Author Archives: ShannaQuintero

The Clinton campaign isn’t ready to take a stance on the Dakota Access pipeline.

by ShannaQuintero Posted on October 13, 2016

A new study from Advancing New Standards in Reproductive Health at UCSF indicates that women who choose to get abortions are actually quite certain in their decision. In fact, they report having less doubt than with other medical decisions, such as getting a mastectomy after being diagnosed with breast cancer.

According to the Guttmacher Institute, 35 (!) states require medical providers to counsel a women seeking abortion, and 27 of those mandate a waiting period between the counseling and the procedure. These laws make up many of the freshest threats to abortion rights in the country.

Previous research has backed up the claim that these waiting periods are medically unnecessary, but this is the first of such studies to scientifically compare a woman’s certainty about getting an abortion to, say, finally getting that mole removed. (Check out the study here.)

“These laws presuppose that women are conflicted in their decision about abortion, but need additional time or information to make a decision,” lead author Lauren Ralph told us. “[Our research] directly challenges the narrative that decision-making about abortion is exceptional or different from other health decisions.”

The takeaway? Never assume women aren’t assured in their medical decision-making — it’s patronizing, scientifically inaccurate, and just not a good look.

Why are we writing about abortion? Click here to learn more.

See the original article here: 

The Clinton campaign isn’t ready to take a stance on the Dakota Access pipeline.

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, ONA, PUR, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on The Clinton campaign isn’t ready to take a stance on the Dakota Access pipeline.

Sorry, Raw Sugar Is No Better For You Than Refined

by ShannaQuintero Posted on September 8, 2014

Mother Jones

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC “-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN” “http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40/loose.dtd”>

Along with plain white refined sugar, most hip coffee shops now offer “raw” sugar. I usually go with raw: The golden crystals and brown paper packets somehow make me think it’s more wholesome than the conventional white stuff, which, as highlighted in a previous Mother Jones investigation, many scientists now believe is far worse for you than the industry would have us think.

Sugar in the Raw, a leading raw sugar brand, suggests on its Frequently Asked Questions page that its product is indeed more wholesome. “White sugar is obtained by refining the sugarcane crystals to remove the molasses (and with that, trace nutrients),” it states. “Some nutritionists believe that the small amount of micronutrients retained in Sugar In The Raw® provides advantages over refined white sugar.” Raw sugar is also more expensive: On Amazon, a four-pound bag of Sugar in the Raw retails for $12.99, versus $3.25 for regular.

So is the raw stuff really more virtuous? Sugar in the Raw could not be reached for comment, but a spokeswoman for the Wholesome Sweeteners brand of raw sugar explained to me that, like refined sugar, raw—technically called Turbinado—sugar comes from sugarcane (refined sugar can also be derived from beets). The main difference between the two is in the boiling of the cane juice: The juice for refined sugar is boiled several times to remove all the molasses, whereas Turbinado sugar is boiled only once.

The residual molasses gives Turbinado sugar “some flavor and texture other than just sweetness,” says Katherine Zeratski, a registered dietitian with Mayo Clinic. But it doesn’t provide any significant nutrition. Refined and raw sugar are “calorically identical,” Zeratski notes. And while Turbinado sugar does contain calcium, iron, and potassium, it contains them in trace amounts. We used the USDA’s National Nutrient Database to calculate a few comparisons:

By Katie Rose Quandt

While one 2012 study found that molasses from sugar cane acted as an antioxidant in laboratory cell cultures, Kimber Stanhope, a University of California-Davis microbiologist who focuses on sugars, said she was unable to find any research suggesting the same effect for cells in the body. She emails: “Given the lack of scientific evidence that consumption of molasses has any health benefits in humans, and the fact that the molasses content of Turbinado sugar is very low, it is certainly a stretch to suggest that Turbinado sugar is healthier than refined sugar.”

There goes my virtuous latte.

View post:

Sorry, Raw Sugar Is No Better For You Than Refined

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, PUR, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Sorry, Raw Sugar Is No Better For You Than Refined

Why BMI Is a Big Fat Scam

by ShannaQuintero Posted on August 25, 2014

Mother Jones

Sam Island

It wasn’t so long ago that fat people were considered healthy. Doctors were far more worried about underweight Americans, many of whom were too poor to afford enough calories. But as farms industrialized and food became cheaper, the tables began to turn. Shortly after World War II, it became clear that eating too much food led to just as many problems as not eating enough. Insurance companies noticed that their fattest policyholders were significantly more likely to die early than those of average weight. They searched for a way to measure excess fat and hit upon a simple formula developed in 1832 by a Belgian statistician, mathematician, and astronomer named Adolphe Quetelet: Simply divide a person’s weight by the square of his height. This formula, known as body mass index (BMI), spread from insurers to health researchers and finally, in the 1980s, entered the clinical realm.

Continue Reading »

Original link: 

Why BMI Is a Big Fat Scam

Posted in alo, Anchor, FF, G & F, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Radius, Uncategorized, Venta | Tagged , , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Why BMI Is a Big Fat Scam

Congress moves to restore ban on horse slaughter

by ShannaQuintero Posted on January 17, 2014

Congress moves to restore ban on horse slaughter

By

Shutterstock

Hear that whinnying? It’s not the sound of horses being led to slaughter. It’s the sound of would-be horse killers reacting to budget cuts.

In 2006, Congress cut funding for inspectors of horse slaughterhouses, which shut down the industry one year later. Funding was restored in 2011, and New Mexico company Valley Meat Co. planned to start slaughtering horses again, intending to export the meat to countries where people might actually want to eat it. But legal challenges and sabotage have stymied Valley Meat. It didn’t help when one of the company’s workers videotaped himself shooting a colt in the head and saying “fuck you” to animal activists — and then asininely posted the footage online. Last month, New Mexico sued in an effort to block the slaughterhouse, which Attorney General Gary King (D) described as “completely at odds with our traditions and our values as New Mexicans.”

And now Congress is once again getting in the way of Valley Meat’s plans, AP reports:

Congress’ latest budget bill tries to block the resumption of horse slaughter in the U.S. by cutting funding for inspections of the process.

The prohibition on spending by the Department of Agriculture is included in the $1.1 trillion budget bill that Congress sent to President Obama on Thursday.

Animal protection groups applauded the vote.

Would-be horse slaughterers hope an international trade agreement will help them:

Despite the growing government action to keep horse slaughter from resuming, an attorney for Valley and Rains Natural Meats of Gallatin, Mo., said Thursday his group will continue to fight to produce horse meat.

Blair Dunn said the companies would be looking at filing a claim that the funding ban violates provisions of the North American Free Trade Agreement.

Because why wouldn’t an international free trade agreement protect somebody’s right to slaughter a horse?


Source
Congress Cuts Funding for Horse Slaughter, The Associated Press

John Upton is a science fan and green news boffin who tweets, posts articles to Facebook, and blogs about ecology. He welcomes reader questions, tips, and incoherent rants: johnupton@gmail.com.

Find this article interesting? Donate now to support our work.Read more: Food

,

Politics

See the article here: 

Congress moves to restore ban on horse slaughter

Posted in ALPHA, Anchor, FF, GE, LAI, LG, ONA, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Comments Off on Congress moves to restore ban on horse slaughter