Dumbest documentary ever.
The docu rambles on about how big ag companies are taking over. The fact is that ag these days is just another industrial operation and bigger is better as far as efficiency goes. If you want food prices to be as low as possible, and as much food produced as possible, let the ag industry run itself without whining about it.
Secondly, I didnt like how Food Inc complains about Monsato, the genetic engineering company. This is a great firm that makes farmers more efficient. It puts more $$$$ in the system making everything from more corn to cotton made. Genetic engineering wtih agriculture is here to stay, and if you want china to take the lead here, just outlaw Monsato and similar companies, and you’ll get just that.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you know who has slow, local, and organic food?
The fucking third world.
Get rid of Monsanto, etc. and MILLIONS die in a matter of years. Take your pseudoscientific alarmist bullshit and drive it up your ass. The lives of millions are infinitely more valuable than the idiotic pipe dreams of yuppie retards.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you know who has slow, local, and organic food?
The fucking third world.
Get rid of Monsanto, etc. and MILLIONS die in a matter of years. Take your pseudoscientific alarmist bullshit and drive it up your ass. The lives of millions are infinitely more valuable than the idiotic pipe dreams of yuppie retards.[/quote]
So, before Monsanto, people couldn’t survive?
I will agree that the natural, non hormone, organic, food is probably better for you. But there is one thing that most people do not realize unless they are around agricultural. Im the owner of a 3rd generation farm with 1000 acres of crops and livestock(horses and cattle). Our cattle are grass fed. But our product isnt and will never be sold “organic”/ What I mean by that is we use herbicides, fungicides, and pesticides. Mainstream medis loves to give this info to citizens bc it sounds so unhealthy. But guess what? They have been used since the early 40’s. But is organic better? Sure I guess it can be. But no large farm owner can profit from it. There are too many natural predators that you have to protect your product from. The organic farms that do exist are small and their produce usually suffers. Now as far as cattle, I can agree with. But I count myself lucky that I live in a part of the U.S where I can get my meats natural; whether that be beef from my own cattle, or fowl and venison from hunting
And also Im sure most of us here have a fairly decent diet. Its hard to do much to alter the country’s frowing obesity problem. I blame some of it on our government and alot on the sorry parents who feed pizza rolls, corn dogs, and God knows what else to their kids. The best thing you can do is make wise choices for yourself and then for your kids. Most likely, your kids will take on the same actions you do when they are older.
[quote]koffea wrote:
the only thing that i truly found disturbing in this movie was the monsanto company. what they are doing to the doing to the seed industry is should be criminal if it is not already.[/quote]
I fundamentally agree with you… but there is a counterargument to the Monsanto villification.
There IS some intellectual property there with those resilient seeds. A copyright, if you will. If everyone had access to the chemistry of those seeds, Monsanto would not be able to get its money back from R&D. Similar to pharmaceuticals. I disagree with how they shut down all competitors, though.
Second, you also cannot blame them for not agreeing to comment in a slanted documentary that has its mind already made up. Recipe for disaster with chances of comments being taken out of context.
I say all this as someone who subscribes to Michael Pollan’s idea of food (the author they interview in the movie).
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you know who has slow, local, and organic food?
The fucking third world.
Get rid of Monsanto, etc. and MILLIONS die in a matter of years. Take your pseudoscientific alarmist bullshit and drive it up your ass. The lives of millions are infinitely more valuable than the idiotic pipe dreams of yuppie retards.[/quote]
So, before Monsanto, people couldn’t survive?[/quote]
No, but before the industrialization (and simplification) of our food supply, it required a whole lot more people (and energy) to feed the same number of people today. Fact is the industrialization of our food supply arose only partly out of evil and greed and mostly out of necessity. People want to eat, and don’t want to pay much for the privilege. This niche was filled in by the adaptation of the free market.
Did you see near the end of the movie when they’re interviewing the good farmer about what would happen if his demand went up dramatically? Would he grow and expand to meet it? He said no, and that beautifully illustrates my point about the necessity of the ‘evil’ corporations.
I just finished ‘In Defense of Food’ today, by the way. Great read.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you know who has slow, local, and organic food?
The fucking third world.
Get rid of Monsanto, etc. and MILLIONS die in a matter of years. Take your pseudoscientific alarmist bullshit and drive it up your ass. The lives of millions are infinitely more valuable than the idiotic pipe dreams of yuppie retards.[/quote]
So, before Monsanto, people couldn’t survive?[/quote]
Way to read selectively there. Before industrialized farming, 6.8 billion people couldn’t survive.
Global food production has increased by 1600% in the last 200 years (1800 being the accepted beginning of the agricultural industrial revolution) whereas global population has increased by 600% in that time frame.
Intensive agriculture fed 600 million people, with an enormous percentage of the population being employed in the acquisition of food. It doesn’t take very advanced math to understand that the earth simply does not have the capacity (in terms of geography or manpower) to feed current population levels without industrialized agriculture. If you really want your food supply to be acquired through intensive means, I suggest you quit your job and devote 12-14 hours a day, 365 days per year to cultivating, growing, and harvesting the crops you eat. A global shift to intensive agriculture will not only mean starvation for 90% of the world’s population, but also an end to rapid consistent scientific and societal advancement, as everyone will be too busy growing their food to think big thoughts. If you look back throughout history, every period of major and rapid societal development (ancient Egypt, Renaissance, Industrial revolution) has coincided with some circumstance that has removed the burden of food acquisition from a significant portion of the population (whether it be through technological means or diminished population).
“Slow, local, and organic” are hippie pipe dreams that have no place in the modern world. Take your dangerous Luddite bullshit and shove it.
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
[quote]Stronghold wrote:
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, you know who has slow, local, and organic food?
The fucking third world.
Get rid of Monsanto, etc. and MILLIONS die in a matter of years. Take your pseudoscientific alarmist bullshit and drive it up your ass. The lives of millions are infinitely more valuable than the idiotic pipe dreams of yuppie retards.[/quote]
So, before Monsanto, people couldn’t survive?[/quote]
“Slow, local, and organic” are hippie pipe dreams that have no place in the modern world. Take your dangerous Luddite bullshit and shove it.[/quote]
Exactly. It sounds just so simple and easy but those who want that dont know enough knowledge about. They just hear about it through media of some sort and go along with it