Earlier quoted context omitted.
In this case, the problem is that there's a huge difference between public perception and reality. For instance, you talk about herbicides: A modern GMO actually lets you use LESS herbicides and insecticides, and often far less dangerous ones than many that are OK for labeled organic crops, and happen to be far more toxic. As far as updates on the field producing toxins, GMOs are actually more controlled, genetically…
> A modern GMO actually lets you use LESS herbicides and insecticides, and often far less dangerous ones than many that are OK for labeled organic crops, and happen to be far more toxic. Citation needed.
At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
81–90 of 109 posts
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#82Earlier quoted context omitted.
Probably my favorite book is "Death by Food Pyramid". I can't remember if she went into this particular topic though. I don't know of any definative proof, which I think is what makes issues like this so dangerous. Scientific proof is a high bar when dealing with something this complex, pit that against powerful food lobbies and truths can stay buried for a long time. For me, it's been an observation of many cues, th…
There's a lot of ground between definitive proof and "personal observation of many cues". Put it this way: are there any scientific reasons, however nebulous or merely suggestive, to suspect that this is the case?
How about looking at it from the flip side.
Things you put in your body can have a pretty massive effect on you. I would rather err on the side of paying $.05 too much for the corn that people have been eating for 50 years over the newest GMO strain.
You only get one body. I do not want to beta test things in my body if I don't have to.
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#83> “It’s really hard to find non-GMO produce,” Moran said. Aside from the IP problems of patent-infringement-via-unintended-germination, I don't understand what's not to like about GMO. GMO seems like a great idea -- modern human medicine seems to include techniques that are similar to or just-short-of "GMO." Are there any HNers who can articulate what they don't like about GMO?
1900s science has a number of well publicized tragic tales relating to scientists promising something and missing side effects; or government/business entities misusing scientific products.
It thus behooves us to be have some concern and caution regarding the food supply.
I was at a demo farm once, where a set of 5-6 corn plots were laid out in farming practices from 1850 to 2000. While the 2000s plot had almost no weeds, very little pest damage, had tall and strong stalks, closer together, with high levels of nutrients, the 1850s plot had far more weeds and a large amount of pest damage. Now, what struck me the most was that the 1850s plot was integrated into the ecosystem in a way the 2000s plot wasn't. The modern view is "kill weeds, kill pests", because that increases yield. Much like we view software bugs and filing pointless paperwork. But I think that there's an ecosystem problem arising with the giant fields of corn that are hostile to other life. This is understood by the US Federal government: "Refuge" crops must be planted in the field to help keep native life around.
So I'm very ambiguous about this approach, recognizing the advantages of cheap food, but concerned about the second and third order effects on the flora and fauna of the farming regions.
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#84A great bit of journalism here, hopefully it reaches a lot of eyes. I think that the fines levied on restaurants that are knowingly deceiving their customers should be much higher. The articles states $300 is the fine for first-time offenders, this is hardly much of a deterrence considering the premiums placed on 'locally sourced' dishes. If you want to get a good feel of how much proper locally grown food is, pop in…
> It costs £15/$21 for a single t-bone, but man is it worth it. I've had plenty of local meat, and I'm in a rural setting known for its farming. I'm skeptical. I'd love to see this actually tested, because I think this is an alternate view of the article; the "hipster" crowd is so keen on getting locally sourced food because it just tastes oh-so-much better (and they're more than happy to tell you). Half the time the…
[deleted]
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#85Earlier quoted context omitted.
A rise in gluten allergies? This is news to me. Is there anything published that you can cite?
http://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-race-celiac-gluten-...
How is that evidence that GMO's are toxic? It doesn't mention GMO's at all. I guess I am supposed to just speculate? "connect the dots" as Jesse Ventura would say?
Edit: I gave you an upvote tho, because you did go thru the trouble of finding a link. (Even if it missed the full context of the thread, imo)
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#86Earlier quoted context omitted.
> A modern GMO actually lets you use LESS herbicides and insecticides, and often far less dangerous ones than many that are OK for labeled organic crops, and happen to be far more toxic. Citation needed.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/guest-blog/natural-vs-sy...
Did you even read the blog? (also note, it's a blog)
None of that blog actually supports the claim:
> A modern GMO actually lets you use LESS herbicides and insecticides, and often far less dangerous ones than many that are OK for labeled organic crops, and happen to be far more toxic.
Nor does it ever mention herbicides, only pesticides. Nor does it mention that you may actually be harming yourself by consuming organic produce vs GMO produce, which is what the claim was alluding too.
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#87A great bit of journalism here, hopefully it reaches a lot of eyes. I think that the fines levied on restaurants that are knowingly deceiving their customers should be much higher. The articles states $300 is the fine for first-time offenders, this is hardly much of a deterrence considering the premiums placed on 'locally sourced' dishes. If you want to get a good feel of how much proper locally grown food is, pop in…
> It costs £15/$21 for a single t-bone, but man is it worth it. I've had plenty of local meat, and I'm in a rural setting known for its farming. I'm skeptical. I'd love to see this actually tested, because I think this is an alternate view of the article; the "hipster" crowd is so keen on getting locally sourced food because it just tastes oh-so-much better (and they're more than happy to tell you). Half the time the…
'global food supply chain' is off-shoring; think of it in the same way as the mis-use of H1B visas and transferring I.T. work to low-wage economies, leaving 'local' I.T. workers out of a job.
Much of the unstated benefit of locally produced food is in a shorter time between harvest and plate (fresher), less handling (bruising), less transportation (ecological), less packaging (resources + cost), shorter supply chain (less middlemen; farmer/producer should receive higher % of retail price), generally more pride and care involved (better quality) plus of course supporting the 'local' economy by keeping the money circulating locally and local smaller family farms in business.
For animals it should mean quicker time-to-kill (less stress) due to less travel and coral-ling at abattoirs, and, depending on the butcher, better cuts of meat (less mechanical cutting) due to following the grain.
In the U.K. the biggest immediate benefit is the farmer receiving a greater slice of the retail price, which is essential in some sectors (such as dairy) where many farmers receive less than the cost of production, and certainly not enough to protect against poor years.
Combined with low investment returns pushing capital into land 'investment' which is driving land price growth to ridiculous levels; subsequently driving rents for farmers who don't own their own land to bankruptcy levels (we recently sold 10 acres @ £10,000/acre which was bought for around £2,500/acre 15 years ago [0], but the gross yield hasn't moved from around £400/acre).
Even amongst farmer land-owners many are selling off small parcels in order to cover shortfalls in farming income or to invest in new facilities and equipment.
The big farming agri-businesses (10,000+ acres) are about the only ones that have the production scale to make profits and invest in land.
Born-n-bred and still living on a 1,000 acre farm, but hacking code.
[0] http://pdf.savills.com/documents/Savills-ALMS-Feb-2014.pdf
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#88Earlier quoted context omitted.
If done accurately it means that the food is produced using the most unsustainable and inefficient ways possible so that only the most privileged can partake. Other than that its just marketing that is targeting people that either want to think of themselves as upper class or have been falsely led to believe that this type of food production is actually eco-friendly and more healthy. (Also see "Organic" food)
Inefficient? Yes. Unsustainable? No way. We've been farming the old-fashioned way for thousands of years with exponential increases in population. If that's not the definition of sustainability I don't know what is. Also, modern cultivation techniques can strip the produce and soil of essential vitamins and nutrients. So yes, in some cases, the "inefficient" and "unsustainable" farms yield more nutritious and eco-fri…
> We've been farming the old-fashioned way for thousands of years with exponential increases in population. If that's not the definition of sustainability I don't know what is.
Just because a technique is sustainable at prior population levels doesn't mean it will be sustainable in the future. Slash-and-burn was used for thousands of years and is now one of the main causes of deforestation. Bottom trawling has been used for almost a thousand years and is now considered directly responsible for fishery collapse. Humans have been responsible for the extinction of thousands of animals through unsustainable hunting practices that occurred thousands or even tens of thousands of years ago.
> Also, modern cultivation techniques can strip the produce and soil of essential vitamins and nutrients. So yes, in some cases, the "inefficient" and "unsustainable" farms yield more nutritious and eco-friendly foods.
Actually modern farmers are very, very careful about keeping high quality soil because it results in higher yields and spending less on fertilizers and pesticides. 60 years ago, farming "the old-fashioned way" we had things like the dust bowl.
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#89> “It’s really hard to find non-GMO produce,” Moran said. Aside from the IP problems of patent-infringement-via-unintended-germination, I don't understand what's not to like about GMO. GMO seems like a great idea -- modern human medicine seems to include techniques that are similar to or just-short-of "GMO." Are there any HNers who can articulate what they don't like about GMO?
Born-n-bred and live on a farm.
GMOs are a form of proprietary lock-in backed by legal restrictions.
The underlying problem with almost all GMOs is that they are tied to a particular chemical combination, and the seed must be re-purchased every year (the harvested seed is sterile and/or you cannot (legally) re-seed).
Those chemical/GMO businesses then have a strangle-hold on the farmers. Farmers are enticed by low prices until a substantial percentage are 'hooked' and then the prices rise - just like Microsoft's Embrace, Extend, Extinguish policy.
Here in the E.U./U.K. we've resisted GMOs but the pressure (mostly from global/U.S. seed/chemical producers) on the politicians to allow them is constant.
Until these global seed producers emerged (latter half of the 20th century in concert with the chemical manufacturers) farmers either kept back some of their own harvest for seed or bought at-will from other farmers without restriction. Such seed sells for a slight premium (due to quality and cleanliness - low numbers of alien species) over other seed.
Re: At Tampa Bay farm-to-table restaurants, you’re being fed fiction
#90I've never understood what "farm-to-table" means. Doesn't all food come from a farm? Is it supposed to mean "farm owned by a stereotypical farmer, not by a corporation?" If so, that's pretty vague and subjective.
it's super subjective until the government defines it and regulates it (read penalize mis-labeling).
Then again:
"The food supply chain is so vast and so complicated. It has yielded extra-virgin olive oil that is actually colored sunflower oil"
That's not "complicated", it's outright fraud. More objectively so than the subjective "local".