text:
Vegans, Donans, Greenans
The abolitionist crowd has a very strange attitude toward vegetarians. We are actually worse than omnivores, they think. Unpublished comments from these people (last month) dismissed both my new book and my Animal Rights course as worthless, since I'm a mere vegetarian. Yesterday Alex even compared vegetarians to embezzlers. Not only do we contribute nothing to animal advocacy, but we actually take away.
I worry these people are single-issue moralists. They never think about any moral issue besides the treatment of animals. That's my suspicion because nobody would dream of having the "vegans only" type of attitude on comparable issues.
Let's make up some new words. Donans are people who do all that they should with regard to preventing death from poverty and disease. They give to the point of marginal utility, just as Peter Singer says we should in "Famine, Affluence, and Morality." They may not do so for exactly Singer's reasons (perhaps they're more persuaded by the arguments in Peter Unger's very interesting book Living High and Letting Die), but they never ever do anything like buying an ipod rather than sending $200 to Oxfam, an amount that will save at least one life.
Donatarians don't do as much. They are just as convinced by Singer or Unger (or by other arguments) but find themselves sometimes buying ipods. They are simply not up to doing everything they should.
Greenans are just as exemplary as Donans, but their focus is on the environment. These are people who recycle every single thing that's recyclable, ride bicyles rather than drive cars, never ever fly, and otherwise reduce their carbon footprint to the absolute minimum.
Greenatarians don't do as much. They are just as convinced of the obligation to be totally green, but they recycle as much as practically possible, drive hybrids, limit family size, etc.
Imagine saying that donatarians and greenatarians do nothing for the poor and the environment. Nobody would take this view seriously. It's just as silly to dismiss what vegetarians can do for animals.
42 comments:
- Mike Almeida said...
If someone were to come to me and say, "Alex, I can either spend the next year doing nothing at all for the animals, or I can spend the next year urging everyone I know to become a vegetarian [or urge them to eat cage-free eggs, pasture-fed beef, etc.]", I would answer, "Please do nothing."
This is wildly counterproductive, and frankly a bit silly. I thought he was concerned with "real world" answers? The fact is that the real world (assuming we are living in the same world) is not filled with this brand of zealotry. The rational approach to this problem has to include the acceptance of incremental change and the encouragement of all forward movement on the issue. "I'm all or nothing" impresses people with one's uncompromising virtue, I guess, but it finally sinks any hope of real change. All major social change involves coalition building. So, being realistic about the matter, we ought to be applauding any change for the better that we can get. - January 10, 2010 at 2:57 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Jean, you misrepresented my position.
In my earlier comments, I thought that I was being quite clear in drawing a distinction between people who practice vegetarianism without advocating it to others versus people who advocate vegetarianism as some sort of morally acceptable (if not exactly morally ideal) method to help the animals.
I don't have much to say about the former group, aside from the obvious position that -- everything else being equal -- less suffering/death is better than more suffering/death. I'll refrain from making another comparison to less-prolific serial killers.
As to the latter group, those are the people I compared to someone who steals from a charity (in the sense that they're hurting the animal-rights cause rather than helping it).
I continue to maintain that advocating vegetarianism does nothing but delude people into thinking that there is a morally relevant distinction between eating flesh on the one hand versus eating eggs/dairy on the other hand (there is no such distinction), and it reinforces the idea that it's OK to exploit animals as long as we pick and choose the ways in which we exploit them.
Furthermore -- and this is something that I didn't mention in my previous comments -- activism is a zero-sum game. Every dollar and every minute that you spend advocating vegetarianism is necessarily a dollar and a minute that you did not spend on vegan education.
I've encountered a fair number of vegetarians, and as far as I can tell, most of them think their job is done -- they believe that they're not complicit in the suffering or death of animals. So why should they become vegan?
Those who promote vegetarianism as some kind of half-way acceptable measure make it that much harder for people like me to engage in vegan education.
To sum up, I do think that those who advocate vegetarianism are spreading misinformation, squandering valuable resources, and putting roadblocks in the way for those who work to put an end to all animal exploitation. Thus, I stand by me assertion that vegetarian activists do more harm than good.
For a longer discussion, see here.
And for the record, I was not among the people who called your book and your course worthless. - January 10, 2010 at 3:01 PM
- s. wallerstein said...
Embezzlers! That's a promotion. Let's break out the champagne. Just a month ago they were comparing us vegetarians to slave-owners and the SS at Auschwitz.
- January 10, 2010 at 3:02 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Mike, I'm not concerned with "uncompromising virtue". I'm an abolitionist primarily for pragmatic reasons. Welfare-type reforms fail on their own terms. See here for a discussion.
I'm all in favor of incremental reform, as long as those incremental changes move us in the proper direction. See the discussion here.
There's nothing wrong with building coalitions, but there is obviously no point in collaborating with those whose approach is counter-productive.
Mike wrote, "we ought to be applauding any change for the better that we can get." Indeed. The dispute here centers on which changes are for the better and which ones are for the worse.
Sorry about posting links, but I simply don't have the time to write another long post. - January 10, 2010 at 3:35 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
Alex, OK, so you think quiet vegetarians are not embezzling. But people like me are not quiet vegetarians. I speak out (here, in my book, in my class) about the value of "doing better" even if one isn't ready to be a vegan. So you are (in effect) calling me an embezzler. Obviously, I do have to take exception to that.
I take it your view of the donatarians and greenatarians (why aren't you talking about them?) is that they should give and be green, but shut up about it, and never commend other donatarians and greenatarians. Only donans and greenans should ever speak about poverty and the environment.
That (obviously) would be a recipe for disaster. There are just too few donans and greenans around for serious issues like poverty and the environment to be left in their hands. We need the efforts of donatarians and greenatarians, and to encourage them we must commend what they do, even if it's not perfect.
All the same things are true about vegans and vegetarians. The vegetarians must speak out too, and it's all to the good if they commend the efforts of vegetarians. (And no, that doesn't mean saying anything silly and benighted about how meat is bad and milk is OK, or chicken is bad and eggs are OK.)
So how about it--do you think donatarians and greenatarians should shut up too (like Al Gore, Peter Singer, Jeffrey Sachs, Peter Unger...and almost every one addressing poverty and the environment), or is it just vegetarians who should shut up? And if just vegetarians, why?! - January 10, 2010 at 4:28 PM
- Faust said...
Well played Jean, imo.
Having said that I appreciate Alex defending his position, I think I actually get it now, though I don't agree with the argument at a pragmatic level. - January 10, 2010 at 8:58 PM
- Melissa said...
In the words of Kathryn Paxton George, "The 'vegan ideal' is not a *moral* ideal at all. It may be adopted as a personal lifestyle, but it cannot be a moral ideal because it would idealize those of a particular age, sex, class, ethnicity, and culture; that is adult (age 20-50), middle-class, mostly white males living in high-tech societies--the group with the most power in our world."
from the book "Animal, Vegetable, or Woman?"
Vegans are creating a "moral underclass" (children, women, the elderly). The 'vegan ideal' is a myth. - January 10, 2010 at 9:40 PM
- rtk said...
C'mon Alex, a dollar spent here is not a dollar unspent there. Many of us have multiple piggy banks. 50 cents spent on an orange is not 50 cents taken from the apple budget.
I've also wondered, when reading your posts, if you would refuse to diminish a cancer by medication, waiting until its growth convinces the doc that surgery is the only option. Lots of pain may lie in that path. - January 11, 2010 at 7:16 AM
- Jean Kazez said...
Melissa, Hmm! I've read an article of hers making basically that argument, but find it puzzling. It may be true that Tom Regan and others with a rights view think that eating animal products is always wrong. So they disapprove of anyone who uses them, whatever the reason. And maybe that will mean their disapproval will fall disproportionally on the some groups and less on others. But I'm not sure that alone is a reason to be dissatisfied. Some kinds of wrongdoing are more prevalent in some groups than others. Must I really have views of wrongdoing that make it just as prevalent in every group?
On the other hand, a utilitarian advocate of veganism like Peter Singer would not make a generalization like "using animal products is always wrong." If there are subgroups with serious enough reasons to drink milk (for example), he will say it's permissible for them to drink milk. There are many other ethicists with this sort of "case by case" ethics for deciding whether using animals for food is permissible...which is far more plausible, I think. (My approach in Animalkind is "case by case" like this.)
Of course, even if you take the "case by case" approach to deciding what's permissible, you need some nutrition science to figure it all out. People will disagree about what the science shows. But I'm inclined to think there really may be special reasons to consume animal products in some populations.
True confessions: when I was pregnant with twins I did not want to take the chance of consuming insufficient protein, and did not want to spend all my time eating beans. So I took a leave of absence from being a vegetarian and added "humane" chicken to my diet.
If anybody wanted to chide me for that, my answer would be..."go ahead, make my day." - January 11, 2010 at 9:33 AM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Jean, I didn't address your analogy to donatarians / greenarians because too much depends on what, exactly, they are doing -- and whether their actions are helping to bring us closer to a true solution to poverty and environmental problems, respectively.
The other issue is that it's extremely difficult to donate most of your possessions and to give up all use of cars, airplanes, etc. In contrast, I do not think it's particularly difficult to become a vegan, especially given today's wide availability of vegan products (even moderate-sized supermarkets usually have a decent selection of vegan foods). So urging people to become vegans is not in the same ballpark as urging them to give away 95% of their savings or to forswear all use of petroleum products.
As for my comparison to embezzlers, I simply wanted to run with your analogy of donating money to a charity. I wasn't trying to offend. Well, maybe I was a little. - January 11, 2010 at 10:11 AM
- Jean Kazez said...
How do you tell whether it's hard or easy to be a vegan. You ask lots of people who are willing to try, and see what their experience is. My experience is that it's hard, and that's what I hear from students too.
The reason it's hard is that we have a lifetime of taste-habits and those are hard to break. I don't get it when vegans say they're just as happy with all their substitutes. I'm not.
So--I say veganism is hard (for many people). Not as hard as greenanism and donanism, but still hard. The hardness is a good reason to commend the vegetarians, greenatarians, and donatarians even if they don't do all that they should.
I think I do understand your misgivings--you think vegetarians are perpetuating wrongheaded ideas. I just don't think that's necessarily the case. Though of course we may disagree about what's wrongheaded and what's rightheaded. - January 11, 2010 at 10:44 AM
- s. wallerstein said...
Melissa: I agree with what you say. It would be almost impossible for me to become a complete vegan where I live, Santiago de Chile, since the foods eaten by vegans are not available. When Alex claims that there is a vegan section in most supermarkets, I suggest that he travel a bit. The world is bigger than the U.S.A, and I would bet that in poor rural areas of the U.S.A, especially those with basically a latino or african-american population, there is no vegan section either in supermarkets either.
- January 11, 2010 at 3:02 PM
- Melissa said...
Excellent point, Amos. I couldn't agree more.
Jean, a few thoughts about making "exceptions"...
As KPG explains in her book, both the abolitionist view and the case-by-case approach look to adult male physiology as "the norm." So isn't there a problem with making exceptions for those who just can't quite live up to the "vegan ideal" (children, pregnant women, the elderly). They are then "less than" ideal, flawed, not as good just by virtue of their very being.
I've been as vegan as a vegetarian can be and yet I still do not advocate a vegan diet for children or others. I believe vegetarianism or perhaps semi-vegetarianism is the "ideal" and veganism is the exception. I say, "Are you a strict vegan? Hooray for you (really)", but moralizing about the mythical vegan ideal strikes me as arrogant -- that is in my humble opinion. Or as KPG states it's more "a bald argument for power rather than for justice, moral virtue, or caring."
If we want to talk about eliminating suffering, let's discuss factory farming. Omnivores and vegetarians alike actually agree that the cruel practices involved are unacceptable, immoral - no arguments there.
I used to host a yahoo group for vegetarian mothers and I learned that it's not uncommon for a woman to return to eating some meat while pregnant. For example, one woman was on bedrest for most of her pregnancy and couldn't cook for herself, so she ate the meat that her friends/family prepared. I'm glad I didn't have to return to meat-eating while pregnant -- not that I wouldn't have if I felt the need, however I started eating free range eggs and organic yogurt again.
Incidentally, as a child we kept chickens as pets and I honestly never witnessed any suffering when we or the dogs swiped an egg or two. - January 11, 2010 at 6:06 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
Melissa, When I say "case by case" I mean that one of the things we have to look at is why THIS individual wants to eat THIS animal product. I think reasons of health do make a difference to the moral equation. My reasons of health (as a woman pregnant with twins) weren't the same as the standard male's.
Re: children. I wouldn't want my kids to be vegans--my instincts just tell me no. So basically I agree--veganism isn't the One And Only Way by which everyone's eating habits should be judged. Yet for me right now (because I have no special health issues), I can say--yes, that would be the best thing, morally speaking.
I must read more KPG. I've been meaning to read more of the feminist animal ethics literature. - January 11, 2010 at 6:19 PM
- s. wallerstein said...
Thanks, Melissa. You have a very fine/subtle ethical eye and I hope that we can hear more from you.
- January 11, 2010 at 6:34 PM
- Melissa said...
Thank you, Amos!
Jean's comment:
"Re: children. I wouldn't want my kids to be vegans--my instincts just tell me no."
Jean, I feel the same way.
I've met only two or three strict vegan parents in my life, and the woman I knew best is a teacher, certainly educated enough. She told me once how she was forcing her son to eat avocado (I guess she realized he needed more fat in his diet or something) and her son was having eating issues. Her three young children were all on her strict vegan diet and from what I witnessed it was not working very well. She was exhausted, tired all the time and cooking was a real chore. I never said a word, but I must admit I found it deeply disturbing and I fortunately never see or hear from her now. - January 12, 2010 at 9:16 AM
- Jean Kazez said...
Yeah, just not appealing. There are health issues, but also "fitting into the world" and happiness issues. I don't want my kids going around feeling like all the tantalizing goodies are forbidden. The only thing that's off limits (and it's by their own choice) is obvious meat. This is enough of a challenge and a sacrifice. I don't want them having to look at every cookie and piece of cake and thinking it might be taboo. This would make them like kids that keep kosher--and I don't think you can do that and really feel like you belong to this world. In fact, that's part of the point of kosher--to separate yourself from the mainstream. I don't want that for my kids...besides there being possible health issues.
- January 12, 2010 at 10:28 AM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Melissa wrote, "If we want to talk about eliminating suffering, let's discuss factory farming. Omnivores and vegetarians alike actually agree that the cruel practices involved are unacceptable, immoral - no arguments there."
From an animal-rights perspective, I think it's counter-productive to focus on animal suffering, because doing so sends the implicit message that it's OK to exploit animals as long as we treat them well.
I think our focus should be on the use of animals rather than their treatment.
I believe it would be immoral to eat a cow that lived a completely idyllic life and then was slaughtered painlessly. Why would it be immoral? Because cows are like dogs, cats, and people -- they have an interest in living out their lives without being used as a means to an end.
I may have posted this link before, but I really like this article about the surprising complexity that scientists have discovered in the intellectual and emotional lives of farm animals:
"The secret life of moody cows"
Getting back to the issue of animal suffering, I'm reminded of the movie, Food, Inc.. The central message of the movie seems to be that it's perfectly fine to eat animals as long as those animals are raised and slaughtered by charismatic, camera-friendly hippie entrepreneurs.
So, yes -- I agree with Melissa's point that factory farms are "unacceptable, immoral" places. But then again, so are organic, free-range, pasture-fed, cage-free farms. - January 12, 2010 at 8:10 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
"my instincts just tell me no".
I'm not a big believer in the power of instincts or intuition. Cornell psychologist Thomas Gilovich wrote an excellent book called, How We Know What Isn't So: The Fallibility of Human Reason in Everyday Life. He provides all sorts of examples of people whose instincts led them astray, such as basketball coaches whose instincts about the game were easily disproven by reviewing videotapes of past games (needless to say, the coaches remained unswayed, despite hard evidence that they were wrong).
On a more tragic level, psychologists Carol Tavris and Elliot Aronson provide examples of police and prosecutors whose faulty intuition resulted in the conviction of innocent people. See, Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me): Why We Justify Foolish Beliefs, Bad Decisions, and Hurtful Acts (this is probably one of the best books I've read in recent years). What's interesting is that some of these law-enforcement people cling to their beliefs even in light of new evidence, to the point where they go beyond mere pig-headishness all the way to full-blown irrationality. - January 12, 2010 at 8:40 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
To me it just sounds horrendous to say "it's counterproductive to focus on animal suffering." Suffering matters, period. We should focus on it just because it's an awful thing. We shouldn't be first figuring out whether it would be "productive" or "counterproductive" to focus on it. Empathy requires us to respond--now, and without strategizing. That certainly doesn't mean we can't care about other things as well (rights, respect, etc. etc) and work toward them simultaneously.
- January 12, 2010 at 8:44 PM
- Melissa said...
Alex, I realize I'm new here on Jean's blog, so I should perhaps let you know that I'm actually very familiar with the arguments presented by Gary Francione/Friends of Animals and others. I've read books about the emotional lives of farm animals. So I understand the arguments, yet I disagree with the so-called abolitionist approach. I have a different worldview, a different perspective.
I've mentioned this article once before, but I'll post the link again just in case you're interested. "Abolitionism versus Reformism: or which type of campaign will lead to animal rights eventually? Animal welfare and animal rights"
http://bit.ly/Fdvqt - January 12, 2010 at 8:53 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
Re: instincts. Yes, maybe that's the wrong word. "Instinct" makes it sounds like we're born knowing what's nutritious, and that's surely nonsense. I'm all for learning, reading, listening. But what I'm saying is--having acquired lots of information and experience for many years (yes, I'm over 18), the conclusion I draw is "no vegan kids." That's for health reasons but also for the sake of their happiness.
- January 12, 2010 at 8:55 PM
- Melissa said...
