Saturday, June 16, 2007

Friday Saturday Frank: Suicide Chump



Apologies! After a very long Friday, I was too tired to sit upright at my desk, much less open my computer. The last thing I remember is threading myself between cat and child and husband. Then blackness. (There was no Journey ballad playing beforehand, thankfully.)

This is wonderful old black-and-white footage of Frank in action. I'm going to ask Maestro what year this is; I'd guess early seventies.

Bon Weekend, everyone.

Sunday, June 10, 2007

Sunday Grace


The face of woman in Western art, in her many incarnations. An offering of beauty, the transient and eternal alike--at once, in fact--unwrapped and presented with a videographer's gentle flourish and Yo-Yo Ma's poignant cello.

Via the brilliant Lord Whimsy, who notes:

An absolute joy to watch. The sequence sometimes gives the impression that the eternal face behind it all is actually flirting with you.

If you're interested, here is the approximate progression:

Leonardo Da Vinci, Raphael - Raffaello, Titian - Tiziano Vecellio , Sandro Botticelli , Giovanni Antonio Boltraffio, Albrecht Dürer, Lucas Cranach the Elder, Antonello da Messina, Pietro Perugino, Hans Memling, El Greco, Hans Holbein, Fyodor Stepanovich Rokotov , Peter Paul Rubens, Gobert, Caspar Netscher, Pierre Mignard, Jean-Marc Nattier, Élisabeth-Louise Vigée-Le Brun, Sir Joshua Reynolds, Franz Xaver Winterhalter, Alexei Vasilievich Tyranov, Vladimir Lukich Borovikovsky, Alexey Gavrilovich Venetsianov, Antoine-Jean Gros, Orest Adamovich Kiprensky, Amalie, Jean-Baptiste Camille Corot, Édouard Manet, Flatour, Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, Wontner, William-Adolphe Bouguereau, Comerre, Leighton, Blaas, Renoir, Millias, Duveneck, Cassat, Weir, Zorn, Alphonse Mucha, Paul Gaugin, Henri Matisse, Picabia, Gustav Klimt, Hawkins, Magritte, Salvador Dali, Malevich, Merrild, Modigliani, Pablo Picasso.


[Video by eggman913]

[H/T Lisa in Baltimore]

Saturday, June 09, 2007

The Sopranos' Metaphysical Tenor


Like everyone else who's been watching HBO's crime drama The Sopranos since its first irresistible season, I have a few thoughts (very well, unsolicited predictions, so consider yourself warned) regarding tomorrow night's much-anticipated grand finale. In a note to Ezra, I wrote:

My own take on what's going on at Casa Soprano? I think the whole final season--beginning with the first half that aired last year, with Tony in the hospital--has been Tony's coma dream as he approaches death (in much the same style as the movie Jacob's Ladder, during which Tim Robbins' character's psychotropically-induced death dream was played out over the course of the movie). I believe Tony actually ratted out the New York family at the end of the previous season, turning state's evidence and going into the witness protection program. You'll remember how in that coma dream, he was a salesman named Kevin Finnerty (going with the reasoning that Feds customarily give protected witnesses new identities with WASP-y names, as opposed to obviously Italian ones), and he was staying in some Marriot-like hotel, with a different ID in his wallet and different kids' voices on his home answering machine? And how at one point he looked out the window and saw the sun do that odd flashing thing, which it did again when he went to the desert with the Vegas stripper girl after winning at the roulette table (at which point Tony raised his arms and yelled "I get it! I get it!")?

Also, remember in the first half of this last season, while T was in the coma, how the bright hospital light shining into his face tied in with the light (inside a house) toward which his dead cousin was urging him--come in, come on in? That same light--and awareness--burned and buzzed at him from above when he first began his peyote trip with the stripper and found himself on her bathroom floor.

Anyway, I think the entire final season has been Tony's conscience (and/or subconscious self) imagining how it all might have played out if he hadn't flipped. And the flipping actually took place after the Feds nabbed him and Johnny on the porch that snowy winter day (the final episode of the previous season). He imagines/dreams himself running and getting away, running through the snow and tossing away his weapon (which even turns up a couple of years later and gets him in trouble), setting the stage for the final season's alternate reality. He has classic parental-worry dreams about his daughter--whom she will date and marry, what career she will choose--as well as his son (will AJ's long-demonstrated patterns of disaffectedness and disinterest persist, and are they symptoms of depression or rather, of the payback cycle--recriminations, guilt, etc.--of a violent and heritable pathology?). Tony is a sociopath, which fact the onscreen shrinks have gone to great lengths to explain. But so is his son, as the writers have shown in an admittedly uneven way. And so were his parents--both of them.

If the series is about Tony Soprano's soul, the final season (both halves) are about the way a sociopath's soul might interpret messages from the universe within and without--for example, memories about family and projections about the future of various loved ones; the relentlessly random outcome of the roulette table; deus ex machina events like Christopher wrecking his SUV and being so conveniently "killable"--as he approaches death. While most moral beings would experience the final "life-flashing-before-one's-eyes" slideshow as just that--a slideshow--the sociopath might turn such an event into one colossal justification for his life choices, one big, final sunflash of insight that everything is random and uncontrolled anyway, that no-one can be counted on, that everyone is out to get you--and indeed, that everyone has already gotten all your crew (last week), and you're next.

Which brings us to the final episode. If I'm close to right in my take on this, you'll see no small amount of visual metaphors dotted throughout the finale. What happened--how and when Tony flipped--may be explored enough to tie up some loose ends, but Chase, more than most screenwriters, seems to appreciate the messy and unexplained element of Being Alive, so perhaps not. I do believe Tony dies.

He's already dead, in fact.


Okay, so perhaps I do have a tendency to overthink things a tiny bit. Still, if my predictions prove close to correct--or even dead-on, so to speak--do remember that you read it here first.

Sopranos fans are invited to share their own thoughts and predictions in comments, and of course, to raise a glass of Brunello in honor of David Chase, a gifted and darkly witty writer.

Salute e millegrazie, Signor Chase. Al futuro!

