Vegan burger at McD's - Lest we forget

News flash on the local Auckland vegan network: you can get vegan burgers from McDonald's now! In some very limited outlets, you can use a touchscreen to create your own gourmet burger. Guacamole, mushrooms, tortilla strips, lettuce, tomato and tomato and chilli relish - sounds delicious!

So is this news to be celebrated? Is this a step in the right direction for vegans everywhere and time for a stampede to try the new offering to support McD's vegan efforts?

Yeah, nah. Time to watch (or re-watch) McLibel.

• Remember how crappy McDonald's is as an employer to vulnerable young and poor people. Anti-union barely begins to describe it.
• Remember how awful they are to their own franchisees.
• Remember how they target children in their advertising.
• Remember how they pressure their way into neighbourhoods and globalise the food economy, with their power undercutting business from local food outlets where the profits support local families. 
• Remember how they consistently resist accountability from their animal product suppliers to be humane, sustainable, or even sanitary. 
• Remember how their business and food philosophy is as anti-compassion as it is possible to get.

(Source: McSpotlight )

Lest we forget

Yes, I have taught my daughter to boo when we pass a McDonald's. I can't forget what I learned during the McLibel case. Yes, they are worse than other fast-food restaurants and supermarkets, if only because their size allows them to be.

No, I wouldn't cross the road to get FREE vegan food from them. Corporate criminals like Nestle and McDonald's bank on most of us forgetting their crimes. They're right.

Yes, it matters where you spend your money - you are voting to support that business's growth. There are lots of other nonvegan restaurants where you can already celebrate vegan options that have been available for years. Hooray!

Obquote from The Princess Bride

In the words of the (apparently) immortal Westley: "My brains, his steel, and your strength against sixty men, and you think a little head-jiggle is supposed to make me happy?" McDonald's head-jiggle may be in the vegan direction, but they're still McDonald's.

Obesity: Supporting satisfaction instead of surgery

Hot news from down under - a couple of surgeons who perform bariatric (stomach-stapling) operations would like to perform more of them on us, and would like tax money to fund their work. The media is running their advertisement as if it were a public health statement.

I've battled weight problems for my adult life, and I know there is no magic bullet for maintaining a healthy weight. Neither is there a magic scalpel. Cutting open your body to reduce your stomach capacity and all that could mean for your future is not a tenable general treatment.

Battling obesity en masse

New Zealand is, like most developed countries, guilty of more reporting than acting on the growing obesity problem. While this is always a sensitive subject, a recent longterm study showed that while there are obese healthy people, they are much less likely to remain healthy over the years.

So is it true that "Surgery still remains the most capable strategy for inducing robust and long-term weight loss"? May I see the source please? The (US) National Weight Control Registry research does not mention surgery at all in their summary of how most of their participants lost long-term weight.

But I am even more interested that New Zealand's tax money supports industries that support obesity. Fatty cholesterol-rich foods like beef, pork, chicken, eggs, and dairy. "Added-value" processed foods, which take natural raw foods and package them for the highest profit and shelf life instead of fiber and nutrients. Food technology trumps food quality.

Calorie density

Why does this matter? Jeff Novick, RD, MS explains in this article and this video presentation, but in short, calorie density reigns supreme in how much people eat.

Steak doesn't fill you up like oatmeal. Potato chips won't fill you up like potatoes.

Where the money goes

So if we're going to tweak our economic contribution to solve the obesity epidemic, let's not psych everyone into thinking we have to catch up with the Aussies in dangerous life-altering surgery rates.

Let's at least stop being part of the problem, and remove tax funding from those industries harming our national health. Restrict their advertising which often reports positive health benefits or just plain fun...and often arrives in our schools to advertise to our children.

Help make healthy food cheaper, more available, and more acceptable instead.

Why this vegan won't go to Hell

...that's Hell Pizza, in New Zealand, of course.

What the Hell?

Recently, my network feed from my local vegan friends and vegan boards have been dripping with pizza selfies. What's the news? Hell Pizza with the brand new addition of Angel Food's delicious vegan mozzarella cheese. I have eaten Hell Pizza before, but they are expensive and gourmet, and I'm a frugal gal, so although they are just up the road we don't often meet anyway.

But we won't be meeting anytime soon, in spite of the vegan cheese. I'm in a minority compared to the Hell-ravers, and I don't enjoy feeling in conflict with a business coup for a well-loved vegan business, but here we go.

Hell of an advertisement

Hell Pizza's name and image is based on exploitation of Christian ideas. Because only a minority in New Zealand take religion seriously, Hell is able to appeal to the majority by using those familiar ideas lightly with that hint of sacrilege to spice up their commercial presence and grab attention.

That's just how they roll. So no surprises really when they advertise rabbit pizza with a billboard of actual rabbit skins and lamb shanks with a cartoon "lambputee". This little lamb came out right before the vegan cheese deal and pushed me over my personal limit. I will get my pizza elsewhere.

