07 June 2011

'Force Of #Nature: The Unlikely Story Of The #WalMart #Green Revolution'; #Organic #Sustainability

How did the oft-maligned megastore come to embrace the environment? An interview with author Edward Humes.

Tue, Jun 07 2011 at 8:06 AM EST

 

Amyyy_20110513161308_320_240

 


The following Q&A was provided by HarperCollins, publisher of "Force of Nature: The Unlikely Story of Wal-Mart's Green Revolution."

Cover_walmart
Q: Wal-Mart has gotten notoriously bad press over the years: low wages, putting mom-and-pop stores out of business, accelerating the outsourcing of American manufacturing to keep prices low. Is this newfound corporate social responsibility just a public relations ploy? 
Edward Humes: That's the question everyone wonders about: Is this for real? I was deeply skeptical myself at the outset, not least because much of the Wal-Mart criticism over the years has been richly deserved. It's no coincidence that this sustainability push began in 2004, when Wal-Mart's public reputation was at an all-time low and the company was desperate to find some way to improve its image. But then something unexpected happened: The first, small forays into more planet-friendly practices — reduced packaging on a single child's toy, more fuel-efficient trucks, energy-saving measures in stores and warehouses — ended up saving millions of dollars. Suddenly the idea of being green stopped falling under the costly "social responsibility" side of the Wal-Mart ledger, and started falling under the category of lean, mean, beat-the-competition business strategies. So Wal-Mart's commitment to sustainability is indeed for real. Such stalwart environmentalists and former Wal-Mart critics as Yvon Chouinard, founder of the Patagonia company, and Jeff Hollender, founder of green product maker Seventh Generation, were sufficiently convinced of Wal-Mart's sincerity to begin working with them.

In what key areas has Wal-Mart increased sustainability? How? 
The main areas have been packaging, energy, waste reduction, transportation, and pushing suppliers, including China, to become more sustainable. This may sound daunting, but much of it turns out to be commonsense. Why ship infant car seats in great big cardboard boxes that quickly fill up a truck when a reusable drawstring bag can do the job just as well — allowing the seats to be nested to take up less space while shipping? Why let your 8,000 big rigs (the largest trucking fleet in the nation) suck millions of gallons of fuel while parked and idling when you can install gas-sipping auxiliary power units that will save you millions of dollars every year? Wal-Mart, which always prided itself as efficient, found shocking amounts of waste within every part of its business that hurt both planet and profits.

Doesn’t the very notion of green products — organic, nontoxic, sustainable — run counter to Wal-Mart’s lowest prices policy? 
Cheap and dirty don't have to go hand in hand (though they often do). In some cases, Wal-Mart's huge scale has allowed it to "democratize" sustainability — offering normally premium green products at low prices, such as organic free-trade coffee at half the usual price, inexpensive organic cotton baby clothes, or cutting the cost of energy-saving compact fluorescent bulbs. Wal-Mart can use its clout with manufacturers to insist on less toxic, healthier products, which it is (slowly) doing. A bigger challenge is a shift away from focusing on purchase price in favor of emphasizing the lifetime value and cost of ownership of a product — something Wal-Mart has discussed, but not yet figured out.

What is Wal-Mart’s connection to the dairy industry's “cow of the future” project? What will it mean for the future of dairy? 
The primary importance of Wal-Mart's sustainability efforts is the influence they are having on other industries, from banking to apparel to agriculture. Wal-Mart, by its example, has made it impossible for business leaders to maintain the old argument that sustainability and green are just too costly to pursue. One of the first industries to embrace Wal-Mart's ideas has been the American dairy industry, which is in the midst of an experiment dubbed "Cow of the Future." Livestock are a major source of greenhouse gas emissions — cow burps are nearly pure methane, a major driver of climate change. The cow of the future project is experimenting with different feeds, breeds and vaccinations to make dairy cows less gassy and their milk more nutritious. These projects would never have been pursued had Wal-Mart not blazed the trail.

Can a company like Wal-Mart ever be truly green? 
Not the Wal-Mart we know today. So much of our economy, our suburban landscape, our highway system, our culture and our shopping patterns are based on the post-World War II, 20th century belief in limitless growth, limitless cheap oil, limitless expanses of clean air, water and land, and technology's limitless potential to create more food, energy and prosperity. That's the world that spawned business models like Wal-Mart's, where it made economic sense to import toothpaste and computer chips and baby toys from China while transforming America from a country that made things into a country that buys things other people make. Now, rather late in the day, we have found all those resources we carelessly considered limitless are, in fact, frighteningly limited, that the old model no longer makes sense, and that big changes are in store whether we prepare for them or not. The efforts by Wal-Mart and other businesses to become more sustainable are vitally important and noteworthy, but they are the equivalent, as green architect Bill McDonough says, of slowing down a car that's headed in the wrong direction. These efforts buy us time, but ultimately, we'll have to turn the car around and head the other way in order to save the day. So a truly green Wal-Mart would be an entirely reimagined Wal-Mart.

