Ode,
I don't think it would be hard to prove the difference between foods
naturally selected by nature over modern GMO foods of today. I doubt we'd
find pig genes in corn or wasp genes in soybeans etc.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ode Coyote" <odecoy...@windstream.net>
To: <silver-list@eskimo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 20, 2010 3:46 AM
Subject: CS>The plow turns the field over...who is the field?
## "Subjective" MEANS the eyes and buds lie, the question is how much.
Any study can be selective. Those doing any given study are out to prove
some point of view.
Sure, no comparison between a home grown tomato and one bred for
transport, but I detect no difference between a home grown potato, onion,
carrot or head of lettuce and one in the grocery store.
Is there a difference beyond opinion? That depends on who you ask.
Then there's that wavy definition of organic.
I have many friends that make a living growing produce that use no
pesticides, but don't qualify as organic growers and won't because the
difference isn't worth achieving or is simply below their standards of
quality that command twice the price when "intelligent and studied" use of
technology makes a lot of difference and an organic compound is the same
compound regardless of origin.
But the "issue" was comparisons between todays foods [in general] and
those of 100 years ago [in general]... "organic" by default [leaving out
the little known fact of poisonous metals pesticides] and grown with
ignorance with no conscious mineral supplementation of soils.
Did THEY have any nutritional advantage over modern commercial foods...in
that specific context?
Point being, is Agribiz an improvement over the old old way, despite any
further recent improvements over that, that go beyond Agribiz?
Let's not be tossing pears into the apples and oranges basket.
Changing the subject doesn't prove, or even illustrate, any points even
if the data and studies are unbiased.
Even harder would be the difference between GMO of today and GMO of
10-20,000 years ago.
We have no records of people selected out [culled] by sensitivities,
allergies and such to compare, only that the "Gift of the Gods" was an
"over all" BOON to civilization in general. [Not that Monsanto has any
idea of what it's doing..or even that the "Gods" did...but nobody took the
"Gods" to court or counted the losers as most people eventually won over
the 100s of centuries. ]
And we can probably show how "saving" people that would otherwise perish
with a change generally regarded as an improvement [or not], genetically
weakens the entire human race setting it up for a disaster that wouldn't
have happened had natural selection within existing context ["natural" or
not ] been allowed.
Point: Nature is much more unforgiving than a studied meddling with it,
but there are always those unintended consequences that the cruelty of
nature may have avoided... WITH or WITHOUT the meddling. Too much success
can be just as bad as not enough and some will always fail to adjust while
others vastly benefit.
"Nature" can be defined as "what is", regardless of "what was" just as
*normal* isn't a constant.
Nature doesn't have any opinions, only results...no matter who screwed
with it or how, it is what it is...now.
Are we better off now than 100 years ago? Absolutely !
Can we do better?...for sure we can.
BUT, what happens next, because of that?
If the world goes organic and green ["improves" ], a heck of a lot of
people won't be around any more that depend on the LAST "Green Revolution"
[Agribiz] to stay alive.
We go to Ethanol and other people go hungry. Why were we feeding them to
the growth point where they can't feed themselves to start with?
Long term cruelty in the name of short term compassion? "Saved" for the
massacre ?
..all this "help" is gonna kill a bunch of folx that otherwise wouldn't be
here to die. Go figger.
Ode [ Shot by a looter that will starve later. ]
At 07:16 AM 4/19/2010 -0700, you wrote:
Ode,
Here is a study showing that organically grown foods do indeed
contain more nutrients, including trace minerals, than non organic foods.
Most studies done have been flawed and carried out by huge agribusiness
concerns.
http://www.grinningplanet.com/2005/12-27/health-benefits-of-organic-food-article.htm
I know personally that when I grow my own veggies they taste better
and look better than non organic varieties from the grocery. Although
this is subjective my taste buds and my eyes don't lie.
--
The Silver List is a moderated forum for discussing Colloidal Silver.
Rules and Instructions: http://www.silverlist.org
Unsubscribe:
<mailto:silver-list-requ...@eskimo.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/silver-list@eskimo.com/maillist.html
Off-Topic discussions: <mailto:silver-off-topic-l...@eskimo.com>
List Owner: Mike Devour <mailto:mdev...@eskimo.com>
