[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: The Limits To Growth
purchase@cyberus.ca (Ken Purchase) wrote:
>> Yuri.
>>
>>Overpopulation? Paul Ehrlich? Wake up and smell the increased food
>>production in the world. Per-capita world food production has been
>>rising steadily since 1950 and is currently 40% higher than it was
>>then. These are official UN figures. As proof of this realize that the
>>real price of wheat has been steadily falling since 1800, and as prices
>>are the best judges of scarcity, we are not facing a food shortage but a
>>massive food surplus. Also do you realize that through the use of
>>hydrophonics a midwestern company called PhytoFarm has built a factory
>>of 50,000 square feet (about an acre) and is producing 1 ton of garden
>>vegetables (like lettuce) per day.
>>
>>In other words, don't worry, be happy theres plenty of food for
>>everyone.
>>
>>Max Jacobs
>>
>>************************************************************************
>>The Bionomics Institute
>>http://www.bionomics.org
>>
>>Viewing the economy as an ecosystem
>>
>>************************************************************************
>I have to say that I agree with the theory that there isn't enough food, at
>least not enough quality food to keep up with population growth. Sure we do
>have hydroponics and we also have new chemicals and pesticides that make
>things grow bigger, faster and with less interference, and we also have cancer
>rates which are increasing as a result. I think this is all part of a larger
i have to agree with Ken's overall assement of cancer risk. But for
the look at the first enviromental problem of the 21st century start
looking at endocrine blockers. The chemicals that pose as endocrines
will be a greater problem than ozone depletion and cancer risk
combined. There is a fair amount of info available on the wweb, just
set your search engine to endocrines.
>picture. We are very smart in the sense that we think we have solutions to or
>can come up with solutions to alot of problems, food being one of them. Our
>companies come up with these new chemicals to help with the food situation,
>governments rubber stamp them after a year of testing and it's like magic.
>All of the sudden we have billions more tomatoes, each one looking perfect I
>might add (just think, there was a day when people would bite into a tomatoe,
>bugs and all). What we don't connect with is the fact that none of these
>chemicals endure long enough research to assess their contribution to the
>increase of disease such as cancer. So in fact yes we may be producing more
>food but we're also increasing the rate at which people die of cancer (one
>example). If you step back from that maybe you will see that if it's not one
>thing (food shortage) that's killing us it's something else (cancer). As far
>as governments and chemical companies are concerned, mandates run between 4
>and thirty years so who cares if their funky tomatoes kill people....they'll
>have enjoyed their wealth by the time the numbers start coming in. This
>chemical theory not only happens in food but it occurs every day in our lives.
> We are constantly exposed to things that are going to eventually have an
>effect on our numbers. Say it's cancer or pollution or tomatoes...it's all
>really the same thing!
References: