The Caddy Shack

...not your typical golf forum


    Food, Inc.

    Share
    avatar
    FamousDavis
    Admin

    Posts : 1091
    Join date : 2012-12-04

    Food, Inc.

    Post  FamousDavis on Thu Mar 13, 2014 5:01 pm

    I watched this on Netflix. It's a documentary where the producer unveils surprising facts about the food industry. Specifically, he shows the viewer how chickens are mass produced in horrible conditions. Same for cattle. One surprising part for me was how powerful the corn and soybean companies are. There aren't that many of them and they literally threaten farmers into using their products. I guess there is a soybean manufacturer that uses strong arm tactics with farmers.

    Here is where I disagree a little bit. I really don't believe that the hormones in these animals are what is causing obesity in America. What's causing obesity are the high sugar and corn products such as soda, chips, cookies, crackers and other snack foods. Consumption of these items has gone up dramatically in the last 20 years. Mainly due to the fact that corn is so cheap and these products are relatively inexpensive compared to meat.

    After watching this documentary I really wasn't shocked or surprised. I've read about and heard stories about slaughter houses and chicken farms. Besides, the chickens seemed pretty happy to me. Well, up to the end.

    I'll still be grilling chicken and going to Mickey D's now and then.
    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Thu Mar 13, 2014 10:14 pm

    Corn and dairy is very subsidized by our government. The reason you can buy a $2 hamburger at McD's is our taxes are paying a portion of each. I agree with you on corn syrup and sugar being bad. Again subsidies. Take those away and let's see where the chips fall. The World Health Organization is recommending about 6 teaspoons of sugar/sweetener a day. that is equal to about 6 oz. of soda a day. You eat mostly pre-processed foods and you won't meet that recommendation. Plus we get way too little dietary fiber. A result of eating way too much meat.

    One thing you are not considering with your animal comment. Those animals are all being feed antibiotics to keep them healthy. Cows are eating corn that they aren't designed to digest. Put that together and you are basically eating meat that is not from a healthy animal. Their omega 6 to omega 3 ratios are way off. Which is an clear indication of inflammation. Eat wild or grass fed animals and their ratios are about even. That is one reason why doctors are so obsessed with consuming high omega 3 foods/oils. We need to get a balance in our systems because we are eating animals that are way out of balance. Not to mention you are consuming a ton of growth hormones if you are not eating organic chicken. If you have the money to spare, it's worth to spend a few extra bucks to get as natural of food as you can afford. Lamb is good; they only eat grass. The same goes for buffalo.

    Food Matters is another good documentary. Not as much about big business and more about health.
    avatar
    Horseballs

    Posts : 752
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Living the dream at the SPCC

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Horseballs on Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:57 am

    FamousDavis wrote:I watched this on Netflix.  It's a documentary where the producer unveils surprising facts about the food industry.  Specifically, he shows the viewer how chickens are mass produced in horrible conditions.  Same for cattle.  One surprising part for me was how powerful the corn and soybean companies are.  There aren't that many of them and they literally threaten farmers into using their products.   I guess there is a soybean manufacturer that uses strong arm tactics with farmers.  

    Here is where I disagree a little bit.   I really don't believe that the hormones in these animals are what is causing obesity in America.   What's causing obesity are the high sugar and corn products such as soda, chips, cookies, crackers and other snack foods.  Consumption of these items has gone up dramatically in the last 20 years.   Mainly due to the fact that corn is so cheap and these products are relatively inexpensive compared to meat.  

    After watching this documentary I really wasn't shocked or surprised.  I've read about and heard stories about slaughter houses and chicken farms.  Besides, the chickens seemed pretty happy to me.  Well, up to the end.  

