HANG ON

I'll be back next week. I've got a project this week that takes 110% of my time. But there'll be plenty of things to say after the 15th.

A SECOND MAJOR U.S. ZOO FREES ITS ELEPHANTS

Oddly, no major newspaper seems to see the connection (as of 10:00 tonight, anyway), but you may recall that just two weeks ago, the Detroit Zoo freed its elephants on ethical grounds, becoming the first zoo in the nation to do so. Today the San Francisco Zoo announced it's sending its two remaining elephants to a sanctuary, get this, ignoring the recommendation of the national organization that accredits it. This is interesting, as the SF Zoo was willing to ship the two elephants (two others died recently, causing the outrage and turmoil that got the zoo here) off to another zoo, but not to the ones that wanted them. So the SF Zoo defied the big boys. "I have a lot of respect for the AZA. This could jeopardize our accreditation," said the director, who has never gone against the organization before. "I'm hoping it doesn't. This is extremely serious." It is, and it may be a harbinger of revolution in clear-eyed zoo management vs. the Olde-Tyme ideals of the institution, as represented by the AZA. If we get another one of these this summer, it's definitely a trend - and a boon for elephants and justice.

TRY THIS: EAT SENSIBLY, THOUGHTFULLY

Matthew Wiant, chief marketing officer of Atkins Nutritionals, predicts that, of at least 2,000 low-carb products flooding the marketplace now, "I bet 500 won't be on the shelf by the end of the year." Less than that, if this study gets more publicity:  A new study has found that repeatedly losing, then regaining weight - "yo-yo dieting" - may harm a woman's immune system. (Though no men participated in the study, the piece says, the immune systems of male dieters would likely be affected the same way.) So which eating pattern is this? Who's the Yo-Yo behind that lose-weight-gain-weight-lose-weight plan? Hmmmm. Fortunately, we don't have to guess, as ADA spokeswoman Katherine Tallmadge spells it out. "People should avoid popular low-carb and low-fat diets that can produce initial weight loss but rarely work in the long term, Tallmadge said. 'Study after study shows that more moderate restrictions are more likely to last permanently,' Tallmadge said. 'That's why we registered dietitians are urging people not to do the fad diets, and just try small changes that they're more likely to be able to live with - even if the weight loss is slower.'"

An example of this more gradual, stable and permanent weight loss - and in many ways the antithesis of Mr. Yo-Yo's diet - is Weight Watchers, which is being commended for most of its adherents keeping weight off over the long term. Similarly,  a new set of U.S. government dietary guidelines being written by nutrition experts was unveiled on Thursday. The preliminary version of the rules for healthful eating flatly tells Americans to cut consumption of saturated fat, trans fat and cholesterol. The only fat you want to strive for more of, of course, is Omega-3s, and as usual the mainstream dieticians stumble over the fish problem: "the panel noted there should be a general warning about mercury in fish. The government said in March that shark, swordfish, king mackerel and tilefish contain too much mercury to be eaten" by folks with... uh oh... weakened immune systems, still trying to put a happy face on it by greenlighting, for everybody else, "up to 12 ounces (340 grams) a week of seafood lower in mercury." Oh, except that theoretically includes Salmon, which if you're in the Northeast, you'll need to limit it to half a serving a month, federal officials said Thursday, due to dioxin "and other pollutants." Gee, I hope all the fishermen and people who eat Northeast hatchery salmon get this message... The Salmon Mousse, indeed.

KILLING ANIMALS CAUSES CANCER?

That's what it looks like, even though I'm always a little leery of news coming out of wacked-out New Zealand. Still, it seems to be on the up and up: "In a comparison with the general population, a group of 6647 meat workers was found to have a higher risk of developing all cancers and almost double the risk of getting lung cancer. The risk was increased when workers were exposed to biological material in animal urine, faeces or blood. The new Massey University research, which supports previous international studies that showed an increased risk of leukaemia, lymphoma and cancers of the lung and larynx among butchers and slaughterhouse workers, has alarmed the meat union," the article goes on to say. (Via Vegan Porn.) So that's promoting cancer. Meanwhile, soy has been shown once again to fight cancer: A study of 1,700 women by the Shanghai Cancer Institute suggested the more soya they ate, the lower their chance of developing womb cancer.

