Excerpts from
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm


Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure to
pesticides and other additives, and when it’s a waste of your money.

Buy these items organic as often as possible:

....apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported grapes,
nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes, red raspberries, spinach, and
strawberries

Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that even after
washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently carry much higher
levels of pesticide residue than others. Their conventionally grown
counterparts tend to be laden with pesticides. Among fruits,
nectarines had the highest percentage testing positive for pesticide
residue. Peaches and red raspberries had the most pesticides (nine) on
a single sample. Among vegetables, celery and spinach most often
carried pesticides, with spinach having the highest number (10) on a
single sample.

....meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy

Why: You greatly reduce the risk of exposure to mad cow disease and
minimize exposure to other potential toxins in non-organic feed. You
also avoid the results of production methods that use daily
supplemental hormones and antibiotics, which have been linked to
increased antibacterial resistance in humans.

....baby food

Why: Children’s developing bodies are especially vulnerable to toxins,
and they may be at risk of higher exposure. Baby food is often made up
of condensed fruits or vegetables, potentially concentrating pesticide
residues.

Buy these items organic if price is no object:

....asparagus, avocados, bananas, broccoli, cauliflower, sweet corn,
kiwi, mangos, onions, papaya, pineapples, and sweet peas

Why: Multiple pesticide residues are rarely found on conventionally
grown versions of these fruits and vegetables.

....breads, oils, potato chips, pasta, cereals, and other packaged
foods, such as canned or dried fruit and vegetables

Why: Although these processed products may have lower levels of
contaminants in them, they offer limited health value because
processing tends to wash away important nutrients. The process of
milling organic whole grains into flour, for example, eliminates fiber
and vitamins, though they are sometimes added back in. The more a food
is processed, the less health value its organic version offers,
especially in products such as cereals and pastas with labels that say
"made with organic ingredients." Read the list of ingredients and you
might find that while the flour is organic, the eggs aren't. The
processed foods with the most added value are labeled "100% Organic"
and "USDA organic."

Don’t bother buying these items organic:

....seafood

Why: Whether caught in the wild or farmed, fish can be labeled
organic, despite the presence of contaminants such as mercury and
PCBs. Some wild fish such as bluefish are very high in PCBs, and tuna
and swordfish are laced with mercury. The USDA has not yet developed
organic certification standards for seafood. In the meantime,
producers are allowed to make their own organic claims as long as they
don’t use "USDA" or "certified organic" logos.

....cosmetics

Why: Unless a personal-care product consists primarily of organic
agricultural ingredients, such as aloe vera gel, it's pointless to buy
organic. Most cosmetics contain a mix of ingredients, and USDA
regulations allow shampoos and body lotions to carry an organic label
if their main ingredient is organic hydrosol, which is simply water in
which something organic, such as a lavender leaf, has been soaked.
While the USDA claims that organic-labeled cosmetics follow the same
standards as food, we have found indiscriminate use of synthetic
ingredients and violations of food-labeling standards. Just because a
product has the word organic or natural in its name doesn’t
necessarily mean it’s safer. Only 11% of ingredients found in
personal-care products, organic or not, have ever been screened for
safety.



--

My friends tell me I have an intimacy problem.
But they don't really know me.

....Garry Shandling

I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

Steve > wrote

> Excerpts from
> http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm

> Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure
> to pesticides and other additives, and when it's a waste of your money.

Its always a waste of your money, just sometimes more of a waste
of your money than otherwise in modern first world countrys.

> Buy these items organic as often as possible:

> ...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported
> grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes,
> red raspberries, spinach, and strawberries

No thanks.

> Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that
> even after washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently
> carry much higher levels of pesticide residue than others.

I dont care.

> Their conventionally grown counterparts tend to be laden with pesticides.

Lie. The USDA never said anything like that.

> Among fruits, nectarines had the highest percentage testing
> positive for pesticide residue. Peaches and red raspberries
> had the most pesticides (nine) on a single sample. Among
> vegetables, celery and spinach most often carried pesticides,
> with spinach having the highest number (10) on a single sample.

I dont care.

> ...meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy

> Why: You greatly reduce the risk of exposure to mad cow disease
> and minimize exposure to other potential toxins in non-organic feed.

Drivel.

> You also avoid the results of production methods that use
> daily supplemental hormones and antibiotics, which have
> been linked to increased antibacterial resistance in humans.

No they havent.

> ...baby food

> Why: Children's developing bodies are especially vulnerable to toxins,

Pity there arent any 'toxins' in what is sold in first world countrys.

> and they may be at risk of higher exposure. Baby food
> is often made up of condensed fruits or vegetables,
> potentially concentrating pesticide residues.

Pig ignorant drivel. There's never enough of those to matter.

> Buy these items organic if price is no object:

No thanks.

> ...asparagus, avocados, bananas, broccoli, cauliflower, sweet
> corn, kiwi, mangos, onions, papaya, pineapples, and sweet peas

> Why: Multiple pesticide residues are rarely found on
> conventionally grown versions of these fruits and vegetables.

So why bother with the organics at all, stupid ?

> ...breads, oils, potato chips, pasta, cereals, and other
> packaged foods, such as canned or dried fruit and vegetables

> Why: Although these processed products may have lower levels
> of contaminants in them, they offer limited health value because
> processing tends to wash away important nutrients.

More pig ignorant drivel. What makes MUCH more
sense is to buy the less processed forms of breads
etc instead if you care about 'nutrients'

The reality in the first world is that everyone gets plenty
of 'nutrients' as part of their normal diet, grossly more
than they need with most of them in fact.

> The process of milling organic whole grains into
> flour, for example, eliminates fiber and vitamins,
> though they are sometimes added back in.

And everyone gets enough vitamins in their diet in the first world anyway.

> The more a food is processed, the less health value its organic
> version offers, especially in products such as cereals and
> pastas with labels that say "made with organic ingredients."

