Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Organic v science

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Holderness
    Posts
    617

    Organic v science

    This mornings Today programme really illustrated the BBC,s and John Humprys bias against modern farming.
    First of all at 730 they eulogised Patrick Holden and the wonders of organic farming.
    Then at 8 30 Humphrys really went for Peter Kendall and modern productive farming.
    Not a mention of the fact that if we all went organic, we would all go hungry.
    Jack Caley

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northumbrialand
    Posts
    1,237

    Re: Organic v science

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack_Caley View Post
    This mornings Today programme really illustrated the BBC,s and John Humprys bias against modern farming.
    First of all at 730 they eulogised Patrick Holden and the wonders of organic farming.
    Then at 8 30 Humphrys really went for Peter Kendall and modern productive farming.
    Not a mention of the fact that if we all went organic, we would all go hungry.
    Jack Caley
    Hmmm......Kendall should have asked Humphries about his own attempt at farming......from memory, Organic dairy in Wales I think.
    Googling required.
    Pretty well shafted.
    Back after googling.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...r-efforts.html

    or for a more balanced view

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ral-dream.html

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Holderness
    Posts
    617

    Re: Organic v science

    Quote Originally Posted by Gee View Post
    Hmmm......Kendall should have asked Humphries about his own attempt at farming......from memory, Organic dairy in Wales I think.
    Googling required.
    Pretty well shafted.
    Back after googling.

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...r-efforts.html

    or for a more balanced view

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...ral-dream.html
    Thank you for those interesting articles. They do show what sort of a man Humphys is, and he can really use the power of speech.
    Trouble is , we know as farmers what the real world is really like.
    The ordinary guy in the street is influenced by this sort of propaganda.I believe one of the people in that programme was someone I engaged in debate with many years ago when I belonged an organisation called Farmers World Network. He was absolutely evangelical against modern farming. He was totally arrogant, could never see that modern science for all its faults had fed this country, a thing that organic farming could never do.
    The other problem is that regrettably the Today programme has tremendous power. I believe it was very instrumental in the demise of GM, a great loss to modern food production.
    Jack Caley

  4. #4
    Senior Member LALANS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Scotland, land of the free home of the brave
    Posts
    390

    Re: Organic v science

    Organic Farming is pure bunkum.
    My fore fathers were 'organic' in the early part of the 20th century. When modern technology became available they rushed to embrace it . Clearly the 'organic' way was so good and profitable that they couldn't wait to abandon it.
    Those who promote organic systems I regard as similar to a cross between a terrorist, an Islamic fundamentalist and snake oil salesman. They consistently never let the truth stand in the way. All else is not just bad but downright evil.
    Forget that organics is a very much niche market, less 1% of total food sales, wholely dependent upon huge subsidy payments and a bastion of the rich neo-liberal chattering classes.
    A recent survey of organic producers revealed that over 60% were quitting after year 3 of entering the Organic Payment scheme. Conveniently leaving when payments to them fell?
    Environmentally friendly? My arse. We would need to crop 30% land to feed the existing population let alone provide adequate nutrition for the projected population growth.
    And where would all the wildlife live then?
    Notwithstanding this we would have increased problems with shelf life, bacteria, fungal toxins. And what about the dangers of so called organic pesticides such as the liberal applications of copper, tin and sulphur salts etc.
    It just makes me laugh. We can all ruminate about it whilst we push our organic gruel round our wooden bowls in our bear skins by the fire.
    We have never been better feed and had a greater life expectancy. Due to organics? I don't think so.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northumbrialand
    Posts
    1,237

