Big Ag are major sources of pollution by the nature of what they do. Corn is a very ugly thing to grow, but as far as pesticide/herbicide use it was even uglier 20 years ago. If people want to have $1.50-$3 a lb. skinless chicken breasts and $4-$7 a lb. quality cuts of beef you need this, though. We don't eat that corn...well, we eat the corn syrup...most of it goes to animal feed. We paid a lot lot lot more for chicken (inflation adjusted) back in the 70s/80s than we do now.

As far as I've seen...the biggest pollution dangers around me are the people who dump all these f'n chemicals and fertilizers off the shelf onto their big piece of green lawn. Sooooooooo much overuse, misuse, and runoff with no one really caring about it or regulating/watching it. One person's work alone won't compare to someone doing 300 acres of corn, but I can think of entire neighborhoods who dump massive fertilizers and chemicals into their lawns without much method to it.

I'm not even getting into the tree fruit industry. I know I wouldn't want to be strolling through an orchard after fruit-set and the bees are gone the way they're managed around here, though. They're not evil, but people will put down that apple with a small spot on it and choose another while that spot gets bigger by the day until it's thrown out. Organic or conventional that's a shopper's pattern and it's true that "one bad apple" can ruin the bunch.

When it comes to the food processing world (canned/frozen/mega-processed frankenfood creations by Kraft)...if an inspector is looking to buy your crop and finds even a single "bad" piece of produce in the shipment they can reject the entire shipment at their discretion out of fear of "one bad apple spoiling the bunch."

On the economic side of things we need to realize that Chile, Brazil, Mexico, etc. can send us fruits/veggies year-round that don't have a prayer of matching our local prices (unless it's peak harvest season locally) even if they have to ship it 5,000+ miles to get it to our market. It's hard to compete with $5-$20 a day labor. It cuts the hell out of the bottom line of operation costs.

nc-crn:

I agree that lawns are a significant problem with almost no oversight. I guess you could say there is a return if people enjoy their setting. But if we could turn lawns into gardens and orchards, there would be significant benefit.

The biggest single improvement we could make in US ag is to cut out all grain production for animal feed. Now that would put a dent in Monsanto. Grow some range fed beef and free range chickens and that's it. But that's not what people want. Don't blame the drug growers, blame the users. Don't blame Monsanto, blame the meat eaters. If you're not vegan, you support Monsanto.

Well, if you're not vegan you're helping support Monsanto or you're paying more for almost all your meat. Even then almost everything out there in the snack food isle with "vegetable oil" or soy is prepared with GMO soybeans or corn so you gotta choose even more carefully.

I eat the factory farm chicken, but I try to get grass/pasture beef pretty much because you can taste a difference in what they eat. Beef picks this up really well with grass-fed compared to grain-fed in my own experiences. It's a few bucks more a pound, though.

nc

Hope it didn't sound like I was picking on you in my last post. I was speaking in general terms. I think you and I agree pretty well on this issue.

Nah, I'm just flowing with the conversation, too.

Beef - Every year we buy either a half or whole beef that's raised in our valley by a local rancher who's our friend. They are open range and fed grain near slaughter time. He gives them no growth hormones or any other nasty stuff. This is the best beef we've every eaten, and by far better and more healthy than the store bought beef. I wished there were more of these small time ranchers that have a true concern for their product.

And BTW...We don't pay an arm and a leg for the beef either. I think the last time we bought one it was $.85 a pound on the hoof.

Greg
Southern Nevada

Monsanto??

Questions of social ethics don't go very far in DC. Social ethics and capitalism just don't mix. They are like trying to mix oil and water. Lets take a look at on highly capitalistic company Monsanto for the low down on how capitalism works.

Monsanto engaged in "outrageous" behavior by releasing tons of carcinogenic PCBs into the city of Anniston and covering up its actions for decades. Monsanto's internal memos stated "...we can't afford to lose one dollar over this."

Any social ethics here? Any ethical behavior? Even a smidgen of humanity? The health of a community is not even worth a lousy buck? (see paragraph 11)

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A54914-2002Feb22?language=printer

Proud vegan here! 23 years veggie, with about 15 vegan.

