Latewire

Daniel Roe

Last time on poisoned foods, I explained how PhDs are full of crap, and how it is that this comes to effect doctors and their advice to patients (you).

Unfortunately, this time I'm going to have to get a little bit more scientific on you. Sorry for the diversion, but once you understand at least some of the science behind metabolism, you too will be able to "call bullshit" on the PhDs. They'd like to keep science confined to the narrow confines of their tiny pinheads, but the reality is that science is for everybody, and it doesn't take an especially smart person (or someone who just thinks they're smart, in the case of the PhD) to come to conclusions based on scientific fact.

First, we're going to talk about insulin. If you get nothing out of this article, you should associate insulin with weight gain. So if I were to say that "this food stimulates insulin release", you would say ....? ...? That's right! it makes you fat!

Insulin, under normal circumstances, is created and released by the pancreas usually, BUT NOT ALWAYS [ -- Note this], in response to a rise in blood sugar. The insulin is merely a SIGNALING hormone that tells your muscles, fat cells, etc, to take up sugar from the blood (sugar is actually converted to fat in the liver and dumped into the blood, then the fat cells take it up and grow plump). These muscle/fat/liver cells are primed and ready to suck up the free sugar. As soon as insulin gives the go-ahead, *FOOM* the sugar is burned / stored like an inferno from that movie Backdraft. This is why when diabetics inject insulin and forget to eat, they can put themselves into a fucking coma™ due to lack of blood sugar.

So, to kind of summarize: in the same way that 'roids tell your pecs to turn into a couple of chest-hams and balls to turn into peanuts, insulin tells your ass to get fat and your belly to inherit the Earth.

Resistance

You may have heard of insulin resistance. I'm not going to cover that here in detail, but it's incredibly important to understand:

Insulin resistance is caused by hormones released by fat cells in the belly and it forces the pancreas to secrete more insulin to compensate. The fatter you are, the more resistant you are, and the more insulin your pancreas releases;
The liver is immune to the resistance hormone, so while muscles aren't eating and burning the sugar, the liver's responding to the high insulin levels by going crazy turning the sugar it into fat, leading to weight gain and even hunger! Therefore, in a person with insulin resistance, more ingested sugar is going to be converted into fat than in a person without resistance.;
Eventually, the give-and-take between insulin and the resistance hormones may result in the pancreas being overworked, damaged, and eventually being unable to compensate. This condition is known as Type 2 Diabetes Mellitus [Pro tip: This is how most diabetics acquire their condition.];
Often, the pancreas will get so chewed up that the person can give themselves a big fat case of Type 1 Diabetes, meaning that even after the person loses the resistance-hormone-secreting fat cells (think treadmill), they will still have overly high blood sugar.

Almost everyone has some small amount of fat cells making them insulin resistant. We're going to assume that you haven't gotten to the point of extreme insulin resistance... yet. However, insulin is still a great barometer to determine how fat something's going to make you. Remember, MORE INSULIN = MORE FAT.

The Carb

Now that you've learned the magic of insulin, you're probably wondering how you're going to use your newfound knowledge to control your weight.

Sadly, there's no way around this: Carbohydrates stimulate insulin release. I know, it's sad, but those low carb numb-nuts actually had a point. Atkins is an extreme example, but really any amount of carbohydrate abstention helps.

You might be asking: "So how does my bagel become sugar in my blood? It doesn't taste sweet, it must not have sugar!" You know what it takes to turn starch into sugar? Saliva (spit). Starch (the main source of carbs from wheat, rice, corn, potatoes, and others) is actually just a whole crapload of sugar linked together in a weak chain. One tiny snip by an enzyme (present in saliva and elsewhere) and a little bit of water added and they turn into single-monomer sugar molecules that float into your intestine cells just as fast as a Jolly Rancher candy.

Carbs are pretty much all the same. The only difference is what other food you mix it with to change the peak and duration of the sugar high.

The fact is, carbohydrates have ZERO nutritional value outside of providing energy for cells. If you're overweight, you already have more than enough energy in your body to burn for a while. Therefore, you don't actually require any carbohydrates if you have sufficient fat stores.

By contrast, in order to burn ingested protein, the body actually has to tune down the insulin and increase levels of the antagonistic hormone glucagon.

A study done of Atkins dieters found that they routinely consumed fewer calories than those not on the diet. The rules don't say they have to do this, but the dieters found they were compelled to eat less due to the the satiety caused by the foods they ate due and due to the lack of an insulin-induced blood sugar dip (which leads to people getting hungry again quickly after carb-rich meals).

The brain, unfortunately, loves to eat sugar. It cannot eat fat directly, so the only choices are ultra tasty sugar and unpleasant, slow burning, ketone bodies, which is like leaving your brain stranded on a desert island with nothing but mulchy disgusting powerbars for eternity--you're alive, you're technically healthy, but you wish you weren't.

That's why a lot of diets simply encourage cutting back on carbohydrates and not eliminating them. The goal is to burn stored energy, so don't be a fool and introduce more energy into the system than you have to, however, keep in mind the only diet that works is one that you can stick to. Carb cravings can drive you nuts, so cutting back may be more to your liking than abstaining completely.

No Fat? No Deal!

You're probably wondering: if the goal is to consume less energy, why not ditch the energy-rich fatty foods instead of that tasty CocaCola? After all, Fat has about twice the calories per weight than carbohydrates, and it can dissolve directly from the food, float right through the intestinal wall, and fly right into that adipose tissue on your already overly-plump posterior.

The fact is: if you're overweight, you're probably already insulin resistant. If you're insulin resistant, more of the carbohydrates you eat go into making fat than being burned by muscle (when compared to a normal person). Also, since the insulin levels are higher than normal in the resistant, the liver will be making fat out of the sugar long after your blood sugar has normalized. This will actually cause low blood sugar, making you even hungrier!

So, to summarize, with sugar: you eat, you spike your insulin, you crash, you feel hungry, you eat again.

"Okay!!" you say "But what about fat? You said you were going to talk about fat, stop stalling!!"

I only mention carbs so that you can keep it in mind when you compare it to fat:

Fat does not spike insulin, period. It also increases satiety directly by release of special hormones.
Fat decreases the rate your stomach empties into the small intestine, leaving you feeling "full" for longer and therefore decreasing your desire to eat
Fat, when combined with a regular helping of carbohydrates, can actually reduce the rate at which it is absorbed, lowering the insulin spike. This reduces the 'crash' effect and therefore reduces the urge to eat again later.
Fat is burned highly effectively by muscle, and does not increase lactic acid levels (so you can work out longer and harder than you can on sugar).
Products that change recipes to gain their "low fat" moniker almost always raise sugar to compensate for taste. This decreases the satiety caused by the fat and increases the urge to eat again later due to the sugar

It's the combination of all these facts that lead many, including myself, to believe that the "low fat" diet craze is one of the prime reasons for America's obesity problem. Fat is not good for you, but it's a necessary addition to carbohydrates, and certainly not any worse. Fat may be more "energy dense" than carbs, but that hardly matters when you're eating three times the food twice as often because it's not filling you up, and it's making you more hungry.

Fiber

For God's sake. Eat more fiber.

Fiber lowers the rate of absorption of carbs, so eat high-fiber bread.

Fiber increases satiety, so eat more fiber.

In the same way that sawdust is used to clear up oil spills, fiber absorbs fat and cholesterol in the gut and prevents absorption--decreasing blood cholesterol and therefore the risk of heart disease. So eat more fiber.

Fiber is incredibly important for GI health and prevents a long list of possible ailments including diverticulitis.

Perforated diverticulitis is where your colon blebs off, fills with puss, gets inflamed, and then pops. When it pops, it leaks out puss into your abdomen, sending you into septic shock. Your immune system goes nuts and starts telling your platelets to clot all over your body so you get little bloody patches on your skin and your internal organs. You start out with blistering fever but the shock is so bad you don't have enough blood to fill your vessels so you get very cold. In the event you survive, you have severe damage to every organ in your body including your brain. This isn't something that takes long to develop, either. The patient I first saw this in was 30. So you're going to eat your fiber now, right?

Oh, fiber also prevents colon cancer. Heard of it? Yeah, fiber's the most important factor in preventing colon cancer behind genetics, so eat more fiber.

Fiber has somewhere between zero and almost zero calories, so why the hell aren't you eating it? Shut up, I know you aren't.

High(er) Protein

Disadvantages (?):

I'm only going to say a few words on protein. First of all, you've probably heard that the Atkins "high protein" diet causes kidney problems. Most of the hubbub about this was from exaggerated claims made by puppet organizations setup by PETA (a pro-animal and therefore anti-high protein diet organization).

Even if that were true: Far and away, the #1 and 2 causes for for kidney failure in the US are Obesity and Tobacco (I don't know which is #1, sorry). Being fat is way worse for you, stop making excuses! Having diabetes is going to eat your kidneys faster than any steak, even that one John Candy ate in "The Great Outdoors."

Luckily, it's not actually true. High protein diets will not wreck your kidneys... unless you're dumb, but dumb people run into trouble with many things.

