Archive for September, 2009

« Older Entries

DNA Testing and Unresolved Questions in Tommy Arthur’s Case

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

By Special to The Birmingham News
September 27, 2009, 5:33AM

Once again, Tommy Arthur is about to receive an execution date. And once again, state Attorney General Troy King is standing in the way of DNA testing that could prove Arthur’s guilt or innocence.

It is a familiar — and troubling — series of events. Four times, Arthur has been scheduled to die, only to have a court step in and stop his execution. The state then spends weeks or months fighting efforts for DNA testing, and courts eventually set another execution date.

This time, the state attorney general wants everyone to believe that DNA testing has been conducted and that it somehow confirms Arthur’s guilt. That’s not true.

What is true is that not a single piece of physical evidence ties Arthur to the 1982 murder of Troy Wicker. The evidence against him boils down to the testimony of Wicker’s wife, who was sentenced to life in prison for killing her husband — but pointed the finger at Arthur in exchange for a reduced sentence.

It’s true that some DNA testing was finally conducted this summer. But the test results neither implicate nor exonerate Arthur. Testing on Judy Wicker’s clothing revealed only her husband’s semen; the hair was not tested. On one other piece of evidence, a wig apparently worn by whoever killed Troy Wicker, DNA testing could not yield a profile.

Ordinarily, when initial testing does not yield a profile, scientists conduct other, more sophisticated types of DNA testing. We have done this time and again at the Innocence Project, and the more sophisticated testing often yields a profile that can confirm guilt or prove innocence. In Arthur’s case, the state is blocking any further DNA testing.

Unfortunately, a rape kit from the case was destroyed years ago — a fact the state only revealed a few months ago. It is gone and cannot be subjected to DNA testing. This underscores the need to conduct all possible testing on the remaining evidence.

The state and courts have agreed that DNA testing could shed light on the case, but then stopped well short of conducting the very testing that could actually yield a profile.

To be sure, Arthur’s case is a complicated one. In July, a prison inmate came forward and claimed he killed Troy Wicker. Against the state’s objections, a court ordered DNA testing to show whether the inmate’s story was true. Arthur’s attorneys pursued the DNA testing, unsure whether the inmate’s story was true — but certain that full DNA testing has the potential to shed light on the case.

The attorney general wants everyone to think Arthur’s requests for DNA testing are a new, last-minute effort to avoid execution. In fact, Arthur has been asking for DNA testing since 2002.

DNA testing could show whether Judy Wicker’s initial story (that a man broke into the Wicker home, raped her and killed her husband) was true; it is entirely possible that she was telling the truth at first but lied after she was convicted. Testing could also show that someone else, hired by Judy Wicker or not, committed the crime. Full DNA testing could yield a profile that can be compared to evidence from other, similar crimes and apprehend a serial rapist or murderer.

It is also, of course, possible that full DNA testing could implicate Arthur. If that happened, serious questions about this case would be resolved, and the public would not be left wondering how a man can be executed without a trace of physical evidence connecting him to the crime.

Until then, there is every reason to wonder — to wonder whether Arthur is guilty, and why the state is so determined to block full DNA testing that could resolve this once and for all.

Jason Kreag is a staff attorney at the Innocence Project, which is affiliated with the Cardozo School of Law. For more information, go to www.innocenceproject.org

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

Perry replaces head of commission probing arson case

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

By ALLAN TURNER Copyright 2009 Houston Chronicle
Sept. 30, 2009, 2:06PM

In a surprise move, Gov. Rick Perry today appointed two new members to a state commission investigating case of a Corsicana man who some believe was wrongly executed for murdering his children — forcing the cancellation of a meeting on the case scheduled for Friday.

Named to head the Texas Forensic Science Commission was John Bradley, district attorney in Williamson County. Bradley cancelled Friday’s meeting at which the panel was to accept fire expert Craig Beyler’s analysis of arson investigators’ work in the deadly December 1991 house fire.

Three children perished in the blaze. Their father, Cameron Todd Willingham, was convicted of capital murder and executed.

Bradley, who has been his county’s chief prosecutor since December 2001, said he called off Friday’s meeting because he didn’t have adequate time to study the arson case.

Beyler’s report was extremely critical of the investigations by Corsicana and state arson investigators, concluding they based their arson ruling on outdated and sloppy procedures.

Beyler’s was the third review to fault the arson investigators.

Outgoing commission chairman, Sam Bassett, an Austin defense lawyer, expressed “disappointment” at Perry’s timing in the naming of new commissioners, but noted, “I understand that I serve at the pleasure of Gov. Perry.”

Also replaced were commission members Alan Levy, head of the Tarrant County District Attorney’s criminal division, and Aliece Watts, quality director at Euless-based Integrated Forensic Laboratories.

Perry named Norma Farley, chief forensic pathologist for Cameron and Hidalgo counties to the panel, and will name a third member in the near future.

A spokeswoman for the commission, which is headquartered at Sam Houston State University in Huntsville, said the outgoing members’ two-year terms technically expired on Sept. 1.

Spokesmen for Perry’s office did not offer immediate comments on the timing of the appointments.

Levy, who, like Bassett, had served four years on the panel, called Perry’s timing on the appointments “unfortunate.”

“It will raise suspicions whether they are justified or not,” he said. “This is a very important case. What this is going to do is raise the temperature, and that will not be a good thing.”

allan.turner@chron.com

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

Nestlé family Twitters

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

Suddenly we are receiving lots of traffic from Twitter that brought my attention to an event Nestlé has organised in California for bloggers. Apparently 20 influential bloggers have been invited to a jolly in the sun to learn more about Nestlé.

Being bloggers, they are tweeting their experiences. Unsurprisingly, there is a lot of activity on Twitter as others raise concerns about various aspects of Nestlé malpractice, some of it linking to our sites which alerted me. You can follow the conversation at:
There’s a description of the event on this site from a blogger who is definitely not a follower of the Nestlé boycott:
Someone at the event tweeted that Nestlé USA CEO said they do not have many complaints. Strange then that Nestlé is one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet because it breaks international marketing standards for baby foods, undermining breastfeeding and endangering babies fed on formula.
Strange too that Nestlé has an anti-boycott team and invest heavily in trying to divert criticism, as well as other tactics, such as infiltrating campaign groups. Nestlé employs a former MI6 Officer (where the fictional James Bond worked) to run Nestlé’s spy operation.
Nestlé does have a history of these all-expenses-paid events as part of its attempts to divert criticism. It has attempted to entice journalists to Switzerland, using invitations sent round by a Midwife who has written a factually incorrect article encouraging midwives to accept Nestlé sponsorship. The article defends Nestlé’s record with regard marketing of baby foods and purports to be a research-based study, but misquotes the primary reference so badly it raises questions over whether it was peer reviewed – questions which have not been answered. Baby Milk Action was given a substantial right to reply published in a subsequent issue of the journal, but Nestlé distributes the article without this. This is one of the issues addressed in my recent analysis of Nestlé’s claims about its activities. See:
There is something curious that sometimes happens when people accept Nestlé hospitality: having eaten Nestlé’s food, people are understandably unwilling to speak – or think – ill of their host. Accepting the company’s largesse may cloud the critical faculties. It will be interesting to see how much Nestlé’s claims will be investigated before being relayed by the bloggers attending this event. Nestlé is a master of two-step communication, having its message relayed by third parties, giving the impression of impartiality, and that is surely part of its goal with this event.
Even if these bloggers were unaware of Nestlé malpractice in the past, how they will respond now they are aware of it from the tweets people have been posting. Will they take an objective look at the evidence – such as the labels which claims formula ‘protects’ babies when in reality they are more likely to become sick than breastfed babies?
Or will they rationalise defending their hosts so as not to feel a little bit nauseous at all the Nestlé products they’ve chowed down? I don’t wish to suggest that chocolate is enough to sway people of integrity, but in the past I’ve seen the critical blindness that can result when people try to defend accepting Nestlé sponsorship. See:
My hope is the bloggers will investigate and report both the evidence and how Nestlé tried to mislead them.
For example, this tin was found last month in Malawi, one of the world’s poorest countries, where under-5 mortality is 140 per 1,000 live births. It is certainly not a place to be telling parents that formula ‘protects’.
We are running a campaign calling on Nestlé to remove these ‘protect’ logos, which are appearing around the world, including at Nestlé’s shareholder meeting this year showing the policy comes right from the top of the company. In a similar campaign in the past we persuaded Nestlé to include warnings and instructions in Chichewa, the national language, on the labels in Malawi – prior to that it had argued the market was so small ‘cost restraints’ prevented it from translating the labels. So campaigning does work. See:
There have been some comments on Twitter from some bloggers about Nestlé USA executives and how open they say they are to discussing the issues around formula marketing. “It’s been worth us coming”, someone tweeted. Please wake up and smell the Nescafé they are plying you with. Not so long ago those nice people at Nestlé USA were attacking the heads of WHO and UNICEF Philippines for defending breastfeeding and supporting better regulation of formula. See the report in the Asia Times:
Nestlé now refuses to speak on its baby milk marketing if Baby Milk Action is in the room, having lost a series of debates between 2001 and 2004. In 2000 it refused to attend a public hearing called by the European Parliament. It is currently refusing to accept our invitation to set out its terms and conditions for taking part in an independent expert tribunal investigating claim and counter claim in depth. But it will spend time pitching its claims to the bloggers.
For the time being I prefer to think that the 20 bloggers were unaware of Nestlé’s practices and to hope they will investigate further. If they support this campaign they could help to save lives around the world and their trip to California can have a happy ending.
I have to much to do supporting our partners around the world to keep tracking this, so if you spot any blogs arising from this event, please do post links below.

