Komputer for Alle 1998 #6/1998 CD 6 (Gul).iso/web/ffa/wwwenv~1.org/arrs/digest/news44~2.htm/text0008.txt

Text File | 1998-04-03 | 20.9 KB | 477 lines

On Tue, 24 Jun 1997, Pat Fish wrote:

>
> Don't Eat That Vegetarian Meal-- There Might Be an Animal In It
>
>   Details are sketchy at this point-- I've been *very* busy riding McLibel
> coattails to expose Wendy's fraudulent "Vegetarian" pita.  In the process of
> working with the Lige Weill of the Vegetarian Awareness Network on the
> Wendy's fraud, I mentioned that Jill Howe had (some time ago) discovered
> that Taco Bell's "Veggie Fajita" uses chicken in it's Fajita sauce.
>
>  Upon further calls to Taco Hell, Lige Weill was told that indeed chickens
> are in the sauce, and that their fajita sauce can sometimes also include
> clams.
>
>  Lige also stated he was under the impression that the PCRM had on June 19th
> issued positive statements about Taco Bell's "Veggie" Fajita, apparently
> unaware of what was really in the Fajita sauce.  This seems to be part of a
> growing trend by corporate fast food chains to try to capitalize on the
> growing vegetarian market, even if it means misleading customers.
>
>  While Taco Bell has recently been somewhat clearer about their ingredients,
> Wendy's has dug in, piling lie on top of lie to cover up their attempt to
> mislead vegetarian consumers.  (US News & World Report called me today for
> dirt on Wendy's gelatin cover-up).  Reporters have been asking for a list of
> groups supporting the boycott and the campaign against Wendy's deceit.  If
> you'd like to add your group's name, email [e-mail]
>
>
> Pat Fish
>
> Ronald McDonald and Wendy:  They both lie to consumers, kill animals, have
> terrible fashion sense, and day-glo red hair.  Just a coincidence, or
> evidence of inbreeding?
>
>
>
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 10:54:41 -0400 (EDT)
From: [e-mail]
To: [e-mail]
Subject: mailing list
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>

I am currently on your AR e-mail list. The amount of mail being sent is
overwelming and I am not able to read it all. Is there a way that I can
receive just the items pertaining to the US?
If not please remove my name from your list and I will sign on again when I
have more time.
Thank you!      Julie Schroeppel
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 08:59:01 -0700
From: Lawrence Carter-Long <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: Newswire: EC adopts "Corporate Standard of Compassion for Animals
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

European community adopts new, tougher "Corporate Standard of
      Compassion for Animals" to stop animal tests for cosmetics,
      household products

      June 25, 1997


      LONDON/BRUSSELS, Belgium--(BUSINESS WIRE)  -- "Manufactured with
      Compassion" is next worldwide step beyond "Cruelty Free" for
      hundreds of products

      Groups in the countries which comprise the European Union (EU)
      and New Zealand Tuesday adopted the same strict "Corporate
      Standard of Compassion for Animals" -- a new set of rules for
      companies that will eliminate the unnecessary, redundant and
      outdated tests which are used on animals for cosmetics and
      household products -- which was announced by companies in the
      United States last November.

      Ninety-nine companies -- including The Body Shop, Paul Mitchell
      Systems, Tom's of Maine, Earth Science, Rachel Perry Inc. and
      Urban Decay -- have already signed the new "Statement of
      Assurance" that animals will not be tested -- and/or have not
      been tested -- to develop or manufacture any of the companies'
      products.

      Animal protection organizations around the United States and the
      world -- including The Doris Day Animal League, The Animal
      Protection Institute, The American Anti-Vivisection Society,
      American Humane Association, Beauty Without Cruelty, U.S.A., The
      Humane Society of the United States, In Defense of Animals, New
      England Anti-Vivisection Society, People for the Ethical Treatment
      of Animals (PETA), The European Coalition to End Animal
      Experiments, Save Animals from Exploitation (SAFE), New
      Zealand and the International Fund for Animal Welfare -- have
      united to support the new policy. The standard provides a
      consistent position on the use of animals in testing for both
      companies and consumers.

      More than 30,000 animals die in cosmetic tests in the EU each
      year, according to Michael Baker, chief executive of the British
      Union Against Vivisection. "The tests include the notorious and
      unnecessary Draize eye test, skin irritation and sensitivity tests
      and the LD-50," Baker said. A new advertising campaign, themed
      "Cosmetic Testing: It's in Your Hands," was also announced at a
      press conference today at the Institute of Contemporary Arts in
      London.

