This past Sunday marked the five-year anniversary, or vegan-versary, of the start of my vegan journey (and my mother’s as well; happy vegan-versary!)  Celebrating the milestones of a cruelty-free lifestyle is always exciting because it reminds us both of how far we have come and our continuing progress as vegans. These occasions also allow us to reconnect with the original reasons that we made the choice to adopt a plant-based lifestyle, which can bring us even closer to these important non-violent and animal-friendly values. Whether a cozy vegan meal cooked up at home or a trip to an animal sanctuary, there are infinite ways to personalize, celebrate, and enjoy vegan-versaries big and small.

#1: Plant a garden.

Nothing is more satisfying than cooking up a meal from produce grown in your very own garden. Whether a few potted herbs growing on the windowsill or a plot at the community garden, there’s always a way to wield your green thumb. Bonus: the fresh ingredients are a great excuse to cook up a delicious vegan meal.

http://www.almanac.com/topics/gardening/planting-garden

#2: Visit an animal sanctuary.

Rekindle the joy of veganism with a road trip to an animal sanctuary. In addition to providing a safe-haven for animals rescued from cruelty and neglect, many animal sanctuaries offer special tours, guest house lodging, volunteer and donation opportunities, guest speakers, cooking classes, summer day camps for children, and many other events. If there isn’t a sanctuary nearby or you can’t make the trip, most sanctuaries also have animal sponsorship programs. Depending on the species, a varying monthly rate covers the cost of food, medical care, and lodging for an animal; for the more able and adventurous, some animals are also available for adoption.

http://casanctuary.org/

http://www.woodstocksanctuary.org/

#3: Explore a local farm.

Regardless of where you live, organic farms, CSAs, and Farmers’ Markets aren’t hard to find. Purchasing local produce and goods is beneficial for the environment, community, and economy, cutting down on the energy needed to transport food over long distances and supporting local food producers at the same time. Some farms also offer special tours, Farm-to-table dinner events, and wine tastings.

http://www.localharvest.org/

#4: Cook up a vegan feast.

A vegan anniversary begs for a beautiful vegan feast. Invite friends and cook up a vegan spread that will wow vegans and omnivores alike. Browse vegan food blogs and cookbooks for meal inspiration, and check out Barnivore for vegan-friendly alcohol options. Grocers like Trader Joe’s have great vegan appetizer, meal, drink, and snack options that make food preparation for a crowd a breeze.

http://blog.fatfreevegan.com/

http://pinterest.com/vegnews/must-make-vegan-desserts/

http://www.barnivore.com/

#5: Volunteer at, donate to, or adopt from a local animal shelter.

Give back to animals in need in your community through monetary support, animal adoption, or lending a hand. Many shelters welcome volunteers to help care for, walk, and feed shelter animals, and money, food, toy, and supply donations are almost always welcome. Shelters are also a great place to look when searching for a new furry friend. If you’re an animal lover but not quite ready to handle the commitment of a full-time pet, fostering is another great option.

http://www.petfinder.com/animal-shelters-and-rescues/

http://www.aspca.org/findashelter

http://www.petfoster.org/

#6: Treat yourself to compassionate clothing.

If you haven’t done so already, donate non-vegan clothing (containing leather, silk, wool, feathers, etc.) to a local thrift shop or shelter. Not only does it add another dimension to the vegan lifestyle, but it also empties your closet for fashionable, compassionate clothing. Depending on budget and style preference, a closet overhaul can consist of animal-friendly picks found at mainstream clothing stores or shopping at specialty vegan stores, boutiques, and websites.

http://www.peta.org/living/fashion/cruelty-free-clothing-guide-vegan-companies.aspx

http://www.timeout.com/newyork/shopping/vegan-style-guide-to-nyc

#7: Dine at a vegan restaurant.

Plant-based eateries are becoming increasingly commonplace. From the iconic (Candle 79, Millennium) to local gems, a delicious vegan meal is the perfect way to celebrate a vegan-versary. A personal in-state favorite is It’s Only Natural in Middletown, CT. Be sure to check Happy Cow to locate vegan-friendly restaurants and lodging across the globe. If you’re planning a vegan getaway, do some background research to locate great vegan restaurants, stores, and activities in the area. For example, New York City is the perfect choice for an east-coast day-trip or vacation, offering delicious vegan food (check out Candle 79, Blossom, Angelica Kitchen, and Lula’s Sweet Apothecary) to vegan shopping and even vegetarian accommodations (Sanctuary Guest Suites).

http://www.happycow.net/

Image courtesy of Flickr, UGArdener, and Creative Commons.

During an online question-and- answer session on Facebook this past Tuesday, Vice President Joe Biden added a level of complexity to the nation’s already extraordinarily muddled gun control debate. Although spearheading recent gun control proposals, Biden stated, and then reiterated, his advice for individuals to protect themselves and their property: “Buy a shotgun”. Biden’s defense of his supposed weapon of choice was, “I promise you whoever’s coming in is not gonna. You don’t need an AR-15 (assault rifle). It’s harder to aim. It’s harder to use and in fact you don’t need 30 rounds to protect yourself.”

I find it incredibly disturbing for a major political figure to advocate any form of gun usage. Our nation has such a widespread, unaddressed gun problem that the frequency of mass shootings is unparalleled on the global level. While I know it is wishful thinking to hope that guns can be banned altogether, especially considering the ever-raging Second Amendment debate and American attachment to all things violent, a gun is a gun. Both assault weapons and shotguns can do tremendous damage, and this is certainly not the image and message that we need portrayed to the public. Biden does not indicate that assault rifles have the potential to take many lives, but rather dismisses them because the extra rounds are superfluous and the gun itself “harder to use”. The timing of such a conversation is also incredibly insensitive. The Newtown Sandy Hook Elementary shooting, the second-deadliest school shooting in U.S. history, resulted in the deaths of 28 individuals just over two months ago. This is not the time, nor is there any proper moment, for people, and especially high-profile political individuals, to be advocating weapons of any kind.

Preceding Vice President Biden’s statement was the White House release of a photo of President Barack Obama target shooting with a shotgun at Camp David, Maryland in 2012. Although he made a point to draw the distinction between hunting or target shooting and the nation’s gun problem, I still believe that an attempt to throw gun-control skeptics a bone cheapens Obama’s promises of stricter gun regulation. Add to this the hypocrisy of the photo’s release just two days before Obama discussed gun-control proposals in Minneapolis. Unbelievably, the major criticism of the photograph came from avid shooters who claimed that details like gun placement made for a manipulated shot. There was little concern over the fact that those at the head of the government are more concerned with molding an image that appeals to gun-owning Americans, in addition to what I think involves a hint of traditional “man’s man”, gun-wielding egotism. “Part of being able to move this forward is understanding the reality of guns in urban areas are very different from the realities of guns in rural areas”, Obama stated upon release of the photo, although events like the Newtown massacre disprove the idea that gun violence is a problem isolated to major cities. He added, “Advocates of gun control need to do a little more listening than they do sometimes”. However, I would argue that opponents of gun control are the individuals who need to open their ears and minds, as they only need to look around on an almost daily basis to see the devastating impacts of gun violence nationwide. According to Slate, over 2,212 individuals have been killed by guns since Newtown, and these only comprise known, matched deaths.

The suggestion for Americans should not be to “buy a shotgun”. On the contrary, it should be to put an end to the absurd Second Amendment justification of gun violence, get rid of the guns, and start focusing on the other (plentiful) pressing issues facing this nation. It’s not very feasible, but it is far better advice.

As interest in veganism and vegetarianism increases, colleges and universities have started to adapt their menus and meal selections to accommodate increasingly ethically and environmentally-aware students. As a college-age vegan, I can thank my university, The University of Connecticut, for making vegan options available daily in each of its eight dining units. Many of the dining units are also constantly striving for ways to offset environmental impact, from trayless dining to composting food scraps. Of course, some dining locales and dishes are better than others, as is the case anywhere. But these changes are proof that rather than adhering to the status quo, institutions are finding ways to increase innovation and heighten student consciousness, which is incredibly important considering the often bleak realities of our food system, not to mention the treatment of the environment.

UConn certainly isn’t alone among colleges making the shift to animal-friendly cuisine. Multiple rankings of vegan-friendly colleges and environmentally-savvy campuses demonstrate that any institution- big, small, rural, urban, and everywhere in between- are dispelling the myth that greasy fast food and unhealthy convenience items are all that college students are seeking out at mealtime.