Friday, June 08, 2007

Friday Frank: Zoot Allures & Trouble Every Day; New York, 1984



Classic Frank. Listening to this makes me want to start Happy Hour a half-day early!

Bon Weekend, everyone.

Wednesday, June 06, 2007

Food Safety This Wednesday: Chinese Leaders Vow To Toughen Regulations And Improve Inspection System


It remains to be seen whether the Chinese government is responding as gravely concerned leaders, forward-looking and justifiably worried businessmen, or public relations pros throwing down the expected comfort words, muffling fires (or attempting to) before they rage out of control. Perhaps they're acting in all three capacities--judge for yourself:


SHANGHAI, June 6 — Responding to growing international concerns about tainted food and counterfeit drugs, China said late Tuesday that it was overhauling its food and drug safety regulations and would introduce nationwide inspections.

The announcement, from the State Council, the nation’s highest administrative body, is the strongest signal yet that Beijing is moving to crack down on the sale of dangerous food and medicine and also trying to calm fears that some of its exports pose health problems.

The move follows a series of embarrassing episodes this year involving China’s export of contaminated pet food ingredients and toothpaste. The shipments of tainted pet food ingredients set off one of the largest pet food recalls in United States history.

Last month, an article in The New York Times revealed that at least 100 people had died in Panama after taking medicine containing a toxic chemical called diethylene glycol that had been produced in China and exported as the harmless syrup glycerine.

And in recent weeks, several countries, including the United States, Panama and Nicaragua, recalled or issued warnings about toothpaste made in China because it contained diethylene glycol.

While Beijing has strongly defended the quality and safety of its food and drug exports, and even denied that toothpaste it exported was unsafe, government regulators at the same time have stepped up safety inspections and shut down companies accused of producing unsafe food or counterfeit drugs.

But with pressure growing from regulators in the United States, Europe and other parts of the world, and international food companies expressing concern about the risks of importing Chinese-made food and feed ingredients, Beijing is pushing for a more forceful response to the crisis.

In its announcement on Tuesday, which was posted on a government Web site, China said that the state council had approved a new food and drug safety guarantee system on April 17 and that an outline of the new program was being distributed to government agencies nationwide.


While the new program sets laudable goals, the outline offers little in the way of a plan by which to achieve them. For example, officials state that by 2010, they will have implemented new controls on food and drug imports and exports; however, it is not clear what these controls will be, nor how the consistency of an exporter's compliance therewith might be monitored--and acted upon, if necessary--in the interest of ongoing commerce if not public health. Absent too is any meaningful plan for carrying out and enforcing the program fairly and uniformly across a nation as massive as China, especially since much of it is rural and remote. The program does call for more random testings of medicines (oddly, food is not specifically mentioned as needing more random inspections) and will require that inspection information (presumably a written label or bill of lading) be supplied with 90 percent of all food products. But why not randomly inspect food as well as medicine slated for foreign shipment, since many of the Dangerous Export Incidents precipitating this rather-too-late announcement actually were about food products? Adulterated, rotten, mislabeled, and otherwise toxic food products that were destined for--that landed in--America's human and animal food supply? And why not require that inspection information be supplied for all food products, not just 90% of them?

As for promises to check up on food makers and crack down on counterfeiters in general, I would ask, How? Will this be yet another strong-arm movement that winds up hurting the least powerful while pretending not to notice the transgressions of those who were in a position to do whatever they had to do to not have their transgressions noticed?


But the challenges facing China are enormous because its regulatory system is weak and enforcement is particularly difficult, partly because the economy is growing so fast and also because local officials accept bribes and sometimes allow small companies to flout regulations.

Also, regulators here say many exporters of food and medicines are mislabeling goods and shipping them illegally.

Two weeks ago, food and drug safety issues were even on the table in Washington during the strategic economic dialogue hosted by Treasury Secretary Henry M. Paulson Jr.

“These are issues China has to deal with over time,” says Rio D. Praaning, secretary general of the Public Advice International Foundation in Belgium, an advisory group that is working on food and drug safety issues around the world. “But we can’t wait. We have interim developments. We have patience, but frankly patience is out the window when people start dying.”


We have patience, but frankly patience is out the window when people start dying.

Hear, hear, Mr. Praaning. One quibble, though: people haven't just started dying. The issue of tragic deaths and illnesses caused by dangerous food and medicine imports has been an underreported but nonetheless horrifying--and continually developing--story for some time, now.

Also at Shakesville.

Saturday, June 02, 2007

Import Alert: Put Down That ToothAntifreeze Paste!


Taking a hiatus from my hiatus, I'm popping into the blogosphere for a moment to urge everyone to look closely at his toothpaste tube this morning: if there is any mention of it having been imported from China--or if it's one of the brands specifically mentioned by the FDA in their latest warning--you're strongly advised to avoid using it, as it may contain diethylene glycol (also known as antifreeze):

Consumers were advised yesterday to discard all toothpaste made in China after federal health officials said they found Chinese-made toothpaste containing a poison used in some antifreeze in three locations: Miami, the Port of Los Angeles and Puerto Rico.

Although there are no reports of anyone being harmed by the toothpaste, the Food and Drug Administration warned that the Chinese products had a “low but meaningful risk of toxicity and injury” to children and people with kidney or liver disease.

The United States is the seventh country to find tainted Chinese toothpaste within its borders in recent weeks.

Agency officials said they found toothpaste containing a small amount of diethylene glycol, a sweet, syrupy poison, at a Dollar Plus retail store in Miami, sold under the brand name ShiR Fresh Mint Fluoride Paste. The F.D.A. also identified nine other brands of Chinese toothpaste that contain diethylene glycol, some with concentrations of 3 percent to 4 percent.
You can see the entire list of adulterated (and potentially-adulterated) brands here.

Adding insult to injury (let us not forget the countless number of human beings around the world, many of them children, who died after ingesting diethylene glycol-adulterated cough syryp) is the cavalier attitude of Chinese officials. Here, as they say, is the money quote:

Over the years, counterfeiters have found it profitable to substitute diethylene glycol for its chemical cousin, glycerin, which is usually more expensive. Glycerin is a safe additive commonly found in food, drugs and household products. In toothpaste, glycerin is used as a thickening agent.

