Nearly every day lately a new topic for concern is brought to my attention. It can be very hard to sort fact from fiction, to determine- is this topic something to worry about and will it cause my family harm? In areas where I have some expertise or have done research I can more easily discern which sources to trust, but that can be difficult when topics seem to require in-depth knowledge or specialization.

My newest area of concern has been the health impacts of electromagnetic fields and electromagnetic radiation (EMF and EMR). I’m talking about the fields put off by things like cell phone towers, power lines, microwaves, wireless internet and Bluetooth devices. Admittedly, I don’t know a lot about electrodynamics, but with recent reports saying mobile phones are more dangerous than smoking or asbestos and that wi-fi may be harming children in schools, it’s hard not to pay attention.

Once I made the leap into this new area of interest, I discovered there’s a lot to take in, more than I had initially realized. I joined an online discussion group to get a feel for the topic, as I find people with a passion for a subject are often the best sources of research. They are most likely to be up on the latest discoveries, try experimental treatments and post all the news articles, a veritable fount of information as good as any RSS reader can provide.

Before joining the discussion (albeit from the sidelines) I had no idea that there were people in the world with extreme electrical hypersensitivity, meaning exposure to the local cell phone towers or the neighbors wi-fi may be keeping them up at night or causing them physical distress. These people are often told they are crazy, that it’s all in their heads and there is no scientific basis for their problems. Still they are frequently experiencing the effects to the point that it’s severely disrupting their lives. Real or no, some have even gone to the point of uprooting their families and forming their own communities to get away from the electrosmog. They’re fighting community wi-fi installations, opposing the construction of cell phone towers and otherwise going to great lengths and expense to shield themselves from something they believe is causing them harm.

Meanwhile all over the world studies are being undertaken to determine the true safety of these technologies. Many suggest there are reasons for concern and that potential health implications to humans from EMR include things like cancer, miscarriage, cataracts, brain tumors, leukemia, auto-immune and neurodegenerative diseases. There’s credible evidence to suggest EMR hazards are threatening wildlife in great numbers — especially frogs and insects. Even low frequency electromagnetic fields have shown the potential to severely disrupt life. Still other studies do not show a true problem and suggest it’s nothing more than an enviro-scare

There are definitely some conspiracy theories and crackpot cures floating around the web, but also a lot of truth in what is being said. I can’t help but sympathize with those who feel that their concerns are being dismissed and that if only the topic could get some attention by the right people it might bust wide open. I haven’t concluded how to handle EMF exposure in our home, but I’m leaning towards the prudent avoidance approach advocated by the EPA.

Sometimes I wonder why I started down this path, researching topics like this until all hours of the night. Then I remember; his tiny body is sleeping between us now. I just hope I’m not irreversibly harming him with my wi-fi.

Unless eating a strictly whole foods diet, it can be tough to tell what exactly is in your food, even when reading the labels. The ever elusive ‘natural flavors’ on packaged foods can conceal ingredients, making it particularly tricky for veg eaters to know whether or not a food contains animal products. Even more a mystery, ‘artificial flavors’ can be made up of natural or synthetic chemicals, sometimes including those banned in other countries. News to me was that these two terms can also conceal ingredients of an entirely separate class — those that come via the biotech industry.

Companies such as Senomyx and Linguagen have been working for years on tricking the taste buds. By activating or blocking receptors in the mouth that are responsible for taste, they are able to help companies decrease the salt, sugar and other ingredients in their products, including somewhat more controversial ingredients like MSG. “We’re helping companies clean up their labels,” said Senomyx’s chief executive, Kent Snyder.

These chemicals are formulated using the same process employed for developing new drugs. Often, because they are utilized in only small amounts, they are not required to go through stringent FDA approval process for food additives. Instead of being listed separately, like artificial sweetener Splenda, they are lumped in with the other artificial flavors. However, where it took Splenda 11 years to get approval, it took less than 18 months and one 3-month animal study for Senomyx to get approval for one of their first products.

