Monday, July 30, 2012

Walking with the Primeval: sea turtles in South Florida

Imagine this:



In the far distance of history, in times long before remembrance, a hulking shape emerges from the sea. Under the bright moon, the dark form slowly struggles up the shore. Instinct takes it above the tide line; instinct tells it to dig - creating a cradle of earth to safely hold the children this creature cannot stay to warm and protect. After disguising its nest, the lumbering beast returns to the sea. 




It's an evocative image, isn't it? Imagining it gives a sense of the primal, the ancient, and of the basic instinct of life that lies within us as it does with all living creatures.

The fascinating thing is that you might witness this glimpse of prehistory on any given night from March to September - sea turtle nesting season here on South Florida's beaches. I had the good fortune to experience it last night.

I was on the beach with my friend Staci from S.T.O.P. (Sea Turtle Oversight & Protection), watching nests that are expected to hatch within the next few days. S.T.O.P. volunteers monitor the nests so, in the event the hatchlings become disoriented by the lights from the nearby buildings, we can rescue them and take them to the sea.

Staci was headed down the sand a bit to check a second nest while I was staying with the first, watching for her to signal me to come if the second nest was hatching. I saw her stop to speak with a group of late-night revelers that were walking down the beach (presumably about their bright white flashlights - a no-no during nesting season), and when I looked just ahead of them, I saw a large, dark shape moving on the sand. A sea turtle mama was ready to make her nest.

Eventually, after some of the party-people wandered back the way they came, I went to take a closer look but still kept a respectful distance, so as not to spook her at such a delicate time. Even in the dark of night and from a distance, it's an amazing thing to see. The mother's return to the very beach where she was born, the great dragging effort to leave the sea... witnessing that evokes a feeling that I can't quite name, but it's something basic and earthy and reverent. It's something I hope that everyone can experience, but that won't happen unless we protect the threatened and endangered turtles that nest on our shores.

Juvenile loggerhead at Gumbo Limbo Nature Center

If you live near nesting grounds or plan to visit them, please visit S.T.O.P.'s website to learn about sea turtles, their habitat, and what you can do to help protect them. And if you live in the South Florida area, why not think about volunteering your time to help the next generation of sea turtles make it to the sea? All you need is a bucket, a red-light flashlight, and the willingness to go enjoy the ocean breezes and the crashing of the surf for a few hours!


Thursday, July 5, 2012

Plants, animals, and souls - a Judeo-Christian perspective

I'd lay money on the fact that within a month of adopting an animal-free diet, a new vegan is bound to have somebody who thinks they're clever asking "What about the poor plants you're killing? Why are their lives less important than animals?"

It's always surprising to me that we need to debate whether to value the lives of animals more highly than plants. But I suppose what we're really asking is, what makes a plant different from an animal? Are animals like us? Are they capable of experiencing life, complete with thoughts, feelings, and awareness? Or do they feel no more than a trampled blade of grass?

I think it's pretty evident that they do have a higher capacity for feeling, as the folks from Free From Harm pointed out in a recent Facebook post.

Someone asked us today, "where should we draw the line with what living things we eat? What if we find that plants are intelligent too?" I responded that SENTIENCE is the moral baseline by which we should base our food choices. The easiest way to understand sentience is this: If you step on a blade of grass, you probably won't feel to bad about it, but if you step on a chicken's toe and he squeals, or if you step on your dog's paw and she squeals, then you're going to feel pretty bad about it. Either of these animals might not get too close to you for while until they regain their trust and confidence in you and realize you made a mistake. That reaction is sentience.

So why is this a question? At least part of it can be explained by examining the carnistic culture. Recent studies indicate that the intelligence of animals used for food is down-played, indicating that people do not wish to think of their food as sharing a common capacity for awareness.

But how we value animals versus plants is closely related to another common question that's pertinent to Christians and Jews, one that was indirectly raised in the recent article 14 Stories that Prove Animals Have Souls. Is there a moral difference in status between plants and animals? What does the Bible say about plants, animals, and souls? 

Interestingly, the very first "souls" mentioned in the Bible are animal souls. The Hebrew word for soul, nephesh, first appears at Genesis 1:20 in reference to fish, and again at 1:24 in reference to "beasts of the earth" -- what we would refer to today as land animals.

