Because you signed up on our website and asked to be notified, I’m sending you this special recall alert.
On October 25, 2015, Salix Animal Health of Deerfield, Florida announced it is expanding the recall of its Good ‘n’ Fun Beefhide Chicken Sticks because the product has the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.
Salmonella is a bacteria that can affect the health of both pets and humans.
To learn which products are affected, please visit the following link:
Close neighbour, Dordie, sent me an email with a link to a recent item that was broadcast on CBS.
Published on Oct 1, 2015
For thousands of blind athletes across the country, just setting foot out the door can be a huge challenge. Now one special dog is helping his owner not just walk out the door, but run. Only on “CBS This Morning,” Barry Petersen reports on the extraordinary story of one man’s journey to find the perfect running mate.
Richard and Klinger, and all those who made it happen, Jean and I salute you!
The title to today’s post is an old British expression that harks back to the days when “queer” meant strange. This blog has published no shortage of posts giving many examples of how “queer” we humans can be at times.
So the latest essay from Mr Monbiot is rather refreshing. I’ll say no more, apart from confirming that Monbiot’s post is republished with his kind permission.
ooOOoo
Human Kind
14th October 2015
Fascinating new lines of research suggest that we are good people, tolerating bad things.
By George Monbiot, published in the Guardian 14th October 2015
Do you find yourself thrashing against the tide of human indifference and selfishness? Are you oppressed by the sense that while you care, others don’t? That because of humankind’s callousness, civilisation and the rest of life on earth are basically stuffed? If so, you are not alone. But neither are you right.
A study by the Common Cause Foundation, due to be published next month, reveals two transformative findings. The first is that a large majority of the 1000 people they surveyed – 74% – identify more strongly with unselfish values than with selfish values. This means that they are more interested in helpfulness, honesty, forgiveness and justice than in money, fame, status and power. The second is that a similar majority – 78% – believes others to be more selfish than they really are. In other words, we have made a terrible mistake about other people’s minds.
The revelation that humanity’s dominant characteristic is, er, humanity will come as no surprise to those who have followed recent developments in behavioural and social sciences. People, these findings suggest, are basically and inherently nice.
A review article in the journal Frontiers in Psychology points out that our behaviour towards unrelated members of our species is “spectacularly unusual when compared to other animals”. While chimpanzees might share food with members of their own group, though usually only after being plagued by aggressive begging, they tend to react violently towards strangers. Chimpanzees, the authors note, behave more like the Homo economicus of neoliberal mythology than people do.
Humans, by contrast, are ultra-social: possessed of an enhanced capacity for empathy, an unparalleled sensitivity to the needs of others, a unique level of concern about their welfare and an ability to create moral norms that generalise and enforce these tendencies.
Such traits emerge so early in our lives that they appear to be innate. In other words, it seems that we have evolved to be this way. By the age of 14 months, children begin to help each other, for example by handing over objects another child can’t reach. By the time they are two, they start sharing things they value. By the age of three, they start to protest against other people’s violation of moral norms.
A fascinating paper in the journal Infancy reveals that reward has nothing to do with it. Three to five-year-olds are less likely to help someone a second time if they have been rewarded for doing it the first time. In other words, extrinsic rewards appear to undermine the intrinsic desire to help. (Parents, economists and government ministers, please note). The study also discovered that children of this age are more inclined to help people if they perceive them to be suffering, and that they want to see someone helped whether or not they do it themselves. This suggests that they are motivated by a genuine concern for other people’s welfare, rather than by a desire to look good. And it seems to be baked in.
Why? How would the hard logic of evolution produce such outcomes? This is the subject of heated debate. One school of thought contends that altruism is a logical response to living in small groups of closely related people, and evolution has failed to catch up with the fact that we now live in large groups, mostly composed of strangers. Another argues that large groups containing high numbers of altruists will outcompete large groups which contain high numbers of selfish people. A third hypothesis insists that a tendency towards collaboration enhances your own survival, regardless of the group in which you might find yourself. Whatever the mechanism might be, the outcome should be a cause of celebration.
So why do we retain such a dim view of human nature? Partly, perhaps, for historical reasons. Philosophers from Hobbes to Rousseau, Malthus to Schopenhauer, whose understanding of human evolution was limited to the Book of Genesis, produced persuasive, influential and catastrophically mistaken accounts of “the state of nature” (our innate, ancestral characteristics). Their speculations on this subject should long ago have been parked on a high shelf marked “historical curiosities”. But somehow they still seem to exert a grip on our minds.
Another problem is that – almost by definition – many of those who dominate public life have a peculiar fixation on fame, money and power. Their extreme self-centredness places them in a small minority, but, because we see them everywhere, we assume that they are representative of humanity.
The media worships wealth and power, and sometimes launches furious attacks on people who behave altruistically. In the Daily Mail last month, Richard Littlejohn described Yvette Cooper’s decision to open her home to refugees as proof that “noisy emoting has replaced quiet intelligence” (quiet intelligence being one of his defining qualities). “It’s all about political opportunism and humanitarian posturing,” he theorised, before boasting that he doesn’t “give a damn” about the suffering of people fleeing Syria. I note with interest the platform given to people who speak and write as if they are psychopaths.
The consequences of an undue pessimism about human nature are momentous. As the Common Cause Foundation’s survey and interviews reveal, those who have the bleakest view of humanity are the least likely to vote. What’s the point, they reason, if everyone else votes only in their own selfish interests? Interestingly, and alarmingly for people of my political persuasion, it also discovered that liberals tend to possess a dimmer view of other people than conservatives do. Do you want to grow the electorate? Do you want progressive politics to flourish? Then spread the word that other people are broadly well-intentioned.
Misanthropy grants a free pass to the grasping, power-mad minority who tend to dominate our political systems. If only we knew how unusual they are, we might be more inclined to shun them and seek better leaders. It contributes to the real danger we confront: not a general selfishness, but a general passivity. Billions of decent people tut and shake their heads as the world burns, immobilised by the conviction that no one else cares.
You are not alone. The world is with you, even if it has not found its voice.
Because you signed up on our website and asked to be notified, I’m sending you this special recall alert.
On October 2, 2015, K-9 Kraving Dog Food of Baltimore, Maryland, announced the recall of its Chicken Patties dog food because the product has the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella and Listeria mitocytogenes.
Salmonella and Listeria are bacteria that can affect the health of both pets and humans.
Please be sure to share the news of this alert with other pet owners.
Mike Sagman, Editor
The Dog Food Advisor
P.S. Not already on our dog food recall notification list yet? Sign up to get critical dog food recall alerts sent to you by email. There’s no cost for this service.
Note: If readers find these food recall alerts a waste of time, then do let me know – I’m aware that for many there are already too many emails in the ‘in-box’.
Dear Fellow Dog Lover,
On September 30, 2015, Salix Animal Health of Deerfield, Florida announced the recall of one lot of its Good ‘n’ Fun Beefhide Chicken Sticks because the product has the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.
Salmonella is a bacteria that can affect the health of both pets and humans.
Because you signed up on our website and asked to be notified, I’m sending you this special recall alert.
On September 23, 2015, The U.S. Food and Drug Administration announced the recall of certain lots of Dingo brand dog chews because the product has the potential to contain amantadine.
Amantadine is a human antiviral drug not approved for use in animal food.
Forget about the big world out there, be loved by our dogs.
Monday’s post about the precariousness of man’s future on this planet if we don’t prevent the melting of the Antarctic ice sheet was a bit gloomy, however true it might be. The gloom continued with yesterday’s post about the VW scandal illustrating the “unethical culture endemic in business”.
So what a nice change to think about the way that our pets keep us bright, cheerful and healthy.
All of which is my way of introducing a guest post from Vee Cecil. Now I am fairly cautious about guest posts from those who want to promote their businesses, for obvious reasons. But Vee’s essay is so lovely that it truly deserves to be shared.
Firstly, here is the email that Vee sent me back in August,
Hi!
In the U.S., 91 percent of pet owners say they consider their pet to be a member of the family. And for good reason! Our pets are constant sources of comfort and companionship.
What many pet owners may not realize is how great their furry family members are for their physical and mental health. For example, studies have shown that pet owners have lower blood pressure than people who don’t have pets and that being around pets also makes us “less anxious and less stressed.” And that’s just the beginning. There are many other wonderful health benefits that result from owning a pet.
