FDA wants to ban manure use

Well, they want to ban raw manure use on fields to grow food for 9 months instead of the current 4. This is for farms over a certain $ intake.
FDA taking comments until tomorrow 11/22/13

You can give em your 2¢ but might want to read up on what they are looking for comments on.
Law text and Comment link here:
http://www.fda.gov/Food/guidanceregu.../ucm334114.htm

popular consumption Article here:
http://wlrn.org/post/organic-farmers...ons-manure-use

Based on what I've seen, the FDA should worry more about where farm workers relieve themselves and how well they wash (or don't wash) afterwards.

Monsanto owns the FDA. They want you to use MiracleGro or other toxic waste instead of natural non-patented stuff.

What? No more fast food?

On a more serious note, it should be clear to anyone with an IQ above 4 that Monsanto has Obama, most of Congress, a majority of judges, and almost every regulatory agency involved in its pocket. Our government hardly even pretends that it works for the people any longer,

I really, really, really suspect that we're on our way to a revolution or civil war in this country.

Dang it. My IQ must be around 3.99 then. I haven't seen compelling evidence that Monsanto is anything other than one more corporation doing what it's shareholders want it to and that's make money.

Follow the Money

http://www.followthemoney.org/databa...tml?u=1758&y=0

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick

Dang it. My IQ must be around 3.99 then. I haven't seen compelling evidence that Monsanto is anything other than one more corporation doing what it's shareholders want it to and that's make money.

---

Correct! And buying politicians is the most effective way to accomplish that.

Correct my IQ is 3.99 or correct I'm right or correct you twisted my words into some malleable context I did not intend to make your point? Fess up. Which is it?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick

Correct my IQ is 3.99 or correct I'm right or correct you twisted my words into some malleable context I did not intend to make your point? Fess up. Which is it?

---

Neither, Rick. I AGREED with your words, "one more corporation doing what it's shareholders want it to and that's make money." And then I pointed out the manner in which many corporations achieve that goal. And "Twisted your words into some malleable context?" Would an officer of the court ever do such a thing?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rick

Correct my IQ is 3.99 or correct I'm right or correct you twisted my words into some malleable context I did not intend to make your point? Fess up. Which is it?

---

Both.



That's his job. C'mon.

And really you believe that Rick? I hate conspiracy theory bs but Monsanto seems to be kind of obvious at their game...

I'll let stand the fact that there were three options and you said both. So..................

I hate you



Hahahaba

Seriously though. I'm no Monsanto expert but I've seen a lot of screwed up stories that seemed to be nothing they were hiding ..

The biggest offenders around here are dairy farms. They produce more manure than they can handle so they over apply it to their fields or just leave it in large piles. The nitrate gets in water courses and the resulting algae bloom chokes them out. Here’s a beaver pond that gets runoff from a dairy farmers fields.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v9...ps28b1d980.jpg

We could spray that algae with some 2-4-D (Agent Orange) and solve the whole problem, eh?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ken

Correct! And buying politicians is the most effective way to accomplish that.

---

If you put out a trough, why should you act surprised when pigs show up to eat?

Monsanto as a company gets a lot of unfair flack. A lot of the people against them are simply antiscience luddites who want artificial scarcity so they can usher in their preferred political system. Genetic engineered crops use less water, less fertilizer, less land, less herbicides than other crops. All of those things are very good for the environment, society, and human civilization.

If you want to pick on Monsanto, a nuanced argument over intellectual property issues is probably reasonable. So much of the hatred pointed their way is just piling on by the uninformed following some uneducated leader (almost identical to the anti vaccine hysteria).

But genetic engineering will, quite simply, save the world.

http://www.geneticliteracyproject.or.../#.UtRK6NImBTY
http://www.slate.com/articles/health...e_people_.html
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIvNopv9Pa8
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Norman_Borlaug
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/08/25/su...pagewanted=all
http://www.slate.com/articles/health...pposition.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...-GM-maize.html (this is a particularly atrocious example of greenpeace gone crazy, people starved)


As for Monsanto, or any company, getting in cozy with government. I don't blame the pig for eating at the trough. I blame the farmer for putting it out. I won't blame someone for acting in their own self interest. It is an absolute travesty when lobbying brings a better ROI for a business than advertising or research, but I won't blame the business that realizes that fact. Blame the government that creates the situation.

oh... as for banning manure. Factually lots of ecoli outbreaks have been traced to it, however I don't think banning it is a solution. The correct solution is to make sure farmers are responsible for their cleanliness. If a farmer (agribusiness) uses manure and sells contaminated crops, he should be able to held civilly liable.

I'd take exception to the less pesticide use. While something like BT corn may require less spraying for corn earworm, the development of Roundup ready crops like soybeans, alfalfa, corn, cotton, spring canola, sugarbeets and winter canola, have led to even more use of the Roundup to kill weeds. In fact some weeds are becoming resistant to the Roundup now. There is a trade off for the technology that means a field isn't fallow for a season with a cover crop to smother weeds in order to grow more food.

It's too bad we place industries in intense concentrations. If you had more farms planting fields with plants that use more of the nutrients in manure rather than just acres of grass for dairy cows there might be a better distribution of that dairy farm manure.

When you see food producers like General Mills dabbling with GMO free in N. America it makes you wonder who’s going to end up having the moral high ground with the consumer? When I look at large and small scale farming, I know what trough I want to eat from.
I remember when farmers put milk cans at the end of their laneways. Those farms are gone. Now a tanker truck passes through.
The Canadian and American military did herbicide testing with Agents Orange and Purple at Gagetown New Brunswick in the 60’s. They assured everyone that it was safe.

There will always be companies and individuals that will take the moral low road. Instead of lambasting companies that are trying to increase yields you might offer a solution to a growing population and dwindling farmland. For now, it seems the only way to feed a rapidly growing populace.

I'm really curious about what is true with them and what isn't now. I remember something about them coming after farmers who's crops were pollinated with Monsanto GMO pollen that blew in, and making them destroy it. Then again there is a lot of hippy propaganda... Possibly more so than the other side...

I remember arguing with a hippy friend over a Facebook picture of a Monsanto guy suited up transferring pesticides into another container. His argument was if it's that bad it shouldn't be on our food. Perhaps, but I tried to explain that is just a picture. You have no idea if that was super concentrated for storage and going to be diluted to 1,000,000 times it's original strength. Almonds have cyanide in them, but in such a low dose it is ok. (This was particularly funny as at first he didn't believe me, and had always bragged about almonds being an amazing super food)


http://i1357.photobucket.com/albums/...ps4d6bb5e8.jpg