    Re: Organic v science

    Quote Originally Posted by LALANS View Post
    Organic Farming is pure bunkum.
    My fore fathers were 'organic' in the early part of the 20th century. When modern technology became available they rushed to embrace it . Clearly the 'organic' way was so good and profitable that they couldn't wait to abandon it.
    Those who promote organic systems I regard as similar to a cross between a terrorist, an Islamic fundamentalist and snake oil salesman. They consistently never let the truth stand in the way. All else is not just bad but downright evil.
    Forget that organics is a very much niche market, less 1% of total food sales, wholely dependent upon huge subsidy payments and a bastion of the rich neo-liberal chattering classes.
    A recent survey of organic producers revealed that over 60% were quitting after year 3 of entering the Organic Payment scheme. Conveniently leaving when payments to them fell?
    Environmentally friendly? My arse. We would need to crop 30% land to feed the existing population let alone provide adequate nutrition for the projected population growth.
    And where would all the wildlife live then?
    Notwithstanding this we would have increased problems with shelf life, bacteria, fungal toxins. And what about the dangers of so called organic pesticides such as the liberal applications of copper, tin and sulphur salts etc.
    It just makes me laugh. We can all ruminate about it whilst we push our organic gruel round our wooden bowls in our bear skins by the fire.
    We have never been better feed and had a greater life expectancy. Due to organics? I don't think so.
    Yep and ban them from using animal meds.
    Non of the double the withdrawal period crap!
    Two faced hypocrites.

  6. #6
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    the Boothen End
    Posts
    5

    Re: Organic v science

    Our household has purchased a weekly veg box from our local organic (soil association approved) farm for the last 20 years. They employ a dozen locals; more than all the other farms in our parish combined. They deliver the veg with zero packaging waste and negligible 'food miles'. They have just bought a new tractor, so I assume it is paying. When they plough there is a flock of gulls following behind - far more so than when their neighbouring wheat/wheat/rape neighbour ploughs - which I assume means they have a higher worm population and by extension a healthier soil.
    I have never heard them criticise their neighbouring non-organic farmers (of which I am one) as there is a mutual understanding that at the end of the day there is far more that unites us than divides us. We are all farmers, at the bottom of the supply chain and at the mercy of the weather, the politicians and the public.
    Every time farmers expend energy criticising each other, the real enemies of a sustainable, profitable UK agriculture - the supermarkets and the decision makers they have in their pockets - must have a quiet chuckle amongst themselves.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Location
    Northumbrialand
    Posts
    1,237

    Re: Organic v science

    Quote Originally Posted by Gee View Post
    Yep and ban them from using animal meds.
    Non of the double the withdrawal period crap!
    Two faced hypocrites.
    Perhaps I should expand.....
    Organic livestock farmers use exactly the same chemicals and medicines as conventional farmers but get around it by insisting on doubling the withdrawal period.
    Yet on the other hand happily claim that their organic meat is produced without any of the chemicals used by conventional farmers.
    Organic consumers gaily swallow both the meat and the SA guff.
    Hypocrites on both counts.
    SA cannot have it both ways.....either you use the products of modern Science or you do not! Weasly words that are little more than a con.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Posts
    1,452

    Re: Organic v science

    Quote Originally Posted by Jack_Caley View Post
    This mornings Today programme really illustrated the BBC,s and John Humprys bias against modern farming.
    First of all at 730 they eulogised Patrick Holden and the wonders of organic farming.
    Then at 8 30 Humphrys really went for Peter Kendall and modern productive farming.

    Jack Caley
    I'm not a fan of Humphrys as a person but in fairness he is usually sympathetic to uk farming, as is the today programme in general. For instance they gave an easy ride to Meurag Raymond when the milk protests were on and virtually begged poor old Meurag to make a coherent point, sadly he didn't quite manage it, other news outlets ate him for breakfast. Like the one that got him to say the NFU had never encouraged farmers to increase production, and then read him extracts from the NFU pamphlet telling farmers to do just that.

    also, if Peter Kendal is there to make one point of view, it's Humphrys' job to play devil's advocate and argue the other point, whether he agrees with it or not.

    Not a mention of the fact that if we all went organic, we would all go hungry.
    well we wouldn't. we'd just have to change the way we thought about food production and start focusing on producing food for people instead of agricultural commodities that may or may not eventually end up as food. you wouldn't be able to go into lidl and buy a chicken for 3 quid, but i'm not convinced this is such a good thing anyway, particularly for the chicken. we live in a world with record levels of obesity, cheap poor quality food is literally killing us.

    Anyway, the world isn't going to go organic because organics, in it's current form, is essentially a brand defined by the certification process. What is a tad more likely is that conventional farming might adopt some of the key principles of organic farming such as maintaining a healthy soil, and promoting sustainability, or reducing reliance on remedial treatment with antibiotics.

    On that latter note, many milk buyers have followed the lead of organics and have banned certain antibiotic types that are used in human treatment, such as third generation cephalasporins, and are discouraging blanket dry cow therapy too. that's because much of what organics stand for is just basic common sense and good practice.

    During the recent crisis with uk milk production with its crash of farm gate milk prices, my own buyer OMSCO maintained a healthy milk price throughout, they did this not by knocking conventional farmers bu by proactively seeking new export markets and by judicious management of the uk pool. (which they are able to do because they are a strong co op with a large market share). This is a clear success story that has enabled UK farmers to receive a fair price for their produce, why some people think this is a bad thing is beyond me. The thing to do is to look at what OMSCO and other such groups have done and apply those lessons to your own businesses, not moan about how unfair it all is and indulge in precisely the sort of negative slagging off you're accusing the organic sector of.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Holderness
    Posts
    617

    Re: Organic v science

    Quote Originally Posted by matbrojoe View Post
    I'm not a fan of Humphrys as a person but in fairness he is usually sympathetic to uk farming, as is the today programme in general. For instance they gave an easy ride to Meurag Raymond when the milk protests were on and virtually begged poor old Meurag to make a coherent point, sadly he didn't quite manage it, other news outlets ate him for breakfast. Like the one that got him to say the NFU had never encouraged farmers to increase production, and then read him extracts from the NFU pamphlet telling farmers to do just that.

    also, if Peter Kendal is there to make one point of view, it's Humphrys' job to play devil's advocate and argue the other point, whether he agrees with it or not.



    well we wouldn't. we'd just have to change the way we thought about food production and start focusing on producing food for people instead of agricultural commodities that may or may not eventually end up as food. you wouldn't be able to go into lidl and buy a chicken for 3 quid, but i'm not convinced this is such a good thing anyway, particularly for the chicken. we live in a world with record levels of obesity, cheap poor quality food is literally killing us.

    Anyway, the world isn't going to go organic because organics, in it's current form, is essentially a brand defined by the certification process. What is a tad more likely is that conventional farming might adopt some of the key principles of organic farming such as maintaining a healthy soil, and promoting sustainability, or reducing reliance on remedial treatment with antibiotics.

    On that latter note, many milk buyers have followed the lead of organics and have banned certain antibiotic types that are used in human treatment, such as third generation cephalasporins, and are discouraging blanket dry cow therapy too. that's because much of what organics stand for is just basic common sense and good practice.

    During the recent crisis with uk milk production with its crash of farm gate milk prices, my own buyer OMSCO maintained a healthy milk price throughout, they did this not by knocking conventional farmers bu by proactively seeking new export markets and by judicious management of the uk pool. (which they are able to do because they are a strong co op with a large market share). This is a clear success story that has enabled UK farmers to receive a fair price for their produce, why some people think this is a bad thing is beyond me. The thing to do is to look at what OMSCO and other such groups have done and apply those lessons to your own businesses, not moan about how unfair it all is and indulge in precisely the sort of negative slagging off you're accusing the organic sector of.
    For various reasons, I have not been able to read your thread until now.
    Thank you overall it was constructive, and I agree with 99% of it, with one or two slight comments.
    If you had heard the programme I think you would have to agree that Humphrys did do his job with Kendall in playing(?) devils advocate. However, there were no questions whatsoever of a negative manner, to the organic,(edit),merely just whole hearted hero worship.No mention whatsoever of things like a huge reduction in production, like a good friend locally who farms organically. He is doing a great job in various ways, but he does happen also to have 3 2megawatt wind turbines on the place!
    I do agree that there is a lot to be earns from the organic sector in good husbandry.
    I suppose I am maybe a little jaundiced over Patrick Holdens arrogance all those years ago.
    Regards,
    Jack Caley
    Last edited by Jack_Caley; 05-09-17 at 04:11 PM. Reason: Addition

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •