The Case for Mother’s Milk

 This image credits to parents.com

By Awake! correspondent in Nigeria
IMAGINE a baby food that is delicious, easy to digest, and meets all the nutritional needs of developing infants. A food that is a “wonder drug” that both guards against and treats disease. A food that costs nothing and is readily available to families everywhere on earth.
Impossible, you say? Well, such a product does exist, though it has not been developed by industrial scientists. It is mother’s milk.

Throughout mankind’s history this marvelous food has been considered crucial to child care. For example, the Bible tells us that when the daughter of Pharaoh found the infant Moses, she directed his sister to call for “a nursing woman” to care for him. (Exodus 2:5-9) Later, in Greek and Roman societies, robust wet nurses were commonly employed to provide milk for the infants of wealthy parents.

In recent decades, however, the practice of breast-feeding has sharply declined, partly because of advertising that made many people think that breast milk was inferior to the infant formulas of modern technology. Today, that trend is being reversed as more and more mothers come to realize that “breast is best.”

The Best Nutrition
Have scientists improved on the Creator’s built-in method of feeding infants? Hardly. UNICEF (United Nations Children’s Fund) states: “Breast-milk alone is the best possible food and drink for babies in the first four to six months of life.” Breast milk contains all the proteins, growth stimulants, fats, carbohydrates, enzymes, vitamins, and trace elements that are vital to an infant’s healthy growth during the first few months of life.

Not only is breast milk the best food for newborn babies but it is also the only food they need. The World Health Assembly reaffirmed in May 1992 that “during the first four to six months of life no food or liquid other than breast milk, not even water, is required to meet the normal infant’s nutritional requirements.”

Breast milk contains enough water to quench a baby’s thirst even in hot, dry climates. Bottle-feeding extra water or sugary drinks is not only unnecessary but can cause the baby to stop breast-feeding entirely, since babies usually prefer the relative ease of bottle-feeding. Of course, after the first few months of life, other food and drink need to be gradually added to the baby’s diet.

No substitute provides such an ideal balance of ingredients to promote the healthy growth and development of infants. The book Reproductive Health—Global Issues states: “Attempts to substitute for breast milk have not been successful. The historical literature on the subject of infant feeding is replete with evidence that non-breastfed infants are at a much higher risk of infection and malnutrition than breastfed infants.”

Breast-Feeding Saves Lives
According to WHO (World Health Organization), a million infant deaths worldwide would be prevented each year if all mothers fed their babies nothing but breast milk during the first four to six months of life. UNICEF’s report State of the World’s Children 1992 states: “A bottle-fed baby in a poor community is approximately 15 times more likely to die from diarrhoeal disease and 4 times more likely to die from pneumonia than a baby who is exclusively breastfed.”

Why is this? One reason is that powdered milk, apart from being nutritionally inferior to mother’s milk, is often overdiluted using unclean water and then served in unsterilized feeding bottles. So bottle milk can easily be contaminated with the bacteria and viruses that cause diarrheic disease and respiratory infections, the major killers of children in developing countries. In contrast, milk straight from the breast is not easily contaminated, requires no mixing, does not spoil, and cannot become overdiluted.

A second reason why breast-feeding saves lives is that mother’s milk contains antibodies that protect the infant against disease. Even when diarrheic disease or other infections do occur, they are usually less severe and easier to treat among breast-fed infants. Researchers also suggest that babies fed on breast milk seem less prone to dental disease, cancer, diabetes, and allergies. And because it requires vigorous sucking action, breast-feeding may promote in infants the proper development of facial bones and muscles.

Benefits to Mothers
Breast-feeding doesn’t benefit just baby; it benefits mother as well. For one thing, a baby’s suckling the breast stimulates the release of the hormone oxytocin, which not only helps milk release and flow but also causes contraction of the uterus. When the uterus contracts promptly after delivery, prolonged bleeding is less likely. Breast-feeding also delays the return of ovulation and menstruation. This tends to delay the next pregnancy.

Longer intervals between pregnancies mean healthier mothers and babies. Another big plus for women is that breast-feeding lowers the risk of ovarian and breast cancer. Some experts say that the risk of breast cancer for a woman who breast-feeds her infant is half what it would be if she did not.

Not to be overlooked in listing the benefits of breast-feeding is mother-child bonding. Since it involves not only the giving of food but also oral contact, skin-to-skin contact, and physical warmth, breast-feeding can help forge an important bond between mother and child and may contribute to the child’s emotional and social development.

Deciding to Breast-Feed
Almost all mothers are physically able to provide enough milk for their infants if certain requirements are met. Breast-feeding should begin as soon as possible after birth, within the first hour after the delivery of the baby. (The first breast milk, a thick yellowish substance called colostrum, is good for babies and helps protect them from infections.) Thereafter, babies should be fed on demand, including during the night, and not according to a fixed schedule. The correct positioning of the baby at the breast is also important. An experienced and sympathetic adviser can provide help in these matters.

Of course, whether a mother decides to breast-feed her infant or not depends on more than simply her physical ability to do so. The State of the World’s Children 1992 reports: “Mothers need the support of hospitals if they are to give their babies the best possible start; but if they are to continue breastfeeding, they will also need the support of employers, trade unions, communities—and of men.”

Breast-Feeding in the Developing World
  1. Breast milk alone is the best possible food and drink for a baby in the first four to six months of life.
  2. Babies should start to breast-feed as soon as possible after birth. Virtually every mother can breast-feed her baby.
  3. Frequent sucking is needed to produce enough breast milk for the baby’s needs.
  4. Bottle-feeding can lead to serious illness and death.
  5. Breast-feeding should continue well into the second year of a child’s life and for longer if possible.

  Source: Facts for Life, jointly published by UNICEF, WHO, and UNESCO.

Breast-Feeding and AIDS
  In late April 1992, WHO and UNICEF brought together an international group of experts to consider the relationship of AIDS and breast-feeding. The need for the meeting was explained by Dr. Michael Merson, director of the WHO Global Program on AIDS. He said: “Breast-feeding is a crucial element of child survival. A baby’s risk of dying of AIDS through breast-feeding must be balanced against its risk of dying of other causes if not breast-fed.”

  According to WHO, about one third of all babies born to HIV-infected mothers become infected also. While much of the mother-to-infant transmission of the disease occurs during pregnancy and delivery, there is evidence that it can also occur through breast-feeding. However, states WHO, “the vast majority of babies breast-fed by HIV-infected mothers do not become infected through breast-feeding.”

  The panel of experts concluded: “Where infectious diseases and malnutrition are the main cause of infant deaths and the infant mortality rate is high, breast-feeding should be the usual advice to pregnant women, including those who are HIV-infected. This is because their baby’s risk of HIV infection through breast milk is likely to be lower than its risk of death from other causes if it is not breast-fed.

  “On the other hand, in settings where the main cause of death during infancy is not infectious diseases and the infant mortality rate is low, the . . . usual advice to pregnant women known to be infected with HIV should be to use a safe feeding alternative for their baby rather than breast-feed.”

Our Versatile Sense of Smell

This image credits to wbmd.com
 


STIRS UP MEMORIES, ENHANCES TASTES
WHAT is your favorite aroma? When this question was asked of several people, their answers were fascinating. Bacon frying. Salt air off the ocean. Clean laundry blowing in the wind. Freshly mowed hay. Hot spices. Puppy breath. When probed further as to why these were their favorite smells, all had a specific, vivid memory that they recalled with the first whiff of the odor. Very often the memories were from childhood.

A young woman remembers lying in her bed in the morning, the tantalizing aroma of frying bacon drifting into the room, beckoning her to breakfast with her family.
Louise, 58, said that the fragrance of sea air brings back her childhood summers on the coast of Maine in the United States. “The freedom we had,” she says, “running and playing in the sand, digging for clams and cooking them over an open fire!”

Michele, 72, remembers the times as a child when she helped her mother gather the laundry off the clothesline, burying her face in armloads of it as she carried it into the house, breathing deeply to take in the fresh, clean fragrance. Freshly mowed hay spreads the scent that takes Jeremy back 55 years, to his days as a child on an Iowa farm, riding on a wagonload of freshly cut hay being taken into the barn to escape the rain he and his father could smell coming.

“Hot spices” was the response of 76-year-old Jessie, who closed her eyes and told of her family cooking apple butter (a heavily spiced sort of jam made in the United States) in an iron kettle outdoors. Seventy years ago, but the memory was still very much alive.
Carol remembers the cuddly little puppy she held in her lap when she was five and recalls the smell of the puppy’s breath. Ah, yes, that smell gives her the feeling of being warm in the sunshine on an old front porch in a little seersucker dress.

Now, what about you? Has a smell ever pleased you as it has others—evoking memories, stirring emotions? Have you ever felt invigorated by pine-scented mountain air or refreshed by the tangy stimulus of a sea breeze? Or perhaps you’ve found your mouth watering after catching a stray whiff from a bakery shop. Neuroscientist Gordon Shepherd stated in National Geographic: “We think our lives are dominated by our visual sense, but the closer you get to dinner, the more you realize how much your real pleasure in life is tied to smell.”

Smell does wonders for our sense of taste. While taste buds differentiate between the salty, the sweet, the bitter, and the sour, our sense of smell picks up other, subtler elements of flavor. If they lacked a smell, apples and onions might taste virtually the same. Or, for example, see how much flavor a piece of chocolate loses when you eat it while holding your nose.

Picture an appetizing piece of food—let’s say a freshly baked pie. Those enticing aromas waft up from it because it is releasing molecules and setting them adrift in the air currents. Along comes your nose, sniffing away eagerly. It sucks in air and sends those molecules on their way through the amazing machinery of our sense of smell. For a more detailed examination of the process of olfaction, see the box on pages 24 and 25. The intricacy and complexity of this sense is truly awe-inspiring.