Alex: I wonder, do you know many adults who have been vegan from birth?
- January 12, 2010 at 8:59 PM
- Melissa said...
Just one more thing. I've often thought that if I were a farm animal I would not want an abolitionist vegan representing me.
"Miss Piggy - it's Attorney Francione on the line. He says you'll have to give birth in that sow stall. He's not settling."
I would want the lawyer fighting for my welfare during captivity as well as fighting for my release/freedom.
OK, that's me being silly, but really. - January 12, 2010 at 9:26 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Melissa, your arguments about "Attorney Francione" and the sow would make more sense if welfare "reforms" actually made some appreciable difference in the lives of farm animals (see here, for an example of the horrific conditions that are present in a "humane" farming facility).
Jean: suffering clearly matters, but basing campaigns on suffering leads to steps backward instead of steps forward (see the link above, for instance). Talking about slaughterhouse atrocities, factory farm practices, etc. just causes consumers to be duped by the "happy meat" industry.
Melissa, the husband-and-wife heads of the Rochester-Area Vegetarian Society (actually, it's a vegan society, but they call it "vegetarian" for historical reasons) have three children -- one adult, one in college, and one in high school. To the best of my knowledge, all three were raised as vegans from birth (and continue to be vegans). They're all quite successful and attend society functions.
As for living outside the mainstream, I'm all about that. It's like the song about the boy named "Sue". - January 12, 2010 at 10:29 PM
- Taylor said...
Evelyn Pluhar has debated Kathryn Paxton George at some length about George's nutrition claims. And Sheri Lucas says the following in "A Defense of the Feminist-Vegetarian Connection" (Hypatia vol 20, no. 1, Winter 2005):
"George's central feminist challenges rely on a problematic principle of nonarbitrariness, equivocate between dietary and ethical vegetarianism, make unwarranted assumptions about human perspectives, appeal to odd claims about 'authentic' diets, are based on outmoded science, and draw sexist inferences about the relationship between this science and the overall health prospects of women and men. George's global challenges rely on imperialistic assumptions, moot hypotheticals, and an unfounded theory of environmental degradation; correctly fault a base mode of judgment, but wrongly take it as intrinsic to ethical vegetarianism; and finally, along with her central feminist arguments, beg the question against the main issues of the debate. Given these and other major flaws, the weight of George's arguments is nil."
Ouch. - January 12, 2010 at 11:31 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
"basing campaigns on suffering leads to steps backward instead of steps forward"
I think for the abolitionist crowd this is an "idee fixe" and not supported by evidence. It is just wild to claim that all the different animal welfare laws, from the Humane Slaughter Act, to the Animal Welfare Act, to all the state animal cruelty laws, have been steps backwards. I see this claim as entirely ideological and polemical--bordering on delusional.
Part of the abolitionist fantasy is that there are all these people out there who were reluctant to eat meat and experiment on animals before all the animal welfare legislation came along. They were holding back because of their concern for animal welfare. Then, because of the legislation, they felt much better and used even more animals.
So (the abolitionists say) it's because of animal welfare legislation that we are now eating more meat, using more animal labs etc.
Good heavens, no. There's no holding back, because almost everyone feels entitled to use animals in any which way. Most people do want animal welfare legislation, but not as a precondition to using animals. There are 1001 reasons why animals are being used more today. - January 13, 2010 at 7:44 AM
- s. wallerstein said...
I've never managed to raise a vegetarian or even less a vegan child. First of all, all the kids I've dealt with go through a stage, from say, age 4 to age 14,
when they absolutely refuse to eat vegetables and when they are very fussy about eating fruit. Since a healthy vegan or even vegetarian diet requires a wide assortment of non-animal foods, it is difficult to get those kids to eat in a healthy fashion, unless you do it at gun point.
Second, kids always find me weird and want to be "normal". My being a vegetarian is another example of my weirdness that my kids (and my step-child) have wanted to avoid in their own lives.
Finally, I think that a child making his or her own decisions, even bad decisions, is important. It's surely part of my weirdness but I prefer a child who independently decides that he or she will eat meat (for bad reasons, but his or her own reasons, even those reasons may not be rational) to one who decides not to eat meat because father knows best. I don't trust children who always say that father knows best, even if it is an a priori and necessary truth that I always know best. - January 13, 2010 at 7:50 AM
- Melissa said...
Taylor: I am not familiar with Evelyn Pluhar, nor have I read Sheri Lucas's "defense."
But "Ouch" is right. That's quite the defense, however I do not think it says much at all about KPG's actual arguments. I would suggest that those who attack KPG's position take a listen to Secretary of State Clinton's recent speech on the 15th Anniversary of the International Conference on Population and Development.
The way I read KPG is she is saying vegetarianism/veganism is not *required:* "I am merely arguing that people not idealize the vegan life nor urge it upon others in the belief that the practice is necessary to being truly ethical, to being a consistent feminist or ecofeminist, or to live by the principle of equality. Quite the contrary. It is *impossible* to honor equality and claim that equality demands ethical vegetarianism." (p 132 Animal, Vegetable or Woman?).
For vegan-feminists to argue that veganism is the "ideal" for children and women of all ages and circumstances and anything less than veganism is immoral ... How is that a feminist position?
Re: Nutrition
Excellent case in point from Amos:
"Since a healthy vegan or even vegetarian diet requires a wide assortment of non-animal foods, it is difficult to get those kids to eat in a healthy fashion, unless you do it at gun point." - January 13, 2010 at 8:14 AM
- Jean Kazez said...
What Amos said...I agree on all fronts. My kids made their own decision to be vegetarians. It's their decision to not fit in 100%--not mine. I think I'd draw the line, though, if they wanted to be vegans. I don't think they'd get enough protein because they're not terribly fond of beans and they dislike all the animal product substitutes that vegans eat (as I do). I also would not want to see them feeling that out of synch with the world.
Melissa and Taylor--Ouch indeed.
I think it's true that discussions about animal ethics tend to focus on the behavior of the affluent western adult. A good way to get focused on a much greater variety of circumstances is to watch Heifer International videos.
In these videos you see a vast variety of ways that using animals can make a vital difference in people's lives. One interesting statistic (that I learned from a movie last night) is that only 3% of farmers worldwide own tractors. Animals are still used for vital reasons all over the world. So "the animal question" is not just about me and my choice about what to eat for dinner.
I don't think all vegans will say that using animals for our purposes is always wrong--that's only the view of a certain sort of absolutist rights position that Tom Regan originally put on the map. Utilitarians can easily say that veganism is morally required in some circumstances but not in others. The outlook of my book is not utilitarian, but it is also case-by-case in the same sense. - January 13, 2010 at 8:50 AM
- Taylor said...
Melissa: For the record, Evelyn Pluhar is a philosopher and the author of Beyond Prejudice: The Moral Significance of Human and Nonhuman Animals. (Her debate with George is not part of that work.) A number of feminist philosophers (e.g., Josephine Donovan, Lori Gruen) have taken issue with George.
Jean: You probably know that the American Dietetic Association says: "Well-planned vegan, lacto-vegetarian, and lacto-ovo-vegetarian diets are appropriate for all stages of the life cycle, including pregnancy and lactation. Appropriately planned vegan, lacto-vegetarian, and lacto-ovo-vegetarian diets satisfy nutrient needs of infants, children, and adolescents and promote normal growth." Would you forbid your children to be vegan even if it were their own choice, they were happy to eat lots of beans and other good sources of protein, and did not mind being considered a bit odd? - January 13, 2010 at 1:11 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
I would discourage it, because I don't in fact think my kids would succeed at eating a balanced diet, but more than that, because I don't want them going around feeling like all sorts of yummy things are forbidden. I think it would be sad for a kid to miss out on every slice of birthday cake at every birthday party. This is not the way to feel like a part of this world.
I would also worry that even though a kid decided to be vegan, he or she would constantly feel pulled toward "forbidden foods." My kids do feel tempted by meat, though they are very disciplined about saying no. I'd hate to see them struggling with those feelings in the face of ice cream, yogurt, cheese, cake, cookies as well...in short, all the time. My kids are willing to think about how animals are treated, but I don't want that intruding into their daily lives relentlessly. Childhood should be more relaxed and fun.
That's just how I feel--and I think there needs to be some level of respect between parents as to how they decide to raise their kids. So--no disapproval of parents raising vegan kids intended. You asked about my attitude, and that's what it is. - January 13, 2010 at 1:44 PM
- Melissa said...
Taylor: I think it would be more accurate to say that a number of *vegan*-feminist philosophers (all ten of them) have taken issue with George, not "feminist philosophers" as you state.
No doubt there will be a number of vegans who disagree with Jean's latest work -- which, incidentally, I received in the mail from Amazon today. - January 13, 2010 at 1:56 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
I'm gratified to hear my book is "out in the world"! Thanks very much for ordering it.
- January 13, 2010 at 2:02 PM
- s. wallerstein said...
You seem to care about your kids a lot, in an Erich Fromm (Art of Loving) kind of way. That's rarer than it should be.
- January 13, 2010 at 5:57 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Sorry, I've been away for a while. Catching up now.
Jean wrote, "It is just wild to claim that all the different animal welfare laws, from the Humane Slaughter Act, to the Animal Welfare Act, to all the state animal cruelty laws, have been steps backwards. I see this claim as entirely ideological and polemical--bordering on delusional."
Delusional? I see the non-abolitionists the ones who refuse to accept the evidence that's plainly visible to all.
See, for example, this recent blog post titled, "Is Vegetarianism Dead?". I've posted an excerpt below. This is what happens when people come out in favor of "happy meat":
Is Vegetarianism Dead?
Eating animals is apparently hip again. The ever-growing bacon trend coupled with the rising popularity of meat-loving chefs means that vegetarianism and veganism are out [...]
...part of the shift away from vegetarianism has to do with the rise of so-called "conscientious carnivorism," a movement in which diners favor local farms and butcher shops over factory-farmed livestock. Even the editor of Edible Brooklyn and Edible Manhattan abandoned her decade-long boycott of meat products. "I suddenly woke up to the fact that I had access to meat I feel great about," said Gabrielle Langholtz.
This is what welfare reform does. It makes people feel better about consuming animal products. It also increases the profitability of those who sell allegedly-humane flesh, eggs, etc. The result is that the animal-exploitation industry becomes more entrenched, more animals suffer and die, and the end of animal exploitation becomes a more-difficult goal to attain.
It's somewhat of a mystery to me why this isn't obvious to everyone who stops to examine the evidence.
For more empirical evidence that welfare reform hurts animals, see www.humanemyth.org.
What's the answer? Instead of advocating in favor of ovo-lactovegetarianism, or cage-free eggs, or whatever, start doing creative vegan education. My wife recently designed a t-shirt the front of which says, "Grass-fed is still dead" (with a drawing of a dead cow), and the back of which says, "There is no such thing as humane meat. Go vegan!". It's a great conversation starter and gets the message across in a concise way. We give the shirts as gifts.
There is also VegFund, which has another excellent approach to vegan education (I've mentioned it here before).
I do not question the intentions of the non-abolitionists. I'm sure that they sincerely think that what they do is helping the animals. Unfortunately, the reality is different. - January 16, 2010 at 12:00 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Amos wrote, "Alex claims that there is a vegan section in most supermarkets".
That's not exactly what I said. I said that even moderate-sized supermarkets typically have a wide variety of vegan foods. I'm not necessarily talking about the specialized, niche products like faux meats. I'm talking about fruits & vegetables (both fresh and canned), rice, nuts, pasta, tomato sauce, peanut butter, etc.
My wife and I are fond of Asian food -- stir-fries and curries. Most of the ingredients can be found easily without going to a specialized store like Whole Foods. Occasionally, the flavorings or spices have to be purchased at an Asian grocery store (we've also ordered them by mail). I've never been to South America, but I suspect that with a small amount of creativity and research, one can come up with a large number of delicious vegan recipes that can be prepared from commonly found ingredients.
That's why I like the idea of Vegan Mondays (rather than Meatless Mondays). Eating vegan food once a week should be enough to convince people that veganism is much easier than commonly believed. It's also good for your health and for the environment. Hopefully, being vegan on Mondays will translate into being vegan the other six days of the week. - January 16, 2010 at 12:17 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
Alex, The anti-welfarists say that major pieces of legislation like the AWA, the Humane Slaughter Act, and state animal cruelty laws have done no good for animals. As I said, that strikes me as delusional.
To counter my charge, you tell me that some vegetarians are starting to eat "humane" meat. How can that possibly be relevant? It's a total non sequitur.
There are two completely different questions here--
(1) Has major welfare legislation benefited animals?
(2) How is the humane food movement helping or hurting animals?
On question (1)--I do think it's totally delusional to think the legislation hasn't been beneficial. Francione has no evidence at all that people were holding back from eating meat and experimenting on animals priori to the AWA and the Humane Slaughter Act. He has no evidence at all that these laws are responsible for increasing the use of animals. This is all just ideological and not evidence-based.
But as to (2), and whether the humane movement is attracting former vegans and vegetarians. A few anecdotes don't add up to much. There's room for debate there, but we need real data.
There's also room for debate about whether a bigger humane meat industry is good or bad. If it becomes a model for the the rest of animal farming (and that may be how things are going), then the other 25 billion animals stand to benefit.
I think vegan education is fine, and I agree with you that grass fed is still dead--nice slogan. I just don't think (sadly) that this message is going to save more than a handful of the 25 billion. So welfare improvements have to be appreciated, even if they're not all we would want. - January 16, 2010 at 12:48 PM
- Alex Chernavsky said...
Maybe it wasn't fair to lump your legislative examples together with the "happy meat" movement, but I see them all as being related in the sense that they reinforce the exploitation of animals.
The Animal Welfare Act of 1966 (together with the 1985 amendmants) is a fraud. It's essentially a free pass to the vivisection industry -- it's government-sanctioned permission to continue experimenting on animals, while giving the public the illusion that vivisection is now conducted in a humane manner. Heck, rats and mice aren't even covered under the regulations -- and these animals make up the bulk of experimental subjects.
The vivisectors get great PR -- they can stand up and say, "Hey, we're the good guys here! The government approves us! We have animal-care committees that oversee us!". And the public buys it all.
The "Humane Slaughter" act is analogous. All it did was make industry more profitable by implementing changes that made economic sense, anyway (cows that flail around are likely to cause expensive damage to slaughterhouse facilities). Legislation doesn't promote social change (it follows social change), and truly beneficial legislation would never get passed. The laws that do get passed are watered-down and ineffective.
So it's a charade, just like the "humane meat" is a charade. The suffering and death of lab animals has only increased since 1966, just as the abolitionist position would predict. We're using more animals today, in a more-horrific manner, than ever before. I don't have time right now to look up the reference for that, but I don't think that this is a controversial assertion.
So yeah, maybe I should have addressed your legislative examples explicitly, but I just happened to see that blog-entry about the death of vegetarianism, and it reminded me to reply to this thread.
"Humane" meat and toothless legislation -- it's all a symptom of the larger problem of welfare "reforms" being viewed as the solution instead of the problem.
By the way, nobody is asserting that people were holding back from eating meat or experimenting, only that the superficial changes make it more difficult to stop people from eating meat or experimenting in the future. - January 16, 2010 at 1:16 PM
- s. wallerstein said...
Alex: People concerned with what is hip or what is in or what is back are perhaps the most irritating group of human beings around (and there are many irritating groups of human beings).
However, in trying to convince people to become vegans or vegetarians or to do anything else, one should not concern oneself with those who see it as a fashionable trend, but look for those who are capable of commitment to an ethical project.
Do you know the song, "I've got a little list and there's none of them be missed", from the Mikado?
If so, those who stupidly repeat "bacon is back" or "SUV's are back" or "God is back" are on my little list. - January 16, 2010 at 2:18 PM
- Jean Kazez said...
Before the AWA, researchers could do surgery on live animals without anesthesia. Do you really want to say that because the AWA now makes an abolitionist's job harder, it would have been better for the animals to go unanaesthized? I sure hope not.
In any event, the issue is whether animal welfare legislation has increased the use of animals in labs, etc. Is there more killing, etc., now, than there would have been without the legislation?
That has not been proved. In fact, the trend seems to be just the opposite in animal research. Carbone (p. 26) shows that the numbers of animals used in research has held steady or decreased for all species covered by the AWA from 1993 to 2001. But the number of mice and rats, which are uncovered, has increased from 10-20 million to 80 million.
So--less welfare legislation in this instance means more killing. Why? Probably because it's much easier to use rats and mice--fewer rules, less paperwork, etc etc.
It's this kind of evidence that makes me see abolitionist anti-welfarism as an ideology. It's maintained despite the evidence against it, not because of evidence supporting it.
When you say that all the Humane Slaughter Act did was make the meat industry more profitable, you leave out what it did for the animals. Just wondering--if you were going to have your throat slit after being hoisted up by your back leg, would you want to be stunned first? I don't think we should discount the importance of stunning.
The notion that there's beef consumption now because of the Humane Slaughter Act has no evidence to support it. Chicken consumption has increased massively, and chickens aren't covered by the Humane Slaughter Act.
There are lots and lots of factors going into increased meat consumption around the world. The notion that this is because of welfare legislation really does require us to believe in the hordes being held back by animal welfare concerns, and then eating more because their qualms have gone away. Obviously this is extremely implausible.
The basic abolitionist ideas about property, personhood, respect, etc., really do seem worthwhile to me, and I'm interested in them. It's the anti-welfarism that I find downright perplexing. You can think that animal orgs are too focused on animal welfare, but to go further and say animal welfare legislation hurts animals or doesn't help them is going about 100 steps too far. - January 16, 2010 at 2:34 PM
- Jo Tyler said...
I would just like to point out that the notion that there are places in the world where "vegan options" aren't available at supermarkets is an absurdity. If you have a supermarket, you have vegan options.
- vegetables
- fruits
- grains
- nuts & seeds - July 14, 2010 at 2:37 AM


