Category: We Need A Famine

Beyond Woke

“We introduced a plant-based protein as a limited time offer and to test the interest of our guests in having this alternative available. Ultimately, the product was not embraced by our guests as we thought it would be. We may offer plant-based alternatives again in the future, but we have removed it from the menu for now.”Tim Hortons spokesperson

War On Agriculture

Nathan A. Schachtman;

A couple of years ago, I met David Zaruk at a Society for Risk Analysis meeting, where we were both presenting. I was aware of David’s blogging and investigative journalism, but meeting him gave me a greater appreciation for the breadth and depth of his work. For those of you who do not know David, he is present in cyberspace as the Risk-Monger who blogs about risk and science communications issues. His blog has featured cutting-edge exposés about the distortions in risk communications perpetuated by the advocacy of non-governmental organizations (NGOs). Previously, I have recorded my objections to the intellectual arrogance of some such organizations that purport to speak on behalf of the public interest, when often they act in cahoots with the lawsuit industry in the manufacturing of tort and environmental litigation.
 
David’s writing on the lobbying and control of NGOs by plaintiffs’ lawyers from the United States should be required reading for everyone who wants to understand how litigation sausage is made. His series,“SlimeGate” details the interplay among NGO lobbying, lawsuit industry maneuvering, and carcinogen determinations at the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC). The IARC, a branch of the World Health Organization, is headquartered in Lyon, France. The IARC convenes “working groups” to review the scientific studies of the carcinogencity of various substances and processes. The IARC working groups produce “monographs” of their reviews, and the IARC publishes these monographs, in print and on-line. The United States is in the top tier of participating countries for funding the IARC.
 
Understandably, the IARC has been concerned that the members of its working groups should be viewed as disinterested scientists. Unfortunately, this concern has been translated into an asymmetrical standard that excludes anyone with a hint of manufacturing connection, but keeps the door open for those scientists with deep lawsuit industry connections. Speaking on behalf of the plaintiffs’ bar, Michael Papantonio, a plaintiffs’ lawyer who founded Mass Torts Made Perfect, noted that “We [the lawsuit industry] operate just like any other industry.”[2]
 
David Zaruk has shown how this asymmetry has been exploited mercilessly by the lawsuit industry and its agents in connection with the IARC’s review of glyphosate.[3] The resulting IARC classification of glyphosate has led to a litigation firestorm and an all-out assault on agricultural sustainability and productivity.[4]

Be sure to read the Slimegate blog posts, and pass them along to your MP and MLA if you still believe in such things.

I’m convinced that the widespread anti-Monsanto social media campaign of the past few years was battlespace prep by tort lawyers intent on grooming the jury pool.

“It is no coincidence that so much dietary advice in the media comes from people whose relationship with food is affected by mental illness.”

Angry Chef;

Recently, whilst publicising her latest diet book, unbearably smug radio personality and all-round irritant Fearne Cotton revealed that she had secretly suffered from bulimia for around 10 years. She said that she was ‘no longer afraid’, and hoped that in speaking out she would encourage others to do so. I suppose her honesty at opening up should be praised, and certainly the reaction has been generally positive. But in truth, I have struggled with this story and the media response to it.

 
Although listening to Cotton on the radio generally makes me want to lance my eardrums with a hypodermic syringe, I understand that she has astonishing popularity and reach, giving her the ability to spread a positive message that might just remove some of the stigma surrounding these conditions. But I cannot get over the fact that she is just one of a troubling succession of diet book authors who have disseminated prescriptive food advice whilst suffering from an eating disorder. She may not be the worst offender, but she is perhaps the highest in profile, which makes writing critically about her full of risk. When friend of the blog ‘Not Plant Based’ covered the story in less than glowing terms, the author received a torrent of abuse on social media. […]

 

So great, let’s have a fucking conversation. Let’s talk openly about our problems. But if we are going to do that, let’s not shy away from discussing the huge dietary revenue stream that feeds on the food insecurities of others. The lucrative rhetoric that drives people towards disorder, and keeps them held within its grip. The restrictive diets and magical food thinking that Cotton and others in the industry have spent years encouraging. The eating patterns that can prove fatal if they take hold in vulnerable minds.

 
Let’s also talk about the concerns of dietitians and eating disorder professionals that are so often blithely dismissed by the authors and publishers of these books. The people that work for months with patients only to have their hard work overturned by a dismissive comment from an influencer that a packet of crisps or a chocolate bar is toxic and doing them harm. Let’s talk about the books and articles that Cotton has written about food, telling countless young people exactly how to eat and what to restrict. Let’s explore her back catalogue, and talk about which parts of it should be immediately withdrawn from sale if she really cares about people’s mental wellbeing. Let’s have a conversation about the pointless, tortured and restrictive food mantras she has spent years preaching. Although she should never be judged for what her illness drove her to, perhaps she should be judged for not looking back and considering the harm this might have done to others.

More.

War On Meat

Proactive;

WASHINGTON (Oct. 28, 2019) – The National Cattlemen’s Beef Association (NCBA) today applauded the bipartisan introduction of the Real MEAT (Marketing Edible Artificials Truthfully) Act of 2019 by U.S. Reps. Roger Marshall (R – 1st Dist., Kansas) and Anthony Brindisi (D – 21st Dist., N.Y.)
 
“A growing number of fake meat products are clearly trying to mislead consumers about what they’re trying to get them to buy,” said NCBA President and Tennessee cattlewoman Jennifer Houston. “Consumers need to be protected from deceptive marketing practices, and cattle producers need to be able to compete on a fair, level playing field. We want to thank Congressmen Brindisi and Marshall for leading the way on this very important issue.”

While our western provincial governments remain asleep at the wheel, as the same agents destroying our energy industry pivot to agriculture. And just as they did with the energy industry, they’ll wake up a decade too late, and wonder what just hit them.

This Is Not Your Grandma’s Humane Society

Long overdue;

The Ontario government will consider all options including new legislation to shield farmers from animal rights activists, the province’s agriculture ministry said Friday.
 
The assurances from Minister Ernie Hardeman’s office come as livestock producers press for action to prosecute those who trespass on their properties and aggressively protest at processing plants.
 
Ministry spokesperson Avi Yufest said the government shares the producers’ concerns following a number of high-profile protests in the past year.

Navigation