ANIMAL RIGHTS FOR AUSTRIA

At least, what's being called "animal rights" by the media. More like anti-cruelty welfare measures, but I'll take 'em. The point is that they're all based on a shared ethic, which is at least a step toward applying such ethics consistently. The law "forces farmers to uncage chickens and bars pet owners from clipping their dogs' ears or tails. The law, enacted by a unanimous vote in parliament, outlaws the use of lions and other wild animals in circuses and makes it illegal to restrain dogs with chains, choke collars or 'invisible fence' - devices that administer mild electric shocks." Hear, hear.

MAD COW POTPOURRI

There's a bunch of little developments and perspectives in the ongoing Mad-Cow brouhaha that need covered, so I'm gonna dump 'em all here:

Even the parent company of the USDA now says they're "disappointed" in it: The National Cattlemen's Beef Association board of directors is telling its members it is "very disappointed" with the agriculture department's handling of mad cow disease.

According to this Duluth paper, the USDA (which is supposedly about to vastly expand its BSE testing next week) still has been "unable for nine months now to document those [20,000] tests [in 2003] in response to a Freedom of Information Act request."

Fun with transcripts, part I: A Denver Post piece called "When advocates become regulators" profiles Charles Lambert, who spent 15 years at the NCBA before joining the USDA as undersecretary for marketing and regulatory programs. At a hearing less than one year ago, Lambert said mad cow disease wasn't a threat.
"Is there a possibility that it could get through?" Rep. Joe Baca, a California Democrat, asked.
Lambert answered, "No, sir."
"None at all?" Baca asked.
"No," Lambert replied.
"You would bet your life on it - your job on it, right?"
Lambert answered, "Yes, sir."
And of course, Lambert, who now says, "I overstated my case," still has a job - the job he bet against Mad Cow showing up in the USA! "Whether it's intentional or not, USDA gives the impression of being a wholly owned subsidiary of America's cattlemen," sez Carol Tucker Foreman in the article. "Their interests
rather than the public interests predominate in USDA policy."

Fun with transcripts, part II: At yesterday's Tele-News Conference with Ann M. Veneman and J.B.Penn, Veneman again said more cows will be found in the US to have BSE: "[W]e anticipate that we may find a few additional cows. And we are prepared for that. Certainly we've discussed this with our trading partners in terms of a very robust system that we are implementing in terms of surveillance in this country." Penn chimed in with " ... And we of course have made them aware that if we have additional BSE in our livestock herds then we'll very possibly find it." Oh, very possibly, huh? That's reassuring. Then comes this question from a reporter:

Q: There's a claim that I believe is coming from not just RCALF but the Consumer Federation that the USDA's misrepresenting the Harvard Study saying that it does not account for the introduction, the possible introduction of diseased cattle from Canada or other countries and therefore you cannot make any presumptions about the state of the safety of the supply in this country.

And Veneman says - wait for it - "I don't have any information," right. "Well, I don't have the benefit of having heard the RCALF press conference first of all, so I can't respond to specific allegations they may be making. But let me just say a word about the Harvard Study. ...And through that study it didn't say that we didn't have BSE or we wouldn't have BSE." No, the study didn't, Madame Secretary, you did, which is exactly what the questioner explicitly asked you. As you know, on Feb. 26, 2002 you said the study's conclusion was that "early government protection systems have been largely responsible for keeping BSE out of the United States." Liar.

Science corner: Here's an interesting angle. "With funding from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, a group of UW-Madison researchers will investigate what happens if infectious prion proteins - considered the cause of chronic wasting disease and mad cow disease - enter wastewater treatment plants. At most treatment plants, microorganisms decompose biodegradable material in the sewage and, in theory, should also disintegrate infectious proteins, says McMahon. But as she points out, prion proteins generally are very resistant to degradation. "Prion proteins can be viewed as an environmental contaminant," says McMahon, adding that it currently is not known how long these proteins can remain intact and infectious in the environment.

Well, fortunately, we don't drink wastewater. I mean, sure, sometimes by accident... but other than that, and in a few places here and there, I mean, sometimes wastewater can become tap water, and in that form, rather a lot, really...