Chinese regulators said Thursday that their investigation of toothpaste manufacturers there had found they had done nothing wrong. Chinese officials also said that while small amounts of diethylene glycol could be safely used in toothpaste, new controls would be imposed on its use in toothpaste.

The F.D.A. said diethylene glycol in any amount was not suitable for use in toothpaste.

Question: why does the United States afford Most Favored Nation trading status to a country that not only places a lower value on safety--indeed, on human life--than we do, but is quite bald-faced in its admission of same? Chinese officials also said that while small amounts of diethylene glycol could be safely used in toothpaste...(!) I mean, I'd much rather see our government get tough on all imports from all countries, requiring that, at a minimum, U.S. health and safety standards be met--and instituting severe penalties, up to and including full-on embargoes, if necessary--than have to witness the kind of slavish genuflection we've been seeing America perform at the altar of free trade lo these recent months.

Antifreeze in toothpaste? For the love of all that is sane, FDA, put a stop to all Chinese food and drug imports until such time as that nation's officials can demonstrate, provably, that they take health and safety standards seriously--at least as seriously as American families, if not American regulatory agencies, are taking all this.

Also at Shakesville.

Friday, June 01, 2007

Friday Frank (Because Really, Hiatus Or Not, It's Mandatory): Stairway To Heaven (Led Zepplin), Cleveland 1988



Frank and the crew take this overplayed classic rock piece to new levels of guitar-y wonder. Given the fixed and faraway camera position, I think this footage was shot by an audience member with a sneaked-in camera. So, no closeups.

It's finally Friday and exams are over--all good. But it's the first day of summer, thus the lads are now underfoot, and I am very much under siege. So I'll take my escapes however I find them (and five minutes of Frank go a long way).

Bon Weekend, Everyone.

Saturday, May 26, 2007

Saturday Frank: Prague 1990, With Václav Havel; On Cultural Matters, Censorship, And The Police State



From his Wiki page:

In early 1990, Zappa visited Czechoslovakia at the request of President Václav Havel, a lifelong fan, and was asked by Havel to serve as consultant for the government on trade, cultural matters and tourism. Zappa enthusiastically agreed and began meeting with corporate officials interested in investing in Czechoslovakia. Within a few weeks, however, the US administration put pressure on the Czech government to withdraw the appointment. Havel made Zappa an unofficial cultural attaché instead.

This appears to be raw footage shot during Frank's visit. And it's magnificent--just great to watch, whether or not you speak Czech*. The conversations are in English, though occasional bits of commentary in Czech (I think) are dotted throughout. While in Prague, Frank meets with President Vaclav Havel and speaks to an enthusiastic audience about censorship, privacy, and the role of the Police State in America; he then launches into a rendition of Love Of My Life.

(H/T marigoldmerion)

*I don't.

Friday, May 25, 2007

Friday Frank: Whipping Post (By Greg Allman), 1981



My sentiments exactly, much of the time, and at the end of this week in particular. That's all I'm saying.

Oh yes, and this: the video features yet another classic Frank solo capable of turning around a really bad mood. And Steve Vai and Chad Wackerman play and sing.

May eveyone enjoy an inspiring and safe three-day Memorial Weekend, with warm wishes and thanks going out to those men and women who spend every day in a dangerous land, separated from their loved ones by this very wrong war; who continue to risk life and limb at the incomprehensible, unconscionable behest of the White House.

(H/T Orv39)

Food Safety This Friday: Imported Monkfish That Are Really Puffer Fish Predictably Contain Deadly Neurotoxin



This morning, after my daily reading of food safety news (well, as much of a reading as I could stomach, at least), I shook my head for the umpteenth time and wondered aloud, What next?

You'd think I would have learned by now. Anyway, I've highlighted the extra-disturbing parts for those who are in a hurry. Here, read:


WASHINGTON -- A frozen product labeled monkfish distributed in three states is being recalled after two Chicago area people became ill after eating it, the importer announced Thursday.

Hong Chang Corporation of Santa Fe Springs, Calif., said it is recalling the product labeled as monkfish because it may contain tetrodotoxin, a potent toxin.

While the frozen fish imported from China was labeled monkfish, the company said it is concerned that it may be pufferfish because this toxin is usually associated with certain types of pufferfish.

Eating foods containing tetrodotoxin can result in life-threatening illness or death and the toxin cannot be destroyed by cooking or freezing.

[...]

Consumers who have purchased this monkfish can return it to the place of purchase for a full refund. Care should be exercised in handling the fish as the tetrodotoxin may be present on the skin and flesh of the fish. Wash hands thoroughly after handling.

Consumers with questions may contact the company at 1-562-309-0068.

People who may have consumed these products and have concerns are encouraged to contact their health care provider. Illnesses associated with consumption of these products should be reported to the nearest FDA district offices and to the local health authority.


This latest episode in a long, sorry series of toxic import sagas is shocking, yes, but the actual consequences of all profit-driven malfeasance--mislabeling cheaper and oftentimes poisonous ingredients, to name just one example--are hardly surprising. If these frozen "monkfish" are actually puffer fish being handled as monkfish, there will be tetrodotoxin all over the place.

The FDA pulls no punches in its press release (dated May 24); much of the language is genuinely chilling:



FDA Warning on Mislabeled Monkfish
Fish Believed to be Puffer Fish; Contains Deadly Toxin

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is warning consumers not to buy or eat imported fish labeled as monkfish, which actually may be puffer fish, containing a potentially deadly toxin called tetrodotoxin. Eating puffer fish that contain this potent toxin can result in serious illness or death.

[...]

Two people in the Chicago area became ill after consuming homemade soup containing the fish. One was hospitalized due to severe illness.

FDA's analysis of the fish confirmed the presence of potentially life-threatening levels of tetrodotoxin.

Initial symptoms of tetrodotoxin poisoning occur 30 minutes to several hours after food containing the toxin is consumed. Tetrotoxin poisoning is characterized initially by tingling of the lips and tongue. Tingling of the face and extremities and numbness follow. Subsequent symptoms may include headache, balance problems, excessive salivation, nausea, vomiting, diarrhea and abdominal pain. Consumers experiencing these symptoms should seek immediate medical care and are encouraged to report their illness to local health authorities. In severe cases, muscles can become paralyzed, and death may follow from respiratory muscle paralysis.