One standout at my school is Whitney dining hall, which serves an innovative menu designed around seasonal offerings in a warm and inviting atmosphere. Whitney’s dishes are based on the principles of UConn Dining Service’s “Local Routes” program, a concept driven by the philosophy of sustainability, especially through support of the local food system. Whitney sources coffee, produce, and other food products grown or processed by Connecticut and surrounding New England farms and businesses, and the result is a true win-win situation in every regard. Students are made aware of the importance of a sustainable food system, local farmers and sustainable food producers are supported (which in turn helps to benefit the local economy), fewer miles travelled from initial production to plate, and plant-based diet in general, are beneficial to the environment, and the meals are fresh, wholesome, and delicious. The wide range of meals include falafel, chickpea and kale stew, tofu tikka masala, and vegan ravioli, and desserts span from French apple squares to freshly made cookies and pies.

Partially because of these dining practices, UConn made it into the “Elite 8” of PETA’s “Most Vegan Friendly College Contest 2012”, a competition that recognizes animal-friendly colleges and their unique approaches to plant-based fare. Although not entirely vegan and vegetarian, my hope is that with engaged student interest, high traffic, positive feedback, and the constant strides of the plant-based lifestyle, Whitney will eventually evolve into an entirely vegan establishment. But at the moment, creating local and sustainable meals that impress vegans and omnivores alike three times a day, seven days a week is no small feat, and one that should not go unnoticed.

I am also encouraged by UConn’s recent decision to incorporate raw grab-and-go line Sain in two campus café locations. The line features numerous vegan and vegetarian options, including cranberry nut compote wraps, cashew cheese ravioli, and cucumber flying disks. The motivation behind the line is driven by increased interest in plant-based cuisine, and its creators thought it would be an interesting concept to adapt the raw food concept common in big-city restaurants to work in the local café setting.

The concept that meat has to be the cornerstone of a meal is proven wrong on a daily basis on college campuses. Each meal poses a new opportunity to make an influential choice in selecting processed and meat-based items, or healthy, fresh, and cruelty-free foods. With any luck, an increasing number of individuals will choose the latter, and all of the benefits that accompany plant-based eating.

At the University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Department of Psychiatry Chair Ned H. Kalin, M.D. is removing newborn rhesus monkeys from their mothers and putting them in isolation for the first seven weeks of their lives. He plans to expose the infant monkeys to numerous frightening experiences, including being in close proximity to a live snake, and will kill the monkeys after one year to examine their brains. Dr. Kalin hopes to learn more about the physiological underpinnings of anxiety and to shed light on anxiety disorders in humans.

The experiments have prompted a growing protest from students and alumni of the university, as well as from animal welfare organizations and the general public. These groups contend that Kalin’s techniques exceed ethical boundaries. Rhesus monkeys normally spend the first month of their lives in literally uninterrupted physical contact with their mothers. According to researchers, in many ways their mother-infant bond is similar to humans:  the mothers “kiss” their babies and have a “sustained mutual gaze,” indicating that rhesus monkeys have a “rich internal world.” It is evident from all we know about these animals that deprivation of nurturing from the mother causes extreme emotional trauma and psychic pain for the rhesus monkey infant.

There is a history of maternal deprivation research at the University of Wisconsin that goes back to the 1950s. Several generations of psychology textbooks have described Harry F. Harlow’s isolated rhesus monkey babies who preferred snuggling with their “terry cloth mothers” even though the milk they received came from the “wire mothers” on the other side of their barren enclosures.  Harlow, and then his students, continued to use rhesus monkeys in various deprivation studies through the 1980s. These types of experiments have not been conducted at the University in over 20 years.

The current experiments at UW have alarmed other researchers and set off a controversy in the professional community. Guidelines specified in an amendment to the Animal Welfare Act of 1985 and a 1998 report by the Institute for Laboratory Animal Research addressing the psychological well-being of non-human primates are clearly violated by UW’s studies. Furthermore, there appears to be some questioning within the University’s oversight committee as to the usefulness of Dr. Kalin’s research and whether the admittedly extreme measures he uses justify hypotheses that are too general to have any real scientific consequence. The committee’s reluctance to withhold approval of maternal-deprivation studies despite these doubts is troubling and suggests a rubber-stamp mentality. What is even more troubling is that minutes from the oversight committee indicate some confusion on their part as to the extent of their authority to reject such protocols.

