PMWS pork entering food chain

"Jim Webster" wrote in message ...

"pearl" wrote in message
...
"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

"pearl" wrote in message
...
"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

fortunately most people out there know that the sort of person who
digs
up
your granny if you don't agree with them is not the sort of person you
can
trust to tell you the truth on anything else either

One instance. Your sort of business has put millions in an early
grave.

except that the rest of the world doesn't believe you

The rest of the world increasingly knows that "I" am correct.


except that they are still eating more and more meat

Some are. Others, many millions, are starving because land that had
supported them sustainably for generations was expropriated by and
for a meat-eating 'wealthy elite'. You ignore it, because -you- 'profit'.

And I hardly think the Chinese shopper who buys a live chicken and takes it
home and wrings the neck of the animal themselves is going to worry about
whether it was killed in a heartless and industrialised fashion

These people are eating more meat, Chinese government planners are ensuring
that they have the output to supply people what they want

Chinese planners are worried. You posted the following on 09 January,
(it's from: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35910 ).

"The grain crop is expected to hit a record 490 million tons this year, the
third straight year of bumper harvests but Chinese planners are worried that
fast-shrinking farming land could affect grain supply in the near future.
Arable land is said to have shrunk by 8 million hectares between 1999 and
2005

The Chinese government has pointed out that "The excessive growth of corn
processing has resulted in scarce feed for livestock and affected the
development of animal husbandry. Some main livestock producing areas are
even considering importing corn,"

"While rivalry between food and fuel producers for grains is not limited
to China, the problem is particularly acute here because of the country's
low per-capita arable land to feed its vast population. "

'Rapid economic growth in China will drive up grain imports from 9m
tonnes to 24m tonnes in 2005 according to Jikun Huang, Director of the
Centre for Chinese Agricultural Policy.

"China will neither empty the world grain markets, nor become a major
grain exporter," he told a farming conference in Oxford, England.
"Instead it is probable that China will become a more important player
in world grain markets as an importer in the coming decades." Increased
consumption would be largely in the form of feedgrain for animals.'

http://www.new-agri.co.uk/98-2/newsbr.html#china

From where?

The increase that you so wish for, is neither feasible, nor sustainable.

'As stocks run out and harvests fail, the world faces its worst crisis for
30 years

By Geoffrey Lean
Published: 03 September 2006

Food supplies are shrinking alarmingly around the globe, plunging the
world into its greatest crisis for more than 30 years. New figures show
that this year's harvest will fail to produce enough to feed everyone on
Earth, for the sixth time in the past seven years. Humanity has so far
managed by eating its way through stockpiles built up in better times -
but these have now fallen below the danger level.

Food prices have already started to rise as a result, and threaten to soar
out of reach of many of the 4.2 billion people who live in the world's
most vulnerable countries. And the new "green" drive to get cars to run
on biofuels threatens to make food even scarcer and more expensive.

The UN's Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) and the US
Department of Agriculture (USDA), which produce the world's two
main forecasts of the global crop production, both estimate that this
year's grain harvest will fall for the second successive year.

The FAO is still compiling its latest crop forecast - due to be published
next month - but told The Independent on Sunday late last week that it
looked like barely exceeding 2 billion tons, down from 2.38 billion last
year, and 2.68 billion in 2004, although the world's appetite has
continued to grow as its population rises.

The USDA estimates it will be even lower - 1.984 billion tons. This would
mean that it would fall 58 million tons short of what the world's people
are expected to consume this year: 10 years ago, by contrast, farmers grew
64 million tons more than was consumed. The world's food stocks have
shrunk from enough to feed the world for 116 days in 1999 to a predicted
57 days at the end of this season, well below the official safety level.
Prices have already risen by up to 20 per cent this year.

The gathering crisis has been largely unnoticed because, for once, the
harvests have failed in rich countries such as the United States and
Australia, which normally export food, rather than in the world's
hungriest ones. So it has not immediately resulted in mass starvation in
Africa or Asia.

Instead, it will have a delayed effect as poor people become increasingly
unable to afford expensive food and find that there is not enough in store
to help them when their own crops fail.

