Recently Yahoo news ran an article put out by Prevention magazine. It was titled "The 7 foods experts won't eat" and it caught my eye. Seven experts from differing fields of research or food production were asked what foods they would not eat. Here is the list with an abridged version of their reasoning.

Canned Tomatoes; due to their high acidity a potentially dangerous chemical is leached from the can lining.
Corn Fed Beef; because corn is not the cow's natural diet, eating it creates a product that is lower in nutrition than the alternative: grass fed beef.
Microwave Popcorn; allegedly there is a chemical compound in the lining of the bag that transfers to the popcorn when it pops that can cause liver damage and infertility.
Nonorganic Potatoes; due to the high pesticide and herbicide residue as well as the anti-sprouting chemical sprayed on the potatoes before they are bagged.
Farmed Salmon; because of the poor feed given to the fish, it is high in DDT and other known carcinogens.
Milk Produced with Artificial Hormones; this product has had a lot of bad press not too long ago due to the bovine growth hormone and its link to breast and prostate cancers.
Conventional Apples; due to their high level of pesticide residue and the links between this and cancer and now even Parkinson's.
The article lists further facts as well as the "experts" that were consulted.


I was surprised by some of the choices. I figured that apples would be on the list and the corn fed beef was not unexpected nor was the milk. I have heard lots of press about these foods, and even have local sources for raw milk and grass fed beef. Now the canned tomatoes and the potatoes did take me by surprise. I had heard that an anti-sprouting chemical was sprayed on potatoes, but kind of forgot about the chemicals used in growing the potatoes. I had not heard about any leaching of chemicals in tomato cans either.

I also found the correlation between the expert's field of study and the "bad" food very interesting. For example: the man who raises grass fed beef and writes books about sustainable agriculture is the one that chose corn fed beef as the food to avoid. Likewise, the person researching the chemical, BPA, is the one that recommends against canned tomatoes because of the risk of BPA contamination. Now, don't get me wrong, I am glad that I know this information, it helps me make healthy food choices. But I do resent that these people were listed in the beginning paragraph of the article as "the people at the forefront of food safety". Perhaps they all do have our safety in mind, but they do have a skewed take on what food is the healthiest. This article is a prime example of how spin is used in the media every day.

Setting him up for failure....

Is it fair to your children if you, once in a while, set them up for failure? Can it be a time of learning for all involved, or is it just plain mean? I would suppose that those questions and ones like it are not that uncommon to parents around the world, but this is really the first time I have put a title to what I am doing. I mean that I certainly have done it before but this is the first time it has been calculated and had a title.
I was blessed with a boy-child seventeen years ago. We named him Johnnie. He was always a dramatic and head strong boy, but extremely loving and caring too. He has a soft heart and appreciation for beauty and creativity that, in turn fuels mine. In July of 2006 we discovered that John (he decided to be called John after his dad, also named John, died) had bipolar. I could easily take up the rest of this blog telling y'all about the long journey that we have been on for the last three years with finding the right medications and treatments, but that is for another blog post. Suffice it to say that I learned how to be my son's advocate and that I learned way too much about medicines and dosages and side effects.
John's symptoms manifest in, thankfully, very mild ways compared to some. He has problems focusing and staying on task and often goes into what we call "mission mode" where he can only see one point of view and will do anything to achieve that point. One of the most frustrating things is that emotionally, John is only about 13. Physically he is 6' 3" tall and 250 lbs. Chronologically he is 17, and sees what his fellow 17 year old boys are doing and wants the same. I haven't let him get a driver's license because of his lack of focus. We don't have the money for all of the electronic gadgets, or the extracurricular activities either so John was feeling rather left out. All that led to some wicked bad jealousy and complaints that I was holding him back. He wanted a job. I held him off for a while with a promise that once we moved back into town he could start applying at one of the seven restaurants within walking distance of our apartment.
Well, we moved into town just this last October, and he called my bluff. I had wanted him to wait a bit longer so I could arrange for him to get into a "job shadowing" program, where he would have a more understanding boss as well as a facilitator there to help him learn the ropes. But John didn't want to wait. (Was I ever that impatient?) He kept pestering me to let him work, so even though I knew he was going to fail, I let him go. He found a local sushi restaurant that had a "help wanted" sign in the window and applied. I thought this might work out because John wants to be a chef and is fascinated with sushi and has even made his own at home. But it didn't. John was fired last night. Part of the reason was because John just couldn't focus and was not able to perform the exacting and precise tasks that his boss wanted. Admittedly his boss is one of those that wants everything exactly the same every time no matter what, but John was just not able to do what was expected. I don't know if he ever will be able to work for an exacting person like that. All I know is that he had lots of opportunities at his job to learn and grow but, it is like I knew it was going to be… he couldn't do it. I let him try and hopefully he learned. It was worth it.

