PERSONAL HEALTH  
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 63

What's So Scary About Michael Pollan? Why Corporate Agriculture Tried to Censor His University Speech

Agribusiness is trying to combat Pollan's message of sustainable, healthy eating.
October 28, 2009  |  
 
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Personal Health headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

Even if agribusiness could shut Michael Pollan up, the outspoken author of Omnivore's Dilemma and a journalism professor at University of California, Berkeley, it still has the Los Angeles Times to contend with.

Last week, the Times blasted California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo for downgrading a scheduled Pollan lecture because it received pressure from David E. Wood, a university donor who happens to be chairman of the Harris Ranch Beef Co.

"Agribusiness gets plenty of opportunities to preach its point of view at agriculture schools such as Cal Poly, where the likes of Monsanto and Cargill fund research," the Times wrote, calling the 800-acre Harris Ranch, near Coalinga, whose "smell assaults passersby long before the panorama of thousands of cattle packed atop layers of their own manure,"--"Cowschwitz." Ouch.

And agribusiness has the University of Wisconsin-Madison to deal with.

The land grant, ag-based university, in the middle of dairyland, clearly doesn't remember its roots. It gave Pollan's In Defense of Food, another anti-agbiz screed according to industry, free to all incoming freshmen as part of its common book read program where everyone reads the same book, Go Big Read, in August.

"I have not seen the students this excited about something in years," Irwin Goodman, horticulture professor and vice dean of the College of Agricultural and Life Sciences told the Associated Press as the James Beard Award-winning book was discussed in French and political science classes and included in an exhibit on the history of food.

Protesting farmers who came to hear Pollan speak at the university's 17,000-seat Kohl Center in September wearing matching green T-shirts which said "In Defense of Farming: Eat Food. Be Healthy. Thank Farmers" were clearly outnumbered. So were bumper stickers reading No Food; No Farms and Don't Criticize Farmers With Your Mouth Full in the parking lot.

Students get all their facts from writers like Pollan, the farmers, who were bussed in by Madison-based feed company Vita Plus, told the Capital Times. They have never visited a farm for first-hand knowledge of food production and don't know what they're talking about.

But efforts to open farms to the public are not always successful.

This month United Egg Producers' "Opening the Barn Doors" media tour at Morning Fresh Farms in northern Colorado, for example, only confirmed the size of today's egg farm that make humane conditions impossible (36 barns; 23,000 birds each, 23 million dozen eggs a year) and raised further questions about environmental blight by showing the press wearing white HazMat suits to enter the barns. (See: You want us to eat WHAT?)

Last month the American Egg Board rolled out a kid-focused "The Good Egg" campaign which includes sponsorship of Sesame Street, a Cookie Monster product placement and a feel good virtual tour to soften public opinion about egg farms. But nowhere does the campaign address the daily grinding up of newborn males even as they hatch at the hatcheries which supply egg farms to provide the industry with only females--a practice that United Egg Producers confirms is routine. Does the Cookie Monster know about that?

Nor can all that crowding and all those chemicals be good for you, Pollan has written and many studies suggest.

But agribusiness is also combating last year's American Institute for Cancer Research and World Cancer Research Fund study that found the link between processed meats and colon cancer so strong, the organizations advised consumers to change their eating habits.

Trent Loos, an outspoken columnist with the agbiz weekly, Feedstuffs, says nitrosamines, found in processed or cured meat and widely believed carcinogenic, may actually be good for you, preventing and treating "cardiovascular and other diseases associated with nitric oxide insufficiency in the diet."

"Nitric oxide is an important signaling molecule in the human body to regulate numerous physiological functions including blood flow to tissues and organs," write Loos of research conducted by Dr. Nathan Bryan at the Brown Foundation Institute of Molecular Medicine at the University of Texas, Houston. "The regular intake of nitrite-containing food appears to ensure that blood and tissue levels of nitrite and nitric oxide pools in the body are maintained at adequate levels."

Some of the ag press has even picked up the theory--but don't expect a Pollan book called In Defense of Nitrites anytime soon.


Martha Rosenberg is a columnist and cartoonist who frequently writes about the impact of the pharmaceutical, food and gun industries on public health. A former medical copywriter, her work has appeared in the Boston Globe, San Francisco Chronicle, Los Angeles Times and Chicago Tribune, as well as on the BBC and in the original National Lampoon.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Personal Health headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: health, food, eating, michael pollan


Comments are closed-

Food from animal hell
Posted by: Ka-bird on Oct 28, 2009 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've driven through dairy-farm country in So. California. A swath of land as big as Belgium with vast pens carpeted in manure and not a blade of grass in sight as far as the eye could see. The stench makes you roll up the car windows. Those cows stand in their own shit until the day they die.
And I won't even start on battery chicken hell.
Most of us would not deliberately torment an animal, but close our eyes to the agro-industry torment that brings us our cheap supermarket meat and eggs. At the very least, if you have a conscience, pay the extra pennies and buy free range beef, chickens, and eggs.
Better still, do the planet, yourself, and animals a favor and go vegetarian.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Food from animal hell Posted by: MeasureFree

