Home About Feed Archives Contact

Books: Food, Inc.

March 31, 2010 | Advertising, Books, Economics, Education, Ethics, Family, Food, Health, Journalism, MSM, PR, Politics, Research, Safety, School, U.S. government

I just finished reading Food, Inc.: How Industrial Food is Making us Sicker, Fatter and Poorer — And What You Can Do About it, edited by Karl Weber and compiled as a companion piece to the movie, which I also just watched. I actually watched the movie (by Robert Kenner) first, not realizing that was the correct order of things.

I’ve read Eric Schlosser’s Fast Food Nation, watched King Corn: You Are What You Eat, a documentary by Ian Cheney and Curt Ellis, and read quite a bit on food, the food industry in the United States and food safety (or lack of it). Food, Inc., gathers much of the information out there and puts it all in one place.

In any case, if you eat, you might be interested in this book and film. The film was done first. The book contains information from people who weren’t in the film. Schlosser says the film and the book are not just about food. They’re also about threats to the First Amendment and the corrupting influence of centralized power.

Contributors include (listed in order they appear in the book)

I think the information provided by this book and film is very important, though not half as fun as reading Barbara Kingsolver’s take on food issues in her book, Animal, Vegetable, Miracle, which I’m reading now. In fact, her book was written before Food, Inc., and I wondered, hey, did they read Kingsolver? Because if they didn’t, they should. But sure enough. She was listed in the “to learn more” section at the end of the book.

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 6:00 am | 3 Comments  

Mammogram guidelines

November 19, 2009 | Benefits, Breast cancer, Death, Economics, Ethics, Health, MSM, Medical, PR, Politics, Research, Statistics, U.S. government

Women should now get mammograms starting at age 50, not 40.

Who says?

The U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. It recently published its recommendations in the Nov. 17, 2009, issue of the Annals of Internal Medicine, published 24 times a year by the American College of Physicians.

Who is the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force?

It’s a panel of 16 people from the medical community and 14 “evidence-based practice centers,” which includes medical-research universities and institutions and — at the top of the list — Blue Cross Blue Shield.

(Blue Cross Blue Shield started a site called Get Health Reform Right earlier this year to express the insurance industry’s wishes regarding health-care reform, such as, “Creating a new government plan would cause the employer-provided health insurance system that 160 million Americans rely on today to unravel.”)

U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Kathleen Sebelius released a statement Nov. 18, saying, “I would be very surprised if any private insurance company changed its mammography coverage decisions as a result of this action.” Anyone who says the task force doesn’t influence what private insurance companies do regarding mammograms needs to read the task force’s Web site, which explains that one of its goals is to inform and develop coverage decisions.

The EPCs review all relevant scientific literature on clinical, behavioral, and organization and financing topics to produce evidence reports and technology assessments. These reports are used for informing and developing coverage decisions, quality measures, educational materials and tools, guidelines, and research agendas. The EPCs also conduct research on methodology of systematic reviews. [Emphasis added is mine.]

Besides, where do they think the current mammogram guidelines come from?

To come up with this most recent recommendation, the task force looked at research done in China and Russia.

The research in China (”Randomized Trial of Breast Self-Examination in Shanghai: Final Results,” published Oct. 2, 2002, in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, Oxford University Press) found that “the efficacy of breast self-examination for decreasing breast cancer mortality is unproven,” based on 266 breast-cancer deaths (135 in the main group and 131 in the control group) over 10 years. The study was conducted from October 1989 to October 1991, and women were followed through December 2000. The task force apparently took the difference of only four breast-cancer deaths to show that breast self-examination plays no part in saving women’s lives from breast cancer.

However, the authors of that study also said, “This was a trial of the teaching of BSE, not the practice of BSE.” They went on to say:

It should not be inferred from the results of this study that there would be no reduction in risk of dying from breast cancer if women practiced BSE competently and frequently. It is possible that highly motivated women could be taught to detect cancers that develop between regular screenings, and that the diligent practice of BSE would enhance the benefit of a screening program.

Yet, the task force recommends that physicians stop teaching patients how to do breast self-examinations.

The articles about the research in Russia are all published in Russian. Unless someone on the task force can read and understand Russian, or unless the task force had the articles translated, it’s fair to say that nobody on the task force read anything other than abstracts on Medline, which provide incredibly limited information, except for dates of publication.

Others weigh in

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 7:53 pm | 5 Comments  

A little less conversation, a little more action, please

October 30, 2009 | Benefits, Books, Corporate Voices for Working Families, Economics, Ethics, Leslie Bennetts, MSM, Maria Shriver, Media, PR, Politics, Working Mother

Maria Shriver declares the United States “a woman’s nation” in The Shriver Report: A Woman’s Nation Changes Everything. Why? Because women now make up half the workforce. That, she says, “changes everything.”

Does Maria Shriver live in the same nation as the rest of us?

The same nation …

… that dropped from 27th to 31st place on the World Economic Forum Global Gender Gap Report.

… where boys and men who “weren’t raised to respect girls” gang rape a 15-year-old girl on school grounds after a homecoming dance.

… where The New York Times glorifies on its front page the life of a robed and slippered senior citizen who amassed great wealth and notoriety literally on the backs of thousands of women.

… where people actually debate whether an adult who rapes a child should be brought to justice.

It’s not clear to me what The Shriver Report’s point is, except it doesn’t seem to be a call to action. It does, however, declare the battle of the sexes over. It’s all rather retro to dredge up a “battle” that saw Billie Jean King defeat Bobby Riggs in a tennis match, which was dubbed “The Battle of the Sexes.” That “battle” was essentially a publicity stunt.

Is that what this is? A publicity stunt? If so, to what end?

Established in 1961, the Presidential Commission on the Status of Women was a compromise by John F. Kennedy, who didn’t want to alienate his supporters who were against the Equal Rights Amendment. Maybe The Shriver Report is a compromise to its sponsors, advisers and the rest of corporate America, which is adamantly opposed to legislation that requires equality and/or benefits of any kind.

As pointed out before:

  • At least 139 countries provide paid sick leave to employees, but this “woman’s nation” does not.
  • Almost 100 countries require employers to provide paid annual leave, but this “woman’s nation” does not.
  • Women in this “woman’s nation” get the same amount of paid maternity leave as women do in Lesotho, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea and Swaziland: zero.
  • Men in this “woman’s nation” get the same amount of paid paternity leave: zero.
  • It is legal in most states of this “woman’s nation” for employers to discriminate against mothers.
  • While illegal, women in this “woman’s nation” deal with pregnancy discrimination every day.
  • At least 84 countries have a maximum length workweek, but this “woman’s nation” — whose workweek length was second only to Japan’s hours among industrialized countries — does not.
  • At least 34 countries guarantee discretionary leave from work — Greece and Switzerland offer paid leave specifically for children’s educational needs — but this “woman’s nation” does not.
  • Women in this “woman’s nation” still earn less than men do, and mothers earn less than anyone.

Knowing all that, it’s confusing to see Shriver on national television talking about flex time as if that were the most pressing issue American women faced every day. Imagine my surprise when I read the report and saw things like equal pay mentioned.

Even so, what does it mean that American women comprise half the workforce? Nothing. Especially if women have no power (or very limited power) to implement change or write policy. It means nothing until women make up half of Congress, half the boards of directors and half the executive teams that run American businesses.

How do some of The Shriver Report sponsors and advisory-committee members measure up in terms of women in positions of power? Let’s see.

Sponsors

Advisory committee

So what’s the point?

Last year, I reviewed Carolyn B. Maloney’s book, Rumors of our Progress have been Greatly Exaggerated: Why Women’s Lives Aren’t Getting any Easier and How We Can Make Real Progress for Ourselves and Our Daughters. While I took issue with a few things and especially how she publicized the book, I said it was a comprehensive look at women’s issues. For those who regularly keep up on these issues, however, not much of the information was new.

That’s how I feel about The Shriver Report, only worse. Yes, the Rockefeller Foundation/TIME survey of 3,400 people provided new data, as highlighted in a special report in TIME, The State of the American Woman, What Women Want Now by Nancy Gibbs, Oct. 26, 2009. But the rest of the essays feel so out of date and certainly undeserving of a breathless media blitz. Maybe it’s “news” to someone who hasn’t read a thing on the subject in 30 years. But for others it might feel as stale and out of place as the term “battle of the sexes.”

Oprah Winfrey says in the epilogue that the report’s intent is to start a conversation. Hello? When she and Shriver weren’t listening, the conversation had already begun.

Simon & Schuster published The Shriver Report: A Woman’s Nation Changes Everything edited by Heather Boushey and Ann O’Leary, with Karen Skelton, Ed Paisley, Leslie Miller, and Laura Nicholson Oct. 20, 2009. The eBook includes an introductory chapter by Maria Shriver. It lists for $20, but I got my copy for $16 with a $4 discount code.


 
Others weigh in

Related posts

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 6:00 am | 2 Comments  

Michelle Obama speaks in whose voice?

May 8, 2009 | Advertising, Barack Obama, Benefits, Bright Horizons, Corporate Voices for Working Families, Economics, Ethics, Journalism, Michelle Obama, PNC, PR, Parenting, Politics, Procter & Gamble, Research, Work, Working Mother

Michelle Obama spoke at the Corporate Voices for Working Families annual meeting Thursday at the Mayflower Hotel in Washington, D.C. CVWF also released its report, Innovative Workplace Flexibility Options for Hourly Workers, which claims to show “that flexibility for lower wage hourly and nonexempt workers is being used effectively in a variety of business settings.”

Obama “praised the organization for its research,” though it’s unclear if she read any of the research or looked beyond a press release. If she had, she would have found layers upon layers of conflict of interest and even direct opposition to her husband’s policies.

Companies participating in the CVWF study were Bright Horizons, Marriott, PNC, Procter & Gamble and another company that remained anonymous. Bright Horizons and Marriott sit on the CVWF board of trustees. They and PNC are corporate partners, and Marriott is also a funding partner with CVWF.

Obama also said that “some 22 million working women don’t have one paid sick day.”

Many of the CVWF members would keep it that way through lobbying efforts on their behalf by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, with which they are affiliated through local chambers. The Chamber opposes any efforts to expand Family and Medical Leave Act leave or mandate paid sick leave. It opposed a bill that would give employees seven paid sick days a year. It opposed SCHIP (State Children’s Health Insurance Program) and the Employee Free Choice Act.

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 6:25 pm | 2 Comments  

Planned Parenthood shocked by response to Blume

May 7, 2009 | Advertising, Fundraising, Internet, Judy Blume, Mother's Day, Motherhood, PR, Social media, Twitter

Tweet, tweet!

“The firestorm against Judy Blume is bullsh*t. If you love Blume’s books, check out … ”

Tweet!

“Support Judy Blume! RT … ”

What’s all the fuss?

The Planned Parenthood Action Center has a page dedicated to “Stand up for Judy Blume.” They were “so shocked at the response [from "anti-choice extremists"] to her latest act of compassion,” which was a “special Mother’s Day message on our behalf.”

Hmm.

Judy Blume asks for donations to Planned Parenthood in honor of Mother’s Day.

Sounds like extremist bait to me. Also sounds like a way to get “the other side” riled up and to send money.

Shocking.

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 11:53 am | Comments  

Super Bowl with the Obamas and us

February 2, 2009 | Advertising, Barack Obama, Ethics, Family, Goon Squad Sarah, Internet, Media, PR, Parenting, Politics, Statistics, Television

I have a few things in common with President Barack Obama and his family (aside from the whole “leader of the free world” thing). He’s just a few year older than I am. He’s been happily married for 16 years. So have I. He has two beautiful daughters. So do I. They had a Super Bowl party yesterday. So did we, though on a much smaller — and less bipartisan — scale.

I wonder if Malia and Sasha had their 3D glasses too.

Did they see the Go Daddy commercial with Danica Patrick? And how did that go?

Maybe the conversation at the White House went something like this.

“Go Daddy? Hey, that’s what we said when you were running for president, Daddy!”

“Hey, Daddy? Why are those boys watching that girl take a shower?”

Did they see the other Go Daddy commercial with Danica Patrick?