Genesis 1:20 And God said, Let the waters swarm with swarms of living souls, and let fowl fly above the earth in the expanse of the heavens. (Darby version)
Genesis 1:24 And God said, Let the earth bring forth living souls after their kind, cattle, and creeping thing, and beast of the earth, after their kind. And it was so. (Darby version)

But wait! you may say, my translation says "living creature" or "moving creature that hath life." Some versions do translate it that way, presumably to distinguish animal from man, but note the familiar scripture at Genesis 2:7.

Genesis 2:7 And Jehovah Elohim formed Man, dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and Man became a living soul. (Darby version)
The same word, nephesh, is used in all three of these scriptures. There are no modifiers that would indicate a nuance of meaning. Throughout the Hebrew scriptures, the word routinely refers to both animals and men. 

Notably though, the word is never used to refer to plant life. If the word actually did have a second meaning which indicated a living thing that was not a soul, wouldn't it also apply to plants?
 

So, what exactly is the distinction between plants and these "souls" (nephesh)? The scholarly Bible commentary Barnes' Notes has this to say about the full meaning of the term:
nephesh, "breath, soul, self." This noun is derived from a root signifying to breathe. Its concrete meaning is, therefore, "that which breathes," and consequently has a body, without which there can be no breathing; hence, "a breathing body," and even a body that once had breath... As breath is the accompaniment and sign of life, it comes to denote "life," and hence, a living body, "an animal." And as life properly signifies animal life, and is therefore essentially connected with feeling, appetite, thought, nephesh denotes also these qualities, and what possesses them. It is obvious that it denotes the vital principle not only in man but in the brute. It is therefore a more comprehensive word than our soul, as commonly understood.
(Underlined for emphasis by me.)

In the original Hebrew, the word that is used signifies not only "a living creature," but feeling, appetite, and thought. Essentially, the word signifies sentience. That plants are excluded indicates they are not sentient; that animals are included indicates that they are.

The Holy Scriptures, the authoritative guide for those of the Judeo-Christian faith, applies this meaningful word to both man and beast. If we speak of the human "soul" with its full original meaning -- a living, breathing creation of God capable of a feeling, thought, and desire -- then we must therefore allow that animals have these same capabilities. We are all, as the first man and the first beasts were described in the account of our creation, living souls.

Monday, July 2, 2012

Recipes: Chocolate Cherry Dump Cake

Let me be really clear: this is not health food! Proceed at your own risk.

We were having a potluck at work today and I wanted a dessert I could eat, but it had to be something easy since I was also cooking a main dish. So I decided to try a twist on an old non-vegan recipe, dump cake. It'd been a long time since I'd made it and I also wanted to use different flavors, so I wasn't sure how it would come out. Well, pretty darn good!


Chocolate Cherry Dump Cake

Ingredients: 

3 cans cherry pie filling
1 Devil's Food cake mix
1/2 cup vegan butter

Note: check the ingredients on your cake mix carefully. I found a vegan one at Aldi.


Instructions: 

Preheat oven to 350 F. Pour the cans of cherry pie filling into a 9x13 cake pan and spread evenly. (No need to grease the pan.) Sprinkle the cake mix evenly over the cherries, breaking up any large lumps. Cut (or spoon, if using a tub) bits of butter and spread around the surface of the cake mix. Bake 40 minutes, or until cherries bubble around the edges and the cake is reasonably firm. Cool and serve.

Notes on butter: You can use more than 1/2 cup vegan butter, if you prefer a moister cake topping. With a half cup, it has a consistency like a shortbread cookie. Also, if you'd ever previously made this with conventional butter, you may be used to cutting the butter in fairly thick pats. But vegan butter has a lower melting point, so it's better to cut thinner pieces, and more of them.

Tuesday, June 26, 2012

Go, Dad, Go! - A Timeline of Dad's Cure from Diabetes

I am super proud of my father, who joined me on this vegan journey a few months ago and yesterday accomplished a major health goal. Here's what happened:

March 14 - Dad and I attended a screening of Forks Over Knives. Impressed by the scientific health information, Dad gets off the fence and decides to give this crazy vegan thing a try.

