Saturday, December 8, 2012

Acceptable agrarian risk?

Another policy clusterfuck is this falsity to attempt a "0 risk" situation in any aspect of food production in small farms or industrialized  is impossible, like scientifically impossible. So why are there seemingly two sets of rules?

Industrial food is only held accountable when enough people get sick,

whereas small farms are held accountable if there might be a theoretical mathematical probability that someone may, at some time in the future possibly get sick.

Seems a little lopsided to me.

And what's this limited sales on raw milk in NY... does that mean that once you sell a certain amount you have to remove yourself from the free market because the government says so... mmmm sounds fairly communist to me.

And not being able to transport ANY amount of raw milk across state lines for strictly personal use, what the hell is that? Does anyone honestly believe that raw milk poses more of a social or personal threat than alcohol? Seriously?
I want to see the figures used to justify that there are more raw milk related injuries and deaths per annum than from booze. That would be the justification for there being tighter regulation on raw milk than for booze. It's MILK for fuck's sake.

This is one of those examples of a PR campaign gone so well, it has turned into this deplorable Kurtz-ian nightmare. Local food was somehow deemed less safe than processed and pasteurized food.

(There is more centralized money in the selling of all the factory equipment and so on... Just a guess)

Now you may be able to find examples of people who have gotten ill, and possibly died from eating "raw" food. It happens, people get sick from all sorts of weird stuff - you cannot remove microbes entirely from growing plants and animals. It's not possible. And it's not safe, but that's another story.

But, I know for a fact that you can also find examples of people who have become ill and even died from food that was processed, and bagged, and shipped to where the consumer bought at a supermarket. I would wager, there are actually more cases of the latter in recent decades as opposed to the former.

So do you want to put something that came from this place in your body?......

OR from this place?...

So, if you're going by the numbers...... the food from factories and supermarkets is MORE DANGEROUS than the food one would get if they bought it straight from the small independent farm.

As it is easy to conceive that more people get sick from e-coli, and mad-cow, and other such food born illnesses from factory farms and modern industrialized foodstuffs than from local organic farms.

Then there is the money issue of localized economies vs. the Tysons, Monsantos and Wal-Marts which we know hurt small local communities way more than help them, financially speaking. But again, whole other (but not unrelated) issue.

So if public welfare and safety was the actual concern of the government.... they would follow the risk to the people...

...instead of the money under the table.

Next, they're going to tell me that i can't have raw oysters or undercooked eggs or Medium Rare anything... oh wait, they keep trying that...

I thought I had the right to pursue happiness and all that jazz... Isn't happiness good food, good people, and a warm gun?

In the land of the free, when am I going to be free to make the choice to buy what i want to buy, grow what i want to grow, and eat what i want to eat?

The amount of work I have to go through to avoid eating processed crap is one step away from not having any choice at all.


All of us.

For letting it come to this.

No comments:

Post a Comment