Connect with us

Alternative News

Use of Herbicides Costs UK Economy £400 Million A Year: Organic Agriculture Is The Only Solution

Published

on

We constantly hear the banter that organic agriculture is simply not sustainable. This is not true, and that’s been made clear by a plethora of literature that’s available on the topic. What is true is that big agrochemical giants, like Monsanto (Bayer) for example, would lose billions of dollars a year if herbicides were no longer considered sustainable, or healthy. This is why these corporate entities spend so much of their revenue marketing the idea that herbicides are necessary, that it’s impossible to grow our food because of pest infestation, and that organic agriculture simply isn’t possible on a large scale, nor economically sustainable. This isn’t true either.

advertisement - learn more

Scientists from the international conservation charity ZSL (Zoological Society of London) have put an economic figure on the herbicidal resistance of a major agricultural weed that is decimating winter-wheat farms across the UK.

Black-grass (Alopecurus myosuroides) is a native annual weed which although natural, large infestations in farmers’ fields can force them to abandon their winter wheat — the UK’s main cereal crop. Farmers have been using herbicides to try and tackle the black-grass problem — but in many areas of England the agricultural weed is now resistant to these herbicides. The cost of black-grass heralded as ‘Western Europe’s most economically significant weed’, is setting back the UK economy £400 million and 800,000 tonnes of lost wheat yield each year, with potential implications for national food security. (source)

The study points out that four million tonnes of pesticides are used on crops worldwide every single year, and that the list of resistant weeds now number well over 200, and continue to grow. These herbicides aren’t as effective as they need to be, and their severe over-use is leading to poor water quality, a loss of wild plant diversity and an “indirect damage to surrounding invertebrate, bird and mammal biodiversity relying on the plants.” Not to mention, they are linked to a wide variety of human diseases, including several cancers, neurodevelopmental disorders and more.  The greatest example may be Glyphosate, which is receiving a lot of attention because it’s being banned by multiple countries, and many people are currently engaged in lawsuits alleging that glyphosate is responsible for their health ailments. There are thousands of cases in the United States alone.

The ZSL research found the UK is losing 0.82 million tonnes in wheat yield each year (equivalent to roughly 5% of the UK’s domestic wheat consumption) due to herbicide resistant black-grass. The worst-case scenario — where all fields contained large amounts of resistant black-grass — is estimated to result in an annual cost of £1 billion, with a wheat yield loss of 3.4 million tonnes per year. (source)

It’s important to mention the corruption that is involved with getting these substances approved. Glyphosate was recently re-licensed and approved by the European Parliament. However, MEPs found the science given to them was plagiarized, full of industry science written by Monsanto. You can read more about that here.

advertisement - learn more

The corruption within the food industry and agrochemical industry is quite large, far too large scale to cover and expand upon in one article. It’s quite mind altering for any researcher who dives into it in depth on their own. The chemicals sprayed on our food and what we are doing for crops is not done for sustainability and protection,  it’s simply being done for large amounts of profit, greed and control of the global food supply.

The contamination of these herbicides has become so large scale that it’s now showing up in our food, and has been for quite some time.

Lead author and postdoctoral researcher at ZSL’s Institute of Zoology, Dr Alexa Varah said,

Understanding the economic and potential food security issues is a vital step, before looking at biodiversity, carbon emissions and water quality impacts in greater detail. We hope to use this method to aid the development of future models to help us understand how British farmers battling black-grass could do it in a way that is more beneficial to biodiversity like insects, mammals, wild plants and threatened farmland bird species like skylarks, lapwing and tree sparrows — unearthing how their numbers are linked to changes in farming practices.

We need to reduce pesticide use nationwide, which might mean introducing statutory limits on pesticide use, or support to farmers to encourage reduced use and adoption of alternative management strategies. Allocating public money for independent farm advisory services and research and development could help too.

One issue that is also important to emphasize is that corporations like Monsanto (Bayer) who manufacture these herbicides have a monopoly in the area. Meaning if a natural pesticide was shown to be effective, one wouldn’t be able to implement it large scale to compete with these agrochemical companies. They completely control the market, which is unfortunate, all we are able to use is what’s been patented.

