A few years ago, I went to the wedding of a good friend – a good guy friend – and somewhere between the exchange of rings and that first slice of cake realized the family and friends of the bride were giving me the stink eye. 

Why? Apparently because I didn’t have the good sense to realize I was having an affair with the groom. News to me, of course, since we were strictly buddies (I often referred to him as the “little brother I never wanted”). But to anyone familiar with the movie When Harry Met Sally – which apparently included the entire bridal party — we weren’t friends at all, because men and women can’t be friends, the sex always gets in the way.

The old opposite sex friends thing is a long-standing dilemma and has made for many such scenes and stories. I was even interviewed about it recently by freelance writer Mark Amundsen for an article that just went live on Match.com. And I’ve written about the topic myself for CNN.com.

Personally, I’ve always felt that you can be “just friends” with a guy and have a raft of sex-free straight friendships to prove it. Of course, I’ve also had a handful of friendships with men where there was some kind of spark, a spark that was sometimes allowed to flare up. And other times, tamped back down (because of boyfriends, girlfriends, or because having sex with a friend is just “Ewwww,” as one source puts it). 

But it’s not always about sex. The real issue with opposite sex friendships – or any friendship, for that matter – is intimacy. I know now that that was what was really bothering the bride and her posse all those years ago. I wasn’t in bed with the groom but I was in sync with him. There was a closeness between us and that closeness was threatening, something that finally hit home when the bride icily handed me a piece of wedding cake (I felt like she’d frosted it with her gaze). Not surprisingly, she served up an ultimatum about the friendship to her husband shortly thereafter.

So what do you think? Have you had opposite sex friendships that stayed spark-free? Or is there always something brewing in the background? And what about the other relationships that come into play – the girlfriends and boyfriends, husbands and wives, the confused family members and friends who don’t quite get it (“So you’re not dating, you’re just spending all of your time with him or her?”) Have your sex-free friendships come under fire by a romantic partner? Have you ever had to give them up?

As always, would love to hear your thoughts. After all that talk of cake, baked goods gladly accepted, as well.

We’ve all seen the personal ads, heard the familiar phrases. Brainy blonde looking for my knight in shining armor. Investment banker in search of his queen. Prince or Princess Charming, where the hell are you?

From televised tripe like The Bachelor to essays in The New York Times (where a writer recently lamented that she “would love to experience life as a pampered princess, at least once”), you’ll find some single people clinging to dreams of royal romance as desperately as some folks hang onto their bad high-school-hair.

I’ve got a new piece out on Singularcity.com (the same folks who publish the slick, sensational Singular Magazine) that discusses the pyrite-like allure of fairy tale romance and what life was really like for kings, queens, princesses and those handsome knights in shining armor.

According to social historian Stephanie Coontz, most royal unions were nasty, brutish and short – especially on love.

“Princess Diana’s situation is typical as far as the historic tradition goes,” says Coontz, author of Marriage: A History and director of education at the Council on Contemporary Families. “Once they got the woman to give them their heir, the king or prince went back to whomever they really liked.”

Princesses were usually pampered by their sycophantic servants rather than suitors and those dashing knights weren’t exactly handsome heroes (or all that hygienic).

For the full story behind the “happily ever after” stuff we’ve been reared on all these years, click here. Warning: reading this story may be hazardous to your Disneyesque ideals of romance.

A buddy and I went to see “Psycho” the other night at the Seattle Symphony. It was fabulous seeing the Hitchcock classic in all its gory on the big screen. Ditto for hearing Bernard Herrmann’s brilliant score being performed live.

The only problem was coming home after the movie. Alone. In the dark. In the middle of a slashing rainstorm.

Jumping out of the cab, I flew up the stairs to my apartment, locked the doors, and desperately surfed the channels looking for a mindless comedy. But it was the day before Halloween and the TV was practically squirting blood.

I finally settled on the campy 1958 science fiction thriller, The Blob (starring Steve McQueen!). But even a handful of wacky teenagers trying to defeat a monster that looked like it belonged inside a Hostess cherry pie couldn’t keep me from thinking about Norman Bates careening around a corner with a butcher knife and a bad wig. Such is the power of being “scared single.” 

It’s happened to me before, most recently when I stayed up until 3 in the morning watching some bad Ewan McGregor film about a serial killer who steals women’s eyes (click here for the Single Shot column I wrote about the whole ordeal).

I use a lot of self-talk (and a little bit of closet-checking) to get through my scared single moments. How about you? Do you keep a baseball bat under the bed, a can of Mace in your makeup bag? Or have you given up the ghost entirely and gotten “scared married”? 

You stop into your favorite watering hole after a long week at work and what should happen but you meet somebody cute. And not only are they cute, they’re seemingly single, obviously interested and there’s even a bit of a spark.

So what do you do? Give them your card? (That’s backfired before.) Give them a deep wet kiss in the back of the coat closet? (Only to be surprised by “sudden spouse syndrome” three weeks down the line.) Or do you pull out your iPhone and do a quick background check while they’re in the loo so you can find out if they’re a creep or a con man or a convicted pedophile before things get out of hand.

My latest Tech story for MSNBC.com looks at DateCheck, a brand new mobile phone app that (for a fee) lets you plumb a slew of public databases to find out if Mr. or Ms. Seemingly Wonderful is married, a convicted felon or worse, a weekend clog dancer.

Some singles love having a “private dick” in the palm of their hands; others feel this sort of access to private information — i.e., a person’s address, employer, property tax records, a record of their unpaid parking tickets — is a bit of a slippery slope. Or just plain old unethical.

What do you do think? Would you want to get the 411 on a complete stranger (and/or have them be able to get it on you?). Or do you prefer to trust your gut when it comes to potential suitors. Discuss among yourselves. I’ll be in the coat closet awaiting your answer.

I came across a post on the Seattle P-I’s The Big Blog today that gave me a start, primarily because I’d read the story somewhere before. Apparently, a trio of carefree single girls had decided to take a trip across America with “no money, no plan and a name they knew would draw attention and controversy.”

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Hot and Retarded.

On August 28, Seattle’s own H & R member (Erica) will join her two friends, Annie and Nicole (hmmmm, where have I heard that before?) for a five-week journey from Los Angeles to the East Coast and back.

“I’ve got no kids, no relationship, no real career and I see all these people constantly say, ‘I’d wish I’d done that when I was younger,’” Erica explained in an interview with the P-I. “I never want to hear myself say that.”

Armed with little more than their cell phone cameras and a potential deal with Fox News, the trio seems open to anything – love, adventure, perhaps even jail time.

“We’ll definitely be getting into trouble along the road,” Erica told the P-I.

After digging around in the dusty recesses of my brain (and my files), I came across the original story that whispered to me when I first read about this madcap-single-gals-take-the-country-by-storm scenario. Wouldn’t you know it? It’s been done before. Like 80 years before.

Back in 1928, another titillating trio decided to set out on a cross-country journey with not much more than a bit of newspaper publicity and some chutzpah. Dubbed the Matrimonial Musketeers, the toothsome threesome was led by Helen Davis, a “pretty Washingtonian still on the sunny side of 40,” who decided to go out in search of decent single guys after she found the pickings in Washington, D.C., too slim. Helen didn’t have two single buddies to join her (most 32-year-olds were long married in that day and age), so she did the next best thing. She put an ad in the paper, garnering nearly 200 responses, out of which she chose two game dames: Stella and Vivian. The three met, discussed the trip, then set about taking care pre-travel necessities, i.e., holding press conferences and having their picture taken (did I mention you can watch a series of YouTube videos with the Hot and Retarded Erica?).

As with today’s trio, the 1928 group set off to much acclaim – their adventures were covered in New York, Iowa, Ohio, D.C., and elsewhere – and many proclamations. “En route, we are going to hold receptions and look over the candidates,” Helen told reporters of their forthcoming plans. “Wherever we stop, all lonely single people will be invited to attend the parties. They may make matches for themselves or the women may join our caravan. We expect to have several automobile loads of eligible women in our party before we reach California.”

Similarly, today’s travelers posted plans about their forthcoming adventure on their website: “There will also be various competitions that you can compete in to party with us as we make our way to your city, along with guest appearances from people we pick up in a city and leave in another, along the way.”

As luck would have it, though, Helen and her companions never made Los Angeles. In fact, they barely made it out of D.C. before Vivian decided to jump ship, leaving Helen and Stella to charm the nation’s bachelors. And that didn’t last too long. According to newspaper accounts, the pair only made it to Nashville, Tennessee before they got into a fight about money and parted ways. Unfortunately, they didn’t part friends; Stella contacted the police who put out a description of Helen and her “husband-hunting” game. No word was available as to whether Helen was eventually arrested or married or both (oh wait, is that the same?).

Will today’s trio of media-savvy minxes fare better than Helen and her posse? Hard to say, but I do find it fascinating how the game never changes. Just the players. And — to borrow a phrase — the level of retardation.

Editor’s note: For a roadtrip of a different kind, here’s a link to an essay I did for the Seattle Times a while back.

You’ve heard of the biological clock. And the doomsday clock. Now meet the “groomsday clock.” Or rather, the groomsday bra. It’s a little tricky so bear with me.

Apparently, Japan is going through a bit of a social craze right now known as “konkatsu” (marriage hunting). According to a story in the Wall Street Journal, marriage rates in Japan have plummeted over the past 30 years with the rate of unmarried men age 30 to 34 soaring from 14% to 47% and the rate of unmarried women skyrocketing from 8% to 32%. There are lots of reasons for the increase in singlehood — women are focusing on their careers more, traditional matchmaking by “neighborhood aunties” has started to fade away – but the authors of a new bestselling book, “The Era of Marriage Hunting” (think of it as “The Rules” of Japan) feel that this is a bad thing. They encourage singles to go on the prowl, to quit sitting around and waiting for the right match to come along, to get out there and hunt that spouse down.

