Comments: Now this is a cool bicycle design.
New Design Could Transform 1st Bike Ride - Yahoo! News
Saturday, April 30, 2005
Thursday, April 14, 2005
Who’s Better Off?
A speech by HON. RON PAUL OF TEXAS BEFORE THE US HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
April 6, 2005
Whenever the administration is challenged regarding the success of the Iraq war, or regarding the false information used to justify the war, the retort is: “Aren’t the people of Iraq better off?” The insinuation is that anyone who expresses any reservations about supporting the war is an apologist for Saddam Hussein and every ruthless act he ever committed. The short answer to the question of whether the Iraqis are better off is that it’s too early to declare, “Mission Accomplished.” But more importantly, we should be asking if the mission was ever justified or legitimate. Is it legitimate to justify an action that some claim yielded good results, if the means used to achieve them are illegitimate? Do the ends justify the means?
The information Congress was given prior to the war was false. There were no weapons of mass destruction; the Iraqis did not participate in the 9/11 attacks; Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were enemies and did not conspire against the United States; our security was not threatened; we were not welcomed by cheering Iraqi crowds as we were told; and Iraqi oil has not paid any of the bills. Congress failed to declare war, but instead passed a wishy-washy resolution citing UN resolutions as justification for our invasion. After the fact we’re now told the real reason for the Iraq invasion was to spread democracy, and that the Iraqis are better off. Anyone who questions the war risks being accused of supporting Saddam Hussein, disapproving of democracy, or “supporting terrorists.” It’s implied that lack of enthusiasm for the war means one is not patriotic and doesn’t support the troops. In other words, one must march lock-step with the consensus or be ostracized.
However, conceding that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein is a far cry from endorsing the foreign policy of our own government that led to the regime change. In time it will become clear to everyone that support for the policies of pre-emptive war and interventionist nation-building will have much greater significance than the removal of Saddam Hussein itself. The interventionist policy should be scrutinized more carefully than the purported benefits of Saddam Hussein’s removal from power. The real question ought to be: “Are we better off with a foreign policy that promotes regime change while justifying war with false information?” Shifting the stated goals as events unravel should not satisfy those who believe war must be a last resort used only when our national security is threatened.
How much better off are the Iraqi people? Hundreds of thousands of former inhabitants of Fallajah are not better off with their city flattened and their homes destroyed. Hundreds of thousands are not better off living with foreign soldiers patrolling their street, curfews, and the loss of basic utilities. One hundred thousand dead Iraqis, as estimated by the Lancet Medical Journal, certainly are not better off. Better to be alive under Saddam Hussein than lying in some cold grave.
Praise for the recent election in Iraq has silenced many critics of the war. Yet the election was held under martial law implemented by a foreign power, mirroring conditions we rightfully condemned as a farce when carried out in the old Soviet system and more recently in Lebanon. Why is it that what is good for the goose isn’t always good for the gander?
Our government fails to recognize that legitimate elections are the consequence of freedom, and that an artificial election does not create freedom. In our own history we note that freedom was achieved first and elections followed-- not the other way around.
One news report claimed that the Shiites actually received 56% of the vote, but such an outcome couldn’t be allowed for it would preclude a coalition of the Kurds and Shiites from controlling the Sunnis and preventing a theocracy from forming. This reminds us of the statement made months ago by Secretary Rumsfeld when asked about a Shiite theocracy emerging from a majority democratic vote, and he assured us that would not happen. Democracy, we know, is messy and needs tidying up a bit when we don’t like the results.
Some have described Baghdad and especially the green zone, as being surrounded by unmanageable territory. The highways in and out of Baghdad are not yet secured. Many anticipate a civil war will break out sometime soon in Iraq; some claim it’s already underway.
We have seen none of the promised oil production that was supposed to provide grateful Iraqis with the means to repay us for the hundreds of billions that American taxpayers have spent on the war. Some have justified our continuous presence in the Persian Gulf since 1990 because of a need to protect “our” oil. Yet now that Saddam Hussein is gone, and the occupation supposedly is a great success, gasoline at the pumps is reaching record highs approaching $3 per gallon.
Though the Iraqi election has come and gone, there still is no government in place and the next election-- supposedly the real one-- is not likely to take place on time. Do the American people have any idea who really won the dubious election at all?
The oil-for-food scandal under Saddam Hussein has been replaced by corruption in the distribution of U.S. funds to rebuild Iraq. Already there is an admitted $9 billion discrepancy in the accounting of these funds. The over-billing by Halliburton is no secret, but the process has not changed.
The whole process is corrupt. It just doesn’t make sense to most Americans to see their tax dollars used to fight an unnecessary and unjustified war. First they see American bombs destroying a country, and then American taxpayers are required to rebuild it. Today it’s easier to get funding to rebuild infrastructure in Iraq than to build a bridge in the United States. Indeed, we cut the Army Corps of Engineers’ budget and operate on the cheap with our veterans as the expenditures in Iraq skyrocket.
One question the war promoters don’t want to hear asked, because they don’t want to face up to the answer, is this: “Are Christian Iraqis better off today since we decided to build a new Iraq through force of arms?” The answer is plainly no.
Sure, there are only 800,000 Christians living in Iraq, but under Saddam Hussein they were free to practice their religion. Tariq Aziz, a Christian, served in Saddam Hussein’s cabinet as Foreign Minister-- something that would never happen in Saudi Arabia, Israel, or any other Middle Eastern country. Today, the Christian churches in Iraq are under attack and Christians are no longer safe. Many Christians have been forced to flee Iraq and migrate to Syria. It’s strange that the human rights advocates in the U.S. Congress have expressed no concern for the persecution now going on against Christians in Iraq. Both the Sunni and the Shiite Muslims support the attacks on Christians. In fact, persecuting Christians is one of the few areas in which they agree-- the other being the removal of all foreign forces from Iraqi soil.
Considering the death, destruction, and continual chaos in Iraq, it’s difficult to accept the blanket statement that the Iraqis all feel much better off with the U.S. in control rather than Saddam Hussein. Security in the streets and criminal violence are not anywhere near being under control.
But there’s another question that is equally important: “Are the American people better off because of the Iraq war?”
One thing for sure, the 1,500 plus dead American soldiers aren’t better off. The nearly 20,000 severely injured or sickened American troops are not better off. The families, the wives, the husbands, children, parents, and friends of those who lost so much are not better off.
The families and the 40,000 troops who were forced to re-enlist against their will-- a de facto draft-- are not feeling better off. They believe they have been deceived by their enlistment agreements.
The American taxpayers are not better off having spent over 200 billion dollars to pursue this war, with billions yet to be spent. The victims of the inflation that always accompanies a guns-and-butter policy are already getting a dose of what will become much worse.
Are our relationships with the rest of the world better off? I’d say no. Because of the war, our alliances with the Europeans are weaker than ever. The anti-American hatred among a growing number of Muslims around the world is greater than ever. This makes terrorist attacks more likely than they were before the invasion. Al Qaeda recruiting has accelerated. Iraq is being used as a training ground for al Qaeda terrorists, which it never was under Hussein’s rule. So as our military recruitment efforts suffer, Osama bin Laden benefits by attracting more terrorist volunteers.
Oil was approximately $27 a barrel before the war, now it’s more than twice that. I wonder who benefits from this?
Because of the war, fewer dollars are available for real national security and defense of this country. Military spending is up, but the way the money is spent distracts from true national defense and further undermines our credibility around the world.
The ongoing war’s lack of success has played a key role in diminishing morale in our military services. Recruitment is sharply down, and most branches face shortages of troops. Many young Americans rightly fear a coming draft-- which will be required if we do not reassess and change the unrealistic goals of our foreign policy.
The appropriations for the war are essentially off-budget and obscured, but contribute nonetheless to the runaway deficit and increase in the national debt. If these trends persist, inflation with economic stagnation will be the inevitable consequences of a misdirected policy.
One of the most significant consequences in times of war that we ought to be concerned about is the inevitable loss of personal liberty. Too often in the patriotic nationalism that accompanies armed conflict, regardless of the cause, there is a willingness to sacrifice personal freedoms in pursuit of victory. The real irony is that we are told we go hither and yon to fight for freedom and our Constitution, while carelessly sacrificing the very freedoms here at home we’re supposed to be fighting for. It makes no sense.
This willingness to give up hard-fought personal liberties has been especially noticeable in the atmosphere of the post-September 11th war on terrorism. Security has replaced liberty as our main political goal, damaging the American spirit. Sadly, the whole process is done in the name of patriotism and in a spirit of growing militant nationalism.
These attitudes and fears surrounding the 9-11 tragedy, and our eagerness to go to war in the Middle East against countries not responsible for the attacks, have allowed a callousness to develop in our national psyche that justifies torture and rejects due process of law for those who are suspects and not convicted criminals.
We have come to accept pre-emptive war as necessary, constitutional, and morally justifiable. Starting a war without a proper declaration is now of no concern to most Americans or the U.S. Congress. Let’s hope and pray the rumors of an attack on Iran in June by U.S. Armed Forces are wrong.
A large segment of the Christian community and its leadership think nothing of rationalizing war in the name of a religion that prides itself on the teachings of the Prince of Peace, who instructed us that blessed are the peacemakers-- not the warmongers.
We casually accept our role as world policeman, and believe we have a moral obligation to practice nation building in our image regardless of the number of people who die in the process.
We have lost our way by rejecting the beliefs that made our country great. We no longer trust in trade, friendship, peace, the Constitution, and the principle of neutrality while avoiding entangling alliances with the rest of the world. Spreading the message of hope and freedom by setting an example for the world has been replaced by a belief that use of armed might is the only practical tool to influence the world-- and we have accepted, as the only superpower, the principle of initiating war against others.
In the process, Congress and the people have endorsed a usurpation of their own authority, generously delivered to the executive and judicial branches-- not to mention international government bodies. The concept of national sovereignty is now seen as an issue that concerns only the fringe in our society.
