Fashion models in France will need to provide medical certificates proving they are healthy in order to work, after a new law was introduced banning those considered to be excessively thin.
A further measure, to come into force on 1 October, will require magazines, adverts and websites to mark images in which a model’s appearance has been manipulated with the words photographie retouchée (retouched photograph).
Doctors are urged to pay special attention to the model’s body mass index (BMI), a calculation taking into account age, height and weight. However, unlike similar legislation passed in Italy and Spain, models will not have to reach a minimum BMI.
Under World Health Organisation guidelines an adult with a BMI below 18.5 is considered underweight, 18 malnourished, and 17 severely malnourished. The average model measuring 1.75m (5ft 9in) and weighing 50kg (7st 12lb) has a BMI of 16.
Announcing the introduction of the new rules on Friday, France’s health minister said they were aimed at preventing anorexia by stopping the promotion of inaccessible ideals of beauty.
“Exposing young people to normative and unrealistic images of bodies leads to a sense of self-depreciation and poor self-esteem that can impact health-related behaviour,” the health and social affairs minister, Marisol Touraine, said.
Given Paris’s iconic role in the fashion industry, the measures – passed in 2015 but only just coming into effect – are likely to have a symbolic impact around the world.
The proposals had originally suggested a minimum BMI for models but, following an outcry from fashion executives and modelling agencies, this was ditched in favour of allowing doctors to decide whether a model is too thin.
Agencies who use models without valid medical certificates will face a fine of €75,000 (£54,000) and staff face up to six months in prison. Failing to flag-up retouched images will incur a fine of €37,500, or up to 30% of the amount spent on the advert.
Live coverage of all the day’s campaign action with the last PMQs before the election and a row over Labour’s NHS funding promises
Labour will lift pay cap for ‘overworked’ NHS staff
Sign up for the Snap, our daily election email – and read today’s
PMQs – Snap verdict
PMQs – Verdict from the Twitter commentariat
Afternoon summary
You’d have to have a screw loose not to think things are pretty tough. I noticed when Jeremy addressed the PLP [parliamentary Labour party] he didn’t announce the key seats we’d need to take off the Tories to form a Labour government. I thought that was ominous.
It is a remarkable achievement for the leadership to have taken a catastrophic situation in Scotland and made it quite a lot worse. We seem to be doing worse in Wales … We’ve gone backwards amongst every demographic, every region of the country. Jeremy is behind Theresa May on managing the NHS! It’s quite a special achievement to put all of that together in a short period of time. Hats off to Jeremy and Seumas [Milne], Diane [Abbott] and John [McDonnell]. That’s pretty special.
In February the government announced that it would close the so-called Dubs scheme for taking unaccompanied child refugees from Europe after a total of 350 were admitted. This caused outrage because, when the government accepted Lord Dubs’ amendment to the Immigration Act committing it to take some unaccompanied child refugees, it was expected that around 3,000 could be admitted.
Today, in a written ministerial statement, the Home Office minister Robert Goodwill has admitted that a further 130 places are available for unaccompanied child refugees. The Home Office should have know about these extra places when it made its announcement two months ago but it didn’t because it lost the submission from a council saying it could provide the places.
The government remains fully committed to the implementation of our commitment under section 67 [the Dubs amendment] to transfer unaccompanied children to the UK from Europe and no eligible child has been refused transfer to the UK as a result of this error. The home secretary has written to her counterparts in France, Greece and Italy and we are working closely with member states, as well as the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the International Organisation for Migration (IOM) and NGO partners so we can identify and transfer children to the UK as soon as possible.
It is welcome that an extra 130 children will be brought to safety in Britain under the Dubs scheme. But it beggars belief that these children weren’t helped earlier because of a basic admin error. This shows a shameful failure by the Home Office to talk properly to local councils who were willing and able to help or to check they had counted the figures up right. This shows the Home Office simply hasn’t taken this seriously enough.
Time and again the select committee and local councils across the country told the Home office that there were more places available, but they wouldn’t budge and they failed to follow up. Surely on something as important as this, when children are at risk of trafficking and prostitution, they would have checked the numbers were right.
Here is another picture from Jeremy Corbyn’s NHS visit this afternoon.
The Scottish Labour party has named a former chief of the pro-UK Better Together campaign, Blair McDougall, and a leading Corbyn supporter, Rhea Wolfson, in their first tranche of general election candidates.
After its rout by the Scottish National party at the 2015 election, Scottish Labour was left with one MP, leaving it the major task of finding up to 58 new candidates when its popularity is at a record low of 14%. This is the first election where Scottish leader Kezia Dugdale and her officials have autonomy from the UK party in choosing candidates.
Leanne Wood, the leader of Plaid Cymru, has also criticised Jeremy Corbyn for not being willing to take part in a leaders’ debate without Theresa May. She is echoing what her friend and political ally, the SNP leader Nicola Sturgeon, said on Twitter earlier. (See 2.08pm.) In 2015 Wood and Sturgeon joined Ed Miliband, the Labour leader, Natalie Bennett, the Green party leader, and Nigel Farage, the Ukip leader, in a so-called “challengers’ debate” that did not feature David Cameron.
Wood said:
It is disappointing to hear that the leader of the Labour party is not prepared to take part in any televised leaders’ debates without the prime minister.
These debates are a good opportunity for people to engage with the election and for the leaders to put forward their vision to voters.
You have probably got the point about “strong and stable leadership” by now, but just in case you haven’t, the Guardian video team have produced a video pointing out just how frequently the Tories hammered home this message at PMQs.
Jeremy Corbyn has renewed his call for Theresa May to take part in TV election debates. And he has signalled that he won’t take part if she is not included. Speaking to Sky News, he said:
I asked Theresa May this morning about the TV debates, lots of people asked her about it, and she said they’re over because there are no more prime minister’s question times because parliament is now dissolved, or will be dissolved next week. And so, actually, the debate has to include the prime minister, the leader of the Conservative party, and we are up for that debate.
You will see me all over the country taking questions from people on the streets.
This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.
CPS source confirms they’ve received a file from Kent Police over election expenses in South Thanet
Jeremy Corbyn has been meeting health workers today.
A Panelbase poll is out today giving the Conservatives a 22-point lead over Labour. Here are the figures.
On BBC Radio 5 Live Michael Gove, the former Conservative justice secretary and a leader of the Vote Leave campaign, said he was “absolutely convinced” that Brexit would result in more money going to the NHS. When it was put to him that Vote Leave had said at one point that an extra £100m a week would go to the NHS if the UK left the EU, and he was asked if he still expected that, he replied:
I am absolutely convinced that we will be spending significantly more on the NHS [after Brexit.] I hope it’s £100m.
Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, has tweeted saying that he has “sacked” David Ward as a candidate. (See 2.26pm.)
I believe in a politics that is open, tolerant and united. David Ward is unfit to represent the party and I have sacked him.
Arlene Foster, Democratic Unionist leader and first minister in the last power sharing government in Northern Ireland, took time out today from electioneering to pay a highly symbolic visit to Irish language pupils at a Catholic school near the border.
Foster had been criticised earlier this year for her opposition to an Irish Language Act – a key demand by Sinn Fein – which would put Gaelic on an equal par to English throughout Northern Ireland.
Now Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, is accusing Jeremy Corbyn of “running scared” after it emerged that Corbyn will not take part in TV election debates if Theresa May is not included. Farron said:
Corbyn is running scared. He is running away from facing his opponents, he is running away from defending his policies, he is running away from leadership.
The Liberal Democrats have barred former Bradford East MP David Ward from standing again for the party, after Tim Farron said his comments about Jews had been “deeply offensive, wrong and antisemitic”, my colleague Jessica Elgot reports.
Related: Tim Farron sacks Lib Dem candidate for ‘deeply offensive and antisemitic’ comments
In the huddle for lobby journalists after the final PMQs of the parliament, Jeremy Corbyn’s spokesman struck an upbeat note about Labour’s prospects. He said the Conservatives’ poll lead will narrow once the campaign gets underway and the public get to hear Labour’s message, “in our own voice”.