May I write an article for learningfromdogs.com on this topic? The article will be approximately 500 words, unique to your site, and complete with resources.
Please let me know – I am always looking to spread the word about how we can be healthier and happier and having a pet is a great way to achieve both!
Best,
Vee
Here then is that article.
ooOOoo
Feeling Under the Weather? Learn More About the Amazing Healing Powers of Pets
Ask any dog owner and you’ll find out just how remarkable a dog can be. They can turn a terrible day into an amazing one with one lick of the face or wag of the tail. But more and more studies are showing that our four-legged friends might be even more awesome than we previously thought.
As TheWashington Post explains, research is showing that being around dogs can help us feel better and less stressed, while also improving our physical health. For example, the article cites studies which found that our pets can lead to “lower blood pressure, lower resting heart rates and less risk of hypertension.”
And that’s not all. Here are four other health issues and how dogs help their human companions:
Cancer. As this CBSNews.com article explains, a recent study at Mount Sinai Beth Israel found that therapy dogs had a very positive impact on patients receiving chemo therapy. The patients showed improvements in “emotional well-being and quality of life.” The director of the program that provided the therapy dogs also noted that patients felt less stressed and anxious. The article notes that this was a ground-breaking study as the impact of therapy dogs on cancer patients hadn’t been examined before.
Alzheimer’s Disease. Therapy dogs are also proving to be extremely helpful for patients with Alzheimer’s. In this article, a man with early on-set Alzheimer’s explains how his therapy dog helps him with daily tasks. Through the help of his therapy dog, the man says his stress and anxiety levels have significantly reduced.
Surgery recovery. Chances are if you were recovering from a painful surgery you wouldn’t turn down a snuggle from a pet. But, as The Telegraph shows, researchers have found that pets can do more than just provide you with a little tender loving care. A study led by a researcher from Loyola University found that pet therapy can reduce the amount of pain patients experience after surgery. In fact, according to the article, the patients in the study, who had had joint replacement surgery, “needed 50 per cent less pain medication if they used pet therapy.”
Diabetes. And perhaps most remarkable of all is what therapy dogs can be trained to do for diabetics. In this case, dogs put their acute sense of smell to good use. As this article explains, dogs exhibiting a better-than-average sense of smell can be trained to help diabetics. Once trained these dogs use their sense of smell to detect signs of hypoglycemia and low blood sugar (based on their human companion’s breath). They’re also trained to get a sugary food for their diabetic, get help if the person goes into diabetic shock, and more.
As more research is conducted to see the benefits of not only service dogs, but pets too, it will be interesting to see how dogs are woven into more medical treatments. They are truly amazing creatures, who can help us mind, body, and soul.
***
Vee Cecil keeps busy by being a wellness coach, personal trainer and bootcamp instructor in Kentucky. She also recently launched a blog where she shares her passion for health by writing about her favorite tips, activities and recipes.
ooOOoo
Here’s a republication of a picture from a recent Picture Parade. It has health stamped all over it, for the young boy and the Shepherd Dog!
Republished for the wider promotion of this alert.
Dear Fellow Dog Lover,
Because you signed up on our website and asked to be notified, I’m sending you this special recall alert.
On September 25, OC Raw Dog of Rancho Santa Margarita, CA, announced it is recalling its OC Raw Chicken, Fish and Produce Raw Frozen Canine Formulation because it has the potential to be contaminated with Salmonella.
To learn which products are affected, please visit the following link:
This is the wake-up call that we humans simply can’t afford to sleep through.
This stunningly beautiful image is of an Antarctic iceberg, with a cavity. It belies the power of ice to destroy the world that we currently experience, and that “we” is not just humans but vast tracts of nature and, of course, our dogs.
So what has got “my knickers in a twist“? Answer: A reminder that the potential melting of the Antarctic ice sheet is a real and tangible threat; something that mankind has understand within the next few years.
First, let me share some of the material from the website of Antarctic Glaciers.
An ice shelf is a floating extension of land ice. The Antarctic continent is surrounded by ice shelves. They cover >1.561 million km2 (an area the size of Greenland)[1], fringing 75% of Antarctica’s coastline, covering 11% of its total area and receiving 20% of its snow.
