Category Archives: Farmageddon

GMO Pusher Bill Gates Teams Up With Richard Branson, Hopes to End the Meat Industry As We Know It With Lab-Grown Beef

althealthworks.com
4 May 2020
by AltHealth Admin



Meat grown in labs has been a hot topic of conversation for the last seven years, with some media outlets hailing it as the future of food and a “cleaner” way to do meat.

But when the real thing hits supermarket shelves, will customers be kept in the dark about how it’s really made, and perhaps more importantly, will anybody actually want to eat it?

Ready or not, lab-grown meat from stem cells is on its way, and it’s being propped up by one of the most controversial names in the world of genetically modified food (GMOs) — Microsoft founder and long-time Monsanto supporter Bill Gates, along with another wealthy investor, Sir Richard Branson, founder of the Virgin Group.

Just recently, the two famous figures placed a big-time bet on the self-proclaimed “clean” lab-grown meat company Memphis Meats, to the tune of $17 million.

But will customers flock to this new so-called “murder free” meat, or are Gates and Branson making a mistake in betting on a an under-tested technology with big claims and unknown effects on human health?

Startup Companies to Grow Meat in the Lab

Memphis Meats and Hampton Creek (recently accused of labeling lies with its other products aimed at reducing animal agriculture) are the most commonly-heard of, but not the only companies who are working on creating lab-grown meat.

MosaMeat of the Netherlands, founded by Professor Mark Post, first started with a product with a $325,000 price tag.

Today that number has been trimmed to a far more manageable $11.36 per package. The founder hopes to decrease the price even more if it succeeds and goes commercial.

The company also has serious financial weight behind it in Sergey Brin of Alphabet (the parent company of Google), and hopes to develop affordable mass-produced lab-grown meat or “cultured meat” within the next 10-20 years (a ways off from its competitors).

Another company is SuperMeat in Israel. Also founded by a professor, its goal is to create lab-grown chicken meat. The company raised $229,269 on Indiegogo to begin its efforts.

These companies are just the tip of the iceberg for what industry insiders hope becomes the new standard for meat eaters everywhere.

Further Examining Lab-Grown Meat Promises

All of the lab-grown meat companies have a similar mission, as evidenced by these slogans and promises:

  • “A method that doesn’t require raising and slaughtering animals.” – Memphis Meats
  • “Let’s change the way meat gets to the plate.” – Memphis Meats
  • “Eating meat without killing animals.” – SuperMeat
  • “Real meat without harming animals.” – SuperMeat

Besides their pledge to save animals, lab-grown meat companies make big claims when it comes to helping the environment.

Memphis Meats says they expect the following results from their products:

  • An up to 90% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions compared to conventional meat
  • The same reduction of land and water use
  • Better meat for human health

MosaMeat says they will help solve the food crisis and combat climate change, but doesn’t say much about animal welfare. Their main technique requires one sample of muscle cells to be taken from live animals for every 20,000 tons of lab-grown meat, saying the biopsy is harmless and noting that the animal survives the procedure.

SuperMeat promises to be humane, eco-friendly, to fight world hunger, and to create meat that is supposedly healthier and cheaper.

How the meat is actually grown, however, is another story entirely (and one these companies don’t exactly seem eager to reveal to future customers).

While a humane, environmentally friendly and even “healthy” burger sounds like a dream come true for meat lovers, there are plenty of misconceptions here that the public is being kept in the dark about.

The first issue with lab-grown meat is how the meat cells are being harvested.

What happens is as follows: if a cow in a slaughterhouse is pregnant, when she is slaughtered, the fetus is removed and brought into a blood collection facility. While still alive, the fetus is drained of its blood until it dies by a process of sticking a needle in its heart. It takes about five minutes, and this is what produces FBS, and ultimately, these so-called healthier burgers.

Even though cows and bulls are kept separately, the percentage of dairy cows who are pregnant is between 17 and 31 percent. As a result the number of fetuses being slaughtered is in the millions.

The FBS from these slaughtered fetuses can then be used in the lab, grown in a petri dish into a meat-like substance by feeding the cells nutrients for about a month. Fetal bovine serum is the easiest to grow, because cells when separated from the body are suicidal. The FBS contains growth factors that prevent them from killing themselves.

This process is not the only way to make lab-grown meat, but it is the fastest way. It can be used on other types of meat cells as well, and may be added to a petri dish with chicken cells to create a similar product.

At the end of the day, this reliance on FBS means some animals are still being killed for lab-created meat; cultured meat is definitely not vegetarian as some may hope.

The moral question of killing animals still remains: is slaughtering fetuses to make this highly unnatural product really any better than killing adult farm animals?

