Archives

Baxter Community Center launches Gardener’s Guild film series

Baxter Community Center, 935 Baxter St SE, launches its Gardener’s Guild series at 6 p.m. Tuesday April 16 with a free screening of award winning documentary, Soul Food Junkies. In this documentary, award-winning filmmaker Byron Hurt explores the health advantages and disadvantages of the soul food culinary tradition. Free popcorn! After the film, Grand Rapids African American Health Institute‘s executive director Shannon Wilson will lead a discussion. 
On May 14, Baxter’s  Gardener’s Guild , Our Kitchen Table will lead the discussion after a screening of the film, Whats On Your Plate?
For information, call (616) 456-8593.

Hip hop artist Quelle Chris sends GR a personal message

Hip hop artist Quelle Chris gave OKT special permission to share his new release, “We Eat It” a song that addresses the poor food choices that are making people sick in America’s urban neighborhoods. For more good hip hop, stop out to LadyfestGR 2013 tonight. Jean Grae and Invincible take the stage at the Pyramid Scheme , 68 Commerce SW, at 10 p.m. Tickets are $10.

You can follow Quelle on Twitter at  https://twitter.com/QuelleChris

Sickly sweet: The science and policy of fructose overconsumption in America

Free Webinar!

Monday March 18, 2013 12 – 1 p.m. EST

REGISTER HERE

America’s’ sweet-laden diet is helping drive obesity and chronic metabolic disease. Join Dr. Robert Lustig, noted pediatrician, neuroendocrinologist and author, as he explores the science behind this phenomenon, as laid out in his new book, Fat Chance. Lustig also addresses America’s fructose addiction as an outgrowth of bad policies and a bad environment. His research reveals how food industry practices lay the groundwork for overconsumption of fructose, how government policy first enabled them, and then more recently turned a blind eye as sugar politics became charged.

Co-sponsors:

  • Collaborative on Health and the Environment
  • Health Care Without Harm
  • Healthy Food Action
  • San Francisco Bay Area Physicians for Social Responsibility

Field Work’s Dirty Secret: Agribusiness Exploitation of Undocumented Labor

This article by Sadhbh Walshe is re-posted from The Guardian via GRIID.  Editor’s Note: The Michigan Department of Civil Rights published a report on the working and living conditions of migrant workers in Michigan. The report acknowledges that working conditions are as bad and in some cases worse now than they were for migrant workers in the early 1960s.

This week, a bipartisan group of senators and the president unveiled their respective plans for much needed and long overdue immigration reform. For the 11 million or so undocumented immigrants who have settled in this country, the path to citizenship being paved for them looks like it will be more tough than fair.mexican-worker-in-us-006

While we don’t yet know how this will allplay out, at least there will be a path. For one group of immigrants, however – the farm workers who sustain our food supply – there is reason to fear that what awaits them is not a path to citizenship, but their cemented status as indentured servants.

Most farm work in America is performed by immigrants, most of whom are undocumented and therefore exploitable. The big agribusinesses that hire these immigrants will tell you that they need an unfettered supply of cheap foreign labor, because they cannot find Americans willing to do these jobs.

When you consider what these jobs entail – hours of backbreaking work in terrible and often dangerous conditions, subsistence wages with little or no time off, and none of the protections or perks that most of us enjoy (like paid sick days, for instance) – it’s hard to see why anyone with other options would subject themselves to a life that is barely astep above slavery.

In the 1980s, President Ronald Reagan signed a bill into law which introduced some protections for these imported serfs, under what has become known as the guest-worker program. These protections include a minimum wage guarantee, housing that meets an acceptable standard for the duration of the contract, and a guarantee that the worker be paid three-quarters of their full pay should should a season end early.

Most employers would be delighted to get away with all this: being able to hire low-wage workers at will, without the hassle of paying disability insurance or other niceties. But agribusinesses find the guest-worker program’s pitiful protections such a burden that they have mounted a relentless campaign to undermine them, and for the most part, work around them anyway; they hire undocumented workers instead.

