Hey, fatty.

#1
milohimself

milohimself

RIP CITY
Joined
Sep 18, 2004
Messages
48,891
Likes
31
#1
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c31cAdYUvT8[/youtube]

Been binging on nutrition lately, thought this was an excellent watch.
 
#2
#2
Reasonably interesting view and probably right on a large percentage of it.

Wonder how many nutritionists are in the hip pockets of food industry.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#7
#7
Only made it half way through, but that's some good stuff. So much BS "nutrition" advice out there now. You have to give us your breakdown Milo.
 
#8
#8
Not sure I agree that spending 10% of your income on food as opposed to 20% is a bad thing. Sure cheaper processed aren't great for you, but its the food that bad, not the fact that its cheap.
 
#9
#9
lumberjack4 said:
Not sure I agree that spending 10% of your income on food as opposed to 20% is a bad thing. Sure cheaper processed aren't great for you, but its the food that bad, not the fact that its cheap.
Click to expand...

I don't think he was suggesting that we need to spend more on food. He was saying that lower prices allowed us in America to use our money on other discretionary items.

He wasn't campaigning for a food price hike.
 
#10
#10
End corn and soy subsidies, shrink the market a bit and see what happens to the prices of those expensive, niche organic locally grown items at the market.

Not that agri-business will allow that to happen...
 
#14
#14
TennesseeOrange said:
Only made it half way through, but that's some good stuff. So much BS "nutrition" advice out there now. You have to give us your breakdown Milo.
Click to expand...

I have a lot of personal rules about food. Nearly every food item I buy comes from within a 100 mile radius of where I am at that point. Nearly every food item I buy has no genetic modification. I'm also meat/dairy free for the time being, but that's for personal dietary reasons. He gave a number of other good ones in the video, like don't eat anything your grandparents wouldn't recognize.

The problems we have come from the way the food industry has expanded -- the larger the scale, the more processed and genetically modified the foods. It all boils down to those two things.

For instance, I've seen an example of a handful store-bought strawberries being so loaded with pesticides, that they were mashed up and spread through a garden bed and worked effectively to keep pests away. Why should we be eating that?

So, I keep it pretty simple. If I am eating greens or grains, I make sure that I could make an afternoon drive to where it came from, that it's roughly when that veggie should be coming out of the ground and that there aren't pesticides. Helps that I typically go straight to a farm once a week for that. Same deal with meats though. If it's seafood, I'm not going to eat anything that comes from the Atlantic. If I buy meat, I go to a butcher who buys from a nearby rancher -- he ought to know well enough what the background behind the meat he's buying is.

I was eating fast food not too long ago and got depressed by the thought that somebody a quarter of the way around the globe was likely eating the exact same thing. Why should my diet in Oregon be exactly the same as somebody's in Georgia? Different cultures, different soils, different climates, etc.

This isn't green hippie lib stuff. It's the way your grandparents ate when they were your age.
 
#17
#17
milohimself said:
I have a lot of personal rules about food. Nearly every food item I buy comes from within a 100 mile radius of where I am at that point. Nearly every food item I buy has no genetic modification. I'm also meat/dairy free for the time being, but that's for personal dietary reasons. He gave a number of other good ones in the video, like don't eat anything your grandparents wouldn't recognize.

The problems we have come from the way the food industry has expanded -- the larger the scale, the more processed and genetically modified the foods. It all boils down to those two things.

For instance, I've seen an example of a handful store-bought strawberries being so loaded with pesticides, that they were mashed up and spread through a garden bed and worked effectively to keep pests away. Why should we be eating that?

So, I keep it pretty simple. If I am eating greens or grains, I make sure that I could make an afternoon drive to where it came from, that it's roughly when that veggie should be coming out of the ground and that there aren't pesticides. Helps that I typically go straight to a farm once a week for that. Same deal with meats though. If it's seafood, I'm not going to eat anything that comes from the Atlantic. If I buy meat, I go to a butcher who buys from a nearby rancher -- he ought to know well enough what the background behind the meat he's buying is.

I was eating fast food not too long ago and got depressed by the thought that somebody a quarter of the way around the globe was likely eating the exact same thing. Why should my diet in Oregon be exactly the same as somebody's in Georgia? Different cultures, different soils, different climates, etc.

This isn't green hippie lib stuff. It's the way your grandparents ate when they were your age.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's anything wrong with GM foods. They've been made out to be like the boogeyman. If anything they have a positive impact on the food supply and prices.
 
#18
#18
He addresses that in the video. Yes, there is some effect on output, but there's a couple things with that:

There is already enough food being produced in the world to feed billions more people than there already are, 16bil worth IIRC. Half of that goes to animal feed, though. Primarily corn and soy going to feed cows though their original genetic makeup is to eat grass. Secondly, in any developed country, if conventional industrial farming space was all converted to organic practices (read: traditional farming) output would still be 92% of what it is. In poorer developing countries, switching from industrial methods to organic would yield 182% of current. What genetic modification has done is increase monocultures (planting the same thing in the same place year after year) and the output of a single farmer. So while it has had an effect in output, it's not significant, but it has primarily made farming more profitable.

And that's if you want to ignore possible risks of genetic modifications. I agree, it is a boogeyman. The fact is we don't know what it does because there hasn't been any extensive testing as to whether or not it's bad for us. But there are other practices typically tied to genetically modified crops, namely pesticides, that we do know for a fact are unhealthy and carcinogenic.
 
#19
#19
milohimself said:
He addresses that in the video. Yes, there is some effect on output, but there's a couple things with that:

There is already enough food being produced in the world to feed billions more people than there already are, 16bil worth IIRC. Half of that goes to animal feed, though. Primarily corn and soy going to feed cows though their original genetic makeup is to eat grass. Secondly, in any developed country, if conventional industrial farming space was all converted to organic practices (read: traditional farming) output would still be 92% of what it is. In poorer developing countries, switching from industrial methods to organic would yield 182% of current. What genetic modification has done is increase monocultures (planting the same thing in the same place year after year) and the output of a single farmer. So while it has had an effect in output, it's not significant, but it has primarily made farming more profitable.

And that's if you want to ignore possible risks of genetic modifications. I agree, it is a boogeyman. The fact is we don't know what it does because there hasn't been any extensive testing as to whether or not it's bad for us. But there are other practices typically tied to genetically modified crops, namely pesticides, that we do know for a fact are unhealthy and carcinogenic.
Click to expand...

I highly doubt those numbers.

And to your last point. One of the advantages of GM is altering in a way that makes it unappealing to certain pests so that pesticides don't have to be used
 
#20
#20
That's because that particular area of genetic modification creates plants with pesticides already on it.

As for the figure, it's cited in the video.
 
#21
#21
Again, the only thing that would really change if industrial farms switched to organic practices, they'd have to have a whole lot more man power, which costs more. I don't blame them, the ultimate goal out of any profit-driven business should be to get more productivity out of fewer people. That is their whole purpose. This is the result.
 
#23
#23
Yep. Although I wouldn't call it a "natural" pesticide. You may remember hearing about Monsanto's New Leaf potato a while back.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top