filled lonely days and nights with chow. Fodder brought thought; it stimulated reflection. Realizations occurred over a bowl of soup, cereal, salad, or stew. Daddy was not as dependent on victuals. However, Bethany’s first father was a glutton, for punishment and pleasure over a plate of steak, veal, lamb, or lobster. That man customarily consumed as though there was no tomorrow.
Bethany recalled every New Years Day, Michael sat on the bathroom floor slumped over the toilet bowl. He puked and purged until he could do no more. When his stomach was empty, then he would stop, only to await the time when he would fill up again.
For Michael, bingeing and ridding himself of all he ingested was not habitual. However, it occurred often enough. The activity was a vivid memory for Bethany. Perhaps she learned to adopt bulimic behaviors. After all, aspects of the conduct were part of her experience.
For her natural father Michael, life was an adventure. He thought it fun to be spontaneous. Bethany was more of a scientist just as her Grandfather had been and as her Dad trained her to be. The little bit of a girl questioned everything. Studious as she was she researched the minutia. There was nothing in her life that did not involve great thought.
When she first chose to relieve herself of food, it was a calculated decision. Early one evening, during dinner Bethany ate so much. After the meal she could barely move. Consumed with a sense of discomfort she sought relief. It occurred to her, if she simply flushed out the food, all would be well. However, she discovered as all scientists do, it is never possible to truly control the environment, or the outcome of any experiment. Indeed, in an investigation, what seemed a solution to a problem, could, and did control the researcher.
Physiology and psychological components are more powerful than mere mortals might wish themselves to be. Addictions may begin with a conscious decision as all actions do. Nonetheless, there are forces that preclude logic and rational thinking. The body is more than a reasonable brain.
Quickly, what was meant to be a moment became a lifestyle. Hence, Bethany concluded she must learn to cope. To survive this young being would have to learn the science of intake and surrender. She measured her moves. What edibles went down smoothly, and which released themselves from the stomach walls smoothly.
While cottage cheese is often considered the finest pabulum for those who wish to lose weight, for a bulimic, this provision is a nightmare. The tiny curds stick to the innards. The amount of acidic bile needed to breakdown this dairy product is ample. It seems a single soul cannot produce enough enzymes to eliminate this compound within a reasonable amount of time. Most cheeses clump once in the digestive system.
All through the holidays, cups of cheese spreads fill the grocers delicatessen cases. Spreads are smooth to the taste, and smoother on the tongue as they slide in and out of the most central orifice.
Milk will cuddle if it sits on the kitchen counter for too long. It does the same if left for any length of time in the stomach. Eggnog, however, glides through the system. She knows not if the egg, sugar, or other additives make the difference. Bethany only understands that this is a delight.
Summer potato salads may be flavorful. However, a boiled and particularly pulverized tuber does not travel as well as the mashed perennial plant does. The moist breadcrumbs that we call stuffing are an interesting delicacy. The ingredients within the mixture matter more than the actual entrée.
Hard cookies can crumble into bits in the outside world. They do the same once digested. Miniscule particles spilled on the floor can be difficult to clean up. When in the body cavity these small pieces scatter. The fragments of food do not gather in as a group, and exit as one. Flat crisp baked goods do not easily escape; yet, the holiday goodies cashew nuggets, goes down and comes up as a silk scarf might.
Indeed, the holidays are wondrous. The food is more fun than time with family might be, or so Bethany hoped as another year approached. Sadly, in truth, during the winter solstice she felt more alone than she ever did. No matter the trials and tribulations, the gift of a shared experience means more than any other event might.
Science and food could not, did not, and would never suffice for what she sacrificed. Those the little bit of a being was closest to were a greater source of solace than what she, a bulimic labeled nourishment. Nature, in the form of ingested plant or animal products, does not nurture a starved soul. A satiated stomach could not compare to a heart filled with joy.
Happy Holidays, Merry Christmas, a Joyous Kwanzaa, a regal Ramadan, none would be as long as Bethany remained bulimic. If only emotions, epidemiology, and the effects of these could be as easily understood as the study of food.
- The Beginning. Bulimia and Becoming [Chapter One]
- Bulimia. A Bit Becomes a Binge [Chapter Two]
- Binges Build A Being, Separate From Self [Chapter Three]
- Hiding the Food. Hiding The Feelings, Hiding Me [Chapter Four]
- The Satiated Stomach. The Study Of Food [Chapter Five]
- Bulimia. Wait! It is Not My Weight [Chapter Six]
- Bulimia. "Control," Not the Means Nor the Mission [Chapter Seven] Or Similar Discussions . . .
- I Am An Anorexic, Bulimic, A Person!
- When Will I Be Right? Is It Ever Okay To Be Me?
- Weight. Balancing Fat with Feelings, Habits With Health.
- Bulimia Builds Bitterness and Bridges
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on December 25, 2007 at 05:00 AM in Anorexia Nervosa, Being, Becoming, Bulimia, Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Food Folly | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
Overweight Children - Adults Face Widespread Stigma and Strain
copyright © 2007 Betsy L. Angert. BeThink.org
In America and the European Union Overweight Kids Face [a] Widespread Stigma. Only days ago, I contemplated this truth. As I watched a family shop, I was struck. She was young, perhaps ten years old. She was very heavy. I wondered how could one little girl carry so much weight on such a small frame.
The lass was sweet, quite petite, although clearly troubled. She had been shopping with her Mom, her grandmother, and her younger brother. From appearances, it seemed this family was in Target gathering wares for Grandmamma. They did not give the impression of being poor; nor did they look to be wealthy. They were average folks; they could have been you or me.
This family did not dress well. Their clothes were clean, just not stylish. Were this group more fashion conscious pants, shirts, and shoes would have been color-coordinated. Patterns might have blended in a manner that was more appealing. However, I guess they were comfortable in casual apparel. After all, making purchases in a discount department store does not require a person to dress with finesse. Simply covering your body is sufficient for such a chore.
The family of four entered the checkout line. I was standing behind them. Their exchanges were pleasant. The children each chose to purchase an item for themselves. Grandmother and Mom paid for their goods, as did the boy. Then the young woman did her transaction. The cashier rang up the sale. Dollars passed from one hand to another. There was change. The school age girl went to place her pennies, nickels, quarters, and dimes into her tiny purse. A single nickel fell to the ground. The coin made a sound as it plunked to the floor. The girl heard the noise and saw the shiny nickel.
She looked at the currency longingly. Then, this lass turned and glanced at her family. They were walking away. Her brother, mother, and grandmother had not noticed what occurred. The group was not far and yet, not near to the girl. It would only take a moment to pick up the coin and move towards the others. Pensively, the female child considered the nickel. She looked down and then up and down again. Finally, she fled in haste, leaving the lonely coin behind. She never bothered to pick it up, although she did think too.
