AndyRobertsPhotos
organicboxes.org.uk/recipes/getting-kids-to-eat-vegetables
-
I posted to flickr.com
Getting kids to eat vegetables | Organic Boxes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aroberts/6006819680/
- Tags:
- blog
- organicboxes
- vegetable
- kids
August 3 2011, 5:05pm | Comments »
-
I posted to flickr.com
Organic Vegetable Box contents
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aroberts/5894911119/
AndyRob
Organic Vegetable Box contents
July 2 2011, 5:48pm | Comments »
-
I posted to distributedresearch.net
Cut red meat intake and don’t eat ham, say cancer researchers
World Cancer Research Fund advises people to limit consumption of beef, pork and lamb and avoid processed meatThis article titled “Cut red meat intake and don’t eat ham, say cancer researchers” was written by Denis Campbell, health correspondent, for The Guardian on Sunday 22nd May 2011 23.06 UTCCancer experts have issued a fresh warning about eating red and processed meat after “the most authoritative report” on the subject blamed them for causing the disease.The World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF) is advising people to limit their intake of red meats such as beef, pork and lamb, and to avoid processed meat such as ham and salami altogether. “Convincing evidence” that both types of meat increase the risk of bowel cancer means people should think seriously about reducing how much they eat, it recommends.The charity kickstarted a global debate in 2007 when it published a study which identified meat as a risk factor for a number of different forms of cancer.WCRF-funded scientists at Imperial College London led by Dr Teresa Norat studied 263 research papers that have come out since then looking at the role of diet, weight and physical activity in bowel cancer. An independent panel of leading cancer experts then reviewed their conclusions. “For red and processed meat, findings of 10 new studies were added to the 14 analysed as part of the 2007 report. The panel confirmed that there is convincing evidence that both red and processed meat increase bowel cancer risk,” said the report .“WCRF recommends that people limit consumption to 500g (cooked weight) of red meat a week – roughly the equivalent of five or six medium portions of roast beef, lamb or pork – and avoid processed meat,” it added. About 36,000 Britons a develop bowel cancer every year, and some 16,500 die from it. It is the UK’s second biggest cancer killer after lung cancer.About 17,000 cases a year (43%) could be prevented if people ate less meat and more fibre, drank less, maintained a healthy weight and kept active, the WCRF says.Its 850-page report, releasedon Monday, is “the most authoritative ever report of bowel cancer risk”, cancer prevention experts claim.Professor Alan Jackson of Southampton University, the chair of the WCRF’s continuous update project expert panel, said: “On meat, the clear message that comes out of our report is that red and processed meat increase risk of bowel cancer and that people who want to reduce their risk should consider cutting down the amount they eat.”Growing concern about red and processed meat prompted the government in February to advise consumers for the first time to consider cutting down. That came after the Scientific Advisory Committee on Nutrition (SACN), experts who advise the government, examined the evidence on the subject. It decided that those meats probably increase the risk of bowel cancer.People who eat 90g or more a day should cut down to the UK average of 70g, SACN recommended. It advised having smaller portions or eating those meats less often. A 70g serving could be three slices of ham, a lamb chop or two standard beef burgers.WCRF’s review has also firmed up from “probable” to “convincing” its view of the protection against bowel cancer afforded by eating foods containing fibre, such as wholegrains, pulses, fruit and vegetables.Milk, garlic and dietary supplements containing calcium also “probably” reduce the risk, the expert panel concluded.But farmers’ leaders denounced the WCRF’s new report and accused it of deliberately choosing the first day of National Vegetarian Week to publish it in order to maximise publicity for conclusions which the charity first reached years ago.Chris Lamb, a spokesman for BPEX and EBLEX, which represents England’s pig, beef and lamb farmers, said: “Average consumption has been in or around 500g a week for a few years. The vast majority of consumers aren’t exceeding this and don’t have to worry about [this]“, he said.The risks identified by the WCRF were unchanged, he stressed.Lamb argued it was unfair for the WCRF to highlight meat as a contributory cause of bowel cancer when the main risk was to people who are generally unhealthy, for example by consuming too much food, alcohol or fizzy drink.“They aren’t assisting consumers. Consumers eat and enjoy meat as part of a balanced diet, and meat plays a valuable part in that balanced diet”, said Lamb. “If you eat or drink anything in excess it’s a danger. Therefore, if you can pick on meat in order to get headlines, then you aren’t actually helping consumers.”Professor Dame Sally Davies, the chief medical officer for England, said red meat can form part of a healthy, balanced diet. “It is a good source of protein and vitamins and minerals, such as iron, selenium, zinc and B vitamins,” she said, “but people who eat a lot of red and processed meat should consider cutting down. The occasional steak or extra few slices of lamb is fine but regularly eating a lot could increase your risk of bowel cancer.”Bowel Cancer UK chief executive Deborah Alsina said: “The report significantly adds to the available evidence into the increased risk of bowel cancer from eating too much red and processed meat; and strengthens the evidence of how eating food with fibre in it protects people against the disease.Hazel Nunn, a senior health information officer at Cancer Research UK, said: “With barbeque season just round the corner, this is a timely reminder that how much alcohol you drink, how active you are, your weight, and how much red and processed meat and fibre you eat can all have a bearing on your risk of bowel cancer.”• Growing numbers of lung cancer patients are having life-saving operations thanks to advances in surgical techniques. The proportion of patients with the disease who undergo surgery has risen from one in 11 in 2005 to one in seven last year, according to a study by the NHS Information Centre. Lung cancer kills more people than any other form of cancer. guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.Thanks for subscribing to Andy Roberts blogCut red meat intake and don’t eat ham, say cancer researchersRelated posts:Alcohol to blame for 13,000 cancer cases a year in UKTurkey Ham?World Development Report: Why no mention of Paris?
