1st this is about frozen produce which is labeled as being from china. If you shop at a whole foods you are probably the same kind of person who checks the labels (I know I do). All the fresh produce is labeled on the price plaques. 2nd the organic fresh produce sold at whole foods here in Chicago is often cheaper than the pesticide produce at regular grocery stores. I don't see whole foods as a premium store simply because they are generally cheaper at least in my area.
-Karl

PS. I think it sucks that they don't seem to have better checks on their verification process, especially when dealing with stuff from china. When I worked at IKEA I found that they have a whole division of the company dedicated to worker protection in the various countries they have factories in. Being a Swedish company they would have to be really careful just because of how active the people are politically and human-rights wise in Sweden. Now you would figure Whole Foods would behave similarly knowing who their customers are.

It is quite simple the solution to the so-called "issue" of health care in the United States. The subject needs little or no banter representative of what can be seen *above, from people who sit at their computers after having ingested newscast, after article, after explanations and solutions by politicians and so-called "experts", who then satisfy themselves that they have a clear picture of how and why the system is in the state that it is.

The country is replete with wind-baggers (see most of the comments above in the "it will be so much better to create a PLAN category) who think they have a clue as to how and why it has reached such a pathetic, critical mass. Watch and read how they take what is promulgated by media and pundits, process the "dis-information" with their tainted apparatus, convinced that one action or the other will create some alternative to the insane state of affairs with regard to the MEDICAL ESTABLISHMENT.

The solution??

Teach people about a healthy way of being. Teach them from infancy, and most importantly, provide them with the raw materials (i.e., diets that are not full of poisons in the form of preservatives, sugars, etc etc), right down to pesticides or whatever one's pet cause for health is. Deny the manufacturers and purveyors of poisons disguised as foods the ability to create human sewage bins, otherwise known as MOST AMERICANS.

-Hobble the fast-food corporations whose criminal intent is akin to manslaughter.
Encourage a collective boycott of all processed, nutrition-less crap by giving people who don't eat the garbage, free health care. None of this can be done without retraining the ignorant masses-THIS INCLUDES PEOPLE WHO THINK THAT WE NEED HEALTH CARE REFORM.

Retrain ignoramuses, and all that the country will need after a couple of generations, are emergency rooms with crack trauma units to patch up the injured. Cancer will disappear. Obesity is the main cause of the dilemma America finds herself in. Diabetes will vanish in those with no genetic predisposition. Stress-related heart problems will fall like a 767 with complete engine failure.

Health care does not need to be reformed. The book of what is edible, nutritious, and real, needs to be re-written. That and the government and television need to be universally ignored.

Need I even mention people who should not be having children, who will grow up fat and ignorant because mankind in her present state is critically dysfunctional; or the undeniable fact that a country to the south of the border of the U.S. is in full-speed sublimation??? Get real, whiners. Use common sense and don't settle for solutions offered, so much Band-aid on an exit wound to the skull.

America would not even need the health care system she has were it not for the putrefaction of human beings by those who profit from collective ill-health. Learn to eat.

>> ^Skeeve:

Further, the Least Harm Principle suggests that living a vegan lifestyle actually kills more animals than if we subsisted strictly on ruminant animals. So I think I'll stick with beef


Skeeve, I just read a quick summary of LHP and it has some pretty obvious holes in it:

- It counts exposing rodents to predators (when crops are harvested) as "killing" them. Obviously, predators would be eating rodents anyway. A loss to mice is a gain to buzzards.

- It bases deaths of wild animals caused by agriculture on decline in numbers compared to before the area is farmed. This is pretty flawed, since animal numbers would plummet when the land was claimed but level out afterwards. Some of the animals would move nearby and some would cut down on reproduction rather than dying in some great massacre.

- It goes by pure numbers, counting a fieldmouse the same as a cow. Now I don't want to see mice getting squished, but an animal with a pinhead brain does not have the same capacity to suffer as a large grazing animal like a cow or a pig. Otherwise you might as well count aphids in the death toll. (I appreciate that this was countering a hard-line vegan argument, so I suppose the equal treatment is valid in that particular context).

- It lists pesticides as a cause of death, but seemingly ignores the possibilities of organic farming. When was the last time you met a vegan that was keen on pesticides?


Sorry, that was really preachy. I'm kind of riled up because I'm lacto-ovo vegetarian and therefore indirectly responsible for those chicks getting minced. Not a nice feeling.

P.s. Props to Throbbin. I have a great deal of respect for people who have killed for their meat. If everyone had to slaughter an animal before they could buy KFC there might only be a small increase in vegetarianism, but at least there would be a large decrease in hypocrisy.

