What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Monsanto does not own General Hydroponics or Botanicare

Status
Not open for further replies.

beta

Active member
Veteran
Sorry. I meant living organic. Not bottle fed. And if our food system took care of its ridiculus waste problem and concentrated on nutrient rich whole food as opposed to additived filled toxic crap yield would not be such a concern.

The waste problem is a symptom of capitalism, not 'conventional' agriculture. The same problem would exist if all food was organic.

Conventional foods are just as nutritious as organic. They do not have any more 'toxic crap' than organic food.

https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog...s-than-conventionally-grown-food-201209055264
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
Just a little tidbit to whet your pallets...

§205.601 Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production.

In accordance with restrictions specified in this section, the following synthetic substances may be used in organic crop production: Provided, That, use of such substances do not contribute to contamination of crops, soil, or water. Substances allowed by this section, except disinfectants and sanitizers in paragraph (a) and those substances in paragraphs (c), (j), (k), and (l) of this section, may only be used when the provisions set forth in §205.206(a) through (d) prove insufficient to prevent or control the target pest.

(a) As algicide, disinfectants, and sanitizer, including irrigation system cleaning systems.

(1) Alcohols.

(i) Ethanol.

(ii) Isopropanol.

(2) Chlorine materials—For pre-harvest use, residual chlorine levels in the water in direct crop contact or as water from cleaning irrigation systems applied to soil must not exceed the maximum residual disinfectant limit under the Safe Drinking Water Act, except that chlorine products may be used in edible sprout production according to EPA label directions.

(i) Calcium hypochlorite.

(ii) Chlorine dioxide.

(iii) Sodium hypochlorite.

(3) Copper sulfate—for use as an algicide in aquatic rice systems, is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to those which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent.

(4) Hydrogen peroxide.

(5) Ozone gas—for use as an irrigation system cleaner only.

(6) Peracetic acid—for use in disinfecting equipment, seed, and asexually propagated planting material. Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(a) at concentration of no more than 6% as indicated on the pesticide product label.

(7) Soap-based algicide/demossers.

(8) Sodium carbonate peroxyhydrate (CAS #-15630-89-4)—Federal law restricts the use of this substance in food crop production to approved food uses identified on the product label.

(b) As herbicides, weed barriers, as applicable.

(1) Herbicides, soap-based—for use in farmstead maintenance (roadways, ditches, right of ways, building perimeters) and ornamental crops.

(2) Mulches.

(i) Newspaper or other recycled paper, without glossy or colored inks.

(ii) Plastic mulch and covers (petroleum-based other than polyvinyl chloride (PVC)).

(iii) Biodegradable biobased mulch film as defined in §205.2. Must be produced without organisms or feedstock derived from excluded methods.

(c) As compost feedstocks—Newspapers or other recycled paper, without glossy or colored inks.

(d) As animal repellents—Soaps, ammonium—for use as a large animal repellant only, no contact with soil or edible portion of crop.

(e) As insecticides (including acaricides or mite control).

(1) Ammonium carbonate—for use as bait in insect traps only, no direct contact with crop or soil.

(2) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1)—the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand.

(3) Boric acid—structural pest control, no direct contact with organic food or crops.

(4) Copper sulfate—for use as tadpole shrimp control in aquatic rice production, is limited to one application per field during any 24-month period. Application rates are limited to levels which do not increase baseline soil test values for copper over a timeframe agreed upon by the producer and accredited certifying agent.

(5) Elemental sulfur.

(6) Lime sulfur—including calcium polysulfide.

(7) Oils, horticultural—narrow range oils as dormant, suffocating, and summer oils.

(8) Soaps, insecticidal.

(9) Sticky traps/barriers.

(10) Sucrose octanoate esters (CAS #s—42922-74-7; 58064-47-4)—in accordance with approved labeling.

(f) As insect management. Pheromones.

(g) As rodenticides. Vitamin D3.

(h) As slug or snail bait. Ferric phosphate (CAS # 10045-86-0).

(i) As plant disease control.

(1) Aqueous potassium silicate (CAS #-1312-76-1)—the silica, used in the manufacture of potassium silicate, must be sourced from naturally occurring sand.

(2) Coppers, fixed—copper hydroxide, copper oxide, copper oxychloride, includes products exempted from EPA tolerance, Provided, That, copper-based materials must be used in a manner that minimizes accumulation in the soil and shall not be used as herbicides.

(3) Copper sulfate—Substance must be used in a manner that minimizes accumulation of copper in the soil.

(4) Hydrated lime.

(5) Hydrogen peroxide.