A total of 282 22-pound boxes labeled as monkfish were distributed to wholesalers in Illinois, California and Hawaii beginning in September 2006. These fish were then sold to restaurants or sold in stores. In one instance, the retailer labeled the fish as "bok," the Korean name for puffer fish.



It's illegal in the U.S., with very few highly-restricted exceptions, but in other countries--Japan in particular--puffer fish are served as fugu,
the inexplicably popular, wildly expensive, and potentially lethal sashimi dish the preparation and serving of which can only lawfully be undertaken by licensed Japanese fugu chefs. Because that mad treat can kill if it's not prepared absolutely correctly and with surgical precision:

Since 1958, only specially licensed chefs can prepare and sell fugu to the public. The fugu apprentice needs a two- or three-year apprenticeship before being allowed to take an official test. The test consists of a written test, a fish identification test, and a practical test of preparing fugu and then eating it. Only 30% of the applicants pass the test. This, of course, does not mean that 70% die from poisoning; rather, they made a small mistake in the long and complicated procedure of preparing the dish. Due to this rigorous examination process, it is generally safe to eat the sliced fugu sold in restaurants or markets.

Furthermore, most fugu sold nowadays comes from fish with only a small amount of toxin. Selling or serving the most toxic liver is illegal in Japan, but this "forbidden fruit" is still sometimes eaten by amateur cooks, often with fatal results. After the years following Japan's defeat in World War II, when several homeless people died from eating fugu organs that had been discarded into insecure trashcans, restaurants in Japan were required to store the poisonous inner organs in specially locked barrels that are later burned as hazardous waste.

Hazardous waste is an understatement. About that tetrodotoxin:


Tetrodotoxin is an exceptionally lethal poison. Tetrodotoxin is approximately 1200 times deadlier than cyanide. In animal studies with mice, 8 μg tetrodotoxin per kilogram of body weight killed 50% of the mice (see also LD50). It is estimated that a single puffer has enough poison to kill 30 adult humans.

A couple of things, in my view, can't be said often enough: One, we must do whatever it takes to properly fund and staff the FDA. And that might mean reworking the entire structure of the regulatory powers and processes, creating a single formidable agency where several weaker ones existed before. If such an organization could wield meaningful authority, and operate with an acceptable and legally-mandated level of transparency, I'd be all for it. When you consider the volume of imported foodstuff that lands in the U.S. every day, remembering the various import alerts--some of them active over a decade--already in place against a number of countries, it is simply not logical to rely on, or even expect, a guarantee of poison-free dining when only 1% of imported foods and ingredients get inspected.

And two, Americans want and need accurate information about the contents and origins of our food. If a country has an official and recorded history of shipping poisoned, mislabeled, adulterated, rotten, or otherwise toxic food into the United States, American consumers deserve the right to decide if they're willing to take the risk, the right to make their concerns known at the grocery store, and the right to hold accountable those who would and do harm us, whether intentionally or as a consequence of institutionalized, profit-driven malfeasance.

It's important to note that Country Of Origin Labels (COOL) legislation is only one way to uphold the notion of accountability. Indeed, it's rather obvious that trade agreements must be revisited, too: strict compliance with U.S health and safety standards should, from this day forward, be a non-negotiable, loophole-free requirement for anyone wishing to export to America. Further, said countries must vow to see to it that visiting U.S. inspectors are afforded full access to any and all physical plants and appropriate records in order to enforce this compliance; delays and denials would risk tangible penalties and threaten the country's trading privileges.

Despite its widespread support among Americans, demonstrated in poll after poll with 82% in favor of mandatory Country Of Origin Labels, the usual suspects--in other words, those powerful, deep-pocket-boasting interests that government unfortunately listens to--have fought COOL tooth and nail, and they've been largely successful. Between 2002 and 2004, the American Farm Bureau Federation amassed $11,840,000 in lobbying expenses aimed at defeating COOL; Wal-Mart's lobbying expenditures toward the same end were $2,760,000. Predictably, all that money effort translated into a (so-far) three year delay of the labeling laws, with no implementation deadline set and none in sight--not unless consumers speak out.

You can contact members of the U.S. Senate here, and the House of Representatives here.

A Question Congress Should Be Asking

"So, Ms. Goodling, which is it--Caymans or Bahamas?"

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Food Safety Briefing: Restrictions on Imported Food Urged; Trade Ambassador Pressured; A Florida Family Reels; From Whence Cometh Garlic?



U.S. Senator Evan Bayh of Indiana, in letters to President Bush and the head of the FDA Monday, called for a crackdown on exporters sending adulterated and otherwise toxic or dangerous food, medicines, and ingredients into the United States:

WASHINGTON – The United States should yank away the “welcome” sign for many Chinese food and medicine ingredients, Sen. Evan Bayh, D-Ind., told President Bush and the head of the Food and Drug Administration in letters he sent Monday.

Recent animal deaths have been blamed on pet food containing an ingredient imported from China that was contaminated with melamine, a plastic precursor used as a fertilizer. Feed tainted with the same imported ingredient was sent to 38 Hoosier poultry operations.

[...]

Even though scientists have concluded that the risk to humans from the chickens fed the tainted feed is very low, Bayh told Bush that the episode illustrates how vulnerable U.S. consumers are “to potentially poisonous agents that may be intentionally delivered to American citizens.”

In a letter to FDA Commissioner Andrew von Eschenbach, Bayh said the FDA should consider restricting Chinese exports of food and medicine ingredients “until it can be established that its bulk ingredients meet U.S. health and safety standards.”

Bayh did not say how the guarantee would be met.


