Paleo

  • Thread starter Thread starter cory
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 138
  • Views Views 20K
DMc said:
The audio in this rather long video is not the best but Dr.Jones from Australia is worth listening to. This stuff is being discussed in the alternative land use thread but is all part of the same questions. I would strongly encourage anyone interested in understanding health and nutrition watch this.

http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...600242FC3FC59F12F669600242F&FORM=VIRE&PC=SMSM
Click to expand...

I am rather surprised that no one has commented on this, as some of the statistics that she gives are amazing. Has anyone watched it?
 
I couldn't find a time clock on vimeo but skip to about a third of the way through and she is talking about today's food and how it differs in nutrition from 1940 to 1991. Huge declines!
 
La becasse said:
No, as soon as I saw the words "rather long video" I'm out.
Click to expand...


I do get that and understand the, "I have better things to do with my time" thought. Unfortunately, it is this aversion of things not fast or fun that makes us easy victims. Without knowledge there is no way to differentiate between what is hype or truth.
 
DMc said:
I do get that and understand the, "I have better things to do with my time" thought. Unfortunately, it is this aversion of things not fast or fun that makes us easy victims. Without knowledge there is no way to differentiate between what is hype or truth.
Click to expand...


"What the human race is suffering from is mass hypnosis. We are being hypnotized by people like this: newsreaders, politicians, teachers, lecturers. The chasm between what we're told is going on and what is really going on is absolutely enormous."

David Icke
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #88
DMc said:
I am rather surprised that no one has commented on this, as some of the statistics that she gives are amazing. Has anyone watched it?
Click to expand...

I bookmarked it immediately and will read sometime this wknd, didn't want to rush through it
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #90
I watched 80% of the vid. It is chock full of stuff Dave and Big Jim advocates- soil health and productivity via age old methods, tilling and ferting soil is a huge no no. And better soil grows better, more nutrient- rich crops which provide better nutrition for da humans. Farmers started relying heavily on chemicals after ww II and this reliance has steadily weakened the soil.

It was both depressing to hear how bad things have gotten re the soil on most (?) farms, and encouraging to hear how easy it is to get good soil by mimicking age old natural processes, especially diversity and cover crops. Its all about having microbes/microryzie in the soil take up the needed elements which are present in most all soil. No need to add the chemicals.

Of course healthy scientific skepticism makes me wonder if all that good info is really accurate, because if it is so beneficial and easy to quit beating on the soil with chemicals and bad/costly practices, why isn't everybody doing it?? Wrecking soil and paying big bucks to do it doesn't pencil as willie would say, so why do so many do it? :drink:
 
cory said:
.... Wrecking soil and paying big bucks to do it doesn't pencil as willie would say, so why do so many do it? :drink:
Click to expand...

Thanks for watching it, Cory.

It's all about money and who is getting it. It is not the farmers and ranchers making boatloads of profit. They are just the ones busting their asses and paying big bucks to stay in the game. No matter how flush a player may appear, it is the house that always wins. Food stopped being just food when it became a global commodity. Agribusiness, look and think of how vast it is and all that it involves. Believe me, it is not about feeding the hungry, it is about money.
 
Current Federal crop insurance regulations and incredibly high operating costs are keeping a lot of farmers out of the mix. That and competition.

You may not think about it, but huge amounts of land is rented. For a whole bunch of reasons, the farmers dont try things because if a farmer looses even a tiny amount of production, which is common during the transition phase, the land lord will kick you off and your neighbor will be farming that ground.

If you lose your ground you have no way of paying for that two or three million dollars worth of machinery you borrowed money for.

If you have a mortgage on your land and borrow money to operate (like most of us) the banks REQUIRE you to carry Federal Crop. If you raise cover crops you ruin your crop insurance to the point that the payment becomes less than the premium. Net loss.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #93
Dave, I just don't know. I'm usually not a big conspiracy guy, but maybe I'm naive. If there is a vastly better, simpler, cheaper, more productive, more efficient way to treat soil/grow food, wouldn't folks be jumping all over it, hook line and sinker? If big ag would be selling less chemicals as a result, I'm sure they'd be selling more of something else to make up for it. If what Christine says is all true and as straight forward and simple as she claims, and the current large scale way of growing is causing increasing soil degradation and decreasing yields, then why wouldn't there be a huge outcry from folks saying hey WTF, nimby big ag? We're gonna do it the better way, so kiss off!

Reminds me of people who say drug companies could cure cancer tomorrow but don't because theres too much money in cancer treatment. Just no, I don't believe that for an instant.

How bout this: before the current absurdly low oil prices appeared, how many of us ever thought in our wildest dreams that fuel prices, which normally always seem to continually creep upward, would ever drop to levels seen like 20 years ago. Conspiracy folks would say oil companies have complete control and therefore will never let prices fall cuz it hurts their interests. Well, today's prices prove that is incorrect.

A little derailed here, but, my point is: I hope and pray for Jims sake and all of our sakes that what Christine says is right and Jim's new approach will flourish and others will follow. But if what she says is all true, its just hard to figure why her approach hasn't taken hold ages ago.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #94
Jim, your post answers my question somewhat, that farmers can't lose even a tiny amount of production during transition. But if the new (old) way is so much better, why isn't uncle sam aware of it and help bridge the gap for farmers trying to make the switch.

I'm playing devils advocate against something I support, but hey, if it stands up then all is good.
 
Human factors have a lot to do with it. We all know that smoking is bad, yet we still do it. Lots of folks still dont wear a seat belt. People still text and drive.

Right now there is no incentive to make the switch, unless you are like us and looking for a life line. The govt is not fully behind the transition. Its not like the public has been inundated with information about this process.

Every year has the potential to break you in farming, so making changes is tough, even if the alternative is success. Lead a horse to water and all that.

You guys might not realize it, but consumers are driving more than you think in today's world of ag.
 
FireFighterZero said:
....You guys might not realize it, but consumers are driving more than you think in today's world of ag.
Click to expand...

Everyone needs to understand this and its implications. This is not a conspiracy to deprive us of healthy soil and foods. It is purely economics. We are buying what is being sold, why should anything change. For the most part people are not willing to waste their time with understanding these things. Like the resistance to take the time and watch a video that could actually give them enough educational knowledge to make some informed decisions.
 
  • Thread Starter Thread Starter
  • #97
So if the little man is to do his part in making a difference, then he should buy organic, true?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top