It did not seem to me that this little lady thought a five-cent piece was not worth much. From appearances, or perhaps I am projecting, recalling my own struggle with excessive weight, her greater concern was the effort involved in bending over to retrieve a small piece of anything. I remember the days, and not too fondly. My heart went out to this child. There, but for the grace of G-d, go I.
I am reminded of the time when I was obese, not pleasing plump, chubby, or fat; I was corpulent. I grew into a size that was twice that of normal quickly. I did not consume gross quantities of food. The portions on my plate, or in hand were not large. It was actually quite startling to see the weight pile on. Pound after pound was added to my body mass. There was no index to guide me. Indeed, I was eating less than I had for years before this gain.
However, my weight gain was not an anomaly. For me, fighting with my body mass was normal. My family was substantial mentally and physically. Many of my relatives are big people, not tall, just wide. The little girl and I seem to share a family shaping, or might I say out of shape. Her mother and Grandmother were large. Her brother was not as rotund; however, he seemed to be ready to tip the scale.
In my family, some were fit. My Grandpop walked for miles, each and every day. He was active and agile; a few relatives are. However, it seems on average, the propensity toward plump was prominent in my world. The younger generations in my own family might have mirrored their elders, or perhaps more accurately did as their parents had. This is true in most families, even the thin ones. However, patterns change. In recent years, Americans are shorter and more stout. For generations, Americans were taller than those in other nations; however, this is changing.
[H]eight has been stagnating in the US for a decade, and Americans are now shorter on average than many Europeans, including not only the very tall Dutch and Scandinavians, but even the citizens of the former East Germany, see John Komlos and Marieluise Baur (2004).This is troubling for many reasons. Not only is our health and life expectancy effected, so too is our income. For years, Economists told us tall persons earn more money than the diminutive do. An inch can increase your net worth by at least a thousand dollars per year. However, recent research reveals the height you achieve in adulthood may not determine your income. Stature may not be the key to financial success.While Americans are not expanding upwards, they continue to expand outwards, and the average American, like the average Briton, is now heavier than the weight that would minimize mortality risk given average height.
Tall men who were short in high school earn like short men, while short men who were tall in high school earn like tall men.If, during our younger years we do not think we are worthy, excellent, brilliant, or outstanding than likely we will not believe we are the best later in life. Often, we trust we are admirable when others act as if we are.That pretty much rules out discrimination. It's hard to imagine how or why employers could discriminate in favor of past height. If tall adolescents—even those who stop growing prematurely—grow up to be highly paid workers, it's got to be because they've got some other trait that employers value. [Nicola Persico, Andy Postlewaite, and Dan Silverman of the University of Pennsylvania] believe that trait is self-esteem. Tall high-school kids learn to think of themselves as leaders, and that habit of thought persists even when the kids stop growing.
For the fatter child, the need for approval weighs on their minds. Much embarrassment is felt, and experienced early on.
Overweight children are stigmatized by their peers as early as age 3 and even face bias from their parents and teachers, giving them a quality of life comparable to people with cancer, a new analysis concludes.At the age of two, nearly three, I recall sitting in the den with a ballpoint pen in hand. I drew lines on my thighs designating exactly where I wanted the excess meat removed. I do not recall being ridiculed at home; nor do I remember peers speaking of my weight.
I did attend summer camp at that age. At two and one half years, I was the youngest camper. Perhaps, being four years younger than all other campers had an effect on me. Indeed, I was left out of much. The counselors were not willing to teach me to swim. My bunkmates did not wish to include me in games. Being a person that loathes and avoids competition, and always did, I had no desire to participate. I was somewhat sedentary.
Possibly the situation demanded it. I could not go off and play on my own. I needed to stay with the group. Yet, I was separate. I sat still for hours while my bunkmates engaged in recreational activities. My situation, although different, mirrors much of what occurs today.
Lack of exercise is a major factor in the growing problem of obesity, both for children and adults, according to Dennis Styne, a UC Davis Medical Center pediatric endocrinologist who is a recognized authority on issues of childhood obesity. "Obesity has become a serious health risk in America, and it is reaching epidemic proportions, even in the pediatric population," Styne says. "Close to 25 percent of America's children and adolescents are now considered overweight, and the numbers are increasing."I developed habits that hurt my already hurting heart. The children ran, jumped, laughed, and enjoyed each other's company. I could not join in. They thought me too young. At an early age, my less active life took its toll. The pounds piled on. Later, as the years passed, I was just lethargic.
They say obese children are victim to teasing, rejection, bullying, and other types of abuse because of their weight. I was fortunate, I did not experience much, if any of this in my youth. However, when I reached the age of sixteen, and added a few more pounds, a phrase was used by a loved one to describe me, "butterball." To this day, every year from Thanksgiving to Easter when the company with the same name advertises their turkeys, I cringe.
"The stigmatization directed at obese children by their peers, parents, educators and others is pervasive and often unrelenting," researchers with Yale University and the University of Hawaii at Manatoa wrote in the July issue of Psychological Bulletin.Research determined the heavier child exposed to such pressure is two to three times more likely to report suicidal thoughts. Frequently, the young and hefty suffer from other health issues. High blood pressure and eating disorders are not uncommon. Yikes, there I am. I was anorexic, then bulimic. My eating was out of order.The paper was based on a review of all research on youth weight bias over the past 40 years, said lead author Rebecca M. Puhl of Yale's Rudd Center for Food Policy and Obesity.
I have long been certain that my bingeing and purging was not related to my weight. Indeed, doing as I did, did not help me maintain a stable mass. The process stressed my body and my mind. Anorexia and bulimia are burdensome. They are as obesity in many ways. There is great shame associated with starving oneself. Over-eating and puking do not leave one feeling proud. People judge those that do not appear perfect or act in a manner that pleases others. We all criticize ourselves.
"The quality of life for kids who are obese is comparable to the quality of life of kids who have cancer," Puhl said, citing one study. "These kids are facing stigma from everywhere they look in society, whether it's media, school or at home."In a time when children are growing fatter, we can no longer avoid an issue that is pervasive. We must consider that they way people treat us when we are young has an effect throughout our lives. Height and weight evoke a response. That reaction stays with us. At a time when childhood obesity overwhelms the planet, we must consider the effect of this epidemic.Even with a growing percentage of overweight people, the stigma shows no signs of subsiding, according to Puhl. She said television and other media continue to reinforce negative stereotypes.
"This is a form of bias that is very socially acceptable," Puhl said. "It is rarely challenged; it's often ignored."