Protection of life and liberty must once again become the issue that drives political thought in this country. If this goal is replaced by an effort to promote world government, use force to plan the economy, regulate the people, and police the world, against the voluntary desires of the people, it can be done only with the establishment of a totalitarian state. There’s no need for that. It’s up to Congress and the American people to decide our fate, and there is still time to correct our mistakes.
April 6, 2005
Whenever the administration is challenged regarding the success of the Iraq war, or regarding the false information used to justify the war, the retort is: “Aren’t the people of Iraq better off?” The insinuation is that anyone who expresses any reservations about supporting the war is an apologist for Saddam Hussein and every ruthless act he ever committed. The short answer to the question of whether the Iraqis are better off is that it’s too early to declare, “Mission Accomplished.” But more importantly, we should be asking if the mission was ever justified or legitimate. Is it legitimate to justify an action that some claim yielded good results, if the means used to achieve them are illegitimate? Do the ends justify the means?
The information Congress was given prior to the war was false. There were no weapons of mass destruction; the Iraqis did not participate in the 9/11 attacks; Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein were enemies and did not conspire against the United States; our security was not threatened; we were not welcomed by cheering Iraqi crowds as we were told; and Iraqi oil has not paid any of the bills. Congress failed to declare war, but instead passed a wishy-washy resolution citing UN resolutions as justification for our invasion. After the fact we’re now told the real reason for the Iraq invasion was to spread democracy, and that the Iraqis are better off. Anyone who questions the war risks being accused of supporting Saddam Hussein, disapproving of democracy, or “supporting terrorists.” It’s implied that lack of enthusiasm for the war means one is not patriotic and doesn’t support the troops. In other words, one must march lock-step with the consensus or be ostracized.
However, conceding that the world is better off without Saddam Hussein is a far cry from endorsing the foreign policy of our own government that led to the regime change. In time it will become clear to everyone that support for the policies of pre-emptive war and interventionist nation-building will have much greater significance than the removal of Saddam Hussein itself. The interventionist policy should be scrutinized more carefully than the purported benefits of Saddam Hussein’s removal from power. The real question ought to be: “Are we better off with a foreign policy that promotes regime change while justifying war with false information?” Shifting the stated goals as events unravel should not satisfy those who believe war must be a last resort used only when our national security is threatened.
How much better off are the Iraqi people? Hundreds of thousands of former inhabitants of Fallajah are not better off with their city flattened and their homes destroyed. Hundreds of thousands are not better off living with foreign soldiers patrolling their street, curfews, and the loss of basic utilities. One hundred thousand dead Iraqis, as estimated by the Lancet Medical Journal, certainly are not better off. Better to be alive under Saddam Hussein than lying in some cold grave.
Praise for the recent election in Iraq has silenced many critics of the war. Yet the election was held under martial law implemented by a foreign power, mirroring conditions we rightfully condemned as a farce when carried out in the old Soviet system and more recently in Lebanon. Why is it that what is good for the goose isn’t always good for the gander?
Our government fails to recognize that legitimate elections are the consequence of freedom, and that an artificial election does not create freedom. In our own history we note that freedom was achieved first and elections followed-- not the other way around.
One news report claimed that the Shiites actually received 56% of the vote, but such an outcome couldn’t be allowed for it would preclude a coalition of the Kurds and Shiites from controlling the Sunnis and preventing a theocracy from forming. This reminds us of the statement made months ago by Secretary Rumsfeld when asked about a Shiite theocracy emerging from a majority democratic vote, and he assured us that would not happen. Democracy, we know, is messy and needs tidying up a bit when we don’t like the results.
Some have described Baghdad and especially the green zone, as being surrounded by unmanageable territory. The highways in and out of Baghdad are not yet secured. Many anticipate a civil war will break out sometime soon in Iraq; some claim it’s already underway.
We have seen none of the promised oil production that was supposed to provide grateful Iraqis with the means to repay us for the hundreds of billions that American taxpayers have spent on the war. Some have justified our continuous presence in the Persian Gulf since 1990 because of a need to protect “our” oil. Yet now that Saddam Hussein is gone, and the occupation supposedly is a great success, gasoline at the pumps is reaching record highs approaching $3 per gallon.
Though the Iraqi election has come and gone, there still is no government in place and the next election-- supposedly the real one-- is not likely to take place on time. Do the American people have any idea who really won the dubious election at all?
The oil-for-food scandal under Saddam Hussein has been replaced by corruption in the distribution of U.S. funds to rebuild Iraq. Already there is an admitted $9 billion discrepancy in the accounting of these funds. The over-billing by Halliburton is no secret, but the process has not changed.
The whole process is corrupt. It just doesn’t make sense to most Americans to see their tax dollars used to fight an unnecessary and unjustified war. First they see American bombs destroying a country, and then American taxpayers are required to rebuild it. Today it’s easier to get funding to rebuild infrastructure in Iraq than to build a bridge in the United States. Indeed, we cut the Army Corps of Engineers’ budget and operate on the cheap with our veterans as the expenditures in Iraq skyrocket.
One question the war promoters don’t want to hear asked, because they don’t want to face up to the answer, is this: “Are Christian Iraqis better off today since we decided to build a new Iraq through force of arms?” The answer is plainly no.
