Lucky The Wonder Dog, river safety officer. When someone goes for a swim, she jumps in the water and swims around them. #fulltangcaninelifestyle
Hikers Explore
Subtitle
Blog
Outdoor Gear and the Environment: What's happening?
|
|
comments (0)
|
Normal 0 false false false EN-GB X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0cm 5.4pt 0cm 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0cm; mso-para-margin-right:0cm; mso-para-margin-bottom:8.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0cm; line-height:107%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;
This piece first appeared in The Great Outdoors magazine last year.
Not many years ago if sustainability meant anything to outdoor companies it was to have some recycled fleece in the range or wool from sheep that had been treated well or other worthy single action unrelated to the whole life-cycle of the products. Today that’s changed, and many companies now look at the environmental effects of gear from the production of raw materials to the end of life of the final product. Trade organisations work with companies too, so these developments are often not in isolation. The European Outdoor Group has a Sustainability Charter that’s been adopted by the Scandinavian Outdoor Group and the Outdoor Industries Association in the USA. This new spirit of collaboration is very positive as it both encourages individual companies to become involved and also means that information and research is shared, making working towards sustainability easier and therefore more likely.
In recent years three issues have dominated the sustainability debate: ethical down, PFC treatments, and microplastic shedding from synthetic materials. Ethical down means down from birds that are certified non-live plucked and non-force fed and otherwise well treated. Patagonia and Mountain Equipment led the industry in working towards this. Down from these, and now many other companies, is traceable back to its origins and this is independently audited.
Taking this one step further recycled down is now available, retrieved from cushions and bedding. Patagonia are again a leader here with a range of 100% recycled 600 fill power down clothing. The European Outdoor Group has published best practise guidelines for recycled down. Re-using down is obviously an excellent idea and hopefully other companies will start using it. Mammut already is, with a hooded down jacket.
Fluorocarbon treatments (PFCs) became a big issue three years ago following a Greenpeace report, Footprints In The Snow, though Nick Brown of Nikwax and Paramo had already been warning about them for many years – neither company has ever used them. PFCs are harmful to human health and persist for a long time in the environment and in food chains. Why then are they used in outdoor clothing? The answer is because they make excellent durable water repellent treatments for synthetic items including waterproofs, windproofs, footwear, sleeping bags, and more. Many companies are now phasing out PFCs, which is good. The problem is finding an effective alternative. Whilst some companies have already dropped PFCs and are using less effective treatments that need renewing more often the biggest name in waterproof clothing, Gore-Tex, hasn’t yet done so but it is working towards achieving 85% PFC free fabrics in 2020 and 100% in 2021-23. One of the first companies to remove almost all PFCs was Fjallraven who say that ‘the compromise is that extra care is required to ensure your Eco-Shell garments retain their waterproofness’ but that ‘this is a price worth paying’. Vaude products are 100% PFC free this year and Jack Wolfskin’s 95%.
One company that hasn’t yet stopped using PFCs is Patagonia, which says it’s first PFC free garments will come out next year. However, the company has been looking into this deeper than most, pointing out that garments with DWRs with shorter lifespans are likely to be replaced more often, an environmental problem in itself (of course renewing the DWR is one answer to this) and that it’s important that replacement DWRs don’t also have adverse environmental effects. To that end Patagonia has invested millions of dollars in Swiss company Beyond Surface Technologies, who are working to develop better alternatives.
The latest problem to emerge is that of microplastic residues known as microfibres that are shed by synthetic clothing while being worn and, especially, when washed. These microfibres are nearly indestructible and they get everywhere – in the air, in water, in food – and are often treated with harmful chemicals and dyes. They can bond to chemical pollutants too. Ironically and sadly research suggests that garments made from recycled synthetics can shed more microfibres than ones made from new materials. Sustainability is complex.
There is as yet no solution to the microfibre problem. It’s not even certain which fabrics shed the most microfibres. Fleece is often given as this but that’s because most research has been done on it. All synthetics can shed microfibres. The worst way fibres are shed is also not known. Washing is certainly a culprit but so is wear and tear. Brushing against rocks or trees, rubbing against rucksack straps.