>> ^dag:
Humans can get by just fine without animal proteins. And as the literature at my local Hari Krishna restaurant says- you could feed the entire world 7 times over if the crops devoted to livestock feed were instead used for human food production.


I already referenced the Least Harm Principle. "So, every time the tractor goes through the field to plow, disc, cultivate, apply fertilizer and/or pesticide, harvest, etc., animals are killed. And, intensive agriculture such as corn and soybeans (products central to a vegan diet) kills far more animals of the field than would extensive agriculture like forage production, particularly if the forage was harvested by ruminant animals instead of machines."

The conclusions of the LHP are that we should stop eating poultry and eat ruminant animals (cow, goat, sheep, deer, etc.). Reasonable estimates are that we would kill about 0.982 billion animals per year. Less than in the vegan alternative of 1.2 billion. (See: Davis, Steven L. "The Least Harm Principle May Require that Humans Consume a Diet Containing Large Herbivores, Not a Vegan Diet" in Journal of Agricultural and Environmental Ethics Vol. 16 No 4 July 2003.)

"It doesn't take long to look up some information on your own to find out who's trying to do the real spinning."

^ thanks, i did just what you said

took about 20 seconds...

http://edition.cnn.com/2008/TECH/science/08/19/organic.cooking.pv/index.html

"Researchers studied five different crops -- carrots, kale, mature peas, apples and potatoes -- which were cultivated both organically (without pesticides) and conventionally (with the use of pesticides) and found that there was no higher level of trace elements in the food grown organically."

Did you visit the link at the top and take a look at any of the evidence compiled?

Everything else sounds like "Obama has never been able to produce a Birth Certificate" to me.

You're so caught up on this issue, and the whole left-right debacle, while this has nothing to do with it!

" -- though I suppose since they don't give us a timeline they can always claim that they're still "working out the details" or something."

It's happening day by day.

There's no particular reason to think that population reduction would be a net benefit to our current economy.

It would be a net benefit to our planet, while getting rid of those who are heavily dependent upon their governments.. and if you consider who would be behind this, it would be very rich and powerful people, who probably wouldn't care to milk the masses anymore than they already have.

If it's to follow the Georgia Guidestone's plan, then becoming more attuned to nature would steer me more towards a conspiracy to get us to stop using coal, oil, eating meat, spraying pesticides, fertilizer, etc. and force us all to reuse & recycle everything.

Err, while that is part of the "plan" - that's not the heart of it. And would you really set in stone for all to see every intention you had in mind? Of course there's an environmental spin on it.

The WHO planning to decimate the earth's population in pursuit of an excuse to centralize power in a world government while enacting a radical environmentalist agenda sure sounds like conservative propaganda to me.

There you go again, stuck in your left/right paradigm! This is not being done by the WHO, though they are playing a major role.

I dunno what else to say in response. I've been up all night. Hopefully we get some more thoughts on the issue from others. I sure would like this all to be bullshit.

I know I'm just asking to be derided for my defense of this, but I think it should be given a little more looking into than the usual hogwash.. and the implications if true are staggering, so I don't think it would be wise to simply overlook.

Someday I need to put together a grand theory on the origin and nature of conspiracy theories, and try to prove an evolutionary linkage between them and more modern memetic virii like spam and computer viruses.

They certainly seem to be evolving on a parallel path. Computer viruses were originally the playthings of bored nerds with semi-destructive streaks, but eventually evolved into tools to be used for profit. In the same way, I think a lot of older conspiracy theories were just made up by people with too much time on their hands, but have now evolved into intentional viral propaganda (see virtually anything a spam e-mail says).

It seems to me that there should be some sort of (relatively) simple informational filter that could be developed to help separate the wheat from the chaff.

I suspect a few basic tests could weed most of them out, starting with:

1. Does the conspiracy story put forth a falsifiable hypothesis?
   
2. Does the conspiracy theory provide a better fit to the observed data than the conventional one?
   
3. Does the conspiracy theory ascribe plausible means, motive, and opportunity to carry it out?
   
4. Does the conspiracy theory explain why information about its existence has been permitted to leak out?
   

This one actually passes the first test, since it's predicting a global pandemic that significantly reduces the population, though I suppose since they don't give us a timeline they can always claim that they're still "working out the details" or something.

In this particular case, I think "motive" is highly questionable. Malthusian economics have kinda fallen by the wayside. There's no particular reason to think that population reduction would be a net benefit to our current economy. If it's to follow the Georgia Guidestone's plan, then becoming more attuned to nature would steer me more towards a conspiracy to get us to stop using coal, oil, eating meat, spraying pesticides, fertilizer, etc. and force us all to reuse & recycle everything.

