This is scary

[Can_supplier]

I understand your point but I simply don't have the money to either own a touch phone or buy healthier food at 3 times the price because it is not heavily subsidized by the government. Sometimes "choice" is only for the well off or the rich.

I'm going to have to disagree with you there... Cheap food tends be be cheap being its sawdust filler and by-products, not because its subsidized.

Smart shopping will actually save you a fortune. buy a whole free range Turkey, yes its expensive as a whole, but if you think of how many meals you can get out of it, it will actually be cheaper than crap in a box.

Look at Halal foods. Their chicken tends to be less expensive, while its held to higher standards and slaughter by a cleaner method.

buy the ingredients and make your own food.. Baking cookies from scratch is WAY cheaper and you know what goes in them. Prepared food tends to have the most junk, and is the most expensive per serving.

Grow your own garden, that's food for almost free. Learn to can, so you have things for the winter.

I hope that helps.

 

[Switched]

*SNIP
Grow your own garden, that's food for almost free. Learn to can, so you have things for the winter.

I hope that helps.

That is the only way you are going to get some nutrition. It's not the box food that is bad, it is the base foods that are no longer nutritional, that goes into the box. Hell once upon a time even the box was healthy

@Nioz...

Time for the food revival!

 

[NoizMaker]

I'm going to have to disagree with you there... Cheap food tends be be cheap being its sawdust filler and by-products, not because its subsidized.

Smart shopping will actually save you a fortune. Buy a whole free range Turkey, yes its expensive as a whole, but if you think of how many meals you can get out of it, it will actually be cheaper than crap in a box.

Look at Halal foods. Their chicken tends to be less expensive, while its held to higher standards and slaughter by a cleaner method.

Buy the ingredients and make your own food.. Baking cookies from scratch is WAY cheaper and you know what goes in them. Prepared food tends to have the most junk, and is the most expensive per serving.

Grow your own garden, that's food for almost free. Learn to can, so you have things for the winter.

I hope that helps.

Considering I come from a family of old school farmers I understand the importance of canning, making things from scratch and making a dollar stretch as far as you can.... And I currently do these things and know the costs involved.

In fact, most of the foods on the market that are cheap are HIGHLY subsidized. I dare you to pick up a product and find neither Corn (high fructose corn syrup, maltodextrin, there are thousands of variants to list) or Soy in it... It's pretty much impossible to find. Corn and Soy are heavily subsidized food products and are found in 99% of what we eat in this day and age.

Chances are if you buy any meat at a grocer, you will find out it has been fed corn to help make it fat quickly. Let it be fish, poultry, beef... Corn is cheap and it can be stored, so it is heavily used.

Fact is; Fast food isn't just at Burger King or McDonalds, it is in the meat isles, the cereal isles and etc. Food production is highly mechanized and any nutritional value is removed during the sanitation process (ie: Treated with ammonia).

It's not a black and white issue so please don't fool yourself that it is... If you don't have the money to eat local, organic foods then you simply don't.

 

[Can_supplier]

Fillers like corn and soy, I don’t think are an evil. Every culture and every type of food uses something to bulk it up. In the east its rice, over here it corn, I don’t see that as a bad thing. Filler makes a meal go further, and seem more filing without adding the calories of eating that extra of the main serving. We are gluttons when we attack the Chinese Buffet without spreading it on a base of steamed rice. Or sitting down to a bowl of ground beef covered with sour cream, rather than bulking it up with a corn based Tortilla.

With the world’s population it’s no longer practical to have free range cattle, there simply is not the space, corn based feeds are the only solution the way I see it. Turning all the land unto pasture, with double the number of methane producing beasts isn’t an environmentally responsible solution.

As for subsidies, market price, organic, genetically modified, all that forms one tangled web, I for one can’t sort out. Corn and soy are subsidized, and grown with pesticides using genetically modified seeds/strains. Now all those should make for ideal conditions for the farmer, yet still they are having a hard time. If they can’t make a profit or even a living with everything in their favor, is it even possible to bring organic products to market at a reasonable price? Do we have enough farming capacity to feed everyone organically? Is the double the cost organic goods are sold reflective of the increased cost of production, or is someone out to make a buck? I don’t know the answer to any of these question, some things don’t have a simple solution.

