Beat it

Beat it

I can't eat diary products but I love cheese so I found this...try it, relaly, it's good


FOR MORE INFORMATION GO TO: http://www.treelinecheese.com/


Ingredients: Cashew nuts, filtered water, L. Acidophilus, sea salt, dried scallions, lemon juice, onion powder.
Nutrition Facts:
Serving size: 1 oz (30g)
Number of Servings: 6
Amount Per Serving:
Calories 90 Calories from Fat 60
% of Daily Value*
Total Fat 7g 11%
Saturated Fat 1.5g 7%
Trans Fat 0g 0%
Cholesterol 0mg 0%
Sodium 95mg 4%
Total Carbohydrate 4g 1%
Dietary Fiber 1g 5%
Sugars 0g 0%
Protein 4g
Vitamin A 0%Vitamin C 0%
Calcium 0%Iron 6%
Calories per Gram: Fat 9 / Carb 4 / Protein 4 



Frequently Asked Questions

Is Treeline Cheese really cheese?

Yes. Like dairy cheese, it is made by a process of fermentation. It contains no milk, so it’s both good for you and cruelty-free.

Why is milk bad?

It’s unhealthy, cruel to animals and bad for the environment. Click on Why We're Dairy-Free for more information.

What is Treeline Cheese made of?

Our cheeses are made of fine Brazilian cashew nuts, cultured with non-dairy Lactobacillus Acidophilus. Our soft cheeses have special blends of herbs, garlic, scallions and onions.
Please see our products page for a complete list of ingredients and nutrition facts.

Is your cheese higher in salt than dairy cheeses?

No. Our soft cheeses have less salt than dairy cream cheese. Our hard cheeses have less salt than most hard dairy cheeses. They have less than half the salt of Parmesan and blue cheeses.

Does Treeline Cheese melt and stretch?

Treeline cheese softens when heated and browns when grilled. It can also be fried. However it does not stretch. This is because it is all natural and has no casein or other melting agents in it. Casein is a milk protein.

Where is Treeline Cheese Made?

In the town of Kingston, in New York’s Hudson Valley. Kingston, settled in 1651, was New York’s first capital. Our facility, minutes from the Ulster County Performing Arts Center, is part of an ongoing effort to revitalize one of the city’s distressed downtown neighborhoods. For more information go to http://artistworkspace.com

Why is Treeline Cheese suitable for people who are Lactose Intolerant?

It contains no milk and therefore no lactose.

Is Treeline Cheese good for your digestion?

Definitely. It is rich in acidophilus, a natural probiotic.

Does Treeline Cheese contain soy, palm oil or gluten?

There is no soy or palm oil on our products. Our Soft French-Style Nut Cheeses and our Aged Cracked Pepper Cheeses are Gluten-free. There are minute traces of gluten in our Aged Smoked Cheeses.

How do we get your cheese?

We are adding retail stores as fast as we can. If your local store or restaurant does not carry Treeline, please download and print this card and hand it to the store manager. We receive a lot of requests from stores and restaurants and we do our best to respond to them.

Is your packaging environmentally friendly?

Our packaging is designed to be minimal and to maintain freshness and shelf-life so that our products can be as natural as possible. All of it can be recycled. The soft cheese tubs are made of 50% recycled plastic.



FDA OKs Xigduo XR, a New Dapagliflozin-Metformin Combo


The US Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has approved a once-daily combination of dapagliflozin and metformin hydrochloride extended-release (Xigduo XR, AstraZeneca) for the treatment of adults with type 2 diabetes.

The once-daily oral tablet is the first in the United States to combine the sodium glucose cotransporter-2 inhibitor dapagliflozin (trade name Farxiga in the United States) with the biguanide extended-release (XR) metformin hydrochloride, according to an AstraZeneca statement.

The new combination is indicated for use as an adjunct to diet and exercise in adults in whom treatment with both dapagliflozin and metformin is appropriate. The combination is already approved in Australia for the same indication, whereas a slightly different version is approved in the European Union, containing an intermediate-release formulation of metformin.

Several different doses of the dapagliflozin/metformin hydrochloride combination are available, including 5 mg/500 mg, 5 mg/1000 mg, 10 mg/500 mg, and 10 mg/1000 mg, allowing for the starting dose to be individualized according to the patient's current treatment regimen. Maximum daily recommended doses are 10 mg for dapagliflozin and 2000 mg for metformin.

The pill should be taken in the morning with food, and the dose should be escalated gradually to reduce the risk for gastrointestinal adverse effects from the metformin.
The FDA's approval of the combination was based on four phase 3 clinical trials demonstrating efficacy and safety of the separate dapagliflozin and metformin intermediate-release or XR tablets in treatment-naive patients and those inadequately controlled on metformin, as well as when compared with the combination of a sulfonylurea plus metformin.

There have been no clinical studies of the combination pill itself in patients with diabetes, but bioequivalence was demonstrated in healthy adults between the combination pill and the separate tablets, according to AstraZeneca.


What it's like when it comes down to me versus Cake


 



Sunlight is key to diabetes fight: Scientists find the sun can actually STOP weight gain SPENDING more time in the sun could be the key to beating obesity and diabetes.




By: Jo Willey
A natural gas called nitric oxide, which is released by the skin after exposure to sunlight, helps people to control their metabolism and slow weight gain.
Rubbing a cream containing nitric oxide on to the skin can have the same effect, experts have found.
The discovery couldlead to a treatment that halts the progress of Type 2 diabetes, which is fuelled by obesity and an unhealthy lifestyle and costs the NHS £9billion a year.
Scientists from Edinburgh and Southampton, led by colleagues at the Telethon Kids Institute in Perth, Western Australia, found applying nitric oxide to the skin of overfed mice had the same effect of curbing weight gain as exposing them to ultra-violet light.
The mice displayed fewer warning signs of diabetes, such as abnormal glucose levels and resistance to insulin.
The findings, published in the journal Diabetes, show the benefits of moderate exposure to the sun’s rays.
Our observations indicate that the amounts of nitric oxide released from the skin may have beneficial effects not only on heart and blood vessels but also on the way our body regulates metabolism
Dr Richard Weller, senior lecturer in dermatology at Edinburgh University, said: “We know sun-seekers live longer than those who spend their lives in the shade.
"Studies such as this are helping us to understand how the sun can be good for us.
We need to remember that skin cancer is not the only disease that can kill us and should perhaps balance our advice on sun exposure.”
Previous studies have shown that nitric oxide can lower blood pressure after exposure to ultra-violet lamps.
Dr Martin Feelisch, of Southampton University, said: “Our observations indicate that the amounts of nitric oxide released from the skin may have beneficial effects not only on heart and blood vessels but also on the way our body regulates metabolism.”
Dr Shelley Gorman, of the Telethon Kids Institute, said: “Our findings are important because they suggest that exposure to sunlight, together with plenty of exercise and a healthy diet, may help prevent the development of obesity in children.”
Professor David Ray, of Manchester University, said: “These findings support the idea that a healthy lifestyle should include time outside in the sunshine, not only for exercise but also to benefit from sunlight on skin.”
As well as nitric oxide, the body produces vitamin D in response to sunlight, which also has health benefits.
Dr Richard Elliott, of Diabetes UK, said: “This study in mice suggests that low doses of sunlight might help to reduce risk factors for Type 2 diabetes by an effect unrelated to vitamin D, but further research is needed to see if this also applies in humans.
“We know that spending more time outdoors contributes to a healthier lifestyle in other ways, such as through exercise.”


The 20 foods that increase nitric oxide
 
1. Dark Chocolate

 Several studies have documented that cocoa, especially the raw kind, increases nitric oxide production and lowers blood pressure.
   There is also evidence of cacao healing the endolethium (the thin layer of cells that lines the interior surface of blood vessels) by increasing the amount of cells that repair it.
   The crucial part in choosing right kind of cacao is the quality. If possible you should always buy raw unprocessed kind, because the ones they sell on markets are so overprocessed that they shouldn’t be even called chocolate anymore.
 

2. Watermelon
Watermelon contains a lot of the amino acid L-Citrulline that is one of the best natural compounds to increase nitric oxide, proven by countless of studies.
  Read this post to learn more about L-Citrulline and how it converts into nitric oxide in the body.
 

3. Pomegranate
If I would have to choose the best food for nitric oxide production and testosterone levels, it would be pomegranate.
   Pomegranate has been performing perfectly in every single study that it has been researched for, producing effects such as reducing arterial plaque thickness by 30% and increasing testosterone levels by 22% in peer reviewed studies.
 
4. walnuts
Walnuts are packed with vitamin E which helps you arteries and testosterone levels.
   Also it has been recently studied and proved to increase nitric oxide production and also to lower blood pressure, significantly.
   This is probably due to the high amounts of L-Arginine found in walnuts, which has been linked to an increase in nitric oxide production, more about L-Arginine here.
 

5. Brown rice
Rice might seem like a food that has nothing on it. Actually I thought so for years myself.
   Recently though I stumbled into this one study that showed a significant increase in nitric oxide levels after the subjects had consumed brown rice.
   Shortly after that I found another one which stated that brown rice also relaxed arterial walls and improved bloodflow significantly.
 
 
6. Spinach
Spinach is known to have one of the highest nitrate contents of all plants, which means that it’s a pretty awesome food to eat if you are looking to increase nitric oxide production.
   Learn more about nitrates in foods and how those convert into nitric oxide, here.
 
 
7. Oranges
Oranges and orange juice contains high amounts of vitamin C, which has been shown to protect your precious nitric oxide molecules from free radicals.
   So ideally there would be no point in increasing your nitric oxide levels without consuming vitamin C and antioxidants at the same time, because without the vitamin C, your beloved nitric oxide would just oxidize away before really doing anything in your body.
 
8. Beets
Beetroot is one of those foods that contain nitrates as explained here.
   The thing that really makes beets so amazing is the fact that it is one of those foods that has highest nitrate count in all of plants, and at the same time beets are capable to lower your estrogen levels by acting as a methylator as explained here.
 
9. Cranberries
There are countless of health benefits that link back to cranberries.
   Possibly one of the less known ones is the fact that cranberries increase nitric oxide production, while lowering blood pressure significantly at the same time. This was found out by a study conducted back in the year 2000.
 