    I'll still be grilling chicken and going to Mickey D's now and then.
    I worked a consulting gig in a small Georgia town that had a huge chicken processing farm for one of the national brands. The people who lived there didn't eat much chicken. There were dozens of dead chickens along the roadside from all the trucks going to the plant. The place had a smell that I suppose you get used to, but I never did. I've heard the same thing is true for people who work at beef and pork processing plants. If you see how the sausage is made, chances are you won't eat it.
    I certainly don't think those chickens had much of a good life. Not that have much sympathy for them, but they basically live in a tiny wire cage from birth and are fed until they can't fit in the cage any longer.
    avatar
    Mongrel

    Posts : 1761
    Join date : 2012-12-04
    Location : The Oort Cloud

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Mongrel on Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:27 am

    Let's face it. If you are born a chicken, you had better hope you're a cock and have a productive one.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 2:29 pm

    Well lets just go back to being like it was 40 years ago when farmers maybe got 100 bpa corn and 30bpa soybeans. Just get rid of all the sprays and fertilizers and see how much food would cost. You think there is hunger now if that happened it would be soylent green to the unwashed masses. Population went from 212.6 mil to 313.8 in 40 years.
    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:26 pm

    jt1135 wrote:Well lets just go back to being like it was 40 years ago when farmers maybe got 100 bpa corn and 30bpa soybeans.  Just get rid of all the sprays and fertilizers and see how much food would cost.  You think there is hunger now if that happened it would be soylent green to the unwashed masses.  Population went from 212.6 mil to 313.8 in 40 years.  

    Tell that to families that have deformed or an autistic child. We all should have access to safe food and water...
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 5:37 pm

    Poe4soul wrote:
    jt1135 wrote:Well lets just go back to being like it was 40 years ago when farmers maybe got 100 bpa corn and 30bpa soybeans.  Just get rid of all the sprays and fertilizers and see how much food would cost.  You think there is hunger now if that happened it would be soylent green to the unwashed masses.  Population went from 212.6 mil to 313.8 in 40 years.  

    Tell that to families that have deformed or an autistic child. We all should have access to safe food and water...

    The bottom line is you cannot feed this nation by going all organic. It is impossible. The yields wouldn't be sufficient. Might help with unemployment as you'd need a fukin army to pull the weeds. But then you'd have to pay for that which would drive up the prices.
    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:05 pm

    jt1135 wrote:
    Poe4soul wrote:
    jt1135 wrote:Well lets just go back to being like it was 40 years ago when farmers maybe got 100 bpa corn and 30bpa soybeans.  Just get rid of all the sprays and fertilizers and see how much food would cost.  You think there is hunger now if that happened it would be soylent green to the unwashed masses.  Population went from 212.6 mil to 313.8 in 40 years.  

    Tell that to families that have deformed or an autistic child. We all should have access to safe food and water...

    The bottom line is you cannot feed this nation by going all organic.  It is impossible.  The yields wouldn't be sufficient.  Might help with unemployment as you'd need a fukin army to pull the weeds.  But then you'd have to pay for that which would drive up the prices.  

    You don't have to liberally douse soy and wheat with roundup either. Just look at colony bee collapse disorders. The are our canary in the mine.

    Besides, I doubt FD is poor and he can afford organic food.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:14 pm

    You're missing the point Poe. There is no way, no how at anytime in the foreseeable future that we can get by without the use of chemicals in farming that we can feed the people in this nation. You can make any argument you want but it just ain't gonna happen.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:22 pm

    Well, there might be a way. You'd have to take everybody out of the city and give them 10 acres to grow their own food on. It would be an all day just about everyday. Their wouldn't be any body to fix computers, cars, fly planes, make your starbucks coffee, etc. Oh wait. Cambodia already tried that. Pull all the chemicals and there would be famine and it would be catastrophic.
    avatar
    Mongrel

    Posts : 1761
    Join date : 2012-12-04
    Location : The Oort Cloud

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Mongrel on Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:51 pm