Thanks SuicideFood!

Who the Hell cares?

At the end of the day, none of this matters much. But this sort of advertising represents the sort of over-the-top satire about animal rights often summed up as "MMMMM...bacon".

Some vegans believe that rabbit skin and legless lamb ads encourage us to connect the dots with animal production and use. Unlikely. Hell pays to design ads to increase sales, not make their loyal customers question their food. It's far more likely that the advertising focus groups showed that this level of satire encourages meat-eaters in their recognised defense mechanism.

Few people walk around draped in furs, and everybody knows that the lambs don't haunt the paddocks with prosthetic legs. The absurdity is a shared joke that avoids consideration of the reality.

But...vegan pizza!

I know, I know. Hell has always offered an unusual range of gourmet vegan pizzas, and now they're offering vegan cheese too!

But Hell's ads show me that they are confident in offending the minority of animal rights supporters, just like  Christians (and amputees, and who's next?), and still sell lots of pizza to those who overlook or even enjoy such jokes at other's expense. Controversy stimulates sales, so offending a minority is a win-win situation.

Ick.

Hell offering vegan cheese may be a shining example of how far veganism has come. Another sign of how far we've come is how other pizza places (Domino's or Pizza Hut) don't even blink when you order a pizza with no cheese - and then perhaps add your own Angel Food mozzarella at home.

And if you're a vegan who still wants to support Hell, please consider, between mouthfuls of pizza, sending a message to them about the message their advertising sends to us.

G is for Gifted and that's good enough for me...

Thanks a million, Sesame Street!

...and now I want a cookie.

The G Word

The G Word (gifted) is very much on my mind right now.

I've just opened discussions within our local gifted group about our name: I would like the name to feature "gifted" more prominently, others have very valid concerns about the impact of such a change.

My personal experience with the label of giftedness started very early, with the introduction of a gifted program at my primary school.

The very real impact of gifted labelling and separation continues as a divisive issue throughout generations of our family.

As for our children, any bonuses they may score from being gifted must be weighed against the other attributes they inherit or must otherwise endure in a gifted family.

So, what are the Pros and Cons?

This isn't a new topic, so here are some discussions:

• Being Labelled as Gifted
• Wrestling with Misconceptions
• Online discussion of being labelled
• "Gifted" - what is it good for?
• Gifted Labelling - Good and Evil part 1
• Pros and Cons of Labelling - on video
• Downsides of labels (warning, this one is interesting but unpleasant)

For me, being gifted is the true divider. Not the label - that's far less visible. So our children have enjoyed gifted educational programmes like Small Poppies and Gifted Kids, as well as the more social Explorers.

Owning Gifted

No doubt, there is a cringe factor out there for “gifted”. But what message do we send when we cringe too?  How will our gifted children feel if the word gifted is so awful we can barely say it?

Even more telling than the cringe factor is the public lack of understanding even of the basics of what gifted means...and what it doesn't. While happy to acknowledge levels in sporting prowess, the world is horribly and hypocritically cruel about differing intellectual capabilities. Consider the word "retarded," which is simply derived from a Latin word meaning "delayed" yet has been allowed to become an insult.

Today, when image means everything, can we afford not to say "gifted" as often as possible, with our message of choice attached? Can we own the word gifted instead of letting it be used against us?

This post has been written for the NZ Gifted Awareness Week Blog Tour. Check it all out!

Jessica Parsons is the mother of two gifted children and the president of Explorers, the Auckland branch of the NZ Association for Gifted Children.

If Education Were the Answer - 5 things that would already be true

Heard this before?

We don't need to pass laws to make things better; we just need more education. If people knew better, they would do better.

I'm a writer. I'm all for information sharing. But telling the truth isn't enough.  If it were, we'd all already:

1. Eat more whole grains than refined grains
2. Eat 5+ fruits and vegetables every day
3. Exercise every day
4. Use public transport
5. Respect everyone, regardless of race, gender, religion, orientation, etc.

I'm accepting other entries for a list of 10, please submit in the comments section.

Education is the:

• talk in "Walk your talk"
• say in "Do as I say, not as I do"
• words in "Actions speak louder than words."

Inspirational educational messages can't beat real world experience.

There you see what is really valued. Money wins over health, environment, and peace. Most people will soon recover from any new lesson and go back to doing exactly what everyone else around them is doing - a much stronger educational lesson.
  
While the government and large corporations work together to maximise profits, educational truths are dangerous and unacceptable counter-culture.

Not convinced? Here's a prime example: the USDA and Maybe Meatless Monday.

Until society takes strong cooperative action to make the better choice the easier choice (instead of folding under pressure), the talk about what's good for us will remain...just talk.

The 99% don't need models

This controversial story about model sizes is the news of the day on my social networks - opinions range from "I still prefer skinny women" to "it shouldn't matter what size you are as long as you're healthy" and anywhere you like in between.

Statistics prove that model sizes have been getting skinnier and skinnier, and the outrage goes into a stampede.

