Going Green: Some hard questions

Going green is an in-thing. People do it for different reasons and at different levels. Its a feel good factor for few and others take it as a part of their responsibility. For some it’s a passion and others see a great business opportunity in it. For whatever reasons, over the last decade -it’s the most heard, used, abused, underestimated and far less understood term..

Being environment friendly is a life style and not an activity. It’s about EVERYDAY and not just on Earth day or on Environment day thing. But without being too cynical, and also accepting the fact that dedicated days are the invention of activity obsessed generation, we should not forget that activities on one particular day or one off events, or a superficial approach can not undo the harms . Tribulations by- our reckless life style, lack of long term policies at the state level, and the significance of dollar sign in the present commercial world. Our present day environmental crises need more consistent and honest approach as a solution. There are also questions investigated by environmental ethics. Some of them are specific questions faced by individuals in particular circumstances, while others are more global questions regarding certain practices by larger groups and communities and also its accountability by the developing nations verses developed nations.

If we look at it from a broader horizon, do we need to be environment friendly because we have no other way out? We all know that a sustainable environment is essential to human well-being and its future, but is that the solitary reason for us to take care of it? Or do as a superior and intelligent creatures of the planet we own it to our planet more than other spices? On the contrary, spices with less intelligence or even no intelligence (as per our parameters) have harmed planet earth far less than we the intelligent ones. Interestingly, Dr Jean-Christophe Vié, who works at IUCN headquarters in Switzerland and has his PhD in ecology, writes – “There is no doubt that nature can survive without humans - and has done so, for the most part, since time began. But humans need nature”. We indeed do need nature but sadly going by what we are doing to mother earth, nature does not need us. Is it what intelligence got us –a not so welcomed status on this very earth? So what do we do?

One can always make a start. Small little steps at individual level can not be undermined. We need to understand term GREEN more than it is understood by most of us. Popular green tips, green habits, suggestions to feel good about green, need to be understood and adopted in totality.

Minding ones own ecological footprint is not as easy as it sounds. Even those who may consider themselves to be concerned about the environment would be gobsmacked if they look at the ecological footprints they leave. Just to add few examples : If using energy saving bulbs make you an environmental friendly person, how you dispose it can make you otherwise. Post usage, if one does not dispose off energy saving bulb properly it can harm environment more than it actually helped. Similarly, one cannot donate money to the organisations working for ecology, animals, bio- diversity and yet turn every inch of his or her house to a concrete, or contribute in any which way in the practices that harm bio diversity. It could be usage of leather, watching circus, buying products with palm oil, which contributes in the destruction of rainforests and hence disturbs ecology. Dr Christophe explains it simply yet clearly- “Everything you buy, I mean if you buy tropical wood, if you have a big car and you want to use bio-fuels, this is produced in a place where you have monkeys, where you have apes. The same will cell-phones. I mean a special mineral comes from a place where gorillas live so you have an impact directly by, what you buy you have a direct impact on primate population”.

Learning green is about adopting a philosophy .First you understand it, then you get convinced and then follow. Environment is for us to keep. We need oceans, forests and other spices more than they need us. Setting policies for realistic goals, building public opinion on environmental issues, and adopting a lifestyle where Reduce is better than Reuse, Reuse is better than Recycle and Recycle is better than sending things to landfills can help us take regular little steps towards bigger goals.

Merry-go-round of Mothers’ milk

Today, children are being born in a pre-packaged world. Everything is available in packages including the baby food. In some cases, child is exposed to artificial food in the very first week. Gone are the days of wet nurses, but the formula milk is there to help mothers who either could not breastfeed their babies or choose not to do so. In Europe and America during the early 19th century, practice of feeding babies mixtures based on animal milk rose in popularity. And it also initiated the debate on its health and environmental concerns.

As paediatricians became increasingly concerned about the quality of such foods, medical recommendations such as Thomas Morgan Rotch's "percentage method" (published in 1890) began to be distributed, and gained widespread popularity by 1907.These complex formulas recommended that parents mix cow's milk, water, cream, and sugar or honey in specific ratios to achieve the nutritional balance believed to approximate human milk reformulated in such a way as to accommodate the believed digestive capability of the infant.(source: Wikipedia).This also reinforced that the human milk is best suited for the human babies . Not to miss the planet they are born into!

Formula milk has its impact on child’s health and on earth’s environment. Other than exceptions, when mothers can not feed their children due to health reasons, formula milk has helped nobody. In any case, the percentage of women who physically can't breastfeed is VERY small. It has been promoted to all mothers since late 19th century. An advertisement for artificial infant milk, by Nestle, appeared in the ladies’ home journal was way back in 1895.

We (read market) have always been cleaver to come up with options, which have helped the consumers less than their producers. Our desire to look for solutions has, mostly, given us new set of problems to solve. Formula milk came as solution to wet nursing and gave us unhealthy children. It has been recognised since the advent of manufactured infant milks that infants fed on such products suffer more illness. They are denied the benefits of auto immunisation of mother’s milk. It also introduced children to the world of rubber and plastics through feeding bottles. Contamination of formula milk (Even in developed countries with refrigeration, clean water and sterilising equipment),impact of packaging involved and its impact on environment……..the list of disadvantages is long. To tackle the situation new solutions are being worked out.

Scientists are trying to come up with a substitute for formula milk, as it’s now widely considered a less healthy substitute to breast milk. According to the Telegraph, scientists have recently introduced 300 GMO cows that produce milk genetically similar to breast milk.

When the world is still debating the impacts of genetically modified food (both for animals and humans), health concern associated with the use of breast like milk from these GM cows is not clear so far. Going by our past experiences with such experiments, it wouldn’t be too presumptuous to say that the emerging solution/s to this self generated problem can again lead us to a new level of troubles. Wouldn't it make more sense just to breast feed in the first place in stead of going Marry-go –round with mothers’ milk?

To see a world in a grain of sand

And a heaven in a wild flower,

Hold infinity in the palm of your hand

And eternity in an hour.

- - William Blake, “Auguries of Innocence,” c. 1803