The difference between sea ice and ice shelves is that sea ice is free-floating; the sea freezes and unfreezes each year, whereas ice shelves are firmly attached to the land. Sea ice contains icebergs, thin sea ice and thicker multi-year sea ice (frozen sea water that has survived several summer melt seasons, getting thicker as more ice is added each winter).
You can see this flat, floating ice shelf is almost featureless.
With this in mind, let me turn now to a recent post from Patrice Ayme in which he spells out very clearly the metaphorical dagger hanging above all our heads.
ooOOoo
Ice Sheets Melt: Academics Waking Up; New York Times In Denial
There has never been a more important moral, philosophical, military, civilizational, psychological, sociological and economic issue than the concerted holocaust of the biosphere by Homo Sapiens, presently passing one tipping point after another. Thus I will not present excuses for keeping abreast of any advance in understanding in the field. Even if it is just to confirm what I have long said.
The first scientific paper including computerized models of ice sheets melt predicts the obvious: if we burn all PROVEN fossil fuels reserves, ice will completely melt, all over Earth. Yet it is a big surprise to most scientists
“This is humanity as a geologic force,” said Ken Caldeira, a researcher at the Carnegie Institution for Science in Stanford, California, an author of the paper. “We’re not a subtle influence on the climate system – we are really hitting it with a hammer.”
Nice to read. Nietzsche was doing philosophy with a hammer, we went further: we are doing climate with a hammer. Hopefully, it will crack soon: nothing like a great catastrophe to bring further fascism. Nihilism is bad thing, naivety, even worse. To please the powers that be, and thus to be taken seriously, serious climate scientists have made unwarranted, profoundly unscientific, over-optimistic declarations about the ice sheets. Now their time is up. In truth the GreenHouse emissions are completely out of control, and still increasing… At a geological scale, every year:
50 Gigatons Per Year: This GreenHouse Is Bigger Than CO2 Alone.
“I didn’t expect it would go so fast,” Dr. Caldeira said. “To melt all of Antarctica, I thought it would take something like 10,000 years.” Didn’t they all. Why? Because only then would one be invited at the White House. Thinking correctly means, first, to think in a way that pleases those with power.
“Combustion of available fossil fuel resources sufficient to eliminate the Antarctic Ice Sheet” [Ricarda Winkelmann, Anders Levermann, Andy Ridgwell,, Ken Caldeira]:
“The Antarctic Ice Sheet stores water equivalent to 58 meters in global sea-level rise. We show in simulations using the Parallel Ice Sheet Model that burning the currently attainable fossil fuel resources is sufficient to eliminate the ice sheet. With cumulative fossil fuel emissions of 10,000 gigatonnes of carbon (GtC), Antarctica is projected to become almost ice-free with an average contribution to sea-level rise exceeding 3 m per century during the first millennium. Consistent with recent observations and simulations, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet becomes unstable with 600 to 800 GtC of additional carbon emissions. Beyond this additional carbon release, the destabilization of ice basins in both West and East Antarctica results in a threshold increase in global sea level. Unabated carbon emissions thus threaten the Antarctic Ice Sheet in its entirety with associated sea-level rise that far exceeds that of all other possible sources.”
The famous Doctor Hansen and his collaborators upset the establishment two months ago by predicting a rise of three meters within 85 years (they use the reasoning I have used before, namely that paleontological data show sea level rise of 5 to 9 meters, with a rise of just one degree Celsius; actually the reasoning was obvious since 2009, when I pointed out that “2C Is Too Much“). The new paper potentially confirms Hansen’s findings. As I said, the new paper tries to NOT upset the powers that be (differently from yours truly, who view most individuals and institutions in power more than suspiciously, and it shows). Thus, one has to read between the lines to deduce that, from the paper itself, interpreting it optimistically is completely unwarranted.
The paper says: “Consistent with recent observations and simulations, the West Antarctic Ice Sheet becomes unstable with 600 to 800 GtC of additional carbon emissions.” Hmm… Let’s see, how long would that take, at the present increasing rate? Now emissions of CO2 itself are around 35 Gt, per year. That’s a number often brandished, but, left at that, it’s disinformation. With other GreenHouse Gases, we are at 50 Gigatons of CO2 equivalent emission, per year. Sorry for taxing the mathematical capabilities of our great leaders: 12 x 50 = 600. This fits perfectly my “Ten Years To Catastrophe” essay. Thus, the West and EAST Antarctic Ice Sheet becomes unstable in TWELVE YEARS (according to this paper; I obtained the same rough estimate with a paleoclimate approach).