Odors and Their Effects on You
Perfumers, master chefs, and vintners have for centuries recognized the power of aromas to captivate the mind and please the senses. Today, fragrance psychologists and biochemists are trying to tap the power of scent in new ways. Experimenting with fragrances ranging from lily of the valley to apple and spice, odor engineers have pumped scents into schools, office buildings, nursing homes, and even a subway train in order to study effects on the mind and human behavior. They claim that certain scents can affect moods, making people friendlier, improving their efficiency in the workplace, and even enhancing mental alertness.

According to The Futurist magazine, people line up at a fashionable health club in Tokyo, Japan, for a 30-minute “aroma cocktail” said to relieve the stress of city living. Japanese scientists have also studied the effects of forest air on humans and recommend walking through forests as a remedy for jangled nerves. The terpenes (pine scent) that trees exude have been found to relax not simply the body but especially the mind.

Not all odors are healthful; far from it. What delights one person might well make another miserable. Strong odors, even of perfumes, have long been known to aggravate asthma and trigger allergic reactions in some people. Then, too, there are the malodors that everyone agrees on—noxious fumes spewed from industrial smokestacks and motor vehicle exhaust pipes, rancid odors of garbage landfills and sewage basins, and vapors from volatile chemicals used in many industrial workplaces.
Of course, dangerous chemicals occur naturally in our environment but are usually so diffuse as to be harmless.

However, when such chemicals are highly concentrated, overexposure to them can cause even the resilient olfactory nerve cells to degenerate. For instance, solvents such as those used in paints, as well as many other industrial chemicals, have been listed by experts as hazardous to the olfactory system. There are also physical disorders that can impede or destroy the sense of smell.

Do You Value the Gift?
Surely the sense of smell is worth protecting from such threats wherever possible. So familiarize yourself with the hazards of any chemicals you must work with, and take whatever reasonable precautions are necessary to protect your sensitive olfactory system. (Compare 2 Corinthians 7:1.) On the other hand, it is good to be equally concerned about the sensitivities of others. A high standard of cleanliness, including our homes and our bodies, can do much in this regard. Some have also chosen to be extra cautious with the use of perfumes—especially when they plan to be in close proximity with many others for some time, as in a theater or an Assembly Hall.—Compare Matthew 7:12.
In general, though, the olfactory system is a low-maintenance gift. It asks little of us in the way of care and protection, yet it brings us a daily bounty of small pleasures in life. When you receive a gift that makes you happy, do you feel a desire to thank the giver? Millions of people today earnestly thank the Creator for the marvelous way in which the human body is made. (Compare Psalm 139:14.) We might well hope that more such thanks and praise ascend to him and, like the sacrifices of the ancient Israelites, be as “a restful odor” to our loving, generous Creator.—Numbers 15:3; Hebrews 13:15.

How the Sense of Smell Works
First, the Odor Is Detected
  ODORS enter the nasal passages when you breathe in. Also, when you swallow food, molecules are forced up the back of the mouth and into the nasal cavity. First, though, odorous air has to make it past the “guards.” Lining the nostrils are the trigeminal nerves (1), which trigger sneezing when they sense stinging or irritating chemicals. These nerves also give pleasure by reacting to the pungency of some flavors.

  Next, odorous molecules are pushed upward by eddies that form when air currents swirl around three bony, scroll-like protrusions called turbinates (2). The airstream, moistened and warmed along the way, carries the molecules to the epithelium (3), the primary reception area. Situated in a narrow channel high up in the nose, this thumbnail-size patch of tissue is packed with some ten million sensory neurons (4), each tipped with numerous hairlike projections, called cilia, bathed in a thin layer of mucus. So sensitive is the epithelium that it can detect 1/1,300,000,000 ounce [1/460,000,000 mg] of certain odorants in a single whiff of air.

  But exactly how odors are detected is still shrouded in mystery. After all, humans can distinguish as many as 10,000 odors. And there are more than 400,000 odorous substances in our environment, with chemists constantly creating new ones. So how does our nose make sense of all this olfactory hubbub? Well over 20 different theories attempt to explain the mystery.

  Just recently scientists have made progress toward solving part of this puzzle. Some evidence was found in 1991 that there are tiny proteins, called olfactory receptors, woven through the cell membranes in the cilia. Apparently such receptors bind differently to differing types of odorous molecules, thus giving each odor a distinctive “fingerprint.”

Second, the Odor Is Transmitted
  To pass this information along to the brain, coded electrochemical messages are fired along the olfactory neurons (4). Dr. Lewis Thomas, a science essayist, calls these neurons the ‘Fifth wonder of the modern world.’ They are the only primary nerve cells that replicate every several weeks. Also, they have no protective barrier between them and the surrounding stimuli, as do the sensory nerve cells that lurk protected within the eye and the ear. Instead, the olfactory nerves reach out from the brain itself and come into direct contact with the outside world. Thus, the nose is a meeting place of brain and environment.

  These neurons all lead to the same destination: the twin olfactory bulbs (5) on the underside of the brain. These bulbs are the main relay station to other parts of the brain. First, though, they edit the flood of olfactory information, eliminate all but the essential, and then send it on.

Third, the Odor Is Perceived
  The olfactory bulbs are intricately “wired” into the brain’s limbic system (6), an elegantly looping set of structures that plays a key role in storing memories and in triggering emotional reactions. This is where “the cold world of reality is transformed into a bubbling caldron of human feelings,” according to the book The Human Body. The limbic system is so extensively tied in with the sense of smell that it was long referred to as the rhinencephalon, meaning “nose brain.” This close link between nose and limbic system may explain why we react so emotionally and nostalgically to odors. Aha! The frying bacon! The clean laundry! The freshly mowed hay! The puppy breath!

  Depending on the odor sensed, the limbic system may activate the hypothalamus (7), which in turn may direct the brain’s master gland, the pituitary (8), to produce various hormones—for instance, those hormones that control appetite or sexual function. No wonder, then, that the odor of food can suddenly make us feel hungry or that a perfume can be seen as an important factor in sexual attraction.

  The limbic system also reaches into the neocortex (9), a rather intellectual, analytical neighborhood within the brain. Here is where news from the nose may be compared with input coming in from the other senses. In an instant, you might combine such data as an acrid odor, a crackling sound, and a faint haze hanging in the air to form a conclusion—fire!

  The thalamus (10) plays a role too, perhaps mediating between those very different parts, the “emotional” limbic system and the “intellectual” neocortex. The olfactory cortex (11) helps to distinguish between similar odors. Various brain parts can also send messages back to the transmission stations, the olfactory bulbs. Why? So that the bulbs can then modify the perception of odors, in effect turning them down or even turning them off.

  You may have noticed that food doesn’t smell as inviting when your appetite is sated. Or have you ever been subjected to a pervasive, inescapable odor that seemed to fade away with time? The olfactory bulbs, informed by the brain, bring about these changes. They may be assisted by the receptor cells on the cilia, which are said to fatigue easily. This is a helpful feature, especially in the face of potent foul odors.
  Quite a system, isn’t it? Yet, we have barely touched on it! Entire books have been devoted to this intricate and sophisticated sensory system.

Smell Dysfunction
  Millions of people suffer smell dysfunction. The fragrance of springtime or of flavorful food does little or nothing for them. One woman described her sudden complete loss of smell this way: “We all know about blindness and deafness, and certainly I would never trade my disability for those afflictions. Yet we so take for granted the rich aroma of coffee and sweet flavor of oranges that when we lose these senses, it is almost as if we have forgotten how to breathe.”—Newsweek magazine.
  Smell disorders can even be life-threatening. A woman named Eva explains: “Not being able to smell, I have to be very careful. I shudder to think of winter coming, because I must close all the windows and doors to my apartment. Without the fresh air, I could easily be overcome by gas fumes if the pilot light went out on the gas stove.”

  What causes smell dysfunction? While there are over a score of causes, three are most common: head injury, upper respiratory viral infection, and sinus disease. If the nerve pathways are severed, if the epithelium is rendered insensitive, or if air cannot reach the epithelium because of blockage or inflammation, the sense of smell vanishes. Recognizing such disorders as a major problem, clinical research centers for the study of taste and smell have been established.

  In an interview, Dr. Maxwell Mozell of the State University of New York Health and Science Center at Syracuse related: “We’ve had patients in here that [smell a bad odor perceived only by themselves]. They smell horrible things. One woman smelled fish all the time. Imagine if every minute of every day, you smelled fish or burning rubber.” After suffering for 11 years with an unpleasant odor in her nose and consequent depression, one woman found immediate relief after one of the olfactory bulbs was surgically removed.

Oh, for Some Fresh Air!

 This image credits to lgsquaredinc.com

BY AWAKE! CORRESPONDENT IN BRITAIN
WHEN you breathe, do you inhale fresh air? Present-day air pollution is “a bigger enemy than smoking,” claims a doctor quoted in The Times of London. In England and in Wales, contaminated air kills an estimated 10,000 people every year. Worldwide, especially in large cities, the situation is serious.

Many blame the automobile industry for polluting the atmosphere. To reduce dangerous exhaust, new vehicles in many countries now come fitted with catalytic converters, which reduce pollution. The hydrocarbons in exhaust gases have dropped to 12 percent of the 1970 levels, with similar reductions of nitrogen oxides and carbon monoxide. Babies in strollers are particularly vulnerable because they ride at the level that cars spew out fumes. But air pollution threatens car occupants as well. Reportedly, the contamination is three times higher inside cars than outside. Further hazards come from inhaling benzene fumes from fuel as you fill your car’s fuel tank.

Now the most prevalent form of air pollution worldwide is “Suspended Particulate Matter,” says a 1993-94 United Nations environmental data report. Apparently, tiny bits of soot, or particulate matter, have the ability to penetrate deep into the lungs and there deposit damaging chemicals.
The depletion of the ozone layer high above the globe attracts much press comment. At ground level, however, sunlight acts on the nitrogen oxides and other volatile elements of air pollution to produce high levels of ozone.