Comments are closed-

Food Production and Health Care Reform Inextricably Linked
Posted by: poorighteousteacher on Oct 28, 2009 5:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Food Producers profit from unhealthy practices (both animal and human), while the Health Care industry profits from what makes us sick (mostly food based and environmental). Both industries fight reform which will benefit the consumer(both physically and financially), because of a possible dip in profits and potential lawsuits. So in a nutshell, under the current system they will profit at our expense. Same is true for companies that pump carcinogens into the atmosphere and water supply. Instead of my taxes paying for a single payer system, they subsidize the agribusiness and chemical industries- the very profiteers who get rich when we get sick and die from their products. The Health Care Cartel knows the causes of our poor health. It is in their interest that people stay sick, and that they have a monopoly on our "health" care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Local harvest
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line on Oct 28, 2009 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
localharvest.org lists local producers all over the country. If you want to opt out of the agribusiness mayhem...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Local harvest Posted by: MotherLodeBeth
» RE: Local harvest Posted by: aremy

Comments are closed-

Another let's kick farmers article
Posted by: rcase on Oct 28, 2009 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If it were not for modern farming advances the world would be starving. We once produced 70 bushels of corn to the acre; now we produce 200. Eggs were as almost as expensive (in some places) during W.W. I as they are today. I raised chickens the old-fashioned way. They ran loose. They also got eaten by possums, were underweight, and died young. Milk (in my area) costs $2 a gallon. In places overseas where they farm differently it costs $6 a gallon. Quality of life? In my area five times as many young men (and some women) would go into farming if they could. I didn't spray my apples this year. There wasn't one I could eat (most of my other non-sprayed vegies and fruit did fine, however). Don't eat the stuff the big farms produce if you don't want to. Grow your own. Live off the farmer's market. But many starving people of the world don't have that option.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The reasons people are starving Posted by: souffrantfleur

Comments are closed-

USG Subsidising CORN is killing us
Posted by: mtatasmith on Oct 28, 2009 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In more ways than one - corn / corn syrup is in EVERY processed food we eat, and fed to just about every(if not every)animal that is eatten. Sugar feeds cancer...we wonder why we have health problems?? Best thing we can do is stop government subsidies to grow corn AND stop eatting sugar. I didn't even mention all the chemical altering that is done to corn - or did I?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

real farmer
Posted by: jrgjniew on Oct 28, 2009 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Some of the ag press has even picked up the theory--but don't expect a Pollan book called In Defense of Nitrites anytime soon." ......and herein lies the problem. A professor with an agenda (Pollen), will refuse to acknowledge current research data, such as that shown here from a a prominant medical research facility--presumably with no dog in the fight. As long as he is making speaking fees and selling books, he will continue on his vegan(although be it veiled somewhat) agenda. What does he thinks happens to the unwanted male chicks on what he would term "sustainable" farms(which really means pre 1950's technology)? This is America, and just as Pollen has a right to say what he wants, as a professor, he should have higher standard of evidence to uphold. His emotional veganism agenda is overriding the fact that people will eat meat, we cannot raise enough meat on all "free-range" production, low-mid income families cannot afford meat raised that way, that the environmental footprint of those farms may actually be worse, depending on what you count and don't count, "horse-power" takes about 40% of the productive land for "horse fuel", folks driving 50 miles to different farmers markets uses more fuel that trucks and trains hauling it to the local grocery, etc., etc. Just as he has a right to say what he thinks(or thinks will sell books), the people who contribute large sums to universities should have a say in whether they wish to continue contributing. (Note, if they pay for research, those results should be public, unbiased, etc.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: real farmer Posted by: progressiveview
» RE: real farmer Posted by: january37
» who drives 50 miles to a farmers market? Posted by: kungfoofighterx
» RE:AL FARMER, - WRONG!! Posted by: blurider
» RE: AL FARMER, - WRONG!! Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: AL FARMER, - WRONG!! Posted by: tkwilson

Comments are closed-

Across the board corporate control of academic institutions is a threat to public safety...
Posted by: gunboat diplomat on Oct 28, 2009 5:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And to democracy itself - but the same goes for corporate control of media institutions and government agencies.

An independent academic system is just as important as an independent judiciary. The two basic pillars of modern civilization are science and law, and if they are corrupted the whole edifice will come crashing down.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has been loaded up with corporate tools and apologists by the previous (Supreme Court-selected) administration - another sign of the breakdown in the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.

Similarly, more and more academic chancellors and administrators have been selected from the ranks of corporate CEOs from pharmaceutical and similar IPR-dependent industries.

The situation is far worse than just pressure to keep Pollan off the speaker's list. When the UC system owns the patent on rGBH milk products (engineered cow growth hormone for dairy cows), don't expect to see any UC scientists examining the safety of rGBH milk (which has high pus & bacteria content, as well as lots of antibiotics).

For example, does a high-antibiotic rGBH drug regime for cows tend to create drug-resistant pathogens? The answer is probably yes - but with the UC looking to clear $100 million from rGBH sales, they're not going to look into it.

