July 24, 2014

Spanking The Gray Matter Out Of Our Kids (Yes, Don't Spank, Please)

http://www.cnn.com/2014/07/23/health/effects-spanking-brain/index.html?iid=article_sidebarHow

"...

Science tells a different story. Researchers say physical punishment actually alters the brain -- not only in an "I'm traumatized" kind of way but also in an "I literally have less gray matter in my brain" kind of way.

"Exposing children to HCP (harsh corporal punishment) may have detrimental effects on trajectories of brain development," one 2009 study concluded.

Harsh corporal punishment in the study was defined as at least one spanking a month for more than three years, frequently done with objects such as a belt or paddle. Researchers found children who were regularly spanked had less gray matter in certain areas of the prefrontal cortex that have been linked to depression, addiction and other mental health disorders, the study authors say.

The researchers also found "significant correlations" between the amount of gray matter in these brain regions and the children's performance on an IQ test.

..."


Yes, I hope this is obvious to most DUers, but the piece is actually well done, and well supported with links to studies.

July 24, 2014

Organic pesticides aren’t necessarily more sustainable than synthetic

http://nutsci.org/2010/06/24/organic-pesticides-arent-always-more-sustainable-than-synthetic/

"It would seem illogical that organic compounds are all more sustainable than synthetics, or vice versa. The term “organic” has a health halo, biasing many people toward believing organic growing techniques are best for the environment. I’ve already covered analyses suggesting that there isn’t enough evidence that suggests organic foods are better for your health, so is the higher cost justified by a lessened environmental impact? Bahlai et al. just published a paper suggesting that the dichotomous classification of organic and conventional is not optimal for sustainability, we must evaluate pesticides individually.


According to the authors, sustainable agriculture programs put an emphasis on the development of organic and natural insecticides to control pests, with the assumption that they are safer on the environment compared to synthetics. Public opinion also leans toward this assumption as well. The various practices (organic, conventional, or integrated) have been studied producing different results on sustainability. Differences in methodologies, practice classifications, and a number of other variables make it difficult to draw conclusions at this point. Importantly, they note:

…each system is characterized by a suite of practices which are ideologically, rather than empirically defined, these systems are not mutually exclusive from each other, and vary from region to region depending on regulations. Because of these variations, generalizations about the overall sustainability of one system over another are never universal.

Organic farms do indeed (generally) use pesticides, they just aren’t synthetically made, while conventional farms can use both natural and synthetics.

..."



Well, I found this piece to be well done, and quite interesting...

July 24, 2014

Mike Adams (of NaturalNews), Monsanto, Nazis, and a Very Disturbing Article

Free speech is good, but does this go too far? Certainly, from an ethical standpoint it does. No?

Link to the article with the same title as the thread title:
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2014/07/22/mike-adams-monsanto-nazis-disturbing-article/

From the article by Keith Kloor:

"...

... after reading the latest piece on GMOs by Adams, I have to wonder if he is literally dangerous. Here’s the title of his piece:

Biotech genocide, Monsanto collaborators and the Nazi legacy of ‘science’ as justification for murder

Here’s how it starts:

(NaturalNews) Monsanto is widely recognized as the most hated and most evil corporation on the planet. Even so, several internet-based media websites are now marching to Monsanto’s orders, promoting GMOs and pursuing defamatory character assassination tactics against anyone who opposes GMOs, hoping to silence their important voices.

These Monsanto collaborator sites tend to be “leftist” publications but also include at least one prominent business and finance publisher on the political right. All of them are Monsanto collaborators who have signed on to accelerate heinous crimes being committed against humanity under the false promise of “feeding the world” with toxic GMOs.

This is the mind of a person who Dr. Oz proudly brought on his show earlier in the year. Here’s the sentence from above I want you to keep in mind as you keep reading: “All of them are Monsanto collaborators who have signed on to accelerate heinous crimes being committed against humanity…”

..."


------------------------------------


Kloor followed that piece with another today:

Mike Adams Elevates his Ugly Anti-GMO Campaign
http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/collideascape/2014/07/24/mike-adams-elevates-ugly-anti-gmo-campaign/#.U9Eyc_ldWGc


I have no intention of discussing GMOs on this thread. I'm curious about people's thoughts regarding such rhetoric, which seems to be more common as time goes on. Of course, I could be very wrong about that, but anyway. This is deeply disturbing to me, at least.