text:
No Products in the Cart
Each clutch is hand dyed, and painted by Suze Ford. The silks are shipped to our designer, Rendered Nest, in San Diego CA. They are then constructed by loving hands. Each purse is one of a kind made with the highest quality of silks. These pieces are intimate works of art, designed to make a statement at any social gathering. They are as unique and luxurious as the woman who carries it. They are made to bring joy and conversation while celebrating a love of art!
Each purse is approximately 7 x 10 in size, is embroidered with the script "Love" and accented with beautiful rose gold hardware, lined with beautiful silk on the inside, and labeled with Suze Ford's authentic signature. It also comes with a beautiful Rose Gold chain, giving a nice strap option.
Please note * The time and care it takes to make each one of these means that they will be small releases of them at a time. We are proud to say these are made in the USA.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
According to the Case-Shiller National Home Price Index, annual home price growth slipped to a seasonally-adjusted rate of 4.80 percent in September. This was 0.30 percent lower than August's year-over-year reading of 5.10 percent.
Cities posting the highest year-over-year gains in home prices were Miami, Florida 10.30 percent, Las Vegas, NV with a gain of 9.10 percent, San Francisco, California posted a gain of 7.90 percent, Dallas home prices gained 7.40 percent and home prices increased by 6.70 percent in Portland, Oregon.
David M. Blitzer, chairman of the S&P Dow Jones Index Committee, said that Florida and the Southeastern region showed sustained strength. Citing gains in builder confidence and housing starts and pre-crisis levels for foreclosures and mortgage defaults, Mr. Blitzer said that the outlook for housing in 2015 should be "stable to slightly better."
Analysts said that higher inventories of available homes had slowed home price growth. Cooling home prices allow more buyers into the market, which creates a better balance between buyers and sellers. Rapidly increasing home prices in late 2013 through early 2014 forced buyers onto the sidelines as investors and cash buyers drove home prices higher and raised demand for available homes.
Cities Post Incremental Month-to-Month Gains
Case-Shiller's 10-and 20-City Home Price Indices were 15 and 17 percent below their mid-2006 peaks with 18 of 20 cities tracked showing slower growth in September than in August. Top month-to-month gains were incremental, with Miami, Florida and Charlotte, North Carolina gaining 0.60 percent, Las Vegas, Nevada gained 0.40 percent and Dallas, Texas gained 0.30 percent. Denver, Colorado, Tampa, Florida and Portland, Oregon posted month-to-month gains of 0.20 percent.
Cities posting no month-to-month gain included Los Angeles, California and New York City.
The steepest decline in month-to-month home prices was seen in Washington, D.C. at -0.40 percent., followed by Atlanta, Georgia at -0.30 percent San Francisco, California, Atlanta, Georgia, Chicago, Illinois, Detroit, Michigan and Seattle Washington posted month-to-month declines in home prices of -0.20 percent. San Diego, California and Boston, Massachusetts posted declines in month-to-month home prices of -0.10 percent.
FHFA House Price Index Unchanged in September
The Federal Housing Finance Administration posted no gain on its month-to-month reading for September, although analysts had expected a gain of 0.40 percent from August to September. Year-over-year, FHFA reported a 4.50 percent gain in home prices between the third quarter of 2013 and the same period in 2014.
On a positive note, Seasonally-adjusted home prices for purchase-only transactions rose in 40 of 50 states during the third quarter of 2014. The top five states posting the highest annual home price gains were Nevada, Hawaii, California, North Dakota and Florida.


