My son is working through a therapy called, "Neurological Reorganization." When I was in elementary school, the whole school did some of the same stuff, and the program had been around since the 1940s. To get him to be more motivated, I did everything with him, including lying on my belly on the kitchen floor, and crawling. We began the program when I'd been having a lot of low back pain, and even rolling over in bed was agony. Getting down on my front on the kitchen floor looked like a huge sacrifice of my dignity, as well as a lot more pain. For the first week, my knees and elbows grew bruises and (when I crawled on the carpet) blisters. Then I got smarter, and put on knee and elbow pads.
One morning found myself without back pain - and rejoiced that I had found something I could do with my son that helped me out, as well. We laughed at one another, listened to goofy CDs of Bill Cosby, Terry Foy, and others, and played games of hiding small cat toys around the house. I felt my waistline beginning to come back into the shape I remembered fondly from photographs...but had not seen for four or five years.
As we crawled on the wooden floor of the kitchen, I thought about the motions my body made, and how the core muscles were being used to slide, lift and propel my body forward, but without much weight resting on my spine. The twisting of the torso and the alternating arm/leg movements were a decent workout, and I worked up a sweat. If nothing else, it was 40 minutes of exercise I could get at home, while doing things with my child. The mouse-eye perspective of my cabinets and floor gave me some inspiration to collect the pet fur and drips more often.
For about a week, our schedule seemed way too hectic for me to get my crawling in before breakfast, and with my 51-year-old body, I just don't want to lie on my tummy after eating. One weekend vigorous gardening and the next Monday morning, I woke up with a sore back again.
I'm back at crawling again, even with my nearing-teen-age child asking me to not be in the same room, or not do my work-out at the same time he does. (Sigh. He's getting to THAT age.) I miss a day now and then, but getting my old bones down on the floor looks a lot better after knowing what it does for me. This core-body work-out needs no special equipment and you don't need to leave home. For us, NR is now a family exercise.
Sunday, May 20, 2012
Friday, May 18, 2012
Ethanol in gasoline, not such a hot idea?
I'm all in favor of weaning America off foreign petroleum, but the following is not the way to do it. The EPA and the state of Minnesota in separate but related stupidities have decreed we will have 15% Ethanol (E15) in our gasoline (EPA) and 20% Ethanol (E20) in our gasoline (Minnesota, starting August 2013) -- both before the testing results of what that would do to automobiles came in.
Well, the test results are now in, and it's a crap shoot for car owners -- CRC final report for project CM-136-09-1B, Intermediate-Level Ethanol Blends Engine Durability Study (PDF).
Those cars older than 2001 stand a good chance of fuel system damage from the lower 15% version. We here in Minnesota will be seeing this version in our pumps very soon, if I understand the Minnesota statute correctly (I may not, since it's very obtuse: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=239.791). The rest of the country is likely to see E15 as a result of the EPA ruling, as well.
For cars newer than 2001, some may be ok with 15%, while others the manufacturers (e.g. Ford) specifically disclaim warranty if used with 15%, while others specifically label their gasoline caps to say NO gasoline with more than 10% ethanol.
20% ethanol is, of course, even worse than 15% as far as risk of damage to fuel systems and engine metals (CRC testing showed damaged valves, for example).
While the Minnesota statute is obtuse in its many subdivisions and references to federal law, and numerous special interest exceptions (ATVs, airplanes, boats, etc.), one thing is clear. The law was not written using science, engineering, or with the purpose of reducing air pollution or dependence on foreign oil. It was instead written with one purpose, political payback. It benefits Minnesota corn growers and ethanol industry members who helped elect former governor Tim Pawlenty and the legislators who pushed the law. This is made obvious in that decisions regarding expiration of the law are based on determinations made by the commissioner of agriculture.
Ed Welsh, Oneida County Legislator (New York) and Central Region General Manager for AAA New York, has written a good editorial about the ethanol situation and the CRC study results. It's very worth reading. My favorite passage says:
Well, the test results are now in, and it's a crap shoot for car owners -- CRC final report for project CM-136-09-1B, Intermediate-Level Ethanol Blends Engine Durability Study (PDF).
Those cars older than 2001 stand a good chance of fuel system damage from the lower 15% version. We here in Minnesota will be seeing this version in our pumps very soon, if I understand the Minnesota statute correctly (I may not, since it's very obtuse: https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=239.791). The rest of the country is likely to see E15 as a result of the EPA ruling, as well.
For cars newer than 2001, some may be ok with 15%, while others the manufacturers (e.g. Ford) specifically disclaim warranty if used with 15%, while others specifically label their gasoline caps to say NO gasoline with more than 10% ethanol.
20% ethanol is, of course, even worse than 15% as far as risk of damage to fuel systems and engine metals (CRC testing showed damaged valves, for example).