These levels have doubled in Britain during this century. 
These gases damage paint and other building materials, cause disease in trees, plants, and crops, and appear to trigger respiratory problems in some people. Although most of the ozone pollution occurs in towns, surprisingly it is the rural areas that suffer the worst effects. In the urban areas, nitrogen oxides mop up the excess ozone, but where these oxides are sparse, the ozone has free rein to wreak damage.

Additionally, air pollution is “up to 70 times higher inside homes than outdoors,” reports The Times. Here the fumes from air fresheners, mothballs, and even dry-cleaned clothes pollute the air. Cigarette smoke likewise adds to health risks indoors. What, then, can you do to protect your family?

 The Times of London offered the following suggestions.

• Reduce your use of the car. If possible, share transportation with others. Drive smoothly. If stuck in a traffic jam or otherwise stationary for more than a couple of minutes, switch off the engine. If possible, on hot days park your car in the shade to reduce pollution produced by fuel evaporation.
• Choose to exercise in the early mornings when ozone levels outdoors are generally low.
• Outlaw smoking in the home.
• Keep bedroom windows slightly open at night to lower humidity and move allergens outside.
No doubt you agree: Oh, for some fresh air!

How Should a Baby Sleep?

 This image credits to lovingmomsdiary.com

MANY babies around the world have died as a result of Sudden Infant Death Syndrome (SIDS). In the United States, it is the most common cause of death among babies between the ages of 1 month and 12 months. Is there any way to reduce the risk? According to The Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), research in recent years indicates that the risk of SIDS seems to drop significantly when babies sleep on their back rather than on their stomach.

 Several countries have instituted programs to alert parents to the association between sleep position and SIDS. In Australia, England, Denmark, New Zealand, and Norway, SIDS fell by at least 50 percent after one to two years of public campaigns to promote putting babies to bed on their back.

Exactly how a baby’s sleeping on its stomach is linked to SIDS is not known, but some researchers suggest that this prone position may result in a baby’s rebreathing its own expelled air, thus increasing the level of carbon dioxide in its blood. The baby’s body may also become overheated because it does not dissipate heat as well when lying on its stomach. In any case, infants laid down either on their back or on their stomach tend to remain in that position. Studies also suggest that putting a normal, healthy infant on its back is better than putting it on its side.

Why do mothers choose one sleep position over another? JAMA notes that mothers often just follow custom—they put their babies to bed the way their own mothers or others in their community would. Or they may adopt the practice they observed in the hospital. Some mothers also feel that their baby prefers or sleeps better in a particular position. Many mothers consistently lay the baby down on its back for the first month but then change to the stomach later on. “This trend is disturbing,” states JAMA, “because the risk of SIDS is highest among infants at 2 to 3 months of age.” Doctors are striving to inform parents of small infants about what they say is a simple, effective measure for reducing the risk of SIDS—placing healthy infants on their back to sleep.
[Footnote]
If a baby suffers from respiratory disease or abnormal spitting up, it would be wise to consult a doctor about the best sleeping position.

The Nut With a New Name

Picture; Credits goes to Trust.org

 

BY AWAKE! CORRESPONDENT IN BOLIVIA
FROM the dense rain forests of Amazonia comes a nut that is tasty and nutritious. Its previous designation, “Brazil nut,” is no longer appropriate, since as much as half its supply now comes from forests beyond the borders of Brazil, especially from Bolivia.
Appropriately, on May 18, 1992, the International Nut Council decided to change the name of the nut, previously known variously as Brazil nut, cream nut, butternut, castana do Pará, Paranuss, and noix du Brésil. Now it is to be called Amazonia nut.

A Nut-Gatherer’s Story
Listen to what Cornelio, a nut gatherer since the age of six, has to say about the gathering of this exotic jungle nut:
“Most Amazonia nuts are gathered in the wild. We have to penetrate deep into the jungle to find them. Winding rivers are the only access. My 19-year-old son and I travel for several days on a double-deck riverboat to an encampment where we are assigned a section of forest.
“To make full use of the daylight, we rise at 4:30 a.m. and are already on our way by dawn. Tracks extend only a few miles to collection points; from there on we must force our way forward, cutting through the dense undergrowth with machetes. There are no landmarks. We have to know how to use the sun as a guide, or we would never find our way back.

“The jungle presents many dangers to anyone seeking its treasures. There are diseases, such as malaria, as well as the constant threat of snakes. We are not worried about the giant boa constrictors—they don’t bother us—but hidden among the dead leaves on the ground are small snakes that are deadly poisonous. Their color and markings camouflage them perfectly.

The bite is not painful at first, but gradually the victim is paralyzed by the venom. Small green snakes hidden in the branches are just as dangerous. “We can easily find the handsome nut-bearing trees called almendros, since they are from 100 to 150 feet [30-50 m] tall and tower far above most other trees of the forest. The trunk usually has no branches until it breaks out above the jungle canopy. At the extremity of the branches grow the cocos, hard spherical shells from four to six inches [10-15 cm] in diameter. These contain from 10 to 25 nuts arranged like the segments of an orange, each in an individual shell.

