Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Food security and the coming storm

eurasiagroup.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 427 posts

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#261

Post by oneoff786 »

hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #44
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Commercial formula kinda is a magical combination of ingredients, including a substantial number of supplements that aren’t gonna be available to home cooks. It’s better to substitute homemade than water down formula, no doubt, but you can understand why newspapers don’t want to publish a recipe knowing that it will send some number of babies to the doctor with an iron deficiency.

> Commercial formula kinda is a magical combination of ingredients, including a substantial number of supplements that aren’t gonna be available to home cooks. Do you have a citation for that? I see all these articles that just say "don't try it yourself, it's too hard", but I'd like to know which specific ingredients are impossible to obtain.

It’s crazy that in the face of health authorities saying don’t do this, it’s dangerous, your reaction is “prove it”, rather than doing some research on your own to counter your skepticism. The lack of trust in public institutions is deeply saddening.

The problem with baby formula is that it needs to contain precise balances of nutrition in specific forms that can be absorbed by the body in specific ways. Much in the way that a calorie is not a calorie is not a calorie, a nutrient is not a nutrient is not a nutrient.

Water down your baby formula? Now it’s different. Babies are sensitive. This could be dangerous.

This took such little effort to research on my own. The bar is so low.

Breast milk is unique. In the past kids had wet nurses as a backup. And when they didn’t, infant mortality was very high.

If you just tel people you can go make this shit at home, a lot of babies will likely die.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#262

Post by onlyrealcuzzo »

redisman wrote: post #209
onlyrealcuzzo wrote: post #197

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's hard to take any food shortage articles seriously when we feed >40% of the calories we grow to cattle alone. Sure, more people might go hungry because we do not allocate food well. But we are so far from actually running out of calories that the idea is ridiculous.

Sure but thinking that the American people don’t implode if the stores are empty and you’re sent a bag of corn every month for your calories is also not realistic.

You can grow other calories on the land you're growing corn for ethenol and livestock feed.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#263

Post by oneoff786 »

IncRnd wrote: post #81
SpicyLemonZest wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't claim that the required supplements are literally not available on the commercial market, but the FDA requirements ( https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfr... ) include over a dozen nutrients to track, some within a relatively narrow safety range. It's not practical to expect that stressed, busy new parents are gonna buy all these supplements, much less break out their scales and care…

> It's not practical to expect that stressed, busy new parents are gonna buy all these supplements, much less break out their scales and carefully measure 2-7 micrograms of selenium per 100 kcal. Brown Rice contains selenium. Even when not breastfeeding, real foods contain micro and macro nutrients that are beneficial for babies.

> Brown Rice contains selenium. Even when not breastfeeding, real foods contain micro and macro nutrients that are beneficial for babies.

Slight variation in too little nutrients, or too much, or in forms that aren’t absorbed at the intended rate can be very dangerous. Throw in some rice? Ok now there’s extra sodium in there. The milk does too. Uh oh. Suddenly this is a complicated optimization problem requiring fine measurements and specific blending techniques.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#264

Post by GekkePrutser »

sdoering wrote: post #4

I recently had a conversation with an organic farmer. While he is able to pass on at least some of his increased costs for energy and fuel through direct sales and cooperatively organized distribution channels, his conventionally farmed colleagues have a bigger problem. They have long-term purchase contracts that fix the prices for milk, meat or vegetables. In the case of milk and meat in particular, production costs…

Maybe they will also go organic and stop being tied to big food though. That would be a good thing. This system sounds really skewed and the farmers will always get the short end of the stick until they get out of it.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#265

Post by RustyConsul »

colechristensen wrote: post #199
sdoering wrote: post #4

I recently had a conversation with an organic farmer. While he is able to pass on at least some of his increased costs for energy and fuel through direct sales and cooperatively organized distribution channels, his conventionally farmed colleagues have a bigger problem. They have long-term purchase contracts that fix the prices for milk, meat or vegetables. In the case of milk and meat in particular, production costs…

If you sold futures for your outputs and didn’t buy futures for your inputs, the results are on you. These are the kind of complaints you get from people who make market bets and end up wrong. You can use futures like insurance to insulate yourself from market fluctuations or you can use them like a casino.

that was my initial thought as well, but you are limited by the availability of financial instruments as you move up the chain to inputs. Outputs are easy to craft instruments around, but inputs are what a business is.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#266

Post by oneoff786 »

ALittleLight wrote: post #247
giantrobot wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good instructions to a lay populace aren't necessarily helpful. Babies are pretty fragile. Slightly undercooked ingredients, slightly improper ratios, or just substitutions made out of ignorance can kill them. It's not DIY chocolate milk powder. A slightly off recipe or preparation won't just taste funny while being otherwise safe.

I think people would trust the government and authorities generally more, if those authorities weren't constantly lying to them. The authorities could say "Here is a rigorous procedure for DIY formula. We strongly recommend against using this, except in an emergency, because slight deviations could result in harm or death for the baby." Instead, they seem to give the impression that DIY formula is never advisable or…

A rigorous procedure involves precise measurements, ph testing, and other things many people do not understand let alone have the capability to execute.

But could easily attempt anyway and fuck up

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#267

Post by GekkePrutser »

jillesvangurp wrote: post #15
sdoering wrote: post #4

I recently had a conversation with an organic farmer. While he is able to pass on at least some of his increased costs for energy and fuel through direct sales and cooperatively organized distribution channels, his conventionally farmed colleagues have a bigger problem. They have long-term purchase contracts that fix the prices for milk, meat or vegetables. In the case of milk and meat in particular, production costs…

I'm less pessimistic. People in the US, and increasingly the rest of the world are on a diet that just isn't good for them: lots of low quality carbs with cheap fat and artificial flavorings and not a whole lot of nutritional value. Arguably, a large part of the population is eating way more than is good for them and not enough good quality food. And it's not just a money issue: it's a skill and knowledge issue. Peop…

Making food is not hard but to me it's boring as hell. I don't want to be spending an hour doing that (including cleanup) after a work day. Especially because I live alone. So no, I take the premade stuff.

I just wish better premade was available.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#268

Post by gruez »

vkou wrote: post #240
colechristensen wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you sold futures for your outputs and didn’t buy futures for your inputs, the results are on you. These are the kind of complaints you get from people who make market bets and end up wrong. You can use futures like insurance to insulate yourself from market fluctuations or you can use them like a casino.

In theory, you are correct. In practice, hedging for increases in fuel prices means buying something like oil futures. Which requires you to be at terminal at some port city 6 months down the line to physically collect the oil/gasoline/whatever that you bought. And then store it for the months before you use it.

Why can't you buy cash settled futures and/or liquidate before due for delivery?

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#269

Post by GekkePrutser »

pharmakom wrote: post #20
jillesvangurp wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm less pessimistic. People in the US, and increasingly the rest of the world are on a diet that just isn't good for them: lots of low quality carbs with cheap fat and artificial flavorings and not a whole lot of nutritional value. Arguably, a large part of the population is eating way more than is good for them and not enough good quality food. And it's not just a money issue: it's a skill and knowledge issue. Peop…

Time for me is by far the limiting factor. Short of a personal chef (too expensive) all the quick options are unhealthy. Edit: Loads of people suggesting cooking - I know how to cook, I just don’t have the time or energy. It’s not just preparation time but also the planning aspect. Meal prep delivery services suggestions are interesting. I have tried a few and found them expensive and low quality. Open to trying more…

> I think what I really want is a work canteen, but open to the public. The economies of scale could make this price competitive and there’s less delivery overhead than the meal prep subscriptions. I like the social aspect too. I would definitely pay a subscription to a canteen.

This would be amazing yes. I don't know why it's not a thing.

It's normal not to do your own books. To fix your own heater. To milk your own cow. In fact I don't even do my own laundry, because there's a shop around the corner that washes, dries and folds a whole bag for 10 bucks. Nobody frowns at that. But not wanting to cook is viewed as really weird.

I just really hate cooking and when I do I do it irritated and in a hurry so it turns out crap.

Re: Food security and the coming storm

#270

Post by GekkePrutser »

atmartins wrote: post #106
pharmakom wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Time for me is by far the limiting factor. Short of a personal chef (too expensive) all the quick options are unhealthy. Edit: Loads of people suggesting cooking - I know how to cook, I just don’t have the time or energy. It’s not just preparation time but also the planning aspect. Meal prep delivery services suggestions are interesting. I have tried a few and found them expensive and low quality. Open to trying more…

Here me out: this sounds like an excuse. If you really want to solve it you could. I did. I use a wok to cook and it's faster than going to McDonalds. It's slower than a frozen meal but not by much. I don't aim for perfection, rather, most of my meals I try and make healthy. I still love bacon. In less than 10 minutes you can chop celery, broccoli, tofu, chicken, etc. If it takes longer then solve that problem: bette…

Your suggestions sound nice if you're a foodie. But as someone with zero interest in cooking it's just horrible having to think about it in the evening.
Post reply on HN