The US-based Monsanto started in 1901 with the production of the artificial sweetener saccharine. By the 1940s, it had expanded its business to Europe and had become one of the leading chemical manufacturing companies in the United States.  Among its herbicide products, the dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (DDT) became particularly infamous for its disastrous health risks and environmental damage, and was banned in 1972 in the US, owing to the efforts by environmentalists.

In early 1980s, Monsanto started genetic experimenting on plant cells. This was a big leap for the company, away from chemical production to biotechnical engineering, and by the end of the century Monsanto had become the biotech giant of the world, specializing in genetically modified seeds. Genetically modified (GM) foods, mostly crops, have the advantages of high tolerance of herbicides, resistance to pests, diseases, drought, and low temperature, and added nutrition. At the same time, such crops have been subject to strong criticism. A number of human health risks, including different types of allergic reactions, have been known as caused by GM foods. And equally, or even more, serious are the concerns of genetic invasions caused by GM species.

Studies show that GM plants are capable of interbreeding with non-GM plants of the same species, which are planted near them. Thus, the biotechnologically altered genes travel through crops and multiply in numbers as well as complexity, posing unforeseen threats to public health. Furthermore, the altered genes can be incorporated into the genetic makeup of the weeds growing around them, causing the weeds to become herbicide resistant. This would mean a threat to environment and crops, as well as additional cost to economy due to the need for researching new, stronger varieties of herbicides.

With an expanding business going hand in hand with the genetic contamination of crops, Monsanto also continued to have an increasing experience of litigation against the farming community. Crop farmers in US and Canada have been sued by Monsanto for reproducing GM seeds/crops without paying the due royalty to the company. By 2005, at least 90 lawsuits had been by Monsanto against American farmers alone. A famous case highlighted by the Greenpeace International was that of a Canadian farmer Percy Shmeiser who lost his case in 2004 to Monsanto for failing to pay the company while accidentally discovering herbicide-resistant canola on his farm and reproducing it without the prior permission of Monsanto. Greenpeace called the GM invasion of common crops ‘genetic pollution’. Does a company have the right to genetically contaminate common crops of farms and then claim patent rights when the uninvited GM seeds on one’s own farm are reproduced?

This question, with added environmental concern, has already entered the law court and the verdict of the court will certainly be the determinant of the future of farming and feeding in and outside America. What is unambiguously clear so far is the fact that if you try to transcend nature, it will cost more than it pays; though for companies like Monsanto, the profit may surpass both the investment and the cost of litigation.

farmcommunities.com  

Organic milk is a little more expensive than regular milk.  This is because cows that produce organic milk do it the normal way.  They are fed with grass and are free to roam vast farmlands.  They are not given any hormone injections to boost milk production and their feeds are not sprayed with chemical fertilizers.  In short, they live easy stress-free lives, grazing and eating whenever they feel like it.

Regular milk producing cows on the other hand are given bovine growth hormones (BGH) to increase milk production.  They live in crowded pens where they eat feeds laced with ingredients that may have been genetically modified.  They live their lives in crowded barns with little exercise.  Their milk is cheaper to buy because of all the tricks used to increase milk production.

Studies have found that organic milk contains a higher quantity of vitamins and nutrients.  Organic milk contains 50% more Vitamin E, 75% more Beta Carotene and three times more antioxidants compared to normal milk.  Aside from this organic milk contains more Omega 3 essential fatty acids that help the body, specifically the heart function properly.  Organic milk is also easier for the body to break down and metabolize.  This property makes it easier for the body to fight of diseases and boost the immune system.

However, organic milk producers are still small in numbers compared to regular milk producers.  This is because of the price differential between the two.  Unless studies and advocates for organic milk take their case to the public, this disparity will continue and the number of organic milk farmers will not increase.  It is very clear that organic milk is more beneficial to humans than regular milk and the time is ripe for a change in milk.

farmcommunities.com  

MSG might make your food taste better, but is it worth it?  Obesity is one of this nations biggest problems and MSG has been linked to the cause.  It is also said that toxic compounds can associated with such neurological diseases like Multiple Sclerosis, brain cancers, ADHD and more.  Of course, the FDA still stands by their claim in amounts that would be used for cooking.  They did admit that MSG symptom complex – short-term responses to the ingestion of MSG – is a problem for some people.  The symptoms can include such reactions as headaches, sweating, nausea, chest pain and more.  The only way to avoid this effect is to stay away from Monosodium Glutamate.

This additive is presented to us as a food product that is harmless, but it is poison.  At the very least, it is completely unnecessary and as a matter of precaution, if nothing else, an additive that we should do our best to avoid.

farmcommunities.com  

farmcommunities.com  

Organic farmers believe that a free range chicken is one happy chicken and therefore is not oozing with harmful toxins. Not only will it help your energy levels and staying power last longer but also it was said to delay the aging process when introduced along with overall healthy lifestyle.

Most free range chickens are kept organic, since then it became so popular to health buffs the world over causing a shortage in supply. This alone makes it a very lucrative business for farmers worldwide especially in times like these when people are beginning to make a conscious effort in living a healthy lifestyle. Organically raised chickens are grass fed and they are encouraged to live a stress free life of clean air and water. As much as possible, no chemicals are introduced to the chicken’s system, whether directly to the chicken or to its surrounding areas.

Free range chickens are a great source of protein. Aside from that, it offers many benefits to humans when consumed. It is healthy and very delicious too unlike those that are raised in coops which tend to be less tasty. Be warned though, since free range chickens require special care, it tends to cost more than its supermarket counterparts.

farmcommunities.com  

Community supported agriculture works effectively in and around areas where farm communities are conveniently located. Since the transportation costs is somehow lessen, if not prevented altogether, produce are offered cheap to members considering that they only have to pay for one-time shareholder’s fee before the planting season starts. There are many types of arrangement when going for CSA depending on what’s convenient for both the farmer and his consumers, these are:

·    Farm-to-home delivery set-up. In this arrangement the farmer will have the produce delivered to his consumers or the consumer picks it up after harvest all boxed up and ready to go. The only problem in this set-up is that the consumer would have to put up with what goes in his or her box since it is all up to the farmer’s discretion.
·    On-farm handpicking set-up. Consumers are allowed to pick their own share in the farm when harvesting season arrives. The only drawback is that this set-up tends to leave the farm in pieces after the harvest is over such as trampled plants. Not to mention this one angry shareholder who happens to be late for the picking.
·    Market style set-up. To avoid farm destruction, some resourceful farmers opt to put up a small stall outside of the farm and put together the produce for the consumers to choose from. This way, everyone is happy to have a variety a produce but also the farmer won’t have to worry about the state of his farm during handpicking sessions.

farmcommunities.com  

Although farm fishing is, by far, the best alternative to commercial fishing, still it has its own environmental effects and may put human consumers in danger as well. Farm fishing is developed by the fishing industries to address the issues of damaged marine life and over-fishing in seas that resulted to the drastic decline of fishes and other marine life, both edible and not. Since farm fishing was born, it earned strong support from the government since it seemed to provide the best possible solution for the problem at hand.

One of the cited concerns in farm fishing is the alteration of habitat for farm-raised fishes which is a very apparent one since most fish farms are manmade. Due to the limited range of motion, disease transmission is almost instant among fishes in cages and since their cages don’t function as a natural one would normally do, their wastes settle and accumulate within their supposedly homes causing bacteria to grow and spread from one fish to another; sometimes, it can get too strong it wipes out the whole batch. These bacteria are also suspected of causing some cases of food poisoning among humans although the link is yet to be established.

And then there’s the issue of pollution which apparently these fish farms cause. It was said that wastes coming from fish farms will eventually lead to larger bodies of water endangering all species living there. While these notions are yet to be established, hopefully someone of authority could shed a light to the issue at hand and arrive to an acceptable solution for all parties concerned. After all, farm fishing still looks promising for fish farmers and the environment alike.

farmcommunities.com  

A macrobiotic diet is different from a vegan diet. A vegan diet is exclusively greens while a macrobiotic diet includes some foods from animal sources, although in limited amounts only. In some ways, a vegan diet shares common food staples with macrobiotic diet such as brown rice and beans but their principles are different. Generally, macrobiotics is based on healthy eating practices that were applied before, when artificial and chemical compositions in food are unheard of.

Macrobiotic dieters state that macrobiotic is a way of life and not a diet which focuses on nutritional value of the food they eat. They believe that in order for the body to achieve maximum health levels, everything inside it should be in perfect balance. This means that a dieter should not deprive the body of nourishment but not overeat. Macrobiotics also has set of rules for cooking and what to eat on certain seasons such as spring, summer, fall and winter. You will also have to learn how to do a macrobiotic diet properly, if you are planning to engage with one.

farmcommunities.com  

Actually, the scary human swine flu affects humans only and the infection is made from one human to another and never by eating infected pork although it is not advisable as well to eat that kind of pork. This human swine flu is a combination of flu strains: human, swine and avian. To avoid further misconception, the CDC changed its name from swine flu to a more technical H1N1.

Again, this human swine flu does not affect the way we eat or put us in any food safety risk by eating pork but proper food handling is highly encouraged to avoid food poisoning. Apparently, there was a reported case wherein a farm worker passed the virus to a herd of pigs but there is no known infection of pig to human, so far.

farmcommunities.com  

Salt is already known to health experts as a high-risk nutrient for cardiovascular problems – high blood pressure, stroke, and heart disease. A new study conducted by Dr. Rachel Thompson, of the World Cancer Research Fund (WCRF), concludes that regular consumption of salty soups increases the risk of stomach cancer. This particularly applies to several well-known brands of creamy soups, especially those containing ham or bacon. Some of these contain around half of the recommended daily intake for salt, which is a maximum of 6 grams per day, in a single serving. Vegetable soups are generally lower in salt (and hence safer), though some of these also carry as much as one-third of the recommended daily intake for salt per serving.

Owing to the risk of stomach cancer, Dr. Thompson recommends that people watch the salt content of branded soups (reading the labels) and make low-salt versions of their favorite soups. People who consume other salted foods – like sausages, hams, and processed cereals (especially those taken for breakfast) – are at a still higher risk of stomach cancer, if they also continue regular intake of salty soups. To stay on the safe side, it is advisable to watch all branded foods for their salt content.

The risk of getting bacterial infection from peanut butter is more immediate as the popular food item is suspected of spreading the infectious bacteria Salmonella. After the latest Salmonella outbreak (culminating in January 2009) in the United States, which left around 600 people down with illness and possibly killed 9 people in the US, the food safety center of the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has ordered the collection and testing of peanut butter for bacterial content before allowing it to go into a facility. Stewart Parnell, the CEO of the Peanut Butter Corporation of America, was summoned by congressional subpoena to explain his orders to ship products of bacteria-tainted peanuts to about 50 manufacturers of food items. While Parnell chose to use his right of not answering the questions, the potential risk of acute bacterial infection remains with the peanut butter products and consumers are advised to stay away from these until the investigation comes up with its conclusions. A list of peanut butter products recalled by the FDA can be read online at http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/peanutbutterrecall/index.cfm

farmcommunities.com