Research is ongoing into manufacturing processes to see if new methods of yarn and fabric construction can make a difference. An initiative called TextileMIssion was set up last year by a group of concerned bodies including Vaude, Adidas, and Polartec, its aim being to ‘reduce micro-plastic particles release’. As well as production methods the project will look at the possibility of using biodegradable fibres as an environmentally friendly alternative. This sounds a good idea anyway. Vaude is already using biodegradable fibres, including Tencel, a wood-derived cellulose, in some products.
The European Outdoor Group has set up a Microfibre Consortium to better understand microfibre pollution and what can be done about it. The consortium has 28 members, not all of them outdoor brands (ASDA, IKEA, M&S for example). Various projects are under way including one at Leeds University to develop a reproducible test method for measuring microfibre shedding.
Patagonia is also conducting research with two scientific studies. The first at the University of California looked at the extent of microfibres shed from Patagonia products in the wash and compared this with that from lower-quality gear, finding that the latter shed 170% more. The study also found that garments washed in top-load machines shed seven times as many microfibres as those washed in front-loaders. Patagonia’s second study, with North Carolina State University, has the goal of better understanding which characteristics of fibres and fabrics lead to microfibres being shed.
TextileMission is also looking at how to improve wastewater treatment to phase out more microfibres. In the meantime, consumers can do something about this. Not washing garments until absolutely essential is one way. Another is to catch the fibres in the washing machine in a filter bag like the GuppyFriend, available from Patagonia. This recyclable bag has a slick inner and catches most of the microfibres which can then be removed and put in the bin. They don’t disappear of course, but this keeps them out of water sources.
Compared with a few years ago much is being done to make the outdoor industry more sustainable. At the same time more problems are coming to light and difficulties are becoming clearer. PFCs and microfibres are not easy to solve. It’s good though that outdoor companies are working to find solutions and that they are doing this together in many cases. Praise should go to those who’ve led the way, especially Patagonia, Nikwax/Paramo, and Vaude.
Links
Beyond Surface Technologies https://www.beyondst.com/
European Outdoor Group Recycled Down https://europeanoutdoorgroup.com/outreach/csr-sustainability/public-resources/recycled-sourcing-best-practice-guide/
European Outdoor Group Sustainability Charter http://europeanoutdoorgroup.com/files/EOG_Sustainability_Charter.pdf
Fjallraven PFC-Free http://foxtrail.fjallraven.com/2017/03/11/the-on-going-quest-for-100-pfc-free-eco-shell/
Greenpeace Footprints In The Snow https://www.greenpeace.org/international/publication/6943/footprints-in-the-snow/
Gore-Tex Fluorocarbons https://www.gore-tex.co.uk/responsibility/environmental/fluorochemicals
Jack Wolfskin PFC Free https://www.jack-wolfskin.co.uk/pfc/
Microfibre Consortium https://www.microfibreconsortium.com/
Mountain Equipment Down Codex http://www.thedowncodex.co.uk/
Nikwax Fluorocarbons http://www.nikwax.com/en-gb/environment/fluorocarbons.php
Patagonia DWR Problem https://www.patagonia.com/blog/2015/09/our-dwr-problem-updated/
Patagonia Microfibre Pollution https://www.patagonia.com/blog/2017/02/an-update-on-microfiber-pollution/
Paramo PFC Free https://www.paramo-clothing.com/en-gb/ourethics/pfc-free.php
Patagonia Recycled Down https://www.patagonia.com/recycled-down.html
Patagonia Traceable Down http://eu.patagonia.com/gb/en/traceable-down.html
Vaude PFC Free https://www.vaude.com/en-GB/Company/Media/VAUDE-Outdoor-Gear-in-Green-Shape-and-100-PFC-free#
Source: http://www.christownsendoutdoors.com/2019/04/outdoor-gear-and-environment-whats.html
Tom Roche - Tinsmith
|
|
comments (0)
|
Underwater Rainbow: Can the Candy Darter Survive the MVP?
|
|
comments (0)
|
Southern Appalachia is a global hotspot for aquatic species. Half of all freshwater fish species on the continent are found here. One of the most spectacular—and most threatened—is the candy darter.
