# data[].attributes.headline
More shoppers buying 'natural' food, yet most don't know what it means

# data[].attributes.subject
More shoppers buying 'natural' food, yet most don't know what it means

# data[].attributes.body
USA Today Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Food and BeverageLatest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Find the latest news, hrasfsaaLatest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.Latest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.Latest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.Latest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.Latest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.Latest news, headlines, blogs and watch video about food and beverage.

# data[].attributes.body
"Hot on the trail to investigate what's really in your food."

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Food Babe - Hot On The Trail To Investigate What's Really In Your Food

# data[].attributes.body
A website about the Industrial Organic Food Chain. Various websites/resources listed.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
To begin to classify modern agriculture, it is imperative to first consider two important categories that have been established in society regarding farming techniques: industrial and organic.

The term "industrial" agriculture is a direct derivative of the Green Revolution that passed across the globe during the mid-20th century. During this period, new advancements in agricultural technologies yielded stronger, more disease-resistant crops. And with this revolution began the trend of genetically modifying farm crops. What began as a small success centralized in Mexico, the birthplace of the "green revolution", soon came to wash over the global community. And today, the term "industrial" farming in society refers to the integration of genetic modification and synthetic fertilizers with conventional farming technologies (Briney, 2010).

The term "organic" agriculture refers to a species cultivated devoid of any synthetic aid, whether that be in the form of genetic modification or applied synthetic fertilizers and pesticides.It is defined that organic is the use of "farming practices that may be agroecological, sustainable, or ecological; utilizing natural (non-synthetic) nutrient-cycling processes; exclude or rarely use synthetic pesticides; and sustain or regenerate soil quality" (Badgley, 2006). Organic agriculture has been around for centuries through small farmers who farmed organically to support their families and their local communities. It was traditionally an interdependent cycle between livestock, animal farming, and crop farming. This process works cyclically; livestock provide food for the family as well as manure, waste products that can fertilize crops that in turn feed the family and the livestock. This essentially makes the process free of any artificial materials and is self-sustainable. Though organic has been known to include not just the farming process, but also packaging, shipping and consumer processes, for the sake of this site, only the farming process will be under consideration with the use of the term "organic".

And therefore it's clear that there is a well-established dichotomy that exists between "industrial" and "organic" agricultural methods in society.

Now to further characterize, there are four possible farming situations that can be classified regarding the global farming situation. These four categories are based up on size and type.

1. Large-scale Industrial Agriculture

2. Small-scale Industrial Agriculture

3. Large-scale Organic Agriculture

4. Small-scale Organic Agriculture

(In the classification system above, we can define large-scale and small-scale to be in terms of relative field size.)

This site will aim at improving large-scale agriculture by adopting the benefits of small-scale and large-scale organic farming. The goal of organic farming is to reduce the disastrous effects of industrial chemicals and fertilizers on topsoil while helping "enhance soil fertility, prevent soil erosion, promote and enhance biological diversity, and minimize the risk to human and animal health and natural resources" (Treadwell, Riddle, Barbercheck, Cavanaugh-Grant, & Zaborski, 2010). Creating a hybridized system between the large-scale industrial and organic family will yield much better benefits and make current farming systems much more sustainable.

The reason an hybridization is being proposed is because it is virtually impossible at this time to completely convert all industrial practices into organic ones. Immediately switching to a completely organic system would lead to a dip in agricultural productivity. Switching to organic methods requires many drastic changes within the infrastructure of farming companies, workers, and production methods. For example, organic farming requires a lot more labor and more workers since a lot of it is "weeding" must be done by hand and not by fertilizers. Time is needed to help establish these changes, which cannot be administered immediately. Workers need to be trained and the big companies who hold the reigns over the large industrialized farms must be overcome, which is not an easy task. The industrialized portion of modern agriculture has produced large quantities of food. If all industrial farming was immediately converted into organic methods, the world would not only suffer losses in terms of agricultural yields, but there would also be great debate and complaints from industrialized companies, as well as industrial farm workers.
Pros and Cons
To compare the benefits of switching from certain industrial large-scale processes to more organic processes, the pros and cons of each process should be taken into consideration.
Industrial Large-Scale Processes
PROS:(Chavis, 2010)

Most staple foods are cheaper due to heavy government subsidies.

Due to the large government subsidies that industrial farms receive, producers in the farms can employ genetic modifications in different ways, experimenting with which crop yields the most optimal results.

Less human labor is required, but output is extremely high and output quality is controlled to a desired level.

As a result of various and advanced methods of food production, processing, packaging, preservation and delivery, food supply availability is fast enough to reach the consumer.

CONS:(See problem page)
Organic Processes:
PROS:(Satalkar)

maintains the life of the soil, not only for the current generation, but also for the future generations

Water pollution is reduced with organic farming because the soil in organic farms is more absorptive and can hold more water than industrial farmed soils with high salinity levels.

The rate of soil erosion is reduced drastically because legume-based crop covers and a blanket of dead and live plant materials protect the soil from being eroded extensively by water and wind.

The nutritional quality and micro-nutrients are present in higher quantities in organically produced crops because fertilizers and artificial ingredients are not added into the crops. Overall cost of cultivating the crops reduces as the farmers use green manure or worm farming to replenish the lost nutrients of the soil.

The life of organically grown plants is longer than the plants cultivated by traditional methods.

There is a reduced price tag in how much it takes to farm, as there is no need to purchase artificial pesticides, fertilizers, herbicides, or large-scale technological tools that help maintain industrial large-scale lands.

The need for more manual labor increases the number of jobs available in a certain area.

Organically grown crop is more drought tolerant because they have the natural mechanism to protect themselves against harsh conditions. Crops used in mass industrial farming are altered and put in such an artificial environment that they no longer can protect themselves using their natural mechanisms, as their genetic identities have been altered drastically by several different components.

CONS:(Satalkar)

Low productivity when first administered.

Organic farmers use the cultivation method as opposed to drilling method used by the traditional farmers. The cultivated soil is prone to wind and water erosion.

Organically produced food is expensive. The cost is very often 50-100 percent more than the traditional food. This is because organic crops are not as heavily subsidized as are industrially grown crops.

The organic farmers grow crops in accordance to the season therefore organic food is not always available locally. The crops can, when the climate is harsh, grow using greenhouses, since organic can be grown in small-scale settings fairly productively.

Lots of manual labor needed.

It has been found that "if converted to organic production, the low-intensity agriculture present in much of the developing world would have the same or slight reduction in yields that has been reported for the developed world, where green-revolution methods now dominate." See the graph below.

Graph 1shows the average yield ratio (organic: non-organic) and standard error. And clearly, the ratio is either very close to 1 or greater than one showing that organic agriculture can be just as productive as non-organic agriculture.

Graph 1 source: (Badgley, 2006)

Graph 2 This graph shows the supply and estimates that organic agriculture has provided and can be expected to provide.

Graph 2 source: (Badgley, 2006)

Although both organic and industrial agriculture have their strengths and weaknesses, there are certain problems with industrial agriculture that necessitate the need to combine both methods.
PROBLEM 1: Use of Monoculture
Industrial agriculture relies on monoculture, the planting of one crop in mass amounts. This decreases biodiversity within the ecosystem within both plants and animals.

"Today as more and more farmers are integrated into international economies, imperatives to diversity disappear and monocultures are rewarded by economies of scale. In turn, lack of rotations and diversification take away key self-regulating mechanisms, turning monocultures into highly vulnerable agroecosystems dependent on high chemical inputs. The technologies allowing the shift toward monoculture were mechanization, the improvement of crop varieties, and the development of agrochemicals to fertilize crops and control weeds and pests. Government commodity policies these past several decades encouraged the acceptance and utilization of these technologies. As a result, farms today are fewer, larger, more specialized and more capital intensive. At the regional level, increases in monoculture farming meant that the whole agricultural support infrastructure (i.e. research, extension, suppliers, storage, transport, markets, etc.) has become more specialized" (Altieri, 2000).

Larger-scaled industrial farms have become so expanded that it is very difficult for there to exist natural links between the soil, the crops, and the animals of a farm. Therefore it has become difficult to farm without the interference of chemical aids (Altieri, 2000).

Though in mass-industrialized large scaled farms there is a plethora of resources available to make the farm self-sustainable, (i.e. there is plenty of animal waste to help the environment), the animal wastes do not have an economically viable way of recycling the nutrients back into the soil. This is because the production systems have due to the large spaced-out scale, become geographically isolated from other farming systems making it extremley difficult to recycle and cycle materials and nutrients within the larger farming system as a whole (Altieri, 2000).

Monocultures act as a specialized "attack zone", as it can be called, for species of pesticides to attack. Because there is little to no diversity among monoculture farms there aren't natural remedies for pests, in other words, there are no predatory species that can naturally elminate a pest species. In this sense monoculture is also very dangerous because if one invincible pest or disease attacks an area it can possibly destroy the whole land area leading to adverse effects adn great economical losses (Altieri, 2000).

The reason for the extensive need of fertilizers to maintain a monoculture farm is due to the fact that the crops are being taken out of their natural habitats. They are being stretched out of their biological niches and cannot be functional to their full extent sans external synthetic aids (Altieri, 2000).

Monoculture relies on one crop for a couple years, around 5-9 years and then the crop is no longer useful. This may be due to insects that have dominated or the crop is no longer efficient. And therefore a new variety must be developed and hence monoculture depends constantly on new developments in resistance and chemically varied crops. What happens when there is no new crop generated?(Altieri, 2000)

Monoculture also has made it okay for industrialized large-scale farms to pour fertilizers on their fields. This is because certain crops grown in large-scale monoculture are genetically modified to be resistant to a certain pest. So to kill the pest they just pour mass amounts of a pesticide on the fields. Though this doesn't damage the crop, it does greatly damage the soil. And herein lies another major problem that gets overseen on a daily basis (Altieri, 2000).

PROBLEM 2: High Reliance on Artificial Pesticides/ Fertilizers
Industrial agriculture utilizes mass amounts of cheap synthetic fertilizers and pesticides to produce high yields. These pollutants greatly reduce the use of the land and causes topsoil degradation. This causes the extreme pollution of local rivers and water sources.

The loss of yields due to pests in many crops (reaching about 20-30% in most crops), despite the substantial increase in the use of pesticides (about 500 million kg of active ingredient worldwide) is a symptom of the environmental crisis affecting agriculture

Due to this lack of natural controls, an investment of about 40 billion dollars in pesticide control is incurred yearly by US farmers, which is estimated to save approximately $16 billion in US crop. (Altieri, 2000)

Image source: (Google, 2009)

Industrial agriculture also leads to soil erosion, which has reached a dangerously high rate; soil is being degraded much faster than it is being replenished, which deprives the land of fertile soil and nutrient richness. There are several causes of land erosion. " The soil is a vital component of our modern agricultural systems and with soil degrading at a faster rate than ever, we are losing arable land at a faster and faster rate every day. "During the last 40 years, nearly one-third of the world's arable land has been lost by erosion and continues to be lost at a rate of more than 10 million hectares per year". The greater the loss of soil, the smaller the productivity of the land; therefore soone nough the land will become virtually unproductive and infertile. This leads to more expansion and deforestation which again is very unsustainable. "Each year, 75 billion metric tons of soil are removed from the land by wind and water erosion, with most coming from agricultural land" (Pimentel, 1995).

This problem of erosion not only exists in croplands, that are about one-third of global agricultural land, but also in grazing land for livestock, which occupies the other two-thirds of global agricultural land. Croplands experience the highest rates of erosion due to poor farming practices. The "soil is repeatedly tilled and left without protective cover of vegetation" (Pimentel, 1995).

Soil erosion dramatically increases on a sloping surface due to water washing down and sweeing away at the soil. And because of modern agricultural practices, sloping surfaces for farming are becoming increasingly popular. The slopes are being converted from forests to agricultural land due to the rapidly increasing demand for food as a result of the ever-increasing human population. For example, to show the severity of sloped surfaces on soil erosion, "in Nigeria, cassava fields on steep slopes lost 221 tons per hectare per year" whereas cassava fields on flat land showed "an annual loss of 3 tons per hectare per year" (Pimentel, 1995). That is a dramatic difference.

Dead and alive plants wastes that accumulate on the surface of the soil are beneficial to prevent soil erosion. Yet on large-scale industrial farms this covering is being removed as a source for fuel to burn. And therefore erosion is increasing at an accelerate rate" (Pimentel, 1995). Erosion by water and wind adversely affect soil quality and productivity by reducing infiltration rates, water-holding capacity, nutrients, organic matter, soil biota, and soil depth" all of which affect agricultural productivity. And hence we have a problem.

Industrial agriculture consumes water very quickly and in mass amounts. This is highly unsustainable on a global account. Industrial agriculture also releases mass amounts of pollutants through it's irrigation systems into nearly by lakes, rivers, and groundwater systems which causes major problems worldwide.

Image source: (Shiklomanov, 1999)

Since we have seen and identified these four major problems with organic farming, we can proceed to see how a more organic approach to industrial farming can help make large-scale modern farming practices more sustainable. There is a general organic solution for each of the four general problems posed above. And since it is impossible and impractical for one to expect a sudden change in global farming from majorly industrial and large-scale to organic, it is most efficient for us to consider a sort of hybrid between the two. Organic farming can be a healthy alternative not only for our bodies, but also for our planet as a whole if it joins forces with our modern industrial agriculture. " Organic agriculture has the potential to contribute quite substantially to the global food supply, while reducing the detrimental environmental impacts of conventional agriculture" (Badgley, 2006).

While large industrial farms are excellent at meeting high demand for food and other agricultural products, industrial methods, however, are harmful to the soil. The goal of organic farming is to reduce the disastrous effects of industrial chemicals and fertilizers on topsoil while helping "enhance soil fertility, prevent soil erosion, promote and enhance biological diversity, and minimize the risk to human and animal health and natural resources"(Treadwell, Riddle, Barbercheck, Cavanaugh-Grant, & Zaborski, 2010). We can then combine the two plans into our solution: organic industrial agriculture. Organic industrial agriculture aims to combine the production ability of large industrial farms with the sustainability of organic farms. Farmers would still rely on mechanized processes but would also use natural fertilizers and herbicides. The mechanized processes would still allow for mass production while the new fertilizers would be safer on the soil and the plants

The reason a hybridization is being proposed is because it is virtually impossible at this time, to completely convert all industrial practices into organic ones. The industrialized portion of modern agriculture has led to it's speed in producing large quantities of food. The world would not only be in a dip of losses in terms of agricultural yields if all industrial farming was immediately converted into organic methods, but there would also be great debate and complaints from industrialized companies, as well as industrial farm workers.

Organic farming unlike industrial farming can be more diverse in terms of what can be grown on a given plot of land, "many kinds of farm products [can be] produced organically including: vegetables, fruit, herbs, grains, meat, dairy, eggs, fibers, and flowers" (Treadwell, Riddle, Barbercheck, Cavanaugh-Grant, & Zaborski, 2010). Therefore unlike industrial farming which focuses growing one or two crops in mass amounts on a plot of land using crop rotations, organic agriculture can grow multiple different crops that maintain the crop and ecosystem biodiversity within the farm.

Pesticides are not used to control weeds and pests. Pests and diseases result when crops are forced to grow in land that they are not naturally suited for. Organic farming involves the growth of crops in land that they grow best in. Furthermore, crop rotation and the introduction of predators to get rid of pests are methods that make for a clean and sustainable agriculture practice. " Data from temperate and tropical agroecosystems suggest that
leguminous cover crops could ﬁx enough nitrogen to replace the amount of synthetic fertilizer currently in use" (Badgley, 2006).

Integrated Pest Management (IPM) is a method that reduces the pest populations of a farm in a predominantly natural manner. It involves a series of simple yet effective steps that help maintain healthy levels of pests in a given area. Integrated pest management focuses on keeping insect populations low and not on completely killing off pest populations, as do most industrial pesticides. There are programs of IPM that are customized by region, by land, and by specific characteristics of the land. IPM establishes an "action threshold" that determines what level of population of pests is healthy and when, past a certain point of population levels, action must be taken depending on specific area. This helps prevent the pest population from becoming immune to a certain pesticide. This is greatly helpful because one of the reasons why industrial farming uses such high levels of pesticides is due to the fact that pests become immune to a certain type of mass pesticide, therefore another one must be applied, and then they become resistant again. So therefore there is a huge line of various pesticides that are added indefinitely as pests become more and more resilient to the previous one. And this destroys the soil (Panneton, Vincent, & Fleurat-Lessard, 2001)

IPM uses various methods of measurement to constantly monitor the amounts of bacteria or spores, as well as other pest levels. IPM involves a lot of hands on research and both quantitative and qualitative observations to work efficiently. Diseased crops are often removed to prevent pest populations from growing as well as other methods such as "simple hand-picking, erecting insect barriers, using traps, vacuuming, and tillage to disrupt breeding". Also IPM relies on a variety of natural, biological controls, such as insects that feed on other pests as well as the use of certain microorganisms such as fungi to kill off other kinds of pests. And as a last resort, IPM may use chemical fertilizers to destroy certain pest populations, but in far less amounts than is used today (Panneton, Vincent, & Fleurat-Lessard, 2001). Therefore we can see how pesticides can be replaced by much healthier alternatives by switching to more organic methods.

Organic Farming poses minimal risk to the environment because it involves the natural growth of produce. This method of farming involves crop rotation, soil surface mulching, and animal manures and recycled crop wastes as compost. Through the use of these natural nutrient recycling methods, organic farming makes soil more sustainable. Because there is no heavy dependence on synthetic fertilizers and pesticides, soil salinity is decreased and as a result the soil is more fertile.

Since the farming practices for organic farming do not involve mass farming everything, water can be resourced and directed in a very efficient manner. Different plants require different watering systems and organic agriculture could accomodate for that. Instead of just pouring hundreds of gallons of water over a field, it is possible to direct x amount of gallons to a specific area, thereby greatly reducing the consumption of water resources. And because organic agriculture does not use synthetic pesticides and fertilizers, pollution of nearby water sources is much less than that caused by industrial farming.

Organic farming offers benefits that are sustainable and long term. Organic farming allows the soil to remains arable for a longer period of time and the water in the area to stay clean and drinkable. The water remains clean because pesticides are not in rain runoff. Furthermore, there are no chemical pesticides to damage the environment and the food is at its best quality because it's entirely natural.

Current farming methods generate food with traces of chemicals from pesticides and herbicides. Also, pesticides and artificial fertilizers destroy the soil because chemicals kill the micro-organisms in soil. Pests and diseases become immune to some pesticides, thus the pests multiply. And therefore we need a new method of global farming! And this method of new farming comes to us a compromise between the already existing industrial agriculture system and more sustainable organic practices.

Organic farming can be a global solution. Organic farming simply focuses on getting the most out of a piece of land in terms of efficiency and productivity while causing minimal damage to the land itself. Therefore, organic farming can be implemented throughout the world in all regions. About one-third of the world's organically managed agricultural land - 12 million hectares - is located in developing countries. The regions with the largest areas of organically managed agricultural land are Oceania (12.1 million hectares), Europe (8.2 million hectares) and Latin America (8.1 million hectares). The countries with the most organic agricultural land are Australia, Argentina and China (Research Institute of, 2010). Seeing all these statistics from around the world, not just in developed countries, but also underdeveloped countries shows the versatility and overall benefit of organic farming (Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL), 2010).

To begin considering how to implement a shift from our current system to a more organic global approach, we must first look at the current mode of agriculture, which is predominantly industrial agriculture. Today's agricultural practices, reliant heavily on chemicals and genetically modified organisms, are not sustainable agricultural practices. This process has not been sustainable around the world, as it has greatly damaged many of our natural resources, contaminated groundwater from pesticide and fertilizer use, increased the levels of soil salinity as a result of poor farming practices, and consumed too many "petrochemicals" in the process causing overall damage of land and crucial resources. Industrial agriculture has also created a monopoly of farming throughout the world causing major agricultural farms and industries to take over small local farms and farmers whose lives depend on small-scale organic farming. Industrial agriculture has not helped '"promote either self-sufficiency [nor] food security in developing countries"' and has proved to be '"clearly [un]sustainable'" (Vasilikiotis).

Though there are so many cons to industrial agriculture, we must acknowledge the fact that industrial agriculture produces mass amounts of food to feed the global public which organic farming cannot immediately mimic. Yet there have been several case studies that show that organic farming can be as fruitful, while being more sustainable.

In one case study conducted by UC, Davis called "Sustainable Agriculture Farming Systems project (SFAS)" we see that organic farming can be equally as productive as industrial or large scale farming. It compared a 2-year and a 4-year crop rotation system with an organic low-input system. After the completion of the 8-year project, they found that "organic and low-input systems had yields comparable to the conventional systems in all crops which were tested - tomato, safflower, corn and bean, and in some instances yielding higher than conventional systems. Tomato yields in the organic system were lower in the first three years, but reached the levels of the conventional tomatoes in the subsequent years and had a higher yield during the last year of the experiment (80 t/ha in the organic compared to 68 t/ha in the conventional in 1996). Corn production in the organic system had a higher variability than conventional systems, with lower yields in some years and higher in others." This shows that organic systems can be as productive while being more sustainable. Yes, there are fluctuations in yearly growth because the process is natural (and with nature come discrepancies) but in total, organic farming can be as sustainable and produce just as much as industrial agriculture (Vasilikiotis).

Implementing this method would involve reducing the vast use of chemical fertilizers and trading for more organic fertilizers such as manure and on cover crops (Vasilikiotis). In our modern world, it would be an impossible task to immediately switch all farming to organic farming. So our goal now must be to start integrating organic practices into the already existing industrial processes. By reducing the use of fertilizers, and bringing back crop diversity into the mass industrial farms we can start to renew our deteriorating land. And eventually, after introducing crop diversity, we can begin to make the transition to organic farming, which is far more sustainable in terms of maintaining our resources. Another simple solution to ease the transition is to begin composting food scraps in order to create topsoil and fertilizer instead of relying on artificial methods. By bringing together livestock farming and crop farming, we can produce large-scale industrial farming. As the farm can feed the animals, and the manure and waste of the animals can cycle and help the farm once again.

In 2008, according to the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture and the International Federation of Organic Agriculture Movements, there were 35,243,265 hectares of agricultural land in the world. And this number can be greatly increased by simply changing a few of our practices in hopes of creating a more sustainable global agricultural practice. There are also over 1,381,154 organic producers today around the world (Research Institute of, 2010), and the number increases, rightly so, daily.

The WWOOF, World Wide Opportunities on Organic Farms is an organization that has volunteers around the world who help in organic farms around the world. They have chapters in North and Central America as well as in South America, Europe, The Middle East, Africa, and in Asia-Pacific. They send volunteers out to help on local organic farms around the world. And organizations such as this can encourage the spreading of organic practices.

This solution is a progressive solution that has to be implemented now and will yield benefits in the long term. It is not a short-term solution, it will not yield mass amounts of crops immediately as it takes time for these crops to grow in and create a new system. Switching from more industrial to organic practices is a gradual solution that will take time to administer. Most underdeveloped countries are already using organic farming methods, and it is up to large-scale farmers in developed countries to begin switching their practices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
To begin to classify modern agriculture, it is imperative to first consider two important categories that have been established in society regarding farming techniques: industrial and organic. The term "industrial" agriculture is a direct derivative of the Green Revolution that passed across the globe during the mid-20th century.

# data[].attributes.body
The Non-GMO Project is a non-profit organization committed to preserving and building sources of non-GMO products, educating consumers, and providing verified non-GMO choices.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Non-GMO Project - Everyone Deserves an Informed Choice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Non-GMO Project is a mission-driven 501(c)(3) organization (EIN 02-0799621). Your tax-deductible donation helps to expand our education and outreach programming; as well as ensures we can continue to build and protect our non-GMO future. Thank you.

# data[].attributes.headline
New Study Links GMOs To Cancer, Liver/Kidney Damage & Severe Hormonal Disruption

# data[].attributes.subject
New Study Links GMOs To Cancer, Liver/Kidney Damage & Severe Hormonal Disruption

# data[].attributes.body
Collective Evolution Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In November 2012, the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology published a paper titled Long Term Toxicity of Roundup Herbicide and a Roundup-Tolerant genetically modified maize by Gilles-Eric Seralini and his team of researchers at France's Caen University. (source) It was a very significant study that made a lot of noise worldwide, the first of its kind under controlled conditions that examined the possible effects of a GMO maize diet treated with Monsanto's Roundup Herbicide.

After the research was completed, it went through rigorous reviews, as well as a four month review process by scientists and researchers. It was eventually approved and published, only to be retracted by request of the Journal. Although hundreds of scientists around the world condemned the retraction, and the researchers addressed the criticisms, it was to no avail.

There is great news to report however, as this major GMO study has now been republished following its controversial retraction (under strong commercial pressure), with even more up to date information and a response to previous criticisms. You can read more about that here.

The study has now been published by Environmental Sciences Europe. (source)

The chronic toxicity study examined the health impacts on rats of eating commercialized genetically modified (GM) maize, alongside Monsanto's NK603 glyphosate-based herbicide Roundup.

The study found severe liver and kidney damage as well as hormonal disturbances in rats fed with GM maize in conjunction with low levels of Roundup that were below those permitted in most drinking water across Europe. Results also indicated high rates of large tumors and mortality in most treatment groups.

The republished study also has a section describing the lobbying efforts of GMO crop supporters to force the retraction of the original publication. This is scientific fraud at its best. The authors express how the previous retraction was "a historic example of conflicts of interest in the scientific assessments of products commercialized worldwide."

"We also show that the decision to retract cannot be rationalized on any discernible scientific or ethical grounds. Censorship of research into health risks undermines the value and the credibility of science, thus, we republish our paper." - Seralini

"Censorship on research into the risks of a technology so critically entwined with global food safety undermines the value and the credibility of science." - Seralini

This study has now successfully passed through multiple rounds of rigorous peer review. Again, the study shows that Roundup-treated GM corn as well as the herbicide used on it increases cancer in rats. There are a number of studies that demonstrate the potential health risks of GM plants, this one in particular drew heavy criticism from industry scientists.
"The major criticisms of the Seralini manuscript were that the proper strain of rats was not used and their numbers were too small. Neither criticism is valid. The strain of rat is that which is required by the FDA for drug toxicology, and the toxic effects were unambiguously significant. In fact, Monsanto published a similar study in the same journal eight years before using the same number and strain of rats. Their study was for 90 days and claimed no harm. In contrast, the Seralini study was for two years and did not see any tumors until after nine months. Therefore, it is clear that the short 90-day feeding paradigm is not sufficiently long to detect the carcinogenic effects of GM products. It takes a long time before low-level exposure to environmental toxins affect health. For example, a recent associated press report documented the dramatic increase in birth defects and cancer in areas of Argentina that have grown GM soy for a decade. Given these facts, what was the justification of the editorial decision to retract the Seralini Manuscript?" (source)
Other Studies Regarding GMOs and Herbicides

There is a reason that multiple countries all over the world have been banning GMOs and the pesticides that go with them. More information is emerging everyday from scientists and researchers all over the world that clearly points to the fact that we just don't know enough about GM's to deem them totally safe for human consumption.

By slipping it into our food without our knowledge, without any indication that there are genetically modified organisms in our food, we are now unwittingly part of a massive experiment.The FDA has said that genetically modified organisms are not much different from regular food, so they'll be treated in the same way. The problem is this, geneticists follow the inheritance of genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to take this organism, and move it horizontally into a totally unrelated species. Now David Suzuki doesn't normally mate with a carrot and exchange genes, what biotechnology allows us to do is to switch genes from one to the other without regard to the biological constraints. It's very very bad science, we assume that the principals governing the inheritance of genes vertically, applies when you move genes laterally or horizontally. There's absolutely no reason to make that conclusion - Geneticist David Suzuki (source)

Below is an excerpt from a previous article I wrote. For more information on this subject you can use the search bar on our website to find what you are looking for.

1. Multiple Toxins From GMOs Detected In Maternal and Fetal Blood

Research from Canada (the first of its kind) has successfully identified the presence of pesticides -associated with genetically modified foods in maternal, fetal and non-pregnant women's blood. They also found the presence of Monsanto's Bt toxin. The study was published in the Journal Reproductive Toxicology in 2011.(1) You can read the FULL study here.

"Given the potential toxicity of these environmental pollutants and the fragility of the fetus, more studies are needed, particularly those using the placental transfer approach. Thus, our present results will provide baseline data for future studies exploring a new area of research relating to nutrition, toxicology and reproduction in women. Today, obstetric-gynecological disorders that are associated with environmental chemicals are not known. Thus, knowing the actual concentration of genetically modified foods in humans constitutes a cornerstone in the advancement of research in this area." (1)

The study used blood samples from thirty pregnant women and thirty non-pregnant women. The study also pointed out that the fetus is considered to be highly susceptible to the adverse affects of xenobiotics (foreign chemical substance found within an organism that is not naturally produced.) This is why the study emphasizes that knowing more about GMOs is crucial, because environmental agents could disrupt the biological events that are required to ensure normal growth and development.

2. DNA From Genetically Modified Crops Can Be Transferred Into Humans Who Eat Them

In a new study published in the peer reviewed Public Library of Science (PLOS), researchersemphasize that there is sufficient evidence that meal-derived DNA fragments carry complete genes that can enter into the human circulation system through an unknown mechanism.(2)

In one of the blood samples the relative concentration of plant DNA is higher than the human DNA. The study was based on the analysis of over 1000 human samples from four independent studies. PLOS is an open access, well respected peer-reviewed scientific journal that covers primary research from disciplines within science and medicine. It's great to see this study published in it, confirming what many have been suspected for years.

"Our bloodstream is considered to be an environment well separated from the outside world and the digestive tract. According to the standard paradigm large macromolecules consumed with food cannot pass directly to the circulatory system. During digestion proteins and DNA are thought to be degraded into small constituents, amino acids and nucleic acids, respectively, and then absorbed by a complex active process and distributed to various parts of the body through the circulation system. Here, based on the analysis of over 1000 human samples from four independent studies, we report evidence that meal-derived DNA fragments which are large enough to carry complete genes can avoid degradation and through an unknown mechanism enter the human circulation system. In one of the blood samples the relative concentration of plant DNA is higher than the human DNA. The plant DNA concentration shows a surprisingly precise log-normal distribution in the plasma samples while non-plasma (cord blood) control sample was found to be free of plant DNA." (2)

This still doesn't mean that GMOs can enter into our cells, but given the fact GMOs have been linked to cancer (later in this article) it is safe to assume it is indeed a possibility. The bottom line is that we don't know, and this study demonstrates another cause for concern.

3. New Study Links GMOs To Gluten Disorders That Affect 18 Million Americans

This study was recently released by the Institute for Responsible Technology (IRT), and uses data from the US department of Agriculture, US Environmental Protection Agency, medical journal reviews as well as other independent research. ( 3)( 4) The authors relate GM foods to five conditions that may either trigger or exacerbate gluten-related disorders, including the autoimmune disorder, Celiac Disease:

Intestinal permeability

Imbalanced gut bacteria

Immune activation and allergic response

Impaired digestion

Damage to the intestinal wall

The Institute for Responsible technology is a world leader in educating policy makers and the public about GMO foods and crops. The institute reports and investigates on the impact GM foods can have on health, environment, agriculture and more.

4. Study Links Genetically Modified Corn to Rat Tumors

In November 2012, The Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology published a paper titled ' Long term toxicity of a Roundup herbicide and a Roundup-tolerant genetically modified maize' by Gilles-Eric Seralini and his team of researchers at France's Caen University. (5)

It was a very significant study, which obviously looks bad for the big bio tech companies like Monsanto, being the first and only long term study under controlled conditions examining the possible effects of a diet of GMO maize treated with Monsanto roundup herbicide.

This study has since been retracted, which is odd, because the journal it was published in is a very well known, reputable peer reviewed scientific journal. In order for a study to be published here it has to go through a rigorous review process.

It's also important to note that hundreds of scientists from around the world have condemned the retraction of the study. This study was done by experts, and a correlation between GMOs and these tumors can't be denied, something happened.

The multiple criticisms of the study have also been answered by the team of researchers that conducted the study. You can read them and find out more about the study here.

GM Crop Production is Lowering US Yields and Increasing Pesticide Use

5. Glyphosate Induces Human Breast Cancer Cells Growth via Estrogen Receptors

A study is published in the US National Library of Medicine (4)and will soon be published in the journal Food and Chemical Toxicology. Several recent studies showed glyphosate's potential to be an endocrine disruptor. Endocrine disruptors are chemicals that can interfere with the hormone system in mammals. These disruptors can cause developmental disorders, birth defects and cancer tumors. (6)

Glyphosate exerted proliferative effects only in human hormone-dependent breast cancer. We found that glyphosate exhibited a weaker estrogenic activity than estradiol. Furthermore, this study demonstrated the additive estrogenic effects of glyphosate and genisein which implied that the use of contaminated soybean products as dietary supplements may pose a risk of breast cancer because of their potential additive estrogenicity. (6)

Researchers also determined that Monsanto's roundup is considered an "xenoestrogen," which is a foreign estrogen that mimics real estrogen in our bodies. This can cause a number of problems that include an increased risk of various cancers, early onset of puberty, thyroid issues, infertility and more.

6. Glyphosate Linked To Birth Defects

A group of scientists put together a comprehensive review of existing data that shows how European regulators have known that Monsanto's glyphosate causes a number of birth malformations since at least 2002. Regulators misled the public about glyphosate's safety, and in Germany the Federal Office for Consumer Protection and Food Safety told the European Commission that there was no evidence to suggest that glyphosate causes birth defects. (7) (link might not work for some, if not you can access that report HERE)

Our examination of the evidence leads us to the conclusion that the current approval of glyphosate and Roundup is deeply flawed and unreliable. In this report, we examine the industry studies and regulatory documents that led to the approval of glyphosate. We show that industry and regulators knew as long ago as the 1980s and 1990s that glyphosate causes malformation - but that this information was not made public. We demonstrate how EU regulators reasoned their way from clear evidence of glyphosate's teratogenicity in industry's own studies to a conclusion that minimized these findings in the EU Commission's final review report (7)

Here is a summary of the report:

Multiple peer-reviewed scientific literature documenting serious health hazards posed by glyphosate

Industry (including Monsanto) has known since the 1980′s that glyphosate causes malformations in experimental animals at high doses

Industry has known since 1993 that these effects could also occur at lower and mid doses

The German government has known since at least 1998 that glyphosate causes malformations

The EU Commission's expert scientific review panel knew in 1999 that glyphosate causes malformations

The EU Commission has known since 2002 that glyphosate causes malformations. This was the year DG SANCO division published its final review report, laying out the basis for the current approval of glyphosate

Another study published by the American Chemical Society, from the university of Buenos Aires, Argentina also showed that Glyphosate can cause abnormalities.(8)

The direct effect of glyphosate on early mechanisms of morphogenesis in vertebrate embryos opens concerns about the clinical findings from human offspring in populations exposed to glyphosate in agricultural fields (8)

7. Study Links Glyphosate To Autism, Parkinson's and Alzheimer's

When you ingest Glyphosate, you are in essence altering the chemistry of your body. It's completely unnatural and the body doesn't resonate with it. P450 (CYP) is the gene pathway disrupted when the body takes in Glyphosate. P450 creates enzymes that assist with the formation of molecules in cells, as well as breaking them down. CYP enzymes are abundant and have many important functions. They are responsible for detoxifying xenobiotics from the body, things like the various chemicals found in pesticides, drugs and carcinogens. Glyphosate inhibits the CYP enzymes. The CYP pathway is critical for normal, natural functioning of multiple biological systems within our bodies. Because humans that've been exposed to glyphosate have a drop in amino acid tryptophan levels, they do not have the necessary active signalling of the neurotransmitter serotonin, which is associated with weight gain, depression and Alzheimer's disease. (9)

8. Chronically Ill Humans Have Higher Glyphosate Levels Than Healthy Humans

A new study out of Germany concludes that Glyphosate residue could reach humans and animals through feed and can be excreted in urine. It outlines how presence of glyphosate in urine and its accumulation in animal tissues is alarming even at low concentrations. (10)

To this day, Monsanto continues to advertise its Roundup products as environmentally friendly and claims that neither animals nor humans are affected by this toxin. Environmentalists, veterinarians, medical doctors and scientists however, have raised increasing alarms about the danger of glyphosate in the animal and human food chain as well as the environment. The fact that glyphosate has been found in animals and humans is of great concern. In search for the causes of serious diseases amongst entire herds of animals in northern Germany, especially cattle, glyphosate has repeatedly been detected in the urine, feces, milk and feed of the animals. Even more alarming, glyphosate was detected in the urine of the farmers. (10)

9. Studies Link GMO Animal Feed to Severe Stomach Inflammation and Enlarged Uteri in Pigs

A study by scientist Judy Carman, PhD that was recently published in the peer reviewed journal Organic Systems outlines the effects of a diet mixed with GMO feed for pigs, and how it is a cause for concern when it comes to health. (11) Scientists randomized and fed isowean pigs either a mixed GM soy and GM corn (maize) diet for approximately 23 weeks (nothing out of the ordinary for most pigs in the United States), which is unfortunately the normal lifespan of a commercial pig from weaning to slaughter. Equal numbers of male and female pigs were present in each group. The GM diet was associated with gastric and uterine differences in pigs. GM pigs had uteri that were 25% heavier than non-GM fed pigs. GM-fed pigs had a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation with a rate of 32% compared to 125 of non-GM fed pigs.

The study concluded that pigs fed a GMO diet exhibited a heavier uteri and a higher rate of severe stomach inflammation than pigs who weren't fed a GMO diet. Because the use of GMO feed for livestock and humans is so widespread, this is definitely another cause for concern when it comes to GMO consumption. Humans have a similar gastrointestinal tract to pigs, and these GM crops are consumed widely by people, especially in the United States.

10. GMO risk assessment is based on very little scientific evidence in the sense that the testing methods recommended are not adequate to ensure safety. (12 )(13)(14)

Deficiencies have been revealed numerous times with regards to testing GM foods.

The first guidelines were originally designed to regulate the introduction of GM microbes and plants into the environment with no attention being paid to food safety concerns. However, they have been widely cited as adding authoritative scientific support to food safety assessment. Additionally, the Statement of Policy released by the Food and Drug Administration of the United States, presumptively recognizing the GM foods as GRAS (generally recognized as safe), was prepared while there were critical guidelines prepared by the International Life Sciences Institute Europe and FAO/WHO recommend that safety evaluation should be based on the concept of substantial equivalence, considering parameters such as molecular characterization, phenotypic characteristics, key nutrients, toxicants and allergens. Since 2003, official standards for food safety assessment have been published by the Codex Alimentarius Commission of FAO/WHO. Published reviews with around 25 peer-reviewed studies have found that despite the guidelines, the risk assessment of GM foods has not followed a defined prototype.(12) (15)"The risk assessment of genetically modified (GM) crops for human nutrition and health has not been systematic. Evaluations for each GM crop or trait have been conducted using different feeding periods, animal models and parameters. The most common results is that GM and conventional sources include similar nutritional performance and growth in animals. However, adverse microscopic and molecular effects of some GM foods in different organs or tissues have been reported. While there are currently no standardized methods to evaluate the safety of GM foods, attempts towards harmonization are on the way. More scientific effort is necessary in order to build confidence in the evaluation and acceptance of GM foods." (12) (15)

Sources:

( All other sources not listen here are highlighted throughout the article)
http://www.enveurope.com/content/26/1/13(1) https://www.uclm.es/Actividades/repositorio/pdf/doc_3721_4666.pdf(2) http://www.plosone.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0069805(3) http://rt.com/usa/gmo-gluten-sensitivity-trigger-343/(4) http://responsibletechnology.org/media/images/content/Press_Release_Gluten_11_25.pdf(5) http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0278691512005637(6) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23756170(7) http://earthopensource.org/files/pdfs/Roundup-and-birth-defects/RoundupandBirthDefectsv5.pdf(8) http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/tx1001749(9) http://www.mdpi.com/1099-4300/15/4/1416(10) http://omicsonline.org/open-access/detection-of-glyphosate-residues-in-animals-and-humans-2161-0525.1000210.pdf(11) http://www.organic-systems.org/journal/81/8106.pdf(12) http://static.aboca.com/www.aboca.com/files/attach/news/risk_assessment_of_genetically_modified_crops_for_nutrition.pdf
(13) Reese W, Schubert D. Safety testing and regulation of genetically engineered foods. Biotechnol Genet Eng Rev. 2004;21:299-324

(14) Schubert D. A different perspective on GM food. Nat Biotechnol. 2002;20:969-969.
(15) http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19146501

Your life path number can tell you A LOT about you.

With the ancient science of Numerology you can find out accurate and revealing information just from your name and birth date.

Get your free numerology reading and learn more about how you can use numerology in your life to find out more about your path and journey. Get Your free reading.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Study Links GMOs To Cancer, Liver/Kidney Damage & Severe Hormonal Disruption

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In November 2012, the Journal of Food and Chemical Toxicology published a paper titled Long Term Toxicity of Roundup Herbicide and a Roundup-Tolerant genetically modified maize by Gilles-Eric Seralini and his team of researchers at France's Caen University. (source) It was a very significant study that made a lot of noise worldwide, the first of its kind under controlled [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

# data[].attributes.subject
The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center

# data[].attributes.body
Do GMOs cause cancer?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
If you munch on corn for dinner, cook with canola oil or eat cereal for breakfast, chances are you're taking in a genetically modified organism (GMO).

"To some degree everything is genetically modified," says Clare McKindley, clinical dietitian in MD Anderson's Cancer Prevention Center.

GMOs are plants or animals created by inserting genes from one species into another. Known as gene splicing, it's a type of biotechnology often done in a laboratory. It's also called genetic engineering.

Scientists modify organisms to enhance certain desired traits. For example, they may make plants more resistant to pesticides, weed killers or disease. They also can make plants hardier so they'll survive during cold weather or droughts, or to improve their nutritional content.
GMO health risks unknown
What's the concern? Many people believe that altering the DNA of a plant or animal has a significant effect on a person's chances of developing cancer. But the current research on the health risks of GMOs is inconclusive. In other words, researchers cannot confirm whether or not GMOs increase cancer risks.

If you are concerned, here are some ways to curb your intake of GM foods.

Know the most commonly modified crops. Soybeans, corn, cotton (for oil), canola (for oil), squash, zucchini and papaya are all popular GMOs. Find other GM crops.

Buy organic foods. Organic foods are grown from non-GMO seeds.

Buy meats from grass-fed animals. Cows, chickens, pigs and even farmed fish are often on a diet of genetically modified corn or alfalfa. Check that your meat is from animals that are grass-fed or pasture-fed.

Read the labels. The top two genetically modified crops are corn and soy. They're also the most widely used ingredients. Avoid products that contain ingredients like corn syrup and soy lecithin.

Buy brands labeled as non-GM or GMO free. Some products are labeled as non-GM or GMO-free. Meaning, they do not use genetically modified ingredients. GMO-free food sources are listed on the Non-GMO Project website.

Shop at local farmers markets. Most GM foods come from large industrial farms. Shop at local farmers markets or sign-up for a co-op.

Eat a healthy diet to reduce cancer risks

Our experts agree - sticking with a diet rich in fruits, vegetables and whole grains outweighs any GMO health concerns when it comes to cancer risks.

"You may have to explore the health food section of your grocery store to find the products that are right for you," says McKindley. "The key is to buy products that help you maintain variety in your diet and excite you about eating healthy."
Request an appointment at MD Anderson's Lyda Hill Cancer Prevention Center online or call 877-632-6789.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
If you munch on corn for dinner, cook with canola oil or eat cereal for breakfast, chances are you're taking in a genetically modified organism (GMO). "To some degree everything is genetically modified," says Clare McKindley, clinical dietitian in MD Anderson's Cancer Prevention Center.

# data[].attributes.headline
Ethical farming dilemma: should we be helping the chicken or fixing the egg?

# data[].attributes.subject
Ethical farming dilemma: should we be helping the chicken or fixing the egg?

# data[].attributes.body
The decision between caged, cage-free or pasture-raised eggs might seem simple, but it isn't. What's best for the environment may not be best for the bird – or for people

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
California's egg-laying hens will soon have more room. A state law, which takes effect 1 January, requires egg-laying hens only be confined in ways that allow them to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.

A similar federal bill - which was backed by both the United Egg Producers trade association and animal rights group The Humane Society of the United States, but criticized for not pushing cage-free systems - failed to make it into the 2014 Farm Bill.

While getting more room may be a victory for California chickens, it won't clear up any confusion over what constitutes a sustainable egg.

Read between the lines of a recent study by the Egg Industry Center that touts the emissions reductions in egg production over the past 50 years and you'll find a classic environmental conundrum: what's best for the environment may not be best for the bird. Similarly, what's best for poultry may not be ideal for people.

The report, published in the journal Poultry Science, shows that while egg production has increased since 1960, the industry today releases 71% fewer greenhouse gases. The study's authors point to effective manure management and improved feed efficiency (the ability of hens to convert food into eggs) as the primary drivers of the improvement, both of which are hallmarks of caged egg production systems.

"There are a lot of misconceptions around free-range," says Frank Mitloehner, a professor and air quality expert at the University of California at Davis who studies the impact of animal food products on the environment.
The case for the cage
While the general public perception of cage-free or free-range eggs is that they are laid by chickens frolicking in a sunny meadow, the reality is different.

"What is happening in the free-range system is that you have no cages, but there's not a dramatic amount of more space available," Mitloehner says. "You still have barns that the animals are in, so they run around freely but are still in a tight area that is artificially ventilated."

Cages were originally used because they made it easier to extract eggs - the eggs roll down a hill to a collection area, never coming into contact with manure - and also to remove manure, which typically falls through the cage bottom onto a conveyor belt, where it is removed three times a day, Mitloehner says.

The disadvantage of the cage system is that the birds are more cramped, with less space to move, he says. But that lack of space translates to efficiency in the Egg Industry Center report. Because the hens aren't moving, they're not exerting energy on much other than producing eggs.
Complexities of 'cage-free'
Meanwhile, the disadvantage of the cage-free system is that manure stays in the barn and can build up, Mitloehner says.

"Animals have a natural drive to work their way through manure to find worms, insects and so on, and they do eat manure as well," he said. "So that's a big problem with respect to food safety and animal safety because animals in that system are now in contact with their manure. If one bird has salmonella, all of the other birds get sick too. Also, anywhere from 10% to 20% of the eggs are soiled because they're laid on that dirt floor."

From a health perspective, Mitloehner says, cage-free systems also pose the greater risk to people working in egg production.

"I'm looking primarily at air pollutants and I've found that in those systems with manure inside that is not being taken out frequently, manure that builds up causes large amounts of dust particles and those particles contain pathogens and toxins that people and animals then inhale."

Cage-free systems in which barns house tens of thousands of hens together also can raise stress for chickens, which naturally collect in flocks of about a dozen. It's similar to putting a cow in a concentrated animal farming operation, in which many cattle are packed into a tight space.

"They cannot establish a pecking order the way they would in a normal-size flock, but it's an instinct so the animal still tries to do this, and that results in a high incidence of cannibalism in cage-free systems, as well as higher incidence of bone breakage," Mitloehner says.
What about pasture-raised chickens?
To address both air quality and animal safety concerns, some experts tout pasture-raised chickens - and eggs - as the way to go. The idea, adopted by some organic farms, is a model in which various animals - such as cattle and chickens, for example - rotate through the same piece of land.

"For the overall benefit of land, chickens and people, we should look to systems of pastured poultry where egg production is part of a greater system of food production," says Douglas R. Fox, professor and director of the Center for Sustainability and Global Change at Unity College in Unity, Maine. "I have seen several 'high tunnel' systems [systems in which chickens graze on pasture while enclosed in large tunnels similar to greenhouses] where chickens graze throughout the winter."

According to Mitloehner, however, such examples are few and far between. "It's an absolutely miniscule percentage of the operations in both the US and Europe," he says.

The reason is two-fold: First, the hens themselves don't necessarily want to be in an open pasture. "You'd be surprised how few will venture out onto pasture if they have access," Mitloehner says.

Second, ranchers don't want them out in a pasture, where they're open to attacks from birds of prey and coyotes, as well as diseases carried by wild birds. There's also no way to control manure in an open pasture, Mitloehner notes.

"The bottom line is that these systems can be improved, but it's not as easy as just saying let's put animals on pasture," he says. "From a food safety and environmental standpoint, pasture raising is not great."

Nonetheless, it may be worth working to address the challenges of pasture raising. In addition to the feel-good benefits of thinking about egg-producing hens clucking about a meadow rather than cooped up in either a barn or a cage, a 2010 study from Pennsylvania State University found that eggs from pasture-raised hens could also be healthier - with twice as much vitamin E, brain-boosting long-chain omega-3 acids and total omega-3 fatty acids.
Amy Westervelt is an Oakland, California-based freelance reporter who covers the environment, business and health Topics

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sustainable farming dilemma: should we be helping the chicken or fixing the egg?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
California's egg-laying hens will soon have more room. A state law, which takes effect 1 January, requires egg-laying hens only be confined in ways that allow them to lie down, stand up, fully extend their limbs and turn around freely.

# data[].attributes.body
Photo

# data[].attributes.body
Photo

# data[].attributes.body
Photo

# data[].attributes.body
Photo

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article

# data[].attributes.headline
Economic Impact of the Indiana Livestock Industries

# data[].attributes.subject
Economic Impact of the Indiana Livestock Industries

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article - CAFOs

# data[].attributes.headline
Genetically Engineered Crops - What, How and Why

# data[].attributes.subject
Genetically Engineered Crops - What, How and Why

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article GMO

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article #1

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article #1

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article #2

# data[].attributes.headline
Nitrogen Fertilizer is Bad Stuff...and Not Just Because It Could Blow Up Your Town

# data[].attributes.subject
Nitrogen Fertilizer is Bad Stuff...and Not Just Because It Could Blow Up Your Town

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article

# data[].attributes.headline
Lunch or Junk? Health experts get tough on school lunches

# data[].attributes.subject
Lunch or Junk? Health experts get tough on school lunches

# data[].attributes.body
EL Article

# data[].attributes.body
Agribusiness

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Monsanto is working to help farmers grow food more sustainably. Learn what we're doing to help nourish the world.

# data[].attributes.body
Local Sustainable Farming

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Dr. Sina McCullough and Joel Salatin bridge the gap between producer, consumer and healthcare practitioner in their amazing book Beyond Labels. Whether you are just embarking on your health or you are a nutrition ninja, this book is for you. -Robb Wolf, New York Times Best-Selling Author of The Paleo Solution and Wired [...]

While the current state of affairs has limited our "special events" we are still open for you to come take a look around, shop the store, take a hike up the mountain or just have a sit on the porch! None of us know what 2021 [...]

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Dr. Sina McCullough and Joel Salatin bridge the gap between producer, consumer and healthcare practitioner in their amazing book Beyond Labels. Whether you are just embarking on your health or you are a nutrition ninja, this book is for you. -Robb Wolf, New York Times Best-Selling Author of The Paleo Solution and Wired [...]

# data[].attributes.headline
Scientists test what one can of an energy drink does to the human body

# data[].attributes.subject
Scientists test what one can of an energy drink does to the human body

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Scientists test what one can of an energy drink does to the human body

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Researchers gave test subjects one can each of Rockstar energy drink. They found it boosted blood pressure and caused a big spike in levels of fight-or-flight hormone.

# data[].attributes.headline
Obesity rate still rising among U.S. adults, and now worse for women

# data[].attributes.subject
Obesity rate still rising among U.S. adults, and now worse for women

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Obesity rate still rising among U.S. adults, and now worse for women

# data[].attributes.headline
Grass-fed cattle take slower path to market, filling small consumer niche

# data[].attributes.subject
Grass-fed cattle take slower path to market, filling small consumer niche

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Grass-fed cattle take slower path to market, filling small consumer niche

# data[].attributes.headline
FDA says OK to salmon with genes modified to make it grow faster

# data[].attributes.subject
FDA says OK to salmon with genes modified to make it grow faster

# data[].attributes.body
Newslea Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | FDA says OK to salmon with genes modified to make it grow faster

# data[].attributes.headline
Americans need to cut back on added sugars, according to new guidelines

# data[].attributes.subject
Americans need to cut back on added sugars, according to new guidelines

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Americans need to cut back on added sugars, according to new guidelines

# data[].attributes.headline
Critics of soft-drink advertising claim "diet" soda really isn't

# data[].attributes.subject
Critics of soft-drink advertising claim "diet" soda really isn't

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Critics of soft-drink advertising claim "diet" soda really isn't

# data[].attributes.headline
It's produce to the people at Chicago's pick-your-own fruit farm

# data[].attributes.subject
It's produce to the people at Chicago's pick-your-own fruit farm

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | It's produce to the people at Chicago's pick-your-own fruit farm

# data[].attributes.headline
Many younger Americans have a fast-food focus

# data[].attributes.subject
Many younger Americans have a fast-food focus

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
Bad news about bacon and hot dogs: They can cause cancer, scientists say

# data[].attributes.subject
Bad news about bacon and hot dogs: They can cause cancer, scientists say

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Bad news about bacon and hot dogs: They can cause cancer, scientists say

# data[].attributes.headline
Families eating healthier as food companies cut calories, study says

# data[].attributes.subject
Families eating healthier as food companies cut calories, study says

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
Food in poor neighborhoods often not so fresh

# data[].attributes.subject
Food in poor neighborhoods often not so fresh

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Food in poor neighborhoods often not so fresh

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Finding fresh food in poorer neighborhoods can be difficult. When it does show up on corner store shelves, it is often old or spoiled, causing people who eat it to become ill.

# data[].attributes.body
Livestrong.com Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Laura Morgan

Laura Morgan has worked in the health-care industry for more than 10 years. She began her career as a clinical dietitian and evolved into a sales copywriter for a national health insurance company, generating privately labeled brochures and sell sheets. Morgan holds a Master of Science in dietetics from D'Youville College.

In the United States, we have become an overweight society: Our busy lifestyles and the abundance of convenience foods have fostered our expanding waistlines. Our society supports working long hours followed by responsibilities to our families, children, homes, pets, social clubs and other things that take up time. Convenience food items and fast food restaurants provide a quick meal for people constantly on the go. A November 2010 Consumer Reports National Research Center report noted that many Americans think they eat healthier than they do, with dietary intakes of refined sugars and saturated fats higher than most realize.

Video of the Day

Convenience food items like fast food, pizza, prepared frozen meat or pasta dishes, boxed rice or pasta side dishes, soups, snack bars, breakfast pastries and single portion frozen meals are an easy solution when daily demands reduce meal preparation time. It's important to remember, however, that many of these items contain high levels of sodium, saturated fat and preservatives. It's difficult for a menu full of convenience foods to replace the nutrients and fiber that can be found in a menu containing fresh produce, whole grains, lean meat and low-fat dairy. Convenience foods should be eaten only in moderation, with a focus on preparing fresh foods whenever possible.

Paying attention to portion size is important in a healthy diet; another pitfall in American society is the growing size of our portions. Portion sizes of restaurant meals and packaged items available in grocery stores have been increasing since the 1970s. It's important to understand what constitutes one portion as well as pay attention to internal cues when eating. One portion of beef, chicken or fish is the size of a deck of cards; a rounded handful is about the same size as one half-cup of pasta, and a golf ball is about the size of one portion of dried fruit or nuts. A good rule of thumb to prevent overeating is to stop eating when you feel satisfied, before allowing yourself to feel full.

Most food items can be included in moderation in a healthy menu, and this includes sweet treats. Many treats are available in reduced-fat or fat-free versions, like reduced-fat or fat-free ice cream, peanut butter or snack foods. These do offer a healthier alternative to their full-fat counterparts; however, it's again important to remain cognizant of portion size. Fat-free does not mean calorie-free, and many reduced-fat foods may contain additional calories from another substance to improve their flavor. Check food labels to determine the size of one portion.

With a little practice, eating healthy can become a habit and can fit into a busy lifestyle. Keep nutritious foods around the house for easy snacks, such as pre-cut vegetables or easy-to-grab fruits like bananas, apples or oranges. Plan to cook a few healthy meals at one time and freeze portions to heat up quickly throughout the week. Crock pot meals are easy to set up before work and can deliver dishes like vegetable chili, hearty stews, or robust soups by the time the work day is through.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the United States, we have become an overweight society: Our busy lifestyles and the abundance of convenience foods have fostered our expanding waistlines. Our society supports working long hours followed by responsibilities to our families, children, homes, pets, social clubs and other things that take up time.

# data[].attributes.body
Livestrong.com Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Natalie Stein

Natalie Stein specializes in weight loss and sports nutrition. She is based in Los Angeles and is an assistant professor with the Program for Public Health at Michigan State University. Stein holds a master of science degree in nutrition and a master of public health degree from Michigan State University.

In the United States, fast food is a contributor to dietary habits, with 11.3 percent of the total calories in the typical American diet coming from fast food. Common fast food choices include pizza, burgers, fried potatoes and soft drinks. Many people who eat fast food tend to have higher fat intakes and poorer diets. Fast food does have some benefits, however, and you can consume fast food occasionally as part of a healthy diet.

Video of the Day

It seems like you can find fast food restaurants on nearly every street corner, and going to a drive-through or using home-delivery makes going to a fast food restaurant appealing. Fast food restaurants enable you to consume ready-to-eat, fresh, portion-controlled foods. If you want to eat healthy food but don't want to prepare it at home, you can order something healthy from a fast food restaurant. This could include oatmeal made with milk or a salad that has a variety of greens, vegetables, nuts and grilled chicken. Although fast food is convenient, be wary of purchasing unhealthy foods, such as fried chicken and pizza, simply because they are available and are appealing.

A wide assortment of fast food styles lets you experience foods from various cultures so that you don't need to spend exorbitant amounts of money at full-service restaurants. Fast food restaurants that offer burgers, chicken and sandwiches are plentiful, but fast-food restaurants that offer Chinese, Italian, Mexican and Middle Eastern dishes also are plentiful. Even though many of these international offerings may be fairly healthy, they also may be high in calories and unhealthy nutrients.

The low cost of a fast food meal compared to a meal at a sit-down restaurant can help you stay within your budget. Home cooking, though, enables you to serve healthier, less expensive meals. If you want to eat healthy foods on a budget, purchase foods such as tuna, peanut butter, dried beans, brown rice, whole pasta and seasonal produce. These nutritious items are relatively inexpensive.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 requires chain restaurants to post calorie counts on menu boards. You can use this information to make low-calorie decisions when you eat fast food. Restaurants that have fewer than 20 locations, such as small, family-owned establishments, do not need to provide nutritional information. When you don't have access to calorie counts, you may be more likely to eat more calories than you had intended.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In the United States, fast food is a contributor to dietary habits, with 11.3 percent of the total calories in the typical American diet coming from fast food. Common fast food choices include pizza, burgers, fried potatoes and soft drinks. Many people who eat fast food tend to have higher fat intakes and poorer diets.

# data[].attributes.body
Livestrong.com Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Hannah Wickford

After attending Fairfield University, Hannah Wickford spent more than 15 years in market research and marketing in the consumer packaged goods industry. In 2003 she decided to shift careers and now maintains three successful food-related blogs and writes online articles, website copy and newsletters for multiple clients.

Unless you enjoy meals containing little more than apple slices and water, it is difficult to find real healthy options at most fast-food chains. Many of the low-fat items, such as salads, are deceiving in that they contain copious amounts of sodium. There are healthier menu choices that you can make at most fast-food restaurants that keep calories, fat and sodium to a minimum.

Video of the Day

Avoid the cheese and any fat-filled condiments, and the 6-inch Subway Veggie Delite sandwich on fresh nine-grain bread gives you plenty of nutrition at only 230 calories with 2.5 g of fat, 0.5 g of saturated fat and no trans fat or cholesterol. Sodium content is relatively low at only 310 mg, carbohydrates weigh in a 44 g and you will get 8 g of protein and plenty of vitamins A and C, as well as calcium and iron.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Unless you enjoy meals containing little more than apple slices and water, it is difficult to find real healthy options at most fast-food chains. Many of the low-fat items, such as salads, are deceiving in that they contain copious amounts of sodium. There are healthier menu choices that you can make at most fast-food restaurants that keep...

# data[].attributes.body
Livestrong.com Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
We've all had days when you just don't have time to pack lunch -- all you want to do is hit the drive-through, which isn't always the best place to eat healthy. Fortunately, many fast-food and quick-serve restaurants have expanded their menus to include healthier options. "I believe that you can eat a 'somewhat'...

# data[].attributes.headline
What Happens to your Body When You Stop Eating Fast Food

# data[].attributes.subject
What Happens to your Body When You Stop Eating Fast Food

# data[].attributes.body
Livestrong.com Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Chris Sherwood

Chris Sherwood is a professional journalist who after years in the health administration field and writing health and wellness articles turned towards organic sustainable gardening and food education. He now owns and operates an organic-method small farm focusing his research and writing on both organic gardening methods and hydroponics.

When you're in a hurry or don't feel like cooking, fast food often becomes an option for just about any meal. While not all fast food chains or menu items are unhealthy, fast food restaurants are notorious for offering not only larger-than-healthy portion sizes, but also foods that are stacked with saturated fat, sodium and calories. By removing, or at least limiting, your intake of unhealthy fast foods options like burgers, french fries and pizzas, you'll start to see and feel many healthy benefits outside and inside your body.

Video of the Day

One of the most noticeable impacts that quitting fast food can have on your body is a reduction in weight. Fast foods are typically high in calories, with portion sizes that are too large to maintain a healthy diet. By reducing your fast food intake and replacing fast food with healthier meals from home, you decrease your total calorie intake, helping create the calorie deficit needed for your body to lose weight. Pair removing fast food from your diet with exercise to see even better results.

Many fast foods contain high levels of saturated fat, especially hamburgers and foods that are breaded and fried in oils containing saturated fat. Foods high in saturated fat typically increase your consumption of bad LDL cholesterol. As LDL cholesterol levels get too high in your bloodstream, the excess cholesterol can calcify, or harden, into cholesterol plaque. Plaque restricts and clog the flow of blood through your blood vessels. As your blood vessels become more clogged, your blood pressure increases, along with your risks for developing heart diseases.

Cutting back on your fast food can significantly decrease your overall sodium or salt intake. Most restaurants overuse salt, which can quickly increase your daily consumption above the American Heart Association's recommended limit of less than 1,500 mg per day. When you consume too much salt, you increase the salt content of your blood. Salt attracts water, which can increase your blood volume. The higher your blood volume goes, the higher your blood pressure becomes. High blood pressure over time damages your cardiovascular system, putting you at a higher risk of heart disease. Lowering your sodium intake by cutting out fast food can help reduce these risks.

Many fast foods have ingredients that are high on the glycemic index, such as white potatoes and buns made from processed white flour. The glycemic index is a tool used to determine how much of an impact a certain food will have on your bloodstream. High glycemic foods introduce glucose into your bloodstream much faster than foods that are low on the index, like whole grains or most vegetables. When glucose is introduced too quickly, it can create a spike and then a crash in your blood sugar levels. Too much glucose at once is also dangerous for those with insulin resistance, such as diabetics and prediabetics.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What Happens to Your Body When You Quit Eating Fast Food?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
When you're in a hurry or don't feel like cooking, fast food often becomes an option for just about any meal. While not all fast food chains or menu items are unhealthy, fast food restaurants are notorious for offering not only larger-than-healthy portion sizes, but also foods that are stacked with saturated fat, sodium and calories.

# data[].attributes.body
Livestrong.com Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Larissa Gedney

Larissa Gedney began writing professionally in 2006. She has been published in Today's Dietitian magazine and several local newspapers and professional publications. Gedney is a registered dietitian who received her bachelor of science degree in nutrition/dietetics from Simmons College in Boston and her master of science degree in nutrition from Rosalind Franklin University.

Fast food often gets a bad rep for being high in fat, calories and sodium. Some of the obvious appeal of eating fast food includes convenience and cost, but many fast-food chains are also altering their menus to appeal to a more health-conscious consumer. Although most foods are OK to eat as an occasional treat, some fast-food menu options are better choices than others.

Video of the Day

A positive aspect of fast-food chains compared to some other more formal eateries is the availability of nutritional information. It's typically posted on menu boards as well as available on in-store flyers. Knowing the nutrition of the foods you're about to order can help you make more informed and healthier choices.

Another positive change in the fast-food world is the availability of foods prepared using healthier cooking methods. Some changes are only a small step in the right direction, such as using vegetable oil instead of lard to fry foods, while other changes result in a significantly healthier food such as grilled chicken breast or broiled fish rather than just deep-fried choices.

In addition to foods prepared in ways to lower the fat, healthier items are often available on fast food menus. Look for fresh salads, low-fat yogurt, fruit cups and wheat buns to replace some of the higher fat and lower fiber menu options. However, keep in mind that these healthy choices have the ability to take a wrong turn when paired with unhealthy selections, such as having fried chicken on your whole-wheat bun, high-fat salad dressing on your salad, or high-sugar candies mixed into your yogurt. Stick with the food in its most natural form to get the greatest nutritional benefit from it.

Fast food often seems like a quick solution for families with small children and working parents, but trying to instill healthy eating habits in young lives can be a challenge at fast food chains. The good news is that healthier, kid-friendly alternatives are becoming more available. For example, low-fat milk is an option in place of sugary sodas. You can also opt for apple slices instead of high-fat French fries in many cases. The positives of fast-food restaurants can go beyond the cost and convenience factors with a little effort in choosing the healthier options on the menu.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Fast food often gets a bad rep for being high in fat, calories and sodium. Some of the obvious appeal of eating fast food includes convenience and cost, but many fast-food chains are also altering their menus to appeal to a more health-conscious consumer.

# data[].attributes.headline
PRO/CON: Should parents support the new school meal standards?

# data[].attributes.subject
PRO/CON: Should parents support the new school meal standards?

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | PRO/CON: Should parents support the new school meal standards?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Two writers give their opposing views on the matter. One says the new standards will make kids healthier. The other argues that parents should have the final say on what their children eat.

# data[].attributes.headline
Obama encourages parents to do more to reduce childhood obesity

# data[].attributes.subject
Obama encourages parents to do more to reduce childhood obesity

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Obama encourages parents to do more to reduce childhood obesity

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The first lady spoke at a high school in New York where the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation announced it would spend $500 million to get kids to eat healthier foods and exercise more.

# data[].attributes.headline
Put down that slice! Experts say too much pizza is making kids obese

# data[].attributes.subject
Put down that slice! Experts say too much pizza is making kids obese

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | The potato's nutrition is questioned

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Congress wants potatoes to be added to the low-income food program so people have more vegetable options. But some health organizations say nutritionally, that's not a good idea.

# data[].attributes.headline
Fast-food companies feed millennial generation's healthy appetites

# data[].attributes.subject
Fast-food companies feed millennial generation's healthy appetites

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Fast-food companies feed millennial generation's healthy appetites

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Millennials as a group spend about $1 trillion eating out and they want healthy menu choices. Restaurants are evolving to entice these customers, while knowing many still want a burger.

# data[].attributes.headline
Study says teens in top schools are more healthy

# data[].attributes.subject
Study says teens in top schools are more healthy

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Study says teens in top schools are more healthy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
A study of 1,000 teenagers in Los Angeles found that attending a high-performing school leads to better health behaviors and lower drop-out rates. Some wonder if the results are reliable.

# data[].attributes.headline
For some, test tube meat probably beats eating insects

# data[].attributes.subject
For some, test tube meat probably beats eating insects

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.headline
Around the world, 2.1 billion people are overweight or obese, a study says

# data[].attributes.subject
Around the world, 2.1 billion people are overweight or obese, a study says

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Newsela is an Instructional Content Platform that supercharges reading engagement and learning in every subject.

# data[].attributes.body
Back to the Start Video

# data[].attributes.body
School Lunch Video

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Visit http://nourishlife.org. Why are many school lunches high in salt, fat, and processed foods? Food journalist Michael Pollan advocates for a better menu for America's children.

# data[].attributes.body
Supermarket Secrets Video

# data[].attributes.headline
White House wants food labels to show what we really eat

# data[].attributes.subject
White House wants food labels to show what we really eat

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | White House wants food labels to show what we really eat

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The changes are aimed at fighting obesity and other long-term diseases like diabetes.

# data[].attributes.body
Sustainable Table celebrates local sustainable food, educates consumers about the benefits of sustainable agriculture and works to build community through food.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sustainable Table celebrates local sustainable food, educates consumers about the benefits of sustainable agriculture and works to build community through food.

# data[].attributes.headline
Sustainable Solutions to Food Production

# data[].attributes.subject
Sustainable Solutions to Food Production

# data[].attributes.body
Video highlights the importance of local food as it travels from the farm to the table.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Sustainable Solutions to Food Production

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Is this the smartest man in the USA, or just a farmer with common sense? Please check out the documentary film "Food Inc.", and read Fast Food Nation. You deserve to know what you're eating. Note: for those who may be squeamish, please realise that the chicken you eat is no longer alive.

# data[].attributes.body
What's Wrong With Our Food System

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Birke Baehr: What’s wrong with our food system | TED Talk

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
At a TEDx event, 11-year-old Birke Baehr presents his take on a major source of our food -- far-away and less-than-picturesque industrial farms. Keeping farms out of sight promotes a rosy, unreal picture of big-box agriculture, he argues, as he outlines the case to green and localize food production.

# data[].attributes.body
Teach Every Child About Food

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Jamie Oliver: Teach every child about food

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Sharing powerful stories from his anti-obesity project in Huntington, West Virginia -- and a shocking image of the sugar we eat -- TED Prize winner Jamie Oliver makes the case for an all-out assault on our ignorance of food.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Disgusting Pink Slime Served In School Lunches

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"The controversial ground beef caused a media firestorm last year, and when given a choice for the first time, schools in most states opted out of ground beef with this component for their school lunches. But this year, meals that are generally more expensive to produce may be behind wider tolerance for the product.

# data[].attributes.headline
One Cow = 175M Burgers? Meet Cultured Meat

# data[].attributes.subject
One Cow = 175M Burgers? Meet Cultured Meat

# data[].attributes.body
CNBC article and video about "cultured beef," which is created by harvesting muscle cells from a living cow.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
"Cultured meat" and a book that cleans dirty water are the latest innovations in food technology that could be key to sustainability in a world of finite resources.

Researchers from Germany and the U.S. revealed their solutions to surging meat demand and fatalities from waterborne diseases at the EMTech Asia conference in Singapore on Wednesday.

Eco-friendly meat

Maastricht University has developed "cultured beef," which is created by harvesting muscle cells from a living cow.

As these cells are nurtured, they multiply to create muscle tissue, which is the main component of meat. Biologically, this tissue is exactly the same as one that comes from a cow, explained Mark Post, chair of physiology and team lead of the Cultured Beef project at the university.

Mark Post, Maastricht University

With global meat demand expected to outstrip existing livestock supply over the next few decades, according to the United Nations, cultured beef improves food security and saves animals, Post said.

"Technically, any species with stem cells in muscles can be used to recreate meat. We've worked on pork, others are working on fish and chicken but we've been focused on beef because cows have a bigger environmental impact," he said.

Livestock emit large amounts of methane, a greenhouse gas 20 times more potent than carbon dioxide, as part of their digestive process. Increased human demand for meat would significantly increase methane and in turn cause loss of biodiversity, Post warned.

"The world is facing a protein crisis, and it's implausible that we're going to eat insect protein or all turn vegan so this could be a helpful solution."

Cells taken from one cow could produce 175 million burgers, while modern farming would need 440,000 cows, according to his research.

Post stressed this his science had nothing in common with genetically modified organisms (GMOs), such as plants with altered DNA.

"The fear about GMOs is they may potentially produce invasive species through cross fertilization. This cannot happen with cultured beef."

Post's technology is a work in progress but the University of Oxford has already suggested cultured beef could use as much as 99 percent less space than is needed for current livestock farming methods.

The Drinking Book

Carnegie Mellon researcher Theresa Dankovich is the creator of "The Drinking Book," a combined instructional book and water filter.

The book's pages contain silver nanoparticles and when dirty water is poured on each page, live bacteria absorb the silver and die. Only tiny quantities of silver are used, releasing a minuscule amount into the water in the cleaning process, and producing drinking water that meets World Health Organization recommendations, Dankovich explained.

The paper is made from renewable and non-toxic materials and Dankovich hopes to implement an indicator, such as a change of colour, soon so users can know when they need to use a new sheet.

"We want this to be the next household commodity product. After doing a lot of surveys, we found that water filter papers are more important than dishes for many people," she said at Wednesday's conference.

One page of the book can provide 100 liters of clean water, enough for one person's needs for a month, she said.

Waterborne illnesses, including cholera and malaria, kill 3.4 million people a year, with many of the victims under the age of five, and is especially prevalent in rural areas with little access to potable water. But Dankovich's testing found the Drinking Book largely eradicated e-coli bacteria, a key cause of infection, in contaminated water.

The book serves an educational purpose as well, with information about contaminated water written on the pages using food-grade ink.

"The water in your village may contain deadly diseases but each page of this book is a paper water filter that will make it safe to drink," is one of the messages.

Dankovich hopes to soon use more pictures instead of words, however, to work around the issue of illiteracy. She eventually hopes to use the book as a way of also teaching people how to read.

Determining a price for individual pages or the book itself would largely depend on who it's being sold to, whether it's large-scale aid organizations or villagers themselves, she said, adding that sheets of paper could be sold for as little as pennies.

-Follow CNBC International on Twitter and Facebook.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
One cow = 175M burgers? Meet 'cultured meat'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"Cultured meat" and a book that cleans dirty water are the latest innovations in food technology that could be key to sustainability in a world of finite resources. Researchers from Germany and the U.S. revealed their solutions to surging meat demand and fatalities from waterborne diseases at the EMTech Asia conference in Singapore on Wednesday.

# data[].attributes.headline
70% of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains 'Pink Slime'

# data[].attributes.subject
70% of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains 'Pink Slime'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
70% of Ground Beef at Supermarkets Contains 'Pink Slime'

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Uploaded by xBehindthetruthx on 2012-03-09.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
70% of ALL Beef and Chicken has been treated with Carbon Monoxide Gas. It makes bad meat look good even though it may have spoiled. The practice of treating meat with carbon monoxide could hide thegrowth of pathogens such as Clostridium Botulinum, Salmonella and E. coli O157:H7.

# data[].attributes.body
Nourish is an educational initiative
designed to open a meaningful conversation
about food, health, and sustainability.
When people are food literate,
good things happen.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Nourish is an educational initiative designed to open a meaningful conversation about food and sustainability, particularly in schools and communities.

# data[].attributes.body
Documentary

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
TheTruth About Your Food with FOOD, INC. Filmmaker Robert Kenner

# data[].attributes.body
All about U.S. food rules and regulations.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The most sweeping reform of our food safety laws in more than 70 years aims to ensure the U.S. food supply is safe by focusing on prevention.

# data[].attributes.body
A Plant's Eye View

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
What if human consciousness isn't the end-all and be-all of Darwinism? What if we are all just pawns in corn's clever strategy game to rule the Earth? Author Michael Pollan asks us to see the world from a plant's-eye view.

# data[].attributes.headline
Planning for a Sustainable Local Food System

# data[].attributes.subject
Planning for a Sustainable Local Food System

# data[].attributes.body
Planning for a Sustainable Local Food System

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Planning for a Sustainable Local Food System

# data[].attributes.headline
Lawmaker proposes warning labels for sugary drinks in California

# data[].attributes.subject
Lawmaker proposes warning labels for sugary drinks in California

# data[].attributes.body
Newsela Article

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Newsela | Lawmaker proposes warning labels for sugary drinks in California

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The labels would be put on the front of all bottles and cans of drinks with added sweeteners that have 75 or more calories in every 12 ounces.