Privilege nets cashing in

(This is one of those stories that heats my blood;  ergo – 2 articles in one are posted here.   This just shouldn’t happen.   Jan)

Congress cashes in on stocks

Timing of 1 in every 8 trades coincides with legislation that affects companies

By Dan Keating THE WASHINGTON POST

Sen. Tom Coburn bought bonds in a company around when he freed up a bill the firm supported.

WASHINGTON — One hundred thirty members of Congress or their families have traded stocks collectively worth hundreds of millions of dollars in companies lobbying on bills that came before their committees, a practice that is permitted under current ethics rules, a Washington Post analysis has found.

The lawmakers bought and sold between $85 million and $218 million in 323 companies registered to lobby on legislation that appeared before them, according to an examination of all 45,000 stock transactions by Congress members contained in computerized financial-disclosure data from 2007 to 2010.

Almost one in every eight trades — 5,531 — intersected with legislation. The 130 lawmakers traded stocks or bonds in companies as bills passed through their committees or while Congress was still considering the legislation. The party affiliation of the lawmakers was almost evenly split between Democrats and Republicans, 68 to 62.

Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., reported buying $25,000 in bonds in a genetic-technology company around the time that he released a hold on legislation that the company supported. Rep. Ed Whitfield, R-Ky., sold between $50,000 and $100,000 in General Electric stock shortly before a Republican filibuster killed legislation sought by the company. The family of Rep. Michael McCaul, R-Texas, bought between $286,000 and $690,000 in a high-tech company interested in a bill under his committee’s jurisdiction.

The trades were uncovered as part of an ongoing examination by The Post of the intersection between the personal finances of lawmakers and their professional duties.

• Earlier this year, Congress responded to criticism of potential conflicts of interest by passing the Stock Act, which bars lawmakers, their staffs and top executive-branch officials from trading on inside information acquired on Capitol Hill.

• But the act failed to address the most-elemental difference between Congress and the other branches of government: Congress forbids top administration officials, for instance, from trading stocks in industries they oversee and can influence. The lawmakers, by contrast, can still invest in firms even as they create laws that can affect the bottom line of the companies.

“If you have major responsibility for drafting legislation that directly affects particular companies, then you shouldn’t be trading in their stock,” said Dennis Thompson, a professor of public policy at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government and author of    Ethics in Congress: From Individual to Institutional Corruption.“Committee chairs especially shouldn’t be in the position of potentially benefiting from trades in companies that stand to gain or lose from actions the committee takes.”

The Post analysis does not provide evidence of insider trading, which requires showing that lawmakers knowingly used confidential information to make trades benefiting themselves. Instead, the review shows that lawmakers routinely make trades that raise questions about potential conflicts.

More than a dozen lawmakers contacted by The Post defended the timing of their trades and the legislation before their committees as coincidental and said they did not know that the companies whose shares they traded were registered to lobby on bills they were considering. In interviews and through spokesmen, they said brokers made the trades, and they had little or no input. Some said their spouses handled their investments. With diverse portfolios, they said, overlap is inevitable.

• Richard Painter, who was chief ethics lawyer for President George W. Bush, said those explanations do not provide ethical cover.

“If you truly want to create some distance, you should set up a blind trust.”

Under ethics rules, lawmakers may establish a blind trust by shifting all their assets into an account managed by a financial adviser. The lawmakers may set general parameters for the blind-trust investment decisions, but they surrender control and cannot know the details of the decisions.

Only six members of the Senate have set up blind trusts that have been approved by the ethics committee. The House does not keep a tally of the number of members who set up such trusts.

Georgia State University professor Alan Ziobrowski said lawmakers who own stocks of companies lobbying on legislation before them have built-in conflicts.

“You can’t get into their heads to know what is motivating them,” said Ziobrowski, whose research helped prompt the initial push for the Stock Act by showing that members of Congress outperformed the market — senators by 10 percent, and representatives by 6 percent. “Are they thinking about their investment, or about what is best for their constituents ?”

The Post analysis does not include 2011 data because it has not yet been computerized.

Former Rep. Brian Baird, D-Wash., who co-authored the original, unsuccessful version of the Stock Act in 2006, said members of Congress and their staffs do not understand that public trust is eroded when people see lawmakers take actions that have the potential to benefit themselves.

“They don’t get it, but they need to,” Baird said. “Why? Because people who are taking actions for venal and nefarious purposes might make the same argument you’re making about your innocence. That’s why if there is an appearance of an impropriety, there just might be an impropriety. Members need to bend over backwards to show people they are there for the good of the country.”

(And now a second article a day later – same subject.  Sad isn’t it?   Jan)

Lawmakers were active traders during crisis

By Dan Keating THE WASHINGTON POST

WASHINGTON — In January 2008, President George W. Bush was scrambling to bolster the economy. The subprime mortgage industry was collapsing, and the Dow Jones industrial average had lost more than 2,000 points in less than three months.

House Minority Leader John Boehner became the Bush administration’s point person on Capitol Hill to negotiate a $150 billion stimulus package.

In the days that followed, Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson made frequent phone calls and visits to Boehner.

On Jan. 23, Boehner, R-West Chester, met Paulson for breakfast. Boehner would later report the rearrangement of a portion of his own financial portfolio made on that same day. He sold between $50,000 and $100,000 from a more aggressive mutual fund and moved money into a safer investment.

The next day, the White House unveiled the stimulus package.

Boehner is one of 34 members of Congress who took steps to recast their financial portfolios during the financial crisis after phone calls or meetings with Paulson; his successor, Timothy Geithner; or Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke, according to a Washington Post examination.

The lawmakers, many of whom held leadership positions and committee chairmanships, changed portions of their portfolios a total of 166 times within two business days of speaking or meeting with the administration officials. The party affiliation of the lawmakers was about evenly divided between Democrats and Republicans, 19 to 15.

The period covered by the Post analysis was a grim one for the U.S. economy, and many people rushed to reconfigure their investment portfolios. The financial moves by the members of Congress are permitted under congressional ethics rules, but some ethics experts said members should refrain from taking actions in their financial portfolios when they might know more than the public.

• “They shouldn’t be making these trades when they know what they are going to do,” said Richard W. Painter, who was chief ethics lawyer for Bush. “And what they are going to do is then going to influence the market. If this was going on in the private sector or it was going on in the executive branch, I think the SEC would be investigating.”

Boehner, now the speaker of the House, declined to discuss his transactions. His spokesman said they did not pose a conflict because a financial adviser executed them and they were made in diversified mutual funds. Other lawmakers also said their financial advisers handled their trades. They said that the timing of the trades and the conversations was “coincidental.”

Lawmakers are not prohibited from trading stocks in companies that appear before them or from reworking their portfolios after briefings with senior administration officials, and the  Post analysis did not turn up evidence of insider trading. Instead, the review shows that lawmakers routinely make trades that raise questions about whether members of Congress have an investing advantage over members of the public.

Consider the case of Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D.

Toward the end of the summer of 2007, the foundation of the nation’s real-estate market started to shake. On Aug. 6, the American Home Mortgage Investment Corp., the nation’s 10th-largest mortgage firm, filed for bankruptcy. On Aug. 9, the Dow fell nearly 400 points, its second-biggest one-day drop in five years.

On Aug. 13, as the markets closed, Paulson called Conrad, chairman of the Budget Committee. The next day, Conrad adjusted his family’s portfolio for the first time in four months. Conrad reported that a total of between $150,000 and $300,000 was shifted out of three mutual funds in his wife’s 401(k) retirement account. He moved $100,000 to $250,000 of that money into a lower-risk money-market fund within the retirement account.

• Conrad said his conversation with Paulson had nothing to do with his trades.

“There is absolutely no connection between the two,” Conrad said.

“The decision that my wife and I made with our financial advisers to diversify into lower-risk investments had everything to do with what was happening that was on the front pages over every paper, including yours.”

There are other examples. On Jan. 31, 2008, Sen. Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., the minority leader, reported making four trades, each worth between $15,000 and $50,000 in his portfolio, and rearranging four mutual funds. He reported selling shares in one international fund, buying shares in another and reconfiguring his investments in two domestic funds. He hadn’t made a trade since Nov. 20, 2007, and he would not make another until April 14, 2008.

• The Jan. 31 trades were made after several days of repeated phone conversations between Paulson, who was trying to salvage the administration’s $150 billion stimulus deal, and McConnell.

McConnell’s spokesman, Michael Brumas, said the senator does not own specific stocks, to avoid the appearance of a conflict, and he relies on his investment adviser to make trades.

Barry Barlow, the adviser who works for Merrill Lynch in Louisville, said the moves he made were suggested by Merrill Lynch. Barlow said he couldn’t recall whether he spoke to McConnell before the readjustment, but he said the senator frequently tells him to stay away from purchasing individual stocks to avoid the appearance of a conflict.

Advertisements

OH partial to Lichtenstein

Above:  A visitor to the Art Institute of Chicago takes in “Reflections on Interior With Girl”  drawing by Roy Lichtenstein.

Lichtenstein retrospective packs plenty of pop

By Caryn Rousseau ASSOCIATED PRESS

CHICAGO — Almost 15 years after his death, pop artist Roy Lichtenstein is the subject of a comprehensive exhibition at the Art Institute of Chicago that spans his famous cartoons from the 1960s to more muted Asian-inspired works from the ’90s.

The exhibit opens with the 1961 work Look Mickey, I’ve Hooked a Big One!! The piece, a riff on Mickey Mouse and Donald Duck in bright blue, red and yellow, is considered a landmark that helped transform the perception of commercial art into fine art, while placing Lichtenstein, along with Andy Warhol, at the forefront of the pop-art movement.

                                                      

“Roy Lichtenstein: A Retrospective” is the “first major retrospective to broadly examine his art since his death,” according to the museum. The exhibition includes almost 170 paintings, sculptures and drawings done between 1950 and his death in 1997 at age 73.

It opened in May and will stay in Chicago through Sept. 3. During the next year, the exhibit will travel to Washington, London and Paris.

The works include established, well-known pieces as well as pictures that have rarely been seen. Among them are Lichtenstein’s interpretations of everyday objects: a ball of twine, a hot dog and a wedding ring.

“Roy was able to transform them and show them to us again in a new way,” said James Rondeau, the exhibit’s co-curator. “He was able to show us something new about the world in which we live and about ourselves and how we see the world.”

Through the years, Lichtenstein also did paintings of mirrors, brushstrokes and interiors, and he re-interpretated works by Picasso, Mondrian, Leger, Monet and Cezanne.

                                                                                                                                                                                                                 

Many of the works feature signature bold black outlines and use of benday dots, the small colored dots used in comic books, named for printer Benjamin Henry Day. Lichtenstein reproduced the dots used in comic strips by laying a metal screen over his canvas, spreading paint with a roller and rubbing it in with a toothbrush.

Jack Cowart, executive director of the Roy Lichtenstein Foundation, said the retrospective exposes the intricacy of Lichtenstein’s art. “This is all about a career that is much more complex than people would have thought previously,” Cowart said.

Lichtenstein’s widow, Dorothy Lichtenstein, previewed the exhibit, saying that even she hadn’t seen some of the works since the 1960s. She said she wants the show to give people a broader appreciation for her husband’s work.

“I hope people come away realizing that he did more than some cartoon frames,” Lichtenstein said.

Artist had two degrees from OSU, taught there

— Michael Grossberg mgrossberg@dispatch.com

Roy Lichtenstein had strong roots in Columbus.

The New York native (1923-1997) studied fine arts at Ohio State University and returned after serving in the Army during World War II to study under professor Hoyt L. Sherman.

Lichtenstein, who received bachelor’s and master’s degrees in 1946 and 1949, worked as an art instructor at Ohio State on and off for a decade.    The artist paid for a new campus studio named after his mentor: the Hoyt L. Sherman Studio Art Center, at Building 358, 1065 Carmack Rd.

The artist’s work has been included in many central Ohio exhibitions through the years, but perhaps the most notable was “Roy Lichtenstein,” which toured major U.S. and European cities and ended in 1996 at the Wexner Center for the Arts.

One of his most famous works, certainly in Columbus, is    Brushstrokes in Flight, a tall aluminum sculpture placed for more than a decade in an airport parking lot after arriving at Port Columbus in 1984.    The tall aluminum sculpture was moved inside in 1998 to its current location at the entrance to Concourse B.

SCOTUS Upholds Health Reform Law

Supreme Court

Supreme Court Upholds Health Reform Law in Landmark Decision

By Kate Pickert | @katepickert | June 28, 2012 | 68

SAUL LOEB / AFP / Getty Images

Supporters of US President Barack Obama’s signature healthcare legislation celebrate after the US Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of the Affordable Healthcare Act, outside the Supreme Court in Washington, DC, June 28, 2012.

The Supreme Court on Thursday upheld President Obama’s health reform law, affirming the centerpiece of the sweeping 2010 overhaul of the nation’s medical industries in a landmark 5-4 vote. The deciding opinion, written by conservative Chief Justice John Roberts, held that the requirement that almost all Americans buy health insurance starting in 2014 or pay a penalty, does not violate the Constitution. The Court limited a massive expansion of Medicaid, the federal program that provides health care to the poor, but did not strike it down. That outcome validates the legacy achievement of Obama’s tenure, and puts the U.S. closer to near-universal health coverage than at any time in its history.

Here are the likely winners and losers in the ruling’s aftermath. (Read the decision here.)