The result of the University’s irresponsibility regarding the stewardship of their primate program is the intense suffering of baby rhesus monkeys. Rick Bogle of Madison, Wisconsin’s Alliance for Animals describes Kalin’s project as “a backward moral leap” and the workings of the oversight committee as a kind of maze or “mental Möbius pretzel” where one keeps returning to “the same mistaken conclusions.” Lori Gruen, Professor of Philosophy at Wesleyan University and author of Ethics and Animals:  An Introduction, comments “There was no oversight system in place back in the days when Harry Harlow’s experiments psychologically tormenting baby monkeys were making news. Surely that sort of horrible work in which infant primates are taken from their mothers to make them crazy wouldn’t be approved of today. On my recent visit to the University of Wisconsin I was shocked to learn otherwise.”

Dr. Kalin’s research is funded by a federal grant from the National Institutes of Health. He has received over five million dollars of taxpayer money in the past ten years.

Alice Bruckenstein

Photo courtesy of Jens Schott Knudsen and Creative Commons.

© 2011 Jens Schott Knudsen | blog.pamhule.com | Twitter: @jensschott

The United States has the highest civilian gun ownership in the world.

Statistics dictate that with as many firearms available, technically one American each can hold a gun. However, the reality is that most civilians who do own firearms tend to own two or more, as wrote Jill Lepore in The New Yorker. In 2011, the FBI’s uniform crime report stated that there were there were 12,664 murders in the US with 8,583 of those murders caused by firearms.

In 2008, Japan as an entirety only experienced 11 firearm related homicides. In the United Kingdom, that number was 39.

In 1996, a gunman killed 35 people in Australia with a semiautomatic weapon. Weeks after, the Australian government worked on enacting gun reform laws that actually work—since then, Australia has not seen another large scale public massacre ever since.

Due to a lack of stricter gun control laws, tragedies like the recent Sandy Hook Elementary school shooting becomes less preventable. Another dimension of the school shooting being discussed in the media revolves around issues on mental health. However, a New York Times piece states that “there is overwhelming epidemiological evidence that the vast majority of people with psychiatric disorders do not commit violent acts. Only about 4 percent of violence in the United States can be attributed to people with mental illness.” The article also states that drug and alcohol abuse are more likely to result in violent behavior.

It is all too often that we hear the shooter described by family and friends after the fact as an outwardly ordinary person that such violence would not be expected from, like in the case of Jacob Tyler Roberts and the Portland Mall shootings. The fact of the matter is that it is easy for individuals who meet the minimum requirements under various state and federal law to purchase a firearm and that should not be the case. Washington now has the dialogue and emotional force required to take a serious look at measures abroad and possibly implement them towards the American system.

As outlined by an article in the Atlantic, in order to legally obtain a firearm (shotguns and air rifles only) an individual first has to take a class and pass a written exam offered only once a month. They must pass a shooting range test and prove that they are mentally sound as well as drug free by a doctor’s appointment. Finally, there is an extensive background check, followed by registration with the police. Documentation must be given to the police that dictate that the specific location of the gun as well as its ammo—both the gun and ammo itself are required to be stored securely and separately. Once in ownership of a firearm, an individual is obligated to retake the exam and class every three years, and are subject to police gun inspection on a yearly basis.

In the United Kingdom, firearms are licensed under a five-year certificate from the police and a valid justification for ownership must be given—self-defense is not considered one. Similar regulations are also in effect within Australia.

Needless to say, there is evident proof that strict gun control laws work in helping preventing decreasing the of deaths caused by firearms. The United States currently fosters a gun culture that is both unnecessary and fatal when we least expect it.

To echo the sentiment of many others, if the death of twenty elementary school children does stir country for profound change—nothing will.

Currently, President Barack Obama has vowed to make gun control a “central issue” by submitting new firearm proposals to Congress no later than January.

Image courtesy of Flickr and Creative Commons.

It seems like it was just yesterday that I was penning an article about the Aurora, Colorado shooting this past July. Sadly, five months later, another tragedy lies in our wake. Gunman Adam Lanza first shot his mother, Nancy Lanza, in her home before driving to Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut, where she worked. He was found dead from a self-inflicted gunshot wound after killing twenty children and six adults at the school. As a Connecticut resident, I found that this tragedy personally hit closer to home than any other of its kind.