March 24 - Dad's first visit to Whole Foods, finding ingredients for a recipe from the Happy Herbivore cookbooks.

March 26 - I get a call at work for assistance in locating the tahini in my kitchen. Dad's first experiment with making hummus, or as I like to call it, vegan manna. Welcome to the club, Dad!

March 27 - The doctor delivers the bad news: Dad's recent bloodwork shows he's progressed from pre-diabetes into full-blown Type 2 diabetes. 

March 28 - I order Dad a copy of Dr. Neal Barnard's Program for Reversing Diabetes: The Scientifically Proven System for Reversing Diabetes without Drugs. Dad reads it the minute it arrives, as well as visiting a doctor-recommended dietitian.

April 2 - I hack Dad's Facebook account and force him to "Like" This Dish is Veg and the 21 Day Vegan Kickstart. Positive reinforcement!

April 7 - Dad's first journey into the wild world of quinoa. He's tried all the colors!

April 16 - Dad buys swim trunksjoins a gym, and starts water walking several days a week.

May 27 - Dad talks me into attempting to feed Mom my vegan lasagna. After he allays her fears of it possibly containing tofu, she kinda likes it. I credit Dad for moxie.

June 22 - Mom, who seemed dubious at first but has been supportive nonetheless, buys Dad an industrial size package of veggie burgers at BJ's. There is no surer sign that she approves of his new healthier lifestyle.

June 23 - Dad accompanies me on my typical Saturday circuit of farmer's market, Whole Foods, & Publix. Afterwards, he still finds the energy to go to the gym! (Later, find tired Dad eating peas for dinner. Introduce him to the glorious world of quick-cooking grains with some tomato lentil couscous.)

June 25 - Dad gets his test results from the doctor -- he is no longer diabetic!

CONGRATULATIONS, DADDY! I'M SO PROUD OF YOU!

Dear readers, as to what's next for my dad, he'll shortly be launching a new blog about public health and food safety issues related to bacteria, and hopes to start a nonprofit organization to fight for better answers to this issue. Stay tuned for news about that!





Monday, June 4, 2012

Not dingoes, just birds: a tale of defending babies

Last week while I was out photographing the hatchlings, something happened that made me very sad. But in telling the story to my husband, I learned to look at it differently. I wanted to share that story with you, dear reader.

I was sitting on the boardwalk with my camera poised to snap a baby blackbird when its mother came back to the nest to feed it.



All through the mudflats behind the nest, black-necked stilts and gallinules were watching over their chicks as they wandered about, testing their little legs, pecking at bugs.

Mama stilt and her chicks
Mama gallinule and her ugly little babies

Suddenly, there was a ruckus. All the mamas were screeching - gallinule and stilt. I figured that a gallinule had wandered too close to a stilt's nest, because even though they are nesting in the same area, they battle each other back if they get too close. But when I looked up, it turned out that wasn't it at all.

This part isn't pictured because it all happened too fast, and I was just stunned. An egret was on the flats, stalking for prey. The egret zipped into a gallinule's nest and grabbed a tiny newborn in its beak, then took off in flight. The gallinules tried to pursue it, but they aren't swift birds. There was no hope they would catch the egret.

The stilts, even though they are constantly fighting over territory with the gallinules, took off in defense of the baby gallinule. Three of them left their own chicks behind to give chase. They dive-bombed the egret, trying to get it to drop the baby.

Soon they were out of sight, and I can only assume they failed to stop the egret. I was so shaken, so upset at the savagery of nature as I left the park. But later, as I relayed the story to my husband, I realized how amazing it was to see the maternal instinct cross those territorial barriers. How marvelous it was to watch those stilts - tiny, adorable birds, easily only a quarter of the egret's size - turn into bold fighters in defense of another species' chick.

Almost all animals have that in common - we love our children. Many will recognize and protect children of other species as well. In the end, all of this serves to make me glad that I am no longer an 'egret'  eating other species children, but a 'stilt' working to protect them!

Tuesday, May 29, 2012

Five Vegan Alternatives I Love


While faux-meats and processed vegan foods should have a very limited place in a healthy vegan diet, every once in awhile, we all get nostalgic for the tastes we grew up with. Consumed in moderation, a veggie burger or vegan ‘ice cream’ can satisfy those cravings and help you maintain your vegan lifestyle.