Winners
The Obama Administration. Beyond the obvious matter of being able to move forward with a major set of policies the Democratic party has wanted for decades, the Supreme Court’s stamp of approval on the Affordable Care Act legitimizes Obama’s most visible and far-reaching domestic achievement. It also undercuts Republicans’ charge that the Obama Administration has consistently overreached its authority. The Supreme Court’s decision says the government’s insurance requirement is a tax with precedent. In addition, a vote from right-leaning Chief Justice John Roberts further seals the argument that the law, while politically explosive, is nonetheless constitutional.

The sick and the uninsured. The Affordable Care Act will extend health insurance to some 30 million Americans who currently lack coverage. It will also guarantee the availability of insurance for those with pre-existing conditions and ensure those people don’t pay more than healthy people. Anyone earning up to 133% of the federal poverty level will get free coverage through Medicaid and those earning 133% to 400% (but without access to employer or government insurance) will be eligible for federal subsidies to help them buy policies.

Congressional Democrats. While health care reform will remain a potent political issue – just because it’s constitutional doesn’t mean everyone has to like it – Democratic Senators and House members who voted for the law won’t have to defend themselves against charges that they ran roughshod over the Constitution. Plus, those campaigning this year will be able to publicize the popular elements of the law.

The Court’s political reputation. It’s unlikely that Republicans will charge this High Court with partisanship in the wake of its ruling on Obamacare. But if the court had struck down the law, there were clear signs that many Democrats were going to demonize the justices as overly political, a criticism that’s grown louder in recent years following controversial cases like Bush v. Gore and Citizens United v. FEC.

Mitt Romney. Yes, a major policy Romney opposed has been upheld, which looks like a Romney defeat. But now that the effort to nix the law via the courts has failed, Romney can argue that the only way to get rid of Obamacare is to elect him. That message will resonate with Republicans and independents who intensely dislike the law.

Losers
Congressional Republicans. Scores of congressional Republicans formally signed onto legal challenges to Obamacare. House GOP members have also been trying to get rid of the Affordable Care Act via “repeal” votes. Neither effort has done anything to change the status quo. Congressional Republicans can tell voters they tried their best to get rid of Obamacare, but in terms of showing results, they’ve come up short. Still, like Romney, members of Congress up for re-election this fall can argue the only way to get rid of (or slow) Obamacare is to vote for them.

Republican Governors. The Affordable Care Act is a federal law, but it’s written to be largely administered at the state level. Most states with Republican governors put off steps to implement the law while they waited to see what the Supreme Court would do. This has left them far behind states with Democratic governors who were eager to start setting up new programs—like consumer assistance offices—called for by the ACA, and funded by federal grants. Republican states also largely decided not to begin setting up health insurance exchanges, the marketplaces where federal subsidies will be doled out, and where individual and small group insurance policies will be sold. The exchanges won’t begin operating until 2014, but states have to prove to the federal government they’re equipped to run them long before that and some Republican states that have held out might not make the deadline. In these cases, the federal government will step in, set up an exchange and run it. This means these Republicans leaders will have to explain that they inadvertently invited more federal control in their effort to resist Obamacare.

Young People (sort of). The requirement to buy insurance, which has been upheld along with the rest of the ACA, is largely designed to pull currently uninsured young, healthy people into the system.These people often forgo insurance because they make the fairly good bet they won’t incur expensive medical bills and because they don’t have enough earning power to afford policies. Young Americans subject to the mandate are expected to pay more into the insurance pool than they get out, to help subsidize the cost of insuring older, sicker people. Standard insurance policies will likely be more expensive for these people under the ACA than they are now. Still, the ACA allows young adults to satisfy the mandate with low-cost catastrophic health insurance policies if they choose—everyone else will be required to buy standard insurance—and if they’re under 26, they can get insured through their parents’ plans.

With Adam Sorensen

Coffee Okay for Heart

2 cups of coffee can be perk for heart, study says

By Misti Crane THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH

The latest coffee research says a couple of cups are safe for your heart — even beneficial — but watch it if you go further.

An analysis of five earlier studies that looked at coffee and the heart found that about two 8-ounce cups a day appear to protect against heart failure, decreasing the risk by as much as 11 percent. Much more increases the risk.

The work appears in the American Heart Association journal Circulation Heart Failure.

It runs counter to the long- held belief that any amount of coffee could be bad for the heart and should have doctors rethinking the role coffee plays in heart failure, said Elizabeth Mostofsky, the study’s lead author and a research fellow at Boston’s Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center.

Heart Association guidelines currently say that coffee might increase the risk, based on a single 2001 study, she said.

The new research analyzed a group of studies that looked at 140,220 people in Sweden and Finland. A typical serving of coffee there is about 4 ounces compared with about 8 ounces here, and the coffee tends to be stronger.

The researchers found a benefit for those who drink about two cups. That benefit, however, begins to disappear when people drink more coffee.

About 5.8 million Americans have heart failure.

The new research is limited in several ways. It looked at a mostly white European population, not at Americans. Also, any work that combines multiple studies has inherent weaknesses. And the study’s results cannot be extrapolated to other caffeinated beverages, including tea and soda.

This study has no potential answers about what might be at play in the relationship between coffee and heart failure, but other research has focused on antioxidants and other compounds that might be protective, Mostofsky said.

There’s a well-established link between coffee and reduced risk of Type 2 diabetes, she said, and people with heart failure often also have diabetes.

Another large study published last month found that coffee drinkers are 10 percent less likely to die early than those who don’t drink it.

Dr. Lee Jordan, a heart-failure specialist at Riverside Methodist Hospital, said this week’s coffee news is unlikely to prompt him to encourage people to change their habits. He’d be more inclined to tell people who already drink coffee that moderate consumption doesn’t appear to hurt, Jordan said.

That said, “As somebody who enjoys his two large cups of coffee in the morn ing, I’m delighted to read it,” he said.

There has been a lot of competing information on coffee in the past decade or two, and many doctors already tell their patients that coffee in moderation is OK, said Dr. Laxmi Mehta, clinical director of the Women’s Cardiovascular Health Clinic at Ohio State University’s Wexner Medical Center and president of the board at the local branch of the American Heart Association.

Patients who have heart palpitations should continue to limit or eliminate caffeine consumption, she said. mcrane@dispatch.com

@MistiCrane

Court backs EPA

Court backs EPA on emissions threat

By Matthew L. Wald THE NEW YORK TIMES

WASHINGTON — A federal appeals-court panel yesterday upheld a finding by the Environmental Protection Agency that heat-trapping gases from industry and vehicles endanger public health, dealing a blow to companies and states that had sued to block agency rules.

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia declared that the agency was “unambiguously correct” that the Clean Air Act requires the federal government to impose limits once it has determined that emissions are causing harm.

The judges unanimously dismissed arguments by industry that the science of global warming is not well supported and that the agency based its judgment on unreliable studies.

• “This is how science works,” the judges wrote. “The E.P.A. is not required to reprove the existence of the atom every time it approaches a scientific question.”

