Tyson Foods no longer uses cattle fed Zilmax growth hormone. Will other meat packers follow suit? Then, the Princeton Review released their annual list of party schools. Did your alma mater make the list? Next, we talk with author David Robertson on the toy empire Lego. How has the company managed to be so successful for so long? And later, we'll talk about the fear of flying. What is it that triggers the phobia? And should we consider regulating sugar like we do alcohol? What are the benefits and what are the drawbacks?
Tyson Foods bans using cattle with Zilmax growth hormone
Last Thursday market traders noticed cattle prices rise sharply. It was in response to news that Tyson Foods - a major meatpacker - quietly had sent letters to cattle feedlots indicating Tyson would no longer buy cows fed Zilmax. That's a supplement designed to bulk up cows before slaughter.
Tyson cited the health of animals as reason for the change. They said experts have anecdotal evidence of cows becoming lame as a side effect of the growth-inducing drug. Such supplements are approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration. If market prices are up on the news, consumers can expect supermarket prices to rise, too. Industry watchers are calling this a game-changer. Some also question Tyson's true motivation.
Is it because they're trying to gain access to foreign markets that ban growth hormones? Is the export market becoming more important than domestic shoppers for agriculture companies? Will other meatpackers follow suit? Will feedlots be forced to halt using Zilmax and similar drugs?
Guests:
Mike Callicrate , Cattle producer based in St. Francis, Kansas; Proprietor of Ranch Foods Direct which markets farm to table beef
Tom Talbot, Cattle producer and Veterinarian from Bishop, California; Past Chairman, Cattle Health and Well-Being Committee, National Cattlemen’s Beef Association
Dennis Smith, Livestock Industry Analyst and Commodities Broker, Archer Financial Services
Top party schools unveiled: did your alma mater make the list?
The University of Iowa is ranked the number one party school in the country as part of the latestPrinceton Review rankings. Last year, Princeton Review ranked West Virginia University number one, but this year WVU dropped to fourth place. University of California, Santa Barbara, is ranked number two. On the other end of the spectrum, the Princeton Review also ranked the top sober schools, with Pepperdine University coming in at number 17.
Princeton Review's Top 10 "Party Schools" for 2013-2014
1. University of Iowa
2. University of California at Santa Barbara
3. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
4. West Virginia University
5. Syracuse University
6. University of Florida
7. Ohio University at Athens
8. University of Wisconsin at Madison
9. Pennsylvania State University at University Park
10. Lehigh University
If you’re a parent, would you care if the school your son or daughter went to a school on the top party schools list? Is your alma mater a party school? Do rankings like this help or hurt a school’s reputation? How much do these rankings matter?
Guest:
Rob Franek, publisher, The Princeton Review
How Lego went from being a cute toy to a play-time empire
The iconic LEGO brick was built in 1958, and since has captivated fans everywhere becoming the world's most valuable toy company. But just 10 years ago the company faced bankruptcy, failing in profits. It started with a Danish carpenter who created toys, and through innovation created hit toys for the next four decades. The book, “Brick by Brick: How LEGO Rewrote the Rules of Innovation and Conquered the Global Toy Industry” delves into the key strategies of the company, its most popular inventions and what nearly ruined the company. This is an insiders story that gives a glimpse into the brand that has reinvented itself through designers, company leadership and loyal fans.
Guest:
David Robertson, professor of Innovation and Product Development at the University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business and the author of “Brick by Brick: How LEGO Rewrote the Rules of Innovation and Conquered the Global Toy Industry”
Why flying phobias persist despite soaring airline safety records
The dramatic images of Saturday's Asiana Airlines' crash stir fears of flying, but the sober statistics of plane crashes tell a different story. According to a notable scholar from MIT, the chance of dying in an airplane disaster in the U.S. is 1 in 14 million. Travelling abroad? World-wide, 2012 was the safest year for commercial air travel since 1945. Put another way, MIT’s Arnold Barnett says flying has become so reliable that you could fly every day for 123,000 years before being in a fatal crash.
So why are people still afraid of flying? Some are so scared that careers get derailed, vacations never got off the ground, and far-away loved ones get fed up with one-way visits. UCLA psychologist Emanuel Maidenberg joins AirTalk to explain the causes of and cures for aerophobia.
Guest:
Emanuel Maidenberg, PhD, Psychologist with the UCLA Health System; he specializes in anxiety disorders
Can regulating sugar like alcohol help lower Americans' sugar consumption?
Yep. That’s exactly what pediatric endocrinologist Robert Lustig at the University of California, San Francisco suggested in an interview at this year’s Aspen Ideas Festival. Lustig argues that sugar satisfies the four criteria used to determine whether a substance, like alcohol, should be regulated. 1. Ubiquity: it is everywhere. 2. Toxicity: that consumption in a large amount leads to chronic health problems. 3. Addictiveness: the more we eat it, the more we want it. 4. It has a negative impact on society.
Certainly, overindulging your sweet tooth could lead to diabetes, obesity and other health issues, but is sugar really as bad as something like liquor? Should we consider regulating sugar? What are the benefits and the drawbacks?
Guests:
Robert Lustig, M.D., a pediatric endocrinologist at the University of California, San Francisco.
Keith Ayoob, Associate Professor of Pediatrics at Albert Einstein College of Medicine