"Raisin" the roof

Images of people have been used in advertisements for just about as long as advertisements have been around. It seems that with food advertisements, women play an important role. Some of the older brands have created their own female icons. One such young woman, the Sun-Maid raisin girl recently got a "make over" that has some people complaining.

Legend has it that young Loraine Collette Peterson was "discovered" sitting in her parents Fresno California back yard drying her long, black hair in 1915. She was asked to sit for a painting, where her image was captured in watercolor, holding a basket of grapes while wearing a red sunbonnet. That image was used to launch a new ad campaign and an icon was born. About three years ago the Sun-Maid company launched a new young lady in their TV ads, and she was given an update. The new Sun-Maid is buxom, thinner and is shown walking amongst the grape vines and later, the red carpet.

As we all know, change is never easy. Even though the new digital images of the Sun-Maid has been on the air for over three months, protests are only now being raised. It would seem that the hue and cries are being heard from both ends of the political spectrum. Jezebel.com has an article on their feminist website (along with a hilarious article on which modern day female actresses should play some of our most popular female icons) as does the ultra conservative Weekly Standard. The displeasure ranges from the fact that the CG image looks like a bad video game to suggestions of breast implants. Sun Maid has further plans for our hip, new Sun-Maid that could include seeing her at the gym or shopping or even speaking in different languages. Will the wonders never cease?



Seriously? I mean in the world full of starving children, unspeakable abuses and war we are spending time whining about the image on a box of raisins? OK, I found the article entertaining and the link to the history of the Sun-Maid was a good read. I also Googled the images of some other iconic women just to see how they had changed over the years and while some of them were for the better (Aunt Jemima and Mrs. Butterworth's for instance) it certainly wasn't earth-shattering.
I admit that I too, would prefer to keep our old friend the Sun-Maid the same (and we will on the boxes… the changes are only on the TV commercials) and not have to look at the bad computer animation. But I don't recall the Sun-Maid writing me and asking me what I thought. So, I can let them know that I am unhappy and buy generic raisins or I can let it go. I can only think that it must have been a slow news day at Yahoo Business news for anyone to crank out this mess.

This company isn't going to the dogs!

Working dogs have been a help to man for centuries, but today's dogs face new foes. We use dogs in police work, all branches of the military as well as for private security contractors. One company in Winnipeg Canada made over $50,000 last year helping to outfit those working dogs with new tools to further help their human partners. In this article put out by Fortune and Small Business We meet Jim and Glori Slater, owners of the business K9 Storm. Jim was a K9 handler who realized one day during a prison riot that his dog and partner, Olaf, was very venerable to being stabbed or shot. This led him to retrofit a human flak jacket to fit his dog. Soon, he was swamped with orders from other professional dog handlers, and thus a booming business was born. For the last eleven years the Slaters have been working to perfect the jackets and equipment seen is their latest catalog.

Equipping a dog for war isn't cheap. K9 Storm's vest the "Intruder" starts out at $20,000. That sounds like a lot, but consider that once on the dog (who themselves can cost up to $50,000 to buy and train) has the bullet proof vest on, its handler can then remotely access a camera mounted on the vest along with speakers and a microphone. The handler can see what the dog sees, and can give commands to the dog as well as people in the immediate area. While the "Intruder" doesn't come out until 2010, there are already several orders waiting for it. Fortunately for local police departments there are donations waiting to assist in covering the purchase costs.



Well, I am a dog person so this article fascinated me. I really like that the dogs that are literally on the front lines are being protected so well. I went to the company's website and took a look around. I was really impressed. They carry professional dog handling items ranging from leashes and collars to a vest that is not only bullet-proof, but straps into a harness so that the dog can make parachute jump right along with their human partner.

The fact that there are grants and donations set up to help offset the cost of this very valuable equipment is heartwarming as well. One donor is Ben Roethlisberger, quarterback for the Pittsburg Stealers gave $250,000 to the Pittsburg police and fire departments to outfit their dogs. I like what Brian Adams, spokesman for the MSPCA-Angell Veterinary hospital in Boston said. "Suspects pursued by police will stab, shoot and kick working dogs. They are like any officer of the law. We want to protect them."

A face to go with the name!

Well, y'all have been reading my blog for almost a semester and I have not put a pix up to go with my name. I just haven't had one. I am camera shy. I find that the camera tells a truth that I used to not like, so I wouldn't let anyone take my pix. That has changed in the last couple of months. I like who I am, and the reality that the camera shows is just that, a reality. People either are repelled by it or like me despite it. Those that are turned away by my truth have very seriously lost out, 'cause I rock!! *grin*

This pix that I am putting up is of my family. Of course I am in there, but so is my 19 year old daughter Devon, my 17 year old son John, and my 13 year old daughter, Bailey. They are my beautiful, talented, enchanting, gifts from God. They are my greatest joy and my biggest frustrations!

This pix was taken in Carthage, MO in a prayer garden. It was one of the most peaceful places I have ever been! I could have stayed there all day with a sketch book, camera and the kids. There are so many more pix from our session, but this composite was put together quickly to try to advertise a weekend special for my photographer (photo818.com). There are lots to go through, and I had some head shots taken of me, so I promise to put one of them up for my profile.

God bless you and yours

Deb Seely

When a soldier dies in war, they are afforded certain privileges . A military funeral, a flag draped coffin, and a condolence letter from the President of the United States. But not so if that soldier died by his or her own hand. During the Clinton presidency, policies were changed to exclude death by suicide, according to this article at cnn.com

Gregg Keesling found that out the hard and tragic way. His son, Spc, Chancellor Keesling committed suicide June 19, 2009 while deployed in Iraq. The family picked up the flag draped coffin, and attended the funeral complete with military honors. They even created a memorial wall in their home. They display their son's dress uniform, the flag from his coffin and the Indiana flag that was flown in Washington to honor his death. They left a space in that grouping for the expected condolence letter from the president. But one never came. Finally, after several inquires the family was informed that condolence letters are not written to the families of soldiers that commit suicide.

Gregg Keesling is very careful now how he explains his son's death. He explains it as "dying of suicide". He is also very involved in changing this policy that keeps him from the honor her feels he is due. The Keeslings have written a letter to President Obama, and they have enlisted the help of their local congressmen as well. Keesling feels that his family made the ultimate sacrifice for the good of their country, and the least the president can do for them is to want to send his condolences.



I agree. My late husband was ex military. When he died I received a condolence letter. He was not in combat and had not been in the service for over thirty years. I don't understand what possible good it would do for the president to NOT write letters. The main reason these kids are getting depressed is because they are in battle situations. So basically if they weren't on the battlefield they wouldn't be as depressed and as likely to commit suicide.

Another issue here is the fact that this young soldier was deployed the second time as a reservist. And as such his records (ones that listed his depression and at least one suicide watch) were not sent to his reserve unit. He was reluctant to reveal that he was depressed and had considered suicide. I would think that some better communication between the services would be of help here too. The article states that Spc Keesling was treated at the VA as well. I know from a friend that is a veteran of Iraqi Freedom that the VA is not what a lot of people think it is or what the soldiers need. I liked how the father in this article put it. He said that his son had been injured, but we couldn't see it. It was on the inside

Breast Cancer recomendations cause debate

For years women have been told that they needed to perform self breast examinations and that they needed to have their first mammogram at the age of 40. But not anymore. The latest recommendations of the U.S. Preventative Task Force are that women in the age group of 40 to 49 do not need regular mammograms, nor do they need to worry about routine self evaluations any longer.

In several recent articles at cnn.com the controversial recommendations are cited and debated. Some of the leading breast cancer groups agree with the decision, and some do not. The Susan G. Koman Breast Cancer group recommends that women "be aware" of any changes in their breasts, but do not recommend that women be taught self breast exams. The American Cancer Society agrees. Both groups claim that they disagree with the new mammogram guidelines. They will continue to recommend that women in their forties have regular mammograms.
The greatest concern of the task force is that younger women (who are generally at a lower risk for breast cancer) will encounter more stress because of lumps that are found but are not a cancer threat. They cite health studies performed in Canada that found that there was no significant decrease in breast cancer deaths in women that performed self examinations versus women who did not.

One may wonder just who this task force is, and why it is so significant that they have made these recommendations. The United States Preventative Services Task force is a group of 16 "health care professionals" that base recommendations concerning preventative health procedures upon scientific studies. (It should be noted for the cynics out there that NONE of the doctors on the board are oncologists and that two of the members are affiliated with non-profit health insurance companies.) This task force, started in 1984 is currently considered to be the "leading independent panel of private-sector experts in prevention and primary care," according to their website. Their recommendations are closely watched and taken to be the standard by The American Health Insurance Plans, a company of over 1,300 health insurance providers. However, Kathleen Sebelius, Health and Human Services Secretary, said that while their recommendations are taken under advisement they do not set the policies for the United States.


When I started writing this blog article I was just trying to find something that interested me. As I have stated before, I am a cancer survivor so anything that deals with cancer peaks my interest, but as I started reading I got madder and madder! Then I started looking around at Google and found so much coverage of this story with so many other networks and groups. This really has people sitting up and taking notice. As well it should.
So, here is my take on this issue. The boiled down version, I hope. It seems to me that this just smacks of hypocrisy. According to one article I found on a cancer support site, written in 2002, the Task Force has been trying for years to change how we approach screening for breast cancer. For the last nine years… sounds like someone has an agenda. I fear that if too many people listen to these "findings" that the average woman will not have a yearly mammogram covered on their insurance policies. That could prove disastrous.
The only reasons I could find cited to change our current way of screening was some ambiguous reference to the "risks" of mammograms and the possibility of causing unneeded stress to younger women if they should happen to find a lump during self examinations. Seriously? Is that the best they can come up with after all this time? There was a source cited that found that younger women that performed routine self examinations of their breasts found a higher incidence of benign lumps. Is that what is being considered the extra stress? I would rather have a false alarm than to ignore a lump and find out years later that my stage three cancer could have been prevented if I had found it earlier. And to not teach young women to examine their own breasts but to tell them to "be aware of any changes" is asinine, in my opinion. How are young women going to know if there are changes if they don't know what their normal feels or looks like? When my oldest daughter turned 18 I took her to my women's health nurse practitioner Tina. Tina taught her how to perform a self exam and what was normal as well as what was not. Now she can tell us if something changes. I find it just disturbing that just as we (women) are getting some life saving procedures paid for as routine in our yearly visits to our health care providers, some group with an agenda comes along and now we will probably have to fight hard to keep them. It will prove interesting to keep an eye on this issue to see where it goes, and how it will affect us in the future. Let's hope we keep moving in a positive direction.