Ben & Jerry’s drops “All Natural” from labels

I literally just watched Super Size Me when I came across this article about Ben & Jerry’s dropping the label “All Natural” from its labels.

Ice cream maker Ben & Jerry’s is dropping the phrase “all natural” from all labels after a request from a health advocacy group.

The Center for Science in the Public Interest and the company confirmed the move Monday.

The CSPI told the company last month it should not use “all natural” if products contain alkalized cocoa, corn syrup, hydrogenated oil or other ingredients that are not natural.

Ben & Jerry’s, a unit of consumer products giant Unilever, said it’s not changing any recipes. It’s just removing the label from all products, whether they are among the majority that contain at least one of the ingredients CSPI listed or not.

The CSPI also played a role in “Super Size Me”.

I’m glad to see this move not out of health advocacy (though I’m also happy from that point of view) but because the term “All Natural” is almost entirely without meaning. It’s just some tricky buzzword that helps sell products, but it doesn’t add any information content to any packaging. I hope the next step will be for the FDA to define it, a position strongly supported by the CSPI.

Libby Mitchell would be great for education

In deep contrast to creationist Paul LePage, Libby Mitchell would be excellent for education in Maine.

Mitchell said Maine schools need to emphasize science curriculum more.

“(We) need to make sure they get it and know that there’s a future for them,” she said. “Maine has a school of math and science, which has been very successful, but all of our curriculum needs to focus on that.”

Whereas LePage and the Republican party are hostile towards science, Mitchell recognizes its crucial importance to the future of the state. She knows that in areas of conservation and new technology (especially for clean energy) it’s going to take a lot of quality education. Maine, just like every single place in the entire world, needs a strong core of people who have highly specialized scientific knowledge.

Mitchell also knows that the answer isn’t to just give away degrees – which is precisely what LePage has suggested we do. It’s obvious to anyone remotely intelligent that the biggest obstacle to students gaining the knowledge they need to get high quality jobs is money: people can’t afford to go to college. Mitchell, seeing this overwhelmingly obvious fact, has a solution.

Maine has far too few citizens with a college degree: only 37% of Maine citizens aged 25 to 64 hold a college degree compared with the New England average of 47%. Creating a public/private partnership for a matching grant program to guarantee tuition for the first year at the university system, community colleges, or Maine Maritime Academy will expand access to higher education and degree completion. This will also help lifelong learners by giving people looking to make job transitions help in getting the education and re-training they need.

Rather than make it easier for people to gain degrees, Mitchell is going to make it easier for people to gain knowledge. If you’re a Maine citizen and you don’t want your degree to mean less and less because absolutely everyone can get one for virtually nothing, vote Libby Mitchell.

Judge orders military to reinstate gay soldier

There are a number of nations whose military allows gay soldiers to serve openly with straight soldiers. The obvious reason is that being gay does not make someone a sex-crazed rapist whose only interest is to cause irreparable moral harm to other people by giving them gay. Recent polls show an overwhelming majority of Americans realize this. In fact, the U.S. military largely realizes this, dismissing fewer gay soldiers per year than they did prior to the Afghanistan and Iraq wars; they may as well be saying, ‘Okay, there’s a lot of hatred for gays out there and, really, that’s our motivation, but when it comes down to it, we need good service members.’

Fortunately, in addition to the other recent positive rulings, a judge has declared the military must reinstate a lesbian soldier it dismissed under ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’. He cites the lack of constitutionality of the law due to its uselessness.

“The application of ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ to Major Margaret Witt does not significantly further the government’s interest in promoting military readiness, unit morale and cohesion,” he wrote.

If it did any of these things, ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ would have some validity within its scope. Unfortunately for all the bigots out there, judges are increasingly recognizing that sexual orientation is irrelevant to the effectiveness of military members.

But I think it’s worth pointing out that calling ‘don’t ask, don’t tell’ a failure would be a mistake. The law was a compromise that marked a major step in terms of equal rights for gays. This is in a similar vein to when Jefferson put an end to the slave trade in 1808. That point was pivotal in the effort to end slavery, but it was also virtually all that could be done politically. Learning from his earlier days in Virginia politics, he knew any effort to end slavery was premature in his lifetime, lest he lose all political capital and ability to govern in any other area. A similar tale can be told of Clinton. Outright ending the unjustified discrimination against gays in the military was virtually impossible at the time (and it’s still proving to be difficult). But by getting the best deal he could for gay service members, Clinton made the first big step in ending the discrimination they face in the military. The fortunate difference here is that it won’t take us 57 years to reach Clinton’s goal.

