I got free beets and basil today--but "conventional", what should be called "chemical". A part of me feels like it doesn't even matter if you avoid chemical produce (when free). I don't want to support it in any way, but if it's already grown, it has already polluted the earth and you can't get away from that. Right now it hurts someone besides you, but in the end it'll still affect you, it'll affect everyone. It'll get to you and everyone else. Anyway, it does pay off in the short long-term to avoid pesticides, but I generally do organic so I'm not worried about these free crops. It's just sad that healthfully grown is not the standard.
Am learning lots about different techniques, just in conversations with people. I have learned about these issues and this really is bringing it all back to the forefront to me.
The most important issue I am thinking about now--- GMOs are 100% about profit, 0% about hunger. The hunger talk is all rhetoric, PR. Hunger is currently caused by unequal distribution of wealth (whether it be land, food, or money). GMOs only exist because of the profit involved, because you can patent GMOs a lot more easily (especially with the help of terminator genes--forcing the farmer to buy new seed every year. What happens to our seed supply if the current infrastructure collapses? I guess we're out of luck). So they actually can make hunger a much bigger problem. Vandana Shiva is a brilliant, accessible writer on this topic. Best to read her before debating anyone on this. I saw her speak at Macalester College.
No comments:
Post a Comment