Here are some vegan alternatives to the classic junk food that I loved growing up; maybe they’ll tickle your tastebuds too.

1. Silk Dark Chocolate Almond Milk - I’ve tried several versions of non-dairy chocolate milk, and Silk’s dark chocolate almond milk is the hands down winner for rich chocolatey taste and creamy texture. And at 100 calories and 5 grams of fat less than a serving of chocolate milk made from whole dairy milk, you can feel pretty good about indulging.

2. Primal Strips Vegan Seitan Jerky - When I first heard of the existence of vegan jerky in an online camping community, I was dubious. How closely could it really capture the taste and texture of meat jerky? Really closely, as it turns out! Plus it’s fairly healthy and, of course, cholesterol-free. Now, I’m totally addicted to the teriyaki flavor, and my omnivore husband swears the lime mesquite flavor is the best jerky he’s ever tasted.

3. Earth Balance Mindful Mayo with Olive Oil - The first time I tried Mindful Mayo, I emailed the company to thank them for giving me back the gift of the classic Southern staple - the tomato sandwich. I’ve tried the other brands of vegan mayo, and to me, none really capture the taste and texture like Mindful Mayo. Challenge your omnivore friends to see if they can tell the difference!

4. Koyo Lemongrass & Ginger Ramen - Half the calories of conventional ramen, made with organic ingredients, lower in sodium, and vegan too? I was sold before I even tasted it! Thankfully, it’s truly tasty too!

5. Amy’s Organic Brown Rice, Black-Eyed Peas, and Veggie Bowl - One of my earliest food memories is unwrapping the aluminum foil from my Swanson TV dinner while watching television with my older sister. Frozen food has always been comfort food for me. But for someone who is not only vegan but soy-sensitive, good frozen food options are hard to come by. This Amy’s Organic bowl is hearty, delicious, and definitely comfort food. When I make it for lunch at work, people always stop by to find out what smells so wonderful!

Monday, May 28, 2012

Lasagna with Almond Ricotta


Let this be your proof that going vegan does not mean giving up the flavors you love! This hearty, rustic lasagna was a hit with omnivores and vegans alike. The recipe is a breeze. And best of all, it's considerably healthier than conventional lasagna.

To make a delicious vegan lasagna, you simply need to put the almonds for the 'ricotta' in a covered dish of water the night before to soak. Follow the recipe below to make the ricotta, then layer in a 9x13 baking dish in this order: sauce, noodles, ricotta, vegetables. End with a layer of noodles covered in sauce. Cover and bake at 375 for 40 minutes.

This particular version was made with a hearty homemade organic tomato and basil marinara (courtesy of my talented husband), but you can use any sauce you prefer. For the vegetables, I used broccoli and portabella mushrooms. I steam the broccoli lightly ahead of time and dice into fine florets, and slice the mushrooms thin.

The ricotta is so delicious on its own that my son and I snacked on a bit of it with crackers while I was cooking. Be careful to leave enough for your layers!

Easy Almond Ricotta

3 cups slivered almonds
¼ cup lemon juice
3 tbs olive oil
4 cloves fresh garlic
2 tsp salt
3 tsp dried basil
½ tsp black pepper
About 1 cup water - added in portions as needed.

Soak almonds overnight. Drain and rinse with cold water. Add all ingredients to food processor and blend until smooth, using more or less water for desired consistency. Store in refrigerator until ready to serve/use.

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

Music Review: at the edge of the unknown, by Minna Bromberg

I never would've imagined myself reviewing an album in this blog, but then I popped the CD in. Here's the thing: the I Am Veggie-Mightee blog comes from a place of love, faith, and generosity of spirit - and so does this music. It's a collection I can imagine many people I know to have visited this blog enjoying, so I'm making an exception to the general rule.

The album at the edge of the unknown is the newest release from alt-folk artist Minna Bromberg. I've always thought Minna sounded a good deal like Joan Baez, with a style a bit more like Joni Mitchell. But here, in her first album since her ordination as a rabbi, Minna's style seems to become more fully her own.