text:
I sure would love to win this package...
VPI Traveler Turntable and Dynavector 20x2H Cartridge Combo From Music Direct Sweepstakes
Analog Planet and Music Direct are proud to offer you a chance to win the brand-new turntable from VPI, The Traveler. This turntable is dedicated to the memory of VPI co-founder Sheila Weisfeld, and it's an amazing American-made work-of-art. Combine this turntable with the great high-output moving-coil Dynavector 20x2H phono cartridge and you are in for such a treat. We dare to say that no digital front end can compete. But hey, we're analog lovers!
Josh Bizar from Music Direct says they will also be including some analog set-up tools and some incredible newly-pressed vinyl so will instantly know how amazing this analog package sounds. As an added bonus, Michael Fremer will personally set up the cartridge with his USB scope.
Click here for more info on the turntable and here for more on the cartridge.
To enter the sweepstakes, all you need is an account on AnalogPlanet.com. If you don't already have one, click on the link labeled "register" at the bottom of this announcement or "Create new account" in the right column. Then, enter a username and a valid e-mail address, and click on the "Create new account" button. A message will be automatically sent to the e-mail address you specified, which will include a link to activate the account.
You can enter once on AnalogPlanet.com. No more than one entry allowed.
The final step (and only step for those who already have an account) is to log in and leave a comment right here on this announcementany comment will do, as long as it's not profane or spam. Then, when the sweepstakes closes, a lucky commenter will be chosen at random to receive the prize. So post a comment, and good luck!
For complete sweepstakes rules, click here.
[This sweepstakes is now closed.]
this would be great, i wonder how it would sound wih my system.
Just starting to make my way to the wonders of vinyl. This would be a nice start.
Please send the turntable to meet my record collection...plllleeeaaassse.!
Thank you.
The VPI Traveller was on my short list. To win it here would be wonderful!
Great analog setup and happy to enter the contest for it.
Great initiative. I'm loving AP and MD!
Here's hoping this is open to non-Americans too! Should I be lucky enough to win I can have it sent to my employer's US office of course. So please consider me American if it helps =)
Pretty nice of you and Music Direct to give away such a nice table. Someone will be very happy.
This package would be great to win, I've been drooling over all the new stuff at MD for awhile now.
This table doesn't look like the more industrial VPI tables of years past. VPI has really outdone themselves as far as cosmetics go. And I'm sure it sounds good too! I'll let everyone know how good it sounds after I win it!
Awesome site, great place to begin my vinyl adventure.
Awesome site, great place to begin my vinyl adventure.
Would love to have this since i have been without a turntable for a while!
Would love a chance to ear the Traveler/20x2H combo!
Never won a contest, but there's alway a first time for everything :)
A great offer, thanks to all those involved, please count me in!
Pick me ! Pick me! My Rega needs a playmate.
I am sure this will be a great combo and for the money, very hard to beat. I hope i win!
Nice package. Would be nice to win.
I've got my trusty modified Technics for now but this VPI will blow it out of the water!
Best wishes to all..Love the site
Does it have a dust cover?
And I love my Pro-ject Debut III with Speed Box and Acryl-It platter but I'd love to spin some vinyl on this thing!
Awsome turntable setup. I've been using the same turntable for over 30 years. Time for me to win this puppy! .
I'm on a Audio Technica AT-LP60. This would be amazing!
This looks amazing -- and I'm sure sounds even better. Put my name on the list!
Sweet looking TT. Hope to win it.
I've been a huge fan of Mr. Fremer's work,from Stereophile to the Tracking Angle (I have every issue!), to the Music Angle, and now to AP. I value his insights, his recommendations, his sense of humor. Many Thanks -- you make my day every time a new review is posted!
And thanks for this cool contest!
I have a lot of old LPs with grooves awaiting.... pick me!
This would be a very nice addition for me, and I no doubt would be able to convert more people to vinyl lovers with it. Think of this as an investment in the future.
That turntable would play sweet in my system
This combo should make anyone's vinyl collection sing!!
I'd love to win this. What a sweet setup.
VPI's are great 'tables -- have never heard one I didn't like. The Dynavectors are wonderful, smooth, articulate and lovable.
I really enjoy the blog. Count me in for a chance on the VPI.
I've been looking to upgrade from my Pro-Ject Debut III to the next level of vinyl listening.
This would be a nice upgrade for me. I hope I win.
This would be a great addition to my "other room". Thanks so much for the opportunity. And the recommendation in regards to Talk Talk "Laughing Stock".
If I win, will Mikey dial the cartridge in for me using his USB microscope?
I'm in dire need of a TT and cart upgrade, and i think this would do quite nicely.
I would love to win the vpi turntable.
This looks like a real humdinger!! Fingers crossed. :)
I noticed that the cartridge costs a large percentage of that of the table. What would be the price range for a proper cartridge for the this table?
Since I never win anything, by me entering this drawing, everyone else has improved chances of winning!
Big (new) fan of vinyl - this would be stellar to have!
I would love to make this my analog front end.
Please, count me in.
I just got a new table, but I am sure I can use a second one!
Someone is going to be very happy!
Excellent site. Thank you for the hard work you put into it.
I've got two VPI tables now, would like to make it three.
I'm fealing lucky... will Micheal Freamer come and install the turntable at home?
Yet another great way to play my hundreds of vinyl treasures, long live the "plow"!
This sure would make a great first turntable.
If I win one of these I will celebrate by playing every single record I have. That should only take me up to, I estimate, my third re-incarnation....
Thirty-Three and Third
Spin it again and again
More true connections
"It's like working with murcury man It's high science" this machine is sweet
What an upgrade this would be, and I could pass on my debut III to my analog nephew.
I'm bound to win something someday!
but I never win anything.
What a great analog combo. Shure hope's my dream will come true.
A beautiful table... I want it please!
Happy Happy Joy Joy always fun to dream about a new toy.
Heck, I just bought a Thorens TD-320, but I'd probably sell it if this guy dropped into my lap.
Great turntable, would love to have this rig!
It would be a dream come true to win the all new VPI Traveler turntable with Dynavector DV-20X2H MC cart. So, please pick me!
I followed Music Angle for about two months, before it shut down and Mikey moved to Analog Planet. I must say that I am really enjoying the content. Please keep up the good work!
PS. A vote for more cool contests!
New VPI will be most welcomed in the home here in Denver.
Thanks for this opportunity! Would be a marvelous prize and best of luck to all!
This would be a huuuuuuuuge upgrade to my system!
Nice package. It would go really well with my existing system!
Hats off to VPI for another great product.
And it's great to have a new site from Mikey!
It looks beautiful! If it sounds as good as it looks I can see myself in analog heaven!
I am new to vinyl and loving it. Glad to have a place to go to like Analog plant for information and advice.
Enter me in the Sweepstakes, please!
He's been begging and Pleading me to let him get a new turntable. He just doesn't understand that we're poor. So, for my sake more than his, replace his whining with some music.
My turntable is so old and tired I'm ashamed to let anyone even see it, let alone listen to it. Boy would this beauty be a welcome addition!
Pick me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I sure do like the look of the arm assembly.
Bee..you..t..full machinning and modern art put together...A fantastic prize to win.. Keep vinyl alive...
A kind gesture during these interesting times!
Trying to upgrade an old Thorens TD160 Super with Linn Basik Tonearm. VPI Traveler might be the one.
Long time listener, first time caller here. Is this really random?
I'm dead curious about the Traveller. Hope I get this one to enjoy it in person. I promise to share my thoughts with you guys.
I would happily win one of these tables. Saw one at Music Direct and they are beauties.
Love the Analog Sound, Still Loving Mixed Tapes from LP records.
Can't wait to add this sweet turntable to my audio gear!!
That 'table is sweet. My fingers are crossed.
I am an analog junkie with an embarrasing turntable.
How I long for a turntable to make me proud. This VPI Traveler Turntable would make all things right in my little World.
Please and Thank You. VERY much~


