RAW-FOOD Archives

Raw Food Diet Support List

RAW-FOOD@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Jean-Louis Tu <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Raw Food Diet Support List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 25 Feb 1999 20:41:26 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (53 lines)
Hi Axel,

I agree with much of what you said, but

 -I think if all animals were organically raised (in particular fed
grass, organic grains and legumes) then this would considerably reduce
agriculture-related pollution: pesticides wouldn't be poured in our
rivers; fields would be fertilized by non-soil-depleting techniques,
etc.  In addition, the fact that animals are free-range means that
they would eat mostly grass (instead of grains) in summer.

 -Suppose that we converted the world to vegetarianism (which is
implausible, of course). Since probably most people will still want to
eat cooked food, it would mean they would start eating more cooked
grains (bread, pasta, boiled rice...) and cooked legumes (tofu, etc.)
Certainly people won't want, or won't be able, to stick with a 100%
vegan diet and therefore will eat dairy and/or eggs. They won't eat
much more fresh produce, since fruits and vegetables--especially the
high-quality ones--are relatively expensive. The result will be a diet
overloaded with gluten, phytates, and potential allergens.

 -The mere fact that we are civilized creates pollution. Agriculture
pollutes, but also industries, cars do. Most of us use clothes,
computers, paper, bleach, plastic, electricity in our houses, etc. A
lot of the pollution could in principle be reduced (like by recycling,
using trains instead of cars, buying things out of necessity and not
because it's in fashion, etc). Perhaps planting fruit trees and/or
eating the grains we are cultivating to feed animals would reduce
ecological damage, but I am not sure it is the most urgent or useful
thing to do.

 -As I suggested, the climate and soil in some countries (like France
or the US) is favorable enough to feed the entire population with
meat, fruits and vegetables, and in addition eliminate hunger in one
or several African countries. Despite the fact that agriculture
employs only a few % of the population, the EEC has to impose quotas
because of overproduction. Prices are constantly dropping. Can you
imagine that the wholesale price of pork is about $0.90/kg in France?
But of course, most of the food in excess is not sent to
Africa. Instead, African people are, either working like slaves for
delocalized industries, or unemployed and starving in slums, or
working in mines extracting some raw material that will be sold at low
prices to industrialized countries, or struggling to cultivate a few
acres of dry land. Tell them to become vegetarian, and they'll laugh
at you, because either they have no money to buy food at all (whether
meat or vegetables), or are anyway almost vegetarian because they only
cultivate cereals (and are malnourished as a result: protein and
vitamin A deficies, etc). In addition, we should keep in mind that
civil wars, natural disasters and population displacement also contribute
to under- and malnutrition.

--Jean-Louis Tu <[log in to unmask]>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2