Anti-vax crowd causing deaths

Anti-vaccine people are a significant danger. They encourage a state ignorance or fear, or both. There’s hardly a discernible reason why they want to advocate against something that has saved so many lives without once causing autism or any of the other horrible conditions they falsely attribute to vaccinations. Perhaps it’s a hatred of “Big Pharma” or maybe it’s a general anti-science attitude. I’m not entirely sure. But whatever the reason, the results are deadly.

State health officials reported Thursday that California is on track to break a 55-year record for whooping cough infections in an epidemic that has already claimed the lives of nine infants.

At least 4,017 cases of the highly contagious illness have been reported in California, according to the state. Data from the Centers for Disease Prevention and Control show 11,466 cases nationwide, though the federal numbers are known to lag behind local reporting.

Vaccinations would have almost certainly saved all those infants. Even if they didn’t get the vaccines themselves, if roughly 95% of all other members of at-risk groups were vaccinated, they probably wouldn’t have faced any illness.

And there’s more.

A measles outbreak has claimed the lives of 70 children in Zimbabwe over the past two weeks, mostly among families from apostolic sects that shun vaccinations, state media said Thursday.

This is both unnecessary and an extension of the anti-vax movement that is taking place in the United States and Europe. We should know better.

It isn’t surprising that religion is involved. Few religious groups overtly advocate against modern medicine based upon their religion, but many of them are hostile towards all the advances human society has made because they’re hostile towards science. There is an unresolvable conflict between science and religion so long as both exist, and this is an extension of that, just as the anti-vax movement in the U.S. and Europe can be partially labeled an extension the conflict. (All the causes, though, are perplexing, and as I said earlier, I just don’t know all the motivations.)

Children aren’t getting autism or any other disease or condition from vaccines. They’re only gaining protection needed for the stability and strength of their health.

Vaccinate.

Follow-up: Clay Greene, Harold Scull

Clay Greene and Harold Scull were an elderly gay couple that was separated by the state under false pretenses. They had all the possible paperwork they could in order to be sure they had all the rights they deserved. But that was unimportant to Sonoma County in California. The two were forced to live out Harold’s last days in separate nursing homes; Clay shouldn’t have even been placed in a home. Their property was stolen and sold by the county, gone forever except in Clay’s memories. It’s a tragedy that ought to move everybody.

Clay soon brought a lawsuit against the county. I’m reporting this late, I know, but a settlement was reached back in July.

A case of reported domestic violence involving two elderly Sonoma County gay men that led to a lawsuit claiming discrimination by the Public Guardian’s office which assisted them was settled today when the County agreed to pay $300,000 for property that belonged to the men which was sold for less than its full alleged value at auction.

What’s unfortunate is that the only source I can find is the one I’ve given here, and that’s a press release from the county. Everyone knows a settlement usually means the defendant knows a loss was guaranteed. But that doesn’t stop the lying.

“This is a case about the County doing the right thing and stepping in to assist an individual, Harold Scull, who made claims of domestic abuse against Clay Greene,” said attorney Greg Spaulding, representing the County in the settlement. “It is everyone’s right—no matter what their sexual orientation—to have a relationship that is not abusive.”

Except charges were never filed. No steps were taken to prove beyond any doubt, much less a reasonable one, that Clay had ever abused Harold. All that happened was the county stole property from two men, placed one in what was effectively a prison, and then lied. Now that it’s obvious to everyone that they were lying, they’re doubling down on the lies. Take a look at the first quote I put up. It sounds like the county only paid for undervalued property. In fact, it was stolen property, but putting that aside, here’s what they really paid.

This settlement, in which the County agreed to pay $300,000 for attorney fees, $275,000 to Clay Greene and $25,000 to the estate of Harold Scull for allegedly undervalued sold property, allows the County to avoid costs associated with a lengthy trial.

The real cost is $600,000, not $300,000. And does anyone believe that the county is merely paying the difference in the stolen undervalued property? They’re giving a massive chunk to Clay while only a small portion to Harold’s estate. How plausible is it that the two men had such unequal shares of property after living together for 20 years? Clearly the county is paying $25,000 to Harold’s estate for the sake of undervalued property, but it’s paying Clay so much because they know they would face a humiliating and just loss at trial that would result in a far bigger payment. It’s that inevitable loss they mean when they talk about “costs associated with a lengthy trial”.

It’s good that Clay has effectively won his case, but none of this changes the fact that he was forced to miss the majority of the last few months of Harold’s life.

Lady Gaga comes to Maine

I’m not a fan of terrible music, but Lady Gaga made a lobbying trip to Maine that makes her worthy of a mention on this blog.

The world’s biggest pop star came to Portland on Monday as part of a last-minute lobbying effort to encourage U.S. Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins of Maine to vote to repeal “don’t ask, don’t tell,” a policy that calls on service members who are gay to remain closeted and prohibits recruiters from asking. It also calls for outed soldiers to be discharged.

Of course, Collins voted with the other Republicans to knock down the bill, but she did it out of a desire to be allowed to present other amendments, not because she hates gays; Collins has voiced her opposition to “don’t ask, don’t tell”.

But I’m not mentioning Lady Gaga merely because I agree with what she’s saying. She actually gave a pretty good speech from the account in the local paper:

The pop star, who eschewed her usual outrageous style in favor of a simple black suit and glasses, proposed a new policy to replace “don’t ask, don’t tell” — one that would flip the equation.

“Our new law is called, ‘if you don’t like it, go home,'” she said. “If you are not committing to perform with excellence as a United States soldier because you don’t believe in full equality, go home. If you are not honorable enough to fight without prejudice, go home. If you are not capable of keeping your oath to the armed forces, to defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies foreign and domestic, that I will bear true faith and allegiance to do the same, unless there’s a gay soldier in my unit, then go home.”

Her point is a powerful one and should effect anyone not blinded by a hatred of gays. The soldier who cannot fight next to a soldier who may be gay probably isn’t a soldier mature enough to handle his or her responsibilities.

Calling dishonesty

I’ve never been a big fan of calling someone dishonest with much ease. There are exceptions (a lot of politicians by virtue of being politicians, people who understand the science behind something but intentionally contradict it at the behest of a big corporation, i.e., researchers who long denied the effects smoking has), but I’m not usually ready to throw out a label of “dishonest” without good reason. I’ll say it for virtually all public-figure young Earth creationists because they present arguments they know are wrong (i.e., Kirk Cameron and his crocoduck; even when it was explained to him that evolution predicts no such thing, he continued to claim otherwise. I don’t think he’s smart, but he can’t be that stupid), but I won’t say it for the random young Earth creationist because they usually don’t know why their arguments are silly. For the former, I have good reason. For the latter, I do not.

And then there are theists in general. I believe most of them think their positions are valid and logical. They don’t inherently make arguments they know or believe to be false simply so they can push an agenda. This is true for all religious members as well as atheists, agnostics, and whatever else we care to name. But that doesn’t mean there aren’t big name theists willing to distort facts, make up history, and outright lie.

Enter the Pope.

‘As we reflect on the sobering lessons of the atheist extremism of the 20th century, let us never forget how the exclusion of God, religion and virtue from public life leads ultimately to a truncated vision of man and of society.’

Specifically, he means Nazis. This is a fallacious argument that attempts to link what just about everyone recognizes as a terrible regime to atheism. Hitler wasn’t an atheist and the Nazis did not promote atheism. The Pope is being overtly and brazenly dishonest.

In light of this, PZ has a series of Hitler quotes that help to demonstrate what the German leader thought. They’re worth a look in their entirety, but I’ll provide just a few here.

“I believe today that I am acting in the sense of the Almighty Creator. By warding off the Jews I am fighting for the Lord’s work.” (1936 speech)

~~~

“My feelings as a Christian points me to my Lord and Savior as a fighter. It points me to the man who once in loneliness, surrounded by a few followers, recognized these Jews for what they were and summoned men to fight against them and who, God’s truth! was greatest not as a sufferer but as a fighter. In boundless love as a Christian and as a man I read through the passage which tells us how the Lord at last rose in His might and seized the scourge to drive out of the Temple the brood of vipers and adders.” (1922 speech – this one goes on for longer than what I’ve represented here)

