More People Trying Vegetarian Diets

January-June, 2000 Vol. 4, No. 1

June – December

Inside This Issue

Animal Protection Charities — Animal People

Each Year, we have been inundated with requests from readers for data that might help them assess not only the fiscal integrity of charities that solicit their gifts, but also the efficacy of their programs. We have often been asked to rank charities by quality.

We have always refused to do qualitative ordering, as that would require making value judgements that we’d prefer our readers make for themselves, using their own criteria. Individuals and organizations tend to have differing priorities and tactical perceptions.

For example, one party might think the best way to fight cruelty is to fight meat-eating first, because if eating animals is accepted, people tend to feel animal life in general has low moral value.

Someone else might argue that protecting dogs and cats should come first, as these are the animals with whom the most people relate. Once a certain standard of treatment of pets is established, this theory goes, better attitudes will carry over to help other species.

Others might put the emphasis on stopping hunting, trapping, and other recreational torment of animals, because such practices lack moral defense.

Many other priorities might be chosen, without any choice being “right” to the exclusion of all others — and then there is the question of how best to achieve the goal. Should one seek reform, or only abolition? Should one pursue protest, legislation, litigation, mitigation, education, reduction, refinement, replacement, or direct action? Is the object immediate redress of a grievance, or effecting long-term change in public attitudes?

Different approaches must be tried, as a way of finding out what might best resolve each issue. Further, the more diverse the voices of animal and habitat protection, the more chance there is to involve people of widely differing background and outlook.

Top

Vegetarian Diets: The Healthier Choice
by Sweta Shah — Harvey, LA (11^th Grade Study Paper)

As the people of the world become health-conscious, they are looking for newer, un-pharmaceutical ways of preserving and treating their health. Vegetarians, people whose diets exclude all meat products, eggs, poultry, and fish, have statistically proven that their diets are healthier than non-vegetarian diets. Vegetarian diets consist of fruits, vegetables, grains, beans, and nuts. In addition, research now shows that meat is not essential for health. Many people are switching to vegetarian diets. This paper examines vegetarian diets and proves that they are healthier than meat-inclusive diets.

We know that protein is necessary in a healthy diet; however, not everyone is aware about the multitude of vegetable protein sources. Protein is needed daily to grow and repair tissues and to maintain the body’s functions. Also, many people fear vegetarian diets make people protein deficient, and then weak, sick, and anemic. Although vegetarians eat less protein than do meat-eaters, they readily get as much as they need from non-flesh sources. Even vegans, who eat only plant foods, get more than the minimum recommended level. In fact, non-vegetarian diets provide too much protein. The National Research Council has established that the average male should consume nine percent of his calories in the form of protein everyday. Inspection of published food tables reveals that most grain products, legumes, nuts, seeds, and vegetables contain more than nine percent of their calories in the form of protein. Even the recommended nine percent is actually more than double the minimum requirement established by the World Health Organization and other experts.

In addition, many people believe that more protein will make them strong and is necessary for doing strenuous work; however, sports records show that vegetarian athletes surpass meat-eating athletes in events that require strength and endurance, such as running, swimming, and tennis. For instance, Pierreo Verot, a vegetarian, holds the world record for downhill endurance skiing. The world’s record for distance butterfly stroke swimming is held by vegetarians James and Jonathan deDonato. Furthermore, vegetarians are more readily able to attain physical balance, mental clarity, and spiritual harmony — factors that are critical in maintaining optimal health.

Formerly, vegetable proteins were classified as second-class, and regarded as inferior to first-class proteins of animal origin, but this distinction has now been generally discarded. It is now seen that the excessive amount of protein found in meat products is actually hazardous to health. Two diseases caused by the over-consumption of protein are osteoporosis and kidney stones.

Researchers at Michigan State University and other universities show that osteoporosis is caused by excessive protein. The more protein (especially from animal origin) a person consumes, the more calcium his or her body loses, resulting in osteoporosis. The high-protein diets cause a gradual decrease in bone density and eventually osteoporosis. The results of the study reported that by the age of 65 in the United States, vegetarian men have an average measurable bone loss of 3%; non-vegetarian men, 7%. Vegetarian women have an average measurable bone loss of 18%; non-vegetarian women, 35%. The study also shows that by the time a non-vegetarian woman reaches the age of 65, she has lost over one-third of her skeletal structure. On the contrary, older vegetarian women tend to remain active, maintain erect postures, and are less likely to fracture or break their bones.

Another problem caused by excessive protein is the production of kidney stones. Kidney stones are caused by the crystallization of the calcium that is lost from the bones in digesting the excess protein. The excessive protein consumption also results in the destruction of kidney tissue and the deterioration of the kidney itself. This is so because the kidney has to work harder to de-aminize and excrete the excess protein out of the body.

Besides proteins, saturated fats and cholesterol play an important role in a person’s health. Although some fats are necessary in a balanced diet for body maintenance, excess saturated fats are hazardous. Animal fats are heavier and stickier, and they agglutinate blood cells, thus increasing the viscosity of blood, restricting blood flow, and raising blood pressure. When the blood stops moving, it causes a clot in the artery. These clots result in many forms of heart diseases. Similarly, cholesterol, which is found only in animal foods, deposits in artery walls and causes the arteries to clog.

Approximately thirty-eight percent of all deaths are caused by heart attacks, in the United States. Recent medical research indicates that a high-fat, low-fiber diet centered on meat is a contributing factor in cardiovascular disease. According to the American Heart Association (AHA), the three major risk factors in heart disease are high blood pressure, high blood cholesterol, and smoking. In 1985, the AHA said, “We have good evidence that most people…can reduce a major risk of having a heart attack by following a cholesterol lowering plan….Foods of plant origin, such as fruits, vegetables, grains, nuts and seeds, contain no cholesterol. These foods are highly recommended.”

Although absent in plant foods, cholesterol is present in meat, poultry, seafood, dairy products, and eggs. Cholesterol is the main component of the plaque that builds up in arteries, causing atherosclerosis.” All of these foods, with the exception of seafood, are also high in saturated fat. Diets high in saturated fats and cholesterol produce atherosclerosis, which leads directly to heart diseases and strokes. Diets low in saturated fats and cholesterol decrease atherosclerosis, and lower the probability of heart diseases and strokes. The AHA recommends cutting back in foods high in saturated fats and cholesterol, which are found mainly in animal products. The AHA recommends that people use beans, lentils, tofu, and other plant foods instead of meat in their main course.

In addition, nutritional studies show that vegetarians consume less cholesterol and saturated fats and have lower levels of cholesterol. Studies also show that meat- eaters have higher rates of atherosclerosis and fatal heart diseases. For example, the average non-vegetarian runs a fifty percent risk of having a heart attack; whereas, a vegetarian runs only fifteen percent risk of having a heart attack (Jainism 11).

Vegetarian diets with a lower saturated fat content are also a method for reversing disease. A California physician became renowned worldwide for prescribing vegetarian diets to people with heart disease. A significantly lowered fat content is the key ingredient in restoring health. Dr. Dean Ornish, MD, head of heart disease reversal studies says, “If everyone in the country was eating a low-fat vegetarian diet, heart disease could be as rare as malaria.”

Recently, Harvard University and Michio Kushi completed a study to discern the effects of macrobiotics on blood and cardiovascular strength and overall condition. People who normally lived their lives on vegetarian foods were asked to change to a more standard American diet, containing meats, heavy sauces, sweets, and processed foods. After a few weeks, the results showed that the people’s cardiovascular systems and blood conditions suffered from it.

In addition to heart diseases, colon and breast cancers are also directly related to the amount of fats and cholesterol consumed. The Association for the Advancement of Science states that “populations on high-meat, high-fat diets are more likely to develop colon cancer than individuals on vegetarian…diets.” Evidence from a study conducted in Stockholm, Sweden, reports that the greater the fat intake of a person, the higher the risk he or she has of contracting colon cancer. Similarly, the more fat a woman consumes in her lifetime, the more likely she is to obtain breast cancer. In a study conducted at the National Cancer Research Institute in Tokyo by Dr. Hirayama, the results show that women who consume meat daily face an almost four times greater risk of getting breast cancer than those who eat no meat.

Cutting out fatty meats and substituting lighter plant proteins have amazing effects on general health and well-being. Not only that, but vegetarian diets can, in many cases, actually reverse diseases. Many cases of miraculous cancer remission effected by adopting a vegetarian diet have been reported. An example of this is the story of Dr. Anthony Satlilaro. He was diagnosed with prostate cancer in 1978. The cancer then spread to his lungs as he underwent traditional medical therapy. When he had only six months left to live, he tried a vegetarian diet. Eighteen months later, a CAT scan performed on him showed that he was completely rid of both cancers.

Most non-vegetarians think that vegetarians are weak, skinny, and anemic; however, it is seen that most vegetarians experience better than average health and typically live physically active and demanding lives. People who have adopted vegetarian diets say that they experience many benefits. They say that they sleep better and for fewer hours and still wake up feeling more refreshed and energetic than they did before. Many feel “they are now able to participate in life more than they thought possible.”

In addition to these physical benefits, a person can enjoy the meals because they can be prepared many different ways, to suit various tastes. People who have adopted vegetarian diets say that they are now able to eat more foods with fewer calories, fats, and cholesterol.

Vegetarian diets should avoid some pitfalls. For example, some foods are prepared with too much salt. They cause the water to be drawn out of blood cells, creating a dehydration of tissues and causing a water retention problem in the body. Excessive sodium overburdens the kidneys and forces the heart to work twice as fast in response. This leads to dehydration, hypertension, and increased blood pressure levels. Another precaution is that you must consume dark green and leafy vegetables, which are a major source of the essential vitamins A and E. Finally, a proper combination of all food groups (grains, vegetables, beans, and fruits) should be maintained in proportion.

The foods that were once believed to be the foundations of good health are actually found to be detrimental to one’s health and the causes of degenerative diseases such as osteoporosis, kidney stones, heart disease, cancer, etc. In addition, those foods that were once looked upon as nutritionally deficient are now proven to be healthy and even helpful in reversing all above illnesses. Therefore, a vegetarian diet is the healthiest choice one can make.

References

Amato, Paul R., Ph.D., and Sonia Partridge. The New Vegetarians: Promoting Health and Protecting Life. New York: Plenum P, 1989.

Iacobbo, Karen. “Diet Clearly Linked to Leading Killer.” Vegetarian Voice: Perspectives on Healthy, Ecological, and Compassionate Living. Oct. 1993.

Jainism and Animal Issues: Handbook for Compassionate Living. “Some Winner Arguments.” Oct. 1996.

Null, Gary. The Vegetarian Handbook: Eating Right For Total Health. New York: St. Martin’s P, 1987.

Ornish, Dr. Dean. Dr. Dean Ornish’s Program for Reversing Heart Disease. New York: Random House, 1990.

Robbins, John. Diet for a New America. New Hampshire: Stillpoint Publishing, 1987.

Vegetarianism: Answers to the Most Commonly Asked Questions. Pamphlet. New York: Natl. American Vegetarian Society, 1993.