More mindless pig ignorant drivel.

> Read the list of ingredients and you might find
> that while the flour is organic, the eggs aren't.

I dont care.

> The processed foods with the most added value
> are labeled "100% Organic" and "USDA organic."

Wrong again.

> Don't bother buying these items organic:

> ...seafood

> Why: Whether caught in the wild or farmed, fish can be labeled
> organic, despite the presence of contaminants such as mercury
> and PCBs. Some wild fish such as bluefish are very high in PCBs,
> and tuna and swordfish are laced with mercury. The USDA has
> not yet developed organic certification standards for seafood. In
> the meantime, producers are allowed to make their own organic
> claims as long as they don't use "USDA" or "certified organic" logos.

> ...cosmetics

Not stupid enough to bother with any of those thanks.

> Why: Unless a personal-care product consists primarily of organic
> agricultural ingredients, such as aloe vera gel, it's pointless to buy
> organic. Most cosmetics contain a mix of ingredients, and USDA
> regulations allow shampoos and body lotions to carry an organic label
> if their main ingredient is organic hydrosol, which is simply water in
> which something organic, such as a lavender leaf, has been soaked.
> While the USDA claims that organic-labeled cosmetics follow the same
> standards as food, we have found indiscriminate use of synthetic
> ingredients and violations of food-labeling standards. Just because a
> product has the word organic or natural in its name doesn't necessarily
> mean it's safer. Only 11% of ingredients found in personal-care
> products, organic or not, have ever been screened for safety.

Beeblebrox > wrote:

>I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
>again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
>was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
>she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

You haven't lived 'til you've chomped down on a cabbage worm. BTDT.
It wasn't quite as bitter as the bee in some canned spinach I once
had.

In article <b1%wf.70078$4l5.46313@dukeread05>,
Beeblebrox > wrote:

> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
> again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
> was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
> she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

Whatever did people _do_ before pesticides came into common usage?

Those of us who buy organic vegetables like broccoli and cabbage
know to soak it in a salt-water solution for a few minutes to loosen
the unwanted visitors.

BTW, there _are_ "pesticides" which can be used to protect
vegetables against insect infestation, including pepper spray,
marigold teas, etc.

sd

_.-In rec.food.cooking, Rod Speed wrote the following -._
> And everyone gets enough vitamins in their diet in the first world anyway.

That is a very big brush you have there. Care to paint me a picture
that supports that claim?

--
.-')) fauxascii.com ('-. | It's a damn poor mind that
' ..- .:" ) ( ":. -.. ' | can only think of one way to
((,,_;'.;' UIN=66618055 ';. ';_,,)) | spell a word.
((_.YIM=Faux_Pseudo :._)) | - Andrew Jackson

me > wrote:
> Beeblebrox > wrote

>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears
>> she'll never again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once,
>> and because there was no pesticide, the bunch was infested
>> with so many little beasties, she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

> Whatever did people _do_ before pesticides came into common usage?

Put up with bug and weavil infested food.

> Those of us who buy organic vegetables like broccoli
> and cabbage know to soak it in a salt-water solution
> for a few minutes to loosen the unwanted visitors.

> BTW, there _are_ "pesticides" which can be used
> to protect vegetables against insect infestation,
> including pepper spray, marigold teas, etc.

Pity they're so useless.

me wrote:
> In article <b1%wf.70078$4l5.46313@dukeread05>,
> Beeblebrox > wrote:
>
>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
>> again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
>> was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
>> she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.
>
> Whatever did people _do_ before pesticides came into common usage?
>
> Those of us who buy organic vegetables like broccoli and cabbage
> know to soak it in a salt-water solution for a few minutes to loosen
> the unwanted visitors.
>
> BTW, there _are_ "pesticides" which can be used to protect
> vegetables against insect infestation, including pepper spray,
> marigold teas, etc.
>
> sd

when I had vegetable gardens I rarely did anything for pesticides, organic or
otherwise. My neighbors were always crazy with them and I think it drove all
the spiders to my yard or something. I had a crazy spider population, all
shapes and sizes and I never really had to worry about other bugs. Of course
it made harvesting a bit of an adventure....

--
..:Heather:.
www.velvet-c.com
Step off, beyotches, I'm the roflpimp!

at Wed, 11 Jan 2006 03:35:00 GMT in <b1%wf.70078$4l5.46313@dukeread05>,
(Beeblebrox) wrote :

>I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
>again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
>was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
>she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

Sounds like she had a one-time bad experience, but I've not encountered
much organic broccoli these days that has had those types of issues. There
was a time in the past when for organic people had to put up with low-
grade, bug-infested, semi-eaten items, but this is generally not the case
anymore. The popularity of organic farming has driven rapid progress in
understanding and careful cultivation.

It must be said, however, that for best results you should buy organic
items in season. Out-of season organics are likely to be much worse than
their out-of-season conventional brethren, generally shrivelled, tasteless,
etc. Furthermore the price premium for out-of-season organic becomes truly
disproportionate, as compared to in-season differences when organic items
are often close to competitive with conventional on price. So if you are to
go with organic, this implies also a commitment to eating seasonally, and
probably locally as well.

Nonetheless, the argument generally comes down to a question of whether or
not the value of organic is worth the extra price. Some people believe that
no amount of benefits from organics could justify the cost. Others say that
no reduction in cost could justify the negatives of conventional farming.
Certainly one can't expect organic to come for free. If there is any extra
value in it, then that value will come at a commensurate price. Much of the
organic movement argues that conventional foods are actually coming at an
artificially low price - that in using unsustainable methods they are
selling products in the short term cheaply, but that sooner or later the
chickens will come home to roost, so to speak, and then prices will rise
anyway. In this argument the price of organic merely reflects real costs of
sustainable production. As it actually happens, there is some inflation
going on as well, because the organic core consumers are prepared to pay
above market value for what they're getting. In some cases this means
egregious overpricing, but in other cases it doesn't, so organic items
aren't automatically a rip-off - it depends entirely on how much value you
see in them. The arguments of the organic camp, therefore, aren't
unassailable, but neither are they irrational. Same thing for the
conventional camp. It's a pure matter of priorities: price versus benefits?