02 April 2011

Soy Formula Linked To Fibroid Tumors

February 04, 2010 by Amy Spangler

The expression, “You are what you eat,” takes on new meaning, given the results of a recent study linking soy formula in babies with uterine fibroids in adults. Uterine fibroids are non-cancerous tumors of the uterus that commonly cause pelvic pain, vaginal bleeding, and fertility problems. Approximately one-fourth of women develop uterine fibroids which are the leading cause of hysterectomy (removal of the uterus).

Baby-taking-bottle-320x212

Method
Twenty thousand white women between 35 and 59 years of age participated in the study. The women were selected from a larger group of 50,000 white women who are part of the Sister Study, a long-term review of women ages 35-74 who have never had breast cancer themselves but whose biological sister was diagnosed with the disease.

Women were asked whether they had ever been diagnosed with uterine fibroids and their age at diagnosis. They were also asked about a variety or early childhood exposures including whether they had been fed soy formula. Women were asked to choose from the following responses: definitely, probably, probably not, or definitely not fed soy formula.

Results
Women who were fed soy formula as babies were 25 percent more likely to develop uterine fibroids compared to those who were breastfed or fed cow milk formula. The link between uterine fibroids and soy formula is thought to be a response to the isoflavones (naturally occurring estrogen-like substances) in soy, and in particular, the high exposure at an early age in women given soy formula during infancy.

Although the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommends that babies be exclusively breastfed for the first six months of life, eight out of ten U.S. babies are given some type of artificial milk by three months of age. Soy formulas account for nearly 25% of the infant formula market. In 2008, the AAP’s Committee on Nutrition released a revised policy statement on the use of soy formula in infant feeding:

• Indications for use are rare and include metabolic disease or vegetarianism.

• Infants with documented cow milk allergy should be fed hydrolyzed formula, because 10-14% of these infants will also be allergic to soy.

• Once infants with severe diarrhea are rehydrated, they should be maintained on human milk or diluted cow milk formula.

• Soy formula has no advantage over cow milk formula as a supplement for the breastfed infant.

• Soy formula should not be fed to preterm infants.

• Use of soy formula does not alleviate colic or fussiness.

• Use of soy formula does not prevent allergic disease in high risk babies.

Bottom line
Concerns over the long-term health effects of soy formula are justified given that infants fed soy formula receive high levels of estrogen-like compounds relative to their body size. Until more data is available, parents are advised to follow the AAP policy and give soy formula only when medically indicated. If a baby is unable to breastfeed and human milk is not available, cow milk formula should be used.

Original Article

Visit Yummy Spoonfuls organic baby food store

22 March 2011

Industry Watchdog “Dumbfounded” By USDA’s Failure To Enforce Organic Law

USDA Continues Bush-era Policy of Allowing Unapproved Synthetic Additives

March 21, 2011
For Immediate Release
Contact: Mark Kastel, 608-625-2042
Charlotte Vallaeys, 978-369-6409

Cornucopia, WI—The Cornucopia Institute, one of the nation’s leading organic industry watchdogs, condemned the position of the United States Department of Agriculture that it will allow products containing unapproved synthetic additives to be labeled “organic” for an indefinite grace period.

The Cornucopia Institute had filed legal complaints against infant formula manufacturers and Dean Foods, manufacturer of Horizon dairy products, for adding unapproved additives: Martek Biosciences Corporation’s omega-3 and omega-6 fatty acids (DHA/ARA), derived chemically from fermented algae and fungus, to foods with the organic label.

The Cornucopia Institute maintains, and the USDA reiterated in a compliance letter issued March 16, that these additives are illegal in organics. But the USDA also stated it would not take enforcement action at this time. The USDA’s compliance letter suggested that it would allow companies to continue adding the additives to organic foods during a phase-out period of unspecified length, despite its clear statement, in the same letter, that the additives were being used in organics due to an “incorrect” interpretation of the federal standards.

“Essentially, the USDA admitted once again in its letter that the DHA additives should never have been allowed in organics, and then goes on to state that they have chosen not to take enforcement action at this time,” said Charlotte Vallaeys, Farm and Food Policy Analyst with The Cornucopia Institute. 

The Wisconsin-based Institute stated that it is meeting with its legal team to determine its next course of action in its efforts to ensure that foods bearing the “USDA Organic” label are produced in accordance with the federal organic standards.

“We hope the current NOP management moves quickly to implement their position, that adding unapproved additives to infant formula constitutes a violation of the organic standards,” said attorney Gary Cox who has long represented The Cornucopia Institute in its oversight of the USDA.

Cornucopia states that it is likely to file a lawsuit against the USDA for its failure to carry out its congressionally-mandated duties in protecting the purity and safety of organic food.

“Federal law clearly states that synthetic additives must be approved by the USDA, through a formal petition process, assuring their safety before they can legally be added to foods with the organic label,” stated Vallaeys. “Martek’s Crypthecodinium cohnii and Schizochytrium oils (sources of DHA) and Mortierella alpina oil (a source of ARA) have never been approved, and the USDA has once again caved to industry lobbyists.”

The Cornucopia Institute is concerned with the USDA’s failure to enforce the organic standards regarding unapproved accessory nutrients, because the synthetic additives have been linked to many serious reported gastrointestinal problems in infants and young children.

Megan Golden of King of Prussia, Pennsylvania, watched her newborn son suffer from serious vomiting and gastrointestinal illness from the day he was born and given formula with DHA and ARA. At age 9 weeks, she switched to formula without these additives, and his symptoms disappeared. “By the next day, no lie, my son was a completely different infant. He was comfortable, was not as agitated, and the throwing up had stopped. His gas pains went away. His stools became normal. And he could finally relax enough to sleep. I am thankful for that,” said Golden.

As of January 2009, more than a hundred similar adverse reaction reports have been filed with the Food and Drug Administration (a more recent open records request by The Cornucopia Institute is pending). Since few parents and healthcare professionals historically report the link between over-the-counter drugs or nutritional additives and adverse reactions to the FDA, scientists believe these reports constitute only the tip of the iceberg.

When USDA enforcement officials first became aware, in 2006, that infant formula manufacturers were adding unapproved additives to formula bearing the “USDA Organic” label, they recognized its illegality and sent an enforcement letter ordering them to take the unapproved additives out of organic infant formula.

Subsequently, discovered through a Freedom of Information Act request by The Cornucopia Institute, and reported in an investigative report by the Washington Post, corporate lobbyists convinced the former director of the USDA’s National Organic Program, Dr. Barbara Robinson, to overrule her staff’s decision, and allow companies to market products with Martek’s unapproved algal-based and fungal-based additives.

The Cornucopia Institute has complained for years that this was an improper and illegal action by the agency. In 2010, the USDA, under the Obama administration, concurred with Cornucopia, stating in a public memorandum that this was an improper decision.

Unlike some essential nutrients (vitamins and minerals), unapproved additives like Martek’s DHA and ARA are not required by the FDA in foods, but are popular with food manufacturers because they are useful in trying to create a competitive marketing advantage.

The Food and Drug Administration just announced that it will conduct a study to determine if marketing claims by infant formula manufacturers, such as claims that DHA and ARA “support brain and eye development,” influence mothers’ feeding decisions and discourage breast-feeding.

Marion Nestle, professor of nutrition at New York University and author of Food Politics, states about DHA and ARA in infant formula: “Competition for market share explains why formula companies want to put distinctive nutrients in their formulas–especially nutrients considered ‘conditional.’ Even if the health benefits are minimal or questionable, they can be used in advertising.”

While they advertise these nutrients with questionable claims of benefits, companies do not share with consumers the process by which these nutrients are manufactured.

“Getting omega-3 fatty acids from natural sources like breast milk, or salmon, or flaxseed, and getting omega-3’s from a synthetic additive in infant formula or milk are two completely different things,” explains Vallaeys. “Companies like Martek don’t like consumers to know that these additives are often chemically extracted, fermented in genetically engineered feedstock, treated with harsh chemicals, deodorized and bleached. There’s a reason why so many consumers are turning to organic foods—to avoid these kinds of novel substances that masquerade as food,” she adds.

Additives like DHA and ARA are not required by the FDA in foods, including infant formula, because scientific data fails to document benefits to human health or development. Dr. Katherine Kennedy of the University College of London’s Institute of Child Health, along with several colleagues, wrote: “We contend this field of research has been driven to an extent by enthusiasm and vested interest.”

The British scientific panel also stated, “Although the vast majority of infant formulas now contain long-chain polyunsaturated fatty acids [manufactured by Martek], the scientific evidence base for their addition is recognized by most investigators and key opinion leaders in the field to be weak.”

“After the USDA determined these materials were being illegally added to certified organic food, it’s unconscionable that they would continue to drag their feet on enforcement even as more reports flow into the FDA on adverse health impacts,” says Kastel.

Consumers exhibit marketplace loyalty in the organic label, because it represents a rigorous third-party certification system of strict federal standards that prohibit synthetic inputs unless they have gone through a rigorous approval process. Organic activists are concerned that if the USDA fails to rigorously enforce the standards, allowing big business to make up their own rules, that consumer confidence in the label will be eroded.

Industry observers speculate that the USDA has dragged its feet on forcing the removal of these unapproved additives in order to allow time for the powerful pharmaceutical companies manufacturing infant formula (Abbott Laboratories and PBM Nutritionals, the private-label manufacturer for Wal-Mart and Hain-Celestial’s Earth’s Best brand) and the nation’s largest milk bottler (Dean Foods) to petition the National Organic Standards Board, the expert citizen’s body created by Congress, to approve the Martek materials, after the fact.

“This is more than just a question of whether a particular additive is risky and inappropriate for inclusion in organics,” Kastel lamented. “The question is whether or not organics will remain a trusted last refuge for families who don’t want to experiment with the long-term health of their children.”

- 30 -

MORE:

On March 14, the National Organic Standards Board released a controversial committee proposal that would allow any synthetic nutrient additive that comes on the market to be added freely to organic foods—without review.

Already, citizens are lining up to voice their disapproval of this industry-friendly committee decision, which will be debated and voted on by the full Board during its next meeting in Seattle, April 26-29.

“It’s unfortunate that the committee, stacked during the Bush Administration with corporate representatives, has voted to open the door to just about any novel synthetic, chemically produced, additive to be added to organic foods—without the congressionally-mandated review,” stated Kastel.

“While the split vote by the 7-person committee was in favor of potentially marketing gimmicky and risky synthetic additives, the organic community as a whole is going to fight like hell against this,” Kastel stated. “There is no way that ethical organic companies, organic farmers, and organic consumers are going to allow a handful of pro-corporate board members to indiscriminately weaken the meaning of the organic label.”

Cornucopia encourages consumers to submit written comments, to voice their opposition to the committee proposal allowing all synthetic “nutrient” additives in organic foods. An action alert with detailed information is available on Cornucopia’s website, http://www.cornucopia.org/2011/03/keep-questionable-synthetic-additives-out-of-organics/

A brief summary of the overwhelming scientific literature questioning the efficacy of Martek’s nutritional oils, and questioning their safety, can be found at: http://www.cornucopia.org/dha-safety-concerns/

Since the USDA is failing its mandate to ensure that all products bearing the “USDA Organic” seal are in fact complying with the federal standards that prohibit unapproved additives, the Cornucopia Institute has developed a list of products containing Martek’s unapproved additives. The list is available on the Cornucopia website (viewable at http://www.cornucopia.org/DHA/MartekDHA_list.pdf), and will be updated on an ongoing basis. The products are also listed below:

For children and adults

Wegman’s Organic Yogurt (Fruit on the Bottom Super Yogurt)
Horizon Organic Milk
Stremicks Heritage Foods Organic Milk
ZenSoy Soy on the Go

Baby Food (select products contain Martek’s DHA)

Happy Bellies
Plum Organics
Tasty Baby Organic Infant Cereal

Infant Formula (all organic infant formula products contain Martek’s DHA, with the exception of Baby’s Only Organic Toddler Formula)

Bright Beginnings Organic
Earth’s Best Organic
Parent’s Choice Organic
Similac Organic
Vermont Organics

 

Original Article

Visit Yummy Spoonfuls Organic Baby Food. 100% Organic, 100% Of The Time

21 March 2011

What’s for dinner? Beets, Cabbage & Carrot Stew With Brown Rice

Saturday was very hectic. The early part of the day was spent at the High Meadows School Indoor Farmers Market. Then there was soccer for our 6 year old, a dash to the farmers market to grocery shop for the week. By the time we made it back home, it was almost dinnertime. I was too tired and needed to make a no fuss meal that is yummy and nutritious for my family. With a variety of fresh, scrumptious vegetables from the farmers market, I decided to make a stew (seriously not sure what to call the dish but it was fantastic).

Beets & Cabbage Stew With Brown Rice
For the stew: 1/2 cabbage, 3 large carrots, 1 beet, 1/2 of an onion, 1/2 white part of leek, cold pressed olive oil, ginger, garlic, olive oil and sea salt to taste.
Peel  and cut carrots. Peel and dice onion and leeks. Peel both garlic and ginger (you can use a hand grater/blender or food processor). Put above ingredients in a pot with 1 cup of water and a dash of sea salt to taste. Peel one beet and slice very thinly (set aside). Gently steam veggies for about 6 minutes or until water is almost completely reduced in the pot. Add cold press olive oil ( to your preference ). Add beets and let them simmer for a few more minutes. Meanwhile, chop half a cabbage in big chunks and add to the pot. Stir well to get the caramelized yummy juices from the other veggies. Since my family loves extra crispy veggies I don’t let them cook for too long.

Beets_carrots__cabbage_stew_close_up

Beets_carrots__cabbage_stew

Basmati brown is a favorite in our home. I use coconut milk to infuse extra taste and flavor.

Beets_carrots__cabbage_stew_with_rice

Voila! Healthy. Happy. Yummy!

Original Post

Visit Yummy Spoonfuls™

20 March 2011

Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food Chunky Yummy (Stage 3) Organic Potato Porridge -- 6 oz

Yummy_spoonfuls_organic_baby_food_chunky_yummy_stage_3_organic_potato_porridge

 

Use promo code STPATTYSDAY through 3/21/2011 for 10% OFF!

Chunky Yummy (Stage 3); 12m+
4 oz
Conveniently shipped directly to you frozen in boxes of 12
$36.00 plus tax and shipping
Purchase online

Meals are chunky and come in varieties that provide optimal nutrition for growing toddlers. Perfect for adults too! Organic red potato, organic peas, organic plum tomato, fresh organic basil, water, fresh organic garlic, organic carrot and organic olive oil. Excellent source of Vitamins C, A B6 and Potassium.

Healthy Babies Are Happy Babies
100% Organic 100% of the Time


Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food
Become a Fan on Facebook!
Follow us on Twitter!

Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food Mushy Yummy (Stage 2) Mashed Organic Sweet Potato & Broccoli -- 4 oz.

Yummy_spoonfuls_organic_baby_food_mushy_yummy_stage_2_mashed_organic_sweet_potato__broccoli

 

Use promo code STPATTYSDAY through 3/21/2011 for 10% OFF!

Mushy Yummy (Stage 2); 9-12m
4 oz
Conveniently shipped directly to you frozen in boxes of 12
$24.00 plus tax and shipping
Purchase online

Here we play with the senses by mixing ingredients to create tantalizing meals for growing babies. The texture is a bit lumpy to encourage chewing. Organic sweet potato and organic broccoli with nothing but water added for steaming. Excellent source of beta carotene, potassium, Vitamins C & E, and folate.

Healthy Babies Are Happy Babies
100% Organic 100% of the Time

Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food
Become a Fan on Facebook!
Follow us on Twitter!

Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food Creamy Yummy (Stage 1) Pureed Organic Peas -- 4 oz

Yummy_spoonfuls_organic_baby_food_creamy_yummy_stage_1_pureed_organic_peas

 

Use promo code STPATTYSDAY through 3/21/2011 for 10% OFF!

Creamy Yummy (Stage 1); 6-9m
4 oz
Conveniently shipped directly to you frozen in boxes of 12
$24.00 plus tax and shipping
Purchase online

This tasty and nutritious single-ingredient item is pureed to a creamy texture for baby from the start of weaning. Creamy yummy organic peas with nothing but a bit of water added. Yes, our peas are vibrantly green and NO, we do not add any color to them. It is just the Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food way, bringing the freshest foods to you and your family. Cooked peas should look like un-cooked peas. Good source of Potassium and Vitamin C.

Healthy Babies Are Happy Babies
100% Organic 100% of the Time


Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food
Become a Fan on Facebook!
Follow us on Twitter!

Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food Creamy Yummy (Stage 1) Pureed Organic Broccoli -- 4 oz

Yummy_spoonfuls_organic_baby_food_creamy_yummy_stage_1_pureed_organic_broccoli

 

Use promo code STPATTYSDAY through 3/21/2011 for 10% OFF!

Creamy Yummy (Stage 1); 6-9m
4 oz
Conveniently shipped directly to you frozen in boxes of 12
$24.00 plus tax and shipping
Purchase online

This tasty and nutritious single-ingredient item is pureed to a creamy texture for baby from the start of weaning. Creamy yummy organic broccoli with nothing but a bit of water added. Excellent source of folate, vitamins C & A.

Healthy Babies Are Happy Babies
100% Organic 100% of the Time

Yummy Spoonfuls™ Organic Baby Food
Become a Fan on Facebook!
Follow us on Twitter!