Many of us care deeply about our body's health and attractiveness. Many in the vegetarian and vegan world enjoy that their food helps them increase their health and attractiveness.

And there's no question that the pictures we see influence what we consider beautiful.

But there's a gigantic assumption behind this controversy - so let's question it.

Why do we have models?

It could be....

 They help us choose our clothes by showing us what the clothes look like.

Well, this is the only possible excuse there could be for the entire modelling industry.  If only it weren't a total con.

At any size, a model doesn't look like me...or you

For the 99%, no model is your size or shape.  S/he has been picked specifically to look really good in clothes and in pictures.  When s/he wears clothes, they don't look like they will on you.  And that's before posing, lighting, makeup, hairstyle, and airbrushing.

The only thing a model sells is a fantasy - a hope that you will look that good if you bought those clothes.

It works - advertisers know it.

At a logical level, most of us know the truth.  That model does not help you pick clothes that suit you.  But that professional image goes straight through your logical brain without touching the sides and makes you want what you never needed and will not get.

To your health and happiness

Of course, pursue your own best road to a healthier body and life.

But that doesn't include an argument over anorexic models vs overweight (average) models  They're all unreal commercial images, unworthy of your personal aspiration and acceptance.  There are lots of beautiful people in the real world, and that includes you!

If you are concerned about our runaway body image problems, stop supporting the industries who use models.  There are enough good-quality and attractive secondhand clothes to get you through the rest of your life. 

You really don't need to see what they look like on the model first.

Real Food Part 2: Eating Less Sugar 5 Ways

The Real Food series helps you eat more real food in the real world.  In Part 1, we ate more whole grains.  Now let's learn how to do what we know we should - eat less sugar.

What's so bad about sugar?

White sugar goes beyond being a refined food - it is an extract.  All that is left from the refining process is empty calories - calories with no nutrition.   Sugar tastes addictively great, but like stripped grain flours, that's a natural sign of a very rich calorie source.

Rotten teeth and bouncing blood sugar don't bother you?  Here are some more of sugar's problems.

Dr Michael Klaper vividly describes systemic sugar damage - the sugar spreads through your bloodstream all over your body (eyes, organs, skin), combines with proteins, and then oxidises.  The effects mimic the aging process - your skin, eyes, muscles, etc, start to fail. 

When I indulge in high-sugar treats, I always have a hangover the next day. I can't feel the problems in my kidneys and blood vessels, but as a contact lens wearer, I can attest to that eye thing.

How to give up sugar

Dr Klaper worked with a buddy to commit to no refined sugar.  Hey vegans!  Like dairy, you may not understand how sugar hurts you until you give it up.

Too hard? A sweet tooth is largely a matter of habit - you expect the sweetness you're used to.  While you know if you choose cakes, cookies and candy you're choosing sugar, sugar's not just in special treats anymore.

The American Heart Association suggests no more than
-  6 tsp added sugar (women)
-  9 tsp (men) per day.

Start with these tricks to cut out everyday sugar surprises. 

Don't drink sugar

Drinking is meant to quench your thirst, and water does the best job.  When you drink calories, they go down quickly, don't satisfy your appetite, and you'll eat more.   

Help your health - avoid:

• Soft drinks and energy drinks - e.g., Coke with its 38g (10 tsp) per can or Red Bull with 27g (7 tsp) - CSPI tells you all about liquid candy
• Juice - your mother may have told you to drink your juice, but even unsweetened apple has 23g (6 tsp) per glass.  Juice has some nutrients but not enough to be worth the sugar hit.  Yes, it's healthier than Coke, but if you want nutrients?  Eat the fruit.  Compare the fruit with the juice. 
  
  Some health experts recommend fresh juicing to get a super hit of nutrients - this will beat supermarket juice but here are Dr McDougall's pros and cons. 
  
  "Unsweetened" juice blends may contain deionised juice (juice sugar water).  And someone's buying those sweetened fruit drinks!
  
  No juice? What to do?  Drink water, water with a splash (lemon, lime, orange, molasses), herbal tea...
• Coffee or tea with sugar -  If you have several cups of tea with a few spoons of sugar each, it adds up.  Going gradually will get you there:  today, only use half the sugar or one spoon less. Or use healthier sweeteners (see below).

Don't wake up with sugar

Most breakfast cereals, especially kids' cereals, are super sugary.  85% of 85 cereals in this cereal list have 10% or more added sugar. Indefensible, yet someone is buying them.  Lots of someones.

Confused about cereal sugar amounts?  Here's help.  But honestly, the taste should give you a clue.  Nobody stops misleading health claims on the box either.

Even plain old cornflakes, ricies, and weetbix are not far off 10% added sugar.  They're processed products and along with the milk or milk substitute most people use, that's sweet enough.  If you're spooning extra sugar on top, you need a taste bud readjustment.   

Cut back, cut back again, and use healthier sweeteners (see below).