Organic Agriculture

There is a wealth of research showing that organic agriculture could produce enough food on a global per capita basis for the current world population. So why do we play with an impractical niche model in favour of an unsustainable, corporate controlled chemical-intensive model? It doesn’t seem to make much sense.

In the 2006 book The impact of organic farming on food security in a regional and global perspective, Halberg and colleagues argue that if a conversion to organic farming of approximately 50 per cent of the agricultural area in the Global South were to be carried out, it would result in increased self-sufficiency and decreased net food import to the region.

In the book Organic Agriculture for Sustainable Livelihioods (2013), Halberg and Muller suggest that organic crops provide farmers with a higher net income compared to their conventional counterparts due to lower production costs. They provide convincing evidence that organic farming has a positive influence on smallholder food security and livelihoods, which is important given that smallholder agriculture is key to food production in the Global South, where food insecurity issues seem to pop up the most.

Dr. John P. Reganold,  a Professor of Soil Science & Agroecology at Washington State University writes,

Organic agriculture occupies only 1% of global agricultural land, making it a relatively untapped resource for one of the greatest challenges facing humanity: producing enough food for a population that could reach 10 billion by 2050, without the extensive deforestation and harm to the wider environment.

That’s the conclusion my doctoral student Jonathan Wachter and I reached in reviewing 40 years of science and hundreds of scientific studies comparing the long term prospects of organic and conventional farming. The study, Organic Agriculture in the 21st Century, published in Nature Plants, is the first to compare organic and conventional agriculture across the four main metrics of sustainability identified by the US National Academy of Sciences: be productive, economically profitable, environmentally sound and socially just. Like a chair, for a farm to be sustainable, it needs to be stable, with all four legs being managed so they are in balance.

In addition, organic farming delivers equally or more nutritious foods that contain less or no pesticide residues, and provide greater social benefits than their conventional counterparts.

With organic agriculture, environmental costs tend to be lower and the benefits greater. Biodiversity loss, environmental degradation and severe impacts on ecosystem services – which refer to nature’s support of wildlife habitat, crop pollination, soil health and other benefits – have not only accompanied conventional farming systems, but have often extended well beyond the boundaries of their fields, such as fertilizer runoff into rivers.

Overall, organic farms tend to have better soil quality and reduce soil erosion compared to their conventional counterparts. Organic agriculture generally creates less soil and water pollution and lower greenhouse gas emissions, and is more energy efficient. Organic agriculture is also associated with greater biodiversity of plants, animals, insects and microbes as well as genetic diversity. (source)

He goes on to emphasize that “Organic farming can help to both feed the world and preserve wildland. In a study published this year, researchers modeled 500 food production scenarios to see if we can feed an estimated world population of 9.6 billion people in 2050 without expanding the area of farmland we already use. They found that enough food could be produced with lower-yielding organic farming, if people become vegetarians or eat a more plant-based diet with lower meat consumption. The existing farmland can feed that many people if they are all vegan, a 94% success rate if they are vegetarian, 39% with a completely organic diet, and 15% with the Western-style diet based on meat.”

At the end of the day, when it comes to organic farming, there is a lot of information out there that shows how sustainable it can be, and how necessary and better it is than we we are currently doing now. That being said, there is a lot of research that also conflicts with this type of viewpoint.

The Takeaway

The crazy thing about the way we produce our conventional food is that it is overall bad for human health as well as the environment. That alone such spark a shift towards a more sustainable and eco-friendly version farming, but this doesn’t seem to be the priority of our ‘leaders.’ Modern day farming isn’t about sustainability and feeding the world, again, it’s about profit, greed and having control over the world’s food supply. If the priority of our leaders was to actually feed the world in an eco friendly sustainable way, programs would have been implemented by now. The solutions exist, that’s not the problem, so ask yourself, what is?