This small fish is often called an “underwater rainbow” with its vibrant blue-green, red, and orange stripes. Candy darters are incredibly rare and currently are only found in 4 streams in all of Virginia and several in West Virginia. Of the 35 known candy darter populations, only 17 remain.
Deforestation, sedimentation, and increasing water temperatures have already reduced candy darter habitat and populations. Now candy darters are facing additional threats from the construction of the Mountain Valley Pipeline, a 300+ mile long fracked gas pipeline that is intended to run through the region. The Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the pipeline, which was approved by FERC (the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission), claimed that the project would not pose a threat to the species. However, Since beginning construction, the pipeline project has been issued 6 notices of violation for failing to control erosion and sediment and for damaging water quality, something for which the project has been widely criticized from the start.
Adding to a stream’s sediment load has several potential adverse effects on stream ecosystems, says Paul Angermeier, professor of Fish and Wildlife Conservation at Virginia Tech. Many native fish to the region are especially sensitive to sedimentation because they require specific habitat types. The candy darters, for example, require a very specific habitat in fast flowing streams, under rocks and around rubble or other silt-free substrates. An increase of sedimentation in rivers and streams could reduce production of high quality foods, leading to reduced growth, survival, and abundance. It could also clog up the space in-between rocks that candy darters use as habitat and reproduction sites.
Excess sediment is perhaps the most pervasive factor affecting species like the candy darter, says Angermeier. One of the highly likely impacts of the pipeline corridor is episodic runoff of fine sediment into streams after a heavy rain. “Such episodes could be locally catastrophic, causing extensive mortality,” he says. “Although the risk of severe erosion will diminish somewhat after soil stabilization tactics are implemented post-construction, the steep slopes and erodibility of the pipeline corridor, combined with the limited efficacy of available soil-stabilizing tactics, ensure that significant risk of severe erosion will persist for decades post-construction.” Additionally, Dr. Angermeier says that there could be permanent increases in the occurrence of stream drying, which could also result from the reconfiguring of karst via trenching for the pipeline.
A decision will be made in October whether to list the candy darter as a federally threatened species. Katie McBaine, a graduate student in Virginia Tech’s Department of Fish and Wildlife Conservation who is studying the candy darter, believes there should have been more of an effort to monitor the fish populations before and after construction of the pipeline.
“The time to manage or conserve fishes or species is when they are common,” says McBaine. “If we keep having this retroactive mentality on management and conservation, it is going to continue to be a difficult road.”
Source: https://www.blueridgeoutdoors.com/environment/underwater-rainbow-can-the-candy-darter-survive-the-mvp/
Lucky The Wonder Dog, Water Safety Officer
|
|
comments (0)
|
Featured In:
Source: http://blog.jackmtn.com/lucky-the-wonder-dog-water-safety-officer/
John Oliver Does Everest
|
|
comments (0)
|
It’s hard to imagine John Oliver dedicating 20 whole minutes to Mount Everest, but he does it in a rollicking and typically hilarious expose. It’s also quite accurate and all-encomposing, which is a testament to the great journalists who work on this show as writers.
You have to wonder if this marks the beginning of the end of Everest. How many negative stories shitting on the Everest scene need to be done before people start losing their enthusiasm for going to Everest?
He also created thetopofmounteverest.com so that you can get your own Photoshopped face on the summit. Brilliant.
Source: https://eveningsends.com/john-oliver-does-everest/
Poetry: Carries No Weight
|
|
comments (0)
|
Saturday, September 8, 2018
Carries No Weight
Cradled within the
cleavage of a copper
moon ceiling hiding
its color, the hiker
capers through an
unpainted gallery of
birch logs. Over the
crackling of chipmunks
chewing candy apple
brown pine cones.,
the cadence of his
cares carries no weight.
George Cassidy Payne
George Cassidy Payne is an independent writer, domestic violence counselor, and adjunct instructor in the humanities at Finger Lakes Community College. George's blogs, essays, letters, poems, and photographs have been published in a wide variety of national and international outlets such as USA Today, The Atlantic, The Wall Street Journal, National Public Radio, The Buffalo News, Albany Times-Union, Syracuse Post Standard, Rochester Democrat & Chronicle, The Toronto Star, The Minority Reporter, Chronogram Journal, Ovi Magazine, CounterPunch, Moria Poetry Journal, Ampersand Literary Review, Adirondack Daily Enterprise, and more.
View all posts by →
Source: https://www.adirondackalmanack.com/2018/09/poetry-carries-no-weight.html
Yes, Your Physical Fitness Can Reduce Your Cancer Risk
|
|
comments (0)
|
There are, in the usual theoretical framework, three levels of training hell. First you’ve got functional overreaching, in which you temporarily push your body beyond what it can really handle—think of an intense week-long training camp, for example—but you then pull back in time and get a rebound effect that supercharges your fitness. Then there’s non-functional overreaching, in which you don’t pull back in time and end up with dead legs and a serious case of the blahs that takes days or weeks to recover from.
And then, beyond that, there’s the terrible specter of full-blown overtraining. No one really understands exactly why it happens, how to predict it, or what to do about it, other than lie in a dark room for months cursing the fates.
Figuring out how to reap the benefits of functional overreaching without tipping over the edge is one of the great challenges of training. That’s what gives a new study from researchers in Belgium its kick. There’s been a bunch of research and interest in the idea of ketone drinks as an endurance booster (as I described in the magazine last year). Ketones are a form of emergency fuel produced in your body when you’re starving or very low on carbohydrate energy, which have only become available in drink form in the past few years. The new research suggests we might have had it backwards all this time: the real magic isn’t what ketones do for you during exercise; it’s what they do afterwards.
The research comes from a Belgian group at KU Leuven led by Peter Hespel, a sports science researcher who works with (among many other pro-sports groups) the QuickStep pro cycling team and the UPlace-BMC pro triathlon team. He and his colleagues put 18 volunteers through a three-week cycling ordeal that involved 10 or 11 workouts per week, specifically designed to push the subjects into non-functional overreaching by the third week. The goal was to put the volunteers through something comparable to what a Tour de France rider experiences.
Half the riders were given ketone ester drinks from HVMN, which is the drink I wrote about last year (ketone esters are a chemical formulation that, by some accounts at least, are more easily processed by your body than other versions like ketone salts). There’s plenty of debate about different kinds of ketone drinks: salts versus esters, doses, palatability, and so on. On Twitter, Hespel made the point that his results only apply to the specific drink he tested. With that point in mind, it’s worth noting that the study was funded by Research Fund Flanders, the Belgian equivalent of something like the National Institutes of Health; the authors declare no competing interests; and they specifically note that the drinks used in the study were purchased from TdeltaS, the Oxford-based company that helped developed the ketone ester now licensed to HVMN. That’s no small detail, because HVMN sells three 25-gram bottles of its drink for $99—and the subjects were drinking up to three bottles per day: one after each workout and one before bed.
The control group, meanwhile, was drinking a medium-chain triglyceride drink spiked with “bitter sucrose octaacetate” to make it taste like crap, or at least like the famously unappetizing ketone drink. Both drinks were tinted with red colorant, and the study was double-blinded, meaning that neither the subjects nor the scientists supervising the study knew who was getting which drink. At the end of the study, only 5 out of 9 subjects in each group correctly guessed what they’d been drinking—more or less what you’d expect by chance, meaning that the blinding was successful.
I’m emphasizing all these methodological details because I approach any new miracle supplement or biohacking research with a huge load of skepticism. To me, the word biohacking is basically a synonym for the exhaustive pursuit of negligible or non-existent gains backed by shoddy research and often at the expense of far more powerful and obvious hacks like, say, getting a good night’s sleep and a reasonable amount of exercise. These experimental details don’t guarantee that the results are bulletproof, but they’re a good start.
