Cost of organic grain

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

This is a very interesting issue.

Many would say belief and religion are a large component of the actual debate on organic farming.

There were much more dangerous problems like thalidomide and other related treatments that were advised to help humanity.

One would suggest that after a generation and billions of people eating GMO grain... that the proof of a concrete issue is very hard to argue...

BSE is a perfect example of food/feed practices that led to problems and even this could be debated. Growth hormones for beef and milk are another 'religious' issue that has little science to back up claims of damage to humans.

To argue religion... is as close to a futile project; yet many will still try!

Grin <(>;{ Grin!

Good thing we are allowed to think for ourselves... and the thought police don't jail us for this privilege...

YET!

[Burbert]

I don't care about people organic farming. Good for them, if they kin make a go of it. I WORRY more about the chemicals currently being used and GMO's that are pretending to be the silver bullets, to be used by angribusiness. Each to his own though, I guess cause the genie is outta the bottle, now. We gotta live wit it whether we likes it er not! Angribusiness is self-regulatin like a lotta other stuff it seems, okay till problem arise, we depend to much on the industry, butt cheap food is cheap food, no matter what?

[JDGreen]

Pars I am offended at your comments regarding "test tube babies" Surely you are not suggesting that my two beautiful children are less than or freaks because of IVF?? Consider you family fortunate, as not even god almighty could help my wife and I conceive. Science has fulfilled our life with more joy than GM foods will ever cause despair.

[parsley]

Oh my, no offense intended, JD. The comment meant nothing except noticing that identical twins are extremely rare. And surprising! Monozygotic twins are formed essentially, for whatever reason, from one egg splitting into two.

Lots of fraternal (two eggs) twins are born in vitro, though, including a pair in the family (not immediate family.

Children are never freaks, JD. They are children. Gifts. As are yours. That's a given.

Twins will be a busy event, though,lol. Just be glad I wasn't a twin, charliep. LOL Pars

[parsley]

QUOTE

Canwest News Service has learned Environment Canada has determined that Yorkshire pigs developed at the University of Guelph are not toxic to the environment under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act. The official declaration will be made on Saturday.
This is the first regulatory hurdle to get the pigs to market, which will be a first in the country if Health Canada approves Guelph's pending application, submitted last year, seeking a government declaration that its transgenic pig is fit for human consumption.
The so-called "Enviropigs," the world's first transgenic animal created to solve an environmental problem, were created in 1999 with a snippet of mouse DNA introduced into their chromosomes.
The pigs produce low-phosphorus feces.
The Guelph scientists were able to reduce phosphorus pollution by creating a special composite gene that enables digestion of a normally unavailable form of phosphorus. This allows the pigs to produce manure that is 30 to 65 per cent lower in phosphorus than found in the manure of regular pigs -- blamed for polluting surface and groundwater when raised in intensive livestock operations.
"The university has successfully satisfied the requirements to allow the line of transgenic pigs to be produced and farmed using appropriate containment procedures. UNQUOTE


From what a few of you comment, you won't mind a little bit of mouse in your bacon, and this..species to species, is to what you are referring, charliep, right? For me, as well as a lot of consumers who choose organic, we prefer old fashioned pork. No mouse in my pork. Dumb huh?

Now, a dash of glyphosate in your ragweed doesn't seem to faze you a bit, either, does it, charliep, but if given a preference, most people buying organic would prefer ragweed was not hitched up with the glysophate gene. Weird, huh? You see, the marriage of ragweed with glysophate affects the world around the ragweed plant, and I haven't read about anyone smart enough to predict where the cross pollinating and the genetic crossing ends up.! Of course, some of you will consider inserting glyphosate into basil... normal. Or another man made chemical into pumpkins.. normal as hell on Tuesday mornings.

Surprise! Look at one teensy-weensy example of "What will be the effects of the marriage of ragweed and glyphosate on some unsuspecting feeder?":

From Wikipedia:

List of Lepidoptera that feed on ragweeds

Ragweeds (Ambrosia spp.) are used as food plants by the caterpillars (larvae) of some Lepidoptera species including:

Monophagous species that feed exclusively on Ambrosia spp.
Bucculatrix leaf-miners:
B. agnella - feeds on A. artemisiifolia
B. franseriae - feeds on A. deltoidea
B. transversata - feeds on A. psilostachya
Chionodes mediofuscella
Schinia spp
S. dobla - feeds on A. dumosa
S. rivulosa
S. sexplagiata - feeds on A. psilostachya
S. thoreaui
Polyphagous species that feed on Ambrosia spp. among other plants
Bucculatrix leaf-miners:
B. ambrosiaefoliella
B. pomifoliella
Schinia bifascia - recorded on A. trifida

Yup. They ALL munch on ragweed. Doesn't seem important to the casual observer. But neither did the Aid's virus in a person's system when it first came to light. Remember that?

Munch. Each one of them. And something else feeds on THEM.Of course your argument is...no harm at all.

But the point is...you really don't know.

Food.

It's important. Don't forget it. As farmers, that's our job to remember that food is the basic building block of life.

Harp. Harp. LOL Pars

PS Okay. Be honest. Who prefers their bacon with a mouse gene in it? (Besides Franny, lol)

[charliep]

Still confused. You always come back to transgenic/genetic
engineering. What is your opinion is introduced using some other
technique? Directed mutagensis? Using knowledge of genes/gene
sequencing to achieve a desired result?

A strange comment but a couple of articles highlighted the organic
industry would be the first to benefit from biotechnology. Disease
resistance (maybe even fusarium graminearium), drought tolerance,
salinity tolerance, improved nitrogen efficiency. Leaving
transgenics/genetic engineering/recombinant DNA to the side, are
these issues that should be dealt with? Could and should
biotechnology solutions be used to deal with these issues?

[parsley]

There will certainly be gene research that will be beneficial to food production, to humans, to the planet. I've always supported research, charliep, and you know I have.

But, I've also made it very clear that I don't believe people should be part of the massive North American experiment that is currently underway.

Triffid should have been an eye-opening example of the laxity and ambivalence that many players have towards life-changing processes.

Currently, many of the biotech companies would have zip-all if Western governments did not dedicate most of their ag/research budgets to them. And that approach/trust is folly.

Too many universities and scientists would sell their grandfather's molars if they thought it would get them another contract. As would a few farmers. Scientists themselves are increasingly wary-worried, albeit some have already been warned to STFU if they want to keep their jobs and hence are afraid to even broach doubt.

newguy initially asked the question, "Does the consumer know the true cost of buying organic food?"

For all the processes you invite to be explored/diced./sliced/studied with my tax dollar, charliep. organic food is indeed cheap. Pars

[TOM4CWB]

Parsley,

I know I am opening a can of worms here... but;

If we could grow wheat canola barley etc with N fixation... inject a fish gene to prevent soybeans of winter Canaola from fall freezes so they would produce well...

1001 needs to feed a hungry world...

Why isn't this a valuable and productive ambition for humanity?

[cottonpicken]

The manipulation of science by governments and
corporations is very scary to me.

Tough to make good choices.

[cottonpicken]

Pars,whats going on with your blog,mees cant get in.

[gregpet]

Pars, you mentioned the quality of nutrition. I know you do your best to make sure the crop has all the nutrients required to produce a good crop. My question is about organics in general. If organic crops do not have sufficient nutrients to produce a healthy crop are those crop nutritional?

For example, cattle fed straw will survive but cattle fed hay will thrive. I feel conventionally grown crops are much more nutritious than organically grown crops that do not have all the nutrients needed to produce a nutritious end product.

If nutrition is the goal then I feel organics fall short in providing this to the consumers that are purchasing this product. Have you ever checked the brix(sugar) level of your product compared to conventionally grown crops? If so, what were the results.

[parsley]

Interesting questions, gregpet.

This farm practices a forage rotation following continuous cropping.

Each piece of land is continuously cropped until weeds abound and nutrients lack, at which time that field is sown down to sainfoin which reaches deep into the soil.

Sainfoin is a nitrogen-fixating legume that livestock are crazy about, and are also 100% bloat free, unlike alfalfa. We showed cattle for many years and really depended upon sainfoin for getting weaned show calves on feed in order to avoid "bloaters".

So, now, cow-neighbors hay the land (have for years)and/or we also combine the sainfoin seed. So while we are fertilizing, we are similtaneously harvesting.

Often the land is "down" for 8-10 years, but can be broken anytime. It's clean as the dickens when broken up.

I studied comparisons of organic vs non-organic vegetables in quite some detail when I had our market barn in operation. They were comparative studies done in the US by the university, and left zero doubt in my mind about nutritive value.

One of the interesting things I discovered was this:

A plant that is primed with fertilizer tucked in beside it acts lazy because all it has to do is lick away at the easily available fertilizer so kindly provided. The plant's only goal is to set seed. It doen't care about nutritional value, so it utilizes the nearest and easiest source to maintian enough growth to simply set seed.

On the other hand, organic plants often struggle, and reach deeper into the ground to draw up nutrients to develop and set seed. They are often the nutrients YOU need the most (and lack the most) and were surprisingly present in the vegetables I studied.

Note: Saskatchewan soil is particularly deficient in selinium and is one I try to source in my vitamin purchases.
The study actually noted Saskatchewan's selinium deficiency and that rather surprised me.

That veggie study also made me aware that maple trees draw up oddball nutrients from the deep deep depths that I have a difficult time sourcing in everyday food, and consequently I buy maple syrup instead of glucosedJemima because of the nutritional factor.

The University of Saskatchewan have been here testing both yield and some nutrients. Organics fared very well.

The U of S tests were arm's length and so was the comparative study I spent quite some time on. Pars