⚠️ This forum has been restored as a read-only archive so the knowledge shared by the community over many years remains available. New registrations and posting are disabled.

All times are UTC + 8 hours




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 360 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 24  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: May 27th, '09, 22:16 
Legend Member
Legend Member
User avatar

Joined: Apr 4th, '08, 09:36
Posts: 549
Images: 0
Location: Perth
Gender: Female
Are you human?: I think...I hope so!
Location: Sou'West Oz
How can you do that when you're on the internet all the time reading and posting on this forum???


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
    Advertisement
 
PostPosted: May 27th, '09, 23:19 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Apr 3rd, '08, 01:57
Posts: 2256
Location: Australia Sydney
Gender: Male
Are you human?: yes
Location: Gods own country,Sydney South
Jens , it;s easy ,, I am so good at my job that I have a lot of spare time there:) I turn two flouro's off in my office when on internet.
At home ,, when surfing the net I only need to use my two 6 watt LED down lights.
:)
Still got time to do all my own cooking / cleaning etc , really isn't hard.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 28th, '09, 08:12 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
Greenland ice could fuel severe U.S. sea level riseNew York, Boston and other cities on North America's northeast coast could face a rise in sea level this century that would exceed forecasts for the rest of the planet if Greenland's ice sheet keeps melting as fast as it is now, researchers said on Wednesday.
Sea levels off the northeast coast of North America could rise by 12 to 20 inches more than other coastal areas if the Greenland glacier-melt continues to accelerate at its present pace, the researchers reported. (Underlined for emphasis- note it says accelerate, which means it's speeding up)
This is because the current rate of ice-melting in Greenland could send so much fresh water into the salty north Atlantic Ocean that it could change the vast ocean circulation pattern sometimes called the conveyor belt. Scientists call this pattern the meridional overturning circulation.
http://www.reuters.com/article/wtUSInve ... SY20090527

Amazon basin braces for ‘extreme climate’
Experts suspect global warming driving huge changes in tropical wilderness

Flooding is common in the world's largest remaining tropical wilderness, but this year the waters rose higher and stayed longer than they have in decades, leaving fruit trees entirely submerged. Only four years ago, the same communities suffered an unprecedented drought that ruined crops and left mounds of river fish flapping and rotting in the mud.
Experts suspect global warming may be driving wild climate swings that appear to be punishing the Amazon with increasing frequency.
"It's important to note that it's likely that these types of record-breaking climate events will become more and more frequent in the near future," Nobre said. "So we all have to brace for more extreme climate in the near future: It's not for the next generation."
Almost simultaneously, southern Brazilian states far from the Amazon have suffered from an extended drought, caused by La Nina — a periodic cooling of waters in the Pacific Ocean. And La Nina alternates with El Nino, a heating up of Pacific waters that is blamed for catastrophic forest fires plaguing the Amazon in recent years.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30933536/


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 28th, '09, 09:12 
Valued Contributor
Valued Contributor

Joined: Feb 3rd, '09, 07:12
Posts: 63
Gender: Male
Location: usa iowa
Exciting times we live in, huh?

I'm soooooo glad to have my ap system to tinker with. Keeps my mind off current world events.

(generalizing alert) All our problems we made for ourselves will find their path of least resistance, eventually. Or we'll get fed-up (pun) and move out to the sticks, away from the rat race. But ironically to be with the 'real' rats.

Like a friend of mine once told me; as I was about to go down a double-diamond ski run, "Don't worry! You'll stop when you get to the bottom..."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: May 29th, '09, 01:33 
Almost divorced
Almost divorced
User avatar

Joined: Apr 6th, '07, 19:29
Posts: 1213
Location: SOUTH AFRICA
Gender: Female
Are you human?: yes
Location: Hartbeespoort. SOUTH AFRICA
The future of food?....

Check the date on this article....

Quote:
The Battlefront for Better Nutrition
Reprint No. 30-E
Lee Foundation for Nutritional Research, Milwaukee 3, Wis.
July 15, 1950

Yes, there is a battle going on between those who are trying to promote better nutrition, and the food manufacturers who insist on making products “worse so that they can be sold for less,” thereby eliminating the competition of more honest and self-respecting producers who would prefer to apply in business the Golden Rule.

These commercial interests have the United States Government on their side, ever since they ousted Dr. Harvey W. Wiley from his job as head of the Food & Drug Administration in 1912. The present head of the Food & Drug Division of Nutrition, Dr. Elmer M. Nelson in a special Constitutional Court in Washington last October testified that: “It is wholly unscientific to state that a well fed body is more able to resist disease than a less well-fed body. My overall opinion is that there hasn't been enough experimentation to prove dietary deficiencies make one more susceptible to disease.” (Washington Post, October 26, 1949.)