--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)

"Alex Rast" > wrote in message
...
In some cases this means
> egregious overpricing, but in other cases it doesn't, so organic items
> aren't automatically a rip-off - it depends entirely on how much value you
> see in them.

> Alex Rast

And it depends a lot on how 'many' people see value in organic produce,
because many times in a market that I shop that is most convenient, the
small amount of organic produce that is available will just sit and rot. I
find that the price for the organic food at this particular store is not out
of line in comparison to their conventional items, which IMO is very high in
price. However, organic is becoming more prevalent, and to be fair, their
conventional produce sometimes ranks pretty close to 'throw away' also.

The other day there was no Italian parsley available; usually there is a
choice between organic and conventional. The produce person went to the
back of the store and brought out a box that was maybe 1/4 full and said
'this is all we have.' I took out a bunch, and he returned the 1/4 box of
parsley to the produce room from whence he came. He had no clue as to the
price, nor did I press him for a price.

I also saw some loose leaf greens that they had on sale for 2 bunches for a
dollar. Geez, I guess it is supposed to be for pet rabbits, it was pretty
darned old.

I'll buy organic, but I'll not generally pay Whole Foods prices across the
board for it; specials, yes, if the produce looks good.
Dee Dee

Alex Rast > wrote
> (Beeblebrox) wrote

>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll
>> never again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and
>> because there was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many
>> little beasties, she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.
>
> Sounds like she had a one-time bad experience, but I've not
> encountered much organic broccoli these days that has had those types
> of issues. There was a time in the past when for organic people had
> to put up with low- grade, bug-infested, semi-eaten items, but this
> is generally not the case anymore. The popularity of organic farming
> has driven rapid progress in understanding and careful cultivation.
>
> It must be said, however, that for best results you should buy organic
> items in season. Out-of season organics are likely to be much worse
> than their out-of-season conventional brethren, generally shrivelled,
> tasteless, etc. Furthermore the price premium for out-of-season
> organic becomes truly disproportionate, as compared to in-season
> differences when organic items are often close to competitive with
> conventional on price. So if you are to go with organic, this implies
> also a commitment to eating seasonally, and probably locally as well.
>
> Nonetheless, the argument generally comes down to a question of
> whether or not the value of organic is worth the extra price. Some
> people believe that no amount of benefits from organics could justify
> the cost. Others say that no reduction in cost could justify the
> negatives of conventional farming. Certainly one can't expect organic
> to come for free. If there is any extra value in it, then that value
> will come at a commensurate price. Much of the organic movement
> argues that conventional foods are actually coming at an artificially
> low price - that in using unsustainable methods they are selling
> products in the short term cheaply, but that sooner or later the chickens
> will come home to roost, so to speak, and then prices will rise anyway.

Mindless silly stuff. Wont happen, you watch.

> In this argument the price of organic merely
> reflects real costs of sustainable production.

More mindless silly stuff.

> As it actually happens, there is some inflation going on as
> well, because the organic core consumers are prepared to
> pay above market value for what they're getting. In some
> cases this means egregious overpricing, but in other cases
> it doesn't, so organic items aren't automatically a rip-off -
> it depends entirely on how much value you see in them. The
> arguments of the organic camp, therefore, aren't unassailable,
> but neither are they irrational.

Yes they are, most obviously with that
terminally silly claim about prices rising.

> Same thing for the conventional camp. It's a
> pure matter of priorities: price versus benefits?

No evidence of any 'benefits' with 'organics, they're a complete wank.

Steve wrote:
> Excerpts from
> http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm
>
> Buy these items organic as often as possible:
>
> ...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported grapes,
> nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes, red raspberries, spinach, and
> strawberries

I once took a bite from an organic apple.....about to take a 2nd
bite...noticed a worm...then noticed it was only *half* a worm....

More & more they're using systemic pesticides (absorbed thru
roots/leaves), there's no "washing" off.

Pesticide triva: Calif. strawberries are No.1. (Yay)
No.1 in pounds per acre of pesticides, iirc over 300, I think it is.
My fav, broccoli was only at 50, or so.

french fry trivia: McDonalds potatoes (for fries), already saturated
with pesticides, are given an xtra dose just b-4 harvest to prevent the
black spotting. (no wonder they're so costly)


> Buy these items organic if price is no object:
>
> ...asparagus, avocados, bananas, broccoli, cauliflower, sweet corn,
> kiwi, mangos, onions, papaya, pineapples, and sweet peas
>
> Why: Multiple pesticide residues are rarely found on conventionally
> grown versions of these fruits and vegetables.

Oh really??? How about if they're imported from Mexico/Central America.
We get lots of their veggies/fruits in the Wintertime. They're only
tested for a few pesticides. If they do find a contaminated
batch....well, tough apples...they'll already have been eaten.


> ...seafood
>
> Some wild fish such as bluefish are very high in PCBs,
> and tuna and swordfish are laced with mercury.

Strange, they overlook the fact that farm-raised fish, esp- salmon are
very high in PCB's.

Rod Speed wrote:

> Steve > wrote
>
>
>>Excerpts from
>>http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm
>
>
>>Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure
>>to pesticides and other additives, and when it's a waste of your money.
>
>
> Its always a waste of your money, just sometimes more of a waste
> of your money than otherwise in modern first world countrys.
>
>
>>Buy these items organic as often as possible:
>
>
>>...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported
>>grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes,
>>red raspberries, spinach, and strawberries
>
>
> No thanks.
>
>
>>Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that
>>even after washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently
>>carry much higher levels of pesticide residue than others.
>
>
> I dont care.
>

You say you don't care several times but you obviously care enough to
post a long response that is full of inaccuracies and pure BS. It takes
a real talent to get so many things wrong all at once, but you managed
to do it.