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

Nestlé family Twitters

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

Suddenly we are receiving lots of traffic from Twitter that brought my attention to an event Nestlé has organised in California for bloggers. Apparently 20 influential bloggers have been invited to a jolly in the sun to learn more about Nestlé.

Being bloggers, they are tweeting their experiences. Unsurprisingly, there is a lot of activity on Twitter as others raise concerns about various aspects of Nestlé malpractice, some of it linking to our sites which alerted me. You can follow the conversation at:
There’s a description of the event on this site from a blogger who is definitely not a follower of the Nestlé boycott:
Someone at the event tweeted that Nestlé USA CEO said they do not have many complaints. Strange then that Nestlé is one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet because it breaks international marketing standards for baby foods, undermining breastfeeding and endangering babies fed on formula.
Strange too that Nestlé has an anti-boycott team and invest heavily in trying to divert criticism, as well as other tactics, such as infiltrating campaign groups. Nestlé employs a former MI6 Officer (where the fictional James Bond worked) to run Nestlé’s spy operation.
Nestlé does have a history of these all-expenses-paid events as part of its attempts to divert criticism. It has attempted to entice journalists to Switzerland, using invitations sent round by a Midwife who has written a factually incorrect article encouraging midwives to accept Nestlé sponsorship. The article defends Nestlé’s record with regard marketing of baby foods and purports to be a research-based study, but misquotes the primary reference so badly it raises questions over whether it was peer reviewed – questions which have not been answered. Baby Milk Action was given a substantial right to reply published in a subsequent issue of the journal, but Nestlé distributes the article without this. This is one of the issues addressed in my recent analysis of Nestlé’s claims about its activities. See:
There is something curious that sometimes happens when people accept Nestlé hospitality: having eaten Nestlé’s food, people are understandably unwilling to speak – or think – ill of their host. Accepting the company’s largesse may cloud the critical faculties. It will be interesting to see how much Nestlé’s claims will be investigated before being relayed by the bloggers attending this event. Nestlé is a master of two-step communication, having its message relayed by third parties, giving the impression of impartiality, and that is surely part of its goal with this event.
Even if these bloggers were unaware of Nestlé malpractice in the past, how they will respond now they are aware of it from the tweets people have been posting. Will they take an objective look at the evidence – such as the labels which claims formula ‘protects’ babies when in reality they are more likely to become sick than breastfed babies?
Or will they rationalise defending their hosts so as not to feel a little bit nauseous at all the Nestlé products they’ve chowed down? I don’t wish to suggest that chocolate is enough to sway people of integrity, but in the past I’ve seen the critical blindness that can result when people try to defend accepting Nestlé sponsorship. See:
My hope is the bloggers will investigate and report both the evidence and how Nestlé tried to mislead them.
For example, this tin was found last month in Malawi, one of the world’s poorest countries, where under-5 mortality is 140 per 1,000 live births. It is certainly not a place to be telling parents that formula ‘protects’.
We are running a campaign calling on Nestlé to remove these ‘protect’ logos, which are appearing around the world, including at Nestlé’s shareholder meeting this year showing the policy comes right from the top of the company. In a similar campaign in the past we persuaded Nestlé to include warnings and instructions in Chichewa, the national language, on the labels in Malawi – prior to that it had argued the market was so small ‘cost restraints’ prevented it from translating the labels. So campaigning does work. See:
There have been some comments on Twitter from some bloggers about Nestlé USA executives and how open they say they are to discussing the issues around formula marketing. “It’s been worth us coming”, someone tweeted. Please wake up and smell the Nescafé they are plying you with. Not so long ago those nice people at Nestlé USA were attacking the heads of WHO and UNICEF Philippines for defending breastfeeding and supporting better regulation of formula. See the report in the Asia Times:
Nestlé now refuses to speak on its baby milk marketing if Baby Milk Action is in the room, having lost a series of debates between 2001 and 2004. In 2000 it refused to attend a public hearing called by the European Parliament. It is currently refusing to accept our invitation to set out its terms and conditions for taking part in an independent expert tribunal investigating claim and counter claim in depth. But it will spend time pitching its claims to the bloggers.
For the time being I prefer to think that the 20 bloggers were unaware of Nestlé’s practices and to hope they will investigate further. If they support this campaign they could help to save lives around the world and their trip to California can have a happy ending.
I have to much to do supporting our partners around the world to keep tracking this, so if you spot any blogs arising from this event, please do post links below.