- Tags:
- General
- fruit
- tea
- pig
- Ham
- vegetable
- warning
- health
- review
- Government
- port
- The Guardian
- UK news
- News
- Food & drink
- Life and style
- Article
- Main section
- research
- Society
- World news
- proportion
- Britons
- researcher
- cancer
- equivalent
- bowel cancer
- cancer research fund
- Chris Lamb
- consuming
- convincing evidence
- Denis Campbell
- disease
- Dr Teresa Norat
- fibre
- imperial college london
- lung
- meat intake
- protein
- red meat
- salami
- Scientific
- vegetarian
May 23 2011, 4:36am | Comments »
-
I posted to distributedresearch.net
Can a family of four be fed for £50 a week?
http://distributedresearch.net/blog/2011/04/30/can-a-family-of-four-be-fed-for-50-a-week
Sainsbury’s is launching a deal that promises it can be done. We asked three leading food writers if it’s really possible
This article titled “Can a family of four be fed for £50 a week?” was written by Fiona Beckett, Simon Majumdar and Richard Ehrlich, for The Guardian on Friday 29th April 2011 23.05 UTC Fiona Beckett: Yes you can Sure you can feed your family for £50 a week, just as you can restrict yourself to 1,200 calories a day if you need to. But it takes willpower, and supermarkets aren’t always the best places to exercise that. Everything – well, practically everything – will have to be pre-planned. You can’t afford to be deflected by impulse buys, though it’s worth keeping, say, a £5 float to take advantage of offers on non-perishable foods like pasta and tinned tuna and for stocking up on basics like herbs and spices (which are cheaper in independent shops than supermarkets). You’ll have to stop pandering to your kids. On this kind of budget you can’t afford to let everyone eat what they like whenever they feel like it. Shared mealtimes are easier to control than 24/7 fridge raiding. Set whatever you don’t need aside for another meal rather than leaving it on the side for scavengers to dip into. Insist that kids ask you when they want a snack rather than just helping themselves. (Frugality, I’m afraid, requires a degree of fascism that doesn’t come easily to today’s laid-back parents.) Forget heavily advertised brands (despite moans from the kids) and buy – or at least try – own label. Discover when your nearest supermarket tends to have reductions. I used to find the one at my local petrol station would virtually give away unsold meat and veg on a Sunday night. The main challenge on a low budget is keeping some variety in your diet. If you build a couple of days round mince (say, a spag bol one night and chilli con carne the next), you could then switch to seafood like frozen prawns, veg and rice for the next two to three days. Forget the idea that every meal has to have expensive lumps of protein – do as our parents and grandparents did, and pad out meals with carbs and puddings. Not all the old wisdom applies though, it has to be said. Veg aren’t always – sadly – cheaper in season. (Frozen berries are almost always cheaper than fresh, for instance.) “Cheap” cuts can be anything but. It can, bizarrely, be more economical to buy steak on special offer than mince, if you stretch it by slicing it thinly. Sometimes ready-made foods like cakes or puds are cheaper than baking them yourself (though in general anything pre-sliced, grated or cubed is a rip-off). And remember that no one shop has all the bargains. You can bet your life that if Sainsbury’s – or any other supermarket – is promoting products to make them look as cheap as chips, they’ll be marking up other lines that will cost you less elsewhere. The old adage that does still apply is “shop around”. Fiona Beckett is author of The Frugal Cook, published by Absolute Press. guardian.co.uk/profile/fionabeckett
Simon Majumdar: No you can’t In 1994, Sainsbury’s ran a campaign promising to feed a family of four for less than £50 a week. I had my doubts then, and I have them even more now that the company is offering almost exactly the same deal some 17 years later. The simple fact is, that while it may be feasible to feed a family of four for £50, it is, I believe, almost impossible to do it well for such a lowly sum. One may be able to meet people’s basic nutritional needs, but it will give little variety in the diet and extract all joy from the experience of dining. Some might suggest that, if people are financially stretched, they should be prepared to forgo certain pleasures to make ends meet. However, for me, such a notion is only a short remove from Ebenezer Scrooge’s impassioned cry of “are there no workhouses?” and has no place in this discussion. A £50 a week budget equates to £1.79 per person, per day. This amount is less than is allocated to guests of Her Majesty’s Prisons and only marginally more than is spent on the daily meals of the majority of National Health Service patients. While one doesn’t hear of too many people dying of malnutrition in hospitals and prisons, one also doesn’t hear of too many people clamouring to change places with them when dinner time comes around. It is possible, of course, to wheel out some well-intentioned nutritionist to talk about “wholesome soups” or “hearty bowls of pasta” in defence of the notion that it is possible to eat well, cheaply. However, anyone who has ever spent time subsisting as a student will testify that, while such dishes might do the job of filling a person’s stomach, the regular arrival of bowls of soup or dishes of spaghetti bolognese, night after night, can be enough to drive a person to bloody murder. Such a view also labours under the incorrect assumption that while people may be economically troubled, they can still find the time to seek out cheap, fresh ingredients and labour over a hot stove to make sure that their families receive all they need from their three square meals a day. If there ever was an era when such a thing was true, it is certainly not the case today when both parents are probably holding down jobs to pay the bills. Sainsbury’s latest promotion might seem like one possible solution to the issue. However, to me, it confirms only two things. One, that marketing people are incapable of ever coming up with new ideas. And, more worryingly, if the cost of this basket of food, meant to feed two adults and their offspring, remains the same nearly two decades on, there must be serious concerns about the quality. Whatever one thinks of our supermarkets, few people would ever consider them exemplars of altruism. For food to be sold at this price must mean that corners have been cut, costs have been shaved, and producers have been squeezed. The cynic in me can’t help thinking that all three are probably the case. Accepting this heady combination of uncertain food quality, a lack of variety and little enjoyment, it may well be possible to physically sustain a family of four people on the meagre sum of £50 a week. But, I have to admit, if I was in such a situation, Her Majesty’s Prisons might begin to look pretty appealing. Simon Majumdar is the co-writer of Dos Hermanos, one of the UK’s most widely read food blogs. guardian.co.uk/profile/simon-majumdar
Richard Ehrlich: Well, maybe It would certainly be possible to feed a hypothetical family of four on a budget of £50 a week – the big question is whether it would be any fun. Before going any further, I have to add that all bets are off if the household includes teenage boys. The UK Department of Health’s Estimated Average Requirements call for a daily calorie intake of 1,940 calories per day for women and 2,550 for men. Teenage boys seem to need at least 5,000 or they start eating their own fingers. For the rest of us, £12.50 a week is just about do-able. It means avoiding many processed and pre-prepared foods: ready-meals for four can devour your whole daily budget. Favour porridge over boxed breakfast cereals, cheap seasonal veg over fancy salad leaves or sugar snap peas from Kenya, fresh fruit over fruit juice. It also means relying on cheap sources of protein. But remember that you don’t need much protein, far less than most omnivores eat. Try to use meat as a seasoning instead of the main event of the meal: four rashers of top-notch bacon will flavour a whole pot of beans or a pasta sauce. If you sometimes need an identifiable piece of meat on the plate, forget about steaks and chops. Cook stews from cheaper, tougher cuts such as shin of beef or knuckle of pork. Chicken legs are cheaper (and tastier) than breasts, and whole chickens, which can produce four meals for four people at a stretch, are cheaper still. A major cost-cutting option lies open to those who have a big garden or an allotment: grow your own vegetables. Even if you only have space for a few pots, growing herbs can save you a pound or two a week. And a final cost-cutting strategy: don’t assume supermarkets are cheap. When I compared prices on five items at my local Sainsbury’s with the fruit and veg stall across the road, the stall was cheaper on three items, the same on one, and more expensive on one. But the loose carrots at Sainsbury’s (35p/kg, compared with 77p/kg at the stall) were as flexible as garden hoses. Fresh ginger at the stall was £3.30/kg as opposed to £10.72 chez Sainsbury’s. But back to the F-word: will £50 be fun? It can certainly be made less painful by deploying cheap seasonings that deliver maximum pleasure. Bags of spices bought from an Asian shop cost a pound or so and last for many months. A knob of ginger, a fresh chilli, a head of garlic, a lemon – all cost little and can be used with anything. Ultimately, your fun-quotient will be determined by your enthusiasm for inexpensive starchy foods: potatoes, pasta, rice, pulses. Well used, these deliver great flavour at minimal expense. Macaroni cheese, curried lentils, any of numerous dishes combining a lot of rice and a little chicken or lamb – all can be made for as little as 30-50p a head. I know I spend more than £50 a week when there are four of us in the house, probably more like £80. If I had to cut down to £50, I could probably do it. But I love macaroni cheese. Richard Ehrlich’s latest book is ’80 Recipes for Your Pressure Cooker’, published by Kyle Cathie, £12.99. guardian.co.uk/profile/richardehrlich
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.