So what happened? In brief: the ketone group was able to sustain a higher level of training in the last week of the study, they had less pronounced physiological signs of overtraining, and they performed better in a time trial. Specifically, even though they were all assigned the same basic training sessions, the ketone riders were able to push harder, accumulating a third-week training load that was 15 percent higher than the control group. Midway through that week, they did a two-hour ride that consisted of 90 minutes at a steady pace followed by a 30-minute all-out time trial. The ketone group’s power output was 15 percent higher in that time trial.
One of the classic signs of overtraining is a reduction in heart rate, reflecting a shift in the balance between your sympathetic and parasympathetic nervous systems. By the third week, both groups did indeed see reductions in their resting heart rate, their submaximal heart rate at a given level of exertion, and their maximal heart rate. But the reduction in the ketone group was significantly less (black circles are ketones, white circles are control):
Perhaps the most telling difference between the two groups was in what they ate. Other than a post-workout protein-carbohydrate recovery drink, the subjects were free to eat whatever they wanted to. Initially, both groups were averaging about 3,500 calories per day. But as the training load ramped up from week to week, the groups diverged. The control group kept eating roughly the same amount, resulting in a daily caloric deficit of about 800 calories by the third week. The ketone group, meanwhile, ramped up its intake, averaging 4,200 calories in the final week and remaining roughly in caloric balance.
The researchers also measured a bunch of different appetite hormones, and one of them—something called growth differentiation factor 15 (GDF15)—looked to be the smoking gun. GDF15 is apparently a relatively recent addition to the list of appetite hormones; the researchers describe it as a “stress-induced hormone that is involved in appetite regulation by decreasing food intake.” As the control group accumulated fatigue, their GDF15 levels climbed, which is perhaps why they failed to eat enough to match their energy burn. The ketone group, meanwhile, had lower levels. Here’s what that looked like:
As an aside, the researchers propose that GDF15 may be a useful biomarker to diagnose overtraining before it gets too serious. That’s an interesting idea, and one that I’m sure they’re pursuing in further studies, because an overtraining predictor would be very useful.
That said, it’s tempting to wonder whether the biggest difference between the two groups was simply that one ate more than the other. The researchers argue against this, pointing out that there were differences in overreaching symptoms (heart rates, stress hormones, GDF15) before significant differences in dietary intake occurred. I can’t really judge that from the data presented, since we only see weekly averages. I’m not ready to rule out the possibility that caloric intake is the biggest factor here, and that ketones somehow encourage people to keep eating in the face of major training stress. Perhaps future research will make that clearer.
There’s more in the study—glycogen levels, nighttime levels of adrenaline, and so on—but I think those are the key points. How practical is it to imagine taking a $33 bottle of ketones after every workout and before every bedtime? For me, not so much. (Have I mentioned recently that you should buy my book?) For pro cyclists, maybe it is. There’s an interesting article (in Dutch) in which Peter Hespel gives some context about the study, with plenty of speculation about the possible use of ketones by QuickStep riders. Other teams obviously know about ketones, but they may not have as much information about its value for recovery rather than direct performance boost. “I can imagine that quite a few athletes are currently using it incorrectly or certainly not in the most optimal way,” Hespel (according to Google Translate) says.
In fact, he goes on to say, taking ketones immediately before a workout or race may actually have a negative effect. There’s been speculation that ketone use could inhibit high-intensity sprint ability. The new study did include weekly tests that involved a 90-second sprint. There were no significant differences between the ketone and control group—but that doesn’t really reveal anything, because the subjects were only taking their ketones after the testing, not before.
So what’s the final takeaway? I’m not sure at this point. But if you’re going to make eyebrow-raising claims about performance enhancement, this is the sort of rigorous and independent research you need to back it up. Here’s hoping there’s more to come.
My new book, Endure: Mind, Body, and the Curiously Elastic Limits of Human Performance, with a foreword by Malcolm Gladwell, is now available. For more, join me on Twitter and Facebook, and sign up for the Sweat Science email newsletter.
Source: https://www.outsideonline.com/2396717/fitness-levels-cancer-risk-correlation
Nepal Earthquake: How You Can Help
|
|
comments (0)
|
The earthquake in Nepal has devastated the region. Here’s a look at what happened and how you can help.
The number of people killed by the magnitude 7.8 earthquake on April 25 in Nepal has risen past 5,000. Much of the capital of Kathmandu was flattened, and the quake shook structures from Tibet to Bangladesh. Rural villages outside the capital have been cut off by road damage as they wait for aid, and on Everest rescue helicopters had to ferry stranded survivors down from the high camps after a massive avalanche swept through base camp, killing 18 climbers.
(Warning: This footage of the avalanche contains NSFW language.)
Travelers and mountaineers who have visited Nepal and who feel a connection to the region are organizing some grassroots, people-to-people humanitarian aid efforts. If you want to help, here are just a few of the smaller rescue efforts worth supporting:
Donate to Rural Communities
The dZi Foundation is a development organization with direct ties to some of the outlying rural communities in Nepal. They are currently taking donations online to help rebuild schools, homes, and infrastructure. Visit dZi.org to learn more.
Donate Used Sleeping Bags or Tents
Most of us have an old sleeping bag or tent in the garage somewhere that we don’t use anymore. Planet-Med (volunteer medical teams formerly mobilizing in Nepal and Bhutan) is taking donations of sleeping bags, tents, tarps, and money to help transport them to Kathmandu. They will be delivering the gear personally. Contact ferrarapete@gmail.com or call 303-638-7379.
Donate to Nepal Company Building Tents
The number of displaced people is high and their need is urgent. Abari.org launched an Indiegogo campaign to raise funds to make canvas and bamboo tents for medical purposes and temporary shelters. Abari is on the ground in Nepal and building tents right now. Find out more here.
You can also support disaster relief efforts by donating to the Red Cross in Nepal.
Source: https://www.womensadventuremedia.com/blog/nepal-earthquake-how-you-can-help/
Coffee on the Road: Putting 3 Methods to the Test
|
|
comments (0)
|
I never drank coffee in the morning. I would have a few sips, get super shaky and feel my heart beating in my ankles, and reach for green tea instead. Then I met Ben. When we met, Ben drank coffee every morning, and then some in the afternoon, and then talked about drinking it in the evening. It started with my stealing a few sips from his mug when he said it was an exceptionally good brew. Then slowly, after drinking enough sips, I was ordering mugs for myself. Today, I proudly announce, I am a full blown coffee snob. Living in a van and being a coffee snob CAN BE synonymous. There are plenty of ways to brew in the forest, but we have a few favorites. Below we put three methods to the test to see what is the ultimate off the grid coffee brewing champion.
Method 1: French Press
The French press was invented by Paolini Ugo and patented by Italian designer Attilio Calimani and Giulio Moneta in 1929. It has clearly stood the test of time, how does it stack up for brewing in the woods?
Pros:
- Easy to use and straightforward. It’s hard to really mess up this method, although I do suggest using a timer to make sure you don’t over steep your grounds.
- Makes a LOT of coffee! Necessary for groups or for Ben to get enough coffee.
- Durable. Our stainless steel French Press has been on the road for two years, and I’ve only had to wood glue the handle once.
Cons:
- Hard to clean. It leaves a lot of ground to deal with and they’re all clumped at the bottom.
- Takes up space, it’s the biggest of the three options.
- Must get coffee ground on “course” which doesn’t allow the flavor of your final product to be as complex. Trust this coffee snob.
Final Score: 7/10
Its convenience and ease of use keep the score high, but the lack of flavor and clean up time dock it a few points.
Method 2: AeroPress
The AeroPress, the newest of the three options, was invented in 2005 by Aerobie president Alan Adler It uses a two plunger system, one with a filter at the bottom. Suction is used to create air pressure to push the water through the coffee grounds. Does the new science work?
Pros:
- It’s small! This brew method takes up far less space than a french press.
- It’s a STRONG brew. It claims to make espresso strength coffee, but we just make two cups and drink it straight. That’s some serious flavor right there!
- It’s fast. No waiting around, no timing. Pour your water and drink your coffee. BONUS: It’s easy to clean up afterward.
Cons:
- It’s all made of plastic, so if you’re weird about hot water and plastic (even though it says it’s safe), you’re going to have to come to terms before you brew.
- It’s a little complicated. There’s step by step directions, but you have to read them a few times to make sure all the parts are in the right places.
- You can only make one cup of coffee at a time.
Final Score: 8/10
The flavor is awesome, and the speed of waking up to coffee in hand in unbeatable. The plastic and amount of components bring the score down.
Method 3: Pour Over
Pour Over coffee can range from a fine art to caveman coffee. This is the simplest method with the least moving parts, but it can turn into a masterpiece if you know what you’re doing.
Pros:
- It’s simple, and there’s only one item you need to make it. Totally self-contained and small.
- Our Sea to Summit X-Brew is made of silicon and collapses into itself, making it a great option for backpacking.
- If you do it right, the coffee ends up flavorful and complex. A nice in-between of French press and Aeropress flavors.
Cons:
- There is a method of pouring and waiting an exact amount of time and then pouring again that brews a delicious cup. It can get a little complicated and annoying.
- You’re only making a cup at a time, and then you have to go through the whole process again.
- Coffee can come out watery if you don’t do the method correctly.
Final Score: 7/10
The simplicity of the device is wonderful, but the ease of use can get complicated if you’re trying to follow proper “pour over” technique.
Brewing Tips:
- DO use a hand grinder! Grinding your beans right before you use them will ensure freshness and flavor.
- DON’T use boiling water! It is far too hot and will burn your beans. Pour from high above so the water has some time to cool down before hitting your brew method.
- DON’T keep your coffee in the freezer. Moisture is the enemy of coffee beans and will dimish the flavor in a moist setting.
- DO warm your cup before pouring in the coffee. This may sound dumb– but it makes a difference! Just use the leftover boiling water.
- DO use high-quality water AND coffee beans. Spend a few extra dollars on the coffee and it will make an incredible difference! You’re saving a ton of money by not buying coffee out, so treat yo’self!
We are not coffee experts by any means, but two years on the road has taught us a thing or two about making coffee off the grid. Comment with any suggestions or your favorite was to make your morning brew!
There is one way for this tour to be a reality, our sponsors! Sending a thank you shout out to our title sponsor Nite Ize, and all of our other awesome sponsors that make this happen: Crazy Creek, National Geographic, Sea to Summit, Mountain House, Lowe Alpine, Old Town, Leki, HydraPak, UCO Gear and Wenzel. If you like the gear that keeps us groovin’ click here to enter for a chance to win
Source: https://www.blueridgeoutdoors.com/road-team/coffee-on-the-road-putting-3-methods-to-the-test/
The Rise of Toxic Skin Lightening Creams
|
|
comments (0)
|
In community centers in Minnesota’s metro areas, young Somali girls are breaking an unspoken taboo to talk about a subject that, for them, could quite literally be poisonous: beauty.
Somali men want light-skinned women to be their wives, the girls say. Their community encourages this attitude. The girls recall conversations with mothers and aunts, who speak to Somali girls they deem beautiful, saying, Caadey, "you are so lovely."
“We have this term of endearment in the Somali community: It means ‘Whitey.’ It’s so embedded in the culture, people don’t even realize what they’re saying,” says Amira Adawe, founder of the Beauty Well Project, a Minnesota-based organization combating toxic skin lightening practices in immigrant communities. Cosmetic skin lighteners often contain mercury, a highly toxic heavy metal, putting women at risk of permanent scarring, nerve damage, kidney malfunction, and fetal developmental problems. Adawe, a researcher and public health educator working in Governor Mark Dayton’s Children’s Cabinet, holds workshops within the Somali immigrant community to raise awareness of mercury in skin lighteners and advocates within the government to keep the products off store shelves.