One of the results of increased protein in the diet is an increase in ammonia (ammonium, actually, but it's almost the same) concentration in the urine. This is normal and natural in animals, and the ammonia in the urine of animals is a necessary part of the ecosystem. If you were to somehow eliminate all the ammonia from the waste of all the living things around the world, it would literally end most life on earth in a matter of months.

If the world ends, what's the body count on Panda bears?? Take that, PETA!!

Alright, fine: Theoretically, higher ammonia concentrations are bad. It may have actually resulted in one or two people suffering some problems. That's why we're going to drink more water, which lowers the concentration of ammonia to safer levels, right?

If you're losing weight, you should be drinking more water anyway. Just add another little bit if you choose to augment your diet by eating more protein.

Advantages

Protein does not increase insulin. In fact, you need to lower insulin just to convince cells to burn protein as fuel.

Protein also increases satiety, meaning you feel full faster.

When insulin and sugar levels are low, the body makes new sugar (to feed the brain, heart, and red blood cells). It sucks ass at this. I mean it's pathetic. Animals are terrible sugar-makers, and they know it. That's why they only do it when they're hungry. In order to make sugar, the body combines protein with stored fat. The body stores fat, but it doesn't "store" protein, so it has to cannibalize itself to get it. With low insulin levels, muscle protein is broken down. This is why when people lose a lot of weight, they tend to lose muscle mass as well.

With a high protein diet, instead of burning muscle, your body will use the dietary protein, leaving the muscle intact. It's actually been proven that high protein dieters end up with more muscle mass after they lose weight than people who diet without high protein.

Verdict

When losing weight, you probably want to eat more protein and definitely want to drink a lot more water. Higher protein will keep more muscle and may allow for faster weight loss.

As an aside, it's not a choice between the Atkins "I ate Bambi's Mom" diet and the Vegan "Suck my Potatoes" diet. That's the kind of binary PhD nonsense that you see all over the literature on this. Some sources on this subject made it seem like you couldn't even eat oranges because it made Dr. Atkins hit-list. It went on to complain that this meant all higher protein diets resulted in scurvy, and that this was the reason "all low carb diets are bad." I'd just like to say that I can eat whatever 'the fuck I want, thanks very much. Yes, it's possible to eat lots of healthy foods, eat fewer carbs, and consume more protein all in the same meal, or at least in the same diet.

Diet Sweets: The Devil You Don't

I wanted to conclude this edition of Poisoned Foods with something definitive and instructive, but really everything I've told you so far is solid fact, and why start pointless controversy by mentioning specifics?

However, one of the things I can say specifically is: avoid artificial sweeteners. No, this is not a "maybe just a tiny bit" situation. Just don't.

Recently, a team of researchers discovered what many of us have already known: artificial sweeteners increase insulin levels.

Unfortunately, the study only tested Nutrisweet (present in nearly all sugar-free gums and beverages). We'll assume (because let's face it: it's true) that this applies to all artificial sweeteners, not like it matters because if we can get people to stop drinking diet coke, the world's going to be a better place hands down.

Side note: I wrote a report for my organic chemistry class on aspartame (nutrisweet). I may make the next edition entirely on that, you're gonna flip when you see the evil. EVVVVILLLLLL!!!

Remember when I said insulin decreases blood sugar in part by increasing the creation of fat? especially in people who are already fat? Hint: I said it like 10 times already.

YES: Diet drinks have no sugar, NO: You will not lose weight if you drink them.

Studies have definitively indicated that switching from regular soda to diet soda will not automatically lead to weight loss. Now you know why.

When you eat carbs, your blood sugar spikes, your insulin spikes, your blood sugar declines, you gain weight, you crash, you get hungry again.

When you consume artificial sweeteners, the exact same thing happens, only without the blood sugar spike. Artificial sweeteners make you hungry for real food, which you have to consume more of to make up for the blood sugar you've locked away into your fat cells.

Usually, these products mask some of the crash effect by being mixed in with caffeinated liquids. In the case of aspartame (nutrisweet), part of the molecule is actually converted into adrenaline (yes, that adrenaline). These effects may not be entirely obvious, but they are occurring.

I'm not saying you should switch from Diet Coke to Dr. Pepper. That would be stupid, now wouldn't it?

What I am saying is: if it tastes sweet, don't eat it if you want to lose weight. Especially soda.

In fact, there was a study done of childhood obesity. It found there was one unifying characteristic of most obese kids. We're talking undeniable correlation here. What was it? The one thing that commonly separates fat kids from skinny kids?: Soda.

-------------------

That's it for this edition. I didn't edit this yet so it may change. Hank's out of town and he's usually the one who edits (so blame him!!) If you see this statement disappear, call it good.

1m1w

Ah, the whale.
A noble beast, the whale is and perhaps it just may be the freest of all mammals. Can you imagine anything better for the soul than swimming through the cerulean depths fighting off vermicious giant squid and cavorting with all manner of aquatic beasties? Swimming with siphonophore’s, dallying with dolphins and in general killing all manner of lesser fish with noggin conks from your massively monolithic boner? It may just be me, being myself somewhat a man of the sea but if there is a finer way to be than you should enlighten me for it’s the best as far as I can see.

Having just crawled out from under the rock (located on mars and full of spiders mind you) I’ve been living under for the past 20 years it has come to my attention that there is an all too serious effort being put forth from super apes all over the globe to ‘Save the Whales.’ This in itself is a chivalrous cause, and if it’s a bit egotistical and completely impractical well so fucking what. After all, how much help can a group of cacophonous land dwelling monkeys really be when it comes to helping out creatures many times their own size? Again, saving the whales is a noble sentiment for a noble beast but let us add a bit of sense to this endeavor!

If we are to really save the whales and not just make a show about it, reality and ideals must somewhere collide and in this grim union we must make practical sense of some issues for the greater good of man and giant boner’d leviathan. First there is the rather major issue of the megaton carcasses of x-whales to be dealt with. If this issue cannot be resolved then all efforts to keep whales safe will have been for naught because beaches and resorts the world over will quickly be shut down by malodorous stench and the bulky blight of something wholly unwholesome. Taking into account that the majority of whale carcasses washing up on shore are going to be freshly decomposing or completely rank, it seems reasonable to assume that most whale bulk could be used in the manufacturing of fancy decorative soaps (with liberal scented oils added) and high-grade pet foods. Also, in the laudable attempt to kill two or more pelicans with one boulder, the feeding of whale blubber to vagrants and other ne'er-do-wells must be instituted as a matter of common practice. What remains is the issue of putting to practical use the skeletal remnants of our barnacled blue buddies, bones much too large to be efficiently relocated. What I propose is nothing resembling a Cetacean ossuary; no what must be done is to create dwelling places out of these relics.

What you see above is a lifelike and to-scale anatomically correct draft of a blue whale skeleton. Now imagine if you will a few patches here and there, a chimney sticking out through one eyehole and a little round door with a doorknob in the middle of it straight out of the Hobbiton Shire. Economical and energy efficient material between the rib bones and electrical/speaker wiring running from the skull down through the spine and supplying various outlets and entertainment pods located throughout the dwelling places. For the high-end whale-dweller, some solar panels and a little bench encircled garden area near the tailbones would not be uncalled for, even the penis bone could be utilized as a storage shed for whatever nonsense people will be pack ratting away once the whales are liberated from the tyranny of Japanese whaling fleets. I suspect some form of highly nutritious algae based cheeto, but don’t buy stock based on my predictions, my oracle isn’t quite what it used to be. It reasons to stand that the smaller whales could make fine orphanages whereas the colossal marmoreal remnants of a mighty blue whale could provide shelter for a large family or even house a concert hall for a little beachside rock n’ roll. Osteoporotic whales could even be utilized as massive bee colonies, or at least low-income housing for destitute swallows.
So if you were one of those malcontented fellows all to happy to sit on the sidelines and let your sea-faring mammalian cousins go the way of the dinosaur, just imagine how fucking cool it would be to stash your gardening supplies inside the erectile ossification of a defunct fin whale. Exercise your neglected imagination and feel the amplified vibrations of an amplified guitar as it caterwauls its way down the hollowed thoracic cavity of a blue whale. Next time a chance in your life comes to lend a hand to the whales, remember that you too could be growing your organic cannabis inside the inside of a truly freed Willy.

Daniel Roe

New years day marked 6 months of literary excellence on the part of the writers here at Latewire.

Latewire thanks all of its writers for their contributions. Maybe someday we'll actually pay you... yeah...

We at Latewire would also like to thank our readers, both the strange insomniacs who actually visit regularly, and the lost souls on the internet who mistakenly click on results for our web page while Googling for porn.

More coming. Today.

-Roe and Everyone else

PS: If you would like to contribute to Latewire, simply register at our forum using the link at the top of the page and message an admin.

Daniel Roe

So I'm using iTunes and I want to put some music on an external hard drive (for reasons I don't think I'll reveal).

The tricky thing is: It's a smart playlist so I only want certain files to actually be transferred.

The easy way is, of course, to select all files in the playlist and "drag" it to the location. However, this playlist just so happens to be 16,000 files, and so that's easily enough to crash both my file manager (Finder, in this case, since I'm on Mac) and iTunes at the same time.

Given the incredible amount of files here, and the fact that I want to maintain the directory structure of my playlist, I had to find another way.

Here is how to do that. This should work for Mac or Windows, but I tested it on a Mac.

1) Export the playlist in XML format (Right click [ctrl+click] on the playlist and select 'export'). Make sure to save it where other users can access it.
2) Create another user on your Mac or PC
3) Make sure your music library will be accessible by the new user (give them appropriate privileges or whatever)
4) Login under the new user and open iTunes
5) Hopefully, iTunes should throw up the EULA and ask you to agree. Agree to that but DO NOT have it search for files on your hard drive--select the "manual" option
6) Go into Preferences -> Advanced and change your music folder to whatever location you want your backup (eg: an external hard drive). While you're there, make sure BOTH "keep my itunes music folder organized" and "Copy files to iTunes Music Folder when adding to Library" are checked. They're enabled by default, by the way.
7) Import the playlist you made in step 1. (File -> Library -> Import Playlist)

That's it! iTunes is extremely quick and powerful, and will copy a playlist of any size to the new location.

I tested this out with a playlist of 16,000 files. It preserved directory structure and copied them all flawlessly.

Daniel Roe

1m1w

Dear Santy Claws, I hold this letter in my hand consider it a plea, a petition, a kind of prayer. There are two people here and I want you to kill them...
No... wait! On second thought, I'll use my Jesus' Birthday Credit for something even better!
What I want Santy, what I really fucking want, besides sympathetic control of my cremaster and dartos muscles (party tricks galore oh lord) is .flv hosting on Latewire and the ability to put flash videos on the front page like all the big boys do on the other fancy blogs. I promise not to put any (geriatric) porno up, scout's honor! Work your Christmas magic Sinter Klaus, don't leave me behind, utilize the remaning Kaballah practitioners of the world if you must, for this is something I want ever so dearly! Oh modern avatar of Thor, with your thunderous hammer and annoying reindeer, grant me this one wish and I promise I'll get around to finishing the main plot of Thundercats. I can even say that I won't attempt to host anything unweildy in size! I don't know what more I can bring to the table here, St. Nick... but I am going to fist Mrs. Klaus in a completely nonsexual way if you do not acquiesce and I may even consider unleashing Jack Frost who has as you know always had a habit of nipping at your ho's.

withnursedwound

Having just wrapped up one of the most stressful semesters of my life, and my first semester abroad at that, I can honestly say that it is a treat to be able to write and not worry about what some asshole with a PhD thinks of my illegible scribbles. This of course does not excuse my lack of latewire vernacular or my skid-row grasp of grammar, but cut a guy some slack, eh?
When first applying for the Malaysian University of Speculative-Fiction & Applied Nanotechnology study abroad program, I can honestly say I had no great conflict of conscience. It was high time to get away from the frigid witch-twat void that is the American northwest. This exchange of temperatures was entirely worth the trade-off of not being able to blast my Melvins records at 120+ decibels at all hours of the day, which is really saying something. Once you live in a cold environment for long enough the only thing which possibly can convey any true feeling of warmth is usually derived from that most blessed of the poppies, Papaver somniferum. Of course anything capable of making a human being feel halfway alive is really not possible to keep fucking around with for any length of time. And so I traded Rock & Roll for some warmth of the soul, little did I know was that I was dancing the razors edge of yet another black fucking hole.
You see the problem lies not in the faculty or curriculum, not in the construction or architecture of the campus which are both quite breathtaking, the problem lies in the misconception that modern Universities must be the litmus test for every utopian pipedream to be shat forth from the illimitable imaginations of eccentric and post-qualified eggheads worldwide. You see, it is not enough for some bespectacled shits to have a horticulture unit which grows a completely pesticide and herbicide free menu for the students. You’d think the reincarnated soul of Albert fucking Einstein himself would be pleased with an entirely self-sufficient solar/wind/tidal powered campus and that further improvements would be entirely superfluous and unwarranted. Well, you would be dead fucking wrong, just as I was.
You see it is the unneeded further improvements which simultaneously sapped my sanity and also spiced up the education process to a point where my elaborate and scathingly humorous murder-suicide plots were kept in a the single digit territories for perhaps the first time in my life since my testacles descended back in the good old summer of El Niño circa 1994. Now, perhaps this is all hyperbole, and it most likely is, but hear me out on this and you may find your credulity rewarded.
I first started to notice that things were not quite as they seemed in the brochures and telephone interviews when I noticed a cacophonous wailing upon reaching the vestibule to my living quarters. It was as if some sonic portcullis had been concocted for no other fact than the sheer mutilation of my eardrums. Nothing could have prepared me for what I was about to witness, in fact the plane ride over had been sheer fucking bliss with not a single unexpected sound whatsoever, which is rare considering how many overfucked and inbred cunts think taking small children on public airplanes is what constitutes a good idea. The stewardess was one of those most rarest and appreciated of females who understand that nothing quite takes the edge off of travelling at supersonic velocities in an oversized aerodynamic soda can like an expertly crafted vodka martini replete with mini-onion which those in the know refer to as The Gibson. To sweeten an already stevia'd deal this particularly lovely lass also was aware of the fact that flirting for flirting's sake is perhaps the best known way to ease tension which is neither illegal nor involves getting uncomfortably sticky, uncomfortable cleaning up something sticky, or avoiding being made sticky by substances which shall remain nameless. Anyways, back to the mewling of the damned, for as it happened, there was a small family of what appeared to be real-life Pokemon all sitting on a windowsill and rising one hell of a ruckus at my approach. You see some local intellectual authority, probably during a moment of narcotic induced epiphany, had concocted the scheme to slightly modify the biological structure of the imported Asian Palm Civet. A Civet is something of a cross between a raccoon, a cat, and that face your little sister used to make when she shit her diaper as a baby. The thing to note about the Asian Palm Civet in particular is its fondness for that most aromatic of beans (no, not human beans) the coffee bean. What comes as second nature to a Civet is to ingest the coffee fruit whole and later shit out an undigested yet perfectly fermented coffee bean which is ready for to be made into that modern day elixir of life, the café espresso. I think the original goal of the project was to fund the campus's energy expenditures with some kind of home grown cat-shit coffee, for you see the Civet-shat coffee bean is worth more than its weight in gold due to the extreme snobbery of coffee drinking assholes worldwide for reasons only known to caffeine tweaking spastics. This plan must have been implemented before the massive solar and wind farms on the roofs of each lecture hall were installed because as far as I understood it, the University generated so much electricity that it was actually making a profit by selling excess Megawatts back to the local energy companies. Nevertheless, RFID implanted Civet's were a staple of the MUSFAN experience and also the impetus for my abstinence from all forms of coffee, be it shat made or organically grown in the shade. As I later learned, these animals were not quite what one would consider ‘organic’ in regards to mitosis/meiosis and other matters, but that is perhaps for another story.
As awkward and ghoulish as the welcoming committee appeared on first visit it wasn’t long before I had befriended the cute little kits. Though I was never hard up for cash enough to harvest their buttbeans, I did develop something of a love/hate relationship with a few of the more personable buggers (emphasis here being on the love, mind you.) They helped me get through some of the more insane study sessions, including the time I completely forgot the Quadratic formula and had to factor my polynomials the good old fashioned long-ways. Civet fur is remarkably soft and comforting, and even absorbs those most pernicious of tears, the tears of blind rage and sheer frustration. So to say the little bastard Civet’s grew on me would be quite accurate. This relationship with manufactured nature was maintained all the way up until Finals Week rolled around…
Now, every individual who has attended an institution of ‘higher-learning’ is familiar with the manmade Hell that is colloquially referred to as Finals Wee. Most likely this phrase conjures fond memories of holes in walls and significant others with blackened and swollen features along with heavy doses of amphetamines and prescription Adderall abuse. Well just let me add one more image to your stygian rolodex if I may, one which you may or may not soon forget. As familiar as Finals are, the frat-boy is just as recognizable. No matter what class of institution you attend, there will always and forever be those privileged weasels who can afford to leach off their lamprey resembling parents (who in turn leach off the labor of other less lazy individuals.) You will find the vultures everywhere you go in life, it is an unavoidable fact. Now I know the lifestyle of the seven A.M. booze run, so it did not in the slightest phase me to see all manner of lay about sprawled across the sub-tropical campus during finals week, but what really surprised me is the lengths through which caffeine saturated individuals will go to get another fix. Nothing and I mean nothing will scrub from your mind the image of an immaculately groomed and gadget toting societal lamprey suckling the rumpled anus folds of a bewildered and frightened Asian Palm Civet. I have seen the horror, and with mine own two eyes have I become the Evil One Which Sobs. The crunching of beans wailed like the grating of bottle glass scraping across the pavement of a late night murder scene. I covered my face in shame and gnawed upon my lips hoping for some kind of chasm to open beneath my feet and end this dire spectacle. It is after many weeks of deliberation that I have come once again to a genial if not saturnine state of being reminiscent of my former modus operandi and in doing so I have come to discover a noble truth: that all our efforts at the University can hope to eventually equip us with is a generation of children equally as worthless and loathsome as the shitsucking sodomites at MUSFAN. The only viable way around this is to spoil the ragamuffin bastards until the age of 13 and then force them to burn their childhood memories one by one before being shipped off to the salt mines for at least a 7 year stint. Of course a wholly viable alternative is to simply build an inorganic shell with which to infuse your nervous system, soul, and memories. Because honestly folks, at the end of the day ain’t it better to keep your experiences to yourself? Spare the world the creation of another special little someone who wouldn’t hesitate to put lips to shitter and suck like J. Edgar Hoover at a mescaline party.

Hank

Pollination of crops is achieved variously by insects, birds, and wind, according to plant species. Some plants can be helped by hand-pollination, but this is a very time-consuming process and works poorly on many plant varieties. The most simple and effective way to improve overall pollination rates (and therefore, yield) for a multi-crop system such as is encouraged in permaculture design and self-supporting gardens is to introduce and / or augment the population of bees.

Bee populations have been in general decline in recent years, and this is cause for alarm. It's not yet clear what factor or group of factors is mostly responsible for the precipitous drop in bee numbers, but it is clear that the self-supporting food producer and the casual gardener alike must do what they can to draw bees to their crops, and encourage them to stay around and reproduce.

Planting flowers favored by local bee species is part of the solution; check with your local department of agriculture to find out about native bee species and the flowers they prefer. The other best tactic for improving pollination with bees is to provide housing for them. The keeping of honey bees is a valuable and rewarding endeavor, but requires a significant time and effort commitment, along with the hassle of potential stings. In areas that are naturally favorable to solitary (nonsocial) wood-boring bees such as the 'orchard mason bee,' however, there is an easy, maintenance-free, and stingless solution.

Wood "Mason" bees have no sting and are solitary, which means that they don't build hives or make honey. Instead, they live in holes that they chew in wood. They are effective pollinators, require virtually no upkeep, and can't hurt humans. We can attract and retain these helpful and stingless bees by constructing a simple 'bee block,' which is a piece of wood with holes already started for the bees, and mounting it in an appropriate spot in our cultivation area. Arizona, Carolina, and many other states naturally host these bees, along with a great deal of places outside the United States. Contact your local department of agriculture to see if these bees inhabit your area.

The 'bee block' is a simple construction. All we need to build one is some untreated wood of at least 50 millimeter depth (~2 inches) at at least 100 millimeters (~4 inches) in height; width can be anything 50 mm or over. It is essential that the wood be untreated, or bees will avoid it. Wider (and taller) bee blocks will attract and house more bees. Tools are fasteners and a drill with 4mm and 6mm bits.

Assembly your bee block by fastening together the wood to be used. If you have a solid wood block that is as wide as you want the bee-block to be when finished, you can skip the fastening step. Strong carpenters' staples or brackets and nails can be used; do not use glue.

When the desired width has been attained, drill a series of holes about halfway through the block, spaced in a grid pattern about 19 millimeters (3/4 of an inch) apart. To improve probability that more than one bee species will be attracted to your block, drill 1/2 to 3/4 of the block with 4mm holes and the remaining space with 6mm holes.

After the blocks are fastened and the holes drilled, attach a sloping roof to the block in order to partially shade the entrance of the holes from the sun and sluice rainwater off the top of the block.

Most bees prefer a bee block that is hung in a sunny area, so hang yours in a spot that is in the sun most of the day. It's not known at present whether this is because they prefer sunny conditions outside their home or because they can more easily find block in well-lit areas. If you want to hedge your bee bet, you can make another block and place it in a shadier place.

After the block is hung, you need do nothing but wait for the bees to arrive. Again, planting flowers favored by your local bees will help in the initial attraction. Check the block once in a while to assess the occupancy rate. A hole covered or partially covered by the typical mixture of wood pulp and bee saliva is the sign of occupancy.

Common occupancy rates can range as high as eight bees per bee-block hole, giving us as many as 800 active bees from a 100-hole bee block.

This simple addition to your growing environment can bring considerable improvement in crop yield through improved pollination, with very little effort or maintenance. Attracting these bees will benefit not only your crops, but the health of your entire neighborhood ecosystem. After the bee population is established, spend a little time observing their flight patterns and use this knowledge to adjust next crop placement to achieve the desired effect (for example, improving pollination of a given crop by planting along the ‘bee line’ or controlling unwanted cross-pollination by placing plants of the same family but different species away from the same bee line).

Enjoy your bees and the benefits they bring, tell your buddies about them, and promote self-reliance through food raising for all!

Note on bees and cold climates :

Bees can thrive in nearly any climate. For example, the long summer and ample supply of fireweed has produced a healthy honeybee industry in Alaska since the Russians brought bees over in the early 1900s. More common than wood bees in cold climates are bumble, 'sweat,' and 'digger' bees, all of which nest in the ground. The cold-climate beekeeper should encourage soil-burrowing bees by identifying local species and planting the appropriate flower species (for example, bumblebees are particularly attracted to the lupine flower).

Depending on the species, bees in cold climates may migrate, may flat-out die (except for their queen, if social) or may 'winter.' Helping bees with wintering is done through a few simple steps :

1) Wrapping the hive or block : You'll want to give the bees some extra insulation, such as wax-impregnated cardboard, Styrofoam, or the Reflectix (mylar/foam sandwiched material) to decrease their need for food by means of keeping them warm. Bees literally shiver to stay warm in winter, so it's in the keeper's interest to promote their warmth.

2) Reduce the number of entrances to the hive if applicable. This applies primarily to honeybees, but if you have a block with unoccupied holes, cover them during winter. This step limits predation and 'robbing,' and eases bee comfort.

3) Open an entrance at the top of the hive, if applicable. This is to facilitate the escape of water vapor from the hive and convenience for bees to take flights as needed, for example to remove dead bees. This is not a rmajor concern for solitary wood 'mason' bees, but some advocate drilling additional holes in your bee-block toward the top (and cover with a slightly raised roof) to allow ventilation.

4) Be prepared for heavy bee attrition. Colony / hive bees lose 60% or more of their population in winter no matter what you do. Try not to choke up as you pick their dead bee bodies out of the snow. Also be aware that dead hive bees can pile up in commercial drawer-style hive, in the bottom drawer, blocking the bottom entrances. Empty these dead bees to prevent a hazard. This factor points up that it is usually wiser to encourage native bee species than attempt to cultivate imported bees.

Addendum regarding wasps :

Beware of wasps, several wood-boring species of which exist and can be a general nuisance with painful stings. Some wasps (those of the Sapygid, Mutillid and Tiphiid families, and some Sphecid wasps known as “Bee-Wolves”) prey on bees or are bee parasites. Sometimes a wasp will take occupancy inside a bee-block. Wasps are pollinators just like bees are, but their lack of body fuzz makes them much less efficient than bees. Most wasps will not attack humans unless disturbed, but some can be aggressive.

If you see a wasp entering your bee-block, you can choose to let it be or you can try to get rid of it. If you want to make it gone, you can either attempt to evict it yourself, or call a professional pest control operator. Note that we do not recommend or advise that you attempt to evict a wasp or wasps yourself, as they can be aggressive. However, those that choose to do so have had some success with the following method :

-Wait until nightfall and hold a flashlight on one hand for illumination. Wasps are less active at night.
-Fill a syringe or small spray bottle with a solution of one part isopropyl (rubbing) alcohol to nine parts water (1:9 solution)
-Wearing full protection (long sleeves and trousers, gloves, hat and face shield), approach the bee-block and positively identify the hole or holes occupied by the invading wasp(s).
-Taking great care not to get any solution on neighboring holes occupied by good bees, spray the alcohol solution directly on, or if possible, in the wasp hole(s). This will kill the wasp(s) after a few minutes.
-Carefully remove the dead wasp or wasps if practical, and allow the alcohol to evaporate. Do not excessively jostle the bee-block.
-Fill the contaminated hole with a screw slightly larger than the diameter of the hole and be sure that it is securely fastened. This is to prevent any bees from trying to use that hole and being poisoned by any remaining residue.

Many permaculturists, who generally try to avoid struggling with nature, will choose to live with the invading wasps as long as they don’t become overly aggressive or eliminate many bees.

Daniel Roe

I love most of Friedman's stuff, but I especially like his argument against "mob rule" democracy.

He pointed out (probably like others have before him) that, at any point in history, the majority of humans live under authoritarian rule. Therefore it's a natural tendency of human beings to shift towards these governments.

By this logic, it is paradoxically more conducive to a free society to give people no power over government, but at the same time, deprive government of power over the people. Perhaps this is an argument for a compromise between democracy and totalitarianism: Representative democracy.

The problem is when someone like Barack Obama (or McCain) gets ~70 million votes and claims a majority, when there are 300 million people in this country. How can 23% of the nation claim to represent the views of 100% when most people were not even motivated by the selection enough to spend 10 minutes at the voting booth.

That's certainly not to say that, if pressed hard, pollsters couldn't squeeze out a majority obama poll from Americans. However it does go to show how little Americans believe these elections actually effect their daily lives. Not to mention the crushing futility of throwing your two cents into a pool of yea or nay's that is so large, nobody can spot or care about your contribution by the time it's over.