As for people not being able to afford to eat properly, I’m having a hard time seeing that. Even the population that lives with the least amount of money in this country can still eat enough to become obese (and in many case still have their beer and cigarettes). I’ll suggest that replacing quantity with quality would allow, even those who have the least, to eat more nutritious foods. This certainly doesn't apply to everyone, nothing does, but I think this does apply to the majority of the population.

 

[Song]

Canada itself can feed its own population just fine. Even if everything is grown organic at a reasonable market price. We have the land and natural resources for it. The thing is most of our stuff is sold to the outside as exports. In the end the world population is growing larger and larger and it is taking more and more resources to feed it. TBH I think the world is going to get worst and worst as the world population grows and soon there will be major wars over our diminishing resources. I'm sure this wont make me to popular with many people but I really thing some regions needs a mandatory 1 or 2 child law in place, to prevent further over population. If that doesn't happen I'm fairly certain that we will see major consequences due to over population in the next several decades.

 

[kanadiankat]

Canada itself can feed its own population just fine. Even if everything is grown organic at a reasonable market price. We have the land and natural resources for it. The thing is most of our stuff is sold to the outside as exports. In the end the world population is growing larger and larger and it is taking more and more resources to feed it. TBH I think the world is going to get worst and worst as the world population grows and soon there will be major wars over our diminishing resources. I'm sure this wont make me to popular with many people but I really thing some regions needs a mandatory 1 or 2 child law in place, to prevent further over population. If that doesn't happen I'm fairly certain that we will see major consequences due to over population in the next several decades.

Over population... really??!

Did ya know that there is enough farmable land and water in just the state of texas alone to feed and water the entire population of the earth (well, those were the figures in the early 90's anyway)?

And that persons born in NATO countries are likely not to reproduce enough to replace the current population - so without immigration from other countries - the numbers would be shrinking?

 

[Song]

Not talking about western countries here kat, but the world population is growing

 

[NoizMaker]

Fillers like corn and soy, I don’t think are an evil. Every culture and every type of food uses something to bulk it up. In the east its rice, over here it corn, I don’t see that as a bad thing.

I don't necessarily see it as a bad thing either. My point is to say it is present in all our food and is a government subsidized commodity. Corn growers are paid to over-produce and some unhealthy products are then manufactured (like high-fructose corn syrup. It can cause all sorts of nasty disorders including diabetes if eaten in too large a quantity too frequently)

Filler makes a meal go further, and seem more filing without adding the calories of eating that extra of the main serving. We are gluttons when we attack the Chinese Buffet without spreading it on a base of steamed rice. Or sitting down to a bowl of ground beef covered with sour cream, rather than bulking it up with a corn based Tortilla.

With the world’s population it’s no longer practical to have free range cattle, there simply is not the space, corn based feeds are the only solution the way I see it. Turning all the land unto pasture, with double the number of methane producing beasts isn’t an environmentally responsible solution.

I understand the demands aren't being met and that the old system can't work the same as it once did. Instead I say we go to vertical farms with an organic approach. That way all of the methane gases can be catalysed or utilized for other means and more food can be grown responsibly on a single plot of land.

As for subsidies, market price, organic, genetically modified, all that forms one tangled web, I for one can’t sort out. Corn and soy are subsidized, and grown with pesticides using genetically modified seeds/strains. Now all those should make for ideal conditions for the farmer, yet still they are having a hard time. If they can’t make a profit or even a living with everything in their favor, is it even possible to bring organic products to market at a reasonable price? Do we have enough farming capacity to feed everyone organically? Is the double the cost organic goods are sold reflective of the increased cost of production, or is someone out to make a buck? I don’t know the answer to any of these question, some things don’t have a simple solution.

Many things don't have a simple answer and result in folks arguing (such as this, lol, though I hope you take this as nothing more than a debate). IMO the cost of food is reflective of the economy right now and also these genetically modified foods fall under the reign of Monsanto (Like the soy beans). Since the US passed a law that you could patent genetically modified organisms things have went haywire. The solution isn't simple and it takes a whole lot of ingenuity to move past it but I truly believe a reasonable solution is out there. I don't truly care about GMO or anything, I care about nutrition and price because everyone from rich to poor deserves the right to good food.