We are confident that we can win this election, and we’re fighting for every seat, and we’re confident that once Labour’s message is clearly heard, and there is a chance for the public to hear policies that many of them won’t have heard before, but which are extremely popular, and we know to be so, that will have cut-through, and Labour support will increase.
The politics and the polling is actually quite complex and quite varied across different countries, and I don’t think it’s just a technical issue to do with the polling companies that we’re in; I think it’s to do with the volatile and fluid political situation, with much more fragmentation.
This was all dealt with when the allegation first came out, and it’s not the case that John McDonnell signed any such statement. When the story was first run about a year ago it was made clear that it was confusion about another statement; he never signed the statement involving MI5, it was another story entirely. This is recycled fake news.
Nicola Sturgeon, the Scottish first minister, has been campaigning in Stirling today.
On the World at One Andrew Gwynne, Labour’s general election coordinator, said the party’s manifesto would be published on Monday 15 May. Asked how Labour would fund its promises, he replied:
I’m not in a position to spell out the Labour party’s full manifesto here. But we will have to wait until May 15 for the manifesto.
Conservatives have denied that Boris Johnson is being sidelined from the party’s general election campaign by Theresa May, the Press Association reports.
Reports have suggested the foreign secretary has been told to keep a low profile because he is vulnerable to challenge over his pre-referendum claims that Brexit would deliver £350m a week to spend on the NHS.
A senior Conservative source dismissed the claims as speculation, and said Johnson would soon enter the fray.
Nicola Sturgeon, Scotland’s first minister, has criticised Jeremy Corbyn for apparently refusing to take part in an election debates if Theresa May is not involved. She posted this on Twitter.
Faced with an open goal, Corbyn decides against even attempting to score . Unbelievable, if true. https://t.co/JkRBLxgLID
Source close to Jeremy Corbyn reveals he won’t take part in TV debates if Theresa May doesn’t. #GE17
This is what political journalists and commentators are saying about PMQs.
Mostly people are quite positive about Jeremy Corbyn, although several people think Angus Robertson was more effective.
Corbyn uses last #PMQs to attack May on triple lock, NHS, housing, education spending cuts. Weak ground 4 May but no real blows dealt #PMQs
May is a master at not answering the question. That is why Corbyn should use #PMQs to ask her the same one 6 times. Makes her uncomfortable
Corbyn channelling impressive levels of passion at #PMQs
Corbyn is doing rather well, as he did last week. Spitting out the questions. May quite pugnacious in reply
There’s much more to being a good PM than PMQs, of course, but May remains quite weak at this. No wonder she’s dodging tv debates
COMMENT AR shows JC how to do #PMQs but remember TM wants to drop pensions triple lock. If this is the worst this gets for her…
Theresa May savages Jeremy Corbyn at final PMQs before election #GE2017 https://t.co/9X2W54WHBL pic.twitter.com/hsy094eOaX
.@AngusRobertson there proving he’s the best opposition leader in the Commons. Skewers May on pension lock #pmqs
SNP’s Angus Robertson doing what Corbyn cd hv done: forcing May to wriggle on triple lock for pensions. May refuses to guarantee it. #pmqs
Corbyn channelling Miliband 2013: “He may be strong at standing up to weak, but always weak when it comes to standing up against the strong”
Corbyn with decent election lines the tories are for ‘the rich not the rest, the strong against the weak, and weak against the strong’
Corbyn quoted both Blair (“many not the few”) and Miliband (“weak against the strong”) at #PMQs. https://t.co/Q15ztRfeIH
Some very glum faces from Labour moderates sitting behind Corbyn during PMQs.
This is #PMQs at its worst – neither answering questions, talking about completely different subjects and shouting slogans #PMQs
Labour sources are also criticising Theresa May for referring to Jeremy Corbyn at PMQs as a terrorist sympathiser.
Senior Labour source says May calling Corbyn “a terrorist sympathiser” in #pmqs was a “discredit to the office of Prime Minister”
I Like Corbyn, But… https://t.co/xZPMEvtpjH
It gets so much better #ILikeCorbynBut pic.twitter.com/YzQwd7xrC8
Labour are ruling out Jeremy Corbyn taking part in any TV debates that do not feature Theresa May, Huffington Post’s Paul Waugh reports.
Labour source just ruled out Corbyn taking part in any TV debates that don’t feature Theresa May.
Theresa May refused to commit to keeping the triple lock at PMQs. But, according to today’s Times, the Tories are thinking of keeping the policy, which ensures pensions rise every year in line with earnings, inflation or 2.5%, whichever is highest, on the grounds that it would be cost free. Here’s an extract from Francis Elliott and Oliver Wright’s story (paywall).
Theresa May is considering keeping the “triple lock” guarantee on state pension increases because it is likely to be a cost-free promise for the next parliament, according to senior ministers.
Labour has promised to increase the state pension by a minimum of 2.5 per cent a year, despite warnings that it could cost taxpayers an additional 1 per cent of GDP by 2036. The lock is triggered only if inflation falls below that figure and the Office for Budget Responsibility is predicting that wages and prices will increase at a faster pace in the next few years.
The Lib Dem peer Olly Grender, who worked in Number 10 as deputy communications director during the coalition, says Theresa May was wrong at PMQs to argue that the Conservatives deserved credit for increasing council house building during the coalition.
Under Coalition NOT Con Govt increase in council house building thanks to LibDems who insisted (Tories at time didn’t give a ****) #PMQs
This is from Politico Europe’s Tom McTague.
French ambassador Sylvie Bermann in the chamber for PMQs. Chuckling away. Would love to read her diptel!
The SNP’s Alex Salmond says Liam Fox went to the Philippines and said we had “shared values” with it. What shared values do we have with Rodrigo Duterte?
May says we need trade deals after Brexit to ensure a strong economy.
Sir Simon Burns, a Conservative, says he has been Chelmsford MP for 30 years. They are perspicacious, he says. They want a government with a strong economy, strong defences and strong leadership. May will deliver that for the next five years, he says.
May thanks Burns for his contribution as an MP and as a minister.
Douglas Carswell, the independent MP, asks what assurance May can give to the 3.8m people who voted Ukip at the last election.
May says she wants to see the UK getting control of its borders and control of its laws.
Dame Angela Watkinson, a Conservative, asks May why people should continue to vote Conservative.
May says every vote for her and the Conservative candidate will be a vote to strengthen her hands in the Brexit talks.
Labour’s George Howarth says Andy Burnham had a debate yesterday on contaminated blood. He called for a Hillsborough-style panel to get to the truth. Will May join the SNP and Labour in backing the idea.
May says the government has put more money into compensation. The department of health will respond to the consultation.
Mike Wood, a Conservative, says it is good to be back. Doctors saved his life in January. Will May look at what can be done to reduce deaths from sepsis.
May says it is fantastic to see Wood back. She says he is right to focus attention on this problem. The department of health is working on a new sepsis action plan.
Labour’s Grahame Morris asks why May is afraid of TV debates. One should be held in Easington, he says, where May could see the impact of her policies.
May says she has been debating Corbyn every week.
Sir Gerald Howarth, a Conservative who is standing down, says he came into the Commons in 1983, when the country had a strong woman leader, and he leaves as another one is restoring British sovereignty. He appeals to Howarth to protect the armed forces guarding “this sceptred isle”.
May says people will have a choice at the election. The Tories will continue to protect the armed forces.
Tim Farron, the Lib Dem leader, says May once berated her party as the “nasty party”. But it has never been nastier. And Labour is not holding to account. Doesn’t the country need the Lib Dems?
May says Farron talks about a decent opposition. She says Farron cannot say that when the Lib Dems have just elected a candidate with a questionable record on antisemitism.
Sir Eric Pickles, the Conservative, asks May about anti-semitism, and if she shares his disgust at the selection of David Ward, a former MP accuses of anti-semitism, as a Lib Dem candidate. (See 10.35am.)
May pays tribute to the work Pickles had done tackling anti-semitism. She says people will be disappointed to see the Lib Dems adopt a candidate with a questionable record on anti-semitism.
Jeffrey Donaldson, the DUP MP, asks May if she agrees that those who refuse to take their seats (Sinn Fein) and who are refusing to form a government in Northern Ireland are not serving their constituents.
May agrees. She says she wants to work for the restoration of a government in Northern Ireland.
Peter Lilley, the Conservative, says he is standing down because of Theresa May. He says he has confidence that she will deliver Brexit properly. And we must accept that no deal is better than a bad deal. To deny this would be to admit that no price would be too high. That would be the worst possible deal, he says.
May thanks Lilley for everything he has done, not just as an MP, but as a minister in government. She says it is right to get on with delivering Brexit. The only way to ensure that is to get a Conservative government elected.
PMQs – Snap verdict: At PMQs you can deploy the sniper’s rifle or the shotgun, and today we saw Angus Robertson try one, and Jeremy Corbyn use the other. They were both effective in their way, although Theresa May’s shield of slogans and talking points managed to protect her quite adequately. It did not feel as if anyone secured a great triumph.
But in the circumstances, and with polling organisations pouring humiliation over Corbyn by the hour, that probably amounted to something of a win for the Labour leader. He asked about a range of topics, resorting to the “here’s a question from a viewer” formula that he used frequently in his first PMQs outings and neatly skewering May over her reluctance to take questions from members of the public. It was not flashy or eye-catching, but it was honest and solid and his points were strong. In response, May resorted to carpet-bombing Corbyn with the “strong and stable” leadership stuff. Her message discipline is outstanding, and conventional wisdom has it that you cannot repeat these slogans too often (although May seems to be testing that theory to destruction.)
Angus Robertson, the SNP leader at Westminster, asks for a clear and unambiguous commitment to keeping the triple lock for pensioners.
May says she has been very clear that pensioners have benefited to the tune of £1,250 a year. Under her pension incomes will continue to increase.
Ben Howlett, a Conservative, asks if May agrees that his voters should give him a renewed mandate to improve traffic around Bath.
May agrees. A vote for any other party is a vote for wrecking the economy.
Corbyn says millions of women will have heard that answer. Labour will guarantee the triple lock. And it won’t move the goalposts. Sybil, who witnessed the founding of the NHS, said she is 88. She has had wonderful service from the NHS. But now she is scared of going into hospital. With more delayed discharges, isn’t she right to be frightened.
May says the NHS is treated more people than ever before. But that is only possible with a strong economy. She says she will defend her record. She says Diane Abbott has been directing her followers to a website “I like Corbyn but ..”. It addresses questions about Corbyn not being able to pay for his policies and being a terrorist sympathiser. Even Corbyn’s supporters know he is not fit to run the country.
Corbyn says the last Labour government delivered a decent homes standard for every council in the country. House building has fallen to its lowest level since the 1920s. Children are being held back by cuts. Laura, a teacher, said she was seeing less cash every year to pay for children, and more reliance on parent funding. Is May still denying funding per pupil is being cut.
May says record levels of funding are going into schools. People will have a choice, she says. The government has delivered more good school places. Corbyn believes in a one-size-fits-all, take-it-or-leave-it approach to education.
Corbyn says Andy is concerned about how his children are being held back. All three of his children, in their mid 20s, cannot afford to move out of the family home. Don’t we need a housing strategy to deal with it?
May asks what happened under Labour. Under Labour, house building starts fell by 45%. And the number of social homes fell. Under the Conservatives more than twice as much council housing has been built as under Labour.
Jeremy Corbyn says this is the last PMQs of this parliament. It would be appropriate to pay tribute to MPs who are leaving, he says. And he thanks the speaker for presiding over these exchanges.
He says when he became leader 18 months ago he said he wanted people’s voices to be heard in parliament. So, instead of just speaking to handpicked audiences, will May today answer questions from the public. Christopher wrote to him this week saying hus husband had only a 1% increase in wages. But their buying power had gone down 15%. So where is his share in the stronger economy.
Richard Drax, a Conservative, asks about a leftwing campaign for socialist victory that proposed disbanding M15. Would May allow anyone like that to draft her manifesto?
No, says May. She says the plan to disband MI%, disarm the police and scrap the deterrent was endorsed by Jeremy Corbyn’s policy chief, Andrew Fisher. Corbyn is “simply not up to the job”, she says.
Theresa May starts by answering a closed question from the Conservative MP Michael Fabricant about the economy in the West Midlands. It is doing well, she says. And so are public services, because you can only have those with “strong and stable leadership”.
Fabricant says the country needs “strong and stable leadership”.
This is from the Daily Mail’s Jason Groves.
More Labour MPs in for #PMQs than there have been for a while – some taking a last look around?
Very loud cheers for Theresa May as she enters Commons chamber for #PMQs
Here is the list of MPs down to ask a question.
#PMQS LIVEBLOG: These lucky MPs will be grilling the PM from 12. Follow all the action here – https://t.co/B8kBRMA48K pic.twitter.com/mTlwnKdOKL
This is from the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg.
This Parliament has only sat for 299 days – and had 61 PMQs – for some MPs, today’s the leaving do! Election will decide which ones
PMQs will start in 10 minutes. It is the last of this parliament.
And it is also only the second, and last, election TV debate between Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn (counting last week’s PMQs as the first.)
Ipsos MORI has more good news for the Conservatives on the polling front. As Joe Murphy reports in the Evening Standard, Theresa May has the best ratings on “best PM” since the firm started polling on this in the 1970s. Here’s an extract from Murphy’s story.
Theresa May’s leadership score has soared higher than either Margaret Thatcher or Tony Blair enjoyed in their best years, an exclusive poll reveals today
The Ipsos MORI survey shows the Conservatives on 49 per cent, with an extraordinary 23 per cent lead over Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour who are on 26 …
Mahatma Gandhi was one of the great figures of the 20th century. He led India to independence and championed a form of non-violent civil disobedience that inspired campaigners around the world. It is hard to think of a modern equivalent, but the Ukip leader Paul Nuttall has suggested a possible candidate: himself.
Nuttall did quite put himself in the same league as the great Gandhi, but in an interview with the Wolverhampton Express and Star suggested they had something in common and the paper’s website has headlined the story: “I’m like Gandhi, says Ukip leader Paul Nuttall in Wolverhampton.” This is what Nuttall told the paper:
Raising issues of equality, women’s rights, and FGM are the issues other parties don’t want to tackle.
Ukip will lead on these and as I said in our press conference I feel as if we are a decade ahead of our time – a bit like we were a decade ahead of our time on getting out of the EU, and on mass immigration.
YouGov has released some new polling this morning. Since February, Theresa May’s net favourability rating has gone up (from +6 to +10) and Jeremy Corbyn’s has gone done (from -40 to -42).
Peter Lilley, the Conservative former social security secretary regarded as one of the Eurosceptics cabinet “bastards” once denounced by John Major, is standing down, the Guido Fawkes blog reports. In a statement announcing his decision Lilley said:
Now we have in Theresa May an outstanding Prime Minister in whom I have great confidence.
I profoundly hope she will be returned with a strong mandate to complete the process of leaving the EU and to seize the opportunities which regaining control of our laws, border, money and trade will give our country.
Lib Dem leader Tim Farron is continuing his tour of remain seats with Brexiteer MPs, after vowing to unseat Labour’s Kate Hoey in Vauxhall. His stop today is St Albans, where more than 62% of voters backed staying in the EU but Conservative MP Anne Main campaigned for leave.
Farron used the campaign stop to highlight the risk to the economy of leaving the EU and tell businesses they should stop funding the Conservatives while they pursue a hard Brexit.
My message to business is this – dump the Tories. Every penny you give them will hurt you; you are funding your own funeral. The success of British business matters. Strong British businesses mean more jobs and a stronger society.
With this disastrous hard Brexit the government is hurting businesses, both big and small, costing jobs and hitting families. All this means fewer jobs, higher prices and spiralling costs of things like fuel. This is a Brexit squeeze affecting millions of people.
.@timfarron visits the National Pharmacy Association in St Albans with @libdemdaisy talking about the #NHS & care pic.twitter.com/ZImwhVQEX1
The Conservatives have also produced a briefing accusing Labour of spending the money it proposes to raise from corporation tax over and over again. The Lib Dems cited 10 examples, although two items on their list were essentially the same. (See 9.09am.) In a note for journalists a few days ago, the Tories cited 11 examples. Most of the Tory ones were the same as the Lib Dem ones, but the Tories had three examples not on the Lib Dem list. Here they are, as set out in the Tory briefing.
Scrapping university tuition fees. Jeremy Corbyn said:‘At the moment what we’re doing is asking students to fund universities rather than the public to fund universities. I would rather move in to the other way around, with public funding of it … It would be largely on levels of corporate taxation’ (Victoria Derbyshire Labour Leadership Hustings, 17 August 2016).
Reversing changes to Universal Credit. John McDonnell:‘Universal Credit. We’re hoping on Wednesday the government will reverse that … If you had a fair taxation system, you weren’t giving the tax giveaways to corporations and to the rich, if you seriously tackle tax evasion and tax avoidance, if you grew the economy we’d be able to afford – we’d be able to afford our public services’ (The Andrew Marr Show, BBC One, 21 November 2016).
Tuition fees will be scrapped and maintenance grants brought back, the Green party are announcing as key features of their election manifesto.
Co-leaders Jonathan Bartley and deputy leader Amelia Womack will also say in a speech today that students and universities will be protected after Brexit if the Green party were in power.
The Green party is the only party standing up for students and putting young people at the heart of its campaign.
Education is a right not a commodity to be bought and sold, and we need a level playing field so everyone has the chance to go to university or college.
If the referendum result had gone the other way David Cameron – remember him? – would be in Downing Street this morning preparing for PMQs. Instead he happens to be in Bangkok, where he has just finished speaking at a tourism conference. My colleague Oliver Holmes was there and he has sent me the highlights.
Here are some of the key points he made.
Let me be optimistic … It’s very good that we are having this election, because I think if Theresa May is successful, she’ll actually have a larger majority and, potentially, more time to deal with Brexit and its consequences.
Arguably, you could say, looking at the state of British politics, the Conservative party having accepted the referendum result and got on with the process and responsibly delivering it, is probably the most healthy mainstream political party anywhere in western Europe.
It was a legitimate cause of populist concern, that Britain was a member of this organisation, the organisation had changed a huge amount over the last forty years, it had gained more powers, it had passed more treaties, it had become more important in more areas. And yet in spite of the fact that the British people were occasional offered a referendum by their leaders, most famously by Tony Blair, they never got a referendum.
If you want to address the causes of populism, it was necessary, in my view, to have a referendum.
But I think it was the right thing. The lack of a referendum was poisoning British politics and so I put that right.
These terrorists and their apologists are trying hijack a great religion and twist and pervert it for their own ends. We must not play into their hands. And that was to me, the biggest problem with President Tump’s travel ban. It would be seen, could be seen, as labelling whole countries as extreme and dangerous because they were predominately Islamic. It’s not a clash between civilisations that we face. That is what the extremists want us to think. This is if you like a war within Islam.”
There would have been a big lesson learn. I thought it was misconceived from the very outset.
Paul Johnson, the director of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, told the Today programme earlier that Labour would have to raise “significant extra sums” to fund its plan to give NHS staff a pay rise. He said:
Each 1% on pay, just 1%, costs half a billion pounds each time. It’s not possible to say from what the Labour party have said quite how much more they intend to spend on the NHS.
If you are going to do that over the next two or three years you will also clearly need to raise significant extra sums in tax revenue.
Norman Lamb, the Lib Dem former health minister, told the Today programme that he agreed with Labour about the need for NHS staff to be paid more. He said the current 1% cap on NHS pay increases was unsustainable.
In effect we are asking very many staff across the NHS to just, year on year, take a pay cut in real terms in order to sustain our NHS. And I don’t think that’s acceptable. I think ultimately it’s dangerous. We are seeing widespread vacancies … Actually people will vote with their feet and leave if you don’t maintain wages at least in real terms.
The problem with the Labour position is their proposal just isn’t credible … The money from corporation tax increase has been spent about 10 times over.
Labour have already committed to using funding from an increase to corporation tax ten times since the last general election:
1. Bringing back the education maintenance allowance and university maintenance grants.
Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, will announce his guarantees for NHS staff in a speech to the Unison conference in Liverpool. According to extracts released in advance he will say:
NHS staff have been taken for granted for too long by the Conservatives. Cuts to pay and training mean hard working staff are being forced from NHS professions and young people are being put off before they have even started. Now Brexit threatens the ability of health employers to recruit from overseas.
What is bad for NHS staff is bad for patients too. Short staffing means reduced services and a threat to patient safety. Labour’s new guarantees for NHS staff will help keep services running at the standard which England’s patients expect …
In his Today interview earlier Jeremy Hunt admitted that Brexit would have an impact on the NHS.
There’s no point saying that Brexit and the Brexit negotiations won’t affect the NHS. This is absolutely critical for our public services.
Q: Are you saying you will give the NHS whatever it needs?
Ashworth says the NHS has not had what it needs.
Good morning. I’m taking over from Claire.
Jonathan Ashworth, the shadow health secretary, is on Today now.
We will outline what level corporation tax will be in our manifesto when we publish it in the coming days … The whole programme that the Labour Party will be putting to the country in this election campaign will be costed.
I’m now handing over the live reins to Andrew Sparrow, who’ll take you through the rest of the day’s political news.
A quick reminder: you can sign up for the Snap, our daily election briefing email, here.
In a video for the Guardian, Paul Mason pushes back against the argument from the Daily Mail and others that those who oppose the government and its Brexit plans are “saboteurs”. Meaningful opposition to the Tories is necessary for the country and for democracy, he argues:
Meg Hillier, the Labour MP who chairs the cross-party public accounts committee, has been talking about its free schools report.
We will consider the recommendations carefully and respond in due course.
As well as Labour’s own NHS pledges, we might expect Jeremy Corbyn to press Theresa May on this damning MPs’ report on free schools when the two leaders meet for the final PMQs of this parliament at noon.
In the – so far – planned absence of televised head-to-head debates during the campaign, today could be the last time we see May and Corbyn take each other on ahead of 8 June.
The DfE is spending well over the odds in its bid to create 500 more free schools while other schools are in poor condition. Many free schools are in inadequate premises, including many without on-site playgrounds or sports facilities …
The department is in a weak negotiating position and commonly pays well in excess of the official valuation. On average, it has paid 19% over the official valuation, with 20 sites costing over 60% more.
Leaders in Europe will demand that Theresa May respects the right of EU nationals who have lived in the UK for five years to acquire permanent residence, Daniel Boffey and Lisa O’Carroll report:
In a sign of growing anger over the perceived bureaucratic hurdles being put in their way, the call will be made at a summit on Saturday, where the leaders of the 27 other EU member states are set to sign their negotiating guidelines.
The guidelines were amended by officials on Monday to strengthen demands over Britain’s €60bn divorce bill, open the door to further cooperation on EU-UK foreign policy and law enforcement, and add a call for transparency during the talks.
Such guarantees must be effective, enforceable, non-discriminatory and comprehensive, including the right to acquire permanent residence after a continuous period of five years of legal residence. Citizens should be able to exercise their rights through smooth and simple administrative procedures.
Related: Brexit: EU leaders to demand May respect citizens’ residency rights
Pressed on the issue of social care – which Theresa May has pledged to “stop ducking” – Jeremy Hunt is similarly reticent about what the not-ducking will look like:
We need a long-term sustainable solution.
You’ll have to wait and see what manifesto says … I’m not going to speculate on what the contents of our manifesto are.
And here’s Jeremy Hunt, the health secretary, who’s popped up to defend his record against the Labour claim that staff are “ignored, insulted, undervalued, overworked and underpaid by this Tory government”.
I think they are working harder than they’ve ever worked before … You see a government that’s responding to that.
We will be able to train record number of nurses.
Applications do then recover.
You’ll have to wait and see what the manifesto says.
Labour will be attempting to shift the debate today on to the NHS, with shadow health secretary Jon Ashworth making a number of pledges:
Related: Labour will give pay rise to ‘overworked and underpaid’ NHS staff
Jonathan Bartley, co-leader (with Caroline Lucas) of the Green party, has been updating Radio 4’s Today programme on the progress of the progressive alliance, their proposed anti-Tory electoral pact.
The response from Jeremy Corbyn and Tim Farron, says Bartley, has been
very disappointing … they haven’t responded.
On a local level, people are talking to each other …
We want people to vote Green [but] we will support whatever the local party wants to do. But it has to be a reciprocal arrangement.
Good morning and welcome back to another day on the campaign marathon.
I’m Claire Phipps, bringing you this morning’s essential – should your morning be incomplete without news of constituency selection battles – briefing, and steering the live blog until Andrew Sparrow joins us later.
Remember, the opinion polls were wrong in the 2015 general election; they were wrong in the referendum; and Jeremy Corbyn himself has said that he was a 200-1 outsider for the Labour leadership in 2015 – and look where that got him.
In effect, this is EU Referendum 2. This is the chance for those who didn’t vote/couldn’t vote, to come out. It’s a chance for Remainers to convert more people, help their friends to see the catastrophe that Brexit is …
‘My own constituency voted Remain,’ Theresa May announced in the Commons as an example of her adhering to the ‘will of the people’. But if everyone in Maidenhead who voted Remain backed the Lib Dems in June, the PM could lose her seat.
The Labour party will need more than a wish list and a collection of grievances. I’ll offer three topics for starters. How do we ensure a fair intergenerational settlement? How can our education and tax system respond to the changes of the world of work and employment? Where do we anchor democratic accountability in a world of global flows of goods, money and people?
Planning for parliamentary deadlock and pacts with other parties might be tempting. But these are the methods of counter-insurgents. If Labour instead wants to be a party of government, it has to go into the 2017 election fighting for every vote.
The gap between first- and second-place party in 2015, 2010 or earlier, as well as any byelection result, is not the only factor. Strategists are having to look at how many people in a given seat voted leave or remain in last year’s EU referendum. This information is especially crucial for the Liberal Democrats …
A 30- to 40-point improvement (that is, a 15% to 20% swing that went entirely from the first-placed party to the Lib Dems) would do the job in seats where a majority voted remain – but that is an incredibly ambitious target.
I do not want the people of Scotland to think that English eurosceptics put their dislike of Brussels ahead of our bond with Edinburgh and Glasgow.
It took two months but Trudy Harrison’s first speech as MP was good. “Who knows if you’ll be back,” SNP MP replies in praise. “Or any of us”
If you’ve been considering adopting a dog or a cat, this new study might help you make up your mind: According to research published in Microbiome, children born into homes with pets have higher levels of gut microbes that protect against allergies and obesity. Researchers say that indirect exposure to furry friends is especially beneficial to babies in their first three months of life, and even while they’re still in the womb.
This period appears to be a “critical window of time when gut immunity and microbes co-develop,” says lead author Anita Kozyrskyj, PhD, a pediatric epidemiologist at the University of Alberta. Disruptions to this development process—for example, the introduction of foreign bacteria—can change immunity and have implications for long-term health, she adds.
Kozyrskyj’s study compared fecal samples from 746 Canadian infants. Some of the infants were from families with pets (70% of which were dogs), some were from families who had pets during their pregnancy but not once the babies were born, and some had no recent pets.
The researchers found that babies from households with pets had twice the amount of two specific bacteria, Ruminococcus and Oscillospira, that have been linked with reduced risk for childhood allergies (such as dermatitis and asthma) and obesity, respectively.
Even when pets had been given up for adoption before the babies were born, this benefit was still seen. This shows that pet exposure affected the babies’ microbiomes indirectly, with influential bacteria transferring from the animal to the mother to the unborn child.
This bacterial exchange occurred regardless of the type of birth (vaginal versus C-section), regardless of whether the babies were breastfed, and regardless of whether antibiotics were used during birth. This is important, say the authors, as previous research has shown that C-sections, antibiotics, and not breastfeeding can all negatively impact babies’ immunity.
The presence of pets in the house during a woman’s pregnancy was also associated with a reduced likelihood that she would transmit group B strep bacteria—which can colonize in the vagina and cause pneumonia in newborns—to her baby during birth.
To get our best wellness advice delivered to you inbox, sign up for the Healthy Living newsletter
The study builds on decades of research showing that exposure to dirt and bacteria can help children build up immunity, and that kids who grow up with pets have lower rates of asthma and allergies, says Kozyrskyj. (This effect is strongest with dogs but is true with cats, as well.) “Pets have always been our best friends and they appear to be good for our babies too,” she says.
But further studies are needed to provide definitive evidence that a “dog intervention” during pregnancy can actually prevent allergies. “Our next step is to pursue the ‘does it matter’ question, to determine the allergy and obesity outcomes of studied infants at ages 1, 3, and 5,” Kozyrskyj says.
And of course, allergies and obesity aren’t products of the environment alone; genetics also play a role. It also makes sense that kids with pets have natural protection against allergies, since parents with allergies are less likely to have dogs and cats in the first place.
RELATED: 13 Fun Ways to Work Out With Your Dog
But the study’s results were adjusted to account for whether the mothers had asthma or allergies, and still held true. Kozyrskyj says her team’s findings “are independent of these two possible explanations.”
It’s not far-fetched to think that pet exposure during pregnancy could one day be an official recommendation from doctors, Kozyrskyj says. It’s even possible that scientists could develop a “dog in a pill” supplement, she adds, for mothers to take as a preventative measure against allergies and asthma.
More research is needed for these scenarios to actually happen, however. For now, families have have another reason (on top of plenty already!) to snuggle up to their fur babies—and that includes moms-to-be.
Like everything else in life, eating is a matter of consciously making wise choices. It is something everyone must do to keep the body healthy and alive, which is the practical purpose for eating.
Unfortunately for many, the purpose eating has become centered around satisfying the tastes the tongue has become addicted to. Allowing the tongue’s addiction for the taste of flesh and blood, refined grains, sugar, salt, etc., to dictate what nourishment for body gets, has resulted in what a U.S. Senate report called “. . . a wave of malnutrition” sweeping the country. This is a fact most Americans are aware of. In 1978, a Harris survey showed that only 14% of those polled thought Americans ate a proper diet. That figure has not changed much since then.
Awareness of this problem can motivate us to live more consciously and thus turn a negative into a positive. Rather than live as consumer zombies ultimately controlled by advertising campaigns, being dragged here and there as slaves to our tongues and other senses, we should take our lives into our own hands beginning at home with the basics.
A natural starting point is to choose not to continue as blind food faddists eating newly developed non-foods that are chemically flavored and preserved, or that contain empty calorie, refined flour and sugar products, or that are loaded with saturated fat, cholesterol, MSG and their euphemisms, and aspartame or Splenda.
Most of these foods have become popular in a relatively short period of time. Instead, choose the kinds of healthful, wholesome foods our ancestors thrived on, like whole grains, legumes, nuts and seeds, and fresh produce, which a major portion of the planet still thrives on. Such apparently small, insignificant choices as these benefit not only each individual, but all of society as well.
Though the concern for making new food choices may begin as a limiting, self-centered interest for personal health and well-being, it easily leads to an expanding consciousness and regard for others and the world around us when we understand that thoughtfully choosing the foods we eat actually renders decisions filled with moral and political ramifications about our use of the Earth’s precious resources.
For example, we know that the excessive meat consumption in the United States has been scientifically linked to the increase in heart disease and colon cancer. In addition to that, it has been scientifically and medically established that protein obtained from plant foods is not inferior to the protein obtained from flesh foods, but rather it is a superior choice of protein because it is cholesterol and saturated fat free.
While recognizing the fact that consumption of meat cannot be justified on a nutritional basis, we must not neglect the fact that in America, 14 to 20 pounds of nutritious legumes and whole grains are fed to livestock to obtain 1 pound of meat in return.
This process of turning plant protein, in whole grains and legumes, to animal protein results in a 90% protein loss. If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million.
With this information available, the consumption of flesh products is proving to be unhealthy, unnecessary, and in a world where millions suffer from starvation or malnutrition every year, totally unjustifiable. In addition, most of the feed given to the animals is genetically modified, which passes to the consumer, and results in a myriad of diseases the cause of which people cannot understand.
Unfortunately, the revaluation of the purpose of food and its fair distribution probably will not come from the people who are presently making “unhealthy” profits on taste addictions. They justify their non-food scamming as simply supplying the demand, even though this demand was created by their multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns.
This sort of reasoning places the responsibility squarely on the people who have the most to gain from being supplied with more healthful products — you and me!
The fact is, in the marketplace of supply and demand, as long as the product is bought, that guarantees it will continue to be manufactured and marketed. But this also means that we have a choice — to say yes or no.
We can say no by refraining from buying non-nutritious, non-quality “plastic” fad foods, and say yes to buying wholesome, natural foods. In this sense, every time you buy or do not buy a product, you are registering to vote in the marketplace of supply and demand.
It may seem to you that this may have about as much effect on the world’s hunger situation as your voting for the President has on the world situation; but the fact is, individuals making such apparently insignificant choices do make a difference when there are enough of them. Consider the health food aisles that have appeared in supermarkets all over the country within the last few years.
It would be totally naïve and misleading for me to say or even imply that your cutting out the meat and junk food consumption from your diet will solve the world’s hunger problem and create a utopia on earth, because it won’t. The philosophy, politics and economics that affect world’s food distribution are far more complicated than that.
The medical evidence is clear, consistent and overwhelming. Vegetarians and vegans are far less likely to get cancer, heart disease, diabetes, or osteoporosis, and are far less likely to be overweight, have lots more stamina, consume far less pesticides in their food, and have superior immune systems.
The largest epidemiological study ever conducted – the China-Oxford-Cornell study found that those eating the amount of animal foods typical for Americans have 17 times the death rate from heart disease, and, for women, five times the rate of breast cancer, than those who get 5% or less of their protein from animal foods.
Meat contains 14 times the amount of pesticides as plant foods, since pesticides get concentrated as they move up to the food chain, and since they’re more easily stored in fatty tissues. In 1980, six years after the pesticide dieldrin was banned, the USDA destroyed 2 million packages of frozen turkey products contaminated with dieldrin. What’s worse is that such contamination can routinely occur without detection.
In 1974, the Fraud and Drug Administration found dieldrin in 85% of all dairy products and in 99.5% of the American people.
The Environmental Pollution Agency discovered that the breast milk of vegetarian women contained far fewer levels of pesticides than that of average Americans.
A study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine found that “The highest levels of contamination in the breast milk of vegetarian women were lower than the lowest level of contamination in non-vegetarian women. The mean vegetarian levels were only 1 to 2% as high as the average levels in the US”.
Nobody wants animals to suffer, but it’s easy to forget that when we eat them. And this is what we support. The easiest action a person can take to reduce animal suffering is to simply stop eating them.
Over 9 billion animals are killed for food every year in the US alone – a number greater than the entire human population of the planet.
What’s worse, modern agricultural methods mean that animals are raised in cramped confinement operations instead of the pastures that we have seen in our childhood picture books. This is a practice known as factory farming.
Chickens killed for their flesh in the United States are bred and drugged to grow so quickly that their hearts, lungs, and limbs often cannot keep up.
Hen’s used for eggs live 6 or 7 to a battery cage the size of a file drawer, thousands of chickens are stacked tier upon tier in huge, filthy warehouses.
Cattle are castrated, their horns are ripped out of their heads, and third degree burns from branding are inflicted upon them, all without pain relief.
Cows used for their milk or drugged and bred to produce unnatural amounts of milk, to have their babies stolen from them shortly after birth and sent to notoriously cruel veal farms so that humans can drink the calves’ milk.
Mother pigs on factory farms are confined to crates so small that they are unable to turn around or even lie down comfortably.
Fish on aqua farms spend their entire lives in cramped, filthy enclosures, and many suffer from parasitic infections, diseases, and debilitating injuries. Conditions on some farms are so horrendous that’s 40% of the fish may die before farmers can kill and package them for food.
Turkeys’ beaks & toes are burned off with a hot blade. Many suffer heart failure or debilitating leg pain, often becoming crippled under the weight of their genetically manipulated and drugged bodies.
For some, vegetarianism and veganism are easy ways to refuse to participate in this cruelty!
Eating vegetarian saves more land, energy, and water then any other choice you can make. That’s because livestock eat several times more grain then they produce as meat. So, raising livestock uses:
several times as much land to grow the grain to feed them
several times as much energy to harvest the grain and transport it
several times as much water to grow the grain and to water the animals
several times as much pesticides, etc.
Worldwide petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 11 years if the rest of the world ate like the US. The least energy-efficient plant food is 10 times as efficient as the most efficient meat food. A nationwide switch to a vegan diet would allow us to cut our oil imports by 60% or more.
Over half the water used in the US is used to grow feed for livestock. It takes 100 times as much water to produce meat than to produce wheat. The water required to produce a days diet for a typical American is 5000 gallons. It’s 1200 gallons for vegetarians and 300 gallons for vegans. Compared to a vegan diet, three days of the typical American diet requires as much water as you use to shower all year assuming you shower everyday.
US livestock produces 250,000 pounds of waste per second – 20 times as much as humans. A large feedlot produces as much waste as a large city, but without a sewage system. Animal waste washes into rivers and lakes causes increased nitrates, phosphates, ammonia, and bacteria, and decreases the oxygen content. This kills plant and animal life. The meat industry accounts for three times as much harmful organic waste as the rest of the industries in the US combined.
It takes 10 times as much land to produce food for an average American compared to a vegan. An acre of land can produce 20,000 pounds of potatoes, but only 165 pounds of meat. In the US, 260 million acres of forest have been destroyed for use as agricultural land to support the meat diet. That’s over 1 acre per person. Since 1967, the rate of deforestation has been one acre every 5 seconds. For every acre cleared for urban development, 7 acres are cleared to graze animals or grow the feed for them.
About 85% of topsoil loss is directly associated with raising livestock. The US Department of Assholes says that crop productivity is down 70% as a result up topsoil loss, and it takes nature 500 years to build an inch of topsoil. Vegan diets make less than 5% of the demands on the soil as meat-based diets.
Making the change in the way we live our personal lives can be the beginning of a real commitment to work on another level to help solve the world hunger problem, beyond just spouting slogans or intellectually nodding our approval while living as hypocrites whose real lives contradict real solutions.
Is change easy? For some yes, for some no. But we all have to look at the big picture to see what is of the utmost importance. If the dictates of your tongue and your senses are more important and the health of the planet, you will be content to stay the way you are. If your consciousness is such that you care about the world you live in but you might want to consider these things to help it stay the way it is until Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, and Syngenta start opening Soylent Green factories.
Besides making wise choices about the basic activity of eating, we can also make choices in so many other little ways in our daily lives: growing more of our own food simply by growing sprouts, hanging clothes on the line instead of using the dryer, walking places when driving isn’t necessary, recycling what we can, refraining from buying things we don’t need, etc. Such choices will not only make our lives happier and healthier, but will ensure the health and well being of future generations as well.
In this new year of 2017 where we have made endless resolutions like we do every year, but don’t follow, why not make one now that has far more reaching value, quality and meaning than any other? Eat wisely!
To learn more about Hesh, listen to and read hundreds of health related radio shows and articles, and learn about how to stay healthy and reverse degenerative diseases through the use of organic sulfur crystals and the most incredible bee pollen ever, please visit www.healthtalkhawaii.com, or email me at heshgoldstein@gmail.com or call me at (808) 258-1177. Since going on the radio in 1981 these are the only products I began to sell because they work. Oh yeah, going to www.asanediet.com will allow you to read various parts of my book – “A Sane Diet For An Insane World”, containing a wonderful comment by Mike Adams. In Hawaii, the TV stations interview local authors about the books they write and the newspapers all do book reviews. Not one would touch “A Sane Diet For An Insane World”. Why? Because it goes against their advertising dollars.