Layered with the modern folk vibe are elements of world music - particularly on the track Dig Deeper - and of faith. I hear tell that the album is actually listed under "Christian and Gospel" on iTunes. Funny, on the one hand, but also not entirely inappropriate. While it's Judaism that informs Minna's songs, what comes through is faith and spirituality, not religion. As a Christian, I find the music expresses shared sentiments. And my favorite track, I Lift up this Waiting, has some commonality with old spirituals, or at least new takes on them like Allison Krauss's version of Down to the River to Pray.

While the whole album seems very personal, very real, a few songs venture into memoir territory. This is generally not my favorite type of song and I don't really love it on These Are the Words, but there's a Cat Stevens-type feel about Gone Tarshisha that makes it infectious.

Tracks like Land of Love and Will One Ocean Be Enough bring the emotion, the full heart, that threads through this album to the surface. But the biggest take-away, the memory you're left with when you're done listening to the album, is Minna's clear, true voice. Perhaps the best example is Turning Song - a lovely guitar piece with an uncomplicated, understandable lyric - where her voice simply shines.

If you're a fan of folk, you're probably familiar with the very particular progression you tend to see in artists in the genre: they tend to begin borne of passion, and eventually arrive at a point of peace. This is Minna's arrival; this is folk come to fruition.

You can sample the tracks and buy the album at cdbaby.

Full disclosure: Minna Bromberg is my second cousin. While I don't think we've actually seen each other since Minna's bat mitzvah (and we're both now closer to forty than thirty), I do love her as family. But my admiration for her as a person and a musician is based in her character and talent, and thus I feel I'm able to be objective. If you doubt me, preview the tracks!

Sunday, May 13, 2012

Bad Reporting: Mother Jones thinks we should eat meat

Oh, how it pains me to be calling out Mother Jones - the last bastion of the free press - for bad reporting. Alas, it's true. While the article was published nearly two years ago, it was linked in their Facebook feed today and deserves to have the glaring fault in the article pointed out.

In the article Steak or Veggie Burger: Which is Greener, Kiera Butler describes her decision to give up life-long vegetarianism in favor of meat. Her reasoning is that... well, honestly I can't make sense of her reasoning. She compares grass-fed beef to faux meats in terms of environmental impact, concluding:
So plant protein is usually the greener choice, as long as it's not overprocessed.

 And yet she decides to eat meat. I guess the basic reason is the premise she begins with:
But a girl can only eat so much roasted kale before she starts craving protein: tofu, veggie burgers, and the (okay, creepy) occasional piece of fakin' bacon.
And therein lies the flaw in Butler's self-justification. (And I don't mean her failure to recognize that roasted kale contains protein.) While she makes a convincing argument that processed faux meats are nearly as bad for the environment as real meat, she implies these are the only two options.

Want a veggie burger? Make one at home from whole foods. Want the protein from soy with less impact than tofu? Eat edamame. To imply that processed foods are the only option that vegetarians have when they want something protein-packed or "meaty" is just a sign of utter laziness. They're called "convenience foods" for a reason.

And honestly, who are the vegetarians or vegans that are eating faux meats at the same rate that carnists are eating real meat? Most carnists I know have meat at least twice a day. If Butler was eating faux meats twice a day, I'm completely certain she was in the vast minority.

This was shockingly shoddy reporting from Mother Jones, usually such a trusted source.

Monday, May 7, 2012

TDIV Q&A: Am I any less vegan if I sneak a piece of cheese?


Q. Am I any less vegan if I slip a piece of Swiss cheese into my diet?

A. Here’s a puzzler for you: If a person is 15/16ths Native American, but had one great-great-grandparent who was European, do they have the right to call themselves Native American? What if the numbers were reversed? If a person is 1/16th Native American, do they have the right to the name?

The answer to the question is that it depends on the purpose for which they are identifying themselves that way. If they are attempting to register as Native American for scholarships or other financial benefits, a person must generally be at least 3/4 Native American to qualify. However, if they are simply trying to describe the culture they identify with, the label they use is a personal decision.

