A mi salud y juventud eterna!

Nunca pensé que fuera a ser vegetariana... Me gustaba la carne, el pollo y demás. No me llamaba la atención la verdad comer solo vegetales. Pero un día fui a mi médico homeópata, el mismo que por años me ha dicho que si dejo las carnes acabaría con mis problemas de hígado, estómago y falta de energía... Me dijo que como seres humanos necesitamos de la tierra y solo la tierra para alimentarnos. Que así como el positivo y el negativo se atraen, y el positivo y positivo no, hay alimentos que nuestro cuerpo procesa mejor que otros... Y tiene razón. Porque no intentarlo, y que tal que si funcione? Igual yo ya no como mucha carne porque cada vez que lo hago de hecho me siento más pesada, con menos energía, y cansada... Así qué sin pensarlo dos veces, decidí lanzarme e intentarlo. Por mi salud, por mi bienestar y por un futuro más lleno de energía!! Esta es mi semana #2! Y la verdad no me hace falta... Me siento bien, llena de energia y mas "light"! Ha sido más difícil convencer a mis padres que dejar de comer carnes!

Hablemos sobre comida..

Este es un articulo interesante sobre la industria de la comida. Muchas veces llegamos a la mesa y empezamos a comer.. pero sabemos de donde vienen esos alimentos? Somos conscientes de lo que realmente nos estamos metiendo a la boca?  Como dicen por ahi... eres lo que comes.

Sacado de Eco portal.net

Comida industrial: Las cinco enfermedades más comunes en México, ligadas a los alimentos

Mexico

Las cinco enfermedades más comunes en México están ligadas a la producción y consumo de alimentos provenientes de la cadena agroalimentaria industrial: diabetes, hipertensión, obesidad, cáncer, enfermedades cardiovasculares. Algunas totalmente, otras parcialmente, ninguna está desligada. Esto se traduce en mala calidad de vida y tragedias personales, pero además en altos gastos de atención médica y del presupuesto de salud pública, un enorme subsidio oculto para las transnacionales que dominan la cadena agroindustrial, desde las semillas al procesado de alimentos y venta en supermercados. Más razones para cuestionar ese modelo de producción y consumo de alimentos.

En artículos anteriores referí cómo el sistema alimentario agroindustrial solamente alimenta a 30 por ciento de la población mundial, pero sus graves impactos en salud, cambio climático, uso de energía, combustibles fósiles, agua y contaminación son globales.
En contraste, la diversidad de sistemas alimentarios campesinos y de pequeña escala son los que alimentan a 70 por ciento de la población mundial: 60-70 por ciento de esa cifra lo aportan parcelas agrícolas pequeñas, las huertas urbanas el 15-20 por ciento, la pesca 5-10 por ciento y la caza y recolección silvestre 10-15 por ciento. (Ver ¿Quién nos alimentará? La Jornada, 21/9/13 y www.etcgroup.org). Agrego ahora datos complementarios, de la misma fuente.
En términos de producción por hectárea, un cultivo híbrido produce más que una variedad campesina, pero para ello requiere la siembra en monocultivo, en extensos terrenos planos e irrigados, con gran cantidad de fertilizantes y alto uso de agrotóxicos (plaguicidas, herbicidas, funguicidas). Todo ello disminuye la cantidad de nutrientes que contienen por kilogramo. Los cultivos campesinos, por el desplazamiento histórico que han sufrido, ocurren mayoritariamente en terrenos desiguales, en laderas y tierras pedregosas, sin riego. Si comparamos aisladamente la producción de un cultivo campesino con el mismo híbrido industrial, la producción por hectárea es menor. Sin embargo, los campesinos siembran, por necesidad y conocimiento, una diversidad de cultivos simultáneamente, varios del mismo cultivo con diferentes características, para diferentes usos y para soportar distintas condiciones, además de cultivos diferentes que se apoyan entre sí (se aportan fertilidad, protegen de insectos) y como usan poco o nada de agrotóxicos, crecen a su alrededor una variedad de hierbas comestibles y medicinales. Siempre que pueden, los campesinos combinan también con algún animal doméstico o peces. Todo sumado, el volumen de producción por hectárea de las parcelas campesinas es mayor que el de los monocultivos industriales, además de que resisten mucho mejor los cambios del clima y su calidad y valor nutritivo es mucho mayor.
De lo cosechado en la agricultura industrial, más de la mitad va para forrajes de ganado en cría a gran escala y confinada (cerdos, pollos, vacas). Virtualmente toda la soya y maíz transgénico que se produce en el mundo –y también la que quieren plantar en México– no se destina a alimentación humana sino a forrajes para cría animal industrial, dominada también por trasnacionales y cuyo sobreconsumo es otro factor causante de las enfermedades principales.
De los fertilizantes sintéticos usados en la agricultura industrial, la mayoría es justamente para producir forrajes, y la mitad que se aplica no llega a las plantas por problemas técnicos. A su vez, el escurrimiento de fertilizantes es factor fundamental de contaminación de aguas y de gases de efecto invernadero.
Adicionalmente, en la cadena industrial se desperdicia de 33 a 40 por ciento de losalimentos durante la producción, transporte, procesamiento y en hogares. Otro 25 por ciento se pierde en sobreconsumo, produciendo obesidad, entre otras cosas por la adicción que provoca la cantidad de sal, azúcar y químicos agregados.
En Norteamérica y Europa el desperdicio de alimentos per cápita es de 95 a 115 kilogramos por año, mientras que en África subsahariana y sudeste de Asia (con mayoría de agricultura campesina), es de 6 a 11 kilogramos per cápita, 10 veces menor.
Ante el desperdicio y la gravedad de los problemas de salud y ambientales que provoca la cadena industrial de alimentos, urge replantearse políticas que la desalienten y estimulen en su lugar la producción diversificada, sin químicos, con semillas propias y en pequeña escala, que además es la base de trabajo y sustento de más de 80 por ciento de los agricultores del país. En el extremo opuesto está la producción industrial con transgénicos, que exacerba todos los problemas mencionados, y además, al estar en manos de cinco trasnacionales es una entrega de soberanía nacional. La siembra de soya transgénica ya está amenazando de muerte a los apicultores, tercer rubro de exportación nacional, que provee sustento a más de 40 mil familias campesinas. Las solicitudes de siembra comercial de maíz transgénico en millones de hectáreas, amenazan eliminar otros miles de familias campesinas y contaminar el patrimonio genético más importante del país.
Por si estos datos no fueran suficientes, los eventos climáticos extremos que ha sufrido el país –con daños exacerbados por políticas que aumentan la vulnerabilidad–, están directamente vinculados a ese sistema alimentario agroindustrial, que es una de las causas principales del cambio climático.