I need nothing from Monsanto. I feel that if forced by global calamity, I could subsist on what I could grow for myself here, on my 55x125 chicago lot, for my 3 member family. I have on hand loads of seed for sprouting - quick food in 3 - 7 days and very healthy. Perennial drought tolerant greens - like mint for example - are a staple here. We prefer it blended with ice and pineapple in the vitamix, but if starving, chewing the leaves alone is not onerus at all. Like a weedy gum. Currently exploring how drought tolerant sorrel is. So far - results indicate it might do fine next year with no supplemental water. It did fine here when I forgot about it!

Lambsquarters is a delicious edible weed in the spinach family - it grows without any special care and I allow several plants each year to go unweeded in my garden. I have used it in green smoothies, soups, and stir frys when it's cousins chard and spinach are not available. It remains mild tasting even through the heat wave this summer.

If there was no municipal water, then things would surely be much more difficult, but the large mint patch is there, plenty of dandelions and purslane in the lawn for eating, and they last longer than the lawn in a drought. The past 2 days I was able to do all my seedling watering with saved rainwater from our last storm. In a prolonged drought without municipal water these would have to suffice.

rose petals, lilac flowers, violet flowers, etc are edible if need be. Borage grows easily and self seeds at will and the leaves and flowers are edible. The flowers taste like honey!

A knowledge of edible weeds and flowers is important for those apocalyptic tough times that may or may not transpire.

In future I will adding more fruit to the property, more water saving devices, more edible 'weeds' that can grow unaided, more 4 season techniques, more seed saving.

I connect with my son by pointing out that this is preparation for the "zombie apocalypse" so many movies and video games depict. He's taken more of an interest in the garden!

"Questions of social ethics don't go very far in DC. Social ethics and capitalism just don't mix. "

I don't necessarily agree with this. There are such things as capitalist with a social conscience, people who are for free enterprise but not willing to compromise their moral integrity.

The real question we have to ask ourselves is how these sociopaths get into all these power positions to do such as this monsanto coverup. Not just one, but all high level people in this case seemed to have no conscience whatsoever. How did it happen that so many cared so little for their fellow man or the environment and wildlife? How are they so heartless, and how was there such a concentration of them in one place?

"How did it happen that so many cared so little for their fellow man or the environment and wildlife? How are they so heartless, and how was there such a concentration of them in one place?"

How? In a word - GREED!

Dont forget that you dont have to be a vegetarian to be a non contributor. Many people buy their meat and eggs from farms who practice with a set of standards that the rest of the mass producers dont.

Hello all, I listened to a program on organic is it hype or some such question well done and on NPR, very good but what no person in the program talked about was over consumption, we hear all the time that the world can not support all the people if it reliant on locally produced food, but never have I heard, the argument that in the 1st world we are eating too much? I have no idea, but I live on an acre, I have no doubt that if I put it all to food production I could support my family of 4, given the amount of food I get in my tiny garden of about just under 200 sq foot, but it would be a full time job, on top of my Children, I could also have a couple of pigs, chickens ducks ect easy, but my neighbourhood would hate it, and i don't wish to upset them, also we are trying to sell the place and apparently this is a no no?
Sorry I have a very good friend who was vegan for 10 years, but she had to give it up as she travels internationally as a lecturer and found she could only eat lettuce :)but we like our veggies and could be near veggie but not quite :) I like my meat on occasion, but I like it ethically treated :)

Very widely disparate viewpoints here. I disagree with Monsanto in particular on incorporating BT into many crops, but I can't disagree that their plant breeding work makes a major difference in producing the seed that makes the food to feed an increasingly hungry world. In spite of claims to the contrary, very few people are capable of producing enough to feed a family of 4 from an acre. To do so, one must make use of the most productive varieties available.

DarJones

Working for them gives a lot of nice perks...even access to their lawyers for your own personal non-court use (wills, legal documents, etc).

Hmmm, Monsanto is a seed company, right? So you'd think their employees would get free seed, not free legal services. Most telling sentence on this thread, according to me.

Monsanto is a long-time swiss army knife company.

They used to make a ton of plastics and chemicals...the chemical path got them into pesticide/herbicides...in the 70s they started researching genetics...which got them into the whole biotech thing they're doing now. They spun off their plastics divisions long ago to avoid the liabilities of how we used to make plastics in the past.