“The cocos fall to the ground during the rainy season, which lasts from November to February. They have to be collected immediately, or they will spoil. Cocos falling from the height of a 15-story building present another life-threatening hazard. We must work quickly, throwing the cocos into a pile away from the almendro to minimize the danger. But watch out for snakes! When they are asleep, coiled up with their head resting on top of the coil, they look just like a coco. Some workers have even picked a snake up and thrown it, mistaking it for a coco.

“Cutting open the coco requires skill. Several full-strength blows with the machete in just the right place are needed to release the nuts without damaging them. Soon we are returning, bearing heavy sacks of nuts. We use no vehicles or beasts of burden. A gatherer must be strong and athletic, especially since the harvest is during the hottest and wettest part of the year.”

After the Gathering
 
The nuts are green when they are gathered, which means that they are perishable because of their high water content (approximately 35 percent). To prevent them from spoiling, they need to be moved each day with a shovel to allow those at the bottom of the pile to dry. Most of Bolivia’s nuts are prepared for export. It takes six months to process the harvest.

Processing begins by heating the nuts in a large steam pressure cooker. The heat separates the nut from its shell. Hence, when extracted from the shells, most of the nuts come out whole. The nuts are then graded into sizes, spread on wire trays, and heated in ovens to reduce the water content to between 4 and 8 percent. The shells are burned as fuel to heat the ovens. The reduced water content makes it possible to store the nuts for a year or for several years if they are chilled. To preserve their quality and flavor, the nuts are vacuum packed in aluminum foil for export.

Amazonia nuts are enjoyed by millions of people around the world in a wide variety of ways. Some have the nuts in their breakfast cereal. Others enjoy them coated with chocolate or mixed with dried fruits. The next time you have this appetizing nut, remember that it has a new name—Amazonia nut!

Perfect Little Housekeepers

Picture; Credits goes to Amazon

By Awake! correspondent in South Africa
GAPS in African rain forests are often filled by a tree with hollow branches called the barteria. To reach its maximum height, the tree must compete with others that battle to reach the forest canopy. To succeed in this struggle, the barteria needs help to keep itself free from smothering creepers and from moss that prevents light from reaching the leaves. Here is where black stinging ants play an important role as housekeepers. The relationship between ant and tree was filmed in Korup, a rain forest of Cameroon, as part of the TV documentary African Rainforest: Korup, produced by Phil Agland and Michael Rosenberg.

The documentary shows a new queen ant seeking out a barteria tree. Instinctively, she knows that its hollow branches are the ideal place to establish her colony. After boring a hole in a branch, she lays her eggs inside. The hollow branches are also home to tiny scale insects that feed on the tree’s sap. The ants care for these insects like livestock and milk them to obtain a nourishing drink. As soon as the ant colony is large enough, it starts evicting other residents and cleaning up the tree.

How fascinating to watch these brilliant little housekeepers! Some descend to the bottom of the tree and attack creepers that threaten to smother it. They gnaw right through the stems and thus kill the creepers. Other ants can be seen clearing the leaves of debris, moss, and lichen. Even a caterpillar found hidden underneath a leaf is evicted.

“Meticulously,” explains the TV documentary, “the ants clean up every piece of debris. Cleared of all damaging insects and creepers, the barteria can now compete effectively with other trees, protected by its ants. In return, the ants can use barteria’s hollow branches to tend their scale insects—their only source of food—and raise their young.” What industrious workers these ants are! An ancient proverb says: “Go to the ant, you lazy one; see its ways and become wise.”—Proverbs 6:6.

Wetlands of The World—Ecological Treasures Under Attack

Credits Goes to Facebook.com

THE Indians called it the Father of Waters. Geographers call it the Mississippi. Whatever you call it, it took its revenge on those who had squeezed it tight in a corset of dikes and levees, robbing it of its wetlands. Swollen by weeks of heavy rains, the river burst through the estimated 75 million sandbags that had been piled up against it and breached 800 of the 1,400 levees that had sought in vain to hold it in. The torrential floodwaters swept along houses, roads, bridges, and sections of railroad tracks and left many towns under water. “Probably the worst ever to wash over the United States,” The New York Times, August 10, 1993, reported.

The Times summarized some of the damage: “In its two-month rampage, the great Midwest flood of 1993 cut an awesome destructive swath. It took 50 lives, left almost 70,000 people homeless, inundated an area twice the size of New Jersey, caused an estimated $12 billion in property and agricultural damage and stirred anew a debate over the nation’s flood-control system and its policies.” Leaving intact the natural flood-control system of wetlands bordering the banks of the Mississippi would have saved 50 lives and 12 billion dollars. When will people learn that cooperating with nature is better than trying to subdue it? Wetlands adjoining a river serve as floodplains that draw off and store the excess water of rivers swollen by prolonged heavy rains.

But serving as natural flood-control mechanisms is only one of the many marvelous services rendered by the earth’s more than 3,300,000 square miles [8,500,000 sq km] of wetlands—which are currently under destructive attack worldwide.

Wetlands, Nurseries of the World

From the vast salt marshes of the coast to the small freshwater swamps, marshes, bogs, and fens inland, to the prairie potholes of the United States and Canada, the primary architect of wetlands is water. Wetlands are areas where the land is covered with water year round or covered only in time of flooding. Another type is coastal, or tidal, wetlands. Since most wetlands are characterized by a prolific growth of vegetation—grasses, sedges, bulrushes, trees, and shrubs—they support a variety of plant, fish, fowl, and animal life throughout the world.

A number of shorebirds and waterfowl make their homes in wetlands. More than a hundred species of them depend on these shallow oases during their spring migration. Many wetlands are nurseries for an immense population of geese and ducks—mallard, teal, and canvasback. These areas also provide food and shelter for such animals as alligator, beaver, muskrat, mink, and moose. Other animals, including bear, deer, and raccoon, use wetlands. They serve as spawning and nursery grounds for most of the fish that support America’s three-billion-dollar commercial fishing industry. It is estimated that 200 kinds of fish and large quantities of shellfish depend on wetlands for all or part of their life cycles.

In addition to being exceptional nurseries of life, wetlands have many ecological virtues. They are natural filters for removing waste and pollutants from rivers and streams and for purifying underground aquifers. They store water during rainy and flooding seasons and later release it slowly into streams, rivers, and aquifers. Tidal wetlands protect shorelines from erosion by waves.

Because of the very nature of their often prolific plant life, wetlands perform significant, essential functions. In the process of photosynthesis, for example, all green vegetation absorbs carbon dioxide from the air and returns oxygen to it. This is necessary for sustaining life. Plants in wetlands, however, are unique in that they are especially efficient in this process.

For centuries many countries have recognized the inestimable value of wetland management for food production. China and India, for example, lead the world in rice production, with other countries of Asia not far behind. Grown in wetlands called paddies, rice is one of the world’s most important food crops. About half the world’s population eat rice as their chief food. The United States and Canada began in time to realize the importance of wetlands and bogs for their production of rice and cranberries.

Wildlife too share in the feast provided by the wetlands. Not only are seeds and insects in abundance for the birds but they also feed the fish and crustaceans that spawn and grow to maturity in the wetlands. Ducks, geese, and other waterfowl in turn feed on these underwater creatures swimming in abundance in these oases of life. The current ecology balances matters to some extent by serving up a variety of fowl to the four-footed creatures who may wander into the wetlands looking for a meal. In the wetlands there is something for everything. They are truly nurseries of the world.
 
The Race to Destroy Wetlands
 
In the United States, the man who became its first president opened the floodgates of mass destruction of wetlands when in 1763 he formed a company to drain 40,000 acres [16,000 ha] of the Dismal Swamp—a wild marshland, a haven for wildlife—on the Virginia-North Carolina border. Ever since then, America’s wetlands have been viewed as a nuisance, a roadblock to development, a source of sickness and disease, a hostile environment to be conquered and destroyed at any cost. Farmers were encouraged to drain wetlands and use them for cultivated land and were compensated for doing so. Highways were built where wetlands teeming with exotic life once were. Many became sites for urban development and shopping centers or were used as convenient shallow depressions for dumping garbage.

In the last few decades of this century, the United States has been destroying its wetlands at the rate of 500,000 acres [200,000 ha] a year. Today, only about 90 million acres [40,000,000 ha] remain. Consider, for example, the pothole region of North America. In a 300,000-square-mile [800,000 sq km] arc of land that stretches from Alberta, Canada, to Iowa in the United States, thousands of prairie wetlands were the breeding grounds for millions upon millions of ducks. It is said that in flight they would darken the sky like dense clouds. Today their numbers have dwindled alarmingly.

The long-range problem, however, is this: When the wetlands are destroyed, the feeding grounds are gone. Without adequate food, ducks lay fewer eggs, and the hatching rate of those that are laid is notably affected. As their habitats are destroyed, more ducks flock to the few that remain, thus becoming easier prey for foxes, coyotes, skunks, raccoon, and other animals who dine on them.

In the United States, 50 percent of the pothole region’s wetlands have disappeared. Canada trails by less than 10 percent, but her destructive attacks are growing. Parts of North Dakota in the United States were 90 percent dry, Sports Illustrated magazine reported. Many farmers view wetlands as unproductive and a nuisance that gets in the way of their farm equipment, ignorant of their ecological value.

The hue and cry, however, to save the wetland habitat of wildlife is today being sounded loud and clear by concerned individuals and wildlife organizations. “The potholes are absolutely crucial,” said one concerned official. “If we’re going to harbour any long-term hope for ducks, we must preserve the wetlands.” “Waterfowl are a barometer of the ecological health of the continent,” said an official of the conservation organization Ducks Unlimited. The magazine U.S.News & World Report adds its voice: “[The ducks’] dwindling numbers reflect assaults on the environment on many different fronts: Acid rain, pesticides, but most of all, the destruction of millions of acres of priceless wetlands.”