Top

This article originally appeared in the October 1995 FDA Consumer.
The version below is from a reprint of the original article and contains revisions made in January 1996.

Perceiving plant foods as beneficial because they are high in dietary fiber and, generally, lower in saturated fat than animal foods, many people turn to vegetarian diets.

Grain products, for instance, form the base of the U.S. Department of Agriculture and Department of Health and Human Services’ Food Guide Pyramid, which recommends 6 to 11 daily servings of bread, cereal, rice, and pasta. Daily intakes advised for other foods are: 3 to 5 servings of vegetables; 2 to 4 servings of fruits; 2 to 3 servings of milk, yogurt and cheese; and 2 to 3 servings of meat, poultry, fish, dry beans, eggs, and nuts. The guide advises using fats, oils and sweets sparingly.

And, who hasn’t seen signs in their grocer’s produce section urging consumers to eat “5 a day for better health”? This slogan reflects a major government-industry campaign to help people eat more fruits and vegetables as part of a high-fiber, low-fat diet that emphasizes variety.

The campaign is consistent with the USDA-DHHS Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which states, “Most Americans of all ages eat fewer than the recommended number of servings of grain products, vegetables, and fruits, even though consumption of these foods is associated with a substantially lower risk for many chronic diseases, including certain types of cancer.” Also noted: “Most vegetarians eat milk products and eggs, and as a group, these lacto-ovo-vegetarians enjoy excellent health.”

But health benefits are not the only reason vegetarian diets attract followers.

Certain people, such as Seventh-day Adventists, choose a vegetarian diet because of religious beliefs. Others give up meat because they feel eating animals is unethical. Some believe it’s a better use of the Earth’s resources to eat low on the food chain — that is, to eat plant foods, rather than the animals that eat the plant foods. And many people eat plant foods simply because they are less expensive than animal foods.

It’s wise to take precautions, however, when adopting a diet that entirely excludes animal flesh and dairy products, called a vegan diet.

“The more you restrict your diet, the more difficult it is to get the nutrients you need,” says John Vanderveen, Ph.D., director of the Food and Drug Administration’s Office of Plant and Dairy Foods and Beverages. “To be healthful, vegetarian diets require very careful, proper planning. Nutrition counseling can help you get started on a diet that is nutritionally adequate.”

If appropriately planned, vegan diets, though restrictive, can provide adequate nutrition even for children, according to the American Dietetic Association and the Institute of Food Technologists.

Plant Food Benefits

Registered dietitian Johanna Dwyer, of Tufts University Medical School and the New England Medical Center Hospital, Boston, summarizes these plant food benefits:

“Data are strong that vegetarians are at lesser risk for obesity, atonic [reduced muscle tone] constipation, lung cancer, and alcoholism. Evidence is good that risks for hypertension, coronary artery disease, type II diabetes, and gallstones are lower. Data are only fair to poor that risks of breast cancer, diverticular disease of the colon, colonic cancer, calcium kidney stones, osteoporosis, dental erosion, and dental caries are lower among vegetarians.”

According to Dwyer, vegetarians’ longevity is similar to or greater than that of non-vegetarians, but is influenced in Western countries by vegetarians’ “adoption of many healthy lifestyle habits in addition to diet, such as not smoking, abstinence or moderation in the use of alcohol, being physically active, resting adequately, seeking ongoing health surveillance, and seeking guidance when health problems arise.”

Can Veggies Prevent Cancer?

The National Cancer Institute, in its booklet Diet, Nutrition, & Cancer Prevention: A Guide to Food Choices, states that 35 percent of cancer deaths may be related to diet. The booklet states:

• Diets rich in beta-carotene (the plant form of vitamin A) and vitamin C may reduce the risk of certain cancers.

• Reducing fat in the diet may reduce cancer risk and, in helping weight control, may reduce the risk of heart attacks and strokes.

• Diets high in fiber-rich foods may reduce the risk of cancers of the colon and rectum.

• Vegetables from the cabbage family (cruciferous vegetables) may reduce the risk of colon cancer.

FDA, in fact, authorized several health claims on food labels relating low-fat diets high in some plant-derived foods with a possibly reduced risk of cancer.

While FDA acknowledges that high intakes of fruits and vegetables rich in beta-carotene or vitamin C have been associated with reduced cancer risk, it believes the data are not sufficiently convincing that either nutrient by itself is responsible for the association. Nevertheless, since most fruits and vegetables are low-fat foods and may contain vitamin A (as beta-carotene) and vitamin C, the agency authorized a health claim relating diets low in fat and rich in these foods to a possibly reduced risk of some cancers.

Another claim may relate low-fat diets high in fiber-containing vegetables, fruits and grains to a possible reduction in cancer risk. (The National Cancer Institute recommends 20 to 30 grams of fiber a day.) Although the exact role of total dietary fiber, fiber components, and other nutrients and substances in these foods is not fully understood, many studies have shown such diets to be associated with reduced risk of some cancers.

Lowering Heart Disease Risk

FDA also notes that diets high in saturated fats and cholesterol increase blood levels of total cholesterol and LDL cholesterol, and thus the risk for coronary heart disease. (The National Cholesterol Education Program recommends a diet with no more than 30 percent fat, of which no more than 10 percent comes from saturated fat.) For this reason, the agency authorized a health claim relating diets low in saturated fat and cholesterol to a possibly reduced risk of coronary heart disease.

Another claim may relate diets low in fat and high in fruits, vegetables, and grain products that contain fiber, particularly soluble fiber, to a possibly reduced risk of coronary heart disease. However, the agency recognizes that it is impossible to adequately distinguish the effects of fiber, including soluble fiber, from those of other food components.

With respect to increasing fiber in the diet, Joanne Slavin, Ph.D., R.D., of the University of Minnesota, in 1990 in Nutrition Today, gives this advice: “The current interest in dietary fiber has allowed recommendations for fiber supplementation to outdistance the scientific research base. Until we have a better understanding of how fiber works its magic, we should recommend to American consumers only a gradual increase in dietary fiber from a variety of sources.”

Precautions

The American Dietetic Association’s position paper on vegetarian diets states, “Because vegan diets tend to be high in bulk, care should be taken to ensure that caloric intakes are sufficient to meet energy needs, particularly in infancy and during weaning.” Dwyer and Suzanne Havala, also a registered dietitian, updated the paper in the 1993 issue of the association’s journal.

It’s generally agreed that to avoid intestinal discomfort from increased bulk, a person shouldn’t switch to foods with large amounts of fiber all at once. A sensible approach is to slowly increase consumption of grains, legumes, seeds, and nuts. “Some may choose to eliminate red meat but continue to eat fish and poultry occasionally, and such a diet is also to be encouraged,” Jack Zeev Yetiv, M.D., Ph.D., in his book Popular Nutritional Practices: A Scientific Appraisal.

As with any diet, it’s important for the vegetarian diet to include many different foods, since no one food contains all the nutrients required for good health. “The wider the variety, the greater the chance of getting the nutrients you need,” says FDA’s Vanderveen.

In its position paper on vegetarian diets, the American Dietetic Association states that, with a plant-based daily diet, eating a variety of foods and sufficient calories for energy needs will help ensure adequate intakes of calcium, iron and zinc.

The mixture of proteins from grains, legumes, seeds, nuts, and vegetables provides a complement of amino acids so that deficits in one food are made up by another. Not all types of plant foods need to be eaten at the same meal, since the amino acids are combined in the body’s protein pool.

“Soy protein,” the paper states, “has been shown to be nutritionally equivalent in protein value to proteins of animal origin and, thus, can serve as the sole source of protein intake if desired.”

The Institute of Food Technologists also recommends careful diet planning for vegetarians. This is especially important when the diet excludes dairy foods, to ensure adequate intake of calcium, iron, riboflavin, and vitamin D. For these vegetarians, the institute recommends calcium supplements during pregnancy, when breast-feeding, and for infants and children.

The institute and the American Dietetic Association say a vitamin D supplement may be needed if sunlight exposure is limited. (Sunlight activates a substance in the skin and converts it into vitamin D.)

They also point out that vegan diets should include a reliable source of vitamin B₁₂, because this nutrient occurs only in animal foods. Vitamin B₁₂ deficiency can result in irreversible nerve deterioration.

The need for vitamin B₁₂ increases during pregnancy, breast-feeding, and periods of growth, Dwyer says. In a recent issue of Annual Review of Public Health, she writes that elderly people also should be especially cautious about adopting vegetarian diets because their bodies may absorb vitamin B₁₂ poorly.

Unless advised otherwise by a doctor, those taking dietary supplements should limit the dose to 100 percent of the U.S. Recommended Daily Allowances.

With the array of fruits, vegetables, grains, and spices available in U.S. grocery stores and the availability of vegetarian cookbooks, it’s easy to devise tasty vegetarian dishes that even non-vegetarians can enjoy.

However, the key to any healthful diet–vegetarian or non-vegetarian–is adherence to sound nutrition principles.

Replacing Animal Sources of Nutrients

Vegetarians who eat no animal products need to be more aware of nutrient sources. Nutrients most likely to be lacking and some non-animal sources are:

• vitamin B₁₂ — fortified soy beverages and cereals

• vitamin D — fortified soy beverages and sunshine

• calcium — tofu processed with calcium, broccoli, seeds, nuts, kale, bok choy, legumes (peas and beans), greens, lime-processed tortillas, and soy beverages, grain products, and orange juice enriched with calcium

• iron — legumes, tofu, green leafy vegetables, dried fruit, whole grains, and iron-fortified cereals and breads, especially whole-wheat. (Absorption is improved by vitamin C, found in citrus fruits and juices, tomatoes, strawberries, broccoli, peppers, dark-green leafy vegetables, and potatoes with skins.)

• zinc — whole grains (especially the germ and bran), whole-wheat bread, legumes, nuts, and tofu

• protein — tofu and other soy-based products, legumes, seeds, nuts, grains, and vegetables

Dixie Farley is a staff writer for FDA Consumer.

American Dietetic Association Recommendations

For people who follow vegetarian diets, the ADA has these recommendations:

• Consult a registered dietitian or other qualified nutrition professional, especially during periods of growth, breast-feeding, pregnancy, or recovery from illness.

• Minimize intake of less nutritious foods such as sweets and fatty foods.

• Choose whole or unrefined grain products instead of refined products.

• Choose a variety of nuts, seeds, legumes, fruits, and vegetables, including good sources of vitamin C to improve iron absorption.

• Choose low-fat or nonfat varieties of dairy products, if they are included in the diet.

• Avoid excessive cholesterol intake by limiting eggs, if they are included in the diet, to three or four egg yolks per week.

• For infants, children and teenagers, ensure adequate intakes of calories, vitamin D, calcium, iron, and zinc. (Intakes of vitamin D, calcium, iron, and zinc are usually adequate when a variety of foods and sufficient calories are consumed.)

• If exclusively breast-feeding premature infants or babies beyond 4 to 6 months of age, give vitamin D and iron supplements to the child from birth or at least by 4 to 6 months, as your doctor suggests.

• Usually, take iron and folate (folic acid) supplements during pregnancy.