Labeling is a complex issue, but it’s generally accepted in Western society that people have the right to self-identify. For example, while modern convention tells us that African-American is the correct term to identify an American person of color who is of African descent, if a person preferred to refer to themselves as “black,” would we correct them? Of course not. Whether a person is “African-American” or “black”, “learning-impaired” or “dyslexic”, “Mrs.” or “Ms.” after marriage, “disabled” or “differently-abled” or even “crippled” is their choice. In our culture, we allow people to select the label that’s comfortable for them when the purpose is self-identification.

Interestingly, however, this attitude hasn’t carried over to the vegan community. It seems many people want to tell you whether you’re vegan enough. Two notable cases involve authors of vegan cookbooks, Alicia Silverstone and Lindsay S. Nixon, and both had different outcomes.

Silverstone - actress, author, and vegan activist - admitted to US Magazine that she occasionally cheats on her vegan diet with a piece of cheese at a party. The vegan blogosphere exploded with criticism, anger, and even sadness. Many declared that a person who occasionally eats cheese was simply not vegan, and that the actress should refer to herself as a “strict vegetarian” instead. Silverstone went about her business, continued to promote veganism, and eventually vegan bloggers went back to referring to her as “vegan.”

Lindsay Nixon, the author of several vegan cookbooks and the popular blog Happy Herbivore, faced an even more extreme example. After being called out, not for “cheating” but for failing to question the source of the sugar in cotton candy she ate at a baseball game, Nixon gave up the term vegan altogether, preferring to be referred to as “an herbivore.”  [See correction at the end of this article.]

Why are we as vegans so protective of the term? Why are we policing its use so carefully? Because it’s human nature to be protective of something you care about that is frequently maligned and misunderstood.

Let’s be plain: veganism is not a diet. It’s not a fad, a trend, a religion, a cult, or even a lifestyle. Veganism is an ideology. It’s an shared belief system with defined tenets and principles. The basic tenets (or beliefs) of veganism are:

1. Animals are sentient and can experience pain.
2. As sentient beings, animals deserve our care and compassion.
3. We must seek to avoid animal exploitation or suffering in all its forms.

Whatever other reasons a vegan has for not eating animal products - be they health, environment, religious, or based on anti-speciest ideals - are secondary to these essential beliefs. A person may choose a plant-based diet for other reasons without having moral or ethical objection to eating animal products; that person is a strict vegetarian, not a vegan.

It’s for this reason that “cheating” throws so many vegans into a tizzy. If even those people calling themselves vegan don’t understand the difference between a vegan and a strict vegetarian, how can we expect anyone else to get the distinction?

However, the simple fact that veganism is a belief system is the reason why we can’t decide whether someone is vegan by their actions alone. Who among us hasn’t, at one time or another, taken an action that is not in line with some belief we hold? Maybe we believe lying is wrong, but find ourselves saying, “Gee, Mom, dinner was great!” in appreciation for Mom’s first attempt at a vegan meal. Maybe we find ourselves saying, “No, Officer, I didn’t see the speed limit sign,” as we rush home to get some antacids after Mom’s “great” dinner.

If veganism is a belief system, then what is required to be called a vegan is simply to believe. Technically, you could eat cheese every day and still be vegan. (A very bad vegan, but a vegan all the same.) It is for no one but you to decide what it is you really believe.

However, if you were a vegan who found yourself eating cheese every day - or more realistically, every once in awhile - there would come a time when you would have to question what beliefs you really hold. Do you really believe that we must avoid animal exploitation in all its forms if your conscience allows you to consume the products of that exploitation with any regularity? Or is it that, deep down, you feel it’s okay if it’s not an everyday thing? If that’s the case, then stop and think about whether it’s fair to call yourself a vegan, or whether you’re contributing to the misconceptions about veganism that so many vegans are fighting against.

Even some people who hold to the vegan ideology and practice those beliefs to the letter choose not to label themselves as vegan. For a number of reasons, they may prefer to be called vegetarian, strict vegetarian, an herbivore, a plant-based eater, a raw foodist, and so on and so on.

Self-labeling is a highly personal issue. How you identify is up to you. But consider how the choice you make affects the efforts of others to erase misconceptions and share their vegan beliefs. It’s your choice, but please make it responsibly.

Correction: While Nixon did receive criticism for not sourcing the sugar, that was one of several incidents leading up to her decision, which culminated with criticism for her stance on the controversial issue of honey.