The controversial FBS is also used in creating vaccines for people, and it also comes with about a 1 in 40 billion chance of contracting mad cow disease. This low risk is much higher in cultured meat, which is why the Food and Drug Administration discouraged its use for the past 25 years (before wealthy investors like Gates and Branson decided to bring it to the forefront of the food industry, that is).

Is Lab Grown Meat Really A Better Choice?

What will the cultured meat companies do, and can Gates and Branson steer clear of the controversy that is sure to arise when people find out how these meats are actually made (much like genetically modified organisms from Monsanto)?

Each company ends up hiding its true plans because their products have to be licensed, and there are plenty of proprietary issues that come into play. It seems that they are trying to avoid FBS, but there are no conclusions to be drawn yet.

Hampton Creek says they will try to create meat using plant-based products to make the cells grow using bioreactors or giant tanks, using a process that will look similar to beer brewing.

Memphis Meats said they have developed the first product without FBS, and are now working on applying it to all of their products.

Neither company will say what they actually use because of the fear that the idea will be stolen. As a result, transparency goes out the window (sound familiar?), although we do know that there’s a chance the process may end up using GMO yeast, at least according to a representative from the company Finless Fish as quoted by Gizmodo.

The environmental claims made by lab grown meat companies may not be what they seem, either. Hampton Creek for example says its lab-meat will be up to ten times more environment efficient than conventional meat, but the evidence is lacking.

A 2011 study concluded that this type of meat product might produce less greenhouse gas, yet that it uses the same amount of energy as the pork industry. Another 2015 study estimated that it will require the same amount of energy as the conventional meat industry.

Despite the controversies, It seems that many animal rights groups are supporting lab-grown meat.

People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) offered a one-million dollar prize to the first company who can produce a commercially successful cultured meat. However, the deadline of the contest has passed as commercial lab-grown meat is still in the works.

It seems that company gave up on inspiring everyone to cut out animal products and is willing to compromise.

“People are surprised to learn that PETA is interested in lab-grown meat, but we have overcome our own revulsion at flesh-eating to champion a breakthrough that will mean a far kinder world for animals,” PETA statement said.

Mercy for Animals also supports “meat that is produced through cellular agriculture instead of slaughter.”

It might not be much better for the environment after all.

Meanwhile, the consumers are being fed an eerily-hypnotizing ads to hype up our expectations.

Watch a TV report about cultured meat that includes laboratory footage:

America’s biggest meat corporation is also jumping on the bandwagon:

Surveillance to make sure farmers look after their animals properly recommended

MSN
25 November 2019
Angie Skerrett


A taskforce established by the Agriculture Minister to look at animal welfare issues around the practice of winter grazing has made a raft of recommendations.

They include expanding knowledge of barriers to adopting improved animal welfare practices, and more active surveillance to ensure animal welfare standards are being met.

Winter grazing sees stock given access to a measured area of forage and shifted in a controlled manner. But the practice has been under the spotlight after photos of mudbound cows in Southland and Otago were released by environmentalist Angus Robson. 

“Images of cows up to their knees in mud, unable to lie down and rest and calving in these conditions is unacceptable to me and I’ve heard loud and clear from the public that it’s unacceptable to them too,” Damien O’Connor said in August, setting up the taskforce in response.

The taskforce included industry group representatives and farmers, as well as Robson.

O’Connor said it’s made 11 recommendations to improve animal welfare in intensive winter grazing farm systems.

“I asked the taskforce to do a stocktake of the multiple initiatives that are already underway to promote good winter grazing and identify where we might work more together to improve practices.”

A pan-sector action group would also be set up to implement the recommendations.

“Winter crop grazing is necessary in some parts of the country to provide enough feed for stock at a time when there’s not a lot of pasture, but we must ensure farmers have the right tools and advice to ensure animal welfare.

“As a Government, we’re committed to working alongside farmers to maintain their ability to export on our valuable New Zealand brand and open up new trading markets. Our international reputation depends on getting this sort of thing right, as does our social licence to operate within New Zealand.”

Ministry for Primary Industries (MPI) would work with farmers and industry groups to ensure farmers get the help they need.

“I know that many farmers are already changing and adapting their practice and I thank them for the effort. We want to help in that work,” said O’Connor.

“The next step will be the establishment of an action group to begin implementing the recommendations so we can see some progress next winter and beyond”.

Eco Liberty Conclusion: It’s that true about the surveillance on Farmers in the name of Animal Welfare in New Zealand; farmer should be concerned about their privacy . Animal Rights Activist have already for surveillance on slaughterhouses according to Brisbane Times Also in the UK according to the The Guardian All slaughterhouses in England will be fitted with compulsory CCTV under plans to be unveiled on Friday by environment secretary Michael Gove, as part of a series of measures to bolster welfare standards and enforce laws against animal cruelty.
To all Farmer if you’re for defending your right to privacy and your livelihood you would no to government surveillance on the farms. Farmers do have their own surveillance system install on their own for security and protecting their property; also catching trespassers and invaders; as well addressing issues that have occur on the farm.
Let say “no” to government surveillance on the farms and protect their farms and their privacy.