• In addition, for vegans:

• Use properly fortified food sources of vitamin B₁₂, such as fortified soy beverages or cereals, or take a supplement.

• If sunlight is inadequate, take a vitamin D supplement during pregnancy or while breast-feeding.

Publication No. (FDA) 96-2296

Visit FDA website for more information.

Top

Invest In Our Future

Buying organic products creates a bankable future for a better environment and a safer food supply for generations to come, says Wendy Gordon, co-founder of Mothers & Others for a Livable Planet.

Wendy Gordon had just given birth to her second son in the fall of 1989 when the Alar pesticide scare began. Alar, sprayed on apples, was ranked as the highest cancer risk to children by the National Resources Defense Council (NRDC), which released a report called “Intolerable Risk: Pesticides in Our Children’s Food.” This frightening study examined for the first time kids’ exposure to and health risks from pesticide-laden foods. It also motivated Gordon to start lobbying for organic farming.

Publicity around the NRDC study increased when actress Meryl Streep joined the outcry demanding cleaner food for children. Streep and Gordon combined forces, and Mothers & Others for a Livable Planet, a Manhattan-based environmental education group, was born.

Gordon, 39, executive director of Mothers & Others, has two boys ages 8 and 11 and holds degrees in environmental health science. In the 1980s, as a staff member with the NRDC — which concentrates on litigation to reach environmental goals — she focused on the toxic substances in food and drink. During her tenure there she discovered her passion: studying environmental issues and how they relate to health. “We hold the power and responsibility over our future,” Gordon says. “If we are provided with challenging information, we’ll make the right choices. The right to know is essential — that’s at the heart of Mothers & Others.”

Mothers & Others’ mission is education. The group encourages safe and life-supporting consumer choices that promote a sustainable future — one that preserves the Earth’s plant and animal species and supports farming practices that produce nourishing food without damaging the environment with pesticides or exhausting the soil. Gordon believes food selection is one of the most powerful political and ecological choices we can make. And, when we refuse to buy into chemical and industrialized farming techniques, we start to solve other eco-problems, she says.

Striking an Environmental Balance

Gordon could recite a litany of environmental issues to address, but she targets sustainability as essential. “To me, sustainability is striking a balance between the extremes of taking too much and giving nothing back to the planet. Our industrialized society has over-taken the natural system,” Gordon states. “We must establish a symbiotic relationship with the Earth. If we proceed in our current direction, we’ll destroy our living systems.” Examine your habits and start asking questions, she urges. “Question our industrial, food and water systems and ask: Who benefits? What are the by products? Is there waste? Answer questions about your most fundamental choices: What foods do you eat? What clothes do you wear? What do you clean your house with? Do the answers harm the environment, the farm worker or a Third World laborer?”

If the answers don’t support ecological systems, make changes. “It’s time to take responsibility for the consequences of our actions,” Gordon says. “What we put in the air, soil and water affects us all. Our first step is to learn to appreciate the ecology of a system and how we’re going to protect it better. We’ve managed to create artificial environments, so we can separate ourselves from consequences. That way we remove ourselves from the problem — but only temporarily.”

Bottled water is a good example. According to Gordon, by purchasing bottled water we diminish our responsibility to take care of the common water supply. “Those of us who can afford it, will, and the problem goes unsolved. We need to collectively realize the reservoir provides us with more than drinking water: It also provides delicate ecosystems and open space,” Gordon points out.

Gordon remains optimistic about even the most monumental eco-problems. She encourages people to take small steps to improve the Earth, and like a single pebble dropping in the water, ever-widening ripples will result. Some of the places you can start:

1. Buy locally grown, seasonal and organic produce. The average mouthful of food travels 1,200 miles from farm to factory to warehouse to supermarket to our plates. Buying local products supports regional growers, thereby preserving farming in your area and requiring less money for transport. Become better acquainted with who grows your food and where it comes from.

2. Avoid rBGH. “This bioengineered hormone used in cows [to make them produce more milk] was an attempt by big business to say factory farming is best,” Gordon contends. “Use of rBGH has the potential to destroy small farms not to mention the animals.”

3. Buy organic cotton. Few people realize their clothes or bed linens contribute to ecological problems. Yet, conventionally grown cotton crops are heavily sprayed with pesticides — a danger to the environment and farm workers. Gordon believes consumers can change this industry by buying organic fibers.

4. Avoid plastics. Many plastics can’t be recycled and end up in landfills. Also, heating foods or storing them in plastic containers can leach out harmful estrogenic chemicals. Reassess your use of plastic containers.

5. Reduce dioxins. Form a group of concerned citizens devoted to helping eliminate dioxins, chemicals that mimic the action of hormones in the body. Dioxins can be carcinogenic and are by-products of plastic manufacturing or disposal. Contact your local hospital and voice your concern about dioxins the hospital might be emitting when it incinerates medical waste.

Top

Must-Eat Organic Foods
Francine Stephens and Betsy Lydon — Mothers & Others for a Livable Planet

Even if you’re not obsessed with healthy eating, it makes sense to avoid foods treated with pesticides and chemical fertilizers. The National Academy of Sciences reported in 1993 that federal pesticide standards provide too little health protection for children and infants. Citing this report, the EPA’s 1997 agenda sought to establish new child-specific standards. “Certified Organic” already applies the strictest standards, producing food without synthetic pesticides and fertilizers. There is also “Integrated Pest Management (IPM),” which restricts pesticide use, and local, in-season food, which is less likely to have been treated with post-harvest pesticides. So, where to start? Here are the 10 most important foods to start buying organic:

1. BABY FOOD In 1995, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) tested eight baby foods made by industry leaders Gerber, Heinz and Beech-Nut. Some 16 pesticides were found in more than half of the samples. Organic baby foods include Earth’s Best, Well-Fed Baby, and Gerber’s Tender Harvest, and you can make your own by cooking and pureeing organic food.

2. RICE Because rice allergies are practically nonexistent, this cereal grass is a primary ingredient in baby foods. But pesticide use on rice fields in California’s Sacramento River Valley, one major growing region, has been so heavy that it has contaminated groundwater.

3. STRAWBERRIES Strawberries are the single most pesticide-contaminated fruit or vegetable in the U.S., according to a 1995 EWG study. No surprise, in a crop that receives a dose up to 500 pounds of pesticides per acre. Strawberries and other produce bought out-of-season are the most likely to have been imported, possibly from a country with less-stringent pesticide regulations.

4. CEREAL The USDA recommends six to 11 servings of grains a day. But, in 1994, the FDA found illegal pesticide residues in a year’s worth of General Mills’ Cheerios oat-based cereal. And in 1996, the FDA found residues from at least one pesticide in 91% of wheat samples tested. Try a healthy variety of organic offerings: oats, wheat, millet, quinoa, barley, couscous, amaranth and spelt.

5. MILK Milk comprises nearly a quarter of the non-nursing infant’s diet, but many dairies inject their cows with recombinant bovine growth hormone (rBGH), a genetically engineered hormone used to boost milk production. Organic milk dairies don’t use hormones or antibiotics.

6. CORN Processed foods made with corn — cornbread, chips and popcorn — were among the top 15 foods likely to expose children to an unsafe dose of organophosphate (OP) pesticide residues, according to a 1998 report of EWG. Organic versions can readily be found.

7. BANANAS Often the first fruit offered to babies, bananas are produced using benomyl (linked to birth defects) and chlorpyrifos (a neurotoxin). In Costa Rica, a major exporter, only 5 percent of farmland grows bananas, but they account for 35% of the country’s pesticide consumption.

8. GREEN BEANS In 1992-93, contamination with pesticides illegal in the U.S. was found in 7.4% of green beans imported from Mexico. EWG’s tests found three pesticides in conventional green bean baby food samples.

9. PEACHES A recent Food & Drug Administration study found that 5% of the peach crop was contaminated. Peaches lead the EWG’s list of foods likely to contain unsafe OP exposures.

10. APPLES Apples rank second on the EWG list for OP residues, and baby food apple juice also made the top 15. Organic and IPM alternatives can be found in some supermarkets. Mothers & Others introduced its “CORE Values Northeast” label in 1996, identifying apples grown regionally by growers practicing biointensive IPM. “CORE Values” was recognized by the USDA SARE Program as an “innovative, interesting and impactful” sustainable agriculture project.

You may also want to seek out organic nectarines, grapes and raisins, and kiwi fruit, all of which made EWG’s “least wanted” list. Contact EWG at 202-667-6982, or www.ewg.org.

Contact: Mothers & Others for a Livable Planet, 40 West 20th St., New York, NY 10011; 1-888-ECO-INFO; or www.mothers.org.

Top

QUESTION AND ANSWERS ABOUT ORGANIC

Q: What is organic?

A: Organic refers to the way agricultural products — including foods and fibers such as cotton — are grown and processed. The word “organic” on the label stands for a commitment to an agriculture which strives for a balance with nature, using methods and materials which are of low impact to the environment. Organic production systems:

• Replenish and maintain soil fertility

• Eliminate the use of toxic and persistent chemical pesticides and fertilizers

• Build a biologically diverse agriculture

Organic foods are minimally processed to maintain the integrity of the foods without artificial ingredients, preservatives or irradiation.

Q: Is there an official definition of organic ?

A: The following definition of “organic” was passed by the National Organic Standards Board in April, 1995:

“Organic agriculture is an ecological production management system that promotes and enhances biodiversity, biological cycles and soil biological activity. It is based on minimal use of off-farm inputs and on management practices that restore, maintain and enhance ecological harmony.”

Q: How large is the organic industry ?

A: The organic industry has experienced incredible growth, with sales increasing by more than 20 percent each year over the past seven years. In 1996, the organic segment of the natural food industry saw a phenomenal growth of 26.3 percent reaching total (distributor) sales of $3.5 billion. Today, approximately one percent of the U.S. food supply is grown using organic methods. By the year 2000, analysts expect that to reach 10 percent. Worldwide, there are now almost 600 organic producer associations in 70 countries. Nations like Japan and Germany are fast becoming important international organic food markets.

Q: What does certified organic mean?

A: When a grower or processor is certified organic, a public or private organization verifies that it meets or exceeds defined standards. These standards include:

• Land on which organic food or fibers are grown must be free of prohibited substances for three years prior to certification

• Farmers and processors must keep detailed records of methods and materials used in growing or producing organic products

• All methods and materials are annually inspected by a third-party certifier

• All farmers and handlers are required to maintain written Organic Plans detailing their management practices

Q: Can any type of product become certified organic?

A: While there may not yet be an organic cream-filled donut, organic foods are becoming available in an ever-increasing variety of convenience foods, such as pasta, prepared sauces, frozen juices, frozen meals, milk, ice cream and frozen novelties, cereals, breads, soups and other products. These foods, in order to be certified as organic, have all been grown and processed using organic standards and must maintain a high level of quality.

Q: Are standards for organic production the same everywhere?

A: Prior to the Organic Food Production Act (OFPA) of 1990 (Title XXI of the 1990 Farm Bill), private and state agencies had been certifying organic practices, but there was little uniformity in standards, and therefore no guarantee that organic meant the same thing from state to state, or even locally from certifier to certifier. The purpose of the 1990 bill was to establish national standards for the production and handling of foods labeled as “organic”. OFPA allows for state standards that are more restrictive than the federal standards, but they must be approved by the USDA.