By 2010, almost 50 percent of children in North America and 38 percent of children in the European Union will be overweight, the researchers said.At times, we as a society must shield children from those that love them most, us. Sadly, parents, teachers, and friends do not realize how they hurt a fragile heart and soul. Teasing is thought to be just in fun. Expecting less of a fat child is considered realistic. Reacting to personal guilt for not caring for a child as you thought best, in a moment, might seem reasonable. However, the harm we do is immeasurable. Children internalize their pain.While programs to prevent childhood obesity are growing, more efforts are needed to protect overweight children from abuse, Puhl said.
A growing body of research shows that parents and educators are also biased against heavy children. In a 1999 study of 115 middle and high school teachers, 20 percent said they believed obese people are untidy, less likely to succeed and more emotional.Fat children are distinct. They stand out in a crowd. Actually, in their own mind they are often larger than life. I know I was. I was so surprised years later when I saw photographs of myself as a camper. I was not obese then. I only thought I was. For me, it was as Lynn McAfee stated, "You hear it so often; it becomes the truth." Even if the words were heard only in my head, they were repeated routinely. The belief that I was fat became my reality. In my teens I grew into the person I long thought I was. I became obese."Perhaps the most surprising source of weight stigma toward youths is parents," the report says.
Several studies showed that overweight girls got less college financial support from their parents than average weight girls. Other studies showed teasing by parents was common.
"It is possible that parents may take out their frustration, anger and guilt on their overweight child by adopting stigmatizing attitudes and behavior, such as making critical and negative comments toward their child," the authors wrote, suggesting further research is needed.
Lynn McAfee, 58, of Stowe, Pa., said that as an overweight child she faced troubles on all fronts.
"It was constantly impressed upon me that I wasn't going to get anywhere in the world if I was fat," McAfee said. "You hear it so often, it becomes the truth."
Her mother, who also was overweight, offered to buy her a mink coat when she was 8 to try to get her to lose weight even though her family was poor.
"I felt I was letting everybody down," she said.
Other children would try to run her down on bikes to see if she would bounce. She had a hard time getting on teams in the playground.
"Teachers did not stand up for me when I was teased," McAfee said.
A study in 2003 found that obese children had much lower quality of life scores on issues such as health, emotional and social well-being, and school functioning.
"An alarming finding of this research was that obese children had (quality of life) scores comparable with those of children with cancer," the researchers reported.
Sylvia Rimm, author of "Rescuing the Emotional Lives of Overweight Children," said her surveys of more than 5,000 middle school children reached similar conclusions.
"The overweight children felt less intelligent," Rimm said. "They felt less popular. They struggled from early on. They feel they are a different species."
Anyone that has ever struggled with their weight knows, trying to take off a few pounds can be a challenge. Eliminating the weight of years of mistreatment takes more effort than most can imagine.
Heavy children are insulted, ignored, rejected, and ultimately resent themselves. They misuse food. The weighty wonders may not appear malnourished; however, they are. The obese do not eat well.
[P]oor nutrition remains an impediment to health in much of the world today, Much less obvious is the idea that nutritional deficits are an important part of the health story in the rich world today. Yet there is a good deal of evidence, even—and in some cases particularly—in populations whose most obvious nutrition-related problem is obesity and over nutrition.Such mass consumption does not serve our children well. Nor do our eating patterns benefit us as we age.
"Obesity rates are increasing fastest among children, and they will carry obesity-related health risks throughout their lives," Ludwig says. "An adult who gains a pound or 2 a year through middle age will be at increased risk. But that is much less dire than the overweight 4- to 6-year-old who gets diabetes at age 14 or 16 and has a heart attack before age 30."Sadly, some of those that were heavy as children are already adults. Older persons, for the most part, do as they did in their childhood. Even if individuals lose the "baby fat," the feelings and ill effects associated with obesity often linger. Lifestyle, habits, health problems are more difficult and daunting than poundage. There are infinite influences on our body and mind. The marketplace matters.Ludwig -- director of the obesity program at Children's Hospital, Boston -- says the childhood obesity epidemic has three phases. The first came in the last decade, when child obesity became common but the public health effects weren't yet felt. Phase two is right now, as we begin to see serious complications such as type 2 diabetes in very young people. Phase three, Ludwig predicts, is coming soon.
"But we still have a little time before these children become young adults with diabetes and start to have heart attacks, stroke, kidney failure, and increased mortality," he says. "It is a massive tsunami headed for the United States. One can know it is coming. But if we wait until we see the ocean level rising over the shore, it will be too late to take action."
The advent of processed foods altered the physique and psyche. Motor vehicles and machines have an effect, A commuter and computer culture counts. The number of calories we consume and do not burn off as earlier generations did effects our overall well-being. There is ample cause for concern.
Today, we stunt our growth upward and expand our girth outward. Perhaps, we need to advance our awareness for what motivates us. Why do we torment the portly? How easy it is to ridicule and judge. Frequently, the tall, the thin, those that appear healthy blame the obviously wounded one. These saintly souls think obesity is a choice. People are not born fat. Perchance that is, in part, true.Poor nutrition and lack of physical activity are responsible for an estimated 300,000 to 600,000 preventable deaths each year.
An estimated one third of all cancers are attributable to poor nutrition, physical inactivity, and being overweight.
It was once thought diabetes or the tendency for this illness was inherited; however, there is ample to reason to believe that is not always true. Might we imagine that nothing occurs in isolation. If we are to cure what ails us, we must be open to options that are not easily observed.
Might we assess why those that gain so easily gravitate to food. I believe for too long we have presumed the answers are simple. It is often claimed obesity runs in families. The genes prime the pump. Numerous researchers prefer placing the blame on parents. Habits are learned. Mothers and fathers are our primary teachers. Schools receive their fair share of culpability. Surely if educational institutions supplied more nutritious fodder children would not eat as they do. Restaurants, food manufacturers all can claim an ounce of responsibility.
We too bear a burden; each of us decides what we will eat and enjoy. We believe we can easily forego exercise. We all are as the little girl. Bending down to pick up the nickel is not a simple task. Our mind may wish to do what we think wise; yet our body says we cannot. The two work in unison.
I believe, too often we do not honor the mind body connection. Possibly, we all are vulnerable to whatever affliction inhabits our bodies. In recent years, we are realizing that many ailments, once thought to be the result of natural causes are related to diet. What we eat has power; it effects the brain and bulk. Might we consider victuals feed us in ways we rarely explore.
To learn how to work with your appetite center, you must first understand it. It's time for you and your brain to become better acquainted.Perchance, we might empathize with the chunky little lass. She is you and me. Might we consider that our culture provides us with foodfare that harms us. Society teaches us habits that hurt us. Some lessons are learned subliminally. Others are fashioned at the dinner table. Possibly, we all would be wise to teach and treat the children well. If we do not attend to the biological, physiological, intellectual, and emotional needs of our progeny, they will suffer as will we all. If one man, woman, or child is diminished, we all are. Little girl, may I help you reach for more than a nickel.As soon as you bite into any food, sensory stimulation of nerve endings on the tongue leads to the release of a number of chemicals, including opioids, into the bloodstream. You release more opioids -- the body's natural versions of drugs like morphine -- when you consume foods high in sugar and fat, creating a powerful, neurochemical drive to overeat those foods.
These opioids and other chemicals enter the bloodstream and carry their messages to the hypothalamus, which sends out yet another set of chemicals to regulate appetite. The more flavors your taste buds register, the more stimulated the hypothalamus becomes, releasing the hunger-promoting hormone neuropeptide Y. When you taste a lot of flavors at once, the brain releases a lot of neuropeptide Y.
Meanwhile, in response to the smell and taste of food, your stomach produces the hormone ghrelin, which also stimulates appetite. It continues to produce this hormone until you eat enough food to literally fill your stomach and stretch the stomach wall. Farther down the line, in your intestines, levels of several hormones rise to varying degrees -- depending on the nature of your meal -- either inducing more hunger or turning off hunger..
The thick of it . . .
Thursday, July 12, 2007; 3:54 AM
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 13, 2007 at 01:44 PM in "Take me as I am!", Adult Influence on Children, Calories. Cells., Childhood Obesity, Diabetes, Eating Disorders or Habits, Food Folly, Habits, Health, Nature or Nurture, Nutrition, Quality of Life, Teach The Children, Weight, When Will I Be Right? | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
I Am An Anorexic, Bulimic, A Person! ©
Once you label me, you negate me.
~ Soren Kierkegaard [Danish Philosopher]
An article in the New York Times grabbed my attention instantly. It appeared in the health section. The title, One Spoonful at a Time. This writing was heartfelt. Author, Harriet Brown tells a gripping tale. It took me to memories of my own struggle with anorexia and bulimia and how these affected my family. In this exposé, the dilemma of how to treat the condition was thoroughly discussed. I wish to share my response to this situation and story. My personal experience of this is vast. I hope my thoughts, realizations, and rejoinders on this topic will be helpful to those grappling with similar issues. I trust that the effects of anorexia and bulimia are trials and tribulations for all those afflicted by these.
The subject of weight alone is a sensitive probing. An individual need not starve, binge, or purge in wrestling with weight. On the same day another New York Times essay loomed large entitled "Big People on Campus." This commentary contemplated the plight of being "fat." I was once that too. Many may muse in this moment, all anorexics believe they are chubby, and while that may or may not be true, I actually was at times in my life. My weight rarely was stable; nor was I when reflecting upon it. However, my weight was never the issue; it was a distraction, a symptom of what was within.
I read the articles mentioned above, then, when I turned on the television and saw a report on the increasing male bulimic and anorexic population, and as I listened to a discussion focusing on the media, and the message of being thin, I wondered. Why are Americans obsessed with their weight and avoiding the truer concern?
Americans spend billions of dollars on books, diet programs, professional weight trainers, and behavioral experts that might deliver them from "evil" otherwise known as "eating disorders." Some recount, "I eat too much," others muse, "I eat too little." There are those that think they do not make healthy choices, those that believe themselves fine; their family worries about their physical condition.
I lived in a plump body; a buff body, a slender body, and one that was sickly thin. As a child I over ate. It was what most members of my family did. As an adolescent, I dieted. That is what teenagers do. However, weight was not the trepidation it appeared to be. My problems with body image were not pressing; nor did my peers influence me.
It was my life at home, in my heart. Much was disquieting. My parents were together; yet, they were not. My natural father was rarely home and when he was, it was not fun for me. My sisters were close in age and seemed to have a connection with me; however, it felt incomplete. For me, school began at an early age. I love learning and welcomed the opportunity; still, there were demands, those I placed on myself. Life progressed and it seemed perfect.
I had goals, visions, and dreams. In my late teens, I wanted to lose my virginity. That seemed the natural progression, at least in my neighborhood, or among my peers. Oddly enough, a young man began paying attention to me. This may not seem unusual; yet, it was. Those that are closely familiar with my ways and thoughts recognize that this was quite striking.
I was never "boy crazy." I had no thoughts of marriage or even being in a relationship. I was and still am extremely comfortable with my own company. Perhaps, I am a little too independent. While I have always had very close friends, I was not one to seek physical intimacy. I did not need company or companionship. It could be imposing. I needed time to be me. Nevertheless, this gentleman delighted in my presence.
Yes, we did "connect;" we did the deed; still he wanted more! Imagine that! Eric wanted a real relationship, with all the bells and whistles. I later learned Eric wanted to marry me. Years, before realizing that his intention was to wed, I freaked. When confronted with the fact that he wanted us to spend all our time together I panicked.
Eric was and is an extraordinary man. Physically, he is quite the "looker," not my type. I love brains; brawn does little to warm the cockles of my heart. He is kind, tender, and evenly tempered. Eric is infinitely considerate, and amazingly enough, he does love to learn.
Women fell for him, flocked to him, and fought for his attention, all but me. Initially, I just saw him as a vehicle for losing my virginity. I never expected he would fill my mind. I did not plan to take time and be with him beyond the bed. I never imagined he would enter my heart. Yet, he did and that scared me. I put on weight, lots, and lots of pounds. I did this as I do most things. I am exceptionally thorough. If I am to do a job, I will do it incredibly well. I grew fat! Perchance, obese might be a better word. Eric said nothing. He still wanted to be with me.
Now, what was I to do? All this weight, I wore poundage that poured over the edges of my clothing. I was uncomfortable in my body. I needed, no wanted to loose all this excess mass. I began dieting. I did it well depending on your standard, and not well, if health is a main concern. At first, I only wanted to lose what I had gained. I did this. Then as the pressures of life grew, my apprehension for food and what would follow were I to eat it grew.
Years passed, as did my obsession with weight and food. After a time, apprehension for my impending graduation from college consumed me. The more I thought about this the more I struggled. Careers, professions, being more a part of the "real" world, more responsible for my self, it all seemed a sacrifice. What was I to do or be now?
While attending the University, I never hesitated. I chose my majors and pursued each discipline with zeal. My course of study never changed. However, I never expected to graduate. That was not part of my plan. I had no desire to leave the sanctuary of school. I first enrolled in classes at the age of two. Academia was the world I knew. What next?
Next, or soon, I would become a statistic. Not unlike the "Kitty" in the tale her author mother, Harriet Brown tells. I was anorexic. Ultimately, that lifestyle was too difficult. Starving my self was such a struggle. I chose bulimia instead. I "thought" that would be an easier avenue to pursue. It was not. I had no control over my life, my weight, my worries, my ways. A person such as myself that prefers infinite tranquility, found herself in a world of chaos, chaos I created!
For decades my family deliberated, what would they do? What could they do? Some pondered what had they done. Who was at fault and would the circumstances ever change? There was much guilt, theirs, mine, and ours!
I share this revealing story with reason. Harriet Brown, the parents, the professionals in her tale all do as people customarily do. They look for facts, quick fixes, simple solutions, thirty-second spots, immediate gratification, and spontaneous change. I acknowledge the year or more this family invested in re-parenting and feeding their child; one spoonful at a time was overwhelming. Yet, in the end, wonderment still fills the void of not knowing.
Ms. Brown discusses in depth the niche, a role, the pondering, the play, the place, and the label each person holds. Yet, for me, she misses the nuances. The world within will determine whether Kitty again chooses an addiction with food or the lack of it. I believe and experience that our compulsions cannot be broadcast through numbers. I understand the fascination with facts, the need to look for answers. Nevertheless . . .
Programs may not be profound no matter what they cost or what their supposed success.
we asked Kitty's pediatrician where her other anorexic patients went for treatment. "When they're this sick, they go away," she said, referring to inpatient eating-disorder clinics, where people often stay for two or three months. The nearest was an hour away and cost $1,000 a day, most of which would not be covered by our HMO.There is ample reason for alarm.
Anorexia is one of the deadliest psychiatric diseases; it's estimated that up to 15 percent of anorexics die, from suicide or complications related to starvation. About a third may make some improvement but are still dominated by their obsession with food. Many become depressed or anxious, and some develop substance-abuse problems, like alcoholism. Almost half never marry. It is thought that if anorexia is not treated early on, during adolescence, it tends to take an average of five to seven years for the person to recover - if it happens at all.There are behavioral modification plans and they tout great success.
Among the few studies done on anorexia treatment, I came across one from 1997, a follow-up to an earlier study on adolescents that assessed a method developed in England and was still relatively unknown in the United States: family- based treatment, often called the Maudsley approach. This treatment was created by a team of therapists led by Christopher Dare and Ivan Eisler at the Maudsley Hospital in London, in the mid-1980s, as an alternative to hospitalization. In a hospital setting, nurses sit with anorexic patients at meals, encouraging and calming them; they create a culture in which patients have to eat. The Maudsley approach urges families to essentially take on the nurses' role. Parents become primary caretakers, working with a Maudsley therapist. Their job: Finding ways to insist that their children eat.Yet, I think it is essential to consider what works for one person may be the kiss of death for another. I personally, would have rebelled and reacted more overtly had my parents spent their every waking hour with me, as the Brown's did.The two studies showed that 90 percent of the adolescents recovered or made significant gains; five years later, 90 percent had fully recovered. (Two other studies confirmed these results.) In the world of eating disorders, I was coming to understand, this was a phenomenally high success rate.
I would not have felt loved, quite the contrary. I would have felt as though they did not trust me. I grew up in a family whose primary principle was "No one has the right to tell you what you "should," think, say, do, feel, or be!" Granted coupled with this was the belief, "Do whatever makes you happy, as long as it does not hurt anyone" and of course, my reactions were hurting everyone; nonetheless, they were mine to choose. In my mind and in the family I was raised in, it was accepted, in order to learn we must error. It is part of our evolution. To force another to be, as we believe is best gives them no room to grow and discover for themselves.
Harriet Brown acknowledges that
The idea that parents should be intimately involved in the re-feeding of their children can be quite controversial, a departure from the conventional notion that the dynamic between parent and child causes or contributes to the anorexia. Many therapists advocate a "parentectomy," insisting that parents stay out of the treatment to preserve the child's privacy and autonomy. They say that a child must "choose" to eat in order to truly recover.However, she chose to believe as Maudsley advocates "no one else knows the child as well or has the same investment in the child's well-being. She states, "That felt right to us."
As I read Ms. Brown's re-counting, I was continually struck by the specifics of the feeding process and the lack of luminosity. There was so little of Kitty's feelings expressed. While I trust that her parents spoke to her of her fears, apprehensions, and worries, the details of these discussions were not shared with the reader.
As I reflected on Kitty's approaching entrance into high school, my own memories flooded my mind. I knew while living through anorexia and bulimia, it was never about the weight. It was the wait, the anticipation of the unexpected, unknown, unidentified, and unfamiliar. It was the strange, the strain, the mysterious, and the mystifying musings that strangled my soul!
I do understand the dynamic; the habit becomes the pattern etched into the brain and physical memory. I comprehend the ever-present question, which comes first the chicken or the egg. I recognize the theories
Over the last few years, most eating-disorders researchers have begun to think that there is no single cause of anorexia, that maybe it's more like a recipe, where several ingredients - genetics, personality type, hormones, stressful life events - come together in just the wrong way.What I think is in error is the prospect presented by
Maudsley practitioners say that focusing on the cause is secondary, ultimately, because once the physiological process of starvation kicks in, the disease takes on a life of its own, unfolding with predictable symptoms, intensity and long-term consequences. Anorexics become almost uniformly depressed, withdrawn, enraged, anxious, irritable or suicidal, and their thinking about food and eating is distorted, in part because the brain runs on glucose, and when it has been deprived over a long period of time, when it's starved, it goes haywire. It's important to get the patient's weight up, fast, because the less time spent in starvation, the better the outcome. Adult anorexics who have been chronically ill for years have much poorer prognoses than teenagers.In my own life and search for a cure, I found professionals that believed as these do. I contend, the obsessions of medical professional almost killed me. Killing with the kindness of tough-love, prescribed by parents or physicians has the potential of doing a person in. It certainly would have taken a toll on me.
Thankfully, I located others, those that treat with love, just as my parents did and do. I discovered "experts" that acknowledge they are not. They understood the notion that a person that has never experienced an illness cannot fully understand it. Thus, they turned to me. My parents and physicians reflected on who they knew me to be as a person. They thought me wise.
I was trusted to resolve the situation for myself. I was given only potassium and talk therapy to keep me alive. Those in my life trusted my intelligence, my reflective nature, and my ability to be introspective. The professionals, my parents, and my peers believed in me when I did not. This was confusing, though extremely meaningful to me.
Those close to me knew of the tens of hours I devoted daily to eating, isolation, and purging. They hoped, based on their history and knowledge of me that I was not simply doing binging and purging, but that I was also thinking. I was working through my concerns and circumstances. Indeed, I was. When I finally, she says with great exasperation, found myself, discovered what Harriet Brown might refer to as my demons, I met them with delight. I no longer; nor did my family or friends need to contemplate the possible impending doom. I would not, will not return to those trying days of old anorexic or bulimic beckoning.
Four months after the "change of life" [no, not menopause] giving up my ways, I was thrown into a situation that truly tested my will. I was in a serious accident. Unexpectedly, my life went topsy-turvy. I was badly injured and unable to walk. The prognosis was grim. It would be half a year before I could again return to a standing position. I had perfected the bulimia process through many a situation, and in the past, I would have found a way to again engage. I had the will and there was always a way. However, on this occasion I did not return or resort to my decades old pattern. I did not consider the option.
Ms. Brown, I share this with you for you are questioning, anxious, what might the future bring. I myself think behavior modification programs such as the Maudsley plan may be nice. Their success rate may seem comforting; however, I caution, it is my experience that unless or until the cause is addressed, the emotional effects are evaluated the likelihood that there is true resolution is "slim." Many experts say anorexia and bulimia are chronic conditions. Years after my coming of age, I still do not experience sweaty palms. I do not white knuckle my way through stressful situations. I think the emotional, intellectual work is essential. Kitty may have done the work that you did not speak of. I know not. Nonetheless, I worry. I think "cures" and certainty come with more than one spoonful at a time.
Please weigh your options. Read the references. Reflect who you are, more than your mass.
Dear reader, you may wish to peruse Chapters One through Six, of my life as an anorexic, bulimic, a person. Please do.
Or Similar Discussions . . .
A reader asked that I share this information.
The National Eating Disorders Association's "Every BODY Is Beautiful" Online Fundraising Auction currently running through Wednesday, December 6th! There are some unique holiday shopping (jewelry, handbags, clothing, celebrity-autographed collectibles - featuring customized jeans from The Sopranos' Jamie-Lynn Sigler and singer Sarah Evans - and much more) while at the same time contributing to an amazing, life-saving cause!
You may wish to read of the artist in an LAWeekly essay, The Art of Spooning, By Caroline Ryder, or of the fundraiser at SpoonFed Art on MySpace.com.
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on November 27, 2006 at 03:28 PM in "Take me as I am!", Addiction, Anorexia Nervosa, Approval or Love, Being, Becoming, Bulimia, Calories. Cells., Change the World [Within], Childhood Obesity, Compassion, Conflict, Complex, Desire to Learn, Diet, Dreams Live and Die , Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Empathy and Evolution, Facts or Fictions, Failure, Family, Functioning, Fables, Fear, Food Folly, Habits, Health, Human Nature, Humans, Self-Destructive, Life, A Forward Motion, Light. Darkness., Looking at Life, Looking for Love, Loss, Love of Learning, Metamorphosis of Minds, Nature, Nature or Nurture, Nutrition, Parent Child Relationship, Personal, Psychology , Quality of Life, Reality or Perception, Short-term Solutions, Society, Standards in Society, Teach The Children, Weight, When Will I Be Right?, “Art of Loving” , “When is Enough, Enough?” | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
When Will I Be Right? Is It Ever Okay To Be Me? ©
They watch my weight and say that they are worried. They are awaiting my passage. They believe I want to die and think I am working towards this vision. I am not; I never was.
They express their concern through ample condemnations. First, I was too fat. Now, I am too thin. When I was eating more “normally,” I ate too much, or not enough. I have never been able to do anything correctly, or at least I cannot live up to their standards.
They accuse me of being a “perfectionist.” They assure me there is no need for precision. I am exactly right just as I am. Oh, am I? I can do no wrong, nor can I do right.
They surmise that my current mission is to control my circumstances. They tell me that I have concluded my body, my food intake, and my weight are all that I can control, truly. Therefore, they believe I do as I do in order to feel powerful. For them, food is my freedom. My decision to eat or not allows me to feel independent. Jeeeez, do they not see how dependent I am on my meals? To have them or not, that is the question! At least that is my quandary. Theirs is only to get me to be as they are, do as they do.
That was then. Ironically, now that I have left anorexia and bulimia behind, now that I have worked through all the battles with food, they still want me to be as they are, do as they do. I suspect they think I want them to be me. I do not, nor have I ever had a desire to change them. I merely want to be me.
They believe that I want them to eat as I do. If my diet is that of a vegetarian or a vegan, that is my choice, it has nothing to do with them. I say, let them eat cake. Enjoy! I need not eat the same!
My progression was a challenge. I studied food and feelings intensely. I looked at the dilemma and pondered my path deeply. I progressed. I have no desire to transform others, be others, to think as others. It took me a long time to give myself permission to be me! I still struggle with this distress. The “eating disorder,” does not haunt me. It is only the decision to be as I am that causes me grief. I know that my life is best when I am “me,” doing as I do. However, the vilification from self and others can cause me great doubt and difficulty.
I now eat large quantities of food. I relish my meals. I still eat no meat and have not since I was sixteen. While originally, this choice had little to do with humanitarian concerns, overtime, that changed. Now, the idea of eating animals pains me.
In my quest towards better health, my research helped my to realize that chemicals can confuse the body. These substances cause sensations that are not genuine. The drugs used in food can drive feelings of hunger and satiation. I want no more of that. Thus, I no longer eat processed foods. Sugar, flour, corn syrup, and honey are just not “my things.”
I never craved starches. These literally leave my mouth feeling dry and stale. Pasta and rice for me are filling, though not gratifying. For years now, I have eaten only fruits and vegetables. I love these. The flavors, the zest, the tang as they touch my tongue, wow; it is all so wonderful. I never imagined food could be so good, delicious. I savor each bite. Still, the criticisms continue to come.
I am questioned. Why must I eat such so much? A plate and one half of vegetables are considered gorging from those that digest so little. They eat bread, pasta, and half a plate of meat. A glass of soda or wine may accompany their meal. After a short time, they are full. I totally understand. These foods are filling.
I consume my plate or two of spinach and broccoli and quench my thirst only with water, and I am told I am eating proportions that are uncalled for and unhealthy. Again, as in years past, I am asked of dying. I am told stories of this relative or that, who died with undigested food in their stomach. Yes, I am the fool, for I do not recognize that vegetables are equal in volume to sugars, starches, breads, and animal protein. God or what ever powers that be, please save me! [I guess, save me from myself, according to them.]
Please peruse Chapters One through Six, if you choose.
