FDA Proposes Changes in Regulation of Processed Ackee Fruit

November 8, 2012 FDA today published in the Federal Register a draft Compliance Policy Guide that, when finalized, will provide guidance for FDA staff on our enforcement criteria for canned ackee, frozen ackee, and other ackee products that contain hypoglycin A. Ackee fruit is harvested from the ackee tree, which is native to West Africa but has been grown for its fruit in Jamaica since the 18th century and is now a widespread fruit tree in many countries in the Caribbean and Central and South America. Canned and frozen ackee fruit is marketed in the United States almost exclusively to people from Caribbean cultures. Most of the ackee and ackee products in the United States are imported from tropical countries, such as Jamaica, Belize, and Haiti. However, ackee trees also grow in southern Florida and in recent years there has been interest by a processor in Florida to market ackee products in interstate commerce. The ackee fruit naturally contains the toxin hypoglycin A, which drops to negligible levels in certain parts of the fruit when it is fully ripe. Hypoglycin A may pose a health risk in amounts in excess of 100 parts per million, according to an FDA risk assessment. If the ackee fruit is not processed properly, levels of hypoglycin A above 100 ppm may be present in the processed ackee product. FDA has in place an Import Alert which states that districts may detain without physical examination all ackee products offered for import, except for those ackee products from firms that are identified on a “green list” included in the Import Alert. The firms on the green list are those firms that have demonstrated to FDA that future shipments of their ackee products will not be adulterated. The Import Alert also includes a “yellow list.” Firms on the “yellow list” of the import alert have been identified as having food safety controls in place to control the toxin, hypoglycin A, in their ackee products. Firms on this list must provide test results demonstrating that their product does not contain a level of hypoglycin A that may render the product injurious to health, in order to secure release of the shipment. FDA assesses all processors of ackee for export to the United States on a facility-by-facility basis. See the Federal Register notice for the Draft Compliance Policy Guide Sec. 550.050 Canned Ackee, Frozen Ackee, and Other Ackee Products--Hypoglycin A Toxin for more information. Interested parties can submit comments on the draft during a 60-day comment period. View the FDA Import Alert for ackee fruit (IA 21-11) on the FDA website.

Peterson Statement on 2012 Farm Bill During Lame Duck Session

WASHINGTON – U.S. House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Collin C. Peterson, D-Minn., today urged House Republican Leaders to bring the Agriculture Committee’s bipartisan five-year farm bill to the floor for a vote next week. “The election is over so it’s time to get to work. I’m optimistic that, if given the chance, we have the votes to pass a five-year farm bill. There is no good reason not to vote on the bill when we return next week, before Thanksgiving. This will give us the time we need to work out our differences with the Senate and get a new five-year farm bill signed into law by the end of the year. “I remain opposed to an extension of any kind for any time.”

Nov. 8, 2012 , Los Angeles - NASA call to animal researchers condemned by animal protection group

Nov. 8, 2012 , Los Angeles - NASA call to animal researchers condemned by animal protection group Taking one giant leap backwards, NASA has called on researchers to submit funding applications for projects which may involve the use of primates, dogs, cats and other animals, provoking condemnation from Animal Defenders International (ADI). The purpose of the research is to study how the environment in space affects biological processes, enabling NASA to develop “a safe, productive human presence in space for extended periods”. Two years ago, following a concerted campaign by ADI and other groups, NASA cancelled a research program at the Brookhaven National Laboratory which would have involved the irradiation of 36 squirrel monkeys. As part of the campaign, ADI distributed a DVD entitled ‘Space Experiments on Monkeys – One Giant Leap Backwards’ to Members of Congress which: • Revealed the horrific nature of the monkey experiments • Outlined how the tests were scientifically flawed • Included quotes from: the European Space Agency; Cosmonaut Valentin Lebedev, who set a world record for time in space; Jim Bates, NASA retired, formerly Co-Chairman of the JSC Space Radiation Environment Group; and ex-ESA astronaut and former MEP, Umberto Guidoni • Included an extensive interview with aerospace engineer April Evans, who worked as a space architect on the International Space Station and resigned in protest over the tests. ADI President Jan Creamer: “Animal Defenders International is horrified at the thought that NASA may recommence their research on primates who, alongside any other animals used, would needlessly suffer for this project. We call on NASA to do the right thing, scientifically and ethically, and ensure that NO animals are used.” In their research guidelines, NASA state “If procedures (e.g., pharmacological or surgical) might lead to severe discomfort, distress, pain or injury, indicators for humane endpoints and euthanasia (e.g., severe infection, respiratory distress, failure to eat, tumor size) should be described.” identifying the potential for severe animal suffering to occur. Calls for research proposals for the project opened on September 30th and the deadline for submissions was October 31st. The selection of proposals is expected to be announced on April 30th, 2013.

