Comments on: You Are What You Grow

By: One/Change » Blog Archive » Environmental Working Group’s Grow Organics Petition

Thu, 12 Jul 2007 19:18:49 +0000

[...] 1Jasmine, Worsted Witch; 2EWG [...]

By: The Worsted Witch »

The Worsted Witch » — Thu, 12 Jul 2007 16:27:24 +0000

[...] The Environmental Working Group has almost reached its goal of obtaining 30,000 signatures on a petition to tell Congress to increase support for organic farms in the farm bill—they just need 3,000 more people to sign it by midnight ET Sunday. Check out the petition here. [...]

By: Sidnie

Sidnie — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 22:03:38 +0000

It is appalling that it is far cheaper to eat so unhealthfully, but our healthcare costs are through the roof as well. I guess what I am trying to say is that yes we will initially pay for eating well, but it far outways what it does long term to the health care system, not to mention or bodies.

By: aleta

aleta — Sat, 28 Apr 2007 04:36:26 +0000

To address some of the Farm Bill questions, mAndrea asked why grains get subsidies, and the answer addresses Helen’s theory as well. I don’t know about airlines, but the reason grains get subsidies is because (a) they’re used primarily for animal feed, and (b) it has to do with the way the original Farm Bill worked. Born out of the Great Depression and Dust Bowl era, the idea was to address the issue of farmers being forced to flood the market with their crop during harvest time which pushed prices down. The govt. made a program that offered to store farmers’ grain so they could sell it at a later time when the market wasn’t flooded and they could get a better price for it. Grains are storable for long periods of time without going bad. And once the govt subsidizes something, it’s hard to take away the subsidies. That’s why produce and nuts don’t get the same type of subsidies. So yes, it was originally a way to make sure lots of people were fed cheaply as well as stabilizing farmers’ incomes, and has gone awry from there. Food & Water Watch has a good Farm Bill 101 sheet: http://www.foodandwaterwatch.org/food/us-farmbill

By: Dustywheat

Dustywheat — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:38:53 +0000

I see this from a different angle. After going to one of my meetings, where we talked about processes vs “whole” (or less processed) foods, one thing the leader said stuck with me.

“Processed food is has already been broken down. Most cereal is basically pre-digested for you.”

So your body gets things it doesn’t need and doesn’t even need to do the work for it. I know snap peas are more expensive than little packages of cookies, but I know how I feel after the little packages of cookies vs the wonderous sugar snap pea.

People have gotten away from thinking of strawberries as a treat vs twinkies. Very sad…

By: mAndrea

mAndrea — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 16:21:42 +0000

Interesting point that you made about the cost of some produce compared to grains.

Never understood why grains and airlines get subsidies, and other businesses do not. First rule of business is that you charge enough to make a profit after expenses. If only a few people can afford to go on trips, then so be it. Better for the environment.

By: Helen

Helen — Mon, 23 Apr 2007 00:16:20 +0000

this is really, really interesting - how do you find out stuff like this?

I don’t believe in ‘laying blame’ and I don’t know how you can get people to break out of learned helplessness and start making better choices (especially given the weight of the blanket of media and advertising that tries to keep them there). But it is astounding to me that government policy is so clearly promoting the problem. Perhaps it started off with trying to find cheap ways to keep people from starving, and has become self-perpetuating.