Q: Who developed the National Organic Standards?

A: The OFPA authorized the formation of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) to advise the Secretary of Agriculture in setting the standards for the National Organic Program. The NOSB based their recommendations on industry consensus. They asked for and received an unprecedented amount of public input from farmers, businesses and consumers during every step of their decision-making process. The NOSB consists of four farmers, two handlers/processors, one retailer, one scientist, three consumer/public interest advocates and three environmentalists.

Q: Do organic farmers ever use pesticides?

A: Yes. However, only botanical and other non-persistent pesticides are permitted with restrictions as a last resort when growers are threatened with crop failure. Organic farmers’ primary strategy is “prevention.” By building healthy soils, healthy plants are better able to resist disease and insects. When pest populations get out of balance, growers will try various options like insect predators, mating disruption, traps and barriers. If these fail, permission will be granted by the certifier to apply botanical or other non-persistent pesticides under restricted conditions. Botanicals are derived from plants and are broken down quickly by oxygen and sunlight.

Q: Are all organic products “pesticide-free”?

A: The word “organic” should not be misconstrued as meaning pesticide-free. Certified organic products have been grown and handled according to strict standards without toxic and persistent chemical inputs. However, organic crops are still exposed to the agricultural chemicals that are now detected in nearly all rain and ground water due to their overuse during the last 50 years nationwide. Organic agriculture techniques strive to limit toxic inputs, and to help maintain and replenish soil fertility. It is a healthier technique for the environment and for the consumer’s long-term health.

Q: How will purchasing organic products help keep our water clean?

A: Conventional agricultural methods can cause water contamination that poses serious health problems. Beginning in May 1995, a network of environmental organizations, including the Environmental Working Group, began testing tap water for herbicides in cities across the United States’ Corn Belt, in Louisiana and Maryland. The results of these tests revealed widespread contamination of tap water with many different pesticides at levels that present serious health risks. In some cities, herbicides in tap water exceed federal lifetime health standards for weeks or months at a time. The elimination of polluting chemicals and nitrogen leaching (found in conventional fertilizers), done in combination with soil building, works to prevent contamination, protects and conserves water resources.

Q: Is organic food a higher quality?

A: The organic farmer believes that the highest quality food is grown on healthy land. In a natural ecosystem, nature constantly works to correct imbalances. Organic farmers do the same by selecting the most environmentally friendly solutions to the pest and disease problems which affect their crops:

· Alternate the types of crops grown in each field, rather than growing the same crop year after year (known as crop rotation)

· Plant cover crops such as clover to add nutrients to the soil and prevent weeds

· Release beneficial insects to prey on pests, helping to eliminate the need for chemical insecticides that can remain in the soil for years

· Add composted manure and plant wastes to help the soil retain moisture and nutrients

Q: Does organic food taste better?

A: We think so, and hundreds of gourmet chefs across the nation agree. In 1996, the National Restaurant Association (NRA) reported that organic items are offered by about 57 percent of the table service restaurants with per person checks of $25 or more and by 29 percent of restaurants in the $15-24.99 range. According to the chairman of NRA, W.W. “Biff” Naylor, “A dedication to organics is no longer an indulgence for many operators; it is a sound business move. As our customers start to believe organic products are good for their health, restaurateurs will find the benefits of organics may outweigh the costs.” It’s common sense — well balanced soils grow strong healthy plants which taste great!

Q: Is organic better, healthier?

A: Organic foods are not necessarily more nutritious; rather organic foods are spared the application of synthetic insecticides, herbicides, fungicides and fertilizers. Many EPA-approved pesticides were registered long before extensive research linked these chemicals to cancer and other diseases. Now, the EPA considers 60 percent of all herbicides, 90 percent of all fungicides, and 30 percent of all insecticides as potentially cancer-causing.

Q: Why do organic products cost more?

A: Prices for organic products reflect many of the same costs as conventional items in terms of growing, harvesting, transportation and storage. Organic products must meet stricter regulations governing all of these steps so the process is often more labor and management intensive, and farming tends to be on a smaller scale.

• Organic Farmers don’t have the luxury of the economies of scale that a large conventional producer has. There is still limited supply of organic products, so the supply vs. demand equation is off balance.

• Conventional crops are often subsidized by government programs, such as research, technical advice, and marketing orders.

• Organic farmers have an added cost of compliance with organic certification standards.

• There is mounting evidence that if all the indirect costs of conventional food production (cleanup of polluted water, replacement of eroded soils, costs of health care for farmers and their workers, etc.) were factored in to the price of food, organic foods would cost the same, or, more likely, be cheaper.

Top

Don’t Be Cruel To Be Clean

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals

Most household cleaning products made by major manufacturers are not only tested on animals, but are ecologically antagonistic as well. Caustic ingredients — including phosphates, chlorine, dyes, and perfumes — in many laundry detergents, bleaches, spray cleaners, and other common products poison rivers, streams, and lakes, endangering fishes and aquatic plants. Lots of people are unable to tolerate these chemicals on their skin or in the air.

Many cruelty-free household cleaning products are composed of natural, environmentally friendly ingredients — like citrus oils and extracts, aloe vera, coconut oil, baking soda, and plant and herb extracts — that won’t hurt the animals or you, are fully biodegradable, and are at least as effective as their animal-tested counterparts. Look for cruelty-free products in local health food stores.

A surprising number of nontoxic, effective alternatives to commercial products are already in your cupboards. Here are some helpful household hints:

Water Softener

1/4 cup vinegar in final rinse.

Oil Stain Remover

White chalk rubbed into stain before wash.

Glass Cleaner

White vinegar and water or rubbing alcohol and water. Or whip with a damp cloth or sponge sprinkled with dry baking soda, rinse with water, and dry with a soft towel.

Copper Cleaner

Paste of lemon juice, salt, and flour, or vinegar and salt.

Household Cleaner

3 tbsp. baking soda mixed into 1 qt. warm water.

Stainless Steel Polish

Baking soda or mineral oil for shining; vinegar for removing spots.

Toilet Bowl Cleaner

Vinegar.

Coffee/Wine Stain Remover

Club Soda.

Mildew Remover

Lemon juice and salt or white vinegar and salt.

Drain Opener

Prevent clogging by flushing drain weekly with boiling water. If clogged, pour ½ cup baking soda followed by ½ cup vinegar down drain.

Furniture Polish

3 parts olive oil and 1 part vinegar or 2 parts olive oil and 1 part lemon juice. Rub with a soft cloth.

RECIPES FOR ALTERNATIVES TO TOXIC AND HAZARDOUS HOUSEHOLD PRODUCTS

Earth Times — April 1996

General notes and safety precautions

The mixing of cleaning or other chemicals can be quite hazardous and is never recommended without following product label instructions. The recipes below are effective and safe when mixed in the quantities indicated.

Washing soda and T.S.P. are the most caustic of the cleaners on this list. Store them with special care in cabinets out of the reach of children. Use them only when diluted and wear latex gloves.

Label cleaning mixtures clearly. Never put them into old food containers or store them near foods.

If you do use chlorine cleaners or bleach, DO NOT mix them with ammonia, acids, or any other cleaning products. A deadly gas is produced!

Look for cleaners that do only what you want done. If you do use a laundry detergent, glass cleaner, or other cleaning product, avoid ones that say they have a “Plus,” which is usually added bleach, fabric softeners, or surfactant.

Avoid Using Use More Often

Aerosols Pump sprays

Chemical drain Plunger, or metal

Openers Snake

Gasoline Water-based

(as degreaser) degreaser

Moth balls Cedar chips or herbal sachets

No-pest strips Fly paper

Rust remover Steel wool

All-purpose Household Cleaner

Add I teaspoon liquid soap and I teaspoon T.S.P. to I quart warm water.

This solution can be used for a multitude of cleaning jobs including counter tops and walls. Look for new eco-friendly brands.

Chlorine Bleach

Use a hydrogen peroxide based

Degreaser (engine and tool)

Use a water-based cleaner, well diluted, in place of kerosene, turpentine, and commercial engine degreaser. Look for “nonflammable,” “nontoxic,” “store at temperatures above freezing” as label clues to water-based products.

Degreaser (Kitchen)

Add 2 tablespoons tsp. to 1 gallon hot water.

Use a nonchlorinated scouring powder with abrasive scouring pad or fine steel wool. Look for “BCD” the first degreasing product to receive a “Green Seal” certification.

Disinfectant

Rarely, if ever, needed in households. If you must, add l oz. chlorine bleach to 1 gallon water for inanimate surfaces. Keep out of the reach of children.

Fabric Softener

Use natural fibers to reduce your need for fabric softeners.

Floor Cleaner

Vinyl Floors: Add ½ cup vinegar to 1 gallon water.

Wood floors: Damp mop with mild liquid soap.

Furniture Polish

Not essential. Simply wipe clean with a slightly damp cloth. If you do polish, use mineral oil.

Oven cleaner

Add either 2 tablespoons of baking soda or T.S.P. or washing soda to 1 gallon of water and scrub with very fine steel wool. Wear gloves and rinse well. For very baked on spots, try scrubbing with pumice (available at hardware stores).

As a last resort, use an aerosol oven cleaner that says “No caustic fumes.”

Glass Cleaner

Add to a spray bottle: ½ teaspoon liquid soap, 3 tablespoons vinegar and 2 cups water. For very dirty windows, add more soap.

Laundry Detergents

Best: Use laundry soap in place of detergents and use ½ cup washing soda as a softener (available in laundry section). Look for new eco-friendly brands. Use detergents with no added bleaches or softeners.

Mildew cleaner

For mild cases, scrub with baking soda. In more sever cases, scrub with T.S.P. and do not rinse of except in food areas.

Scouring powder

Use baking soda or a nonchlorinated commercial scouring powder.

Spot removers

All work best when applied to fresh stains. Try one of the following solutions:

All purpose: make a paste of water and baking soda or washing soda. Soak the stain and let dry prior to washing as usual. Check for color fastness first.

Blood: Pour 3% hydrogen peroxide solution directly on the stain, before rinsing with water. Then wash as usual.

Ink: Apply a paste of lemon juice and cream of tartar; allow it to dry. Then wash as usual.

Toilet bowl cleaner

Scrub with nonchlorinated scouring powder and a stiff brush. For removal of hard water deposits, pour in vinegar or a commercial citric acid-based toilet bowl cleaner. Allow to sit several hours or overnight, then scrub.

Tub/Tile Cleaners

Use nonchlorinated scouring powder or baking soda.

Air Freshening Tips

Leave open boxes of baking soda in refrigerators, closets, and bathrooms.

Use flowers, herbs, and spices to add subtle fragrances to indoor air.

Top

The Truth Behind Bullfighting
SHARK (Showing Animals Respect & Kindness)

Bulls, as all bovine creatures, are gentle community-oriented animals. Prior to entering the bullring, each bull is held in an isolation box — a small structure with a tiny ventilation opening in the top. He is deprived of light, food, water and most importantly, the security of his herd. Mexican bullfights occur even during the hot summer months.