All of the points that I addressed in my previous article about Aurora remain ever more true. Our culture is so drenched in violence, from violent media to aggressive foreign policy, that it is essentially impossibly to avoid. This violence often manifests itself in tragedies such as this most recent Connecticut massacre. However, while years separated similar tragedies like Columbine and the Virginia Tech massacre, these instances are becoming more common. Just on Tuesday, a gunman opened fire at a mall outside of Portland, Oregon, killing three, including himself.

Days, months, and years later, we find ourselves in the same position. Vigils are held, memorials constructed, and sentimental speeches delivered by political figures. Each time these tragedies occur, it is an equally unimaginable horror. Each time, our personal connections to these atrocities become more likely, an unfortunate collective experience that we wish we didn’t have to share. In the wake of mass shootings, we find ourselves in both a vulnerable and powerful position. The shock and trauma make it difficult to fathom such atrocities, but the raw, deeply affecting feelings that exist at moments like these should also push us to seek solutions. While the impacts of these crises will forever alter the lives of those affected, life goes on for the vast majority of individuals, and we tend to forget how imperative change is until yet another tragedy strikes.

What we need is for more individuals to speak out in favor of more stringent gun control. Lanza used two semi-automatic pistols to execute the crime, and an automatic rifle was found in his car. He supposedly had hundreds of rounds of ammunition, and the guns were legally purchased and licensed by his mother, Nancy Lanza. In my opinion, the fact that the weapons were legally obtained offers no peace of mind; there simply is no legitimate reason to have access to such destructive firearms. Many claim that guns make them feel safer, but I believe that both past massacres and the most recent tragedies prove their hazard to both public peace and safety.

Any life lost is always a tragedy. But from what I have heard and experienced so far, people seem more willing to support gun control when the victims are young, innocent children. The situation becomes more real for many individuals when they imagine their own children facing the same fate. Newtown parents report being taken to the town firehouse to see if their children were among the surviving students. Some were reunited, while others learned in what could be the most heartbreaking manner that their children were among the deceased victims. No one should ever have to face such suffering, especially when it is completely preventable.

We truly hope that each of these mass shootings is the last of its kind. While it currently seems as though such occurrences have increased as of late, we have complete control over how much unnecessary violence we are willing to tolerate as a nation. Other developed countries do not even come close to the frequency of gun violence present in the United States. I feel nothing but empathy and wish only the best for the families affected by the Newtown shooting. The fact that these situations continue to be relevant in our self-perceived progressive society is beyond unacceptable. I think it’s time that we become more vocal about the atrocities of gun violence; we owe our citizens, and the victims of all gun-related tragedies, far more than our current level of action.

Image Courtesy of M. Glasgow, Flickr, and Creative Commons.

Flickr: torbakhopper
The United States Supreme Court has announced that it will review the federal government’s Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA) and California’s Proposition 8, which banned same-sex marriage in the state. After a string of victories for proponents of marriage equality in the United States following a historic election for the gay rights movement, where same-sex marriage was legalized in Maine, Maryland, and Washington by the public, and a ban on same-sex marriage rejected by Minnesotans, the Supreme Court will rule on DOMA and Proposition 8′s constitutionality.

The general public has shown greater support in favor of granting same-sex couples fully equality under the law. In the United States, a large block of states in the Northeast have granted same-sex couples marriage rights: Massachussets (2004), Connecticut (2008), Vermont (2009), New Hampshire (2010), New York (2011), and Maine (2012). Maryland, which is sometimes considered a part of the Northeast, also, along with Maine, legalized same-sex marriage in the most recent election. Washington, D.C. granted same-sex couples marriage rights in 2009. Currently, Iowa is the only state in the Midwest to grant same-sex couples marriage rights; this was decided in 2009. Washington is also the only state on the West Coast to grant same-sex couples marriage rights to marry following California’s Proposition 8.

A common argument in favor of marriage equality has been the fact that the same arguments made against same-sex couples being able to legally marry are the same arguments made against interracial couples seeking their own marriage equality prior to 1967. In 1967, in the landmark civil rights case, Loving V. Virginia, the Supreme Court declared the state of Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law is unconstitutional, which brought an end to interracial couples being barred marriage rights. Loving V. Virginia declared that Virginia’s anti-miscegenation law violated the Due Process Clause and the Equal Protection Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment.