As a result, many unmarried women in Japan have jumped on a “marriage hunting” bandwagon. Although, according to the article, the men are a bit more reticent about the whole business, thanks to the economic slump (men, traditionally, marry when they feel like they can afford it).

Where does the weird ticking bra come in?

Well, Japanese women aren’t the only ones to embrace the “marriage hunting” mindset (and not all of them have, mind you). Businesses have also gone ga-ga for the concept, primarily as away to boost their, if you’ll pardon the expression, sagging bottom line. There are konkatsu bars, konkatsu seats at the baseball game, konkatsu prayer services (for $62 a pop) and even a popular new konkatsu TV show. Local governments have also gotten into the act, promoting konkatsu matchmaking events, perhaps in hopes of boosting the country’s low birthrate (no marriage, no babies — eek!).

And now, there’s the konkatsu bra, a lovely piece of lingerie with a clock embedded into the lace, a clock that counts down to some kind of marriage deadline. According to the WSJ article, “inserting an engagement ring into the heart-shaped ring box between the cups stops the ticking and a congratulatory wedding march begins to play.”

No pressure or anything.

So I’m curious … what happens if no one inserts a ring into this urgent piece of underwear? Does the bra explode? Administer an electric shock? And if a woman gets married to the one (or “a one” which is much more likely when it comes to this kind of weird matrimania) and it doesn’t work out, does the clock automatically rewind? Does she somehow get back the “best years of her life”?

Just a bit of food for thought on this lovely Independence Day. And a reminder to enjoy yours while you can. (Need a primer in the joys of living alone? Check out my Single Shot column from last Fourth of July.)

Says Schneider:

If nanotechnology goes astray, companies and their investors could face billions of dollars in asbestos-like litigation because potential risks are now hidden due to weak regulations governing disclosure of liabilities.

The post is on Cold Truth, Schneider’s newly launched blog. For what it’s worth, I’ve been giving Schneider technology advice as he mixes old-school, award-winning investigative techniques with new-school publishing technology. This will be a site to watch.

I’m moving. Again.

andrewschneiderinvestigates.com is being replaced with my new site, ColdTruth.com.

Although I know how to dig through documents and get bad guys to confess their misdeeds, I’m learning as I go about the best ways to use this new medium. And one of the things I’ve learned — especially from many of you — is that the name I had was too long, too easy to misspell and just generally a pain. So we’re changing it to ColdTruth.com. Short, easy to remember and ready for you to check out.

You’ll find the same investigative coverage of health, environmental and workplace issues from me. And you’ll also see investigative work from my colleague Ben Shors, a journalism professor at Washington State University and a very talented environmental reporter.

So, if you want to keep up on the latest hot facts, you can now find them on coldtruth.com

I’m hoping that I’ll see you on the other side.come

a. schneider

I’ve been doing journalism for decades, several of them. I covered my first two or three wars with the keys of a battered portable typewriter.

It never crashed but the spell-checker is lousy

I not only understand change, I covet the ability to get our words out instantly and to a world-wide audience that most journalists never dreamed of reaching a few years ago.

This morning, I saw something in the news that hammered home how deeply cyber communications have permeated our cells.

For centuries, governments and ruling powers have tried to control how much their citizens knew about the news of the day, especially during battles, coups d’état, revolutions, uprisings and episodes of political upheaval. I have watched this, some times far too closely, in Central and South America, the Caribbean, Asia, the Middle East and twice in Africa.

The first rule was always to seize and close the newspapers, then silence the radio stations and, in later years, stifle the television broadcasts. This was always pretty easy because those with the guns and machetes knew where the offices were.

Today, gagging dissemination of news and comment is far more complex.

Just read the following two sentences from an Associated Press dispatch from Tehran on crowds taking to the streets protesting yesterday’s vote and claiming that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad had stolen the presidential election.

Deep into the AP story the reporter wrote:

“Authorities pushed back with ominous measures apparently seeking to undercut liberal voices: jamming text messages, blocking pro-Mousavi Web sites and Facebook and cutting off mobile phones in Tehran.

“With the Internet and mobile texting down, some Iranians turned to Twitter to voice their views.”

The government made getting the word out more difficult, but they failed to stop it. Cyberspace over Iran is very much alive with what people think.

Silver nanoparticles, untested for safety, are being used in a growing number of children’s toys, babies’ bottles, cosmetics, dishwashers, underwear and hundreds of other items.
A report issued today says that consumers and workers who make the products may be at risk.

Silver nano particles Photo ACA

The report, authored by Friends of the Earth and Health Care Without Harm Europe, details what they call “the growing public health threat posed by nano-silver particles in consumer products.”

“What we’ve learned is alarming,” said Ian Illuminato, one of the report’s authors.

“Major corporations are putting nano-silver into a wide variety of consumer products with virtually no oversight, and there are potentially serious health consequences as a result. The workers who manufacture these products, the families that use them, and the environment are all at risk.”

Human consumption of silver is not new and medical historians have traced its health benefits back

Ian Illuminato, Friends of the Earth

more than a century. At that time, the literature reports, people had ready access to beneficial silver in their diet because it was plentiful in surface and ground waters.

“What we’re concerned about is when the silver is scaled to nano size because evidence shows that it is far more potent. That potency – the impact on human health – is what is we don’t yet know,” Illuminato told me.

His concern is shared by other scientists who also worry that nanosilver doesn’t distinguish between good and bad bacteria. It kills all bacteria, even the good bacteria that humans and animals need to survive.

“We are playing with fire, especially at a time when anti-bacterial resistance is an ever increasing medical problem globally,” said report co-author Dr. Rye Senjen, of Australia.

“Do we really need to coat cups, bowls and cutting boards, personal care products, children’s toys and infant products in nano-silver for ‘hygienic’ reasons?” he asked.

The Korean manufacturer Samsung made the first clothes washer with a nanosilver-coated drum and said it would kill over 600 different bacteria.

Nanoparticles are one billionth of a meter in size or, as one scientist told me at a nano-in-food conference this week in California, “Slice a human hair lengthwise into a 100 slivers and a single one of those is what we’re dealing with. We are manipulating single molecules and atoms.”

Andrew Maynard

The Project on Emerging Nanotechnologies, one of the best known centers for nanotech policy research, presented testimony before Congress last year and cautioned that hundreds of products with nano particles are on the market, with three to five new ones added every week.

Andrew Maynard, the lead scientist for the Project, told me in an telephone interview from the Regulating Nanotechnology in Food and Consumer Products conference in Brussels yesterday, that the report raises some uncertainties that must be addressed.

“There is no indication that silver at the nano scale goes wild in the body. However, it is known that silver becomes more toxic at the nano level,” Maynard explained, adding, “That does not mean it always does more damage.

“More research must be done.”

A coalition of consumer protection, public health and environmental groups filed a petition with the Environmental Protection Agency demanding the agency halt the sale of consumer products containing silver nanoparticles

The petition called for the EPA to:

* Determine the potential human health and environmental hazards from nanosilver with nano-specific toxicity data requirements, testing and risk assessments.

* Clarify that nano-silver is a pesticide and thus must undergo the rigorous and extensive testing process involved in registering a pesticide. Moreover, products with nano-silver must carry a pesticide label.

* Take immediate action to prohibit the sale of nano-silver products as illegal pesticide products with unapproved health benefit claims.

The authors of the report say that EPA is not “doing near enough” to address the hazard.

“This report should be a kick in the pants to EPA to start fining companies that use nanosilver without going through the registration process,” Dr. Jennifer Sass, senior scientist and nano specialist for the Natural Resources Defense Council, who is also speaking at the Brussel’s meeting told me in an email.

EPA says it is ready to take action if asked.

“The EPA is prepared to address the nanosilver issue but nobody has applied to the EPA with a product. It hasn’t happened,” said Dale Kemery, an agency spokesman.

Nanoized silver is not the only metal that worries regulators and the public health community. Carbon nanotubes, nano zerovalent iron, cerium oxide and others are on some government hot lists.

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control has ordered all manufacturers who manufacture, import, sell or use nano material with those metals to supply the department with extensive information on their source, use, transport, and disposal.

According to the EPA and FDA, they have no plans to collect similar information.

The debate, to some extent, centers on semantics. Pesticides kill bugs and other things and their use is controlled by the government.

The Nanotechnology Industries Association and other trade groups insist that nanosilver is antimicrobial – it goes after germs – and is not a pesticide.

Many food exports from China may be dangerous, but some of the tricks used to fool Chinese shoppers are even more treacherous.

Everyone knows about the about the tens of thousands of Chinese infants struck down but kidney-destroying melamine in their milk and the 60,000 dogs and cats worldwide who died after eating it in the pet food. Here are some other examples to consider:

Stinky tofu (yes, a real name) is a very popular street food throughout many Asian countries. Its aroma, which can bring the weak to their knees, comes from lengthy and thus costly fermentation. Chinese food authorities found that some tofu producers created the reeking odor with rancid water and sewage. The desirable dark color came from ten illegal chemical dyes.

Chicken and duck farmers added Sudan Red Dye IV to the feed used in their poultry operations. The dye, a cancer-causing agent banned in food in many countries, makes the yolks a vivid bright reddish orange, and is sought after as a special and costly treat.

Some of the Chinese verdors at the IFT expo. (c) a. schneider

Another egg fraud centers on another foul-smelling but very expensive and coveted traditional delicacy called a 1000-year-old egg. They’re really not preserved for ten centuries, but more like 100 to 150 days, according to a cook who gave me a bite of one in Vancouver. She said they normally are buried in a mixture of soil, lime, ashes, salt and green tea. Eventually, the egg white turns a gooey brown in color, and the yolk becomes dark grayish-green. But people love it.

Money hungry phony egg producers eliminate the waiting time and just add lead oxide to alter the eggs. However, the chemical can destroy blood, the central nervous system, kidneys and other organs as well as causing birth defects and convulsions.

Other inventive food suppliers, instead of using a higher quality flour, have been caught adding alum to strengthen noodles and borax to preserve rice cakes, while fish farmers use the cancer and birth defect-causing antibiotic and antifungal agent Malachite green to control disease in the fish they sell. Of course, there are the beekeepers who taint their honey by using illegal antibiotics in their hives.

“Everyone of these food adulterations can be attributed to economic motivation,” said Dr. Yao-wen Huang, a professor of food science at the University of Georgia. Most of the appealing examples mentioned above are his, and he and his colleague Hong Zhuang, a research food technologist for the USDA, were speaking at the International Institute of Food Technologists on food safety challenges in China.

The existing food safety system is not effective for a variety of reasons, including that 17 different bureaucracies work under the food and drug safety umbrella, and they each jealously guard their power, Huang explained but added, that 8o percent of China’s food producers are small operations employing fewer than 10 workers and most pay little attention to the few safety requirement that exist.

Not only is enforcement convoluted, but also the blurred lines of responsibility and weak investigatory skills are further hampered by corruption, with some inspectors and their bosses take bribes in exchange for favors, the professor told me.

Prof. Yao-Wen Huang

On June 1, China imposed a new food safety law.

Qin Zhenkui, president of the Chinese Academy of Inspection and Quarantine, believes the comprehensive requirements of the new law will make a difference.

Zhuang presented remarks from Zhenkui, which detailed the increased controls on food producers. These include inspection and licensing of all food manufacturers as well as rigorous requirements and previous state approval for all additives.

Food inspectors are not permitted to grant any exceptions to the rules, Zhuang explained.

This could eliminate, or at least reduce, the bribes for not seeing wrongdoing, but is that enough?

“The law should be an improvement,” Huang told me. “Everyone in the supply chain should be forced to get involved in ensuring the safety of the food — from the farmers, to the processors, the transporters, exporters and the importers themselves.

“’I didn’t know’ can no longer be an acceptable answer from anyone when it comes to food safety.”

This morning I stopped by nine exhibits of Chinese companies exporting food and asked representatives what they thought of their country’s two week-old food safety law.

Five sales agents told me that they’d never heard of it. The remaining four said the were forbidden to speak with the press, but one added, “China only sells the highest quality food. The problems in the press are fabricated.”

He wouldn’t give me his name.

There are two gigantic professional food organizations that gather their members each year to compare notes and discuss what’s new.

The International Association of Culinary Professionals musters its legions of chefs, recipe creators, food stylists, restaurateurs, educators and writers. They debate and discuss what new styles of cooking, innovations in cuts and seasoning of beef, pork, lamb, poultry, goats and seafood of all types, and treatments of fruits, veggies and salads will be appearing on menus throughout the world.

The other culinary blow out is the international conference and food expo of the Institute for Food Technologists, which is meeting here in Anaheim this week. Jumping from meeting to meeting and cruising the poster sessions, it appears to me that safety is this group’s most important product. Scientists of almost every conceivable specialty gave scores of presentations on making food safer and keeping it safe, which is what the food developers, producers and processors they work for must have.

I walked around the exposition floors where about 1,200 companies are showing their products and services and checked out what was being touted as new and better. Most were additives.

Make up your own mind if this bothers you or if you realize that it’s just a necessary fact of life in the food industry.

Here are just some of the additives I could recognize. There were:
Acids and alkaline agents.
Anti-caking agents.
Antimicrobial agents.
Bulking agents.
Bleaching agents.
Colors.
Brining, pickling and curing chemicals.
Emulsifiers.
Fat replacements.
Flavoring agents, hundreds of different ones.
Nutrients.
Stabilizers.
Thickenings.

I only made it around half of the display hall, but it’s obvious that lots of substances are added to what we eat. I wonder whether these additives deal with safety of the food or marketability?

I’m in Anaheim, Calif., and I’m not visiting Disney’s mouse. For the next few days, I’ll be attending the Institute of Food Technologists’ annual international conference. It’s not nearly as boring as it sounds.

There are about 15,000 food scientists, microbiologists, engineers, chemists, educators, government regulators, chefs and a score or more of other PhD-toting specialists from well over 50 countries. What they all have in common, besides being in this hunk of California, is that just about every one of them is obsessed with food – its safety, flavor, shelf life, appeal, delivery and just about every other aspect of food creation, processing and marketing that makes edibles leap into your shopping cart.

Sitting at the bar in the convention hotel – the Hilton – a cluster of the attendees were sputtering in their drinks last night as one scientist said he felt really at home in this hotel because the water in his room was as chalky white as gunk that came out of the hand-dug well in his rural farm in Somalia. But, he said, the water of his childhood tasted better.

Knowing that they had a hotel full of scientists whose life’s work is to prevent and detect bad things in liquids and foodstuff, you might have thought that the hotel staff would have been more candid about the nasty-tasting, opaque water that squirts from their facets.

Fresh from the Hilton tap

Two front desk managers feigned amazement when I asked about the weird water, both saying they’d never heard of it but they’re sure that it’s safe. However, it wasn’t a surprise to the housekeepers, bartenders and a telephone operator,who all said: “Whatever you do, don’t drink the water.”

Of course, the Hilton was helpful, a flavor scientist said sarcastically . “They told me that room service would gladly bring me as much of the $6 a liter ‘artesian water’ as I wanted to buy,” he repeated.

Don’t let me leave the impression that all the attendees do is drink (there are beaches 20 minutes away.) There are 1,400 scientific lectures, seminars and symposiums such as: the oxicative stability of raw chicken breast and beef loin; the handling of blue pigments in crushed garlic cloves; the antioxidant capacity of traditional rye breads; PCBs and organochlorine insecticides in fish oil being sold in Canada, and many, many more.

One of the main reasons that I came is that there are about 12 hours of lectures on nanotechnology in food. By the time I attend them all, I hope to be able to spell the word.

I admit that this is not beach reading but these are the people who work to keep our food tasty and safe.

More on how they do that later.

Hot on the heels of a new study that suggests women aren’t that picky about mate selection after all (see “You’re so picky!” below), comes this news item about a new reality show where women are getting married without even meeting their mates.

Currently in development with Fox, “I Married a Stranger” will feature a gaggle of 30-something single women “frustrated by the dating scene” (spinster alert!) who agree to marry men they’ve never met. Who are these guys? The producers of the show will come up with a half a dozen bachelors as a starting point (dullard alert!), after which the woman’s friends and family will whittle it down to one. In other words, the husbands will be created by committee. Yippee!

Each episode of “I Married a Stranger” will feature a bride-to-be preparing for her “blind wedding” and a finale in which two groom finalists walk down the aisle. But as the show’s creators put it “only one makes it to the altar to reveal himself to his new wife.”

So, what, is the guy going to be wearing the veil?

Oddly enough, this isn’t the only reality show featuring women marrying strangers that’s in the works. CBS has also announced a new reality series called “Arranged Marriage,” in which three women marry three guys sight unseen and, you guessed it, hilarity ensues. According to the CBS website, “’Arranged Marriage’ is a series that brings the tradition of arranged marriages, which is still practiced successfully by many cultures throughout the world, to the U.S., where it is virtually an inconceivable option for most single Americans.”

I suppose I shouldn’t complain. There are tons of other traditions “practiced successfully by many cultures throughout the world” that they could have turned into a reality TV series. Stoning, for instance.

But the whole arranged marriage thing – especially when played out on national TV – just seems creepy. What happens if they marry somebody off to a psychopath? Is that part of the entertainment? Next up on “I Married a Strangler”: Susie discovers a garotte in Brad’s underwear drawer!

Also, what kind of message does this impart to little kids? Or even big kids? I know reality TV is supposed to be light entertainment and all, but it’s hard to take all this “sanctimony of marriage” talk seriously when shows like this turn it into such a desperate disturbing farce.

Personally, I’d rather tune in to something more honest like “I Slept With a Stranger.” Or as you may know it, Sex and the City.

Prof. Dash

Physicians have figured out that nanoparticles of silver may be a new way to prevent blood clots and some coronary artery disease, heart attack and stroke.

Dr. Debabrata Dash and colleagues at India’s Institute of Medical Sciences at Banaras Hindu University said they pursued the anti-clotting study because “patients urgently need new anti-thrombotic agents because traditionally prescribed medications too-often cause dangerous bleeding.”

The scientists found that when low levels of silver nano particles – only 1/50,000th the diameter of a human hair – were injected into the bloodstream laboratory mice, it reduced the ability of platelets to clump together by as much as 40 percent.

I asked a couple of cardiologists in Seattle and Boston about the reduction, and both said, if reproducible in humans, it could be a very big deal.

“Nanosilver appears to possess dual significant properties critically helpful to the health of mankind — antibacterial and antiplatelet — which together can have unique utilities, for example in coronary stents,” Dash said.

In email, Dash said that while the results are important, more work needs to be done.

When asked if he and his team were worried about harmful side effects from the injection of the silver particles.

“ Yes, the concerns remain as we have not carried out any human toxicity studies,” Dash told me but added that in the mice testing In mouse model the nanoparticles “appeared to be quite safe. . . “

“However, like any other drug,” the doctor said, “one has to weigh between the benefits and side effects of nano silver before considering a therapeutic use.”

Dash’s study will be published later this month in the American Chemical Society’s peer-reviewed scientific journal Nano.

Here’s a link if you want to see the study.

Women have gotten used to hearing about how “picky” they are, thanks to “well established evolutionary explanations” that point to women as the more discerning sex because of our irksome, responsibility-laden wombs. (Hmmm, should I select the toothless, out-of-work alcoholic with anger issues as the future father of my child or go with the reliable bank vice president with green eyes and a fabulous smile?)

But new research out of Northwestern University suggests that choosiness in mate selection has nothing to do with gender and everything to do with power. According to a story in Science Daily, when researchers assigned women the “traditionally male role” of approaching romantic partners, they were “not any pickier than men in choosing that special someone to date.”

The research, conducted during a speed dating event (a phrase that totally makes me yearn to become a social scientist), featured 350 undergrads who each took turns at the “dominant dater” role. In half the events, the men moved from table to table while the women stayed put. In the other half, women roamed the joint, hopping from date to date. Afterwards, everybody provided info about their various encounters, including their level of romantic interest, whether they’d like to see the person again and how self-confident they felt about the whole she-bang (so speak). And that’s where things got interesting, i.e.,

Regardless of gender, those who rotated experienced greater romantic desire for their partners, compared to those who sat throughout the event. The rotators, compared to the sitters, tended to have a greater interest in seeing their speed-dating partners again.

Associate professor of psychology at Northwestern and co-investigator of the study Eli Finkel explained it thus: “The mere act of physically approaching a potential partner, versus being approached, seemed to increase desire for that partner.” He went on to talk about how “our physical activity and psychological processes interface in ways that are outside our conscious awareness” and emphasized that the results of this study “strongly suggest that the mere act of approaching a potential love interest can boost desire.” 

In other words, sitting around passively waiting for Mr. Right to approach may mean you’ll be stuck in that chair for months (or even years). Walking across the room to chat up some guy, on the other hand, may magically turn him into Mr. Right. Voila! 

Here’s hoping the speed-dating outfits will take note and revamp the whole “ladies in waiting” motif they seem so fond of (sounds like it would produce a lot more happy customers). And that women everywhere will realize that true love may not be so much about pickiness, but about pickups.

Sometimes there are things that we should just stop using.

Take melamine for an example.

The plastic-like substance has been used for tens of thousands of products such as Formica countertops, whiteboards, tiles and fabric. And let’s not forget the scratched and stained tableware from the 50s and 60s called Melmac that still magically migrates from one yard sale to the next.

But tens of millions of pieces of melamine eating-ware are still being produced, mostly in Chinese factories, and sold throughout the world.

This week, health officials in Indonesia ran tests of 62 samples of melamine plates, bowls, spoons and forks. The head of the country’s Food and Drug Monitoring Agency said that “30 of them released formaldehyde when used for anything hot, watery or acidic,” the Jakarta Globe reported.

In Korea, food scientists tested eight different brands of Chinese-made melamine dinnerware in January and February and found that 88 percent of the plates and bowls released formaldehyde when heated in a microwave.

And last week in Hong Kong, officials with the Consumer Council told the Hong Kong Standard that it had checked 300 melamine products from 20 household goods and chain stores, and only 5 percent of samples were properly labeled to warn customers not to use them in microwaves.

The head of the Indonesian FDA said, “Melamine resin products were relatively safe to use for some dry foods or cookies,” according to the paper.

German scientists developed melamine in the early 1800s. Today, worker safety warning information affixed to barrels and drums of melamine caution that the material is “harmful if swallowed, inhaled or absorbed through the skin. Chronic exposure may cause cancer or reproductive damage.”

Food scientists in the U.S. say that there are melamine products in which it’s safe to cook and serve, but because of inadequate labeling it’s almost impossible to tell the safe products from those that can release formaldehyde.

Importers estimate that millions of pieces of melamine eating ware is imported from Asia into the U.S. and Canada every year.

The Chinese created havoc with melamine in 2007 when it was added to pet food, killing thousands of dogs and cats throughout the world. Last year, over 50,000 infants in China were poisoned when milk producers added the compound to fraudulently boost the protein level in milk, thus getting higher prices.

U.S., Canadian and European manufacturers lost millions when they had to toss out thousands of products ¬— including the most popular candies and snacks and beverage mixes — because they used melamine-tainted dry milk from China in their processes.

A reader emailed me and asked if it were true that Shepard Fairey, the wonderfully creative street artist whose stylistic portrait of the president became the icon of the campaign, had done a spinoff to aid dogs languishing in pet adoption shelters.

Yep, here it is. I’m told that he even signed a few dozen to help spark donations to adopt-a-pet.

I’ve been hearing from organic food producers, especially dairy farmers, who say that after years of soaring growth and markets for all they can produce, the reality of dealing with rough economic times is painfully hitting home.

They say that sales they could always count on, are falling off.

But many shopper are more carefully weighing the presumed quality of organics with the cost.

“I want the best for my children but I know I can get this for half the price at the chain groceries. Four or five dollars make a difference these days,” said a woman I chatted with yesterday at Whole Foods who was holding a head of organic lettuce in one hand and tomatoes in the other.

I’m going to hit some farmer’s markets this weekend to talk to some producers but as one farmer told me recently, he’d spent so much money bringing his farm up to organic standards that even a drop of five or 10 percent in his sales can close him down.