Another example, a company called Intralytix has created bacteria-killing viruses that are meant for treating the food supply. In 2002, they petitioned the FDA to allow the use of these bateriophages (a.k.a. phages) as food additives and were subsequently the first company to get approval. Their first product to hit the market is sprayed on ready to eat meats and used to kill Listeria. They are also seeking approval for a phage that can be sprayed on beef before grinding to kill E. coli. The FDA doesn’t know if these phages are safe to consume on a regular basis or what the consequences might be of consuming them over a lifetime. However, they do not require even so much as a note on the label to let people know the meat has been treated with the virus.

In these and other cases, I think what most upsets me is that consumers have no way to know that these ingredients are in their foods. How can we make safe choices if we’re not fully informed? We’re dependent on the government to police the industry and frankly I don’t trust them to do a thorough job. The FDA has failed to keep our products safe time and time again.

Do you feel safe feeding your children live viruses or supressing their newly developing taste buds? I know I don’t! The best we can do seems to be to purchase products in as natural a state as possible and from local or well-known sources.

–

Some additional articles and sites talking about the secretive world of food additives and flavorings:

Why McDonald’s Fries Taste So Good
“Complex flavors are being made using enzyme reactions, fermentation, and fungal and tissue cultures. All the flavors created by these methods — including the ones being synthesized by fungi — are considered natural flavors by the FDA.”

What Everybody Ought to Know about Food Additives
“Nobody knows the effects of the many different additives used in the thousands of different combinations. To make matters worse, because of political pressure, the FDA allows manufacturers to add small amounts of cancer-causing substances to our food. So, not only are many of our foods not healthy, they’re unsafe.”

The Food Commission Guide to Food Additives [PDF]
From the UK. “540 food additives and over 4,500 un-named flavouring agents are permitted in the foods we eat. On average we each eat about 14 pounds (6.5kg) of food additives every year. “

I wrote the most fantastic post, one of the most emotive things I’ve written in a long time, and then it was spirited away as my laptop mysteriously shut off. This post seems downright clinical in comparison, but I felt it was an important enough topic to try again.

—–

I had never really thought much about how milk production worked until I was pregnant and nearing time to breastfeed. Now that I’ve been at it for over a year, I understand a bit more about how it all happens. Still, until recently I hadn’t considered the similarities between human production and that of dairy cows.

A campaign from Viva! called Mothers Want Their Babies Back!, timed to coincide with Mother’s Day in the UK, captured my attention. In addition to the research I’d already done on dairy consumption, this prompted me to take another look at the milk industry from a lactating mom’s point of view.

In order to produce milk, a cow must go through a full pregnancy and birth her child just as a human mother would. To capture the milk for human consumption, the calf is taken away from the mother within hours of delivery. By that point the mother’s bond with her baby is already strong, and just as any mother would be she is devastated when it is taken away. (Little does she know that more cruelty is right around the corner for the babe as the male calves are either killed straightaway or raised as veal, a short but torturous existence, and the females kept for future milk production.)

Since mother and babe have been separated, production must be maintained via pumping several times a day. This doesn’t take place in a cushy corporate mother’s room, but instead in a shed crowded alongside other “working moms” that may never see the light of day. To make sure she has a strong supply, the cow will likely be given a galactagogue. Instead of the oatmeal or fenugreek you or I might use, she’s given something like BGH instead.

To increase profitability, the mother cow is pushed to oversupply, often to the point her udders sag so low they drag on the ground. Plugged ducts and mastitis occur as in humans, but on a more frequent basis due to the filthy conditions — a very painful ordeal often treated with antibiotics but meaning a death sentence for some cows.

Since the milk producing period is only meant to last as long as the baby needs it to grow, each year the cow will be artificially impregnated. This viscious cycle repeats until her supply dips to the point where she’s no longer profitable. Long before her life would naturally end, sometimes pregnant, she’s slaughtered. (As seen in recent news, even this doesn’t always mean quick relief from a miserable existence.)

