Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I find a diet consisting entirely of meat tends to leave me rather bunged up.


Wiping said bunged up bum with a steak is interesting, but pricey.


As a consequence, I tend to visit a range of shops to satisfy my non-meat needs and wants.


The meat in William Rose isn't all organic. They stock free-range, wild game and, I believe, non-organic farmed meat.


I think Blue-tongue disease is spread by midge.


I've yet to discover anything that will keep the midge away.


Does this mean that a degree of accuracy sprinkled through a flaccid pseudo provocation might improve rigidity?


Just wondered...

bawdy-nan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------


>

> I've yet to discover anything that will keep the

> midge away.

>


Have you heard of insecticide?




Organic farming is at least partly to blame but William Rose are only required to anchor the debate in SE22.

Alan Dale Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> bawdy-nan Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

>

> >

> > I've yet to discover anything that will keep

> the

> > midge away.

> >

>

> Have you heard of insecticide?

>

>

>

> Organic farming is at least partly to blame but

> William Rose are only required to anchor the

> debate in SE22.


Insecticide does nothing for midges - if it did the entire West Coast of Scotland would have used it by now.

Some guidance on the use of insecticides to control the spread of bluetongue can be found here:


http://www.defra.gov.uk/animalh/diseases/notifiable/pdf/bluetongue_technical.PDF


Seems it's the animals themselves that need to be treated with insecticide rather than their food as I previously suggested.


But that's just not organic is it?

Still don't see how it follows that farming organically leads to blue-tongue disease or its spread.


The purpose of treating the animals is so that they don't get infected not to eradicate the disease. Unlike, say foot and mouth, the disease is not spread animal to animal, rather by midge. The aim of the defra proposals is not to try and get rid of the insects. Its expected that this will happen with the onset of colder weather.


I can see the point that you want to make this scenario isn't a suitable vehicle for it.

Insecticides can be used to combat bluetongue but using them would prevent the meat from being able to be labeled as Organic.


It is indisputable that there are conflicts between the desire for organic meat and the need to combat bluetongue.


I have decided to stop eating organic meat to show my support for the farmers and I hope others will follow suit..

Was the farm where the outbreak occurred organically certified? Sorry haven't read story in depth so just wondered. Also wondering if part of the reason for the increase in midges is due to their natural predators being wiped out by non-organic and industrial agricultural methods i.e. decline in bird numbers due to destruction of habitat and knock on effects. Alan?

Plausible hypothesis.


Certainly one in the eye for the organic herd if it proves to be the case.


I think that banning pesticides, fertilizer and the like is a bit like when Jovo's won't let their kids go to the doctors.


Organic is just a brand, marketed well but with no substantive value and I like many others have been suckered into buying it just to keep up with my fellow forumites.


No more.


Our turkey was from William Rose last Christmas- back to Iceland this year.

the point is farmers are all cynical rip-off merchants, the "organic" label, however flawed in its implementation, stops them from taking the p*** by selling that rubbish bacon that shrinks in the pan etc. I couldn't care less about pesticides but there's no doubting W. Rose meat tastes miles better than Sainsburys'.

Pesticides have been linked (not necessarily definitively) to all sorts of nasty things from Parkinsons' to BSE.

Often its a cost benefit thing.


DDT helped eradicate malaria from many areas but did untold damage to the food chain. I've no idea what the answers are but I don't think it's nearly as straightforward as you imply AD.

On the whole I'm inclined to believe that avoiding eating stuff drenched in nerve agents is probably a good thing.

mockney piers Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

I don't think it's nearly

> as straightforward as you imply AD.

>


I don't think it's straightforward at all. It's the pro-organic lobby that is oversimplifying everything with their blanket non-acceptance of modern farming methods.


I think technology should be judged on merit not condemned as harmful artificial interference. It is a ridiculous leap of faith to say that if it's natural it's ok and any intervention is harmful.


What is ironic is the overlap between the organic loving Guardianista and the Dawkins' mob from the Enemies of Reason thread. Seems like they aren't the atheists they thought they were - more pagan worshippers of Mother Earth.

I just want stuff to appear on my table without having to worry too much about it, if that's me modern farming methods that make that possible then whoopee doo.

I'm merely pointing out that blind faith in chemicals with a long track record in causing harm is probably more harmful in the long run than superstitious belief in the organic god.


Where you put yourself in that spectrum Alan, is not only none of my business, it doesn't interest me at all.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Unless we don't fly I don't think we can be too critical of the authorities.  
    • In 2016 London City Airport began using concentrated flight paths. When there's a predominantly westerly wind, incoming aircraft approach from East London (north of the River). When there's a predominantly Easterly wind, incoming aircraft approach the airport from the West: circling through Forest Hill, Dulwich, Vauxhall, Tower Hamlets, Docklands. This latter flight path affects many of us in South East London. https://www.london.gov.uk/who-we-are/what-london-assembly-does/questions-mayor/find-an-answer/london-city-airport-concentrated-flight-paths The planes going into City are often below 2,000 ft, so very noisy. Sometimes we have incoming Heathrow at the same time, flying higher. The early flights that I hear e.g. 04:30 are incoming to Heathrow. They are scheduled to land at 05:30 but are 'early'. Apparently the government allows a percentage of flights to arrive early and late (but these are now established as regular occurrences, informally part of the schedule). IMHO Londoners are getting very poor political representation on this issue. Incredible that if you want to complain about aircraft noise, you're supposed to contact the airport concerned! Preposterous and designed solely in favour of aviation expansion.
    • Yet another recommendation for Jafar. Such a nice guy, really reliable and fair. He fixed a problem with our boiler and then incredibly kindly made two more visits to replace a different part at no extra cost. 
    • I didn't have any problems with plane noise until city airport started flying planes to and from about 5-8 minutes apart from 5.30 am or  6 am,  and even with ear plugs and double glazing I am woken at about 6 well before I usually would wake  up. I have lived here since 1986 and it is relatively recently that the planes have been flying far too low over East dulwich. I very much doubt that they are headinbg to Heathrow or from Heathrow. As the crow flies we are much , MUCH closer to City Airport than Heathrow or Gatwick. I even saw one flying so low you could see all the windows, when I was in Peckham Rye Park.
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...