A breakfast that you sweeten yourself, like porridge or whole grain toast, is a better bet.  And you can use healthier sweeteners (see below).

Say No to sugar on the go
 
We eat less food at home and more while travelling - snack food is a huge business.  Too many snack foods are labelled healthy when they are anything but.  This trick works best with healthy hippie food that corporate food companies have stolen.  Like...

Yoghurt
 
This is just one story about yoghurts which scream lowfat but have an entire day's worth of added sugar (6tsp) in one tiny pot. 

Most often used in small children's lunches or for women trying to be health-conscious!

Try a plastic container, some natural yoghurt, and only a couple of tsp of fruit, jam, or even sugar.  Word to the wise - vegan soy yoghurt contains no lactic acid so needs less sweetening.

Muesli (granola) bars

This review from Oz says it all:

• Cereal bars can be loaded with sugar (most more than 20%) and saturated fat (more than a packet of chips). 
• Some brands contain ‘fruit’ that owes more to chemistry than agriculture.
• A piece of real fruit is a much healthier snack.

We are vegan but with careful label reading I have discovered some supermarket choices with wholegrains and an acceptable sugar and fat content (Pams and Nature Valley). 
Cut sugar in baking

If you do home baking, you're in a great position - the hand that controls the sugar scoop. 

• Almost any standard cake or cookie recipe can have 1/3 of the sugar accidentally not find its way into the mixture and you will probably not notice. 
  (Exceptions are recipes like meringues or marshmallows where the sugar, not flour, is the main ingredient)
• For more reductions, experiment by replacing some of the refined sugar with the healthier sweeteners (below).   I often use molasses, soft bananas, and stevia extract to replace lots of the refined sugar.

Choose healthier sweeteners

Fruit

If you can't face plain oatmeal or cornflakes, then dried, canned, or fresh fruits are your 5+ a Day option to the sugar bowl.  Raisins, bananas, strawberries, apples are easy. Get as exotic as you like with other fruits.

Juice is off the beverage list, but it is a healthier choice than sugar in baking.

Molasses

Unsulphured blackstrap molasses is my fave breakfast and beverage sweetener.  The major byproduct of sugar refining, it has the nutrition of the sugar cane with lots less actual sugar.

Caution: Very strong flavour!   To start, use only a teaspoon or so in porridge or a hot drink and 4 Tbsp in baking.  Increase when acceptable.

Blackstrap molasses is a source of calcium, magnesium, potassium, and iron; one tablespoon provides up to 20% of the daily value of each of those nutrients.  My vegan kids have been enjoying molasses since they started porridge.

Sugar Substitutes

Of the commonly used sugar substitutes, only stevia is naturally derived from a plant.  I use both stevia leaves and extracted stevioside (the sweet chemical in stevia), with the usual assumption that the stevia leaves are a healthier choice.  But you don't need much stevioside - it is so sweet that its scoop has a bowl about the size of the pupil of my eye.

Sorbitol and xylitol are also becoming popular as more natural low calorie sugar substitutes.

I'm scared of artificial laboratory based sweeteners like aspartame, cyclamate, and saccharin: their origins, their skewed and inconclusive testing and often corrupted results.  I don't use them or buy products with them.  There are other choices to make your life a little sweeter.

Cost $$

Molasses, fruit and stevia may cost you more than refined sugar.  Some healthier cereals cost more (but there's always great value porridge!)  Choosing water with a splash instead of Coke and fruit juice is definitely cheaper. 
In the end, decide where your best investment lies.  Hint: it's your health!   

What difference does it make?

Let's define an Average Person - during one Average Day she consumes some normal stuff:

• one can of Coke (10 tsp)
• two glasses of juice (12 tsp)
• two cups of coffee with 2 tsp sugar each (4 tsp)
• a bowl of average (36% sugar) cereal (3 tsp)
• one popular snack bar (4 tsp)

Total: 33 tsp of sugar from these foods alone!  Remember, the AHA recommends 6 tsp.

She could have chosen some other (still normal) stuff:

• 3 glasses of water with a splash (1 tsp)
• two cups of coffee wtih 1 tsp sugar each (2 tsp)
• a bowl of cornflakes (1/2 tsp)
• a natural snack bar (1 1/2 tsp)

Total: 5 tsp - she has a real chance of being sugar healthy today. 

After one year

At this rate, she could avoid 10,220 tsp of sugar - that's about 2.5 kgs!

In time, cutting sugar out altogether might seem very possible.

Top Clutter - Paper Rules

As promised, the first in the Top Clutter series:  Paper Rules!

Now that the filing cabinet is in its proper home, DH and I teamed up to declutter more stacks of old paper.  The target?  DH's filing system ever since we moved to this house - one poor filing basket.

Easily 90% of the stack was clutter.  Bank statements, insurance information, and papers that were never important.  What a warm feeling, especially because I burned it all in the fireplace.  (Spring is not here every day yet.)

Broken from years of overloading

Paper!

We can't yet live without it, so we need to learn to live with it.

Here is your new attitude:

1. Keep Nothing
2. File any exceptions
3. Review exceptions often

Keep Nothing

You don't want to keep any pieces of paper.  Each piece you keep is a layer in a looming stack next month that will waste lots of time to sort or lots of space to ignore.

File any exceptions

Will I get in trouble?

A tiny minority of papers are so important to your government that they must be exceptions.  Birth certificates, passports, tax documents - these need to be kept in their original form.  If you don't have them, there is a chance you could end up in serious trouble.

A note reminding you what to pack for your child's school trip is not most valuable in its original form.  Stay out of minor trouble by putting the information you need into whatever daily reminder system you have - then get rid of the note (because there will be another note tomorrow and they will gang up on you). 

The more complex your financial situation, the more gray areas there will seem to be.  Again, ask yourself, "Will I get in trouble if I do not have this record?"  If you have the only copy and don't know how to get the information again, it might be an exception.

Will I lose money?

If the paper represents enough money to be important to you, it might be an exception. Receipts may be crucial when something goes wrong.

Some papers (like passports) can be replaced but only for a fee or with a waste of time.  This is another reason to make an exception.

Will I be unhappy?

Some papers mean something to you - they are sentimental.  This is a good thing - as long as you have the space and energy to store these mementos. 

As you look through mementos, most of them may give you a little buzz.  Ask instead whether you would be unhappy if you never saw it again?  Would you notice and miss it?  Could you keep just one of a group of mementos?

These rules may sound tough, but even using them strictly, you will still have more paper than you really want to handle.

Filing

If you don't have a system, you won't find what you kept when you need it.  You may need a plastic stack tray, an accordion file, or a 3 drawer filing cabinet.  We have a 2 drawer filing cabinet and I'm not sure we need that.  It might be that we need it but need to use it better.  Work always in progress.

In any case, design your storage for your papers, not somebody else's guess at what you need.  You may have totally different categories now and 5 years from now.  Be flexible.

Review exceptions often

Within 2 years, most important papers aren't. 

Tax documents are supposed to be kept at least 7 years and I would be wary of tossing them even then.  They could get you out of trouble years from now that you didn't even know could happen.  You can research IRD (or IRS) horror stories at your leisure online.

But as the years pass, some papers like receipts will no longer be needed.

Papers with a short shelf life need to be filed front and centre.  Book yourself an appointment at least once a year to sort and toss.

Stop your paper

Your job is much easier if you can stop paper arriving in the first place.

Online bills and statements

Electronic communication has partly replaced paper.  We are able to choose to read and pay lots of bills online.  Ironically, having switched power suppliers to EnergyOnline, we now receive paper statements again.  I just emailed them about this, and the great news is that we can get online statements.

But National Bank claim that because our bank account has an overdraft, our "statement cannot be suppressed".  I've requested and am still awaiting a logical explananation.

Ads
Someone is regularly ignoring my "NO ADS" message on our box - perhaps because it is in nail polish but probably because they can't read.  I probably need to get another official badge instead.

In our neck of the woods they are even sneakier.  I enjoy our free local paper - but of course it isn't free.  It comes with ads inside it - printed inside and bundled inside.

If you haven't stopped the ads arriving, you can certainly reduce their impact.  Plan not to let them land anywhere but the recycling place.  If your recycling place is not convenient enough, make it so. I used to let the kids play with ads and their pretty coloured pictures, but they know about buying now.

How do you handle your paper?  Are you happy with your system?

Next in the Top Clutter series:  Toys!  (kids and grownups )

Professional sports are rigged

The "accidental" tackle? Photograph: Ross Land/AP

In case anyone was confused or upset about last night's Rugby World Cup semifinal between Wales and France, relax.

Professional sports cannot exist without funding, and a consistent source of funding is impossible without controllable results.

• Advertisers must be able to count on viewers (advertising works wonders, but people must watch)
• In sports gambling, the house must be able to win

If you think that's not enough motivation, perhaps you're not aware of the amount of money involved in those two areas.  With all the focus on the economic benefit to New Zealand of hosting the RWC, there been little press about the benefit to our sports gambling company, the TAB.

The biggest gambling losers are those who really can't afford it, but we encourage it anyway.

Rest assured that it's economically irresponsible to allow a professional sports match to just happen - too much is at stake.

The most recent example - Wales vs France (15/10/11)

This is hardly the first match I've watched that's awkwardly supported this economic truth, but it's a great example.  Sports-wise, this game made no sense.

It was only a guess for us viewers who might win - Wales were perhaps favoured.  But Wales' captain made a textbook dangerous spear tackle near the beginning of the game.  In itself, this is almost inexplicable - a player experienced enough to be the captain making such a high and spectacular spear tackle accidentally.  This is obviously debatable - make your own decision.  

The IRB has also said that in rugby union a spear tackle should be a straight red card. 

But this was just the start.