Sure, there are only 800,000 Christians living in Iraq, but under Saddam Hussein they were free to practice their religion. Tariq Aziz, a Christian, served in Saddam Hussein’s cabinet as Foreign Minister-- something that would never happen in Saudi Arabia, Israel, or any other Middle Eastern country. Today, the Christian churches in Iraq are under attack and Christians are no longer safe. Many Christians have been forced to flee Iraq and migrate to Syria. It’s strange that the human rights advocates in the U.S. Congress have expressed no concern for the persecution now going on against Christians in Iraq. Both the Sunni and the Shiite Muslims support the attacks on Christians. In fact, persecuting Christians is one of the few areas in which they agree-- the other being the removal of all foreign forces from Iraqi soil.
Considering the death, destruction, and continual chaos in Iraq, it’s difficult to accept the blanket statement that the Iraqis all feel much better off with the U.S. in control rather than Saddam Hussein. Security in the streets and criminal violence are not anywhere near being under control.
But there’s another question that is equally important: “Are the American people better off because of the Iraq war?”
One thing for sure, the 1,500 plus dead American soldiers aren’t better off. The nearly 20,000 severely injured or sickened American troops are not better off. The families, the wives, the husbands, children, parents, and friends of those who lost so much are not better off.
The families and the 40,000 troops who were forced to re-enlist against their will-- a de facto draft-- are not feeling better off. They believe they have been deceived by their enlistment agreements.
The American taxpayers are not better off having spent over 200 billion dollars to pursue this war, with billions yet to be spent. The victims of the inflation that always accompanies a guns-and-butter policy are already getting a dose of what will become much worse.
Are our relationships with the rest of the world better off? I’d say no. Because of the war, our alliances with the Europeans are weaker than ever. The anti-American hatred among a growing number of Muslims around the world is greater than ever. This makes terrorist attacks more likely than they were before the invasion. Al Qaeda recruiting has accelerated. Iraq is being used as a training ground for al Qaeda terrorists, which it never was under Hussein’s rule. So as our military recruitment efforts suffer, Osama bin Laden benefits by attracting more terrorist volunteers.
Oil was approximately $27 a barrel before the war, now it’s more than twice that. I wonder who benefits from this?
Because of the war, fewer dollars are available for real national security and defense of this country. Military spending is up, but the way the money is spent distracts from true national defense and further undermines our credibility around the world.
The ongoing war’s lack of success has played a key role in diminishing morale in our military services. Recruitment is sharply down, and most branches face shortages of troops. Many young Americans rightly fear a coming draft-- which will be required if we do not reassess and change the unrealistic goals of our foreign policy.
The appropriations for the war are essentially off-budget and obscured, but contribute nonetheless to the runaway deficit and increase in the national debt. If these trends persist, inflation with economic stagnation will be the inevitable consequences of a misdirected policy.
One of the most significant consequences in times of war that we ought to be concerned about is the inevitable loss of personal liberty. Too often in the patriotic nationalism that accompanies armed conflict, regardless of the cause, there is a willingness to sacrifice personal freedoms in pursuit of victory. The real irony is that we are told we go hither and yon to fight for freedom and our Constitution, while carelessly sacrificing the very freedoms here at home we’re supposed to be fighting for. It makes no sense.
This willingness to give up hard-fought personal liberties has been especially noticeable in the atmosphere of the post-September 11th war on terrorism. Security has replaced liberty as our main political goal, damaging the American spirit. Sadly, the whole process is done in the name of patriotism and in a spirit of growing militant nationalism.
These attitudes and fears surrounding the 9-11 tragedy, and our eagerness to go to war in the Middle East against countries not responsible for the attacks, have allowed a callousness to develop in our national psyche that justifies torture and rejects due process of law for those who are suspects and not convicted criminals.
We have come to accept pre-emptive war as necessary, constitutional, and morally justifiable. Starting a war without a proper declaration is now of no concern to most Americans or the U.S. Congress. Let’s hope and pray the rumors of an attack on Iran in June by U.S. Armed Forces are wrong.
A large segment of the Christian community and its leadership think nothing of rationalizing war in the name of a religion that prides itself on the teachings of the Prince of Peace, who instructed us that blessed are the peacemakers-- not the warmongers.
We casually accept our role as world policeman, and believe we have a moral obligation to practice nation building in our image regardless of the number of people who die in the process.
We have lost our way by rejecting the beliefs that made our country great. We no longer trust in trade, friendship, peace, the Constitution, and the principle of neutrality while avoiding entangling alliances with the rest of the world. Spreading the message of hope and freedom by setting an example for the world has been replaced by a belief that use of armed might is the only practical tool to influence the world-- and we have accepted, as the only superpower, the principle of initiating war against others.
In the process, Congress and the people have endorsed a usurpation of their own authority, generously delivered to the executive and judicial branches-- not to mention international government bodies. The concept of national sovereignty is now seen as an issue that concerns only the fringe in our society.
Protection of life and liberty must once again become the issue that drives political thought in this country. If this goal is replaced by an effort to promote world government, use force to plan the economy, regulate the people, and police the world, against the voluntary desires of the people, it can be done only with the establishment of a totalitarian state. There’s no need for that. It’s up to Congress and the American people to decide our fate, and there is still time to correct our mistakes.
