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

    • It’s a 4 year old on a bike do you really think he is going 15mph. Grown adults complaining about a child who probably isn’t able to string a few sentences together says a lot about the people in this forum. If this member was hit from behind the father was probably walking behind the bike so I don’t get the point of stretching out an overreaction from a child in Nursery bumping into you. Grow up Obviously a four year old should be cycling on the pavement.
    • Malumbu,  if none of us were there, does that mean that nobody should post anything on here unless they have witnesses from the EDF? Why would someone post something like this if it  wasn't true? This is not about whether children should or should not be cycling on the pavement. There are specific issues. a) the child was out of sight of the person supposed to be caring for him b) he appears to have been  either not looking where he was going or was out of control of the bike c) if he did see that he was about to hit someone  he apparently did not give them any kind of warning  d)  a person was unexpectedly hit from behind whilst just walking along, which in my view makes him a victim e) does the title of the thread really matter as the issue was described in the first post?  f) nobody is blaming the child, they are blaming the person who should have been watching him g) do you really think it was acceptable for that person to find the situation funny? The OP was not complaining about the 4 year old. They were complaining about an adult's lack of supervision of a 4 year old who was not capable of riding a bike and who hit someone from behind with no warning. Also, apart from reading the OP more carefully, perhaps also choose your words more carefully. Jobless? Lunatic? Charming.
    • Completely jobless and lunatic behaviour coming on a forum and complaining about a 4 year old and the child’s bike riding skills. Honestly grow up
    • I have to say, I too am upset about the passing of DulwichFox. He was a real local character, who unlike me, managed to stick with ED despite all of the nauseous yuppification of the last three decades. R.I.P to foxy    Louisa. 
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

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