According to a report compiled by Eric Ruark (pdf), the director of research at the Federation for American Immigration Reform (Fair), as of 2006, only 27% of workers hired by agribusinesses are American citizens, 21% are green card holders, around 1% are part of the guest worker program … and a whopping 51% are unauthorized immigrants.

It’s agriculture‘s worst kept secret that farm owners routinely break the law by hiring undocumented workers, but the crime receives tacit approval from lawmakers sympathetic to the plight of major agribusinesses, which seem to consider cheap labor their right. In South Carolina, for instance, lawmakers passed their version of Arizona’s draconian bill, and have mandated that employers use an e-verify system to check the immigration status of employees. Farm workers, however, were exempted from verification.

The agribusiness sector has gotten away with exploitative and illegal practices because of ridiculous threats, like the suggestion that should the supply of cheap labor dry up in the US, they will outsource our food production to China. This idle threat is based on the absurd notion that if they have to pay workers higher wages, somehow there will be fewer people willing to do the jobs. The other scare tactic is spreading talk that if they have to increase their expenditure on labor, those costs will have to be passed on to the American consumer.

Several studies have been conducted, however, that expose these hollow threats for the nonsense that they are. A report by the Congressional Research Service (pdf)found no evidence of a labor shortage in the agricultural sector. On the contrary, it found that between 1994 and 2008, the unemployment rate for farm workers was consistently higher than for all other occupations. In other words, agriculture has had a surplus of available workers for decades.

During this period, the agricultural industry has recorded a nearly 80% average annual increase in profits – more than all other major industries. No doubt, these record profits have something to do with the fact that real wages for farm workers have remained stagnant throughout this time. Finally, a 2011 report by the Economic Policy Institute found that an increase in farm workers’ wages of 40% would result in an annual rise in household spending by the American consumer of just $16.

Clearly, the economic argument for allowing one industry a workforce of virtually indentured labor does not hold water. But there is a humanitarian argument to be made, as well, that should be enough to put an end to this exploitative practice immediately. In 2009, the New York Times’ Bob Herbert wrote an article about the horrible treatment of farm workers in upstate New York – in this case, hired to feed and care for ducks farmed to be slaughtered for foie gras.

“The routine is brutal and not very sanitary. Each feeding takes about four hours and once the birds are assigned a feeder, no one else can be substituted during the 22 day force feeding period that leads up to the slaughter … Not only do the feeders get no days off during that long stretch, and no overtime for any of the long hours, but they get very little time even to sleep each day. The feeding schedule for the ducks must be rigidly observed.

“When I asked one of the owners, Izzy Yanay, about the lack of a day of rest, he said of the workers: ‘This notion that they need to rest is completely futile. They don’t like to rest. They want to work seven days.’”

Herbert went on to make the point that we are much more likely to hear complaints about cruelty to ducks by force-feeding than we are about the cruelty to the people hired to feed them. Consumers have long since showed a willingness to pay more for organic meat or chicken because they don’t like the idea of animal cruelty.

Are we really not willing to pay a few cents more for farm produce so that human beings are not treated like animals?

It remains to be seen what the bipartisan “gang of eight” senators have in mind specifically for farm workers in any future immigration bill. But one can only hope that they will not give in to bullying by the spoiled agricultural industry, which continues to deny these workers the same rights and protections every other worker in America enjoys.

Free webinar: How Green Chemistry Could Help Reduce Escalating Rates of Learning and Developmental Disabilities

Join the Great Lakes Green Chemistry Network and  Elise Miller, Director, Collaboration on Health and the Environment for this free webinar 3 p.m. Wednesday,
January 30.

To register, click here.

For decades, science has suggested that chemical contaminants can profoundly impact neurodevelopment starting with fetal development. In fact, the more researchers have focused on known neurotoxicants, such as lead, mercury and PCBs, concerns about how these chemicals might contribute to learning and developmental disabilities have only deepened.