Under Friedman's dream, your vote still wouldn't matter much, but for a much different reason: The candidates can be Nazi Donkey Rapists Vs. Fred Durst (redundant?), but once they get into power, their jobs will be to play golf and smile pretty for the camera, because the government that prints their tiny pay checks refuses to enforce any of their dictums. Under our current system, a "we" elect a half-way dictatorial puppet every 4 years who is nearly indistinguishable from the previous dictatorial puppet--again, negating ones vote.

Hank

On Milton Friedman's “The Role of Government in a Free Society” from "Capitalism and Freedom"
Brief overview with resolutions for debate

Friedman presents a vision of limited state government with a view to maximizing individual freedom and from the perspective of an economist. Adhering to the classical concept that coercion by the state is, when necessary, a necessary evil, Friedman holds that it should be used only to distribute goods that cannot be divided – such as national defense.
Friedman addresses the question of public regulation as it impacts the individual and suggests that functions that are performed by the state in many governing models are better done by the actions of the market. The author’s position is that this arrangement creates “unanimity without coercion.”
The ideas that Friedman puts forth are characteristic of the political viewpoint that in contemporary times has come to be called “libertarianism,” a thought framework which asserts that the liberty of the individual to do as he or she pleases, especially as concerns property, is nearly inviolable and should be curtailed only with the greatest of caution. Of interest is his use of the term “liberal,” which is classical and very different from the contemporary use of the word. Friedman wrestles with the problem of overlapping freedoms and how they affect the basic personal security of individuals, neighborhoods, and the larger populace.

Biographical information :
Milton Friedman (1912-2006) was an American economist and intellectual known primarily for his contributions to free-market thinking and conservative public policy. His policy preferences, which rejected the long-dominant Keynesian model and have come to be known as “laissez-faire,” have been influential; he was awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics in 1976.

Questions and debate resolutions :

Friedman posits that the market is more effective than state apparatus at providing “proportional representation” on any issue that concerns divisible goods. Early in the article, he indicates that legislation produces forced conformity, which has a destabilizing effect on the “social fabric.” How does state action and legislation of individual economic behavior affect the health of society and as a result, the security of persons?

Resolved : That any matter concerning divisible resources is better addressed, and community security better assured, by the natural action of the market than by state legislative intervention.

Friedman discusses paternalism – that is, political action justified by the belief that the actor knows better than the party subject to the action what is best for that party or, as he puts it, “that some shall decide for others.” The author accepts that some measure of paternalism must be accepted in a functioning economy, in particular where persons who are “not responsible” are concerned. Friedman raises the question of who is to judge whose freedoms are to be abridged in this manner and by what mechanism this is to be carried out. How does this question relate to issues of privacy, personal sovereignty, and national security in the ‘Information Age’?

Resolved : That the state apparatus is better able than the individual to judge how much personal information is rightly accessed and controlled by the government.

Friedman, in his list of “don’ts” for government at the conclusion of the article, includes Social Security and other mandatory old-age and retirement support programs. He asserts that to coerce earners to allocate a set percentage of their income to a state-controlled annuity institution is an unjustifiable trespass on individual property rights. What impact have mandatory payroll taxes to fund government old-age programs had on society, and what state coercion of the able to assure security of the old and infirm is justifiable?

Resolved : That the provision of security in old age should be the sole domain of the individual, with no interference by the state.

DeadcowX

I am guilty for the crime of not posting as frequently as the cool kitties in this late pool.

If this was a late night show, I would not be a frequent guest. Jay Leno would grill me. J is hard for me to type because I spilled some cranberry gingerale vodka into my keyboard last week. I managed to pop out most of the keys and clean them but the J key seemed to avoid me.

I blame society for my faults and failed endeavors. It's your fault I don't post like ever. I'm going to poop in yall's pants. Yessum.

Hank

Like Jack in 'Sideways,' we're an infant - at least as regards our ability to look after ourselves in a real and substantial way. If we're going to get our sovereignty back, we like the bambino must first learn how to feed ourselves.

Food matters, big time. Most crucially, it's what we choose to use as fuel and building material for our bodies. Nearly as importantly, it's a major component of our cultural and social reality. No factor is as crucial to our bodily and mental health as food security -- reliable access to nutritious food.

Food can be transformed in numerous ways, but ultimately all food comes from the ground -- the soil. The food chain starts with that which grows in the ground, and much what we eat comes directly from the dirt. Everything that is in our food was once in the soil, chemically speaking. It follows, then, that anything we put in our soil will end up in our food.

This last fact, coupled with expense and ecological factors, makes plain that for best health and nutrition, we want our soil to be free of poisons. Poisons, as we understand them here, include among other things all chemical and synthetic toxins such as pesticides, herbicides, and artificial fertilizers.

How, though, are we to raise an adequate amount of food for serious self-support without the use of 'fertilizers.' especially in harsh climates?

Organic, self-produced compost is the answer. Compost that we make ourselves, controlling all inputs and results, gives our crops the nutrients they need in abundance, while freeing us from chemical residues created by commercial fertilizers. Compost is so effective at increasing crop yield that it has earned the sobriquet ‘brown gold.’

With a properly-implemented composting plan, we can raise really substantial amounts of our own food without much delay. Here's the scoop, starting with a brief overview and FAQ :

- What is compost and what benefits does it provide? -

-Compost is organic matter that has fully decomposed, becoming a uniform dark, microbially-active but non-toxic, soil component material that is much like the soil type known as 'humus.'

-Compost, when added to soil, acts as an addition of live matter that promotes plant growth.
-Composting recycles spent plants back to the soil
-Compost, with its active microbe communities, attracts beneficial worms that aerate the soil, promoting root growth and good water drainage
-Compost buffers excessive sodium content -- a common problem in many arid and depleted regions
-Compost provides high-density nutrients to plants
-Compost protects plant root systems from heat and cold, and fortifies entire plant against the elements by means of better nutrition
-This same nutrition, combined with the microbial community it brings and the underground ecosystem is engenders, protects crops from disease.
-Compost application is very effective at balancing the pH of soil, quickly bringing it to the 6.4 to 6.8 range that is ideal for cultivation of food. This is of great value in areas with harsh, alkali soil, such as deserts.
-The application of sufficient compost completely eliminates the need to till the soil. Eliminating tilling altogether dramatically improves soil health.

- Are mulch and compost the same thing?
- -No. Mulch is relatively large-sized chunks of relatively dry organic material (for example, wood chips) whose primary functions are to improve water drainage, to protect soil from harsh sun and cold, and to choke out weeds by denying them sun. Its secondary function is to help clay-heavy soils become more permeable to root systems, which occurs as mulch breaks down. Some mulch is partially decomposed when delivered, some is not. Mulch, added to a compost batch as a ‘carbon input’, will become compost over time. Note that there exist products known as ‘plastic mulch,’ which are bits of plastic marketed for use as mulch. These are harmful to your growing environment, will not break down, and should be avoided. Beware also of mulch that may be covered in insecticides, such as commercial landscaping byproducts.

- What tools do we need to start composting right now? -

-A bucket for the compost material
-A shovel to spread and stir the compost
-A pair of clippers for getting raw materials like branches down to compostable size
-A long-stemmed thermometer ("compost thermometer")
-Compost screen -- you can make this yourself in minutes
-A dust mask or respirator
-Other useful but nonessential equipment includes a wheelbarrow, chipper / shredder, blender, gloves both rubber and leather, and pitchfork.

-What are the popular methods of composting?

There are three major methods of composting. Each requires a correct balance of raw materials (more on this later), regular turning / agitation, and monitoring of the internal temperature of the compost as it breaks down.

1) The Pile Method : This is where you simply layer your raw organic materials into a pile in a specified place and allow it to decompose in the open. This method is popular but can be susceptible to weed germination and pests within the pile, and can be unsightly.

2) The Bin Method : Construct a wooden bin from scrap wood, old pallets, or drill aeration holes in a 30 gallon rubbish can. This method offers more control than the pile method.

3) The 'In-Vessel' Method : where a closed, rotating vessel known as a 'Compost Tumbler' or 'Compost Drum' is used. These can be bought commercially or made with some effort. The advantages of this method are considerable convenience of agitation and material addition, and nearly complete protection from weeds and pests.

-What raw materials should I use?

-We need a proper ratio of two classes of materials in our compost :
1) "Carbon inputs" - this means dried brown material like dry leaves, wood chips, and clippings
2) "Nitrogen inputs" - this means green and / or moist material such as green plant and grass waste, discarded fruit and vegetable material, coffee grounds, and manure
NOTE : the proper ratio is 25 carbon to 1 nitrogen by weight, which works out in practice to about 1 : 1 (half and half) by volume.

-What must I avoid composting for use on food crops?

-Dog, cat, and other predator manure -- these can carry persistent pathogens
-Castor and oleander products -- these materials contain persistent toxins
-Pine needles in high quantity -- these contain a persistent natural herbicide.

-So what manure is OK to compost?

-Cow (as opposed to steer) manure is best, and has properties that in practice appear to protect against certain plant diseases, such as dollar spot disease and sweet basil wilt.
-If cow manure is unavailable, look for horse manure. Horse manure is available from stables and, as a bonus, comes with straw (so you get both nitrogen and carbon inputs from one source)
-Avoid steer manure - this contains harmful amounts of sodium -- this includes all commercial manures
-Be aware that if your manure comes from animals which are fed non-organic diets and / or treated with chemicals, certain of these residues may remain in your compost. See addendum on bioremediation for details on how to mitigate this factor.

- What exactly is going on in my compost bin?

-What's happening is the biological process of decomposition, which converts solid and liquid waste into a stable, humus-like product. This is acheived through the action of bacteria. There are three types of bacteria :
-Aerobic : bacteria that need oxygen to live
-Anaerobic : bacteria that can thrive without oxygen - such as those inside your stomach
-Facultative : bacteria which can adapt to either condition
We want to encourage the action and propagation of aerobic bacteria in our compost, because this type of bacteria is best at controlling the odors of decomposition. This is done by regular agitation (mixing) of the compost as it decomposes.

-Why do I need to take the temperature of my compost every day?

-There are two reasons for this :
1) To be sure that your compost is achieving what is known as the 'thermophilic temperature range' - 114 to 160 Fahrenheit degrees. This is essential for the elimination of pathogens, pests, and weed seeds from your compost. If your compost doesn't get this hot at its core, it's not properly decomposing.
2) To judge when the compost is 'done' -- this is when it returns to the low end of a temperature bell curve.
-The heat described here is caused by the action of living microbes as they go about consuming and processing the composted material.
-If your compost isn’t getting into the proper heat range, that means that your carbon / nitrogen (“C/N”) balance is off target.

Understanding Carbon / Nitrogen Ratio and Temperature

If your C/N ratio isn’t close to the recommended 25:1 (by weight) mark, your compost will not break down properly. If there is too much carbon input in the mix, you will see very slow decomposition rates. If there is too much nitrogen input, you will detect an ammonia smell coming from your compost container. Note : Compost should not create unpleasant odors! If your compost stinks, mix it up and add more carbon inputs.
The temperature of your compost will rise and fall on a bell curve over the processing time of the batch. From the starting temperature, it should gradually climb to 114 to 160 Fahrenheit, and then begin a gradual decline back to near the starting temperature. Because we rely on the action of aerobic bacteria for this progress, it is important to aerate (turn) the compost regularly, up to once per day but at least twice a week. This is how we introduce oxygen to the aerobic organisms that need it. If you are using the pile or bin method, use your shovel or pitchfork to turn each batch; if you have a compost tumbler, you simply turn the crank.
Be sure to stick the stem of your stainless-steel compost thermometer into the very center of your compost batch to ensure an accurate reading, and take the temperature every day.
It is important to keep the average size of the particles in your compost batch small to encourage speedy decomposition – this is where the chipper/shredder (balance horsepower with cost according to your needs when selecting these) and blender can come in handy. The smaller your starting particles are, the more easily they will be processed by the bacterial action. Smaller particles are also easier to store – note that you can store carbon and nitrogen inputs separately in plastic rubbish containers for future use, and it is wise to do so.
In addition to being properly oxygenated, each compost batch must be properly hydrated. The proper moisture level of the compost batch should approximate that of a wrung-out sponge; there should be no standing water. Standing water will attract pests and insects – if you detect excess water in your compost batch, add more dry inputs. Typical sources for moisture in your compost will be green nitrogen inputs such as plant trimmings, household waste (non-animal-product food scraps) that has been blended with water, and ‘compost tea,’ the making of which is described in the addendum.
You can add water directly as necessary, being careful not to overwater, but beware! Do not use water direct from a tap or garden hose unless you have a whole-house filtration system. The chlorine added to municipal water will quickly kill the bacteria you need for successful compost and leave you with a soggy, inactive waste mass. Chlorine also combines with other compounds in compost to produce harmful methane molecules. If you have no filtration system available, you can put water in a watering can and allow it to sit outside for 24 hours before using it – this will cause all the chlorine in the water to evaporate. De-chlorinating filters are also available, which attach to faucets and hoses.
When the compost batch returns to the bottom of the bell curve, decomposition is complete and the batch is ready to use. Take care! If you do not wait until the compost is ‘done’ and at the bottom of the curve (that is, until the bacteria are done processing), the active and voracious bacteria will eat the seedlings you’ve planted. Waiting until your compost has completed its thermal bell curve is known as ‘resting to maturity.’ A well-executed, efficient compost batch will go from start to finish in about two weeks; less efficient batches will take longer.

Understanding the Role of Manure

Manure can be a helpful and inexpensive addition to your compost batch. It’s important to understand the nature and role of manure before deploying it, however, to avoid potential serious problems.

-Manure is animal waste. As noted above, only cow (not steer or commercial) and horse manure are acceptable among mammal wastes. Chicken and other bird manure is also good for composting. Cow manure has properties as an antifungal compost additive and a unique complement of nutrients, and is therefore widely sought.
-Rule #1 : Never apply raw manure directly to your soil. This is a grave error made by many, from commercial farms to home gardeners. Direct application of raw manure to soil has the following negative effects :
-Raw manure contains numerous pathogens that will be passed on to your crop – potentially a deadly situation in the case of vegetables like leafy greens that grow low to the earth. One has only to recall the recent salmonella outbreaks to understand the gravity of this problem.
-Raw manure contains weed seeds that you likely do not want to introduce into your growing environment.
-Raw manure contains high concentrations of nitrogen that can cause ‘nitrogen burn,’ wherein the plant uptakes a harmful amount of the element and suffers what is in effect chemical burn, and ‘junkie plant syndrome,’ wherein a plant will get ‘high’ after the first application of raw manure, growing rapidly, and then ‘crash,’ wearing out and withering rapidly before producing a substantial harvest. Both of these effects substantially reduce your yield and biologically damage your plants.

Worms and Composting

Worms are basic to healthy soil. Their action is to consume microbes and small material and leave behind nutrient-rich ‘castings’ – this is not considered to be raw manure and can be applied directly to soil if desired. When in soil, the worms also aerate the ground, allowing roots to more easily penetrate (essential in areas like Arizona with hard clay-rich soil) and water to drain and distribute. Worms from the nematode and annelid families are both needed for healthy soil, and annelids such as nightcrawlers can be cultivated. Commercial ‘worm hotels’ are offered by many companies, and a side-science of ‘vermiculture’ has grown up around this activity. Generally speaking, vermiculture involves growing many worms at once, in a contained system that allows their castings to be easily obtained (usually in trays). These worms can be added to the soil to continue their work.
It is possible to attract considerable numbers of worms to even arid soils without the need for expensive vermiculture set-ups. This is done through the practice of ‘cold composting.’
Cold composting is the addition of blended, hydrated carbon and nitrogen inputs, most often in the form of non-animal kitchen wastes blended with water, directly into the soil without the step of allowing them to first decompose through microbial action. These blended wastes are put in a shallow depression dug in the ground and then covered with soil, each application in a different spot. Worms are attracted to this ‘cold compost’ from far beneath the surface of the ground and will quickly make their way to the upper soil layers to consume this treat, bringing with them all their benefits of aeration and castings. When cold composting, remember to clip all scraps to a small size before blending, and to dig a new hole for each batch of cold compost. This can be done daily, with great effect coming from little effort.

Screening Your Compost

In order to maximize the effectiveness of your composting effort, make or buy a compost screen and use it with a wheelbarrow. The way that this is done is by building a simple wooden frame of two-by-fours to a size that will sit closely in the opening of your wheelbarrow, securing half-inch steel mesh across the frame, and shaking and raking your compost through it with a trowel before applying compost to your cultivation area. The chunks that don’t fall through the screen into your wheelbarrow are not fully broken down and can be added back to your next compost batch to ‘finish.’ A finish of boiled linseed oil will improve the durability of your compost screen. It’s also possible to build a rotary screen by cutting out panels from a large plastic bucket, covering the panels with screen, and adding a loading gate and hand crank similar to those on a compost tumbler. Once built, this method makes for rapid screening.

Applying compost

Compost should be applied directly to your planting beds before seeding, and then regularly around the crop rows. There can never be too much compost in your cultivation area, so apply liberally. If you manage to generate more compost than you can use in one application, it will keep for a long time in a covered plastic barrel or bin.

Composting and your climate

Those of us who live in climates that are warm year-round can enjoy an uninterrupted composting cycle throughout the year. Those who live where cold temperatures are common and freezing often occurs, however, will be faced with a compost cycle limited by the seasons. It does no harm to leave compost and compost inputs out in the cold, but it simply won’t produce finished product until it’s warm enough to achieve the 114-160 degree temperature range at its core.
Compost will not decompose much during the wintery months in temperate and colder zones. The producer has a choice to either :
1) Compost only when it is warm enough to do so outside
2) Move the composting process indoors, such as in a garage or unused room, during the winter.
Since properly-done composting does not generate offensive odors, we advocate the practice of indoor composting in cold winters. This can either provide a substantial store of compost to be applied in the spring, or provide compost for continuing indoor container gardening. Since compost will keep for months, there is no need to worry about an apparent excess.

