Food is Dangerous to Your Health

By David Shaw

Don't Eat the Food

Our food supply is an essential part of protecting critical national infrastructure. However protecting the "supply" is only one part of a chain of dependencies. The health and safety of citizens is inextricably linked to nutrition and safety in food.

At the end of that chain we have consumption of food by citizens who are the comon element in all critical infrastructures. The safety, security and well-being of citizens is the foundation of national security. Yet in North Anerica we have seen an epidemic of obesity and diabetes, and other health issues that are poorly understood.

Nutrition plays a big role in this, especially the extraordinary over-use of high-fructose corn sugar (contains omega-12) in all processed foods. Producers started adding sugar when governments mistakenly said all fat was bad and we had to eat lean. It's almost guaranteed that a low-fat label on food equals high sugar content.

The evidence is over-whelming that a Meditteranean Diet is best. But trying to maintain a balanced nutritional diet that is also safe is more than a challenge. A lot of food that is 'good' for us contains contaminants from a wide range of agricultural and industrial sources.

For example, eating fish is good because of the essential omega 3/6 oils it contains; however, most tuna is contaminated with mercury. Beef and poultry from factory farms are contaminated with steroids, growth hormones and antibiotics. And there is no need to mention mad cow disease, the result of feeding animals with animal protein, a practice that continues today.

The latest threat is the splicing of pesticide and herbicide DNA directly into plant DNA. Well, we know that will just end in tears.

Unfortunately we can't look to government to protect safety in food. Through regulatory capture such as the Monsanto Protection Act and suppression of scientific research government dances with big business.

Consequently grass-roots movements are starting up. Organizations are evolving, several cities have recently had citizen demonstrations about safe foods, and some brands are voluntarily adopting some safe-food practices.

 Since it's too complicated to list all the adverse ingredients in food, I've developed this food-safety creed that can be adopted by any food growers, producers, processors, food retailers and restauranteurs who are concerned about the future health of our children and our planet.

Food Safety Creed

• We commit to honest and ethical business practices.
• We commit to complete, open and transparent labelling of the contents and nutritional value of our food products.
• Our food products are free from:
  • genetic modification
  • animal growth or dietary supplements using steroids, hormones or antibiotics
  • chemical additives such as BHA, BHT, HFC, MSG, partially hydrogenated oil, artifical colours and sweetners, nitrates and sulphites.
  • dioxins
  • toxic and heavy metals
• Our animal products are produced from animals that do not consume animal protein in their feed.

Be well. :)

Keeping Schools Safe

By David Shaw

We all want our children to be safe, whether at Newtown primary, École Polytechnique or Dawson College, and there are several easy things mentioned below, including a ban on semi-automatic rifles and shotguns, that we can do as a society to safeguard them. Yet we should know that no matter what we do, there is never an absolute guarantee of safety in anything in life. Shit happens.

The one thing we do not want to do is to get swept up by the psychosis of our neighbour: the United States. There are reasonable individuals in the USA, yet the country as a whole is psychopathic and, it seems, gun incidents are escalating. Where else in the world would people seriously propose in national media that children died because:

• Schools are a gun-free zone
• Children were not taught how to charge a killer en masse
• Teachers were not armed like these 600
• Children did not wear accesories like bullet-proof back-packs
• God was denied access to schools
• Guns are restricted too much
• Crazy people are not identified and locked up
• Armed guards are not in every school
• Children's hearing is damaged because silencers are restricted
• Good guys couldn't fight back because they didn't all have guns

We also do not want to get swept up by the security and surveillance set that proposes to turn schools into the modern equivalence of a motte-and-bailey castle; or by distractions like bans on assault-style weapons (stay with me on this one). A security approach would turn every school into a fortress:

• Perimeter fence with a controlled gateway
• Parking outside the fence
• Main entrance is a controlled airlock
• Silent panic alarm system to notify police
• Raised windows fitted with plate glass
• All auxiliary doors automatically locked, fitted with emergency bars on the inside, fitted with alarms and cameras activated when doors open
• Classroom doors automatically locking, with no large windows, so every room becomes a secure panic room
• Cameras in all corridors

Some of these measures are sensible, like a panic alarm, secure design of classrooms and control over side doors. What we want to do is slow down any intruder, alert police immediately without panicked people shouting "what's the number for 911" and keep people in a secure location until the police arrive. (The formula for protection against intruders is Deter, Discover, Delay, Deny.) But a look at any large high-school campus like this one shows how impossible some of these ideas are. Large schools are like villages. And anyway, armed camps send the wrong cultural message to children and to our larger society.

Typical large high-school -- note the sports fields

Bans on assault-type weapons are a deliberate political distraction aimed to protect the bulk of the self-loading gun market. Assault-type weapons are semi-automatic (self-loading) rifles that just happen to have military styling. In the United States new semi-automatic rifles with a military-style appearance were prohibited from retail sale by the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, which was enacted in 1994 and expired in 2004. But what's the point of banning the "appearance" but allowing the function? There are dozens of semi-automatic types and models, including some that look just like traditional hunting rifles. Semi-automatic simply means that every time you pull the trigger, another round is loaded. Some gun types have been semi-automatic since 1885.

Instead of worrying about "appearance" and fortress schools we should focus on creating a safe society for everyone with measures such as:

• Ban on all semi-automatic rifles, semi-automatic shotguns, and silencers
• Licencing of all gun owners, just like car drivers, and a national licence-registration database
• Training as a prerequisite for a gun licence
• Periodic licence renewal just like a driver's licence
• Police approval for gun purchases
• Restrictions on the amount and type of ammunition that can be purchased
• Mandatory public-liability insurance for gun owners

If Conservative radicals oppose a ban on semi-automatic rifles (as they will), then we should have:

• Magazines limited to 10 rounds
• Ban on stackable nagazines

I personally think 10 rounds is too many -- a bolt-action rifle is adequate for hunting --  but it's a number political radicals might force us to accept.