While the Minnesota statute is obtuse in its many subdivisions and references to federal law, and numerous special interest exceptions (ATVs, airplanes, boats, etc.), one thing is clear. The law was not written using science, engineering, or with the purpose of reducing air pollution or dependence on foreign oil. It was instead written with one purpose, political payback. It benefits Minnesota corn growers and ethanol industry members who helped elect former governor Tim Pawlenty and the legislators who pushed the law. This is made obvious in that decisions regarding expiration of the law are based on determinations made by the commissioner of agriculture.
Ed Welsh, Oneida County Legislator (New York) and Central Region General Manager for AAA New York, has written a good editorial about the ethanol situation and the CRC study results. It's very worth reading. My favorite passage says:
If we examine how the federal government mandates certain products we would find that it occurs in one of three ways. In no particular order, the first is to subsidize it , the second is to protect it from competition and third is to require its use. Corn Ethanol as used in our gasoline has the remarkable distinction as perhaps the only product that enjoys all three.Start saving money for car repairs now, folks.
Ask yourself, who would purposely buy fuel that’s more costly, gets worse mileage and increases carbon emissions? Due to government mandate, the answer is: All of us!
Thursday, May 17, 2012
The real reason gasoline is so expensive
This article was eye opening for me. I knew there were a number of reasons our gasoline was nearly $4 a gallon, and always seeming to get more expensive over the years. But I had forgotten that "[c]artels, by definition, exist to maximize the profits of their members." And OPEC members are exactly that, a cartel. For the most part, OPEC countries don't export anything of significance, other than oil. According to the linked article, every time we fill up, we are sending 35 cents per gallon to the "fund" to save the Saudi Arabian king from having unhappy citizens storm the palace -- that is, he is using the "extra" money to pay them off through billions of dollars of spending since the Arab Spring got his attention.
The only way around this is to stop using so much petroleum. OPEC sits on 80% of the world's reserves. As long as we keep using petroleum, we will keep paying oil monarchs to stay on their thrones.
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Big Ag redefines feral, criminalizes Michigan pig owners
Always follow the money, and always follow the greed, it seems. Big, industrial pork producers and their industry have managed to lobby, cajole, bribe, or do whatever it takes to get a new Michigan law passed which essentially redefines the word feral when used with pigs.
The commonly understood meanings are in a wild state and resembling a wild animal especially when referring to a domesticated animal having escaped from captivity or domestication, e.g. a feral cat. But now in Michigan, it apparently will mean any pig not raised on an industrial hog farm.
Small farmers, raising pigs of other breeds than those used on industrial hog farms, will become felons under the new law, passed in 2010 and scheduled to take effect April 1, 2012.
Here's a good article describing the situation in detail: http://www.alternet.org/story/154752/
Thursday, September 1, 2011
Where did that food come from?
While traveling, eating healthy, good-tasting food is harder than at home. Even when you buy something that should just be reasonably safe and normal, it can be fraught with peril.
At one gas stop, we bought some apple juice. The front label said "all juice". But reading the fine print written sideways on the rear, it turned out that it was not all apple juice. Filtered water, malic acid, ascorbic acid and of course, apple juice concentrate were the actual ingredients. This erosion and perversion of names allowed by federal regulators has spread far and wide. Standard names like "apple juice," "chocolate," "milk," and "meat" no longer mean what they once did, nor what the consumer often expects them to be. When a container says "all juice" a reasonable person, perhaps even most people, would tend to imagine juice produced from the fruits in question ("juiced"!) was what was bottled.
Additionally in the above product, the apples from which the apple juice concentrate was made were potentially from Austria, Germany, Spain, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina and America. Now, it's likely that there are growers in all of those countries who grow good quality, even organic, apples. But those are not likely the apples bought be some multi-national company looking for the cheapest apples it can find from a dozen different countries to make its juice.
This was really an industrial beverage, containing some small amounts of real apple juice from locations unknown. I don't object to such products being available. I do object to regulators allowing manufactures to cheapen, distort and abuse the language in order to trick consumers into buying something other than what they imagine. Pink slime, anyone?
At one gas stop, we bought some apple juice. The front label said "all juice". But reading the fine print written sideways on the rear, it turned out that it was not all apple juice. Filtered water, malic acid, ascorbic acid and of course, apple juice concentrate were the actual ingredients. This erosion and perversion of names allowed by federal regulators has spread far and wide. Standard names like "apple juice," "chocolate," "milk," and "meat" no longer mean what they once did, nor what the consumer often expects them to be. When a container says "all juice" a reasonable person, perhaps even most people, would tend to imagine juice produced from the fruits in question ("juiced"!) was what was bottled.