An Open Letter to Mitt Romney By Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson

An Open Letter to Mitt Romney By Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson Editor's note: A version of this piece first appeared at USAToday.com. Dear Mitt, I have awakened on November 7 to learn that your bid for the presidency was unsuccessful. In the midst of the disappointment that I share with you, I want to thank you for devoting years of your life to the wearisome task of running for president. Millions of Americans are grateful to you. You have been one of my heroes for the past 48 years. I still recall vividly the valiant cross country race you ran at our Cranbrook Homecoming in October of 1964—a race when you willed yourself to run faster than you ever had until, near the end, oxygen starvation set in, causing you first to stagger, then to collapse just 30 yards from the finish line. I can still see your face, ashen and contorted in pain, as you ignored the torture of the cinders on the track scraping against soft skin and began to crawl. Even though every other runner passed you, and you had nothing to gain—other than surcease of agony—from dragging yourself to the finish line, you refused to quit until you reached your goal. Your brave effort touched me deeply. That’s when I learned that you were special—a man of character, commitment, heart and guts, someone who embodied the indomitable American spirit. I also admired your exuberant joie de vivre. You loved life, and I can see that your great capacity for love found abundantly happy fulfillment in your life with your wife and sons. I also remember your friendship with Chester, our night watchman at Cranbrook. At prep school, there can be a tendency to disregard the support staff, to take them for granted like the furniture, but you reached out to that good, simple, kind, salt-of-the-earth security guard. (Just for the record, I befriended Chester, too, during my senior year, so I feel we share that bond.) Nobody can doubt your love for our country. Whereas your opponent concentrated on lining up support from key special interest groups, your focus was more akin to the patriotic statesman than the opportunistic politician—it was so clear that you wanted to get our country back on track. As we can now see, that wasn’t to be. What occurs to me is that, by losing the election, you might have been spared a cruel fate. If elected, you would have inherited an economic mess. The problem isn’t just the looming fiscal cliff and debt ceiling, but the overall financial situation of our government is clearly unsustainable and nonviable. Entitlement spending has mushroomed so that it—combined with interest on the national debt—now consumes virtually every dollar of tax revenue. That means that the various departments and agencies that we normally think of as “the federal government,” from the Pentagon through the EPA and everything in between, is being run on borrowed (or “quantitatively eased”) dollars. No president could trim entitlement spending or shut down enough of the government to stanch the flood of red ink. Government indebtedness will continue to balloon and our currency will continue to be debauched, and it would have been impossible for you, given the prevalent attitudes of the people, to halt that insidious process. You might have tried by firing Ben Bernanke and replacing him with someone who would stop quantitative easing, but that would have caused interest rates to rise and the federal government to become insolvent, triggering a crisis that would have made you a vilified president. The presidency at this juncture in history strikes me as an impossible job. Both domestic and foreign policy seem to be Gordian knots that no mere mortal can cut. I know, though, that you would have valiantly been willing to give your all in the attempt to help your country at this difficult time. Your path as president would have been as excruciating as those last 30 yards of that cross country race you ran so long ago, but you would have addressed the challenge with the same determination and commitment as you did then. Now those awful burdens you would have been willing to shoulder fall on your opponent, and we’ll see what kind of shoulders he has. You gave years of your life for the chance to be of service to your country, Mitt, and you lived by our school motto, “Aim High.” You did us proud. — Dr. Mark W. Hendrickson is an adjunct faculty member, economist, and fellow for economic and social policy with The Center for Vision & Values at Grove City College.

How to Detect & Protect Against Workplace Bullying -- a Chronic Corporate Disease

How to Detect & Protect Against Workplace Bullying -- a Chronic Corporate Disease By: Rakesh Malhotra Stories of workplace bullying are commonplace throughout the United States. Some real-life examples: Mavis: “When I started there, I was told that someone had been acting in the position and had expected to get the job. This person continually undermined me and turned other staff against me. I endured 12 months of hell, and felt as if I was sinking in quicksand.” A male employee at a different company: “The misery took over my whole life. I turned nasty and bitter and treated my wife and kids like whipping posts. After many visits to a psychologist, I was able to think of all the positive things in my life. Now I look back and think I wouldn’t want to go through that experience again.” In general, there are no legal repercussions for non-physical bullying except in specific cases, such as sexual harassment. In fact, bullying is a character trait that tends to be condoned in American society. Consider our national obsession -- football. The object of this celebrated game is to get the ball to the other player’s goal, no matter what it takes: trampling, hitting, pushing, screaming. If football is a metaphor for American society, then the winner is the person who pushes others out of the way and wins no matter the cost. Bullies win by controlling situations and people around them. They crave power and the attention that comes from getting what they want. The effects of working with a bully Adults have a difficult time performing their jobs effectively when subjected to bullying by a co-worker. It takes a toll physically because of our physiological responses to emotional stress. Typically, victims endure feelings of depression, guilt and shame, and they suffer sleep loss and fatigue. In some cases, victims begin to believe the bully’s behavior is warranted, and they develop feelings of worthlessness. They cannot complete tasks at the same level as others in their units. Victims of bullying may suffer from panic disorders, post traumatic stress syndrome, agoraphobia and stress-induced high blood pressure. If they leave the job or are docked because of resulting lowered performance, they face economic issues. Some take their own lives. The abuse takes a toll on victims in every way imaginable. Are you a bully? Being accused of being the bully can be difficult to accept. You may believe your actions were unintentional, or a justified emotional response to provocation. Perhaps, you see yourself as the only one in the office qualified to do anything right. However, whatever you have said or done, whether purposefully or not, you have created a culture of negativity for at least one person and you need to honestly assess the situation and your role in it. Symptoms that you may be the bully include: • Insulting a coworker (remember, one person’s “joke” may be another’s insult). • Undermining another employee’s work by creating a hostile environment or perhaps by consistently calling their attention to “flaws”. (Bullies focus on a person, while constructive criticism focuses on a task.) • As an employer, ignoring your employees’ suggestions. • Humiliating your employee in front of others. If any of these sound like something that you may be doing, it is important to address this immediately with your victim. You may want to speak with your doctor about getting help, such as counseling, sensitivity training, anger management and other seminars. It is important to understand the signs and symptoms of a bully in order to help the victim and the victimizer deal with and exterminate the behavior. If you are a victim, diligently record workplace bullying events. If you choose to make a formal complaint, you will be responsible for providing information should there be charges brought against the bully.

CSPI: Antioxidant Comes From Illegal Fortification, Not the Named and Pictured Fruits

WASHINGTON--7UP manufacturer Dr Pepper Snapple Group is facing a lawsuit over its practice of touting an added antioxidant in its regular and diet Cherry Antioxidant, Mixed Berry Antioxidant, and Pomegranate Antioxidant varieties. “There’s never been a more delicious way to cherry pick your antioxidant!” is how 7UP’s web site puts it. But according to the lawsuit filed today in federal court in California, the antioxidant claim is both misleading, since it gives the impression that the antioxidants come from the pictured healthful fruits, and illegal, since Food and Drug Administration regulations prohibit fortifying nutritionally worthless snack foods and beverages with nutrients. The suit was filed on behalf of a Sherman Oaks, Calif., man who purchased the drinks but would not have had he known the product didn’t contain juices from the advertised fruits, and that the drinks have only a small amount of one isolated antioxidant, vitamin E. The nonprofit Center for Science in the Public Interest is acting as co-counsel in the lawsuit, with the consumer protection class action law firm Reese Richman LLP. “Non-diet varieties of 7UP, like other sugary drinks, promote obesity, diabetes, tooth decay, and other serious health problems, and no amount of antioxidants could begin to reduce those risks,” said CSPI executive director Michael F. Jacobson. “Adding an antioxidant to a soda is like adding menthol to a cigarette—neither does anything to make an unhealthy product healthy.” Despite the pictures of cherries, blackberries, cranberries, raspberries, and pomegranates on various 7UP labels, the drinks contain no fruit or juice of any kind. 7UP Cherry Antioxidant contains water, high-fructose corn syrup, citric acid, potassium benzoate, and the controversial dye Red 40. The Mixed Berry and Pomegranate varieties also contain Blue 1 dye. One 12-ounce serving contains 9 teaspoons (38 grams) of sugars and 140 calories. The diet versions replace the high-fructose corn syrup with the artificial sweeteners aspartame and acesulfame potassium. In all six products, the added antioxidant is a small amount of vitamin E in the form of vitamin E acetate or d-alpha tocopherol acetate. But the purported health benefits of antioxidants are suggested by studies involving the consumption of whole fruits and vegetables, not artificially fortified foods, according to CSPI. Moreover, the FDA has a policy that states that the agency “does not consider it appropriate to fortify … snack foods such as candies and carbonated beverages.” The FDA sent a warning letter to Coca-Cola for similar violations of that policy. According to the lawsuit, the antioxidant claims violate several California laws, including its Consumers Legal Remedies Act, the Sherman Food, Drug, and Cosmetics Law, and several provisions of its Business and Professions Code related to fraudulent business practices and misleading advertising. This isn’t the first time that 7UP’s labeling and marketing practices have attracted CSPI’s attention. In 2006, CSPI threatened to sue to stop the company from calling 7UP “100% Natural” even though it contains factory-made high-fructose corn syrup. Cadbury Schweppes, then 7UP’s parent company, soon dropped that claim though it now makes reference to the drinks’ “100% natural flavors.” In May, CSPI had privately contacted 7UP’s new parent company, Dr Pepper Snapple Group, over the issues surrounding the antioxidant claims, but the company has since refused to correct its labels. Reducing soda consumption is increasingly a priority of public health officials. “High consumption of SSBs [sugar-sweetened beverages] has been associated with obesity....diabetes, elevated triglycerides, cardiovascular disease, non-alcoholic fatty liver disease, elevated uric acid levels, gout, and dental caries,” according to a guide published by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. CSPI recently released The Real Bears, an animated short film that depicts a family of polar bears suffering from some of the adverse health effects of soda consumption. "Every can or bottle of 7UP consumed brings one closer to obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and other serious health problems," said CSPI litigation director Steve Gardner. "So I look forward to having 7UP go under oath and testify before a judge or a jury that this disease-promoting sugar water is actually a source of healthy antioxidants."