Throughout Latin America, it is common for animal torture such as bullfights, to be closely associated with the Church and many times used to celebrate religious holidays. At this Mexican bullfight, a mass is held prior to the event within the bullring itself.

Upon being released from the box, the bull enters the bullring. Here he is disoriented from the sudden light and the crowd noise.

Furthermore, when he enters the ring, the bull is already bleeding profusely. While still in the holding box, the bull is injured with a harpoon-tipped ribbon that has been jammed into his side.

The bull is quickly joined by two men on horses. The mounted men begin to circle the confused bull and stab pointed lances into his back and his sides. The lance blade cutting the bull is at least 5 inches long.

Once the bull is severely wounded, the bullfighter and his team engage their wounded, weakened, tortured and confused victim. These men take turns chasing the bull and slamming banderillas into the bull.

These banderillas, or adorned barbed darts, hang onto the bull with razor sharp tips. By this time, the bull is in extreme pain, the blood is spraying, pouring, bubbling, and oozing out of every wound. Internal bleeding is evident by the blood pouring out of his mouth and nostrils. Also, uncontrollable urination and defecation is usual. He cannot defend himself and attempts to run away.

After at least twenty minutes of this, the matador takes advantage of this weakened state and approaches the bull from the front. Armed with a long sword, the matador strikes and jams the entire sword into the top of the bull’s body. This is supposed to be a fatal strike through the heart.

Unfortunately, many times the sword goes through the lungs causing the bull’s blood to come gushing out of his mouth and nostrils–drowning the creature in his own life fluids. Still standing, the bull attempts to run away with instinct driving him to survive. The “bullfighters” continue to chase him around the ring, surrounding him and continuing this merciless attack.

Finally, exhausted and badly hemorrhaging, the bull collapses to his knees mortally wounded.. in complete submission.. begging for mercy. The sword is then removed from his back.

He lies there, clinging to life. He can no longer run and now will suffer until death.

The matador finally approaches with a short knife. The knife pierces the back of the bull’s neck and dragged from side to side to cut the spinal cord. This paralyzes but does not kill the victim. The victim is conscious as trophies are cut from his body — his ears, tail, and/or hooves. Sometimes the bull is even conscious as he is dragged to the back of the arena and butchering begins.

Why is this horror allowed to happen? Blood bullfights are illegal in the states, yet is funded by the Americans. The bullrings are crowded with American tourists who want to experience some “local color.” Also, the American company, Pepsi, is the biggest advertiser we saw at Mexican bullrings. Their banners and signs are strewn everywhere — giving their silent approval of animal torture. Also, Pepsi has pouring rights at these arenas–blood money.

WHAT CAN YOU DO:

Write to PepsiCo and let them know that you will be boycotting their products until they put an immediate stop to this support of bloody torture. Send letters to both Peter Thompson (President) and Craig Weatherup (Chairman) at

PepsiCo, Inc.

1 Pepsi Way

Somers, NY 10589

Or why spend thirty-three cents when you can charge it to Pepsi? Use their toll-free number to lodge your complaint: 1-800-433-2652.

For more information, contact SHARK at [email protected]. And, you can also visit websites, www.pepsibloodbath.com and www.sharkonline.org.

THE BULLFIGHT — An Eyewitness Report
A Bullfight is thought to be a beautiful exhibition of a struggle between man and beast.
IT IS NOT !!!

It was July, 1996 and Rhonda and I were visiting Spain. We were there almost 9 days and had planned on spending about 6 of those days in Marbella Spain. The other three were in Madrid. These notes are about the highlights of that trip. All westerners think they want to see a bullfight. We did, and I am glad I did. Particularly so I can tell others not to go.

We were staying at the Marbella Club which is one of the nicest resort hotels we could find in the South of Spain. We noticed bullfight posters all over town, but didn’t pay much attention to them. Finally the man at the hotel reception asked us if we would like to see the most famous woman bullfighter in the world. She was to fight in Puerto Banus this coming Sunday. This seemed like it would be a great topper to what had been a terrific trip. We loved Spain, it had such an international feeling. The people were modern and always nice to the tourists.

So, we bought tickets, and they weren’t cheap either, about $150.00 each. Of course we bought front row seats figuring that if we were going to see a real bullfight once, we should see it right.

The beginning of the fight was colorful and festive. Everyone paraded out. I had my telephoto lens and immediately got a good picture of the famous lady bullfighter. The procession was led by two young girls riding beautiful Andalusian horses. We particularly enjoyed this as we had owned Andalusian horses ourselves. The parade continued on for a several minutes and we got to see everyone that was going to participate in the event.

When the ring was empty, a trumpet played that familiar tune. Then door would open directly across the ring from us and a bull would come out of a dark tunnel. They must have done something to him because he was pissed. He charged around the ring as the crowd yelled and clapped. There were others dressed in Matador costumes that would jump out and taunt the bull. They would then jump behind a barrier to escape bull’s charge.

After a short time, Christina Sanchez came out and performed the traditional waving of the cape to attract the bull, then stepping aside at the last moment. This is what we always think of when we think of bullfighting. There were two different performers this Sunday, but Cristina Sanchez was definitely the favorite. Christina worked the bull for a few minutes then some other guy came out and stuck four colorful sticks in the back of the bulls neck. The program called this “quieting the bull”. The practice was not always successful and the other Matador might need to do it many times.

There was a band that would play from time to time to liven up the occasion.

A little later, two huge, heavily padded draft horses came out. As soon as the bull would see the horses, he would charge. Luckily, the rider of each horse was carrying an 8 foot pole, 1¼ inches in diameter with a silver point in the end. He would poke a huge hole in the back of the bulls neck. Usually one was not enough, so he would do it a few times. As soon as this was done, the horses would leave the ring.

Now the bull was bleeding profusely. Again the Matadors would tease him relentlessly. By this time, the bull was plenty tired and often would have to be prodded to go after the Matador’s cape. Often the bull was so weak that he would collapse. One time the bull just laid down. He would not get up so a bunch of guys ran into the ring to poke at him and bend his tail to get him up. Finally he did get up.

This seemed to be the most proud time for the Matador. With the bull completely broken down, he would show us how brave he was, by kneeling down in front of the bull.

The surround of the ring was like the sideline of a basketball game. Managers and the press took their positions there to watch the event.

At a later point in time, when the bull could hardly stand up, it was time for the kill. Proudly the Matador would stand, sword in hand, poised to make the kill.

Then the Matador would lunge at the half dead bull with a three foot long sword. Rarely would they get the sword in on the first attempt. This Sunday afternoon, they killed 6 bulls. Only once did they kill the bull without several tries.

After the bull was killed, a guy would run out and cut off one or both of the bulls ears. Patiently a team of horses waited to drag the dead bull out of the ring.

The Spaniards call this a sport. We thought it was disgusting. We couldn’t believe the barbaric nature of the event. There was no respect for the bull, and certainly no consideration for the pain the bull was in.

When the first bull came out, we both wanted to leave, but the ring was so crowded with people, it would have been impossible. So we stayed.

After it was all over, we both agreed we were glad to have come, but also agreed that we had both lost our respect for many Spanish people. Who would think that a culture so rich with art and beauty could entertain themselves in this manner.

— Gregory and Rhonda McMurry — Marina Del Rey, CA

Many famous people have quoted, that they did not enjoy, and were not entertained by the fights, but simply interested in the occurrences. In the three times I have been to Mexico, I have refused to attend such events, even though the chance was available. I too would be fascinated by the fight itself, but such an unfair slaughter deserves no glory.

Some people call this a form of art, not brutal murder. Many people for the bullfight will protest that we have boxing and fox hunts in our countries, but boxers are willing to fight, and foxes are not so brutally and immorally slaughtered. The supporters of the fights would also argue that they use this for war training, but in this day, nuclear war is prevalent, not hand to hand combat. They argue that they kill the bull young so it doesn’t have to suffer of old age, and they should be commended for that. But does that then mean a human who murders a child should get an award for taking their life at a young age? No, not a chance!

Many of the people who have tried to protest such fights have had their families killed or harmed by the Mafia surrounding such high income entertainment. The thing that we can do to try and stop the brutal and useless fights is to not go and not support advertisements that use bull fights and fighters to sell products.

Top

FOR CODS’ SAKE
Who’d Fight for a Fish?

Animal Times, Spring 1997 — People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals
People reeled in disbelief when we declared that fish have feelings. Fish?!
Read the arguments for and against the campaign.

They say… “It’s a game.”

Pathologist John Grizzle claims that fish “enjoy the excitement and travel [of being hooked]. It may be the fish think it is a real thrill.” Another fisher wrote: “Hooked fish feel about as much pain as potatoes do when you cut off their ‘eyes.'”

Ann Lewis, spokesperson for the Bass Anglers Sportsman Society, says, “No one can prove to me that the fish doesn’t actually consider it a game. Look at pro football players who have just been injured, begging to go back onto the field.”

We Say… If fishing’s a game, get a root canal for a real hoot. Dr. Donald Broom, animal welfare advisor to the British government, agrees: “The scientific literature is quite clear. The pain system in fish is virtually the same as in birds and mammals. In animal welfare terms, you have to put fishing into the same category as hunting.” Adds Dr. Austin Williams, a U.S. National Marine Fisheries Service zoologist, fish “are sentient organisms, so of course they feel pain.”

Fish also experience fear. An Australian study found that when fish are confined or otherwise threatened, they react as humans do to stress: with increased heart rate and breathing rate and a burst of adrenalin.

They say… “What’s next? Worm rights?”

We say… Well, perhaps. We don’t know about you, but we doubt the average night crawler is eager for an encounter with the “Worm Blower,” a plastic squeeze bottle with a syringe-type needle on the end that anglers use to “puff up” worms for bait.

Other animals you might find cowering inside a tackle box of terrors include frogs (now sold live in U.S. vending machines just like sodas), mice (according to fishing lore, one of the “best” bassers in the States used live mice to lure the big ones), rabbits and roosters (artificial flies are often made from rabbit fur or the colorful neck feathers of specially bred roosters who are killed when only months old) and, of course, other fish.

They say… “Anglers are angels compared to commercial fishers.”

We say… Didn’t your mama ever teach you that two wrongs don’t make a right? Factory trawlers are vacuuming the oceans clean of sea life, but the ordinary angler is hardly animal-friendly!

Countless animals and water birds like ospreys and blue herons become entangled in lost or discarded fishing line — some lose limbs, some their lives. Other animals fall victim to “impregnated baits” (plastic worms with scents inside them), which can look and smell like a swimming smorgasbord. One veterinarian in Florida discovered that some sick otters’ intestines were full of undigested plastic worms.

And anglers raised a ruckus over the call for a ban on lead sinkers, which poison birds, saying that it would inflict “unnecessary hardship.”

They say… “without anglers, rivers and lakes would be nothing but open sewers.”

We say… Right now, they’re just anglers’ trash cans. A study of one lake in Wales revealed that 64 percent of the litter left by visitors was found along the 18 percent of the shoreline predominantly used by anglers. Discarded bait containers accounted for 48 percent of the total trash!

