Problem:
We are eating cancer from the drugs we feed animals. To make
them grow faster or to produce more milk we feed them hormones and
steroids and ground up carcasses! We are eating the cancer we
feed them!
Warrior for a Healthy Planet
by James Faber
Conscious Choice, November 1998
Beef...it's what's for dinner. It's as much a part of American
culture as country music, a Chevrolet, or Grandma's apple pie. But
the fact is, most Americans don't realize how meat is produced, or
what goes on behind the scenes of the beef industry. Nor do they
understand how most of the other food they eat is produced, or the
consequences of their food choices -- especially the havoc a
meat-centered diet wreaks on the health of human beings, animals,
and the environment.
Howard Lyman is one man with intimate knowledge of factory
farming, chemical agriculture, and their effects in the United
States. He is a former insider of the American beef industry, and
is considered an authority on American beef production as well as
its chief antagonist.
"The American consumer is eating a product being fed with
hormones, antibiotics, steroids, manure, and ground-up dead
animals," Lyman says. "The difficulty is that the money is in the
hands of the multi-national corporations beating the drum about
eating their garbage, and it's killing this nation."
The story of Lyman's journey and transition from factory farmer to
vegetarian activist, including his experience and success as a
defendant with Oprah Winfrey in the now famous Texas food
disparagement lawsuit, is told in his new book, Mad Cowboy:
Plain Truth from the Cattle Rancher Who Won't Eat Meat,
written with Glen Merzer. His story is both fascinating and
unique.
Lyman inherited his Montana dairy farm like his father and
grandfather before him, but after receiving a B.S. degree in
general agriculture from Montana State University, and a two year
stint in the Army, he returned to the farm and abandoned the
traditional organic methods. Instead, he rode the wave of
chemically-based agricultural production that had swept through
the United States at the end of the second world war as part of a
government effort to revive a depreciating chemical industry.
"We have done what the government set out to do after World War
II, which was turn agriculture into chemical junkies," says Lyman.
"I saw the organic soil go from a living productive base to a
sterile, chemical saturated mono-cultural ground because of my
so-called modern methods."
Lyman had turned his modest 540-acre farm into a $5 million-a-year
agribusiness with ten thousand acres of crops, a thousand range
cows and seven thousand head of cattle in a factory feedlot. He
continued his operation with little concern about the effects of
the chemicals he was using on the environment, or on the consumer
who ended up with meat from his feedlot on their dinner table --
until a snowy night in 1979 altered his life forever. He was
diagnosed with a tumor on his spine and given a one-in-a-million
chance of walking again. It was then, while lying in the hospital
awaiting emergency surgery, that he decided to make a change. In
Mad Cowboy, he explains, "I made up my mind right
then and there that no matter what the outcome of my operation,
I'd dedicate the rest of my life to restoring the land to what it
had been when I'd had the good fortune to be born with it."
Ever since recovering from his operation, Lyman has stayed true to
his word. He has become a voice for family farmers, animal rights,
and the environment. Today, he is president of the International
Vegetarian Union and keeps busy maintaining a grueling road
schedule to promote an animal free diet.
Human health issues
One of the most convincing arguments for a meat-and-dairy-free
diet is how directly meat and dairy products affect human health.
A 1988 Surgeon General's Report on Nutrition and Health found that
68 percent of all diseases in the U.S. are diet-related.
Many scientific studies have linked human health problems to diet.
In Mad Cowboy, Lyman highlights a number of different
studies that point to a meat-based diet as a cause of cancer,
heart disease, osteoporosis, diabetes, hypertension, and obesity
in the United States.
"We have an absolute medical disaster facing this country, with an
American public on a diet just loaded with saturated fat and
cholesterol," he says. Instead, he advocates diets like those
recommended by Dean Ornish or John McDougall, which are low in
fat, high in fiber, and get most of their calories from
carbohydrates rather than protein.
Studies have also shown that traces of herbicides, pesticides, and
antibiotics can be found in many of the products sold to the
consumer. "According to the United States Department of
Agriculture (USDA), 75 percent of all carcinogens and toxins in
the human body get there through animal products, and 16 percent
through vegetables," says Lyman. "That means 91 percent of all
carcinogens and toxins in our bodies can be eliminated by doing
two things -- giving up animal products and buying organic
produce."