United We Dream Network to Congressional Republicans: If Sean Hannity Can "Evolve" on Citizenship for New Americans, So Can You!

50,000 Latinos Turn 18 Every Month – The Clock is Ticking for Action Washington, DC – Talk radio host Sean Hannity said yesterday that he had “evolved” on a pathway to citizenship for immigrants without papers. Hannity’s comments were the latest in a string of Republican and conservative leaders including Charles Krauthamer, Speaker John Boehner, Leader Eric Cantor and others who have realized the obvious: Latino voters don’t appreciate it when politicians lash out at their youth, the DREAMers, and their families. NAME, a member of the National Coordinating Committee for United We Dream, the largest network of immigrant youth led organizations in the country issued the following statement: "For years, conservative leaders have told DREAMers that they support us and our families behind closed doors. DREAMers are glad to see conservatives begin to poke their heads out of the anti-immigrant closet by speaking publicly about citizenship. "But DREAMers know the difference between talk and action; and we know how to win. After years of talk, the President agreed to protect DREAMers from deportation after the enormous pressure we put on his Administration to deliver. And after Republicans talked a good game to our face and then voted against the DREAM Act, we made sure that Latino voters cast their ballots with us in mind. "DREAMers call on both parties to create a roadmap to citizenship for us and all of the millions undocumented Americans. We will not rest until we win anything less. "900,000 DREAMers are expected to apply for our new Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program over the next two years and according to the polling firm Latino Decisions, 50,000 U.S. born Latinos – our cousins, siblings and friends – become eligible to vote every month. The demand in our community and in all immigrant communities for politicians to deliver citizenship is only going to get stronger. "Our message for Republican leaders in Congress is: if Sean Hannity can evolve on immigration, so can you." For more information, and to interview members of United We Dream, please contact Rafael Noboa y Rivera, (202) 455-4673, or Marisol Valero, (281) 806-0170, marisol@unitedwedream.org

Chairwoman Stabenow Statement on Continuing Farm Bill Process in the Lame Duck Session

Washington, DC - Sen. Debbie Stabenow, Chairwoman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, today released the below statement on continuing and finalizing the farm bill process in the lame duck session. "Americans could not be more clear that now that the election is over, they want us to work together to create jobs and reduce the deficit. If Congress can work together to pass the Farm Bill, it will create the trust and momentum we need to overcome gridlock and solve the challenges our country faces. Passing a bipartisan Farm Bill that reduces the deficit by $23 billion is a significant first step in meeting the critical deficit reduction challenges our country must face head-on this year."