I truly believe that humanity has more than enough resources and potential to provide for everybody. We have more than enough resources and technology to do this, but scarcity is always pushed and taught because it holds up the current economical system we live in. We are constantly putting economic development and sustainability first, but if we were a race that put the planet and all life on it as our first priority, things would be a lot different. The entire concept of money, for example, isn’t even needed. If humanity wants to move forward, all of these systems need to collapse and be replaced with something better. This is another deep discussion, but in short, we have the solutions to our problems, the real problem we have are the barriers that prevent us from implementing them.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Advertisement
advertisement - learn more

Alternative News

Forget Nursing Homes! Welcome Co-Housing, Communal Homes For Our Beloved Aging Friends

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Many seniors are living in isolation in nursing and retirement homes nationwide. This often leads to loneliness and depression.

  • Reflect On:

    There must be a better way! There is, imagine growing old with purpose, passion and community. Not only for yourself, but for your parents, grandparents and aging friends as well.

When I came across this topic and decided to write about it, I was blown away that this isn’t already more of a “thing” and it isn’t very common for seniors to shack up together and live in communities. This is especially shocking as many elders are living in complete isolation, which has been shown to cause anxiety and depression. 

If you are thinking, isn’t that what nursing homes are for? So they don’t have to live alone, in isolation? — well, contrary to popular belief, nursing homes can be very lonely places for elderly people. In fact, it is not uncommon for elderly people to experience social isolation, leading to depression and loneliness right inside these homes. Many believe that a nursing home would alleviate these issues, but these feelings of depression don’t go away and in many cases, they only worsen.

In the Western world, a nursing home is the most common place for seniors to go once they reach a certain age. It seems this is symptomatic of our culture because in many other countries the elderly people live with their adult children and grandchildren and are taken care of  in their old age. They would never dream of dropping their parents off at a retirement home just because their parents have reached a certain point in their lives where it is difficult for them to care for themselves.

Is It Finally Time To Revamp Retirement Homes?

The concept of community housing for our retired and aging friends has recently come into awareness, and really, I couldn’t think of a more brilliant solution to a system that is not really working for millions of seniors across the country–well, entire western world more likely.

How Does This Work?

However you wish! Some seniors prefer to have their own space within a community setting with communal spaces to share and socialize in. A tiny home community could work well for this type of setting. Others prefer having a large house and having other seniors as roommates, encouraging more connection on a regular basis. Also, some options include having seniors live with other families with children in communities. It’s really up to the specific individual, as we all have different needs, including seniors. Often the nursing homes have a sort of one-size-fits-all approach, and they often cost a small fortune to boot.

Buying a piece of land and parking tiny homes on it or pooling some finances together to purchase a larger house would undoubtedly be cheaper than the combined cost of staying in a nursing home. They can also cook together and share meals together, which would be much more cost effective than the food offered in a nursing home.

advertisement - learn more

Benefits Of Senior Community Homes

The seniors themselves get to decide exactly what they want to create, as the co-housing communities are founded and run by the members. Instead of the high-priced care from nursing homes, the members of the communities agree to take care of one another. If it’s too much, they could likely afford to have a nurse come to the home at scheduled times with the money they’ve saved. Ideally, they would look out for one another and keep a schedule so that everyone stays on track with important dates. Maybe they even have some animals to bring them joy and affection, gardens to get them outside in the sun, and plenty of hobbies and activities to work on together. Really, the benefits are endless here, as long as they are able to cooperate and get along with the other residents of the community, it would work out well.

Children of these seniors would feel better knowing that their parents are enjoying their final years accompanied by friends and fun.

Someone needs to design a website that can assist the connection of like-minded seniors within certain cities or states, so they can make profiles discussing their likes, interests and hobbies and find friends with similar passions. Like tinder, but a whole lot more innocent. 😉

What do you think of this idea? Would you like to live in a co-housing community when you reach old age rather than be alone for your final years? Let us know what you think in the comments!

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Washington States Creates A Bill To Stop Companies From Bottling Their Water

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Washington is looking to become the first state to ban bottled water operations in an effort to protect its natural aquifers.

