An article in ‘Animal’ compares the lifetime performance (mortality, maturity, nutrition, birth weight etc.) of West African Dwarf goats kept under various feeding systems.
In my view, farming is only profitable and sustainable in true form when it is practice as people’s agriculture, not the machine’s agriculture. With the people’s agriculture, the orchard/garden is considered as part of the home and the animal cares as a family member.
I have the background of the subsistence rural agriculture and know the link between the small scaled farmer and their farm and animals. Such farmers only pick the fruit and vegetables when it is needed for food and cash money. The same they do with the animals. They hardly sell their animals when there is no extreme demand for the money.
When we think of the big drivers of climate change, cars and air travel often come to mind. But transformations over the past century in the way food is produced and consumed have resulted in more greenhouse gas emissions than those from transportation. The biggest culprits? Industrial meat and dairy.
In addition to reducing global greenhouse gas emissions, reducing consumption in the countries that currently eat too much meat and dairy could have significant health and social welfare benefits. One study shows that reducing meat consumption as a means of fighting climate change would also cut the risk of colon cancer, heart disease and lung disease worldwide by 34 percent. Another says it would reduce global mortality by 6 to 10 percent by 2050, translating into a healthcare cost savings of US$735 billion per year.
Other scientists point out that cutting meat and dairy consumption would cut infectious disease and reduce the emergence of antibiotic resistance, and have secondary effects as well. One model shows that the worldwide adoption of a healthy diet could reduce mitigation costs for the energy sector by more than 50 percent by 2050. It would also free up land now used for animal feed production and, if combined with other policy measures, could help small farmers access much-needed land.
For details, please go to the link below for GRAIN Report
Dr Peter Clausing says the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) have twisted scientific facts to give glyphosate a clean bill of health. Report by Claire RobinsonGerman toxicologist accuses EU authorities of scientific fraud over glyphosate link with cancer
copied from GMWATCH.
The German toxicologist Dr Peter Clausing has accused the German Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR) and the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of committing scientific fraud by twisting scientific facts and distorting the truth, with the aim of concluding that glyphosate is not a carcinogen. EFSA and BfR thereby accepted and reinforced the conclusion proposed by the Monsanto-led Glyphosate Task Force (GTF).The Poisonous Fields
Clausing made this accusation in front of five judges at the Monsanto Tribunal, held in The Hague from 14–16 October.
The background to this latest allegation of foul play by the EU authorities over glyphosate is the high-level dispute over whether or not the pesticide causes cancer.
In March 2015 the World Health Organization’s cancer agency IARC concluded that glyphosate was a probable human carcinogen.
For further details, please go to the link below.
Originally posted on Ban GMOs Now: “The pursuit of food security faces an uncertain future.Biocultural community protocols: tools for securing the assets of livestock keepers In the absence of a robust consumer rights framework, both farmers and consumers are heading into a future replete with unsafe and insecure food. Moreover, if the federal regulatory framework continues to rely on arcane federal laws, without incorporating modern…Characterization and significance of Raigi camel, a livestock breed of the Pashtoon pastoral people in Afghanistan and Pakistan
Do we really eat safe food? The reply cannot be a clear yes. The factory farming is producing toxic foods as the scientific findings revealed. Sometimes I think ‘a day will come when the living people will say “those who killed in wars and disasters are luckier. Eating from the poisonous field make us prone to various health issues. Just watched a TV program on RT, how the factory farming is poisoning our field and ultimately our bodies.
Roundup (active ingredient Glyphosate) is the world’s most widely-used weed killer. Some claim it’s completely harmless, others say it’s a serious health hazard for humans and animals. The WHO has suddenly called for an all-out ban on glyphosate, considering it toxic and probably carcinogenic. This film sets out in search of sick animals, humans and plants in Germany, Denmark and the US, and asks how the WHO reached these new conclusions and what action the Federal Institute for Risk Assessment is taking poisoned fields: Glyphosate, an underrated risk?
While googling, there are many research based peer reviewed articles proving that this product is causing cancer and also developing Autism in the kids. Are our generations are safe? The decision makers should not ignore this fact. There must be a concreted outcome of the whole discussion as going on among the scientists.
I found Dr. Stephanie Seneff, the author of more than 170 peer reviewed scientific article is focusing especially on this alarming issue. Stephanie Seneff is a well-known scientist emphasizing on the consequences of the Monsanto roundup, GMOs and the factory farming. Some scientists and activists have the fears that up to 2050, around half of the kids in USA will be autistic. Also, Glyphosate causes low or poor fertility in dairy cows who depend on the food coming from such a poisonous fields.
I have been arguing since last 12 years that small scaled ecofriendly agricultural system is the solution to such threats like poisonous fields. We should eat less but quality products. We should not pose threat to the whole humanity just to earn some extra pennies. Let’s advocate small farming and promote the products come from small farmers and pastoralists.
Although environmentally-adapted strains of livestock, are essential to smallholder farmers, there has been a decline in the populations of such breeds, such the ‘hardy’ Red Massai sheep. A recent poster by scientists at the International Livestock Research Institute (ILRI) emphasizes that through the implementation of various breeding strategies it may be possible to safeguard this drought- and disease-resistant sheep breed, helping increase food security and productivity across southern Kenya