This is where we might wish the USDA were allowing their workers to actually learn the new food-safety rules without taking a sick day from work. But don't worry, because the USDA may soon be investigating itself again over Mad Cow, this time, over the clear violation of its own policy to allow millions of pounds of Canadian processed beef into the US. Chuck Schumer "has requested the OIG look into who at the USDA made the decision and if the meat industry put pressure on the agency to ignore the Canadian restrictions." CSPI's Caroline Smith DeWaal sums it all up: "They've been ignoring the risks from (mad cow disease) in the human food supply since the 1990s, on the basis that we didn't have (mad cow) in this country, so now these assertions from the agency that there's no possibility that contaminated meat could reach U.S. consumers is really questionable."

FAMILIES CAN'T 'BEAR' TO GIVE UP CRUELTY

An intentionally frightening photo of former sex kitten Brigitte Bardot accompanies this story of her success in getting 24 Bulgarian dancing bears, formerly working for Gypsy families, returned to the wild. The article notes that "The brown bear has been a protected species in Bulgaria since 1991, which means that it is forbidden by law to sell or buy the animals or exhibit them to the public. But in spite of this some 20 families still earn their living using dancing bears, who need to be trained for years with methods that are considered cruel. Tsvetelina Ivanova from Four Legs said the organisation also offered them jobs in the bear reserve but they refused, saying it does not correspond with their lifestyle." Awwwww. Not quite cruel enough for you, huh? Sorry, but I have no sympathy for maintaining any "cultural heritage" that involves animal abuse, any more than I weep for crack dealers who would rather stick with that "lifestyle" than do honest work. Leave the bears alone and get a job, losers.

USDA: "SEATING PREFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN TO THE INDUSTRY"

Now it looks as though our health guardians are afraid of finding any form of dangerous contamination: A recent memo on the new HACCP food safety rules informs inspectors that the USDA will not reimburse them for travel expenses or give them time off to attend an educational session that's been scheduled during weekday working hours. Here's the money quote: "The memo says inspectors are free to attend a separate session on Saturday that is intended for industry personnel, but cautions 'seating preference will be given to the industry.'"

This wry piece by Steve Mitchell slams the USDA's bogus excuses up against the wall with deadpan reporting: The USDA spokesman says the meeting was on a workday because "it would be more convenient for the inspectors rather than taking up their time in the evening," whereas "The industry meeting was scheduled for the weekend because 'a lot of companies find it easier to do these workshops on Saturday than they do during the work week.'" Steve Mitchell blithely notes the evasiveness: "Asked if a weekend meeting also might be more convenient for agency employees, Baun [completely changed the subject]."

Later Mitchell spells out what should be obvious: USDA inspectors need the training more than industry employees "because they oversee the companies to ensure they are conducting the HACCP tests in an appropriate way and often help the plant employees understand what the regulations require of them."

It all wraps up in a classic wry juxtaposition. "The CDC recently reported a 36 percent reduction in E. coli infections as well as drops in illnesses associated with other pathogens, an announcement that was hailed by the USDA and the meat industry as evidence the HACCP program was effective." Then: "The same week of the CDC announcement, however, the meat company Excel recalled 22 tons of beef due to possible E. coli contamination." Well, yeah.

But here's the REAL kicker - this whole we-don't-want-you-to-learn-how-to-find-pathogens-so-we'll-make-it-egregiously-hard approach to scheduling? Casually tossed off in the middle of the story:

USDA spokesman Matt Baun "said a similar approach had been used for training sessions on mad cow disease testing."

ATKINS: TOO FEW VITAMINS, TOO MUCH CHOLESTEROL

"By severely limiting -- or completely cutting -- carbohydrates from their diets, many people may not be getting the full complement of nutrients required for optimal health," said Andy Davis, senior vice president for Wyeth Consumer Healthcare. And he should know, since he's putting out a vitamin expressly designed to make up for the deficiencies of Atkins-style diets. Of course he's got a vested interest in saying that, BUT he's also putting out a product he expects people will want. "Centrum Carb Assist is formulated with high levels of the B vitamins -- niacin, thiamin, riboflavin, vitamins B6 and B12 -- as well as the antioxidants selenium, manganese, and vitamins C, D and E. It also has 100 percent recommended daily requirements of iron, zinc and copper." Jesus. Vitamin C and E, antioxidants, sure; but whodathunkit that you'd need a supplement for friggin' iron, zinc and B12? What exactly is the point of eating meat, again?

Similarly, a government-commissioned panel of dietary experts on Wednesday gave "a cold shoulder to the craze for high-protein diets," stressing the need for a "variety" of foods. Given the above, it's unclear why meat should be included at all in that variety. More to the point, the draft language "is not as straight forward as I think it needs to be," said Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director for activist group Center for Science in the Public Interest. "You have to cut calories, too." Hmmmm... what kind of food is low in calories and high in nutrients?

All this would be kind of academic if it weren't so dangerous to eat so much animal protein. A dieter suing Atkins says "following the Atkins diet for two years raised the man's cholesterol so much that his arteries became clogged and required a medical procedure to open them." Specifically, after just two months on it, "his cholesterol shot from 146, well within the normal range, to 230, considered in the hazardous range. In October 2003, after three episodes of chest pain, doctors found that Mr. Gorran had a 99 percent blockage in a major artery and performed angioplasty and inserted a stent to keep it open. Before starting the diet, he said, tests showed that his arteries were clear. Within two months after going off the Atkins diet, where his favorite foods were cheese every day and cheesecake three times a week, his cholesterol dropped to 146."

The American Heart Association said it would not comment on the suit, but issued a statement saying, "Eating large amounts of high-fat foods for a sustained period raises the risk of coronary heart disease, diabetes, stroke and several types of cancer."

USDA BACKS DOWN ON 'ORGANIC' CHANGES

"The Agriculture Department is rescinding new organic food guidelines that allowed limited use of pesticides and antibiotics, which had prompted criticism from some consumer groups and organic farmers." This is a happy "ending," yes, but it once again demonstrates that the USDA is either run by incompetents who simply do not grasp their basic task, or they continually push things as far as conceivably possible to accomodate their Big Biz cronies, and pull back only when the blowback gets too extreme. I suspect it may be both.

SOME 'R' MORE IMPORTANT THAN OTHERS

Britain announced a new national "centre" to reduce animal tests and "raise standards of welfare." The BBC reports that "funding for reduction, replacement and refinement of animal tests, known as the "three R's", will rise from £330,000 to £660,000 in this financial year." Sounds like a lot of money, I guess. But some critics point out that the "replacement" R is geting short shrift among the three. Jan Creamer, chief executive of National Anti-Vivisection Society, said "we have been lobbying for years for a national centre for replacement. But we can't take part in an organisation that funds animal experiments, because it would be at odds with our remit." She continued: "Refinement and reduction already have plenty of money spent on them - it is replacement that is starved of funds."

DRUG-SNIFFING DOGS

An animal rights organization Wednesday called on Florida Attorney General Charlie Crist to investigate alleged cocaine use at dog tracks across the state, including the Fort Myers-Naples track in Bonita Springs. The Bonita track leads the state with 10 greyhounds testing positive for cocaine during the past three years. Overall, "119 dogs at Florida's 18 greyhound tracks have tested positive for cocaine during that time period."

MAD COW: USDA BUMBLES ON

It's almost impossible to keep track of all the elements of the USDA's screwed-up Mad Cow strategy, though the federal investigations do help. The latest is into "allegations an agency supervisor in Texas violated federal policy and ordered that a suspect cow not be tested for mad cow disease." In his ongoing quest to rake the Mad Cow muck, Steve Mitchell also finds that at that same Texas facility, the USDA did not test any cows for mad cow disease in the past seven months. "The USDA also failed to test a single cow in 2002 at another Texas slaughterhouse that processes high-risk, downer cows." And this is getting to be a common refrain: "A woman at [the other slaughterhouse,] San Angelo Packing, who refused to identify herself, declined to comment, saying the president of the company, whom she also would not identify, was out of town."

Lack of information seems to be the main concept here, applied as liberally as the meatpackers and their lobbyists can get away with. In addition to the above stonewalling, the USDA "has failed to supply the number of cows exhibiting signs of a brain disorder it has tested for mad cow disease to Japanese authorities, who requested the information more than four months ago." Mitchell continues, quoting a Japanes official, that "the USDA has also failed to address other questions about how the agency is ensuring mad cow disease does not infect U.S. herds." Despite our attempts to bamboozle the Japanese into accepting our risky meat, this official saw the problem pretty clearly: "For some reason, this government can't do anything the big meat industry (opposes)," he said.

And as Ann Veneman's resignation is demanded over the department's breaking of its own rules in secretly importing Canadian beef, what's her rebuttal? "I didn't know." Come on, how's she supposed to keep track of every little life- and economy-threatening issue that's the biggest story her agency has faced in decades? Really, now. When "who knows?" is your organization's basic operating principle, you gotta expect a couple oddball developments here and there.

And speaking of developments, that's the trouble. BSE could still be developing in our herds as well as in our population. In our herds because the FDA is still doesn't have Mad Cow feed rules announced, much less in place and enforced, and can't even say when this will happen. So any feed that's "at risk" is still getting fed to cows right now, with potential consequences several years down the road. And according to British scientists, BSE is still developing in the human population, with up to 4,000 people over there unwittingly carrying it. (But none here, of course, since we have a Firewall against Mad Cow.) The concern is that these folks, even if they don't get Mad Cow symptoms, could still pose a risk to others as blood donors "or if they had an operation which involved instruments contacting infected tissue." It's being called a Mad Cow Time Bomb. But when it comes to the USDA, the key word is: Dud.

UPDATE 5/24: Veneman lied about not knowing, says Cattlemen's group, adding "there were numerous indications Veneman would have been aware" of the millions of pounds meat illegally crossing the border. The Seattle Post-Intelligencer puts it bluntly: "Don't trust USDA about mad cow." And the Wilmington Star-News both states outright that Veneman is a liar and accuses her of cronyism and profiteering.
ALSO: Mad Cow-type prions are discovered in sheep muscle, but don't worry, if sheep have Mad Cow, "it probably would be in very small amounts." And we all know it takes a huge amount of that stuff to infect anybody.

DETROIT ZOO FREES ITS ELEPHANTS

This is a biggie: The Detroit Zoo will become the nation's first major animal facility to give away its elephants solely on ethical grounds. Apparently the director, Ron Kagan, is an old softie who has spoken out against sport hunting, sent a zoo expert to testify against a circus using polar bears in Puerto Rico and pissed off other animal-abuse lovers from time to time. He spells out what this means: "If we don't feel like we can (keep elephants), then the question is, who can and how?," he said. "For us, there really is a big question about whether elephants should be in captivity at all." Yes, there is, as there are about other animals. But even there he leaves the window open: "In the future, there may very well be more species that we'll look back and say, 'We just didn't understand.'" What's noteworthy is that while this is one (large) zoo, even the director of the American Zoo and Aquarium Association admits "We're seeing an evolution in elephant management." Kagan sums up this milestone pretty well:
"I wouldn't expect the American public - which has been told for 100 years it's OK to have elephants in captivity - to say 'Oh, OK, we understand' right away. But we have an educational mission. The zoo is the window into our humanity, and how we treat other things in nature."

NYT FOOD COLUMNIST PREACHES VEGETARIANISM

Even though Mark Bittman isn't a vegetarian himself, he does a good job making the case in this column: "Thirty years ago vegetarian food in America meant either brown rice and vegetables stir-fried until lifeless or something cooked in the style of the original Moosewood Cookbook - heavily laden with cheese and cream. Now vegetarian food draws from the traditions of the entire world, traditions that, in the form of ingredients, spices and cooking tools, are now available to everyone, at least those with access to good supermarkets or the Internet." Note that "cheese and cream" part. There are seven recipes accompanying the piece, only one of which is not vegan: Rice and Cheese.

LOW-CARB MIRACLE FIZZLES

Another week, another good-news-bad-news story on Atkins. Some papers, again, cast it (ludicrously) as a "vindication" story, while others see it as another "where's the big results?" story. Two studies just came out: Basically they both found that low-carbers who had lost weight dramatically after six months had gained a good bit of it back by the end of a year, while "moderate-fat" dieters (nothing near vegan, of course) continued to slowly lose weight. In the MSN version, Dr. Glenn Gasser of the University of Virginia predicts this longer-term research is the beginning of the end of the Atkins fad. "My guess is that, in a few years, people will look at themselves in the mirror and they won't see much difference in this low-carb diet they've been on for a number of years, and will go on to something else." Similarly, "I don't care that low-carb diets produce short-term weight loss; all diets do," said a Yale nutrition specialist, Dr. David L. Katz. "When you go out a year, the weight loss benefits disappear." Even the lead author of the study said "if it's not effective at a year, it negates what happens at six months." And Walter Willet, who's often dragged in to "endorse" Atkins in these stories, notes that "Patients should focus on finding ways to eat that they can maintain indefinitely rather than seeking diets that promote rapid weight loss."

Of course the Atkins group reported more side effects such as constipation and headaches, but PCRM brings us the most alarming news hidden in the studies - that two participants on the low-carb diet died in the course of the study. Whether there's a causal connection isn't proven, but it may be irrelevant: Now not just orange growers and bread makers but "industry insiders" say the low-carb boom has peaked. "Sales of low-carb products have fallen sharply at independent and health food stores, and some longtime industry insiders say a shakeout has begun. Even as they rush to cash in on the craze, some major food manufacturers say they see the phenomenon cooling down and becoming one part of the broad market for weight-loss products." Just another part of the broad market? Atkins must be sloshing around in his grave.

WHY DOES THE MEAT INDUSTRY HATE AMERICA?

Public comment on the USDA's ban on allowing "downer" cattle into the food supply is running 10 to 1 in favor of the restriction, while cattle groups and some U.S. states are pushing to weaken the ban on the consumption of downers. Any doubts now on the disconnect between the meat industry and the public interest?

SUPER FOODS ARE VEGAN FOODS

Here are the "Super Foods" everybody should eat more of, according to nutrition experts in the Chicago Tribune: Avocados, blueberries, Brazil nuts, broccoli, butternut squash, edamame, flaxseed, kale, kiwifruit, lentils, onions, quinoa, sardines, tomatoes and yogurt. And here are the Runners-Up: Apples, Asparagus, Bananas, Beans, Beets (and beet greens), Cantaloupe, Carrots, Cranberries, Garlic, Grapes, Nuts, Mushrooms (shiitake, enoki), Oats and oatmeal, Olives and olive oil, Oranges and orange juice, Pears, Peppers (bell and chili), Pomegranates, Spinach, Strawberries, Sweet potatoes, Tea (white, green, oolong and black).

So out of 25 foods everyone needs more of, there are exactly 2 non-vegan items, one of which has an exact soy equivalent, the other of which - well, how can I put this gently - is just this side of absurd.

FLEXITARIAN NATION?

I don't think I even posted that original "Flexitarian" article from a few months back that had people all atwitter, but I did want to point out this estimate: "Flexitarians [people who usually or often, but not always, eat vegetarian] could be as high as 40 percent of the U.S. population, according to Charles Stahler, co-director of the Vegetarian Resource Group." Now, of course Stahler has good reason to want to see the proportion that high, but it wouldn't surprise me. The grocery store trends are showing it - grocers aren't trying to stock meatless and dairyless items for vegans, but for the growing number of people who want them some of the time. And however you slice it, that's a good thing.

MAD COW INSIDER TRADING: THIS TIME IT'S CRIMINAL

A civil probe was already underway by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, but now federal prosecutors are looking into possible criminal violations by commodities traders who may have received advance knowledge about the first U.S. case of mad cow disease and used it to reap profits in the cattle futures market. The disclosure of an investigation by criminal authorities was made today in testimony before the Senate Agriculture Committee.

Dunno how any insider trading could be possible here - after all, the USDA would've been the first to know if the test was positive, and they wouldn't have wasted one minute to let people know about this - wouldn't have allowed cronies to profit while they scheduled the release of potentially life-saving information for Christmas Eve, would they? Nah.