NOTICE!

The Weatherzone forum has now closed and is in read-only mode until the 1st of November when it will close permanently. We would like to thank everyone who has contributed over the past 18 years.

If you would like to continue the discussion you can follow us on Facebook and Twitter or participate in discussions at AusWeather or Ski.com.au forums.

Page 21 of 43 < 1 2 ... 19 20 21 22 23 ... 42 43 >
Topic Options
#1207758 - 20/08/2013 08:44 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Pepsi, Coke, Kellogg & Kraft Pulling GMOs from Europe — But Not the US

Thanks to pressure from European countries on food providers to stop using GMOs, corporations like Kellogg, Heinz, Kraft, Coke and Pepsi are now ceasing sales GMO products– at least in certain territories in Europe. Even agricultural giant Monsanto has pulled its bid to have new GMO crops approved in Europe.

However, these companies continue to operate as normal in United States. Their marketing efforts to pass off GMO food as the same as regular food are still succeeding, due in large part to the high power lobbyists that manipulate the American political system at the top.

This power is not going unchecked, though. Many consumers are now demanding United States follow the way of Europe and how it treats GMOs. In some places legislation is even being passed to give consumers the right to know what’s in their food.

Grassroots Progress Building Momentum

Even though the United States as a whole isn’t waking up to the dangers of GMOs, individual cities and regions are taking steps to fight back against big agriculture. Recently, Connecticut became the first state to pass a law requiring GMOs to be labeled. Soon, Connecticut shoppers can know whether or not the food on their shelves contains GMOs, allowing consumers the freedom to choose whether or not they want to risk their health with genetically modified produce. This also makes it harder for companies to hide the fact that they use genetically modified foods in their products.

Shortly after Connecticut passed its law, Maine passed a similar law. Unfortunately, political lobbying has made these laws ineffective — at least until other states joining them pass similar legislation. However, the fact that these laws came so far is proof U.S. consumers are waking up and wanting to know what’s in their food.

Now, Massachusetts voters are trying to have a similar measure passed. The Boston city Council unanimously voted in favor of a resolution to ban foods containing genetically modified ingredients until they have been more scientifically scrutinized and labeled for consumers. Even though some states have already rejected GMO laws (like California), it’s clear anti-GMO consumer interest is growing.

Consumers Should Have the Right to Know What’s in Their Food

While labelling seems like progress, some claim GMO labels are a scare tactic to push consumers away from genetically modified food. However, this argument is a fallacy. Consumers have the right to consume whatever they want, but they should also have the right to know what they’re consuming. If someone wants their diet to be full of unhealthy chemicals, dangerous fats and deadly ingredients, they have that right. (In fact, many people do make this choice – that’s why obesity is an epidemic in United States.)

It isn’t right that big companies can effectively lie to consumers and given the impression their food is all natural and healthy when in fact it has been genetically modified. Fortunately, more and more people – and countries – are getting on board with this idea and demanding the situation be changed, one state at a time.

The U.S. Needs to Catch Up

With more and more European companies banning GMOs, one could conclude that developed countries are getting wise to the dangers of genetically modified crops. However, United States is still far behind it’s treatment of GMO foods.

The fact that cynical corporations can still deceive U.S. consumers into buying GMO food without consumer knowledge shows how far we have to go. It’s through grassroots efforts and growing the anti-GMO momentum in the U.S. and Canada that pro-consumer, anti-GMO legislation can finally be passed. Then, companies will no longer be able to market inferior, dangerous GMO products to U.S. consumers that won’t sell in Europe.

http://www.undergroundhealth.com/pepsi-coke-kellogg-kraft-pulling-gmos-from-europe-but-not-the-us/
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1207809 - 20/08/2013 16:37 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: KevD]
datadog Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 16/01/2013
Posts: 199
Originally Posted By: Bello Boy
The second section you highlighted was a concession that was added after massive protests from growers across Europe (and beyond in fact as the potential repercussions were substantial). Before that there were no planned exceptions which meant one home grower giving seeds to another could be breaking the law!


Thats as far as i've got so far. Will steel myself later tonight for more reading.

Its a worrying read there so far Bello Boy. Seems to me when these big rule changes get a foot in the door they soon 'tidy up' all the little inconvenient 'concessions'.

As per the climate nonsense, any European idiocy soon gets to Oz.







.

Top
#1207862 - 21/08/2013 08:52 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: datadog]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Dr Wang: GM Crop Weed Hybrids Set to Destroy Genetic Diversity

A new study from researchers at Fudan University in Shanghai, China has shown that GM crop-weed hybrids could outcompete wild relatives. Bad news for genetic diversity.

Find Full Study Here: http://gmoevidence.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/GMO-weeds.pdf

A novel 5-enolpyruvoylshikimate-3-phosphate (EPSP) synthase transgene for glyphosate resistance stimulates growth and fecundity in weedy rice (Oryza sativa) without herbicide.

Authors: Wei Wang , Hui Xia, Xiao Yang, Ting Xu, Hong Jiang Si, Xing Xing Cai, Feng Wang, Jun Su, Allison A. Snow and Bao-Rong Lu

Summary:

Understanding evolutionary interactions among crops and weeds can facilitate effective weed management. For example, gene flow from crops to their wild or weedy relatives can lead to rapid evolution in recipient populations. In rice (Oryza sativa), transgenic herbicide resistance is expected to spread to conspecific weedy rice (Oryza sativa f.spontanea) via hybridization.
Here, we studied fitness effects of transgenic over-expression of a native 5-enolpyruvoylshikimate-3-phosphate synthase (epsps) gene developed to confer glyphosate resistance in rice. Controlling for genetic background, we examined physiological traits and field performance of crop–weed hybrid lineages that segregated for the presence or absence of this novel epspstransgene.
Surprisingly, we found that transgenic F2 crop–weed hybrids produced 48–125% more seeds per plant than nontransgenic controls in monoculture- and mixed-planting designs without glyphosate application. Transgenic plants also had greater EPSPS protein levels, tryptophan concentrations, photosynthetic rates, and per cent seed germination compared with nontransgenic controls.
Our findings suggest that over-expression of a native rice epsps gene can lead to fitness advantages, even without exposure to glyphosate. We hypothesize that over-expressed epsps may be useful to breeders and, if deployed, could result in fitness benefits in weedy relatives following transgene introgression.
http://gmoevidence.com/dr-wang-gm-crop-weed-hybrids-set-to-destroy-genetic-diversity/
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1207877 - 21/08/2013 13:03 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
They spruik about milo and how good it is for you "6 vitamins and minerals rich in protein...full of calcium."

But what they don't state is that is also FULL of sugar! just under half to be precise! in 100 grams of Milo 46.4 grams of that is sugar!

So going by the directions on the pack you use 3 *heaped* teaspoons or 20g of Milo (9.3 grams of that is sugar) then what do most people do when they have made it? add another 2 spoons of sugar? so basically in that "healthy" drink you are consuming over 20 grams of sugar, and the "vitamins" that they spay on are probably of the synthetic type which you body does not readily absorb anyway, so they are most likely passed straight out of your body and the calcium from the Milo directly is only 160mg.

Most of the calcium that you are getting from the Milo comes from the milk that is added to the Milo.

It is rich when you think of it a 1kg tin of milo is over $9.00 and out of that just under half is sugar.... so you are basically paying $4 odd dollars for 464 grams of sugar smirk
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1208089 - 23/08/2013 11:16 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
What a complete waste! and where will the imported fruit come from? china? south africa? bye by fruit processing in australia. shocked frown

Farmers urged to help rip up 750,000 fruit trees in Victoria

Victorian farmers are being urged to help tear up 750,000 fruit trees in the Goulburn valley to prevent an unprecedented biosecurity risk to the region’s agricultural industry.

The Victorian Farmers Federation (VFF) has called on livestock and arable farmers to volunteer their time and equipment to help rip up the vast tracts of orchards that are no longer viable.

The unusual request follows a decision by Shepparton-based cannery SPC, which has operated in the area since the 1930s, to discontinue peach and apricot contracts with local growers.

The move has left 61 growers stranded, with about 150 others affected to a lesser degree.

Fruit trees will have to be removed because untended orchards pose a biosecurity risk if pests invade to feast on the fruit.

The Victorian government says it has relaxed the rules requiring growers to pay the government for helping clear unwanted trees. Payment will now be taken later, or when a property is sold.

Rien Silverstein, an apple and pear grower and VFF Shepparton branch president, told Guardian Australia the situation was a severe blow to the “fruit salad bowl” of Victoria.

“Growers have been completely cut off, which has been a complete shock to them,” she said. “There’s no alternative market for them because canned fruit is grown differently to fresh fruit.

“There are growers now who suddenly have zero income and it’s not like you can just start growing something else. It takes a good five years to pull something out and put a new variety in.”

Silverstein said the high Australian dollar had led SPC to switch to imported canned fruit, largely from South Africa and Chile.

“This happened because of our high wages, our high costs and because we don’t protect our growers, like other countries do,” she said. “This is a free trade policy but it certainly isn’t a fair trade one.

“Many growers came to the area after the war and made their home here. A lot of them are in their 50s and 60s but too young to retire. It’s a real shame for them and the Goulburn valley.”

Peter Tuohey, VFF president and a grain grower, said he would deploy his front-end loader to remove peach and apricot trees.

“But for this to work we’ll need support from local growers to co-ordinate, identify and help battling growers through this process,” he said.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2013/aug/22/farmers-rip-fruit-trees-victoria
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1208100 - 23/08/2013 12:08 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Greg Sorenson]
ant Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 05/10/2002
Posts: 9063
Loc: Overlooking ACT at 848m
This is so rotten, we are idiots. We need some kind of mass campaign to get it through to people that if they don't pay 10 cents extra for that tin of Australian peaches, we won't have any and we'll be buying rubbish full of shocking chemicals from China.

Top
#1208101 - 23/08/2013 12:14 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Greg Sorenson]
roves Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 02/02/2005
Posts: 1638
Loc: Paringa-Riverland
This is exactly when a import tariff should be applied other countries do it but we are idiots well the buffoons running this country are.
We also need to fix labelling laws as well.


Edited by roves (23/08/2013 12:16)
_________________________
YTD-36mm AVE-260mm

Top
#1208102 - 23/08/2013 12:15 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: ant]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
We used to occasionally buy "homebrand fruit" in the tin, until one day when we opened it up and noticed how pale the fruit in the tin was....then we looked on the back and noticed it came from south Africa....(where previously it had come from australia)needless to say we didn't buy that anymore, if we did buy tinned fruit it was SPC.

The trouble with SPC now is it is not wholly australian owned anymore, it is owned by coca cola-amatil.....

There is an add on TV now, with a farmer saying "you could buy my pear or for a few cents less you can buy an imported pear... and put me out of business.."
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1208168 - 24/08/2013 09:39 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Greg Sorenson]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
The dilemma of Generic Branding.

People have been brainwashed by the two major supermarket chains into believing that generic or Store Brand grocery items are the same day to day, week to week and month to month when it is actually anything but.

Scenario:
Joanne Bloggs goes in to Woolies and buys a can of generic 220g can of Tuna in spring water. She likes the taste and the cost is within her budget so next month she stocks up on 6 cans and takes them home. She opens the first one and it tastes and looks different that the first one but seeing as she is relying on a faulty memory (the human brain – which is what the supermarkets are relying on ) she talks herself into believing that they are the same tins. She then checks the cupboard and finds that some of the cans are subtly different from the first can so she looks a bit closer and notices that on the first can it is “Produce of the Philippines” while the other cans are “Made in Taiwan, Product of Fiji, product of Brazil”. Each can has a very slightly different label that can only be seen if you compare them side by side but they share a common font, ink colours, logos and the only real difference is the NIP (Nutritional Information Panel) is slightly different as is the barcode and country of origin.

So here we have 3 different countries supplying Tuna in spring water to a supermarket all labelled to resemble as closely as possible to each other because the supermarkets don’t want you to see that each supplier is different and the reason for this?
Cost is the only factor they care about. Also the type of Tuna means nothing to them Tuna is tuna be it blue fin, dog tooth or anything else. So long as it is Tuna they can and will label it as Tuna.

If in 2 months time Taiwan is selling tuna cheaper than say Fiji then they will bang out a contract via one of their in country buyers and order umpteen million unlabelled cans. The supermarket then asks for and gets a sample to test for quality and nutritional information, prints the labels, sends them back to the cannery and they are then canned, labelled, boxed and shipped to Australia where Joe Bloggs unwittingly now buys a product that he thinks is the same as the one he bought last month but is anything but.

Now comes the supermarket supply chain and back end. The warehouse has 1,000,000 cans of Tuna. The break up is 250,000 from Fiji, 100,000 from Brazil and the rest from Taiwan. It is told by head office to shift these ASAP as the shelf life is less than 12 months so it processes the orders and forced selling lines back to its stores in say WA, SA, Vic and NSW. So WA gets the Fiji produced ones, SA and Vic get them from Taiwan and NSW gets the ones from Brazil. But there is a problem and so they send out by number of cans ordered/forced not by country of origin. Now a problem occurs (say a small number have had seals fail) and a product recall is made for say the Brazil made cans. So what happens? Do they recall all 220g cans of tuna in spring water? No just the ones from Brazil which then becomes a nightmare for those who bought the product, the stores that sold it and the shareholders are all screaming because of the damage the brand has suffered.

OK so that isn’t a big deal but it gets worse. Say you have a medical condition that means that you have to follow a strict nutritional regime and have to follow very strictly say a low sodium diet. No foods that contain more than 120mg per 100g of product.

The first can you bought had a sodium content of 96mg per 100g according to the NIP (Nutritional Information panel). Remember the labels are similar and if you don’t check you have no idea that the next can you buy in a week/months time isn’t from the same batch so you see the bale and impulse buy it because it looks like the same as the previous one. You get home, consume the contents, start getting high blood pressure and it is potentially life threatening but you get to hospital in time and are soon back to normal after a couple of days in hospital.

The cause? The next lot you bought came from a different country and the sodium content went from 96mg/120g to 440mg/100g with zero warnings.

There is nothing wrong with our labelling laws. They are some of the toughest in the world except when it comes to generic style products. Our NIP (that funny looking box on the label that contains all sorts of stuff you can’t understand) is the best practice in the world but is confusing for those who don’t know how to read them.

Does the scenario above sound far fetched? To some people it might but exactly this has happened to my wife on 2 occasions. Both times it was generic branding that caused the problems. Both times it was directly because of the dodgy labelling used by supermarkets to try and fool people into thinking they are buying the same product from the same source and that taste, quality, nutritional content and safety are exactly the same when they patently aren’t.

Now that is a single product – multiply that by every generic branded food item that both major supermarket chains sell and you will see that they are playing a very dodgy game with consumers.

I refuse to buy generic branded anything. Yes branded products cost more but at least I have some idea where the product comes from as well as having a Brand that I can contact if I have a problem.

Who are you going to contact if you have a problem with a generic brand? The supplier? You can't because there is no supplier shown on the label. The supermarket? They aren’t going to help you either unless you start dragging lawyers into the conversation.

So do yourself, the economy and the general public a service and refuse to buy generic products. You are being sold dodgy quality from dodgy sources of some unknown country of origin produced in a 3rd world country with hygiene stands not the same as our own with unknown nutritional value.

I buy Australian instead of overseas products unless we can't produce it here and then I weigh up whether I actually need it or not.
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1208285 - 26/08/2013 11:26 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
The loophole that really needs to be closed is MADE in Australia from Local and imported ingredients or MADE in Australia from imported and Local ingredients.......

How on earth do you know where the "imported" ingredients come from? China? what portion of the product contains imported ingredients? in some cases it could be the whole contents are imported produce and only the tin/packaging or lable could be made in Australia.
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1208312 - 26/08/2013 17:13 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Greg Sorenson]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics
Australian Logo information from http://www.australianmade.com.au/media/57333/AMAG-1-Logo-brochure-2012.pdf

Product of Australian All of the product’s significant ingredients come from Australia, and all or nearly all of the manufacturing or processing is also carried out in Australia.

Australian MadeThe product is substantially transformed in Australia and at least 50 per cent
of the cost of production has been incurred in Australia.

Australian Seafood Each significant ingredient has been grown in Australia and all or virtually
all of the production processes have occurred in Australia.

Australian Grown When the logo is used with the words ‘Australian Grown’ plus a name of an
ingredient, e.g. ‘Australian Grown Potatoes’ it means that 100% of the named ingredients (e.g. the potatoes) was grown in Australia, and at least 90% of the whole product was grown here.

Australian OwnedIt can only be used on products that are registered with the and meet the criteria outlined below. It must always be used with one of the four descriptors:
Australian Made
Australian Grown
Australian Seafood

The full criteria behind each descriptor can be found in the AMAG Code of Practice. These criteria are equivalent to or stricter than the provisions of the Australian Consumer Law. In addition to the descriptor required, businesses may add additional information, such as “Australian Made since 1905”.
All of the product’s significant ingredients come from Australia, and all or nearly all of the manufacturing or processing is also carried out in Australia. The product is substantially
transformed in Australia and at least 50 per cent of the cost of production has been incurred in Australia.
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1208527 - 29/08/2013 08:37 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Syngenta, Bayer challenge EU bee-saving pesticide ban

GENEVA, Genève — Swiss agrichemical giant Syngenta and German chemicals group Bayer on Tuesday said they were taking legal action against the European Commission over its suspension of the use of an insecticide it blames for killing bees.
The two companies, which announced their challenges separately, said they were bringing their cases before the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.
"We would prefer not to take legal action but have no other choice given our firm belief that the Commission wrongly linked thiamethoxam to the decline in bee health," Syngenta chief operating officer John Atkin said in a statement.
In neighbouring Germany, a spokesman for Bayer said its agrochemical division Bayer CropScience had submitted its legal complaint in the middle of this month and wanted clarity for the sake of future investment.
The European Commission announced in May that it was temporarily banning the use of Syngenta's thiamethoxam, which is also sold under the name Cruiser. The product is used to treat seeds and is applied to the soil or sprayed on bee-attractive plants and cereals.
It simultaneously banned two pesticides produced by Bayer, and expanded the ban last month to a fourth pesticide made by another German company, BASF.
Syngenta and the other companies have insisted their products cannot be blamed for a very sharp decline in the bee population.
Bee numbers have slumped in Europe and the United States in recent years because of a mysterious plague dubbed colony collapse disorder (CCD), which some reports have said has resulted in a loss of more than 40 percent of hives across the United States.
This has stoked fears over future food security, since bees account for 80 percent of plant pollination by insects, which is vital to global food production.
Without the work of bees, many crops would be unable to bear fruit or would have to be pollinated by hand.
But Syngenta insisted on Tuesday that it was being wrongly blamed for the problem.
"The Commission took the decision on the basis of a flawed process, an inaccurate and incomplete assessment by the European Food Safety Authority and without the full support of EU Member States," the company insisted.
The Bayer spokesman told AFP meanwhile that the company needed "dependable basic conditions with regard to future investment decisions".
No new facts had come to light since the products' approval, he argued. "In our opinion there are no new scientific findings," he said.
After the Swiss company's announcement, European Commission officials said the body "takes note" of the Syngenta statement and said it had based its measures on scientific information.
But the challenge would not affect the ban's implementation, the officials said.
The Commission's decision received support from 15 countries, including France and Germany, but eight others, including Britain, Italy and Hungary, voted against the move. Four, including current EU presidency holder Ireland, abstained.
Syngenta said the EU suspension was causing deep concern among farmers, who once the two-year-ban takes effect in December will need to replace "an extremely effective, low dose product (with) much less sustainable alternatives."
"Modern products like thiamethoxam are essential to address the challenge of increasing European food production and reducing the reliance on imports," Atkin said.
Instead of going after pesticide makers, Syngenta said, stakeholders should "concentrate on practical solutions to bee health, which most experts agree is damaged by disease, viruses and the loss of habitat and nutrition."
At 1200 GMT, the price of shares in Syngenta were down 1.4 percent to 366.6 Swiss francs, as the Swiss stock exchange's main index slumped 1.8 percent.
Shares in Bayer were down 2.2 percent to 86.60 points in afternoon trading while the Frankfurt market was 2.0 percent overall.
Copyright © 2013 AFP. All rights reserved.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/art...be9966d599a.1d1
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1209072 - 04/09/2013 11:31 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Pests in Illinois destroy fields of Monsanto corn, proving its inefficacy

Farmers in two Illinois counties have reported that the western corn rootworm, a potentially devastating pest, is showing up in their fields despite rotating fields and planting Monsanto's GM corn.

On Monday, two entomologists from the University of Illinois went to Livingston and Kankakee counties where they spotted severe corn rootworm damage in two fields planted with Bt corn. Bt corn was engineered to protect crops from this very situation by producing an insecticidal protein derived from Bacillus thuringiensis.

Illinois corn farmers practice rotation farming to help minimize the damage caused by pests, but the corn rootworm is rotation-resistant and now seems to be Bt resistant as well.

Joe Spencer and Michael Gray, the two entomologists, will run tests to confirm that these rootworms have acquired a resistance to the poison-producing corn.

The entomologists also collected corn rootworms from adjacent soybean fields. "The density of the western corn rootworm adults in both crops ... was additional evidence that the Bt hybrids had failed to offer the necessary root protection," Gray said in a statement.

Spencer and Gray say that this rootworm is found in Indiana, Michigan, Ohio and Iowa, in addition to Illinois, meaning that the problem could become more widespread in the coming years.

Gray and Spencer claim that farmers will have to switch to a less natural, more heavily genetically modified product that has "multiple modes of action," such as Monsanto's Genuity SmartStax line, to kill the corn rootworm. Otherwise, more insecticide would have to be used, which is allegedly the opposite of what GMOs were supposed to achieve. Of course though, calling for increased GMO usage to cover up the issues created by GMOs will only exacerbate the problem further.

http://buzz.naturalnews.com/000976-Monsanto-GMOs-corn_rootworm.html
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1209947 - 13/09/2013 08:51 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Ahhh, if only other countries were smart enough to follow suit...

McDonald’s goes belly up in Bolivia

McDonald’s leaves Bolivia healthier forever!

After 14 years of presence in the country, and despite all the existing campaigns and having a network, the chain was forced to close the eight restaurants that remained open in the three main cities: La Paz, Cochabamba and Santa Cruz de la Sierra.

It is a question of the first Latin-American country that will remain without any McDonald’s, and the first country in the world where the company has to close because it persists in having their numbers in the red for over a decade.

The impact for the creative and marketing managers has been so strong that a documentary was filmed under the title “Why McDonald’s went broke in Bolivia,” where they try to somehow explain the reasons that led Bolivians to still prefer pies to hamburgers.

Cultural rejection

The documentary includes interviews with cooks, sociologists, nutritionists, educators, historians and more, where there is a general agreement: the rejection is neither to the hamburgers nor to their taste. The rejection is in the minds and mentality of Bolivians. Everything indicates that “fast food” is literally the opposite of a Bolivian’s conception of how to prepare a meal.

In Bolivia, the food to be good requires, in addition to taste, care, and hygiene, a lot of preparation time. This is how a consumer values the quality of what goes into the stomach, also by the amount of time it took to make the meal. Fast food is not for these people, the Americans concluded.



Read more http://www.trueactivist.com/mcdonalds-goes-belly-up-in-bolivia/
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1209950 - 13/09/2013 08:56 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Again you have to ask yourself why such a company would need 'protection' if what they were selling was so safe......


‘Monsanto Protection Act’ quietly extended by Congress



A budget provision protecting genetically-modified seeds from litigation in the face of health risks was extended for three months in an approved US House of Representatives’ spending bill on Tuesday evening.

Called “The Monsanto Protection Act” by opponents, the budget rider shields biotech behemoths like Monsanto, Cargill and others from the threat of lawsuits and bars federal courts from intervening to force an end to the sale of a GMO (genetically-modified organism) even if the genetically-engineered product causes damaging health effects.


The biotech rider first made news in March when it was a last-minute addition to the successfully-passed House Agriculture Appropriations Bill for 2013, a short-term funding bill that was approved to avoid a federal government shutdown.

The current three-month extension is part of the short-term FY14 Continuing Resolution spending bill.

The Center for Food Safety, a vocal opponent of the rider, released a statement expressing dismay that the measure once again avoided proper legislative process while usurping the power to challenge GMO products in court.

“The rider represents an unprecedented attack on US judicial review, which is an essential element of US law and provides a critical check on government decisions that may negatively impact human health, the environment or livelihoods,” they wrote. “This also raises potential jurisdictional concerns with the Senate Agriculture and Judiciary Committees that merited hearings by the Committees before its consideration.”

Following the original vote in March, President Barack Obama signed the provision into law as part of larger legislation to avoid a government shutdown. Rallies took place worldwide in May protesting the clandestine effort to protect the powerful companies from judicial scrutiny.

“It is extremely disappointing to see the damaging ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ policy rider extended in the House spending bill,” said Colin O’Neil, director of government affairs for Center for Food Safety. “Hundreds of thousands of Americans called their elected officials to voice their frustration and disappointment over the inclusion of ‘Monsanto Protection Act’ this past spring. Its inclusion is a slap in the face to the American public and our justice system.”

Largely as a result of prior lawsuits, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) is required to complete environmental impact statements (EIS) to assess risk prior to both the planting and sale of GMO crops. The extent and effectiveness to which the USDA exercises this rule is in itself a source of serious dispute.

The reviews have been the focus of heated debate between food safety advocacy groups and the biotech industry in the past. In December of 2009, for example, Food Democracy Now collected signatures during the EIS commenting period in a bid to prevent the approval of Monsanto’s GMO alfalfa, which many feared would contaminate organic feed used by dairy farmers; it was approved regardless.

http://rt.com/usa/monsanto-protection-extended-house-741/
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1210053 - 14/09/2013 08:34 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Greg Sorenson]
Farm Weather Offline
Weather Freak

Registered: 10/11/2009
Posts: 845
Loc: West Mallee SA
even the most radical are allowed to change there views

Frankenfood. It's the meme that keeps giving...the brainchild of an English professor from Boston named Paul Lewis, whose timing was as impeccable as his rhetorical flourish was devastating.

'Ever since Mary Shelley’s baron rolled his improved human flesh out of the lab,' Lewis wrote, 'scientists have been bringing such good things to life… If they [the GMO corporations] want to sell us Frankenfood, perhaps it's time to gather the villagers, light some torches and head to the castle.'

It was 1992 and the first GM crops were coming online for approval by America’s Food and Drug Administration. Lewis’ turn of phrase was fabulously alliterative, catchy as a car commercial, and conjured powerful notions of something amiss. Fish genes in tomatoes. Nature being tampered with. Humans playing God. Mad scientists in their labs cackling demonically as they tinkered with the very building blocks of life.

In reality, though, scientists have been tinkering with crops since the dawn of agriculture, making them more productive, resistant to disease...shorter, fatter, bigger, better. The development of hybrid crops in the 1930s was a game-changing moment. Then, in the 90s, ethical, environmental and food safety concerns collided with panic about mad-cow disease to produce a backlash against the notion of crop science gone too far. Frankenfood provided the frightening metaphor that tilted the war of words wildly in favour of the anti-GM warriors.


This article represents part of a larger Background Briefing investigation. Listen to Ian Walker's full report on Sunday at 8.05 am or use the podcast links above after broadcast.

'It feeds into a very deep-seated and long-held fear of technology that people have,' explains former anti-GM activist Mark Lynas. 'And that's where the Frankenstein association is so powerful. It’s something humans are doing which they shouldn't do. You even get this back in Genesis with the Tree of Knowledge. So it's a very strong myth that goes right through human culture.'

And, while scientists weren’t exactly being burnt at the stake, some took Lewis’ rallying cry to heart and found righteous cause to destroy important scientific experiments in the trial crop stages. Lynas excelled in this for nearly two decades, leading campaigns in the UK and Europe.

'It was my life,' he says. 'We did all of these kinds of night-time actions against GM crops, going and chopping them down. We thought we were decontaminating the landscape. We thought what we were doing was environmentally responsible and important.'

What he didn't realise at the time, Lynas says now, was that the real Frankenstein's monster was not GM technology, but the reaction against it by people like him and his anti-GM cohorts. Back in January 2013, his public apology to the Oxford Farming Conference for what he now describes as his 'years of wrongheadedness' made headlines around the world. At the time, it was nerve-wracking and heartfelt.

'I'd kind of had enough, and I just wanted to put all of my cards on the table and speak from the heart, really, and say, “I got this wrong". I think everyone else in the anti-GM movement has got this wrong. We need to take stock of where we are and I for one am issuing an apology.'

Oxford was a fitting place for such a dramatic change of heart, being the same venue where Lynas had earned notoriety for throwing a cream pie in the face of Bjorn Lomborg, an outspoken critic of eco-apocalyptic agendas. 'Pies for lies,' yelled Lynas as his underarm lob hit its target.

This time, he was asking for forgiveness from a gathering of farmers and scientists, soberly recanting 'demonizing an important technological option which can be used to benefit the environment...I could not have chosen a more counter-productive path.' No-one preaches better than a convert.

Lynas is a respected environmentalist, and a strong campaigner on climate change who's written award-winning books. What irked him was the slow realisation that his passionately held views on GM were inconsistent with his reliance on evidence-based science when arguing his position on human-induced climate change. When it came to GM, he admits, he actively ignored the weight of evidence in favour of biotechnology.

The argument he puts is that an estimated three trillion meals containing food derived from GM-bred plants have been eaten in 29 countries over 15 years without one single substantiated case of harm. 'You are more likely,' he quips, 'to get hit by an asteroid than to get hurt by GM food.'

Mark Lynas was a big fish in the anti-GM pond. Within days of his conference appearance, the video of his speech went viral. There are now versions in more than a dozen languages, translated by volunteers in different countries around the globe.

The Lynas conversion was a revelation for journalist Jon Entine, who wrote up the story for Forbes magazine. Entine saw it as the potential dynamite it was for the ongoing GM debate. But, he says, it also pointed to a turning point in our thinking about the interface between technology and the natural world.

'Every once in a while our society faces major inflection points when certain technologies come into play,' Entine explains. 'We saw it in the 1800s with the railroad, we've seen it with nuclear technology, we've seen it with computer technology. And I really think that we're in this kind of inflection period with biotechnology.'

'It is literally changing the way we can think about nature. And I mean in a good sense. I don't believe we're violating God's way, or any kind of natural order of things, but it is a profound experience, which is why it's scary to many people.'

As Entine pointed out in his article, Lynas took a somewhat slow-road to Damascus. It happened over a number of years of realising that, while he was backing the claims in his various books about climate change with scientific evidence, he was doing the opposite when it came to GM. He actively ignored the weight of the evidence in favour. Finally, Lynas says, he had to admit his own cherished beliefs about GM turned out to be little more than 'green urban myths'.

'There were so many myths,' he recounts. 'Probably first off was this idea that somehow there's a unique property that genes have when they belong in different species, so that there's something carroty about carrot genes or fishy about fish genes. So I don't think I realised that DNA is this universal code, and it's just a number…you know, four sequences of letters, basically, is how we interpret it, and you can chop and change it between different species with actually very little impact.'

As a new convert, Lynas has joined the likes of Jon Entine, as a champion of the potential benefits of biotechnology. His conversion has coincided, or highlighted, a new urgency to feed a hungry world, a new generation of consumers, more scrutiny of anti-GM activism, plus the weight of scientific evidence showing it is safe.

Lynas makes the case strongly that it’s time for scientists to speak out about the benefits of biotechnology. For too long, he says, they’ve been cowed by the strident fear campaigns around Frankenfood. And, it seems, some are fighting back and talking up a new phase of the technology. Like Australia’s Professor James Dale.

'We’re just starting to see the revolution,' says Dale, the Director of the QUT’s Centre for Tropical Crops and Biocommodities. 'Virtually all of the really big crop genomes have been sequenced, we’re now starting to identify what genes in those genomes are going to be really useful.'

The prospects and potential of what’s to come has been dubbed 'Biotech Version 2.0'. And, Dale is convinced, it’s likely to further sway the debate.

'A lot of it is going to be targetted towards the things that we’re really concerned about, with climate change, with drought, with flooding, submersion. So we’re starting to see those traits coming through and the next generation of GM crops are going to be of much greater benefit to humanity than round one.'

Dale’s Banana 21 Project is a case in point. It’s funded by the Gates Foundation and is tackling Vitamin A deficiency in some of the poorest parts of Africa by enriching a staple food—in this case, bananas for Uganda—via GM.

It might help save the 670-thousand or so kids who die from micronutrient malnutrition every year, and half as many again who go blind. These genetically-modified 'golden bananas' have been developed in Australia and Professor Dale claims the results so far are very promising.

'We have provitamin A Cavendish bananas with double our target level of provitamin A, so that’s fabulous. We now know which genes to use and which promoters to use. We transferred that technology to Uganda, and they now have their bananas in the field. Just very recently they identified a line which also has double the target level of provitamin A. It’s really exciting, so we’re now moving into development phase.'

The project’s on track to produce enriched bananas ready for human eating trials by next year. But not if some of the NGOs in Uganda have their way. Lynas has just returned from a visit there with some hair-raising tales of treachery by anti GM activists.

He says he’s heard stories from local MPs who have had activists going into their Muslim constituencies telling people that the scientists are putting pig genes into bananas—the bio-fortified and the bacteria-resistant bananas—which you wouldn’t be allowed to eat as a Muslim.

'Literally, people have been going crazy about this,' Lynas reports. 'There’s almost been violence breaking out. So, the anti-GM activists have stooped so low as to cause religious violence in order to stop this technology.'
_________________________
Average Rainfall 340mm

Top
#1210075 - 14/09/2013 12:08 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Farm Weather]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Originally Posted By: Farm weather
even the most radical are allowed to change there views


That is correct, and that is why there are also a lot that were once staunch supporters of GM products have changed sides after they have done in depth research.

It is all fine and well saying that you can whack a gene from a pig into a banana and state that the banana now has x amount of vitamin A.

if the banana never had that vitamin in it in the first place then the whole process is pointless as the vitamin would be unavailable when processed in the body, like the added synthetic vitamins that they put in food, the majority of them get passes straight out of the body with negligible benefit because they are either synthetic or heavy forms which are unavailable to the body.
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
#1210165 - 15/09/2013 11:18 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: Greg Sorenson]
SBT Offline
Meteorological Motor Mouth

Registered: 07/02/2007
Posts: 14286
Loc: Townsville Dry Tropics

Your supposition makes no sense.
Quote:
if the banana never had that vitamin in it in the first place then the whole process is pointless as the vitamin would be unavailable when processed in the body . . . .
Heavy or synthetic can't be use? Seriously?

You obviously have zero idea about how foods/vitamins/minerals are used by the human body. The body will use or not use whatever it is given. If you don't need a vitamin it will be excreted, if your body does need a vitamin the body will use it but only in the amounts that it needs and the excess is excreted. The problems begin when you exceed the bodies ability to self regulate by over dosing on say Vitamin C or salt.

Vitamins and minerals have been added to foods for at least 100 years. If it didn't work then why are they still doing it?

Just another conspiracy Yasi? So big business can make a profit by selling more vitamins and minerals that are mandated to be put into our foods?

http://www.abc.net.au/health/thepulse/stories/2008/11/06/2399550.htm
_________________________
785mm Jan
799mm Feb
130 March
2019 Total 1714mm
2018 Total 822mm






Top
#1210174 - 15/09/2013 12:47 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: SBT]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
Originally Posted By: SBT
Heavy or synthetic can't be use? Seriously?
You obviously have zero idea about how foods/vitamins/minerals are used by the human body.


Maybe you need to do a little more research on the subject yourself before you attack....

Have you never looked on the back of supermarket brand vitamins (and most of the leading brands for that matter where they state 'heavy oxide'?

Just one example...

Synthetic Vitamins vs. Whole Food Supplements

When you break it down to the basics, there are really two types of encapsulated nutrients you can buy; whole food supplements or synthetic vitamins (aka pharmaceutical-grade vitamins). The most common is synthetic vitamins, of which there are hundreds of brands (such as centrum). Interestingly, only a few companies like Merck and Kodak make almost ALL the brands of synthetic vitamins you see in places like Wal-Mart, Walgreens, and GNC. Even worse, only 3% of nutrition companies make their own product!

So what is wrong with synthetic, or pharmaceutical-grade vitamins? Besides not being absorbed by the body (prepare to be astounded by the above image), they do not come from food and were made in a laboratory with chemicals. That may not sound too bad, but here is the kicker… let’s use Vitamin C as an example.

A synthetic vitamin is a single compound removed from the larger nutritional source. Vitamin C naturally occurs in fruit with bioflavinoids, co-factors (P,K,and J), and enzymes that allow your body to process vitamin C. All this is contained in a shell made of ascorbic acid. Ascorbic acid is only a small percent of the natural vitamin C complex, but synthetic vitamin C is made from ascorbic acid only! It is virtually unusable by your body, and can even be harmful.

If you are taking these synthetic vitamins, your body will use co-factors from it’s own storage supply to help make the synthetic vitamins complete, creating even more nutritional deficiencies! One recent study demonstrated that synthetic vitamin C caused free radical damage while natural sources of vitamin C prevented free radical damage. Synthetic vitamins also put a greater strain on your kidneys, and make for expensive urine since it all ends up in the stool instead of your body.

For additional reading, see what Dr. Melissa Wood and Dr. Keith Unger have to say about whole food vs. synthetic vitamins.
http://colebradburn.com/2012/08/20/are-you-getting-proper-nutrients-from-your-vitamins/

Originally Posted By: SBT
Vitamins and minerals have been added to foods for at least 100 years. If it didn't work then why are they still doing it?


Because it is called clever marketing to those that are "time poor" and those that believe everything that they read! smirk

like the claim of 99% fat free! yet look on the back of the packaging and it is full of sugar.... or if it is not full of sugar then it is loaded with salt....

next time you are in the supermarket have a laugh at the 'weight watches products'.... they are loaded with sugar!

Was looking at the *new* Wonka's chocolates at Wollies there yesterday...... (again for a good laugh) had a look on the back of the pack, first ingredient,sugar......
Look at the nutritional panel....sugar per 100grams =56.8 so over 56% of the 'chocolate' is sugar before they add their fillers and other crud!

Looked at a flavoured milk that claimed "now with 30% less sugar!!" and what did they replace it with? the artificial sweetener aspartame!

Top
#1210182 - 15/09/2013 13:46 Re: Farming, food production and consumers [Re: @_Yasified_shak]
@_Yasified_shak Offline
Weatherzone Addict

Registered: 07/03/2009
Posts: 4219
Loc: El Arish
More on the subject of synthetic vitamins.....

The sad truth is, many nutritional supplements are almost completely useless. That is because they're made from synthetic chemicals produced in a laboratory. Your body can't absorb synthetically made vitamins and minerals nearly as well as the vitamins and minerals found in food. Some experts estimate only 50% of a synthetic vitamin is usable by the body at best. Usability is likely lower than that. Even worse, many synthetic vitamins are made from compounds similar to coal tar and acetylene gas. Sound yummy?

Absorption rate is an issue with synthetic vitamins. Some experts estimate that as little as 10% of synthetically made supplements are absorbed as they travel through the digestive system. In other words, 90% of the vitamin gets flushed down the toilet when you use the bathroom. Combine that with the less than 50% usability rate and synthetic vitamins and minerals are looking more and more useless

http://www.healthynaturalyou.com/vitamins-supplements.html

Supplements & Nutrients

Synthetic Supplements: Your body cannot absorb synthetic vitamins like supplements companies try to convince you. All vitamins are not created equally. Your body knows the difference even though synthetics are made to trick the body. Natural nutrients are absorbed because we are biologically programmed to to absorb naturally occurring compounds. Isolated chemical or synthetic nutrients the body will try to convert to a usable substance. Fifty percent of the synthetic vitamins the body automatically renders useless. Chemists will claim they look and act exactly the same comparing the molecular structure under microscopes.

http://www.avoiddisease.com/Supplements___Nutrients.html

WHOLE FOOD VERSUS SYNTHETIC VITAMINS
Synthetic vitamins are missing these vital micronutrients. The body needs to find a way to match the synthetic vitamin with whatever micronutrients it can find. It also must deal with these chemical vitamins much the same way that it handles toxins and other unwanted chemicals, especially since they have no function without the support of the micronutrients you’ll find in whole food vitamins. The metabolism of these unwanted synthetic vitamins can lead to vitamin overdoses and imbalances in body chemistry. In addition, manufacturers cannot disassemble whole food complexes and turn them back into assembled complexes. This is because, once a whole food vitamin complex has been disassembled into its component parts, it is considered “dead” and nonfunctional.
http://www.thewellnessdoc.com/resources/vitamins/natural_synthetic.asp
_________________________
Why is it in the era of "Time saving" devices, that people are more "Time poor" than ever?

Humans think they are the fabric of society,when they are merely part of the thread.


Top
Page 21 of 43 < 1 2 ... 19 20 21 22 23 ... 42 43 >


Who's Online
0 registered (), 46 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Today's Birthdays
sharjay
Forum Stats
29947 Members
32 Forums
24194 Topics
1529247 Posts

Max Online: 2985 @ 26/01/2019 12:05
Satellite Image