• The Beginning. Bulimia and Becoming© [Chapter One]
• Bulimia. A Bit Becomes a Binge © [Chapter Two]
• Binges Build A Being, Separate From Self © [Chapter Three]
• Hiding the Food. Hiding The Feelings, Hiding Me © [Chapter Four]
• The Satiated Stomach. The Study Of Food [Chapter Five]
• Bulimia. Wait! It is Not My Weight © [Chapter Six]
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on July 29, 2006 at 01:24 PM in "Take me as I am!", Anorexia Nervosa, Approval or Love, Being, Becoming, Bulimia, Diet, Discussion, Eating Disorders or Habits, Emotional Decisions, Emotional Intelligence, Empathy and Evolution, Food Folly, Life, A Forward Motion, Looking at Life, Teach The Children, When Will I Be Right?, “When is Enough, Enough?” | Permalink | Comments (1) | TrackBack
Calories Do Not Count. Cellular Considerations Do ©
People ponder, “How many calories might I eat or burn? Will exercise bring me bliss? What is my heart rate, my blood pressure, and how are my Triglycerides? What is my HDL, [High Density lipoproteins] or LDL [Low-density lipoproteins]? Is my glucose level good?” BMI [Body Mass Index] is an important concern, or is it. I contend our weight may not be the issue. Calories are not the contribution that counts, cellular considerations do.
Nevertheless, conversations on health turn to diet and weight is always the issue. Talk of menus, medical issues, and diets always turns to surgery, and medication. Good health seems to be the concern. People want to achieve it, maintain it, or ignore it. For many, loosing excess pounds or gaining them is the solution. They think all ailments are caused by excessive or inadequate weight. I think they are not. Many healthy looking people are not as they seem to be.
Still, diet books sell in mass. Bulky building “nutrients” are also flying off shelves. Manuscripts mimic what experts may state; however, often they propose what is thought to be the contrary. In America, and possibly worldwide, those living in “civilized” societies are consumed with their weight. Individuals count calories, carbs, grams of fat, and points. People flock to join groups looking for support; they try Weight Watchers™ and Jenny Craig™. They descend into a world of trends. The Zone, South Beach, and Atkins diets come to mind. Individuals calculate the numbers. They do so in every office, home, restaurant, and car.
The common consensus remains, thin signifies vigor and vitality, as long as it is not too extreme. Fitness is visible, rather than veiled. For some reason we are convinced, if a person that appears to be in good physical shape, s/he is. We do not look deeply; we focus on the obvious, weight and vitals.
Over the last decades, I too was consumed with the superficial, the diagnosis, and not the cellular forces that guided me. I did not always consider the function of food as much as the taste. There are those that eat only to survive; they too rarely weigh the benefits of their choices.
I thought emotions were my main guide. I ate because I felt sad, happy, scared, or expectant. Even the experts, media, and conventions told me that my eating, weight, and milieu were responsible for what was my life. Numerous persons believe convenience, cost, and accessibility are the decisive factors that influence them.
While these rationalizations, in part, may be true, why we eat, as we do, cannot be easily categorized. Nothing is that simple. Therefore, I propose we must take a comprehensive approach to assessing our food choices and the results of these.
We look at the body and see only the size. Rarely, do we assess the color, texture, and quality of a person’s skin when we are evaluating health. Judgments are often that, appraisals with little information. In the minds of most, outer beauty defines what is within. Even as we scan our own bodies, we rarely look at the characteristics of our nails, teeth, or hair. When considering good health we ignore the clarity of our eyes. We attribute what we do see to outside forces. Few of us think about what is happening within.
For the most part, studying these nuances is not possible. Nails are painted, broken, or bitten. Teeth are capped, bleached, false, or stained. Hair is dyed, fried, or otherwise altered. The glow in one’s eyes, some think, simply fades with age. Age, now that is an interesting topic. Why do we age and do we need to. I myself am experiencing juvenescence.
I offer my beliefs and those that substantiate my experience. In my own life, I have realized that weight was never my problem. Counting calories did not help. Actually, ignoring these and the scale were my answers.
I looked at science, at chemistry, physic, physiology, and psychology. I combined all schools of thoughts and determined what would be my truth. Yours may be different and that is fine. I merely wish to bring possibilities to the table. Please feast along with me, differ, disagree, and discuss. My mind is open to the opportunity.
In my life, there were many food addictions, poor eating habits, and health concerns. All were interrelated. I lived on sugar, transfats, grains, and goodies that were made of these. I stayed away from these at times and; yet, I was always drawn back. I struggled to gain control over my food plan, not my weight. However, they were inextricably tied. Until I realized this, I was lost in a world of confusion, consumption, calories, or chaos.
Finally, I recognized calories and consumption were not the problems; the way my body reacted to the quality of these was. For me, the chemistry of foods, the cellular reactions were more important than the calories or other superficial considerations.
I changed. I exchanged complex carbohydrates for simple sugars. I studied the Glycemic Index so that I might determine how foods were being processed in my body. Were they physically and psychologically fulfilling? Were they acting as fuel and fending off ailments.
I increased my protein while balancing this intake with other nutrients. I chose fats and oils that were healthy and essential. I personally decided against dairy and looked to food that are naturally fortified with calcium. This thought may not be a popular one. I offer it only because it works for me.
Grains and starches, for me, need to be consumed with caution. When I start filling my empty stomach with these, I can easily become bloated. I forget to eat the more nutritious victuals. For me, a wholesome diet is beneficial. Manufactured blends that are now labeled “food,” I think are empty. I know the arguments, time, money, convenience, and comfort. For most people these are all truths. I struggle with none of them; nor do I believe these dictums. I have made my life work, and I eat, as I prefer.
Personally, I think simple sugars are costly. Fast food does not come quickly. The affects of these last a lifetime. It is more convenient for me to eat nourishing foods. I can grab a piece of fruit or a vegetable easily. Preparation, at times, can be nil. As for comfort, ahh, I can only sigh. There is such comfort in not needing extraordinary amounts of medication, if any, in visiting physicians at will and not because of a chronic condition. I trust that healthy food is not the answer for all that ails any of us. However, if we eat well, we can eliminate worries of weight.
In all, I make no recommendations. I only ask you to do your own research. Study your body. Look at more than weight, or the indicators of overall health. Reflect upon the data and then digest how the foods you eat feel within you.
• The New Superfoods, By Anne Underwood. Newsweek October 24, 2005
• Bulking up without 'the juice,' By Jacqueline Stenson MSNBC March 24, 2006
• Getting Thin On A Budget CBS News. May 25, 2004
• How the new diet books measure up, By Nanci Hellmich, USA Today January 4, 2006
• Skinny models 'send unhealthy message By Audrey Gillan. The Guardian. May 31, 2000
• Unhealthy obsession, By Gabriella Boston. The Washington Times. April 9, 2006
• The Effects of Physical Activity On Health and Disease Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
• Weight-Loss Surgeries Info Ethicon Endo-Surgery 2006
• Common Dietary Supplements for Weight Loss, By Robert B. Saper M.D., M.P.H., David M. Eisenberg, M.D., and Russell S. Phillips, M.D., Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts
• Who made America fat? By Julie Flaherty. Tufts Nutrition. Tufts University. Fall 2004
The farmers passed the extra calories onto the food companies in the form of inexpensive raw materials. The food industry prospered by supplying large volumes of low-cost, good-tasting processed food that the American public was very willing to buy. Americans chose and bought their food mainly on taste, convenience and price, rather than on health benefits.