Conclusion and end notes

Composting is the way for us to rapidly take control of our food supply by greatly increasing our crop yield and re-using our food waste. As we’ll see in better detail later in this series, the best way for the new food raiser to get a jumpstart is to apply compost and mulch in layers of equal depth directly to the crop area with no tilling, and to plant directly in this, according to season. With good compost, costly and ultimately damaging chemical fertilizers are made obsolete, along with tiresome and time-consuming digging and tilling. With the knowledge presented here and the right inputs, the novice food producer can begin planting within a few short weeks, and can start producing poison-free food and look forward to an expeditious trip down the road to self-reliance. It will be beneficial to the new food raiser to record the data about their endeavors, such as inputs used, daily temperatures, and total length of processing for each batch; in this way, one can learn the most effective methods for their own environs and resources. More information about the actual planting and cultivation process will be presented as this series unfolds. For now, begin collecting inputs and start that compost batch!

Addendum : Bioremediation and ‘Compost Tea’

Most people in the industrialized world live on land that has been subject to the ravages of commercial urban horticulture (landscaping, which tends to use a lot of insecticides and herbicides) or ‘factory farming’ (which also uses chemical fertilizers). What goes into your soil goes into your food, and subsequently into your body when you eat that food. Therefore, the presence of these industrial residues, along with whatever unintentional pollution may exist in your soil (for example, motor oil dumping, waste from mills that has seeped into soil, etc) is troubling for the food raiser.
One way to partially mitigate the effects of these toxins that are in your soil through no fault of your own is to employ a strategy known as ‘bioremediation.’ This is a term that means the use of microorganisms to neutralize chemical toxins – a biological remedy. The technique is used extensively by governments in the cleanup of ecological disasters like oil spills, and can be employed by the self-maintaining food producer as well.
The basic idea is to identify microbes that consume toxins, cultivate them in quantity, and spread a liquid solution containing them across the area that is affected by chemical pollution. The microbes work through the soil, consuming and neutralizing the toxic chemicals.
The government uses classified blends of microbes to achieve its ends, but the private citizen has other options available. The two most popular are the purchase of commercial ‘effective microorganisms’ and the making of ‘compost tea.’
‘Effective microorganisms’ is a trademarked term that generally refers to a specific commercial product, available for sale online. This product is a suspension of a proprietary blend of microbes in a water and molasses solution. The manufacturer contends that the organisms offered in this product can ‘bioremediate’ a wide range of toxins. If one chooses to buy this product, one need buy it only once – these microbes are like yeast and can be propagated indefinitely by adding more molasses and water to the solution as it’s used. Also, we recommend ignoring the ‘expiration’ or ‘use by’ dates on the package, for the same reason. Unless left in the sun or otherwise killed, these organisms will keep and reproduce indefinitely, similar to the behavior of a sourdough starter. The commercial preparation is diluted with water and sprayed directly onto the affected soil.
‘Compost tea,’ simply, is what is produced when a cloth bag of compost is suspended in a barrel of filtered water and ‘brewed’ for 48 hours, preferably in the sun. The resulting liquid is certainly rich in nutrients and helpful bacteria and can be added as an enriching amendment directly to crop areas or compost batches. Proponents of this ‘tea’ often employ it as a bioremediation tool, claiming that the microbes present in the average compost tea batch are similar to those in the commercial preparation, work effectively to neutralize toxins, and can be produced by the grower at little cost (whereas the commercial preparation is very costly).
More research into bioremediation of agricultural soil, particularly for the urban food producer, is urgently needed. Better and more widely-informed science on this subject will go a long way in helping the food producers large and small achieve higher yields of less-toxic crops.
Whichever method you choose, it is wise for anyone growing their own food to apply one of these preparations to their soil before beginning the initial growing process. In addition, if using inputs from non-organic or non-poison-free sources such as non-organic cow / horse manure, or grass clippings and tree trimmings from around the neighborhood, it is advisable to add bioremediation solutions to your compost container to neutralize toxic residues. Unless you have a full laboratory at your disposal, you won’t be able to truly gauge the effectiveness of your bioremediation efforts. Therefore, it’s best to use only organic inputs for your compost when you have the option. There is a mounting body of anecdotal evidence, however, that these solutions can be effective in rehabilitating land tainted by chemical inputs and polluting residues, making food grown in that soil less toxic to consume. There will be more information presented later in this series about the concentration of soil toxins within the food produced. Suffice to say that bioremediation of our soil before planting is a low-cost bet that it makes sense to take.

Acknowledgement : A large part of the information presented here is taken from the lecture “Composting in the Southwest Desert,” by master gardener and writer Jim Muir, as presented on 11-13-2008.

Hank

As I mention in my upcoming essay "The Inadequacy of Hope," the condition of slavery that we find ourselves in -- that is, that we cannot do as we wish and can't live free from coercion by others -- is rooted in a basic fact. To wit, we have been trained to stake our survival on external sources, from employers to food supply chains, and are therefore in bond to those sources. The spigot of this terrible reality spray is the view that human institutions were created for the purpose of and can be trusted to secure for the individual results that are beneficial, and furthermore to distribute those results in an efficient manner. We are so convinced that these institutions can take care of our needs better than we ourselves can, that we have surrendered our sovereignty to them. Even when they fail, we hope that they will right themselves so that we can be in their good care again soon.

This dependency and subsequent self-sale into servitude occurred as a direct result of our appetite for a single commodity : convenience. Our thirst for convenience and its brother, portable money currency as a store of wealth, proved to be so unquenchable that when we were offered a bargain wherein we would be able to live without ever really seeing personally to any of our basic human needs such as food, shelter, defense, or sanitation, but would as a result become utterly dependent on and enslaved to the entities we allow to see to those needs for us, we opted in without a thought.

We're slaves. We can't even escape our bonds by running : if I successfully sneak away to some other place now, I'll still be as unable to live without a steady stream of currency, food created and transported by someone else, and shelter created and maintained by someone else that if any of these supplies were to be substantially interrupted, my life would likely be in real danger.

This arrangement, in the pithy words of Rodney Dangerfield, sucks.

There is a potential way to break the Marley chains of modern institutional dependency, this new slavery I've described :

First, we must abandon the hope that these institutions will ever truly deliver to us what we need and desire in a way that remains efficient and also keeps us free.

Second, we must quickly and effectively learn real ways to achieve practical self-reliance.

This task is huge and daunting, as the knowledge of self-sufficiency that was held and exercised by a very large percentage of Americans not much more than a century ago has been evaporated from the popular mind by decades of nonuse, and even if we could instantly revive that knowledge base, it would be sorely lacking in relevance to our modern world.

The truth is that we need to develop a fresh body of methods for self-reliance that make good sense for our current reality.

The easiest first step toward freedom from institutional slavery in the modern world is to be able to reject the industrial food supply chain that controls what we eat and when we eat it. That is, we should learn how to grow and produce our own food.

The articles I'll present on food-raising here are drawn in large part from the excellent classes offered by the Phoenix Permaculture Guild. I've provided notes for each piece on adapting the tactics presented to various climates. Let's take ourselves back, starting with sovereignty over our own physical frames and the food we feed on.

Daniel Roe

Intro: Why We Docs Get it Wrong

So I'm sitting up here in Cake City trotting through my second year of medical school and I thought it was time to stop and take stock of some of the things I've learned.

For instance, I can tell you first-hand now that the reason doctors give conflicting advice is because the professors from whom all us pre-doctors learn the academics of our profession don't actually profess correct information, but actually a mixture of up-to-date facts, out-of-date facts, and outright lore in unknown proportions they've concocted from many years of palling around with fellow squirrel-faced PhDs.

Let me tell you about PhDs. PhDs are funny. If you get a medical doctor (or DO) in a room with two PhDs and ask them what the best flavor of ice cream is, the two PhDs will debate for hours and then pat themselves on the back, for they have somehow served "the scientific community" by spurring debate, though they have not reached a conclusion. Meanwhile, the real doc has walked out hours ago, leaving a note in his stead reading "Best flavor? sometimes chocolate, sometimes vanilla, and sometimes PhDs are as useful as sex organs on a pair of Nikes."

After the two PhDs are done giving each other high-fives and reach-arounds, they'll meet up with the D.O. at the bar, much to his dismay. Some girl will walk up eyeballing one of the three, introduce herself and gesture for reciprocation. The PhDs seem to always push their title around like it demonstrates some kind of social prowess, so they'll answer Drs. Douchebag and Pedant, while our buddy the MD will simply say "Jim." It's baffling, really, because all a PhD represents is that you had a masters degree and then fellated a few other PhDs for a couple more years--sort of a bizarre hazing ritual--in lieu of joining the workforce. With the infinitely more expensive, difficult, and humbling feat of a medical degree, one would think medical doctors would be showing off their "Doctor" status at every occasion; not so. In fact, we call those kind of doctors "assholes." You can look it up in Dorland's medical dictionary.

With their anal-retentive attention to detail, one would think that PhDs would be the prime source of accurate and up-to-date information in their respective fields. This is not always the case, since PhDs are also incredibly lazy. They complain endlessly about their "terrible" jobs in which they have no responsibility but to read, word for word, the same slides they wrote 5 years ago at least 3 hours a week. It is true that some PhDs do revise their lectures and put in some effort to teach effectively, however it is not a requirement for employment.