They Say… “Anglers are great conservationists.”

We say… Well, with friends like that… Did you know that government agencies often “reclaim” lakes for anglers by poisoning the waters with pesticides (fish pesticides) — to kill off unwanted “trash fish” like carp — and then restock them with “game fish” like bass and trout? Eco-friendly or what?

Artificially introducing “Game Fish” into local ecosystems goes against Mother Nature! The number of frogs in Yosemite National Park has declined dramatically since the early 1900s. One culprit: Trout, introduced into the lakes for sport fishers, gobble up frog eggs, tadpoles and even adult frogs like guppy food.

Until 30 years ago, Glacier National Park stocked its lakes with trout for anglers; the fish have all but wiped out some microscopic animals, changing the entire food chain.

And in Colorado, things have totally spun out of control. In the late 1980s, hatchery trout infected with whirling disease, a fatal cartilage disorder, were introduced into the Colorado River for the benefit of anglers. Since then, 90 percent of the wild rainbow trout in some parts of the river have died of the disease.

They Say… “Nothing could be more P.C. than catch-and-release fishing.”

We say… If by P.C. you mean “painful and cruel,” we agree. Although some “experts” like John Grizzle claim that hooked-and-released fish are unaffected by their ordeal, others aren’t so sure. The German government has even banned this practice, citing the prolonged suffering it causes fish.

Common injuries to hooked fish include ruptured swim bladders (resulting in internal bleeding) and toxic buildups of lactic acid in their muscles (thanks to anglers who “play” fish to exhaustion). Fish can also suffer from the loss of their protective outer coating if anglers handle them, which often leads to dangerous bacterial infections.

They say… “fishing keeps kids off drugs.”

We say… Actually, fishing just hooks `em on cruelty, whether or not they’re taking drugs.

At the night “tournaments” sponsored by The Bowfishing Association of Michigan (BAM), hunters armed with bows and arrows and bright lights kill as many “trash fish” as possible. Hundreds of fish can be killed in one night; then their bodies are dumped into the local landfill. BAM spokesperson Rick Sanders sounds as if he’s been sniffing the bait when he claims these shoots are “a family activity. We encourage anglers to bring their kids.” Adds Sanders, BAM promotes “ethical shooting.” Sounds like another fish story to us!

“There are three prerequisites for angling — a hook, a line, and a stinker” — John Bryant, “Fettered Kingdoms”

Top

CHILDREN AND PETS

A boy and his dog, at least in America, is a symbol of friendship and of healthy psychological development. People sometimes say that giving children pets to love helps children develop universal love. But we can easily see that it doesn’t work. Children love their dogs, cats, hamsters, and lizards, yes, but they eat cows, pigs, fish, sheep, and chickens. Some children on farms even learn to arrange for the slaughter of animals they pampered as pets.

Both pampering and slaughtering stem from a desire to please one-self, or, more accurately, from a desire to please to senses and mind with which one falsely identifies. So teaching a child to love a pet because the pet is cute or loyal or cuddly simply binds the child to valuing bodily pleasure instead of spiritual pleasure.

Finally we need to train our children in specific guidelines about animals. Carnivorous animal such as dogs and cats should never be allowed in a house. While a carnivorous animal freely living outside can catch and eat other animals without sin, if we buy pet food made from meat, fish, or eggs we contribute to the slaughter of innocent creatures.

Let us teach our children to show spiritually equal vision by giving all creatures the opportunity to engage in Krishna’s service. Let us not allow our children to develop material attachments for an animal body.

Urmila Devi Dasi

Top

WATER CONSERVATION for Jiv Daya
Dr. Hasmukh & Nalini Shah — New Philadelphia, OH

Ahimsa is the cardinal principle of all religions, and especially Jainism. Very strong emphasis is given to “Jiv Daya,” that is avoiding any kind of suffering or killing of even one sensed living beings (Ekendriya Jivas). Let us raise our awareness and apply it in our daily life, this simple measure of ‘water conservation.’

Water contains innumerable number of microscopic lives in each drop, and water by itself also is composed of innumerable number of water body particles, the Ekendriya Jivas. By conserving or minimizing the use of even one drop of water, we will be instrumental in saving billions & billions of lives. On the other hand, with little negligence, we will also be responsible for killing them. Let us focus on a few facts and figures about our daily water usage and how we can minimize violence to microscopic and water bodied life.

On the average, water use in typical single family home in USA, without any water conservation is about 74 gallons per person per day. Large bulk of water volume (about 43%) is used for flushing toilets. Showers, dish washing, bathing, laundry, etc. consume another 48%. Remaining 8 to 10% is used for drinking, cooking, and minor uses.

Old toilet tanks use 3.6 gallons per flush, and simply replacing them by new more efficient toilet-tanks, which use 1.6 gallons per flush, we can save 56% of water per flush. Just imagine how much water can be saved by a family of four in a single day.

Many shower heads put out about 5.3 gallons of water per minute. Average shower consumes 25 to 50 gallons of water per person. In this modern society, very few people take old fashioned bath with a bucket full of water. However, simply by replacing old shower heads with new low volume shower heads (most of them give out only 2.5 gallons per minute, without any noticeable loss of force), we will be conserving more than 50% of water. Each shower could save 10 to 30 gallons.

Simple acts like brushing teeth with running tap uses about 2 gallons of water, and this wastage can be minimized by simply using glass of water instead of the tap water.

There are many more ways to cut down use of water, and the readers can always come up with their intuition. Let us adopt them in our day-to-day life, and give “Pran-Daan” to innumerable one-sensed lives.

Live and Let Live.

Top

Children Mortgaged for Money

Some more hidden cruelties behind closed doors in silk industry
Purnima Toolsidass — Compassionate Friend, Monsoon-Winter 1997 — Beauty Without Cruelty India

When Sargunam needed Rs 5,000 to pay for an operation to remove her uterus, she did what people in her village near the town of Kancheepuram had been doing for generations — she mortgaged her eleven-year-old son Ravi Kumar to raise the money.

Similarly, Chinakuzhantha, thirty-eight years old, pledged her twelve-year-old daughter Ramani to pay her husband’s medical bills. Earlier, she had mortgaged her elder son to clear other debts.

Leela borrowed Rs 2,000 to carry out urgent repairs to her house two years ago. As collateral, she offered her ten-year-old son Muthu and committed him to work for twelve hours a day in one of the local silk handloom units to pay off the debt. His tasks included stretching the warps for the looms and manually feeding the threads for the intricate designs of silk saris for which he earned a paltry sum of Rs 10 per day.

‘Advance’ money for child labour is easily available in the flourishing silk industry of Kancheepuram in Tamil Nadu. As the quantum offered — ranging from Rs 2,000 to Rs 15,000 — is the highest than in any other industry, parents are inclined to succumb and lease out their children as a matter of routine.

Although the majority of families providing child labour for bondage belong to the “below-poverty-line” category, in many cases the lust of parents for money rather than their poverty is the main reason behind the ongoing anachronism. The mothers in each case express remorse and regret, but they do it anyway.

“My husband earns so little and I have two smaller children to feed,” was Kannimma’s explanation for pledging her daughter Satya, aged twelve, for a sum of Rs 2,000.

A new dimension to the silk industry has been unfolded courtesy the Asian Age newspaper. Added to which The Times of India has reported that it is a practice for contractors to fleece farmers in Jammu and Kashmir by purchasing silk cocoons for as little as Rs 150 per kilogram.

Those with vested interests will, undoubtedly argue that if we stop buying silk, it will only add to the poverty of these people. Think hard: had such patronage (over generations) improved their lot, would these poor people have continued to mortgage their twelve-year-olds to twelve hours of labour Rs 2,000? Even if you do not have a 12-year-old child, but you have a heart and a conscience, do please, stop using silk, be it Kancheepuram or Kashmir silk, or any other. By using an alternative material, you will be helping one of the smallest of God’s creatures — the silk-worm, the unfortunate children of the most evolved — man, and most of all yourself!

If you do not wish to use Silk… because you’d be indirectly supporting child-labour, or simply because to produce a single gram of woven silk, fifteen silk-worms in their cocoons are boiled alive, Beauty Without Cruelty can help you with an informative new leaflet The Silk Moths Undoing which explains the untold killing in silk production. The leaflet lists the varieties and different materials and things which contain and do not contain silk. For those who would like to have a free copy, please send a Rs 2 postage stamp. Please also indicate if you would like it in English or Hindi.

Beauty Without Cruelty, India 4 Prince of Wales’ Drive

Wanowrie, Pune 411-040

Top

EVOLUTION, A Higher Vision of the Human Species

By Liam Brophy, Ph.D. — American Anti Vivisection Society
(The AV Magazine, January 1994)

We have it on the highest authority that evolution is still an on-going process. Here, in elegant prose, are the final words of Darwin’s masterpiece, On the Origin of Species, first published in 1859: “There is a grandeur in this view of life, with its several powers, having been originally breathed by the Creator into a few forms or into one; and that, whilst this planet has gone cycling on according to the fixed law of gravity, from so simple a beginning endless forms most beautiful and most wonderful have been, and are being evolved.” Fearing that some of his views would shock the religious feelings of some, he waited until 1871 to publish his conclusions concerning our species in The Descent of Man.

The thought that evolution is still at work prompted a contemporary naturalist to pose the question: if evolution produced offshoots of Super Man, would they be justified in using us lesser mortals as laboratory animals? Left to the normal and leisurely processes of nature it has taken our species some two million years to get where we are. But now, for the first time in our long history, humankind is able, with the help of science, to take evolution into its own hands, and decide its direction and rate of development. It is a dizzying and daunting prospect.

The earliest traces we have of our species were found in the savanna country of North Kenya and in southwest Ethiopia near Lake Turkana. Other human remains of two million years vintage have been found at Taung, just south of the equator. They are distinguished from the remains of other hominids by the position of the foramen magnum, the hole in the skull through which the spinal cord contacts the brain. This is positioned in an upright position in humans, while in apes and monkeys the aperture is positioned to allow the head to hang forward. There were other clues to distinguish humans from other hominids — small square teeth unlike those of fighting canines such as apes and the proximity of the remains of primitive flint tools to those distant members of our kind to whom was given the formidable name, Zinjanthropus Homo Habilis.

It is believed that humankind lived up in the trees with other swinging hominids until a serious drought crossed Africa. Lakes shrank and forests were compelled to retreat, and humans were forced from their perch to drop down on the savannas.

From the time that our very remote ancestors parted company with the lemurs and other tree-faring companions, they spread out from the open plains of East Africa, increased and multiplied, and filled all the earth.

W hen the Romans invented the census of population at the very beginning of the Christian era, as we know from the Bethlehem story, the world population registered between 300 and 400 million people. By the year 1700 it had risen to some 500 million. It accelerated to reach some two billion in our time according to World Health Organization statistics. By the year 2000 it is estimated the number will reach five billion. The rapid increase from near constancy for almost two thousand years to a multiplication by ten in three centuries shows an astounding increase in our species unmatched by our fellow creatures, thereby steadily diminishing their living space and food resources. Meanwhile evolution has been — is still — at work, and it is strange that we speak so persistently of past evolution, and so little of what is going on all the while.

