It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by nixie_nox
reply to post by redoubt
The reason organic is more expensive is because: since you don't use chemicals, you don't have nearly the yield or success of chemcial farming. If you have never eaten "organic" then you don't know that there is a profound difference. I have people come to my house to eat and have remarked on how good something is, w/o knowing it is organic. There is a HUGE difference.
I get milk delivered right from a dairy, in glass bottles. Homoginized, but hormone free. Huge diffference there too. We can't even drink commercial milk anymore. Tastes like a penny with water poured on it compared to the real stuff.
A number of nightshade species have been used medicinally for thousands of years, and some species have narcotic and poisonous characteristics. Tobacco is a nightshade that has had a tremendous economic impact and has been a source of controversy since the A partially cut field of tobacco in southern Wisconsin. JLM Visuals. Reproduced by permission. early 1960s because of the link between smoking tobacco and several deadly diseases.
Some species of nightshades are important sources of food, such as tomatoes, chili and bell peppers, potatoes, and eggplant.
Bitter almonds and moldy sweet almonds
Only the bitter variety, called flowering almond and planted decorative purposes, has sufficent cyanide to harm you. The bitter almond has a pink flower. The sweet almond tree has white blooms and the fruit contains no cyanide. The nut has a strong bitter taste and it is dificult to ingest more than a single one. Even that could give you a mild stomach ache. Both varieties contain a chemical pre-curser to cyanide which can become poisonous under damp conditions.
Originally posted by alien
Well...like others I also find theres a definite difference in tastes/flavours of the vegetables and fruits I grow myself than those I may purchase from the store.
So too the seafood I collect, fish I catch, and meat I hunt.
Is it better for me though? Hmmm. I personally think it is:
- I notice the colouring of my eyes is better when eating predominately naturally grown or hunted/collected foods
- I notice I have more energy, can exercise for longer and generally feel *happier and calmer*
- I notice my outputs at work increase - my ability to process data, make decisions, complete tasks etc all improve...I summise thats perhaps due to a possible increase in cognitive functioning
- I also notice that I actually excrete less body odour via perspiration - okay, my wife more notices that - when I'm consuming less of the 'store bought' foodstuffs
- Those, err, 'calls of nature' are far more regular and less prone to anything like constipation etc
...and one other thing, which is probably even a little too wishy-washy but I believe it:
I personally find on some, dear I say *spiritual* level, I am more *balanced* when eating predominately naturally grown/hunting/collected foods.
Perhaps - particularily with meat - there is something to some theories about the trauma of the animal, the negative context they are farmed in and slaughter in that in some way *imprints* into the flesh of it which is then consumed.
Either way - for me at least - I do believe there are health gains. Be it physical, mental, emotional, spiritual. Even if its just from the whole 'feel good' factor of gardening and sitting down to a meal you know YOU grew, YOU gathered, YOU caught/hunted...a sense of pride if you will...
Peace.
Originally posted by thoughtplacebo
One of the requisites for a food to be considered organic is not weeding the garden. So okay, maybe there's no difference between a non-weeded and a weeded garden? Do you see the manipulation at work here? So, because there's no difference due to weeding suddenly Monsanto's genetic sorceries are safe? I don't f-ing think so.
Either you didnt read it, or you dont understand it. They are saying nutritionally there is no difference. If you are not smart enough to wash off your produce before consumption I dont know what to say. If washing food before ingestion is not good enough I suggest you stop putting chemicals on your body daily like deodorant, shampoo, lotion, clothes with dyes.. etc.
Originally posted by alienesque
so..first we are told that mercury is good for us by the american food people..now the british food agency are saying that food which has been sprayed with chemicals is just as good for us as food which hasnt.
do these people really think an informed person would believe this?
has this also anything to do with codex?
news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
Yea but people are stupid enough to pay extra when all they need to do is wash it and it is identical. So you need studies like this to tell people how stupid they are, apparently.
Originally posted by mopusvindictus
This goes directly into the Top 100 stupidest studies of all time...
Duhr
Of course two Bananas grown in the same soil have the exact same nutrients...
Except One is sprayed with a Poison LOL the other isn't
This is seriously incredibly retarded
Even reading this kind of research lowers your IQ, this is worse than the scientist who shot the Elephant with 10,000 x then normal dose of '___' to see "what happened" (Elephant freaked out and died)
Who pays these people?
Originally posted by mopusvindictus
This goes directly into the Top 100 stupidest studies of all time...
Duhr
Of course two Bananas grown in the same soil have the exact same nutrients...
Except One is sprayed with a Poison LOL the other isn't
This is seriously incredibly retarded
Originally posted by alienesque
Organic has no health benefits
news.bbc.co.uk
(visit the link for the full news article)
Organic food is no healthier than ordinary food, a large independent review has concluded.
There is little difference in nutritional value and no evidence of any extra health benefits from eating organic produce, UK researchers found.
Originally posted by zorgon
Monsanto Tomato
Bet its still tastes good
A body burden study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found n TCPy—a metabolite specific to chlorpyrifos—in the urine of 91% of people tested.[15] An independent analysis of the CDC data claims that Dow has contributed 80% of the chlorpyrifos body burden of people living in the US.[16] A 2008 study found dramatic drops in the urinary levels of chlorpyrifos metabolites when children switched from conventional to organic diets.
Originally posted by mopusvindictus
More important than that, is the rate of decay of the pesticide, handling on the surface of the fruit, entrance into the water table and uptake into the fruit via the soil.
The three most common pesticides in use in the USA can remain in the water table for months sometimes years, in some cases Decades, when they break down, they break down into chemicals as much as 100x more lethal to living organisms including mammals and have an extremely high capacity for passing through the root system directly into the fruit or vegetable your eating, and do not break down in water so cooking doesn't help.
A body burden study conducted by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention found n TCPy—a metabolite specific to chlorpyrifos—in the urine of 91% of people tested.[15] An independent analysis of the CDC data claims that Dow has contributed 80% of the chlorpyrifos body burden of people living in the US.[16] A 2008 study found dramatic drops in the urinary levels of chlorpyrifos metabolites when children switched from conventional to organic diets.