Re:comments on ag. fueled by Avery/Salatin debate + others

Amy and Eric Johnson (akjedj@gamewood.net)
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 08:33:33 -0700

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------=_NextPart_000_0062_01BEE7C2.06C81480
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Sanet-eers and Dennis,

I understand about needing to compost manure, I never use fresh =
uncomposted manure, my point was, and I didn't go into this in my post, =
as I was referring to a later part of Avery's statement ("To me, =
irradiation is the one big, obvious thing we
can do to make what is already the safest food supply in world history
significantly safer. But, so far, the public doesn't want it, and we =
live in
a democracy.")
in which he defers to public refusal of irradiation based upon =
non-scientific reasons, but will not yield to the same type of refusal =
by the European countries which ban hormone treated beef.

But I resent his comments since he implies that organic food poses a =
greater threat of bacterial risk. Granted healthy soil is chock full of =
bacteria as opposed to chemically loaded soils which provide a hostile =
environment for these microbes. But to imply that organic food is a =
greater health risk and therefore in greater need of irradiation than =
say, hamburger out of a Monfort packing plant, is irresponsible. Maybe =
if Avery wasn't so negative about people who are managing to make =
successful use of sustainable/alternative methods, he would feel better =
about his son following his agricultural footsteps.

Thanks very much for the organics standards bit at the end of your =
e-mail! Good reading!

Amy

------=_NextPart_000_0062_01BEE7C2.06C81480
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">

Sanet-eers and Dennis,
 
I understand about needing to compost manure, I = never use=20 fresh uncomposted manure, my point was, and I didn't go into this in my = post, as=20 I was referring to a later part of Avery's statement ("To me, = irradiation is the=20 one big, obvious thing we
can do to make what is already the safest = food=20 supply in world history
significantly safer. But, so far, the public = doesn't=20 want it, and we live in
a democracy.")
in which he defers to = public=20 refusal of irradiation based upon non-scientific reasons, but will not = yield to=20 the same type of refusal by the European countries which ban  = hormone=20 treated beef.
 
But I resent his comments since he implies that=20 organic food poses a greater threat of bacterial = risk.=20 Granted healthy soil is chock full of bacteria as opposed to chemically = loaded=20 soils which provide a hostile environment for these microbes. But to = imply that=20 organic food is a greater health risk and therefore in greater need of=20 irradiation than say, hamburger out of a Monfort packing plant, is=20 irresponsible. Maybe if Avery wasn't so negative about people who are = managing=20 to make successful use of sustainable/alternative methods, he would feel = better=20 about his son following his agricultural footsteps.
 
Thanks very much for the organics standards bit at = the end of=20 your e-mail! Good reading!
 
Amy
------=_NextPart_000_0062_01BEE7C2.06C81480-- To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command "unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command "unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest". To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command "subscribe sanet-mg-digest". All messages to sanet-mg are archived at: http://www.sare.org/htdocs/hypermail