Alex Epstein interviews Pierre Desroches: The Locavore's Dilemma
Pierre presents a bunch of facts that I had no idea about like: - the origins of corn - reasons why people naturally moved away from local farming to grocery stores - what fuels the "buy local movement" - the problems that the "buy local movement" is facing - what to be mindful of when visiting a farmers market - synthetic fertilizer vs natural fertilizer - vitamins derived from oil - deforestation; how the technologically unadvanced are it's biggest supporters - "The Greenbelt" across Canada - how the organic movement will deal with Walmart carrying organic food
I'm a pretty food conscious guy. I eat paleo and prefer grass fed, free range meat. This I have studied alot and despite what is said in the video, I still would prefer to eat grass fed, free range meat because of the health benefits (more nutrient dense, better balance of Omega-6 to 3, etc...) However the video does not deny these benefits but rather focuses on mass production and making food reliable, available, and plentiful.
As for veggies, I do buy local and have visited my local farmers market before. I stopped going because I noticed that the little stickers on alot of the veggies were the same exact ones found in the grocery store (same brand and other details) so I figured there was no difference. But I still pick Canadian grown over anything else if I have the option. However, after listening to this video I have grown an appreciation for the time saving, stress saving benefits that groceries stores, industry, and scientists have brought to my life. Food is so simple for me to obtain because other people have mastered its production. I feel like I owe them a big thanks.
Edit: Found a short debate between Pierre Desroche and Jill Richardson (sustainable food activist) http://bit.ly/KuCT6t Starts at 52:24 Ends at 1:14
On June 23 2012 19:24 djukger wrote: penn and teller bullshit: Organic food "no study ever has shown that organic food has more nutrients than "normal" food."
True or not, Penn and Teller really shouldn't be anyones first stop when looking for facts.
FinestHour United States. June 23 2012 19:47. Posts 6701
On June 23 2012 19:47 FinestHour wrote: Organic food isnt about the nutrients. It is about the crops are grown.
It's funny that in Starcraft we typically prefer efficiency, but in real life jeans and a plaid shirt slightly middle-aged folks with "organic" farms is more romantic, even though we know it's worse.
funny(at the same time its sad...) that there are still so much people who don´t know about these facts and how food industry treats their customers and workers like trash.
Its not efficiency what they do. The price you pay at the wall mart isn´t the full prize. You need to add that people get fat or even ill from our food and we destroy our environment. Not really efficient and its not romantic to think about alternatives it is thinking about a better future
Dr. Von Derful United States. June 23 2012 21:31. Posts 346
the FDA still allows "organic" labeled food products to use pesticide and insecticides, just up to a certain amount. You will find that you'll end up spending more at a farmers market for what you're going to have to assume doesn't have any chemicals sprays on them or uses GMO seeds. If you want cheap AND quality, grow it yourself.
On June 23 2012 19:47 FinestHour wrote: Organic food isnt about the nutrients. It is about the crops are grown.
It's funny that in Starcraft we typically prefer efficiency, but in real life jeans and a plaid shirt slightly middle-aged folks with "organic" farms is more romantic, even though we know it's worse.
No chemicals worse than chemicals? Does not compute XD
On June 23 2012 19:24 djukger wrote: penn and teller bullshit: Organic food "no study ever has shown that organic food has more nutrients than "normal" food."
On June 23 2012 19:24 djukger wrote: penn and teller bullshit: Organic food "no study ever has shown that organic food has more nutrients than "normal" food."
While I'm not saying wikipedia is definitive proof for or against the superiority of organically produced food to that of "normally" produced food, or that my own opinion is one way or the other, I will say that it presents a far less biased opinion than websites designed around the promotion of organic foods.
My chemistry prof was shooting off about "organic food", his argument was that if it's made with the exact same atoms it's the exact same thing... He said the only issue facing synthetic is the additives (bad chemicals) which pollute the populace. I agree with him, if it's made with the same chemical build it's the same thing.
@ArcticMuse - Well, I'm not that knowledgeable about the whole thing, I just wanted to prove that there are many sources of information that suggest a higher concentration of nutrients in organic food.
Also, the studies done by the FSA (which the relevant paragraph in the wiki page you linked hinges on) are highly controversial, but that's another issue entirely.
