Healthy Living

Parade Magazine Does It Again

I don’t know why the Sunday newspaper insert Parade keeps on making a monthly editorial blunder, but they have done it again. I have sort of an interesting history of taking issue with Parade. You can read about a couple of these here and here. In addition, there have been others that I have passed on. Parade is not a shoestring budget periodical. It is the most widely read magazine in America, with a circulation of 32 million and 71 million readers. They need to be thinking more clearly than this.

The trouble this time is caused by a short article on feeling "better about your body", written by Michael O’Shea. It is not the content of the article itself that trips up. In fact, OShea’s article is quite good. He discusses our societal obsession with unrealistic and unobtainable quests to look like the models in the Victoria’s Secret catalog or GQ magazine.

The article has sections titled "Don’t tie your self-worth to the number on the scale", "Ease up on the pressure", and "Accept yourself and you will have more energy". He quotes Judith Beck, the author of "The Beck Diet Solution", as saying "Remind yourself every single day that your outward appearance is irrelevant to who you are inside". The article consistent message is that you should be realistic and accept yourself for who your are. There are tips on making positive changes, but no words that even imply our advertising industry’s horrible message that, unless you look like a cover girl or boy, you are less of a person.

The mistake is the photo chosen to accompany the story. Probably picked by an editor rather than O’Shea, it is of a young woman dressed only in her underwear. She looks to be 18 - 20 years old and does indeed look like she could model for Victoria’s Secret. I have used this description before in reference to Parade Magazine, but it really does seem like their left hand does not know what the right hand is typing.

It is unfortunate that the positive message written by O’Shea, and read by millions of people, is torpedoed by a bone-headed photo choice. Worse still is that the photo is large and placed dead center of the article. Come on Parade!

Parade magazine chooses good topics that get written well by the columnists. They seem to have an editing problem they have needed to address for a while, but have chosen to ignore. You can read the original article and leave a comment of your own for Parade at this link. Interestingly, the article online does not include the photo of the scantily clad girl.

May 15th, 2008 Posted By: Will | Leave a Comment |

Categories: Contemporary Issues
Trackback: http://willtaft.com/contemporary-issues/parade-magazine-does-it-again/trackback/

Should We Use Food Crops For Food, Not Fuel?

The above photo is of an ethanol manufacturing plant in the middle of the U.S. corn belt. The U.S Department of Agriculture announced last Friday, May 9th, that because of weather caused late planting, U.S. corn production could be down more than 7% from 2007’s level. This caused a worrisome prediction of even higher World corn and food prices in the year to come. Approximately 35% of the 2008 corn harvest will be used for ethanol production.

A reader left a link to Oil Heat America in a comment the other day. He correctly said: “If all oil heat users were to switch over to a B5 blend of biodegradable oil, we would help conserve 400 Millions gallons of regular household heating oil.” Doing this, the cost would be similar to costs now and the same heating equipment could be used. If you look at the OilHeatAmerica site you can see the details. They also have a thorough FAQ with answers to a lot of general heating questions. This is an organization lobbying for the oil heat industry. Although I suppose there could be concern in the oil heating industry about losing market share to solar, gas, geothermal, or other technologies, I am making no judgment about Oil Heat America or their parent group, the National Oilheat Research Alliance, only disclosing what I found.

My concern about this idea is exactly the same concern I have had for the past year about ethanol and other biofuels for our cars and trucks. Using food crops like soy and corn for heating oil is no different. As another commentator recently put it, “We need to feed our stomachs before we need to feed our cars” It sounds good in theory, but as we can see from all the corn, and even soy production being diverted to biofuels like ethanol, using food for purposes other than food can backfire. I believe we eat way too much in the way of corn based food in this world, but the fact remains that we do. Remove even a small percentage of that corn from the food chain and prices go up and shortages, real, or perceived, result.

Most of the crops that the OilheatAmerica site lists as being used for heating oil seem to be food crops. I think that the oil heating industry will be fighting a losing battle unless the list can be shortened to include non-food crops and crops that don’t compete for space on the world’s farmlands. Using food crops for non-food purposes may not be the entire reason for rising food prices and shortages. Speculation in the commodities market is also playing a role. But it still is not a good idea to use food to run our cars, heat our homes or power our businesses, until we van do so without impacting the world’s food supply.

Some biofuels are not made from raw food crops. One I can think of now is the biodiesel made from used cooking oil. I know we need alternatives to imported crude oil. I also know that conservation alone will not solve our current energy problems. We need to further develop and make more cost effective, wind, solar, geothermal, and even ocean wave technologies, but we need new ideas and technologies in addition to those. We need to use the world’s farmland for food before we divert it to heating oil and automotive fuel.

This is the Food Not Bombs logo. Maybe we need to design a logo for Food Not Fuel!

Anyone want to try?

Here is the Oil Heat America list. There are a few items that are not foods, but most are.

•Avocado •Brazil Nut •Calendula •Cashew •Castor Bean •Coconut •Coffee •Corn •Cotton •Euphorbia •Hazelnut •Hemp •Jojoba •Linseed •Lupine •Macadamia Nut •Oat •Oil Palm •Olive Tree •Palm •Peanut •Pecan •Pumpkin Seed •Rapeseed •Rice •Rubber Seed •Safflower •Sesame •Soybean •Sunflower •Tung Oil Tree

Loading …

May 14th, 2008 Posted By: Will | 10 Comments |

Categories: Energy Use
Trackback: http://willtaft.com/energy-use/use-food-crops-for-food-not-fuel/trackback/

Wordless Wednesday 5-14-2008

The perfect spot from which to watch the driveway for the return of my favorite person.

May 13th, 2008 Posted By: Will | 26 Comments |

Categories: Photography
Trackback: http://willtaft.com/photography/wordless-wednesday-5-14-2008/trackback/

Drug Ads Being Pulled

I saw this story that claims pressure form law makers and doctors is forcing drug companies to stop advertising their drugs directly to consumers. I too have noticed that all kinds of magazines are now filled with advertisements directed to consumers to make them ask their doctor for the medication. I have seen some articles where doctors complain that patients make appointments just to ask for a prescription and get upset if the doctor does not think it necessary.

A couple of the comments are very interesting also. I wonder how much of the huge increase in profits for the pharmaceutical industry has come as a result of their 5 billion dollar a year advertising budget. Don’t we already get a sufficiently high dose of various medications from our drinking water? OK, bad joke, but still, don’t you think it should be up to doctors to discuss drug options with their patients without being forced to counter drug company advertising profits? Or is this another issue where we as consumers have a right to know as much information as possible in order to make more informed choices?

As always I am for full disclosure, but this issue has me conflicted. I am not sure that ads by drug companies trying to sell their products qualify as truthful disclosure. What do you think?

May 10th, 2008 Posted By: Will | 13 Comments |

Categories: health
Trackback: http://willtaft.com/health/drug-ads-being-pulled/trackback/

Will Green Be Sticky This Time?

It is really something how everything “green” is so in style right now. I often think about the reasons for this current focus and wonder if it will hold up as time goes by. I remember how alternative energy was the big issue many years ago after the “oil crisis” with its mile long gas station lines. Some great thinking and innovation came out of that difficult situation, but as time went by, we seemed to forget. There were some who did their best to keep the issue on the front burner, but most of us slipped in one way or another. I know I stayed interested in the greening of technologies and lifestyles, but I did not always adhere as strictly as I should in my own life.

When energy and oil was reasonably priced, it was easy to forget and buy a bigger car or truck. It was easy to put off adding the extra layer of insulation to the attic. Once the winter heating bill became a huge monthly burden, I did the dirty job and what a difference it has made. The second floor of our house is much warmer in the winter and cooler in the summer. I am sure we are saving a bunch on the heating costs.

This time we are being hit by a double whammy of both high energy costs and a changing world economy. It sometimes seems like the U.S. might never again be the economy the rest of the world looks to as the shining example of abundance and comfort. Even when the U.S. economy does recover, we will still face competition for resources that countries like China, India, and many others will also need.

Because of this, I think the green changes happening now have a better chance of becoming a permanent part of our lives than they did in the 1970’s. What do you think? Please take a look at the poll below and leave your opinion. Please expand on your answers in the comments. I hope we are able to make some of the lifestyle and technology changes that are being forced on us now a more comfortable and permanent part of the landscape.

Small changes can make a big difference in a huge country like the U.S. We do not need to make wholesale, difficult changes to save our way of life. We can be a successful and healthy country and still reduce our dependence on foreign energy sources. Many families and businesses will continue to need a big car or truck to make their lives work. But we can make those big vehicles more fuel efficient. And we can educate people to show how they can use less gas and save money by their choices of second cars. Very few families really need two big SUV’s or trucks.

I believe we can grow enough food for our needs and the needs of many others in the world. The current food shortages around the world are focusing attention on the food supply. With enough of a commitment I hope we can help grow the food the world needs sustainably, safely, and in a way that is healthy for the consumer, the farm workers, and the environment.

So what do you think? Will the coming, necessary changes be good ones? Will they be mostly “green”? And will they stick, or do we risk going back to our old ways if current crises are resolved? Leave a comment, answer the poll. Let us know what you think.