The scientific evidence is impressive, but Lyman's own story is as
effective. Among the arsenal of experiences Lyman draws from to
back up his message, is the example of his own health -- he used
to weigh over 300 pounds, with a cholesterol level over 300. Since
becoming vegan, he has lost 130 pounds and brought his cholesterol
level to 140. According to Lyman, of ten friends back home in
Montana who shared the same diet he did before becoming vegan, he
is the only one who hasn't had heart disease or cancer. Half of
the ten have already died before reaching age 60.
"Being from Montana, I would rather be caught riding a stolen
horse than admit to someone I was a vegetarian," he says. "The
fact is, I knew that if I didn't change my diet, I was not going
to live for very much longer."
Even despite the overwhelming evidence of the dangers of an animal
based diet, a misinformed U.S. public continues to jeopardize its
health with poor diet choices. In Mad Cowboy, Lyman's
analogies of the meat and dairy industries to the tobacco industry
illustrate how the general public is misled. "The meat and dairy
industries thrive by keeping the general population too confused
or misinformed to change their destructive habits," he says. "But
the case for the health benefits of a vegetarian diet is at least
as clear, and established in at least as many scientific studies,
as the case for not smoking."
Animal issues
Most people have heard stories about what goes on in factory farms
and slaughter houses, but choose to ignore the details and not
think about the fact that farm animals can experience stress,
frustration, fear, pain, and pleasure.
On a factory farm
the animals are overcrowded in concrete feedlots, or virtually
immobilized in crates or cages. The greatest number of animals are
raised in the smallest possible space at the lowest possible cost
to maximize productivity and profits. Factory-farmed animals are
treated like machines with no concern for their pain and
suffering.
According to the The Humane Society of the U.S. (HSUS), since
there are no federal laws regulating the treatment of animals on
farms, managers are free to use whatever methods of production are
most profitable, regardless of their impact on the animals'
well-being.
Lyman explains, "The percentage of food produced for the American
consumer in factory farms is increasing as the number of family
farms decreases. Today in Wisconsin we're seeing four small family
dairy farmers go out of business every day."
In a cattle feedlot, the animals are corralled in roofless pens
with a feed trough on one end, and are fed an unnatural diet,
along with hormones, to achieve the main goal of the feedlot
operator: make them grow as big and fat as possible, as quickly as
possible. With animals in confinement, disease and health problems
also become an issue for the operator. To combat this problem,
feedlot operators put antibiotics in the feed of the animals, and
spray insecticides directly onto them. According to Lyman,
one-half of all the antibiotics in the U.S. are fed to animals --
these are the traces that eventually make it onto the consumer's
plate.
The methods used for the slaughter of the animals are just as
inhumane as the methods used for raising them. Cattle are stunned
with a steel bolt through the head, then their throats are cut,
leaving them to bleed to death. If one of the animals gets
frightened, the others can sense the fear and become restless. In
a written statement for the McDonald's McLibel case, Lyman states,
"The animals are terrified at the slaughter plant, and the cruelty
inflected on the animal in their last moments on earth [is]
indescribable."
Environmental issues
Very few consumers are aware of the impact of their food choices
on the environment. The current methods of agriculture in the U.S.
are extremely resource-inefficient, and have serious effects on
water supplies, topsoil, rainforests, and pollution.
According to statistics from the HSUS, to produce one pound of
grain fed meat requires between 300 and 500 gallons of water. That
means 50 percent of our water usage in the U.S. goes to livestock
production, depleting our natural aquifers.
Cattle grazing also depletes resources. More than one-third of the
Earth's land surface has been decertified to some degree by
livestock grazing. In the rainforest, land is being clear-cut for
grazing at a rate of 5 million acres a year, according to some
estimates, but the American public remains in the dark. "While
most Americans are concerned about rainforest destruction, few
realize that cattle ranching stands as its salient cause," Lyman
says. "An estimated 70 percent of the clearing of the Amazon is
for cattle pasture."
Another issue is the water pollution caused by livestock waste
dumped into streams and rivers. Les Inglis explains in his book,
Diet for a Gentle World, "Water pollution from the
livestock industry is two to three times greater than water
pollution from all other industrial activities." According to
Lyman, the largest feedlots produce as much waste as the largest
American cities, with waste that can be several hundred times more
concentrated than raw domestic sewage.