Wholesale reform is needed, meaning a complete repeal of the Reagan-era university privatization laws that were pushed by Bayh, Dole, Rumsfeld & Co.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

john henry
Posted by: jrgjniew on Oct 28, 2009 6:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Agribusiness is trying to combat Pollan's message of sustainable, healthy eating." The problem is in the definitions. What he calls "sustainable", will likely lead to starvation of millions more. What he calls sustainable, does not necessarilly mean "healthy". That is the problem. He is trying to link outdated farming methods with health. That is a fallacy. Those products raised the way he proclaims can be healthy, but the is no direct link or guarantee. He is promoting a lifestyle, for which only a few can afford.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: But the farming methods are exactly the problem Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: john henry Posted by: AndyF
» RE: john henry Posted by: Kathy-B

Comments are closed-

FACTORY FARMS & GOVERNMENT COMMIT HOLOCAUST ON ANIMALS
Posted by: smf1403 on Oct 28, 2009 7:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Factory farms, aided and abetted by the U.S. government commit a holocaust on animals.

The torture and death camps are uncivilized and immoral and the only way this will change is if people change.

The factory farms handle the animals like factory parts, dismantling their body parts; cutting the tails off cows and pigs and the beaks off chickens without anesthetic. The cruelty inflicted on these animals would bring most people to tears.

There is big money contributed by the Smithfield Farms' and the Purdue's to the campaigns of our elected officials which is why factory farms are subsidized by the government using our tax dollars.

I first learned about this cruelty from a Michael Pollan New York Times article several years ago and decided not to be a part of it.

It's that simple. We are either as uncivilized, mean-spirited and cold-hearted as these factory farms or we are decent, thinking persons.

Supply and demand means we contribute to the holocaust and look the other way, knowing the suffering that we are directly responsible for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Follow the money
Posted by: njguy73 on Oct 28, 2009 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Pollan is bad for stockholders. People who grow their own food do not buy mass-produced food. If Pollan came up with a way for Cargill or Archer daniels Midland to get rich off sustainable agriculture, he'd be OK.

What's it gonna be, folks? Your 401k or your health?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Censorship
Posted by: xbeeno on Oct 28, 2009 8:35 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow censorship in ANY form totally sucks and is NOT right!

Jessi
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

re: real farmer
Posted by: january37 on Oct 28, 2009 8:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Huh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

abolish factory farming
Posted by: vasumurti on Oct 28, 2009 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some discussion of the cruelty of modern factory farming is is necessary here. Most Americans are still under the mistaken impression that animals are raised on idyllic farms with sunshine, fresh air, and open spaces, and are killed humanely, after a pleasant life. The reality, however, is quite different.

A contermporary Benedictine monk, Brother David Steindl-Rast, wrote in Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a peace and justice periodical, in 1995, that "...the survival of our planet depends on our sense of belonging--to all other humans, to dolphins caught in dragnets, to pigs and chickens and calves raised in animal concentration camps, to redwoods and rainforests, to kelp beds in our oceans, and to the ozone layer."

In a sermon preached in York Minster, September 28, 1986, John Austin Baker, the Bishop of Salisbury, England, attacked factory farming; choosing as his example, the treatment of chickens.

"Is there any credit balance for the battery hen, denied almost all natural functioning, all normal environment, lapsing steadily into deformity and disease, for the whole of her existence? he asked. "It is in the battery shed and the broiler house, not in the wild, that we find the true parallel to Auschwitz. Auschwitz is a purely human invention."

On another occasion, Bishop Baker taught: "By far the most important duty of all Christians in the cause of animal welfare is to cultivate this capacity to see; to see things with the heart of God, and so to suffer with other creatures."

On World Prayer Day for Animals, October 4, 1986, Bishop Baker preached against indifference to animal pain and lauded the animal welfare movement:

"To shut your mind, heart, imagination to the sufferings of others is to begin to slowly but inexorably to die. It is to cease by inches from being human, to become in the end capable of nothing generous or unselfish--or sometimes capable of anything, however terrible. You in the animal welfare movement are among those who may yet save our society from becoming spiritually deaf, blind and dead, and so from the doom that will justly follow."

According to Bishop Baker: "...Rights, whether animal or human, have only one sure foundation: that God loves us all and rejoices in us all. We humans are called to share with God in fulfilling the work of love towards all creatures...the true glory of the strong is to give themselves for the cherishing of the weak."

The realization that meat is an unnecessary luxury, resulting in inequities in the world's food
supply, has prompted religious leaders in different denominations to call on their members to abstain from meat.

Paul Moore, Jr., the Episcopal bishop of the Diocese of New York, made such an appeal in a November 1974 pastoral letter, calling for the observance of "meatless Wednedays." A similar appeal had been issued earlier by Roman Catholic Cardinal Cooke of New York. The Reverend Eugene Carson Blake, former head of the World Council of Churches, and founder of Bread for the World, has encouraged everyone in his anti-hunger organization to abstain from eating meat on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

Ronald J. Sider of Evangelicals for Social Action pointed out in his 1977 book, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, that 220 million Americans were consuming enough grain (largely because of the high consumption of grain fed to livestock) to feed over one billion people in the poorer countries.