Aside from the EPA’s “endangerment finding,” the court upheld related rules setting limits on greenhouse-gas emissions from autos and limiting emissions from stationary sources. Opponents also had challenged the agency’s timetable for enforcement and its rules singling out big polluters, but the court said it did not have the jurisdiction to block either of those moves.

Fourteen states, led by Virginia and Texas, had sued to block the rules. Fifteen states, including New York, California and Massachusetts, went to court to support the agency. Massachusetts and California were among the states that won a landmark Supreme Court decision in 2007, Massachusetts vs. Environmental Protection Agency, that led to the agency’s endangerment finding.

At the National Association of Manufacturers, Jay Timmons, the president and chief executive, called the ruling “a setback for businesses facing damaging regulations from the EPA.” The Clean Air Act was not designed for greenhouse gases, he said.

Environmental groups cheered the decision.

“This is a slam-dunk victory for EPA and for the Clean Air Act,” said Frank O’Donnell, a spokesman for the group Clean Air Watch.

The plaintiffs can ask for a hearing by the full appeals court, or appeal to the Supreme Court, but it is not clear whether they will do so, given the emphatic nature of the decision.

The panel’s opinion was unsigned. The chief judge, David Sentelle, was appointed by President Ronald Reagan; he was joined by David Tatel and Judith Rogers, who were appointed by President Bill Clinton.

P Wollen speaks of animals

New from Dr McDougall, a passionate speech on one of the greatest cruelties imaginable.    He asks it to be shared.  Gladly

Philip Wollen, Australian Philanthropist, Former VP of Citibank, Makes Blazing Animal Rights Speech

Go for Gold – healthwise

(Just found this post  and wondered what it was about??  Title didn’t offer a clue – so junked it.  Read the post and like it and felt it just needs a name, categories and tags.  What’s it about?  Maybe a laid-back thinky piece on trying to get where we all kind of want to be – – you know, the best we can be, but doin’ it easy.  .  .  mother hen .  .  Jan)

Balanced Approach usually Best and Easiest

Most of us would like a  pill or potion to fix whatever problems we have.  Usually, that’s not a realistic expectation.  Why?  Well, as most often is the case [barring accidents of course], our problems have crept up over a lengthy period of time.  Some damage is done one way or another.  How?  Well, lifestyle choices, of some kind.  Either, we haven’t been able or free to exercise or move our bodies in enough activity to keep our juices flowing and muscles rippling as they would like to.   (remember being a kid?)

Or maybe we carry too great a burden somehow that weighs heavily on our physical or mental shoulders. .  .  .  called Stress.

If there is a problem, its usually the “diet”

But odds are great, it’s the diet.  Because you  live in America, its entirely possible that its the food (?) you are eating.  Here, where we have the most expensive medicine practiced in the world;   have a shortening life span over our European counterparts;  die from medications [usage or errors] at an alarming rate [in the 100’s of thousands – annually];  eat less nutritious foods than any ancestors we have ever had due to  a) genetically modified frankinfoods which are grown for profitability instead of health  b)  on depleted and/or dead soils because of using synthetic chemicals rather than sustainable methods used for thousands of years  c)eating the SAD Diet so popular in our world today. . .namely: fast foods,   and a mainstay of refined end products such as sugars of all descriptions – real or synthetic,  flours and a list of “Processed Foods” too long to mention.  d) and finally, just in case we are deficient in something, we pop a few vitamin pills which are some kind of concoction made in a laboratory which are nothing more than fractionated chemicals, which together with all that garbage already consumed, just increases the burden on our kidneys and liver to have to detoxify and then eliminate as these are useless to the body and not recognized as food – only a burden, increasing their work load, which is one of the reasons we wear them out so early in life.

This is just a little groundwork to show a common denominator we all share.  The only way we are not ALL dying too young is because some  alert ones wake up and look around and ask – “what’s going on here?”  .  .   start asking lots of questions and getting platitudes for answers, start digging for the truth  all around us, but requiring  understanding.  Its simple and basic, but shrouded in modern jargon.  There have been countless books about our modern age of chemicals and invention – modernity.  But if it is killing us off young and making us wish we were dead with all the diseases we’ve come to find a part of our world –  – what good is it?   Sometimes, we need to ask, is all this “progress” necessary?

I am not against doctors as I feel most of them went into medicine in order to relieve pain and help people.  By the time many of them learn it ain’t workin – – they seem trapped in the rigid constraints, controls and political correctness of their organized club.

There are many, many exceptions – – there always has been.  Many excellent physicians are showcased here at this blog.  The essentials to health and the things we need to do for ourselves to achieve and maintain it have been displayed under many names,  authors,  doctors,  opinion pieces and so on.

So, where to begin?

There are a few basics we need to eat such as wholesome, organic food – – never GMO’s,  farm-raised fish,  caged fowl  or factory farmed cattle of any description.  Our bodies were not designed to ingest dairy or grains. (Paleolithic ancestors),   many of us can and do, but there is generally a price to pay.  Our animal product which we may choose to have at table should be happy, healthy pasture raised and fed animals.   Same for the fowl, they should be allowed to scratch around the way they choose and lay those beautiful eggs where they are comfortable to do.  And don’t let anyone tell you not to eat those eggs – eat all you want, they’re  good for us.

• About the eggs,  the healthiest ones (and tastiest) come from the cage free eggs.  One need not worry about salmonella on the interior of eggs,  this is an external thing from the environment surrounding the chicken’s world, it would be on the shell.  People should wash hands thoroughly after touching the egg crate and returning to the refrigerator because that is more frequently the source.     I was reading an article recently which advised to not scramble your eggs (my favorite way, cause its fast and easy).   Breaking the membrane surrounding the yolk subjects it to oxidation which triggers the so-called cholesterol process which one does not face say with a simple fried egg, straight up or over easy. Or any soft or hard-boiled egg.    Make sense?  Good.  Now go enjoy those eggs.

Additionally, we should endeavor to drink the purest water we can, any way you find acceptable.  I have for several decades been distilling my own water at home, but to each his own.  We do not want fluoride  or chlorine in our water, they are poisonous to us causing much harm to everything from bones and teeth  to brain and beyond.

We should be eating mostly fruits and vegetables [70% to 80% or more] and the rest protein foods of choice – fish,  beef,  fowl,  or nuts and seeds.  Why?   Because of the minerals.  We only get our minerals from the plant kingdom and our bodies are truly starved for minerals.  From this lack, most of our problems begin.  Eating too much by way of starches plus protein equates to a highly acidic condition within our body.  It is from an acidic condition that all diseases grow and thrive. [especially all types of cancers which they now say one in three of us will have sooner or later.]

Many of us are natural-born vegetarians.  But people like me were brought up on meat and potatoes.  As a school girl, I had tomato soup and crackers for lunch every day followed by chocolate-chip ice cream.  I kid you not.  Year in and year out. I don’t think anybody thought anything about that. Peas were one of the few veggies I would eat.   [I digress, again!] By the time I was forty, I had indeed learned to like [and even love] a variety of vegetables – thanks in part to my mother-in-law.  Bless her.

Juicing does it for me

But what are people to do who really want to get healthier, and hearing all this not only from me and smokinchoices, but from everywhere – it is a known fact. . .we need our majority of food to be of the plant world.  Fruits are great, but we can’t overdo them without  running a risk of elevated sugar levels.  So that means a whole lot of green leafy, doesn’t it.    For my part, tho I eat kale,  bok choy, spinach and a few others, I could not ingest pounds of green leafy – –  it isn’t going to happen.  So my choice is to juice and it works very well for me.    I have shared often the stuff I put in my juice and I down about a quart of juice daily.   If  I had a specific disease like a cancer or something, I would need to consume much more (See the Gerson Therapy, briefly, (1-26-12) as an example.   There are however, these days, many and diverse doctors doing this and similar work combating cancers, MS, heart disease and so on.  This is a sure path to regaining lost health, no matter what the disease.  Once the body is getting what it needs – – it is able and willing to heal it’s problems.   It is always the body which does the healing. [or not]  Charlotte Gerson has said she learned from her famous father – Dr. Max Gerson, that one doesn’t selectively heal the body of a particular disease, but rather, one heals the body and then the body heals all the diseases.

Please understand, I do not want to imply that juicing is the only way. . .it is a way which works for me and multitudes of others.   Popular for many decades now is the “smoothie”   Perhaps Victoria Boutenko is the one who really made it sing.  I will say, that for children, it is a no-brainer.  Even kids who won’t look at a vegetable, let alone eat them.  But they should be part of the plan when you want to encourage better eating.  Let them choose what veggies and fruits they want and even put them into the blender.  Can add dandelion greens (one of the best things) or spinach, etc., and  handful or so of berries, banana or orange,  celery, carrots – – get creative and of course good water, cup or so,  or some ice cubes.    Victoria and her son and daughter all have recipes online and there are more than you can imagine.  Just google Smoothie.

So these are the main items, if done which will help you to have better health or keep you there once achieved.

Intestinal Problems

If one has had to deal with health issues which demanded the taking of antibiotics, this can tear the intestinal flora into disarray. Remember, the gut is the center of health – the home of our immune system.  Anti-biotics throw a monkey wrench into the works.  Our defenses are down and we lose that protection we count on.   Our intestinal bacteria are out of balance.  They need to be replaced and repaired so that harmony can be restored.   Not only antibiotics, but poor food choices, bad food combining all can cause a diminishing of the healthy bacteria in the gut, which in turn impacts the tone of health in varying ways.

One can take probiotics and they are helpful over time.   Nobody knows more about this than Donna Gates of  “Body Ecology” from whom I have learned much – – she is a personal hero of mine. I personally eat my fermented veggies on a daily basis which is one of the most advantageous things one can do to replenish and keep healthy, the intestinal flora with its rich bacterial variety.  But if one has been seriously hurt, it might be helpful to consider  detoxifying.  This brings me finally to Bentonite Clay.  I had mentioned this in the Diatomaceous Earth Kills Fleas post June 25, that I wanted to tell you about this.  Well, now is the time.

Bentonite Clay, helpful with diarrhea or detox

Maybe 6 or 7 years ago when I was not well and weakening, I became depressed on top of everything else because I thought I had been doing everything pretty much alright and I could tell, I was actually starting that slide down the tubes.  No matter how hard I tried, couldn’t pull out of it.  I had so desperately wanted to save my noble  thyroid gland, refused surgical removal and finally had to consent to Radioactive Iodine.  But by then, my heart had been injured and I had been in A-Fib for over 5 years.  A doctor had been trying to help with this by upping my Magnesium intake, more and more til I was housebound with diarrhea.  I’m am quite sure that at this point, malnutrition had an impact in my deterioration as nutriment can not be used or processed properly in such a chaotic gut.    In speaking with my friend Ron Pellegrini at Vitalnutrients (in the blogroll), he advised my getting Bentonite Clay which is colloidal Montmorillonite.  Ron had  used this for his own mother to give her some relief as she lay dying in a nursing home.    I remember having to scout around to find this.  I’m looking at it now,  it was a quart bottle, liquid made by Sonne  #7.  It was $17.95 then

The box it came in speaks of the centuries of use and it’s great absorbency.  Actually, it goes on to describe pretty much the same usage and attributes of the Bentonite Clay selling at the site I mentioned before – the Bulk Herb Store which has such a great site.  So informative.  Go there by adding  www. to the front and .com to the end of the name.  The point of this?  It has such large absorb-ability,   it binds with toxins and carries them out of the system via usual excrement.  This organic product is useful to our body in various ways.  It is an excellent cleanser, is safe and non-toxic and loaded with minerals as almost all earth-stuff is.  This can be useful combating Candida and many use it in removing heavy metals from the body.

All in all, a very worth-while product.

Slow and easy does it best

Just a last point or two.  Changing one’s diet can be stressful.  Even tho one is mindful of his reasons  and is eager to do,  it is a good idea to be kind to self, bathing love and acceptance all over the place.  Does no good to berate oneself for any reason over anything.  Pure waste of energy [and I bet it even pains our maker].  Many decide hey I want to go all Raw and leap in.  I admire the effort and enthusiasm,  but it would be kinder to self to take a little time to train those taste buds. And, there is no need whatever to shock our system  Can’t we all get along – all parts of the body want to cooperate and will, but easy does it is best.

Try including some Raw, get used to it a little, then more and see how it goes.  Next thing you know, you are actually enjoying it.  Just take your time, there is no hurry.  I may never be 100% Raw.   And frankly, I don’t care!  I still love meat, but am fussy as I’ve said, have priorities which must be met.  If I can’t get meadow-raised, grass-fed, I don’t want it.

Try to remember,  cooking (heat) destroys enzymes (without which, we can’t assimilate our food well),  and many nutrients.  Try to use lower temperatures.  High heat and Broiling (tasty I know) are not good if you want maximum nutriment.

Keeping it simple is good.  But do go for flavor, some spices, herbs and maybe some new combinations.

Do it your way and be happy.                              Jan

Elder Beauties w/Style

(This really caught my attention,  I’m not a “rebel” for no reason!   Independent, doing things my own way –  in thought, deed and yes, even style.  When I read about this young  Ari Seth Cohen’s  “ADVANCED STYLE,” blog, was hooked. It thrills me, so hope you find something here to your liking, too.  Jan  )

Ari Seth Cohen’s Portraits of Older Women

By RUTH LA FERLA

Ari Seth Cohen  An image from the book “Advanced Style” by Ari Seth Cohen.