I'm glad another Senator has added his voice to the small-but-growing chorus of criticisms surrounding the regulatory agency (the FDA) that by its own admission inspects only 1% (or "less than 2%", depending on who's talking) of all imports; I'm especially heartened to hear Bayh point out the melamine elephant in the room--that is, how unnervingly vulnerable we are--and even utter the phrase "...potentially poisonous agents [that may be] intentionally delivered to American citizens”. Senator Dick Durbin, D-Ill. and Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro, D-CT continue to address food safety and consumer information issues: Senator Durbin testified before Congress about the FDA's current state--there are too many imports pouring in for agents who are far too few in number, to name just one obvious problem--and Congresswoman DeLauro urged the enactment of tougher product labeling laws, including Country Of Origin Labeling (COOL) and clear notification if a meat or poultry product came from a cloned animal or its progeny.

On May 10th, the two leaders co-wrote a terse and forthright letter to U.S. Trade Representative Susan Schwab (my emphasis):

Dear Ambassador Schwab:

We are writing in light of the recently discovered contamination of imported wheat gluten and rice protein concentrate used to manufacture pet food in the United States.

[...]

The safety of food imports from China extends beyond the pet food recall. China is especially poor at meeting international food safety standards, which is particularly disturbing considering that China exported approximately $2.26 billion in agricultural products to the United States in 2006. A recent news article noted that, in February, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) blocked the entry of several food products from China because they contained banned additives, were tainted by pesticides or were contaminated with salmonella. Some products were simply unsanitary.

The U.S. Trade Representative (USTR) is involved in these matters because regional, bilateral, and international trade agreements entered into by the United States often include sanitary and phytosanitary (SPS) measures. For example, there are two World Trade Organization (WTO) agreements that deal with food safety and animal and plant health and safety. We understand that these provisions allow countries to set their own standards but require countries to base regulations on science and encourage countries to use international guidelines where they exist.

Our concern is whether the USTR has the ability to challenge the sanitary and phytosanitary standards of our trading partners based on evidence that they are not meeting international standards and may be endangering public health in the United States.

This issue is particularly important as U.S. agricultural imports are predicted to reach a record $69 billion in FY 2007. If we are to continue at this rate, we must ask important questions about the food safety standards of our trade partners to ensure our nation's public health is not compromised.

Developing countries often lack sufficient regulations, monitoring, and enforcement of SPS regulations. China, for instance, has come under scrutiny in the past for an overall lack of transparency and failure to properly adhere to SPS measures required by the World Trade Organization.

While we understand the importance of the United States' involvement in international trade, participation in these trade relations should not come at the expense of animal or human health.

Therefore, we request answers to the following questions—

1) What sanitary and phytosanitary measures are included in current free trade agreements and other permanent trade relations in which the United States is currently engaged?

2) What legal recourse does the United States possess with respect to imported food products that pose a threat to public health, in the event that the country where the offending product originated is not cooperative?

Incidentally, neither of the two Senators from Florida--Mel Martinez (R) and Bill Nelson (D)--mentions food safety or labeling issues on his website, though the Sunshine State has an obvious stake in both issues: in terms of the size of its contribution to Florida's GDP, agriculture is second only to tourism. And many Floridians, along with families and farmers in the other 49 states, have already been profoundly affected by the melamine-adulterated pet food and animal feed. This family, for example:

If it's not trips to the vet, it's the nightly ritual of injecting a feeding tube intravenously into the animals. Without the daily fluid pack that hangs above the laundry room dryer, Libby faces certain death.

Two of their four cats already have died. All four have suffered kidney disease their veterinarian attributes to contaminated pet food.

The food, Nutro Max Gourmet Classics, did not appear at first on the ever-growing national recall list, and Cmar thought all was well. But then Nutro Max's manufacturer issued a recall, and Gourmet Classics joined hundreds of other products being blamed for the illness and deaths of thousands of cats and dogs nationwide.

Cmar has spent almost $10,000 trying to save Libby and her family's three other cats. Cmar, who runs a small business from home, charged much of it to her Visa card.

As bills mount, she finds herself at a crossroads: continue spending thousands to save Libby? Or does that just prolong the animal's suffering?

"I'm an anxiety-ridden mess," says Cmar, as she weighs the financial issues and the concern that her 4-year-old son, Matthew, and 1-year-old daughter, Maudaline, won't understand the continued loss of their pets.

Lastly, a recent USA Today article about food safety and questionable imports offers some interesting data:

The overall dollar figures for food imports into the USA from China are high — $29 million worth of fresh or frozen fruit and $131 million worth of fresh or frozen vegetables in 2006, according to the USDA. But "the share of the U.S. food supply that comes from China is tiny, probably less than 1%," said Fred Gale, a senior economist with the China team at the USDA's Economic Research Service.

[...]

But that doesn't mean the average American isn't eating food from China, and some surprising ones at that. If you season with garlic, sip apple juice, spread honey or savor fish dishes, there's a good chance you're buying food from China.

Garlic: More than 50%

China produces 75% of the world's garlic, according to the FAO. Last year was the first year in which U.S. consumers bought more garlic produced in China than garlic grown in California, said Bill Christopher, owner of Christopher Ranch, a major grower of garlic in Gilroy, Calif. California grows "99.9% of U.S. garlic," he said.

"There were roughly 150 million pounds of fresh and peeled garlic from California sold in the U.S. in 2006 and 170 million pounds from China," he said.

Chinese garlic is easily recognized, he said. "In California we cut the roots off but we leave a little bit of a brush. In Chinese garlic they cut the root plate off flat, with no brush."

California garlic farmer, author, and English professor Chester Aaron recommends seeking out domestically-grown garlic:

...thanks to a persistent garlic fungus in the nutrient-robbed soil, rock-bottom pricing and a loophole in U.S. trade law, most of the garlic sold in the United States has been grown in foreign soil. China grows two-thirds of the world's garlic, while California is currently responsible for just two percent.

[...]

China has been the particular focus of legislation designed to prevent "dumping," in which exporters introduce garlic to the U.S. market at prices significantly lower than their stated production costs. At the urging of American farmers, federal trade officials agreed to levy a 377 percent duty on imported garlic in 1994. Under pressure from free-trade advocates, officials revised the ruling a year later, to lower tariffs on "new" shippers who were not involved in the original investigation. Foreign shippers have had to merely form new companies in order to avoid the tariffs, thereby freeing themselves to continue dumping their product into the U.S. market. Accordingly, the volume of Chinese garlic in the U.S. market has increased more than ten-fold since 2000, forcing California garlic farmers to sell off vast tracts of land in order to survive. Since 2001, Christopher Ranch has put 40 percent of its garlic fields out of commission.