A team without a captain

Now Wales had one less player than France, for the rest of the game.  My DH immediately said "That's it.  Wales has lost."  That's the only logical conclusion (and was, in fact, true).  With competent and similarly skilled teams, the loss of one player, especially the captain, must disadvantage one team so much that the other team can use their otherwise similar skills to win.

But DH's logical conclusion would have led many viewers to stop watching this economically vital semifinal.  Some will watch anything looking like rugby, even commercials and endlessly repeated highlights.  But most only want to watch something exciting, and a foregone conclusion for teams you don't otherwise care about is not exciting.

It was a late game, and many viewers would have found something obviously better to do - in bed, with a book, doing the dishes...

How to save the money (I mean match)?

Immediately two (otherwise inexplicable) things happened:

1.  "Wales is going to win"

One commentator said this almost immediately.  He continued to repeat this absurdity until the late stages of the match.  He even said, "Would it be unprofessional of me to..." and broke into some silly pro-Wales chanting.  Yes, normally, that would be not only embarrassing but unprofessional. But he did his job - he kept some viewers glued to their screen, hoping for a sports miracle.

2.  France didn't try

Anyone who knows enough about rugby to argue with this knows it's true.  Wales was down one man and France kicked for the corner again and again instead of trying to take advantage of their numbers to score tries.

Even the commentators mentioned this difference between the playing of the two teams - make your own decision on how unlikely this behaviour is in a professional team in a semifinal.  Instead of being fired up by their obvious advantage, France relaxed.  Apparently they were exhausted by the experience of having only 15 men against 14 men.

That transformed what should have been an ever widening (and viewer discouraging) scoreline to a nail-biting finish.

The last mystery

Wales was twice in position in the end game to kick a drop goal and pull ahead.  They did not need a try to pull ahead, they only needed a drop goal.  They declined both scoring chances, instead continuing to batter the defensive line fruitlessly.

The last chance was in the final minutes of the match and was so obvious it was comical. Wales passed the ball to each other and attacked more than 20 times with no real hope of getting a try.  The clock ticked down to the end and they still did not take their only real chance at scoring and very real chance of winning instead of losing. 

In sports terms, this was insane.  The commentators said, "The question will always be asked, should the ball have been passed to (the kicker)...?"

Only if Wales was supposed to win.  From the result, I'd guess that the brief was for Wales to lose by a small margin.  Possibly the early spear tackle was part of that strategy.  I assume that this is a better result for the TAB.

Couldn't there be another explanation?

In that game, in isolation?  Possibly.  Feel free to entertain me further with one.

Given the money involved? I use Occam's razor, and I say no.

So why watch professional sports?

It's sociable, and it's often fun.

But like the opera, remember that when the plot doesn't seem to make sense, that's because it's just supposed to happen that way.

Relax and enjoy the show!

Ads - what are they good for?

PCRM's Power Plate

Absolutely nothin....

Read more over on Vegsource - enjoy!

How many great reasons do you need to use minimalist cleaners?

Ready, aim, clean!

1.  The children 
How many locked cupboards do you want in your house?  Most cleaners from the supermarket are dangerous poisons and your small children can't really understand that.

If you do most of your cleaning with baking soda and vinegar, your biggest worry is whether they will overdose on salt or rise an hour earlier than usual, or perhaps want to be salad dressing for Halloween.

And there's the longterm exposure danger as well.  It's very difficult to do scientific double-blind studies to prove such damage, but common sense leads me to the precautionary principle.  I wish more companies practiced this.

2.  Your skin (and eyes, and...)

The cleaners that "eat through grease and grime like magic" will do their work on your hands and anything else you let them touch.  Of course, rubber gloves look great and are lots of fun to wear - a regular hand sauna every time you clean.

3.  The environment

All those cleaners end up outside,  In the water, or in the ground.  Read the ingredients (if the cleaners actually list them, of course) and think about whether the earth is a better place with more of these chemicals floating around.

When you choose to use these cleaners, animals and plants die.  Yes, your house water does go through pipes to get treated, but pipes leak. They are known to leak (up to 50% of contents in older systems!), and that is an accepted part of the system.  And when water is purified, the resulting chemicals don't just disappear.

4.  The clutter

How many different bottles and cans of cleaner do you have for your house?  How hard is it to find the one you want underneath the others?  How often do you have to go back to get the right one for the next cleaning job?  How much poisonous rubbish goes into a landfill over a year from buying cleaners?

A big bag of baking soda and jug of vinegar can be stored anywhere it suits you.

5.  Your health

Thanks to modern science, there are lots of things new under the sun these days.  Laboratories create substances that nature has no remedy for, and it's old news that overuse of antibacterial soaps is causing an unnatural imbalance in bacteria populations.  Remember, not all bacteria make you sick.  Many of them keep you healthy and alive.  

Advertisers would have you believe that your house is only clean if it's been thoroughly disinfected of all those nasty germs.  They want to frighten you into buying their product.  They don't want you to ask how their product knows which are the nasty germs.