If you want to read more on this, Katie Zezma wrote a really well-researched piece in today’s New York Times. Here’s a link to it.

One of the unforeseen challenges of this recession is that people are not only losing their jobs (and their income), they’re losing their convenient social circles, as well. Suddenly, thousands of singles are working at home and/or starting their own businesses, which usually means long days, limited free time and little to no outside contact (except for the UPS man).

How are you supposed to meet someone interesting and of your ilk when you’re spending all your time slaving over a hot laptop or building an entrepreneurial empire out in the garage?

As luck would have it, there’s a new online dating site for the single and self-employed. MatchmakingInc.com touts itself as the place where “single entrepreneurs and business owners connect,” a dating site offering the busy self-employed professional the “opportunity to connect with others who understand and appreciate the unique challenges of self-employment” (i.e., 38-hour days).

Sadly, though, when I logged in, there was no one to connect to.

No single Seattle business owners or entrepreneurs age 40 – 55. Nor age 35 – 60. I couldn’t even find a breathing bipedal male aged 18 to 80. Of course, the site is brand spanking new and as the FAQ page puts it, “while our membership is growing, there will be areas with few members.” Unfortunately, even searching nationwide with the parameters cranked all the way open, I only found 12 single men (and 14 single women).

Guess everybody’s too busy making money to think about making love. Or else they’re opting for Plan B — waiting for love to just show up on their doorstep. Speaking of which, I’ve got to run. I think I hear the hunky UPS man.

My story on “appnoxious” smartphone users went live today on MSNBC.com. In a nutshell, the story’s about people who’ve become so enamored by all their fancy phone applications that they’re driving everyone around them insane. Or as I put it in my reported piece:

Thanks to a wave of popular new apps, our phones are now capable of passing gas, passing judgment, and annoying our friends, family and colleagues in a much more efficient, high-tech manner. They’ve also granted us the power to instantly correct — and/or alienate — anyone around us in a matter of seconds because of Web access at our fingertips. “I was at a restaurant with friends and said something about Ralph Macchio being in a movie and pretty soon somebody’s got IMDb (the Internet Movie Database Web site) out on their phone and they’re looking it up,” says Jonathan Acuff, a 33-year-old copywriter from Alpharetta, Ga. “You can’t casually say, ‘I kind of like that guy in that movie’ anymore unless you’re sure he was in it. Now they look it up and somebody else looks it up and they’re like, ‘You’re wrong.’ ”

I didn’t include info on this in the story, but there are also a slew of new mobile phone dating apps. Speeddate.com, which offers 3-minute online speed dates using instant messaging or live video has just come out with a new free downloadable Android app (apparently there’s an iPhone app already) that allows people to speed date through their smartphone as opposed to their computer.

Other mobile dating apps include BumpChat 1.1, a new “location-aware” mobile dating and chat application for the iPhone, and Are You Interested? an iPhone application for mobile dating that ties in with the AYI? website and Facebook Connect integration. Whatever the hell that means.

Also just released (and you knew this was coming): 140love.com, a new Twitter-based dating service, where you can sign up, peruse members’ online dating profiles and see if anybody’s 140-character communication stream sets your heart “a twitter”.

If it just me or does it seem like we should all save ourselves a lot of time and trouble and just start having sex with our computers? My guess is there’s an app for that, too.

The Gov2.0 panel I organized and the BOF Eric Mill from Sunlight Labs organized were both excellent and well-attended. You can see more info, including my slides, at the official conference site.

The panel was the first time I’ve publicly talked about Open Government, the Gov2.0 book O’Reilly Media has asked me to compile/edit. Definitely getting a positive response from the community about it.

Tomorrow, the Squeejee guys are presenting TweetCongress, which is a totally inspiring demonstration of the power of developing in Rails and the network effects of social media activism. If that rocks as hard as I expect it to, we’ll have a Gov2.0 trifecta.

For anyone who was at the Gov2.0 panel, I’d love any notes you have for me on the quality of my presentation.

A widget, is a small pluggable program that is embedded in someone else’s Web site. Wordpress, the blogging platform that runs this site, actually calls them widgets. They’re also know as Facebook apps, iGoogle gadgets, PageFlakes, etc.

Why would you want to Widgetize? After all, I’m hearing that most media organizations are putting page views and unique Web site visitors at the forefront of the metrics for their managers.

Well, widgets (like RSS feeds and APIs) can drive traffic back to your main Web site, but that really isn’t the reason for them. Forget about your Web site. These widgets can be your product.

Take Facebook Causes, according to the case study, this third-party Facebook App has generated $4.5 million in donations to charities and has a monthly audience of 17.5 million active users. That’s a larger monthly online reach than Google News, FoxNews.com, ABCNews.com, Gannett online or The Tribune Company had in 2008.

I’m going to be asked, how do you monetize that? Well, game companies are doing it.

Add widgetizing to syndication via RSS, and the even more ambitious creation of content and data APIs and you see an emerging answer to the fragmentation of media on the new world. Stop