text:
Here at books.co.uk you can find the perfect book at a cheap price, thats because our price comparison engine searches many of the best online books stores so you dont have to.
Compare real-time-prices from the webs best online cheap books stores including Amazon, Abebooks, Biblio, Blackwells, Waterstones, Play.com and WHSmiths all in one click, there is no better way to relax than with a good cheap book! Best Selling titles on books.co.uk
Recommended titles on books.co.uk
Categories and genres on books.co.uk


text:
In a routine vaginal delivery, your first view of your child may be the top, or crown, of his head, seen with the help of a mirror. After the head is delivered, the obstetrician will suction the nose and mouth and your baby will take her first breath. She doesn't need to be slapped or spanked to begin breathing, nor will she necessarily cry; many newborns take their first breath quietly.
With the most difficult part of the birth now over, there is usually one last pause before the push that sends the rest of your child's body, which is smaller than his head, gliding smoothly into the doctor's or nurse midwife's waiting arms. After another, more thorough suctioning of his nose and mouth, your child may be handed to you to hold—and behold.
Even if you've seen pictures of newborns, you're bound to be amazed by the first sight of your own infant. When she opens her eyes, they will meet yours with curiosity. All the activity of birth may make her very alert and responsive to your touch, voice, and warmth. Take advantage of this attentiveness, which may last for the first few hours. Stroke her, talk to her, and look closely at this child you've created. The obstetrician or nurse midwife may place the baby on your abdomen or lower chest in those first few moments. Watch how the baby moves up toward your breast, seeking that first feeding. Those moments are magical for you and the baby. Those moments should not be hindered; they should be allowed to happen. The natural wonder of your baby looking at you, looking at your breasts and wriggling upward, will make you realize just how exciting those important first few minutes are. Attendants should not wash you, nor should they wash the baby or interfere. The smell and feel of the moment will guide the baby to her first feeding. As with many moms, you may find that putting your baby to your breast creates an intense emotional bond between you and your newborn.
Fresh from birth, your child may be covered with a white cheesy substance called vernix. This protective coating is produced toward the end of pregnancy by the sebaceous (oil-producing) glands in her skin. She'll also be wet with amniotic fluid. If there was an episiotomy (surgical cutting) or tearing of tissue in the vaginal area, she may have some of your own blood on her. Her skin, especially on the face, may be quite wrinkled from the wetness and pressure of birth.
Your baby's shape and size also may surprise you, especially if this is your first child. On one hand, it's hard to believe that a human being can be so tiny; on the other, it's incredible that this "enormous" creature could possibly have fit inside your body.
The size and shape of her head in particular may alarm you. How could the head possibly have made it through the birth canal? The answer lies in its slightly elongated shape. The head was able to adapt to the contours of the passageway as it was pushed through, squeezing to fit. Now free, it may take up to several days to revert to its normal oval shape.
Your baby's skin color may be a little blue at first, but gradually will turn pinker as her breathing becomes regular. Her hands and feet may be slightly blue and feel cool, and may remain so, on and off, for several weeks until her body is better able to adjust to the temperature around her.
You also may notice that your newborn's breathing is irregular and very rapid. While you normally take twelve to fourteen breaths per minute, your newborn may take as many as forty to sixty breaths per minute. An occasional deep breath may alternate with bursts of short, shallow breaths followed by pauses. Don't let this make you anxious. It's normal for the initial days after birth.


text:
High Quality Hygiene Products Manufacturer.
Tissue Dispenser.Paper Towel Dispenser,Soap Dispenser.Aerosol Dispenser. Yu Wei Products Company Limited is a leading international Manufacturer and Exporter of all kinds of Plastic Products & Stainless Products items,Household Products,Commerical Hygiene Cleaning Products etc. All the products being manufactured by the company promise high performance and excellent quality. We innovate,Develop.Design,and Manufacture all of our own products.Our R & D division can develop new products to meet customers requirements. Hot Items:WASHROOM HYGIENE SYSTEMS Twin Jumbo Roll Tissue Dispenser,Jumbo Roll Tissue Dispenser,M-Fold/C Fold/V Fold Paper Towel Dispenser,Centre-Pull Paper Towel Dispenser,Lever Roll Towel Dispenser,Autcut HRT Dispenser,Auto Sensor Roll Towel Dispenser,Toilet Seat Cover Dispenser(1/2,1/4),Foam Soap Dispenser,Soap Dispenser,Auto Soap Dispenser,Air Freshener Dispenser. Website: www.yuweiproducts.com Executive Director: Email: email@example.com Sales Director: Email: email@example.com
We are located in Sanshui Industrial Park,Foshan City,Guangdong,China. Our factory between Guangzhou Airport about 30 minutes.


text:
The explosion occurred Monday night at the Hawthorne Army Depot, a sprawling facility used by troops heading overseas, during an exercise involving the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force from Camp Lejeune, N.C. Several Marines from the unit were injured in the blast, authorities said.
The mortar round exploded in its firing tube during the exercise, Brig. Gen. Jim Lukeman said at a news conference at Camp Lejeune. He said investigators were trying to determine the cause of the malfunction.
The Pentagon expanded a temporary ban to prohibit the military from firing any 60 mm mortar rounds until the results of the investigation. The Marine Corps said Tuesday a "blanket suspension" of 60 mm mortars and associated firing tubes is in effect.
The Pentagon earlier had suspended use of all high-explosive and illumination mortar rounds that were in the same manufacturing lots as ones fired in Nevada.
It was not immediately clear whether more than a single round exploded, a Marine Corps official said, speaking on condition of anonymity because the official wasn't authorized to speak about an ongoing investigation.
The Marine Corps said early Tuesday that seven Marines were killed. Eight men under the age of 30 were taken to Renown Regional Medical Center in Reno. One of them died, four were in serious condition, two were in fair condition and another was discharged, said spokesman Mark Earnest.
John Stroud, national junior vice commander in chief for the Veterans of Foreign Wars, began a memorial event in Hawthorne on Tuesday night by saying "one of the critical has passed," bringing the death toll to eight. Mourners then laid eight floral arrangements at a park where a flag flew at half-staff within sight of the Hawthorne depot's boundary.
Stroud said he spoke with Marine officers from Camp Lejune who gave him the news before the ceremony. Messages left for a spokesman for the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Force were not immediately returned.
The force did issue a statement Tuesday evening saying an additional Marine has been reported as injured.
The identities of those killed won't be released until 24 hours after their families are notified.
"We send our prayers and condolences to the families of Marines involved in this tragic incident," said the force's commander, Maj. Gen. Raymond C. Fox. "We mourn their loss, and it is with heavy hearts we remember their courage and sacrifice."
The rescue was complicated by the remoteness of the site, which is favored because the harsh geography simulates conditions in Afghanistan.
The 60 mm mortar is a weapon that traditionally requires three to four Marines to operate, but it's common during training for others to observe nearby. The firing tube is supported in a tripod-like design and fires roughly a 3-pound shell, some 14 inches in length and a bit larger than 2 inches in diameter.
The mortar has changed little since World War II and remains one of the simplest weapons to operate, which is why it is found at the lowest level of infantry units, said Joseph Trevithick, a mortar expert with Global Security.org.
"Basically, it's still a pipe and it's got a firing pin at the bottom," Trevithick said. Still, a number of things could go wrong, such as a fuse malfunction, a problem with the barrel's assembly, or a round prematurely detonating inside the tube, he said.
The Marine Corps official said an explosion at the point of firing in a training exercise could kill or maim anyone in or near the protective mortar pit and could concussively detonate any mortars stored nearby in a phenomenon known as "sympathetic detonation."
The official said a worldwide moratorium after such an accident is not unusual and would persist until the investigation determines that the weapon did not malfunction in ways that would hurt other Marines or that mortar shells manufactured at the same time as the one involved in the accident were safe.
The official said it would be normal to warn other U.S. military branches that use 60 mm mortars, such as the Army, about the Marines warning. The moratorium could last for weeks or months.
The investigation will focus on whether the Marines followed procedures to properly fire the weapon, or whether there was a malfunction in the firing device or in the explosive mortar shell itself, the official said.
The Hawthorne Army Depot stores and disposes of ammunition. The facility is made up of hundreds of buildings spread over more than 230 square miles, and bunkers dot the sagebrush-covered hills visible from the highway.
Renown hospital emergency physician Dr. Michael Morkin, at a news conference late Tuesday afternoon, said some of the injured Marines he treated were conscious and "knew something happened but didn't know what."
He said he's "fairly confident" that one of the most seriously injured Marines wouldn't have survived had it not been for the response of a Careflight medical helicopter to the remote site near Hawthorne, 140 miles southeast of Reno.
Morkin said the Marines mostly suffered blunt force trauma from shrapnel.
"They're injuries of varying severity ... to varying parts of the body. They're complicated injuries to deal with," he said.
Retired Nevada state archivist Guy Rocha said the Hawthorne depot opened in 1930, four years after a lightning-sparked explosion virtually destroyed the Lake Denmark Naval Ammunition depot in northern New Jersey, about 40 miles west of New York City.
The blast and fires that raged for days heavily damaged the adjacent Picatinny Army Arsenal and surrounding communities, killing 21 people and seriously injuring more than 50 others.
Following the news of the explosion, Nevada and North Carolina political leaders have expressed their sympathy.
"I was so saddened to learn about the seven Marines from Camp Lejeune who were killed last night in Nevada," U.S. Sen. Kay Hagan, D-N.C., said in a statement. "My thoughts and prayers are with the families of the Marines who were killed and those who were injured, and I will continue to monitor the investigation so we can find out what happened and take appropriate steps."
Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., gave his condolences to victims of the explosion during a Tuesday morning speech on the Senate floor.
Nevada Republican Sen. Dean Heller tweeted, "Thoughts and prayers are with the families who lost a loved one in the Hawthorne Army Depot explosion. Grateful for their service."
"The men and women who work and train there put service ahead of self each and every day," Republican Nevada Gov. Brian Sandoval said in a statement. "Kathleen and I wish to extend our deepest sympathies to those killed and their families."
Hawthorne has held an important place in American military history since World War II when it became the staging area for ammunition, bombs and rockets for the war. The Nevada Division of Environmental Protection says that the depot employed more than 5,500 people at its peak.
The facility was considered safely remote, but strategically close to Navy bases in California.
Rocha said he was unaware of any other catastrophic event at the depot over the years it served as a munitions repository. The facility has downsized in recent years but survived a round of base closures nationwide in 2005.
Military officials noted that it gave Marines, Army and Navy personnel a place to train for deployment overseas.
"They train at a similar climate, elevation and terrain as Afghanistan," said Rocha, who has visited the depot many times over the years.
In the small town that calls itself "America's Patriotic Home" near the depot, a massive flag in a park across from the local war memorial waved at half-staff.
Larry Mortensen, an industrial engineer at the depot for 41 years before retiring in 1999, serves with his wife, Carole, on the board of directors of the Hawthorne Ordnance Museum. The museum displays hundreds of shells and other munitions, battery guns and weapons dating to World War II.
Mortensen said there had been fatal accidents at the depot in years past, but none resulting in mass casualties. He said he expected the rural town of about 3,500 residents to rally around victims' families.
"It's a military community. Everybody here supports the military," he said.
See It On TV | Report A Typo |
Send Tip |
Get Alerts | Send us photos
Follow @abc11 on Twitter | Become a fan on Facebook


text:
BullRun – stock.adobe.com
You enter your place of residence or the place where you want to contact the administration or use the location sensing.
Whether with your own vehicle, bicycle or public transport - mobility is of great importance in our society. We offer you information about vehicles, driver's licences, road traffic or subsidies for certain types of mobility.


text:
The Residence at Moani'ala, located at "The Pointe" on Hawaii Loa Ridge, was built in the round that encompasses views from Diamond Head to Koko Head. The homeowner's love of Star Wars led the team to create a custom-designed Star Wars themed theater, complete with scale models of R2-D2 and C-3PO.
Completed: 2011
Awards: BIA Renaissance Grand Award Winner; New Residential


text:
Scotland winger Sean Maitland has been ruled out of Saturday's Calcutta Cup clash with England at Murrayfield.
The Scottish Rugby Union's head of medical performance, Paul McGinley, said: "Sean suffered a concussion as well as injury to his right leg (on Sunday).The British and Irish Lion went off injured in the first half of Scotland's opening RBS 6 Nations defeat by Ireland in Dublin on Sunday.
"He will be subject to further investigation (on Monday) at Spire Murrayfield hospital and will be assessed later by consultant surgeon Graham Lawson.
"We also have a number of injuries at this juncture which will impact on availability to train at the start of this week but we are optimistic that players will recover in time for the England game."
©Press Association


text: In the arclength plot, 'arclength' is our way of parametrizing the position of the star on the detector in one dimension. The arclength plot essentially shows the dependence of flux on position and how successful our technique is at removing it. If the black points form a tight relation and the orange dots fit through it well, then the correction is likely of high quality. In the image plot, the region outlined in red is the photometric aperture, and the green dots are the image centroid positions. The image itself is the coadded image from all K2 observations after the spacecraft attained fine guiding control. |


text:
pmwiki.org |
Firefly /
Home PageHere's how it is...Earth-that-was got used up. We moved out -- terraformed and colonized hundreds of new earths; some, rich and flush with the new technologies; some, not so much. The central planets -- them as formed the Alliance -- decided all the planets had to join under their rule. There was some disagreement on that point. After the Unification War, many of the Independents who had fought and lost drifted to the edges of civilization, far from Alliance control. Out here, people struggle to get by with the most basic of technologies. A ship will bring you work; a gun will help you keep it. A captain's goal is simple: find crew, find a job... keep flying. Welcome to Firefly Wiki This wiki is an encyclopedia of the Firefly 'verse (created by Joss Whedon), intended both as a resource to fans of the television show (and movie) and to show people what a cool show Firefly is. (Please note: You may find a link here and there that looks wonky. Feel free to point them out or fix them!) This site is password-protected because spammers suck. The password for the site is Kaylee Frye's real first name. It works on all but a couple pages where there have been some edit-wars. If you want to help out:
Wiki Information


text:
Looking back this past year, I give O'Brien a C rating for this year. Considering that he wasn't hired till November, he had little time to prepare for the Winter Meetings. Instead, his first three months on the job was busy revamping the front office and farm system while instituting policies that were to be followed by every farm team. His first trade is pretty much inconclusive because we won't know for another year or two if Bong and Nelson pan out. You look at Reitsma's numbers and really they didn't improve that much while in a Braves uniform.
Even then, he took conservative approaches by signing journeyman John Vanderwal for the bench and signing journeyman pitcher Corey Lidle and picking Todd Jones off the scrap heap. But if the young players O'Brien got in return for Lidle and Jones pays off two or three years from now, then you have to say O'Brien's moves were a success. But right now, they are inconclusive.
IMO, I expect O'Brien to be more active this offseason. He personally had the entire season to view the entire organization from top to bottom. He made the moves necessary to revitalize the farm system. That is in place. Now, he can devote more time to the major league roster and if Lindner and Allen allows him to bump the payroll to the 57 million mark, I do expect him to be more active addressing the major league roster this offseason.
So, how do you rate O'Brien's first year?


text:
- Yeti 1000 Core Power Station
- 120W Power Supply
- Ranger 300 Briefcase Solar Panel
- Canvas Carrying Bag
This solar generator can recharge from the sun in as little as 4 hours.
Solar panels designed for maximum recharge that are lightweitch, easy to set up.
A sustainable energy source with no noise and no fumes.
Smart Phone
(12 Wh):Tablet
(30 Wh):Laptop
(50 Wh):POV Camera
(5 Wh):DSLR Camera
(18 Wh):Head Lamp
(5 Wh):Light-a-Life 350
(4.5 W):Light Bulb
(65 W):Pellet Grill
(60 W):Microwave
(1000 W):Portable Fridge
(25 W):WiFi Router
(25 W):Mini Fridge
(35 W):Full Size Refrigerator
(65 W):Setup is quick and easy. Place the solar panels outdoors in good, direct sunlight. If you have multiple panels, use the Combiner Cables to connect them. Need extra reach? Use the optional Extension Cable to extend your range. The cables and connecters are plug-and-play. Simply match the shape of the plug to the shape of the connector. Plug directly into the input of your Yeti and enjoy endless power!


text:
Find a Doctor
Doctor Search
Specialists Directory
Practice Directory
Our Newest Doctors
Stay Healthy
The MD.com Blog
Health Tips
Health News
Medical Specialties
Are you a provider?
MD.com for Doctors
Claim Your Profile
MD.com Telemedicine
Premium Services
Doctor News
MD.com for Managers
Contact Us
Log in
Consumer Login
Doctor Login
Manager Login
Sign up
Consumer Signup
Doctor Signup
Manager Signup
Log In
Please log in to save Dr. Raizon. Not a member?
Sign up now
Log In
Email Address
Forgot Password?


text:
The good news is that Social Media provides your small business or organization the ability to reach millions of potential customers and make your brand or service the next big thing. The bad news is that you now have to do something about it.
At Social Media Guardian we use a blend of online software technology and (more importantly) human interaction by our team of Social Media Experts to help liberate you from the chains of Social Media Marketing.
To learn more, watch our video presentation on Implementing an Effective Social Media Strategy! We'll show you how we can help you Create social media accounts, Build your followers, Monitor your social media feeds and Engage with your customers!
Creating Social Media accounts is easy, right? With some time investment you can create a blog, Facebook fan page, and Twitter account, and you're off and running!
But what about other Social Media channels like LinkedIn, YouTube, StumbleUpon, Foursquare, Google Buzz, Digg and others? Which ones are right for you and your business? Determining what they do and how your business could benefit from them takes even more time!
At Social Media Guardian, we'll evaluate your business and industry and create the right accounts for you!
The reach of your Social Media Marketing efforts extend only as far as your followers. Therefore, the goal must be to build and increase your social media followers.
So you post social media icon links on your website and embed them within your email signatures. Then you hope that customer will visit and then follow, like or subscribe to your channels. That's a good start, but you'll find that this initiative quickly plateaus, and the ability to increase followers becomes even more challenging.
With Social Media Guardian you will stop being reactive and start a proactive approach that will continuously grow your social media followers.
What are customers saying about your business? What are they saying about your competitors?
Your online reputation is the most valuable asset for your business. One negative review can affect hundreds of potential clients.
Social Media Guardian protects your online reputation by monitoring everything that is said about your organization and responding to any negative comments that might adversely impact your business. Through its bleeding edge sentiment engine, Social Media Guardian highlights risks and identifies opportunities while offering powerful insight on how your brand and products are perceived by consumers against your competitors.
Lack of engagement = abandonment.
Abandoned customers will not return. When you monitor effectively, you at least have the opportunity to engage with your customers.
But how long is too long to engage? One business day? Four hours? One hour? ASAP is the golden rule - the clock is ticking from the moment feedback is posted.
Social Media Guardian will engage customers via social media posts on your behalf with pre-determined responses to ensure that your customers know you're listening and that you value their business.
Watch and learn how you can start engaging today!