Like everything else in life, eating is a matter of consciously making wise choices. It is something everyone must do to keep the body healthy and alive, which is the practical purpose for eating.
Unfortunately for many, the purpose eating has become centered around satisfying the tastes the tongue has become addicted to. Allowing the tongue’s addiction for the taste of flesh and blood, refined grains, sugar, salt, etc., to dictate what nourishment for body gets, has resulted in what a U.S. Senate report called “. . . a wave of malnutrition” sweeping the country. This is a fact most Americans are aware of. In 1978, a Harris survey showed that only 14% of those polled thought Americans ate a proper diet. That figure has not changed much since then.
Awareness of this problem can motivate us to live more consciously and thus turn a negative into a positive. Rather than live as consumer zombies ultimately controlled by advertising campaigns, being dragged here and there as slaves to our tongues and other senses, we should take our lives into our own hands beginning at home with the basics.
A natural starting point is to choose not to continue as blind food faddists eating newly developed non-foods that are chemically flavored and preserved, or that contain empty calorie, refined flour and sugar products, or that are loaded with saturated fat, cholesterol, MSG and their euphemisms, and aspartame or Splenda.
Most of these foods have become popular in a relatively short period of time. Instead, choose the kinds of healthful, wholesome foods our ancestors thrived on, like whole grains, legumes, nuts and seeds, and fresh produce, which a major portion of the planet still thrives on. Such apparently small, insignificant choices as these benefit not only each individual, but all of society as well.
Though the concern for making new food choices may begin as a limiting, self-centered interest for personal health and well-being, it easily leads to an expanding consciousness and regard for others and the world around us when we understand that thoughtfully choosing the foods we eat actually renders decisions filled with moral and political ramifications about our use of the Earth’s precious resources.
For example, we know that the excessive meat consumption in the United States has been scientifically linked to the increase in heart disease and colon cancer. In addition to that, it has been scientifically and medically established that protein obtained from plant foods is not inferior to the protein obtained from flesh foods, but rather it is a superior choice of protein because it is cholesterol and saturated fat free.
While recognizing the fact that consumption of meat cannot be justified on a nutritional basis, we must not neglect the fact that in America, 14 to 20 pounds of nutritious legumes and whole grains are fed to livestock to obtain 1 pound of meat in return.
This process of turning plant protein, in whole grains and legumes, to animal protein results in a 90% protein loss. If all the grain currently fed to livestock in the United States were consumed directly by people, the number of people who could be fed would be nearly 800 million.
With this information available, the consumption of flesh products is proving to be unhealthy, unnecessary, and in a world where millions suffer from starvation or malnutrition every year, totally unjustifiable. In addition, most of the feed given to the animals is genetically modified, which passes to the consumer, and results in a myriad of diseases the cause of which people cannot understand.
Unfortunately, the revaluation of the purpose of food and its fair distribution probably will not come from the people who are presently making “unhealthy” profits on taste addictions. They justify their non-food scamming as simply supplying the demand, even though this demand was created by their multimillion-dollar advertising campaigns.
This sort of reasoning places the responsibility squarely on the people who have the most to gain from being supplied with more healthful products — you and me!
The fact is, in the marketplace of supply and demand, as long as the product is bought, that guarantees it will continue to be manufactured and marketed. But this also means that we have a choice — to say yes or no.
We can say no by refraining from buying non-nutritious, non-quality “plastic” fad foods, and say yes to buying wholesome, natural foods. In this sense, every time you buy or do not buy a product, you are registering to vote in the marketplace of supply and demand.
It may seem to you that this may have about as much effect on the world’s hunger situation as your voting for the President has on the world situation; but the fact is, individuals making such apparently insignificant choices do make a difference when there are enough of them. Consider the health food aisles that have appeared in supermarkets all over the country within the last few years.
It would be totally naïve and misleading for me to say or even imply that your cutting out the meat and junk food consumption from your diet will solve the world’s hunger problem and create a utopia on earth, because it won’t. The philosophy, politics and economics that affect world’s food distribution are far more complicated than that.
The medical evidence is clear, consistent and overwhelming. Vegetarians and vegans are far less likely to get cancer, heart disease, diabetes, or osteoporosis, and are far less likely to be overweight, have lots more stamina, consume far less pesticides in their food, and have superior immune systems.
The largest epidemiological study ever conducted – the China-Oxford-Cornell study found that those eating the amount of animal foods typical for Americans have 17 times the death rate from heart disease, and, for women, five times the rate of breast cancer, than those who get 5% or less of their protein from animal foods.
Meat contains 14 times the amount of pesticides as plant foods, since pesticides get concentrated as they move up to the food chain, and since they’re more easily stored in fatty tissues. In 1980, six years after the pesticide dieldrin was banned, the USDA destroyed 2 million packages of frozen turkey products contaminated with dieldrin. What’s worse is that such contamination can routinely occur without detection.
In 1974, the Fraud and Drug Administration found dieldrin in 85% of all dairy products and in 99.5% of the American people.
The Environmental Pollution Agency discovered that the breast milk of vegetarian women contained far fewer levels of pesticides than that of average Americans.
A study reported in the New England Journal of Medicine found that “The highest levels of contamination in the breast milk of vegetarian women were lower than the lowest level of contamination in non-vegetarian women. The mean vegetarian levels were only 1 to 2% as high as the average levels in the US”.
Nobody wants animals to suffer, but it’s easy to forget that when we eat them. And this is what we support. The easiest action a person can take to reduce animal suffering is to simply stop eating them.
Over 9 billion animals are killed for food every year in the US alone – a number greater than the entire human population of the planet.
What’s worse, modern agricultural methods mean that animals are raised in cramped confinement operations instead of the pastures that we have seen in our childhood picture books. This is a practice known as factory farming.
Chickens killed for their flesh in the United States are bred and drugged to grow so quickly that their hearts, lungs, and limbs often cannot keep up.
Hen’s used for eggs live 6 or 7 to a battery cage the size of a file drawer, thousands of chickens are stacked tier upon tier in huge, filthy warehouses.
Cattle are castrated, their horns are ripped out of their heads, and third degree burns from branding are inflicted upon them, all without pain relief.
Cows used for their milk or drugged and bred to produce unnatural amounts of milk, to have their babies stolen from them shortly after birth and sent to notoriously cruel veal farms so that humans can drink the calves’ milk.
Mother pigs on factory farms are confined to crates so small that they are unable to turn around or even lie down comfortably.
Fish on aqua farms spend their entire lives in cramped, filthy enclosures, and many suffer from parasitic infections, diseases, and debilitating injuries. Conditions on some farms are so horrendous that’s 40% of the fish may die before farmers can kill and package them for food.
Turkeys’ beaks & toes are burned off with a hot blade. Many suffer heart failure or debilitating leg pain, often becoming crippled under the weight of their genetically manipulated and drugged bodies.
For some, vegetarianism and veganism are easy ways to refuse to participate in this cruelty!
Eating vegetarian saves more land, energy, and water then any other choice you can make. That’s because livestock eat several times more grain then they produce as meat. So, raising livestock uses:
several times as much land to grow the grain to feed them
several times as much energy to harvest the grain and transport it
several times as much water to grow the grain and to water the animals
several times as much pesticides, etc.
Worldwide petroleum reserves would be exhausted in 11 years if the rest of the world ate like the US. The least energy-efficient plant food is 10 times as efficient as the most efficient meat food. A nationwide switch to a vegan diet would allow us to cut our oil imports by 60% or more.
Over half the water used in the US is used to grow feed for livestock. It takes 100 times as much water to produce meat than to produce wheat. The water required to produce a days diet for a typical American is 5000 gallons. It’s 1200 gallons for vegetarians and 300 gallons for vegans. Compared to a vegan diet, three days of the typical American diet requires as much water as you use to shower all year assuming you shower everyday.