This is nothing new for Dr. Nelson. Ten years ago he, with his group of experts, testified in a similar court, that neither degenerative disease, infectious disease, nor functional disease could result from any nutritional deficiency.

For all these years, he has battled for the maker of devitalized foods, tried to stem the tide of public opinion against the use of white flour, refined sugar, pasteurized milk and imitation butter by vigorous prosecution of any maker of any dietary supplement designed to abate the consequences of using such devitalized food, basing his arguments on the thesis that there were no such things as deficiency diseases.

Truly, as Dr. Wiley sadly remarked in his book The History of a Crime Against the Pure Food Law (1930) the makers of unfit foods have taken possession of Food & Drug enforcement, and have reversed the effect of the law, protecting the criminals that adulterate foods, instead of protecting the public health.

Truth Suppressed

Books that have told the story are being suppressed by the use of the copyright law. This includes Dr. Wiley's book, and the three wonderful books by Alfred McCann (The Science of Eating, The Science of Keeping Young, and Starving America). Since the death of their authors, there have been changes in the copyright ownership and complete suppression has followed.

In 1949, for the first time in history, Dr. Nelson's efforts failed to impress the Federal judges sitting in the case. The defendant in this case obtained a permanent injunction against the Food & Drug Administration from any further interference into his business.

This may well be the turning point in the battle against food adulteration. In the past, defendants have been found guilty of violation of the “law”, and fined the limit for daring to assume in their advertising that nutritional deficiency could cause any kind of disease whatever. (For without “functional” changes, there is no evidence of any disease).

Even the Federal Trade Commission has been called in to help protect adulterators. It has issued orders stopping health food exponents and lecturers from intimating that aluminum compounds in foods may be harmful, apparently to protect the makers of aluminum containing baking powders, and makers of aluminum cooking utensils. You may not know that it is impossible to legally get a court review of the arbitrary and despotic orders of the Federal Trade Commission. It has the same complete and absolute power that any totalitarian despot ever had. In the baking powder dispute, the testimony of the defendant who was opposed to alum in foods, and his expert pathologists was so damning to aluminum that it has been apparently suppressed, participants who had copies of the proceedings were warned not to publish them under penalty of jail sentences. This is docket 540, the Averill Report on Aluminum as a Cause of Cancer.

The Federal Trade Commission has also issued orders to makers of natural foods prohibiting them from claiming that natural food factors are superior to synthetic imitations. The penalty for violation of such orders is a ten thousand dollar fine for each and every violation. So you will not be hearing much in the way of sales arguments from makers of better food products where they compete with synthetic substitutes.

Just what is really wrong with white flour, oleomargarine and pasteurized milk?

Vitamin E and Phosphatase

We will only discuss two fractions that are lost by this processing and substitution. These are vitamin E and the enzyme, phosphatase. The bleach and chemicals used to keep bugs out of flour destroy both. Pasteurization destroys phosphatase in milk. Oleomargarine contains no vitamin E as does butter. It also contains a poison, sodium benzoate, as oleo cannot be made to keep without a chemical preservative.

Why do we need phosphatase? Simply because without it, we fail to split and assimilate the mineral salts in our foods that are in the form of phytates. No enzyme is naturally secreted in the human intestinal tract that splits phytates although many other animals, including the rat, do have such an enzyme. That is discussed in Hutchinson's Food and the Principles of Dietetics, tenth edition, (Williams & Wilkins), where these authorities claim that no minerals can be assimilated from cereal foods, as a consequence. That is quite right, if we eat such cereal foods with pasteurized milk, and use cereals in which the enzyme content has been destroyed by bleaching chemicals. (Cereal germ and bran are the highest common sources of phosphatase, other than raw milk). The drastic effect of pasteurized milk in causing degenerative diseases in cats was emphatically demonstrated by Dr. Francis M. Pottenger Jr. a few years ago, reported in the American Journal of Orthodontics and Oral Surgery, August 1946. The cats became afflicted with every disease common to man it seemed, gastric ulcers, constipation, arthritis, liver disease, heart disease, and even pyorrhea and mental aberrations.

Bleaching and Pasteurization

Every doctor has wondered why his patients fail to assimilate calcium. He has not been informed that the reason is milk pasteurization and flour bleaching.

He has neither been informed about the 400 percent increase in bleach chemical used to keep the bugs out of commercial “Whole” wheat flour. As a result, in animal tests, where 54% would survive on white bread, on commercial “Whole” wheat bread there were NO survivors. (Reported in the News Letter of the Academy of Applied Nutrition, March 1949).

Wheat flour is almost as perishable as milk, if bleach preservatives are not used, it would have to be distributed from cold storage warehouses.

If milk were not pasteurized, it would have to be clean, and produced under far more sanitary conditions, or its poor condition would be reflected in a curdling before it could be delivered to the consumer. Pasteurization hides this low quality, just as flour bleach hides the musty state of poor wheat. Homogenization is another trick; it permits the mixing of stale milk with fresh, which without homogenizing would exhibit the tell-tale curdling of staleness.

Enriching the white flour to improve its salability is not warranted by animal tests.

In the News Letter report cited above, when the white bread was enriched with synthetic vitamins, the survival percentage dropped from 54% to 49%. So we see that “enrichment” is a colossal fraud.

Pasteurization does not lower the bacteria count of the milk as consumed, for germs grow faster in pasteurized milk than in raw, and the count while cut down by the pasteurization, soon exceeds the figure it had before.

Pasteurization does not control undulant fever, for this disease has been increasing by leaps and bounds where all milk is being pasteurized. It is now known to be a deficiency disease, curable in both man and animal by organic trace minerals. So Pasteurization too, seems nothing more than a colossal fraud.

Now about vitamin E. Cattle fed grains as usual, except that the vitamin E was removed, in a few months, although gaining normally in weight, began to drop dead one by one after exhibiting slight changes in their electrocardiograms that were identical to those in human heart patients. (Science, Oct. 4, 1946.)

Superiority of Butter

Children of adolescent age, fed oleo and butter, side by side, over a few years demonstrated that oleo feeding caused castration of both sexes in a considerable degree, as indicated by excessive height of both boys and girls, greater weight increase in girls than boys, and neutral physiques in both - girls had broader shoulders and narrower hips than normal, boys vise versa. Sex development demands vitamin E, and butter is our main source in the American diet. And we do NOT mean synthetic substitutes for the natural vitamin E complex. Take vitamin E out of its environment by “purifying” it and it loses up to a 99% of its potency, say authorities. You cannot keep time by using the brass out of a watch. You cannot get the normal effect by taking a natural vitamin complex apart either. It is a balanced mechanism as it occurs in food.

Now do you begin to see why heart disease kills more people in this country than any other ailment, and that it is practically unknown in China.

Do you see the vital importance of rigorously examining every article of food you use and of demanding the unprocessed, high quality you are entitled to? That is the only hope we have of escaping what Theodore Roosevelt called “Race Suicide.” It is far later than we suspect in our progress toward the untimely end of all unblissfully ignorant mortals.
http://www.soilandhealth.org/02/0203CAT/royal.lee.lets.live.articles.htm


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 1st, '09, 22:29 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Sep 4th, '07, 04:16
Posts: 2475
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Are you human?: YES
Location: Texas 75703
:shock:

Nice..


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 9th, '09, 01:32 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
I ran across a posting blog for an article and it was so interesting that I thought I would post part of it here. Mind you these are real people just posting their comments to a dairy story.
http://elkhartproject.newsvine.com/_new ... ns-lament-

AmericanWoman-727632
That is one thing that I have found puzzling about the LACK of national reporting on the farm situation. This is only one single piece of the puzzle. Americans all over the country are engaged in a hard fight against the USDA and this has not from what I can see, made the mainstream national news.
-----------------------you said------------------------
We take so very much for granted in the USA, especially our "unlimited" quantity of groceries. We need to be aware that if the number of farmers continues to dwindle, we may no longer have cheap unlimited amounts of even basic foodstuffs
---------------------------------------------------------
This is EXACTLY the problem, and it's not Elkhart alone facing severe issues. You have made a true statement and it is nationwide. Do people not care that they need to eat??? Why has the national coverage been so sparse of the USDA's draconian tactics and programs that will harm our local sustainable food supply? This is being done in the name of "big ag" rather than concern for America. Those proponents of the National Animal ID System and the upcoming bills to force the local small vegetable/fruit producers out of business, I just simply call traitors to America. This is our FOOD SUPPLY the govt. is overregulating to ineffective purpose to the point that yes the people that produce what you and I eat are going out of business!!!! NO FOOD = STARVATION and FAMINE.
If that sounds extreme to you think about it logically. The USDA's proposed plans will put livestock and local farmer's costs even more out of proportion to income. If you don't have income to sustain your production, you don't produce. We have an increasing population, we are looking at a plunging supply of those producing food and rapid reduction of land being farmed. Logic that out and tell me if you think we aren't headed for disaster? The factory farms are seeing big $$$ but at the expense of the people. Most of the cattle producers for instance have less than 100 head of cattle. As a farmer myself I've seen the numbers. If all those guys go out of business the few that are left won't be able to supply everyone with meat. Imported meat doesn't have the same standards and are less likely to be disease free. An ear tag in a cow and knowing where she originates does not prevent disease, nor does tracking. Only safety improvements at the large factory farms, the slaughterhouse and the grocery store will do that!
MSN, where are you on these issues? Why are you not covering the USDA listening sessions where overwhelmingly your public is against the NAIS? The USDA is taking ARMED GUARDS to these sessions to protect themselves for the first time in history. They know they are wrong and have little support and are so far refusing to acknowledge the consensus is AGAINST THE USDA and its falsehoods and bribery tactics. This article is a good start MSN but you are letting America down by so very little coverage of farm issues!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I'm not a radical activist, just a normal everyday law abiding citizen with a few horses and chickens scared to death that my government has gone totally wacko out of control. I stand to lose my horses under NAIS. Get a reporter on this please and INVESTIGATE our side! Vilsack and his crew is coming close to inciting domestic disobedience and violence over this issue. Why not help to prevent that by bringing it home to the govt. how strong an opposition there is to get this program stopped?
{"commentId":7519970,"threadId":"597750","contentId":"2900956","authorDomain":"shadowct"}
2!#10.1 - Mon Jun 8, 2009 7:18 AM PDT

literfairy
A lot of other countries have much stricter food production and labeling guidelines and invest more money in enforcing them. I'm not suggesting that we should import their food, but rather look at our own food and oversight and ask why other countries REFUSE to import much of our food, food that we feed to our children. The FDA and the USDA have created a system in America where the healthier we try to eat the worse our health seems to get and farmers have to produce more to cover costs which only drives down the price of food and therefore forces them to produce even more. Meanwhile, we eat genetically modifies foods that are not labeled as such and have not been tested for long-term effects on our own genes, the health of the ecosystems where they grow, and our metabolism.
{"commentId":7520597,"threadId":"597750","contentId":"2900956","authorDomain":"literfairy"}
1!#10.2 - Mon Jun 8, 2009 7:50 AM PDT

William Greiner
Farmers are one of the only businesses that buy products retail and then sell their products wholesale, usually at prices set by someone else, whether it be milk grain, etc.. The price of fuel, electricity, equipment, replacment cattle, and other necessities are all obtained retail. I was raised on a family dairy farm and we folded due to the increased prices of necessary supplies and the diminishing income from milk causing us to basicially go into debt we could not emerge from.
{"commentId":7519322,"threadId":"597750","contentId":"2900956","authorDomain":"wfgrnmpa"}
2!#11 - Mon Jun 8, 2009 6:40 AM PDT

AmericanWoman-727632
You are right. I buy my farm feed retail at Co-op, Tractor Supply or my local small feed store. My costs have more than doubled. I reduced my herd from 13 head to 4 and now I even pay sales tax on top of it all because I couldn't sustain profitability and claim enough profit for tax purposes to be a farming operation. The rising prices due to the drought plus the plunging economy killed our operation. There's also no help for horse producers from USDA programs yet we are being considered a "cash cow' for their ID system program for livestock ID. Go figure. Their cost analysis they are relying on is a complete joke and still forces horses in despite their documents acknowleding that it's all just guesswork. Costs are already practically unsustainable and they are adding more to NO BENEFIT to farmers or consumers. All taxes should be removed from feed and the farm feed producers should get more rightful share of a lower final cost of animal feed. Tennessee has put sales tax on all feed unless you are "registered" as a farm for profit. In this economy that's ridiculous. People buying horse, cattle, goat and chicken feed are feeding LIVESTOCK period. Plus we've had an ongoing farm disaster in this state from drought since 2005 - who's making profit? Sure we've had rain lately but pastures don't recover overnight and hay is still up in price.
{"commentId":7520322,"threadId":"597750","contentId":"2900956","authorDomain":"shadowct"}
2!#11.1 - Mon Jun 8, 2009 7:36 AM PDT

There are a lot of angry, paranoid and scared people in the U.S. and they have reason to be so. My father's ancestors and my mother immigrated from their homelands and if this government gets too radical, so will I. The new America will be either a mass exodus from persecution or civil war of the middle class.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 10th, '09, 02:17 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
Bio-fuels are sustainable over the long term??? I don't think so.


Higher U.S. ethanol blends would spike food: experts
He said in a report issued on Tuesday that 12 to 15 percent blends would push up the amount of land needed to grow corn to at least 100 million acres by about 2010 to 2015.
That would compare to 76.5 million acres that were the average from 1983 to 2006 and such an increase could force corn farmers to take land away from other crops, helping to raise prices for all sorts of grains, he said.
Using 100 million acres could spike corn prices to a level that would make last June's price of about $7.50 a bushel, "look like a walk in the park," Lapp told reporters in a teleconference.
http://www.reuters.com/article/GCA-Gree ... NH20090609


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 10th, '09, 02:41 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
Carbon trading is going to be a problem. Already I can see where a huge polluting factory, in say, Kentucky, can buy clean air carbon credits in places like India. That won't help the people and the environment that have to deal with it locally. How stupid is our government!!!!


What is Carbon Trading?
Who are potential buyers for Carbon credits?
Any entity, typically a business, that emits CO2 to the atmosphere may have an interest or may be required by law to balance their emissions through mechanism of Carbon sequestration. These businesses may include power generating facilities or many kinds of manufacturers.

Who are potential sellers of Carbon credits?
Entities that manage forest or agricultural land might sell carbon credits based on the accumulation of carbon in their forest trees or agricultural soils. Similarly, business entities that reduce their carbon emission may be able to sell their reductions to other emitters.

Who does this website target?
Carbon Trading is a market based mechanism for helping mitigate the increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. Carbon trading markets are developing that bring buyers and sellers of carbon credits together with standardized rules of trade.

http://www.carbontrading.com/ct/ct2.htm


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 10th, '09, 02:53 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Feb 8th, '07, 11:18
Posts: 975
Location: Buckhead, The City of Atlanta, The State of Georgia, The Republic of the United States of America
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Yes
Location: United States
Using petro-chemically fertilized corn to produce corn to produce ethanol is asinine.

It's like there was a contest to think of the least efficient thing to do, and that was the winner. That, or the corn lobby managed to trick politicians (not hard) into a different form of subsidy for corn growers.

But that's not to say that biofuels in general don't work. Just that you need to actually think about the efficiencies of your system ahead of time.

So there are a few conditions that need to be met for biofuels to replace gas as a fuel:

1, whatever crop that you're considering has to be able to be grown oil free

2, the crop needs a very high starch content to convert to ethanol or produce a usable oil directly

3, the crop needs to be grown very densely in terms of area

As far as I know there are only a few crops that meet all three criteria: taro, beets, certain species of algae, and probably a few other tubers.

Also, you need an ethanol conversion process that is efficient with respect to oil, or independent of oil.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 10th, '09, 04:50 
A posting God
A posting God
User avatar

Joined: Sep 4th, '07, 04:16
Posts: 2475
Location: Texas
Gender: Male
Are you human?: YES
Location: Texas 75703
Fun fact: Something like 90% of our grain goes to animal feed. Producing alcohol would reduce our food my ZERO. This is oil company propaganda, ignorance, or fear speaking. The distillers solids contain all the protein that whole grain does, only now cows will not fart so much because the starch they can not digest is removed; so that means less ozone depleting gas. Infact, this fermented feed, is a superior food in many respects. Its a win win. I have no problem running GMO in my fuel tank. Well, other than the fact that crap could destroy our natural genetic base of crops(speaking in fear or ignorance?).

Now having said that, some fuel plants are burning their dried distillers solids to produce energy to run their plants in an effort to make even more profit: :evil5: Once again corp profit threatens common sense in the name of profit..


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 12th, '09, 23:52 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
I thought this was interesting so I posted the entire article.

Author Michael Pollan on "Food Inc." and How to Eat Well
Newsweek
By Nicki Gostin
The last few years have been interesting times for food and eating habits, as "slow food," locavores and farmer's markets have entered mainstream conversations about how we eat. This spring saw Michelle Obama planting the first garden on White House grounds since the era of President Roosevelt. One of the Pied Pipers leading the movement to eat more fresh, local fruits, vegetables and meats has been author Michael Pollan. In books such as In Defense of Food: An Eater's Manifesto and The Omnivore's Dilemma, Pollan explains why junk food really is junky and why it's so important not to eat food that has ingredients that you can't even pronounce. Now Pollan appears in the new documentary Food Inc., a disturbing look at giant food companies in the United States, with a focus on the beef industry. NEWSWEEK's Nicki Gostin spoke with Pollan about whether the cost of food at farmer's markets is worth it, why Europeans eat better than Americans and the steps we can all take to improve how we eat. Excerpts:
Gostin: Why is it so terrible that cows eat corn?
Pollan: Because it makes them sick when they eat it in large quantities. A little corn is not going to kill them, but when it's 80 to 90 percent of their diet, it deranges their metabolism. They are evolved to eat grass, that's what they're good at; when you put corn into that amazing organ called the rumen, it acidifies it and creates an environment where acid-loving bacteria such as E. coli 015787 are able to evolve. What's beautiful is a rumen has a very different ph than a human stomach; whatever bacteria live in the rumen would normally get killed by our stomach acids, but if you make the cow's digestive system more like ours, any bugs that evolve there will survive their transit to our stomach and go on to possibly make us sick. That's really the E. coli story, but there are other problems, too: To keep the animals healthy on that corn diet, you have to give them lots of antibiotics, they just wouldn't survive otherwise.
It's amazing in this film to see how removed the food industry is from actual food.
Even people who follow these issues in print for the last few years I think will be shocked to see this film, because the camera takes you places you have not been. One of the most noteworthy things about our food system is how invisible it is to most of us. The packages still have pictures of farms, but people don't see the places where their food is produced. As a journalist, visiting these places was transformative. To me, going on feed lots, chicken and hog operations, it changed the way I eat. You can't go through these places without being changed. You lose your appetite for certain kinds of food.
But farmer's markets are expensive and out of reach for a lot of people.
I think that's right, and that's why it's not enough to vote with your fork; if you can afford to, you should, but we have to vote with our votes to get in a different set of policies. It's not an accident that fast food is so cheap. This is what the government underwrites. Factory farming does not exist without subsidized corn, it doesn't exist without it being legal to give important human antibiotics to cattle, it doesn't exist without basically regulatory indulgence. And the fact [is that] we don't make these animal cities clean up their waste the way we would a human city of the same size, so the cheapness of this food is a result of government policy. If the government would put those kinds of resources into underwriting healthy and real food, whether that's grass-fed beef or organic produce, then the healthy calories could compete more effectively with the unhealthy calories. Healthy food should not be out of reach. On the other hand, I don't think it's ever going to be as cheap as junk food.
Why?
You do get what you pay for. There is a qualitative difference, and the goal should not be to make healthy food as cheap as junk food.

In Europe, people pay more for their food.
It's a culture question. Also they have a better safety net [in Europe]. You can afford to spend 15 to 17 percent of your income on food if you don't have to worry about healthcare, if you know you're going to get, I don't know, five weeks of vacation a year and your retirement is not in doubt. So one of the reasons we're so dependent on cheap food is we have a society that makes it hard to afford anything else.
There's also the problem that a lot of kids don't know what fresh fruit and vegetables are.
I was talking to the head of school lunch in Baltimore, and he had a field trip where he took some kids out to a peach orchard and he said a significant percentage of kids had never had a fresh peach. They'd only had peaches in syrup, and it blew their minds. And that should not be. Everyone in America should experience a fresh peach.

I find it depressing.
Well, there's a lot of money to be made selling cheap food, and there's a lot of power behind it, so it won't be easy to change. But school lunches are a very important place to push, because that is where you make this food accessible to everyone. The school lunch is the least elitist arena where you can bring about change, but it's going to cost money. I happen to think it would be a real investment, a real down payment on health-care reform, if you gave kids one healthy meal a day.
The movie talks a lot about Monsanto. Can you explain this?
It's a company that genetically modifies seeds, and they sell a very high percentage of the seeds worldwide now, and they're gradually consolidating their hold over the world's seed supply. They don't want farmers to save seeds. They are great believers in the fact [that] you should come to them every year, and so this age-old tradition of farmers saving a certain amount of seeds for the next year, they're determined to stamp it out. Now they have the law on their side. Beginning in 1985, the patenting of seeds in America has been the law. I think that was a really big mistake, and there should be exclusions for farmers who want to save their seeds.
[Editor's note: Asked for comment, Monsanto representative John Combest wrote in an email, "Monsanto invests more than $2.6 million each day in research and development in order to bring new tools to farmers. If farmers ignored patent laws and saved our seeds, we would not be able to continuously fund the development of newer and better technologies." He added, "Regarding 'monopoly' allegations: Farmers have the option not to purchase biotech seed and also have the option not to purchase seed from Monsanto. … Farmers can purchase seed from over 200 different seed companies, many of whom sell both conventional and biotech seed."]
You said before you've changed your eating habits. How?
I don't eat industrial meat anymore. I eat grass-fed beef, organic chicken from a place I know. It is more expensive, and as a result I eat less meat.

Which is a good thing, right?
It's a very good thing in matters of health and climate change. Your meat consumption is probably your biggest contribution to climate change. You can point to very healthy populations that eat a lot of meat, but they're not eating the kind of meat we're eating. They're eating wild meat. In general, meats have pushed fruits and vegetables and whole grains off the diet, and those are really important for your health. So the less meat you eat, the more you're going to be eating of those other things, and by and large, those are much better for your health. Meat is nutritious food; it has a lot of things your body needs, but we eat altogether too much of it.
Also, the other thing I changed in my diet is I cook more. I think the first step in taking back control of your diet from the corporations who would feed you is to cook. To start with real food, real ingredients, and nothing will do more for your health than actually making food from scratch. That's a pretty subversive act in America these days, cooking.

Also, shopping at the farmer's market, getting out of the supermarket as much as you can. Now is the time, it's June, the markets are full of great produce. If you want to help build this food movement and improve your health and keep farmers in your community and keep the land open near where you live, the best thing you can do is go to a farmer's market.
Do you think it's a pivotal time for food right now?
I do. I think we are reaching a tipping point, to use a cliché. This is one of the most interesting social movements afoot right now. The politicians haven't quite recognized it yet. There are a very small handful who realize that there are votes in these issues. Hopefully this movie will be part of the change. We are realizing that the way we are eating is making us sick. The phrase "health-care crisis" is in large part another term for the catastrophe of the American diet. More than half the money we spend on health care goes to treat preventable diseases linked to diet.

Did you get a little verklempt when Michelle Obama dug her garden?
[Laughs] I did. I thought it was great. Also, when she goes to food kitchens, she talks about the importance of real food and getting off processed food. I think she's a very important teacher. She didn't have to say [the White House garden] was an organic garden, and she did.

http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/popvox/a ... -well.aspx


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 13th, '09, 03:14 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Feb 8th, '07, 11:18
Posts: 975
Location: Buckhead, The City of Atlanta, The State of Georgia, The Republic of the United States of America
Gender: Male
Are you human?: Yes
Location: United States
While I disagree entirely with the economic arguments, I am very excited to see this movie next week!


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 16th, '09, 04:06 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
While large food recalls make headlines, most do not. This is a government website that updates recalls- not only on food but other products as well.

http://www.recalls.gov/recent.html


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Jun 16th, '09, 05:47 
Legend Member
Legend Member

Joined: Apr 17th, '08, 02:47
Posts: 601
Location: Tulare County, California, U.S.A
Gender: Female
This is an article confirming many things that I already knew- huge land grabs of farm land by corporations and nations; that these people are hedging on our future lack of but greater need for food as food is a basic necessity. For those interested in commercial AP, this can help buffer this dangerous future scenario.

This in not the complete article. Click the link to read it in it's entirety.
Betting the farm
....As world population expands, the demand for arable land should soar. At least that's what George Soros, Lord Rothschild, and other investors believe.

Two years ago Warner launched an investment firm, called Chess Ag Full Harvest Partners, with a fairly simple underlying strategy: Buy undervalued farmland in the U.S. and profit from the coming global agriculture boom.
Last June she closed her first fund with $30 million from wealthy individuals and institutional investors such as Dow Chemical (DOW, Fortune 500). (See correction, below.) She says her ultimate goal is to take the company public as the first farmland-only real estate investment trust in the U.S. "The returns in agriculture haven't looked sexy for a long time, but I think that's about to change," she says.
Warner is just one of many financiers around the world making that same bet. Over the past few years hedge fund gurus like George Soros, investment powerhouses like BlackRock, and retirement plan giants like TIAA-CREF have begun to plow money into farmland - everywhere from the Midwest to Ukraine to Brazil. Canadian private equity firm AgCapita, which raised $18 million in 2008 to invest in Saskatchewan cropland, estimates that as of the first quarter of 2009, more than $2 billion of private equity money had been raised for farmland investments globally, and another $500 million was planned.
The growing flow of money into farms has persisted despite a major drop in the commodities markets last fall, prompted in part by the global financial crisis. In the spring of 2008 spiking grain prices caused food shortages and rioting in dozens of countries before falling some 50% by December. In fact, that crash has obscured a broader trend. Even after the correction, grain prices remain above their 20-year average, and food stocks around the world are still near 40-year lows. For many investors, last year's shortages are a preview of what could lie ahead.
The fundamentals remain in place for a long-term boom in the prices of everything ag-related. The simplest metric to consider is the amount of farmland per person worldwide: In 1960 there were 1.1 acres of arable farmland per capita globally, according to data from the United Nations. By 2000 that had fallen to 0.6 acre (see chart above, "Precious Acres"). And over the next 40 years the population of the world is projected to grow from 6 billion to 9 billion.
"Land is scarce and will become scarcer as the world has to double food output to satisfy increased demand by 2050," says Joachim von Braun, director general at the International Food Policy Research Institute. "With limited land and water resources, this will automatically lead to increased valuations of productive land. And it goes hand in hand with water. Water scarcity will probably increase even more than land."
Improving diets in the developing world will also help drive up prices. As per capita incomes rise in China, India, and other parts of Asia, hundreds of millions of people will be adding meat to their daily fare. In the coming decades that will have a multiplier effect on demand because of the massive amounts of grain used to feed livestock. The USDA estimates that it takes seven pounds of grain to produce one pound of beef. Even with better crop yields from new seed technology, a supply crunch is looming. And the effects of climate change - rising sea levels, more droughts - could only amplify the problem.
"I'm convinced that farmland is going to be one of the best investments of our time," says commodities guru Jim Rogers, who serves as an adviser to AgCapita. "Eventually, of course, food prices will get high enough that the market probably will be flooded with supply through development of new land or technology or both, and the bull market will end. But that's a long ways away yet."
The biggest investors in farmland over the next decade will probably be sovereign wealth funds and governments of crop-starved countries eager to secure food supplies for their rapidly growing populations. In 2008, China announced a $5 billion plan to develop agricultural assets in Africa. That's just a start. Given that it has 20% of the world's population but only 7% of its arable land and 7% of its freshwater resources, China has no choice but to look beyond its borders. And the global recession has hardly slowed its appetite for crops. In the first four months of 2009, China imported a record 13.9 million tons of soybeans.

The Gulf States of Qatar, Abu Dhabi, and Saudi Arabia have already begun making deals to acquire or lease large tracts of farmland in Africa and Asia at bargain prices. That in turn has led to spate of headlines recently about a "land grab" by rich countries. When South Korea's Daewoo Logistics announced a $6 billion deal last November to lease roughly half the arable land in Madagascar - a plot about twice the size of Delaware - it caused so much anger that it helped spur a coup d'etat. In May a UN-sponsored study concluded that too many farmland deals were giveaways by leaders of poor countries, with only vague promises of jobs and investment in return.
The farmland phenomenon is almost certainly still in the early stages and is playing itself out in many ways around the globe. To get some insight into those strategies, Fortune focused on three investors with vastly different approaches - a British lord who's putting his money on Brazil, an American who is playing on political tensions in war-torn Sudan, and Warner, who is bargain hunting in the U.S. "Farming might not look sophisticated," says Warner. "It might wear overalls and talk funny. But it's older than Wall Street, it's a fine-tuned machine, and it's a very difficult business." Still, she says, if you execute right, "there is a big opportunity here."
.......Agrifirma has already acquired some 100,000 acres in the Brazilian state of Bahia and holds an option on another 60,000. This summer it will produce its first crops of soybeans, cotton, and corn. Rothschild and Watson say they chose Brazil in part because there was a large quantity of scrubland, or cerrado, that could be irrigated and converted to farmland, enhancing the value greatly. They also liked the fact that its economy has been growing robustly. And perhaps most important, Brazil has 14% of the world's freshwater resources, the most of any country. "The world is fully in a water crisis, and we haven't realized it yet," says Watson. "When you're exporting agriculture, you're de facto exporting water."
......With hundreds of thousands of acres of lush, undeveloped land in the Blue Nile and White Nile valleys, Sudan has the raw potential to develop into an agricultural powerhouse. Investors from Abu Dhabi, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Kuwait have already reportedly made deals to lease land in the predominantly Muslim northern part of the country. But in January, Heilberg raised a lot of eyebrows by announcing that he had agreed to lease roughly 1 million acres of undeveloped land - an area the size of Rhode Island - in Mayom County in southern Sudan.
The deal has drawn all kinds of criticism - everything from cries of land grabbing to accusations that Heilberg is intentionally fomenting discord on behalf of the U.S. government to outrage that he is consorting with "warlords." Heilberg has cultivated connections to Washington. His vice chairman is former ambassador Joe Wilson, the husband of onetime CIA agent Valerie Plame and the man who blew the whistle on the Bush administration's obfuscations about Iraq and yellowcake uranium. Another executive is a former CIA operative.
......Back on Highway 61, Warner is reflecting on the fact that the wider world is mimicking her own journey back to the farm. "I think it's fun to get Wall Street types and farmers talking," she says. "They might have a lot to offer each other. A couple of years ago when I started telling my buddies in New York my little story about row-crop agriculture, it seemed really exotic. But I think people have sort of been slapped around and gotten a wake-up call, and they're thinking, 'Oh, this kind of makes sense.'"

There's another thing she finds comforting about what she's doing. "I've always personally liked the idea," she says, "that even if the bottom dropped out of this whole credit bubble and the world blew up, that the farmland, while it might not make a return for two or three or four years, was going to be there down the road. Because in the end, people have to eat."
http://money.cnn.com/2009/06/08/retirem ... 2009061112


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 360 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19 ... 24  Next

All times are UTC + 8 hours


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron

Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Portal by phpBB3 Portal © phpBB Türkiye
[ Time : 0.172s | 14 Queries | GZIP : Off ]