10. Garlic
Researchers say that garlic is a potent activator of NOS (nitric oxide synthase), and produces same kind of effects as Cialis or Viagra.
   In one study it was noted that garlic decreased systolic and diastolic blood pressure by 8 points on subjects with high blood pressure. That’s a very impressive result from a food, as it shows to be working even better than most of the high blood pressure medications.
 

11. Black tea
Black tea contains caffeine which acts as a vasoconstrictor, and that’s the main reason why black tea is not something you usually see on a list of foods that increase nitric oxide. But despite black teas caffeine content, it still has some major vasodilating effects.
   Many studies claim that black tea significantly increases nitric oxide production and lessens the arterial stiffness.
   On top of that there is this study done back in 2009 which claims that more black tea = more bloodflow.
 

12. Cayenne pepper
Cayenne pepper contains high amount of capsaicin, the compound that makes all chili’s hot.
   One study noted that capsaicin has a dose dependent effect, meaning that more the subjects consumed capsaicin, the more their nitric oxide levels increased and arteries relaxed.
 

13. Honey
One animal study claims that honey significantly increases nitric oxide production.
   This is probably caused by either the high enzyme content, or the high nitrate content that honey has.
 

14. Pistachios
Like almost all nuts, pistachios are also packed with L-Arginine, a precursor of nitric oxide, that is known for its ability to increase nitric oxide production significantly.
 
15. Salmon
Wild salmon is a very good source of co-enzyme Q10, enzyme that can be spotted on moisturizer adds for women.
   Co-enzyme Q10 is not only great for soothing wrinkles, it’s also a very good nitric oxide booster as it has been shown in dozens of studies to increase nitric oxide production significantly.
 
16. Kale
Kale is also a very good source of co-enzyme Q10 which boosts nitric oxide.
   Kale also has very high nitrate content which makes it very good nitric oxide booster.
  Theres also many other health benefits linked to kale, such as increased testosterone levels and improved arterial health.
 
17. Animal organs
One of the greatest foods that every man should be consuming are the animal organs.
   The organs contain high amounts of cholesterol and healthy fat-soluble vitamins that boost your testosterone levels.
   Those organs are also very good source for co-enzyme Q10 that increases nitric oxide levels, so it’s a win-win situation if you eat organs!
 
18. Onions
Onions are not only good for your testosterone levels, as they have been shown to increase nitric oxide production in 2 different studies.
   They are also a very good source of vitamin C, which as explained above protects your nitric oxide molecule from free radicals.
   Onions also contain a compound called quercetin, explained briefly here. Querceting is well known for its ability to boost nitric oxide levels.
 
19. Shrimps
 Shrimps are one of the best sources of dietary L-Arginine, as mentioned above L-Arginine is an amino acid and precursor of nitric oxide.
   By consuming shrimps you are essentially increasing the amount of L-Arginine in your body which then converts into nitric oxide.
 
20. Peanut butter
 Nuts are high in arginine and peanut butter is filled with what? Peanuts of course! Now what could be any more easier than consuming some tasty peanut butter to increase nitric oxide production? Nothing. Except perhaps eating a watermelon…

 Anyhow consume some peanut butter, preferably organic kind with unprocessed peanuts to increase your nitric oxide levels naturally.


McDonald’s profit falls 30%: Are Australia’s fast food companies next?


By Andrew Mudie –

Analysts were delivered a rude shock on Monday (US time) when long-time fast food supremo McDonald’s Corporation (NYSE:MCD) reported a 30% fall in profit and acknowledged significant headwinds in most markets.
McDonald’s shares fell over 3% on the news that third quarter profit fell to US$1.07 billion from US$1.52 billion last year, and earnings per share fell to US$1.09 a share from US$1.52 last year. Analysts expected US$1.37 a share but most importantly McDonald’s management reported that the company was facing headwinds in many of its regions.



Big Soda's false populism





By CHRISTOPHER D. COOK



Studies show sweet drink consumption contributes to Type 2 diabetes, obesity and heart disease
San Francisco residents drink 23.4 million gallons of sugar-laden soda drinks each year
San Francisco report finds a soda tax would reduce consumption by 31%
In its $10.5-million spending binge to defeat soda tax measures in Berkeley and San Francisco in November — and to stem the nationwide push to hold Big Soda accountable for epidemic diseases related to sugar overconsumption — the soda industry has positioned itself as a populist defender of poor people's access to supposedly cheap soda.
In San Francisco, the American Beverage Assn. calls its campaign the Coalition for an Affordable City, likening a rise in soda prices from the proposed two cents per ounce tax (a penny per ounce in the Berkeley measure) to skyrocketing rents that have displaced thousands of residents.
The soda industry is protecting sales and profits, not poor people's economic or physical well-being.- 
But it's the soda industry that is generating enormous costs with its glut of sugary drinks — to both human health and our collective pocketbook. Our national epidemic of obesity, diabetes and heart disease costs us millions of lives and hundreds of billions of dollars annually, and health studies consistently identify sugar overconsumption as a significant factor.
To be sure, a soda tax would make sugar-packed drinks more expensive for all consumers, including poor people, to help discourage overconsumption. But the true costs of seemingly "cheap" soda are deadly high — physically and financially — and poor consumers pay dearly for high soda consumption. Studies repeatedly show it contributes to elevated rates of Type 2 diabetes, obesity and heart disease, resulting in widespread suffering and huge healthcare costs.
Don't buy Big Soda's faux populist frame: The soda industry is protecting sales and profits, not poor people's economic or physical well-being. Rather than an attack on poor people's soda rights, the proposed taxes are important public health measures that would enhance and expand access to healthful food and beverage options for poor people and communities of color.
A report by the San Francisco city economist found that a soda tax would reduce consumption by 31%. The city, despite its "foodie" reputation, imbibes 23.4 million gallons of sugar-laden soda drinks each year.
A study by scientists from UC San Francisco, San Francisco General Hospital and Columbia University concluded that a penny-per-ounce tax on sweetened beverages "would prevent nearly 100,000 cases of heart disease, 8,000 strokes and 26,000 deaths over the next decade." A soda tax would "prevent 240,000 cases of diabetes per year," says study coauthor Kirsten Bibbins-Domingo, professor of medicine at UC San Francisco.
and minority communities in California and nationally have very high rates of diabetes, a chronic condition with potentially devastating health complications," Bibbins-Domingo explains. "Although many steps are needed to reverse the rising diabetes trends in the state, our study suggests that efforts to curb sugary beverage consumption can have a significant positive impact, particularly in those most likely to be affected."
The industry's false frame of soda access obscures the reality that a veritable flood of soda, along with fast food and junk food, has crowded out more healthful food and beverage choices in low-income communities across the nation. In addition to discouraging soda's damaging proliferation, the tax would produce revenue supporting children's nutrition and physical education programs, creating vitally needed openings for more healthful alternatives in poor communities.
In Berkeley and San Francisco, a broad coalition of public health groups, Latino and African American health and community organizations, education and youth groups, food access advocates and others are backing the soda tax measures as a means of protecting health and expanding poor communities' access to nutritious food and drink.
It's important to view Big Soda's products and campaign claims in the context of America's deep food divide. Health studies and food mapping research show direct links between poverty, food access, the proliferation of fast food and junk food (including soda), and elevated rates of chronic and life-threatening diseases.
Although soda taxes alone won't fix America's nutritional nightmare, they would bolster efforts to expand access to healthful food in poor communities. By encouraging all Americans to consume less soda, these taxes create the incentive and opportunity to seek out more healthful options that would save lives. It would also save dollars; otherwise, the soda industry wouldn't be so worried.

Christopher D. Cook is a journalist and the author of "Diet for a Dead Planet: Big Business and the Coming Food Crisis."





Could a Donut Tax Save Lives?


By Brian Goldman

Canadians keep getting heavier and heavier. Obesity rates in this country have tripled over the past thirty years. Now an editorial just published in the Canadian Medical Association Journal is calling for tough action to deal with obesity.
The editorial calls for a new approach to tackling the obesity epidemic, proposing the use of tried and tested methods that have been highly successful at curbing rates of tobacco use. The authors say the government should pass laws that - as with tobacco - restrict the sale of foods that are high calorie and nutrient poor. It also says the government should make these foods more expensive to purchase by slapping taxes on them. Call it a donut tax.  This kind of approach might also include age restrictions on certain foods as well as laws banning super-sized portions.
The CMA says that the current educational approach -- giving Canadians guidelines on things like how to eat right and warning about the diseases associated with obesity -- has clearly not worked. The editorial says our society is over-endowed with nutritional guidelines and yet far too many of us continue to make the wrong choices. There are plenty of exercise guidelines that most Canadians likewise don't follow. The Global Burden of Disease Study by the World Health Organization says that between 1980 and 2013, rates obesity went up astronomically despite education.  
The editorial says that fundamental problem with the educational approach is that it wrongly assumes that eating right or wrong comes down to a choice and that education can help people to make the right choice. It points out that there is a neurobiological basis behind the human craving for sugary and high-fat foods noting the addictive properties of such foods. It also makes the point that the craving for these foods gave humans a survival advantages at a time when food was scarce and humans who could make every calorie count were more likely to survive.  The editorial bats away the notion of food being a simple choice by asking rhetorically, "Are millions of people really choosing to be overweight?"
Last year, Mexico imposed an 8% tax on junk foods - those high in saturated fat, sugar and salt - and a surtax on one litre bottles of sugary drinks such as Coca Cola.  Mexicans drink an astonishing two hundred litres per year of sugary soft drinks. That's the highest consumption rate on the planet. The money raised is supposed to pay for school health programs and access to drinking water in schools. Mexico has one of the highest rates of obesity in the world - even higher than the US. Last month, Ecuador announced it was going to pass legislation taxing fast food -- particularly from US fast food chains like McDonald's and Burger King.  The pointed reference to US-based companies makes one wonder if the measure is as much a slap at Corporate America as it is an effort to slim down Ecuadorans. 
A 2010 study published in JAMA Internal Medicine looked at more than five thousand young adults.  It concluded that a ten percent tax on sugary soft drinks led to a seven percent reduction in calories from soft drinks, and a ten percent tax on pizza led to a twelve percent reduction in calories from pizza. The authorities concluded that an eighteen percent tax on these foods would results in a two pound weight loss per person per year.  But beware of unintended consequences of taxation. In October 2011, the Danish government introduced a tax on pizza, meat, milk, cheese, butter, oil and processed foods containing more than 2.3% saturated fat, and then a tax on sugary foods. The fat tax was abolished a little over a year later, and the government abandoned the sugar tax idea.  The reason: these measures didn't change the consumption patterns of Danes.  Not only that, the tax led to cross border shopping to countries that didn't post the tax, thus costing Danes jobs. Given Canada's close proximity to the US border, I could see the same problem happening here as well.


