Well..only when you use human effluent as fertilizer :lol:
Incidentally, I have an friend from Ireland whose family grew potatoes using human effluent as fertilizer - and then sold them to the English!! Oh! sweet justice!!!!! :lol:
Illegal to Grow Own Food
- Thread starter Stretch
- Start date
Incidentally, I have an friend from Ireland whose family grew potatoes using human effluent as fertilizer - and then sold them to the English!! Oh! sweet justice!!!!! :lol:
DNA test.
No I haven't. I picked up right away on why this is blown out of proportion. Gopher mentioned it, and I assume other people must have noticed the "interstate commerce" part. You can grow whatever the hell you want in your back yard.
The standards for quality are set by government scientists and the Departments they work for.
So, grow your own damn food in your back yard then. Nobody is stopping you. They will stop you from selling it to grocery chains. Unless you happen to have HACAAP approved facilities and any other relevant licenses. That's only sane.
Unless you think that Ottawa was right, and we should be less stringent on food producers...
What is it that you don't get? Interstate commerce does not equal your local farm market. Get a clue.
Nobody is putting an end to farmer's markets. Nobody is putting an end to local vegetable gardens.
The new Administration is just now coming to grips with similar problems that we have in Canada now. Regulation down loaded and private inspectors employed by Kellogg's inspecting Kellogg's.
This uproar in fact enforces the staus-quo.
There probably would be nothing wrong with using human effluent if it came from people who eat out of their own garden. Mix in all the toxic waste most people eat and then you have a deadly concoction. If you pass it through a methane digester first, all you have is high nutrient soil left over. Properly composted manure of any kind has burned out most parasites and other harmful organisms.
I've seen it done (NASA purification in the ISS lab) and you have to be pretty desperate to drink that.
I looks fine. But you know where it came from and it goes into a common tank. So what you drink my not yours.
I knew a Russian woman in the Slocan Valley who said she drank her first urine of the day. She said it was full of antibodies or something. Tried to convince me to do the same after my heart attack in "96. Ya right!
That was one of the main points of my post: government decisions in this area represent agribusiness interests. This has been the case for some time now, they're just upping the ante.
In North America, corporate interests practically run the show as far as medicine is concerned why would food be any different? I think this should almost be common knowledge these days no?
The war on American (and Canadian) farmers has been waging for some time now.
The law opens the door to a whole host of other legal possibilities, none of which are in your favour as a consumer.
You're taking the law at face value: it has branching effects that will lead to what I was bitching about before. But you don't have to listen my blabber, the nightmare of corporate dominance of food supply is just around the corner, so you won't have to wait much.
Not being able to grow the bloody food is where this is going (i.e. complete control over food supply). Private control over necessities is a corner stone of a process of privatization in the USA. Why the hell is this so difficult to fathom?
Put your money where your mouth is. What part of this food bill specifically is favorable to agri-business at the expense of consumers?
Common knowledge doesn't mean correct knowledge. Just as common sense isn't all that desirable. I'll bet most of you here arguing against the "evil corporations" have not one iota of comprehension concerning the trials and tests that are run on new drugs, and the lax food inspections.
I mean you could give up modern medicine. Your life span will be greatly reduced. But at least you'll be sticking it to the corporations! :roll:
Explain. Your assertions are meaningless by themselves.
Take it from somebody who is studying agriculture at school. The trends in the marketplace today are towards farmer markets, and local produced goods. This is the antithesis to your rant here. Part of this switch has been the recent scandals over food safety. This law is addressing food safety, and if more people are moving towards the 'eat local philosophy' concurrently, then that's a good thing, no?
So you say. You're wrong. Paranoid delusions.
A nice drive through the Fraser Valley may be pretty to look at if there isn't any smog but the smell of untreated animal waste fertilizing the veggies you eat is overwhelming somedays.
They have that patented and lease the rights to veggie seed companies. Patenting natural life forms is just plain insane and so wrong it defies words.
Monsanto purchased Seminis, who markets vegetable seed. The Seminis squash seed is not genetically modified, is not patented, and is used by organic farmers. These aren't engineered crops, they are seeds developed with partners like Cornell University, Texas A & M and the University of California. The company markets F1 hybrids, that are considered to be among the very best in plant genetics.
Monsanto has an image problem. That doesn't mean everything they are involved with is inherently bad. If you know anything about plant genetics you can purchase these cultivars and start your own breeding program.
They don't have to be engineered to be patented. Monsanto has patented nearly every wild seed it has gotten it's mitts on.
Yes they do. What are you patenting if there is nothing novel or new? You can't patent a breed. You can patent the introduction of a protein into the plant.
Ahhhh. I see you are just assuming and not bothering to do some research. You'd best look it up that they are indeed patenting wild species of both flora and fauna. Ignorance and assumption are how these crimes against man and nature are commited.