Friday, November 2


The news broke this week that 36 states in the United States could see a water shortage within five years. More intensively, Atlanta is now dealing with a real-world, right-now water shortage, and one Tennessee town has already run out of water, having to restrict its availability to 3 hours a day.

It's clear that there is an overall water emergency, although its effects will be felt by different people in different localities at different times. But once it hits a community, measures such as not washing your car for a while will only stave off the inevitable for a tiny bit. Meanwhile, there's one long-term, nationwide measure that gets zero news coverage, even though it would, by the most meat-industry-friendly estimate, triple the availability of freshwater (more realistic assessments put the ratio between 20 and 100 to 1): STOP EATING ANIMALS.

Oh noes! Not that! Our precious habits! Such a radical solution!

Fine... call me back when you're ready to admit there's an emergency.

Thursday, November 1


In a familiar routine, the news that a major scientific study has (again) confirmed a causal connection between processed meats (bacon, sausage, lunchmeat etc.) and cancer has already been swamped by stories of "defiant" meat-eaters who oh-so-bravely continue to eat the crap in question despite warnings from "scaremongers." (How come those noting lead content in toys aren't "scaremongers"? I suppose they are, to Mattel.)

What's both amusing and sadly predictable in the situation is the media presentation as though this was one new, sole piece of data, when it's actually an overview of reams of science confirming something that's already been pretty well known for at least a decade.

We get it - to meat-lovers, no amount of science is sufficient to alter your eating habit. But really, if "living it up" is your highest goal in life, great, go ahead and kill yourself - as long as you do it without ruining the environment and killing animals, more power to you!


I know, eating plant foods is just as dangerous as animal foods, because don't you remember how there was that big spinach recall last year? And the peanut butter? And, like, a few years back there was a problem with green onions?

Meanwhile, if I hadn't checked the FSIS recall list for info on today's 3.3 Million-pound meat Pizza recall for E.coli (which has already caused more than 20 illnesses across 10 states - hear about this one?) I would otherwise have not heard (as you also didn't) of these additional meat recalls just within the past few weeks: 173,554 pounds of frozen ground beef products for E. coli; 1,900 pounds of ground beef products for E. coli; 8,200 pounds of frozen ground beef products for E. coli; and, in addtion to smaller recalls, 4,374 pounds of various cooked beef and chicken products that may be adulterated due to inadequate verification and documentation of processing activities as required by the establishment's Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) plan. Hmmmm. That one kind of begs the question, adulterated with what? But the wise USDA realizes that we don't really want to know the answer to that.

Heckuva job, news media! Remember, when millions of pounds of meat products are found to be contaminated with animal feces, that's "dog bites man" - Borrrrring. But when the animal feces cross-contaminate plant food products, now that's a story!!! Crack out the Drudge siren!

UPDATE SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 4: Hey hey hey, another weekend recall to add to the crop - Over a Million Pounds of Cargill Hamburger Tainted with E. coli, and yes, that's the second Cargill recall in less than a month. How many people do you suppose will a) hear about this one at all, or b) have any notion that Cargill has had two separate recalls recently? Hmmmm, a real toughie.

Monday, October 29


Saw this at the beginning of the month and noted it but didn't publish the entry. Now that I'm ready to, the link on the newspaper site has already expired. (Bradenton, is it possible people might want to read columns that are more than five weeks old?) So I'll link to a forum where someone helpfully posted it. Some highlights:

    Recent figures from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have shown the number of hunters over 16 years old declined by about 10 percent from 1996-2006.

    Although the drop was most significant in New England, the Rocky Mountains and the Pacific states, the decrease has been felt locally as well.

    The number of Americans who fish also has dropped, down 15 percent from 35.2 million in 1996 to 30 million in 2006, according to The Associated Press and the latest version of a national survey the Florida Fish and Wildlife service conducts every five years.


    Perhaps the sport of hunting also has suffered due to the perception it is animal cruelty.

    Of course, many people who believe this likely aren't reading this column.
Heh. Wanna bet, Mr. Misunderstood Wildlife Conservationist? We're reading it all right, and laughing at your pathetic attempts to justify this narcissistic anachronism.