Saturday, April 09, 2005
Question of the year
"WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE IS TRUE EVEN THOUGH YOU CANNOT PROVE IT?"
From The Edge
Now that's a question that gets stuck in your head.
Now after you have your short list of unprovable beliefs, here's a couple more questions you can ask yourself about them.
Where did this belief come from? (or Who? What? When?)
Does having this belief make my life better or worse?
Post a comment and let me know what you come up with.
From The Edge
Now that's a question that gets stuck in your head.
Now after you have your short list of unprovable beliefs, here's a couple more questions you can ask yourself about them.
Where did this belief come from? (or Who? What? When?)
Does having this belief make my life better or worse?
Post a comment and let me know what you come up with.
Thursday, March 31, 2005
Lurking In Your Yogurt: Live Cultures That May Boost Immunity
Chicago Tribune
http://www.chicagotribune.com
March 28, 2005
Bacteria in your food are a bad thing, usually: Think of E. coli or other harmful bugs. But a whole other world of "friendly" bacteria lurks out there. Called "probiotics" and found in such products as yogurt and yogurt drinks, they provide health benefits beyond the regular live cultures found in those foods.
Probiotics are among the fastest-growing category of functional foods, according to the market research firm Mintel, which cites a 140 percent increase last year in the launch of new probiotic-fortified products.
So far, the strongest evidence on probiotics has focused on digestive- tract problems such as lactose intolerance and diarrhea-including infectious diarrhea among children and the type that develops after a person has taken antiobiotics (which wipe out both good and bad bacteria in their path, altering the natural balance of the digestive tract).
Additional studies suggest probiotics may help decrease the risk of colon cancer and ease symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome and the more serious inflammatory bowel disease, which includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Researchers also are beginning to see signs that probiotics may help lower blood pressure and blood cholesterol levels.
Europeans have long embraced the concept of probiotics (which is derived from the Greek word meaning "for life"), but Americans haven't fully warmed up to the idea of downing a drink swimming with billions of live microorganisms.
"We've done a good job in this country of scaring people to death of microbes," said Mary Ellen Sanders, president of the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics, a non-profit scientific organization. "People don't understand the important role microbes can play in our health."
Unlike antibiotics, which kill harmful microbes in the body, probiotics simply take up temporary residence and neutralize the negative effects of the "bad" bacteria living there. Some of the benefits of probiotics appear to be their feisty aggression toward these nasty bugs in our bodies, Sanders said.
EMERGING HEALTH BENEFITS
Some of the most exciting research on probiotics involves its potential to boost immunity, according to Allan Walker, a professor of nutrition and pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, who is studying how exposure to good bacteria could help children decrease their susceptibility to infections and allergies.
Probiotics appear to communicate with the cells in our intestines to turn on antibodies to fight infections, Walker said. This "cross-talk" helps rev up our immune response so we're better prepared to deal with invading bacteria and viruses that could make us sick, he said.
Though research is preliminary, scientists are revealing some promising immune function benefits, particularly among children:
-Finnish researchers cut in half a baby's risk of developing allergies early in life by giving probiotics to expectant mothers and their newborns who were predisposed to asthma, hay fever and eczema.
-A recent study published in Pediatrics found that infants fed formula containing probiotics had less diarrhea and fever, and fewer clinic visits and absences from child care centers, compared to those who consumed a formula without probiotics.
-A seven-month study of more than 570 children in day care centers found that intake of a probiotic milk reduced the number and severity of respiratory infections and the need for antibiotics.
TRACKING DOWN `GOOD BUGS'
Some foods may be made with microbes-everything from sourdough bread to pickles, sauerkraut, kim chi, miso and fermented meats like salami. But it doesn't mean all the "good bugs" survived the processing or that the strains used provide actual health benefits, which is required before it would qualify as a probiotic, Sanders said.
You also can't assume that all yogurts contain probiotics (although not all experts agree on where you draw the line). Though many of the national brands contain "live active cultures," the typical strains used to make yogurt don't make it the full ride through our digestive tract.
These starter bacteria produce lactic acid and are used to give yogurt its tart flavor, but they don't seem to have the same types of health benefits as probiotics, which do survive the digestive tract, Sanders said (although they still might help folks with lactose intolerance).
If you want a yogurt with the gut-healthy, friendly bugs, you need to scour the label to see if the manufacturer supplemented the standard strains with probiotic bacteria. The two most common are Lactobacillus acidophilus and bifidobacteria (or bifidus). You won't necessarily see the word "probiotics" on the label.
These bacteria (and their probiotic cousins L. casei, L. reuteri and others) also are being added to fermented milks like acidophilus milk, kefir and soy beverages.
New to the market is Dannon's DanActive, a probiotic dairy drink that contains 10 billion live cultures per serving-or 10 times more cultures than yogurt, according to the label. DanActive also appears to be the first product to use the immunity claim to try and sell Americans on the benefits of live microorganisms. The label touts its ability to "naturally strengthen your body's defense system."