The WHO planning to decimate the earth's population in pursuit of an excuse to centralize power in a world government while enacting a radical environmentalist agenda sure sounds like conservative propaganda to me.

Maybe there's some crony capitalism going on with who's getting contracts to supply the vaccine. That part I buy. Everything else sounds like "Obama has never been able to produce a Birth Certificate" to me.

>> ^cybrbeast:
I couldn't agree more with this guy. He even talked about the evils of Greenpeace trying to stop Africa from using biotech. But that's only half of it, they are also against artificial fertilizer and pesticides. Probably responsible for the deaths of millions of Africans.
We need more rational environmentalists!


I appreciate Brand's appeal for rational global-problem solving as well as his research and his organization of information, but I share almost none of his enthusiasm for the topics he discussed.

Genetic engineering presumes that humans, in our 50-70 year life span know better than nature. Nature has been at the game of shaping genes, of us and every living thing on the Earth, for a long time. Once a gene has been modified it can stay way for eternity. There is no undo. It is arrogant for any human to believe that even the knowledge of how to meddle with genes should be the same as carrying the wisdom to wield that knowledge without error.

Though it is true that warheads can be dismantled (with significant effort) for use in nuclear power stations, the fact that the bi-product of fission reactors is weapons-grade material remains lost on most people.

Geo engineering is the product of similar arrogance of as genetic engineering. It is fueled by a desire for a static environment. The fact is that the Earth has never stood still, and will never do so (except for that one time in film..).

TED's own YouTube embed are highly superior in speed and quality
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TUxwiVFgghE
*promote

I couldn't agree more with this guy. He even talked about the evils of Greenpeace trying to stop Africa from using biotech. But that's only half of it, they are also against artificial fertilizer and pesticides. Probably responsible for the deaths of millions of Africans.
We need more rational environmentalists!

Lyrics:

EG: where all the shawties on the court?

JS: It's ridiculous, one woman on the Supreme Court, uh, doesn't seem right to me.

EG: Ain't nobody have a breakfast with all sausage and no eggs.

MG: We need a shawty with a hot body and sexy legs.

EG: When the court convenes it's an ancient sausage festival.

MG: Only two ovaries, sixteen testicles..

BB: There are so many qualified women out there.

MG: Qualified to get low in they apple-bottomed robe.

MB: I completely agree with you.

EG: And I complete agree, too.

MG: How does Ginsburg stand being the only woman who ain't a man?

BB: Judge Ginsburg said, she's really very lonely without another woman.

MG, EG, BB: Without another woman, lonely without another woman!

EG: I know what it's like with a woman gone, cryin in the nude with the curtains drawn.

MB: Breaking news!

EG, MG: Oh snap! News is broken! Breaking news, in ya face!

MB: Obama has picked Sonia Sotomayor.

EG, MG: She's a shawty, She's a Boricua!

EG: Jurisprudent!

JS: With soft thighs!

MG: And other soft features, that Ginsburg can appreciate, stayin up late, makin sure to thank
heaven above.

EG: because she ain't

All: lonely without another woman, lonely without another woman!

EG: Listen up, y'all, Joe Biden's got a shout out!
This one goes out to all the serbians
And also the ladies
But mostly the Serbians

JB: And until the Serbian people
Look themselves in the face
Understand what their leaders have done
And convinced them of
Until that moment arrives
Serbian people will not
Be able to shed this notion of victimization
That all of their leaders prey upon
And manipulate them with
Until that moment arrives
Until the Serbian people look themselves in the face
Until that moment arrives
Until that moment arriiiiiiiiives

KC: April showers bring May flowers
But what do May flowers bring?
AG: Romance for a shawty
KC: Possibly lead poisoning
AG: ::Barf::
KC: Lead poisoning
AG: ::Barf, barf:: I'm gettin sick like
::Barf, barf, barf, barf, barf::
KC: Before you dig in and start to enjoy all the
Fruits and vegetables of your labor
AG: Shawty
KC: You'd better get your soil tested first
AG: Oh
KC: Your soil tested first
AG: Oh, I live in the ghetto
So I'll expect the worst
KC: Paint chippings and old pesticides
May be buried insiiiiide
AG: Me, oh my
KC: Raising the level of lead in the soil
The tests are inexpensive
And some local health departments
Do them for freeeeeeee
AG: Even for a talking head thug like me?
KC: Once you're in the clear
Mary, Mary quite contrary
Plant away
AG: Okay
And when asked how does your garden grow
Tell them it's healthy, green and lead-free
AG: I'll say it's healthy, green and lead-free, shawty
KC: Healtheeeeeee
AG: Healtheeeeeee, believe me
I ain't tryna munch on a poison zucchini

NG: This bill actually has the secretary of energy
Regulating jacuzzis
Now, the ideastrikes me
As close to being nuts

AG: I agree--I'm an angry gorilla and that makes me angry

JI: The only jacuzzis this will regulate
Will have to produce 2,500 mega watts of energy

AG: You made me angry with lies
Hurt my angry gorilla pride; I'm angry

NG: On page 233, uh
Line 5: portable electric spas

All: Portable electric spas!

MG: No spa is above the law!

NG: Now, I don't know what a portable electric spa is
I was told it was a jacuzzi
But that's in this bill

AG: So it's true!
I'm no longer angry at you
My original anger's renewed

JI: We will give you a hot spa
That is energy efficient
I hope that doesn't offend you

AG: He might have a point
My anger's makin a switch
Cuz you're being a little b*$&
But maybe not
Maybe you're just defending freedom and justice for jacuzzis
ohhhhhh
What's this? a single tear that is wet that i shed

When an angry gorilla cries
Who's gonna be there to dry his eyes?
And when an angry gorilla's depressed
Who's gonna heal him with a soft caress?
Ooh ooh ah ah, the tears are rolling down my cheeks
Ooh ooh ah ah, liquid sorrow that my eyes excrete

And I'm a soulja, but a soulja's got feelings,
Don't know whom to lend my anger to,
And that's why I'm crestfallen and confused

Sure, organic farming may have a reputation of being for the elite only. But, from my perspective, my unemployed mother was growing and canning mostly organic vegetables in our rural home in Arkansas long before any of this hype. Why? Because our family of four lived off 20,000, we couldn't afford fresh veggies from the store, and pesticides weren't exactly cheap either. Over the last decade, I've LOVED watching this trend of popularizing and commercializing home/locally-grown food. We thought of it first, BOO-YA!

Yes, time is money (to a degree), but gardening is also outdoor activity. So, every hour spent gardening also means more natural Vitamin D, more exercise and broader immune system exposure. There are psychological benefits as well. Making all of these habitual (even if only seasonally) offers great long term health benefits, which is worth a hell of a lot of money. It's foolish to think that fresh food is the only economic benefit to growing some of your own food.

Again, though, moderation is crucial. If you expend all sorts of energy and cortisol worrying about pesticides and how to afford a more "organic" diet, then you aren't doing yourself a lick of good. Relax, and don't put all your eggs in one basket: grow some food yourself, try to support local farmers often (for cost, health and the local economic boost), but do NOT fret about buying mass-produced food too. Both are very important to having a healthy, secure and efficient food industry in our modern society. We would be unwise to concentrate production too much (as is the current trend), but producing everything local and organic is only efficient and environmentally sound in a few areas of the world.

Your video, Fighting bugs with bugs - no pesticides, has made it into your personal Highest Rated Videos listing. Congratulations on a job well done. For you contribution you have been awarded 1 Power Point.

"to me, [freedom] means I don't have to spend hours researching farmers and grocers to be sure they're not using toxic pesticides"

Haha. That's your definition of freedom? I doubt that is widely accepted.


" The same way I have police out there to make sure my house isn't eternally being broken into."

Where do you live? I'm going to move there, because everywhere I've lived in the past I never had a police sentry outside my house ensuring my house isn't burglarized. That's amazing. LOL.

>> ^blankfist:
^It sounds like the majority of Chicken Littles on here believe people are too weak and too stupid to know what to do with freedom.

I think that's proven by the continued existence of the Republican party.

As a corollary, you should see the fact that the Libertarian party's best hopes are to hit 5% support in the Presidential election as proof of that.

To you, freedom necessarily means "you're on your own", to me, it means I don't have to spend hours researching farmers and grocers to be sure they're not using toxic pesticides -- it's just illegal for them to use them, and there's an enforcement apparatus that keeps them honest. The same way I have police out there to make sure my house isn't eternally being broken into.

Eternally having to operate under caveat emptor isn't freedom to me. Some things shouldn't have to be complex or difficult. I shouldn't have to be an expert on everything in order to function in modern society.

Education is a blurrier subject, and while I agree with the need for decentralized control of schools, I also think certain toxic things should be banned from schools, just like toxic pesticides. Things like the earth being flat, racial superiority, creationism, etc. Mention them sure, but they shouldn't be part of the curriculum.