Aaron says that China, along with fellow exporters Argentina, Brazil, Chile, Ecuador and Mexico, are all using pesticides and herbicides banned in, and inherited from, the United States. "There aren't enough inspectors at the borders to check all the garlic that comes in from around the world, and the chances are that what you buy in most markets has been heavily sprayed," says Aaron. He recalls happening upon a bushel basket of purple-skinned garlic in a local organic grocery a few years ago. A shop clerk told him it had been organically grown in Monterrey, but he recognized the "grower's" name as an importer who sells Mexican garlic. Aaron bought a bulb and passed it along to a chemist friend at Berkeley. A few days later she called to tell him that the supposedly organic garlic contained several varieties of chemicals banned in the U.S. A representative from the Food and Drug Administration, contacted for this story, reports that there are no instances on record of garlic shipments from Mexico being turned away because they've contained banned sprays, which neither confirms nor refutes Aaron's claim. "The best advice I can give is to buy from a reputable farmer or grow your own," says Aaron.

Until we have mandatory labels here in the States, concerned consumers will have to ask the friendly produce manager about the origins of the store's garlic inventory or take their chances with pesticide residue on the imported bulbs--pesticide that may well be banned, or in the process of being phased-out, in the U.S., but which the chemical giants continue to produce and sell to farmers abroad, who in turn apply it to garlic and other produce that winds up back in America's food chain.

More on the issue of pesticide inheriting soon.

(H/T JayMonster; Lisa in Baltimore.)

Also at Shakesville.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

It's Time For America To Legislate Mandatory Country Of Origin Labels



Yesterday's New York Times brought some gruesome news: the toxic Chinese fake-glycerin (diethylene glycol, also known as antifreeze) that I wrote about earlier this month has turned up in Panama--in toothpaste.


Diethylene glycol, a poisonous ingredient in some antifreeze, has been found in 6,000 tubes of toothpaste in Panama, and customs officials there said yesterday that the product appeared to have originated in China.


“Our preliminary information is that it came from China, but we don’t know that with certainty yet,” said Daniel Delgado Diamante, Panama’s director of customs. “We are still checking all the possible imports to see if there could be other shipments.”

Some of the toothpaste, which arrived several months ago in the free trade zone next to the Panama Canal, was re-exported to the Dominican Republic in seven shipments, customs officials said. A newspaper in Australia reported yesterday that one brand of the toothpaste had been found on supermarket shelves there and had been recalled.

Diethylene glycol is the same poison that the Panamanian government inadvertently mixed into cold medicine last year, killing at least 100 people. Records show that in that episode the poison, falsely labeled as glycerin, a harmless syrup, also originated in China.

There is no evidence that the tainted toothpaste is in the United States, according to American government officials.


There is no evidence that the tainted toothpaste is in the United States. Nonetheless, after the food adulteration disaster of recent months during which thousands of pets died and many Americans quite rightly began to consider--some for the first time--that their own food might not be as safe to consume as they imagined, this sort of disturbing news causes one to re-think every grocery-store purchase. And while I am an avid label-reader myself, I'll be the first to agree that we are not all organic chemists accustomed to remembering--and then ferreting out--seventeen-syllable chemical names on labels. It isn't realistic, or even fair, to expect all consumers to stand there in our grocery and drug store aisles, reading paragraph after paragraph of minuscule type, trying to determine if this toothpaste or that cough syrup might kill our families. Not only that, it wouldn't matter, in many cases, if we did: the ingredients may say one thing (i.e. glycerin), but the contents could contain something else entirely--like poisonous antifreeze.

The FDA has proven ineffective in protecting our food supply, admitting they inspect less than 2% of imported foods and food ingredients. So, I'm recommending--urgently--that we all pressure our representatives in government to push COOL (Country Of Origin Labeling) legislation into law as quickly as possible. Let consumers decide if we're willing to trust the product safety policies of countries halfway around the world--countries that saturate farmed shrimp with dangerous antibiotics and spike their animal feed (and possibly grain meant for human consumption, too) with ground up melamine scrap and prohibit their citizens from accessing the news and information we in the States take for granted. You know, free market and all.

Unsurprisingly, an overwhelming majority of Americans--82%--support COOL. And equally unsurprisingly, many of the big players are against it, stating that it would be far too onerous and expensive for them to print a few words or sentences on labels and let us know the national origin(s) of what went into our cereals and sinus medicines:

Although polls indicate that the overwhelming majority – 82 percent – of Americans want to know where our food is coming from, Big Food and Washington bureaucrats have united to deny us this right.

Lobbyists for corporate agribusiness such as the American Farm Bureau; giant food manufacturers such as Cargill, Smithfield and Con-Agra; and supermarket chains have handed over millions of dollars to an industry-indentured Congress to keep us in the dark about the “country of origin” of the hundreds of billions of dollars of foods we buy every year in supermarkets or consume in restaurants.

Shocked by media reports that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration inspects only 1 percent of all imported food shipments, increasing numbers of health-minded consumers have complained to their elected public officials. They are demanding that the government increase food-safety inspections – which unfortunately have been reduced by nearly 50 percent under the Bush administration – and require mandatory country of origin labels for foods.

With the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention admitting that Americans suffer from more than 78 million cases of food poisoning every year, resulting in 5,000 deaths and 200,000 hospitalizations, food safety and lax government regulation have become an important issue for many consumers.



Bear in mind that some of these same American interests who also export to Europe somehow manage to squeeze a few words about their products' origins in between New And Improved! and Now More Chocolate-y Than Ever when labeling goods meant for those destinations, since country-of-origin labels are required by law in EU countries and elsewhere around the world:

Europe and most other industrialized nations require mandatory country of origin labels on food. Reacting to the long-standing concerns of their constituents, reflected in polls indicating that 80 percent of Americans want country of origin food labels, Congress finally incorporated such labels into the 2002 Farm Bill, supposedly to go into effect in September 2004.