Companies are exploring adding the cultures to a wide range of non-dairy products, including breakfast cereal, energy bars, juices and other beverages, and even candy. Capsules of probiotics also are available in health food stores, but experts believe there may be additional benefits of getting your bacteria in a food form, especially through dairy products.
To take care of the "good" bacteria you buy, don't let your probiotic products linger at room temperature, and don't heat them or you'll kill the live cultures. Also, it's best to consume probiotics before the use-by date on the label (or within the week following the sell-by date). Otherwise, the live cultures begin to die off.
To reap the full benefits, you need to consume probiotics on a regular basis. The friendly bacteria only persist in your gut as long as there's a steady supply. So if you don't eat any foods or supplements containing probiotics, after about a month they will be gone.
AND DON'T FORGET PREBIOTICS
Now that you've gotten to know the term "probiotics," there's something else you should add to your lexicon: prebiotics.
These are types of dietary fiber, such as inulin and oligosaccharides, that help nourish the growth of good bacteria. Companies are beginning to introduce new products that contain a combination of probiotics and prebiotics.
Consuming foods that naturally contain prebiotics-garlic, onions, artichokes, bananas and whole grains-also can help stimulate the good bugs that naturally reside in your digestive tract.
(c) 2005, Chicago Tribune. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune News
Service.
http://www.chicagotribune.com
http://www.chicagotribune.com
March 28, 2005
Bacteria in your food are a bad thing, usually: Think of E. coli or other harmful bugs. But a whole other world of "friendly" bacteria lurks out there. Called "probiotics" and found in such products as yogurt and yogurt drinks, they provide health benefits beyond the regular live cultures found in those foods.
Probiotics are among the fastest-growing category of functional foods, according to the market research firm Mintel, which cites a 140 percent increase last year in the launch of new probiotic-fortified products.
So far, the strongest evidence on probiotics has focused on digestive- tract problems such as lactose intolerance and diarrhea-including infectious diarrhea among children and the type that develops after a person has taken antiobiotics (which wipe out both good and bad bacteria in their path, altering the natural balance of the digestive tract).
Additional studies suggest probiotics may help decrease the risk of colon cancer and ease symptoms of irritable bowel syndrome and the more serious inflammatory bowel disease, which includes Crohn's disease and ulcerative colitis. Researchers also are beginning to see signs that probiotics may help lower blood pressure and blood cholesterol levels.
Europeans have long embraced the concept of probiotics (which is derived from the Greek word meaning "for life"), but Americans haven't fully warmed up to the idea of downing a drink swimming with billions of live microorganisms.
"We've done a good job in this country of scaring people to death of microbes," said Mary Ellen Sanders, president of the International Scientific Association for Probiotics and Prebiotics, a non-profit scientific organization. "People don't understand the important role microbes can play in our health."
Unlike antibiotics, which kill harmful microbes in the body, probiotics simply take up temporary residence and neutralize the negative effects of the "bad" bacteria living there. Some of the benefits of probiotics appear to be their feisty aggression toward these nasty bugs in our bodies, Sanders said.
EMERGING HEALTH BENEFITS
Some of the most exciting research on probiotics involves its potential to boost immunity, according to Allan Walker, a professor of nutrition and pediatrics at Harvard Medical School, who is studying how exposure to good bacteria could help children decrease their susceptibility to infections and allergies.
Probiotics appear to communicate with the cells in our intestines to turn on antibodies to fight infections, Walker said. This "cross-talk" helps rev up our immune response so we're better prepared to deal with invading bacteria and viruses that could make us sick, he said.
Though research is preliminary, scientists are revealing some promising immune function benefits, particularly among children:
-Finnish researchers cut in half a baby's risk of developing allergies early in life by giving probiotics to expectant mothers and their newborns who were predisposed to asthma, hay fever and eczema.
-A recent study published in Pediatrics found that infants fed formula containing probiotics had less diarrhea and fever, and fewer clinic visits and absences from child care centers, compared to those who consumed a formula without probiotics.
-A seven-month study of more than 570 children in day care centers found that intake of a probiotic milk reduced the number and severity of respiratory infections and the need for antibiotics.
TRACKING DOWN `GOOD BUGS'
Some foods may be made with microbes-everything from sourdough bread to pickles, sauerkraut, kim chi, miso and fermented meats like salami. But it doesn't mean all the "good bugs" survived the processing or that the strains used provide actual health benefits, which is required before it would qualify as a probiotic, Sanders said.
You also can't assume that all yogurts contain probiotics (although not all experts agree on where you draw the line). Though many of the national brands contain "live active cultures," the typical strains used to make yogurt don't make it the full ride through our digestive tract.
These starter bacteria produce lactic acid and are used to give yogurt its tart flavor, but they don't seem to have the same types of health benefits as probiotics, which do survive the digestive tract, Sanders said (although they still might help folks with lactose intolerance).
If you want a yogurt with the gut-healthy, friendly bugs, you need to scour the label to see if the manufacturer supplemented the standard strains with probiotic bacteria. The two most common are Lactobacillus acidophilus and bifidobacteria (or bifidus). You won't necessarily see the word "probiotics" on the label.
