Lukewarming

Ok, I admit it:  I’m not really a climate change group thinker or believer anymore , BUT neither am I a  skeptic or climate denier – perhaps I am a lukewarmer,  What the heck is that, you ask???

When it comes to climate change – aka global weirding – I am classifying myself now as a lukewarmer. 

I’m a bit tired of the pop media and group think around climate change – it’s a bit too much – it’s like the environmentalism of the  80’s & 90’s:  let’s do less bad… and if you are not with us you’re against us. We’re about to battle this in Congress when climate science gets in front of Trump’s climate deniers. Oh such entertainment!

Climate change pundits and most scientists focus 100% on emissions.  This is wrong.   Climate change is redundant – it always changes.  And yes, humans are a major contributor – but I sure wish people would stop making us feel guilty about it.   Instead of doing less bad things,  how about we start doing some GOOD things:  like putting biochar back into the soil.  All climate changers keep doing is pounding us with having less CO2 emissions,  having a smaller carbon footprint: stop buying this, start eating that.

Like Dr. Braungart once told me:  if zero emissions are our goal, we should all be DOA (dead).  Humans are part of nature – we’re organic aren’t we?  So it’s quite natural for us to have ’emissions’.  His co-author in ‘Cradle to Cradle’     and partner Bill McDonough just published a paper on a new language for carbon — if we can change our carbon language to do more good, rather than less bad – perhaps we can design a world that will reduce carbon emissions as a by-product rather than declaring a WAR again…

Bill talks about living, durable and future carbon, rather than zero emission.   Here’s a synopsis: “The world’s current carbon strategy aims to promote a goal of zero. Predominant language currently includes words such as “low carbon,” “zero carbon,” “negative carbon,” and even a “war on carbon.” To show progress, according to McDonough, the design world needs values-based language that reflects a safe, healthy and just world. In this new paradigm, by building urban food systems and cultivating closed-loop flows of carbon nutrients, carbon can be recognized as an asset rather than a toxin, and the life-giving carbon cycle can become a model for human designs.”  http://finance.yahoo.com/news/william-mcdonough-offers-language-carbon-160000133.html Continue reading Lukewarming

GMO – here we go again…

…with another consumer scam sponsored by ‘Profits-R-Us’ corporate food greedies. BUT this time it’s a bit different: WE  HAVE A CHOICE.  Please pass this on to your friends…

IGNORE ‘non-GMO’ food labels.  Please, it’s good for you.

the story behind the story…

Consumers are starting to focus on buying non-GMO labeled products. This trend may decimate the organic industry.  Consumers unwittingly think that ‘non GMO’ is also organic. It is not. The dirty secret is non-GMO certified products have nothing to do with organic, and can freely use all industrial farming and heavy pesticide practices among other things.

Consumers are ‘eating up’ (pun intended) the non-GMO label more than the ‘organic’ label and are unwittingly increasing sales of industrial food conglomerates that use pesticides, …. other non-organic practices here….

It gets crazier: non-GMO labels are appearing on dairy and meat products. This is meaningless!

There have been several peer-reviewed scientific studies done debunking the notion that animals being fed GMO feed ‘transmit’ that GMO into their blood stream and into milk, eggs, and meat. There is NO DIFFERENCE between non-GMO labeled dairy and meat products and those that don’t have that label – except price (sometimes 2-3X higher). GMO grain fed cows, pigs, chickens do not produce GMO milk, beef, pork, eggs.

The new label of ‘Non GMO certified’ is a Trojan horse if there ever was one. It basically means it could or could not be organic (most aren’t) and everything else (besides the non-GMO) is industrial farm grade: pesticides, harmful practices, round-up, dirty water, etc.

Your better buy is to look for both labels, side by side (but they ARE duplicative since USDA organic already omits GMO):

Here’s details from an SF Chronicle article:

…organic farmers who objected to the label feel that the non-GMO designation takes away from organic certification, which already requires that farmers avoid using genetically engineered seed and animal feed. Meanwhile, some conventional dairy farmers said the term “non-GMO milk” makes their perfectly safe product sound scary…..

….. Eenennaam’s research has concluded that DNA from genetically engineered feed is not passed to milk or meat. Her 2014 scientific review of 30 years of livestock studies showed no difference in the health of animals given genetically engineered feed and those consuming unmodified feed, or a difference in the nutritional makeup of their meat or milk.

“We are really talking marketing here — developing a product line to differentiate it from a product that already does not contain GMOs,” she said. “As a company they of course can develop whatever products they want and if they see a profitable market — then it is a good business decision.”

It just doesn’t stop! Why do corporations continue to confuse, deceive and mislead consumers in the name of profit? Why is the media not more omnipresent and on top of these things?

On another note, the name ‘Monsanto’ is soon to disappear into ‘Bayer’ and everyone things that Bayer is an aspirin company. Bayer is almost worse than Monsanto when one looks at the ‘sudden bee collapse’ that Bayer’s nicotine based pesticides are mostly responsible.  More info here… link.