1470071166000

robots

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fredirect.viglink.com%2F%3Fu%3Dhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.slate.com%252Fblogs%252Fbrowbeat%252F2016%252F08%252F01%252Fgreat_performances_john_c_reilly_as_dr_steve_brule.html%26key%3Dddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
r0B0t: John C. Reilly Is Giving One of the Best Performances in TV Comedy Today

This article originally appeared in Vulture.

From Matthew McConaughey to Rachel McAdams, John Travolta to Jessica Lange, Terrence Howard to Taraji P. Henson, acclaimed actors who travel to television from the big screen tend to bring a lot of attendant hoopla with them—provided their shows air in prime-time, apparently. That's the only reason I can think of that Tony- and Oscar-nominee John C. Reilly isn't regularly showered in praise for what he's been doing on late-night ratings powerhouse Adult Swim on a weekly basis this summer. The star of films ranging from Talladega Nights to We Need to Talk About Kevin, Reilly is anchoring the fourth season of Check It Out! With Dr. Steve Brule, the bizarre local-news parody from co-creators Tim Heidecker and Eric Wareheim. (The season finale airs tonight at 12:15 a.m.) Reprising a role he developed over five seasons of the pair's Tim and Eric Awesome Show, Great Job!, he plays Dr. Steve, the semi-functional host of a disastrous human-interest show. And word to the wise, he's delivering one of the best comedic performances on TV.

It starts with the character's look. Reilly's physical appearance has always served him well as an actor. There's something about the combination of his large frame and round, expressive face that makes him look not so much tall as overgrown, like a child stretched to adult proportions. This gives him an air of vulnerability that belies his size; it lends pathos to his dramatic performances, like the sad-sack cop in Magnolia, and a goofball naïveté to his comedic turns, like the fake music legend in Walk Hard: The Dewey Cox Story. It's how a guy who's six-foot-two can sing the ode to interpersonal invisibility “Mr. Cellophane” in the film adaptation of Chicago and earn an Oscar nomination, or pair up with the relatively diminutive Mark Wahlberg in Boogie Nights and come across like a natural sidekick.

In these strictly physical terms alone, Dr. Steve is his magnum opus, the idiot man-child he was born to play. Wearing a brown suit that's at least two sizes too small, teasing his curly hair to fright-wig proportions, twisting his mouth and squinting his eyes to give his face a vibe of permanent confusion, Reilly leans into his quirks as Dr. Steve.

It's the sort of role that demands slapstick with an almost Newtonian certainty, and Reilly never fails to rise, or more accurately fall, to the occasion. Dr. Steve stomps, lurches, and bumbles through every segment; even something as simple as standing still and introducing his latest topic can end in physical havoc, with smashed props and toppled glass-brick sets. This being a Tim and Eric production, the pratfalls often stretch into cringe-comedy territory. In last week's episode alone, Brule tripped on the way to the soundstage and cut his head so badly that his producer stapled the wound shut on camera; he got hit hard enough in the head with a baseball bat during a piñata stunt gone wrong that he vomited from the impact. For a performer equally at home in absurd Judd Apatow comedies and painful Paul Thomas Anderson dramas, the blend of funny-ha-ha and funny-yikes is ideal.

But it's the sense that you're watching a toddler in the body of a large middle-aged man that gives Reilly/Brule his best material. Dr. Steve greets his topics—space, friends, cars, music, eggs—with appropriately childlike wonder and delight, his twinkling eyes and introductory shout of “Let's check it out!” evoking Christmas-morning levels of enthusiasm. He reacts to his guests with a complete lack of guile, whether holding their hands and kissing them on the head or announcing their physical flaws to the world like a child ignoring his mother's advice that it's impolite to point. He'll eat anything put within range of his mouth, from seafood out of a dumpster to MDMA offered by a strip-club owner. The result is often gross-out body-fluid humor that Reilly throws himself into with terrifying commitment; the scene in which he “had to go to the bathroom at both ends” after having too much to drink at a leather bar he mistook for a Hell's Angels hangout is the ne plus ultra of the genre. When he gets hurt, insulted, excluded, or frightened, he cries, sulks, panics, and screams so convincingly you want to go get his parents. (Unfortunately, his mother, Dorris Pringle-Brule-Salahari, is an abusive murderer who kept him caged in the basement as a boy after his fry-cook father skipped town, so that rules that out.)

Then there's his voice, a masterful mangling of pronunciation and grammar that's the character's trademark. Back when Brule was a recurring character on Awesome Show, Reilly played him relatively straight, sounding simply dopey rather than deranged. Once he became the star of his own series, however, his speech pattern took a turn for the weird. He adds unnecessary “r”s to the opening consonants of words: “boats” becomes “broats,” “pirate” becomes “prirate,” “puppets” becomes “pruppets,” and so on. (The bit during an episode on fear where he popped out from behind the set and shouted “Broo!” may be the series' funniest moment.) He's incapable of properly pronouncing anyone's name, and he's often not even in the ballpark; those that begin with “D” are especially taxing on him for some reason, and Davids, Dans, and Dons are invariably mangled into something like Dang or Dong or Drungus. The preposition “of” gets a real workout, most memorably when the Doctor discovers that when it comes to American currency, “one of paper equals four of coin.” And there's a mushmouthed quality to his voice throughout, as if he'd been suddenly awoken from a nap just before the camera started rolling. (The overall effect is so strange and singular that it defuses criticism that the character is some sort of mean-spirited ableist stereotype: No real person on Earth sounds like this.)

And as ill at ease as Brule appears in his man-on-the-street segments, he fits right in to the peculiar public-access world Heidecker and Wareheim have built around him. The VHS-distortion effects, the no-budget graphics and set design, the cast of non-actors playing Brule's fellow Channel 5 employees, the occasional eruptions of Mulholland Drivelevel menace amid the ridiculousness: Dr. Steve's solo show is the Tim & Eric aesthetic in its purest form, at a time when the pair's other ventures (notably their bigger-budget recent series Bedtime Stories) have largely moved away from the deliberately crude, visually noisy look that once defined them. As Reilly's collaborators, they seem determined to rise to his level of calculated madness. I don't think it's an exaggeration to compare this relationship to Sam Esmail and Rami Malek on Mr. Robot or Bryan Fuller and Mads Mikkelsen on Hannibal, in the sense that the look and work of the performer enables the filmmaker to take things farther than they otherwise could. That's the mark of a great performance, no matter how odd it looks, or how late you have to stay up to see it.

robots

1470069965000

cogdis

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.co.uk%2Fsuzanne-day%2Fjeremy-hunt-mental-health_b_11294160.html&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
Jeremy Hunt, You Need to Sort Out the Mental Health Service - Now!
What I am going to write in this post isn't going to shock people. There is no big revelation hidden within it. But I have come to the conclusion that if Jeremy Hunt isn't constantly nagged about the state of the Mental Health Service in England, nothing is actually going to be done about it.