Ecoportal.net

*Investigadora del Grupo ETC
www.etcgroup.org

It has been a while...

I created this site, for a class, about 2 years ago. I never really thought that I was gonna use this site ever again after that class... but today, for some reason after having a million things in my head (ok, I'm exaggerating.. only a couple) I thought: maybe this is a good way of letting it all out and perhaps with these words things can become a little bit clearer. Perhaps this can serve as medium to connect with someone who is experiencing something similar, or just feels on the same boat as I am now. Or perhaps my sister can read it regularly and keep up with me... whatever reason, I'm just writing, just because, just to let it all out.

 I'm from Colombia and moved to the US to go to school. While in the US, I learned to appreciate the little things that didn't see before, didn't hear before, didn't notice before. I learned to appreciate family, those meals that only grandma makes that until this day I can't make. I learned that my mom has so many things to teach me, to show me, to tell me to make my life less complicated and more filling. I learned that were I come from is so unique and authentic... nowhere you can find a little town in the middle of the mountains. Be surrounded by green, huge trees, all kinds of flowers, species, colors, flavors. I really learned to appreciate a meal made with love, with real flavors, with real stuff, free of chemicals and weird additives that you can't even pronounce. I started to notice that I'm not living solo neither I'm an individual... I'm not a different or separate specie.

I can't speak for others but what I noticed is that what I do, what I choose, what I eat, has an effect, an impact not only on me but on others. And is because of all these that I started a search, for a healthier, better, happier, improved life style. I plan to change what I'm used to eat, I plan to use my abilities and skills as a journalist to let others know what's up in my hometown, so others can notice too (as I did) and then they can make their choice.

Will see and will keep you posted...

Meet Judy... GSTV's Janitor

This is a story I did for the news show at GSTV, the Panther Report. The story features the most lovely and interesting person behind the lady that cleans our office. She is not only the janitor.. she is our friend, she is our GSU momma!

Cable is now a government issue...

           Remember that Cablevision and News Corp. dilemma? Well, since the issue became public, it has attracted the attention of many. Newspapers keep following up with what really happened with the two companies. While in Congress, some politicians had demanded FCC’s involvement.

In an article in The Hill's Congress Blog by Former Rep. Jack Fields, who sponsored retransmission consent, he states that the congress created this term in order to “ensure that the public would retain access to local broadcast programming as cable television gained in power and influence.” However, it didn’t work quite well because broadcasters are using these provisions as an excuse to charge cable companies high fees for programming.

 Fields explains that when the Federal Communications Commission created this ruling the main purpose was to help market competition. They initially thought that cable stations were going to be a monopoly, so they created the retransmission consent in order to avoid future problems between broadcasters and cable stations. 