Terra Preta – Amazon Soil Mystery – What We Can Learn From Ancient Cultures -w- Matt Powers

Matt Powers is an author, educator, and entrepreneur focused on radically transforming the K-12 experience for children everywhere by aligning their education with current regenerative science, natural principles, and clear ethics: earth care, people care, and future care. https://www.youtube.com/user/permacul… The Permaculture Student Online http://www.thepermaculturestudent.com… Coolest/Wettest January-June On Record In The US https://realclimatescience.com/2019/0… What type of soils are found in the amazon rainforest? https://socratic.org/questions/what-t… Amazon Jungle Once Home to Millions More Than Previously Thoughtn https://news.nationalgeographic.com/2… EM-1 Effective Microorganisms Microbial Inoculant Soil Conditioner Concentrate Quart https://amzn.to/2NzCYSL LeakCon2019 Live-Stream Replay On Demand https://bit.ly/2TTbPIq Prepare With The Ranch – http://preparewiththeranch.com Leah and I are two humans who no longer support the inhuman, oligarchic empire model destroying our planet and our true nature as human beings. As activists we decided to do something about it, so we opted out of our former lives to begin anew. We are currently transforming pristine alpine wilderness into a self-sustaining homestead and organic farm in preparation for the upcoming collapse. We plan on developing and executing every single step of the process in open source format for the benefit of all humanity. With our backgrounds in academia and the sciences (climatology, geology, physics, biology, chemistry, and more) we hope to uncover the lies perpetrated by the mass media. It will be presented here and on our website in a systematic and thorough process. As you can imagine, this is a multifaceted, lifelong project, and we are so passionately excited to take the next steps towards self sufficiency and our dream! Won’t you join us? https://www.patreon.com/OppenheimerRa… LeakCon2019

These are the first genetically modified animals approved for U.S. consumption

marketwatch.com
21 June 2019
Associated Press

NEW YORK (AP) — Inside an Indiana aquafarming complex, thousands of salmon eggs genetically modified to grow faster than normal are hatching into tiny fish. After growing to roughly 10 pounds (4.5 kilograms) in indoor tanks, they could be served in restaurants by late next year.

The salmon produced by AquaBounty are the first genetically modified animals approved for human consumption in the U.S. They represent one way companies are pushing to transform the plants and animals we eat, even as consumer advocacy groups call for greater caution.

AquaBounty hasn’t sold any fish in the U.S. yet, but it says its salmon may first turn up in places like restaurants or university cafeterias, which would decide whether to tell diners that the fish are genetically modified.

“It’s their customer, not ours,” said Sylvia Wulf, AquaBounty’s CEO.

AquaBounty will be producing the first genetically modified animals approved for human food in the U.S. and one way companies are pushing to transform plants and animals, as consumer advocacy groups call for greater caution.

To produce its fish, Aquabounty injected Atlantic salmon with DNA from other fish species that make them grow to full size in about 18 months, which could be about twice as fast as regular salmon. The company says that’s more efficient since less feed is required. The eggs were shipped to the U.S. from the company’s Canadian location last month after clearing final regulatory hurdles.

As AquaBounty worked through years of government approvals, several grocers including Kroger and Whole Foods responded to a campaign by consumer groups with a vow to not sell the fish.

Already, most corn and soy in the U.S. is genetically modified to be more resistant to pests and herbicides. But as genetically modified salmon make their way to dinner plates, the pace of change to the food supply could accelerate.

This month, President Donald Trump signed an executive order directing federal agencies to simplify regulations for genetically engineered plants and animals. The move comes as companies are turning to a newer gene-editing technology that makes it easier to tinker with plant and animal DNA.

That’s blurring the lines around what should be considered a genetically modified organism, and how such foods are perceived. In 2015, an Associated Press-GfK poll found two-thirds of Americans supported labeling of genetically modified ingredients on food packages. The following year, Congress directed regulators to establish national standards for disclosing the presence of bioengineered foods.

But foods made with the newer gene-editing technique wouldn’t necessarily be subject to the regulation, since companies say the resulting plants and animals could theoretically be produced with conventional breeding. And while AquaBounty’s salmon was produced with an older technique, it may not always be obvious when people are buying the fish either.

The disclosure regulation will start being implemented next year, but mandatory compliance doesn’t start until 2022. And under the rules , companies can provide the disclosures through codes people scan with their phones. The disclosure also would note that products have “bioengineered” ingredients, which advocacy groups say could be confusing.

“Nobody uses that term,” said Amy van Saun of the Center for Food Safety, who noted “genetically engineered” or “genetically modified” are more common.

