Irradiation proclaimed safe by FDA terrorists

Most of the food in the American diet is approved by the FDA for irradiation and chemo treatments. Our fresh produce and meat are subjected to these invasive procedures 1) to kill microorganisms and other pathogens 2) to arrest or delay the ripening process 3) to act as a pesticide 4) to prevent spoilage or sprouting. Although they don't say it explicitly, irradiation also masks serious sanitation problems in both farming and meat processing and provides greater immunity to the food industry executives who can claim that their products were "clean" when they left the facility.

The FDA has assured us over and over that the process of irradiation is completely safe. So safe, in fact, that consumers don't even need to know which foods are exposed to ionizing radiation.

I think the FDA should define its terms. What do they mean by safe? Irradiation works by breaking down molecules and creating free radicals. Sure, the free radicals kill some bacteria, but they also damage vitamins and fragile enzymes. The free radicals can combine with existing chemicals in the food, like pesticides, to form new chemicals, called unique radiolytic products (URPs). Some of these URPs are known toxins like benzene and formaldehyde, and others are unique to the irradiated foods. Since they are unique, I guess we can assume they are safe.

After the anthrax scare a few years back, the US Postal Service began irradiating our mail. Because there is no danger in irradiating anything, least of all the mail, they were surprised when postal employees began to experience headaches, nausea, eye irritation, lightheadedness, nose irritation, and chest or throat tightness when processing irradiated mail. The USPS hired an industrial hygiene consultant who found elevated levels of carbon monoxide, ozone, chlorine, and other volatile organic chemicals in the work area. The USPS called OSHA.

OSHA pseudo-scientists came in and performed a bunch of tests. They found the same URPs that the consultant had identified, and quite a few more. But instead of addressing the dangers of mail irradiation, OSHA made the following recommendations:

1) "Air out" the mail before processing.
2) Monitor facilities for high concentrations of toxic chemicals/gases and, if found, try a change in handling methods or provide additional ventilation.
3) Keep a log to track health problems related to handling or being exposed to irradiated mail. Have the log reviewed periodically by an occupational medicine physician to look for trends or areas requiring further evaluation. (like maybe increased cancer rates or other pesky statistics)
4) Recommend that employees experiencing eye irritation use over-the-counter eye drops as often as necessary to relieve symptoms. (don't worry about the underlying causes)

Can you believe it? OSHA sold the postal employees down the river so they could keep the irradiation-is-perfectly-safe lie going. I'm sure they weren't given much leeway by the unscrupulous ignorant bastards at the FDA.

Scientists have known for years that irradiation causes food to become vitamin deficient which leaves well-fed bodies starved for nutrition. Irradiation deactivates food enzymes which affects the digestion process, which affects absorption of nutrients, which affects every cell in the human body. Irradiation damages the very DNA of not only the food, but also the bacteria it's supposed to kill. This, in turn, leads to irradiation-resistant super germs that are far more dangerous to us than the original pathogens. Irradiated food contains toxic radiolytic products, aka poisons, which are ingested by you and me and everyone we know. Irradiation creates free radicals which are known to cause cell damage. The cell damage can manifest in innumerable ways, from premature aging to cancer to blindness.

The process of irradiation is safe? It's certainly not free of harm. I guess the FDA means that irradiation is safe from public scrutiny, safe from government accountability, safe from ethical study, safe from its own sad truth.

I HATE THE FDA! HATE 'EM. HATE 'EM. HATE 'EM.

Sarah Plain

Someone forgot to tell Cindy McCain that the fashion word on Sarah's big night was "populist." Cin's half-peeled banana outfit was examined by the couture analysts at Vanity Fair and the numbers look like this:

Oscar de la Renta dress: $3,000

Chanel J12 White Ceramic Watch: $4,500

Three-carat diamond earrings: $280,000

Four-strand pearl necklace: $11,000–$25,000

Shoes, designer unknown, I'm thinking Manolos: $600

Total: about $300,000!

How long until Sarah Plain stops playing moose hunter/hockey mom/sexy librarian and starts sportin' some real duds? That would make the election season almost bearable.

info via Liza at culturekitchen

If it's not in his jeans, it's in his genes!

Men who cheat on women should not be held responsible. Why? According to a new Swedish study, there is a direct relationship between a man's DNA and his aptitude for monogamy. Infidelity is a genetic likelihood for certain men!

Two of every five men possess a gene variant that is linked to both marital discord and lack of emotional intimacy. Men with two copies of the variant have twice the risk of conjugal dysfunction than their male counterparts. The gene also seems predictive of whether men marry or just live with women without taking the leap.