The lack of world attention contrasts with the last great food crisis, in
the mid-1970s. Then Henry Kissinger - at the height of his powers as
Richard Nixon's Secretary of State - called a World Food Conference, in
which governments solemnly resolved that never again would they allow
humanity to run short of sustenance. The conference, in Rome, resolved
to eradicate hunger by the mid-1980s. Kissinger himself pledged that
"within a decade, no child should go hungry to bed".

Yet, a generation later, more than 800 million people worldwide are still
constantly hungry. Every day, some 16,000 young children die, at least
partly because they do not get enough food. And the new food crisis
threatens to be even worse than the last one. In the seven years running
up to the Rome conference grain production fell below consumption only
three times, compared to six now.

It was at the conference that I first met Lester Brown, who has, ever
since, been the principal prophet of the coming scarcity, repeatedly
warning of the new crisis which is now upon us.

Brown - who now heads the Earth Policy Institute, a respected
Washington-based think tank - gleaned his first insights into the world's
predicament as a tomato tycoon when he was a teenager. Back in the early
1950s, when he was just 14, he and his brother bought an old tractor for
$200 (£105), rented a couple of fields near their home in southern New
Jersey and started growing the vegetables after school.

Soon the brothers were among the top 1 per cent of tomato growers in the
United States. They easily qualified for the Ten-Ton Tomato Club - "the
Phi Beta Kappa of tomato growers" - which is open to those who harvested
that amount per acre.

Then Campbell's Soups, trying to lower costs, threw money into research to
increase yields. Within a few years, the club had to change its name to
the Twenty-Ton Tomato Club. But the pace of improvement could not be
sustained. Despite decades of more research growth of yields slowed
dramatically; by the mid- 1990s the best growers were getting about 30
tons of tomatoes per acre.

That, says Brown, is what has been happening to the world's harvests as a
whole. Between 1950 and 1990 grain yields more than doubled, but they
have grown much more slowly since. Production rose from around 630
million tons to 1.78 billion tons, but has only edged up in the past 15 years,
to around 2 billion tons.

"The near-tripling of the harvest by the world's farmers was a remarkable
performance," says Brown. "In a single generation they increased grain
production by twice as much as had been achieved during the preceding
11,000 years, since agriculture began. But now the world has suffered a
dramatic loss of momentum."

Apart from increasing yields, there has always been one other way of
boosting production - putting more land under the plough. But this, too,
has been running into the buffers. As population grows and farmland is
used for building roads and cities - and becomes exhausted by overuse -
the amount available for each person on Earth has fallen by more than
half.

There are more than five people on Earth today for every two living in the
middle of the last century. Yet enough is produced worldwide to feed
everyone well, if it is evenly distributed.

It is not just that people in rich countries eat too much, and those in
poor ones eat too little. Enormous quantities of the world's increasingly
scarce grain now goes to feed cows - and, indirectly, cars.

The cows are longstanding targets of Brown's, who founded the prestigious
Worldwatch Institute immediately after the 1974 conference, partly to draw
attention to the precariousness of food supplies. As people become
better-off, they eat more meat, the animals that are slaughtered often
being fed on grain. It takes 14kg of grain to produce 2kg of beef*, and 8kg
of grain for 2kg of pork. More than a third of the world's harvest goes to
fatten animals in this way. [*these figures do not include forage/pasture.]

Cars are a new concern, the worry arising from the present drive to
produce green fuels to fight global warming. A "corn rush" has erupted in
the United States, using the crop to produce the biofuel, ethanol -
strongly supported by subsidies from the Bush administration to divert
criticism of its failure to ratify the Kyoto Protocol.

Just a single fill of ethanol for a four-wheel drive SUV, says Brown, uses
enough grain to feed one person for an entire year. This year the amount
of US corn going to make the fuel will equal what it sells abroad;
traditionally its exports have helped feed 100 - mostly poor - countries.

From next year, the amount used to run American cars will exceed exports,
and soon it is likely to reduce what is available to help feed poor people
overseas. The number of ethanol plants built or planned in the corn-belt
state of Iowa will use virtually all the state's crop.