The cruelty in the dairy enterprise is astounding and I can no longer play a part. I have decided to permanently adopt the near vegan diet I’ve assumed since we found out pur babe was sensitive to cow’s milk. Not only will it be good for my health and the environment, I’d like to do it for the moms.

While pregnant I asked a midwife about the difference between securing a pediatrician and a family practice doctor for our lad. She said there was no big distinction and it was mostly a matter of personal preference. We chose a pediatrician based on the assumption that specialist care would be a good thing (the same reason we initially chose the midwife group over going to our family doc). I’ve now come to think there are some big disparites, and to know what’s a good fit for you is as simple as asking yourself the question- do you want parenting advice or strictly medical care?

I’m sure my opinion is largely tainted by our experiences to date, and I hesitate to make such broad generalizations, but pediatricians seem to have set agendas and expect the parents to listen to their advice as gospel. They want to impose their standard regimen and don’t appreciate it when you attempt to deviate from the norm. They dislike when parents do their own research and are extremely suspcious of information found on the Internet, no matter the source. They encourage questions, as long as you don’t come across as challenging their wisdom.

I believe decisions such as where the baby sleeps, when/what/how to start feeding them, the disciplining methods to use, and whether to let them “cry it out” are ours to make as parents. Unless there is a medical reason behind their direction, I’m not sure why we should take their advice over that of any other seasoned parent.

I’ve had a coworker tell me that their pediatrician is their #1 guide, an expert on all things related to their child, including non medically related topics such as appropriate car seat use ( I’ll trust the manufacturer’s manual to give me the height/weight limit, thanks!). Some may agree, but I just want a doctor to help us with the medical diagnosis and treatment when our child is ill. Is that too much to ask?

Apparently, yes. We’re looking to take our lad to our old family practice doc.

The story of the unvaccinated school children in Maryland was getting a lot of media attention last week. The headlines screamed that kids were being rounded up like cattle, parents summoned to court and potentially facing jail time, and that the parents must vaccinate their children or face expulsion.

In truth, the families are being called on the carpet on an administrative matter with the school district. These parents have the choice to either vaccinate their children or file an exemption. Either one is acceptable, they just must do one or the other. Let me be clear — vaccination is not manditory in order to attend school. This may not be what you hear from other parents, the school or your pediatrician, but it is true. What is needed is for your child’s records to be up to date with the school so that when the health department comes calling, all the information is accounted for.

You can either file your child’s vaccination record or file an exemption. The kind of exemption available to you varies by state. Two states offer a waiver only if you have a medical reason not to get the shots, most offer both medical and religious exemptions, and a few offer the additional choice of a philosophical exemption.

Some in the anti-vaccination community are up at arms because it has been made out that the children were forcibly vaccinated. I’m not sure this is true (though if it was it wouldn’t be the first time). I do agree that tactics taken by officials involved in the matter have been heavy handed and that the media should have done a better job in clarifying the situation. The fearmonering is uncalled for and there’s a need to make sure parents are fully informed of their options.

Obviously, the school district and other officials are looking at things from their own perspective. In part, they want to make sure the kids are in school so they don’t lose out on any funding. The honus is on the parents to seek out what’s right for their individual child and then comply with the law.

I’ve long considered fall to be my favorite season, but I’m not so sure anymore. While September and October are filled with gorgeous colors and mild temps, late fall seems marred with violence. Colder weather brings with it the start of the hunting season, the Thanksgiving holiday, and the remembrance of a traumatic experience.

One morning a few years ago, as I was completing my morning run I saw a flock of geese winging their way towards me. As they circled to land in a field, their honking filling the crisp air, I heard shots. There were a group of hunters on the other side of the road shooting in my direction from approximately a block away. As some birds would drop from the sky and go missing from the group, the others would circle around as if looking for them, bringing them back to the onslaught. I stopped and cried out, pleaded silently that they’d wise up and turn away, but it made no difference. One by one they all fell; the hunters had shot down the entire flock of more than twenty birds. Tears streaming down my face, I ran home and called the police. These men were a danger, shooting towards traffic and homes. The police said they’d check into it, but by the time the sent someone to our edge of town the hunters were gone.

I have no respect for the practice of sport hunting and don’t understand why so many around here partake. Nationwide less than 6% of people hunt, but in our area of the country the stats double. During this time of year we are constantly reminded of this violent form of recreation. I see stickers on bumpers in traffic, men dressed in neon orange wandering through ditches, and celebratory pictures of people’s latest kills masquerading as desktop wallpaper at work. Last year my grandma received a Christmas card from a family member with a group of relatives in camouflage showing off the racks of several dead deer. People talk about it at the office, coworkers and executives alike, oblivious to the fact someone might object.

I hear it called a sport. It can’t be a sport when the other side doesn’t know they’re playing. True gun sports do exist, like target or trap shooting, and I know there are bow sports, but most of the hunters I know would fail as athletes.

I hear people say that they do it because they love the outdoors. I don’t buy it. There are dozens of things to do outdoors that don’t involve traipsing around with a gun in your hands looking to end the life of an animal. What about hiking, boating or snowmobiling?

I hear talk that the meat is good, cheap. That’s not a justification in my book. Of course as a vegetarian I’m biased, but even for those that do eat animals, what percentage of animals hunted are eaten? Many, many animals are shot but not killed. More yet are killed, but remain unretrieved. And to claim cost savings is a stretch. By the time you add in the costs of the weapon, ammunition, gas for driving around in pursuit, special clothes, hunting licenses, etc. you could have had at least a week’s worth of shopping.

I hear talk of conservation initiatives, how the licensing fees are used to promote environmental causes like preserving animal habitats. But what good is encouraging the perpetuation of a species just so that you can kill the offspring a few years down the road?

I think the biggest thing that bothers me about hunting is the obvious lack of compassion and empathy for animals. It’s the total and utter disrespect for other living beings to the point of killing them. It’s the selfishness that I see every day driving the interstate, extended to a life or death situation. It’s cruelness for pleasure.

If kindness to animals is a sign of human advancement, we have a long way to go.

I’ve often wondered why people expect babies to sleep through the night. Do adults sleep through? Do they never wake for a drink or to use the bathroom? Then why would you expect an infant to do the same? They have a stomach the size of a marble as a newborn.

From near day one, the main question about our babe (after the routine name, age, size bit) has centered on how he’s sleeping. Truth is, our babe sleeps like a dream most nights. I consider us lucky, but at the same time think that we owe a lot to the fact that we co-sleep. Nobody I know seems to talk about bed sharing but to me it seems totally natural. I’ve ofen wondered if more people do it than let on.

Thankfully, we have the resources available to help us become informed about the risks and benefits of the decision to share our sleep space. Turns out we’re not alone in the choice we’ve made. It seems co-sleeping is natural for our species and very common in many parts of the world.

Some studies show that if done properly it decreases the rate of SIDS, allows parents to more easily hear if their child is in distress and take corrective action, and can even regulate the child’s breathing and temperature. It promotoes breastfeeding, allowing feeding on demand without the need for babe or mom to fully wake, let alone schlep across the house in the middle of the night. For us it’s resulted in better sleep for all involved. It may not be the norm here in the Midwest, but it works well for our family and that’s what matters.

Much of the information out there about bed sharing is doom and gloom, worst case scenario type of stuff. It’s nice to see there are some sites devoted to providing useful information. SafeBedSharing.org can give you the lowdown on how to sleep safely with your babe.

Even if you’re not concerned about animal welfare or the potential health benefits of a vegetarian diet, there is yet another reason to reconsider your animal product consumption - the environmental impact.

Several great articles followed a lengthy UN report issued late last year that said raising animals for food generates more greenhouse gases than all the cars and trucks in the world combined. But that’s just the tip of the iceberg! The facts and figures surrounding this topic are astounding. Here are a few that I’ve pulled out of my recent readings:

• A 10-acre farm can support 60 people growing soybeans, 24 people growing wheat, 10 people growing corn and only two producing cattle.
• More than 1/3 of all fossil fuels are used in animal production.
• Farmed animals are fed more than 70 percent of the corn, wheat, and other grains grown in the U.S.
• Because of deforestation to create grazing land, each vegetarian saves an acre of trees per year.
• Producing a single hamburger patty uses enough fuel to drive 20 miles.
• The livestock sector is responsible for 18 percent of greenhouse gas emissions measured in CO2 equivalent. This is a higher amount than the transportation sector.
• Reducing meat production by just 10 percent in the U.S. would free enough grain to feed 60 million people.
• You could spend more than $20,000 on a Prius and still emit 50 percent more carbon dioxide than you would if you just gave up eating meat and other animal products.
• Waste from animal production pollutes American waterways more than all other industrial sources combined.
• Methane is 21 times more powerful a greenhouse gas than CO2. Animal agriculture produces more than 100 million tons of methane a year.
• You’d save more water by not eating a pound of beef than not showering for a year.
• Chickens raised for KFC and other companies are fed crops that are grown in the Amazon rain forest.
• More than 260 million acres of U.S. forest have been cleared to create cropland to grow grain to feed farmed animals.
• Almost half of the water and 80 percent of the agricultural land in the U.S. are used to raise animals for food.

With the recent media focus on “going green”, I find it somewhat surprising that we’re not hearing more about this. It’s all over the news in other countries, and in the UK official government sources have encouraged people to examine their meat consumption and eat and drink in a greener way. So why is this a non-issue in the US to the point that even Al Gore does not mention it??

Recent research has shown that a majority of people are concerned about climate change and want to do something to feel like they’re a part of the solution, but the recommendations our government and media gives to the average consumer are limited. In addition to driving a hybrid, switching to energy efficient appliances, or turning off lights, we need to better communicate the message that reducing your animal product consumption is something you can do every day that will have a huge impact on the environment and global warming.

Want to make a transition to eating less meat? Check out One Bite at a Time: A Beginner’s Guide to Conscious Eating, participate in Meatless Monday, get a starter pack from Vegan Outreach, find a vegetarian friendly restaurant, or do whatever it takes to stop global warming one bite at a time.

O.K. I admit it, I’m a paranoid conspiracy theorist. If that’s the moniker you get when you question something important, I accept it most gratiously.

I’d been meaning to post a link to this piece for quite awhile now. I like it because it gives a short overview of vaccination issues, explains that its not a black or white topic, and advocates researching and then making up your own mind. (I haven’t purchased the magazine it links to, so can’t speak to that.)

I try to extend this research and decide concept to everything in my life, especially when it comes to our lad. Research, research, research some more and then make a decision based on what you’ve learned and what your instincts are telling you to do. Then continue to research from time to time to see if anything has changed and reaffirm or refute your position.

I don’t like to push my viewpoint on others. I’m not an evangelist, even try to stray away from discussing controversial issues because I dislike conflict. However, when it comes to parenting issues (especially those that could mean life or death) I do think it’s important to advocate that parents at least take the time to build an informed opinion. Your ultimate decision should be your own; don’t thoughtlessly follow the status quo (or the blind wisdom of authority) when it comes to something as important as the health of you and your children.

I was down on myself for awhile for passing judgment on others, something I’m very quick to do, especially when it comes to things in which I believe strongly. I think I’ve finally decided that it’s OK to do this. Comparison is a common way for people to learn, a form of evaluation. (Sesame Street taught me this. Which one of these things is not like the others?…)

Watching interactions between others and determining whether I would take the same or a different action forces me to think about issues I never might have considered, allows me to make choices in advance and often points me to areas where I can see I need to do more research or where DH and I need to have a discussion.

The important thing is to know when to share a viewpoint and when to keep your mouth shut. Judging in my head is a lot different than openly announcing that I agree or disagree. At best it can foster discussion, but at worst…