Death by Diet Coke?

I was going to send this link via email to a circle of friends and family, knowing most of them would probably ignore it among the mass of jokes and cute pictures and "male enhancement" emails clogging up their in boxes and then I realized that I should reward the regular readers of this site awaiting a new post.

Anyway, I hate to join the latest health scare panic as I usually find that the stories don't hold up to their initial promise, but this latest disturbing health study seems part of a pattern to me...

Caution: Some soft drinks may seriously harm your health
Expert links additive to cell damage
By Martin Hickman, Consumer Affairs Correspondent
Published: 27 May 2007

A new health scare erupted over soft drinks last night amid evidence they may cause serious cell damage. Research from a British university suggests a common preservative found in drinks such as Fanta and Pepsi Max has the ability to switch off vital parts of DNA.

The problem - more usually associated with ageing and alcohol abuse - can eventually lead to cirrhosis of the liver and degenerative diseases such as Parkinson's.

(snip)

Sodium benzoate has already been the subject of concern about cancer because when mixed with the additive vitamin C in soft drinks, it causes benzene, a carcinogenic substance. A Food Standards Agency survey of benzene in drinks last year found high levels in four brands which were removed from sale.

Now, an expert in ageing at Sheffield University, who has been working on sodium benzoate since publishing a research paper in 1999, has decided to speak out about another danger. Professor Peter Piper, a professor of molecular biology and biotechnology, tested the impact of sodium benzoate on living yeast cells in his laboratory. What he found alarmed him: the benzoate was damaging an important area of DNA in the "power station" of cells known as the mitochondria.

The FDA has become a joke and whether it's Chinese food unfit for animal or human consumption or killer pharmaceuticals released without proper testing (at the same time they tell you that you can't get them from Canada because it might not be safe or that if you smoke pot you are a dangerous criminal who will end up stupid and forgetful).

Maybe it's time to write your Congressman or one of your two Senators:

The FDA normally inspects about 1 percent of all food and food ingredients at U.S. borders. It does tests on about half of 1 percent.

And official vigilance has been going down — for two reasons.

First, food imports have increased dramatically, from $45 billion in 2003 to $64 billion three years later.

Second, the "food" part of the FDA has been getting smaller.

After all, if you're not testing for it, it's easy to say there's no problem since it hasn't been caught. I'm sick of poisonous products being pumped out for corporate profit without regard to the many lives affected. Our current system has failed to protect the public and it's because we've handed the keys to our country over to people who only care about their own bottom line and have managed to gut the FDA's power to properly inspect our food and drug supply:

Earlier this year, lead-contaminated multivitamins showed up on the shelves of U.S. retailers. And this spring, vitamin A from China contaminated with dangerous bacteria nearly ended up in European baby food.

It's bound to happen more often. Hubbard says the agency is overwhelmed by the rising tide of imports.

"When I came to the FDA in the 1970s, the food program was almost half of the FDA's budget. Today, it's only a quarter," Hubbard says.

Experts say the FDA has about 650 food inspectors to cover 60,000 domestic food producers and 418 ports of entry.

The agency plans to close nearly half of its 13 food-testing labs.

Yes, it seems as if they want to make the companies themselves responsible for their own testing. The reason we have an FDA is because we know what happens when companies are in charge of overseeing the safety of their own products without government "interference" and "over regulation." Anyone remember the Ford Pinto's exploding gas tank?

In the 1970s Ralph Nader warned of and tried to do something about the fact that airlines needed to strengthen their cockpit doors as a means to help defend against plane hijackings, a warning which went unheeded due to the airlines' insistence that such a regulation would be burdensome to the industry. Anyone care to "connect the dots" there? If our government would have insisted on public safety maybe the public wouldn't have had to write a $15 billion check after 9/11? Also, we likely wouldn't have started a bogus invasion of a foreign country, leading to a bloody and costly occupation.

We now a see a pattern of a political philosophy that sees government as the problem when in fact, in the case of food and drug safety, it's the lack of government that is a problem. Without rigid regulations, stiff inspections and serious penalties for failure to meet a proper standard, we will continue to have to take our lives into our own hands when we sit down at our dinner table or when we pop a pill.

DARE to think different

"If you build it, they will come."