Big Soda Is Totally Freaking Out About This Local Ordinance



Will spending $1.7 million stop a small city from enacting a tax on sugary drinks?
—By Josh Harkinson

In a couple of weeks, residents of Berkeley, California, will decide whether or not to place a penny-an-ounce tax on sugary beverages such as sweetened teas and sodas. The beverage industry has fought off similar taxes and restrictions in every American city where they've been proposed, but it has never faced a more formidable challenge than it does in this overwhelmingly liberal and well-educated college town.
The soda fight is, if nothing else, a case study in whether truckloads of cash can sway a politically engaged citizenry.
Early polls show almost two-thirds of Berkeley residents favoring the tax proposal, known as Measure D. If Big Soda can defeat a tax here, the thinking goes, it can defeat one anywhere. Yet if the industry loses, the momentum could swing to the nutritionists and health advocates who've argued for years that sugar-packed foods and sugary drinks are the smoking guns in our diabetes and obesity epidemics—despite decades of campaigning by the sugar industry to make us believe otherwise. (A new study suggests that drinking a 20-ounce soda daily can age your cells as much as smoking does.)
To date, beverage companies have poured an astounding $1.7 million into derailing this small-city measure, more than $21 per registered voter. With No on D ads flooding local TV and radio broadcasts, newspapers, bus stops, light-rail stations, and residential doorknobs—not to mention all the mailers and handouts from paid canvassers, it can feel like the whole city is under invasion by a propaganda machine. The soda fight is, if nothing else, a case study in whether truckloads of cash can sway a politically engaged citizenry.
Rather than defend the merits of sugary beverages or even question the point of taxing them, the ads seem designed to confuse voters and breed cynicism about how the money will be spent. I snapped some photos of the advertising around town and asked the measure's outgunned campaign to respond to some of the claims.
Anti-Measure D ads appear on numerous Berkeley bus shelters. Clear Channel Outdoor, which handles the advertising did not return a call seeking information about their cost and placement.
According to Sara Soka, the campaign manager for Berkeley vs. Big Soda, as the pro-D campaign is known, milk products and 100% fruit juice were exempted due to their nutritional value. Soda, on the other hand, is just empty calories. "It's not like kids are walking around and drinking milkshakes," Soka says. Liquid sweeteners added to coffee drinks are taxed. Alcohol is exempted because it's already taxed. Diet drinks, while not exactly good for you, also aren't strongly linked to diabetes or obesity.
Two of Berkeley's three BART stations, I discovered, were awash with ads opposing the measure. According to Berkeleyside, a local news site, the No campaign has spent $46,750 on the BART ads alone. Here are more shots at the North Berkeley station.
But before I outed myself as a reporter, I wanted to hear their pitch to voters firsthand. Here's a short clip from my chat with one canvasser. (The background music is coming from his cell phone).
One of the reasons he said I should vote against the measure—I'm actually an Oakland resident, so I can't vote on it either way—is that it would hurt local businesses and the poor. Now it's conceivable that someone going on a big soda run might pop over the border to avoid the tax, but it's hard to imagine that anyone grabbing a drink at the local convenience store would bother.
As for whether the tax would hurt the poor, Soka of Berkeley vs. Big soda argues that the tax was in fact designed to help low-income people by reducing the obesity epidemic that disproportionately affects the poor and people of color. And while some people may not like the nanny-state aspect of that, Measure D has been endorsed by the NAACP and Latinos Unidos. If the measure's opponents "were truly concerned about communities of color or low-income communities," Soka said, "they would stop using them as a target."
Here are some flyers the canvassers were handing out:
The fairness factor is always a nice argument. The irony, though, is that soda interests used nearly the opposite critique to defeat a soda-tax proposal in nearby Richmond two years ago. The wording of the Richmond proposal did not explicitly exclude certain beverages, such as soy milk and baby formula. So "they immediately attacked us saying that we were going to tax that," recalls Jeff Ritterman, who led the Richmond effort. And although the city attorney clarified that the tax would indeed exempt those drinks, the industry's campaign firm kept using the bogus claims, right up through Election Day.
Over at the Ashby BART station, which was covered completely in anti-Measure D ads, I encountered still more canvassers.
Berkeleyside has found it necessary to respond to the prominent use of its logo: "Many Berkeley residents have been confused by that literature, and have asked Berkeleyside whether the news site has taken a position to oppose Measure D," the publication noted in an article about the flyers. "Berkeleyside does not take editorial positions. The flyer is a production of the No on Measure D campaign."
In fact, most of the relevant op-eds on the site support Measure D. But Big Soda has spent almost $10,000 placing ads on Berkeleyside, and tens of thousands more on similar ads in most local publications. Here's a two-page spread in the East Bay Express, which also has covered the fight.
The argument about the tax receipts going into Berkeley's general fund instead of being earmarked for, say, nutrition programs—a pitch I also heard from the canvasser—is misleading at best, the soda-tax proponents say. There's a reason it's not earmarked: Under California law, you need a two-thirds majority to pass a local ordinance that earmarks tax money for a specific use. (One reason why a similar proposal in San Francisco is far less likely to pass.) Measure D, Soka informs me, would direct the Berkeley City Council to appoint a panel of experts with backgrounds in nutrition and education to determine how to spend the money. And it's almost a given that the cash would go toward health and education programs for low-income communities.
Even if they don't watch TV, use public transit, or read local newspapers, Berkeleyans can hardly avoid these:
A doorknob hanger.
Foes of the Measure D also have done at least seven mass mailings, defined as mailings targeting more than 200 households. Here's one mailer:
The White Pages doesn't show anybody named Masanoni Yasumagn living in Berkeley. But they do list a very similarly named resident, Masanori Yasunaga, who happens to be the CEO of Calbee, Inc.—the "second largest snack company in the world."
Here's another mailer. What is this woman thinking? If she were an actual Berkeley resident, she might be wondering why she's getting so many anti-Measure D mailers.
Or rather, read the soda industry's annotated version.
Until recently, there were a lot more signs around town like the one below. But that was before the city sent out two letters warning the campaigns that it's illegal to place yard signs on public property. Now No on D yard signs can only be found in actual yards—which is to say, not many can be found.  After driving all over town one morning, this was the only one I saw, and only after I asked Sara Soka where I might find one.