“It’s a stigma,” Adawe says. “People don’t want to be talked about for using it, but they’re also told that light skin is beautiful and dark skin is not. Women won’t tell their doctors that they’re using skin lighteners, so I teach health providers culturally sensitive ways to ask a patient who’s experiencing mercury exposure if she’s using skin lighteners.”
Demand for skin lighteners is high: The global industry exceeds $10 billion and is projected to grow to $23 billion by 2030. Primarily marketed to women—though they are gaining a following among men—the biggest market for skin lightening creams is in the Asia-Pacific, in countries like Thailand and Indonesia; they are also widely used in Africa, Latin America, and the Middle East.
Despite being banned by the Food and Drug Administration in 1973, mercury-based skin lighteners are easy to access. Retailers often omit mercury in product ingredient lists. In a study by Sierra Club toxicologists of skin lightening products found on Amazon and eBay, 19 creams were identified to have mercury levels up to 30,000 times greater than the legal limit of 1 part per million. None of the products listed mercury among their ingredients. “The internet model is no accountability,” says Sonya Lunder, a toxicologist who participated in the study. Online retailers do a lot of lip service to environmental groups, Lunder says, without serious commitment. For example, in October, Amazon announced a chemicals management policy that includes its first-ever restricted substance list—but it only regulates products under Amazon’s private brands. Most skin lighteners are sold by third-party vendors. Such pledges are “a trend in the industry,” Lunder observes. “Retailers will say they won’t sell products that contain mercury, but will do little to implement it. They need to actually be meaningful in their commitment to consumer protection.”
With sales in mercury-based skin lighteners ever increasing, governments and environmental groups are responding. In November, 51 environmental, health, and justice organizations, including the Sierra Club, from over 20 countries called on Amazon and eBay to ban the sale of mercury-based skin lighteners. In simultaneous letters, the groups demanded that the companies “ensure the products they sell comply with government regulations; develop and monitor lists of toxic skin lighteners; and require prior sale approval for those to be sold.” The groups’ call to action aligned with restrictions set forth by the global Minamata Convention in 2013, which is set to ban the sale of mercury-based cosmetics after 2020.
To deduce who is affected the worst by this public health crisis, says Adawe, look no further than cultures that have been historically victimized by colonial beauty standards.
“When I first started researching about skin lighteners and who uses them, I thought it was just the older Somali generation,” she says. “But it’s also the Hmong population in Minnesota. The Latinos. Young girls of East African descent. They start at a very young age, because they experience a lot of identity crises. They don’t fit in in their own culture or American culture, not perfectly: At home, people will comment if they’re dark skinned; when they go to school, they still don’t fit in with American kids for the same reason. Young girls internalize all of this. The reason most people do this is heavily associated with fear.”
Colorism, at its heart, is fear. Fear of being undesirable if you’re dark-skinned; fear of being judged based on Jim Crow–era stereotypes that belittle people’s intelligence based on skin color, or stoke fears of natural-born violence. And in tight-knit communities, colorism elicits the fear of being shunned not just by strangers, but by those you love, because of something about yourself that you cannot change—not without paying a heavy price.
Adawe has spent the last seven years trying to disrupt internalized racism that demands dark-skinned women poison themselves with heavy metal to be accepted by society. Through the Beauty Well Project, Adawe has implemented a multipronged approach, training community health workers and dermatologists, conducting studies of mercury exposure in immigrant communities, hosting a local call-in radio show, raiding beauty stores for illegal products, and holding workshops for both men and women to learn about mercury poisoning, and talk openly about cultural stigmas.
“This is as big a public health crisis as lead, and needs to be treated as such in city and county budgets,” Adawe says. “Multiple communities lose if governments do not allocate resources to educating their communities about this, and ban these products. Education is key because the more people that know and hear about this, the more the narrative of who gets to be beautiful changes. It’s a trickle-down effect: How do we change that narrative and redefine what beauty means, so that it’s not always about one specific feature?”
Source: https://www.sierraclub.org/sierra/rise-toxic-skin-lightening-creams
