Zack Bush - How roundup and other chemicals in modern farming are killing us.

[farmerm]

a favorite point I like to make, is, at agri shows, looking at all the nice shiny paint, superdoopa gadgets, and all the salesmen, to tell the younger generation, look, ask, and remember, all of what you can see displayed, is the simple point, they are all living off us, and what we make.

I have no problem the salesman getting a £1 from me when what I get for my £1 gives me an extra £10 in either output value or £10 reduction in cost... The challenge for any businessman is knowing when the £1 spend will give a £10 return, a £1 return or even a £0 return.

 

[Blaithin]

Our gut health is about as new/unknown a frontier for science as soil health is. There is quite a bit of emerging evidence that poor gut health, like IBS, have a large contribution not just to general health, but mental health as well.

I actually believe I’ve seen research that improved gut health has had positive impact on Autism.

Now gut health can be a very fragile thing when we fill our bodies with crap. Since farming is the root of all that crap, we grow the products that are processed into that crap, we tend to get the blame. Is the gluten in the crackers or the chemicals used to grow the wheat in the crackers the cause, or is it the fact that crackers are a poor staple to have in a diet, especially when processed the way they are. Similar are the claims against milk. Many who report IBS from milk claim to be lactose intolerant. Research is showing this can be a false assumption and can be caused by anything from which beta casein protein is in the milk to the fact that a lot of milk is homogenized allowing the particles to become small enough to escape the gut. Is the processing the dairy farmers fault? No, but they still get the brunt of “milk is bad, people are lactose intolerant and not meant to consume milk”

A lot of the current research is very contradictory. There’s that grating dude on Twitter, James Wong, who gets up on his high horse about how stupid people are to believe that soils have been mined to the point that what’s growing is nutritionally poorer than what was grown there decades ago. Food is just as nutritionally valuable now as it ever was and soil mineral levels don’t affect it. Yet if you apply that logic to farming.... here we need to supplement selenium to livestock because the soil has hardly any, therefore the plants have hardly any for the grazers to access and they become deficient. Many settlers on the prairie also suffered goiter because there is not enough iodine in this environment to sufficiently supply the diet. In farming we also know that when we apply trace element, gradually the numbers lower over the years so that we need to top them up. They can also become less available to the plants depending on the ratios of the elements. So if I take this agriculture logic that to have healthy crops and livestock I need to monitor soil health and composition, then the train of thought carries on that the same is applicable to us and the food we’re eating.

Similar contradictory research is found in chemical uses. Glyphosate becomes inactive as soon as it hits the dirt so cannot negatively impact the soil biome. Ok, that sounds good. But glyphosate also kills everything above the soil and removes diversity. In farming we know that diversity isn’t a bad thing. The rhizobium bacteria that live on legume roots can be very beneficial to the soil and surrounding plants. You kill the legume, you’ve now lost your rhizobium, so glyphosate may not directly kill soil bacteria, but it absolutely has the ability to lead to the death of soil bacteria.

Now can we say with all absolute certainty that our gut health (and even general health) has nothing to do with the soil health and bacteria? As rural folk we tend to joke we have good immune systems because of our dirty hands and general dirt consumption. This helps boost our immune systems! So obviously we have a link in our minds that soil can have an impact on our health. We also know that enough of some bacteria in the soil, like E. coli, can make us ill. So we talk that soil can help keep us healthier, and we talk that soil can make us ill, yet if we say current pesticides can cause health issues, we must be against ag?

Sensationalism and exaggeration shouldn’t be necessary to get a point across but sensationalist presenters are usually the ones more enjoyable to watch. Monotonous speakers are pretty boring and liable to put you to sleep even if what they’re saying is 100% true. If buffoonery like Zack’s gets people thinking then I’ll take it. Any point is a starting point. Anyone with half a brain will start to do their own research. Just those who blindly follow what they’re spoon fed will either take what he says is gospel, or blindly call him out as complete hogwash because he threatens their ideas.

I’m going to add a PS to this since many more conventional farmers automatically assume I’m anti chemical. Pre and Post emergence sprays are huge tools used here and because of our brittle environment are quite beneficial in ways. I’m not against the proper and responsible use of them at all. However I’m also not against the learning and utilization of other methods. There’s no reason production has to be all one way or the other.

 

[Treg]

@Treg , it was a biodynamic dairy farmer who drew my attention to the interview mention above. There is a lot of fascinating stuff involved with biodynamics and it has opened my eyes whilst slowly learning about the logical thinking behind all their preparations which they apply. Some of the big biodynamic farms out in the States were spraying their preps over hundreds of acres and employed very highly qualified people to just focus on making sure all the compost and prep routines were done properly.

I did smile because the biodynamic farmer was concerned for all the conventional farmers - felt they were getting done over by snake oil sales people - as in the multi million pound spray and fertiliser companies. Which made me think of this thread!..... If @som farmer uses fert and spray, maybe they can assess the shiny paint level of chemical company's reps ……. do those companies need farmers or does farming need them?. It all interesting food for thought.

As a Organic farmer I feel the same way, so I do find it odd when a conventional farmer says about snake oil.
I reread Newman Turner's Fertility farming recently & it goes in to detail about the waste of money spent on fertiliser & the damage it does to the soil , Agriculture is now waking up to what he was saying 60-70 yes ago.

 

[Kiwi Pete]

Would redesigning out systems for health not production mean we have to start firstly by "redesigning" the size of the global population that needs to be fed and secondly by removing some of the freedom of choice for the population. Humans are biologically primed to make bad food choices when price, convenience, sugar and salt are involved.

Human populations will be "redesigned" without farmers' input.
You only need look at the industrial-scale dumbness Covid has brought out - "lets wax our biome with sanitiser and deplete our immune system by staying in a bubble, the WHO said so" and the consequences will likely be quite horrifying.

But, it will point out to many that the sole purpose was to crash the human spirit, and to sell vaccine - and revolution will start from the bottom

Eventually even the type who use caps-lock on the internet to reinforce their opinions will wake up to the fact that the "system" that they admire and love so much is treating them like a milking cow, mainly for the benfits of patent-holders.
This is neatly mimicked by the current levels of malnutrition in the first world, when we think of malnutrition we tend to think of Ethiopia but it's all around us, and the opposite - people have never been able to cheaply eat so much rubbish.
Again it facilitates a conduit of funding to the pharmaceutical industries and patent-holders.

As such, I really don't care about debating minor points that seem like massive hurdles to commodity producers - you only need to step back and look at it to see how thick the layer of fog is

 

[newholland]

@Blaithin and @Kiwi Pete some very refreshing points, maybe there is hope left in the world still!.

 

[Kiwi Pete]

@Blaithin and @Kiwi Pete some very refreshing points, maybe there is hope for the world after all!

I think there's a lot of hope, but you won't find much of it amongst commodity producers.

They're still at the stage they think they grow "food", and wanting thanked for that

"You should be ashamed of yourself" really made this thread great.

 

[newholland]

Bee Wilson has a very good book "the way we eat now" which is brilliant. She points out that some African countries such as Chad, Mali and Cameroon have the best quality diet in the world and that it's actually USA and European who are starving and the most malnourished populations (but obese as their bodies desperately consume more processed food searching in vain for what it can't get)

 

[newholland]

I think there's a lot of hope, but you won't find much of it amongst commodity producers.

They're still at the stage they think they grow "food", and wanting thanked for that

"You should be ashamed of yourself" really made this thread great.

To be honest, I think most "normal" or organic , holistic and biodynamic sort of farmers find those style of comments therapeutic..... we would get very worried if we didn't hear them!

(I added "normal" for you @Henarar )

 

[Henarar]

To be honest, I think most organic , holistic and biodynamic sort of farmers find those style of comments therapeutic..... we would get very worried if we didn't hear them!

and non "organic" [whatever that is] farmers get use to hearing that sort of comment no doubt

 

[Henarar]

(of food or farming methods) produced or involving production without the use of chemical fertilizers, pesticides, or other artificial chemicals.
"organic farming" ·
[More]
synonyms:
pesticide-free · additive-free · chemical-free · non-chemical · natural
definition
but its not is it ?
its a set of rules where ideals are substituted by convenience ?

 

[bumkin]

what i think is a shame we have been given some fantastic agro chemical tools to help but they have become abused its also a shame that some organic producers just see organic as a marketing tool,if we look at any chemical aid we have its gone from a curative to a prophylactic with the cereal rotation or lack of it we used to grow cereals and cary the crop to the barn to be threshed and the weed seed would be put in a sack and burnt then came the combine and it threw the weeds out the back so some bright spark thought to spray the weeds and each year we would need a new weed killer as we killed one off we made room for another .then disease became an issue so the good people thought of fungisides the lack of fertility was cured by the use of fertiliser and we ended up with a non rotational agriculture. with folk like oly walston held up as shining examples of progresive agriculture, why because at that time it made money . even now people think this is the way to go we now have herds of cows in the thousands if you can use the word herd,that never see a field, and the forage is carted in for miles but the sh!t doesn't get half that far and then we wonder why there is a pollution problem,, the food industry is to suit the likes of tesco and sainsburys it not about nutrition its about profit,,i think i am fortunate to be old enough to remember when farming was done properly and we had proper food remember a proper broth made at home with real marrow bones the depth of taste was fantastic and the home made bread made with live yeast , now we eat that sliced crap they should not be allowed to call it bread
not so long ago there was someone on hear asking about a cereal break crop i said grass and sheep , and i was made to feel like a rite peasant with the reply

 

[PSQ]

To be honest, I think most organic , holistic and biodynamic sort of farmers find those style of comments therapeutic..... we would get very worried if we didn't hear them!

Reading some of the replies to this thread you'd almost think some organic farmers 'get off' on the idea that they're some kind of persecuted minority...

You may be surprised to hear that I chose an 'organic farming' elective at college and I'm not averse to 'alternative farming' ideas, live and let live. As Treg says, Biodynamics takes a leap of faith to get your head around, and you just have to wonder where Rudolph Steiner plucked his anthroposophy 'spiritual science' ideas from, but having seen them I completely buy in to the idea of Camphill Communities and the work they do with the disadvantaged in society.

Where I disagree is when some organic advocates regurgitate any old crap they read on the internet. It's not organic farming I have a concerns with, it's people like yourself who fail to spot they're having their leg lifted by a complete and utter charlatan who then go on to promote his 'Resolve' marketing as being factual and truthful.
If you opened your eyes and looked you'd find lots of evidence from people with serious illnesses https://cfsremission.com/2015/12/08/restore-for-gut-health-danger-will-robinson/ questioning how this quack gets away with exploiting the ill, and asking why his miracle cures don't work. I particularly like this bit:

This product is a rebranding of “New Earth Dynamics” done in early 2015 [Press Release]. The company behind it registered in Delaware in October 2014. Delaware is famous for being used by scam artists, “”When you’re an officer or a director, many other states impose liability on you for making bad decisions, whereas in Delaware you’re protected by the Delaware Business Judgment Rule,” [source] – is it not odd for a group of people living in Virginia to form a LLC in a different state???? (why are they seeking such protection by forming a LLC in THAT state instead of Virginia).

So no, I dont have a problem with organic or holistic farming. But I do have a problem with it's blatant exploitation, and you not being able to see that you're unwittingly leading others up the garden path. Blind faith in Dr Zach Bush and his kind just drags organic farming away from plausibility and acceptance.

 

[PSQ]

From the 'chronic fatigue syndrome' website linked in the previous post:


In my view the MAIN problem is that the company appears to be crooked in the worst ways – preying on sick people and, apparently, primarily on the parents of autistic children.

The product – assuming it contains what it claims to contain – must have actual material costs of just pennies per bottle, which they are selling for $70. Honestly, if it contains what it says it contains, one would be better off in nearly every way simply going outside and playing in the dirt a little bit each day.

And while the company hides behind scientific-sounding claims, they provide no actual evidence. They don’t link to any published – or unpublished – papers at all except for a single white paper produced for the company that reads like a bunch of nonsense.

I’ll go so far as to say that the people involved are evil. And because this is your house, Ken, I’ll refrain from writing what I REALLY think of such people, which wouldn’t be appropriate for polite company.

So in any case, thanks for bringing this to people’s attention. Let’s hope your post steers some people clear of what could be a dangerous product.

Thanks.

 

[jack6480]

Our gut health is about as new/unknown a frontier for science as soil health is. There is quite a bit of emerging evidence that poor gut health, like IBS, have a large contribution not just to general health, but mental health as well.

I actually believe I’ve seen research that improved gut health has had positive impact on Autism.

Now gut health can be a very fragile thing when we fill our bodies with crap. Since farming is the root of all that crap, we grow the products that are processed into that crap, we tend to get the blame. Is the gluten in the crackers or the chemicals used to grow the wheat in the crackers the cause, or is it the fact that crackers are a poor staple to have in a diet, especially when processed the way they are. Similar are the claims against milk. Many who report IBS from milk claim to be lactose intolerant. Research is showing this can be a false assumption and can be caused by anything from which beta casein protein is in the milk to the fact that a lot of milk is homogenized allowing the particles to become small enough to escape the gut. Is the processing the dairy farmers fault? No, but they still get the brunt of “milk is bad, people are lactose intolerant and not meant to consume milk”

A lot of the current research is very contradictory. There’s that grating dude on Twitter, James Wong, who gets up on his high horse about how stupid people are to believe that soils have been mined to the point that what’s growing is nutritionally poorer than what was grown there decades ago. Food is just as nutritionally valuable now as it ever was and soil mineral levels don’t affect it. Yet if you apply that logic to farming.... here we need to supplement selenium to livestock because the soil has hardly any, therefore the plants have hardly any for the grazers to access and they become deficient. Many settlers on the prairie also suffered goiter because there is not enough iodine in this environment to sufficiently supply the diet. In farming we also know that when we apply trace element, gradually the numbers lower over the years so that we need to top them up. They can also become less available to the plants depending on the ratios of the elements. So if I take this agriculture logic that to have healthy crops and livestock I need to monitor soil health and composition, then the train of thought carries on that the same is applicable to us and the food we’re eating.

Similar contradictory research is found in chemical uses. Glyphosate becomes inactive as soon as it hits the dirt so cannot negatively impact the soil biome. Ok, that sounds good. But glyphosate also kills everything above the soil and removes diversity. In farming we know that diversity isn’t a bad thing. The rhizobium bacteria that live on legume roots can be very beneficial to the soil and surrounding plants. You kill the legume, you’ve now lost your rhizobium, so glyphosate may not directly kill soil bacteria, but it absolutely has the ability to lead to the death of soil bacteria.

Now can we say with all absolute certainty that our gut health (and even general health) has nothing to do with the soil health and bacteria? As rural folk we tend to joke we have good immune systems because of our dirty hands and general dirt consumption. This helps boost our immune systems! So obviously we have a link in our minds that soil can have an impact on our health. We also know that enough of some bacteria in the soil, like E. coli, can make us ill. So we talk that soil can help keep us healthier, and we talk that soil can make us ill, yet if we say current pesticides can cause health issues, we must be against ag?

Sensationalism and exaggeration shouldn’t be necessary to get a point across but sensationalist presenters are usually the ones more enjoyable to watch. Monotonous speakers are pretty boring and liable to put you to sleep even if what they’re saying is 100% true. If buffoonery like Zack’s gets people thinking then I’ll take it. Any point is a starting point. Anyone with half a brain will start to do their own research. Just those who blindly follow what they’re spoon fed will either take what he says is gospel, or blindly call him out as complete hogwash because he threatens their ideas.

I’m going to add a PS to this since many more conventional farmers automatically assume I’m anti chemical. Pre and Post emergence sprays are huge tools used here and because of our brittle environment are quite beneficial in ways. I’m not against the proper and responsible use of them at all. However I’m also not against the learning and utilization of other methods. There’s no reason production has to be all one way or the other.

brilliant post!

Its frustrating that we instictly know and sometimes are taught things which are seem to be the basics, however the way we live and work goes against them. I hope that makes sense

 

[Guleesh]

You may be surprised to hear that I chose an 'organic farming' elective at college and I'm not averse to 'alternative farming' ideas, live and let live. As Treg says, Biodynamics takes a leap of faith to get your head around, and you just have to wonder where Rudolph Steiner plucked his anthroposophy 'spiritual science' ideas from, but having seen them I completely buy in to the idea of Camphill Communities and the work they do with the disadvantaged in society.

Where I disagree is when some organic advocates regurgitate any old crap they read on the internet. It's not organic farming I have a concerns with, it's people like yourself who fail to spot they're having their leg lifted by a complete and utter charlatan who then go on to promote his 'Resolve' marketing as being factual and truthful.
If you opened your eyes and looked you'd find lots of evidence from people with serious illnesses https://cfsremission.com/2015/12/08/restore-for-gut-health-danger-will-robinson/ questioning how this quack gets away with exploiting the ill, and asking why his miracle cures don't work. I particularly like this bit:


So no, I dont have a problem with organic or holistic farming. But I do have a problem with it's blatant exploitation, and you not being able to see that you're unwittingly leading others up the garden path. Your blind faith in Dr Zach Bush just drags organic farming away from plausibility and acceptance. I'll say it again, you ought to be ashamed.

I also see the exploitation of organic and holistic farming, and 100% agree that it drags organic farming away from mainstream plausibility. There seems to be an unfortunate tendency for a few organic/ holistic farmers to be so enthusiastic for the cause that basic reasoning goes out of the window. These well meaning folk are just easy prey for con artists.

There are many individuals that have contributed to organic/holistic farming, in many different ways, studies done, experiments conducted, educating others or just generally promoting what they believe to be a good and worthy cause, What I sometime perceive is that some seem to be gaining more of a cult like following, whereby anything they say will be taken as gospel. I think a conventional farmers observation of this attitude is severely hampering uptake of more 'alternative' farming practices.

There's also a lot of farmers who'd like to promote and spread Organic/HM/Regenerative and I've read plenty on here discussing how to get the message out to a wider audience and as to how to make, or what it is that makes 'conventional' farmers stop and reassess. I think one of the biggest obstacles is the 'them and us' mentality that I witness growing, and I see some people who just blindly pick a side without understanding the facts, in the same way people tend to do politically, they pick their party and therefore the leader of that party can do or say no wrong, and the opposition leader can do or say no right. We see this time and time again on both sides, Trump is a great example. In the background the silent majority just observes and makes up their own mind based on facts presented.

The very last thing I want to do on here is start a political discussion but I use the example, of poorly behaved political party followers at election rallies etc. It's a complete turn-off for any sensible thoughtful person that is interested in knowing the facts and making a decision.

I didn't personally start looking into holistic grazing because i wanted to join a cult and hang off the words of its leaders, it was rather because I viewed down to earth farmers who seemed to be doing well at it and talking sense about it. It's a damn shame if folk are going to be put off trying something new because there first perception is some of the con artists trying to cash in.

I still think you're being a tad harsh on poor newholland.

 

[som farmer]

I have a sneaky feeling, that since grain was in intervention, with no need to increase production, the breeding companies, took the onus on production, and instead, developed new varieties, that needed more imputs, so profit was maintained, but I'm only a suspicious country bumkin, that knows nowt.

 

[som farmer]

I also see the exploitation of organic and holistic farming, and 100% agree that it drags organic farming away from mainstream plausibility. There seems to be an unfortunate tendency for a few organic/ holistic farmers to be so enthusiastic for the cause that basic reasoning goes out of the window. These well meaning folk are just easy prey for con artists.

There are many individuals that have contributed to organic/holistic farming, in many different ways, studies done, experiments conducted, educating others or just generally promoting what they believe to be a good and worthy cause, What I sometime perceive is that some seem to be gaining more of a cult like following, whereby anything they say will be taken as gospel. I think a conventional farmers observation of this attitude is severely hampering uptake of more 'alternative' farming practices.

There's also a lot of farmers who'd like to promote and spread Organic/HM/Regenerative and I've read plenty on here discussing how to get the message out to a wider audience and as to how to make, or what it is that makes 'conventional' farmers stop and reassess. I think one of the biggest obstacles is the 'them and us' mentality that I witness growing, and I see some people who just blindly pick a side without understanding the facts, in the same way people tend to do politically, they pick their party and therefore the leader of that party can do or say no wrong, and the opposition leader can do or say no right. We see this time and time again on both sides, Trump is a great example. In the background the silent majority just observes and makes up their own mind based on facts presented.

The very last thing I want to do on here is start a political discussion but I use the example, of poorly behaved political party followers at election rallies etc. It's a complete turn-off for any sensible thoughtful person that is interested in knowing the facts and making a decision.

I didn't personally start looking into holistic grazing because i wanted to join a cult and hang off the words of its leaders, it was rather because I viewed down to earth farmers who seemed to be doing well at it and talking sense about it. It's a damn shame if folk are going to be put off trying something new because there first perception is some of the con artists trying to cash in.

I still think you're being a tad harsh on poor newholland.

there are many different ways to farm, and they all 'work' in differing ways, and farmers should be left to farm, as they wish, without people trying to 'force' a system, on them.
Which is a pity, because, whether you farm, organically, holistic, intensive or extensive, or normally (whatever normal is}, there are excellent ideas and practices, in each system, that would work equally as well, in another system.
All the hot air, wasted by overzealous fanatics, in trying to force 'their way, is the only way', and if you don't change, the world will end, stops farmers from trying some of the more practical 'things'. A sensible, and open approach to new ways, would be far more effective, than a rant.

 

[bumkin]

I have a sneaky feeling, that since grain was in intervention, with no need to increase production, the breeding companies, took the onus on production, and instead, developed new varieties, that needed more imputs, so profit was maintained, but I'm only a suspicious country bumkin, that knows nowt.

i agree with you its almost as if we are a milch cow designed for the purpose of making money for others we now have systems in place where we produce food and every one gets more out of it than we do ,i can remember when we could grow a two ton crop of spring barley without the use of sprays and very little use of fert now we have spray programs that are mind blowing, i think that there is more to food than we will ever know and if it is grown on good fertile ground and not newked at every turn it will be far better fo us. these days we grow food for its looks not its taste or food value.

 

[som farmer]

i agree with you its almost as if we are a milch cow designed for the purpose of making money for others we now have systems in place where we produce food and every one gets more out of it than we do ,i can remember when we could grow a two ton crop of spring barley without the use of sprays and very little use of fert now we have spray programs that are mind blowing, i think that there is more to food than we will ever know and if it is grown on good fertile ground and not newked at every turn it will be far better fo us. these days we grow food for its looks not its taste or food value.

I think the answer is, a more 'mixed' system, ground re-acts to a 'rest' or break. Arable farms now are really mono culture, the rotation being a change of crop. A lot of very light ground around here, is suffering some serious yield drops, basically, they have raped the soil of nature, and now, there's nothing left. Its how to restore that nature, or to halt its decline, that, is the question. I think we have to stop continuous ploughing, all that achieves, is the loss of worms, bugs and fungi, that help to keep soil healthy. The obvious and easiest way, is to reintroduce livestock, as part of the equation, easier said than done.
But, it could, quite easily be achieved, with a different mind set. Instead of chasing more and more acres, to justify the huge cost of modern arable equipment, take a step, or two, backwards, ease the work load, ease the frantic rush, just find a keen young farmer, who is prepared to work with you, with his livestock, to create that real break, your soils need, at the moment, more relevant, in thinner soils, but could help the heavier maintain a higher level.

 

[bumkin]

you are so correct when i moved here thirty years ago the farm had been predominantly cearrials for the previous ten years and before that early spuds with irrigation, dont get me wrong its a good farm with a high reputation , but the first problem i found was slugs until then i had never spread a slug pellet every one told me you have to feed the slugs its because of the mild winters, then one year i put a difficult field into settaside and all that year we carted muck out onto it my agronomist said i would never get the slugs under control after that but we had the finest crop of winter wheat and not a slug in sight the conclusion was the slugs were such a problem because of the lack of humus over the years we have rotated and mucked fields and got the humus levels up and we dont need slug pellets , and what is nicer than ploughing up grass with all those long smooth furrows with ll those bristly roots poking out and anticipating the next crop. on the subject of buggering up the soil i was watching them prepare for potatoes a couple of weeks ago they ploughed it a foot deep (when i say plough they turned it brown)then went through with a subsoiler then power harrowed it destoned it ridged it and planted it i counted three passes with the power harrow the ground was pulverised into submission then the chap talks about soil structure ffs one problem is to much horse power