As for people not being able to afford to eat properly, I’m having a hard time seeing that. Even the population that lives with the least amount of money in this country can still eat enough to become obese (and in many case still have their beer and cigarettes). I’ll suggest that replacing quantity with quality would allow, even those who have the least, to eat more nutritious foods. This certainly doesn't apply to everyone, nothing does, but I think this does apply to the majority of the population.

Here is where we are in the least amount of agreement. Obesity imo is determined by income level, lifestyle, physical fitness regime and genetics, not how much food they eat. I come from a poor family and growing up I had to deal with ome harsh realities. I'm not sure if you have ever seen the commercials but even a few years ago a considerable number of Canadians had to choose between heating their homes or eating... and with the economy getting slammed I would imagine there was a rise in the numbers.

To end off I would like to give you some food for thought (Don't mind the pun) in the form of a documentary film. I don't agree with all the points... but I do agree with a lot of what it says.

Watch Food Inc. online | NovaMov - Free and reliable flash video hosting

You will notice it is only 3 years old and when I saw it 3 years ago it was all total garbage to me.. Then I read into it. I watched some Penn & Teller: BS! (which I will gladly Link at a later time) to get both sides of the argument and realized both sides are wrong in their own ways.. But that doesn't mean there isn't an answer.

 

[Can_supplier]

Canada itself can feed its own population just fine. Even if everything is grown organic at a reasonable market price. We have the land and natural resources for it. The thing is most of our stuff is sold to the outside as exports. In the end the world population is growing larger and larger and it is taking more and more resources to feed it. TBH I think the world is going to get worst and worst as the world population grows and soon there will be major wars over our diminishing resources. I'm sure this wont make me to popular with many people but I really thing some regions needs a mandatory 1 or 2 child law in place, to prevent further over population. If that doesn't happen I'm fairly certain that we will see major consequences due to over population in the next several decades.

Ironically a shrinking population also creates issues. Russia is one country which is having problems with that.

A decrease in population can mean that the country is unable to maintain its infrastructure and maintain its financial obligations. An ageing population without a health new generation presents some serious challenges.

Also if we just rely on what we grow, then its an end to our supply of most fruit and other products we import. Without a doubt we are moving towards a global market for everything. To try and avoid that, would be the same as moving yourself up north in the woods somewhere to live of your own resources.

 

[Can_supplier]

(such as this, lol, though I hope you take this as nothing more than a debate).

I take it as nothing more than a debate and I'm glad you feel the same way.

I think in the end we both agree.. On one side there is the zealous unless its 100% natural (whatever that means) its bad for you. On the other side there is the don't care what it is or what it does as long as it makes money. Neither side is right and the answer is somewhere in the middle. Unfortunately I don't see anyone there

There is an answer, the only question is can we find it? Where everyone is looking for it, unfortunately I don't see much hope

I'm sorry to hear about your experiences in the past. The food or heat is very troubling, and I feel very fortunate I am not able to directly relate to that, although ashamed I don't have a better understanding. In that situation there are some serious economic issue that must be addressed before we can even consider nutrition. No one should be forced into that situation given the wealth that we have.

 

[kanadiankat]

Not talking about western countries here kat, but the world population is growing

Yeah - I do get that.

Here's some pepper on the debate though -

In 1994 one multi-national body claimed that a population explosion would be out of control by 2050 and ruin the planet's eco-system.

In 2006 another multi-national body claimed that the world population growth will diminish and possibly reach zero by 2050.

Personally - I think corruption, bad resource and nation management should be the one to reach zero in 2050 - then population control wouldn't be the issue that some believe it is.

 

[Song]

Yeah - I do get that.

Personally - I think corruption, bad resource and nation management should be the one to reach zero in 2050 - then population control wouldn't be the issue that some believe it is.

amen on this one

 

[Switched]

Yeah - I do get that.

Here's some pepper on the debate though -

In 1994 one multi-national body claimed that a population explosion would be out of control by 2050 and ruin the planet's eco-system.