Whey to go - new food fad a boon for Dutch dairy farmers


The powerful Dutch dairy industry is scrambling to cash in on exploding demand for whey, a cheese by-product once used mainly in cattle feed that's turned into a global nutritional hit.
Over the last decade powdered whey, produced when milk separates into curd during the cheese-making process, has become a multibillion-euro industry. Analysts say research has proven that whey, once the ugly stepsister to its more widely consumed sibling, cheese, is in fact one of the planet's best sources of natural protein.
From bodybuilding supplements to infant formula and fortified meals for the elderly, demand for whey has skyrocketed over the last five years, with even non-dairy companies wanting a piece of the action. And analysts predict that is likely to keep growing, driven by a taste for imported dairy products from Asia's growing middle class and the expanding ranks of elderly around the world.
Last year whey powder and proteins represented a global market of €7.6 billion (HK$75.2 billion), up 36 per cent from 2011, said Tage Affertsholt, dairy market specialist at the Danish-based 3A Business Consulting Group.
By 2017, the market will have expanded to €9 billion, Affertsholt predicted. The demand for whey "just keeps growing, irrespective of the relative poor performance of the global economy," he said. "Some people used to say whey is a by-product. Today cheese has become something of a by-product."
Investment in the whey industry since 2012 has topped €3 billion globally, including €2 billion in Europe. "At one stage whey was worth pretty much nothing, only good to go into cattle feed," Rabobank senior analyst Kevin Bellamy said. "Today, whey forms a major part of many dairy companies' profits."
The Dutch dairy industry is fighting for its stake in the rapidly expanding market.
"All the major dairy companies in the world are squaring up for control of the liquid whey industry," said Affertsholt.

One of the world's largest dairy cooperatives, FrieslandCampina, now produces more than 350,000 tonnes of "whey dry matter" a year. Fonterra plans to export whey from there to the half-billion-euro Chinese market, said Jan Willem van der Windt, the company's European financial director.


Michael Bloomberg funds campaign to impose fizzy drink tax in California


Former New York mayor takes his war on sugary ‘soda’ to town of Berkeley

By Rosa Prince

Michael Bloomberg, the former mayor of New York, is taking his war against fizzy drinks to California by funding a campaign to impose a tax on sugary beverages.
The billionaire businessman, who was made an honorary knight by the Queen this month, waged an ultimately unsuccessful effort to introduce a ban on the sale of supersized soft drinks in New York City during his time as mayor.
He has now donated thousands of dollars to a group in the town of Berkeley which is fighting to persuade voters to impose a one cent an ounce tax on fizzy drink – or soda as it is called in the US.
So far he has given $85,000 (£53,000) and is expected to donate more as the campaign continues. The measure will be voted on next month.
The contribution was welcomed by the group, which had been heavily outspent by its opponents in the drinks industry, having raised only $135,000 (£84,000) by last week.
In contrast, those seeking to block the new law had already spent $1.4 million (£870,000), the equivalent of $12 (£7.46) per voter in a town of only 117,000.
Howard Wolfson, one of Mr Bloomberg’s advisers, told the New York Times that the money would be spent on campaign literature and efforts to persuade those who support the measure to turn out on election day.
He added: “We want to come in and try to equalise the spending disparity, which is enormous.”
Last year, Mr Bloomberg contributed nearly $10 million (£6.2 million) to a successful campaign to tax fizzy drinks in Mexico. Retailers say sales have plunged since then.
The 72-year-old former Republican who became an independent mayor has contributed large sums of money to a number of causes, including gun control and the environment.