Additionally in the above product, the apples from which the apple juice concentrate was made were potentially from Austria, Germany, Spain, Turkey, Brazil, Argentina and America. Now, it's likely that there are growers in all of those countries who grow good quality, even organic, apples. But those are not likely the apples bought be some multi-national company looking for the cheapest apples it can find from a dozen different countries to make its juice.
This was really an industrial beverage, containing some small amounts of real apple juice from locations unknown. I don't object to such products being available. I do object to regulators allowing manufactures to cheapen, distort and abuse the language in order to trick consumers into buying something other than what they imagine. Pink slime, anyone?
Wednesday, July 27, 2011
Some legal success for organic farmers
"Wafting poison makes fertile ground for suit in Stearns County" reads the Minneapolis - St. Paul newspaper's headline. Despite the bad pun, the article reports some good news for organic farmers in Minnesota, as well as in other states around the country. From the article:
Recently a similar damage award was made in California, where an organic farmer won $1 million in damages. According to Alexadra Klass, a professor of environmental law at the University of Minnesota, this Minnesota ruling puts the state in line with the majority of jurisdictions around the USA in finding that pesticide drift is a trespass.
This is good news for organic farmers and consumers. In the bigger scheme of things, it should mean the price of conventional, pesticide-sprayed produce will go up, and organic producers will have an easier time of maintaining their organic status and economic viability. I say "hooray" for this ruling.
Since the pesticides make Johnson's crop unsalable in the organic market, he is entitled to damages from the company responsible for the pesticide application.Oluf Johnson's 1,500-acre farm in Stearns County is an organic island in a sea of chemically treated corn and soybeans.Improperly applied pesticides repeatedly drift over from neighboring farms, often with dire consequences for Johnson. But now, thanks to a new court ruling, he and other farmers can sue to recover their losses.
Recently a similar damage award was made in California, where an organic farmer won $1 million in damages. According to Alexadra Klass, a professor of environmental law at the University of Minnesota, this Minnesota ruling puts the state in line with the majority of jurisdictions around the USA in finding that pesticide drift is a trespass.
This is good news for organic farmers and consumers. In the bigger scheme of things, it should mean the price of conventional, pesticide-sprayed produce will go up, and organic producers will have an easier time of maintaining their organic status and economic viability. I say "hooray" for this ruling.
Monday, June 27, 2011
Goiter, Water, and Dew

Just the other day, one of my sisters was diagnosed with goiter. This seemed pretty strange, because she has always lived in Minnesota, not in a "developing" country. Her doctor advised her that goiter can run in families, so I started researching.
Goiter is a swollen thyroid gland. Generally, goiter is caused by too little iodine in the diet; the thyroid gland grows larger, trying to do its job, making sufficient thyroid hormones to keep the body running smoothly. But, you may say, "Our salt is iodized!" So it is. Digging further, I learned that in the periodic table of elements, iodine sits on the same column as fluorine, chlorine, and bromine. These are called the Halogen Family, and all have similar chemical characteristics. The human body gets fooled, and fluorine, chlorine and bromine can slip like skeleton keys into the locks made for iodine. Once the lock is filled up, the iodine can't get in, and passes out of the body.
So, how does a thyroid get locked up with weird chemicals we don't need?
The first question the doctor asked my sister was, "Do you drink a lot of Mountain Dew?" She thought the doctor was being silly, but answered truthfully that, yes, she had until a few weeks before. Mountain Dew is one of many citrus beverages with bromine (it stabilizes the color). Bromine is also used in flour ("bromated"), and can be found in many processed foods. Bromine is used in pesticides, flame retardants, gasoline additives, swimming pools and hot tubs.
Fluorine/fluoride is put into our drinking water and toothpaste, to prevent cavities. Almost all processed foods use fluoridated water in manufacturing - juices, soups, jam, pasta sauce, etc...
Chlorine is used in sanitizing food preparation surfaces, in drinking water, and in many cleaning supplies.
We are surrounded by chemicals ready to displace the iodine our bodies need. We eat them, drink them, bath in them, and breathe them, and we are not warned of their effects.
I've switched to drinking spring water, and have begun taking iodine drops.
Because almost all processed foods contain fluoridated water and some form of bromine as an additive, it is important to read labels. Just about any food with "water" on the ingredient list has fluoride. My family drinks raw, unprocessed milk from a tiny farm, so we are not getting milk tainted with fluoride.
My sister has begun to really work on her diet. She and her kids are really becoming thoughtful about what they eat and how their food is prepared. Where once she let her kids drink lots of soda pop, they now drink milk and water - spring water. She's hoping her symptoms will begin to resolve, and in a year at her follow-up appointment, she can show a smaller thyroid gland and a healthier body to her doctor. I hope she makes it.
I hope to make enough changes in my life that I won't need to meet her doctor!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)