"Dont forget that you dont have to be a vegetarian to be a non contributor. Many people buy their meat and eggs from farms who practice with a set of standards that the rest of the mass producers dont."

I think this is true - but being vegan is much easier....for example buying a coffee cake, eating at someone else's house, out to dinner, etc.

"we hear all the time that the world can not support all the people if it reliant on locally produced food"

I also reject this as spurious.

Sure - it couldn't happen tomorrow because the necessary systems are not in place. What needs to happen is for people to make it a priority, once they do that it will happen.

For myself - it would likely take me 5-10 years to make it happen on my small urban property, Planting fruit trees, berries, grape vines etc that take time to produce reliably. Other factors would include learning more 4 seasons techniques, acquiring materials - like maybe a "real" greenhouse, and making the best use of unused areas, such as vines and cordoned trees up the side of the house, rooftop area put to productive use (both of which would cool in summer, hold heat in winter and reduce fuel consumption)

Honestly - this will take me more than 5 years as I work full time - and won't really happen as some measures are ruled out due to aesthetics or difficulty level of accomplishment vs the reward of it. And the lilac hedge takes up a great deal of room, and I'm not taking it out unless our lives did depend on it. But technically I could.

Alternately - I was surprised to find that for Chicago - food coming in from Wisconsin and Michigan are considered "local"!!! Based on that, I don't see that local can't happen if local is relatively define as up to 200 miles away!

In terms of the global issues, people need to be relatively close to a productive food area. Is that rocket science or something that humanity instinctive did since its nascence?

yes there should be emergency measures in place for natural disasters, droughts or other unexpected food shortages. But other than that, individual nations need to be food self-sufficient for their own safety. Sure - import your coconuts and pineapples for variety, but having a system that demands imports to feed the masses is risky at best.

Technologies exist today that could be put to use everywhere to increase food prodution on small and larger scales.

Big Ag wants everyone to believe that its existance is necessary to feed the world - it make them money - so why wouldn't they brain wash the world and themselves? Hey - It's only a lie if you haven't drunk your own kool aid. Elsewise - its just another misinformed talking head - not so rare.

People can do what they set their mind on doing. They seldom accomplish what they believe to be impossible and unnecessary. More knowledge is available to more people than ever before, and at the end, I think it will be that those who believe and want will make it happen. Whatever it is that they believe and want.

So if people believe and want Big ag as the primary producer of food, it will happen. If people believe and want local organic, it will happen. The current trend is a few steps away from big ag - and they are terrified of losing "even 1 dollar" for anything, despite M's to B's in profits. Can you really believe their take on the situation?

"The fact is that without the kinds of advances in genetics and crop protection that companies like Monsanto provide we can't feed all the people in the world now or in the future."

I disagree because production farming is the most inefficient method of gardening, the equipment replaced people who hand picked, so the produce was bred for easy machine picking.

Organic options in big production farming would be the only way to improve production. More space in between rows could be used, giving lots more growing space. Some things if pruned properly will produce 3 times more fruit per plant, not to mention organic matter will not be depleted by adding compost instead of chemicals proven to cause cancer. They might feed more with these crops, but they kill more as well with cancer.

Every so many years the farmers have to overhaul the soil, or nothing grows well. Every time commercial farmers are forced to try organic methods to improve productivity, they get more productivity, not just because of a special seed.

I disagree anyone needed Monsanto seeds because of the forced use of seeds, everyone is now relying on them, dependency made by government for a false need for Monsanto products.

It's the name of the game, monopolies can do what they like to who they like, now it's a government forced necessity. Anyone who found better methods organically was forced out of business, or made into smaller corporations.

Monsanto represents big government, not people or nutrition because no way could these seeds hold more nutrition, they own the market and it's a good thing they go under before a bigger dependency will happen.

I continue to be puzzled at what people pay for grass-fed. In MI, high quality grass-fed beef is $3.00/lb for the carcass, or $4.50/lb for the meat. The heart, tongue, liver, short ribs, tail, neck, are all free. Very nicely, one gets unlimited amounts of bones, which is good for us since we eat soup every night in winter (25 gallons of stock a year). Granted, we do it efficiently (buy half or whole to split with other families, use and eat everything, steak everything that is steakable), but it is not more expensive than buying at Kroger. It is also incomparably better of course.

One argument in favor of grass-fed is nutrients per dollar. Iron is probably the most important, and clearly grass-fed will deliver more than corn-fed per ounce. In other words, grass-fed keeps you healthy because you eat less bad fats, and because you need less.

In the south-east US, while we have a decent amount of dairy cows we don't produce a lot of beef.

The stores mostly buy what is cheapest and it creates a somewhat artificially high market for the grass fed beef because of the limited amount of stores bringing it in.

although i feel bad for the people who have lost their jobs, i can't say i feel the same about the company they worked for. in his book "seeds of destruction", f. william engdahl has a lot to say about monsanto, their products, and methods. some of the advances they have made in crop production, are over stated or flat out false. what troubles me is their lack of ethics, and their ability to keep quiet the results of any research that put their products in a bad light. there is no government oversight. the government has given them a green light to do whatever they want. anyone who thinks monsanto is a good company needs to read the book.

keith

Monsanto reminds me of the agricultural version of FEMA. They took government training into their hands and left local offices to die in terrible natural disasters because they didn't know how to handle it, total bad planning.

Monsanto is vying to be that and probably was for a long time. I blame the Bush era for it, take what you can, do what your told, don't argue with authority or establishment because they are always right and are given a free ride with no supervision or even monetary fines. Two Bush presidents, two bad people with community planning, banking planning, and were a part of what made Monsanto what it is today. I don't understand why the republicans claim them, they were never truly republican, always for big government.

Now the ashes of our county are left behind, still the economy is failing and will for the next 10 years. I'm surprised at how much support Monsanto gets for the damage it's done. Many people see dollar signs in their eyes and the reports of high yields as success, but they don't count the doctor bills the chemicals created to get things to grow fast and big. Add the tally up, a Monsanto product is probably worth 4000 dollars per pound.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!

Well I've heard or read where GW was (or is) responsible for just about everything that's wrong but this is a new one on me.

Greg
Southern Nevada

Is there a "RANTING" forum? Perhaps there should be. This is the Vegetable Gardening Forum last I checked.

Ranting forums here and here. I agree. It is quite disheartening that this thread was allowed on here. Perhaps if others also requested it be moved we could return to gardening.

GW is a big supporter of Monsanto and he is a big piece of the economy being corporations weren't regulated. That is my opinion, but the oh superior followers argue not.

Monsanto is still a company waiting to lose it's license for everything it's done, look at Blackwater, now down to smaller and more regulated positions. I blame Bush, but you can Blame Obama if you want, even though he wasn't in office and didn't have authority to approve any of this.

I'll bet Obama isn't a fond follower of Monsanto, if you search for the White House Garden, I'll bet none of the seeds planted were Monsanto seeds. I'm wondering how organic he might be going too. They had a beautiful winter garden even after 2 feet of snow dumped on them.

Not as much corporate support in this term and Monsanto is one feeling the pinch. Nothing they're sending through FDA is getting approved, but in another presidency, it wouldn't have had to go through the ten year testing limits.

Call it what you like, but it's the truth.

DOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOM!!!!

In economics, there is something called 'comparative advantage' - people in one area are better at producing something than people in another area. That is particularly the case with agriculture, corn grows well in the mid-west, wheat and barley in the north, fruit in the southwest, ect. If you want to consume 'local' food, that means that either you have to consume a very limited and seasonal diet, or you will consume 'local' food that has been produced in an inefficient manner.

It takes a considerable gardening effort to produce a significant portion of one's diet, calorie-wise. Sure we grow tomatoes, peppers, onions, ect, but the pasta sauce we make with that only contains 5% of the calories of the spaghetti - most of it is from the wheat in the pasta. It happens that wheat is very well adapted to mega-mechanical cultivation, which is no coincidence, that's why it's a big part of our diets. I grow small amounts of wheat, and would suggest it for fun and perspective.

