modern agri-business

[nepalnt21]

is a big load of dogshit

i encourage everyone to watch food, inc.

http://www.foodincmovie.com/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eKYyD14d_0

you can watch it on netflix

http://www.michaelpollan.com/

http://www.amazon.com/Everything-Want-Do-Illegal-Stories/dp/0963810952

i wish everyone farmed, even if it just means a little square meter in their backyard, or a few plants in the windowsill.

i also wish that everyone that was involved in any sort of agriculture practiced sustainable farming techniques, such as crop rotation, green manure, etc... instead of using petroleum based fertilizers, pesticides, etc.

i REALLY REALLY wish people would eat more plants, and less animals. i heard form my teacher once (something like... im [badly] paraphrasing) that you can feed one person with one hundred square feet of land if you raise cattle, but that same plot of land, if used for plants, could raise 100 people (forever).

please consider it. you can make all of your own food quite easily (especially since most of us are already gardeners [many are pretty friggin talented ones, too])

 

[Bionic]

Suggested reading.

Organic Food: The Real Story!
By Jamie Hale

Over the past two decades the sale of organic foods has increased annually nearly 20%. Today’s organic food system includes a combination of small and large food producers, local and global distribution networks, and a wide variety of products including processed foods, fruits, vegetables, meats and dairy (1). Recent food crises such as mad cow disease and foot-and-mouth disease may have decreased consumer confidence in conventional foods and swayed their buying tendencies to what they perceive as safer foods – Organic, All Natural Foods. In one survey the reasons people consumed organic foods were avoidance of pesticides (70%), freshness (68%), for health and nutrition (67%), and to avoid genetically modified foods (55%) (2). The majority of Organic Food Advocates I have spoken to eat organic foods because they feel organic foods are safer. A couple of common statements by advocates are “I don’t like chemicals in my foods” and “all natural has to be safer than artificial”. Both of these assumptions are erroneous Organic foods do contain chemicals and all natural is not necessarily safer. Every living molecule inside every living organism is created through chemical reactions. And natural chemicals contained in organically grown coffee, pepper, mushrooms, apples, celery, potatoes, nutmeg and carrots present a greater risk of cancer in people than DDT, DDE, or Alar, three pesticides that are banned in the USA and many other countries (3).

Aectaldehyde, benzaldehyde, benzene, benzo (a) pyrene, benzofuran, caffeic acid, catechol, 1,2,5,6-dibenz (a) anthracene, ethylbenzene, formaldehyde, furan, furfural, hydroquinone, d-limonene, 4-methylcatechol, styrene, toluene.
-Natural carcinogenic and DNA –damaging chemicals present in a cup of certified organic coffee (4)

In the following pages, I will take you back to the early 20th century where the fundamental ideas of organic farming were born, through the present day where sales of organic foods are booming.

Organic defined

In the early 19th century all living organisms were referred to as organic while non-living substances were referred to as minerals or inorganic (13). As time passed it was demonstrated that all material substances contain the same chemical elements. Today the word organic is used to define all complex carbon based molecules. According to the scientific definition of organic means all foods are organic.

Organic Food & Spirituality

Rudolf Steiner’s brilliance was recognized when he was a youngster. His innate ability allowed him to escape the peasant environment he was raised in. He enrolled at the Vienna Institute of Technology and the University of Vienna. In 1897 he moved to Berlin and entered into the world of German High Society. He never felt comfortable among this group who promoted technology and the power of science to change the world for the better, they often poked fun at his spirituality (3).

Steiner’s spiritual interests drew him to a religious movement called theosophy. Theosophy combined aspects of Christianity, astrology, and Hinduism. He wasn’t impressed with the fact that theosophists depended on faith to justify their beliefs. He thought pure reason could explain the universe without reliance on faith (3). In 1912 Steiner created his own philosophy or “spiritual science” as he referred to it called anthroposophy. In Challenging Nature (2006) L Silver describes some of Steiner’s beliefs.

Steiner claimed that by looking deep inside himself, he could “see” a detailed past history of cosmology in which humanity evolved from primitive beings living on the surfaces of the sun, Mars, Saturn, and Jupiter (he meant this literally, not metaphorically). The latest incarnation of humanity somehow made it way to earth, where it had once lived in communication with its own spirits as well as those of Mother Nature in an Edenic setting that he called Aquarius. But people became addicted to material artifacts, consumer goods, and private property. As a result, they forgot how to contact the spiritual world. Materialism and capitalism led to the fall of Aquarius (equivalent to the biblical banishment form Eden) and the present state of human distress. Nevertheless, there is hope for a future age of Aquarius (like the second coming of Christ) when everyone heeds Steiner’s call to forsake the material and artificial and rediscover the spiritual.