In addition, the growing field of epigenetics now points to the non-genetic heritability over generations of certain health concerns, including neurodevelopmental problems that were initially triggered by exposures to certain contaminants.

As founder and executive director of the Institute of Children’s Environmental Health, Elise Miller started to engage national learning and developmental disabilities groups, such as the Learning Disabilities Association, the American Association on Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities and the Autism Society, in 2002. The intention was to educate these constituencies about the emerging environmental health science so that they could become a strong health-sector voice for chemical policy reform.

What became known as the Collaborative on Health and the Environment’s (CHE’s) Learning and Developmental Disabilities Initiative then helped these organizations catalyze their own environmental health initiatives.

Now as director of the CHE, Elise will discuss the current science on links between chemical contaminants and neurodevelopment and how safer alternatives and green chemistry could reduce exposures that put children at risk for learning and developmental disabilities.

This entry was posted on January 28, 2013, in Policy.

Are America’s Nutrition Professionals in the Pocket of Big Food?

This article by Dave Murphy is re-posted from EcoWatch.

reportcover1

Ever have that creeping feeling that those in charge of watching over our food supply or making recommendations about what constitutes a healthy diet have lost their way? Sadly, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ looks like it has fallen sway to big money corporate contributions and sponsorships from Big Food like junk food giants Coke, Pepsi and Nestlé.

Public health attorney and author Michele Simon asks: Are America’s nutrition professionals in the pocket of Big Food? While the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ 74,000-member trade group partners with the likes of Coke and Hershey’s, the nation’s health continues to suffer from poor diet.

The largest trade group of nutrition professionals—the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics—has a serious credibility problem. In a damning reportreleased yesterday, industry watchdog Eat Drink Politics examines the various forms of corporate sponsorship by Big Food that are undermining the integrity of those professionals most responsible for educating Americans about healthy eating.

The report details, for example, how registered dietitians can earn continuing education units from Coca-Cola, in which they learn that sugar is not a problem for children and how Nestlé, the world’s largest food company can pay $50,000 to host a two-hour “nutrition symposium” at the Academy’s annual meeting. Additional disturbing findings from the report include:

  • Beginning in 2001, the Academy listed 10 food industry sponsors; the 2011 annual report lists 38, a more than three-fold increase;
  • Companies on the Academy’s list of approved continuing education providers include Coca-Cola, Kraft Foods, Nestlé and PepsiCo;
  • At the 2012 annual meeting, 18 organizations—less than five percent of all exhibitors—captured 25 percent of the total exhibitor space. Only two out of the 18 represented whole, non-processed foods;
  • The Corn Refiners Association (lobbyists for high fructose corn syrup) sponsored three “expo impact” sessions at the 2012 annual meeting;
  • A majority of registered dietitians surveyed found three current Academy sponsors “unacceptable” (Coca-Cola, Mars, and PepsiCo);
  • 80 percent of registered dietitians said sponsorship implies Academy endorsement of that company and their products;
  • The Academy has not supported controversial nutrition policies that might upset corporate sponsors, such as limits on soft drink sizes, soda taxes, or Genetically Modified Organisms (GMO) labels;
  • Sponsors and their activities appear to violate the Academy’s own sponsorship guidelines.

Among the report’s recommendations are for the Academy to:

1) provide greater transparency on corporate funding sources;

2) gather input from all members on corporate sponsorship;

3) reject all corporate-sponsored education; and

4) provide better leadership on controversial nutrition policy issues.

Registered dietitian and academy member Andy Bellatti, who has long criticized his professional group’s conflicted corporate sponsorships said:

Michele Simon’s report on the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics is thoroughly researched and expertly points out the different ways in which the nation’s leading nutrition organization harms its reputation, efficacy and members by forming partnerships with food companies that care more about selling products than they do about improving the health of Americans. Anyone concerned about public healthwill realize that the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics is in dire need of systemic change if it hopes to take a leadership role and be taken seriously as the home base of the nation’s nutrition experts.