      Holly Hazard, executive director of The Doris Day Animal League,
      said: "The new 'Corporate Standard of Compassion for Animals'
      program is being proposed for all cosmetics and household
      products manufacturers around the world. It will result in
      important changes for consumers to find out if any animal testing
      occurs, prior to marketing, for the products they buy and use.

      "In the past, the term 'cruelty-free' generally referred to the
      companies that did not perform or commission animal testing of
      their finished products," Hazard added. "The new standard is
      much tougher. It says that manufacturers may not purchase any
      ingredients from suppliers that conducted or commissioned
      animal testing on them."

      Companies that comply will require written assurances from all of
      their suppliers and intermediary agents that, with respect to the
      specific ingredients, formulations and products supplied, no
      animal testing has been conducted on their behalf.

      Cosmetics and household products include many products
      regulated under federal law as either cosmetics or drugs. The
      standard also applies to the kinds of products we traditionally
      find in the "household products" aisles of supermarkets, such as
      cleaning supplies, bleach, laundry and dish detergents, cleaners,
      floor polish, floor wax, ink, correction fluid, glue and even toys.

      "Cruelty-free products and those manufactured with compassion
      have become a dominant presence in the marketplace during the
      past several years," Hazard said. "Our organizations are joining
      this new 'Corporate Standard of Compassion for Animals' program
      to better inform the public about its choices and give companies
      the opportunity to show their true commitment to compassionate
      products."

      Corporations and consumers can contact the Coalition for
      Consumer Information on Cosmetics for information about the
      new Corporate Standard of Compassion for Animals. Contact Jo
      Stephens, administrator, at P.O. Box 75037, Washington, D.C.,
      20013 or 304/725-7412.

      CONTACT: Linda Dozoretz Communications | Linda
      Dozoretz/Heather Kenyon, 213/656-4499

      [Copyright 1997, Business Wire]


Lawrence Carter-Long
Coordinator, Science and Research Issues
Animal Protection Institute
phone: [phone]
[e-mail]

"Faced with the choice between changing one's mind
and proving that there is no need to do so, almost
everyone gets busy on the proof."  -  Galbraith's Law
Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 12:57:00 -0700
From: Hillary <[e-mail]>
To: "[e-mail]" <[e-mail]>
Subject: BUGORAMA in US--LA
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

Subj:Annual Bug-A-Rama Held
Date:97-06-23 06:44:55 EDT
From:AOL News
 BCC:FreeAnmls

.c The Associated Press

      SHREVEPORT, La. (AP) - Susan Snow chomped a cricket cookie,
smiled and exclaimed: ``It's crunchy, and they're fat-free!''
      Snow was among dozens of people who spent Saturday at the second
annual Bug-A-Rama at SciPort, Shreveport's science museum for
children.
      Becky Palmer said she brought her 4-year-old daughter in the
hope that learning about bugs would help her overcome her fear of
the critters.
      ``You know, they say bugs are going to be a round a lot longer
than humans, so why not get used to them?'' Ms. Palmer said.
      After looking at slides of everything from head lice to Black
Widow spiders, it was snack time: brownies and cookies made with
crickets.
      Bugs were also on the menu at the Louisiana Nature Center in New
Orleans.
      The Incredible Edible Insect Day included six-leg jambalaya,
cricket fritters with brown sugar, and mealworms - not real worms,
but larvae of a kind of beetle - with mushrooms and garlic.
      ``My mother used to say, `An old shoe and yesterday's newspaper
would taste good if you put enough butter and garlic on them,'''
said Zack Lemann, a staff entomologist with the Audubon Institute.
      Times-Picayune columnist Sheila Stroup said the Crispy Cajun
crickets had an unmistakable crunch, chocolate chirp cookies taste
nutty, and crickets dipped in chocolate are similar to
chocolate-covered raisins (but with heads).
      And the mealworms?
      ``Well, I'll say this for them. They don't taste like chicken,''
she said.
      AP-NY-06-23-97 0639EDT

Date: Wed, 25 Jun 1997 20:10:18 -0700
From: Sean Thomas <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: fois gras ottawa
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Ottawa Citizen,Tues June 24,1997

Restauranteur Appeases Activists by Dropping Foie Gras from Menu

Cafe Heny Burger chef bows to complaints aboiut animal cruelty
By Ron Eade

  A restaurrant owner in Hull has removed foie gras from his menu to
appease animal rights activists who say the production fo fattened duck
liver is cruel to animals.
  But even though foie gras will never appear on his menu, chef Robert
Bourassa of the Cafe Henry Burger says he will provide the delicacy on
request.
  "I will not put foie gras, specifically those two words on my menu.
But that does not mean if a client were to ask me for some I would not
have it available," Mr. Bourassa said yesterday.
  "I have some clients who request this frequently - that's why they
come here - and I'm not about to lose that business because of the
animal rights people.  I agree with them in terms of the animal rights
issue, but business is business.  So I've decided it would be
appropriate to go part of the way by not printing it on the menu."
  A group calling itself Animal Action is urging Ottawa area restaurants
and specialty food shops to drop foie gras from their product lists
because itis made form the livers of force-fed ducks and geese.
  "This satisfies our group," said Len Goldberg, animal rights spokeman,
concerning Mr. Bourassa's decision.
  "We cannot expect a restaurant like that to decline requests from its
clientele, so it's a reasonable compromise," Mr. Goldberg said.
  The group has focused most of its attention on one Ottawa retailer,
A.E Price Fine Foods Ltd. at L'esplanade Laurier, were activists plan to
continue periodic pickets until foie gras is taken off the shelves, Mr.
Golberg said.
  the store owner was unavailable for comment.
  Force-feeding, particularly by producers in France, is achieved by
pushing a rigid tube down an animals throat at least three times a day
for more than two weeks to fill its stomach with a corn mixture that
fattens the liver.
  Mr. Bourassa said his foie gras, which comes from a supplier in
Quebec, is not force-fed in the traditional fashion.
  Where a normal duck liver would weigh 100 grams, the product Mr
Bourassa uses weighs between 400 and 600 grams.
  That compares with a force-fed duck liver that can weigh one kilogram.
  "The force-fed foie gras in Europe is much larger than we have here,
so for this reason I see mine as not force-fed," Mr. Bourassa said.
  Still he agreed not to display it on the menu as a fair compromise to
satisfy both his customers and animal activists.
  "I didin't want the hassle to be honest," Mr. Bourassa said.
  Mr. Bourassa will continue to list a different product, called foie
blond, which is rich tasting liver that he said is not force-fed.
________________________________________________________________________

Note;  Animal Action is not "satisfied" by the compromise reached with
Cafe Henry Burger, however we had an opportunity to gain more exposure
and keep the issue alive in the media by agreeing to this.  We are
currently focusing on the largest distributor in Ottawa and wanted to
create additional pressure, this story was run on the front page city
section and also carried by CBC french laguage TV news.
Our position for the stores in Ottawa is that they must never sell foie
gras again.

Sean Thomas
Co-Director Animal Action
Date: Thu, 26 Jun 1997 10:14:33 +0800
From: jwed <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail]
Subject: (CN) a new Zoo, an enlarged Reserve, an analysis of Grain
  Problems without the mention of the effect of increased meat production
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"

China Daily 26th June 1997

1. Wildlife garden

SHIJIAZHUANG -- The third phase of the construction of China's largest
nature reserve for protecting wildlife has been completed. Situated in
North China's Hebei Province, the Qinhuangdao wildlife garden covers 333
hectares of land, with a total investment of 15 million yuan ($1.8
million). The extension of the project includes a cub nursery, a restaurant
and a mini-car racing course. Construction of the zones for birds, and
herbivorous, carnivorous and tropical animals, breeding grounds, and a
veterinary hospital has also been completed.

2. Forest reserves

KUNMING -- Xishuangbanna, one of China's largest tropical rain forest
reserves, will almost double its area to bring more wild plants and animals
under protection. The Xishuangbanna Dai Autonomous Prefecture of Southwest
China's Yunnan Province has decided to enlarge the reserve area to 470,000
hectares from its present 268,000 hectares, according to the local
government. The area, bordering on Myanmar and Laos, earned its reputation
as "a kingdom of plants and animals" for its more than 20,000 species of
plants, 429 species of birds and 67 species of animals.

3. China must grow its own, stable grain supply

TO ensure a stable grain supply, China needs to solve a variety of
problems, including declining arable land, rising production costs,
insufficient investment, limited production scale and obsolete technology.

At the same time, China should prioritize self-reliance, while at the same
time not exclude itself from the world market.

China will need 633 to 726 million tons of grain by the year 2030.

If the output of grain is to grow at an annual rate of 1 per cent and China
continues to sow 110 million hectares, then by the year 2030 the output of
grain should reach 663 million tons.

China will be able to provide 90 per cent of the grain it needs and import
no more than 100 million tons of grain each year in the coming century.

Perhaps China's most daunting challenge is the reduction of arable land. In
1995, the size of arable land in the country was 95 million hectares,
compared with 112 million hectares in 1957. During 1978 and 1995, the
reduction of arable land alone reduced the grain output by 226 million tons.

