(23-02-2023, 08:28 PM)Oh_hunnihunni Wrote: Wanting agriculture to change to be more sustainable isn't being antifarming or antifarmer. it's just being sensible in view of the evidence.
(23-02-2023, 09:21 AM)SueDonim Wrote: The point is that Fonterra's sole reason for being is to help farmers by selling the dairy products they produce.
Artificial food might be a reality for the future but it's not Fonterra's job to be investigating it. Our primary sources of natural food are under threat and we should be doing our best to support production of good, healthy, natural food. The analogy of the horse-drawn days giving way to the ICE is interesting. Right on one level, but now we are re-thinking the ICE. The freedoms it gave us to enrich our lives are now being criticised as wasteful. Let's not make similar mistakes with food. The techs can investigate food alternatives as they will continue doing, but here in NZ our culture and population level allows us to enjoy proper food and may that continue.
Proper food?
A bit judgemental there perhaps?
"In the year 2525, if man is still alive, if woman can survive, they may find
In the year 3535 Ain't gonna need to tell the truth, tell no lie
Everything you think, do and say Is in the pill you took today"
Actually I was simply differentiating between food that started out from a plant or animal, against food that started out in a laboratory. For me, one is "proper" and the other "artificial". I'm sure there are other terms that would do as well.
(24-02-2023, 11:18 AM)harm_less Wrote: The overriding factor is that all of us operate on differing metabolic ways and the increasing levels of inflammatory responses and autoimmune afflictions caused to a large part by poor diet, pharmaceutical overuse, environmental toxins, caffeine and alcohol consumption and most importantly stress. We are increasingly becoming a health compromised species and while the adoption of food that are less damaging to our environment is to be admired on one level the increase in such heavily refined and manipulated inputs into our diets is very questionable for our gut and overall bodily health.
Exactly
(24-02-2023, 12:25 PM)Olive Wrote: I agree. If I choose to feed myself and my household on minimally processed foods such as fish, meat, eggs, cheese, nuts, fruit and vegetables, thereby maintaining my very good health, I will be placing much less burden on our health services and our environment than if I eat ultra-processed convenience foods that are are associated with inflammation, diabetes, mental health problems and obesity. I am quite sure that the carbon footprint of a pasture-fed steer (and the necessary butchering) is smaller than the footprint of even one medical practice with its equipment and pharmaceuticals.
And let's not get into footprint of all the packaging of ultra-processed food.
And yes, I know this is a reductive example, but it is a useful perspective.
Also a great perspective.
Overall, it is becoming increasingly difficult to get food that hasn't been adulterated with unnecessary chemicals. Coming back to the topic, it's not something Fonterra should be meddling in. They should be highlighting their shareholders' products as being the real deal.