This isn't a problem exclusive to 2016. I have had personal experience of its shambolic state for seven years.

Undoubtedly mental health problems are complex to treat. If you break your leg, you go to A & E, you have an X-ray, you might get your leg put in a cast, you will have follow up appointments and probably physio for a maximum of a year afterwards.

Now let's say you are depressed. You go to your GP, you might get prescribed anti-depressants, or Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (counselling), you might feel better, you might not.

A common misconception about anti-depressants is that you take them and they immediately work and everything is fine. There is more than just one anti-depressant out there. Some people have to try all of them to find the one that actually helps them.

Counselling, alongside medication, helped me when I needed it for anxiety. But again, there is no magic formula and you aren't necessarily going to have the right sort of bond with the first counsellor you see. (Just for the record on both the occasions I have had counselling I have paid for it myself).
Then when you find the right counsellor, sometimes you can have a few sessions and have a breakthrough, and sometimes it can take years of talking therapy.

I hope you understand what I am saying. With mental health problems often you are not ever properly healed. The same problems can recur over and over again. Exhausting, heart-breaking and like I said incredibly hard to cope with for the NHS.

Financially something needs to be sorted. Over the last few years the amount of money being set aside for mental health care has been going gradually down - which is frankly laughable. It is a service in absolute chaos.

I was prompted to write this post because of a relative of mine. He is in his early seventies, living alone, recovering from a stroke, and suffering awfully with anxiety. Even getting a parcel (and this is not even him answering the door) sends him into a total, frantic panic.
He is also terribly depressed and admits he gets no pleasure from the small things in life he used to enjoy.

One day I was at his bungalow when he was having a really bad week, the previous day one of his brilliant carers had fought tooth and nail to get his doctor or a paramedic to come out to him. The carer and I continued trying this the next day and eventually we had a phone call from someone in the mental health team saying they would be out to see him that evening (hours later).

When the man, presumably a doctor (he didn't say) arrived, he was reassuring. Sensibly he suggested an increase in medication. Because of the vulnerability of my relative, he also said he would send someone out again in the next few days to talk to him about how he was feeling.
This all happened on a Wednesday evening. A week and half a later there had been no increase in medication and no visit.

I then witnessed my mum having to phone four or more different numbers trying to find out why nothing had been done. The majority of people she spoke to made her feel like an inconvenience.

This reminded me of a time seven years ago when I was sent a letter from a Cognitive Behavioural Therapy (CBT) team, basically saying I told them I didn't want counselling - when in fact the total opposite was the case. I had waited weeks to be assessed and weeks to get that letter. When I read it, it sent me crashing over the edge.

It is a feeling I hope Mr Hunt, or anyone close to him, never experiences. But I do hope he realises that measures need to be put in place to sort out the mental health care shambles in England. Otherwise it is going to be too late for too many people!
cogdis

1470069961000

cogdis

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Ffeeds.gawker.com%2F%7Er%2Flifehacker%2Fvip%2F%7E3%2F9qxmg9NwHr0%2Fhow-effective-are-nootropics-and-smart-drugs-1784648058&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
How Effective Are Nootropics and “Smart” Drugs?

Imagine a pill you can take to speed up your thought processes, boost your memory, and make you more productive. If it sounds like the ultimate life hack, you're not alone. There are pills that promise that out there, but whether they work is complicated. Here are the most popular cognitive enhancers available, and what science actually says about them.

When you hear about nootropics, often called “smart drugs,” you probably picture something like the scene above from Limitless, where Bradley Cooper's character becomes brilliant after downing a strange pill. The drugs and supplements currently available don't pack that strong of a punch, but the concept is basically the same. Many nootropics have promising benefits, like boosting memory, focus, or motivation, and there's research to support specific uses. But the most effective nootropics, like Modafinil, aren't intended for use without a prescription to treat a specific condition. In fact, recreational use of nootropics is hotly-debated among doctors and medical researchers. Many have concerns about the possible adverse effects of long-term use, as well as the ethics of using cognitive enhancers to gain an advantage in school, sports, or even everyday work.

None of that has kept entrepreneurs and their customers from experimenting and buying into the business of magic pills, however. In 2015 alone, the nootropics business raked in over $1 billion dollars, and web sites like the nootropics subreddit, the Bluelight forums, and Bulletproof Exec are popular and packed with people looking for easy ways to boost their mental performance. Still, this bizarre, Philip K. Dick-esque world of smart drugs is a tough pill to swallow. To dive into the topic and explain, I spoke to Kamal Patel, Director of evidence-based medical database Examine.com, and even tried a few commercially-available nootropics myself.

http://gizmodo.com/nootropics-and…

Caffeine and L-theanine Have the Most Research to Support Their Use

Without a doubt, the two most popular nootropics are compounds you've likely ingested on many occasions: caffeine and L-theanine. Both are found in coffee and green tea, but in small amounts when compared to the nootropic doses available.

We've talk about how caffeine affects the body in great detail, but the basic idea is that it can improve your motivation and focus by increasing catecholamine signaling. Its effects can be dampened over time, however, as you start to build a caffeine tolerance. Research on L-theanine, a common amino acid, suggests it promotes neuronal health and can decrease the incidence of cold and flu symptoms by strengthening the immune system. And one study, published in the journal Biological Psychology, found that L-theanine reduces psychological and physiological stress responses—which is why it's often taken with caffeine. In fact, in a 2014 systematic review of 11 different studies, published in the journal Nutrition Review, researchers found that use of caffeine in combination with L-theanine promoted alertness, task switching, and attention. The reviewers note the effects are most pronounced during the first two hours post-dose, and they also point out that caffeine is the major player here, since larger caffeine doses were found to have more of an effect than larger doses of L-theanine.

http://lifehacker.com/5585217/what-c…

While these two compounds may not be as exciting as a super pill that instantly unlocks the full potential of your brain, they currently have the most science to back them up. And, as Patel explains, they're both relatively safe for healthy individuals of most ages. Patel explains that a combination of caffeine and L-theanine is the most basic supplement stack (or combined dose) because the L-theanine can help blunt the anxiety and “shakiness” that can come with ingesting too much caffeine.

