In reply to Rupert (W.Yorkshire) ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

"Martin" wrote in message
...
I think you are nuts and gullible,

Martin

Perhaps more importantly she is also very dangerous.
All information via La Puce comes with a health warning.

If Ms Puce wants to try to eat proper stuff that isn't contaminated with all
sorts of chemicals then I think that's an admirable quest.

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:34:31 +0100
K wrote:

I understand that dandelions secrete a chemical which inhibits the
growth of other plants and that may partly account for the length of
time it's taken for the grass/other flowers to fill in the patches, but
I'm now inclined to take the assertion about glyphosate becoming
inactive on contact with the soil with a large pinch of sceptical salt.

I'm immensely sceptical about assertions that various plants secrete
chemicals that inhibit growth of other plants. It's said about a lot of
different trees, and in a lot of cases, absence of growth can easily be
explained by shade, lack of moisture and impoverishment of the soil.

Hello K,

I agree that allelophathy -- the name for the process in question -- is
easily made a scapegoat for poor culture. None the less plant allelopathy is
a very well documented and researched area of botany. Are you
saying you "don't believe in it?"

cordially,

-E
--
Emery Davis
You can reply to ecom
by removing the well known companies
Questions about wine? Visit http://winefaq.hostexcellence.com

In reply to Emery Davis ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 13:34:31 +0100
K wrote:

I understand that dandelions secrete a chemical which inhibits the
growth of other plants and that may partly account for the length of
time it's taken for the grass/other flowers to fill in the patches,
but I'm now inclined to take the assertion about glyphosate becoming
inactive on contact with the soil with a large pinch of sceptical
salt.

I'm immensely sceptical about assertions that various plants secrete
chemicals that inhibit growth of other plants. It's said about a lot
of different trees, and in a lot of cases, absence of growth can
easily be explained by shade, lack of moisture and impoverishment of
the soil.

Hello K,

I agree that allelophathy -- the name for the process in question --
is easily made a scapegoat for poor culture. None the less plant
allelopathy is a very well documented and researched area of botany.
Are you
saying you "don't believe in it?"

It's an interesting one. I planted some garlic mustard in a Big Wooden Tub
last season, along with some other salady stuff.

I think there is definitely some truth in it :-)

Garlic mustard now goes in its own small pots.

On 26/7/07 23:16, in article ,
"Martin" wrote:

On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 18:16:28 +0100, Sacha
wrote:

On 26/7/07 17:02, in article
, "La Puce"
wrote:

On 26 Jul, 16:29, Martin wrote:
Read the report and all will be revealed.

Jesus Martin, which bit?! It's a huge report!! And since when do you
beleive what our
government say?! Couldn't find anything on chicken either.

Me too, what did you miss?

Miss where and what?! When I visited several food growers? I don't
really
understand what you mean. But if you think I've missed something, I
did once, when I
came to realise that some growers were certified 'organic' for some
produce, but grew
several foot away from the 'organic' crop a crop which they copiously
sprayed! That is very
naughty and that's why I have visited the places I did. Again I can't
say for certain that what
I eat is entirely 'organic' but hey, what can I do other than just not
use chemicals myself and tell
others not to.

I think what you may be missing is that 'organic' does NOT mean the use of
no chemicals but it does mean the use of 'approved' chemicals. Copper based
sprays are used on potatoes because blight is so prevalent in this country.
So 'organic' potatoes may well have been sprayed with Bordeaux mixture, for
example.

Organic rules allow the use of pesticides in extreme circumstances. I quoted
the
DEFRA rules on organic food, they are the same as those applied all over the
EU.



Yeah right.

Yeah.

It was recommendations on how to produce organic food in the third world.
How many babies died as a result?

From the OISAT recipes?! How should I know?! My point is still the
same. No chemicals equal
better chance of non poisonning. What is difficult to understand in
this?

I sympathise with attempts at the non-use of chemicals if at all possible
but you did claim that babies had died as a result of their use and now you
can't produce any evidence. However passionately you might feel about this,
it doesn't help your cause to make claims you can't substantiate if you're
trying to convert people to your way of thinking.
snip

You sum up my feelings on the subject.
The only things we eat that we know are truly organic are our vegetables grown
in our allotment. We had the ground tested to ascertain there were no nasty
residues from the time when the land was used for bulb cultivation. The ground
was absolutely clean, I expected signs of the heavy metals that the Dutch used
in bulb cultivation.

I'm very wary of the organic claims from far flung countries because I'm not
au fait with how they're inspected or set. In any case, I try not to buy
foods that have flown thousands of miles to get here. They're not only not
fresh, they're not 'planet friendly'.
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

In reply to Sacha ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

I'm very wary of the organic claims from far flung countries because
I'm not au fait with how they're inspected or set. In any case, I
try not to buy foods that have flown thousands of miles to get here.
They're not only not fresh, they're not 'planet friendly'.

I have read that it makes more sense to fly them here than force them in
heated greenhouses here.

The real answer is to eat only seasonal food, like wot we always used to.

It won't happen, sadly.

On 27/7/07 07:58, in article , "Emery
Davis" wrote:
snip

As for the addition of sulfites, sulfite-free wine is practically
non-existant,
because a certain level is required to stabilize the wine.

Patricia Atkinson mentions adding sulfites in her autobiographies and her
wines are highly acclaimed.

Any wine that
will keep without refrigeration contains sulfites. (This is why the labelling
enforced by the US government is so annoying to winemakers.) Most
wines get their sulfites through equipment and barrel sterilization
techniques,
like the burning of sulfur in barrels. Further sulfites occur naturally in
the must,
(crushed juice and skins) although these may not be enough to stabilize.

AIUI, the more sulfites the more the chance of headaches and the cheaper the
white wine the more sulfites? Or so I was told in USA some years ago,
though not by a wine grower.
snip
--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

On 26 Jul, 19:00, "
wrote:
We use sprays when necessary, organic is superb but growing
food and crops commercially is not viable without their use. It is
said that in some countries, the yield would be so small that it would
be inadequate for the populace.

Do you grow commercially?! No, so why do you use glyphosade? For your
horsetail?
And show me the yield results you mention and in which country does
this refers to?

Certainly there is a lot to be said for restricting sprays, as much as
is reasonably possible but not to take it to the lengths of some nutty
fanatics, their reasoning is flawed.

Oh, that's what you call people who wants to preserve our birds,
insects, mamals and plants fanatics?
I had no idea.

On 26 Jul, 18:16, Sacha wrote:
I think what you may be missing is that 'organic' does NOT mean the use of
no chemicals but it does mean the use of 'approved' chemicals. Copper based
sprays are used on potatoes because blight is so prevalent in this country.
So 'organic' potatoes may well have been sprayed with Bordeaux mixture, for
example.

I'm not missing it. I understand it. However, what do I have to say to
tell you all that I am
trying to eat fruits and vegs that have not been sprayed with anything
and that are
in season? Why is this so bloody wrong?! It's ridiculous beyond beleif
to try to make me feel like some kind of
allien when what I am trying to do is either try to tell people to
stop using sprays for their
crops averaging 20kg per year ... and especially those who spray
manically on anything because
I've seen it done!! There's nothing wrong with that, is there?

When it's about crops commercially grown, we start to look at massive
spraying, tons of the stuff in the USA. The
cheap labour employed there are suffering and kids are born with no
limbs, eyes etc. I have provided 5 links at the
beginning of this thread.

I beleive that if we want these suffering to stop, we must eat
seasonnal vegs/fruits and not rely on imports. Then
we must ban these chemicals, because what is ok today will not be
tomorrow. See how many chemicals have been
removed from our shops. There's a reason for that. So why give me such
a bad time for thinking what is best?

I sympathise with attempts at the non-use of chemicals if at all possible

Great. As for the babies dying, see above.

In reply to La Puce ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

On 26 Jul, 19:00, "
wrote:
We use sprays when necessary, organic is superb but growing
food and crops commercially is not viable without their use. It is
said that in some countries, the yield would be so small that it
would be inadequate for the populace.

Do you grow commercially?! No, so why do you use glyphosade? For your
horsetail?
And show me the yield results you mention and in which country does
this refers to?

Certainly there is a lot to be said for restricting sprays, as much
as is reasonably possible but not to take it to the lengths of some
nutty fanatics, their reasoning is flawed.

Oh, that's what you call people who wants to preserve our birds,
insects, mamals and plants fanatics?
I had no idea.

:-)

I am going to say this only once ...

G L Y S O P H A T E

"Uncle Marvo" wrote ...
In reply to Sacha who wrote this in
I'm very wary of the organic claims from far flung countries because
I'm not au fait with how they're inspected or set. In any case, I
try not to buy foods that have flown thousands of miles to get here.
They're not only not fresh, they're not 'planet friendly'.

I have read that it makes more sense to fly them here than force them in
heated greenhouses here.

The real answer is to eat only seasonal food, like wot we always used to.

It won't happen, sadly.

Happens in France so why not here.

--
Regards
Bob Hobden
17mls W. of London.UK

In reply to Bob Hobden ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

"Uncle Marvo" wrote ...
In reply to Sacha who wrote this in
I'm very wary of the organic claims from far flung countries because
I'm not au fait with how they're inspected or set. In any case, I
try not to buy foods that have flown thousands of miles to get here.
They're not only not fresh, they're not 'planet friendly'.

I have read that it makes more sense to fly them here than force
them in heated greenhouses here.

The real answer is to eat only seasonal food, like wot we always
used to. It won't happen, sadly.

Happens in France so why not here.

You don't want me to answer that really, do you?

On 27/7/07 10:06, in article , "Uncle
Marvo" wrote:

In reply to Sacha ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

I'm very wary of the organic claims from far flung countries because
I'm not au fait with how they're inspected or set. In any case, I
try not to buy foods that have flown thousands of miles to get here.
They're not only not fresh, they're not 'planet friendly'.

I have read that it makes more sense to fly them here than force them in
heated greenhouses here.

The real answer is to eat only seasonal food, like wot we always used to.