“Ninety percent of California’s coastal salt marshes have been destroyed,” reported the magazine California, “and every year 18,000 more acres [7,000 ha] disappear. The tule elk survive only in a few scattered places. The ducks and geese return in smaller numbers each year to their ever-shrinking wintering grounds. Many wetland species are close to extinction.” In silence these whose lives depend on the world’s wetlands for survival cry out for help.

The Water Crisis
 
A terrible thing has happened on man’s way to destroying earth’s wetlands. He has affected his most valuable and critical resource—water. Water is essential for every living thing. Many of the world’s scientists have predicted a time when pure water will be earth’s scarcest resource. “Either we manage to limit the waste of water or by the year 2000 we shall be dying of thirst,” proclaimed the UN World Conference on water in 1977.
With these ominous warnings of the potential shortage of this valuable resource, conventional wisdom should dictate a respectful management of earth’s waters. In man’s race to destroy wetlands, however, he has seriously jeopardized this most necessary resource. Wetlands help in the purification of surface water—rivers and streams. Some aquifers are no longer being recharged with pure water but are now contaminated with waste and pollutants, all to man’s detriment. Water that was once there in multitudes of wetlands has been drained, adding to the shortage.
Will responsible men hear the frantic cries for help of wetlands-dependent life? Will action be taken to save such life before it is too late? Or will men remain deaf to these cries, with ears open only to the wails of the greedy?

The Attack Is Worldwide

At the opening of a worldwide campaign promoted by the United Nations to save wetlands, threats to Brazil’s Pantanal ecosystem were cited. It is one of the world’s largest wetlands. The magazine BioScience stated: “The Pantanal, with its extraordinary diversity and abundance of wildlife, is a threatened region. Deforestation; expanding agriculture; illegal hunting and fishing; and pollution of the water with herbicides, pesticides, and by-products of fuel alcohol production have caused a progressive deterioration of the natural environment, placing at risk one of Brazil’s most important ecosystems.”

The New York Times pointed out the threat to the wetlands along the coast of the Mediterranean. “The loss of wetlands has quickened in the last three decades as the Mediterranean coasts have become more coveted than ever and large stretches of coastline have been covered with concrete in the name of sun worship, comfort and profits. United Nations studies cite major losses in Italy, Egypt, Turkey and Greece.”

The wetlands of Spain’s fabulous 125,000-acre [50,000 ha] Doñana National Park become an avian airport in spring as hundreds of thousands of birds en route from Africa to Europe stop off at its swamps and woodlands to nest and breed and feed. But the rash of hotels, golf courses, and farmlands surrounding the park are siphoning off so much of the water that the park’s survival is threatened. In the past 15 years, such projects have already pumped so much water that the water table has dropped 6 to 30 feet [2-9 m], and several lagoons have dried up. “Any more growth here,” the park’s research director says,” will be the death sentence for Doñana.”

State of the World 1992 reports: “Mangroves, one of the most threatened and valuable types of wetlands, have suffered heavy losses in Asia, Latin America, and west Africa. Nearly half of these protective swamp forests in Ecuador, for example, have been cleared, mostly for shrimp ponds, and plans call for the conversion of a like proportion of the remaining areas. India, Pakistan, and Thailand have all lost at least three fourths of their mangroves. Indonesia seems determined to follow suit: in Kalimantan, its largest province, 95 percent of all mangroves are to be cleared for pulpwood production.”

The value of mangroves is highlighted in Thailand’s Bangkok Post of August 25, 1992: “Mangrove forests are made up of diverse tree species which thrive in upper tidal zones along flat, sheltered tropical shores. The trees have [thrived] in the harsh environment of brackish water and changing tides. Their special adaptive aerial roots and salt-filtering tap roots have established rich and complex ecosystems.

 Besides protecting vast areas of coastline from erosion, they are vital to inshore fisheries, wood-products industries, and wildlife.“In the mangrove forest life abounds. One can find shorebirds, crab-eating monkeys, fishing cats and mud-skipper fish that skim across the swamp mud to make their way between water holes at low tide.”

What Will Be the Outcome?

The crisis is worldwide. International Wildlife magazine states: “The bogs, fens, bayous, mangrove swamps, salt marshes, prairie potholes and lagunas that once covered more than 6 percent of the Earth’s landmass are in deep trouble. So many have been drained for farming, destroyed by pollution or filled in by developers that about half the planet’s wetland acreage has disappeared.”

Will people make peace with the earth? So far the signs are not encouraging. Yet, some struggle valiantly and claim that they will succeed. Jehovah, the earth’s Creator, says they will fail. He promises to step in and stop the assault on his marvelous earthly creation. He will “bring to ruin those ruining the earth,” and in their stead he will leave upon it those who will “take care of it.” To such appreciative ones, he will present it as a gift: “You are the ones blessed by Jehovah, the Maker of heaven and earth. As regards the heavens, to Jehovah the heavens belong, but the earth he has given to the sons of men.”—Revelation 11:18; Genesis 2:15; Psalm

[Credit Line]
By courtesy of the National Research Council of Thailand
Residents of wetlands: crocodile, bullfrog, dragonfly, box turtle digging hole to lay eggs