Guest guest Posted August 19, 2002 Report Share Posted August 19, 2002 Dear a, I just have a few comments below. I wonder if you saw Message #11462, Today's fruits & veggies lack yesterday's nutrition? I'll email it to you. There certainly is something wrong with food production today, according to that report. Peace, Kris , gardening in northwest Ohio If you want to hear the good news about butter check out this website: http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/know_your_fats.html ----- Original Message ----- From: " erica feldman " <hlthgrl5275@...> < > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:35 AM Subject: GMOs > I was wondering if there are any farmers on this list > who could comment on how GMOs effect their business. > Is there any way a farmer could benefit from a rise in > genetically altered crops? > I pose this question to you because it was asked on a > message board I frequent. The topic is *Genetically > Enhanced Foods. What are your feelings on > this?* ...here's what she said - > > " Many foods are genetically modified to resist insect > infestation which reduces the need for pesticides and > increases the crop output. Farmers love GM crops b/c > they are so much easier to grow. Its either that or > put the time and effort into pesticide application > (and who the heck wants crop dusters flying over their > fields after hearing about the possibility of > terrorists using them). On one hand, we can > genetically modify foods to resist pests or we can eat > pesiticide laden food. There is no evidence that GM > foods are harmful to humans but long term effects are > unknown. That defintely makes me leary. Unfortunately the pests are smart and resistant ones are starting to bother the crops. Also lots of spraying still gets done, such as Round-up for round-up ready soybeans, etc. and now they have to spray for the insects that show up because beneficial insects have been harmed. The genetically modified plants have the pesticide in their tissues, so when we eat that food we're actually getting that pesticide. To say that there is no evidence that GM foods are harmful, is just to say that they haven't really looked at what the effects might be. In fact, how do you test to see that X, Y, or Z (there are all kinds of possibilities) will not result at some time in the future as a result of what we are doing now. > So the answer is organic right? Well, not exactly. > Don't get me wrong - I am totally PRO-ORGANIC!!! I > work for a company that supplies organically grown > ingredients and we charge a huge premium for them. > Organic keeps the profits rolling in. But I don't buy > organic. There is not enough evidence to me that > organic is better (and I think the excess money > charged for organic just irks me) With our present commercial system farmers are losing money and subsidizing our cheap food, it's all the other guys that are making the money. It's a lousy system. We're ruining our soil and driving our farmers off the land in the process. And we're not feeding the world, as some companies claim. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_2000/lecture5.stm >Organic refers to > the way that the crop is grown - typically using > manure. Manure has not been proven to have benefit > over traditional farming techniques. This reveals a total lack of understanding of organic agriculture, as manure is not used in organic field without proper composting. Traditional farming techniques used manure, but modern organic and biodynamic agriculture have refined the processes involved in nourishing the soil so that crops are healthy, resistant to pests, and full of nutrition. Modern agriculture has so much trouble with pests because it ruins the vitality of the soil. There is research showing that organic foods are more nutritious. Here's a report I have in my files: Below is a study published in Permaculture International Journal (March-May 2000, No. 74, ISSN 1037-8480), p.27: Food with Attitude An analysis of vegetable produce commissioned by the Organic Retailers and Growers Association of Australia (ORGAA) showed that organic produce, grown on minerally enriched and biologically revitalized soil, was generally 10 times higher in nutritional elements than supermarket samples. The Australian Government Analytical Laboratory compared nutrient value (mg/kg) of beans, tomatoes, capsicum and silver beet purchased in the supermarket to those from organic sources. (See tables.) According to ORGAA spokesman, Alenson, who supervised the study, the results demonstrated that consumers may not be getting the nutritional benefits they expect from the food they buy. " Recent samples say kids are only eating 30% of the required daily intake of fruit and vegetables - could the reason be taste? " asked Alenson, who queried the long term health effects of low mineral intake. " National nutritional surveys [in Australia] indicate a move towards increased reliance on fast foods and snacks high in fat and low in fibre. Nutritionists are unanimous that adequate consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables is vital in disease prevention and health maintenance, " he said. " The problem for consumers is that fruit and vegetables produced by 'high tech' agricultural systems, fed by synthetic fertilizers, exposed to pesticides and fungicides, may not be delivering the nutritional benefits that consumers believe they may be receiving. " He says further research is needed into the nutritional value of our food supply. The results, in a colourful brochure on how to grow nutritionally rich vegetables, are available from ORGAA - call (+61) 3 9737 9799. Table: mg per kg of supermarket/organic produce - -------- Beans Tomatoes Capsicum Silver Beet Calcium 40/480 6.7/67 4.7/84 65/1600 Potassium 260/1900 200/300 150/1600 450/2600 Magnesium 26/240 10/89 11/700 69/1700 Sodium <1/<10 2.4/26 <1/20 180/1800 Iron 0.6/<5 <0.5/<5 0.5/<5 1.4/9.4 Zinc .38/3.4 0.19/1.2 0.13/2.5 0.57/130 >Organic foods > have not been proven to be more nutritious in the > studies that I have looked at - and believe me, I > looked and looked! However, the last time I researched > this was in 1998 - If anyone has scientific research > to show me otherwise, please share!! In addition, the > organic crops are more likely to have fecal > contamination (E. coli, etc) from the manure used to > grow it. Not so! regular crops are more likely to get manure that has not be properly composted. Remember that E. coli is everywhere. The particularly virulent strain that causes problems comes from confinement raised cattle that are fed so much grain. It is not a problem on a well managed balanced organic farm that includes crops and animals. >Organic crops very often have just as much, > if not MORE pesticide residue than traditionally grown > crops. This is due to run off from neighboring fields, > cross pollination, etc. Unfortunately, even if a > farmer is committed to growing organic foods, he can't > help what his neighbors grow. This person sounds like she's getting her info from one of the sources of erroneous info about organics - there are those people out there who are in hock to commercial agriculture. IF the neighbors are being that careless with their chemicals they would be subject to lawsuits. Besides, if we all supported organic farmers with our purchases, the neighbors might switch to organic production. > > The laws regulating organic foods have greatly > improved though thanks to organizations committed to > keep the food industry in check. I wouldn't discourage > anyone from eating organic. I am just afraid that it's > not quite as pure and natural as it's made out to be. " That may well be when commercial agriculture gets hold of organic - lots of organic farmers are worried about that. That's good reason to find your local organic farmer and patronize him. That gives him a decent living and gives you fair prices. That's enough of my ranting for now. Kris > I'd love to counterpoint this argument but feel as > though I need solid evidence to do so. Rather than do > some impersonal search on the web, I thought it would > be more thought-provoking if I could get some feedback > from this group. > > Thanks a million, > a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 19, 2002 Report Share Posted August 19, 2002 Hello, This is Carol... new to this list. I am in a Child Nutrition business that teaches kids to eat fruits and veggies. through the use of a Cartoon CD ROM. Any article about fruits and veggies lacking nutrition is of prime interest to me. Thanks for your info. Carol from Children's Health Watch Organization _______________________________________________________________ ----- Original Message ----- From: Kris Native Nutrition Group Sent: Sunday, August 18, 2002 10:00 PM Subject: Re: GMOs Dear a, I just have a few comments below. I wonder if you saw Message #11462, Today's fruits & veggies lack yesterday's nutrition? I'll email it to you. There certainly is something wrong with food production today, according to that report. Peace, Kris , gardening in northwest Ohio If you want to hear the good news about butter check out this website: http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/know_your_fats.html ----- Original Message ----- From: " erica feldman " <hlthgrl5275@...> < > Sent: Thursday, August 15, 2002 8:35 AM Subject: GMOs > I was wondering if there are any farmers on this list > who could comment on how GMOs effect their business. > Is there any way a farmer could benefit from a rise in > genetically altered crops? > I pose this question to you because it was asked on a > message board I frequent. The topic is *Genetically > Enhanced Foods. What are your feelings on > this?* ...here's what she said - > > " Many foods are genetically modified to resist insect > infestation which reduces the need for pesticides and > increases the crop output. Farmers love GM crops b/c > they are so much easier to grow. Its either that or > put the time and effort into pesticide application > (and who the heck wants crop dusters flying over their > fields after hearing about the possibility of > terrorists using them). On one hand, we can > genetically modify foods to resist pests or we can eat > pesiticide laden food. There is no evidence that GM > foods are harmful to humans but long term effects are > unknown. That defintely makes me leary. Unfortunately the pests are smart and resistant ones are starting to bother the crops. Also lots of spraying still gets done, such as Round-up for round-up ready soybeans, etc. and now they have to spray for the insects that show up because beneficial insects have been harmed. The genetically modified plants have the pesticide in their tissues, so when we eat that food we're actually getting that pesticide. To say that there is no evidence that GM foods are harmful, is just to say that they haven't really looked at what the effects might be. In fact, how do you test to see that X, Y, or Z (there are all kinds of possibilities) will not result at some time in the future as a result of what we are doing now. > So the answer is organic right? Well, not exactly. > Don't get me wrong - I am totally PRO-ORGANIC!!! I > work for a company that supplies organically grown > ingredients and we charge a huge premium for them. > Organic keeps the profits rolling in. But I don't buy > organic. There is not enough evidence to me that > organic is better (and I think the excess money > charged for organic just irks me) With our present commercial system farmers are losing money and subsidizing our cheap food, it's all the other guys that are making the money. It's a lousy system. We're ruining our soil and driving our farmers off the land in the process. And we're not feeding the world, as some companies claim. See: http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/static/events/reith_2000/lecture5.stm >Organic refers to > the way that the crop is grown - typically using > manure. Manure has not been proven to have benefit > over traditional farming techniques. This reveals a total lack of understanding of organic agriculture, as manure is not used in organic field without proper composting. Traditional farming techniques used manure, but modern organic and biodynamic agriculture have refined the processes involved in nourishing the soil so that crops are healthy, resistant to pests, and full of nutrition. Modern agriculture has so much trouble with pests because it ruins the vitality of the soil. There is research showing that organic foods are more nutritious. Here's a report I have in my files: Below is a study published in Permaculture International Journal (March-May 2000, No. 74, ISSN 1037-8480), p.27: Food with Attitude An analysis of vegetable produce commissioned by the Organic Retailers and Growers Association of Australia (ORGAA) showed that organic produce, grown on minerally enriched and biologically revitalized soil, was generally 10 times higher in nutritional elements than supermarket samples. The Australian Government Analytical Laboratory compared nutrient value (mg/kg) of beans, tomatoes, capsicum and silver beet purchased in the supermarket to those from organic sources. (See tables.) According to ORGAA spokesman, Alenson, who supervised the study, the results demonstrated that consumers may not be getting the nutritional benefits they expect from the food they buy. " Recent samples say kids are only eating 30% of the required daily intake of fruit and vegetables - could the reason be taste? " asked Alenson, who queried the long term health effects of low mineral intake. " National nutritional surveys [in Australia] indicate a move towards increased reliance on fast foods and snacks high in fat and low in fibre. Nutritionists are unanimous that adequate consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables is vital in disease prevention and health maintenance, " he said. " The problem for consumers is that fruit and vegetables produced by 'high tech' agricultural systems, fed by synthetic fertilizers, exposed to pesticides and fungicides, may not be delivering the nutritional benefits that consumers believe they may be receiving. " He says further research is needed into the nutritional value of our food supply. The results, in a colourful brochure on how to grow nutritionally rich vegetables, are available from ORGAA - call (+61) 3 9737 9799. Table: mg per kg of supermarket/organic produce - -------- Beans Tomatoes Capsicum Silver Beet Calcium 40/480 6.7/67 4.7/84 65/1600 Potassium 260/1900 200/300 150/1600 450/2600 Magnesium 26/240 10/89 11/700 69/1700 Sodium <1/<10 2.4/26 <1/20 180/1800 Iron 0.6/<5 <0.5/<5 0.5/<5 1.4/9.4 Zinc .38/3.4 0.19/1.2 0.13/2.5 0.57/130 >Organic foods > have not been proven to be more nutritious in the > studies that I have looked at - and believe me, I > looked and looked! However, the last time I researched > this was in 1998 - If anyone has scientific research > to show me otherwise, please share!! In addition, the > organic crops are more likely to have fecal > contamination (E. coli, etc) from the manure used to > grow it. Not so! regular crops are more likely to get manure that has not be properly composted. Remember that E. coli is everywhere. The particularly virulent strain that causes problems comes from confinement raised cattle that are fed so much grain. It is not a problem on a well managed balanced organic farm that includes crops and animals. >Organic crops very often have just as much, > if not MORE pesticide residue than traditionally grown > crops. This is due to run off from neighboring fields, > cross pollination, etc. Unfortunately, even if a > farmer is committed to growing organic foods, he can't > help what his neighbors grow. This person sounds like she's getting her info from one of the sources of erroneous info about organics - there are those people out there who are in hock to commercial agriculture. IF the neighbors are being that careless with their chemicals they would be subject to lawsuits. Besides, if we all supported organic farmers with our purchases, the neighbors might switch to organic production. > > The laws regulating organic foods have greatly > improved though thanks to organizations committed to > keep the food industry in check. I wouldn't discourage > anyone from eating organic. I am just afraid that it's > not quite as pure and natural as it's made out to be. " That may well be when commercial agriculture gets hold of organic - lots of organic farmers are worried about that. That's good reason to find your local organic farmer and patronize him. That gives him a decent living and gives you fair prices. That's enough of my ranting for now. Kris > I'd love to counterpoint this argument but feel as > though I need solid evidence to do so. Rather than do > some impersonal search on the web, I thought it would > be more thought-provoking if I could get some feedback > from this group. > > Thanks a million, > a Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted August 22, 2002 Report Share Posted August 22, 2002 a raised a question about the quality of organic vegetables a few days ago. This website has a lot of interesting info - refers to several research project down toward the bottom. http://journeytoforever.org/garden_organic.html#brix Peace, Kris , gardening in harmony with nature in northwest Ohio If you want to hear the good news about butter check out this website: http://www.westonaprice.org/know_your_fats/know_your_fats.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted November 14, 2005 Report Share Posted November 14, 2005 I would be very intrested in knowing how to identify GMOs. saw a University broadcast on the dangers of GMOs. It was frightening. And even more so, did not realize that we have been ingesting them for 8 years and no labeling is required. The fish that are bred with this gene, grow faster but die after one year. Are more aggressive and with even farm raised salmon can infiltrate natural habitats to cross breed, 100,000 at a time like with incurrent weather. The crops, they are programmed to die after the first year, to avoid cross pollinating, and to force the farmers to have to buy seed every year. It alters the DNA and was said 95% of the scientists working on them are researchers bought by for profit corporations. This one investigator said he was all for the GMOs in the beginning, buying into it stopping world hunger, except his own research is now opposed to it because of altering DNA of those who consume it. Seems one of the few organizations fighting it in legal circles stated that rather than our technology adapting to nature, we are trying to force nature to adapt to technology. They have actually done brain surgery on mother hens to take out the nurturing instinct because it is problematic to the assembly line egg manufactures. They showed pictures of this one pig that they had tried to implant the gene in and he was grossly deformed, impotent, cross eyed not even able to stand. Seems that the only ones that will benefit from GMOs is the for profit manufacturer with the patent. It was a horrendously frightening prospect about disrupting the entire ecological system. Donna Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.