This will not only cut food supplies, but drive up the process of grain,
making hungry people compete with the owners of gas-guzzlers. Already
spending 70 per cent of their meagre incomes on food, they simply cannot
afford to do so.

Brown expects the food crisis to get much worse as more and more land
becomes exhausted, soil erodes, water becomes scarcer, and global warming
cuts harvests.

Making cars more fuel-efficient, and eating less meat would help but the
only long-term solution is to enable poor countries - and especially their
poorest people - to grow more food. And the best way to do that, studies
show, is to encourage small farmers to grow crops in environmentally
friendly ways. Research at Essex University shows that this can double
yields.

But the world needs a new sense of urgency. "We are living very close to
the edge," says Brown. "History judges leaders by whether they respond to
great issues. For our generation, the issue may well be food security."

http://news.independent.co.uk/enviro...cle1325467.ece

[opinion from E/The Environmental Magazine]

Al Gore's movie (and book), An Inconvenient Truth, is playing to
rave reviews. His laudable project is an urgent message on the vital
issue of global warming. We all must heed the call.

If we didn't realize it already, we now know that we are overheating
our planet to alarming levels with potentially catastrophic consequences.
2005 was the hottest year on record. Think of an overheated car;
now imagine that on a planetary scale.

Organizations from Greenpeace to the Union of Concerned Scientists,
World Bank and the Pentagon, all agree that global warming is, perhaps,
the most serious threat to our imperiled planet. The Pentagon report,
for example, states that climate change in the form of global warming
"should be elevated beyond a scientific debate to a U.S. national
security concern," higher even than terrorism.
....
Geophysicists Gidon Eshel and Pamela Martin from the University of
Chicago concluded that changing one's eating habits from the Standard
American Diet (SAD) to a vegetarian diet does more to fight global
warming than switching from a gas-guzzling SUV to a fuel-efficient
hybrid car. Of course, you can do both - and more! It has been said
that "where the environment is concerned, eating meat is like driving a
huge SUV.... Eating a vegetarian diet is like driving a mid-sized car
[or a reasonable sedan, according to Eshel]. And eating a vegan diet
(no dairy, no eggs) is like riding a bicycle or walking. Shifting away
from SUVs and SUV-style diets, to much more energy-efficient
alternatives, is key to fighting the warming trend.

Global warming is already having grave effects on our planet and we
need to take action. Vegetarians help keep the planet cool in more
ways than one! Paul McCartney says, "If anyone wants to save the
planet, all they have to do is just stop eating meat. That's the single
most important thing you could do." Andrea Gordon, in her article
"If You Recycle, Why Are You Eating Meat?" agrees: "There is a
direct relationship between eating meat and the environment.
E Magazine asked the same question in its cover story, "So You're
an Environmentalist. Why Are You Still Eating Meat?" Quite simply,
you can't be a meat-eating environmentalist. Sorry folks."

Vegetarianism is literally about life and death - for each of us
individually and for all of us together. Eating animals simultaneously
contributes to a multitude of tragedies: the animals' suffering and
death; the ill-health and early death of people; the unsustainable
overuse of oil, water, land, topsoil, grain, labor and other vital
resources; environmental destruction, including deforestation,
species extinction, mono-cropping and global warming; the
legitimacy of force and violence; the mis-allocation of capital,
skills, land and other assets; vast inefficiencies in the economy;
tremendous waste; massive inequalities in the world; the
continuation of world hunger and mass starvation; the transmission
and spread of dangerous diseases; and moral failure in so-called
civilized societies. Vegetarianism is an antidote to all of these
unnecessary tragedies.
....
Global warming, as Al Gore so powerfully shows, is "an
inconvenient truth." The fact that the production of meat
significantly contributes to global warming is another
inconvenient truth. Now we know.

full story: http://www.emagazine.com/view/?3312

wrote in message
ups.com...