A 100mg dose of caffeine (half of a No-Doz or one cup of strong coffee) with 200mg of L-theanine is what the nootropics subreddit recommends in their beginner's FAQ, and many nootropic sellers, like Peak Nootropics, suggest the same. In my own experiments, I used a pre-packaged combination from Nootrobox called Go Cubes. They're essentially chewable coffee cubes (not as gross as it sounds) filled with that same beginner dose of caffeine, L-theanine, as well as a few B vitamins thrown into the mix. After eating an entire box of them (12 separate servings—not all at once), I can say eating them made me feel more alert and energetic, but less jittery than my usual three cups of coffee every day. I noticed enough of a difference in the past two weeks that I'll be looking into getting some L-theanine supplements to take with my daily coffee.

Piracetam and Choline Can Be Beneficial, But We're Not Sure Why or How

Racetams, specifically Piracetam an ingredient popular in over-the-counter nootropics, are synthetic stimulants designed to improve brain function. Patel notes Piracetam is the granddaddy of all racetams, and the term “nootropic” was originally coined to describe its effects. However, despite its popularity and how long it's been around and in use, researchers don't know what its mechanism of action is. Patel explained that the the most prominent hypothesis suggests Piracetam enhances neuronal function by increasing membrane fluidity in the brain, but that hasn't been confirmed yet. And Patel elaborated that most studies on Piracetam aren't done with the target market for nootropics in mind, the young professional:

The majority of studies seem to be done on types of people who are NOT buying nootropics. Like the elderly, people with blatant cognitive deficits, etc. This is analogous to some of the muscle-building research but more extreme. Like there are studies on some compound increasing muscle growth in elderly patients or patients with wasting, and supplement companies use some of those studies to back their supplements.

That said, there are plenty of studies out there that point to its benefits. One study, published in the British Journal of Pharmacology, suggests brain function in elderly patients can be greatly improved after regular dosing with Piracetam. Another study, published in the journal Psychopharmacology, found that Piracetam improved memory in most adult volunteers. And another, published in the Journal of Clinical Psychopharmacology, suggests it can help students, especially dyslexic students, improve their nonverbal learning skills, like reading ability and reading comprehension. Basically, researchers know it has an effect, but they don't know what or how, and pinning it down requires additional research.

So I decided to try some.

Over the course of a few weeks, I took doses of Piracetam (around 1600mg three times a day), and I noticed a slight change in my focus. It was easier for me to sit down and power through my writing, I didn't get distracted while doing research, and it noticeably improved my Crucible scores in Destiny.

However, when I didn't stack it with Choline, I would get what users call “racetam headaches.” Choline, as Patel explains, is not a true nootropic, but it's still a pro-cognitive compound that many take with other nootropics in a stack. It's an essential nutrient that humans need for functions like memory and muscle control, but we can't produce it, and many Americans don't get enough of it. The headaches I got weren't terribly painful, but they were uncomfortable enough that I stopped taking Piracetam on its own. Even without the headache, though, I didn't really like the level of focus Piracetam gave me. I didn't feel present when I used it, even when I tried to mix in caffeine and L-theanine. And while it seemed like I could focus and do my work faster, I was making more small mistakes in my writing, like skipping words. Essentially, it felt like my brain was moving faster than I could.

Modafinil Shows the Most Promise, But You Can't Get It Without a Prescription

Of all the smart drugs in the world, Modafinil is most often touted as the best. It's a powerful cognitive enhancer, great for boosting alertness, and has very few, mild side effects that most healthy users will never experience. And no, you can't have any. Sorry. Modafinil is a prescription medication used to treat disorders like narcolepsy, shift work sleep disorder, and for those who suffer from obstructive sleep apnea.

As with other nootropics, the way it works is still partially a mystery, but most research points to it acting as a weak dopamine reuptake inhibitor. Put simply, it increases your dopamine levels the same way cocaine does, but in a much less extreme fashion. The enhanced reward system it creates in the brain, however, makes it what Patel considers to be the most potent cognitive enhancer available; and he notes that some people go from sloth to superman within an hour or two of taking it.

But perhaps the biggest difference between Modafinil and other nootropics like Piracetam, according to Patel, is that Modafinil studies show more efficacy in young, healthy people, not just the elderly or those with cognitive deficits. That's why it's great for (and often prescribed to) military members who are on an intense tour, or for those who can't get enough sleep for physiological reasons. One study, by researchers at Imperial College London, and published in Annals of Surgery, even showed that Modafinil helped sleep-deprived surgeons become better at planning, redirecting their attention, and being less impulsive when making decisions.

So what's the catch? Well, it's potentially addictive for one. Anything that messes with your dopamine levels can be. And Patel says there are few long-term studies on it yet, so we don't know how it will affect your brain chemistry down the road, or after prolonged, regular use. Also, you can't get it very easily, or legally for that matter, if you live in the U.S. It's classified as a schedule IV controlled substance. That's where Adrafinil comes in.

Adrafinil is a prodrug for Modafinil, which means it can be metabolized into Modafinil to give you a similar effect. And you can buy it legally just about anywhere. But there are a few downsides. Patel explains that you have to take a lot more to achieve a similar effect as Modafinil, wait longer for it to kick in (45-60 minutes), there are more potential side effects, and there aren't any other benefits to taking it.

I've had some success with nootropics, but your mileage may vary. And because I'm not a scientist or a doctor, it's hard for me to say for certain how much they helped. Did they work? Or did I really want them to work? As Patel explains, it's important to distinguish the placebo effect from a real effect, especially with nootropics:

With something like creatine, you'd know if it helps you pump out another rep at the gym on a sustainable basis. With nootropics, you can easily trick yourself into believing they help your mindset. The ideal is to do a trial on yourself. Take identical looking nootropic pills and placebo pills for a couple weeks each, then see what the difference is. With only a third party knowing the difference, of course.

Most research on these nootropics suggest they have some benefits, sure, but as Barbara Sahakian and Sharon Morein-Zamir explain in the journal Nature, nobody knows their long-term effects. And we don't know how extended use might change your brain chemistry in the long run. Researchers are getting closer to what makes these substances do what they do, but very little is certain right now. If you're looking to live out your own Limitless fantasy, do your research first, and proceed with caution.

Animation by Angelica Alzona. Photos by paul_hoole and Anders Sandberg.

cogdis

1470068993000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fmaria-rodale%2F3-ways-to-avoid-fairwashi_b_11295038.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
3 Ways to Avoid Fairwashing
"Image

Workers process organic coconuts at Fair Trade coconut oil facility Serendipol in Sri Lanka. Photo Courtesy of Dr. Bronner's.

by guest blogger Lisa Bronner, writer of the blog Going Green with a Bronner Mom

Fair Trade is a good thing. Authentic Fair Trade includes such principles as direct buying from growers; fair prices; benefit to communities where products are grown; no child labor, forced labor, or otherwise exploited labor; transparency and traceability; and environmental sustainability, among other key components.

And the very good news is that Fair Trade initiatives work. As concluded in a 2013 Harvard study, "Fair Trade does achieve many of its intended goals."

However, as with any movement that captures consumers' attention and their spending (over $5.7 billion were spent on Fair Trade purchases in 2014), unscrupulous manufacturers make a grab for some of these profits without engaging in authentic Fair Trade practices. This is fairwashing.

No one appreciates being taken for a fool. None of us want to find out that our well-meaning dollars went to support child or slave labor. We don't mind paying more for more benefit but the last thing we want to discover is that our money is not benefiting whom we thought it was.

The key is to become savvy consumers who can navigate the shopping options instead of cynical consumers who stop buying Fair Trade altogether.

Here are three steps to increasing your Fair Trade savviness:

1. Increase your education and awareness as a consumer.

Familiarize yourself with independent consumer education groups such as Fair World Project, which is a branch of the Organic Consumers Association. Not only is their website a wealth of information on authentic Fair Trade, current efforts to promote Fair Trade and exposing fairwashers, but it will also point you to the next steps: good Fair Trade certifiers and Fair Trade companies.

2. Familiarize yourself with meaningful Fair Trade certifications.

As with any claim, there is a great difference between what an organization says about itself and what can be verified through independent third party certifiers. Part of fairwashing is the use of flimsy certifiers, whose certification seals look awfully reassuring but whose standards are full of gaps. Furthermore, there has been a surge in corporations who have internally certified their own products as Fair Trade, but without independent, external, third party confirmation, these claims are unverified.

Again, because of the lack of legal oversight, it is up to the consumer to learn which certifications are meaningful.

Based on the International Guide to Fair Trade Labels and the Fair World Project's recommendations, the following are certifications found in the United States that are reputable and substantive:

Fair for Life, which has become a part of Ecocert.
Fairtrade America, the domestic branch of Fairtrade International (Not to be confused with Fair Trade USA).
Small Producers Symbol, a program from Fair Trade International.

There are other programs doing excellent eco-social work that may not be specifically Fair Trade, but are still worth checking out. The Fair World Project has this excellent comparison of such groups.

3. Create direct relationships with companies.

Don't stop reading yet. You cannot throw down the gauntlet and say that you're only going to buy fittings with these seals above, because there are many reasons why excellent companies do not seek certification. One reason a company may forgo certification is that the certification process is time consuming and expensive. Small manufacturers may not have the wherewithal to do it. They also may not feel like they need to because they have such good and open communication with their customers.

Companies that have transparency, that answer questions openly, that reveal their supply chains readily--check out what they say about themselves. Contact them and see how readily they answer questions. Research their reputation in the marketplace. If you encounter a run-around, or change of subject, or flat-out refusal to answer, that's a red flag.

To sum up, bad labor practices are an issue that requires all consumers' attention. Forced labor and child slavery in the cocoa industry of West Africa is widely documented, including in the 2014 documentary The Dark Side of Chocolate and Fortune magazine's recent overview. The most nefarious problems with coffee production include forest and habitat destruction, child labor and unfair pay. The 2013 Bangladesh garment factory collapse made the conditions in the clothing industry impossible to ignore.

With awareness comes responsibility. As our world shrinks through communication and technology, we are no longer far removed from what's happening on the other side of the world. We can easily see that our decisions and actions do not exist in a vacuum. What we do here, for good or for bad, has a reverberating impact through the global web. We cannot ignore this power.

As the 2013 Harvard report concludes, "Fair Trade, if it is implemented successfully, holds the possibility of being a market-based tool that can improve the welfare of consumers, the lives of producers, and the local environment."

Lisa Bronner is the writer of the blog Going Green with a Bronner Mom, in connection with her family's company, Dr. Bronner's, makers of best-selling organic personal care products. Through her writing and public speaking, Lisa guides consumers through the quagmire of the organic marketplace and simplifies the process of green living at home. Embracing the concept of stewardship, she recognizes individuals' ability to make a world of difference by how they live their every day. A stay-at-home mom to three, she believes that regularly gathering with them around the family dinner table is the single most important parenting act in her day.

For more from Maria Rodale, visit www.mariasfarmcountrykitchen.com

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

1470062472000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Faudrey-peterman%2Fmilestone-birthdays-this_b_11293388.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
Milestone Birthdays This Month For National Park Service & Me!
Happy Birthday month to me and the National Park Service!

This first day of August we both enter a month of symbolic birthdays. On August 21 I turn 65 and become Medicare eligible, though I still feel the youthful enthusiasm and zest I felt as a child, largely because of the experiences I've had in our stupendous national parks. On August 25 our National Park Service celebrates its 100th birthday and enters its second century as caretaker of our national treasures in a country that is vastly different by race, ethnicity, gender and age than in 1916, and sorely in need of the lessons from our parks to help unify us.

From the perspective of age 65, I can see the long arm of destiny in my life. As a little girl growing up in Jamaica in the 1950s, slipping away to sit by myself on the banks of the stream that ran through our village, how could I have known that I was being prepared for the role I would play in my life? Sitting quietly under cool shade trees, watching schools of tiny fish darting and turning in the water and shrimp backpedaling on their tailfins, I dreamed of someday becoming a tour guide and introducing people to stunningly beautiful and historic places.

I had no concept of America, and no idea there was such a thing as a National Park System in the world. Yet for the past 20 years my husband Frank and I have been at the forefront of a movement that has made America's national parks household words in homes where they'd never been uttered before, and growing numbers of ethnically diverse Americans have been drawn to visit and stand up for our parks.

From the perspective of 21 years ardent involvement with the National Park System, I can see the long arc the Park Service has traveled from its inception by passionate conservationists in 1916 to where it is today. The first director of the Service, Stephen Mather was also instrumental in its creation. His passion for nature and for protecting treasured spaces for Americans into perpetuity mirrors mine and can be deduced from how he left no stone unturned to achieve those goals.

According to PBS, Mather "counted as one of the highlights of his life meeting the legendary John Muir on a hike in Sequoia National Park in 1912. When he visited Sequoia and Yosemite in the summer of 1914, Mather was disgusted by the poor condition of the parks.

"He wrote a letter of complaint to his college friend, Secretary of the Interior Franklin Lane, who invited Mather to come to Washington and do something about it himself. Mather accepted the challenge. As assistant to Lane in charge of the parks, he began a crusade to mold a haphazard collection of national parks into a cohesive system and to create a federal agency solely devoted to them: the National Park Service.

"Mather took on staff, paying their salaries out of his own pocket, and began a public relations and political lobbying campaign to build awareness of the parks and increase their size and number. He raised funds from his wealthy friends to purchase new park lands and he often purchased land himself and donated it to the National Park Service for protection. He joined forces with the budding automotive industry to 'democratize' the parks by making them more accessible to a broader cross-section of Americans. He and his assistant, Horace Albright, professionalized the corps of superintendents and rangers in the parks. . ."

Today, the current office holder in Mather's position is fronting a proposal that, for the first time in 100 years, would allow greater commercial/corporate presence in our national parks and require park staff to raise funds, completely foreign to their job description. As I discuss in this blog, the order has been criticized by the National Parks Conservation Association, the Coalition of Retirees and is the subject of multiple online petitions, but still today is shrouded in secrecy. It is scheduled to go into office in 2017 when the current director will have left office.

As the Service enters its much-heralded Centennial month, we remain far short of Mather's goals of "democratizing" the system and making it accessible to a broader cross section of the public. Many millions of people still have not been reached with the message that there are such things as national parks, that they represent our collective legacy and history, that they belong to us and that we have the duty and privilege of protecting them for the future.

To help accomplish these goals Frank and I, along with legions of other people including members of the Diverse Environmental Leaders Speakers Bureau that we formed in 2014, are among the catalysts for a growing nature movement of racially diverse Americans. As members of the Next100 Coalition, we are striving to help shape a new vision for the Park Service's Next 100 years by asking President Obama to issue a Presidential Memorandum with policies to ensure a more diverse system, workforce and stream of visitors.

Like Mather, this week we're heading to Washington, DC to do what we can for the parks and their future, including helping inspire young leaders in the Historically Black Colleges & Universities Initiative (HBCUI) for public lands, accompanying them to meet with Members of Congress and Interior Secretary Sally Jewell.

For mine and the Park Service's birthdays, the greatest gift I could get is to see Mather's vision for the Park Service being realized. I know it can happen because my nascent vision as a child desiring to be a tour guide introducing people to beautiful places has been filled beyond my wildest dreams, almost outside my own volition. The great mystic and philosopher Joseph Campbell said it best in The Power of Myth, "I don't have to have faith. I have experience."

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

1470062468000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fcarey-gillam%2Fmore-coca-cola-ties-seen_b_11287198.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
More Coca-Cola Ties Seen Inside U.S. Centers For Disease Control
In June, Dr. Barbara Bowman, a high-ranking official within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, unexpectedly departed the agency, two days after information came to light indicating that she had been communicating regularly with - and offering guidance to - a leading Coca-Cola advocate seeking to influence world health authorities on sugar and beverage policy matters.

Now, more emails suggest that another veteran CDC official has similarly close ties to the global soft drink giant. Michael Pratt, Senior Advisor for Global Health in the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion at the CDC, has a history of promoting and helping lead research funded by Coca-Cola. Pratt also works closely with the nonprofit corporate interest group set up by Coca-Cola called the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), emails obtained through Freedom of Information requests show.

Pratt did not respond to questions about his work, which includes a position as a professor at Emory University, a private research university in Atlanta that has received millions of dollars from the Coca-Cola Foundation and more than $100 million from famed longtime Coca-Cola leader Robert W. Woodruff and Woodruff's brother George. Indeed, Coca-Cola's financial support for Emory is so strong that the university states on its website that "it's unofficially considered poor school spirit to drink other soda brands on campus."

CDC spokeswoman Kathy Harben said Pratt had been on a "temporary assignment" to Emory University but his work at Emory "is completed and he is now back on staff at CDC." Emory University websites still show Pratt as currently assigned as a professor there, however.

Regardless, research by consumer advocacy group U.S. Right to Know shows Pratt is another high-ranking CDC official with close ties to Coca-Cola. And experts in the nutrition arena said that because the mission of the CDC is protecting public health, it is problematic for agency officials to collaborate with a corporate interest that has a track record of downplaying the health risks of its products.

"These alignments are worrisome because they help provide legitimacy to industry-friendly spin," said Andy Bellatti, a dietitian and founder of Dietitians for Professional Integrity.

One key message Coca-Cola has been pushing is "Energy Balance." Consumption of sugar-laden foods and beverages is not to blame for obesity or other health problems; a lack of exercise is the primary culprit, the theory goes. "There is increasing concern about overweight and obesity worldwide, and while there are many factors involved, the fundamental cause in most cases is an imbalance between calories consumed and calories expended," Coca-Cola states on its website.

"The soda industry is keen on deflecting the conversation away from the well-documented negative health effects of sugar-sweetened beverages and onto physical activity," said Bellatti.

The messaging comes at a time when leading global health authorities are urging a crack-down on consumption of sugary food and beverages, and some cities are implementing added taxes on sodas to try to discourage consumption. Coca-Cola has been fighting back in part by providing funding for scientists and organizations who back up the company with research and academic presentations.

Pratt's work with the industry appears to fit into that messaging effort. Last year he co-authored a Latin America health and nutrition study and related papers funded in part by Coca-Cola and ILSI to investigate the diets of individuals in Latin American countries and to establish a database for studying the "complex relationship existing between energy imbalance, obesity and associated chronic diseases..." Pratt also has been acting as a scientific "advisor" to ILSI North America, serving on an ILSI committee on "energy balance and active lifestyle." And he is a member of the ILSI Research Foundation Board of Trustees. He also served as an advisor to an international study of childhood obesity funded by Coca-Cola.

ILSI's North American branch, whose members include Coca-Cola, PepsiCo Inc., Dr Pepper Snapple Group and more than two dozen other food industry players, states as its mission the advancement of the "understanding and application of science related to the nutritional quality and safety of the food supply." But some independent scientists and food industry activists consider ILSI to be a front group aimed at advancing the interests of the food industry. It was founded by Coca-Cola scientific and regulatory affairs leader Alex Malaspina in 1978. ILSI has had a long and checkered relationship with the World Health Organization, working at one time closely with its Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and with WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer and the International Programme on Chemical Safety.

But a report by a consultant to WHO found that ILSI was infiltrating WHO and FAO with scientists, money and research to garner favor for industry products and strategies. ILSI was also accused of attempting to undermine WHO tobacco control efforts on behalf of the tobacco industry.

One April 2012 email exchange obtained through a Freedom of Information request shows Pratt as part of a circle of professors communicating with Rhona Applebaum, then Coca-Cola's chief scientific and regulatory officer, about difficulties getting cooperation on a study in Mexico from that country's National Institute of Public Health. The Institute would not "play ball because of who was sponsoring the study," according to an email Peter Katzmarzyk, a professor of exercise science at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University, sent to the group. Appelbaum defended the integrity of the research and expressed anger at the situation, writing "So if good scientists take $$$ from Coke - what? - they're corrupted? Despite the fact they're advancing public good?" In the email exchange Pratt offered to assist "especially if these issues continue to arise."

Emails show Pratt's communication with Applebaum, who also served a term as ILSI's president, continued through at least 2014, including discussion of work for "Exercise is Medicine," an initiative launched in 2007 by Coca-Cola and for which Pratt serves as an advisory board member.

Applebaum left the company in 2015 after the Global Energy Balance Network that she helped establish came under public scrutiny amid allegations that it was little more than a Coca-Cola propaganda group. Coca-Cola poured roughly $1.5 million into the establishment of the group, including a $1 million grant to the University of Colorado. But after Coca-Cola's ties to the organization were made public in an article in The New York Times, and after several scientists and public health authorities accused the network of "peddling scientific nonsense," the university returned the money to Coca-Cola. The network disbanded in late 2015 after emails surfaced that detailed Coca-Cola's efforts to use the network to influence scientific research on sugary drinks.

Coca-Cola has been particularly zealous in recent years in working to counter concerns about consumption of beverages with high sugar content and links between sugary beverages and obesity and other diseases. The New York Times reported last year that Coke's chief executive, Muhtar Kent, admitted that the company had spent almost $120 million since 2010 to pay for academic health research and for partnerships with major medical and community groups involved in curbing the obesity epidemic.

Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University and the author of "Soda Politics," said that when CDC officials work so closely with industry, there is a conflict of interest risk the CDC should consider.

"Officials of public health agencies run the risk of cooptation, capture, or conflict of interest when they have close professional ties with companies whose job it is to sell food products, regardless of the effects of those products on health," said Nestle.

Pratt's ties to Coca-Cola and ILSI are similar to those seen with Bowman. Bowman, who directed the CDC's Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, worked early in her career as a senior nutritionist for Coca-Cola and later while at the CDC co-authored an edition of a book called Present Knowledge in Nutrition as "a publication of the International Life Sciences Institute." The emails between Bowman and Malaspina showed ongoing communications regarding ILSI and beverage industry interests.

During Bowman's tenure, in May 2013, ILSI and other organizers invited Bowman and the CDC to participate in a project ILSI was engaged in with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop a "branded foods database." Travel costs for Bowman would be paid by ILSI, the invitation stated. Bowman did agree to participate and the CDC provided funding, at least $25,000, Harben confirmed, to support the database project. The 15-member steering committee for the project held six ILSI representatives, documents show.

Both Bowman and Pratt have worked under the direction of Ursula Bauer, director of the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. After U.S. Right to Know publicized emails about Bowman's ties to ILSI and Coca-Cola, Bauer defended the relationship in an email to her employees, saying "it's not unusual for Barbara - or any of us- to correspond with others who have similar interests in our areas of work..."

Still, Bowman announced an unexpected retirement from CDC two days after the emails were made public. CDC initially denied she had departed the agency, but Harben said this week that was only because it took some time to "process" Bowman's transition to retirement.

The relationships raise fundamental questions about how close is too close when public officials collaborate with industry interests that can conflict with public interests.

Yoni Freedhoff, MD, an assistant professor of family medicine at the University of Ottawa and founder of the Bariatric Medical Institute, said there is a real danger to when public health officials become too close with corporate players.

"Until we recognize the inherent risks of conflicts of interest with the food industry and public health, there is near certainty that these conflicts will influence the nature and strength of recommendations and programs in ways that will be friendly to industries whose products contribute to the burden of illness those same recommendations and programs are meant to address," Freedhoff said.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

1470061473000

science

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fcarey-gillam%2Fmore-coca-cola-ties-seen_b_11287198.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dscience%26ir%3DScience&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
More Coca-Cola Ties Seen Inside U.S. Centers For Disease Control
In June, Dr. Barbara Bowman, a high-ranking official within the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, unexpectedly departed the agency, two days after information came to light indicating that she had been communicating regularly with - and offering guidance to - a leading Coca-Cola advocate seeking to influence world health authorities on sugar and beverage policy matters.

Now, more emails suggest that another veteran CDC official has similarly close ties to the global soft drink giant. Michael Pratt, Senior Advisor for Global Health in the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion at the CDC, has a history of promoting and helping lead research funded by Coca-Cola. Pratt also works closely with the nonprofit corporate interest group set up by Coca-Cola called the International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI), emails obtained through Freedom of Information requests show.

Pratt did not respond to questions about his work, which includes a position as a professor at Emory University, a private research university in Atlanta that has received millions of dollars from the Coca-Cola Foundation and more than $100 million from famed longtime Coca-Cola leader Robert W. Woodruff and Woodruff's brother George. Indeed, Coca-Cola's financial support for Emory is so strong that the university states on its website that "it's unofficially considered poor school spirit to drink other soda brands on campus."

CDC spokeswoman Kathy Harben said Pratt had been on a "temporary assignment" to Emory University but his work at Emory "is completed and he is now back on staff at CDC." Emory University websites still show Pratt as currently assigned as a professor there, however.

Regardless, research by consumer advocacy group U.S. Right to Know shows Pratt is another high-ranking CDC official with close ties to Coca-Cola. And experts in the nutrition arena said that because the mission of the CDC is protecting public health, it is problematic for agency officials to collaborate with a corporate interest that has a track record of downplaying the health risks of its products.

"These alignments are worrisome because they help provide legitimacy to industry-friendly spin," said Andy Bellatti, a dietitian and founder of Dietitians for Professional Integrity.

One key message Coca-Cola has been pushing is "Energy Balance." Consumption of sugar-laden foods and beverages is not to blame for obesity or other health problems; a lack of exercise is the primary culprit, the theory goes. "There is increasing concern about overweight and obesity worldwide, and while there are many factors involved, the fundamental cause in most cases is an imbalance between calories consumed and calories expended," Coca-Cola states on its website.

"The soda industry is keen on deflecting the conversation away from the well-documented negative health effects of sugar-sweetened beverages and onto physical activity," said Bellatti.

The messaging comes at a time when leading global health authorities are urging a crack-down on consumption of sugary food and beverages, and some cities are implementing added taxes on sodas to try to discourage consumption. Coca-Cola has been fighting back in part by providing funding for scientists and organizations who back up the company with research and academic presentations.

Pratt's work with the industry appears to fit into that messaging effort. Last year he co-authored a Latin America health and nutrition study and related papers funded in part by Coca-Cola and ILSI to investigate the diets of individuals in Latin American countries and to establish a database for studying the "complex relationship existing between energy imbalance, obesity and associated chronic diseases..." Pratt also has been acting as a scientific "advisor" to ILSI North America, serving on an ILSI committee on "energy balance and active lifestyle." And he is a member of the ILSI Research Foundation Board of Trustees. He also served as an advisor to an international study of childhood obesity funded by Coca-Cola.

ILSI's North American branch, whose members include Coca-Cola, PepsiCo Inc., Dr Pepper Snapple Group and more than two dozen other food industry players, states as its mission the advancement of the "understanding and application of science related to the nutritional quality and safety of the food supply." But some independent scientists and food industry activists consider ILSI to be a front group aimed at advancing the interests of the food industry. It was founded by Coca-Cola scientific and regulatory affairs leader Alex Malaspina in 1978. ILSI has had a long and checkered relationship with the World Health Organization, working at one time closely with its Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) and with WHO's International Agency for Research on Cancer and the International Programme on Chemical Safety.

But a report by a consultant to WHO found that ILSI was infiltrating WHO and FAO with scientists, money and research to garner favor for industry products and strategies. ILSI was also accused of attempting to undermine WHO tobacco control efforts on behalf of the tobacco industry.

One April 2012 email exchange obtained through a Freedom of Information request shows Pratt as part of a circle of professors communicating with Rhona Applebaum, then Coca-Cola's chief scientific and regulatory officer, about difficulties getting cooperation on a study in Mexico from that country's National Institute of Public Health. The Institute would not "play ball because of who was sponsoring the study," according to an email Peter Katzmarzyk, a professor of exercise science at the Pennington Biomedical Research Center at Louisiana State University, sent to the group. Appelbaum defended the integrity of the research and expressed anger at the situation, writing "So if good scientists take $$$ from Coke - what? - they're corrupted? Despite the fact they're advancing public good?" In the email exchange Pratt offered to assist "especially if these issues continue to arise."

Emails show Pratt's communication with Applebaum, who also served a term as ILSI's president, continued through at least 2014, including discussion of work for "Exercise is Medicine," an initiative launched in 2007 by Coca-Cola and for which Pratt serves as an advisory board member.

Applebaum left the company in 2015 after the Global Energy Balance Network that she helped establish came under public scrutiny amid allegations that it was little more than a Coca-Cola propaganda group. Coca-Cola poured roughly $1.5 million into the establishment of the group, including a $1 million grant to the University of Colorado. But after Coca-Cola's ties to the organization were made public in an article in The New York Times, and after several scientists and public health authorities accused the network of "peddling scientific nonsense," the university returned the money to Coca-Cola. The network disbanded in late 2015 after emails surfaced that detailed Coca-Cola's efforts to use the network to influence scientific research on sugary drinks.

Coca-Cola has been particularly zealous in recent years in working to counter concerns about consumption of beverages with high sugar content and links between sugary beverages and obesity and other diseases. The New York Times reported last year that Coke's chief executive, Muhtar Kent, admitted that the company had spent almost $120 million since 2010 to pay for academic health research and for partnerships with major medical and community groups involved in curbing the obesity epidemic.

Marion Nestle, a professor of nutrition, food studies and public health at New York University and the author of "Soda Politics," said that when CDC officials work so closely with industry, there is a conflict of interest risk the CDC should consider.

"Officials of public health agencies run the risk of cooptation, capture, or conflict of interest when they have close professional ties with companies whose job it is to sell food products, regardless of the effects of those products on health," said Nestle.

Pratt's ties to Coca-Cola and ILSI are similar to those seen with Bowman. Bowman, who directed the CDC's Division for Heart Disease and Stroke Prevention, worked early in her career as a senior nutritionist for Coca-Cola and later while at the CDC co-authored an edition of a book called Present Knowledge in Nutrition as "a publication of the International Life Sciences Institute." The emails between Bowman and Malaspina showed ongoing communications regarding ILSI and beverage industry interests.

During Bowman's tenure, in May 2013, ILSI and other organizers invited Bowman and the CDC to participate in a project ILSI was engaged in with the U.S. Department of Agriculture to develop a "branded foods database." Travel costs for Bowman would be paid by ILSI, the invitation stated. Bowman did agree to participate and the CDC provided funding, at least $25,000, Harben confirmed, to support the database project. The 15-member steering committee for the project held six ILSI representatives, documents show.

Both Bowman and Pratt have worked under the direction of Ursula Bauer, director of the National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion. After U.S. Right to Know publicized emails about Bowman's ties to ILSI and Coca-Cola, Bauer defended the relationship in an email to her employees, saying "it's not unusual for Barbara - or any of us- to correspond with others who have similar interests in our areas of work..."

Still, Bowman announced an unexpected retirement from CDC two days after the emails were made public. CDC initially denied she had departed the agency, but Harben said this week that was only because it took some time to "process" Bowman's transition to retirement.

The relationships raise fundamental questions about how close is too close when public officials collaborate with industry interests that can conflict with public interests.

Yoni Freedhoff, MD, an assistant professor of family medicine at the University of Ottawa and founder of the Bariatric Medical Institute, said there is a real danger to when public health officials become too close with corporate players.