US livestock produces 250,000 pounds of waste per second – 20 times as much as humans. A large feedlot produces as much waste as a large city, but without a sewage system. Animal waste washes into rivers and lakes causes increased nitrates, phosphates, ammonia, and bacteria, and decreases the oxygen content. This kills plant and animal life. The meat industry accounts for three times as much harmful organic waste as the rest of the industries in the US combined.
It takes 10 times as much land to produce food for an average American compared to a vegan. An acre of land can produce 20,000 pounds of potatoes, but only 165 pounds of meat. In the US, 260 million acres of forest have been destroyed for use as agricultural land to support the meat diet. That’s over 1 acre per person. Since 1967, the rate of deforestation has been one acre every 5 seconds. For every acre cleared for urban development, 7 acres are cleared to graze animals or grow the feed for them.
About 85% of topsoil loss is directly associated with raising livestock. The US Department of Assholes says that crop productivity is down 70% as a result up topsoil loss, and it takes nature 500 years to build an inch of topsoil. Vegan diets make less than 5% of the demands on the soil as meat-based diets.
Making the change in the way we live our personal lives can be the beginning of a real commitment to work on another level to help solve the world hunger problem, beyond just spouting slogans or intellectually nodding our approval while living as hypocrites whose real lives contradict real solutions.
Is change easy? For some yes, for some no. But we all have to look at the big picture to see what is of the utmost importance. If the dictates of your tongue and your senses are more important and the health of the planet, you will be content to stay the way you are. If your consciousness is such that you care about the world you live in but you might want to consider these things to help it stay the way it is until Monsanto, Dow, DuPont, and Syngenta start opening Soylent Green factories.
Besides making wise choices about the basic activity of eating, we can also make choices in so many other little ways in our daily lives: growing more of our own food simply by growing sprouts, hanging clothes on the line instead of using the dryer, walking places when driving isn’t necessary, recycling what we can, refraining from buying things we don’t need, etc. Such choices will not only make our lives happier and healthier, but will ensure the health and well being of future generations as well.
In this new year of 2017 where we have made endless resolutions like we do every year, but don’t follow, why not make one now that has far more reaching value, quality and meaning than any other? Eat wisely!
To learn more about Hesh, listen to and read hundreds of health related radio shows and articles, and learn about how to stay healthy and reverse degenerative diseases through the use of organic sulfur crystals and the most incredible bee pollen ever, please visit www.healthtalkhawaii.com, or email me at heshgoldstein@gmail.com or call me at (808) 258-1177. Since going on the radio in 1981 these are the only products I began to sell because they work. Oh yeah, going to www.asanediet.com will allow you to read various parts of my book – “A Sane Diet For An Insane World”, containing a wonderful comment by Mike Adams. In Hawaii, the TV stations interview local authors about the books they write and the newspapers all do book reviews. Not one would touch “A Sane Diet For An Insane World”. Why? Because it goes against their advertising dollars.
As an 18-year-old in 1966, I would go to the pub on a Saturday night with five girlfriends, before an alcohol-free dance at the local “palais”. We each drank a half of cider and one green chartreuse because, while it tasted like an antidote to dyspepsia, it was 55% proof. That was it; that was all we could afford. Even if we had the money, shame, social convention and a fear of what the neighbours might tell your mother restrained female, if not male, drinking. Now, for young and old, we live in different times.
Last week Tony Rao, a consultant psychiatrist who has long campaigned on the dangers of older-age drinking, warned that the number of over-50s admitted to hospital because of the amount of alcohol they drink has more than trebled in a little over a decade.
Anyone over 55 who habitually reaches for a glass or several might like to steel themselves sufficiently to consider an alcohol-free day by reading chapter five of The Drink Less Mind: The Truth About Overdrinking by Georgia Foster. It lists the negative side of a bit of a tipple, which includes: impaired coordination, depression, heartburn, nausea, stomach ulcers, pancreatitis, high blood pressure, anxiety, falls, dementia, fractures (divorce isn’t on the list, but could be) and, of course, the cancers, including those of the mouth, throat and rectum. And still the booze appears to be going down the necks of the children of the 1960s and 1970s (but not their offspring and grandchildren) in ever-increasing quantities. The question is: why?
Alcohol has become the baby boomers’ very own form of Russian roulette. Everyone knows the magic figure, no more than 14 units of alcohol a week for men and women (previously, men were permitted 21). And yet more people are taking the risk of going over the top.
In 2015 there were 3,627 admissions of over-50s with alcohol-related brain damage, compared with 994 in 2002. Experts say that the condition could even be twice as prevalent as that, because it is poorly diagnosed. (It can also be argued that in the past older drinkers were more concerned to conceal their habit). “If an educated woman turns up at a GP’s surgery or A&E with a fall,” Tony Rao says, “no one asks about her alcohol intake.”
A study conducted by Rao, published late in 2015, found that 21% of over-65s – one in five – exceeded the alcohol limits then set at 14 and 21 units a week. Rao defines “a heavy drinker” as a woman who regularly drinks one large glass of wine a day (one and a half glasses for a man). Since denial is a major part of boozing, the first reaction of a drinker is obviously to lie about the size of the glass.
Alcohol is a relaxant. It’s a reward. In comparison to other countries, the UK can also argue it’s bad, but not that bad. According to the World Health Organisation, the country with the highest consumption of alcohol per person from the age of 15 is Belarus, with 17.5 litres (of pure alcohol) a year; then come Moldova, Lithuania and Russia. In Russia over-15s consume 15 litres of pure alcohol per year – the rough equivalent of 155 bottles of wine or 1,500 shots of vodka . The UK is 25th on the global list with 11.6 litres consumed per adult per year.
However, according to Rao, in England between 2007-08 and 2013-14 the number of hospital admissions wholly attributable to alcohol rose by 30% in the 25-54 years age group, and by 70% for those aged 55 and above.
Numbers are still relatively small (109,720 aged 55-plus in 2013-14), but baby boomers are only at the outset of what could be a very long journey into retirement that equates to an awful lot of time for habitual and escalating drinking, the side-effects of which cost the NHS billions. So Rao is right to ask that “a brighter light is shone on the scale of the problem”. But what might that light reveal?
Retirement is an issue. The reshaping of what can be 30 years or more of useful post-work life has yet to happen in the UK. This is unlike, for instance, the US, where baby boomers who seek more than decades of “silver fun” in “the third age” can retrain and have a second career and give something back to the community, leaving little time for hangovers.
Ageism and its pressure to become time-defying, seventysomething Peter Pans might also provide reasons why the bottle becomes more attractive the older we grow. Other factors may be that drinking at home is far more common now than for previous generations; more people over 50 are living alone, partly because we are all living longer; and Rao suggests baby boomers may have been seduced by watching years of advertising about the glamour of booze before restrictions were put in place.
Anyone past middle age will remember the promise of what might happen with a martini in hand: sun, sea and summer in Monte Carlo was a promise repeated several times a week on cinema screens and television, echoed by the refrain of “a Double Diamond works wonders … ” without any health and safety warnings. Baby boomers ought to be smarter, but a lot can happen by osmosis with a large advertising budget.
Another major factor, however, goes back perhaps to the scale of disappointment experienced by a postwar generation that believed it was building a better, more equal world based not on the individual but a sense of collective goals. “What does alcohol mean to our generation?” asks Christina Fraser, a relationship counsellor with Coupleworks and herself a baby boomer. “We drink to fill a void. Our parents had a job, retired and dropped dead two years later. They worked hard and had fewer opportunities. The baby boomers were given the promise of a world that was full of possibilities. Instead, we are seeing that world close in.”
In Happiness: Lessons from a New Science, the economist Richard Layard says that what builds happiness at a community level is trust (in scant supply now), a lack of loss (tell that to the Remainers) and a “sense of shared purpose” (also absent), while a concern with status and envy about what others have contaminates the civic heart. “If your sole duty is to achieve the best for yourself, life becomes just too stressful, too lonely – you are set up to fail. Instead,” Layard writes, “you need to feel you exist for something larger …each person counting.”
Most of us can put the glass down rather than go for a refill – an excuse for another drink has always existed – but never before have so many of us had so long to drink ourselves under that table. And that’s a strange price to pay for so-called “progress”.