Last edit: 2012-06-23 22:15:31
@jtypemusic
CajunMan United States. June 23 2012 22:22. Posts 801
As long as walmart food is properly cleaned there is no difference. I like many with me grew up on that sort of food as well as stuff in my own back yard living in Louisiana. The difference between Organic and regular in almost not there. The only way to have a better grade vegetable is to grow it yourself. If you buy it from a store it has the same nutritional value but less taste. I have never gotten sick and you will be perfectly fine with the food.
On June 23 2012 19:47 FinestHour wrote: Organic food isnt about the nutrients. It is about the crops are grown.
It's funny that in Starcraft we typically prefer efficiency, but in real life jeans and a plaid shirt slightly middle-aged folks with "organic" farms is more romantic, even though we know it's worse.
No chemicals worse than chemicals? Does not compute XD
In some ways yes chemicals are not all bad they keep food fresh and unbugged (eww icky bugs) and when your food is properly washed you can't tell the difference between organic and regular store bought.
Lol not that dude again. As if the local movement would say people have to starve if the crop is bad. As if it would be only principals they are holding on to.
They are appriciate to know where the food comes from, that the transport of food doesnt need too many recources, that farmers get a nice part of the share, that the farmers can exist on the long run.
We have so many problems with the industrial food produktion. The lack of insects could become quite an issue. Monsanto or however this evil corporation is called messed up so hard that i lost any trust in industrial production.
Let both exist if people are willing to pay a little more than why not? Why spend nearly a hour to explain those people are stupid biased and bad ^^
If you only speak about the stupid arguments ofcourse the movement looks bad. But seriously than every movement would look bad.
On June 23 2012 22:40 danmooj1 wrote: I've been trying to eat healthier and was looking into organic/health foods but I guess I would just be wasting my money?
edit: I have no prior knowledge on this subject besides hearing that organic food is better for you but more expensive
If you only get a small percentage of your daily calories from fruits/vegetables then upgrading that small percentage won't yield much benefit.
Interesting, and I agree on some points, but most of it seems too... narrow-minded ?
One major issue is the way we see agriculture nowadays. Growing the same crop all over one field, plowing deep into the earth and stuff like that. There are some alternatives that are actually much more productive than traditionnal agriculture, and yes, way more efficient.
Plowing for exemple has proven to be harmfull for the land, killing soil's life, causing erosion, making land more like desert than anything else. That way, we NEED chemicals, 'cause we're basically growing crops over sand/rocks. Some experiments done around my area have shown that without plowing, without ever letting the soil be naked, life comes back to the earth, making the soil more fertile, thus reducing the need for chemicals and hardcore tractor-usage. It takes some years to settle, but in the end, farmers work less for around the same productivity. They use smaller machinery, thus reducing the dependance on oil. They make fewer interventions because they don't need fertilizant anymore, so they have more time to do anything else/can take care of more surface. Less energy needed to achieve similar resultats = more efficient.
Now, about productivity, some other experiments have shown that by smartly mixing trees, crops and animals, you can achieve an off the chart productivity, without using any chemicals. It is not letting nature do everything on its own, but it's more about understanding how it really works, and using these rules in a way that benefits you. Nature on its own is abundant, but mostly with stuff we don't need. Make a similar setup with fruit trees, man-made crops and such, and you have the best of both worlds. I could point out sources, but they're in french, so ya... Permaculture is one word to look for though.
Also, about a molecule being a molecule. WTF. Sure, it's absolutely the same, and that's why nature on its own create diversity and abundance, and the chemical agriculture kills biodiversity, in soil and on earth. I agree that the end result (the plant grows) may be the same, but that may be overlooking some major issues with the chemicals industry. Just maybe...
To be "fair", I agree that going purely local is pretty much bullshit nowadays, and that the organic movement is a reactionnary thing opposed to chemicals, and that it's mostly about marketing now. But there are other ways, and I believe they make the organic/local/chemical debate useless. They are just plain better, and we should focus on seeking ways to make it globaly used, and even fruther improved.
Edit : Also quite funny how the interviewed guy insists on being a geologist. Get an agrobiologist on the show next time, please. Plants are alive, you know...
Store
NeMeSiS3 Canada. June 23 2012 22:04. Posts 2969