The center is suing over the U.S. Food and Drug Administration’s approval of AquaBounty’s salmon, and it is among the groups that asked grocers to pledge they wouldn’t sell the fish.

The disclosure rules also do not apply to restaurants and similar food service establishments. Greg Jaffe of the Center for Science in the Public Interest noted that AquaBounty’s fish will represent a tiny fraction of the U.S. salmon supply, and that many people may not care whether they’re eating genetically modified food. Still, he said restaurants could make the information available to customers who ask about it.

“The information should not be hidden,” Jaffe said.

AquaBounty’s Wulf noted its salmon has already been sold in Canada, where disclosure is not required. She said the company believes in transparency but questioned why people would want to know whether the fish are genetically modified.

“It’s identical to Atlantic salmon, with the exception of one gene,” she said.

____

Follow Candice Choi at http://www.twitter.com/candicechoi

___

The Associated Press Health and Science Department receives support from the Howard Hughes Medical Institute’s Department of Science Education. The AP is solely responsible for all content.

Biodynamic Agriculture – Who Was Rudolf Steiner? – (CSA) Community Supported Agriculture

Biodynamic agriculture is a form of alternative agriculture very similar to organic farming, but it includes various esoteric concepts drawn from the ideas of Rudolf Steiner (1861–1925). Initially developed in 1924, it was the first of the organic agriculture movements. It treats soil fertility, plant growth, and livestock care as ecologically interrelated tasks, emphasizing spiritual and mystical perspectives. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biodyna…

Who Was Rudolf Steiner? Rudolf Steiner (1861-1925), founder of the biodynamic approach to agriculture, was a highly trained scientist and respected philosopher in his time, who later in his life came to prominence for his spiritual-scientific approach to knowledge called “anthroposophy.” Long before many of his contemporaries, Steiner came to the conclusion that western civilization would gradually bring destruction to itself and the earth if it did not begin to develop an objective understanding of the spiritual world and its interrelationship with the physical world. Steiner’s spiritual-scientific methods and insights have given birth to practical holistic innovations in many fields, including education, banking, medicine, psychology, the arts and, not least, agriculture.

https://www.biodynamics.com/steiner.htmlhttps://www.britannica.com/biography/…https://www.quackwatch.org/11Ind/stei… Check Out Our New Channel Magnetic Reversal News For Updates https://bit.ly/2Sic1os LeakCon2019 Live-Stream Rebroadcast On Demand https://bit.ly/2TTbPIq Leah and I are two humans who no longer support the inhuman, oligarchic empire model destroying our planet and our true nature as human beings. As activists we decided to do something about it, so we opted out of our former lives to begin anew. We are currently transforming pristine alpine wilderness into a self-sustaining homestead and organic farm in preparation for the upcoming collapse. We plan on developing and executing every single step of the process in open source format for the benefit of all humanity. With our backgrounds in academia and the sciences (climatology, geology, physics, biology, chemistry, and more) we hope to uncover the lies perpetrated by the mass media. It will be presented here and on our website in a systematic and thorough process. As you can imagine, this is a multifaceted, lifelong project, and we are so passionately excited to take the next steps towards self sufficiency and our dream! Won’t you join us? https://www.patreon.com/OppenheimerRa… Oppenheimer Ranch

Preparedness Store – BOOM! https://www.amazon.com/shop/oppenheim…

This is the true meaning of SUSTAINABILITY


This video on you tube show the importance of livestock, Mulching and Carbon Dioxide. Why the fake environmentalism movement is pushing the false form sustainability. The real reason why the land become desert because their no livestock to fertile the land restoring nutrients into soil for future growth. The idea of over farming can just go out the window because the nutrient can be restore in the soil. As long the nutrient is being put back into the soil the land can use on a longtime for agriculture. Having the soil mulched and covered will reduce erosion greatly than not having the soil mulched and covered as it was in the video from 23:20 to 28:00; the result was clear.

The 5 farming principals in the video from 31:10 to 36:55


  • Growing living in the soil as long possible
  • Keep skin on the soil(please the soil in 35:30 in the video show the soil; One without the mulch the temperature is 92.8°F(33.8°C); One with the mulch the temperature is 77.2°F(25.1)
  • Limit Chemical and Physical Disturbances
  • Increase Plants animals and insects diversity
  • Integrate livestock using adaptive stewardship.
  • Eco Liberty Conclusion: We encourage farmers to be better steward of the land they’re working on. Unlike the fake environmentalism movement they do not encourage better stewardship of the land but push Climate Change or Global warming scare upon people to pay Carbon tax; also push veganism in the name of sustainability which the false form of sustainability in an order to push for agenda 21/2030 by forcing people off their land and put them into jam pack cities which that is even more unsustainable but the global elites call sustainable. We say “no” to the false form of sustainability but we say “yes” to the true of sustainability.