Luckily, medical students like myself don't have to suffer PhDs and their ilk for more than the first two years of medical school. The last half of "school" is on-site training. Unfortunately, the poisoned seeds of misinformation have already been planted in our minds and we'll carry those with us until such time as we can have patients of our own to recommend chamomile tea instead of nitroglycerin--just like Dr. Douchebag told us to.

Obviously wrinkles in reality such as substituting vasodilators with diarrhea-flavored herbal teas would get ironed out in training. However, things such as patient education are very commonly tainted with the narrow-minded pea soup that gets sprayed on us daily in our first two years of hell (think Gallagher stand-up).

Calories Are BULLSHIT

The first thing PhDs will tell you about dieting is the synopsis we've all grown tired of: Eat fewer calories and burn more energy, and the pounds will disappear magically!

Yeah, no shit. Thanks Dr. Dipshit, who's you're employer? I want recommend they promote you to full fucktard.

Yes, everybody knows they need to exercise more, eat less, blah blah blah. That's of course technically correct, and I'm sure Dr. Obvious will roll you around in the dry-rub of thermodynamic laws for a few minutes before baking you in the "energy dense foods" oven. I'm sure that's what Dackow was really all about: just a friendly debate between the prison guards about calorie counting.

What people really want to know are what foods to eat, not how much of it. Obesity essentially fries your hormones and makes plain "calorie counting" extremely difficult. It takes an incredible amount of willpower for an obese individual to lose 10% of their body weight without use of a malignant cancer (which you may order from our online store any time!)

Of course if you eat enough of anything with any nutritional value, the body will retain weight, but there are simple things you can add to or subtract from foods to actually increase satiety--the feeling of fullness--so that you will not feel the need to eat so much.

This doesn't just work on the obese, it works on anyone, including the mildly overweight and even athletes.

---------------------------

Well this is my intro to the 56-part series on "poison foods".. it may be two weeks for the next one

Bill

So I'm quitting nicotine for the 11th time, and got to thinking damn this stuff is awesome. If it weren't for the cost and health effects I'd still be smokin'. So why does everyone have to be hating?

Health Nazis

The first national anti smoking crusade was from everyone's favorite overused hyperbole of evil Uncle Adolph (Link). I can't separate modern activists from their prestigious pedigree as their goals and ideology are extremely similar. The idea is simple, it's not only in your interest to quit smoking it's in the nations interest. The state or your local do-gooder is better able to make decisions about your consumption and ultimately your body is the property of the state.

The Nazi State not only discouraged smoking but also enacted the broadest anti-smoking legislation on the planet including banning smoking in workplaces, banning the military from smoking in uniform, and banning smoking of everyone under 18 in public. Like what the Autoban did for personal transport this legislation would become blueprint to the world flowering with the idea of community health.

Not to be left out, other dictators including Mussolini and Franco jumped on the band wagon. And like most things any Italian government has attempted; the program backfired terribly. Leaving Italy slightly ahead of European averages.

Butt Out Science

Cigarettes smoking cause the smoker cancer. Second hand smoke causes cancer. The first is undeniable true the second has never been proven. What? How can the American Lung Association claim it does? Both the EPA and the UN fudged statistics within their own studies to arrive at conclusions that where desirable for the issing agency. (Link) (Link) This persecution is clearly of trying to shore up belief by any means necessary to promote an agency agenda; It's not enough that smoking kills smokers, but it must kill everyone around them as well in order to justify funding a public health effort.

The sad thing is, no one but smokers really care. Other environmental pollutants like perfume, Corn Nuts, and children go unregulated and largely unstudied but as smokers are an undesirable minority and must be held to the closest scrutiny.

The Smell of Ass

People stink. Places where people congregate for lengths of time smell worse. Clubs and Pubs in the UK found that out the hard way when a law was passed outlawing cigarettes. Overnight the awful smells of cigarette smoke dissipated and patrons where bombarded with the smell of people and pub i.e. ass, beer, and puke. (Link) Some pubs even purchased fake cigarette smell to spray to try and hide the stench and bring back the old happy feeling of quite desperation. (Link)

I can't say I enjoy the smell of cigarettes nor do I enjoy the smell of people, but something strikes me that smoking bans in drinking establishments are targeted against the working class. The busybodies who enact such legislation probably have never broken a sweat, much less sat down with a bunch of sweaty men looking to tie one off after a day's work of heavy manual labor. In order to equalize things, I purpose banning do-gooders from coffee shops and spraying liquefied smug around to keep the
'atmosphere'.

The Man

The Man hates smoking (see Health Nazis) but loves taxes on tobacco. When talking about tobacco anti-smoking crusaders love to call tobacco merchants 'Merchants of Death,' what would the call the single largest recipient of Death Money? The Man receives more revenue than any single tobacco company, more than the tobacco wings of R.J. Reynolds or Philip Morris. Does this make The Man the King of Death? For this reason alone, I am convinced the man won't kill tobacco outright, or at least until he has taxed most sales into the black market.

Though still legal, The Man in his wisdom, has sought fit to fuel a black market through insane levels of taxation. Creating smuggling, adding another level to the underground economy, and making tobacco trucks a more common target than armored trucks in places like New York. (Link) Spurring criminal enterprise and raking in the dough, the Man should be ashamed. But no, he gets more brazen every year.

My Say

It is my opinion that smokers are marginally above pedophiles in the rungs of modern social acceptance among non-smokers. It's for this reason the majority has time and time again put us down. In a shocking turn around the general public has grown health conscious has quit smoking in droves, only to compensate by stuffing themselves to levels of obesity unheard of in human history.

When Obama was outed as a smoker, there was a cacophony of screams of health Nazism until the Obama campaign issued a statement that he was trying to quit. The guy is going to be president, let him enjoy his smokes. Not only that, he should be allowed to enjoy his smokes in public without wailing and gnashing of teeth.

After there are far worse things in this world than tobacco, shouldn't you anti-smoking types be working on getting them fixed first?

1m1w

that viewing obscene amounts of drawn out pornography does not in fact count as studying for Human Anatomy & Phsyiology 112. Ah, wasted youth.

P.S. Rumours of my death have been woefully underexaggeratted. Sso I got kicked in my softspot fontanelle by a moose, so what, I got better.

Hank

Here’s another installment in the lead-up to Dr. Daniel R_e’s mind-opening series on nutrition and poison foods.

I’ve been a food freak for as long as I can remember. I love eating food, cooking food, and learning about food. I’m in the process of training to grow my own food. I’ll eat darn near anything except lima beans and Rocky Mountain oysters*. I have certain favorite dishes that I seek out in every place I can, and really dig comparing notes on various restaurants with other chow fanatics. For example, between 1995 and 2005, I ate dozens of Reuben sandwiches, ordering them in many states at every joint I visited that featured them on the menu, searching for the ultimate. [Pro tip : the grand winner was and remains Chompie’s ‘Grandpa Ruby’s Reuben’ – nonpareil, and available in Tempe or Scottsdale.] Currently, I’m on a grilled cheese safari that started in June of 2008. [Current point leader : Mile High Grill in Jerome, AZ]

Sounds like fun, huh? It is. But there’s a catch. Something else that I started in June is the transition from the poison to the Poison-Free Lifestyle ™ . For those not in the know, the Poison-Free Lifestyle™ is concerned primarily with excluding from one’s eating patterns such things as chemical additives like BHT, highly-processed ingredients such as modified corn starch, animal products that have been subject to the use of antibiotics, cannibal feed, or other nasty manipulation, and produce that has been grown with the addition of chemical pesticides or fertilizers. These excluded products are broadly construed as ‘poison’ for varying reasons. The chemical pesticides are kind of a no-brainer – those are literally poison, petrochemical compounds that you wouldn’t put in your mouth under any reasonable circumstances. Ditto known FDA-approved poisons like aspartame, which has been conclusively proven to be carcinogenic. The logic of excluding chemically modified and manipulated ingredients is a little more conceptual : even though eating pure modified corn starch or soy lecithin (for a terrifying and true account of how this stuff is produced, read the excellent and unbiased “Twinkie, Deconstructed”) hasn’t been proven to be harmful, the basis for rejecting it (and a great many other things that are hidden in the ingredient lists of nearly every item in the grocery store) is that it’s a food that’s twisted out of its basic form by processes that the consumer doesn’t understand and which involve harmful chemicals and is then tucked away into foods that you’d think would be perfectly free of weird synthetic ingredients without the consum

Latewire

Daniel Roe

1m1w that viewing obscene amounts of drawn out pornography does not in fact count as studying for Human Anatomy & Phsyiology 112. Ah, wasted youth. P.S. Rumours of my death have been woefully underexaggeratted. Sso I got kicked in my softspot fontanelle by a moose, so what, I got better.

1m1w

that viewing obscene amounts of drawn out pornography does not in fact count as studying for Human Anatomy & Phsyiology 112. Ah, wasted youth.

P.S. Rumours of my death have been woefully underexaggeratted. Sso I got kicked in my softspot fontanelle by a moose, so what, I got better.