Mildred Loving has stated her support of full marriage equality for all:

“I am not a political person, but I am proud that Richard’s and my name is on a court case that can help reinforce the love, the commitment, the fairness and the family that so many people, black or white, young or old, gay or straight, seek in life. I support the freedom to marry for all. That’s what Loving, and loving, are all about.”

Following Loving V. Virginia‘s ruling by the Supreme Court, some states still did not repeal their laws against interracial marriage until 2000, when Alabama was the last state to repeal such a law.

In 1987, artist Andres Serrano released one of the most controversial works of art that has been labeled as “Shock Art.” His photograph, titled Piss Christ, is an image of a plastic crucifix, which Serrano placed in a glass that contained his own urine.

Although the work became extremely controversial for its supposed blasphemous theme that lead to legislative hearings in the United States Congress because of government funding of the Southeastern Center for Contemporary Arts from the National Endowment for the Arts, the work could be considered one of the most misunderstood works of art. To Serrano, Piss Christ is not an attack on Christianity but a criticism of the misuse of religion that he has called the “billion-dollar Christ-for-profit industry” by those “who abuse the teachings of Christ for their own ignoble ends.”

Serrano’s defense of his work continues to be ignored; it is still attacked when it is on display despite the work’s true meaning.

And in 2012, a man not known for his artistic abilities but for his right-wing, sometimes libertarian-leaning, but mostly conspiracy-loving views, has channeled Andres Serrano. Glenn Beck has been inspired by Serrano’s Piss Christ to create “Piss Obama,” or “Obama in Pee Pee,” which actually has nothing to do with Piss Christ‘s meaning, Andres Serrano, or even art.

Beck’s “Piss Obama,” doesn’t even use Beck’s own urine — he used beer. Beck’s work, if it could even be called that, is simply an Obama figurine placed in a jar filled with beer. The Obama figurine actually has an American flag on it, though.

If Serrano’s Piss Christ received such a negative reception despite there being a major misunderstanding in the artist’s true intentions in his art, why is Beck’s placement of an American president with an American flag placed in a liquid meant to represent urine not drawing any backlash from the same conservatives that attack Serrano’s work? The same conservatives that attacked Serrano for his work are the same ones that would call Beck’s work unpatriotic.

Beck’s attempt at “Shock Art,” or whatever it is that he tried to achieve, simply looks immature. Perhaps that is what he tried to do. But Beck did come to another artist’s defense. On Michael D’Antuono’s “Truth,” which features the president representing Jesus Christ on a cross, which many found offensive, Beck said the following:

“Art is in the eye of the beholder and this guy has a right to do this. I think its offensive. I don’t think its close to reality but whatever floats your boat. I support his right to do exactly that. I agree with him that people who are upset should not trump his right to be able to do it and be able to hang it wherever he wants – as long as its wanted there.”

The First Amendment protects works of art like Serrano’s Piss Christ, D’Antuono’s “Truth,” and even Beck’s “Piss Obama.” Perhaps only real art is what receives criticism but, then again, art is subjective, and as Beck said, ‘art is in the eye of the beholder.’

Flickr: epSos.deScientists and nutritionists have long debated the importance and health benefits that eating organic begets. According to the Organic Consumer’s Association, eating organic foods, especially raw fruits and vegetables, offers a substantial amount of benefits that eating non-organic does not; so, is eating organic better for you?

The Association reports that organic produce contain higher levels of beta carotene, an important anti-aging property; anticancer property; and antioxidant vitamin in one’s diet. The vitamin can be found in orange-colored foods like sweet potatoes and carrots.

Organic fruits and vegetables have also been found to have higher levels of vitamins C, D and E, and antiflavonoids, which prevent and repair cellular damage.

Organics are said to be 25% more nutritious than traditional industrial agricultural fruits and vegetables but now scientists are debating whether what we previously thought is really correct.