This is perhaps understandable seeing that humankind’s span and field of observation is so brief in comparison with the hundreds of million years during which evolution has been at work. Humankind must be considered in the light of evolution as the outcome of an age-long process since it is in humans that nature finds its chief significance. “He is the agent of the evolutionary process on this planet,” says Sir Julian Huxley. “This is so whether he knows it or not, whether he wants it or not; but will he do the job better if he does know it and does consciously want to do it?”

In writing of biology and human progress another eminent naturalist, Arthur Thomas, writes: “Part of the momentum of Organic Evolution works in Man today, and while we always hope that the ape and tiger may die within us, we are in line with our best endeavors.” Maybe this is what the poet had in mind when he wrote of man toiling upward, working out the beast.

A less pejorative meaning can be attached to the term “speciesism” if we take it to mean that the human is the dominant species of our world, still evolving through the constant development of his or her superior brain and mind. Humans can improve the lot of all living things, and stave off the catastrophe which their active brains have devised. We are the clever keepers of our brothers and sisters through land, sea and sky. So while pessimists talk of the dethronement of our species, and refer to it as a random twig on the tree of life, “an item of history, not an embodiment of general principles,” the more intelligent teachers of our time are urging us to take up humankind’s burden through the maximum use of mind and brain. Thinkers like Koestler and Attenborough are not quite so optimistic, but we prefer to believe the scientists who hold that:

The best is yet to be, The last of life, for which the first was made: Our times are in His hand

Who said “A whole I planned…”

T hat eminent French naturalist and palaeontologist, Pierre Teilhard de Chardin, shared with Julian Huxley an enthusiasm for evolutionary studies, and an intuitive sense of direction toward a higher vision of our species — the welfare of all creation. They agree with Nietzsche’s view that humankind is unfinished and must be surpassed or completed. The French thinker showed what steps he considered necessary in order for us to take our evolution into our own hands. These are set forth with Gallic clarity in his fine study, The Phenomenon of Man (Fontana Books), to which Huxley contributed an enthusiastic introduction. In is not an easy book to peruse because of the vastness of the world prospect it opens before us, and because the author had to coin words and phrases at times to describe the new world to be brought about by intensified human awareness, heightened intelligence and love for all life. It should be read along with the author’s kindred book, The Future of man, and Bergson’s Evolution Creatrice.

We are convinced that the inspiring evolutionary process in humankind will progress in proportion to the diminishment of cruelty in mind and heart, and believe that all who promote the cause of kindness to animals are helping human evolution. We are invited to participate in this, the highest form of Speciesism.

Buddhist VANDANA

Whatever living beings there may be without exception, weak or strong, long, large, middling, short, subtle, or gross, visible or invisible, living near or far, born or coming to birth — May all beings have happy minds! Let no one deceive another nor despise anyone anywhere. Neither in anger nor ill will should anyone wish harm to another. As a mother would risk her own life to protect her only child, even so towards all living beings one should cultivate aboundless heart. One should cultivate for all the world a heart of boundless kindness, above, below, and across, unobstructed, without hate or enmity.  Whether standing, walking, or sitting, lying down or whenever awake, he should develop this mindfulness; this is called divinely dwelling here.

Top

Animal Violence, Youth Violence and Domestic Violence:
A Deadly Progression by Representative Connie Morella (R-8th District, Maryland)

Animal Guardian, Vol. 11, No. 3, 1998 – Doris Day Animal League

A 15-year-old Oregon student slaughtered his parents and a classmate and left 23 students injured in a shoot-out at his high school. He had a history of abusing and torturing animals.

A 16 year-old from Mississippi stabbed his mother to death, then shot and killed two classmates and injured seven others. In his diary, he confessed to burning and torturing his dog, Sparkle, to death. Two Arkansas elementary school boys shot and killed four fellow students and a teacher during a faked fire drill at their school. Classmates reported that one of the boys shot dogs with a .22 all the time.

Increasingly, women in battered women’s shelters report that their abusers victimize the family pet in order to control their behavior or their children’s behavior. The abusers either threaten to harm or kill the animals. Not surprisingly, children raised in such homes often learn that cruelty to animals is acceptable behavior. In turn, this behavior becomes the first step in repeating a legacy of violence toward family members.

These are all reasons why I joined with Congressman Tom Lantos in introducing a resolution in the House of Representatives to raise awareness of the link between cruelty to animals and domestic violence, child abuse, and other forms of violent behavior. The bill urges social workers, teachers, mental health professionals, and others to be aware of the connection between animal cruelty, and the evaluate and closely monitor individuals who have a history of animal abuse.

The legislation also urges federal research concerning the connection between animal and human violence in order that appropriate intervention methods be developed and that local law enforcement officials take seriously all incidences of animal cruelty.

The legislation reflects growing awareness — and growing concern — that violence perpetrated on animals is a symptom of violence that will escalate in time to violence against humans. This spring, at a congressional briefing, Kim Roberts, who is with The Humane Society of the United States’ “First Strike Campaign,” so called because that violent first strike is frequently against the family pet, spoke about how such violence is “often used to control, manipulate, or terrorize family members. It is a ‘warning sign’ that the violence is escalating. Taking animal cruelty seriously offers an opportunity to intervene in violent households and with violent individuals. Cross-reporting and cross-training of humane investigators and those charged with investigating child abuse and domestic violence are also valuable tools in the identification of current and possible victims of violence, both human and animal.”

But there are some in our society who dismiss animal cruelty as inconsequential or as “boys being boys.” FBI Special Agent Allan Brantley, who also spoke at the briefing, strongly disagrees. “Violence against animals is violence and when it is present it is considered by the people I work with to be synonymous with a history of violence. In many cases we have seen examples whereby violence against animals is a prelude to violence against humans. Some offenders kill animals as a rehearsal for targeting human victims and may kill or torture animals because to them the animals symbolically represent people.”

Agent Brantley continued, “Animal violence does not occur in a vacuum. It is highly predictive in identifying children at risk for committing future acts of violence but also in identifying children being abused and cases of spousal abuse.”

Whether we live in cities, small towns, suburbs or in rural areas, whether we are parents, teachers, neighbors, whether we are young or old, we must all work together to confront such violence in our homes, in our schools, and in our communities.

But what can the average person do to help?

• Write to your member of Congress and ask that he or she recognizes the link between animal cruelty and violence against humans. We need this important tool for anti-violence advocates.

• Become an advocate for strong, anti-cruelty to animal laws and for strong enforcement of these laws in your state. These laws should include stiff penalties, fines, and jail sentences, require restitution and reimbursement, and provide for psychological examination and counseling, and offer intervention strategies for offenders.

• Always report incidents of animal cruelty to your local humane society or to your local police department. Intentional cruelty to animals is always serious. If the perpetrator is a child, contact the child’s parents, school teacher or principal as well.

• Contact the ASPCA’s Family VISION Program (Violence, Information Sharing, Intervention, and Observation Network), the Humane Society of the United States First Strike Campaign for information about these programs.

• Get Involved with your local antiviolence coalition.

There are many ways you can contribute your time and talent to raise awareness about the connection between animal cruelty to animals and violence against humans.

Top

Ally Walker Spotlights Animal Abuse
Investigating the Cruelty Connection
PETA’s Animal Times, Winter 1998

In July 1998, Russell Eugene Weston walked into the U.S. Capitol, pulled out a gun and started shooting. When he was done, two police officers were dead and a bystander was wounded. Hours earlier, Weston had been involved in another shooting. That time his targets were cats, more than a dozen strays cared for by his father.

Ally Walker, star of U.S. TV’s The Profiler, knows these two events were not unrelated and that Russell Eugene Weston is not a lone statistic. In a new public service announcement for PETA, she hopes to spread the word that violence toward animals is linked to violence toward humans.

“According to the FBI, 80 percent of violent criminals start off abusing animals,” says Ally in the PSA.

Among that 80 percent are Albert De Salvo, the “Boston Strangler” who killed 13 women in 1962-63 and reported that, in his youth, he trapped dogs and cats in crates and then shot arrows through the crates. Carroll Edward Cole, executed in 1985 for five of the 35 murders of which he was accused, said his first act of violence was the strangulation of a puppy. Serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer confessed to the childhood killings of neighbors’ dogs and cats. Richard Allen Davis, the man charged with abducting a California girl from her bedroom and murdering her, reportedly set cats on fire and used dogs as targets to practice knife-throwing. More recently, a rash of deadly school shootings had one thing in common: They were preceded by acts of violence toward animals.

Alert animal control officers are aware of this trend. In San Francisco, officers are trained to recognize child abuse because of the parallel between animal abuse and child abuse. According to the San Francisco Child Abuse Council, people are often quicker to report animal abuse because it is more visible and because people “do not wonder what the animal has done to provoke [it].”

“Animal abuse is a serious crime with serious consequences for all of us,” says Ally Walker.

School Shootings Linked by Animal Cruelty

May 1998/Springfield, Ore.: Kip Kinkel killed his parents and two classmates and injured 22 others. He had a history of animal abuse and torture, having boasted about blowing up a cow and killing cats, squirrels and others by putting firecrackers in their mouths.

March 1998/Jonesboro, Ark.: Mitchell Johnson and Andrew Golden shot and killed four students and a teacher. A friend says Andrew “shoots dogs all the time wit a .22.”

December 1997/West Paducah, Ky.: Michael Carneal shot and killed three classmates at a prayer meeting. Carneal had talked about throwing a cat into a bonfire.

October 1997/Pearl, Miss.: Luke Woodham stabbed his mother to death, then shot and killed two classmates and injured seven others. In his diary, Woodham wrote that he and a friend beat, burned and tortured his dog, Sparkle, to death.

Most serial killers have a known history of killing animals. Jeffrey Dahmer killed and strangled neighborhood dogs and cats. Ted Bunty tortured animals as a teenager. Carroll Edward Cole strangled a puppy. David Berkowitz “Son of Sam” shot a neighbor’s dog.

Top

In Defense of Protesters at The Ringling Brothers Circus

Many people never lift a finger to do anything that does not somehow benefit themselves. But not Ms. Miyun Park. After she comes home from her 10 hour-a-day job for a non-profit group, she dedicates her evenings and weekends, 52 weeks a year, tirelessly striving for a day when non-human animals are not seen as mere things, chattel to be used and abused in every imaginable way.

Amanda Moeckel is 20 years old and currently in her third year at American University, majoring in Political Science and Art. Her extracurricular activities include AUARE (American University Animal Rights Effort (President)), and Food Not Bombs (serves vegetarian meals to the homeless). She has done this while maintaining a GPA of 3.72. Like Ms. Park, Ms. Moeckel devotes her life to doing things that do not benefit herself, except fighting for peace, compassion, and humanity. It is my honor to represent two such good people and good friends.

Now, about this case. This prosecution epitomizes many of our social ills. D.C. Code º 22-801 makes it a crime for anyone to cause or procure an animal to be tortured, tormented, or cruelly killed, or to deprive them of necessary sustenance. So on some level we know that mistreatment of animals is wrong. But the statutes just sit there.