 

Snyder continues to stack Ag commission with agribusiness people

Reposted from GRIID.org

Yesterday, MLive reported that Michigan Governor Rick Snyder appointed a new member to theMichigan Commission of Agriculture and Rural Development.

farm-subsidies

Fred Walcott, who works for Valley View Pork near Allendale, is the newest of the five-member commission, that is exclusively made up of people who work for large agribusiness operations.

Walcott, who works at a 4,000 acre farm, will serve as commissioner along with Bob Kennedy, who is Vice President of Operations for Auburn Bean and Grain. The website for this business reads like a stock market sheet instead of a place where people respect the land and care for the earth.

Also serving on the Ag Commission is Diane Hansen, owner of Hansen Seed Farm and Donald Coe, the managing partner of Black Star Farms. Based on the information at Black Star Farms, it appears to be more of a tourist destination than a farm.

The fifth member of the Michigan Agriculture Commission is Trever Meachum, who is the production manager for High Acres Fruit Farm, a 3,000 acre farm in Van Buren County.

Adding Walcott demonstrates that the Governor is only interested in having the perspectives of people involved in large agribusiness operations. There is no one on the commission that seems committed to organic and sustainable farming practices, or people who are committed to promoting food justice.

Walcott is also part of the Michigan Pork Producers Association, which represents the interests of large factory farming operations, also known as CAFOs, in Michigan.

More importantly, groups like the Michigan Pork Producers Association and the industry groups represented by those on the ag commission, are also actively involved in federal farm policy issues and are engaged in lobbying efforts to continue the massive taxpayer subsidies currently operating through the Federal Farm Bill.

According to the Environmental Working Group, Michigan Farmers received $79,450,000 in federal subsidies for 2011. Looking at the list of farms that did receive massive subsidies, the majority of them are larger agribusiness operations and not smaller farms engaged in Community Supported Agriculture.

This announcement, coming from Snyder, is another blow to those who are part of the local food movement and those who work for food justice.

“The A to Z on Atrazine: Sex Hormones and America’s Most Popular Pesticide”

Free Webinar

3 pm EST/ 12 pm PST January 15th, 2013

Despite being banned in Europe due to health risks, atrazine, a hormone-disrupting herbicide, is one of the world’s most largely used pesticides — hundreds of millions of pounds per year.  It can be found in our lakes, streams, rain, and drinking water, at levels that make a difference to human health.  Scientists link exposure to increased risk of birth defects, infertility and cancer, among other health impacts.  It turns tadpoles into hermaphrodites.

Indiana neonatologist Dr. Paul Winchester will discuss the science on atrazine exposure and birth defects in particular.  Biologist Emily Marquez, PhD, discusses how communities are monitoring drinking water supplies for atrazine, and are pushing for health protections.  She manages the Grassroots Science Program at Pesticide Action Network.  Finally, we will discuss why this chemical remains on the market in the U.S. and dialogue about roles that health professionals can take in changing our pesticides and chemicals policies.

Learn more and register


Co-sponsors:

Pesticide Action Network, North America; The American Congress of Obstetricians and Gynecologists District IX; Physicians for Social Responsibility Los Angeles (PSRLA); Physicians for Social Responsibility San Francisco Bay Area (PSR); Program on Reproductive Health and the Environment, University of California, San Francisco

 


 

This entry was posted on January 3, 2013, in Policy.

Help stop the unjust land-grab in Detroit

Lottie Spady, Eastern Michigan Environmental Action Council,  explains why the proposed sale of 1,800 lots of land to John Hantz is a case of preferential treatment and foregoes the rights of Detroit’s citizens. Share this with your Detroit area friends and contact  Detroit’s City Council about this unjust land-grab!

Urgent Support for Detroit’s urban gardeners needed

Reposted from Food First 

Hello all national justice friends and allies in food and climate!!