    Access to nutritious food and potable water for humans is not a
    God-given right. The deal is that those who have it live and those who don't die. Obviously, the more technologically advanced the production of food becomes, the more humans can have adequate supplies of it. However, chemicals or not, there comes a point where there will be too many humans and not enough food even assuming a perfect distribution system and no spoilage. When that point is reached, people will die in numbers sufficient to balance out the demand/supply situation and then the cycle will begin again. I am just glad that I have the purchasing power to partake in enough daily caloric glop for myself and wife that we may live the take good shits the following morning. If someone wants to get the moronic mouth-breathing elected leadership to try to ban the chemical substances that make my food available and affordable, I would not be disappointed to see him and the politcos drawn and quartered or crucified in the biblical sense. In the words of that great Texan, Steve Miller, "Give me a cheeseburger."
    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Fri Mar 14, 2014 6:57 pm

    jt1135 wrote:Well, there might be a way.  You'd have to take everybody out of the city and give them 10 acres to grow their own food on.  It would be an all day just about everyday.  Their wouldn't be any body to fix computers, cars, fly planes, make your starbucks coffee, etc.  Oh wait.  Cambodia already tried that.  Pull all the chemicals and there would be famine and it would be catastrophic.  
    I get your point. I just don't buy into it. I don't think monocultures, GMOs, patented seeds, etc. Is about anything other than greed. More bpa for more money. Never mind people's health. Processed food is crap and it's killing us slowly.

    There are many young industrious young people that would love to farm for a living but can't. Unless you have millions of dollars you can't get into farming in much of the US. I'm sure Monsanto will do everything possible to push your image of food production in this country.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:13 pm

    Poe4soul wrote:
    jt1135 wrote:Well, there might be a way.  You'd have to take everybody out of the city and give them 10 acres to grow their own food on.  It would be an all day just about everyday.  Their wouldn't be any body to fix computers, cars, fly planes, make your starbucks coffee, etc.  Oh wait.  Cambodia already tried that.  Pull all the chemicals and there would be famine and it would be catastrophic.  
    I get your point.  I just don't buy into it.  I don't think monocultures,  GMOs, patented seeds,  etc.  Is about anything other than greed. More bpa for more money.  Never mind people's health. Processed food is crap and it's killing us slowly.  

    There are many young industrious young people that would love to farm for a living but can't.  Unless  you have millions of dollars you can't get into farming in much of the US.  I'm sure Monsanto will do everything possible to push your image of food production in this country.



    I grew up on a 2000 acre farm in the sixties and seventies. Also farmed with my brother and we ran about 600 acres. 20 years ago the price for corn was on the south side of 2 dollars a bushel. I started working construction and farmed at the same time. Decided to stick with the construction. Now living on the family farm with my 82 year old mom. Help my brother and uncle every spring and every fall. They are down to about 1000 acres but it is all bought and paid for. In other words, very familiar with pretty much all aspects of farming for the last 40 years. Monsanto or whoever doesn't have to push me to anything. Someday you might want to get out and see how most of the people in this country are fed. It ain't by little mom and pop organic foodstands.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 7:45 pm

    Interesting story from Mother Earth News. Not my type of rag but they do make a point.

    http://www.motherearthnews.com/homesteading-and-livestock/organic-farming-feed-the-world-ze0z1207zkon.aspx#axzz2vzFrXDM3
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Fri Mar 14, 2014 9:30 pm

    After doing a bunch of research on the interweb, some conclusions.

    The Green Revolution of the late 60's caused the change of agriculture from sustainable to chemical. It is credited with saving a billion people. As in most things, nobody could see the future.

    The world population will level off about 2100 and theoretically they can all be fed.

    The biggest factor between being hungry and being well fed is money. The more you have the better you can live. Like in Platoon the guy says the poor have always been fuked and they always will.

    The level for the U.S. to survive strictly on sustainable agriculture is 200 million. We already have 313 million. The only way to get to the 200 is to quit screwing or wipe out 113 million people.

    As I stated earlier, not possible in the foreseeable future. Doesn't mean at some point technology and science or for that matter famine and pestilance can't change the outcome. Ain't gonna happen in our life time.

    In short, it is what it is



    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Sat Mar 15, 2014 8:18 am

    jt1135 wrote:After doing a bunch of research on the interweb, some conclusions.

     The Green Revolution of the late 60's caused the change of agriculture from sustainable to chemical.  It is credited with saving a billion people.  As in most things, nobody could see the future.  

    The world population will level off about 2100 and theoretically they can all be fed.

    The biggest factor between being hungry and being well fed is money.  The more you have the better you can live.  Like in Platoon the guy says the poor have always been fuked and they always will.  