(6) Lime sulfur.

(7) Oils, horticultural, narrow range oils as dormant, suffocating, and summer oils.

(8) Peracetic acid—for use to control fire blight bacteria. Also permitted in hydrogen peroxide formulations as allowed in §205.601(i) at concentration of no more than 6% as indicated on the pesticide product label.

(9) Potassium bicarbonate.

(10) Elemental sulfur.

(j) As plant or soil amendments.

(1) Aquatic plant extracts (other than hydrolyzed)—Extraction process is limited to the use of potassium hydroxide or sodium hydroxide; solvent amount used is limited to that amount necessary for extraction.

(2) Elemental sulfur.

(3) Humic acids—naturally occurring deposits, water and alkali extracts only.

(4) Lignin sulfonate—chelating agent, dust suppressant.

(5) Magnesium sulfate—allowed with a documented soil deficiency.

(6) Micronutrients—not to be used as a defoliant, herbicide, or desiccant. Those made from nitrates or chlorides are not allowed. Soil deficiency must be documented by testing.

(i) Soluble boron products.

(ii) Sulfates, carbonates, oxides, or silicates of zinc, copper, iron, manganese, molybdenum, selenium, and cobalt.

(7) Liquid fish products—can be pH adjusted with sulfuric, citric or phosphoric acid. The amount of acid used shall not exceed the minimum needed to lower the pH to 3.5.

(8) Vitamins, B1, C, and E.

(9) Sulfurous acid (CAS # 7782-99-2) for on-farm generation of substance utilizing 99% purity elemental sulfur per paragraph (j)(2) of this section.

(k) As plant growth regulators. Ethylene gas—for regulation of pineapple flowering.

(l) As floating agents in postharvest handling. Sodium silicate—for tree fruit and fiber processing.

(m) As synthetic inert ingredients as classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for use with nonsynthetic substances or synthetic substances listed in this section and used as an active pesticide ingredient in accordance with any limitations on the use of such substances.

(1) EPA List 4—Inerts of Minimal Concern.

(2) EPA List 3—Inerts of unknown toxicity—for use only in passive pheromone dispensers.

(n) Seed preparations. Hydrogen chloride (CAS # 7647-01-0)—for delinting cotton seed for planting.

(o) As production aids. Microcrystalline cheesewax (CAS #'s 64742-42-3, 8009-03-08, and 8002-74-2)-for use in log grown mushroom production. Must be made without either ethylene-propylene co-polymer or synthetic colors.

(p)-(z) [Reserved]
 

bigtacofarmer

Well-known member
Veteran
That entire list of crap was added by people that do not support actual organic technique.

Maybe coventional food is as healthy as organic (with all that on it). How about the processed food? Many of which are also monsanto owned companies? Yum.

Your argument is based on crap. Not even actual organic farming. Go grow a label and try eating that. Our failed education system really did a number here.
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
And, if you think that is a surprise... take a look at what they are shooting into your "organic" cows. Sucrose, Iodine, Xylazine, Tolazoline, Poloxalene. Do a little research on these substances and you'll find Roundup isn't so bad after all.

LOL

Knowledge is power. LOL

§205.603 Synthetic substances allowed for use in organic livestock production.

In accordance with restrictions specified in this section the following synthetic substances may be used in organic livestock production:

(a) As disinfectants, sanitizer, and medical treatments as applicable.

(1) Alcohols.

(i) Ethanol-disinfectant and sanitizer only, prohibited as a feed additive.

(ii) Isopropanol-disinfectant only.

(2) Aspirin-approved for health care use to reduce inflammation.

(3) Atropine (CAS #-51-55-8)—federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires:

(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed veterinarian; and

(ii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 56 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard period of at least 12 days after administering to dairy animals.

(4) Biologics—Vaccines.

(5) Butorphanol (CAS #-42408-82-2)—federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires:

(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed veterinarian; and

(ii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 42 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard period of at least 8 days after administering to dairy animals.

(6) Chlorhexidine—Allowed for surgical procedures conducted by a veterinarian. Allowed for use as a teat dip when alternative germicidal agents and/or physical barriers have lost their effectiveness.

(7) Chlorine materials—disinfecting and sanitizing facilities and equipment. Residual chlorine levels in the water shall not exceed the maximum residual disinfectant limit under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

(i) Calcium hypochlorite.

(ii) Chlorine dioxide.

(iii) Sodium hypochlorite.

(8) Electrolytes—without antibiotics.

(9) Flunixin (CAS #-38677-85-9)—in accordance with approved labeling; except that for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires a withdrawal period of at least two-times that required by the FDA.