Father Thomas Berry, a Catholic priest, author, and founder of the Riverdale Center for Religious Research in New York, wrote in 1987 that "Vegetarianism is a way of life that we should all move toward for economic survival, physical well-being, and spiritual integrity."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

corp ag business not farms but factories
Posted by: ZeeBruce on Oct 28, 2009 9:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My family operated a farm in New England from 1643 through 1956 and during that time it never used petrochemicals for fertilizer or for herbicides or for pesticides. It used the manure from the cows to fertilize the fields which produced the corn for the cows as well as other crops for direct consumption by people. This is the Pollen model and the one followed in Argentina and France and other countries where there is not the closed loop system of government funding of factory ag operations which may large contributions to US Congress members who in turn vote for the government funding of these companies food factories. Of course ADM and other companies that profit enormously at public expense are going to oppose ending this very profitable system and through a corrupt corporate American media and corrupt researchers will sway the opinions of even some working farmers who should know better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:IGHT ON, ZeeBruce!! Posted by: blurider

Comments are closed-

Would It Have Been So Hard To Write An Actual Article About Ag Reaction to Pollan
Posted by: femmyv on Oct 28, 2009 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And less preaching-to-the-choir on agri-business issues that most of Alternet's readers are more than familiar with, already?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

RE:AL FARMER, - WRONG!!
Posted by: blurider on Oct 28, 2009 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we could always eat a little less - wouldn't hurt! OR at least eat a little less of the high quality, organic, free range, grass fed meats we enjoyed!

We could only raise our beef, mutton and goats (bison and some game meats) on all the grasslands that should never have felt the plow, on the mountainous and rocky, swampy and semi arid desert lands and the so called 'farm land' that isn't suitable for farming without a million and one amendments. We could put more buckaroos on horseback going out with the chuck wagons in the west and much, much less antibiotics and growth hormones along with less corn and soy meal in less, over fattened steers in ever less mechanized and over medicated 'feed lots'!

We could even use 'multi-purpose chicken breeds to raise our eggs and eat the males - seems more humane and much more efficient.

Horse power takes forty percent of the farmland?? In what universe? What about the rangeland in the west? Forty percent???!! HORSE MANURE!!

Do you even know what end of the horse, to put the bridle on? Maybe you sould stick to the 'multi-purpose chicken ranching'!

You owe it to the world and Pollan to read one or more of his books before you attack! He's a city boy no doubt, but he's a smart, well informed and well intentioned city boy and he's as willing and eager to learn as you would be in my, more perfect world!

Farmers don't farm today to feed the world's starving, huddled, masses but to feed the greed of Con Agra, Monsanto and Archer Daniels Midland.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

chickens unfit for human consumption
Posted by: oregonmagoo on Oct 28, 2009 2:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A friend of mine went to an "egg factory". They were in the process of killing all the birds in a building because they were older and production was down. He innocently asked if the meat was headed for Cambell's(chicken noodle soup, maybe?). No, he was told that due to the feed addditives, antibiotics and hormones, the meat was considered toxic waste and by law had to be incinerated(put it in the air, OK!). Think about that next time you pick up a carton of 12 in the store! Grourown!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Mixed On Pollan
Posted by: Gravitas on Oct 28, 2009 4:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I certainly can't side with agribusiness, as a sociologist I must say his joining the anti obesity bandwagon and the stats he uses is irresponsible. No one should be allowed to get away with presenting research from MSM that is nothing more than pharma marketing, and that is exactly where most stats on obesity he uses ultimately come from.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mixed On Pollan Posted by: wormfarmer
» RE: Mixed On Pollan Posted by: Kathy-B

Comments are closed-

American agriculture (and agri-businesses) are the envy of the World!
Posted by: AJR Journal on Oct 28, 2009 5:08 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Name a country that has the productivity, efficiency, and the high quality results of the American farmer and the downstream enterprises.
You can't.
American food production , without question is the best in the World. Nowhere is food more affordable, of higher quality, and of greater variety. In my local Pick'n Save in Milwaukee, there fruits, vegetables, and meats for every pocketbook. Nowhere in the World do low-income buyers get more bang for their buck.
Can production be improved? Of course.
Are smart people working on that? 24/7
Relax, it will only get better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

700 acres of Harris Ranch should be olive groves
Posted by: plantland on Oct 29, 2009 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If our Sec. of Health and Human Services were serious about health refor, she would be identifying areas that could be converted to olive groves.

Good oils could decrease disease, especially if the calories are swapped out from ccorn syrup and other empty calories.

Right now, we don't have enough olive oil to switch people over to it even if we had that as a health reform directive or goal.

Coachella is warm enough, and all those feeder cattle must consume water that could go to establishing olive groves.

Farmers and ranchers shouldn't go under after switching over to socially responsible production.

I also wonder whether Harris Ranch was ever a grapefruit grove.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The problem is the mindset.
Posted by: wisegalah on Oct 29, 2009 5:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Things (customers, chickens, cornfields, potatoes, etc, etc) only have meaning if they can be used to make money.
There has been a fundamental reversal of values. Money was meant to be an easily managed and transferable measure of the value of potatoes, corn, chickens, coal, iron ore, etc). As such it is a valuable and important invention. Money should be in the service of those products and services which serve and enrich life.
What has happened is that there has been a reversal of the order of things.
Big business is interested only in making money and is happy to use anything to do that and are prepared to prostitute everything to increase their profits. When they tell you that they are interested in agriculture they are lying unless they add that their interest is only because of the opportunities for profit that are inherent in that activity.
They will use and abuse the resources of the planet to increase their returns. In other words the resources (plants, minerals, individual labour, etc) now have come to symbolise profits, money. This really is prostitution of the worlds valuables.