“Enhanced? Hey, Daddy, what are they talking about?”

“Daddy? Why is that girl taking off her shirt?”

The Nielsen Company says in its Super Bowl guide that 37.7 million women are National Football League fans. That’s 42 percent of the viewing audience. I wonder how many children regularly watch NFL games.

I know a lot of women who like sports. Sarah covers sports for BlogHer and has her own sports blog. She even wrote about misogyny in sports media.

So I wonder …

How do women football fans reconcile the game and all the “Go Daddy” stuff that comes with it? Or do you? Does it just come with the territory, even though you’re almost half the viewing (and spending) audience?

How would you answer the questions I imagined Obama’s daughters might have asked? What would you tell your sons?

How about fathers who are football fans?

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 4:43 pm | 3 Comments  

I just realized where “Yes We Can” comes from

November 12, 2008 | 2008 campaign, Barack Obama, PR, Television

“Can we fix it?”

Yes, we can!

(Hmm. Think someone fell asleep while the kids watched Bob the Builder … and a new slogan was stolen born?)

So … who will make up the new cabinet? Shall we start with Scoop, Muck and Dizzy?

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 6:16 pm | 3 Comments  

It’s like buttah

November 6, 2008 | 2008 campaign, Afghanistan, Apples, Barack Obama, Economics, Iraq, PR, Politics, U.S. government

Well, not exactly buttah. I cheated and didn’t use a strainer or food grinder, so my apple butter is lumpy. But, hey, it’s apple butter. I got fancy yesterday and used the food grinder on the applesauce. It’s more like buttah than the apple butter. Oh well.

I heard someone on election night say that everyone will remember exactly where they were when Barack Obama was elected president. Yep. I was at home. Making apple butter.

Congratulations, President-elect Obama, on your victory.

You said you need my help.

Yes, you do.

You said you will be my president too.

Yes, you will.

You said you hear my voice.

I’d love to agree with that, but you have shown me that you hear only what you want to hear. So, while I have a whole lot of other things I could say, I’ll leave it at this for now:

Well done. And good luck.

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 9:16 pm | 2 Comments  

‘Becky, I don’t need your vote’

October 29, 2008 | 2008 campaign, Advertising, Barack Obama, Economics, Media, PR, Politics, Television

Ding, ding, ding, ding!

Oh, wait. That didn’t happen, did it?

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 8:35 pm | 2 Comments  

To the senators who want to be president

October 11, 2008 | 2008 campaign, Afghanistan, Barack Obama, Debates, Iraq, John McCain, Media, PR, Politics, SLBTM

Dear Sens. McCain and Obama,

You both sold me out with your votes for the googillion-dollar bailout, and you both want my vote. These things don’t go together, and I’m confused.

Oh, wait. It is easy to decide who to sell out and who to bail out.

Sell out: A taxpayer with one measly vote.

Bail out: Friends in high places with bags o’ cash, like, oh … AIG.

Sen. McCain, you got $43,275 from AIG employees and $7,634,378 from the securities and investment industry.

Sen. Obama, you got $88,099 from AIG employees and $10,847,652 from the securities and investment industry.

And you’re looking out for … me?

Umm, OK.

And those debates. Are you kidding me? We’ve got troops dying in two wars that neither of you plan to end, even though the American public told you loudly and clearly two years ago that’s what it wanted. We’ve got people losing their jobs, their homes, their retirement savings. We, as a country, are broke, thanks to failed policies both of you supported. And this is the best you can do?

Umm, OK.

Sen. Obama, would you please call your Hollywood friends? The ones who patronize average Americans with reverse psychology because, you know, average Americans are stupid like that. The ones who made this:

Know what I say to them? Shut up. Give me a viable candidate, and I’ll vote. Until then? Shut it. Well, you go ahead and tell Leo he can come over here and lick my face … then I might think about voting for him. Or … maybe I’ll just let him lick my face.

C’mon, Senators. Level with me. Neither one of you wants or needs my itty-bitty vote. The first one who stands up and publicly admits that? Gets my vote.

add to kirtsy Posted by Becky @ 11:57 am | 3 Comments  


Somebody likes me



Bookshelf