Thursday, 6 February 2020

Almonds are out. Dairy is a disaster. So what milk should we drink?

A glass of dairy milk produces almost three times more greenhouse gas than any plant-based milk. But vegan options have drawbacks of their own

For environmentally minded consumers, the news is hard to swallow: almond milk is not healthy for the planet and the popular milk substitute is especially hard on bees. Our recent investigation into the connection between California’s industrialized almond industry and a record 50bn commercial bee deaths created quite a buzz. The widely read story prompted one primary response from readers: “What should we be drinking instead?”

This is a thorny question, and food sustainability experts are reluctant to single out any one plant milk as best because all have pros and cons.
But we’re going to try.

One thing is clear. All milk alternatives are far better for the planet than dairy. A 2018 study by researchers at the University of Oxford showed that producing a glass of dairy milk results in almost three times more greenhouse gas emissions than any plant-based milk and it consumes nine times more land than any of the milk alternatives. (Land is required to pasture the cows and grow their feed, which the animals belch out in the form of methane.)

Plant milks can, nevertheless, have a dark side, as when any crop is produced in mass quantities. It’s important to consider not just whether they are grown using organic methods. Other factors include how the farming of the crop affects people and native habitats in developing countries, the carbon footprint and water use. And while each product has its trade-offs, some plant milks are more sustainable than others.
When choosing a plant milk, it’s important to consider how the crop impacts people and native habitats, along with its carbon footprint and water use. Photograph: Luigi Giordano/Getty Images/iStockphoto

Based on interviews with experts, here is a an environmental ranking of plant milks, from the disappointingly sour to the sustainably sweet.

Coconut: ‘An absolute tragedy’
Coconut has a reputation as exotic and healthy, but for poor regions in the Philippines, Indonesia and India, where pickers are often paid less than a dollar a day, the palm groves are no paradise.

Because coconut trees only grow in tropical climates, the pressure to meet global demand is causing exploitation of workers and destruction of rainforests. “Coconut is an absolute tragedy and it makes me really sad,” Isaac Emery, a food sustainability consultant. “I love cooking with coconut milk but I don’t feel good about buying coconut products. Farmers in Indonesia should be growing food to feed their families instead of meeting international demands.”

According to an investigation by the New York Times, between 2007 to 2014 rainforests in Indonesia were clearcut at the rate of three acres every minute to make way for coconut palm trees. To avoid supporting unsustainable practices, choose coconut products that are certified Fair Trade.

Almond: bad for bees
While almond trees occupy smaller amounts of farmland compared with other crops grown for milk, this benefit is overshadowed by the negative impacts of almond farming in the US. Concentrated almost entirely in California’s arid Central Valley, almonds are the largest specialty crop in the US and the orchards cover a region the size of Delaware.

Almonds require more water than any other dairy alternative, consuming 130 pints of water to produce a single glass of almond milk, according to the Oxford study. Satisfying continual demands for larger almond crops is also placing unsustainable pressures on US commercial beekeepers. Nearly 70% of commercial bees in the US are drafted every spring to pollinate almonds. Last year, a record number –over one-third of them– died by season’s end as a result of these pressures and other environmental threats.

Rice: a water-guzzler
Although rice milk is ubiquitous as an inexpensive and widely available dairy alternative, it offers little in the way of nutrition or environmental benefits compared with other choices.

Rice is a water hog, according to the Oxford study, plus it produces more greenhouse gas emissions than any other plant milk. Bacteria breeding in rice paddies pump methane into the atmosphere and large amounts of fertilizer pollute waterways.

Hazelnut: on the up
For consumers who want the nutritiousness and tastiness of a nut milk but without the environmental impacts of almond farming, the hazelnut is a rising star. Like all nuts, hazelnuts grow on trees that pull carbon from the atmosphere and help reduce greenhouse emissions rather than increase them. Hazelnuts are environmentally superior to almonds in that they are pollinated by the wind rather than commercial honeybees and they grow in moist climates, such as the Pacific north-west, where water is less of an issue.

Hemp and flax: niche contenders
Another way to ensure sustainable choices is to choose milk alternatives made from what Emery describes as “niche crops” such as hemp and flax. 

They are grown in relatively small quantities in the northern hemisphere, which makes them more environmentally friendly compared with a monoculture operation. Both plants produce seeds that make for a milk rich in protein and healthy fats.

Soy: back in favor
According to the Oxford study, soy milk is the joint winner on the sustainability scale. Plus, soy is the only plant milk that comes close to offering a protein content comparable to dairy. It was the go-to alternative long before almond milk came into vogue – but then soy fell out of favor.

“Soy has a relatively high concentration of certain hormones that are similar to human hormones and people got freaked out about that,” says Emery. “But the reality is you would have to consume an impossibly large amount of soy milk and tofu for that to ever be a problem.” Recent studies have instead found that a moderate amount of soy is healthy, especially for women.

The primary environmental drawback to soy milk is that soybeans are grown in massive quantities around the world to feed livestock for meat and dairy production. Large swaths of rainforest in the Amazon have been burned to make way for soy farms. The work-around for this is to simply do a little research and read the carton to find soy milk that is made from organic soybeans grown in the US or Canada.

Oat: a humble hero
Meet the winner: the unassuming oat.

“I’m excited about the surge in oat milk popularity,” says Liz Specht, associate director of science and technology for the Good Food Institute, a not-for-profit that promotes plant-based diets. “Oat milk performs very well on all sustainability metrics.” Also: “I highly doubt there will be unintended environmental consequences that might emerge when the scale of oat milk use gets larger.”

According to Bloomberg Business, retail sales of oat milk in the US have soared from $4.4m in 2017 to $29m in 2019, surpassing almond milk as the fastest-growing dairy alternative. But unlike almonds, there are already plenty of oats to go around. “Right now, 50 to 90% of global oat production goes into animal feed,” says Specht, “so there’s a huge existing acreage that we can safely steal share from without moving the needle at all on total production.”

Oats are grown in cooler climates such as the northern US and Canada, and are therefore not associated with deforestation in developing countries. The only drawback with this trendy and guilt-free option is that most oats come from mass-produced, monoculture operations where they are sprayed with the Roundup pesticide right before harvest. A study by the Environmental Working Group found glyphosate, the active ingredient in Roundup and a possible carcinogen, in all the foods it tested containing conventionally grown oats and even in one-third of products made with organic oats. However, the popular Oatly brand oat milk company maintains its oats are certified glyphosate free.

The bottom line: as long as it’s not dairy
Both Emery and Specht emphasize that whether it’s coconut, soy or oat, consumers should drink whatever plant milk is most appealing to them and not fret over sustainability shortcomings, which are chump change compared with the environmental harms from dairy.

“Drink what you want,” says Emery. “If you’re going with plant milk instead of animal milk, you’ve already addressed most of the environmental problems that your animal milk habit was causing.”


Source: The Guardian)

Wednesday, 5 February 2020

Peppa Pig voice Harley Bird to step down

The actress who voices Peppa Pig is leaving the role after more than a decade.

Harley Bird, 18, who has been the cartoon character's voice since she was five, said the cast of the TV series had given her "unforgettable memories".

She will be replaced by nine-year-old Amelie Bea Smith, who becomes the fourth actress to take on the voice of the anthropomorphic pig.

Smith will first appear in the Peppa Pig episode on Valentine's Day.
Harley Bird won a Bafta for the role in 2011


Bird, who is in her final year of A-Levels, won a Bafta for the role in 2011 and performed songs for the recent Peppa Pig My First Album release.

She said: "Becoming the voice of Peppa Pig at the age of five was the start of an incredible journey, and I'll never forget my time on the show."

She added her co-stars on the show had "become like a family" and had given her "unforgettable memories."

Bird said she was "looking forward to starting the next chapter" and wished Smith "the best of luck" in the role.

Peppa Pig co-creators Neville Astley and Mark Baker said: "As our longest-standing Peppa, Harley's award-winning contribution to the show over the past 13 years has been tremendous, making her a key part of the success of Peppa Pig."

Smith previously appeared in several episodes of EastEnders in 2018 and 2019.

