Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
Animals avoid GM food
Jim Webster wrote:
"Brian Sandle" wrote in message ... Jim Webster wrote: we are not talking about arbitary perceptions but people who are monitoring high yielding dairy cows so closely that a 5% drop in yield against predicition is a cause for major investigation. Yield is one important thing, but some people will pay for qualities, won't they? not s noticable proportion of the UK population So many are trying to coach down the quest for organic quality. I suggest you restrict yourself to talking about things you know about, the price of organic milk has collapsed in the UK because of over production. Organic is a very small niche market A lot of farmers converted around 1999 to organic milk, and were by 2001 able to call their milk organic and get a higher price. Suddenly there was a lot more on the market. But they were asking more for it than imported organic milk in the shops. The disributors sold excess as non-organic, presumably to try to keep organic label prices up. So really the industry was getting a margin for organic, but not so much overall because a good proportion of farmers were doing it. You are starting to feel the EU competition in milk. I think you are going to find the price for non-organic dropping, too, and organic getting some of a premium but being easier to sell. It will be the protecting factor for the farmers who have gone to it as subsidies go off. New Zealand had a guaranteed butter fat and farming in general market in the UK until UK joined EU. Then we went through a lot of strife, a lot of farms were sold as subsidies were removed. For a long time we did not see organic produce in New Zealand shops, it was all going to Japan. Now some is available. Organic carrots here sell for over double in shops. Organic milk is 25 to 35% more. I think there will be a race to enter the market as non-org prices will drop. When the top milk is butter it can no longer be poured on the pudding. BF, Protein and Lactose have been measured on a twice weekly basis (at least) in UK milk for over 20 years. All these things are carefully monitored Measured in quantity. I used to think that the processing was causing the trouble - that the milk would be being agitated more in processing so that the journey in the delivery truck would finish the churning to butter of the top milk. Now I am thinking of the different fatty acid composition of the BF because of feed. given the level of your knowledge your thoughts aren't exactly worth a lot. The feed changes constantly over the year are various feedingstuffs change in price on the world market. When above I spoke of the butter fat (BF) composition, I was not speaking of the proportion of fat in the milk, your usual measurement, but what constitutes the fat. That latter is not usually measured. Some taste tests may be done. The butter churners may notice a difference per batch. In NZ matters will be different again because of the predominance of grass in the diet and therefore, as the feed quality of grass can change on a daily basis depending on the weather or field, there is little consistancy in feed I used to be a big milk drinker. I noted the turnip sort of taste of the milk once. I think sometiems curly kale had been fed in winter. But then there was a move to corn for times of grass shortage. Milk probably tasted a bit better was only 50% in vitamin E & carotene I suppose. Especially the homogenised trim milk would go off in flavour fairly quickly as it spoiled faster. Attempts have been made to fix that by quicker refrigeration, I think, at the farm, perhaps. If GM feed had any effect at all on milk yield as opposed to the conventional feed it would have been spotted and its effects detailed Though I am thinking that large scale importation of maize may have coincided with the time it became Bt, unwanted or unallowed (Starlink) for human consumption. look at Torstens post, Which post? My server has not had overseas groups for a few days. Well it managed to pick up mine! Yes because nz.general is on the newsgroups. there has been no sudden large importation of maize Therefore it should be possible to check. The checks on results are constant, there is no sign of any effect Maybe because the effect is within variation between breeds or or other variations of cows. But set up 15 or 16 pairs of animals and see what happens. Again: Linkname: GM Animal Feed URL: http://www.btinternet.com/~clairejr/Animal/animal.html size: 547 lines Ohio farmer Leon Ridzon does not grow GMOs, but he deals with farmers who do. He recounted local farmers' experience with Bt corn: "We first had problems three years ago, when famers planted Bt corn and the cows refused to eat it. The farmers had to camouflage it to get them to eat it." So waht sort of `camouflaging' was done and is it being done to maize before export to britain? One guy recounted (or made up) a few tall tales which are not backed by any evidence whatsoever Now Torsten has shown us something which does not disprove it, rather shows a trend indicating a bigger experiment than 8 pairs *is* justified. Maybe these cows are just finicky? Ridzon says not - other animals won't eat Bt grain either: "The Bt corn was left on the cob and stored in an open bin. The rabbits would not touch it, the squirrels would not touch it. The rats and mice didn't go near it. It killed all the spiders in the bins." One guy recounts a few tall tales You always say it is only one, each time we give a different example. Our examples have added to several. And note the author of the one Torsten gave gets Monsanto funding. Ridzon has become increasingly suspicious about the possible toxicity of Bt corn. His testimony is the more remarkable for the fact that the norm for most Ohio farmers is intensively grown and chemically treated corn - which the animals apparently prefer to GM Bt corn. Remarkable testimony but where is the actual evidence, where are the feeding trials, where are the feed lots who are actively sourcing non-GM Bt? Where is there any evidence whatsoever other that the word of Ridzon Torsten has given some, now more has to be done. Ridzon confirms Sprinkel's account of reduced weight gain in Bt corn-fed cattle. He says farmers report that cattle need nine pounds of Bt corn to make a one pound weight gain as compared with only six of normal corn. Then that must not be because they eat less. And this only happens in Ohio because there have been no reports of it in any other country in the world I think Donkin is Indiana. Journalist Steven Sprinkel says that a major U.S. seed dealer told him that there is evidence that earthworms are dying as a result of the effects of Bt corn. And no one else has noticed, FOE or Greenpeace have not actually come up with the evidence? They have a lot to do. These reports from farmers and seed dealers can easily be dismissed as anecdotal evidence from which no conclusions can be drawn. But if we wait for the scientists to catch up, it could be too late. Scientific studies take years to do, and the majority are funded by industry or governments greased with biotech dollars. Who is going to fund a study which may find that a GM crop is toxic? What a lot of balls. It takes three weeks to note that milk cows are dropping in yield and switch the diet, it might take slightly longer on a well run beef unit What percentage do you change at? Donkins result was a 3% drop. That means say you change feed at 5% you only have 2% more to go. Were cows on a similar amount of maize before then? Yes Sure? If not there would be no accurate comparison. Has anything been done to it to improve palatability? No Not before it was imported? No, What guarantee? As it is all we get is someone in the mid west winding up a reporter telling them that racoons will not eat it So you ignore it and the other animals. tales told to wind up a reporter as opposed to measurable facts, yes I ignore the racoon story And Ridzon? You believe one farmer who says what you want to hear, and disbelieve one farmer who doesn't and tells you what is really going on. That is your problem not mine Ridzon isn't a farmer if you read it. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
using foraging animals as lawnmower substitutes; return to having animals around every home | Plant Science | |||
[IBC] Avoid Nothing (Was [IBC] Trees to avoid collecting or trying to work with !) | Bonsai | |||
GM crop farms filled with weeds (Was: Animals avoid GM food) | sci.agriculture | |||
Animals avoid GM food (Was: biotech & famine) | sci.agriculture | |||
Animals avoid GM food (Was: biotech & famine) | sci.agriculture |