China needs to tackle the problem of rising production cost, too.

During 1978 and 1993, the cost of production of major grain, rice, wheat,
corn and beans rose by an average of 201 per cent.

In comparison, the State purchasing price for grain is too low. Statistics
indicated that for nine of the last 11 years, the State-set purchasing
price for grain was lower than the market price, sometimes 100 per cent less.

The State should try to reform the grain purchasing system to unify the
State purchasing price and the market price.

To maintain the output of grain, China should also increase the production
scale. On average, the land cultivated by each farmer was 0.29 hectare in
1995, down from 0.35 hectare in 1978.

Each household cultivates about 0.57 hectares of land. The land usually was
located in six or seven different places, making irrigation, pest control
and other tasks difficult.

China should also straighten out the relationship between grain producers
and dealers as well as the relationship between the local authorities and
central government.

The State-owned grain-dealing enterprises, which are profit-oriented, also
function partly as government departments that regulate the market.
Consequently, the State suffers losses. By the end of 1995, the losses by
the State grain sectors had reached 50 billion yuan ($6 billion).

The State also needs to effectively regulate the grain market. Between the
second half of 1993 and the first half of 1995, the State sold more than 20
billion kilograms of grain in order to lower the market price, but with
little effect.

The central government should regulate the inter-provincial grain supply in
terms of amount and variety, while local governments are responsible for
stable supplies of grain.

Domestic and foreign trade also should be co-ordinated. In four of the
years since 1984, the country's grain output decreased. In three of those
years, grain exports surpassed imports.

In the eight years grain output increased, grain imports surpassed exports.

Most tellingly, between 1995 and 1996, grain output rose by 34.9 million
tons, while the net import of grain totalled 27 million tons.

Meanwhile, efforts should be made to enhance the initiative of farmers.
Such measures should include preferential policies, the control of
production material prices and the establishment of services.

The increase of investment is also crucial. Investment from the State,
enterprises, individuals and overseas also are necessary.

China needs to invest 740 billion yuan ($89 billion) if it is to improve
the output of 60 million hectares of low-yield land, and develop 14 million
hectares of waste land and expand the size of irrigated land by 17 million
hectares.

The State should also take measures to save grain. The rapid development of
the liquor industry has consumed a large amount of grain. This industry
consumes 17.4 million tons of grain each year.

The waste of grain is also serious. On average, each year 45 billion
kilograms of grain is wasted in transport or thrown away after produced as
food.

(The author is deputy director of the Institute of Economics under the
State Planning Commission.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------


Date: 06/26/97
Author: Ma Xiaohe


Every child has the right to a healthy diet - that means no meat.

http://www.earth.org.hk/

</pre>
                            <!-- END OF PAGE CONTENT -->

    </TD>


    <TD width=50 align=center>

    </TD>
</TR>

                            <!-- THE BOTTOM TOOLBAR -->

<TR>

    <TD colspan=3 align=center fontsize=2>
    <a href="../SUB~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/sub.html">ARRS Tools</a>  |
<a href="../NEWSPA~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/newspage.html">News</a>  |
<a href="../ORGS~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Orgs.html">Orgs</a>  |
<a href="../SEARCH~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/search.html">Search</a>  |
<a href="../SUPPOR~1.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/Support.html">Support</a>  |
<a href="../ABOUT/INDEX.HTM" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/arrs/about">About the ARRS</a>  |
<a href="mailto:[e-mail]">Contact ARRS</a>
    </TD>
</TR>


                                <!-- END OF MAIN -->

</TABLE></center>




        <!-- THE UNDERWRITERS -->

<table border=0 width=100%>
    <tr><td>

<center>    <hr width=285>
<Font Size=1>THIS SITE UNDERWRITTEN IN PART BY:</FONT>
<BR>


<a href="../../../tppmsgs/msgs4.htm#476" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/cgi-bin/show_support.pl?id=t889237296&sec=sbn_bottom&url=http%3a//www.go-organic.com/greenmarket/gorilla/" target=_top><img src="../../SUPPORT/BANNERS/CROSS-~1/MICHAE~1.GIF" tppabs="http://www.envirolink.org/support/banners/cross-promotion/michael_wide.gif" border=1 alt="Gorilla Foundation"></a>


<hr width=285>

    <br><font size=2>
    <b>The views and opinions expressed within this page are not
necessarily those of the <br>EnviroLink Network nor the Underwriters.  The views
are those of the authors of the work.</b></font>
    </center>
    </td></tr>

</table>

</BODY>

</HTML>