The American Academy of Pediatrics recently conducted an extensive study about the apparent benefits of organic produce, dairy, and meat. Doctors Janet Silverstein and Joel Forman, on behalf of the American Academy of Pediatrics, conducted the study and the conclusion is somewhat ambiguous. The authors of the article, which appears in an upcoming issue of the journal Pediatrics, found that organics have the same level of vitamins, minerals and nutrients though their pesticide levels tend to be lower than non-organic. This finding may be the most beneficial to young people.

Unfortunately, no larger studies have been conducted on populations and there are no conclusive factors that have been found that agree that organics lead to long term improved health or a lower risk of disease. Janet Silverstein, a medical doctor and member of the American Academy of Pediatrics stresses the importance of children eating a well-rounded and balanced diet compiled of fruits and vegetables.

The Academy stresses that if money is an issue, families should not buy less, more expensive produce just because it is organic. Growing children need as many fruits and vegetables as possible and quantity should be more of a concern for families with young members.

The Academy also found no individual health benefit from organic milk but does emphasize the importance of pasteurized milk. There is still a lot of research that needs to be conducted on organic foods and long lasting health benefits but once again eating a balanced and well rounded diet and getting regular cardiovascular exercise is the most important factors for a long and healthy life.

Flooding in Brooklyn, New York from the East River.Climate change can already be attributed to rising sea levels across the planet but it will soon be attributed to why maps had to be redrawn.

Rising sea levels are set to impact coastal communities and major metropolitan areas across the world; even entire nations are threatened by rising sea levels.  Small island-nations such as the Polynesian island of Tuvalu could become the first to disappear from maps.  The island has a population of just over 10,000 residents and they are are already fleeing to nearby countries such as Australia and New Zealand.

Although a nation with a population smaller than some cities in other nations, the country has advocated for the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol since it is threatened by the rising sea levels caused by climate change.

In the United States, hurricanes are alarming citizens to the threat of rising sea levels.  Hurricane Sandy, which struck the nation’s east coast with violent tropical-storm-force winds on October 29, brought life-threatening surges to the country’s most populated region that sits at sea level.

New York City, Long Island, which is east of the city, and the New Jersey coast face a grim future because of rising sea levels. By 2020, the coast will see an approximate increase of one foot of water as the sea level rises from storm surges and tides.

Climate Central, which dedicates itself to “[communicating] the science and effects of climage change to the public and decision-makers,” has created a powerful, interactive tool to provide its users an idea of what our coastline will look like in the next 10, 20, and 90 years.

Climate Central’s interactive map, Surging Seas, allows users to see the changes on the coastline along the East Coast, the Gulf, and the West Coast.

The areas most devastated by Hurricane Sandy are also the ones to experience the worst of rising sea levels. Staten Island’s coast, the southern neighborhoods of Brooklyn and Queens, and even the barrier island of Long Beach practically disappear by 2100.

According to Climate Central’s Surging Seas map, cities as far inland as Albany, New York and Troy, New York could experience the effects of rising sea levels due to the Hudson River.

On its research, Climate Central states the organization’s information is factual:

Climate Central scientists publish peer-reviewed research on climate science; energy; impacts such as sea level rise; climate attribution and more. Our work is not confined to scientific journals. We investigate and synthesize weather and climate data and science to equip local communities and media with the tools they need to visualize the threat of climate change and the need for practical solutions.

New York City has always been at great risk for a major storm surge, such as the one experienced during Hurricane Sandy. The city has experience major flooding similar to what Sandy brought in the past in 1960 during Hurricane Donna but nothing has been done to prepare for a future disaster and the city paid for it financially and by losing human lives from the flooding, even in Manhattan.

London has already prepared for a similar situation by creating a barrier called the Thames Barrier, which is built in the River Thames. The city constructed the barrier to protect itself from high tides and storm surges, which was the deadly combination that hit the east coast during Hurricane Sandy.

London is not the only city to construct a barrier. Oosterscheldekering in the Netherlands is another storm surge barrier that was built in order to protect the nation from flooding similar to the flood the nation experienced in 1953. Both England and the Netherlands have constructed barriers in order to protect themselves from the inevitable.

New York City lost billions of dollars from the effects from the storm by crippling the financial sector, the city’s subway system, and the financial burden placed on residents and business owners from the damages due to the storm.

Governor Cuomo (D-New York) has stated that “extreme weather is the new normal.” The governor believes that climate change must be taken into consideration when rebuilding along the coast but has not mentioned a storm surge barrier.

Image Source