    The level for the U.S. to survive strictly on sustainable agriculture is 200 million.  We already have 313 million.  The only way to get to the 200 is to quit screwing or wipe out 113 million people.

    As I stated earlier, not possible in the foreseeable future.  Doesn't mean at some point technology and science or for that matter famine and pestilance can't change the outcome.  Ain't gonna happen in our life time.  

    In short, it is what it is


    So,  do you eat well? By that I mean healthy, mostly organic food, non processed food?

    I find what you are saying hard to swallow when animal feed constitutes annually almost half of the corn consumption and over half of the soy consumption. Our meat and dairy industry receives over 60% of our subsidies. This is not the best way to feed a nation.

    GMO food and current farming practices will not win against mother nature.  Liberal application of roundup is making resistant weeds.  Monoculture farming and not rotating crops combined with presistant use of herbicides and pesticides are also making super bugs. Nature will win this battle.

    No,  these choices are not about feeding a nation.  It is all about making money.  A sick and unhealthy one.

    BTW - can someone explain why we subsidize tobacco?
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Sat Mar 15, 2014 9:09 am

    Poe4soul wrote:
    jt1135 wrote:After doing a bunch of research on the interweb, some conclusions.

     The Green Revolution of the late 60's caused the change of agriculture from sustainable to chemical.  It is credited with saving a billion people.  As in most things, nobody could see the future.  

    The world population will level off about 2100 and theoretically they can all be fed.

    The biggest factor between being hungry and being well fed is money.  The more you have the better you can live.  Like in Platoon the guy says the poor have always been fuked and they always will.  

    The level for the U.S. to survive strictly on sustainable agriculture is 200 million.  We already have 313 million.  The only way to get to the 200 is to quit screwing or wipe out 113 million people.

    As I stated earlier, not possible in the foreseeable future.  Doesn't mean at some point technology and science or for that matter famine and pestilance can't change the outcome.  Ain't gonna happen in our life time.  

    In short, it is what it is


    So,  do you eat well? By that I mean healthy, mostly organic food, non processed food?

    I find what you are saying hard to swallow when animal feed constitutes annually almost half of the corn consumption and over half of the soy consumption. Our meat and dairy industry receives over 60% of our subsidies. This is not the best way to feed a nation.

    GMO food and current farming practices will not win against mother nature.  Liberal application of roundup is making resistant weeds.  Monoculture farming and not rotating crops combined with presistant use of herbicides and pesticides are also making super bugs. Nature will win this battle.

    No,  these choices are not about feeding a nation.  It is all about making money.  A sick and unhealthy one.

    BTW - can someone explain why we subsidize tobacco?

    A couple of quotes from Norman Borlaug, Nobel winner and father of the green revolution..

    They point to a quote from the year 2000 in which he stated: "I now say that the world has the technology — either available or well advanced in the research pipeline — to feed on a sustainable basis a population of 10 billion people. The more pertinent question today is whether farmers and ranchers will be permitted to use this new technology? While the affluent nations can certainly afford to adopt ultra low-risk positions, and pay more for food produced by the so-called 'organic' methods, the one billion chronically undernourished people of the low income, food-deficit nations cannot." [49]

    Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things".[38]

    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Sun Mar 16, 2014 12:45 pm

    jt1135 wrote:
    Poe4soul wrote:
    jt1135 wrote:After doing a bunch of research on the interweb, some conclusions.

     The Green Revolution of the late 60's caused the change of agriculture from sustainable to chemical.  It is credited with saving a billion people.  As in most things, nobody could see the future.  
    8
    The world population will level off about 2100 and theoretically they can all be fed.

    The biggest factor between being hungry and being well fed is money.  The more you have the better you can live.  Like in Platoon the guy says the poor have always been fuked and they always will.  

    The level for the U.S. to survive strictly on sustainable agriculture is 200 million.  We already have 313 million.  The only way to get to the 200 is to quit screwing or wipe out 113 million people.

    As I stated earlier, not possible in the foreseeable future.  Doesn't mean at some point technology and science or for that matter famine and pestilance can't change the outcome.  Ain't gonna happen in our life time.  

    In short, it is what it is


    So,  do you eat well? By that I mean healthy, mostly organic food, non processed food?

    I find what you are saying hard to swallow when animal feed constitutes annually almost half of the corn consumption and over half of the soy consumption. Our meat and dairy industry receives over 60% of our subsidies. This is not the best way to feed a nation.

    GMO food and current farming practices will not win against mother nature.  Liberal application of roundup is making resistant weeds.  Monoculture farming and not rotating crops combined with presistant use of herbicides and pesticides are also making super bugs. Nature will win this battle.

    No,  these choices are not about feeding a nation.  It is all about making money.  A sick and unhealthy one.

    BTW - can someone explain why we subsidize tobacco?

    A couple of quotes from Norman Borlaug, Nobel winner and father of the green revolution..

    They point to a quote from the year 2000 in which he stated: "I now say that the world has the technology — either available or well advanced in the research pipeline — to feed on a sustainable basis a population of 10 billion people. The more pertinent question today is whether farmers and ranchers will be permitted to use this new technology? While the affluent nations can certainly afford to adopt ultra low-risk positions, and pay more for food produced by the so-called 'organic' methods, the one billion chronically undernourished people of the low income, food-deficit nations cannot." [49]

    Of environmental lobbyists he stated, "some of the environmental lobbyists of the Western nations are the salt of the earth, but many of them are elitists. They've never experienced the physical sensation of hunger. They do their lobbying from comfortable office suites in Washington or Brussels. If they lived just one month amid the misery of the developing world, as I have for fifty years, they'd be crying out for tractors and fertilizer and irrigation canals and be outraged that fashionable elitists back home were trying to deny them these things".[38]


    I get it. Deforestation, monoculture, etc. will save the starving people around the world until it can no longer. In the meantime we become chronically ill and malnourished. Monocultures, GM food, pesticides, and lack of biodiversity is causing many issues like autoimmunity issues.

    Man is and never above or outside the laws of natures. It's not if but when these methods taken to absurd levels will cause major problems for humanity.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:24 pm

    No Poe, I'm afraid you still don't get it. You are talking like one of those elitists. Since you seem to be so knowledgeable about food and nutrition, come up with some feasible answers that doesn't include massive starvation and that the whole world will except.
    avatar
    jt1135

    Posts : 441
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : Middle of Nowhere

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  jt1135 on Sun Mar 16, 2014 1:30 pm

    Actually to get down to the selfsufficiant number of 200 million in the U.S., all we'd have to do is wipe out all the people from the Rockies west. It would put us real close to that number. Laughing 
    avatar
    FamousDavis
    Admin

    Posts : 1091
    Join date : 2012-12-04

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  FamousDavis on Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:43 pm

    Poe4soul wrote:Corn and dairy is very subsidized by our government.  The reason you can buy a $2 hamburger at McD's is our taxes are paying a portion of each.  I agree with you on corn syrup and sugar being bad.  Again subsidies.  Take those away and let's see where the chips fall.  The World Health Organization is recommending about 6 teaspoons of sugar/sweetener a day.  that is equal to about 6 oz. of soda a day.  You eat mostly pre-processed foods and you won't meet that recommendation. Plus we get way too little dietary fiber.  A result of eating way too much meat.

    One thing you are not considering with your animal comment.  Those animals are all being feed antibiotics to keep them healthy.  Cows are eating corn that they aren't designed to digest.  Put that together and you are basically eating meat that is not from a healthy animal.  Their omega 6 to omega 3 ratios are way off.  Which is an clear indication of inflammation.  Eat wild or grass fed animals and their ratios are about even.  That is one reason why doctors are so obsessed with consuming high omega 3 foods/oils.  We need to get a balance in our systems because we are eating animals that are way out of balance. Not to mention you are consuming a ton of growth hormones if you are not eating organic chicken. If you have the money to spare, it's worth to spend a few extra bucks to get as natural of food as you can afford.  Lamb is good; they only eat grass.  The same goes for buffalo.

    Food Matters is another good documentary.  Not as much about big business and more about health.

    I disagree with your theory that the animals are unhealthy and therefore that makes the humans who eat them unhealthy. I think the chickens and cows are fatter than they would normally be and have more meat on them because of the corn consumption. That in itself might be unhealthy for their hearts and internal organs but I don't necessarily believe that equates to their meat being unhealthy for us.

    In other words, I don't believe there is anything in the corn fed cows or chickens that is harmful to humans other than the fact that they are probably more fatty.

    I also don't believe that fertilized crops are bad for you. You wash them off, eat them and go on your way.

    I'm not going to spend money on food labeled "organic". I think that's a scam and I seriously doubt it's any different.

    If you want to live a long time you need to moderate what you eat, exercise and not worry. Snack foods like Soda, Chips, Cookies and Candy have WAY more to do with health problems than corn fed cows.

    The same people who eat organic foods are probably standing in line at the hemp joint in Colorado right now. What a paradox. It will be interesting to see what unemployment is like in Colorado in 5 years.
    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Thu Mar 20, 2014 11:00 am

    FamousDavis wrote:
    Poe4soul wrote:Corn and dairy is very subsidized by our government.  The reason you can buy a $2 hamburger at McD's is our taxes are paying a portion of each.  I agree with you on corn syrup and sugar being bad.  Again subsidies.  Take those away and let's see where the chips fall.  The World Health Organization is recommending about 6 teaspoons of sugar/sweetener a day.  that is equal to about 6 oz. of soda a day.  You eat mostly pre-processed foods and you won't meet that recommendation. Plus we get way too little dietary fiber.  A result of eating way too much meat.

    One thing you are not considering with your animal comment.  Those animals are all being feed antibiotics to keep them healthy.  Cows are eating corn that they aren't designed to digest.  Put that together and you are basically eating meat that is not from a healthy animal.  Their omega 6 to omega 3 ratios are way off.  Which is an clear indication of inflammation.  Eat wild or grass fed animals and their ratios are about even.  That is one reason why doctors are so obsessed with consuming high omega 3 foods/oils.  We need to get a balance in our systems because we are eating animals that are way out of balance. Not to mention you are consuming a ton of growth hormones if you are not eating organic chicken. If you have the money to spare, it's worth to spend a few extra bucks to get as natural of food as you can afford.  Lamb is good; they only eat grass.  The same goes for buffalo.

    Food Matters is another good documentary.  Not as much about big business and more about health.

    I disagree with your theory that the animals are unhealthy and therefore that makes the humans who eat them unhealthy.  I think the chickens and cows are fatter than they would normally be and have more meat on them because of the corn consumption.  That in itself might be unhealthy for their hearts and internal organs but I don't necessarily believe that equates to their meat being unhealthy for us.  

    In other words, I don't believe there is anything in the corn fed cows or chickens that is harmful to humans other than the fact that they are probably more fatty.  

    I also don't believe that fertilized crops are bad for you.  You wash them off, eat them and go on your way.  

    I'm not going to spend money on food labeled "organic".  I think that's a scam and I seriously doubt it's any different.  

    If you want to live a long time you need to moderate what you eat, exercise and not worry.   Snack foods like Soda, Chips, Cookies and Candy have WAY more to do with health problems than corn fed cows.  

    The same people who eat organic foods are probably standing in line at the hemp joint in Colorado right now.  What a paradox.   It will be interesting to see what unemployment is like in Colorado in 5 years.  

    Your idea of washing away pesticides and herbicides is just ignorant.  You can in some, but not all. Just google "dirty dozen" and educated yourself on which foods are the worst offenders.

    Question, if a cow on corn and soy feed is require antibiotics mixed into it's feed to keep it from being sick, do you think there's a chance they might have other health issues? Why would you want to ingest meat that is not healthy. And, why would you want to ingest residual antibiotics that kill off you gut biotics that make you healthy and vital?  Is your health worth that chance?  Corn fed cows have poor omega 6 vs omega 3 ratios. You need to educate yourself on omega 6 vs. omega 3.  Your doctor should have helped you on this one.  It's one of the primary discussions in relation to high cholesterol and relates directly to inflammation. Link... http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12442909

    If you ignorantly stick to your beliefs; I hope they are strong enough to keep you healthy.
    avatar
    Kiwigolfer

    Posts : 477
    Join date : 2012-12-05
    Location : A land downunder

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Kiwigolfer on Thu Mar 20, 2014 12:17 pm

    I try to eat healthy non processed food but I don't eat organic. I'm with FD in that I am skeptical of the foods claiming to be organic. How stringently are they monitored? Do they just need to tick a couple of boxes entitling them to call themselves 'organic' therefore justifying their exorbitant prices? It reminds me of the NZ Heart Foundation tick on many of our foods that are nothing but processed, unhealthy junk (like crackers) but they get the Heart Foundation tick because they are low fat! Ridiculous yet you see uninformed imbeciles buying this stuff thinking it's healthy. Plus there isn't exactly have a wide range or slection of organic produce available. I guess I'll just have to take my chances with the fresh fruit and veges available at my local green grocer. As for meat I am not aware of any corn fed beef in our market. As far as I know all our beef and lamb is grass fed but I could be wrong. I know when I dine out in Aussie if the beef is corn fed it is stated on the menu. In some cases it is considered desirable because it leads to more marbled, fatty steak which is more tender and succulent to eat. Not necessarily healthier though.
    avatar
    Mongrel

    Posts : 1761
    Join date : 2012-12-04
    Location : The Oort Cloud

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Mongrel on Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:32 pm

    The animals that have been corn-fed are fine. But stay away from those who have been corn-holed.
    avatar
    Poe4soul

    Posts : 417
    Join date : 2012-12-08
    Location : Portland, OR

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Poe4soul on Thu Mar 20, 2014 2:49 pm

    Kiwigolfer wrote:I try to eat healthy non processed food but I don't eat organic. I'm with FD in that I am skeptical of the foods claiming to be organic. How stringently are they monitored? Do they just need to tick a couple of boxes entitling them to call themselves 'organic' therefore justifying their exorbitant prices? It reminds me of the NZ Heart Foundation tick on many of our foods that are nothing but processed, unhealthy junk (like crackers) but they get the Heart Foundation tick because they are low fat! Ridiculous yet you see uninformed imbeciles buying this stuff thinking it's healthy. Plus there isn't exactly have a wide range or slection of organic produce available. I guess  I'll just have to take my chances with the fresh fruit and veges available at my local green grocer. As for meat I am not aware of any corn fed beef in our market. As far as I know all our beef and lamb is grass fed but I could be wrong. I know when I dine out in Aussie if the beef is corn fed it is stated on the menu. In some cases it is considered desirable because it leads to more marbled, fatty steak which is more tender and succulent to eat. Not necessarily healthier though.

    I'm probably just spoiled. Portland has many good options for organic food. I'm also not sure about the "organic" cert but I'm certain that eating pesticides and herbicides is not the best thing for you.

    The majority of our meat here in the US is corn/soy fed. The cows live all but the first six months of their life in feedyards walking, eating, and shitting in small yards. It's not done because of the marbling, although it is better on that grain/antibiotic diet. It's done because they can get a cow to market 75% faster. Plus corn and soy are highly subsidised. Meat from feedyards in the US market is easily subsidised 50%, or more. This is part of our fat society we've made. Burgers, meat, processed food are all on the dole.

    Most countries laws are better than the US at informing their citizens about what is in their food products. In the US, corporations have more power than the citizens. So, origin of the food, rather it's GMO, etc. doesn't have to be disclosed. It wasn't until recently that even if a food is found to be contaminated, the Fed's didn't have the power to issue a mandatory recall. It took peoples, and childrens, deaths to get this law changed.

    Do you have Community Supported Agriculture Coalitions, CSA's, in NZ? We have many in the Portland area. You basically are a member of the farm and get a portion of the proceeds. Each month you get a box of vegetables. Not all are certified organic but they all are better than mass production farms. Plus the food is freshly harvested prior to delivery.

    Sponsored content

    Re: Food, Inc.

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Aug 22, 2017 7:43 pm