Her agent, Mark Jermin said she has been "a huge fan of the show since she was little, so voicing the title role is like a dream come true".
Smith will first appear in the Peppa Pig episode on Valentine's Day


Astley and Baker said they are "confident" Smith "will continue the strong legacy of the previous Peppa voice actors."

She is the fourth artist to take on the role after Bird, Lily Snowden-Fine and Cecily Bloom.

Lily Snowden-Fine was the first to voice Peppa Pig when the series debuted in 2004, before Cecily Bloom provided the voice of the character in the second series in 2006.

Bird took over from the third series in 2007, and has appeared in 185 episodes of the show.

Smith's voice as Peppa Pig will be heard in the UK, the US, Australia and other international territories that show episodes in English.

Peppa Pig first aired in 2004 on Channel 5's Milkshake and Nick Jr.

It is now available in more than 180 territories and is broadcast in more than 40 languages.


(Source: BBC)

Germany is turning 62 military bases into wildlife sanctuaries

'We are fortunate that we can now give these places back to nature'

They were once military bases at the centre of a 50-year war between the world's two superpowers. They will soon become a haven for rare birds and other animals.

The German government has announced plans to convert 62 disused military bases just west of the Iron Curtain into nature reserves for eagles, woodpeckers, bats, and beetles.
The German government is converting disused military bases into nature reserves especially for rare birds (Dieter Damschen) ( BUND-Naturschutz )
Environment Minister Barbara Hendricks said: "We are seizing a historic opportunity with this conversion — many areas that were once no-go zones are no longer needed for military purposes.

“We are fortunate that we can now give these places back to nature."

Together the bases are 31,000 hectares — that's equivalent to 40,000 football pitches. The conversion will see Germany's total area of protected wildlife increase by a quarter.

After toying with the idea of selling the land off as real estate, the government opted instead to make a grand environmental gesture. It will become another addition to what is now known as the European Green Belt.

A spokesperson from The European Green Belt told The Independent: "In the remoteness of the inhuman border fortifications of the Iron Curtain nature was able to develop nearly undisturbed.

"Today the European Green Belt is an ecological network and memorial landscape running from the Barents to the Black Sea."

(Source: Independent)

Tuesday, 4 February 2020

Coronavirus: Worldwide cases overtake 2003 Sars outbreak

The number of coronavirus cases worldwide has overtaken that of the Sars epidemic, which spread to more than two dozen countries in 2003.

There were around 8,100 cases of Sars - severe acute respiratory syndrome - reported during the eight-month outbreak.

But nearly 10,000 cases of the new virus have been confirmed, most in China, since it emerged in December.

More than 100 cases have been reported outside China, in 22 countries.

The number of deaths so far stands at 213 - all in China. In total, 774 people were killed by Sars.



In another development, the US also declared a public health emergency and said it would bar any foreign nationals who have visited China in the past two weeks from entering the country.

Estimates by the University of Hong Kong suggest the true total number of cases could be far higher than official figures suggest. Based on mathematical models of the outbreak, experts there say more than 75,000 people may have been infected in the Chinese city of Wuhan alone, where the virus originated.

Most cases outside China are in people who have been to Wuhan. But Germany, Japan, Vietnam, the United States, Thailand and South Korea have reported person-to-person cases - patients being infected by people who had travelled to China.

Wuhan's Communist Party chief said on Friday the city should have taken measures sooner to contain the virus.

"If strict control measures had been taken earlier, the result would have been better than now," Ma Guoqiang told state broadcaster CCTV.

As governments around the world acted to contain the virus, WHO spokesman Chris Lindmeier warned that closing borders could in fact accelerate its spread, with travellers entering countries unofficially.

"As we know from other scenarios, be it Ebola or other cases, whenever people want to travel, they will. And if the official paths are not opened, they will find unofficial paths," he said.

He said the best way to track the virus was at official border crossings.

How does this outbreak compare to Sars?
Sars was a type of coronavirus that first emerged in China's Guangdong province in November 2002. By the time the outbreak ended the following July, it had spread to more than two dozen countries.

The new coronavirus emerged only last month. So far, it has spread to fewer countries and - while more people have been infected globally - it has resulted in fewer deaths.