We are facing a situation here in Detroit which many of you are familiar with, the #landgrab!

Please express your support for Detroit grassroots community in the form of a phone call or e-mail to City Council members. Share your insight and expertise as to how similar instances have affected your community. We would really appreciate it!

We attended today’s (Nov. 8) City Council Meeting and the matter was “tabled until next week for council members to gain more insight”, but we recognize this as a band-aid. We need a public hearing on this matter and a community- based strategy based on the following points. Feel free to reference this letter and/or modify it to suit your heartfelt response. A letter with some main points follows and a list of contact information for Detroit City Council follows. Appreciate any and all support!!!

In solidarity!!
Lottie

Some background

Detroit: A Tale of Two Farms.

Big food and land grabbing.

A video response from the Justice Communicators Team

Below is a letter expressing concerns about the proposed Detroit City Council action which would allow for an urban land grab by Hantz Woodlands.

Dear Council Member,

Understanding that land is the base of all power, as a Citizen of Detroit, I am writing to request that the proposed sale of land to Hantz Woodlands be on hold until such a time that a public hearing can be convened for full disclosure of proposed plans and any alternative plans are revealed.

There is concern about the way in which the proposed Hantz Woodlands (formerly known as Hantz Farm) sale has been navigated and the general transparency of the process and its timing as related to the proposed Urban Ag Ordinance.

There is concern about setting a precedent that impedes our ability master plan and govern our 140 mile land footprint in the future. What is the process by which this came to be and is this, in fact ,the same process that a citizen would be able to use to purchase parcels of land, in the same time frame and for the same price?

Governance is the issue at the heart of this land sale. Where are the “plans”? The development folder at Planning and Development should be made public in order to ascertain the scope and plan of this project.

What are the direct community benefits to such a deal for residents? How does this acquisition of 2,000 parcels coincide with the plans for this neighborhood in 20/30/50 years going forward?

What is the environmental impact of the proposed project and its alternatives with regard to pesticide use, fertilization, soil and compost acquisition, etc.

What is the process for investing in and encouraging the stability and expansion of existing urban agricultural sites in the city? Now and when/if such a sale were to take place?

The residents of the City must play an active role in the transformation of their neighborhood and community. We need to make sure that the promise of folks being notified about the sale of adjacent land still exists, there is supposed to be first right of refusal for people within the footprint. The value of the land in large tracts actually has greater value than the selling price.

Concerned citizens are speaking up for a fair, just, transparent process for the sale of city-owned land. Wealthy developers should not be extended favor that is not shown to the average Detroiter. Please e-mail Detroit City Council members to express concerns about how this sweetheart purchase of such a large tract of urban land will affect the ability of Detroit’s citizens to grow their own food.

COUNCIL PRESIDENT CHARLES PUGH
313.224.4510 (office)
CouncilPresidentPugh@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER BRENDA JONES
(313) 224-1245 (office)
bjones_mb@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER SAUNTEEL JENKINS
(313) 224-4248 (office)
councilmemberjenkins@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER KENNETH V. COCKREL, JR
(313) 224-4505 (office)
E-mail: Kenneth.Cockrel@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER BRENDA JONES
(313) 224-1245 (office)
E-mail: bjones_mb@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER ANDRÉ L. SPIVEY
(313) 224-4841;(office)
E-mail: CouncilmanSpivey@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER JAMES TATE
(313) 224-1027 (office)
E-mail: councilmembertate@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER KWAME KENYATTA
(313) 224-1198 (office)
E-mail: K-Kenyatta_MB@detroitmi.gov

COUNCIL MEMBER JOANN WATSON
(313) 224-4535 (office)
E-mail: WatsonJ@detroitmi.gov

This sample letter was drafted by:
East Michigan Environmental Action Council
4605 Cass Ave, Detroit, MI 48201
Contact: Lottie V. Spady, Associate Director
www.emeac.org