"Until we recognize the inherent risks of conflicts of interest with the food industry and public health, there is near certainty that these conflicts will influence the nature and strength of recommendations and programs in ways that will be friendly to industries whose products contribute to the burden of illness those same recommendations and programs are meant to address," Freedhoff said.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

science

1470057689000

gaia

%feed
http://redirect.viglink.com?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2Fellen-kanner%2Fmeatless-monday-cool-bean_b_11279680.html%3Futm_hp_ref%3Dgreen%26ir%3DGreen&key=ddaed8f51db7bb1330a6f6de768a69b8
Meatless Monday: Cool Beans, Hot Jazz and More Ways to Celebrate the International Year of Pulses
Nutrition, sustainability, versatility, affordability, sheer deliciousness -- there's so many reasons to love dried beans, especially now, the International Year of Pulses. I've been celebrating all year, blogging, teaching and presenting about them, including later this month at Farm to Table Experience in New Orleans, but my favorite way to celebrate is to cook and share them --a pot of pulses brings the fun. I'm soaking red beans now to have a pot of red beans and rice ready for August 4, Louis Armstrong's birthday. The jazz great so loved New Orleans and the city's signature dish, he'd sign autographs, Red beans and ricely yours.

Like many bean dishes, RBR, was created as dish to satisfy the belly and stretch the budget. Honoring culinary traditions are part of the pleasure of cooking and eating for me, but so are riffing, innovating and reinterpreting, doing with ingredients what musicians do with melodic form -- kitchen jazz. Pulses welcome that. Their meaty but meatless chew invites me to create vegan versions of classic dishes. Armstrong's own RBR recipe, like most, includes pork. Mine swaps plants for pig but loses no flavor.

Both Armstrong's RBR recipe and mine require slow cooking, letting the beans simmer over low heat with no fuss. You get on with your life, the beans get on with theirs. Over time, a dish of simple ingredients develops rich, umami, complex flavors, so you end up with something greater than the sum of its parts.

Basic supermarket beans will do, but heirloom recipes deserve heirloom ingredients. I think they offer deeper flavor, deeper connection and a little romance -- I'm for all three. So is heirloom bean purveyor Rancho Gordo. By supporting smaller farmers producing beans from open-pollinated seeds, Rancho Gordo has introduced us to beans of every color, size, texture and flavor, reflecting America's rich crop diversity.

Slow cooking beans from scratch does something magical to them, endowing them with a creamy tenderness, infusing them with whatever spices and ingredients you pair them with. Problem is, we're less and less likely to invest the time -- slow cooking -- or any cooking -- requires. Lucky for you Better Bean Co. is glad to do the work for you. Better beans aren't dried, they're not canned, they're slow cooked, and skillet finished, generously seasoned and sold fresh and ready to eat in tubs in refrigerated section of many grocery stores. They're innovators with an old fashioned ethic -- they're small, family-owned and all their beans -- including some red beans Armstrong might have gone for-- are vegan and organic.

"2016-07-30-1469901792-2191062-ScreenShot20160730at2.02.38PM.png"

Pulses aren't just versatile in the kitchen, they're friendly in the field. Growing pulses requires a fraction of the water of raising livestock. Family-owned Fresh Nature Foods goes one better by producing extra low water-chickpeas. They're green -- green as in sustainably farmed and green as in color. They're fledgling chickpeas, if you will, picked sweet and early in the growing stage, nutrient-dense and GMO-free. Fresh Nature Foods has just wrapped up a healthy and sustainable green chickpea harvest. Their frozen green chickpeas are being used in food service from schools to restaurants. Now they're making their way to markets, along with green chickpea hummus.

"2016-07-30-1469901298-7490390-Greenhummussignature.jpg"

This is not a sponsored post. This is me wanting to connect people with pulses, just spreading some leguminous love. Happy Louis Armstrong's birthday, happy International Year of Pulses.

Green is the New Black (Green Chickpeas With Black Rice and Green Tahini Dressing)

Whether it's red beans and rice or rice and chickpeas, beans and rice is the most important dish in the world. Here nutty-flavored, nutrient-dense black rice changes it up from basic brown, so do sweet green chickpeas instead of the standard blonde ones The parsley-infused tahini dressing has a bold flavor and adds a designery pale green accent to a dish that may be served hot or -- to beat the summer heat -- at room temperature.

For black rice:

1 cup black rice
2-1/2 cups water or vegetable broth
sea salt to taste
juice of 1 lemon (about 2 tablespoons)

In a large pot set on high heat, bring water or broth to boil. Pour in the rice. Cover, reduce heat to low and simmer for 30 minutes. Grains will swell and become tender but retaining some chew. Drain off any remaining cooking liquid. Add sea salt to taste and lemon juice, Set aside.

For the green chickpeas:

2 cups green chickpeas, thawed (you can also use the standard blonde ones)
1 handful each mint, cilantro and flat-leaf parsley, finely chopped
2-3 tablespoons green tahini dressing (recipe below)
sea salt to taste

Pour 1-1/2 cups of the chickpeas into a large bowl, reserving the remaining 1/2 cup for garnish. Add the chopped herbs to the bowl, mix together and add 2 to 3 tablespoons of the green tahini dressing. Season with sea salt.

For the green tahini dressing:

1/4 c lemon juice
1 clove garlic
1/2 cup tahini
1/2 cup water
1 cup flat-leaf Italian parsley, tightly packed (about 1/2 bunch)
1/4 teaspoon sea salt
pinch turmeric (if desired)

Whizz everything together in a blender or food processor until thick, creamy and smooth. Cover and refrigerate. Dressing will thicken as it chills. Thin with another 3-4 tablespoons of water, if desired.

Makes 1-1/2 cups, or 8 to 10 servings. Dressing keeps covered and chilled for a week.

To assemble:

Mound dressed chickpeas atop black rice, garnishing with the 1/2 cup of plain chickpeas for an extra pop. Pour remaining green tahini dressing in a bowl to drizzle on top, if desired.

Serves 4 to 6.

More about pulses at Beans: A Handful of Magic.
More things soulful at soulfulvegan.com.

-- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

gaia

Caffeine and L-theanine Have the Most Research to Support Their Use

Piracetam and Choline Can Be Beneficial, But We're Not Sure Why or How

Modafinil Shows the Most Promise, But You Can't Get It Without a Prescription

Mini-robots float round your body and zap your neurons

'Strange goings on' prompt Dublin bish to send trainees abroad

Relax con gli amici by Anna