As food producers consolidated into larger corporations, they were able to invest millions in the marketing and promotion of processed foods. Advertising was a good way to reach every available customer. But once there are no more new customers to be found in the United States, the only way to increase sales is to get those customers to eat more.
“In spite of largely saturated markets in all types of processed foods and beverages in recent years, the food industry as a whole continues to grow both in sales and product volumes,” Tillotson wrote in the Annual Review of Nutrition. “This economic paradox of continued growth in spite of apparent market saturation results in the caloric source of much of America’s pandemic obesity.”
Not surprisingly, Economic Research Service data suggest that the average daily calorie intake is 2,700 calories. That is an increase of 530 calories, or 24.5 percent, between 1970 and 2000.
At heart, it is good old-fashioned capitalism, Tillotson acknowledges. “Our stock market demands it,” he said. “They honor the company that has growth and promise.”
• Poor Nutrition and a Sedentary Lifestyle: “The 21st Century Plague”
• High Costs Of Poor Eating Patterns In the United States, By Elizabeth Frazão
• Fat In America By, R. Coleman. The North Texan
• CSPI's Guide to Food Additives, Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI)
Traditional thinking says it’s our own fault, but University of North Texas [UNT’s] Priscilla Connors says this may not be entirely true. “We certainly have a level of personal responsibility, but it can also be said that we live in a somewhat toxic environment,” says Connors, a nutritionist and assistant professor of hospitality management.
• Prescription for Aging Beautifully, By Dr. Nicholas Perricone. Harpo Productions
• All that rich food is leading to poor health, By Wang Shanshan. China Daily. May 16, 2006
With more money in their pockets, they are now eating food that is higher in quantity and lower in quality, according to some of the country's best nutritionists. "Urban residents are taking in too much fat and too few minerals," said Chen Chunming, nutritionist and former president of the Chinese Academy of Preventive Medicine in Beijing.
• A Simple Guide To Complex Carbohydrates, By Dale Blumenthal. Hopkins Technology. 2006
• Protein: Moving Closer to Center Stage, Harvard School of Public Health. 2006
• Dietary fats: Know which types to choose, Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research. 2006
• Healthy Grains, Big Carrot Natural Food Market
• Eating Guidelines to Lower Triglycerides, University of Wisconsin Hospitals. 2004
Simple Sugars
• Sugar, It’s Effects On the Body and Mind The Macrobiotic Guide
Refined sugar contains no fiber, no minerals, no proteins, no fats, no enzymes, and only empty calories. What happens when you eat a refined carbohydrate like sugar? Your body must borrow vital nutrients from healthy cells to metabolize the incomplete food. Calcium, sodium, potassium, and magnesium are taken from various parts of the body to make use of the sugar. Many times, so much calcium is used to neutralize the effects of sugar that the bones become osteoporotic due to the withdrawn calcium.
• Nancy Appleton, PhD, Author of “Lick The Sugar Habit” offers 146 Reasons Why Sugar Is Ruining Your Health. I submit a few of these for your review.
1) Sugar can suppress the immune system.
2) Sugar upsets the mineral relationships in the body.
3) Sugar can cause hyperactivity, anxiety, difficulty concentrating, and crankiness in children.
4) Sugar can produce a significant rise in triglycerides.
5) Sugar contributes to the reduction in defense against bacterial infection (infectious diseases).
6) Sugar causes a loss of tissue elasticity and function, the more sugar you eat the more elasticity and function you loose.
7) Sugar reduces high-density lipoproteins.
8) Sugar leads to chromium deficiency.
9) Sugar leads to cancer of the ovaries.
10) Sugar causes copper deficiency.
11) Sugar interferes with absorption of calcium and magnesium.
12) Sugar raises the level of a neurotransmitters: dopamine, serotonin, and nor epinephrine.
13) Sugar malabsorption is frequent in patients with functional bowel disease.
14) Sugar contributes to obesity.
15) High intake of sugar increases the risk of Crohn’s disease, and ulcerative colitis.
Why Sugar is Toxic To the Body Nexus
Dr Martin classified refined sugar as a poison because it has been depleted of its life forces, vitamins, and minerals. "What is left consists of pure, refined carbohydrates. The body cannot utilize this refined starch and carbohydrate unless the depleted proteins, vitamins, and minerals are present. Nature supplies these elements in each plant in quantities sufficient to metabolize the carbohydrate in that particular plant.
Transfats
• Trans Fatty Acids and Coronary Heart Disease ©, By Alberto Ascherio, Meir J. Stampfer, and Walter C. Willett. President and Fellows of Harvard College. 1999
Departments of Nutrition and Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health
Five years ago, evidence was strong that trans fat had deleterious impacts on blood lipids; ensuing studies have confirmed these metabolic findings and strengthened epidemiologic support for an important adverse effect on risk of coronary heart disease.
• “For the sake of health, the food industry must admit oils ain't oils,” The Sydney Morning Herald. May 16, 2006
Trans fat is associated with a long list of serious problems. It increases "bad" LDL cholesterol, just like saturated fats. But it also decreases "good" protective HDL cholesterol (saturated fats increase this one), raises triglyceride levels, and increases blood levels of another harmful fat called Lp(a). Studies show that a 2 per cent increase in kilojoules from trans fats increases the incidence of heart disease by almost 25 per cent.
Trans fat also increases inflammatory reactions within the body - including those associated with diabetes and sudden death from cardiac causes. And many of the adverse effects are greater in those who are overweight, a problem for the majority of Australian adults.
Grains
• Whole Grains By Jane Higdon, Ph.D.
Linus Pauling Institute. Oregon State University. December 16, 2005
A Possible Frame. Personally, I believe the choice is yours. Study your body.
• Food Guide Pyramid. What Should You Really Eat? Harvard School of Public Health Nutrition. 2006
Posted by Betsy L. Angert on May 18, 2006 at 06:50 PM in Calories. Cells., Childhood Obesity, Competitive Production, Diabetes, Diet, Eating Disorders or Habits, Emotional Decisions, Farming Business, Food Folly, Ford, Soda, Soft Drinks, Sugar, TransFatty Acids, Weight | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack
