The redneck strike again.

[Angrboda]

None of these claims is substantiated by modern medicine. You are truly gullible.

The evidence that modern medicine can not yet solve the problems that
suppose to solve is there for all to see.
Hospitals, rehab. centers, nursing homes, jails are full of sick people.
Modern medicine is still far away from understanding what is good and
bad for us so if you believe in something that is still far away from
solution then you are very gullible.

Yes, medicine can't cure all disease, therefore any remedy you pull out of your butt is likely valid.

That's mularkey. Until fasting is shown to work, skepticism of medicine doesn't justify believing in it. That's an argument from ignorance.

[Cyberman]

Ricky has a lot of argument.

[bennyboy]

That is a commercial site selling 'detoxing retreats'. You are incredibly gullible - they love people like you.

So when you buy a car you must be gullible.
They love people like you.

If he looks to the car ad for facts about his health, he is.

People in very poor countries all over the world fast. Except they don't call it fasting. They call it starving, and it very often results in sickness and death. Don't believe me. Look at the past-60 life expectancy in India, the source of many of the world's religions, and then look at the life expectancy in any civilized country. http://www.helpage.org/global-agewatch/c...ncy-at-60/

But you won't do that, because that would involve accepting real facts that people carefully collected from real people-- not some goofy idea that slid out during your last cleansing enema.

[Confused Ape]

The meat is actually a byproduct (in our current system or a "better one") - that's why the comment probably doesn't apply. The question was "What do we do with all of this corn?"

There isn't any excess corn to be got rid of. From that NYT article again - The Staggering cost of rising world meat production

Grain, meat and even energy are roped together in a way that could have dire results. More meat means an increase in demand for feed, especially corn and soy, an increase some experts say will contribute to higher prices.

This will be inconvenient for residents of wealthier nations, but it could have tragic consequences for those of poorer ones, especially if higher prices for feed divert production away from food crops.

The environmental impact of growing so much grain for animal feed is profound. Agriculture in the United States - much of which now serves the demand for meat - contributes to nearly three-quarters of all water-quality problems in U.S. rivers and streams, according to the Environmental Protection Agency.

The corn is being grown for factory farming feed. This means less land available for human food crops. When you can't grow enough human food crops to feed the population it has to be imported from elsewhere.

List Of Foods Imported Into the U.S. - Slide 3 is vegetables.

As is the case with other foods, the United States imports billions of dollars' worth of vegetables from other countries. Mexico dominates the supply of imported vegetables, supplying peppers, cucumbers, tomatoes, corn, pinto beans, broccoli, cabbage, onions, lettuce, celery, squash and spinach, to name a few. Other important suppliers like Canada and Peru supply carrots, cauliflower, asparagus, mushrooms and potatoes.

Some farmers, such as Will Harris, are going back to the old fashioned farming methods - From Factory Farm To Organic Icon

His animals and poultry are pastured. The farm has its own slaughterhouses for red meat and poultry so the animals don't have to be transported elsewhere. This means no waste because the bits which can't be used for human food can be composted while hides are tanned. Slaughterhouse discards are also used to raise black soldier fly larvae for chicken feed. He's even got a bit of room left for fruit trees and vegetables.

I found website for his farm - White Oak Pastures - Local Food

Most of the farmland in United States cannot cost effectively produce high quality grass-fed beef and free-range poultry on a year round basis. Because of our favorable climate, we are able to do this in the Gulf Coast Plain. We feel that our grass-fed beef, lamb, and poultry are local to the Southern region of the U.S. all year. During certain seasons, it is local for the entire east coast.

So what do you do elsewhere? Easy. Just adopt the methods which were used before factory farming was invented in the 1950's. My husband grew up on a traditional farm. Beef cattle were grazed during the summer and then brought into the yard for the winter. They were fed on hay and some cattle feed. Less corn needed means more land available for human food such as vegetables.

The food Will Harris produces for local markets is more expensive but this is the result of something else I've been looking into. Most of the farming subsidy money goes to the factory farms so family farmers can't compete and a lot of them have been forced to give up. Money for subsidies comes from the pockets of taxpayers so people are still paying high prices for factory farmed meat in an indirect way. The price is even higher when you consider how much extra money is spent combating the negative health effects from eating all this meat.

If people made smarter dietary decisions no amount of greed in the universe would move the food budget a single penny.

People are starting to make smarter dietary decisions now.

I'm going to finish this post with an article about a chicken farmer who got out of factory farming - 'Food, Inc.' Chicken Farmer Goes Rogue – Says Goodbye to Factory Farms

She and her husband were going through a nightmare because of 'contract farming'.

Carole Morison: The control over our farm and constant demands for upgrades to housing and equipment infuriated me. It was as if we had turned our bank account over to the company and they had a blank check. If we didn’t allow the company to spend our money for us, the threat of contract termination was used as the enforcer. Many times I had to bite my tongue to not tell the company men to put the contract where the sun doesn’t shine. When both of us had to get off-farm jobs in order to support the farm and put food on the table, it made absolutely no sense to me. It was like we were supporting a very expensive habit that we could do without.

When antibiotic-resistant bacteria and other public-health issues emerged, I knew in my mind that the culprit was the industry. Finding out that arsenic was in the feed that the company sends (which the farmer has to use—another contract item) infuriated me. It had been going on for years. Unknowingly we were spreading manure containing arsenic on our land as well as being exposed to it on a daily basis from the dust and feed in the chicken house. I went ballistic wondering how our right to know didn’t figure into the equation.

The boiling point came when the company hinted at us upgrading the chicken houses and equipment to their newest whim. It was an expensive proposition which we would have never seen a return on and would have only sunk us deeper in debt. Cost was not the only deterrent. The upgrades would have taken away all natural fresh air and sunlight to the chickens and increased stocking density, used three times the electric already being used, and drained more water from a well that couldn’t handle the increased flow. And once again our money was being spent on a company whim. We refused!

[The Grand Nudger]

There isn't any excess corn to be got rid of. From that NYT article again

Well, there's always -some-..but there was once a whole lot more. We've made very good use is all. You're putting the cart before the horse.

The corn is being grown for factory farming feed. This means less land available for human food crops. When you can't grow enough human food crops to feed the population it has to be imported from elsewhere.

That's what we use it for -now-...but how we got ourselves into this mess was getting really lucky with corn crossbreeding going back into the early 20th century. We just got better at growing corn faster than we got better at growing anything else. Once we found ourselves sitting on a mountain of corn (and the yield increases got really impressive in the 40's...which is why factory farming cropped up in the 50's.......) we had to find something to do with it. One of the things we got really good at was getting corn to grow in conditions that other crops wouldn't tolerate, and with a minimum of labor of course- especially in the case of feedcorn..which is often unfit for human consumption, but -is- the most economical use for this or that parcel of land. Unfortunately, "less corn" would not equal more human food crops - until such time as we bring the rest of our crops up to the impressive pedigree that corn is hefting around (but it would mean less food..since there would be less meat)- AND completely overhaul our ag policy.........AND our transportation network......which I doubt is coming down the pipes anytime soon. It's not (in the case of the US) that we couldn't grow our own food..so much as it's actually cheaper to import the food of others..and then sell ours..or produce another product (like feed for cattle).

(in the interests of disclosure, I do this for a living..grow food and try to get people to squauk about changing our food policies and dietary choices..lol)

[Confused Ape]

That's what we use it for -now-...but how we got ourselves into this mess was getting really lucky with corn crossbreeding going back into the early 20th century. We just got better at growing corn faster than we got better at growing anything else. Once we found ourselves sitting on a mountain of corn (and the yield increases got really impressive in the 40's...which is why factory farming cropped up in the 50's.......) we had to find something to do with it. One of the things we got really good at was getting corn to grow in conditions that other crops wouldn't tolerate, and with a minimum of labor of course- especially in the case of feedcorn..which is often unfit for human consumption, but -is- the most economical use for this or that parcel of land.

Thanks for the information. All the articles about the drawbacks of factory farming concentrate on how things are today. The reasons why it got started in the first place aren't gone into with any great detail.

Unfortunately, "less corn" would not equal more human food crops - until such time as we bring the rest of our crops up to the impressive pedigree that corn is hefting around

I'm guessing that this is where Monsanto and it's rival companies come in. It's difficult finding unbiased sources for the possible dangers of GM crops but a Washington State University report paints a gloomy picture - Superweeds linked to rising herbicide use in GM crops, study finds It seems that superweeds haven't overrun Britain yet but then, there's been resistance to GM crops over here.

but it would mean less food..since there would be less meat)- AND completely overhaul our ag policy.........

The US isn't the only country which needs to overhaul its agricultural policy but will it be done sensibly? Probably not. After the disasters of factory farming and superweeds we're likely to get future disasters with genetically engineered livestock.

It's not (in the case of the US) that we couldn't grow our own food..so much as it's actually cheaper to import the food of others..and then sell ours..or produce another product (like feed for cattle).

I wonder how that's going to be affected in the future by climate change. Even though Britain grows over 50% if its own food we're still very vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

Climate catastrophes in other countries will hit UK's food security, experts say

The pattern emerging with food supplies is that when a weather disaster strikes a country it holds on to the food it grows," said Herweijer. "In 2008, 25 developoing countries banned exports or increased their export taxes because of climate emergencies at home. In 2011, Russia banned food exports for a time during a heatwave. Countries protect their own food supplies in an emergency," she said.

Britain is also vulnerable because its population is expected to add more than 10m people in the next 40 years, putting added strains on farmers and supermarkets, she said. Imported foods that are particularly vulerable to climate change abroad include fruit like bananas, staple crops like wheat and commodities like cocoa. Much animal feed is also imported which suggests that the price of meat could rise if harvests are hit elsewhere.

"Climate change overseas could have impacts on the UK, greater than that from climate change at home. It's the quantity of food that we need which is the problem. We can expect the price of meat to go up. We might have to change our diets," she said.

So, it's back to meat again.

(in the interests of disclosure, I do this for a living..grow food and try to get people to squauk about changing our food policies and dietary choices..lol)

Can you recommend any websites for further information about all this? You'll know what is relevant from first hand experience.

[The Grand Nudger]

Thanks for the information. All the articles about the drawbacks of factory farming concentrate on how things are today. The reasons why it got started in the first place aren't gone into with any great detail.

Which is unfortunate, because it's generally good to know how one got into a mess, if one hopes to get out of it eh.

I'm guessing that this is where Monsanto and it's rival companies come in. It's difficult finding unbiased sources for the possible dangers of GM crops but a Washington State University report paints a gloomy picture - Superweeds linked to rising herbicide use in GM crops, study finds It seems that superweeds haven't overrun Britain yet but then, there's been resistance to GM crops over here.

Actually..Big Ag was once a monolithic block. Most of the players you find now are pieces of that monolith that were forcibly broken apart from the 40's onward for a variety of reasons. The dangers of GM are the dangers of any tech, as are the benefits. Risk v. Reward.

The US isn't the only country which needs to overhaul its agricultural policy but will it be done sensibly? Probably not. After the disasters of factory farming and superweeds we're likely to get future disasters with genetically engineered livestock.

I'm an optimist. I figure we'll get it wrong in some pretty dramatic ways here and there..but overall..like rural electrification - we'll enrich our lives with GMos. I'm also an optimist with regards to changes to policy. If nothing else we'll simply be -forced- to set smarter policies as the cost of production increases.

I wonder how that's going to be affected in the future by climate change. Even though Britain grows over 50% if its own food we're still very vulnerable to the effects of climate change.

We cover alot of ground. Ag will just move with the weather - like it has always done. I'm sure it won't be fun..unless you're one of the guys that finally gets to grow strawberries when the zones become more favorable. Some places may - for the first time in a long time - be able to support agriculture...which is great for those folks. Others will get the shaft - but since we have a distributed production system.... ultimately it will be a matter of logistics as to how it pans out, not ag-proper. Shipping, not farming.

Can you recommend any websites for further information about all this? You'll know what is relevant from first hand experience.

Sites specific to ag? Or sites specific to changing food policy?

You can never go wrong with the USDA (or whatever agency you have where you're at), your local universities ag extension, ATTRA...and I'm sure that there are plenty of think tanks pushing this or that policy online. I don't know if there's a site that puts a broad view on it like I've tried to in this thread.

[Little Rik]

Ape.
That is funny how you criticize me for being some sort of redneck
that is doing so much damage to the veg. cause and then you
yourself slowly slowly get along the same path.
I notice that in the last few pages as you dig more and more in
the damages that the meat policy is doing you get more and more
aware of this problem as per OP issue.
What can i say?
Welcome aboard girl.

---

Yes, medicine can't cure all disease, therefore any remedy you pull out of your butt is likely valid.
That's mularkey. Until fasting is shown to work, skepticism of medicine doesn't justify believing in it. That's an argument from ignorance.

Ignorance is when you say something that does not make sense
because it does not work.
Considering that fasting make sense because it works that is not
ignorance.
Suppose that in your car tank the fuel is mixed with some sand
or other pollutants.
What would you do?
Would you keep on going like this or would you get rid of the
pollutants first?
An intelligent person would try to get rid of the pollutants first
as far as i know so before to put more fuel in the tank he would
get rid of the crap.
Fasting work in the same way.
With the stomach full it is impossible to get rid of the crap in it.
As simple as that girl.

[Whateverist]

Ricky has a lot of argument.

.. and even more ignorance.

---

That's mularkey. Until fasting is shown to work, skepticism of medicine doesn't justify believing in it. That's an argument from ignorance.

[Rampant.A.I.]

Ignorance is when you say something that does not make sense
because it does not work.
Considering that fasting make sense because it works that is not
ignorance.
Suppose that in your car tank the fuel is mixed with some sand
or other pollutants.
What would you do?
Would you keep on going like this or would you get rid of the
pollutants first?
An intelligent person would try to get rid of the pollutants first
as far as i know so before to put more fuel in the tank he would
get rid of the crap.
Fasting work in the same way.
With the stomach full it is impossible to get rid of the crap in it.
As simple as that girl. :wink-shades:

So you're calling yourself ignorant?

"There is no scientific evidence it will detox the body. The issue of fasting to cleanse the body has no biological basis because the body is real good at that by itself," says Fernstrom. "The liver is a natural detox center; the lungs, the colon, the kidneys, [the lymph glands] and the skin get rid of toxins."