  • Reflect On:

    Should we not be protecting the natural water sources in an effort to counteract the absurdity of bottling a natural resource to begin with? Consider the resources needed to obtain, bottle and distribute it across the country.

There was a time, not that long ago, when the thought of bottling water was just as comical as the idea of bottling air is to us today–even thought that’s becoming more of a thing. Over the course of just a few decades, the bottled water industry has blown up and total worldwide sales are expected to reach $344 Billion by 2023. Clearly, consumers are creating that number as they have the purchasing power, but at what cost to our planet? As a concern for environmental sustainability continues to grow, it becomes more untenable to allow such practices. Recently, the state of Washington, known for it’s beautiful mountains and abundant fresh water sources, has passed a new bill through the senate that will ban new water permits.

Washington State is abundant with glacier-fed springs and lush rainforests and will become the first state in the country to put a total ban on any new water-bottling operations that are seeking to rape the state’s natural resources. This proposal is one of a few that are currently in progress in Washington aiming to protect the local groundwater and to fend off the rapidly growing bottled water industry.

The Bill

Once signed into law this bill will retroactively go into effect and apply to any new permits filed after Jan. 1, 2019. The Guardian reports,

“Washington State is carving the path towards a groundbreaking solution,” said Mary Grant, the director of Food & Water Action’s public water for all campaign, in a statement, as The Guardian reported. “This legislation … would ban one of the worst corporate water abuses – the extraction of local water supplies in plastic bottles shipped out of watersheds and around the country.”

Activists have been trying to raise awareness about the consequences of these massive water-bottling companies effectively stealing water from natural sources nationwide, bottling it, then shipping it elsewhere leaving local aquifers depleted. This is so backwards on so many levels. Consider the resources to obtain the water, to transport it, to store it, then to produce the plastic water bottles, bottle it then ship it out across the country. If our actions were harmonious with our planet, we would all get our water from the sources that are closest to us.

Shouldn’t There Already Be Laws Banning This?

Washington State Senator Reuven Carlyle, who supported this bill, explained this outrageous situation well by saying,

advertisement - learn more

I was jolted to the core to realize the depth and breadth and magnitude of how they have lawyered up in these small towns to take advantage of water rights. The fact that we have incredibly loose, if virtually nonexistent, policy guidelines around this is shocking and a categorical failure.

Leaked emails revealed some seriously shocking intentions by bottling company Crystal Geyser, who had planned to open up a bottling plant near Mount Rainier. Locals of this area were concerned that pumping 400 gallons per minute could lead to dry wells. The emails revealed that Crystal Geyser had begun a legal campaign attempting to sue the local subdivision that was opposing the bottling facility. They were also planning on starting an underground public relations campaign in order to garner support for their proposal. According to Tribune News Service,

“Pumping water out of the ground, putting it in plastic bottles and exporting it out of the state of Washington is not in the public interest,” said Craig Jasmer, a leader of the Lewis County Water Alliance, the group that sprung up to oppose the Randle plant and has pushed for the statewide ban.

This company in particular doesn’t have the best track record in regards to concern for environmental welfare. In January of this year, the company pleaded guilty to storing wastewater laden with arsenic in Eastern California and then delivering it to water treatment plants without informing authorities of its toxicity. The Center for Environmental Law & Policy had this to say:

Washington’s waters belong to the people of Washington. There has been an increasing number of proposals to locate commercial water bottling plants in Washington. These plants would allow Washington’s water to be taken for the benefit of corporations and users outside of the local area, perhaps out-of-state.

What Can You Do?

The answer is so simple, and yet if adopted on a global level could completely eradicate this problem… STOP BUYING BOTTLED WATER! Water is a natural resource that is free for every other species on this planet, and contrary to popular belief, we do not HAVE to pay for it. As rumor has it, the first bottled water company, Evian, hides a telling message about those who choose to purchase bottled water in its name. Evian is “Naïve” spelled backwards, indicating the nature of consumers who fall for this marketing gimmick.