For instance, the Ringling Brothers and Barnum & Bailey Circus causes families of elephants and other animals to be brutally killed right before their children, so that the children can be stolen from their home without incident. Or, they are born into captivity for the use and abuse of another. The baby elephants’ lives and free will are beaten out of them, and under force and threat of force they are forced to perform unnatural acts. Every day, for the rest of their lives, they are taken from a cage, to a rail car, to another cage, to a stage, and back to a cage. They never know what it’s like to have the open earth in front of them without having a chain around their feet, or without a small cage around them, they never taste what it’s like to romp around, to run free. It’s the same despicable story for other circus animals as well. When they are weary, old, and no longer able to perform, they are killed, many being sold for canned hunts. Animals are treated without mercy, all so that people, shielded from the truth about what goes on behind the big top, can pay money to see these animals perform.

But the United States Attorney’s Office doesn’t bring the executives before the court on charges of cruelty to animals. Why not? The answer is simple — because there’s money being made,$200 million per year in profit. In As an attorney who has taken an oath to justice, and a person who has taken an oath to compassion, it makes me sick.

Attorney Sean Day

Top

Rise of Slaughter in India

It may be hard to believe, but “Independent” Hindu India now kills more animals than ever before!
Even more than the enslaved India under Christian British rule, or even the very ruthless Moslem emperors . . .

More animals have been butchered in the last decade than any previous decade in India’s history!!

After independence, we have tried to catch up with the industrialization of the 20^th century. For that we needed foreign machinery, for which we needed foreign exchange, for which we had to export many of our resources — even the ones scarce to our poor masses or important to our future generations. Most lately we have resorted to exporting meat. The government has issued licenses to huge slaughterhouses with an eye on the market in Arab countries. We have ignored that ours is a culture of nonviolence and this business does not fit in it at all. This has raised a big cry in the animal-loving community of Hindus and Jains. Here are some of their thought-provoking views.

The first one is from “Jain Mitra,” dated 15-Oct-98, pages 375-376. It describes “Alkabir,” a major slaughterhouse in Andhra Pradesh. Maneka Gandhi also has talked about this one, at our Chicago Convention.

Killer Alkabir: Inhumane Tyrannies on Helpless Animals

This mechanized slaughterhouse is located 15 miles from Hyderabad, the capital city of Andhra Pradesh, on 300 acre land. This efficient modern plant can process up to 10,000 animals a day.

The central and state governments have issued licence for ‘useless’ 500 buffalos and 2000 sheep and goats, of which 50% have been canceled by the supreme court; but who is counting all these animals, and who is there to judge their ‘uselessness?’ There is no supervision of that. That is why in reality, thousands of healthy animals are annihilated there daily. This also is a murder of law.

Tyranny: Don’t think that these animals are killed easily and painlessly. Their agonies start long before they are dead. They are brought to Alkabir in trucks, from far away distances. For economy, 20-25 huge buffalos are stacked up in each truck. Nobody cares to feed them food, or even water while in transit. They are packed so tightly in the truck, that they are hurt by each other. By the time they arrive, they are no more capable of standing on their own feet! They are moved with force of whips . . .

They are brought into the final ground, where at least a thousand animals are stored. This is their last open air. They are kept here for four days, hungry and thirsty. Then their legs are broken and eyes poked, so that a ‘certificate’ can be obtained about their uselessness. The hunger and thirst of four days cause the hemoglobin to move from blood in to fat. The meat with higher hemoglobin fetches better prices.

Now these animals are pushed into washing showers. Extremely hot water (200 degrees!) is sprayed on them for five minutes, to soften their skins, so they will be easy to remove. The animal faints at this point, but it is not dead yet.

Now it is hung upside down with one leg, on a chain-pulley conveyor. Then half of the neck is slit. This drains the blood, but does not kill the animal. After death, the skin swells thick, which sells for a poor price. But the skin of a live animal is still thin, which has better economic value. On one side the blood is dripping from the neck, and on the other side a hole is made in stomach, from which air is pumped inside. This causes the body to swell, making it easier to peel the skin. After removing the leather, the animal is cut into four pieces: head, legs, body, and tail. The machines remove bones, and pack small pieces of meat into cans for shipping to Alkabir’s headquarters in Hyderabad. From there it is shipped to Mumbai for exporting to its final destination.

Personnel? Most of the people working here are Hindus. The Director, Subhash Sabarwal, is an NRI in Dubai, and his brother, Satish Sabarwal, manages the plant. The other principals are Ghulam Mohammed Sheikh (Dubai), Dilip Himmat Kothari, B.N. Raman, etc. Even though the main workers on cutting machines are from Kerala and Muslims from Mumbai, the administration, security, etc. consists mainly of Hindus. There are several other equally large (or larger) plants in India, owned and operated similarly by NRI’s and Arab citizens in cooperation.

The people working here are paid very handsomely. This is a big attraction. A monthly salary of Rs. 50,000 to 75,000 is common. At the site, there are many veterinarians, but their job is not to save healthy lives. Their only concern is to see that the meat does not carry any germs which may hurt the customers. In fact, there is a small army of government veterinarians, whose job is to see that healthy and useful animals do not get butchered. But these corrupt officials write false certificates according to wishes of Alkabir.

You cannot easily enter Alkabir, because outside people are not allowed in there. Even the local veterinarians and police cannot go inside, so there is no question about the other local poor people even coming close to its boundaries . . . Security is tightened at nights with hunting dogs. Now the neighboring people do not even come close to it.

Depleting our Animal Wealth?

Alkabir alone holds permits to export 15,000 tonnes of meat a year. The other permit-holders are even bigger: Frigorico Alanali (Aurangabad) has permits for 24,000 tonnes, Hind Industries (Aligadh) has permits for 25,000 tonnes, and Alana Sons (Delhi, Andhra and Maharashtra) have permits for 45,000 tonnes. These are just legal numbers. Illegal business is even bigger. Alkabir, even though originally licensed only for export, now sells meat in India too.

Besides all these authorized establishments, there are many smaller unauthorized butcher houses. In addition, animals are butchered on certain rituals too, by various religions, on certain days, by millions. Again, let us make some estimates.

Right now, there are 36,000 slaughterhouses, of which 10 are highly automated, where daily 250,000 animals are hacked. One estimate is that annually 300,000 tonnes of meat are eaten by the flesh-eaters, for which 10 million cows-buffalos and 40 million sheep-goats are killed. At this time the population of buffalos in the country is only 75 millions, and cows 200 millions. The situation of sheep-goats is even worse. Their population is depleting the fastest. Alkabir alone is licensed to kill 600,000 a year, but Deonar (Mumbai) is licensed to kill 2,500,000 a year, in addition to 120,000 cows and 60,000 buffalos. Calcutta located slaughterhouse kills 1,200,000 cows and buffalos per year. These are just official numbers for a few large facilities. There is no count for thousands of smaller unmechanized facilities. But one thing is very clear: The sheep and goats will not survive the next century. We may see the end of our animal wealth in early part of the next century.

Strange – But True!!

• India is the only country in world that provides in its Constitution for mercy and care of the animals.

• According to its laws, only those animals can be slain, which are older than 16 years of age, and are useless. However, now meat of young healthy buffalos between 4 months and one year is allowed for exports.

• Meat of one cow/buffalo is worth Rs. 20,000. However, the same animal may produce, in its 18 years of life span, goods (milk, butter, and manure) worth Rs. 300,000. Thus, the country has to suffer a loss of Rs. 280,000 for each animal slaughtered.

• We get foreign exchange for meat. However, we also pay foreign exchange for chemical fertilizers, manure, urea, milk powders, etc. which cost several times the price of meats. Then why export meat?

• The government encourages certain businesses-industries with financial supports. The government has announced 100% supports for opening new slaughterhouses, and the agriculture department has already approved several slaughterhouses. The Indian meat fetches only 40% of international prices. Then what is the meaning of supporting this industry?

• The government argues that if we don’t kill the animals, their population will go on increasing. However, according to the same statistics, the number of animals per capita is rapidly decreasing.

• The world trend is towards vegetarianism. The developed countries are learning the dangers of meat-eating. Britain has not opened any new slaughterhouse since 1980, whereas the Indian government is opening new slaughterhouses and modernizing the older ones.

• According to laws enacted to prevent cruelty to animals, it is considered a crime to treat any animal with cruelty (beating, over-burdening, inflicting pain, etc.). At the same time, however, butchering them is permitted! Does this make any sense?

• Central Food & Technological Research Institute (Mysore Government) has concocted a concentrated meat, with an objective to alleviate the shortage of ‘quality’ protein for masses. The government still thinks that meat provides superior proteins…

Message from Acharya Shree Vidhyasagarji

Slaughterhouses don’t kill animals only; they also murder ‘humanity.’ The government of this Ahimsak country, by murdering animals and selling its meat, is converting this country’s face forever. India has always been a country of playgrounds, farmers, agriculture, and shepherds taking care of their animals with love; never a country of butchers and butchery. Bloodbath is foreign to Indian culture.

The country can never prosper by selling meat, wine, eggs, fish, etc. because there is gross violence involved in all these businesses. The wealth produced by this violence, this bloodbath, will bring many disorders of mind, and all the money will be spent in repairing these disorders. So how will there be any real prosperity?

Industry of violence will spread only violence in the country, not nonviolence. The government wants nonviolence, but condones the violence! Can we establish nonviolence with violence? Today, we need peace not cruelty, because we can not live without peace.

And, what kind of economic policy is this, that we kill milk-producing animals to export their blood and meat to other countries, and then import milk powder and manure from other countries? Rulers of this nation need to change this ‘economic’ policy, because in reality it is an ‘uneconomical’ policy.

The nation that used to export gold, silver and diamonds, is now exporting bones, blood and meat. Our Bharat will never thrive with wealth in this way. We need sanctuaries, not slaughterhouses. It is so absurd that we kill our cows to feed foreigners, when our own people don’t get enough to eat, and we have to use artificial milk! These artificial foods also bring their own killer diseases. We should provide for pure and healthy food for our masses, and for that, we must save our cattle.

Freedom means giving right to live to all lives. What kind of freedom have we achieved, in which we talk about human rights, but define animals as ‘useless’ and annihilate them? Humans have no right to attack other species and take their lives. Everyone has a born right to live, and the death sentence is given only to those who have done big crimes. But these animals are innocent. Those who have done no crime, why are they being killed? There should be a penalty for this atrocity.

Religion is not ringing bells in temples. Religion is compassion and kindness. Protect the animals that are being packed in trucks for sending to slaughterhouses. Saving their lives is true religion.

Our literature has always focused on nonviolence, our culture has always professed nonviolence, then why is our government now moving to violence? This butchery and bloodbath are a big shame to our nation. We can never feel proud for such activities. There is no prestige in such businesses. World peace can never be achieved on foundation of animal massacre.

There was a time when we did not even sell milk – we just gave it free. Where is that Bharat gone? Today we have arrived at selling blood and flesh!

June – December