On Wednesday, the number of confirmed cases within China surpassed the Sars epidemic.

Sars was also estimated to have cost the global economy more than $30bn (£22bn).

But economists have said the new coronavirus could have an even bigger impact on the world economy. It has forced global companies including tech giants, car makers and retailers to shut down temporarily in China.

China was also criticised by the UN's global health body for concealing the scale of the original Sars outbreak.

It has been praised for responding to the latest virus with tough measures, including effectively quarantining millions of residents in cities.

But in his interview with CCTV on Friday, the Wuhan Communist Party chief said transport restrictions should have been brought in at least 10 days earlier.

"The epidemic may have been alleviated somewhat, and not got to the current situation," Mr Ma said.

The estimates from the University of Hong Kong suggest the epidemic is doubling in size roughly every week and that multiple Chinese cities may have imported sufficient cases to start local epidemics.

"Large cities overseas with close transport links to China could potentially also become outbreak epicentres because of substantial spread of pre-symptomatic cases unless substantial public health interventions at both the population and personal levels are implemented immediately," Professor Joseph Wu said.

Harder to spot and harder to stop
Analysis by James Gallagher, Health and Science correspondent
Why is this outbreak more difficult to stop than Sars?

The answer is not down to China - the speed and scale of the country's response to this new virus is widely considered to be unprecedented. The difference is the way the virus behaves inside the human body.

Sars was a brutal infection that you couldn't miss - patients were contagious only when they had symptoms. This made it relatively easy to isolate the sick and quarantine anyone who might have been exposed.

But the new virus, 2019-nCov, is harder to spot and therefore harder to stop.

From the virus's perspective, it has a far smarter evolutionary survival strategy than Sars.

The best estimate is only one-in-five cases cause severe symptoms, so instead of infected people turning up in hospital, you have to go out and find them.

And we are getting detailed documented cases of people spreading the virus before they even have symptoms.

There is a tendency to focus only on how deadly a virus is. But it is this, in combination with a virus's ability to spread, that determines its true threat.


How is China handling this?
A confirmed case in Tibet means the virus has now reached every region in mainland China.

The central province of Hubei, where nearly all deaths have occurred, is in a state of lockdown. The province of 60 million people is home to Wuhan, which is at the heart of the outbreak.

The city has effectively been sealed off and China has put numerous transport restrictions in place to curb the spread of the virus. People who have been in Hubei are also being told to work from home.

China has said it will send charter planes to bring back Hubei residents who are overseas "as soon as possible". A foreign ministry spokesman said this was because of the "practical difficulties" Chinese citizens had faced abroad.

The virus is affecting China's economy, the world's second-largest, with a growing number of countries advising their citizens to avoid all non-essential travel to the country.

How is the world responding?
Voluntary evacuations of hundreds of foreign nationals from Wuhan are under way.
The UK, Australia, South Korea, Singapore and New Zealand are expected to quarantine all evacuees for two weeks to monitor them for symptoms and avoid contagion.

Australia plans to quarantine its evacuees on Christmas Island, 2,000km (1,200 miles) from the mainland in a detention centre that has been used to house asylum seekers.

In other recent developments:
  • Sweden confirmed its first case - a woman in her 20s who arrived in the country on 24 January after visiting the Wuhan area
  • Russia said two Chinese citizens had been placed in isolation after they tested positive for the virus
  • Singapore closed its borders to all travellers from China
  • Germany confirmed its seventh case - a man from a company in Bavaria where five other workers have tested positive
  • Italy declared a six-month state of emergency after two Chinese tourists in Rome were diagnosed with the coronavirus
  • Thailand confirmed its first case of human-to-human transmission
  • Mongolia suspended all arrivals from China until 2 March. It also banned its citizens from travelling to the country
  • In the US, Chicago health officials reported the first US case of human-to-human transmission
  • Russia decided to close its 4,300km (2,670-mile) far-eastern border with China
  • Japan raised its infectious disease advisory level for China
  • Some 250 French nationals were evacuated from Wuhan
  • India confirmed its first case of the virus - a student in the southern state of Kerala who was studying in Wuhan
  • Israel barred all flight connections with China
  • North Korea suspended all flights and trains to and from China, said the British ambassador to North Korea
  • Guatemala announced new travel restrictions, saying anyone who had been to China in the past 15 days would be prevented from reaching the country

(Source: BBC)

Coronavirus panic is worse than the beast itself. We all need to calm down, this isn’t Contagion

Pathogens in movies do not work the way they do in the real world. As a professor told me this weekend, there’s never been a virus quite like Hollywood

The World Health Organisation has declared a public health emergency of international concern. The UK has had its first confirmed cases and Israel is quarantining all airline passengers from China at home. 