I am not advocating the ending of money as the central method of exchange. I am simply asking for a readjustment of the values by which business does its stuff.

Money should be the servant of people and production. The worlds resources should not be made to serve money and its worshippers. servant

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

In Coalinga, not Coachella!
Posted by: Campesino on Nov 2, 2009 2:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
700 acres of Harris Ranch should be olive groves
[Report this comment] [Ignore this user] Posted by: plantland on Oct 29, 2009 8:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
If our Sec. of Health and Human Services were serious about health refor, she would be identifying areas that could be converted to olive groves.

Good oils could decrease disease, especially if the calories are swapped out from ccorn syrup and other empty calories.

Right now, we don't have enough olive oil to switch people over to it even if we had that as a health reform directive or goal.

Coachella is warm enough, and all those feeder cattle must consume water that could go to establishing olive groves.

Farmers and ranchers shouldn't go under after switching over to socially responsible production.

I also wonder whether Harris Ranch was ever a grapefruit grove.

===============================================

Harris Ranch is in Coalinga, in the northern San Joaquin Valley. Nothing like the desert of Coachella near Palm Springs.

And if you bother to look at their website, you'll see their other major products are garlic and onions.

But you probably could grow olives there if you wanted. Just a matter of water

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

monsanto,con agra,adm
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Nov 3, 2009 5:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
all criminals. thieves and out to make the most money they can,and it they couldn't care less about you or your families' heallth. just try to go visit monsanto sometime.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

Food from animal hell
Posted by: Ka-bird on Oct 28, 2009 12:35 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I've driven through dairy-farm country in So. California. A swath of land as big as Belgium with vast pens carpeted in manure and not a blade of grass in sight as far as the eye could see. The stench makes you roll up the car windows. Those cows stand in their own shit until the day they die.
And I won't even start on battery chicken hell.
Most of us would not deliberately torment an animal, but close our eyes to the agro-industry torment that brings us our cheap supermarket meat and eggs. At the very least, if you have a conscience, pay the extra pennies and buy free range beef, chickens, and eggs.
Better still, do the planet, yourself, and animals a favor and go vegetarian.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Food from animal hell Posted by: MeasureFree

Comments are closed-

Food Production and Health Care Reform Inextricably Linked
Posted by: poorighteousteacher on Oct 28, 2009 5:06 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Food Producers profit from unhealthy practices (both animal and human), while the Health Care industry profits from what makes us sick (mostly food based and environmental). Both industries fight reform which will benefit the consumer(both physically and financially), because of a possible dip in profits and potential lawsuits. So in a nutshell, under the current system they will profit at our expense. Same is true for companies that pump carcinogens into the atmosphere and water supply. Instead of my taxes paying for a single payer system, they subsidize the agribusiness and chemical industries- the very profiteers who get rich when we get sick and die from their products. The Health Care Cartel knows the causes of our poor health. It is in their interest that people stay sick, and that they have a monopoly on our "health" care.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Local harvest
Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line on Oct 28, 2009 5:17 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
localharvest.org lists local producers all over the country. If you want to opt out of the agribusiness mayhem...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Local harvest Posted by: MotherLodeBeth
» RE: Local harvest Posted by: aremy

Comments are closed-

Another let's kick farmers article
Posted by: rcase on Oct 28, 2009 5:31 AM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If it were not for modern farming advances the world would be starving. We once produced 70 bushels of corn to the acre; now we produce 200. Eggs were as almost as expensive (in some places) during W.W. I as they are today. I raised chickens the old-fashioned way. They ran loose. They also got eaten by possums, were underweight, and died young. Milk (in my area) costs $2 a gallon. In places overseas where they farm differently it costs $6 a gallon. Quality of life? In my area five times as many young men (and some women) would go into farming if they could. I didn't spray my apples this year. There wasn't one I could eat (most of my other non-sprayed vegies and fruit did fine, however). Don't eat the stuff the big farms produce if you don't want to. Grow your own. Live off the farmer's market. But many starving people of the world don't have that option.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» The reasons people are starving Posted by: souffrantfleur

Comments are closed-

USG Subsidising CORN is killing us
Posted by: mtatasmith on Oct 28, 2009 5:42 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
In more ways than one - corn / corn syrup is in EVERY processed food we eat, and fed to just about every(if not every)animal that is eatten. Sugar feeds cancer...we wonder why we have health problems?? Best thing we can do is stop government subsidies to grow corn AND stop eatting sugar. I didn't even mention all the chemical altering that is done to corn - or did I?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

real farmer
Posted by: jrgjniew on Oct 28, 2009 5:46 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Some of the ag press has even picked up the theory--but don't expect a Pollan book called In Defense of Nitrites anytime soon." ......and herein lies the problem. A professor with an agenda (Pollen), will refuse to acknowledge current research data, such as that shown here from a a prominant medical research facility--presumably with no dog in the fight. As long as he is making speaking fees and selling books, he will continue on his vegan(although be it veiled somewhat) agenda. What does he thinks happens to the unwanted male chicks on what he would term "sustainable" farms(which really means pre 1950's technology)? This is America, and just as Pollen has a right to say what he wants, as a professor, he should have higher standard of evidence to uphold. His emotional veganism agenda is overriding the fact that people will eat meat, we cannot raise enough meat on all "free-range" production, low-mid income families cannot afford meat raised that way, that the environmental footprint of those farms may actually be worse, depending on what you count and don't count, "horse-power" takes about 40% of the productive land for "horse fuel", folks driving 50 miles to different farmers markets uses more fuel that trucks and trains hauling it to the local grocery, etc., etc. Just as he has a right to say what he thinks(or thinks will sell books), the people who contribute large sums to universities should have a say in whether they wish to continue contributing. (Note, if they pay for research, those results should be public, unbiased, etc.)

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: real farmer Posted by: progressiveview
» RE: real farmer Posted by: january37
» who drives 50 miles to a farmers market? Posted by: kungfoofighterx
» RE:AL FARMER, - WRONG!! Posted by: blurider
» RE: AL FARMER, - WRONG!! Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: AL FARMER, - WRONG!! Posted by: tkwilson

Comments are closed-

Across the board corporate control of academic institutions is a threat to public safety...
Posted by: gunboat diplomat on Oct 28, 2009 5:59 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And to democracy itself - but the same goes for corporate control of media institutions and government agencies.

An independent academic system is just as important as an independent judiciary. The two basic pillars of modern civilization are science and law, and if they are corrupted the whole edifice will come crashing down.

Unfortunately, the Supreme Court has been loaded up with corporate tools and apologists by the previous (Supreme Court-selected) administration - another sign of the breakdown in the separation of powers enshrined in the Constitution.

Similarly, more and more academic chancellors and administrators have been selected from the ranks of corporate CEOs from pharmaceutical and similar IPR-dependent industries.

The situation is far worse than just pressure to keep Pollan off the speaker's list. When the UC system owns the patent on rGBH milk products (engineered cow growth hormone for dairy cows), don't expect to see any UC scientists examining the safety of rGBH milk (which has high pus & bacteria content, as well as lots of antibiotics).

For example, does a high-antibiotic rGBH drug regime for cows tend to create drug-resistant pathogens? The answer is probably yes - but with the UC looking to clear $100 million from rGBH sales, they're not going to look into it.

Wholesale reform is needed, meaning a complete repeal of the Reagan-era university privatization laws that were pushed by Bayh, Dole, Rumsfeld & Co.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

john henry
Posted by: jrgjniew on Oct 28, 2009 6:29 AM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Agribusiness is trying to combat Pollan's message of sustainable, healthy eating." The problem is in the definitions. What he calls "sustainable", will likely lead to starvation of millions more. What he calls sustainable, does not necessarilly mean "healthy". That is the problem. He is trying to link outdated farming methods with health. That is a fallacy. Those products raised the way he proclaims can be healthy, but the is no direct link or guarantee. He is promoting a lifestyle, for which only a few can afford.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: But the farming methods are exactly the problem Posted by: Fat Man at the Buffet Line
» RE: john henry Posted by: AndyF
» RE: john henry Posted by: Kathy-B

Comments are closed-

FACTORY FARMS & GOVERNMENT COMMIT HOLOCAUST ON ANIMALS
Posted by: smf1403 on Oct 28, 2009 7:28 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Factory farms, aided and abetted by the U.S. government commit a holocaust on animals.

The torture and death camps are uncivilized and immoral and the only way this will change is if people change.

The factory farms handle the animals like factory parts, dismantling their body parts; cutting the tails off cows and pigs and the beaks off chickens without anesthetic. The cruelty inflicted on these animals would bring most people to tears.

There is big money contributed by the Smithfield Farms' and the Purdue's to the campaigns of our elected officials which is why factory farms are subsidized by the government using our tax dollars.

I first learned about this cruelty from a Michael Pollan New York Times article several years ago and decided not to be a part of it.

It's that simple. We are either as uncivilized, mean-spirited and cold-hearted as these factory farms or we are decent, thinking persons.

Supply and demand means we contribute to the holocaust and look the other way, knowing the suffering that we are directly responsible for.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Follow the money
Posted by: njguy73 on Oct 28, 2009 8:21 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Michael Pollan is bad for stockholders. People who grow their own food do not buy mass-produced food. If Pollan came up with a way for Cargill or Archer daniels Midland to get rich off sustainable agriculture, he'd be OK.

What's it gonna be, folks? Your 401k or your health?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Censorship
Posted by: xbeeno on Oct 28, 2009 8:35 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Wow censorship in ANY form totally sucks and is NOT right!