The United Nations has said that the rise of the sea would not likely exceed three feet in this century. Some island nations will be wiped out (oops). Yet experts officially hope that major cities could be protected from it, in the richest countries that is (re-oops), though at a cost in the trillions of dollars (contemplate the enormous works to protect London or Venice).
The New York Times mentioned the paper above, which say the ice sheets will start melting irreversibly within a decade, to argue, in Politically Correct fashion, that ice sheets respond slowly enough to changes in the climate that it simply takes longer than a century for large-scale melting to begin. As if that notion was in the paper. It is not. Far from it. As I have argued before, that notion is ridiculous.
Subglacial Basins Are The Achilles’ Heel Of The Biosphere.
{WAIS = West Antarctica Ice Shelf; WB = Wilkes Basin; AB = Aurora Basin.]
Yet from that (tipping) point on, the paper found that thereafter, the sea would rise at the rate at a foot per decade, ten times faster than now, the New York Times admitted.
However the real text is much more alarming. Here is an extract:
“The Antarctic Ice Sheet is severely affected by high carbon emissions through both the marine ice-sheet instability and surface elevation feedbacks. On the time scale of millennia, large parts of the ice sheet melt or drain into the ocean, raising global sea level by several tens of meters. Most of the ice loss occurs within the first millennium, leading to high rates of sea-level rise during this period (Fig. 3; for more details, see also fig. S6). Our simulations show that cumulative emissions of 500 GtC commit us to long-term sea-level rise from Antarctica of 1.15 m within the next millenium, which is consistent with the sensitivity of 1.2 m/°C derived with a different ice-sheet model (33, 34). Paleo data suggest that similar rates of sea-level rise have occurred during past warm periods (35). If the 2°C target, corresponding to about 600 GtC of additional carbon release compared to year 2010, were attained, the millennial sea-level rise from Antarctica could likely be restricted to 2 m. In our simulations, this would keep the ice sheet below the threshold for the collapse of the Wilkes Basin. However, if that threshold is crossed, the Antarctic ice cover is significantly reduced in thickness and area (Fig. 4). If we were to release all currently attainable fossil fuel resources, Antarctica would become almost ice-free. It is unclear whether this dynamic discharge would be reversible and, if so, on which time scales.”
As I already said, since 2010, we have added another 230 Gigatons. So we are within eight year of the Wilkes ice sheet, the largest in the world, to become unstable. The paper admitted that about half the Antarctic ice sheet would melt or fall into the sea in the first thousand years.”
The New York Times’ interpretation that it will take nearly a century for dramatic melting to start was obviously tainted. It is just driven by political Machiavellianism: let’s admit there is climate “change” just as there is sea level “change”, and misinform about the unfolding catastrophe (although Main Stream Media had to recently admit the snow pack in California last April was the lowest in at least 500 years). How do I know this? The scientific paper used computerized models of the huge ice sheets covering Antarctica and Greenland. It is the first paper to do so. Yet, according to the biased New York Times, it would have found exactly what the UN found, during this century… Although the UN did not incorporate the ice sheet melt models.
Once the ice sheet melting is incorporated, faster melting ought to have been predicted, for THIS century. However that grim prediction would have upset the powers that be. We don’t want that to happen. Now that they have the drone habit, killing throngs of people they know nothing about, who knows what’s coming next if one disparages them? Beheading and crucifixion at the most esteemed Saudi plutocracy?
For plutocrats, the Saudis are a model of Human Rights: thus they elected them to head the UN panel on Human Rights. And ice sheet melting is perfect: all great catastrophes call onto what Obama calls “leaders” (our masters). If a bit of engineered inflation could bring Hitler, imagine what an inflating ocean can bring! A great future for the few who rule us, tax free.
Patrice Ayme’
ooOOoo
Let me close with two pictures:
That is a very great deal of water locked up in that ice!
and this one that shows how at least one would have a wonderful view of the sea from your room at the Boston Harbour Hotel!
Learning from Dogs 