Is the organic food movement the most anti-science social movement out there?

[Drake Tungsten]

It doesn't get any easier than this.

[C0ckney]

nice try.

whenever someone gets the better of you, you simply ignore the issues raised, run away, start a new thread, get reduced to debating semantics or some combination thereof. you're a know nothing troll and it's quite sad.

[Ecofarm]

It doesn't get any easier than this.

What, making yourself look like an idiot and a dishonest piece of sht? Not to mention a pedo.


Yeah, I imagine that's pretty easy for you. Gratz.

[Dauphin]

Drake has been pwned.

[Drake Tungsten]

you simply ignore the issues raised

What issues have any of you raised? Not a single one of you has provided scientific evidence that organic food is anything other than a moronic fad.

get reduced to debating semantics

I didn't start arguing semantics until smarter posters like Laz realized that defending organic food was a lost cause and started defending grass-fed livestock (which I have no problem with) while trying to claim it as "organic".

[Ecofarm]

let the market decide if we should use oil :P

Well played and I agree. The agricultural market (particularly in the US and Europe) is moving decisively away from oil-based food production, as highlighted in economic figures.

I'd like to get rid of agricultural subsidies. However IMO they're a sign of the power of lobbying...

And that powerful lobbying is what has kept us ignorant this long. That powerful lobbying is what produces such abortions as the UK government paper claiming no personal health benefit from organic systems. That powerful lobbying is what has kept growth to a mere 20% per year while organics get $15m of the $6b farm bill in the US (those numbers are actually accurate). Ain't that a shame, and a grotesque distortion of the free market and informed consumer. If Drake represents the informed consumer, the free market is fkd.


I wholeheartedly believe in the free market (I really do) but we have got to work on the 'informed consumer' part, especially in regard to agriculture; I think that is pretty obvious, just look at our people. Wanna fix healthcare? Fix diet and (inherently) agriculture. Diet is an agricultural statement.

[Drake Tungsten]

I can't believe lefty morons still think overpopulation is a serious problem...

Why Is Population Control Such a Radioactive Topic?

[Al B. Sure!]

I really do not feel like going through six pages of this thread so forgive me if this was stated somewhere (honestly, I expect the thread to have devolved into someone like Kuci arguing philosophical nonsense about the nature of truth and calling people ******* while someone else talks about paedophiles)...

Organic free range (the free range part is more crucial than the organic part) meat and eggs are known to contain higher quantities of Omega 3 acids (the result of being grass-fed) than non-free range meat and eggs which are heavy in Omega 6's (grain-fed). The disproportionately high amount of Omega 6 fats that we moderns consume may be linked to a variety of health issues and is important to maintain a balance (hence why fish oil supplementation is so popular and medically sound).

There's a scientific argument for at least that aspect of Organic food.

[Drake Tungsten]

Again, free range/grass fed is a completely separate issue from "organic". Organic food is retarded.

[Al B. Sure!]

It's nice to have the option of buying food without preservatives and various chemical additives (high fructose corn syrup is one of the worst things we consume and it is in virtually everything... and don't get me started on soy derivatives! Estrogen replacement therapy in everything we eat!).

[Drake Tungsten]

high fructose corn syrup is one of the worst things we consume and it is in virtually everything...

Another retarded point of view, and one already mocked in this thread.

[Riesstiu IV]

Drake, I just want to say you are a fat piece of ****.

[Drake Tungsten]

Thank you.

[Al B. Sure!]

http://www.princeton.edu/main/news/archive/S26/91/22K07/

The first study showed that male rats given water sweetened with high-fructose corn syrup in addition to a standard diet of rat chow gained much more weight than male rats that received water sweetened with table sugar, or sucrose, in conjunction with the standard diet. The concentration of sugar in the sucrose solution was the same as is found in some commercial soft drinks, while the high-fructose corn syrup solution was half as concentrated as most sodas.

The second experiment -- the first long-term study of the effects of high-fructose corn syrup consumption on obesity in lab animals -- monitored weight gain, body fat and triglyceride levels in rats with access to high-fructose corn syrup over a period of six months. Compared to animals eating only rat chow, rats on a diet rich in high-fructose corn syrup showed characteristic signs of a dangerous condition known in humans as the metabolic syndrome, including abnormal weight gain, significant increases in circulating triglycerides and augmented fat deposition, especially visceral fat around the belly. Male rats in particular ballooned in size: Animals with access to high-fructose corn syrup gained 48 percent more weight than those eating a normal diet.

In the 40 years since the introduction of high-fructose corn syrup as a cost-effective sweetener in the American diet, rates of obesity in the U.S. have skyrocketed, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. In 1970, around 15 percent of the U.S. population met the definition for obesity; today, roughly one-third of the American adults are considered obese, the CDC reported. High-fructose corn syrup is found in a wide range of foods and beverages, including fruit juice, soda, cereal, bread, yogurt, ketchup and mayonnaise. On average, Americans consume 60 pounds of the sweetener per person every year.

"Our findings lend support to the theory that the excessive consumption of high-fructose corn syrup found in many beverages may be an important factor in the obesity epidemic," Avena said.

Science says you're wrong, Drake

[Al B. Sure!]

and if you want to see their paper:

http://www.foodpolitics.com/wp-content/uploads/HFCS_Rats_10.pdf

Abstract:

High-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) accounts for as much as 40% of caloric sweeteners used in the United States. Some studies have shown that short-term access to HFCS can cause increased body weight, but the findings are mixed. The current study examined both short- and long-term effects of HFCS on body weight, body fat, and circulating triglycerides. In Experiment 1, male Sprague–Dawley rats were maintained for short term (8 weeks) on (1) 12 h/day of 8% HFCS, (2) 12 h/day 10% sucrose, (3) 24 h/day HFCS, all with ad libitum rodent chow, or (4) ad libitum chow alone. Rats with 12-h access to HFCS gained significantly more body weight than animals given equal access to 10% sucrose, even though they consumed the same number of total calories, but fewer calories from HFCS than sucrose. In Experiment 2, the long-term effects of HFCS on body weight and obesogenic parameters, as well as gender differences, were explored. Over the course of 6 or 7 months, both male and female rats with access to HFCS gained significantly more body weight than control groups. This increase in body weight with HFCS was accompanied by an increase in adipose fat, notably in the abdominal region, and elevated circulating triglyceride levels. Translated to humans, these results suggest that excessive consumption of HFCS may contribute to the incidence of obesity.