"Certainly these [environmental] problems wouldn't disappear
overnight if the world suddenly became vegetarian," Lyman says.
"But no other lifestyle change could produce as positive an impact
on these profound threats to our collective survival as the
adoption of a plant-based diet."
Hope for the future
All the different reasons for making a change in diet can seem
overwhelming, but there is a brighter future. Lyman has seen the
worst, yet still remains optimistic. "I personally believe we're
winning," he says. "That's why we see so much money spent on
advertising from the meat and dairy industries -- they're
terrified that the word is getting out."
One of the keys to ending factory farming in the U.S. will be to
empower the consumer with the education needed to make informed
choices about their food. "If we're going to have a
producer-consumer alliance, which uses small family farmers
producing food without pesticides, herbicides, hormones and
medication, it's not going to happen because of the government, or
the farmers," Lyman says. "It will happen when the consumers use
their money to buy the kind of product it's going to take to keep
the farmers that are producing correctly, in business."
According to Lyman, the organic industry in the U.S. continues to
grow at a rate of about 25 percent per year since 1992, and today
there are 15,000 more farmer's markets than just one year ago. He
is also quick to point out that it's easier to be vegetarian today
than at any time in recent history, but he warns people to get
educated about a vegetarian lifestyle before they decide to make a
change in their diet. "I would say understand the issue, then
attack it in a sensible fashion," he says. "Either eliminate all
of the animal products, or take out the dairy and significantly
cut down on the meat in your diet -- then ask yourself how you
feel."
Since 1991, Lyman has traveled over 100,000 miles a year to
educate consumers about the dangers and consequences of an
animal-based diet. "The nice thing about it is, for change we need
a crisis -- and we have a crisis," he says. "We will either
implement the start of the solution for our children and
grandchildren, or they will not have a future."
Howard Lyman will be speaking at "Lifestyles of the Healthy and
Humane" Conference on Vegetarianism, on November 14 at Roosevelt
University in Chicago, Illinois. For more information contact
SPEAK at 773-925-1277.
Resources
The Humane Society of the United States, 301-258-8255.
EarthSave,
502-589-7676
Mad Cowboy: Plain Truth from the Cattle Rancher Who Won't Eat
Meat, by Howard F. Lyman with Glen Merzer. Scribner: NY
(1998).
Diet for a Gentle World: Eating with Conscience, by Les
Inglis. Avery Publishing Group, Inc.: NY (1993). |
Solution:
Alfalfa is the oldest known plant in the world and has been been
used for centuries for healing. It's clinical name is Medicago
Sativa! Where did the name medicine come from?

Nov. 15, 2002 -- A new study serves as good
evidence that a western diet can more than double the risk of
colon cancer. Researchers found that an increasingly western diet
has led to a dramatic rise in colorectal cancer in Singapore.
Rates of the cancer have doubled in the past three decades,
largely because residents eat more red meat and fewer vegetables
than in the past.
Singapore is one of Asia's most
rapidly developing nations. And for many of the ethnic Chinese
who make up 77% of the population, industrialization has brought
both changes in diet and a more sedentary lifestyle. Colorectal
cancer rates now approach those in developed countries and are
among the highest in Asia.
To determine the influence of
changing lifestyles on cancer rates, researchers from the
National University of Singapore conducted interviews with 121
Chinese colorectal cancer patients and 222 healthy Chinese
people. The findings appear in the Dec. 1 issue of the journal
Cancer.
Researchers concluded that diet
and a family history of colorectal cancer were the primary risk
factors for the disease in the Chinese population. After
accounting for all other risk factors, a high intake of red meat
-- including beef and pork -- doubled the risk of colorectal
cancer. No rise was seen for those reporting increased
consumption of other meats or seafood. Eating vegetables was
associated with a reduction in risk.
People who ate lots of red meat
and few vegetables were more than 2.5 times more likely to get
colon cancer. Eating lots of vegetables reduced the risk only
slightly in those who also ate large amounts of red meat, but the
risk was still almost double that of the healthy population. No
other food groups -- including soy, legumes or fruit -- were
found to have an impact on risk.
"Dietary intake of red meat in Western
populations has been related to the risk of colorectal [cancer]
in many, but not all, studies, and this appears to be independent
of its contribution to total fat or protein content," lead
researcher Adeline Seow, MD, and colleagues noted.