That over-quoted line from “Field of Dreams” accurately predicts what virtually always happens when we build new jails and new prisons. Yes, we’ve got a lot of everything in this wonderful country, and a lot of places to put ’em in. All you have to do is look at the statistics that show the United States, ironically known as the land of the free, has more people per capita behind bars than in any other industrialized nation in the world. More than Russia, more than South Africa, more than all those countries with dictatorships we love to trash as hating freedom.

We should keep this in mind when we look at the notion that Barry County needs a new jail, which I don’t doubt since the old one isn't worth repairing for the price it would take. I just find it sad we’re among the many in this country that must build bigger and more spacious lock-up facilities out of fear of overcrowding. If we build it, they will come and fill it up. For the record, I support somehow finding a way to construct a new Barry County Jail in a new and more appropriate location. It doesn’t make a lot of economic or social sense to have the sheriff’s department and jail smack dab on one of the best commercial locations in Barry County, on Hastings' West State Street across from McDonald’s and virtually next door to Pennock Hospital and a senior citizens’ complex.

I’d like to see the county find a way to sell that parcel to a commercial buyer for top dollar and move to a better location. A lot of people are mentioning the soon to be vacant First Presbyterian Church, within walking distance for deputies and prisoners to appear in court, thereby saving money in the energy department. There could be other locations, but this does seem to have some good arguments in its favor.

Then I’d propose the Barry County Board of Commissioners cut the excessive emergency 911 millage, which will come up for renewal next year, from one mill to one-half to six-tenths of a mill and use the difference to help fund a jail over, say about 20 years. If that isn't enough money to do the job by itself, then ask for a small amount from the people in the form of a millage to make up that difference.

The current 911 millage is a good example of one program getting more money than it needs or deserves while others are starving. Officials at 911 have crowed loudly and proudly often they’ve not used all of that one mill and they bought state of the art equipment that arguably is more than a bit over the top for a sparsely populated and poor, rural county. In other words, director Charlie Nystrom and his legions are pleased they have bought a brand new Mercedes-Benz with all the options when a slightly used, bare bones Ford or a Chevy would do perfectly well. So let’s take some of that taxpayer money back, maybe four-tenths of a mill, put it to work with the profits from the sale of the current location's real estate, and maybe try to add the money the county gets from the delinquent tax fund every year to fund a needed (unfortunately) new jail in a more sensible location.

Then I’d like to challenge all judges and cops in this county to think long and hard about just who we want sitting in these jails and prisons and use some common sense, which has been sorely lacking in these United States of America for too long and has made us the world’s crime capital. Taking things a little further, I think (and polls show Americans agree) it’s past time for legislators to summon a little courage and repeal many of the stupid drug and victimless crime laws that have put too many people behind bars who are not threats to society, but mostly to themselves and maybe their livers. Jails and especially prisons are tailor-made for people whose behavior threatens the safety and well being of society, not for people who smoke marijuana or hire the services of a woman practicing the world’s oldest profession. We tried a long time ago to outlaw alcohol but it only helped create more criminals, so why don't we get the same message when it comes to fighting other behavior where the war against it causes more damage and wrecks more lives than the thing being fought?

Crime fighting has become big business, with a lot of drug warriors, homeland security personnel and the prison industrial complex sucking furiously on the public teat and making a living by exploiting our irrational fears, fueled by sensationalist television news and entertainment programs. Yes, lawmakers and police are raking in big bucks and shiny medals for their war on drugs over the last quarter of a century. In the meantime, their war seems to be going about as well as the one in Iraq. Civil rights are violated, property stolen, people killed, and for what? So cops can get a shiny D.A.R.E. car with a cool paint job so they can play superhero? Guess who pays for it? You, and our society.

Our jails are filled with people who could be useful and productive members of society, instead they become a drag on the economy. We take away their right to vote and ability to find good work then wonder why we can't put them back out into the public successfully all or even most of the time. We fail to take this problem seriously at our peril. We need more than "the way we've always done it." We need to think different: Imagine what our society might be like if we would bother putting one half of the money we spend to imprison people towards treatment or other investments to improve their chances of working within society and not against it. Quit letting fear rule the debate. We need a new jail, but new means more than the physical material to build it. That will take some guts and some imagination.