The Walmart Way of Business: When Profits Go Up, Cut Health Care for 30,000 Employees



BY ZAID JILANI, ALTERNET

Reprinted with permission from AlterNet.
Walmart is a wildly successful company. Its “corporate fact sheet” online boasts that for “the fiscal year ended January 31, 2014, Walmart increased net sales by 1.6% to $473.1 billion and returned $12.8 billion to shareholders through dividends and share repurchases. Walmart ranked first on the 2014 Fortune 500 list of "the world’s largest companies by revenue.”
Yet despite the retail behemoth's growing financial prosperity, which greatly benefits the company's shareholders, executives and especially the Walton family, the company has now decided that poverty wages are not bad enough for its employees. It will also cut their benefits. Walmart just announced that it will both be cutting health care coverage altogether for 30,000 part-time employees (about 2 percent of its workforce) while increasing the premiums paid by its other employees. The size of the premium increases is significant—biweekly premiums for its lowest-cost employee plans will rise 19 percent from $3.50 to $21.90.
Walmart's latest move on health care is just the latest in its crusade to build a business empire based on cheap labor, one where even full-time workers need food stamps to survive. It is notorious for suppressing employee rights, going as far as to shut down entire stores that have unionized. In 2013, a Congressional report estimated that Walmart's failure to provide decent wages and benefits could cost taxpayers as much as $900,000 per store thanks to government provision of food stamps and other aid. Chances are that number will increase now.
Thanks to all this, the Waltons, the Walmart heirs, have more wealth than the bottom 40 percent of Americans—estimated at $102.7 billion in 2012.





Mexico: Study Finds Soft Drink Tax Effective


Coke is the second most recognized word in the world behind “okay", but a new tax in Mexico has reduced the consumption in the nation with the highest consumption per capita of the sugar high beverage.
After a new tax on soft drinks, over half of Mexicans have reduced their consumption of sugary soft drinks, the National Obesity Survey found.
The taxes in Mexico add one peso, about 7 cents, to the cost of a liter of sugary drinks in addition to a 5 per cent of the price to foods with 275 calories or more per 100 grams.
The survey also found that almost all respondents recognized that the consumption of soft drinks was a cause of obesity and diabetes.
Seventeen percent of respondents said they consumed more than three liters of soft drinks a week this year, down from the 25 percent who drank this amount in 2013.
“Consumers are becoming aware of the fact that drinking soda and sugary beverages is bad,” said the organization which is made up of non-governmental organizations in the report.
Ex Mexican president Vicente Fox (2000-2006) was a top Coca-Cola executive, as Mexico saw a 3 fold increase in its coca-cola products.
The nation is the highest consumer in the world of Coca-Cola products followed by Chile and the United States.
For example, in Los Altos, each inhabitant drinks 2.25 liters daily and is the reason why the bottles there are extra-large and not sold anywhere else.
And directly related to this, Mexico is the country with the second-largest number of obese adults, trailing just the United States, and has the largest number of overweight children.
But the Coke empire is still expanding in developing nations, with in 2000, BRIC countries making up only 12 percent of Coke’s total sales. By 2010, they hit 20 percent of its total sales, and they’re expected to make up 25 percent of Coke’s global sales by 2015.
Another Latin American nation, Ecuador plans to introduce a tax on food sold by fast food chains, Ecuadorian President Rafael Correa said on September 4.
Details of the plans have yet to be disclosed, but Correa said the revenue from the tax will be used to fund health care spending.



Eating Disorders May Start In Elementary School



Eating disorders may start in elementary school, according to research conducted at the University of Montreal. The study, presented at a meeting of the Eating Disorders Association of Canada in Vancouver, surveyed data  on 215 kids (ages 8-12) with eating problems.
The research  team found that over 15 percent made themselves vomit from time to time, 52 percent had been hospitalized because of their eating disorder, and 48 percent had received outpatient treatment.
"Many researchers believe that bulimia only appears at adolescence, but our studies indicate that the problem can arise much earlier. It is possible that it is currently under-diagnosed due to a lack of awareness and investigation," said study  author Dominique Meilleur.
"Many factors are associated with the development and persistence of eating disorders," she added. "For some children, bullying can initiate or reinforce body image preoccupations and possibly lead  to a change in eating behavior."
Twenty-three percent of the kids questioned said they had been mocked or bullied because of their appearance.



Mediterranean Diet May Help Reverse Metabolic Syndrome


Twitter @CarolynMcC, or carolyn.mcclanahan@gmail.com.