Anyway, 98% of people's diets will come from industrial farming for the rest of time (hopefully!), even most of us gardeners get a minority of our calories from our gardens. I would hope that we can maintain a standard of living that allows gardening for many folks in the future, but I would not wish hand-threshing wheat for sustenance upon my children. Leave the commodity stuff to big commercial operations, and we can keep the good stuff, like heirloom tomatoes that are so juicy they're hard to ship from the garden to the kitchen intact, to us.

I enjoyed the perspectives offered on this thread, and disagree that it does not belong!

Are people forced to read and add to threads they don't like? I had thought this one was finished and surprised to see more, then find it's just a couple of posts about how people didn't like this thread......why keep adding to it? Most everyone was done with it anyway :)

My advice is to only read and add on to those topics you like ;) Then nothing will annoy you.

"My advice is to only read and add on to those topics you like ;) Then nothing will annoy you."

I agree. If you see something you don't like then just ignore it and move-on to something you have an interest in.

T-bird:

I am intrigued by your statement about producing enough calories for 3 people (adults?) on 55'x125', presumably minus the footprint of your house and other buildings plus their shadows, and non-food plantings. Very generously this leaves maybe 4000 sq ft?

I am vegetarian also, and have been working fairly assiduously on food-production for about a dozen years. In my estimation, to produce all the caloric intake for one average adult male from 4000 ft would be an impressive achievement. Things like mint provide no calories, no starvation hedge there. The herbals and pollinator attractors and pest detractors are good and necessary but even if the whole 4000 ft was in calories it would be a close thing and not sustainable without more space for cover and compost crops and the afore-mentioned companion plants.

Given the range of good soils to marginal soils that people must contend with, on average it would prudent to figure on about an acre per person for sustainable local food production, or about a half-acre if in fairly good soil structure and rainfall climate and a no-meat diet.

Hi pnbrown,

I've been eating alot in the raw food world, and when you eat exclusively raw foods - fruits veggies and lots of greens - your body adapts over time to function with a much lower calorie load. I did 100% raw for well over a year. It was great, and I felt fabulous, and was able to exist on mostly fruits and salads with some nuts and seeds. I would go days at a time with just salads and fruit and was quite content and didn't lose weight after a while. Your body adapts to a high-nutrient vs high calorie diet. In many respects, it was quite amazing how little you could eat without being hungry. But - it took months and months to get to that point. Initially - there is a period of transition in which you crave the heavy, carb loaded diet that you were raised on.

I regret not sticking with it, it was more the difficult social aspects that tripped me up eventually. It seems to be socially isolating on many levels, and also quite expensive if you want anything besides fruit and salad. Even then - an occasion ramen noodle or pasta meal really stretches the food budget.

And while I'm not saying it would necessarily be fun to subsist for the 3 of us on our little area - I am merely saying that if we had to, we might actually be able to. Of course, every conceivable inch of space would be utilized etc. with intensive gardening techniques and 4 seasons and root cellar storage and all - it would be a lot of work for sure. I hope to be able to try at some point.....

Hi Guys,
I don't eat a lot of vegetables (I do snack from the garden though ;-)
I just went out and measured my Garden, and giving very liberal pathways around all my beds, I garden on 2850 sq. feet

I do use French Intensive/Biodynamic Gardening Practices, and I was able to get from march till today 2600 lbs of Fresh Veggies from that garden, and my garden is by no means done for the year,I have a few hundred cabbage babies that are ready to be planted, (as well as carrots, beets etc etc) for a fall garden,but there is simply no room available to plant anything yet, the crops are still pumping out the produce, I was able to nip the powdery mildew in the bud (by using Baking soda right out of the box (or should I say boxes ;-), and new growth abounds.
Because I don't eat a lot of vegetables, I really don't know what a person could consider enough lbs/calories per person per year...but my little garden produces a seemingly good amount of food, (if one was inclined to can it ;-)
It is very little work (besides the six hours a week to harvest), I have virtually no weeds in the garden, and it is all automatic watering... So if any of you mathematicians/food experts want to use these #s, my uneducated guess is I will have at least 4000 lbs out of my garden this year.

Wow, a year on raw foods only. I presume the nuts were unroasted? I had raw peanut-butter once, didn't like it at all. I know many say it is the healthiest diet, but I am not inclined to try it. Ayurvedic tradition is fairly against raw foods, I follow that for the most part.

Hi Jon! Fabulous info! So we're looking at 4000 pounds of food out of 2850 sq foot. Extremely impressive no mater how you look at it.

I get 3.65 pound/person/day for 3 people.

However - very shocking to hear that you don't eat much vegetables! That kind of takes away from this gardening book idea, don't you think? A gardener who doesn't eat his own veggies, tsk tsk!!! :)

pnbrown,

The unfortunate part of the raw food regime is that almost everything in our current system is pasteurized, rendering in unraw. In fact, by current law, all almonds produced in the us must be pasteurized, so I special ordered almonds that were grown in spain and sold raw here. Nutty, to say the least. And quite pricey.

Perhaps as I increase my garden productivity - including such as the grapes and fruit trees and perhaps a green house, I can return to eating raw without sticker shock. Currently-I have been indulging in the old favorites of bread, pasta, rice, and potatoes.....I've put away the skinny jeans for now, lol! It's amazing how quickly those worked their way into their old proportions in my diet.

Overall however, I find that high consumptions of raw greens really satiate the appetite. About 6-8 cups a day do it for me. Right now my garden isn't procuding enough greens for me, I'm only getting about 2 cups a day for all of us.

So in the event of the zombie apocalypse, I would focus on growing greens as much as possible, and the secondary consideration would be high calorie foods such as sunflower seeds, flax seeds, etc.

Raw peanut butter is not done by most in the raw food world. Not only are legumes in general not very palatable, but with peanuts in particular, there is some worry about alfatoxin that is a concern. Almond butter is the preferred alternative, and I find it quite tasty. I used to make my own in the food processor, mixing a minute or so, then refrigerating for 10 minutes so it cooled down - I was pretty hard core there.

Once I had the almond butter, I would put some away in the fridge - it kept a long time quite nicely - and I would put some in a blender with spices to make a faux peanut sauce type of thing. Yeah - it was alot of time in the kitchen too. I had more energy, but most of it went to making everything from scratch....

This post belongs in the Zombie Apocalypse gardenweb forum. :(

Just have to say this because several posters have claimed the world would starve without big Ag. First of all, there is no shortage of food in the world. Why does the government subsidize things like corn? Because we are producing more than we can sell and the price would hit bottom if it had to compete fairly with other grains world wide.
The people who are starving are doing so because they can't afford to buy food, not because there is no food to buy. In some countries certain "troublemaker" populations are deliberately being starved by their governments who are purposely keeping food from being delivered to them. the problem is financial and political, not supply.

Raw greens, 6 cups a day, or some of it cooked? A friend of mine was drinking the super-blenderized raw greens for a couple years. Greens are healthy in any form, and if one consumes enough volume one might sate the appetite as you say, but can a person survive long term on greens alone? As you say, no, must have some dense foods as well, seeds and nuts, and those take far more growing space.

"This post belongs in the Zombie Apocalypse gardenweb forum. :("

Yes - because the garden forums should be completely without humor of any kind.

On Monsantos corporate clout and techniques:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eZkDikRLQrw

Is this news to anyone, or have you all heard about this?

"Raw greens, 6 cups a day, or some of it cooked? A friend of mine was drinking the super-blenderized raw greens for a couple years. Greens are healthy in any form, and if one consumes enough volume one might sate the appetite as you say, but can a person survive long term on greens alone? As you say, no, must have some dense foods as well, seeds and nuts, and those take far more growing space."

I do try to have the majority of my greens raw - and I do do the green smoothies. But I also love them sauteed with olive oil, garlic, and a smokey schezuan flavoring over rice, also always hide as much greens as I can in soups (youngest child not on the greens bandwagon).

Also to note the importance of rotating greens - cabbage family, beet family, mint, carrot family, others. Too much of the same greens all the time are not a good thing.

oh - time to check out the fall seedlings, I'm getting hungry!

" This post belongs in the Zombie Apocalypse gardenweb forum. :("

Obfuscation is the concealment of intended meaning in communication, making communication confusing, intentionally ambiguous, and more difficult to interpret.

A personal reason to stalk the boards? I have never read so much pro corporatism from one individual anywhere. A person who creates a smokes screen to encourage others to sway opinions in their favor, obfuscation. My favorite saying about this is "Idiocracy", what a great movie! So true!

1- You're way into insulting me or putting words into my mouth or telling me how evil I am or whatever I'm doing to you this week

2- If you can't tell that's a joke then go complain to the Zombie Apocalypse forum on gardenweb...they specialize in these matters. Just read the post before mine to complete the joke in case you missed it the first time.

3- I'm not stalking anyone. I'm not shouting anyone down. I'm not "pro corporatism" just because I don't agree with some of your views.

4- This post now really does belong in the Zombie Apocalypse forum, imo.

nc-crn,

I don't think it's fair for you to use my little joke to try to discredit the entire thread. I made a joke. You tried to use it to poke fun of everything I said. That is not a joke - but mean-spirited.

For those who may not be more familiar with my previous postings, gardening as a hedge against the zombie apocalypse was something I used to get my gamer son more interested in the gardening.

When I portrayed the garden as an essential component of survival in the event of the dissolution of society (for whatever reason), it really clicked with him about the connection between man and earth. Growing up in a highly urbanized society as we do in chicago, this is really missed by those who think food comes in cans and packages. Identifying widespread unknown social unrest with the zombie apocalypse is a way to connect with younger people. And I like to stay well connected with my younger people!

Furthermore, I played that video for my son that I posted above, about monsanto and milk and bovine hormones. I mentioned that is sounded like Umbrella Corp, and he laughed.

Those not familiar with Umbrella Corp, go see the new resident evil movie out in theaters now....but best rent the first 3 so you know what is going on.

We're going to go see the movie this weekend!

Good thread. I thought I'd add this link from the Union of Concerned Scientists, about genetic engineering's failure to increase yields in food and feed crops despite claims to the contrary. There are some interesting conclusions there.

Here is a link that might be useful: GM - Failure to Yield

"I don't think it's fair for you to use my little joke to try to discredit the entire thread."

I'm not. I'm just trying to piggyback on your joke to extend it. Woo internet. We wouldn't have this issue if we were face to face, but it's hard to convey everything in text alone.

Being a huge bad movie, horror, gore fan...I'm very in tune to the various coming zombie apocalypses.

I'm not in the pocket of big agriculture, nor do I use/promote GM crops or chemical culture. I don't use either on my own vegetable garden aside from a light chemical fertilizer (aka, Miracle Grow).

I just work in/around some of the "evil" (very indirectly, mostly end-user farmers), but most of the research and work I've done involve how to use less resources...that's where agriculture research is. Less water, less pesticides, less chemicals...part of this, unfortunately, is the role GM crops play in putting less of these other inputs into the soil.

For us managing a few dozen to a few hundred rows of crops we don't need it, but when a person is planting/managing 100 acres+ things get a little harder.

I'm not happy where GM is going or the companies pushing it or the governments that can't even get patent law under control approving most of it and letting judges with limited knowledge battle it's roll-out.

I walk in both worlds, but I know where I stand.

It doesn't show much legitimate unbias if you are annoyed at the research proven by all that have touched it, accept the research created by the company for GM crops, are unsafe.

Arguing for something allowed to lie for itself and push its weight around while someone completely has proven it wrong is a lie in itself.

These products wouldn't be getting the rap they have, if they weren't proven unsafe. No one goes home, jumps to dumb conclusions, and then makes things up on big corporates who can't be touched like Monsanto.

Monsanto has its own cheering legal section, they write their own rules, and they need rules, to be regulated, like everyone else. In this day and age, no one can sue big companies or government, but look at a poor man, who if he were in this situation, how much money would he have to pay out in damages for what health, death, and environmental damages caused by inventions like what companies like Monsanto has created.

Would you be still interested in arguing for this person? Or is it just that it's a corporate that has the right to do these things to people? A man/woman would be strung up and hung out to dry if they endangered so many people, it should be the same for a corporate.

You be good, boys and girls.

"It doesn't show much legitimate unbias if you are annoyed at the research proven by all that have touched it, accept the research created by the company for GM crops, are unsafe."

I don't know how many times I can tell you that you've got the wrong end of the stick there. Here's yet another time.