These bacteria (and their probiotic cousins L. casei, L. reuteri and others) also are being added to fermented milks like acidophilus milk, kefir and soy beverages.
New to the market is Dannon's DanActive, a probiotic dairy drink that contains 10 billion live cultures per serving-or 10 times more cultures than yogurt, according to the label. DanActive also appears to be the first product to use the immunity claim to try and sell Americans on the benefits of live microorganisms. The label touts its ability to "naturally strengthen your body's defense system."
Companies are exploring adding the cultures to a wide range of non-dairy products, including breakfast cereal, energy bars, juices and other beverages, and even candy. Capsules of probiotics also are available in health food stores, but experts believe there may be additional benefits of getting your bacteria in a food form, especially through dairy products.
To take care of the "good" bacteria you buy, don't let your probiotic products linger at room temperature, and don't heat them or you'll kill the live cultures. Also, it's best to consume probiotics before the use-by date on the label (or within the week following the sell-by date). Otherwise, the live cultures begin to die off.
To reap the full benefits, you need to consume probiotics on a regular basis. The friendly bacteria only persist in your gut as long as there's a steady supply. So if you don't eat any foods or supplements containing probiotics, after about a month they will be gone.
AND DON'T FORGET PREBIOTICS
Now that you've gotten to know the term "probiotics," there's something else you should add to your lexicon: prebiotics.
These are types of dietary fiber, such as inulin and oligosaccharides, that help nourish the growth of good bacteria. Companies are beginning to introduce new products that contain a combination of probiotics and prebiotics.
Consuming foods that naturally contain prebiotics-garlic, onions, artichokes, bananas and whole grains-also can help stimulate the good bugs that naturally reside in your digestive tract.
(c) 2005, Chicago Tribune. Distributed by Knight Ridder/Tribune News
Service.
http://www.chicagotribune.com
Thursday, March 24, 2005
Mondays With Martha by Wendi Friesen
Comments: Here's a story from one of the newsletters I get. This will really make you question if the right thing is being done in the Terri Schiavo case.
Mondays With Martha
A few years ago I had the opportunity to spend my Mondays with Martha.
Martha had been unresponsive for 3 years, the cause was unknown. She seemed to be unable to respond, move, or interact in any way. Her hands were stiff and unable to open or relax. Her legs were locked in a bent position.
If she was unable to respond and had been this way for 3 years, surely there was nothing I could do. To make things worse, I had to drive over an hour to her house where her 2 daughters cared for her.. I certainly didn't see why I needed to try to help when no one else had been able to.
What at first seemed like an impossible task, became a journey of great joy.
Martha's most immediate need seemed to be to communicate and get her hands and legs to relax. Her fingers were curled and stiff as wood. Her face was unresponsive. Her legs were stiff and unbendable. She had a feeding tube and her daughters fed her through this and cared for her with dedication and love. In their dedication they chose to continue to try to heal the condition that robbed their mother of life.
In the first session, I sat close to Martha and stroked her face, her arm, her hand. I had no idea where to start or what I could do, as a Hypnotherapist that the doctors were unable to do.
We played beautiful music, I put my head close to her and I took her on an imaginary walk down a beautiful path. My plan was to re-establish her connection with her senses and create movement in her hands and legs. I described a cold stream that had crystal clear water from the new, fresh, melting snow, and asked her to put her toes in the water and feel the icy coolness. We went to a sunny meadow and found little flowers and sat in the warmth of the sun and imagined making daisy chains out of the tiny flowers. I talked about two little girls who saw what she was doing and come over to learn the daisy chains. Together we felt the grasses, and the warmth of the sun, the breeze as it blew her hair. I described in great detail how her nimble fingers slid the flower into the stem of the other.
As I talked, I stroked her hands and fingers, saying relax and let go- your fingers open and relax, and I continued to describe the sensations in her body.
Her two daughters were in the room and after our session they told me that the stream and meadow and daisy chains were an actual memory from their childhood with their mother. The details I described on the journey were just as they remembered.
In the next sessions I asked her inner mind to create a connection with her fingers and to create an ideo-motor response (an involuntary movement of a finger) that indicates yes, and another finger to move to indicate no. And as I asked, her fingers would move. We could communicate! Her hands became relaxed and soft, her legs could bend.
In the weeks that followed she began to have _expression when I came in the room. She would raise her eyebrows when she heard my voice, and yes, she smiled. Her progress was remarkable. We didn't expect much, and every little bit of progress was so very rewarding.
One day, I decided to sing. I asked her to sing with me and remember the music of her soul, her voice carrying the wonderful sounds that her soul has been longing share. No sounds were made at first and it just seemed that we could feel how much she wanted to sing. Soon she began to make sounds, soft, beautiful sounds - the aaaahs and oooohs that her willing mind learned to express as she healed. Amazing.
I am sure there were many that wanted to give up on her, pull her feeding tube, let her die since there was no hope.
But now, here in her room, after just a few months, Martha communicated. Her face had _expression. She made sounds. Her muscle unfurled and her hands could move. The joy she brought to her daughters was beautiful.
Martha's daughters- at this time in their adult life, were dedicated to their mother. Their life had meaning, joy, and reward because they could care for Martha and love her.
