New Zealand and North Korea

Well there you go, the Korean Central News Agency (that's north) has reported that:

.

"A friendly meeting took place at the Korea-New Zealand Friendship Haksan Co-operative Farm in Hyongjesan District, Pyongyang, on March 22 on the occasion of the fifth anniversary of the establishment of diplomatic relations between the DPRK and New Zealand. Present on invitation were members of the visiting New Zealand-DPRK Association. On hand were members of the Korea-New Zealand Friendship Association and officials of the farm. The guests helped farmers in carrying compost. They appreciated an art performance given by farmers and talked with them about the need to boost the relations between the two countries, deepening the friendship. They handed aid materials to the farm. "

.

You will hear this on Voice of Korea radio in English on shortwave today only in the news (no there is no way to listen online). Presumably the NZ-DPRK Association didn't ask about the children of political dissidents being kept in gulags, they prefer to carry compost - which wouldn't be hard to find, given that virtually everything ever published in the country is worth less than that. It would have been more helpful had they been able to hand radios to the farmers so they could find out how much they are lied to by their government.

.

Still, these are private individuals, not government and it is not for me to ask why they provide propaganda for a regime that is the antithesis of reason and life itself.

Wishart vs. Cresswell

Following on from Clark's comment that Investigate magazine editor Ian Wishart is a "creep", PC gave his own opinion on him calling him a scandal monger and fundamentalist nutbar et al. Wishart is now threatening to sue him for defamation,

.

Now I’ve avoided Investigate magazine after seeing time and time again headlines I’d expect to see in a tabloid, and rather empty musings like this.

.

His own blog makes banal assertions like:

“There is more evidence for the existence of Christ and a contemporaneous belief of his deity than there is for virtually any other historical figure of his time.”
.
Well we know people believe in Christ, but that clever use of language doesn’t get you very far. Christ may well have existed, but just because people believe in the ghost doesn’t mean IT exists. The notion that there is MORE evidence for the existence of Christ than others “of his time” is ludicrous. More than Cleopatra or Caesar? This is like saying that there is more evidence for Churchill than of Stalin or Hitler.

.

So I thought I’d read a bit of Wishart, particularly an initially alarming story about hormones in New Zealand beef and lesbian seagulls (bound to excite environmentalists and adolescents alike).

The end of the articles states:

“Increasingly, scientists suspect environmental hormone pollutants caused by human agriculture and industrial waste are working into the animal food chain and creating more instances of so-called “gay behaviour” by animals. The question is, what are the hormones doing to humans?”
.
Well the only case cited is of seagulls, and before that of a WWF zoologist more generally concerned about the effects of hormonal contaminants on animals. Fair enough, but the implication here is that hormones we consume through pollution or food could be making people gay. So how is this relevant to New Zealand? How valid are these concerns, or are they just scandal mongering with a joining of the dots as noted by PC?
.
It starts with:

"Hormone Growth Promotants .... Known in the industry as HGPs, the official line is that the sex hormones implanted into the ears of cattle are natural or nature identical substances that simply replicate nature, mimicking the hormones lost through castration and equating to other natural dietary sources of hormones such as eggs or soybeans. But how do New Zealanders feel about growth promoting hormones implanted in their meat patties?"
.
The "official line" well no Ian, it's the line of the farmers and the producers. You have a better explanation than this? He effectively rubbishes fact by implying the "official line" is like some press statement from Belarus, then "how do New Zealanders feel" should be the test? Well Ian, after reading articles like this, they will feel scared because you were remarkably selective.

.
“Compudose is implanted only in the skin immediately beneath the ear of a cattle beast. Disposal of ears of implanted cattle is an issue. NZFSA says they are discarded as waste, rendered or used in gelatin production.”
.
Ok so the main issue is that the ears may be used in gelatin, though the hormones spread through the beef. Nothing much more is said on this and then...
.
“A further issue is the use of antibiotics. Elanco acknowledges that the implant may be dusted with the antibiotic tetracycline. Derek Moore is unsure if the New Zealand version contains any antibiotic. He suggests that perhaps the implant is coated in talcum powder.”
.
Ohhhhh “unsure” and “perhaps” smells of a cover up now, scandal, especially since...
.
“In the United States the needle used to insert the implant is also often coated with an antibiotic. Vet Services in the Hawkes Bay are adamant they do not use antibiotics to cleanse needles. But either way the trace use of an antibiotic for non-therapeutic purposes is concerning.”
.
Says the non-scientist – even though there isn’t evidence it is used in New Zealand and no evidence of it being harmful if it was used, as the article itself states. The facts are hear, but with a sprinkling of skeptical fear pepper makes it taste a bit foul, so all you non-scientists can go – whoa I don’t use antibiotics unless I’m ill, something wrong here – except by now you’ve forgotten that there is no evidence antibiotics are used in New Zealand at all for this process. In addition...
.
“Elanco says it has yet to be demonstrated that non-therapeutic use of antibiotics has a detrimental effect on humans.”
.
BUT that’s ok, the whole tone is “can’t be too careful” and you can't trust industry can you now? You know what THEY are like.

.
Then we have the comfort that if you really are concerned about it, you can take this advice:

.

“New Zealand Beef and Lamb Marketing Bureau advises consumers to look out for their red tick of hormone-free approval. Seager Mason, tech-nical director for BioGro says organic food by definition is free of additives. “The whole point of organics is the system for monitoring the producers. Food producers should always declare the means of manufacture.” He comments that any decision on the safety or otherwise of food ingredients should be made by the consumer not the ‘vested-interest’ producer.
.
So first you can avoid beef with hormones in it, then you have an organic producers claiming that producers have vested interests, as if organic producers don’t have a vested interest in raising questions about the safety of their competitors’ typically cheaper products? No, that isn’t even raised. However, organic producers like to raise issues with non-organic produce, especially scaring people into believing what is "really in their food". The whole industry is based on scaring people into thinking non-organic food is bad for you, so why should you be surprised? Wishart ignores this.
.
So why are HGPs used?
.
“The industry calls them ‘quality enhancers’. In a local trial cattle treated with Compudose had an average weight increase of 23.5% (9). Cattle treated with HGPs grow faster enabling them to be sent to the works in shorter time, lowering the farmer cost of beef raising. It’s estimated that for every dollar spent on an HGP there is a five-dollar return.”
.

The first sentence drips of a huge "yeah right" by saying the "industry calls them" and quotation marks around 'quality enhancers', rather than simply explaining the rest of the point. So it produces bigger cattle at lower cost - anything to complain about there?
.

Then he makes sense:
.
“Consumer choice is promoted as the ultimate freedom. It is the market that must test the validity of claims in support of HGPs. It is the market that must sort out whether consumers really want to eat meat grown with growth promoting hormones.”
.

It sure is, as long as the market is free and informed by fact, not fear. The organic sector provides this choice, as to other farmers explicitly growing beef without HGPs - no problem then..

.

So what about those lesbian seagulls?
.
“A University of California, Davis, study by avian toxicologist Michael Fry in the 1980s determined that estrogenic pollution lay behind the “lesbian behaviour” of seagulls. Significantly, to test their theory, they injected normal seagull eggs with estradiol, the additive being pumped into some New Zealand and Australian beef.
.
Pumped into? Injected into ears – but then hyperbole sells more magazines.

.
“To connect these effects with estrogenic pollutants, Fry and his colleagues conducted a number of experiments during the 1980s. In one, they injected eggs of contaminant-free gulls with estradiol…When the hatchlings emerged, they exhibited the same array of feminized sex organs as DDT-contaminated Western gulls on Santa Barbara Island, off the coast of California.” The estradiol, and a range of other estrogenic pollutants like DDT, effectively “chemically castrated” the males, Fry says.
.
So there you go, because some seagull eggs were injected with estradiol and were chemically castrated, and some NZ cattle use HGPs and this is the same substance, it could chemically castrate your children, maybe turn them (horrors!) gay! See the "joining the dots" that PC mentioned? That is what you may surmise.

.
So what ABOUT these hormones anyway? Well they actually are about increasing the amount of naturally occurring hormones in cattle that may be reduced due to castration. This article below from Clemson University South Carolina claims that no residues remain in cattle treated with it through the ears.
.
The US Department of Agriculture states:
.
“The amounts of estradiol, progesterone and testosterone in animals raised using hormones as growth promotants are extremely low compared with their production in humans. Even a young boy would need to eat more than 7000 grams (about 16 pounds) of beef raised using estradiol daily in order to produce a one percent increase in his production of this hormone. A 500-gram portion of beef raised using estradiol contains approximately 15,000 times less of this hormone than the amount produced daily by the average man, and about nine million times less than the amount produced by a pregnant woman.”

.

or how about:

.

"A one pint glass of milk from an untreated cow contains about 9 times as much estradiol as a 250 gram portion of meat from a steer raised using hormones"

.
Or is Ian going to claim that the USDA is in league with the producers of these drugs?

.

Well no, the article does contain a link to the NZ Food Safety Authority which defends the use of HGPs here.

.

So what does it all mean? It means that you've been eating beef with HGPs in it with no ill effects, your body produces far more estradiol than you consume through beef. That is the fact, but could you sell magazines by claiming that chemicals used in agriculture are harmless? No - people like scandals. A bit like implying that the Clark government is all about some covert gay agenda and was going to decriminalise cannabis - chance would be a fine thing!

.

Belarus protest shutdown

The bully of Belarus has his batons on, clearing the protest against the rigged elections in Europe’s most fascist state. According to The Times they have been taken away, I can only hope that they don't disappear - like some other political opponents have.

.

It is a shame that more people in Minsk were not willing to stand up for freedom, but the grinding dreariness of Belarus in late winter is hardly inspiring - Belarus should be subject to international isolation. New Zealand should ostracise it economically and diplomatically, as it has Zimbabwe. No Right Turn has also blogged this and supported liberal democracy in Minsk. I suspect Belarus will lose more of its brightest stars to Russia and Ukraine, where there is more freedom and more opportunity - while its sad people continue to exist, not live.

Kember, Sooden and Loney freed

Congratulations on the SAS for rescuing Norman Kember, Harmeet Sooden and Jim Loney from their kidnappers in Iraq. DPF, PC, Whaleoil and Oswald Bastable have blogged on this, but I am pleased at last that the CPT website thanks the soldiers for risking their lives for these misguided peace campaigners.
.
As much as I disagree with IFR and CPT, I am pleased that peaceful people have been freed. To paraphrase Voltaire’s famous phrase, I disagree vehemently in what they believe in, but I defend their right to freedom and their own lives. The soldiers who risked their lives for these misguided fools are the true heroes - the soldiers have been thanked after some outrage that it was reported the hostages were "freed" (as if the kidnappers had chosen to do it).

.
The so-called “peace movement” is always keen to advocate peace between countries, to exercise moral equivalency in treating evil murdering totalitarians with the semi-free world and to ignore peace within countries (it is “ok” for Iraqis to be attacked by Saddam’s government, but not US forces). Had the peace movement had its way, you wouldn’t be reading blogs, you might be speaking German or Russian, as Europe would be divided between Hitler and Stalin, and the USA may have sat back and negotiated “peace” with evil. War is the second greatest evil in the world, the greatest in when governments turn on their own people.

.

Ask yourself whether, truly, politicians in western democracies want war. Bush would have much preferred Saddam to have been overthrown, Libya ended its nuclear weapons programme and normalised relations with the west - which was a relief. It would be a relief if Kim Jong Il ended North Korea's weapon's programme and talked about reform and opening up. The savings to western democracies in reducing military expenditure are appealling to politicians on the left, because money can be funnelled into other spending, and the right, because it can fund tax cuts. War is risky, messy and expensive - and western democracies always fair worse because the media is uncensored - and because only in a free country can people protest against the government's side during war. Notice when the Cold War ended how the US and the UK withdraw massive forces from western Europe, shut down bases (low cost airlines fly to some of those now!), cut weapons and troop deployments - because the threat had gone.

UK Budget yawn

I thought about what to say about this - just more tax and spend, more throwing money at the broken inefficient NHS and the education system, letting Britain slosh around on welfare, a massive inefficient regulatory behemoth of a bureaucracy, dishing out subsidies to whoever shouts the loudest.
.
For all I am grateful for with Tony Blair (reforming Labour to not be an outpost of the Warsaw Pact and a solid commitment to enlightenment values and Western civilisation), Gordon Brown reminds me a lot of Michael Cullen, except I think Cullen is better. Brown doesn't ridiculously overspend or ridiculously increase taxes, he doesn't rock the boat, but bit by bit he adds on extra spending, little discounts on taxes here and there, making the state ever more complicated and ever more intrusive. The idea that people should pay for what they use where practicable, and be taxed on a fairly uniform basis is light years away from Brown or Cullen. It is a trend since the end of Thatcher and Ruth Richardson that Budgets have been about satisfying interest groups with axes to grind. Axes they grind at the expense of the silent majority.
.
Britain has had its halcyon days of heady reform, which brought it back from the brink - the only thing stopping it being the poor cousin of Europe is that France, Italy and Germany are worse.
.
Look at this load of pork and thieving from the budget:
.
- free off peak bus travel nationwide for pensioners and disabled people;
- establishing a £1 billion health research fund;
- establishing an International Business Advisory Council;
- increase to Enterprise Capital Funds scheme;
- Money for Elite athletes training for the Olympics
- Increase road tax for large so called "more polluting" vehicles

- Increased landfill tax credit
- Fiddling of stamp duty to increase net revenue (increase threshold, remove exemptions)
- Money for developing microgeneration technology

.

Yes I know Cullen does that too, but the tax system in NZ is far simpler, and the subsidies are far lower for businesses and pork. In short, more of the nonsense was ripped out under Douglas and Richardson than under Thatcher.

.

£552 billion of Brit's money is being spent by Brown, that's £9200 per person, £516 billion in tax is being raised, which is £8600 per person. So it's borrow and spend. Someone's getting a good deal, since I am paying more than that in income tax alone. The single biggest item is "social protection" at £151 billion - in other words, compulsory social welfare. Health is second at £96 billion, and it continues to disappoint.

.

and anyone who thinks National Insurance pays for health and pensions needs to wake up - the total revenue from national insurance contributions is £90 billion. Hiding this cost helps to ensure the average Brit thinks he is paying the full cost of the NHS from national insurance - which is a lie.

.

but I did learn the median income is £24000. Translate that into $NZ and you'll see that New Zealand has low incomes, and a lower cost of living (translating £prices into NZ$ prices would drive a kiwi mad here). Dr Cullen's rich tax bracket would hit the average income earner in the UK.

.

oh well, it's daylight from 7am till 6pm now :)