We got the best government money can buy. Lobbyists' influence must be
restricted before we can have true representative democracy but that is
another topic.

ah yes, ban the other lobbyists but don't ban ours, the old argument of the
anti democrat


Perhaps you just think that most people don't care

They would care if they knew what goes on inside factory farming and
slaughter houses. I wonder how many people would buy meat if some of
the photos and videos of animal abuse were displayed next to the meat
counters.

well they manage pretty well up to now.
Probably because people aren't as gullible as you seem to think, they know
that the law exists in this country even if you don't and they disregard the
claims of vested interests who live on the subscriptions of those gullible
enough to believe their propaganda

Jim Webster

"pearl" wrote in message
...


except that they are still eating more and more meat

Some are. Others, many millions, are starving because land that had
supported them sustainably for generations was expropriated by and
for a meat-eating 'wealthy elite'. You ignore it, because -you- 'profit'.

sure, and explain how I profit out of meat production in china?



And I hardly think the Chinese shopper who buys a live chicken and takes
it
home and wrings the neck of the animal themselves is going to worry about
whether it was killed in a heartless and industrialised fashion

These people are eating more meat, Chinese government planners are
ensuring
that they have the output to supply people what they want

Chinese planners are worried. You posted the following on 09 January,
(it's from: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35910 ).

exactly, and they are worried that they will not be able to provide them
with enough meat, so are making sure they can

they aren't worried about a long of whinging westerners, if they want a
bizarre ideology they already have one, they don't need yours

Jim Webster

"Jim Webster" wrote in message ...

"pearl" wrote in message
...


except that they are still eating more and more meat

Some are. Others, many millions, are starving because land that had
supported them sustainably for generations was expropriated by and
for a meat-eating 'wealthy elite'. You ignore it, because -you- 'profit'.

sure, and explain how I profit out of meat production in china?

I didn't say that you profited from meat production in China.

'.. two-thirds of all soybeans and meal imported into the UK came
from Brazil, the primary source of non GM soy in the world.
...
http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/PGE...ments.01.p df

'In Central and South America, ever-increasing amounts of land
are being used to grow soya beans and grain for export - to be
used as animal feed. In Brazil, 23 per cent of the cultivated land
is currently being used to produced soya beans, of which nearly
half are for export (13). The Oxfam Poverty Report explains that
the subsidised expansion of the EU's dairy and livestock industry
has created a huge demand for high protein animal feedstuffs and
that the demand has in part been met through the expansion of
large-scale, mechanised soya production in Brazil. Smallholder
producers of beans and staple foods in the southern part of the
country have been displaced to make way for giant soya estates.
Soya has now become the country's major agricultural export,
"however, it is a trading arrangement which had proved
considerably more efficient at feeding European cattle than
with maintaining the livelihoods of poor Brazilians." (16)
...'
http://www.viva.org.uk/guides/feedtheworld.htm

And I hardly think the Chinese shopper who buys a live chicken and takes
it
home and wrings the neck of the animal themselves is going to worry about
whether it was killed in a heartless and industrialised fashion

These people are eating more meat, Chinese government planners are
ensuring
that they have the output to supply people what they want

Chinese planners are worried. You posted the following on 09 January,
(it's from: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35910 ).

exactly, and they are worried that they will not be able to provide them
with enough meat, so are making sure they can

By abandoning an alternative fuel, and increasing imports of grain?
Grain from where? See what you snipped. What you've ignored.

they aren't worried about a long of whinging westerners, if they want a
bizarre ideology they already have one, they don't need yours

What "bizarre ideology" do I have? A healthy diet? Food for all?
Recovering and thriving wildlife and ecosystems? Oh, excuse me!

"Derek Moody" wrote in message ...
In article , pearl
wrote:
"Jim Webster" wrote in message news:50m60pF1fu3
...

One instance. Your sort of business has put millions in an early grave.

Jim's sort of business has fed millions of people in cities who would
otherwise have gone hungry - or worse.

No. Jim's sort of business kills millions, both at home and abroad.

A colossal part of the Earth's land surface has been devoted to pasture,

Because a colossal part of the Earth's land surface will not grow any crop
suitable for human consumption.

The arable land currently being cultivated could comfortably feed the
entire human population, but much is used to feed livestock instead.

We've done this one to death many times Pearl (Lotus). Jim even offered you
the use of enough of his land to demonstrate your principles and show him,
and the rest of the farming community, where they were going wrong.

You declined then when you realised the impossibility of the task you had
set yourself

Hardly, (and are you sure you aren't confusing me with another?)

and so Jim has continued to graze that same land extensively
(look it up - Lotus, don't guess) and to convert its product into food.

There are many alternatives, I gave you all one not that long ago.

Consult google or one of the other usenet archives if your memory is faulty.

You do that. Meanwhile...

'In his 1583 text, Anatomy of Abuses, Stubbes wrote that previous
generations "fed upon graine, corne, roots, pulse, hearbes, weedes,
and such other baggage; and yet lived longer than we, were healthfuller
than we, of better complexion than we, and much stronger than we in
every respect." A century later, Macauley noted that, "meat was so
dear in price that hundreds of thousands of families scarcely knew
the taste of it," while half the population of England, "ate it not at all
or not more often than once a week."

Writing in the 1840s, Sylvester Graham observed: "The peasantry
of Norway, Sweden, Denmark, Germany, Turkey, Greece, Italy,
Switzerland, France, Spain, England, Scotland, Ireland, a
considerable portion of Russia and other parts of Europe subsist
mainly on non-flesh foods.
...
"The hardy Scotch have never been great meat eaters. In the remote
districts kailbrose, shredded greens and oatmeal over which hot water
is poured, is eaten with or without milk...According to Douglas,
writing in 1782, the diet of the Scotch of the East Coast was then
oatmeal and milk with vegetables. He says: 'Flesh is never seen in
the houses of the common farmers, except at a baptism, a wedding,
Christmas, or Shrovetide.'"
.....'
http://www.all-creatures.org/murti/tsnhod-14.html

Derek Moody wrote:

We've done this one to death many times Pearl (Lotus). Jim even offered you
the use of enough of his land to demonstrate your principles and show him,
and the rest of the farming community, where they were going wrong.

It is kind of silly to present these childish challenges since they are
totally meaningless. People concerned for animals often become
vegetarians because of cruel conditions of factory farming and to
contrast the horrible conditions animals have to suffer because the
meat industry tortures these animals from birth to slaughter with the
free grazing of animals is absurd. The reality of factory farming is so
horrible that one has to wonder how any of these people are able to
sleep at night or look their wives and children in the face. How would
they like if they and their loved ones had to live under the conditions
they force those helpless animals to live under? Has anyone made a
study to find out if there is a connection to society becoming
insensitive to the horrors of factory farming and the rise of brutal
crimes especially against those who are too weak to defend themselves?

"pearl" wrote in message
...
"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

"pearl" wrote in message
...


except that they are still eating more and more meat

Some are. Others, many millions, are starving because land that had
supported them sustainably for generations was expropriated by and
for a meat-eating 'wealthy elite'. You ignore it, because -you-
'profit'.

sure, and explain how I profit out of meat production in china?

I didn't say that you profited from meat production in China.

'.. two-thirds of all soybeans and meal imported into the UK came
from Brazil, the primary source of non GM soy in the world.
..
http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/PGE...ments.01.p df

'In Central and South America, ever-increasing amounts of land
are being used to grow soya beans and grain for export - to be
used as animal feed. In Brazil, 23 per cent of the cultivated land
is currently being used to produced soya beans, of which nearly
half are for export (13). The Oxfam Poverty Report explains that
the subsidised expansion of the EU's dairy and livestock industry
has created a huge demand for high protein animal feedstuffs and
that the demand has in part been met through the expansion of
large-scale, mechanised soya production in Brazil. Smallholder
producers of beans and staple foods in the southern part of the
country have been displaced to make way for giant soya estates.
Soya has now become the country's major agricultural export,
"however, it is a trading arrangement which had proved
considerably more efficient at feeding European cattle than
with maintaining the livelihoods of poor Brazilians." (16)
..'
http://www.viva.org.uk/guides/feedtheworld.htm

And I hardly think the Chinese shopper who buys a live chicken and
takes
it
home and wrings the neck of the animal themselves is going to worry
about
whether it was killed in a heartless and industrialised fashion

These people are eating more meat, Chinese government planners are
ensuring
that they have the output to supply people what they want

Chinese planners are worried. You posted the following on 09 January,
(it's from: http://ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=35910 ).

exactly, and they are worried that they will not be able to provide them
with enough meat, so are making sure they can

By abandoning an alternative fuel, and increasing imports of grain?
Grain from where? See what you snipped. What you've ignored.

they aren't worried about a long of whinging westerners, if they want a
bizarre ideology they already have one, they don't need yours

What "bizarre ideology" do I have? A healthy diet? Food for all?
Recovering and thriving wildlife and ecosystems? Oh, excuse me!