I can remember my drive home every Monday after seeing Martha. It was a long drive, over an hour that I spent reflecting on how much Martha taught me and how deeply she touched me. Some days I cried because I was so touched to be a part of such beautiful devotion of family.
Martha taught me, touched me, and will always be with me. I reached her because I didn't know how not to. I did it because I could.
I am saddened that the courts can take away a Mother and Fathers right to care for their daughter. Terry Schiavo brings joy, meaning, purpose and love to that family, regardless of how unresponsive she seems. This situation has turned up our country's awareness of what is real, what is right, and where we place our priorities. If Terry wanted to die she would have left long ago.
If a court had ordered the feeding tube to be removed from Martha her daughters memories of her would be filled with anger and helplessness.
I remember Martha for what she taught me, and the purpose she brought to the lives of those who loved her.
Thank you Martha.
Bless you.
And to the parents and family of Terry, my heart goes with you.
Peace on Earth,
Wendi Friesen
Mondays With Martha
A few years ago I had the opportunity to spend my Mondays with Martha.
Martha had been unresponsive for 3 years, the cause was unknown. She seemed to be unable to respond, move, or interact in any way. Her hands were stiff and unable to open or relax. Her legs were locked in a bent position.
If she was unable to respond and had been this way for 3 years, surely there was nothing I could do. To make things worse, I had to drive over an hour to her house where her 2 daughters cared for her.. I certainly didn't see why I needed to try to help when no one else had been able to.
What at first seemed like an impossible task, became a journey of great joy.
Martha's most immediate need seemed to be to communicate and get her hands and legs to relax. Her fingers were curled and stiff as wood. Her face was unresponsive. Her legs were stiff and unbendable. She had a feeding tube and her daughters fed her through this and cared for her with dedication and love. In their dedication they chose to continue to try to heal the condition that robbed their mother of life.
In the first session, I sat close to Martha and stroked her face, her arm, her hand. I had no idea where to start or what I could do, as a Hypnotherapist that the doctors were unable to do.
We played beautiful music, I put my head close to her and I took her on an imaginary walk down a beautiful path. My plan was to re-establish her connection with her senses and create movement in her hands and legs. I described a cold stream that had crystal clear water from the new, fresh, melting snow, and asked her to put her toes in the water and feel the icy coolness. We went to a sunny meadow and found little flowers and sat in the warmth of the sun and imagined making daisy chains out of the tiny flowers. I talked about two little girls who saw what she was doing and come over to learn the daisy chains. Together we felt the grasses, and the warmth of the sun, the breeze as it blew her hair. I described in great detail how her nimble fingers slid the flower into the stem of the other.
As I talked, I stroked her hands and fingers, saying relax and let go- your fingers open and relax, and I continued to describe the sensations in her body.
Her two daughters were in the room and after our session they told me that the stream and meadow and daisy chains were an actual memory from their childhood with their mother. The details I described on the journey were just as they remembered.
In the next sessions I asked her inner mind to create a connection with her fingers and to create an ideo-motor response (an involuntary movement of a finger) that indicates yes, and another finger to move to indicate no. And as I asked, her fingers would move. We could communicate! Her hands became relaxed and soft, her legs could bend.
In the weeks that followed she began to have _expression when I came in the room. She would raise her eyebrows when she heard my voice, and yes, she smiled. Her progress was remarkable. We didn't expect much, and every little bit of progress was so very rewarding.
One day, I decided to sing. I asked her to sing with me and remember the music of her soul, her voice carrying the wonderful sounds that her soul has been longing share. No sounds were made at first and it just seemed that we could feel how much she wanted to sing. Soon she began to make sounds, soft, beautiful sounds - the aaaahs and oooohs that her willing mind learned to express as she healed. Amazing.
I am sure there were many that wanted to give up on her, pull her feeding tube, let her die since there was no hope.
But now, here in her room, after just a few months, Martha communicated. Her face had _expression. She made sounds. Her muscle unfurled and her hands could move. The joy she brought to her daughters was beautiful.
Martha's daughters- at this time in their adult life, were dedicated to their mother. Their life had meaning, joy, and reward because they could care for Martha and love her.
I can remember my drive home every Monday after seeing Martha. It was a long drive, over an hour that I spent reflecting on how much Martha taught me and how deeply she touched me. Some days I cried because I was so touched to be a part of such beautiful devotion of family.
Martha taught me, touched me, and will always be with me. I reached her because I didn't know how not to. I did it because I could.
I am saddened that the courts can take away a Mother and Fathers right to care for their daughter. Terry Schiavo brings joy, meaning, purpose and love to that family, regardless of how unresponsive she seems. This situation has turned up our country's awareness of what is real, what is right, and where we place our priorities. If Terry wanted to die she would have left long ago.
If a court had ordered the feeding tube to be removed from Martha her daughters memories of her would be filled with anger and helplessness.
I remember Martha for what she taught me, and the purpose she brought to the lives of those who loved her.
Thank you Martha.
Bless you.
And to the parents and family of Terry, my heart goes with you.
Peace on Earth,
Wendi Friesen
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
