Saturday, December 12, 2009

Tim Tams Banned in most countries....

Well, this is an interesting one. We know from being in the 'eco' industry that the Australian government has an appalling record in informing & protecting it's citizens from bad chemicals, additives, and other nasties banned in the rest of the world, but this is a new one to us that a customer brought to our attention.

(Our favourite quote found while researching: Food and the Australian federal election International Registry of Food Additive Reactions (IRFAR) Research: "UK study confirms harmful effects of additives: Network astonished by lack of response from Australian/New Zealand regulators".


Being curious little demons we did a little further digging, and what do you know, most other countries have actively banned Timtam's because of dangerous food additives.
In fact , FIVE additives banned in most countries outside Australia!
At least three of them: E102, E110, E120 have seriously bad side effects and long-term health effects. Not going to harp on here about these, go and look up the effects yourself and you will see why they have been banned from import in most countries.
Any of your kids have unexplained rashes, hyperactivity, constant illnesses, asthma etc...? Could well be due to these additives.
(While we are on the subject, all insect sprays in your house - again, banned in most countries as HIGHLY HARMFUL TO HUMANS - could also be responsible for the above symptoms - check out: http://www.ecopestproducts.com.au/).

There is also a 5% loophole in Australian law, which allows manufacturers to get away with not listing 5% of the additives in their product. This is regardless of how toxic the chemical is to human health including pregnant and breast feeding women, babies and school children. Even though the labelling can state that there are no added artificial flavouring or colouring agents used, this information can be very misleading. It's all about the money of course.

We won't be eating Timtam's again (yes we know they taste nice, but we would prefer a healthy life)...and suggest you don't either. In fact, if a product has numbers in it's ingredients you should probably avoid them altogether, whatever the product.
Timtams just seem a little scarier than the others as they are so widely eaten...

Some further reading:

http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/nsw-act/kids-at-risk-from-harmful-food/story-e6freuzi-1111116369332

http://www.fedupwithfoodadditives.info/newsletters/contents.htm

http://www.ecohealthguru.com/?p=94









Thursday, December 10, 2009

Grape power at Tokyo eco show

The Eco show in Tokyo presents soem great new concepts for the future:

http://media.smh.com.au/national/breaking-news/grape-power-at-tokyo-ecoshow-962505.html?&exc_from=strap

Wednesday, December 2, 2009

Climate Sceptics.....

If the evidence is overwhelming that man-made climate change is already upon us and set to wreak planetary havoc, why do so many people refuse to believe it?

The UN's panel of climate scientists, in a landmark report, described the proof of global warming as "unequivocal".

That was two years ago, and since then hundreds of other studies have pointed to an ever-bleaker future, with a potential loss of life numbering in the tens of millions, if not more.

Yet survey after survey from around world reveals deep-seated doubt among the public.

A poll published in Britain on November 14, to cite but one example, found that only 41 per cent of respondents accepted as an established fact that human activity was largely responsible for current global warming.

The majority said the link was not proven, that green propaganda was to blame or the world was not heating up at all.

Last week, a private exchange of emails among climate scientists stoked a firestorm of scepticism after it was hacked and posted on the web.

The memos expressed frustration at the scientists' inability to explain what they described as a temporary slowdown in warming, and discussed ways to counter the campaigns of climate naysayers.

Experts see several explanations for the eagerness with which so many dismiss climate change as overblown or a hoax.

"There is the individual reluctance to give up our comfortable lifestyles - to travel less, consume less," said Anthony Grayling, a philosophy professor at the University of London and a bestselling author in Britain.

While deeply anchored in the West, this resistance also extends to emerging economies such as China, India and Brazil where a burgeoning middle class is only today tasting the fruits of a lifestyle they have waited so long and worked so hard to obtain.

For Tim Kasser, a professor of psychology at Knox University in Galesburg, Illinois, the reality of climate change impinges on core aspects of our identity.

"We are told a thousand times a day, notably through advertising, that the way to a happy, successful and meaningful life is through consumption," he said.

"But now scientists and environmentalists come along and say part of the problem is that we are consuming too much or in the wrong way."

Yet there may also be a darker explanation. It is the human instinct to shut out or modify a terrifying truth: that the world as we know it is heading for a smash.

"It's a paradox: when it comes to disasters, people do not allow themselves to believe what they know," explained Jean-Pierre Dupuy, a professor of social philosophy at the Ecole Polytechnique in Paris.

"Because everybody is in denial - or would like to be in denial - and would prefer to not shoulder too much of the responsibility for dealing with the problem, you have a kind of disconnect here," Grayling said.

Even scientists reluctantly pushed by their growing sense of alarm into launching public appeals for action have trouble coping.

When Clive Hamilton, a professor of public ethics at Australian National University, attended a September climate conference at Oxford tasked with imagining a world warmed by 4 degrees Celsius, he was struck by how researchers spoke among themselves.

"It was very revealing. As they relaxed somewhat, they began to speak about their fears, about losing sleep, not wanting to think about the implications of what they do," he recalled.

Under such circumstances, people are resourceful in finding ways to reassure themselves or turn their backs on the threat posed by climate change.

Some applaud their own environmental virtue: "Changing to compact fluorescent bulbs makes people feel good - 'I've done my bit for today,'" said Kasser, describing a common attitude in the United States.

"Blaming China and India is another great psychological defence mechanism."

A more sophisticated variant is to conclude, with a sigh of resignation. that individual action isn't enough.

"Even if all of us were at our most maximally green, it probably wouldn't make much more than about a 0.5 per cent difference," said Grayling in characterising this mentality.

At some point, however, reality may bite.

Hamilton, who is running for Parliament in Australia, said more and more people he meets are having what he calls an "Oh shit!" moment.

"It's that moment when you really get it, when you understand not just intellectually but emotionally that climate change is really happening. I think we will see a rush of that over the next couple of years," he said.

It may take one or more terrible shocks - national bankruptcies, a major environmental disaster in a vulnerable country like Bangladesh - for that to happen, said Grayling.

Once it does, "it will be impossible to look back over your shoulder and think, 'it's not true,' or 'there will be a scientific fix, it will all go away'."