Jessi
Ultimate Anonymity

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

re: real farmer
Posted by: january37 on Oct 28, 2009 8:38 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Huh?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

abolish factory farming
Posted by: vasumurti on Oct 28, 2009 8:43 AM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Some discussion of the cruelty of modern factory farming is is necessary here. Most Americans are still under the mistaken impression that animals are raised on idyllic farms with sunshine, fresh air, and open spaces, and are killed humanely, after a pleasant life. The reality, however, is quite different.

A contermporary Benedictine monk, Brother David Steindl-Rast, wrote in Harmony: Voices for a Just Future, a peace and justice periodical, in 1995, that "...the survival of our planet depends on our sense of belonging--to all other humans, to dolphins caught in dragnets, to pigs and chickens and calves raised in animal concentration camps, to redwoods and rainforests, to kelp beds in our oceans, and to the ozone layer."

In a sermon preached in York Minster, September 28, 1986, John Austin Baker, the Bishop of Salisbury, England, attacked factory farming; choosing as his example, the treatment of chickens.

"Is there any credit balance for the battery hen, denied almost all natural functioning, all normal environment, lapsing steadily into deformity and disease, for the whole of her existence? he asked. "It is in the battery shed and the broiler house, not in the wild, that we find the true parallel to Auschwitz. Auschwitz is a purely human invention."

On another occasion, Bishop Baker taught: "By far the most important duty of all Christians in the cause of animal welfare is to cultivate this capacity to see; to see things with the heart of God, and so to suffer with other creatures."

On World Prayer Day for Animals, October 4, 1986, Bishop Baker preached against indifference to animal pain and lauded the animal welfare movement:

"To shut your mind, heart, imagination to the sufferings of others is to begin to slowly but inexorably to die. It is to cease by inches from being human, to become in the end capable of nothing generous or unselfish--or sometimes capable of anything, however terrible. You in the animal welfare movement are among those who may yet save our society from becoming spiritually deaf, blind and dead, and so from the doom that will justly follow."

According to Bishop Baker: "...Rights, whether animal or human, have only one sure foundation: that God loves us all and rejoices in us all. We humans are called to share with God in fulfilling the work of love towards all creatures...the true glory of the strong is to give themselves for the cherishing of the weak."

The realization that meat is an unnecessary luxury, resulting in inequities in the world's food
supply, has prompted religious leaders in different denominations to call on their members to abstain from meat.

Paul Moore, Jr., the Episcopal bishop of the Diocese of New York, made such an appeal in a November 1974 pastoral letter, calling for the observance of "meatless Wednedays." A similar appeal had been issued earlier by Roman Catholic Cardinal Cooke of New York. The Reverend Eugene Carson Blake, former head of the World Council of Churches, and founder of Bread for the World, has encouraged everyone in his anti-hunger organization to abstain from eating meat on Mondays, Wednesdays and Fridays.

Ronald J. Sider of Evangelicals for Social Action pointed out in his 1977 book, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger, that 220 million Americans were consuming enough grain (largely because of the high consumption of grain fed to livestock) to feed over one billion people in the poorer countries.

Father Thomas Berry, a Catholic priest, author, and founder of the Riverdale Center for Religious Research in New York, wrote in 1987 that "Vegetarianism is a way of life that we should all move toward for economic survival, physical well-being, and spiritual integrity."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

corp ag business not farms but factories
Posted by: ZeeBruce on Oct 28, 2009 9:43 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
My family operated a farm in New England from 1643 through 1956 and during that time it never used petrochemicals for fertilizer or for herbicides or for pesticides. It used the manure from the cows to fertilize the fields which produced the corn for the cows as well as other crops for direct consumption by people. This is the Pollen model and the one followed in Argentina and France and other countries where there is not the closed loop system of government funding of factory ag operations which may large contributions to US Congress members who in turn vote for the government funding of these companies food factories. Of course ADM and other companies that profit enormously at public expense are going to oppose ending this very profitable system and through a corrupt corporate American media and corrupt researchers will sway the opinions of even some working farmers who should know better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE:IGHT ON, ZeeBruce!! Posted by: blurider

Comments are closed-

Would It Have Been So Hard To Write An Actual Article About Ag Reaction to Pollan
Posted by: femmyv on Oct 28, 2009 11:55 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
And less preaching-to-the-choir on agri-business issues that most of Alternet's readers are more than familiar with, already?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

RE:AL FARMER, - WRONG!!
Posted by: blurider on Oct 28, 2009 12:01 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
we could always eat a little less - wouldn't hurt! OR at least eat a little less of the high quality, organic, free range, grass fed meats we enjoyed!

We could only raise our beef, mutton and goats (bison and some game meats) on all the grasslands that should never have felt the plow, on the mountainous and rocky, swampy and semi arid desert lands and the so called 'farm land' that isn't suitable for farming without a million and one amendments. We could put more buckaroos on horseback going out with the chuck wagons in the west and much, much less antibiotics and growth hormones along with less corn and soy meal in less, over fattened steers in ever less mechanized and over medicated 'feed lots'!

We could even use 'multi-purpose chicken breeds to raise our eggs and eat the males - seems more humane and much more efficient.

Horse power takes forty percent of the farmland?? In what universe? What about the rangeland in the west? Forty percent???!! HORSE MANURE!!

