posted on Jun, 18 2011 @ 04:59 PM
Originally posted by DevolutionEvolvd
reply to post by Amaterasu
Get a second job. Or third. Buy in bulk (one whole/half cow). Make a garden. Eat more of the cheaper organic foods (fruits and vegetables) and eat
the more expensive on occasion (meat).
Since I have been trying to find ONE job, getting a second and a third is beyond Me at the moment. (I am limited in what I can do - cannot stand for
more than about 1/2 hour.) I already do eat the cheapest stuff I can find (but am beholden to the pantries for whatever they offer). I am virtually
I'm not saying everybody has the luxury of being able to choose their food source so effortlessly. However, until the data on GMO consumption
becomes less ambiguous and more conclusive, especially on genetically modified animal products, then there isn't much of an argument.
I WILL say that virtually everyOne on food stamps cannot keep Their diets pure.
You have a choice:
A) Choose to consume cheaper, genetically modified food which has a health-science data record that is the very definition of ambiguity. You're
taking a risk by consuming such foods, as scientists have not arrived at a consensus about the possible long-term side effects of GMO consumption.
Well... When it's that or not eating for two weeks out of every month...
B) Choose to consume more expensive, organic foods that are not inherently deleterious in nature. However, there can be a financial risk by
choosing this route. Some sacrifices may be needed by lower income families. (a side note: although it may seem financially burdening to spend more
money on food, if GMO consumption does cause long term side-effects in the form of chronic illness, it's quite reasonable to assume that consuming
organic food is a preventative measure and will save one from an even more financially burdening factor: Medical Bills.)
Considering I am already trying to maintain as healthy a diet as I might, I'm going to tell You... There ain't anything left to sacrifice. As is
the case for most people on food stamps.
Until the science becomes clearer, the government should stay the hell out of it and let the scientists do their jobs. Last time they stepped
in to prevent obesity and heart disease....they made a severely premature assessment and issued guidelines that were not consensus at the time. Only
after the public health authorities began repeating the mantra did it become common dietary knowledge. And, sadly, those very recommendations
probably caused us to become more obese, atherosclerotic and extremely diabetic.
While I agree with You in principle, because the love of money leads to profitable actions that are even completely counter to the public's
interests, there needs to be one of two things: governmental restraint or eliminating the need for money. This is why We have so many drugs pulled
and law suits filed. The "testing" is a lick and a promise, done by the company that wants to sell the stuff.
I have great fear in allowing money-lovers to release into uncontrolled spaces frankenspecies that may wind up throwing the ecology of the planet awry
without a great deal of study, at the bare minimum by a disinterested party.
Let's get a better, more conclusive understanding of how these foods react in our bodies before labeling thing "good" or "bad".
Um... Let's get a better, more conclusive understanding of how these foods react in Our bodies before allowing them free reign in Our biosphere.