Yes, it’s getting scary. But no, it’s not because of the coronavirus that’s at the centre of these developments. It’s people, and their reactions to it, that inspire fear in me. 

It’s the people talking about avoiding Chinese takeaways. The bullies who targeted a Japanese British boy at a school local to me. The travellers who’ve been getting up and moving when British Chinese citizens sit near them on public transport. The steaming piles of alarmist crap on social media. Seven shades of wrong in every case. 

“Going viral is a social media phenomenon and this virus has gone viral,” was how one Cambridge University academic described it to professor Jonathan Luke Heeney, the head of the Laboratory of Viral Zoonotics at that august institution. 

I talked to him before writing this because it had been a long time since I did a virology course as part of my university degree, and I wanted to establish some facts before I advanced the idea that panic is every bit as nasty as the virus, and maybe as dangerous. 

So here they are. 

When it comes to infectiousness Sars, which caused a panic of its own when it emerged some years ago, had what’s known as an R-Zero number of about 3. 

Common or garden ’flu ranges from 2-5. Measles (and if you’re a parent, for goodness sake get your child vaccinated), is the king here at 12-18. The number for the coronavirus sparking all the fuss is currently at 2.3, although that will inevitably change as more data comes in. 

How about mortality? As with Sars, the elderly and those with compromised immune systems or other conditions are most at risk. Sars killed 9-16 per cent of those infected. Mers (Middle East respiratory syndrome), another coronavirus of recent vintage, was more frightening. Its number was 30-40 per cent. 

The new one is currently hovering at around 4 per cent of those infected.  

The nasty thing is that it can be spread when people are asymptomatic (by contrast to Sars). Heeney worries about it getting into populations where public health systems are weak, and other infections are prevalent, and with good reason. 

But this is a long way from the Chinese virus depicted in Stephen Soderberg’s Contagion, or one of Hollywood’s other dystopian pandemic dramas. 

Soderbergh’s pathogen appeared to be lethal to everyone who came into contact with it with the exception of Matt Damon. Nasty as it is, the coronavirus is a long way from that. 

Much as I love movies, I can understand why Heeney opined that “there’s never been a pathogen quite like Hollywood”. 

So listen to the advice, wash your hands, try not to touch your face, and so on. But there is no earthly reason not to order a chicken chow mein this weekend, or to act like an idiot if someone of Chinese ethnicity sits next to you on the Tube. 

Sure, I get it. There’s something primeval about the fear of infection. 

Something about the idea of an invisible killer in the air that is uniquely chilling. In some ways, the feelings it induces are similar to those spread by terror attacks, which are similarly, and frighteningly, random and strike from out of the blue.

But we need to get a sense of perspective.

One thing that this really ought to do is serve as a reminder that we need to stop screwing with the environment. We don’t yet know the source of this virus, but suspicion has fallen on bats. If you disturb their habitats, or those of other creatures, well, do I need to spell it out? You reap what you sow and all that. 

In the meantime, the US State Department has urged its citizens to depart China and perhaps return home to a country in which 30,000 people die every year from gun-related violence. 

In the UK, with its NHS and its public health infrastructure, you’re probably more at risk from heading out on to the congested roads than you are from this virus, especially if you do so on two wheels. I can testify to that having come agonisingly close to shuffling off this mortal coil that way myself.

It really is time to pick up a copy of The Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy and take heed of the message on the front cover: “Don’t Panic”, because panic is highly infectious and extremely unpleasant. It’s a disease that there’s no reason to succumb to.

(Source: Independent)