(10) Glucose.

(11) Glycerin—Allowed as a livestock teat dip, must be produced through the hydrolysis of fats or oils.

(12) Hydrogen peroxide.

(13) Iodine.

(14) Magnesium hydroxide (CAS #-1309-42-8)—federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed veterinarian.

(15) Magnesium sulfate.

(16) Oxytocin—use in postparturition therapeutic applications.

(17) Parasiticides—Prohibited in slaughter stock, allowed in emergency treatment for dairy and breeder stock when organic system plan-approved preventive management does not prevent infestation. Milk or milk products from a treated animal cannot be labeled as provided for in subpart D of this part for 90 days following treatment. In breeder stock, treatment cannot occur during the last third of gestation if the progeny will be sold as organic and must not be used during the lactation period for breeding stock.

(i) Fenbendazole (CAS #43210-67-9)—only for use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed veterinarian.

(ii) Ivermectin (CAS #70288-86-7).

(iii) Moxidectin (CAS #113507-06-5)—for control of internal parasites only.

(18) Peroxyacetic/peracetic acid (CAS #-79-21-0)—for sanitizing facility and processing equipment.

(19) Phosphoric acid—allowed as an equipment cleaner, Provided, That, no direct contact with organically managed livestock or land occurs.

(20) Poloxalene (CAS #-9003-11-6)—for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires that poloxalene only be used for the emergency treatment of bloat.

(21) Tolazoline (CAS #-59-98-3)—federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires:

(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed veterinarian;

(ii) Use only to reverse the effects of sedation and analgesia caused by Xylazine; and

(iii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 8 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard period of at least 4 days after administering to dairy animals.

(22) Xylazine (CAS #-7361-61-7)—federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the lawful written or oral order of a licensed veterinarian, in full compliance with the AMDUCA and 21 CFR part 530 of the Food and Drug Administration regulations. Also, for use under 7 CFR part 205, the NOP requires:

(i) Use by or on the lawful written order of a licensed veterinarian;

(ii) The existence of an emergency; and

(iii) A meat withdrawal period of at least 8 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter; and a milk discard period of at least 4 days after administering to dairy animals.

(b) As topical treatment, external parasiticide or local anesthetic as applicable.

(1) Copper sulfate.

(2) Formic acid (CAS # 64-18-6)—for use as a pesticide solely within honeybee hives.

(3) Iodine.

(4) Lidocaine—as a local anesthetic. Use requires a withdrawal period of 90 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter and 7 days after administering to dairy animals.

(5) Lime, hydrated—as an external pest control, not permitted to cauterize physical alterations or deodorize animal wastes.

(6) Mineral oil—for topical use and as a lubricant.

(7) Procaine—as a local anesthetic, use requires a withdrawal period of 90 days after administering to livestock intended for slaughter and 7 days after administering to dairy animals.

(8) Sucrose octanoate esters (CAS #s-42922-74-7; 58064-47-4)—in accordance with approved labeling.

(c) As feed supplements—None.

(d) As feed additives.

(1) DL-Methionine, DL-Methionine-hydroxy analog, and DL-Methionine-hydroxy analog calcium (CAS #'s 59-51-8, 583-91-5, 4857-44-7, and 922-50-9)—for use only in organic poultry production at the following maximum levels of synthetic methionine per ton of feed: Laying and broiler chickens—2 pounds; turkeys and all other poultry—3 pounds.

(2) Trace minerals, used for enrichment or fortification when FDA approved.

(3) Vitamins, used for enrichment or fortification when FDA approved.

(e) As synthetic inert ingredients as classified by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), for use with nonsynthetic substances or synthetic substances listed in this section and used as an active pesticide ingredient in accordance with any limitations on the use of such substances.

(1) EPA List 4—Inerts of Minimal Concern.

(2) [Reserved]

(f) Excipients, only for use in the manufacture of drugs used to treat organic livestock when the excipient is: Identified by the FDA as Generally Recognized As Safe; Approved by the FDA as a food additive; or Included in the FDA review and approval of a New Animal Drug Application or New Drug Application.