Sure, there are several reasons to validate buying bottled water:

  • to avoid contaminants in the municipal water supply such as fluoride and chlorine (Be advised however, that these chemicals are often still contained in water that is bottled)
  • for added vitamins and minerals
  • if you are on the go and want to stay hydrated
  • you like the taste
  • you are traveling in a foreign country and are concerned of any pathogens in the water

Solutions

There are solutions to all of these above issues, however, that could ensure you never have to buy another plastic bottle of water again:

  • If you don’t like your tap water or want to avoid the added chemicals, you can install a good filtration system at home if you can afford it. Or you can purchase Reverse Osmosis water from many grocery stores and you simply bring a big 5 gallon jug to refill every time. There is also the option of finding a local spring, you can do so here at findaspring.com and bottle your own
  • In regards to vitamins and minerals, just add your own vitamin drops to your own water source
  • Reusable water bottles, ideally good quality ones that are durable and made to last, are a great option and over a short time they will save you money as well. I don’t leave my house without filling up my water bottle to take with me
  • If you prefer the taste of bottled water, I would again recommend purchasing 5 gallon Reverse Osmosis water
  • If you are traveling, this is the only instance in my opinion that justifies the purchase of bottled water. However, there are still many options you can take with you to sterilize the water. I’ve used a portable UV light before that works very well. If you have the means you can also boil the water before drinking it.

We don’t have to be perfect, but if everyone just put in a little bit of effort, we could drastically reduce one of our extremely unnecessary environmental footprints, save money, and save our natural resources. And as an added perk, we would keep our hard-earned dollars out of the hands of massive corporations that don’t have the best interest of the planet or its inhabitants at heart.

Can you do it for the planet?

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading

Alternative News

Is Brexit The First Domino To Fall In The Liberation Of The Planet?

Published

on

In Brief

  • The Facts:

    Brexit has been in effect for almost a month and the sky has not yet fallen in.

  • Reflect On:

    Does this mark the end of globalism and the embracing of a multipolar world?

The monumental withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union at 00:00:01 am on February 1st, 2020 finally allowed us to witness whether prognostications from the prophets of doom would come true. Amidst fears being pushed right up until the end that this move would result in absolute chaos and the weeping and gnashing of teeth, this event yielded the same results that other such events have produced: the realization that there was never anything to fear.

Of course those prophets of doom will never recant, they will just press forward with future predictions of how Brexiters will eventually rue the day they left the European Union, with some form of quasi-threat that the UK will never be able to establish the favorable economic ties they had with the rest of Europe under the ‘Union.’

Time will ultimately tell all, of course, but logic would dictate that if a nation is fully independent and free to accept or reject any terms offered, they are in a much better bargaining position than if they are already hamstrung by the rules and regulations dictated by their would-be trading partner.

If we can look at a particular geopolitical pattern of power unification that has long been rising and now has started to fall, we may view Brexit as not only a boon to the UK’s economic outlook, but indeed as the beginning of the end of a long sought-after endeavor to enslave humanity within a rigid centralized economic system.

The New World Order

The phrase ‘New World Order’ is often associated with the Latin phrase ‘Novus Ordo Seclorum’ which has adorned the American dollar bill the past 85 years, in terms of the plans of a global elite conspiring to create a totalitarian world government hidden in plain sight. While this link remains somewhat speculative, one thing that is true is that more than one president has employed the phrase in an attempt to inspire countries of the world to come together fully under a centralized economy and system of governance.

George H. W. Bush famously employed the phrase in a speech on September 11th, 1990, at a time when few people had suspicions about the true motives of global institutions like the United Nations or the perceived need for a new world political and economic order:

advertisement - learn more

We have before us the opportunity to forge for ourselves and for future generations a new world order–a world where the rule of law, not the law of the jungle, governs the conduct of nations. When we are successful–and we will be–we have a real chance at this new world order, an order in which a credible United Nations can use its peacekeeping role to fulfill the promise and vision of the U.N.’s founders. (source)

Perhaps the prospects for the implementation of this new world order reached its apex early in the presidency of Barack Obama, who was so eloquently able to couch the concept of an unelected, totalitarian government running the planet within ‘pillars’ such as peace and security, environmental preservation and economic opportunity, as he explains to the UN General Assembly below.