~~~

“This human world of ours would be inconceivable without the practical existence of a religious belief.” (Mein Kampf)

~~~

“ATHEIST HALL CONVERTED

Berlin Churches Establish Bureau to Win Back Worshippers

Wireless to the New York Times.

BERLIN, May 13. – In Freethinkers Hall, which before the Nazi resurgence was the national headquarters of the German Freethinkers League, the Berlin Protestant church authorities have opened a bureau for advice to the public in church matters. Its chief object is to win back former churchgoers and assist those who have not previously belonged to any religious congregation in obtaining church membership.

The German Freethinkers League, which was swept away by the national revolution, was the largest of such organizations in Germany. It had about 500,000 members …” (New York Times, May 14, 1933, page 2, on Hitler’s outlawing of atheistic and freethinking groups in Germany in the Spring of 1933, after the Enabling Act authorizing Hitler to rule by decree)

Far from being an atheist, Hitler believed in God. Furthermore, he actively suppressed atheist groups. The Pope, having lived in Nazi Germany and having been forced to join them, knows this. His people know it. Everyone frickin’ knows it.

But my favorite quote of all (which isn’t on that list):

Walking about in the garden of Nature, most men have the self-conceit to think that they know everything; yet almost all are blind to one of the outstanding principles that Nature employs in her work. This principle may be called the inner isolation which characterizes each and every living species on this earth. Even a superficial glance is sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life-urge of Nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law–one may call it an iron law of Nature–which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind. (Mein Kampf)

Mmyes. In addition to not being an atheist, Hitler didn’t even accept the fact of evolution. Only a fundamentally dishonest theist would bother to argue otherwise.

Mind reading machines

This is far too cool to not post.

Researchers have been able to translate brain signals into speech using sensors attached to the surface of the brain for the first time.

The breakthrough, which is up to 90 per cent accurate, offers a way to communicate for paralysed patients who cannot speak and could eventually lead to being able to read anyone thoughts.

Because just thinking a word – and not saying it – is thought to produce the same brain signals, Prof Greger and his team believe that soon they will be able to have translation device and voice box that repeats the word you are thinking.

What is more, the brains of people who are paralysed are often healthy and produce the same signals as those in able bodied people – it is just they are blocked by injury from reaching the muscle.

The researchers said the method needs improvement, but could lead in a few years to clinical trials on paralysed people who cannot speak due to so-called “locked-in” syndrome.

“This is proof of concept,” Prof Greger said, “We’ve proven these signals can tell you what the person is saying well above chance.

“But we need to be able to do more words with more accuracy before it is something a patient really might find useful.”

People who eventually could benefit from a wireless device that converts thoughts into computer-spoken words include those paralysed by stroke, disease and injury, Prof Greger said.

People who are now “locked in” often communicate with any movement they can make – blinking an eye or moving a hand slightly – to arduously pick letters or words from a list.

The new device would allow them freedom to speak on their own.

“Even if we can just get them 30 or 40 words that could really give them so much better quality of life,” said Prof Greger.

It would be incredible, provided he continues to amazingly survive, if this sort of technology ends up on the brain of a person like Stephen Hawking.

That silly mosque

In all the coverage I’ve seen on the proposed New York City mosque (and that’s virtually all that’s been covered lately it seems), what sticks out to me the most is the religious-fueled xenophobia. Worst of all, it can’t merely be chalked up to politics. Of course, the Republicans only care about the ‘issue’ for political reasons, but much of the country has bought straight into the political fear-mongering (a classic tool of Republican…well, tools).

The real issue here isn’t that Muslims are going to be allowed to build a place of worship. It’s that any religious group is being allowed to build a place that is tax-free. Aside from being plainly unconstitutional (despite its wide-spread and even welcomed acceptance), not taxing religions implies, perhaps outright says, that religion has something worthwhile to offer society. Given that religion is entirely impotent to inform us anything about the world (if not, then what has it ever said that was not trivial?), society would be better served taxing religious institutions and investing that money into education, infrastructure, and bringing people out of poverty.

All the important news

My access to news was limited while on vacation. Of course, there was no shortage of televisions in Vegas and I tended to spend the 105 degree days inside, opting instead to go out at night when it was a mere 97 degrees, so I did catch plenty of CNN, FOX, MSNBC, and whatever other crap passes for news these days. Here’s what I’ve learned:

  • Muslims are to 9/11 victims as Nazis are to Holocaust victims.
  • I have paid so little attention to mini Donald Trump/Martha Stewart Rod Blagojevich that I’ve only recently realized it really is Rod, not Rob.

Other than that, it appears there has been no news over the past couple weeks.