And of course, your house isn't clean unless it smells of artificial fragrance, right?  But you may not know which visitor to your house is allergic.  Many reputable sources consider multiple chemical exposure to be a major contributor to the "mysterious" rise we are suffering in allergies, sensitivities, asthma, etc. 

6. The cost

At the price per millilitre for supermarket cleaners, you might as well be buying water with gold dust thrown in.  Minimalist cleaners are cheap and you can buy them in large quantities, saving even more money.  Many minimalist cleaners can do more than clean, making them an even better bet.

How do I start?

If you search the web for information on natural household cleaning, you'll probably never run out.

• Beauty of homemade cleaners
• More baking soda and vinegar
• More natural cleaning recipes - OK, it's not all baking soda and vinegar.  With a few other ingredients, you can have fancier or stronger cleaners naturally
• And now, with lemons!   Good thing I can get lemons when I need them now.  I even picked a lot of lemons this week for a freecycler in my neighbourhood who wanted to make lemon curd.

You've got to be in to win... your odds in life's lottery

Be in to win - those are wise words to guide your life to true success.

But this is also a slogan to sell lottery tickets in New Zealand (and probably elsewhere).

And lotteries do not make winners.  They encourage and feed off the same commercial fantasies that drive people to consume beyond their means.





Looking at the Lottery
Just a bit of fun, right?  And who knows, it could be you!  So where's the harm?

The lottery is gambling, as much as the slot machines and the roulette table - all luck, no skill.

Like all other gambling:

1. The hook is the dream of being a big winner, but the odds are impossibly stacked against you.  It's not easy to get hold of actual figures, but average lottery gamblers will invest far more in tickets than they will ever win.
2. Any money you do win is from other people just like you - the losers
3. Most of the gamblers are spending money that isn't really spare.  They have mortgages, and credit card debt, and car payments...and usually, limited incomes. 

 Unlike other gambling:

1. Lottery outlets get prime space in supermarket entryways and shopping malls, normalising them for the young.  
2. They have flashy TV shows bringing the "fun" into your home.
3. Their reputation is cleaner, because from the fact that a portion of the money gets donated to organisations chosen by the government (i.e., a levy or voluntary tax).

But some money goes to help people
Let's be honest, if you want to help an organisation, you donate money directly.  Buying a lottery ticket is not about charity, it's about the dream of changing your life by winning lots of money.  And it makes sense that people with less money are more susceptible to buying what seems like a cheap chance into the big time. That's how all good scams work.

When a small organisation fundraises with a raffle, which is basically the same but with a small prize, everyone understands they are unlikely to win and that their money is meant to help fill a need.  But in a lottery, the prize is big and the donation aspect smaller, and the fantasy and greed dominates - even though the odds are far less.

Like all large pools of money, lottery money is from many people losing a small amount - and a lottery is unproductive.  Every time the lottery rolls around, there's a huge sucking sound in the economy as the masses open their bank accounts into a black hole.

Studies and reports
Just a couple here...

(US) National Gambling Impact Study Commission Commissioner Richard C. Leone stated in June 2001:

“In my view, state lotteries have paved the way for great increases in legalized gambling. They have promoted the notion of beating the odds, they have been able to advertise while others have not, and they have propagated the myth that gambling is good for society in general and the government in particular. Lotteries are perhaps the hardest form of gambling to justify in terms of their costs and benefits. The best studies all point in the same direction: Lotteries prey on the poor and the undereducated.”

A study examining the Georgia state lottery revealed households with an income of less than $20,000 spent $250 a year on lottery tickets, while households with an income greater than $40,000 spent only $97 a year.

I could easily go on.  Whenever anyone looks deeply into lottery patterns, they turn over the same ugly facts - those who can least afford it spend the most - in absolute terms and percentage of income.

Yes, but I could be a big winner? How cool is that?
You'd think. But the majority of big winners blow the lot within a few years.

Why?  The average person doesn't know what to do with lots of money.  The big players are generally even less savvy than average (they're gambling on the lottery).  Often, prizes are in the form of expensive consumer goods like cars and houses that require upkeep to maintain their value.  Generally, again, these people are more likely to have friends and family also in need of money.  And money disagreements are the #1 cause of relationship breakups.

The lucky big winner is instead an accident waiting to happen, and you are welcome to Google for the innumerable references to the horror stories, not only involving money but the tragic breakdown of families. 

Why doesn't winning make them happy?
For minimalists, this information will not be a surprise.  Above the amount needed for comfortable living, it's been consistently shown that money does not buy happiness and brings its own problems.

And your money used to belong to a lot of people with not enough - who have been conned through ads to buy into the dream.  You have benefited from an organised scam.  Is that OK?  Most of these people have already lost several rolls in life's lottery compared to you.


Of course, if you won, perhaps you would be different.  Perhaps you think you wouldn't change really, and that your friends and family would simply wish you joy in your new lifestyle, no strings attached.  Perhaps you can beat the odds again, if you've done it once.


But a ticket doesn't cost much!  Chill...
The economy is not treating many of us very well right now.  Even $10 each week gambling on the thrill of a lottery could instead be:

• organic produce instead of the usual
• about 5 kgs of flour, rice, or oats for your pantry
• craft supplies for the kids
• rented movie for a date night
• donation each week to a charity you choose as a family
• $520 lump sum payment toward debt

Inspire me!  Tell me what you can do with a small amount of money that would bring extra joy to your world...

Kickstart your day

This isn't news to anybody who can read labels, but the vast majority of packaged cereals aren't good for you.  In fact, the vast majority of food in the supermarkets aren't good for you either.

But some of the quotes in the cereal article make my lip curl: 

Food and Grocery Council chief executive Katherine Rich said manufacturers had already reduced the salt and sugar content of their cereals, but "only so much can be removed without removing taste and flavour".

Allow me to translate:

Our customers are addicted to sugar and we like it that way.  If we added less sugar, our customers would go to another cereal that still has lots of sugar, and...wait, sorry, (fans face vigourously) I just can't talk about it anymore!

And:

Kellogg's spokeswoman Tina Wall said its Crunchy Nut Corn Flakes and Nutri-Grain contained less sugar than a 200g pottle of fruit-flavoured yoghurt.     

Pay that woman an even more obscene salary - she's worth every penny.  In case anything is lost in translation:

We're not actually at all bad, especially compared to another product that has also been sweetened past all resemblance to its natural state.

I fondly remember the days when my kids would happily chow down on porridge with me every morning.  While their tastes have been adulterated already, our pantry holds only cornflakes, rice bubbles, weetbix, and muesli.  Boring?  Hooray for boring!  I can't imagine a trip to the store that would include buying Chocolate Frosted Sugar Bombs for my little Calvin. I shudder to think of his behaviour after eating a bowl, and this crap costs more than basic cereals.

• Perhaps it's only a psychological effect, but I really like to start the day with simple whole grains; the way I would like to eat for the rest of the day too.  With that one meal, I get more fibre than the average person eats all day.  If you start with sugary treats, are you likely to improve with the rest of your day?

But somebody's buying them.

OK, let's get real.  A lot of people are buying a lot of them...a lot.  Supermarkets don't stock boxes that don't move, and 72% of cereals had unacceptable levels of fibre, sugar and fat!  And they taste like it.  They taste too good to be good for you.

So if you do buy more, shall we say, entertaining cereals, will you step up bravely and explain why?  And I'm also interested if these are actually served to children for their breakfast...  I will also accept stories about other people you know who buy these cereals, if you know why they do.

How not to go shopping

Whoa!  This really speaks to me:  Why Consumerism is unsatisfying...
No, really, click on this, read the quickie article, and come back.  Now this one from our lovely Leo - it's really short too.

OK, let's move on...

We've all experienced it.  And in general, buying less stuff is good.  I admit to having a natural advantage because I don't like shopping that much.  I find comparison shopping stressful and I can't remember ever going on to do more comparison after I've painfully decided what to buy.  I hate busy shops with lots of people and ads everywhere.  And I don't really like spending money. 

So how does the natural (that's me) shop?

Don't go shopping
This is my first line of defense.  This may sound too obvious, but when your eyes gets hit with the goodies, your brain gets the gimmes! Marketing creatures are professionals and they are paid to know how you think.  What's your win/lose average for going shopping and coming out empty handed (or even with only what you went in for)?   Yeah, me too.  Wow, I didn't even know I needed that until I saw it....

This applies to

• Real shops
• Online shops
• Mail catalogues

Of course, we all must shop.  But with a strategy, some shopping trips can remain in the alternate universe where they belong while in this universe, I have more money and an uncluttered home.

1. Plan food shopping - schedules and lists are a must to avoid hitting the supermarket many times a week
2. Don't shop as casual entertainment or mood enhancement - the shop owner is getting better entertainment for their dollar than I am and remember that article at the top of the page?  Again, with planning you could spend that money on something really satisfying.  Shopping can be lots of fun sometimes, I do know that, so keep reading.

OK, so when you must go shopping

• Shop first at basic stores - this goes for food and anything else.  The fancier the store, the higher the prices and the better the "come-hither and buy me" tricks.
• Shop at secondhand and charity stores - when I feel the urge for retail therapy, I avoid retail stores.  Downmarket shops don't have flashy ads and plastic packaging, a lot of their goods are better quality than new in retail stores, a real range of fashions and sizes are available, and of course, if I feel like some seriously uncontrolled shopping, better at the charity shop than the mall.
• Group shopping tasks together - if I know I have to visit 5 shops before lunch to buy what I need, I am more focused and less likely to browse, even if I had the energy!  If you do a casual shopping trip each day of the week, you will magically discover more things you need to buy as you stroll down the aisles.

What's your shopping personality?  Does it interfere with any of your other important goals?