Unfortunately, corporate agribusiness and supermarket chains bribed an ethically impaired Congress with millions of dollars in campaign contributions to block implementation of the labels.


It's a matter of greed economics more than anything else--they're afraid that if American consumers find out how many of their purchases contain ingredients from countries with spotty safety records, many if not most of us will start getting uppity, refusing to buy products and foodstuffs that are packed with cheap and potentially dangerous fillers and chemicals, and take our dollars elsewhere, spending them on products that offer what we want, without the rubbish we don't want. So they bribe lobby our congresspeople (emphasis mine):

Deep pockets influenced Washington as industry lobbyists blocked COOL, with the exception of seafood. Lobbying expenditures by groups that opposed COOL between 2000 and 2004 include American Farm Bureau Federation: $11,840,000, and Wal-Mart: $2,760,000. The Goliaths of Agribusiness thus undercut our right to know the source of our food, despite 82 percent consumer support for the idea. Along with over 200 organizations, the National Family Farm Coalition sent a letter to Congress urging our elected officials to finally implement COOL as of September 2007 and end the backdoor delays. So while my T-shirt tag informs me it was from Bangladesh, darned if I can place the hamburger sizzling on my grill.


I don't mean to sound melodramatic; rather, I'm trying to say all this with the kind of passion and emphasis required to bring about meaningful change: the elections of 2008 offer America unprecedented potential to effect real, positive change for us all--in this as well as many respects. Regardless of our individual politics, we're all consumers of products that, increasingly, come from sources around the globe. As such, it's absolutely vital that we use our voices and votes, and do so in numbers large enough to overwhelm the deep-pocketed interests who currently dictate policy.

Tell Congress in no uncertain terms that you, the American consumer and voter, want Country Of Origin Labels (COOL) legislation enacted immediately. You can contact members of the U.S. Senate here, and the House of Representatives here.

Also at Shakesville and Ezra's place.

Friday, May 18, 2007

Friday Frank: Watermelon In Easter Hay, 1988



I'm in a reflective mood these days, and more often than not, I find myself reaching for time-travel music. Sometimes the memories are funny; other times, they need accompaniment that's meditative and properly fluid. Melancholy, even.

Frank's gently weeping Watermelon In Easter Hay is one such wistful melody, the perfect soundtrack for tea and raindrops.

Bon Weekend, everyone.

(H/T boondock78)

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Chinese Government: Says Don't Worry, Eat Happy, Keep Importing And Bans Litbrit


The government of the People's Republic of China--the same folks who have blocked their citizens' access to my blog, as well as Shakesville, HorsesAss, and an enormous number of American websites--claim they have conducted their investigations and found that the practice of melamine-adulteration was limited to a couple of individual companies. Therefore, they state, Americans can once again have confidence in the safety of China's exported food and ingredients.

The FDA is apparently buying it, so to speak, despite reports from actual Chinese farmers and individuals who've admitted that melamine-spiking of animal feed and grains is commonplace and has been going on since the early 1990's, when the previous method of cheating--urea-spiking--was exposed by lab tests.

SHANGHAI, China — China says further checks on food exporters have turned up no sign of a chemical blamed in the pet deaths in North America, and urged U.S. authorities not to take additional measures against Chinese producers.

The government body responsible for overseeing food safety said it accompanied U.S. Food and Drug Administration inspectors on visits to two companies blamed for the chemical contamination on May 8-12 following the publication of the results of China's own investigation.

The incidents involving Xuzhou Anying Biologic Technology Development Co. Ltd. and Binzhou Futian Biology Technology Co. Ltd. were "special individual cases," the General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and Quarantine said in a statement viewed on its Web site Wednesday.

[...]

The statement said FDA inspectors also expressed satisfaction with the quality controls and tracing measures in place at another exporter of vegetable protein, Sinoglory, saying those met U.S. production standards for similar products.

"China emphasizes that its determination to crackdown on law breaking enterprises is firm and its policies are effective," said the statement.

"We hope the American side will accurately and objectively deal with problems among individual companies and not take stringent measures against other Chinese companies producing the same type of products," it said.

And not take stringent measures against other Chinese companies... Oh, I don't think Chinese officials need to worry too much. Not only is the US government not doing any banning of Chinese grains, they're actually discussing--seriously!--importing their poultry. Besides, we kind of owe them, don't we?

Also at Shakesville.

Monday, May 14, 2007

UAE: No Melamine In Food, Please, And No Food On Melamine, Either.


Health officials in the UAE (United Arab Emirates) are issuing a novel melamine warning to their citizens today: Don't eat or drink from it. Apparently, consuming substances that are stored in or served on plates, cups, and bowls made from the hard, formadlehyde-produced polymer may be hazardous to one's health:


Dubai: Beware of eating on cheap melamine dining plates as they contain a substance harmful to health, the Dubai Municipality has warned.

“We have issued an official circular banning import and sale of some cheap melamine plate and cups containing urea formaldehyde, which is hazardous to health,” said Salah Amiri, director of Municipality’s Dubai Central Laboratory.

He said the civic body has also launched a campaign to confiscate melamine tableware, which contain urea formaldehyde and do not comply with the UAE standards and specifications.

He said that urea formaldehyde, which is commonly used for making casings for electrical appliances and also used as insulation material, is an acidic foaming agent and is not suitable for public health. It can harm human digestive system in addition to creating problems in the respiratory system.


Also at Shakesville.

Ex-Largo City Manager Stanton Braves The Cameras

Times photo: Douglas R. Clifford

Susan (nee Steve) Stanton reaches an important mile-marker in her courageous odyssey: her First Photograph.

She had spent years planning for this day. In the last month, she had frantically built a wardrobe, learned makeup, fretted over her too-short hair. She thought she looked good. Pretty. Professional.

Her debut would come after four decades of self-examination, in the dust of a leader's best-laid plans, in the remnants of her family. It glowed with the promise of possibility. Like new skin.

But what if others didn't see her the way she saw herself?

She had already lost her job, her friends and her home -- the things that gave her an identity -- for admitting she wasn't the person they knew. Now that she was showing them a second self, would they reject that person too?