The National Cancer Institute's
Arthur Schatzkin, PhD, who is an expert on the role of foods in
cancer, tells WebMD that the evidence linking red meat
consumption to colorectal cancer is strong but not conclusive.
The consumption of processed meats has also been linked to
colorectal cancer. Schatzkin is chief of the Nutritional
Epidemiology Branch of the NCI's Division of Cancer Epidemiology
and Genetics.
"The majority of studies
support the red meat link, but we have seen several widely
accepted hypotheses become controversial," he says. "Until
recently the link between dietary fiber and a reduced risk was
accepted. Several well publicized studies challenged that idea,
but they did not totally refute the hypothesis."
Colorectal cancer expert
Charles Fuchs, of Boston's Dana Farber Cancer Institute, says
that evidence suggests that eating red meat in moderation is
safe. But how much is too much? Fuchs cites findings from a large
U.S. study, which showed that women who ate beef, pork, or lamb
five or more times a week had triple the risk of colon cancer.
"There are a lot of good
reasons to be moderate in one's consumption of red meat, not the
least of which is its link to heart disease," he tells WebMD.
"Eating red meat more than five times a week is probably too
much."
Beef Hormones Linked to
Premature Onset of Puberty & Breast Cancer
Research links breast cancer, beef hormones
By Dennis Bueckert / The Canadian Press
Ottawa - Consumption of hormone-treated beef may be causing girls
to reach puberty earlier than they used to and making them more
susceptible to breast cancer, say researchers attending a world
conference on breast
cancer.
It is "very likely" that hormone residues in North American beef
is a factor in the early onset of puberty among girls in recent
decades, said Carlos Sonnenschein of the Tufts University School
of Medicine at Boston.
"There is no other reason to explain it," Sonnenschein said in an
interview Friday.
Pediatricians say the onset of menstruation has steadily
decreased in recent decades. The average age for a first period
is now 12½, up from age 14 in 1900.
Early onset of puberty with its raging hormones translates into
higher risk of breast cancer, said Sonnenschein.
"The length and amount of exposure to estrogens (a class of
hormones) is one of the most significant risk factors in breast
carcinogenesis.
"Unless you are exposed to estrogens you don't get breast cancer.
The longer the exposure is, the higher the incidence. Therefore
if you decrease the age of menarche (first menstruation) . . .
you are at higher risk."
Hormones are used by cattle farmers in Canada and the United
States to increase the weight of cattle prior to slaughter. They
are currently the focus of a major trade dispute between North
American and the European
Union.
Annie Sasco, of the International Agency for Research on Cancer
at Lyons, France, said more study is needed but it makes sense
that hormone-treated beef could affect the onset of puberty.
"Any exposure to a high level of hormones is associated with
earlier onset of puberty. It needs to be studied more but it
makes sense."
She said the risk of breast cancer associated with hormone
residues in meat is not proven, and is probably small.
"We all have estrogens and we need estrogens," she told the
mainly female audience. "They are needed for life, for being what
we are. We cannot say, 'Ban estrogens.'
"We all have to try, through our diet and physical exercise, to
keep our levels down. But there is a need to keep things in
perspective . . . without getting into a complete
panic."
Even if the risk is small, she said it would be prudent to stop
the use of hormones in the cattle industry there's no offsetting
health benefit for consumers.
The European Union has banned the use of hormones for fear they
pose a health risk, and has banned imports of hormone-treated
Canadian and U.S. meat.
The two North American countries have taken the dispute to the
World Trade Organization and have won the right to retaliate by
placing tariffs on European goods. Canada announced retaliatory
tariffs on a range of goods this week.
The federal government maintains the hormones are safe, despite
strong misgivings on the part of its own scientists at the Health
Protection Branch.
Four scientists with concerns have been placed under orders not
to discuss the issue in public.
The incidence of breast cancer has been rising steadily, most
quickly in rich countries. In 1997, around the world, close to
400,000 women died of the disease.
The number of new cases reported annually approached 900,000 in
1997, up from 572,000 in 1980.

Click to read what former cattle rancher Howard Lyman had to say
on the Oprah Winfrey Show that led the beef industry to sue them.


These are not range chickens

What are these cattle eating?

Just to get to this point!

Hormones increase milk production |