I guess, in addition to relationship counseling and testing for STDs, we women should insist on DNA analysis before getting seriously involved with a genetic mutant. Will it be long before Merck comes up with an expensive drug to combat his natural predilections? Ask your doctor if Fidelistat is right for you.

I think the man should ask his wife instead. Or, worse, he should ask his girlfriend!

Autocracy Now!

There have been some really astounding Gestapo tactics playing out in St. Paul today. Preemptive raids, mass arrests, suspension of habeas corpus, and police brutality to name a few.

Democracy Now!'s Amy Goodman was arrested and charged with obstruction of a legal process (ha) and two of her producers have felony riot charges pending. The three were manhandled by the police and sustained minor injuries.

The scariest thing? The police knew who they were arresting. They knew that they were being filmed. They knew that there was no crime being committed. And they did it anyway. Why? Because they have approval to shut down any and all dissent by whatever means.

It isn't their immediate bosses giving them carte blanche to tread on the Bill of Rights. The approval is coming from much higher up the chain of command.

It's simple, Sarah Palin. Just say no!

Exactly who is John McCain pandering to by adding Sarah Palin to the ticket? Talk is that he's hoping to hook the evangelical crowd, but he's obviously missing a few key bits of information.

Conservative Christians do not put their women in positions of authority over men. Ever. In my former church, women were not allowed to preach to the general congregation because this was seen as unbiblical, and a condescension to their male counterparts. Believe it or not, they aren't even permitted to lead the "praise and worship" musical segment of the Sunday service for the same reason. Jezebel can forget about the support of evangelical males.

As for females, they present an even peskier problem. Christian women have strong opinions about the roles of wife and mother. In my experience, few evangelical wives are employed full-time outside the home. Their lives are about rearing godly children and glorifying their husbands. Many consider themselves helpmates, subordinate to their husbands and the church. They are not going to view Sarah Palin as a sister in Christ. She resembles a Biblical harlot, not a Proverbs 31 role model.

There is a nonreligious unbridgeable gap here as well. In case you hadn't heard, there is an ongoing feud between stay-at-home mothers (SAHMs) and women employed outside the home. The SAHMs claim the moral high ground in the area of child-raising and husband-tending, while the working women, especially those in traditionally male-dominated professions, cling to feminist values of independence, equality, and self-actualization. Ms. Palin -- the working woman who calls herself a soccer mom -- may strike both camps as an imposter. And many women, regardless of work status, will wonder why Sarah would leave five children, including a special-needs infant, to be used as a pawn in a good-ol'-boys ploy.

I feel sorry for Sarah Palin. She's being used as hastily begotten arm candy to pretty up an ugly ticket. Things won't go well for her this election season. In my opinion, she should have refused McCain's offer. She should have thanked him for the honor of being asked, and then used the national spotlight to showcase who she really is. Not the life preserver he'd like her to be.

Sarah Palin-Melnitz for VP!

You know how sometimes something you see, hear or smell calls to mind another something? Something close yet inaccessible. It's a bit like the feeling of deja vu, yet not exactly.

Anyway, when I saw Sarah Palin for the first time yesterday, I had the sense that she reminded me of someone. For some reason, I kept thinking about the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles but couldn't complete the mental thread. It gnawed at me all day. Kids show. It had to be late eighties when my boy was little. Whaaaat was it?


Finally it came to me. Ghostbusters! Janine Melnitz, aka Annie Potts, aka Sarah Palin. Now I can sleep.

Suburban warrior

We were told that we risked arrest if we remained on the grass median. Armed with my pocket-sized Bill of Rights and my reading glasses, I donned my riot gear and stood my ground.

DNC: Police state of the union

"Those who would give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin

DNC: Denver PD serving and protecting

DNC: It's anarchy!

Anarchy: a theory that regards the absence of all direct or coercive government as a political ideal and that proposes the cooperative and voluntary association of individuals and groups as the principal mode of organized society.


From the moment I saw them I knew what they were. Scattered around in small groups, surrounded by bicycles and backpacks, sharing food, tossing frisbees. Some were dressed in black. A few had tattoos. They were young, and clearly dangerous.

How dare they question the status quo? We have over 200 years of American history and the two-party system is working just fine. They should be proud and grateful that they live in the land of the free and the brave. Like I am.

So why is it that I've never felt less free, or more cowardly, than I do right now?

Maybe instead of standing shoulder-to-shoulder in front of the young anarchists to impede their progress, the cops ought to walk beside them or, better, let them lead.