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

Nestlé family Twitters

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

Suddenly we are receiving lots of traffic from Twitter that brought my attention to an event Nestlé has organised in California for bloggers. Apparently 20 influential bloggers have been invited to a jolly in the sun to learn more about Nestlé.

Being bloggers, they are tweeting their experiences. Unsurprisingly, there is a lot of activity on Twitter as others raise concerns about various aspects of Nestlé malpractice, some of it linking to our sites which alerted me. You can follow the conversation at:
There’s a description of the event on this site from a blogger who is definitely not a follower of the Nestlé boycott:
Someone at the event tweeted that Nestlé USA CEO said they do not have many complaints. Strange then that Nestlé is one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet because it breaks international marketing standards for baby foods, undermining breastfeeding and endangering babies fed on formula.
Strange too that Nestlé has an anti-boycott team and invest heavily in trying to divert criticism, as well as other tactics, such as infiltrating campaign groups. Nestlé employs a former MI6 Officer (where the fictional James Bond worked) to run Nestlé’s spy operation.
Nestlé does have a history of these all-expenses-paid events as part of its attempts to divert criticism. It has attempted to entice journalists to Switzerland, using invitations sent round by a Midwife who has written a factually incorrect article encouraging midwives to accept Nestlé sponsorship. The article defends Nestlé’s record with regard marketing of baby foods and purports to be a research-based study, but misquotes the primary reference so badly it raises questions over whether it was peer reviewed – questions which have not been answered. Baby Milk Action was given a substantial right to reply published in a subsequent issue of the journal, but Nestlé distributes the article without this. This is one of the issues addressed in my recent analysis of Nestlé’s claims about its activities. See:
There is something curious that sometimes happens when people accept Nestlé hospitality: having eaten Nestlé’s food, people are understandably unwilling to speak – or think – ill of their host. Accepting the company’s largesse may cloud the critical faculties. It will be interesting to see how much Nestlé’s claims will be investigated before being relayed by the bloggers attending this event. Nestlé is a master of two-step communication, having its message relayed by third parties, giving the impression of impartiality, and that is surely part of its goal with this event.
Even if these bloggers were unaware of Nestlé malpractice in the past, how they will respond now they are aware of it from the tweets people have been posting. Will they take an objective look at the evidence – such as the labels which claims formula ‘protects’ babies when in reality they are more likely to become sick than breastfed babies?
Or will they rationalise defending their hosts so as not to feel a little bit nauseous at all the Nestlé products they’ve chowed down? I don’t wish to suggest that chocolate is enough to sway people of integrity, but in the past I’ve seen the critical blindness that can result when people try to defend accepting Nestlé sponsorship. See:
My hope is the bloggers will investigate and report both the evidence and how Nestlé tried to mislead them.
For example, this tin was found last month in Malawi, one of the world’s poorest countries, where under-5 mortality is 140 per 1,000 live births. It is certainly not a place to be telling parents that formula ‘protects’.
We are running a campaign calling on Nestlé to remove these ‘protect’ logos, which are appearing around the world, including at Nestlé’s shareholder meeting this year showing the policy comes right from the top of the company. In a similar campaign in the past we persuaded Nestlé to include warnings and instructions in Chichewa, the national language, on the labels in Malawi – prior to that it had argued the market was so small ‘cost restraints’ prevented it from translating the labels. So campaigning does work. See:
There have been some comments on Twitter from some bloggers about Nestlé USA executives and how open they say they are to discussing the issues around formula marketing. “It’s been worth us coming”, someone tweeted. Please wake up and smell the Nescafé they are plying you with. Not so long ago those nice people at Nestlé USA were attacking the heads of WHO and UNICEF Philippines for defending breastfeeding and supporting better regulation of formula. See the report in the Asia Times:
Nestlé now refuses to speak on its baby milk marketing if Baby Milk Action is in the room, having lost a series of debates between 2001 and 2004. In 2000 it refused to attend a public hearing called by the European Parliament. It is currently refusing to accept our invitation to set out its terms and conditions for taking part in an independent expert tribunal investigating claim and counter claim in depth. But it will spend time pitching its claims to the bloggers.
For the time being I prefer to think that the 20 bloggers were unaware of Nestlé’s practices and to hope they will investigate further. If they support this campaign they could help to save lives around the world and their trip to California can have a happy ending.
I have to much to do supporting our partners around the world to keep tracking this, so if you spot any blogs arising from this event, please do post links below.

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

Nestlé family Twitters

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

Suddenly we are receiving lots of traffic from Twitter that brought my attention to an event Nestlé has organised in California for bloggers. Apparently 20 influential bloggers have been invited to a jolly in the sun to learn more about Nestlé.

Being bloggers, they are tweeting their experiences. Unsurprisingly, there is a lot of activity on Twitter as others raise concerns about various aspects of Nestlé malpractice, some of it linking to our sites which alerted me. You can follow the conversation at:
There’s a description of the event on this site from a blogger who is definitely not a follower of the Nestlé boycott:
Someone at the event tweeted that Nestlé USA CEO said they do not have many complaints. Strange then that Nestlé is one of the four most boycotted companies on the planet because it breaks international marketing standards for baby foods, undermining breastfeeding and endangering babies fed on formula.
Strange too that Nestlé has an anti-boycott team and invest heavily in trying to divert criticism, as well as other tactics, such as infiltrating campaign groups. Nestlé employs a former MI6 Officer (where the fictional James Bond worked) to run Nestlé’s spy operation.
Nestlé does have a history of these all-expenses-paid events as part of its attempts to divert criticism. It has attempted to entice journalists to Switzerland, using invitations sent round by a Midwife who has written a factually incorrect article encouraging midwives to accept Nestlé sponsorship. The article defends Nestlé’s record with regard marketing of baby foods and purports to be a research-based study, but misquotes the primary reference so badly it raises questions over whether it was peer reviewed – questions which have not been answered. Baby Milk Action was given a substantial right to reply published in a subsequent issue of the journal, but Nestlé distributes the article without this. This is one of the issues addressed in my recent analysis of Nestlé’s claims about its activities. See:
There is something curious that sometimes happens when people accept Nestlé hospitality: having eaten Nestlé’s food, people are understandably unwilling to speak – or think – ill of their host. Accepting the company’s largesse may cloud the critical faculties. It will be interesting to see how much Nestlé’s claims will be investigated before being relayed by the bloggers attending this event. Nestlé is a master of two-step communication, having its message relayed by third parties, giving the impression of impartiality, and that is surely part of its goal with this event.
Even if these bloggers were unaware of Nestlé malpractice in the past, how they will respond now they are aware of it from the tweets people have been posting. Will they take an objective look at the evidence – such as the labels which claims formula ‘protects’ babies when in reality they are more likely to become sick than breastfed babies?
Or will they rationalise defending their hosts so as not to feel a little bit nauseous at all the Nestlé products they’ve chowed down? I don’t wish to suggest that chocolate is enough to sway people of integrity, but in the past I’ve seen the critical blindness that can result when people try to defend accepting Nestlé sponsorship. See:
My hope is the bloggers will investigate and report both the evidence and how Nestlé tried to mislead them.
For example, this tin was found last month in Malawi, one of the world’s poorest countries, where under-5 mortality is 140 per 1,000 live births. It is certainly not a place to be telling parents that formula ‘protects’.
We are running a campaign calling on Nestlé to remove these ‘protect’ logos, which are appearing around the world, including at Nestlé’s shareholder meeting this year showing the policy comes right from the top of the company. In a similar campaign in the past we persuaded Nestlé to include warnings and instructions in Chichewa, the national language, on the labels in Malawi – prior to that it had argued the market was so small ‘cost restraints’ prevented it from translating the labels. So campaigning does work. See:
There have been some comments on Twitter from some bloggers about Nestlé USA executives and how open they say they are to discussing the issues around formula marketing. “It’s been worth us coming”, someone tweeted. Please wake up and smell the Nescafé they are plying you with. Not so long ago those nice people at Nestlé USA were attacking the heads of WHO and UNICEF Philippines for defending breastfeeding and supporting better regulation of formula. See the report in the Asia Times:
Nestlé now refuses to speak on its baby milk marketing if Baby Milk Action is in the room, having lost a series of debates between 2001 and 2004. In 2000 it refused to attend a public hearing called by the European Parliament. It is currently refusing to accept our invitation to set out its terms and conditions for taking part in an independent expert tribunal investigating claim and counter claim in depth. But it will spend time pitching its claims to the bloggers.
For the time being I prefer to think that the 20 bloggers were unaware of Nestlé’s practices and to hope they will investigate further. If they support this campaign they could help to save lives around the world and their trip to California can have a happy ending.
I have to much to do supporting our partners around the world to keep tracking this, so if you spot any blogs arising from this event, please do post links below.

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

GI News—October 2009

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

[COLLAGE]

  • Does organic food have more nutrients?
  • Looking for healthy ways to eat well and lose weight – start a cookbook club
  • High meat diets and diabetes risk
  • Catherine Saxelby on why tomatoes are tops
  • Two new recipes from the GI News kitchen
  • Michael Pollan on why NOT cooking may be bad for our health
  • Check out the new GI Symbol

‘People are always looking for healthy ways to eat and lose weight and a cookbook club is a great way to do both,’ suggests GI News subscriber, Darlene from Arizona. ‘It has been fun for us to come together every week to try new things and it has opened up new ways of combining good foods with recipes that are easy to make and affordable. Here’s how we started our Cookbook Club. I purchased a copy of Glycemic Index Cooking Made Easy a few months ago to lose weight and try new foods – especially vegetables that I am a stranger to. I brought the cookbook to the office and it received so much interest that several of us joined together to take turns preparing a recipe to share. We discuss the recipe and make notes in the cookbook. There are approximately ten of us now and we meet every Wednesday.

At our recent Cookbook Club lunch I tried a dish that contained tuna. I have not had tuna in 30 years and it was very good recipe. Comments from our club regarding the recipes have been – “inexpensive”, “easy”, “great for potluck” and “I would never have thought to mix this or that into a salad but it works very well and I will definitely make it again.” You asked about our favorites so far? All the recipes we have tried so far are favorites! We visit your website and obtain helpful information from your newsletters and share it with the group.’

The GI Cookbook Club

Good eating, good health and good reading.

Editor: Philippa Sandall
Design: Scott Dickinson, PhD
Web management: Alan Barclay, PhD

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

GI News—October 2009

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

[COLLAGE]

  • Does organic food have more nutrients?
  • Looking for healthy ways to eat well and lose weight – start a cookbook club
  • High meat diets and diabetes risk
  • Catherine Saxelby on why tomatoes are tops
  • Two new recipes from the GI News kitchen
  • Michael Pollan on why NOT cooking may be bad for our health
  • Check out the new GI Symbol

‘People are always looking for healthy ways to eat and lose weight and a cookbook club is a great way to do both,’ suggests GI News subscriber, Darlene from Arizona. ‘It has been fun for us to come together every week to try new things and it has opened up new ways of combining good foods with recipes that are easy to make and affordable. Here’s how we started our Cookbook Club. I purchased a copy of Glycemic Index Cooking Made Easy a few months ago to lose weight and try new foods – especially vegetables that I am a stranger to. I brought the cookbook to the office and it received so much interest that several of us joined together to take turns preparing a recipe to share. We discuss the recipe and make notes in the cookbook. There are approximately ten of us now and we meet every Wednesday.

At our recent Cookbook Club lunch I tried a dish that contained tuna. I have not had tuna in 30 years and it was very good recipe. Comments from our club regarding the recipes have been – “inexpensive”, “easy”, “great for potluck” and “I would never have thought to mix this or that into a salad but it works very well and I will definitely make it again.” You asked about our favorites so far? All the recipes we have tried so far are favorites! We visit your website and obtain helpful information from your newsletters and share it with the group.’

The GI Cookbook Club

Good eating, good health and good reading.

Editor: Philippa Sandall
Design: Scott Dickinson, PhD
Web management: Alan Barclay, PhD

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

GI News—October 2009

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

[COLLAGE]

  • Does organic food have more nutrients?
  • Looking for healthy ways to eat well and lose weight – start a cookbook club
  • High meat diets and diabetes risk
  • Catherine Saxelby on why tomatoes are tops
  • Two new recipes from the GI News kitchen
  • Michael Pollan on why NOT cooking may be bad for our health
  • Check out the new GI Symbol

‘People are always looking for healthy ways to eat and lose weight and a cookbook club is a great way to do both,’ suggests GI News subscriber, Darlene from Arizona. ‘It has been fun for us to come together every week to try new things and it has opened up new ways of combining good foods with recipes that are easy to make and affordable. Here’s how we started our Cookbook Club. I purchased a copy of Glycemic Index Cooking Made Easy a few months ago to lose weight and try new foods – especially vegetables that I am a stranger to. I brought the cookbook to the office and it received so much interest that several of us joined together to take turns preparing a recipe to share. We discuss the recipe and make notes in the cookbook. There are approximately ten of us now and we meet every Wednesday.

At our recent Cookbook Club lunch I tried a dish that contained tuna. I have not had tuna in 30 years and it was very good recipe. Comments from our club regarding the recipes have been – “inexpensive”, “easy”, “great for potluck” and “I would never have thought to mix this or that into a salad but it works very well and I will definitely make it again.” You asked about our favorites so far? All the recipes we have tried so far are favorites! We visit your website and obtain helpful information from your newsletters and share it with the group.’

The GI Cookbook Club

Good eating, good health and good reading.

Editor: Philippa Sandall
Design: Scott Dickinson, PhD
Web management: Alan Barclay, PhD

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

GI News—October 2009

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

[COLLAGE]

  • Does organic food have more nutrients?
  • Looking for healthy ways to eat well and lose weight – start a cookbook club
  • High meat diets and diabetes risk
  • Catherine Saxelby on why tomatoes are tops
  • Two new recipes from the GI News kitchen
  • Michael Pollan on why NOT cooking may be bad for our health
  • Check out the new GI Symbol

‘People are always looking for healthy ways to eat and lose weight and a cookbook club is a great way to do both,’ suggests GI News subscriber, Darlene from Arizona. ‘It has been fun for us to come together every week to try new things and it has opened up new ways of combining good foods with recipes that are easy to make and affordable. Here’s how we started our Cookbook Club. I purchased a copy of Glycemic Index Cooking Made Easy a few months ago to lose weight and try new foods – especially vegetables that I am a stranger to. I brought the cookbook to the office and it received so much interest that several of us joined together to take turns preparing a recipe to share. We discuss the recipe and make notes in the cookbook. There are approximately ten of us now and we meet every Wednesday.

At our recent Cookbook Club lunch I tried a dish that contained tuna. I have not had tuna in 30 years and it was very good recipe. Comments from our club regarding the recipes have been – “inexpensive”, “easy”, “great for potluck” and “I would never have thought to mix this or that into a salad but it works very well and I will definitely make it again.” You asked about our favorites so far? All the recipes we have tried so far are favorites! We visit your website and obtain helpful information from your newsletters and share it with the group.’

The GI Cookbook Club

Good eating, good health and good reading.

Editor: Philippa Sandall
Design: Scott Dickinson, PhD
Web management: Alan Barclay, PhD

Posted in Health News | No Comments »

« Older Entries
Categories
Bookmarks
Search
Archive

You are currently browsing the Health News blog archives for September, 2009.

(c) 2008 Health News
All Rights Reserved.

© Copyright 2010 Health News All Rights Reserved
WP Theme Design by iWordpressThemes.com Sponsored by lakefrontcondo.info and USA pharmacy Shop