"pearl" wrote in message
...
"Jim Webster" wrote in message
...

"pearl" wrote in message
...


except that they are still eating more and more meat

Some are. Others, many millions, are starving because land that had
supported them sustainably for generations was expropriated by and
for a meat-eating 'wealthy elite'. You ignore it, because -you-
'profit'.

sure, and explain how I profit out of meat production in china?

I didn't say that you profited from meat production in China.

and now explain why more chinese eating meat, many getting a decent diet for
the first time makes them a wealthy elite


'.. two-thirds of all soybeans and meal imported into the UK came
from Brazil, the primary source of non GM soy in the world.
..
http://www.pgeconomics.co.uk/pdf/PGE...ments.01.p df

'In Central and South America, ever-increasing amounts of land
are being used to grow soya beans and grain for export - to be
used as animal feed.

exactly, because these people are determined to eat more meat. Obviously it
will mean they have less to export to those whinging in Europe who cannot be
bothered to grow their own food, but don't moan to me, go on line to the
Latin American groups and moan at them
Sadly for you, the meat-eating 'wealthy elite' now includes the massive
majority of the people in these countries, and they are going to have their
meat and you are the one who is going to have to pay more for your food.
They now have three choices
They can eat meat
They can convert grain to fuel
they can sell it to you at an increasingly expensive price

Jim Webster

wrote in message
ups.com...
Derek Moody wrote:

We've done this one to death many times Pearl (Lotus). Jim even offered
you
the use of enough of his land to demonstrate your principles and show
him,
and the rest of the farming community, where they were going wrong.

It is kind of silly to present these childish challenges since they are
totally meaningless. People concerned for animals often become
vegetarians because of cruel conditions of factory farming and to
contrast the horrible conditions animals have to suffer because the
meat industry tortures these animals from birth to slaughter with the
free grazing of animals is absurd. #

but fortunately in the rest of the world where people aren't so stupid as to
believe the propaganda of lobbyists who depend on their subscriptions, this
doesn't wash
The chinese housewife who takes home a live chicken to kill herself isn't
going to be bothered by that sort of crap

Jim Webster

On Thu, 11 Jan 2007 12:51:28 +0000, Derek Moody
wrote:

In article , pearl
wrote:
"Jim Webster" wrote in message news:50m60pF1fu3
...

One instance. Your sort of business has put millions in an early grave.

Jim's sort of business has fed millions of people in cities who would
otherwise have gone hungry - or worse.

A colossal part of the Earth's land surface has been devoted to pasture,

Because a colossal part of the Earth's land surface will not grow any crop
suitable for human consumption. Sheep, for example, can roam many acres of
upland grass and convert a very thin supply of nutrient into a form that
humans can eat.

No one is talking about the highly destructive hill farming, which
even the farmers don't like. You are well aware of this Webster, stop
trying to shift the goalposts again.

A colossal part of the earth productive land, is given over to
pasture. That clear enough for you Jim?

We've done this one to death many times Pearl (Lotus).

You lied, and bull****ted Jim.

Jim even offered you
the use of enough of his land to demonstrate your principles and show him,
and the rest of the farming community, where they were going wrong.

You are Jim, Jim.

You declined then when you realised the impossibility of the task you had
set yourself and so Jim has continued to graze that same land extensively
(look it up - Lotus, don't guess) and to convert its product into food.

Why should we show you how to farm? You've been told the way forward.
If you cannot do it, or are unwilling, then hand your land over to
someone who can. You can retire on the state benefit system you have
milked all your life!