Thanks for subscribing to Andy Roberts blogCan a family of four be fed for £50 a week?
Related posts:London Overground starts next week A five minute argument or the full week? Call to tax junk food ingredients to halt obesity
- Tags:
- money
- UK
- marketing
- General
- recipes
- recipe
- Features
- vegetable
- The Guardian
- Food & drink
- Life and style
- Seafood
- Article
- household
- budget
- Supermarkets
- beef
- Sainsbury
- nutrition
- Economic
- supermarket
- Consumer affairs
- Fiona Beckett
- frugality
- herbs and spices
- J Sainsbury
- Money news & features
- Richard Ehrlich
- sauce
- Saving money
- scavengers
- Simon Majumdar
- tinned tuna
April 30 2011, 6:57am | Comments »
-
I posted to distributedresearch.net
Japanese nuclear workers face new threat from radioactive groundwater
Fukushima workers surviving on two small meals a day, Japanese technicians sleep in corridors during three-day shifts, nuclear radiation monitors shared between employees.
This article titled “Japanese nuclear workers face new threat from radioactive groundwater” was written by Justin McCurry in Tokyo, for The Guardian on Friday 1st April 2011 13.57 UTC Workers at the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear power plant face new threats to their health after radiation exceeding safety levels was found to have seeped into groundwater near the facility. The plant’s operator, Tokyo Electric Power (Tepco), was the target of further criticism amid reports that some workers at the site had not been provided with personal radiation monitors. Tepco’s handling of the crisis has come under closer scrutiny since three workers were exposed to dangerously high levels of radiation last week. They have all been discharged from hospital after suffering no ill effects. Japan’s nuclear and industrial safety agency, Nisa, ordered the firm to review its latest radiation measurements taken from the air, seawater and groundwater, saying they seemed suspiciously high. Earlier on Friday Tepco reported that groundwater beneath one of the plant’s six reactors contained levels of radioactive iodine 10,000 times higher than government standards. “We have our suspicions about their isotope analysis,” said Hidehiko Nishiyama, a Nisa spokesman. Tepco said that a computer software fault could be responsible for the high readings, but added that the data could turn out to be accurate. Experts said it was unlikely that the radioactive iodine-131 found nearly 15 metres (50ft) below one of the reactors would find its way into drinking water. For several days authorities have issued assurances that none of the radiation readings are high enough to present a threat to people living beyond the 12-mile (20km) evacuation zone. But the risks being taken by about 600 technicians, engineers, firefighters and troops as they struggle to contain radiation leaks have only increased. Tepco admitted it had not been able to provide enough dosimeters to teams of workers who are completing gruelling three-day shifts in an attempt to remove and dispose of radioactive pools of water and prevent damaged fuel rods from going into full meltdown. Tepco said it had secured additional gauges to replace hundreds that were damaged in the 11 March tsunami. “We must ensure the workers’ health and safety, but we also face a pressing need to get the work done as quickly as possible,” Nishiyama said, adding that sharing meters up until now had been “unavoidable”. Soon after the disaster the health ministry raised the maximum radiation level to which each worker can safely be exposed from 100 millisieverts a year to 250 millisieverts a year to enable them to spend more time in contaminated areas. Nisa said that 21 workers had so far been exposed to radiation exceeding 100 millisieverts, although tests have shown that no one has been exposed to radiation high enough to damage their health. Sumio Imoto, a spokesman for one of Tepco’s main subcontractors, said its labourers were being looked after and were not taking unnecessary risks. “The safety of our employees is our primary concern,” he said, “but keeping up morale is a big challenge.” Robert Peter Gale, a US medical researcher who has been advising the Japanese government, said: “There’s a huge difference between whole-body and partial-body radiation. “One of my primary considerations is the geometry of the reactor and the likelihood that people are in a configuration that would give them full-body radiation. It’s not impossible, but it’s highly unlikely. They have to be exposed in