A must read for farmers

[charliep]

As I wandered around the Superstore, I often wonder how much
of a concern food safety is in the average consumers mind. My
suspicion is not a lot.

I suspect agriculture and the food system needs to do a better job
talking about the safeguards that are in place to ensure a save
reliable source of food that meets all consumers. From there, the
food system needs to be prepared to segregate the market in a
way that meets specific groups needs and improves opportunity
for profit.

I hope no one is arguing for increased regulation and oversight
by government/society in your business. Its one thing to change
your business to meet the needs of the consumer either for profit
or because you share common values. It is quite another to have
government at your doorstep telling you what you can do and
how you can operate your business - particularly if your
competitors have access to a fuller range of technology and you
are both living in a commodity that doesn't care as long as it
meets the required international standards of being safe.

On the flax, things need to play out. Suspect that it is application
of the same European rules as the PNT rules - plant with novel
traits. An assessment of what the gene is and then from there, a
risk assessment about what it means. Realizing flax has found
new life in health products and diet with omega3, the major of
flax is crushed for linoil (industrial) and the meal used as a
livestock protein supplement. Europe already has GM in livestock
feed via US corn and Brazilian/US soymeal.

[parsley]

As food producers, we should be very worried about child obesity.

I was looking at old snapshots of school kids from the 1900's and up. There was not a fat kid in my mother's class. I looked at all kinds of pictures from the 40's 50's 60's and there were simply no fat kids

Fat kids make for poor health down the road.

Maybe farmers should be looking at what is done with the food we produce. We don't grow fat food.

Do you ask questions?

[parsley]

Regulation, charliep, you say regulation? Don't get me going. LOL

Farmers grow the best hrs in the world, and the millers make it into flour.

And the government regulates the millers what additives should be added to the flour!

<p></p>
<p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong><a href="http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/labeti/inform/flofare.shtml">((f) may contain calcium carbonate, edible bone meal, chalk (B.P.), ground limestone or calcium sulphate in an amount that will provide in 100 grams of flour 140 milligrams of calcium)</a></strong></p>

Now, tell me this, how smart is it to be adding bone meal to flour, by government regulation, during the mad cow crisis, how good is that for business?

And how smart is it, by government regulation, to allow cows to be fed to cows, and add their mad cow bonemeal to flour to make bread?

Agriculture is studded with decision making dolts.

Farm organizations need to guard farming, instead of concentrating on the menu for the next annual meeting, which is what they seem to do best.

Farmers took the hit for mad cow. Financially and PR wise. Farmers. Not one godamned government decision maker got fired.

Pars on the Rant. Yup.

[parsley]

<p></p>
<p class="EC_style8ptBK"><strong><a href="http://www.bakersjournal.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1782l">( Feeling warm and fuzzy and safe, now, charliep?)</a></strong></p>

The point is this...industry can make, design, create, invent, whatever they want. But it should be thegovernment's job to regulate everyone. From a third party view.

That is a governmet's job; they shouldn't be business partnering, or handing out incentives to their partners. Or covering up their own stupid collaborated decisions.

Transgenics, mutagenics, new inventions, new products, should, ..all of them,.. be subject to vigorous government regulatory scrutiny.

They have not done, and are not doing their job. Parsley

[Fransisco]

Speaking tour? Well if I did one on the subject I'd have to quote Professor Bruce Ames.

"99.9% or more of the chemicals we eat are natural. For example, 99.99% of the pesticides we eat are natural chemicals that are present in plants to ward off insects and other predators. More than half of those natural pesticides tested in high dose animal tests are rodent carcinogens [that is, they give laboratory rats cancer] . There are about 10,000 or so different natural pesticides in our diet, and they are usually present at enormously higher levels than synthetic pesticides.

Cooking food also generates thousands of chemicals. There are over 1000 chemicals reported in a cup of coffee. Only 26 have been tested in animal cancer tests and more than half are rodent carcinogens; there are still a thousand chemicals left to test. The amount of potentially carcinogenic pesticide residues consumed in a year is less than the amount known of rodent carcinogens in a cup of coffee.

We estimate that Americans eat about 1.5 g of natural pesticides per person per day, which is about 10,000 times more than they eat of synthetic pesticide residues."

Then Parsley you can counter by saying that eating organic just feels right.

[parsley]

May I suggest, fran, and I am so bold here I admit, the thrust of your speaking tour should pronounce the desirability of and encouragement of genetically modifying each one of the 10,000 or so different natural pesticides in our diet, because these natural pesicides will indeed pose MORE harm to humans than the natural pesticides do; because as you say, the naturals contain enormously higher levels than the expertly created synthetic pesticides.

Obvioulsy mother Nature needs a bit of counselling.

Name the project, drum roll, ta dah:

Substitutional Genetic Therapy.

"Nature, the bitch, is faulty, we're gonna give her a gene patch"

And then, fran, promote public funding for the entire exercise, promote partnering with Canadian Food Inspection, with deep-pocketing by the Federal Government.

Finally, get all licening and inspections done by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency. hee hee.

If your human experimentation is faulty, and your the pesticide reduction causes genetic infertily, send the bill to the Feds.

The next 0-generation will never have to pay,anyhow.

Pars

[Fransisco]

It doesn't look like mother nature is the one that needs the counseling.

[parsley]

Well, I had to spin the quoted document a bit(okay, a lot). That fits with the "it feels right" comment you graced me with, though. LOL

And I am feeling a bit mischievous today. And fran, you're ever the good sport. Pars

[Kodiak]

This could be an interesting (and far less frustrating) discussion if all writers to this forum posted in English instead of gibberish. Some of you are logical, articulate, and have sound arguments which are well written. Others need to remember lessons learned in elementary school; maybe even remember the lessons they once taught there.

[parsley]

[parsley]

And the link for fran is because he IS smart and I thought he'd be particularly interested in it.

[parsley]

Click on your mouse kodiak if you are too confused. And go help plan a menu.