It won't happen, sadly.


No but it's what I aim for. I don't succeed all the time but I do try. I
use a fair bit of frozen veg too which, recent research has shown,
apparently, has often got more of the natural vitamins than that which has
been trucked around UK, let alone flown from Peru or Chile!

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

In reply to Sacha ) who wrote this in
, I, Marvo, say :

On 27/7/07 10:06, in article ,
"Uncle Marvo" wrote:

In reply to Sacha ) who wrote this
in , I, Marvo, say :

I'm very wary of the organic claims from far flung countries because
I'm not au fait with how they're inspected or set. In any case, I
try not to buy foods that have flown thousands of miles to get here.
They're not only not fresh, they're not 'planet friendly'.

I have read that it makes more sense to fly them here than force
them in heated greenhouses here.

The real answer is to eat only seasonal food, like wot we always
used to.

It won't happen, sadly.


No but it's what I aim for. I don't succeed all the time but I do
try. I use a fair bit of frozen veg too which, recent research has
shown, apparently, has often got more of the natural vitamins than
that which has been trucked around UK, let alone flown from Peru or
Chile!

The freezer was invented so that we could eat broad beans with our gammon in
winter, IMHO :-)

I don't actually own one, apart from the little bit in the top of the
fridge. It will hold ice cubes plus a bag of either broad beans or Aunt
Bessie's Oven Chips.

On 27/7/07 11:04, in article
, "La Puce"
wrote:

On 26 Jul, 18:16, Sacha wrote:
I think what you may be missing is that 'organic' does NOT mean the use of
no chemicals but it does mean the use of 'approved' chemicals. Copper based
sprays are used on potatoes because blight is so prevalent in this country.
So 'organic' potatoes may well have been sprayed with Bordeaux mixture, for
example.

I'm not missing it. I understand it. However, what do I have to say to
tell you all that I am
trying to eat fruits and vegs that have not been sprayed with anything
and that are
in season? Why is this so bloody wrong?! It's ridiculous beyond beleif
to try to make me feel like some kind of
allien when what I am trying to do is either try to tell people to
stop using sprays for their
crops averaging 20kg per year ... and especially those who spray
manically on anything because
I've seen it done!! There's nothing wrong with that, is there?

Nobody has said it is wrong for you to try to eat as healthily as possible.
What we are saying is that your claims that children are dying because of
the use of glyphosate appear unsubstantiated.

When it's about crops commercially grown, we start to look at massive
spraying, tons of the stuff in the USA. The
cheap labour employed there are suffering and kids are born with no
limbs, eyes etc. I have provided 5 links at the
beginning of this thread.

I beleive that if we want these suffering to stop, we must eat
seasonnal vegs/fruits and not rely on imports. Then
we must ban these chemicals, because what is ok today will not be
tomorrow. See how many chemicals have been
removed from our shops. There's a reason for that. So why give me such
a bad time for thinking what is best?

Nobody is giving you a bad time. You made a case and some others don't
agree with it. This is a discussion forum so people are discussing.

I sympathise with attempts at the non-use of chemicals if at all possible

Great. As for the babies dying, see above.


Of glyphosate on someone's garden? I don't think so. That's the problem as
far as I can see. You're painting with too broad a brush for the purposes
of the group.

--
Sacha
http://www.hillhousenursery.co.uk
(remove weeds from address)
'We do not inherit the earth from our ancestors, we borrow it from our
children.'

On 27 Jul, 10:06, "Uncle Marvo"
wrote:
I have read that it makes more sense to fly them here than force them in
heated greenhouses here.

Indeed. Although there are many commercial growers managing to grow
toms without heating greenhouses. Growing with Grace for example do
it. Remember that if you eat local, the demands on the growers are
not as great as for supermarket flying the food. Eating non local
always mean that food has been picked up before it is ripe ... and
therefore is not as good for you as it should be. Vitamins and
minerals are also greater in a fruit/veg that has been picked when
riped.

But we all know that don't we ... I wonder if we have a 'guilty
conscience' when it comes to talking about this - about the way we
shop and eat and cook and justifying ourselves when we know that we've
bought those asparagus out of season to impress family or friends.
Obviously I and every women I know don't spend whole days cooking,
storing, bottleing and labelling hundreds of jars for winter days. We
do some, but not as much as we did say 50 years ago. That is the key
to change in my opinion, the time to reflect on our way of life, and
how we feed ourselves and our kids.

What would be doubly great is realising that the stuff we eat and
which is being flowned from miles away are produced by ruthless
corporations destroying the environment in which they produce the
stuff, using cheap labour who are suffering beyond beleif. That in my
opinion should be the key to make us all feel really crap about buying
the stuff.

That was my point in this thread.

The real answer is to eat only seasonal food, like wot we always used to.
It won't happen, sadly.

Yes it can if you really want to and you don't have to set up a cult
either ;o) It's already happening and what is
good is to hear one of your kids requesting a food and realising it's
not in season. When that happens you can be
sure that we're on the right track. I'd like to think that we're
making a difference. Feels good )