Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net>]

Organic is far from enough, by federal standards. Chickens can be organic
basically by avoiding feed that's on the prohibited list. They need free
range, room to roam in protected areas, a place to dig bugs and worms and
get wide variety in their diet. And even organically grown groceries can be
awful. They can have nutrients processed out for longer shelf life, be
trucked a couple thousand miles or ten thousand, or be grown in severely
depleted soil that qualifies as organic by not using chemicals on it for
three years. Duhh. That's China-Mart organic for ya. 

paul tradingpost@lobo.net

*********** REPLY SEPARATOR  ***********

On 2/22/2007 at 4:41 AM Mark Nagel wrote:

>Hmm...  The ONLY thing that they could come up with was this?
>
>"For example, because organic chickens were reared for longer than battery
>hens, they had a larger environmental impact."
>
>They also fail to consider that people are likely to need less organically
>grown foods because such foods are more nutrient dense.  And that this
>will all have a better impact on health (reduce the associated pollutive
>effects from the pharmaceutical industry).  Clearly these "experts" are
>unable to grasp the big picture...
>
>
>-Mark Nagel
>Everett, WA
>
>
>=====================
>From: TradingPostPaul <tradingpost@riseup.net>
>Date: 2007/02/21 Wed PM 09:49:18 CST
>To: livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
>Subject: [Livingontheland] Why going organic could cost the earth
>
>
>This just tells me the over-processed, long distance "food" sold as
organic
>by the "natural food" stores is discrediting organic. 
>
>paul tradingpost@lobo.net
>-------------------
>
>http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id

>=437234&in_page_id=1770
>Why going organic could cost the earth
>
>_______________________________________________
>Livingontheland mailing list
>Livingontheland@lists.ibiblio.org
>http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/livingontheland