Since this time, however, some of the true ‘pillars’ of a totalitarian system of enslavement have begun to impact human consciousness, especially in the European Union: the breakdown of national sovereignty and identity, untenable refugee and immigration policies, and backbreaking economic austerity measures.

Protests like the Yellow Vests movement in France and elsewhere in Europe where austerity measures under the EU have been foisted upon a nation rage on. These movements have gotten little coverage in the mainstream, except on occasions where they can characterize these movements as violent. As time goes on, there is only an increase in the clear and present resistance to the global elite telling everyday citizens that their standard of living can no longer be what it used to be. And such resistance is powering the geopolitical winds of change.

The Multipolar Vision

Born out of this growing global environment of discontent and dissatisfaction, an important precedent to Brexit was the election of Donald Trump, who ran on a platform of nationalism (critics repeatedly called it ‘outdated protectionism’) with the promise to ‘Make America Great Again’ by bringing jobs back home that had been shipped overseas and cancelling U.S. involvement in global economic schemes like the Paris Accord, while renegotiating trade deals with other countries.

Philosophically, Trump has found an ally in Vladamir Putin. One of the reasons that Putin has been demonized by the West is that he has always been the most powerful opponent of American hegemony, and has fought tirelessly to promote a multipolar vision in global politics and economics. If we look at recent history, we see that Russia has shown little evidence of wanting to establish global domination in the way that the American Empire has done through wars, regime building and permanent military presence all over the world.

In a speech in December 2019, Putin stated flatly that the new world order (‘unipolar world’) was dead, and signs in global economic relations reflected his fervent belief that a multipolar world, in which there are several points of power and sovereignty, Russia being one of them, is essential for a secure and prosperous world.

It [the multipolar world] has been established, a unipolar world does not exist anymore. After the collapse of the Soviet Union, there was an illusion that this world is possible and could exist for a long time. However, it was just an illusion. I have always said that, and recent events serve as a testament to this. (source)

The ongoing push for Brexit, finally realized a year after Putin’s speech, is surely one of those signs. And as other countries in the European Union start to see the impact of leaving on the UK’s economy, and perhaps more importantly on their autonomy, it may not be long before Grexit, Frexit, Spexit and other such colloquial terms start to take hold and put the nail in the coffin of Europe’s contribution to the globalist agenda.

The Takeaway

Human beings have an innate desire for unity, and it is this very desire that globalists have long tried to manipulate in order to fulfill their plans for world domination. The fact is, though, if these leaders truly had the best interests of humanity at heart, and really wanted to bring the planet together, they would have long handled problems such as war, environmental destruction, starvation and slavery.

Our destiny is unity, but the process will require several waves of decentralization before the true unity of humanity can be achieved. We see the beginnings here with Brexit, where nations are beginning to reject the global centralization of power. From there, sovereign nations will need to cede power to their states and cities. Those in turn will have to cede power to their communities. And then, finally, the communities will need to restore the power and sovereignty of individuals by being fundamentally grounded in the principles of Natural Law, which protects the life, liberty, and pursuit of happiness of each individual.

When individuals become sovereign, through an awakening of their consciousness that enables them to become fully responsible for the state of their world, that is when the true unity of the planet becomes possible.

Start Your Free 7 Day Trial To CETV!

Due to the pressure of mass censorship, we now have our own censorship-free, and ad-free on demand streaming network!

You can stream conscious media 24/7 and enjoy mind-expanding interviews, original shows, and documentaries and guided programs.

Click here to start a FREE 7-Day Trial and watch 100's of hours of conscious media that you won't see anywhere else.

Continue Reading
advertisement - learn more
advertisement - learn more

Video

Pod

Elevate your inbox and get conscious articles sent directly to your inbox!

Choose your topics of interest below:

You have Successfully Subscribed!