Do you even know what end of the horse, to put the bridle on? Maybe you sould stick to the 'multi-purpose chicken ranching'!

You owe it to the world and Pollan to read one or more of his books before you attack! He's a city boy no doubt, but he's a smart, well informed and well intentioned city boy and he's as willing and eager to learn as you would be in my, more perfect world!

Farmers don't farm today to feed the world's starving, huddled, masses but to feed the greed of Con Agra, Monsanto and Archer Daniels Midland.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

chickens unfit for human consumption
Posted by: oregonmagoo on Oct 28, 2009 2:45 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
A friend of mine went to an "egg factory". They were in the process of killing all the birds in a building because they were older and production was down. He innocently asked if the meat was headed for Cambell's(chicken noodle soup, maybe?). No, he was told that due to the feed addditives, antibiotics and hormones, the meat was considered toxic waste and by law had to be incinerated(put it in the air, OK!). Think about that next time you pick up a carton of 12 in the store! Grourown!!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Mixed On Pollan
Posted by: Gravitas on Oct 28, 2009 4:35 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
While I certainly can't side with agribusiness, as a sociologist I must say his joining the anti obesity bandwagon and the stats he uses is irresponsible. No one should be allowed to get away with presenting research from MSM that is nothing more than pharma marketing, and that is exactly where most stats on obesity he uses ultimately come from.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» RE: Mixed On Pollan Posted by: wormfarmer
» RE: Mixed On Pollan Posted by: Kathy-B

Comments are closed-

American agriculture (and agri-businesses) are the envy of the World!
Posted by: AJR Journal on Oct 28, 2009 5:08 PM   
Current rating: 2    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Name a country that has the productivity, efficiency, and the high quality results of the American farmer and the downstream enterprises.
You can't.
American food production , without question is the best in the World. Nowhere is food more affordable, of higher quality, and of greater variety. In my local Pick'n Save in Milwaukee, there fruits, vegetables, and meats for every pocketbook. Nowhere in the World do low-income buyers get more bang for their buck.
Can production be improved? Of course.
Are smart people working on that? 24/7
Relax, it will only get better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

700 acres of Harris Ranch should be olive groves
Posted by: plantland on Oct 29, 2009 8:55 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
If our Sec. of Health and Human Services were serious about health refor, she would be identifying areas that could be converted to olive groves.

Good oils could decrease disease, especially if the calories are swapped out from ccorn syrup and other empty calories.

Right now, we don't have enough olive oil to switch people over to it even if we had that as a health reform directive or goal.

Coachella is warm enough, and all those feeder cattle must consume water that could go to establishing olive groves.

Farmers and ranchers shouldn't go under after switching over to socially responsible production.

I also wonder whether Harris Ranch was ever a grapefruit grove.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The problem is the mindset.
Posted by: wisegalah on Oct 29, 2009 5:34 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Things (customers, chickens, cornfields, potatoes, etc, etc) only have meaning if they can be used to make money.
There has been a fundamental reversal of values. Money was meant to be an easily managed and transferable measure of the value of potatoes, corn, chickens, coal, iron ore, etc). As such it is a valuable and important invention. Money should be in the service of those products and services which serve and enrich life.
What has happened is that there has been a reversal of the order of things.
Big business is interested only in making money and is happy to use anything to do that and are prepared to prostitute everything to increase their profits. When they tell you that they are interested in agriculture they are lying unless they add that their interest is only because of the opportunities for profit that are inherent in that activity.
They will use and abuse the resources of the planet to increase their returns. In other words the resources (plants, minerals, individual labour, etc) now have come to symbolise profits, money. This really is prostitution of the worlds valuables.

I am not advocating the ending of money as the central method of exchange. I am simply asking for a readjustment of the values by which business does its stuff.

Money should be the servant of people and production. The worlds resources should not be made to serve money and its worshippers. servant

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

In Coalinga, not Coachella!
Posted by: Campesino on Nov 2, 2009 2:02 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
700 acres of Harris Ranch should be olive groves
[Report this comment] [Ignore this user] Posted by: plantland on Oct 29, 2009 8:55 AM
Current rating: Not yet rated [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5
If our Sec. of Health and Human Services were serious about health refor, she would be identifying areas that could be converted to olive groves.

Good oils could decrease disease, especially if the calories are swapped out from ccorn syrup and other empty calories.

Right now, we don't have enough olive oil to switch people over to it even if we had that as a health reform directive or goal.

Coachella is warm enough, and all those feeder cattle must consume water that could go to establishing olive groves.

Farmers and ranchers shouldn't go under after switching over to socially responsible production.

I also wonder whether Harris Ranch was ever a grapefruit grove.

===============================================

Harris Ranch is in Coalinga, in the northern San Joaquin Valley. Nothing like the desert of Coachella near Palm Springs.

And if you bother to look at their website, you'll see their other major products are garlic and onions.

But you probably could grow olives there if you wanted. Just a matter of water

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

monsanto,con agra,adm
Posted by: cwilsondrum on Nov 3, 2009 5:41 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
all criminals. thieves and out to make the most money they can,and it they couldn't care less about you or your families' heallth. just try to go visit monsanto sometime.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS