I must agree with Craig about the purpose and rationale behind
> > What is interesting to me is the vitriolic response of the sustainable
> > ag folks. It is almost like this is (along with pesticides and maybe
> > GMO's) a sort of litmus test. Like you can't be an authentic
> > sustainable ag person if you accept it. I think that there is a
> > political root to all of this.
> It seems very straight-forward to me. Nothing about food irradiation
> fits into the lexicon of sustainable anything. No serious sustainable
> ag person can support this "solution".
It's very indicative of a food system gone awry -- use of
antibiotics in feed to hasten weight gain, confinement rearing of
cattle, concentration of processing in the hands of a few giant
corporations, cattle regarded as units of production only, cattle fed
parts of their own offal -- very much a techno-fix for a
techno-created problem -- very much the medical model of making the
symptom disappear, and leaving the cause unchecked.
University of Minnesota
To Unsubscribe: Email email@example.com with "unsubscribe sanet-mg".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email firstname.lastname@example.org with the command