In 2006 another multi-national body claimed that the world population growth will diminish and possibly reach zero by 2050.

Personally - I think corruption, bad resource and nation management should be the one to reach zero in 2050 - then population control wouldn't be the issue that some believe it is.

As a Gr 10 student in 1972 I wrote a paper for one of my classes. The evolution of man will lead to its destruction.

At the time, I wasn't aware of today's econocratic society (thanks for the new word). I would like to see that paper today to see what I wrote then as a mere 16 year old naive as the rest teenager.

 

[cactusgirl]

Here's some food for thought....

So how does a mother feel when her baby is dead from vaccines and all she hears from doctors, the government and media is that vaccines are safe and effective? | IAS

 

[Mindfield]

Here's some food for thought....

So how does a mother feel when her baby is dead from vaccines and all she hears from doctors, the government and media is that vaccines are safe and effective? | IAS

That's anecdotal at best, and actually ends up sounding like a combination of medical arrogance and a mother who was a little too trusting of their advice -- to the point where it seemed as though when symptoms started getting severe, rather than taking her child to a hospital, she waited for her specialist appointment.

Not to diminish her plight or loss, but no matter how much faith you have in medicine, you must at least maintain a certain, healthy degree of skepticism about those who practice it as they are, after all, still fallible humans, and when push comes to shove, even a doctor with any respect for their profession will advise getting a second opinion.

I also think vaccinations shouldn't be done when the child is an infant. That's just way too damn young if you ask me; the kid hasn't even had a chance to develop their own immunities yet, and they're certainly not old enough to verbalize what's wrong if something does go wrong. I didn't get my vaccinations until I was in the fifth grade, and I can't see any reason to administer them much younger than that. You need to give the child a chance to play in the dirt, get sick, fight it off, and let their bodies learn what illnesses they can get and how to combat them. From my point of view, anything else is rather irresponsible. (I'm not blaming the mother from the above link for that. I don't know what the usual course of action regarding vaccinations in New Zealand are, but I think it is irresponsible of the doctors to even agree to give vaccinations to an infant.)

 

[cactusgirl]

I don't know what the usual course of action regarding vaccinations in New Zealand are, but I think it is irresponsible of the doctors to even agree to give vaccinations to an infant.)

From what I understand, it's not much different from our own, if not identical. The usual course of vaccinations for infants here in Canada is 2-4-6mos with boosters following at 5yrs and beyond.

 

[Mindfield]

From what I understand, it's not much different from our own, if not identical. The usual course of vaccinations for infants here in Canada is 2-4-6mos with boosters following at 5yrs and beyond.

Is it? Obviously I was too young to remember anything that young and only recall those I got in grade school. Still, it strikes me as unnecessary in infants. I understand how it can protect infants who are at their most susceptible to pretty much everything, but at the same time it seems to me that children should be allowed to develop their own immune systems first before reinforcing them artificially.

 

[Switched]

Is it? Obviously I was too young to remember anything that young and only recall those I got in grade school. Still, it strikes me as unnecessary in infants. I understand how it can protect infants who are at their most susceptible to pretty much everything, but at the same time it seems to me that children should be allowed to develop their own immune systems first before reinforcing them artificially.

All I knew when I was growing up, from our family physician to my parents is to refuse school vaccination programs period, and of course mum complied. Furthermore, one of the adjuvents found in current vaccines would kill my wife if administered, this included but not limited to the H1N1 vaccine.

 

[pmoraldo]

Why not China has takin over just about all other manufacturing We better all start learning Mandarin!

 

[Ms. Creant]

Is it? Obviously I was too young to remember anything that young and only recall those I got in grade school. Still, it strikes me as unnecessary in infants. I understand how it can protect infants who are at their most susceptible to pretty much everything, but at the same time it seems to me that children should be allowed to develop their own immune systems first before reinforcing them artificially.

I think that goes for most healthy people, including adults. I know somebody that is constantly using hand sanitizer and sanitizing wipes to clean everything in her office *esecially* when somebody in the office is sick. Guess what, she is the one that is always getting colds and flus. No exposure = no immunity.