In 1924 Steiner introduced the world of farming to his “spiritual science”. Steiner proposed that people should favor the natural and reject the synthetic and artificial. Every family farm should be recognized as an individual organism that lives within the larger organism that is Mother Earth. Family farms should be entirely self sufficient (3). Steiner’s philosophy was given the name Biodynamic agriculture. The name is under trademark protection by Demeter Association, Inc (3,5).

Organic versus Conventional

Steiner laid the groundwork for what is now called organic farming, but J.J. Rodale is credited for coining the term in 1942, in his magazine Organic Farming and Gardening (6,7). Rodale proclaimed that processes performed by living things are fundamentally different than ones created through chemical laboratory processes. Ok, never mind that every living process is fundamentally a chemical process (7). According to Rodale and many modern day organic farmers the primary difference between organic and nonorganic food is the process in which the foods are produced, organic food is derived from natural processes whereas nonorganic comes from unnatural processes. This line of thinking demonstrates a common misperception, which is natural is always better. Would you be surprised if I told you the world’s most dangerous toxins are all natural?

They include ricin, abrin, botulinum, and strychnine—highly evolved chemical weapons used by organisms for self-defense and territorial expansion. Indeed, every plant and microbe carries a variety of mostly uncharacterized, more or less toxic attack chemicals, and synthetic chemicals are no more likely to be toxic than natural ones (7).

Most consumers assume organic foods are grown without chemical pesticides, however this is not true. Rotenone is a potent neurotoxin, used by organic farmers that has long been used to kill fish and has been linked to Parkinson’s Disease (7, . Betarbet et. al. found that chronic exposure to Rotenone could reproduce the anatomical, neurochemical, behavioral and neuropathological features of PD (8). Another pesticide used by Organic farmers Pyrethrin, sometimes used the day of harvesting, can result in breathing difficulties when inhaled (7, 9). Other pesticides used in organic farming include hypochlorite, sodium hypochlorite, copper sulfate, boric acid, lime sulfur, elemental sulfur, and oils (1). Organic foods have been shown to have fewer pesticide residues than conventional foods. But do the higher levels found in conventional foods have a negative impact on human health?

Organic fruits and vegetables can be expected to contain fewer agrochemical residues than conventionally grown alternatives, but the significance of this difference is questionable inasmuch as actual levels of contamination in both types of food are generally well below acceptable limits (10).

Pesticide residues, naturally occurring toxins, nitrates, and polyphenolic compounds exert their health risks or benefits on a dose-related basis, and data do not yet exist to ascertain whether the differences in the levels of such chemicals between organic foods and conventional foods are of biological significance (1).

Kajiya (2006) suggested a possible relationship between parasite infection and organic food. Hookworm in an 87-year old Japanese man who had a 30-year history of eating organic foods caused heart failure. In general, footwear and proper sanitation are important for control of hookworm because the parasite is usually transmitted through contact with contaminated soil. The highest rates of hookworm infection occur in the
world’s coastal regions and are often associated with poverty stricken areas. The 87-year old Japanese man wore shoes outdoors and lived inland. In fact, he did not go outside often. The occurrence of hookworm infection in Japan is uncommon. Organic foods have become relatively popular in advanced countries with good hygiene, and increasing numbers of people buy foods grown without added pesticides. Kajiya suspected that the Japanese man became infected by eating organic food imported from endemic areas of hookworm infection (11).

The Institute of Food Technologists issued a Scientific Status Summary on the organic foods industry (2006). Below is some of the key points from the Summary:

Organic fruits and vegetables possess fewer pesticide residues and lower nitrate levels than do conventional fruits and vegetables. In some cases, organic foods may have higher levels of plant secondary metabolites; this may be beneficial with respect to suspected antioxidants such as polyphenolic compounds, but also may be of potential health concern when considering naturally occurring toxins. Some studies have suggested potential increased microbiological hazards from organic produce or animal products due to the prohibition of antimicrobial use, yet other studies have not reached the same conclusion (1).

While many studies demonstrate these qualitative differences between organic and conventional foods, it is premature to conclude that either food system is superior to the other with respect to safety or nutritional composition (1).

This review illustrates that tradeoffs exist between organic and conventional food production. Organic fruits and vegetables rely upon far few pesticides than do conventional fruits and vegetables, which result in fewer pesticide residues, but may
also stimulate the production of naturally occurring toxins if organic crops are subject to increased pest pressures from insects, weeds, or plant diseases. Because organic fruits and vegetables do not use pesticides or synthetic fertilizers, they have more biochemical energy to synthesize beneficial secondary plant metabolites such as polyphenolic antioxidants as well as naturally occurring toxins. In some cases, food animals produced organically have the potential to possess higher rates of bacterial contamination than those produced conventionally since organic production generally prohibits antibiotic use (1).

A review conducted in July 2009 (14) investigated differences in the nutrient contents between conventional and organic foods. Eleven crop nutrient categories were analyzed. The researchers identified 162 studies; 55 were of satisfactory quality. Only the satisfactory quality studies were analyzed. Conventionally produced crops had a significantly higher content of nitrogen, and organically produced crops had a significantly higher content of phosphorus and titratable acidity. There was no difference between the two for the remaining 8 of 11 crop nutrient categories analyzed. Analysis on livestock products indicated no difference in nutrient content between organically and conventionally produced livestock products. After reviewing studies of satisfactory quality the researchers concluded that there is no evidence of a difference in nutrient quality between organic and conventional foods.

Conclusion

If you like the taste of organic food and have the extra money to spend, go for it. However, don’t consider it a necessity. When choosing the foods to include in your diet, the first consideration should be a well-balanced diet. Whether it comes from conventional foods or organic foods has little significance (12).


References

1. Winter CK, Davis SF. Organic Foods. Journal of Food Science Vol. 71, Nr.9, 2006.
2. Whole Foods Market. Whole Foods Market Organic Trend Tracker. Austin, Tex Whole Foods Market 2005.
3. Silver LM. Challenging Nature. Harper Collins 2006.
4. Gold LS, Slone TH, Stern BR, Manley NB, Ames BN. Rodent Carcinogens: Setting Priorities. Science 258, 261-265, 1992.
5. Home- Demeter USA [online] July 7, 2004 http://www.demeter-usa.org
6. Oxford English Dictionary
7. Silver LM. The Environments Best Friend GM or Organic? Update Magazine May / June 2006.
8. Betarbet R, et. al. Chronic Systemic Pesticide Exposure Reproduces Features of Parkinson Disease. Nature Neuroscience 3, 1301-1306 2000. .
9. Sitting M. Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens. 3rd ed. Vol.2 New Jersey: Noyes Publications 1991.
10. Magkos F, et. al. Organic Food: buying more safety or just piece of mind? A critical review of the literature. Crit Rev Food Sci Nutr 46 (1): 23-56 2006.
11. Kajiya T, et.al. Heart failure caused by hookworm infection possibly associated with organic food consumption: Intern Med 45 (13): 827-9 2006.
12. Hale J. Knowledge and Nonsense: The Science of Nutrition and Exercise. MaxCondition Publishing 2007.
13. Rezende L. Chronology of Science. Checkmark Books 2006.
14. Dangour AD, et. al. Nutritional Quality of Organic Foods: A Systematic Review. AM J Clin Nutr 2009.

 

[nepalnt21]

not that a library of arguments against organic foods would convince me that organic is not better, but this has little to do with what i am talking about.

what i am talking about is taking the food production out of the hands of big business.

WE dictate the market, not some tough guy in a suit with a pen wearing a cowboy hat.

 

[9Lives]

IMO the health issues in organic vs regular are all pretty much BS...

The main issue and the focus of the discussion should be sustainability..Energy security if you will. All conventional food sources are HIGHLY dependent on fossil fuels. Oil in paritcular. Now what will happen to the food supply if oil goes to 150-200$ and stays there ? Any guesses ? Not a question of ''if'' but a question of ''when'' imo..

 

[Lazyman]

I agree organic is total bullshit, A guy won the Nobel prize in the 1920's for his research on organic farming. He came to the conclusion that we have only enough arable land on the planet to farm food for 4 billion people if they were all organic. So, since we're already at 6B and counting, which 2B people should starve to death?

Man's ability to cook and eat animals was instrumental in our evolution and brain development. As herbivores we we little more than chimps, but with cooked meat we became homosapiens. This is no accident! Our protein intake is vital for our health and our future as a species.

Besides, vegetables aren't food, they are what food EATS!

 

[nepalnt21]

shenanigans...

meat shouldnt be our main food... vegetarians are SOOOOO much fucking healthier than those that eat mostly meat. and i really cant understand why everyone wants to keep on surviving off the SHIT quality meat that the market is flooded with right now.

id like to see how this dude came to his conclusion.

if i were to venture a guess, i would say that if everyone ate only plants, and didnt cook them to hell, and actually fucking CHEWED we could end world hunger. im no nobel prize winner, but ive seen how many plants we can grow in a small space, and how LITTLE plant material one really needs to live. its pretty much a no-brainer for me.


o and lazyman... nice tit. i always enjoy your posts, even if i cant concentrate on the content.

 

[buckeye-leaf]

i have a veggie garden every year, always grow more than enough. my family, friends always get stocked with tons of tomatoes,potatoes,sweet corn,melons,lettuce,peppers,onions,carrots,green beans,cucumbers,zucchini. i give it away for free knowing someone wont go hungry but i always get nice things in return. i grab me a cold beer and a doob and spend a few hours every day just workin out there after work. it brings me serenity

 

[nepalnt21]

beautiful

 

[B. Friendly]

I started a thread after watching super size me. and all i got was flack. The thread was something like "SUPER SIZE ME, is Mcyd's Sueable???"
http://www.icmag.com/ic/showthread.php?t=163369&highlight=sueable
Very good info Nep21

 

[Cookie monster]

I agree organic is total bullshit, A guy won the Nobel prize in the 1920's for his research on organic farming. He came to the conclusion that we have only enough arable land on the planet to farm food for 4 billion people if they were all organic. So, since we're already at 6B and counting, which 2B people should starve to death?

Yeah well that was the 1920's and you only have to look at some of the organic grows on this site to realise organic growing/farming works just as well as intensive growing/chemical farming.

That guy who won the nobel prise would soon change his mind if he knew about the giant green houses in holland that grow lettuce hydroponically year round, and the word poly tunnel would be alien to him.

We've moved on from the 1920

 

[MarquisBlack]

I sincerely doubt that organic farming is that unsustainable. Perhaps if we're shipping foods from one region to another, but if we did things locally, I really can't imagine it being impossible. I guess I'm just reluctant to believe that we've come too far to go back to the land without the aid of Industrail-age mineral fertilizers. (Though that's all I use on my grow, I'm no organic snob, lol.)

 

[B. Friendly]

organic farming is sustainable, in horti college we visited many large acerage farms, one of them was a couple decades old.

 

[rambone]

shenanigans...

meat shouldnt be our main food... vegetarians are SOOOOO much fucking healthier than those that eat mostly meat. and i really cant understand why everyone wants to keep on surviving off the SHIT quality meat that the market is flooded with right now.

id like to see how this dude came to his conclusion.

if i were to venture a guess, i would say that if everyone ate only plants, and didnt cook them to hell, and actually fucking CHEWED we could end world hunger. im no nobel prize winner, but ive seen how many plants we can grow in a small space, and how LITTLE plant material one really needs to live. its pretty much a no-brainer for me.


o and lazyman... nice tit. i always enjoy your posts, even if i cant concentrate on the content.

skinny =| healthy, every vegetarian I know looks emaciated if we were meant to consume solely plant matter why the fuck do we have incisors?

 

[nepalnt21]

im not saying that meat wasnt a big part of our evolutionary history...

all i know is i felt much healthier back when i was a vegetarian (although it takes a lot of will[power, money (or land) and dedication, and unfortunately, meat is a part of my diet once again.

and i know some vegetarians that are AMAZINGLY fit. i dont know anyone that eats a lot of meat that is fit, though. emaciated to you might be average for the rest of the world. what's wrong with skinny? im not talking anorexic model skinny...

 

[rambone]

im not saying that meat wasnt a big part of our evolutionary history...

all i know is i felt much healthier back when i was a vegetarian (although it takes a lot of will[power, money (or land) and dedication, and unfortunately, meat is a part of my diet once again.

and i know some vegetarians that are AMAZINGLY fit. i dont know anyone that eats a lot of meat that is fit, though. emaciated to you might be average for the rest of the world. what's wrong with skinny? im not talking anorexic model skinny...

If you go to any respectable gym you will see fit people that have a diet high in animal protein, it is necessary to support muscular growth. But then you have the others who consume too much meat and not enough plant matter which is just as bad as consuming solely plant matter.

 

[grapeman]

Yeah well that was the 1920's and you only have to look at some of the organic grows on this site to realise organic growing/farming works just as well as intensive growing/chemical farming.

That guy who won the nobel prise would soon change his mind if he knew about the giant green houses in holland that grow lettuce hydroponically year round, and the word poly tunnel would be alien to him.

We've moved on from the 1920

Simply not true. And my answer here is not from google or watching or reading videos or books.

With the advent of globalization (started with cheap transistor radios from Japan) I now compete on a global basis. When Mexico began growing table grapes in the 1970's and importing them in the early summer, market chains, jobbers, brokers and distributors started buying their totally unregulated product. Why? It was cheaper mostly due to $3/day labor vs. our USA $3.75 an hour or so labor. this crop is labor intensive.
Today's it costs about $15/day Mexico vs $100/day in the US.

How in the world did the american grape farmer survive? By becoming more efficient and productive. Necessity is the mother of invention. Production went from 450 boxes/acre to today's production of over 1000 boxes per acre. sometimes, when nature cooperates, up to 2000 boxes per acre. All with better quality.

When you say that organic farms of the 1920's were as productive as farms today, it's simply not true. Not even close to being true.

Now I don't care if anyone likes organic produce. It's flatly a supreme waste of money but it is a free country.

The problem we will be facing in the future is China. If we continue to bash our domestic farmers, in 30 years you will be buying all your food from china. Fact. They have cheap labor and a valley 10x the size of California's San Joaquin valley and with the completion of their dams and water distribution systems China is getting ready to control the world through their stomachs.

A time tested and proven method of controlling people and governments.

Wake the fuck up.

 

[9Lives]

and i know some vegetarians that are AMAZINGLY fit. i dont know anyone that eats a lot of meat that is fit, though. emaciated to you might be average for the rest of the world. what's wrong with skinny? im not talking anorexic model skinny...

99.9% of bodybuilders are on a high protein diet..they eat meat and lots of it..

LOL vegetarianism is the biggest load of crap ever! And healthy ? It's just another hippy fad for people with their heads full of nonsense..

I wont believe that for a second. They are malnourished. The human stomach is terrible in breaking down plant cell walls. Plant food is very inefficient as far as nourishment goes.

Shit i'm a man...i can't look and feel like a weakling. I got shit to do!

 

[9Lives]

Simply not true. And my answer here is not from google or watching or reading videos or books.

With the advent of globalization (started with cheap transistor radios from Japan) I now compete on a global basis. When Mexico began growing table grapes in the 1970's and importing them in the early summer, market chains, jobbers, brokers and distributors started buying their totally unregulated product. Why? It was cheaper mostly due to $3/day labor vs. our USA $3.75 or so labor. this crop is labor intensive.

How in the world did the american grape farmer survive? By becoming more efficient and productive. Necessity is the mother of invention. Production went from 450 boxes/acre to today's production of over 1000 boxes per acre. sometimes, when nature cooperates, up to 2000 boxes per acre. All with better quality.

When you say that organic farms of the 1920's were as productive as farms today, it's simply not true. Not even close to being true.

Now I don't care if anyone likes organic produce. It's flatly a supreme waste of money but it is a free country.

The problem we will be facing in the future is China. If we continue to bash our domestic farmers, in 30 years you will be buying all your food from china. Fact. They have cheap labor and a valley 10x the size of California's San Joaquin valley and with the completion of their dams and water distribution systems China is getting ready to control the world through their stomachs.

A time tested and proven method of controlling people and governments.

Wake the fuck up.

I can't agree with you totally on that post.

Commodities will go up, Energy will go up! China is facing a food crisis of it's own. China is allready buying up land in Africa to support it's needs.

I believe BIG organic is possible and can be cheap. But it's a complicated and expensive system. Starting with your own energy and ending with the finished product. Organic will become competitive in the not too distant future. Simply because all the costs of regular production are going up and labour is getting cheaper. Look at how many unemployed people you have right now. Soon they will work next to nothing! And this financial crisis is just getting started..

 

[steppinRazor]

food inc was a great doc. but this vegetarian talk has got to go!!

 

[cocktail frank]

i usually pick my teeth w/ a vegetarian after i eat a fat rib-eye.