She knew that some people would never even see Susan Ashley Stanton.

They would see a man in a dress.

Shedding a life usually means starting over, quietly, somewhere else. Slip town. Get a new job in a place no one knows your name.

For Steve Stanton, that wasn't an option.

(I think Susan looks terrific, by the way, especially when you remember all she's been through this year alone.)

Also at Shakesville and Pushing Rope.

Sunday, May 13, 2007

My Mother

When my maternal grandmother died in 1980, I wrote this poem as an ode to my Mum, whose brave rejection of traditional dogma--hers was, and is, an individual and intellectual take on matters spiritual--I'd known (and often aspired to) since babyhood, though competing voices always hummed in the background. You see, my mother chose our schools for their academic muscle, not their church affiliations; that meant, over the course of living in various parts of the hemisphere, that we were exposed to wildy divergent belief systems along the way. At twenty, I thought I knew everything. Loss made me reflect and reconsider. I never did find a concrete answer, but I knew, as I wrote this, that losing Nanny had made me love and appreciate her daughter--my own dear mother--that much more.


My Mother

I think she said to me, one time,
A cynic always she'd remain;
To laugh at hymns in perfect rhyme
And ridicule the rough refrain

Of voices. Hers, a twisted cry
Above the congregation floats
As they await the Broken Lie
To crumble in their sinful throats.

The circles lilies that they sent
Were cruel, she said, though sweet, though bright--
For they were never flowers meant,
But compensations for one's plight.

I think I'll tell her she was right,
For now I'm twenty and I see:
Their Man In Charge can end the light.
He took her mother away from me.

-- DNT 1980

Saturday, May 12, 2007

China And The USDA: If You Liked Our Chemical-laced Crunchy Grains, You'll Love Our Putrid Plump Poulty!

Apparently, it isn't enough that our pets have been poisoned and unknown amounts of ground plastic scrap and swimming-pool chemicals are floating around in America's human food supply. Oh no--US authorities are currently working on a proposal that would permit chickens that are grown, slaughtered, and cooked in China to be exported to the US, where we currently produce almost all poultry domestically. It's utterly unbelievable:

WASHINGTON -- In China, some farmers try to maximize the output from their small plots by flooding produce with unapproved pesticides, pumping livestock with antibiotics banned in the United States, and using human feces as fertilizer to boost soil productivity. But the questionable practices don't end there: Chicken pens are frequently suspended over ponds where seafood is raised, recycling chicken waste as a food source for seafood, according to a leading food safety expert who served as a federal adviser to the Food and Drug Administration.

China's suspect agricultural practices could soon affect American consumers. Federal authorities are working on a proposal to allow chickens raised, slaughtered, and cooked in China to be sold here, and under current regulations, store labels do not have to indicate the meat's origin.

Again with the No Labels Required! Remember, our government wants us to buy cloned meat, too, without knowing that we're doing so, since there won't be any labels informing consumers that the meat they're buying comes from the body of a cloned animal. And remember further how Big Ag companies like Monsanto have famously challenged organic dairies' and ice-cream companies' right to label their milk and milk products as hormone-free, stating that so doing implied that their own hormone-laden milk might conceivably have something wrong with it. As if we consumers have no right to know what we are feeding our families and make choices in their best interests, decisions that include rejecting any products we believe to be dangerous or suspect. Congresswoman Rosa DeLauro , who strongly supports consumers' right to have food labeled properly, is all over this:

DeLauro, Democrat of Connecticut and chairwoman of a US House agricultural subcommittee , said Congress should signal its willingness to restrict imports from China until it improves food safety oversight.

"There is deception. There is lax regulation, and they've got unsanitary conditions," DeLauro said. "They need to hear from us they're at risk. Congress has to look at limiting some of their agricultural imports."

[...]

The USDA, which shares food safety oversight with the FDA, says its proposal to allow the sale of Chinese chicken is in the early stages and that there will be many opportunities for the public to be heard on the matter. Under the plan, any country seeking to export meat , poultry, or egg products to the United States must earn "equivalency," with documentation that its product is as safe and wholesome as the domestic competition. USDA officials would review records, conduct on-site audits, and confirm that foreign laboratories could ensure the food's safety, said Steven Cohen , a spokesman for the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service . The agency would also inspect imported products as they enter the nation, he said.

Now, the USDA has considerably more muscle (and a fatter budget) than the FDA, but forgive me if I don't put a whole lot of faith in those promises of tightly-controlled inspections. I'm especially concerned about our government saying they will "confirm that foreign laboratories could ensure the food's safety".

Yeah, right.

All an unscrupulous chicken exporter would need to do is set up some company and give it a nice, science-y name like, oh, Acme Biologic Technology, let's say. Then, he could purchase some industrial, lab-like building--maybe an abandoned processing plant that hasn't yet been bulldozed to destroy evidence--fill it with stainless-steel tables and inspection equipment, and use it to "certify" the Chinese poultry as safe. Until the USDA's attention wanders, and like the chicken waste that drips into many Chinese shrimp ponds, the inspection process devolves into a foul, dangerous mess.


Ensure the food's safety? In a land where conditions like this exist?

In China's agricultural system, many farmers toil on 1-acre plots, while US farmers often work thousands of acres, said Michael Doyle , director of the Center for Food Safety at the University of Georgia and former chairman of the FDA's science advisory board.

In China, "there are hundreds of thousands of these little farms," Doyle said. "They have small ponds. And over the ponds -- in not all cases, but in many cases -- they'll have chicken cages. It might be like 20,000 chickens in cages. The chicken feces is what feeds the shrimp."

[...]

The USDA has found that up to 10 percent of shrimp imported from China contains salmonella, he said. Even more worrisome are shrimp imported from China that contain antibiotics that no amount of cooking can neutralize. Last month alone, the FDA rejected 51 shipments of catfish , eel , shrimp, and tilapia imported from China because of such contaminants as salmonella , veterinary drugs, and nitrofuran , a cancer-causing chemical.

You can write to Congresswoman DeLauro via her Website.

(H/T oddjob)

Also at Shakesville.