(g)-(z) [Reserved]

[72 FR 70484, Dec. 12, 2007, as amended at 73 FR 54059, Sept. 18, 2008; 75 FR 51924, Aug. 24, 2010; 77 FR 28745, May 15, 2012; 77 FR 45907, Aug. 2, 2012; 77 FR 57989, Sept. 19, 2012; 80 FR 6429, Feb. 5, 2015; 82 FR 31243, July 6, 2017]
 

Rondon

Member
If the whole global ag world "went back to organic farming" (lol) its very likely you would have mass global food shortages and starvation. Your e.coli poisonings and other nasties would prolly go through the roof as well. There is a reason organic methods are not practiced on a global scale. You organic types certainly have an ideal and an ambition that far outweighes reality and common sense. Sorry. But that's the Truth. The real problem (that almost all other problems stem from - not just ag farming pollution) is that there is 7 billion people on this little rock and counting. With nowhere else to go. Fact.
 

bigtacofarmer

Well-known member
Veteran
More labelling errors put in place by coorperations seeking an organic label. Instead of improving their farm and actually growing with true old school organic earth friendly practices. They have the regulations changes.

Do you not get it or do you work for them?
 

bigtacofarmer

Well-known member
Veteran
If the whole global ag world "went back to organic farming" (lol) its very likely you would have mass global food shortages and starvation. Your e.coli poisonings and other nasties would prolly go through the roof as well. There is a reason organic methods are not practiced on a global scale. You organic types certainly have an ideal and an ambition that far outweighes reality and common sense. Sorry. But that's the Truth. The real problem (that almost all other problems stem from - not just ag farming pollution) is that there is 7 billion people on this little rock and counting. With nowhere else to go. Fact.


I think anyone that cannot see how their point has flaws or the other point has some merit is not too bright.

As far as this conversation. I am very opposed to the majority of our agriculture and food being owned by one seemingly very shady group of coorperations. I think most farms can go mostly organic and sustainable quites safely. I think the word "organic" is broken, much like the words conservative or liberal. We need a safe sustainable food system and in my somewhat educated opinion these companies are poised to do much more harm than good.
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
Truth be told, it's not the raw fruits and veggies that is killing us all. It's the processing of foods.

Just about any food that is in a package has been "Decarboxylized". Perhaps not in the exact form that we all know and love but all processed food is cooked and boiled and all the nutrients are collected and separated. Just like we separate CBD and THC and all the terps).

Then, the separated substances are mixed together in a proprietary blend.

Why else does Tropicana Orange Juice taste and look the same from bottle to bottle. Oranges from all over the world (where Tropicana gets them) are not all the same flavor and color. Believe it or not, it is the perfume companies that develop and make most of these proprietary blends for food companies.

And, you can't go by the labels. Look at a bag of white sugar and check the ingredients.... it simply says,"sugar". OMG, do we all know how they make white sugar and the poisons and chlorine that are used to produce it. Some crazy people out there compare processed sugar to heroin. LOL I don't think it's quite that bad but, I guarantee you.... there's more in that bag than sugar cane. LOL

Everything is a lie.

"Made with 100% real beef" can mean it is 99% soy with 1% REAL BEEF. LOL People will automatically think that means it's 100% beef.

The American people are pretty fucking stupid when it comes to being sheeple. And, the big corps have people working on deceiving you day and night.

Be suspicious of EVERYTHING. Read and research EVERYTHING.
 

beta

Active member
Veteran
Truth be told, it's not the raw fruits and veggies that is killing us all. It's the processing of foods.

Just about any food that is in a package has been "Decarboxylized". Perhaps not in the exact form that we all know and love but all processed food is cooked and boiled and all the nutrients are collected and separated. Just like we separate CBD and THC and all the terps).

Then, the separated substances are mixed together in a proprietary blend.

Why else does Tropicana Orange Juice taste and look the same from bottle to bottle. Oranges from all over the world (where Tropicana gets them) are not all the same flavor and color. Believe it or not, it is the perfume companies that develop and make most of these proprietary blends for food companies.

And, you can't go by the labels. Look at a bag of white sugar and check the ingredients.... it simply says,"sugar". OMG, do we all know how they make white sugar and the poisons and chlorine that are used to produce it. Some crazy people out there compare processed sugar to heroin. LOL I don't think it's quite that bad but, I guarantee you.... there's more in that bag than sugar cane. LOL

Everything is a lie.

"Made with 100% real beef" can mean it is 99% soy with 1% REAL BEEF. LOL People will automatically think that means it's 100% beef.

The American people are pretty fucking stupid when it comes to being sheeple. And, the big corps have people working on deceiving you day and night.

Be suspicious of EVERYTHING. Read and research EVERYTHING.

This is all mindless essentialism. It's all predicated on the idea that 'natural' is good and 'un-natural' is bad. That's horse shit. The most toxic substance known to man (botulism) is 100% 'natural'.

There is nothing about 'processing' that makes food less nutritious. In fact, cooking makes nutrients MORE available. Stop fearmongering.
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
Cooking makes foods MORE nutricious????

I think everybody knows that's untrue.

Besides, my post you quoted never even used your accused words of "Natural".

Everything I posted was fact. Not fearmongering. Just posting a few facts. Believe them or not, I don't care. Makes no difference in my life what you believe. Bless you and enjoy your life.

Tell me how FCOJ is made. I dare you. LOL
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
Hey Beta, we are both right to some extent. I learned something new. Cooking increases Vitamin A levels.

Broccoli loses 28 percent of its vitamin C and 20 percent of its calcium when it is boiled. Broccoli also loses 26 percent of the carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin. However, cooking increases vitamin A levels in broccoli by 19 percent. Boiling spinach removes or destroys 11 percent of its vitamin A and 8 percent of its lutein and zeaxanthin, 35 percent of its vitamin C, 12 percent of its folic acid, 28 percent of its calcium and 24 percent of its iron.

https://healthyeating.sfgate.com/foods-nutritious-raw-cooked-7336.html
 

beta

Active member
Veteran
Hey Beta, we are both right to some extent. I learned something new. Cooking increases Vitamin A levels.

Broccoli loses 28 percent of its vitamin C and 20 percent of its calcium when it is boiled. Broccoli also loses 26 percent of the carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin. However, cooking increases vitamin A levels in broccoli by 19 percent. Boiling spinach removes or destroys 11 percent of its vitamin A and 8 percent of its lutein and zeaxanthin, 35 percent of its vitamin C, 12 percent of its folic acid, 28 percent of its calcium and 24 percent of its iron.

https://healthyeating.sfgate.com/foods-nutritious-raw-cooked-7336.html

I can't think of a single processed food that uses boiled vegetables.
 

igrowone

Well-known member
Veteran
...
Broccoli loses 28 percent of its vitamin C and 20 percent of its calcium when it is boiled. Broccoli also loses 26 percent of the carotenoids lutein and zeaxanthin. However, cooking increases vitamin A levels in broccoli by 19 percent. ...l

boiling also destroys broccoli's anti cancer compound, sulforaphane
it is preserved/enhanced when broccoli is chopped, that is a form of processing
also preserved to some extent by microwaving(lazy man's favorite)
it's case by case, some want simple explanations
not that kind of world
 

different

Member
Bingo
 

Attachments

  • F40387E2-005F-4E87-BCAE-D33A0C7B4DBB.jpg
    F40387E2-005F-4E87-BCAE-D33A0C7B4DBB.jpg
    74.1 KB · Views: 26
This is all mindless essentialism. It's all predicated on the idea that 'natural' is good and 'un-natural' is bad. That's horse shit. The most toxic substance known to man (botulism) is 100% 'natural'.

There is nothing about 'processing' that makes food less nutritious. In fact, cooking makes nutrients MORE available. Stop fearmongering.


Actually the most toxic thing known to man is polonium-210. Which is natural BUT only gets taken up by plants when conventional, inorganic nitrate and supertriphosphate fertilzers are used. In fact, it is theorized that cigarettes are only cancerous because of radioactive isotopes that get into plants when conventional fertilizers are used.

Look, its not as cut and dry, hurrdurr a pesticide is in the soil, its bad for you. A lot of those pesticides have half lifes, but a lot of those half lifes are increased significantly when there are no microbes in the soil due to fertilizer salts.
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
I can't think of a single processed food that uses boiled vegetables.

Pretty much any veg in a can....

Canned foods are considered processed because the method is a means of food preservation that ultimately seals the product in an airtight container. The canning process often exposes fruits and vegetables to high heat, which can cause some nutrient loss, depending on the food.

https://www.theactivetimes.com/4-processed-foods-are-actually-healthy
 

Ringodoggie

Well-known member
Premium user
Oh man, I love Bayer aspirin too. LOL

I never take Tylenol or Ibuprofen. I seldom take anything but that rare headache is history only minutes after taking my loyal and trusted Bayer Aspirin.

I have taken Bayer aspirin for 65 years. The familiar bottle has had it's place in my medicine cabinet for my entire life.

Bummer, does this mean I have to hate them, now? LOL
 

Gry

Well-known member
Veteran
The way that corporations process food, has become so bad that efforts are made in keeping the methods used from any public scrutiny at all.
The example of OJ is accurate as could be.
I recall seeing an industry publication years ago that described what was involved. Never been able to look at it the same way.
There is no substitute for integrity that I aware of that works out well in the long run.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Latest posts

Top