their entirety from three to four metres to get a whole-body dose. This is not a kamikaze situation.” According to the few reliable descriptions of conditions at the plant, the workers are given just two meals a day – crackers and a small carton of vegetable juice for breakfast; dried rice and canned fish or chicken for dinner – and take naps in cramped corridors on lead-lined sheets to limit their exposure to radiation. “That’s where they sleep, with only one blanket each to wrap themselves around,” said Kazuma Yokota, a Nisa official who spent five days at the plant. Yokota said the rush to save the plant meant some workers had been unable to change their underwear, while high radiation levels were hampering the arrival of fresh supplies. Conditions have marginally improved amid widespread admiration for the workers, initially nicknamed the Fukushima 50 because they worked in groups of that number. Their daily bottled water allowance has increased and the government has vowed to improve food supplies. The workers’ nightly meeting ends with shouts of “ganbaro!” (“let’s keep going”). The anonymous workers have little or no contact with the outside world while they are on site, and media interviews are discouraged. “They are doing their best while they aren’t even able to contact members of their family,” Yokota said. After three days’ work they spend three days at J-Village, a nearby sports complex, for a shower, proper food and sleep. “It isn’t perfect, but it does provide a place for the workers to pull back and get some rest before they have to go back in,” said a Tepco spokesman, Hirota Oyama. “They can eat fresh vegetables, something they can’t do on the site.” The prime minister, Naoto Kan, will visit the sports complex on Saturday to show his support. His spokesman, Yukio Edano, said: “I humbly bow to the workers and officials who are doing difficult jobs at the plant’s frontline.” Japanese media reported that nuclear workers had been offered up to 400,000 yen (£3,000) a day to work inside the crippled reactors. Before the crisis some contract workers were reportedly being paid as little as 10,000 to 20,000 yen (£75 to £150) a day. Tepco said it was considering using “jumpers”, or workers who enter highly radioactive reactors to perform short but essential tasks, then evacuate quickly to avoid prolonged exposure to radiation. An early return home is unlikely given the perilous condition of the plant three weeks after the tsunami. As Kan warned on Friday: “I am prepared for a long-term battle over the Fukushima nuclear plant and to win this battle. “At the current stage we cannot say that the plant has been sufficiently stabilised. But we are preparing for all kinds of situations and I am convinced that the plant can be stabilised. We cannot say at this stage when this will happen, but we are doing our best.”
guardian.co.uk © Guardian News & Media Limited 2010 Published via the Guardian News Feed plugin for WordPress.
Thanks for subscribing to Andy Roberts blogJapanese nuclear workers face new threat from radioactive groundwater
Related posts:Japanese nuclear firm admits error on radiation reading Japanese nuclear officials fear crack in reactor core Japan fears radioactive contamination of marine life
- Tags:
- Hospital
- Japan
- japanese
- vegetable
- Minister
- health
- The Guardian
- Energy
- Environment
- News
- Article
- Main section
- World news
- International
- Ministry
- meltdown
- breakfast
- japanese media
- Nuclear power
- radiation level
- radiation levels
- Yukio Edano
- Fukushima
- radiation leak
- radiation leaks
- daiichi
- Justin McCurry
- nuclear power plant
- tokyo electric
- japanese government
- nuclear plant
- contaminate
- iodine 131
- Radiation
- Hidehiko
- Japan disaster
- Nuclear
- Technicians
- danger
- radiation measurement
- Nishiyama
- evacuation
- tepco
- radioactive iodine
- blanket
- chicken
- geometry
- government standards
- handling
- industrial safety
- isotope analysis
- japanese nuclear workers
- Kazuma
- nuclear radiation
- researcher
- safety agency
- software fault
April 1 2011, 3:55pm | Comments »
-
I posted to flickr.com
Organic Vegetable Boxes
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aroberts/4055757757/
Andyrob
Organic Vegetable Boxes
October 29 2009, 2:23pm | Comments »
-
I posted to flickr.com
June 19th Organic Vegetable Box
http://www.flickr.com/photos/aroberts/3641343112/
Andyrob
June 19th Organic Vegetable Box
- Tags:
- organic
- boxes
- organicboxes
- box
- vegetable
June 19 2009, 8:05am | Comments »
1