The Mediterranean diet, rich in whole grains, fruits, beans, fish and olive oil, may help reverse metabolic syndrome, according to research conducted at the Hospital  Universitari de Sant Joan de Reus, in Spain. The study, published in CMAJ, surveyed the effects of the Mediterranean diet on metabolic syndrome, which is characterized by a collection of risk factors for heart disease.
The study  compared results of one group on the Mediterranean diet against a group on a low fat diet over a period of five years. Twenty-eight percent of those who maintained the Mediterranean diet no longer met the criteria for metabolic syndrome.
"It seems that the Mediterranean diet supplemented with nuts or virgin olive oil has similar effects on the metabolic syndrome reversal," said lead  author Dr. Jordi Salas-Salvado.
Metabolic syndrome is a cluster of conditions, which include increased blood pressure, a high blood sugar level, excess body fat around the waist and abnormal cholesterol levels, that occur together, increasing your risk of heart disease, stroke and diabetes, according to the Mayo Clinic.




Managing The Cost Of Your Diabetes



Diabetes is an expensive disease. Approximately 9.3% of Americans have diabetes and another 27% have pre-diabetes. In 2012, the estimated direct medical costs such as doctor’s visits, hospitalizations, and medications were $176 BILLION. Based on these numbers, diabetes alone accounts for 7% of the money we spend in our health care system. In addition, we lose $69 billion per year in reduced productivity – time off from work for doctor’s visits and hospitalizations, early disability, and early death all cost our society. The epidemic of obesity will only make these costs more staggering in the future. What can we do to improve these dreadful statistics? Importantly, if you have diabetes, what can you do to cut the cost of your illness?
There are two main classifications of diabetes. Type 1 diabetes typically occurs in childhood or young adulthood, and is an autoimmune phenomenon that destroys the ability of the pancreas to make insulin. Type 2 diabetes occurs when the body becomes resistant to the effects of insulin and eventually the pancreas burns out. Type 2 diabetes is usually adult onset and is the result of obesity and genetic predisposition. The obesity epidemic has significantly increased the number of children with Type 2 diabetes. The distinction between types of diabetes is important both in treatment and in financial implications.
Personal Cost of Diabetes
Many people think of diabetes as just a problem with “high sugar” levels.  Have you ever spilled something sweet on your hands? It leaves them sticky and gross, especially if you can’t wash them and gunk gets on top of the sugar. Imagine your blood having high levels of a substance doing the exact same thing to your body. As it courses through your blood vessels, it coats all your organs, and here is what happens:
•           Your heart becomes more susceptible to cholesterol and other lipids, leading to clogging of the arteries, which increases your risk of heart attacks.
•           In fact, all your blood vessels become susceptible to fatty plaque build-up – increasing risk of strokes in your brain and arteries becoming clogged in your legs, which then results in a higher risk of amputations. And for the guys, it also decreases blood flow to your penis, making sexual performance a distant memory.
•           The sugar messes up the function of specialized cells needed for vision and sensation – leading to blindness and neuropathy. When you can’t feel your feet, you can become easily injured, leading to yet higher risk of amputation.
Fortunately, taking good care of blood sugar levels improves lifespan and more importantly, quality of life. Of course, better health leads to lower health care costs. Let’s examine the financial cost of diabetes on a personal level.
•           People diagnosed with diabetes incur medical expenses 2.3 times higher on average than those without diabetes.
•           Poorly controlled diabetes makes it nearly impossible to get individual disability insurance, life insurance, and long term care insurance. There are policies available for those with well controlled diabetes, but for disability and long term care insurance, these policies can be expensive. Life insurance can be obtained for less well controlled diabetes, although at more expensive rates.
•           If you take great care of your diabetes, you should only have to see your doctor no more than four times a year. However, if your diabetes is in poor control, you will see the doctor more often and end up in the hospital periodically. This will increase use of sick days and potentially affect your income.
•           Diabetic patients need to follow a special diet, which includes a majority of healthy foods. Healthy meals are more expensive than the typical American diet.
Decreasing Out of Pocket Costs for Diabetes
The obvious way to decrease out of pocket costs for diabetes is to keep your blood sugar in good control through a healthy diet, exercise, and appropriate use of medication. By creating a consistent method of care, you can decrease doctor visits and stay in better health. Make this the bedrock of your care plan.
•           Until your diabetes is in good control, keep a diary of when and what you eat. A great (and free) application to do this is MyFitnessPal.
•           In conjunction with your diet diary, input your daily blood sugar checks. Your doctor may have you check your glucose anywhere from one to four times a day, depending on your medication and level of control.
•           Be very consistent with taking your medication, whether it be insulin or oral medication.
•           Show your doctor your diet diary and your glucose levels. If your glucose levels are in good control, they will back off on how often they need to see you. If your glucose levels are not in good control, you have provided the information they need to adjust your medications appropriately. Over time, if you are following your diet, you will obtain good control of your diabetes and visits will be less frequent.
Other tips to decrease out of pocket costs:
•           According to Dr. Jennifer Shine Dyer, a pediatric endocrinologist, some health plans do a better job covering diabetic supplies. If you are responsible for purchasing your own insurance, make certain your plan covers what you are using. Ask your physician and health insurance agent to recommend plans that may better cover your needs.
•           Generally, for those who need to go to the doctor often, copays and deductibles are maxed out each year. If you take great care of your diabetes, you may not see the doctor as often and your deductibles and copays may not max out. It may then pay to obtain a higher deductible plan with lower yearly premiums.
By becoming an empowered patient and taking care of your diabetes, good health and lower health care costs can be the lasting result.