             The FCC has stated in their 2000 ruling that rates charged by networks or cable companies are determined by these businesses and the “commission does not have the authority to review these rates or to investigate allegations that the rates are excessive.” 

            However, now that the FCC doesn’t have any control over how much broadcasters can charge for their programming, broadcasters are taking advantage of the provision. Broadcasters know they can charge as much as they want because cable stations need their programming.

Right after the dispute between the two companies, Senator John Kerry conducted a meeting with some broadcast executives to examine the retransmission consent. He stated in a press release that in order to provide a fair service to subscribers this provision has to be changed. He also stated that the “FCC can and should use its existing authority to draft new rules” and he also reminded “the agency that its role is to protect those consumers.”

            As of now, the FCC has not taking any action about this issue. Hopefully, after the attention that Cablevision and News Corp.’s dilemma took in the media and the Congress, the FCC will get more involved and do something about it. The issue here is that subscribers are the most affected by this inconvenient, and they are the ones who will have to pay the price. Because it’s for sure that cable companies will have to raise their fees in order to maintain their business.

 

Cable.. a luxury?

Everyday day we hear that the economy is recuperating, slowly but is getting better. Still for some people money is tight and so they try to find solutions to save some money. Some choose to eat more at home, but for some others the solution is: no cable. According to an article in the New York Times’ Media Decoder, cable subscriptions have gone down tremendosly in the past months. Little by little consumers have canceled their cable and satellite subscriptions.

“Cable distributors like Comcast have been hardest hit by the loss of subscribers. Some people who had cable have switched to satellite or to new telecommunications services like Verizon FiOS. Others, according to Comcast, are reverting to over-the-air television signals.”

This situation has affected the television industry because most of the money they collect comes from cable distributors like Comcast and DISHNetwork. However, some TV companies are trying to come up with new strategies to help solve the problem. Time Warner Cable, for example, is trying to retain consumers by introducing cheaper packages of TV programming. Right now they hope that subscriptions will increase during the third quarter of the year, since during this season they expect that more people will want to watch special programming.

This issue relates to the News Corp and Cablevision dilemma. The prices of subscriptions are directly affected by increments in programming fees, and in such a hard economy customers are not able to pay much for TV.

The problem is that when companies like News Corp make cable companies pay huge amounts of money for their programming, it is causing that TV viewers take drastically actions, like canceling their cable subscriptions. The question now is, if we can watch TV for free (over the airwaves or online), why do we have to pay ridiculously amounts of money for a subscription? I agree that if you want more, well, you pay more, but I don’t agree that a regular consumer be forced to unsubscribe from this service because companies just want to take too much advantage of their products.

Panther Report Ep. 5

And here is our Halloween edition of the Panther Report!! Make sure you watch the entire episode! It has 2 parts.We are looking so much better... and we are learning so much out of this experience, you can actually see our progress!

Also, in this episode we have an interview with The Economist's Economics editor, Zanny Minton Beddoes. Check it out!

Panther Report Ep. 4

It's been long time since my last post... it's always hard to take time off!! But here is an update... watch the 4th episode of the Panther Report. It's divided in 3 parts, so just click on it to watch the rest!

Cablevision vs. News Corp continues (Part 2)

A couple of days ago Cablevision (the cable company that serves the New York metropolitan area) and News Corporation (owner of Fox) were having some difficulties reaching an end to the negotiation terms for the cable company to carry Fox.

Cablevision’ subscribers were unable to watch Fox since October 16, and their main concern was that Fox was going to broadcast the World Series. While the dispute was taking place, subscribers were unable to watch these series, and some others were forced to switch to other cable companies. Other methods used for subscribers were to watch shows online and some others went back to the use of an antenna.

The dispute finally came to an end last Saturday (October 30), just in time for cablevision subscribers to watch the third game of the World Series. According to an article in the New York Times, the two companies came to an agreement, in which Cablevision accepted to pay a huge amount of money to News Corp. Cablevision stated that it was ridiculous they had to pay so much money to carry these channels when people can get them for free over the airwaves.

Even though the two companies reached a deal, it seems they still involve in a big dispute. Cablevision stated that the retransmission consent system is badly managed and they ask the government to take a more active action in the issue. Since they, and some other cable companies, believe that the government doesn’t care much about these issues.

However, News Corporation stated that Cablevision has always been complaining about the prices. They also alleged that the only reason why Cablevision wants to get the government involved is because they want a change in the regulations to benefit their company.

Everyday we see disputes like this, in which businesses try to take the most advantage out of their services. It’s ridiculous that the broadcast company want to charge so much when subscribers can get these same channels for free with an antenna. And what is unfair is that subscribers are the ones who will have to pay the price, because it’s for sure that the cable company will raise their prices. In situations like this, I think that government (precisely the FCC) should take action, because at the end consumers are the most affected.
           

Cablevision vs. News Corp

Throughout this year there have been several disputes between broadcasters and cable companies over the right and fees involved in distributing and transmitting programming. In an New York Times’ article that I read today I found that one of New York’s biggest cable providers, Cablevision, is having problems with News Corporation, the owner of Fox, because they can’t agree on terms for the cable company to distribute and transmit some channels, something called retransmission consent.



News Corporation's Channels





This term was created by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) and basically means that cable companies have to ask and/or negotiate with broadcasters to distribute and transmit their programming. However, broadcasters don’t have to accept cable companies terms.



In the case of Cablevision and News Corporation, if the two companies don’t get to an agreement, Cablevision won’t probably be allowed to broadcast News Corp.’s programming, leaving many subscribers unable to watch some of Fox’s local channels. The article says that besides the uncertainty of what will happen between the two companies, they also have been publishing ads attacking each other. In one ad Cablevision states that News Corporation is charging them exorbitant carrying fees, and so they claim is not fair that subscribers fees be increased. On the other hand, News Corporation’s ads claim that Cablevision can’t provide subscriber’s great sports games and so directing consumers to other cable companies.



I understand that both companies have to act on their best interests, but I think it’s ridiculous that they are taking this issue outside to the public, and create ads that attack each other business. By looking at the ads a consumer can’t be certain of what the right side of the story is. One could say that News Corp is trying to get the most money out of the cable company, and that Cablevision is the poor guy of the story. But on the other side one could blame the cable company, and see all that drama as an excuse that the cable company is using to raise their fees later on and just say it isn’t their fault.

We all know television production is very expensive, it uses lots of very complex and expensive technology and people who know how to manipulate it. I agree that broadcasters charge reasonable amounts of money to cable companies to carry their programming because anyways cable companies get lots and lots of money from subscribers. 





Channels broadcasted by Cablevision



 

Panther Report Ep. 3- PART 1

Ok, so we are getting better and better… AND this is just the beginning! We got so many stories (well… compared to the other last 2 episodes) that we had to divide this episode in 2 parts!!  Enjoy! :)



Specially thanks to all our volunteers, GSTV staff, Kelly M., and Andree G.

Panther Report Ep. 3- PART 2

And here is part 2 of episode 3. What you think?

And here is the Second Episode of the Panther Report!

We’re getting better! I never imagined it was going to be so HARD to produce a show!! but I'm learning along the way.. and I love it!! It’s very stressing but guessing I’m just getting used to know how the business really is.

Paid Websites

I found a really interesting story today in the New York Times. It seems that media companies are trying to find some ways of getting people to pay for news online. The article said that The Boston Globe will launch next year a new paid website called the BostonGlobe.com in addition to their existing website Boston.com.

This new website, BostonGlobe.com, will require readers to pay for content such as photographs, full coverage stories, full editions of the daily and Sunday paper, among other things. However, subscribers to the newspaper will get full access to the website without having to pay any extra fees. According to the article, the company hopes to attract more and different types of advertising but expects not to have much advertising on BostonGlobe.com. They said that in the past they required readers to register in order to get content and it worked. With this new website, the company expects to provide more easy access to their audience.

Even the idea is good, I don’t know if their revenue model will last really long. When Internet came out everybody, including newspapers, started to post all online, without knowing the consequences that it was going to bring. Now, that one can go and find all kinds of information online for FREE is hard to set a new system where instead of getting it free you have to pay.

I consider it’s a good idea because newspapers are a business, and somehow needs to get money from somewhere to sustain the business. It needs to pay their employees, in this case reporters who get the news for us, the people. And if you think about it, if the newspaper doesn’t have the money to pay reporters, who is going to get the news for us? Will the news we get be paid by the “big guys”… or probably we’ll only get a little of news but not all.

Yeah, it is bad that now we have to pay for something it was free before, but I prefer to pay a price and be informed of what is going on in my community and my county THAN to be uninformed. After all everything has a price…

Talking about new things...

This is the very 1st episode of the Panther Report. It was not easy... but we made it. After months of planning and days of no sleep and great stress, we finally created it! It’s not great, neither what I had in mind… but hey it’s just the beginning! Enjoy!

First Time!!

I guess I'd start by saying that this year is full of new things for me... my first blog, my first job at a TV station, my first shows, my first year living by myself (my closest relatives left to other more exciting cities, so now is just me here in this growing city... Atlanta) and my first TV show!!! wow... lots of things in just few months... time goes by too fast.. so you better enjoy every minute and take the most advantage of it!