Peter

Beeblebrox wrote:
> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
> again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
> was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
> she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

Yaknow, I understand the squick factor, but when you step back and look
at it in the Grand Scheme o' Things, the bugs are probably a lot
healthier to eat than the pesticides.

P.Aitken wrote:

> You say you don't care several times but you obviously care enough to
> post a long response that is full of inaccuracies and pure BS. It takes
> a real talent to get so many things wrong all at once, but you managed
> to do it.

It's always fascinating when, through the miracle of cross-posted
threads, the rest of the world is introduced to the Wonder Which Is Rod
Speed.

Steve wrote:
> Excerpts from
> http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm
>
>
> Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure to
> pesticides and other additives, and when it's a waste of your money.
>
> Buy these items organic as often as possible:
>
> ...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported grapes,
> nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes, red raspberries, spinach, and
> strawberries
>
> Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that even after
> washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently carry much higher
> levels of pesticide residue than others. Their conventionally grown
> counterparts tend to be laden with pesticides. Among fruits,
> nectarines had the highest percentage testing positive for pesticide
> residue. Peaches and red raspberries had the most pesticides (nine) on
> a single sample. Among vegetables, celery and spinach most often
> carried pesticides, with spinach having the highest number (10) on a
> single sample.
>
> ...meat, poultry, eggs, and dairy
>
> Why: You greatly reduce the risk of exposure to mad cow disease and
> minimize exposure to other potential toxins in non-organic feed. You
> also avoid the results of production methods that use daily
> supplemental hormones and antibiotics, which have been linked to
> increased antibacterial resistance in humans.
>
> ...baby food
>
> Why: Children's developing bodies are especially vulnerable to toxins,
> and they may be at risk of higher exposure. Baby food is often made up
> of condensed fruits or vegetables, potentially concentrating pesticide
> residues.
>
> Buy these items organic if price is no object:
>
> ...asparagus, avocados, bananas, broccoli, cauliflower, sweet corn,
> kiwi, mangos, onions, papaya, pineapples, and sweet peas
>
> Why: Multiple pesticide residues are rarely found on conventionally
> grown versions of these fruits and vegetables.
>
> ...breads, oils, potato chips, pasta, cereals, and other packaged
> foods, such as canned or dried fruit and vegetables
>
> Why: Although these processed products may have lower levels of
> contaminants in them, they offer limited health value because
> processing tends to wash away important nutrients. The process of
> milling organic whole grains into flour, for example, eliminates fiber
> and vitamins, though they are sometimes added back in. The more a food
> is processed, the less health value its organic version offers,
> especially in products such as cereals and pastas with labels that say
> "made with organic ingredients." Read the list of ingredients and you
> might find that while the flour is organic, the eggs aren't. The
> processed foods with the most added value are labeled "100% Organic"
> and "USDA organic."
>
> Don't bother buying these items organic:
>
> ...seafood
>
> Why: Whether caught in the wild or farmed, fish can be labeled
> organic, despite the presence of contaminants such as mercury and
> PCBs. Some wild fish such as bluefish are very high in PCBs, and tuna
> and swordfish are laced with mercury. The USDA has not yet developed
> organic certification standards for seafood. In the meantime,
> producers are allowed to make their own organic claims as long as they
> don't use "USDA" or "certified organic" logos.
>
> ...cosmetics
>
> Why: Unless a personal-care product consists primarily of organic
> agricultural ingredients, such as aloe vera gel, it's pointless to buy
> organic. Most cosmetics contain a mix of ingredients, and USDA
> regulations allow shampoos and body lotions to carry an organic label
> if their main ingredient is organic hydrosol, which is simply water in
> which something organic, such as a lavender leaf, has been soaked.
> While the USDA claims that organic-labeled cosmetics follow the same
> standards as food, we have found indiscriminate use of synthetic
> ingredients and violations of food-labeling standards. Just because a
> product has the word organic or natural in its name doesn't
> necessarily mean it's safer. Only 11% of ingredients found in
> personal-care products, organic or not, have ever been screened for
> safety.
>
I'm always astounded by the negative reaction to concepts that are
simply "different". Why do some people feel/react/seem so threatened
by the notion of not using pesticides??? It's as if they take it
personally :-) Why does anyone give a rat's ass if I choose to eat a
diet that doesn't include meat, fish or pesticides? And why is there
often such a knee-jerk, defensive reaction? I have scratched my head
on this one for about 3 decades and although I've learned to talk less
and less about how and what I eat, I still see the reaction is alive
and well in forums such as this.

Yeah, I get grossed out when I find a bunch of bugs in a clump of
broccoli, but to think that it's only on organic broccoli, is a bit
silly. For those that have the atttitude that "what you see won't hurt
you," well, go on with your way of thinking. If it works for you, go
for it. But why oh why do you have to put others down who choose not
to eat foods laden with the stuff? For those of you who choose to eat
animal non organic animal products...help yourself to all you want.
But for god's sake...why do you give a rip if others do not want to?
This is one of those concepts that I will never understand.

"DrLith" > wrote in message
...
> Beeblebrox wrote:
>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
>> again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there was
>> no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties, she
>> couldn't get it clean enough to cook.
>
> Yaknow, I understand the squick factor, but when you step back and look at
> it in the Grand Scheme o' Things, the bugs are probably a lot healthier to
> eat than the pesticides.

There is no real reason to an have either/or factor. True organic gardening
will eliminate both; not always obtainable, tho.
Dee Dee

DrLith wrote:

> P.Aitken wrote:
>
>> You say you don't care several times but you obviously care enough to
>> post a long response that is full of inaccuracies and pure BS. It
>> takes a real talent to get so many things wrong all at once, but you
>> managed to do it.
>
>
> It's always fascinating when, through the miracle of cross-posted
> threads, the rest of the world is introduced to the Wonder Which Is Rod
> Speed.

So Rod has a history, does he? Why am I not surprised?

Peter

tofuqueen wrote:

>
> I'm always astounded by the negative reaction to concepts that are
> simply "different". Why do some people feel/react/seem so threatened
> by the notion of not using pesticides??? It's as if they take it
> personally :-) Why does anyone give a rat's ass if I choose to eat a
> diet that doesn't include meat, fish or pesticides? And why is there
> often such a knee-jerk, defensive reaction? I have scratched my head
> on this one for about 3 decades and although I've learned to talk less
> and less about how and what I eat, I still see the reaction is alive
> and well in forums such as this.
>
> Yeah, I get grossed out when I find a bunch of bugs in a clump of
> broccoli, but to think that it's only on organic broccoli, is a bit
> silly. For those that have the atttitude that "what you see won't hurt
> you," well, go on with your way of thinking. If it works for you, go
> for it. But why oh why do you have to put others down who choose not
> to eat foods laden with the stuff? For those of you who choose to eat
> animal non organic animal products...help yourself to all you want.
> But for god's sake...why do you give a rip if others do not want to?
> This is one of those concepts that I will never understand.
>

I see two things at work here.

1) Insecurity. When you eat a different diet than someone else they can
infer that you are somehow labeling their diet as inferior or bad in
some way. Their insecurity causes them to lash out in an attempt to
avoid these feelings.

2) Politics. For various reasons, mostly historical, a concern with
natural foods, pesticides, and the environment has become associated
with the liberal end of the political spectrum. As every election shows
us, there are millions of mindless, ignorant "conservatives" who
automatically react negatively toward anything that smacks of "liberalism."

Peter

On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 10:25:34 -0500, "Dee Randall"
> wrote:

>
>"DrLith" > wrote in message
...
>> Beeblebrox wrote:
>>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
>>> again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there was
>>> no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties, she
>>> couldn't get it clean enough to cook.
>>
>> Yaknow, I understand the squick factor, but when you step back and look at
>> it in the Grand Scheme o' Things, the bugs are probably a lot healthier to
>> eat than the pesticides.
>
>There is no real reason to an have either/or factor. True organic gardening
>will eliminate both; not always obtainable, tho.
>Dee Dee
>

I have been gardening organically for many years and I have never been
able to "eliminate" bugs. I fight them each year anew. Granted, good
gardening techniques make the plants more resilient to certain insect
invasion, but nothing is bug-proof. Nothing. No garden I have ever
seen. In fact, without many insects, there would be no garden at all

Some years the weather fights the efforts knocking off one pest while
it only encourages another. Some years a surge in population of a
certain insect pest defeats everything. Some years even a favorite
variety is susceptible. Outwitting the critters of varying sizes is
what gardening is all about.

If you know of some way to defeat Mother Nature this way, I'd love to
hear it.

One of the baking mix supply houses my husband contracts out to says
that if they receive a shipment of "organic" grains/flours and there
are NO bugs in it, they send it back, knowing it isn't organically
grown. What do you think sifters were invented for? Now freezers help.
So do sticky pantry pheromone thingees - at least for the grains.

Boron

P.Aitken > wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Steve > wrote

>>> Excerpts from
>>> http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm

>>> Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure
>>> to pesticides and other additives, and when it's a waste of your money.

>> Its always a waste of your money, just sometimes more of a waste
>> of your money than otherwise in modern first world countrys.

>>> Buy these items organic as often as possible:

>>> ...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported
>>> grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes,
>>> red raspberries, spinach, and strawberries

>> No thanks.

>>> Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that
>>> even after washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently
>>> carry much higher levels of pesticide residue than others.

>> I dont care.

> You say you don't care several times but you obviously care enough to post a
> long response

I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS, stupid.

> that is full of inaccuracies and pure BS.

Lie.

> It takes a real talent to get so many things wrong all at once, but you
> managed to do it.

You cant even manage to comprehend what I dont care about, ****wit.

P.Aitken > wrote:
> tofuqueen wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm always astounded by the negative reaction to concepts that are
>> simply "different". Why do some people feel/react/seem so threatened
>> by the notion of not using pesticides??? It's as if they take it
>> personally :-) Why does anyone give a rat's ass if I choose to eat a
>> diet that doesn't include meat, fish or pesticides? And why is there
>> often such a knee-jerk, defensive reaction? I have scratched my
>> head on this one for about 3 decades and although I've learned to
>> talk less and less about how and what I eat, I still see the
>> reaction is alive and well in forums such as this.
>>
>> Yeah, I get grossed out when I find a bunch of bugs in a clump of
>> broccoli, but to think that it's only on organic broccoli, is a bit
>> silly. For those that have the atttitude that "what you see won't
>> hurt you," well, go on with your way of thinking. If it works for
>> you, go for it. But why oh why do you have to put others down who
>> choose not to eat foods laden with the stuff? For those of you who
>> choose to eat animal non organic animal products...help yourself to
>> all you want. But for god's sake...why do you give a rip if others
>> do not want to? This is one of those concepts that I will never
>> understand.

> I see two things at work here.

Not a shred of evidence that you can see, you've clearly wanked yourself blind.

> 1) Insecurity. When you eat a different diet than someone else they
> can infer that you are somehow labeling their diet as inferior or bad
> in some way. Their insecurity causes them to lash out in an attempt to
> avoid these feelings.

Wota ****ing ******.

> 2) Politics. For various reasons, mostly historical, a concern with
> natural foods, pesticides, and the environment has become associated
> with the liberal end of the political spectrum. As every election shows us,
> there are millions of mindless, ignorant "conservatives" who automatically
> react negatively toward anything that smacks of "liberalism."

Wota ****ing ******.

Pity about 3) ******s. Plenty with a clue realise that 'organics'
are a complete wank in modern first world countrys that have
perfectly adequate setups that ensure that our food is safe to eat.

"Rod Speed" > wrote:
>I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS, stupid.

What makes you think your produce is coming from a "modern first world
country"?


--

My friends tell me I have an intimacy problem.
But they don't really know me.

....Garry Shandling

This is a pretty good article. I would add tomatoes to the list that
should be purchased organic if possible. Conventionally grown tomato
fields are often fumigated with methyl bromide, which is just awful for
your health, the health of the field workers and for the atmosphere.
It's actually banned now, but there are so many loopholes that there
was actually more used in 2005 than 2 years ago when the ban was put in
place. It's commonly used in growing strawberries as well.

As for the "organic" seafood, I agree that term is meaningless. It is
still best to buy wild catch salmon though (as well as other fish).
Farm raised salmon have a high rate of physical deformities, which
means that somethings going on in how they are raised. Salmon farmers
are allowed to use a fish food that includes a petroleum based red
pigment because it's chemically the same and the red pigment found in
krill, the tiny crustaceans that wild salmon eat.

BTW, I work at Whole Foods Market in Austin.

wrote:
> This is a pretty good article. I would add tomatoes to the list that
> should be purchased organic if possible. Conventionally grown tomato
> fields are often fumigated with methyl bromide, which is just awful for
> your health, the health of the field workers and for the atmosphere.
> It's actually banned now, but there are so many loopholes that there
> was actually more used in 2005 than 2 years ago when the ban was put in
> place. It's commonly used in growing strawberries as well.

Once I tasted homegrown tomatoes (that also happened to be organic)
I've not been able to purchase or eat store bought tomatoes. They are
completely flavorless. I'm not sure if it's the non pesticide fact or
the fact that they're home grown, not transported 8 billion miles or
picked while still green and gassed to get color or whatever the hell
they do to a poor little tomato! :-)
>
> As for the "organic" seafood, I agree that term is meaningless. It is
> still best to buy wild catch salmon though (as well as other fish).
> Farm raised salmon have a high rate of physical deformities, which
> means that somethings going on in how they are raised. Salmon farmers
> are allowed to use a fish food that includes a petroleum based red
> pigment because it's chemically the same and the red pigment found in
> krill, the tiny crustaceans that wild salmon eat.
>
> BTW, I work at Whole Foods Market in Austin.

BTW...how are you treated as an employee of WF. I've heard rumors
about some pretty bad pay, medical, etc. practices (in the NW, that
is). I'm curious to hear your view. I sure do love their variety of
foods there but having heard about unfair practices, etc. I've been
reluctant to shop there and prefer to support the smaller co-ops and
mom and pop stores. Please don't take this that I"m personally
attacking you, okay? :-) I just find it sad when huge stores put
those small guys out of business :-( but I still can like the store.
It's kind of a connundrum.

Steve > wrote:
> Rod Speed > wrote

>> I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN
>> MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS, stupid.

> What makes you think your produce is
> coming from a "modern first world country"?

I know its not. I also know that it wont be allowed into
my country unless it meets acceptible standards, stupid.

tofuqueen > wrote
> wrote

>> This is a pretty good article. I would add tomatoes to the list that
>> should be purchased organic if possible. Conventionally grown tomato
>> fields are often fumigated with methyl bromide, which is just awful
>> for your health, the health of the field workers and for the
>> atmosphere. It's actually banned now, but there are so many
>> loopholes that there was actually more used in 2005 than 2 years ago
>> when the ban was put in place. It's commonly used in growing
>> strawberries as well.

> Once I tasted homegrown tomatoes (that also happened to be organic)
> I've not been able to purchase or eat store bought tomatoes. They are
> completely flavorless. I'm not sure if it's the non pesticide fact or
> the fact that they're home grown, not transported 8 billion miles or
> picked while still green and gassed to get color or whatever the hell
> they do to a poor little tomato! :-)

The problem is that the varietys used commercially are tasteless.

They're the only ones that have a viable shelf life for commercial use.

>> As for the "organic" seafood, I agree that term is meaningless. It
>> is still best to buy wild catch salmon though (as well as other
>> fish). Farm raised salmon have a high rate of physical deformities,
>> which means that somethings going on in how they are raised. Salmon
>> farmers are allowed to use a fish food that includes a petroleum
>> based red pigment because it's chemically the same and the red
>> pigment found in krill, the tiny crustaceans that wild salmon eat.
>>
>> BTW, I work at Whole Foods Market in Austin.
>
> BTW...how are you treated as an employee of WF. I've heard rumors
> about some pretty bad pay, medical, etc. practices (in the NW, that
> is). I'm curious to hear your view. I sure do love their variety of
> foods there but having heard about unfair practices, etc. I've been
> reluctant to shop there and prefer to support the smaller co-ops and
> mom and pop stores. Please don't take this that I"m personally
> attacking you, okay? :-) I just find it sad when huge stores put
> those small guys out of business :-( but I still can like the store.
> It's kind of a connundrum.

Gosh I love it here. We have co-ops and smaller stores here in Austin
too (Sun Harvest, part of the Wild Oats chain) but they just don't
offer the variety that they have at WF. As for bad pay, I guess it's
just up to people to work where they want. They are very good about
promoting from within, so Personally, I think the medical is great,
although it is different than other places I've worked. It has a high
deductible, but after you've worked here a year you get a "benny card"
that can be used for medical expenses of any kind, including
alternative medicine like acupuncture. It effectively pays for your
deductible, and it's a good option for young people who may not use
"normal" health insurance as much, and the company pays 100% of the
premiums. Stay here long enough and they cover spouses, domestic
partners and children too. We also get stock options every 3 years.
Everything is geared towards keeping people here, including leave time,
and it must be working because our turnover is 1/3 what it is in the
general grocery industry. That being said, we do have more issues in
parts of the country that are heavily unionized. We may may less than
union workers up front, but our benefits are good enough that most
people find it worthwhile. We just got on Forbes "Best Places to Work
For" list for the 9 year in a row.

Alex Rast a écrit :

> There
> was a time in the past when for organic people had to put up with low-
> grade, bug-infested, semi-eaten items, but this is generally not the case
> anymore. The popularity of organic farming has driven rapid progress in
> understanding and careful cultivation.

Quite right. Most organic produce looks as fine as regular these days.


A few years ago in Québec a poll revealed that more than 50% of
consumers would buy organic food if the price was more reasonable, even
if it cost more than regular items. But already most farmers were
growing some of their vegetables according to the standards of OCIA
Québec, Québec Vrai, Garantie Bio, OJBA and Demeter. To be allowed
to use the term organic, a product has to have been certified by one of
those standards organisations.

As a consequence of the poll, the organic food industry got a long
awaited boost and now a raft of organic produce are available in most
supermarkets. Also, producers can now stop living hand to mouth and
start developing long term plans for production.

http://www.equiterre.org/agriculture...ire%20v2n4.pdf

As a member of the Slow Food International Association, I approve of
this positive step to begin ridding the world of "malbouffe".

"Rod Speed" > wrote:
>>> I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN
>>> MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS, stupid.
>
>> What makes you think your produce is
>> coming from a "modern first world country"?
>
>I know its not. I also know that it wont be allowed into
>my country unless it meets acceptible standards, stupid.

Then you must have a considerably more reliable inspection system in
your country. I'd sure hate to vouch for the inspection systems in
most of your so-called modern first-world countries, including the US.


--

My friends tell me I have an intimacy problem.
But they don't really know me.

....Garry Shandling

Rod Speed wrote:

> P.Aitken > wrote
>
>>Rod Speed wrote
>>
>>>Steve > wrote
>
>
>>>>Excerpts from
>>>>http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm
>
>
>>>>Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure
>>>>to pesticides and other additives, and when it's a waste of your money.
>
>
>>>Its always a waste of your money, just sometimes more of a waste
>>>of your money than otherwise in modern first world countrys.
>
>
>>>>Buy these items organic as often as possible:
>
>
>>>>...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported
>>>>grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes,
>>>>red raspberries, spinach, and strawberries
>
>
>>>No thanks.
>
>
>>>>Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that
>>>>even after washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently
>>>>carry much higher levels of pesticide residue than others.
>
>
>>>I dont care.
>
>
>>You say you don't care several times but you obviously care enough to post a
>>long response
>
>
> I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS, stupid.
>
>
>>that is full of inaccuracies and pure BS.
>
>
> Lie.
>
>
>>It takes a real talent to get so many things wrong all at once, but you
>>managed to do it.
>
>
> You cant even manage to comprehend what I dont care about, ****wit.
>
>

Try "don't" instead of "dont." Also "countries" instead of "countrys."
And also "can't" instead of "cant."

Once you learn third grade spelling I will let you talk to my pet gerbil
who will further instruct you in the art of civilized discourse.

You are a pitiful, ignorant, looser. My bet is that you will always be
that way. I feel sorry for you.

Peter

"me" > wrote in message
...
> In article <b1%wf.70078$4l5.46313@dukeread05>,
> Beeblebrox > wrote:
>
>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears she'll never
>> again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once, and because there
>> was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with so many little beasties,
>> she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.
>
> Whatever did people _do_ before pesticides came into common usage?
>
> Those of us who buy organic vegetables like broccoli and cabbage
> know to soak it in a salt-water solution for a few minutes to loosen
> the unwanted visitors.
>
> BTW, there _are_ "pesticides" which can be used to protect
> vegetables against insect infestation, including pepper spray,
> marigold teas, etc.
>
i eat organic all the time and have never seen a bug in my produce.

> wrote in message
oups.com...
> Gosh I love it here. We have co-ops and smaller stores here in Austin
> too (Sun Harvest, part of the Wild Oats chain) but they just don't
> offer the variety that they have at WF. As for bad pay, I guess it's
> just up to people to work where they want. They are very good about
> promoting from within, so Personally, I think the medical is great,
> although it is different than other places I've worked. It has a high
> deductible, but after you've worked here a year you get a "benny card"
> that can be used for medical expenses of any kind, including
> alternative medicine like acupuncture. It effectively pays for your
> deductible, and it's a good option for young people who may not use
> "normal" health insurance as much, and the company pays 100% of the
> premiums. Stay here long enough and they cover spouses, domestic
> partners and children too. We also get stock options every 3 years.
> Everything is geared towards keeping people here, including leave time,
> and it must be working because our turnover is 1/3 what it is in the
> general grocery industry. That being said, we do have more issues in
> parts of the country that are heavily unionized. We may may less than
> union workers up front, but our benefits are good enough that most
> people find it worthwhile. We just got on Forbes "Best Places to Work
> For" list for the 9 year in a row.
>

I wonder how Trader Joe's compares. Just my observation, but TJ's employees
seem to be under a lot less stress than in Whole Foods, and seem more
willing to take care of customers and a lot more knowledge about any product
I ask about. I had been dedicated to Whole Foods and there are still things
I need to buy there, but if Trader Joe's (plural) have the same product as
Whole Foods, I will buy it at TJ's. For instance, one particular item at
Whole Foods is $2.50, at Trader Joes it is $1.99. This is a common item
that everybody buys. Yes, I know all the ramifications of the buyers'
problems, etc. but one can't expect the consumer to take a hit for the
buyers' abilities.
Not intended to be a rant against WF, but I'm glad there is some competition
for them. Forbes also must know what they're talking about.
Keep up the good work, Whole Foods.
Dee

Steve > wrote
> Rod Speed > wrote

>>>> I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN
>>>> MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS, stupid.

>>> What makes you think your produce is
>>> coming from a "modern first world country"?