Discovering Mimi Weddell, the gauntly stylish actress who, at 90, was the subject of a 2009 documentary, was a turning point for Ari Seth Cohen. Mr. Cohen, a 20-something photographer living in Seattle at the time, quickly decamped for Manhattan in pursuit of his new fashion idol.

A doting Harold to her Maude, he tracked her down, picked up his trusty Canon and began shooting Ms. Weddell, who was the first in a stately parade of New Yorkers, aged from 60 to 100, whose images he began posting on Advanced Style, his blog.

Now 30, Mr. Cohen has staked out a turf in the blogosphere that is distinctly his own, politely stalking voguish ladies of a certain age just because he can. They inspire him, he said, with their startling freedom and poise.

Ari Seth Cohen  From the book “Advanced Style” by Ari Seth Cohen.

“They don’t have a job, they don’t have to impress their bosses, their children, their lovers,” he said. In dressing, “they have no one to please but themselves.”

Their audacity is a central theme of “Advanced Style,” the book, out last month, and of a documentary, a work in progress paid for through Kickstarter, the Internet finance-your-project site. In print and on film, Mr. Cohen’s arrestingly bedizened models embrace fashion with a sense of play.

“Tomorrow is another day and another look,” Mr. Cohen is told by Debra Rapoport, who poses for him in goldtone brocade trousers, which she alternates in other shots with bright furs or a crazily sculptured tricorn hat.

Recording their efforts, Mr. Cohen said, has been purely a labor of love. Yet in hindsight his timing seems canny. As the population ages, this once neglected demographic is gaining striking visibility, to say nothing of marketing clout.

Ari Seth Cohen

“Many of these individuals are living outside of the boxes that society has traditionally put them in,” noted the editors at the Alliance for Aging Research, in a recent newsletter titled “Fashion Savvy Seniors Help Redefine Old Age.” Delaying their retirements or even starting new careers, the editors wrote, “they are making an impact on relationships, sex and even fashion.”

Some are becoming increasingly vocal.

“This is what 60 looks like,” declares Robin Bobbé, looking raffishly youthful in the headshot accompanying her new blog on The Huffington Post. “I would like to get the word out to the advertising world that we are strong, vital and confident.”

No worries, Ms. Bobbé. Marketers seem to be getting the message. These days trendsetters like Iris Apfel, 91, once mere footnotes in the world of style, are landing cosmetics contracts and selling handbags and jewelry on late-night TV. Mr. Cohen’s subjects absorbed that message long ago.

“In some ways you should always be in love,” a chicly turbaned Beatrix Ost tells Mr. Cohen in his book, “and never say I can’t wear that because of my age.”

GMO Labeling Law – wha happened?

I’m  Heartsick

(This is about as stressing as anything can get.    And to think my own Senator whom I love to pieces, let me down!     Why?  Jan)

Home > Legislation & Records Home > Votes > Roll Call Vote XML U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 112th Congress – 2ndSessionas compiled through Senate LIS by the Senate Bill Clerk under the direction of the Secretary of the SenateVote Summary Question: On the Amendment (Sanders Amdt. No. 2310 ) Vote Number: 161 Vote Date: June 21, 2012, 12:36 PM Required For Majority: 3/5 Vote Result: Amendment Rejected Amendment Number: S.Amdt. 2310 to S. 3240 (Agriculture Reform, Food, and Jobs Act of 2012) Statement of Purpose: To permit States to require that any food, beverage, or other edible product offered for sale have a label on indicating that the food, beverage, or other edible product contains a genetically engineered ingredient. Vote Counts: YEAs 26 NAYs 73 Not Voting 1 Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State Alphabetical by Senator Name Akaka (D-HI), Yea Alexander (R-TN), Nay Ayotte (R-NH), Nay Barrasso (R-WY), Nay Baucus (D-MT), Nay Begich (D-AK), Yea Bennet (D-CO), Yea Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea Blunt (R-MO), Nay Boozman (R-AR), Nay Boxer (D-CA), Yea Brown (D-OH), Nay Brown (R-MA), Nay Burr (R-NC), Nay Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Cardin (D-MD), Yea Carper (D-DE), Nay Casey (D-PA), Nay Chambliss (R-GA), Nay Coats (R-IN), Nay Coburn (R-OK), Nay Cochran (R-MS), Nay Collins (R-ME), Nay Conrad (D-ND), Nay Coons (D-DE), Nay Corker (R-TN), Nay Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Crapo (R-ID), Nay DeMint (R-SC), Nay Durbin (D-IL), Nay Enzi (R-WY), Nay Feinstein (D-CA), Yea Franken (D-MN), Nay Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay Graham (R-SC), Nay Grassley (R-IA), Nay Hagan (D-NC), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Nay Hatch (R-UT), Nay Heller (R-NV), Nay Hoeven (R-ND), Nay Hutchison (R-TX), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Nay Inouye (D-HI), Yea Isakson (R-GA), Nay Johanns (R-NE), Nay Johnson (D-SD), Yea Johnson (R-WI), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Yea Kirk (R-IL), Not Voting Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay Kyl (R-AZ), Nay Landrieu (D-LA), Nay Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Leahy (D-VT), Yea Lee (R-UT), Nay Levin (D-MI), Nay Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea Lugar (R-IN), Nay Manchin (D-WV), Yea McCain (R-AZ), Nay McCaskill (D-MO), Nay McConnell (R-KY), Nay Menendez (D-NJ), Nay Merkley (D-OR), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea Moran (R-KS), Nay Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea Nelson (D-FL), Nay Nelson (D-NE), Nay Paul (R-KY), Nay Portman (R-OH), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay Reed (D-RI), Yea Reid (D-NV), Nay Risch (R-ID), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea Rubio (R-FL), Nay Sanders (I-VT), Yea Schumer (D-NY), Nay Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shaheen (D-NH), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay Snowe (R-ME), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay Tester (D-MT), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay Toomey (R-PA), Nay Udall (D-CO), Nay Udall (D-NM), Yea Vitter (R-LA), Nay Warner (D-VA), Nay Webb (D-VA), Nay Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea Wicker (R-MS), Nay Wyden (D-OR), Yea Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State Grouped By Vote Position YEAs —26 Akaka (D-HI) Begich (D-AK) Bennet (D-CO) Blumenthal (D-CT) Boxer (D-CA) Cantwell (D-WA) Cardin (D-MD) Feinstein (D-CA) Inouye (D-HI) Johnson (D-SD) Kerry (D-MA) Lautenberg (D-NJ) Leahy (D-VT) Lieberman (ID-CT) Manchin (D-WV) Merkley (D-OR) Mikulski (D-MD) Murkowski (R-AK) Murray (D-WA) Reed (D-RI) Rockefeller (D-WV) Sanders (I-VT) Tester (D-MT) Udall (D-NM) Whitehouse (D-RI) Wyden (D-OR) NAYs —73 Alexander (R-TN) Ayotte (R-NH) Barrasso (R-WY) Baucus (D-MT) Bingaman (D-NM) Blunt (R-MO) Boozman (R-AR) Brown (D-OH) Brown (R-MA) Burr (R-NC) Carper (D-DE) Casey (D-PA) Chambliss (R-GA) Coats (R-IN) Coburn (R-OK) Cochran (R-MS) Collins (R-ME) Conrad (D-ND) Coons (D-DE) Corker (R-TN) Cornyn (R-TX) Crapo (R-ID) DeMint (R-SC) Durbin (D-IL) Enzi (R-WY) Franken (D-MN) Gillibrand (D-NY) Graham (R-SC) Grassley (R-IA) Hagan (D-NC) Harkin (D-IA) Hatch (R-UT) Heller (R-NV) Hoeven (R-ND) Hutchison (R-TX) Inhofe (R-OK) Isakson (R-GA) Johanns (R-NE) Johnson (R-WI) Klobuchar (D-MN) Kohl (D-WI) Kyl (R-AZ) Landrieu (D-LA) Lee (R-UT) Levin (D-MI) Lugar (R-IN) McCain (R-AZ) McCaskill (D-MO) McConnell (R-KY) Menendez (D-NJ) Moran (R-KS) Nelson (D-FL) Nelson (D-NE) Paul (R-KY) Portman (R-OH) Pryor (D-AR) Reid (D-NV) Risch (R-ID) Roberts (R-KS) Rubio (R-FL) Schumer (D-NY) Sessions (R-AL) Shaheen (D-NH) Shelby (R-AL) Snowe (R-ME) Stabenow (D-MI) Thune (R-SD) Toomey (R-PA) Udall (D-CO) Vitter (R-LA) Warner (D-VA) Webb (D-VA) Wicker (R-MS) Not Voting – 1 Kirk (R-IL) Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State Grouped by Home State Alabama: Sessions (R-AL), Nay Shelby (R-AL), Nay Alaska: Begich (D-AK), Yea Murkowski (R-AK), Yea Arizona: Kyl (R-AZ), Nay McCain (R-AZ), Nay Arkansas: Boozman (R-AR), Nay Pryor (D-AR), Nay California: Boxer (D-CA), Yea Feinstein (D-CA), Yea Colorado: Bennet (D-CO), Yea Udall (D-CO), Nay Connecticut: Blumenthal (D-CT), Yea Lieberman (ID-CT), Yea Delaware: Carper (D-DE), Nay Coons (D-DE), Nay Florida: Nelson (D-FL), Nay Rubio (R-FL), Nay Georgia: Chambliss (R-GA), Nay Isakson (R-GA), Nay Hawaii: Akaka (D-HI), Yea Inouye (D-HI), Yea Idaho: Crapo (R-ID), Nay Risch (R-ID), Nay Illinois: Durbin (D-IL), Nay Kirk (R-IL), Not Voting Indiana: Coats (R-IN), Nay Lugar (R-IN), Nay Iowa: Grassley (R-IA), Nay Harkin (D-IA), Nay Kansas: Moran (R-KS), Nay Roberts (R-KS), Nay Kentucky: McConnell (R-KY), Nay Paul (R-KY), Nay Louisiana: Landrieu (D-LA), Nay Vitter (R-LA), Nay Maine: Collins (R-ME), Nay Snowe (R-ME), Nay Maryland: Cardin (D-MD), Yea Mikulski (D-MD), Yea Massachusetts: Brown (R-MA), Nay Kerry (D-MA), Yea Michigan: Levin (D-MI), Nay Stabenow (D-MI), Nay Minnesota: Franken (D-MN), Nay Klobuchar (D-MN), Nay Mississippi: Cochran (R-MS), Nay Wicker (R-MS), Nay Missouri: Blunt (R-MO), Nay McCaskill (D-MO), Nay Montana: Baucus (D-MT), Nay Tester (D-MT), Yea Nebraska: Johanns (R-NE), Nay Nelson (D-NE), Nay Nevada: Heller (R-NV), Nay Reid (D-NV), Nay New Hampshire: Ayotte (R-NH), Nay Shaheen (D-NH), Nay New Jersey: Lautenberg (D-NJ), Yea Menendez (D-NJ), Nay New Mexico: Bingaman (D-NM), Nay Udall (D-NM), Yea New York: Gillibrand (D-NY), Nay Schumer (D-NY), Nay North Carolina: Burr (R-NC), Nay Hagan (D-NC), Nay North Dakota: Conrad (D-ND), Nay Hoeven (R-ND), Nay Ohio: Brown (D-OH), Nay Portman (R-OH), Nay Oklahoma: Coburn (R-OK), Nay Inhofe (R-OK), Nay Oregon: Merkley (D-OR), Yea Wyden (D-OR), Yea Pennsylvania: Casey (D-PA), Nay Toomey (R-PA), Nay Rhode Island: Reed (D-RI), Yea Whitehouse (D-RI), Yea South Carolina: DeMint (R-SC), Nay Graham (R-SC), Nay South Dakota: Johnson (D-SD), Yea Thune (R-SD), Nay Tennessee: Alexander (R-TN), Nay Corker (R-TN), Nay Texas: Cornyn (R-TX), Nay Hutchison (R-TX), Nay Utah: Hatch (R-UT), Nay Lee (R-UT), Nay Vermont: Leahy (D-VT), Yea Sanders (I-VT), Yea Virginia: Warner (D-VA), Nay Webb (D-VA), Nay Washington: Cantwell (D-WA), Yea Murray (D-WA), Yea West Virginia: Manchin (D-WV), Yea Rockefeller (D-WV), Yea Wisconsin: Johnson (R-WI), Nay Kohl (D-WI), Nay Wyoming: Barrasso (R-WY), Nay Enzi (R-WY), Nay Vote Summary By Senator Name By Vote Position By Home State

Find out about congressional voting with this How to guide. Use this guide to help you find the full text of recent bills and resolutions on the Web, or order them from the Senate or House Document Rooms, or you can find them in a library. You can access legislative information, by bill number or key words, from the THOMAS Web site.  Information from the present back to the 93rd Congress (1973) is available on THOMAS. The Votes page of the Virtual Reference Desk provides voting procedure information, research guides, and essays about historic votes. The Votes category on the Statistics page features facts and figures about votes made by Senators.

• Senators
• Committees
• Legislation & Records
• Art & History
• Visitors
• Reference

D.E. kills Fleas (Wow)

A Non-Toxic Answer I have wanted

(Have already spoken of Diatomaceous Earth a couple of times  about how to KILL BEDBUGS. What I purchased was  a bargain  and highly effective in killing pain when having trouble with teeth;  posted on that a couple of times too. Dabbed on a hurting tooth or gum problem with a que tip takes the pain right down.   And not to worry, it’ll be absorbed by the body and that’s okay because it’s good for hair , skin and nails – – a good thing.    I had bought my product from the good people at Perma Guard.

I just found this site online.  It is called www.Bulk Herb Store.com    Impressed, I read through all and found that this same  Fossil Shell Flour I already have had for many months now has another application that I had only dreamed of finding  FLEAS not for me mind you, but for Heidi).      .       .       .      .      >         >          >         >

Herbs: Diatomaceous Earth (Fossil Shell Flour)

Diatomaceaous Earth

Also called Fossil Shell Flour, has many health benefits. Diatomaceous earth consists of diatoms, a type hard-shelled algae which is a fossilized deposit of microscopic shells created by one celled plants called Diatoms. These plants inhabit all the waters of the earth, and serve as the basic food for aquatic life, just as grass is the basic food for land animals. Some of these deposits, shifted to dry land, are extremely important to humans.
Diatomaceaous Earth is a naturally occurring, soft, siliceous sedimentary rock that is easily crumbled into a fine white to off-white powder. It has a particle size ranging from less than 1 micrometre to more than 1 millimetre, but typically 10 to 200 micrometres. This powder has an abrasive feel, similar to pumice powder, and is very light as a result of its high porosity.
It is used as a filtration aid, mild abrasive, mechanical insecticide, and because of its high silicon content, fossil shell flour is known for strengthening the nails, hair and teeth.
Diatomaceaous Earth is used as an insecticide, due to its physico-sorptive properties. The fine powder absorbs lipids from the waxy outer layer of insects’ exoskeletons, causing them to dehydrate. Arthropods die as a result of the water pressure deficiency, based on Fick’s law of diffusion. This also works against gastropods and is commonly employed in gardening to defeat slugs. It can also be used to help control and eventually eliminate cockroach and flea infestations and has wide application for insect control in grain storage. It has also been used to control bedbug infestations, but this method may take weeks to work
100% pure food grade Diatomaceous Earth from a fresh water source is 100% NON-TOXIC and FDA approved for internal and external use and has a rating of Food Codex Grade.

Diatomaceaous Earth suggested feeding instructions below . Adjustments may be made based on your own experience and the weight of the animal.

(I read all the way through including customer questions and responses, and- the Bentonite Clay which I am going to post on soon.   Jan)

Guidelines:

Humans 1 heaping teaspoon stirred in cup of water, mixed in food or in anything you like.
Children 1/2 to 1 level teaspoon per day.

Kittens 1/2 teaspoon
Cats 1/2 to 1 teaspoon

Puppies 1/2 to 1 teaspoon
Dogs under 50 lbs. 2 teaspoons
Dogs over 50 lbs. 1 tablespoon
Dogs over 100 lbs. 2 tablespoons

Cattle 2% by weight of dry ration
Calves 4 grams in morning
Dairy Cows 2% by weight of dry ration (4 oz. )

Chickens 5% in feed, also add to dusting boxes

Goats 1% to 2% in grain

Hogs 2% of weight in feed ration

Horses 1/2 – 1 cup in daily ration

Sheep 1% to 2% in ground grain

For effective use, the Diatomaceaous Earth must be fed long enough to catch all the newly hatching eggs or cycling through the lungs and back to the stomach. A minimum of 60 days is suggested at 2% of dry weight of the grain ration. It doesn’t have to be exact. More will not be harmful, but less may not give you the results expected.

For large animals, it may also be offered “free choice” as long as dispenser is protected from wind. Use on beddings, rub into fur and mix in with salt and or minerals for livestock

Diatomaceous Earth will not harm warm-blooded animals or earthworms. Earthworm farmers use it to treat their worm beds for parasites, fungus gnat larva etc. Earth worms are structurally different from insects in that they can actually digest particles of DE. The particles are then eliminated in their castings.

What veterinarians, researchers, integrated pest management, and users of quality Diatomaceaous Earth report:
• Improved digestion for all mammals. Absorbs viruses and bacteria-passes them for the body. Kills stomach and intestinal parasites better than toxic poisons-with no side effects.
• Improves bone structure
• Gives hair more body and shiny appearance
• Remove harmful bacteria from the upper intestinal tract
• Absorbent -useful for spill clean-up. The U.S. Center for Disease Control recommends it to clean up toxic liquid spills.
• Beneficial as a soil additive-safe for earthworms
• Reduce fly hatch. Keeps fly larvae from developing in manure, noticeably reducing the fly population
• Stop animals from licking holes, chewing fence posts. Cows from eating dirt.
• With feed for chickens and turkeys – makes shells harder, reduced mortality rate, reduce odors, dries droppings quickly, reduces fly hatch.
• As a barrier against slugs and snails.
• To remove odors – shake on manure, urine, vomit, or spills to absorb odors and moisture
• Reduces moisture and odors in barns, stalls, coops, kennel, litter boxes, compost piles, and other moist areas.
• In Europe and Asia this product is used extensively as a health and beauty product for hair, skin, nails, bones, and joints.
• As a feed additive for all mammals: reduce the smell of manure, reduce fly hatch, It is believed to remove viruses, and give the benefits from the 14 trace minerals.
• Reduce vet bills up to 75%
• Use in facial masks to absorb excess oils
• Added at a rate of 2% to pet food in the bag or bin. Prevents feed from getting stale or moldy.
• Fed to hogs or calves with scours – stops scours after one feeding
• Kills many bugs by dehydration-environmentally safe
• Use to dust animals and animal bedding
• Decreased mastitis
• Use in cat litter to absorb moisture and odors
• Lightly rub food grade diatomaceous earth into pets coat and bedding
• Mix into soil for a soil conditioner. Will retain over 6 times its weight in moisture and will release it as the plants need it. It may also help with nematodes.
• On lawns, will retain moisture and prevent drought damage. Adds nitrogen to the soil.
• On camping trips. Dust the ground where you intend to place your tent and camp area.
• Converts feed better
• Better coat and hoof condition
• Promotes shinier coats
• Reduces overall animal stress
• Colon cleanser
• Helps detox heavy metals, e-coli, bacteria, viruses, etc.
• Completely safe and non-toxic
• Stimulates basic metabolism
• Antifungal properties – good for garden fungal growth
• Dust under and behind appliances, in window sills, door thresholds and in attics and walls
• Used in seed and grain storage to keep dry and mold free indefinitely. Will allow seeds to sprout after years in storage.
• On lawns, will retain moisture and prevent drought damage
• Keeps fly larvae from developing in manure, noticeably reducing the fly population. (Neighbors no longer complain about flies)
• In cattle- increased milk production
• In cattle- decreased mastitis
• Rub it onto bug bites and Poison Ivy or Oak, relieves the itch. Use dry or make a paste.
• Sprinkle the ground liberally on and around tree trunks, also may be painted with a mixture of DE and water.
• In food animals and dairy cattle- no withdrawal prior to use of products