>> I know its not. I also know that it wont be allowed into
>> my country unless it meets acceptible standards, stupid.

> Then you must have a considerably more reliable inspection system
> in your country. I'd sure hate to vouch for the inspection systems in
> most of your so-called modern first-world countries, including the US.

More fool you. We managed fine in the last half of the last century
pesticides wise in food in ALL modern first world countrys.

P.Aitken > wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> P.Aitken > wrote
>>> Rod Speed wrote
>>>> Steve > wrote

>>>>> Excerpts from
>>>>> http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/f...and-doesnt.htm

>>>>> Know when it pays to buy organic products to reduce your exposure
>>>>> to pesticides and other additives, and when it's a waste of your money.

>>>> Its always a waste of your money, just sometimes more of a waste
>>>> of your money than otherwise in modern first world countrys.

>>>>> Buy these items organic as often as possible:

>>>>> ...apples, bell peppers, celery, cherries, imported
>>>>> grapes, nectarines, peaches, pears, potatoes,
>>>>> red raspberries, spinach, and strawberries

>>>> No thanks.

>>>>> Why: The US Dept of Agriculture's lab testing reveals that
>>>>> even after washing, some fruits and vegetables consistently
>>>>> carry much higher levels of pesticide residue than others.

>>>> I dont care.

>>> You say you don't care several times but you obviously care enough to post a
>>> long response

>> I dont care about PESTICIDE RESIDUES IN MODERN FIRST WORLD COUNTRYS,
>> stupid.

>>> that is full of inaccuracies and pure BS.

>> Lie.

>>> It takes a real talent to get so many things wrong all at once, but you
>>> managed to do it.

>> You cant even manage to comprehend what I dont care about, ****wit.

> Try "don't" instead of "dont." Also "countries" instead of "countrys."
> And also "can't" instead of "cant."

Go and **** yourself.

> Once you learn third grade spelling

I CHOOSE to spell that way. You get to like it or lump it.

Reams of your puerile shit any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it
belongs.

Rod Speed wrote:
> me > wrote:
> > Beeblebrox > wrote
>
> >> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears
> >> she'll never again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once,
> >> and because there was no pesticide, the bunch was infested
> >> with so many little beasties, she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.
>
> > Whatever did people _do_ before pesticides came into common usage?
>
> Put up with bug and weavil infested food.
>
It's easier to take a worm out of an apple than to take poison out of
your body after you eat a non-organic one. I used to eat apples fresh
off the tree, in Russia, and yes, there were worms in them every so
often. So what? I'd take the creature out and eat the apple.

The scary thing is when there are poisons and bacteria in your food
that you *can't* see and take out that easily.

LM

Larisa wrote:

> It's easier to take a worm out of an apple than to take poison out of
> your body after you eat a non-organic one. I used to eat apples fresh
> off the tree, in Russia, and yes, there were worms in them every so
> often. So what? I'd take the creature out and eat the apple.

It's not so bad to find a worm in the apple you are eating. It is much better
than finding half a worm in it.
:-)

Larisa > wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> me > wrote
>>> Beeblebrox > wrote

>>>> I remember a conversation with a friend of mine who swears
>>>> she'll never again buy organic broccoli. Says she tried it once,
>>>> and because there was no pesticide, the bunch was infested with
>>>> so many little beasties, she couldn't get it clean enough to cook.

>>> Whatever did people _do_ before pesticides came into common usage?

>> Put up with bug and weavil infested food.

> It's easier to take a worm out of an apple than to take
> poison out of your body after you eat a non-organic one.

No need to bother with the non organics, every modern
first world country ensures that what is in them is safe.

> I used to eat apples fresh off the tree, in Russia, and yes, there were worms
> in them every so often. So what? I'd take the creature out and eat the
> apple.

I've never had any problem with any apple I have ever eaten.

> The scary thing is when there are poisons and bacteria
> in your food that you *can't* see and take out that easily.

Nothing 'scary' about it in a modern first world country where
there wont be any pesticide residue thats any health problem.

They may have it priced as a "loss leader" - a product that's priced
close to cost just to get people in the door. My guess is that if you
took the item in to a Whole Foods with your receipt, they would give
you a competitive mark down.

at Wed, 11 Jan 2006 16:15:09 GMT in
>, (P.Aitken) wrote :

>
>tofuqueen wrote:
>
>>
>> I'm always astounded by the negative reaction to concepts that are
>> simply "different". Why do some people feel/react/seem so threatened
>> by the notion of not using pesticides??? ...
>>
>
>I see two things at work here.
>
>1) Insecurity. When you eat a different diet than someone else they can
>infer that you are somehow labeling their diet as inferior or bad in
>some way. Their insecurity causes them to lash out in an attempt to
>avoid these feelings.
>
>2) Politics. For various reasons, mostly historical, a concern with
>natural foods, pesticides, and the environment has become associated
>with the liberal end of the political spectrum. As every election shows
>us, there are millions of mindless, ignorant "conservatives" who
>automatically react negatively toward anything that smacks of
>"liberalism."

In addition, both of these factors cut both ways. There are also a fair
number of organic people who, confronted with various studies that cast any
sort of doubt on organics, are equally defensive. In this case the
inference that is drawn is that eating an organic diet automatically makes
you credulous. I'll note that reacting to those kinds of supposed
implications actually *reinforces* the implication that's being drawn.

And on the political side, there are plenty of liberals who automatically
react negatively toward anything that smacks of conservativism. Thus for
instance plenty of "liberals" react badly towards eating meat because again
for various reasons, eating meat has become associated with the
conservative end of the political spectrum.

What it goes to show is that by framing the argument ahead of time you can
easily cast your opponent as ignorant, foolish, erroneous, or whatever, no
matter how well put their arguments are. Predefining the terms of the
debate is the quickest way to ensure that there can be no rational debate.


--
Alex Rast

(remove d., .7, not, and .NOSPAM to reply)