SPECIAL FEATURES:
12 foods that are bad for the planet
12 foods that are bad for the planet
photo 1 of 14
Photo:
Thomas Vogel/iStockphoto
Sign in with one of these accounts to add your comment.
Gene Parquette
Jan 17 2013 at 3:36 AM
Having read all the article, I can see that the common trend there isn't that these things are 'bad', not as good as others, perhaps, but not 'bad'... just that they are drastically overused. Take into account the 7 billion plus people on the earth right now. For everyone to have an American standard of living- keep in mind this is without any environmental policy- we would need two and a half earths. If we converted the maximum amount of land for farmland and housing, lowered our expectations, and
.... More
decreased fuel consumption, the earth an still only support 10 billion people. The bottom line is that humans are animals, but we are smart animals that adapt our world to us without any real natural predators, except ourselves. If we really want to save the planet, and by saying this I realize I may be stepping on a few toes... then environmentalists need to realize that they are going about it the wrong way. for every acre of rainforest they save in the amazon, somewhere else, another tree gets it. The human race is just too expansive. What we need to do, is look to the future. Use basic population control for now, like the Chinese did, and find a way to colonize.
Diane
Jul 22 2012 at 4:09 PM
Why would you suggest it's okay to eat food we know is bad for us if we eat it in moderation? Trans fats are okay in moderation? Processed chemicalized soy, wheat, and corn products are okay in moderation? I'm disappointed in you, MNN.
Carissa
Aug 25 2011 at 12:48 AM
I'm super bugged by this article. It hits all the obvious and broad points without really getting into any detail... Why not look at actual fruits and veggies, like pineapples and bananas the commercial harvest of which are probably some of the worst for the environment? Or perhaps taking a look at bad choices and their alternatives (factory farmed meats vs locally grown). Yeah there are some interesting "I didn't know that"s in the article but over all I think its an EPIC FAIL.
Enter your name
Jul 26 2011 at 10:40 AM
Maybe the "Dugger family" can start the downsizing of humans and stop populating an already overpopulated country. But to tell you the truth, God made enough earth to feed us all..it's government control that stops us from being able to feed ourselves in a healthy manner. Farmers get paid to NOT grow certain foods to keep the costs from being lowered too much and unable to make huge profits. It's the same in all areas of government. Control. But they should make it a law that we have to have
.... More
a license to have a family. More than one to a family (multiple births exempted)....should be only allowed IF they can afford to raise them.....too many teen moms out there and not enough RESPONSIBLE daddys!! Keep it zipped man.....and girls....keep your legs crossed until you can get married and afford a kid. Otherwise, the babies should be given to people who can't have them naturally and CAN afford them without being a burden to the taxpayers. That should keep you teens from profiting from hard working taxpayers for your illigetimate babies.
James
Jul 26 2011 at 3:41 AM
That entire GM food part is crap. Contrary to the common far-left conspiracy, biochemical engineering isn't conducted in a dark room by 12 paraplegic monkeys. Biochem engineers understand the risks far better than anyone else in the world. (The vast majority of)Scientists have a very strong set of ethics and won't go traipsing through the DNA of living creatures just to make a buck. The idea that using a specific gene from "bacteria and viruses" could cause corn to somehow bring about "super-polio"
.... More
is laughably absurd. In the process, the specific gene is isolated from the "bacteria or viruses" genetic code and used for a very narrowly defined objective. To create a disease requires a vast number of genes and I would challenge you to find a team of scientists willing to alter that many genes in a consumable product. And instead of generically labeling rice has bad, the focus should be placed on rice production. Yes, rice consumes a lot of resources but because it is incredible cheap, it is the stable crop of just about every third world country.We need to work on how to make the process more Eco-friendly, not eliminate its consumption as the article suggests. The only way we can possibly feed the world's population is with the use of rice and GM food. Now I know that the basic argument against that is "well obviously the world is vastly over populated". That is absolutely correct, The problem is I could never tell a third of the world's population "we've decided to go a different direction, sorry". Could anyone?
Annu
Jul 27 2011 at 9:57 AM
except for that it is scientifically clear that GMO causes infertility! can cause complete infertility within 2 generations!
http://www.examiner.com/modern-love-in-national/genetically-modified-foo...
Guest
Nov 06 2012 at 3:48 PM
This is a bunk trial and has been labeled as such by EVERY SINGLE scientist that has come across it. The truth is there has never EVER been an objective/repeatable study that has proved GMO food has a negative effect on its consumers. Period.
JR
Jul 26 2011 at 8:31 AM
As we refer to the "experts", we need to review what an "expert" is.
EX=has been
SPERT=small drip under pressure
Enough said! W7eEM
Sarah
Jul 25 2011 at 11:55 PM
I don't understand why some people consider this article to be stupid and false. Giant factory farms, CAFOs, destorying the rainforests, and using up the planet's fresh water ARE bad things. Sugar is bad for you and growing it is using up precious resources and destroying land that could be used to grow things that are good for you. High fructos corn syrup is bad for you. It's completely man made. GMOs are banned in other countries because of how dangerous they are. Even Mexico won't grow GMO
.... More
corn. This isn't some hippie crap made up by tree huggers. It's fact. You think it's the people who write these articles who are trying to control you? Then look into how much money the food industry spends to convince you to eat what they tell you to eat (and what not to eat -- fiber tastes like carboard unless it's covered in chocolate and veggies have to be hidden in sloppy joes or juice drinks). Look at the fact that the FDA, the Supreme Court, and the EPA all have top officials (or judges) that were previously employed by one of the largest seed/fertilizer companies and continuesly pass legislation in their favor.
Only people who eat processed crap for every meal would thing this article leaves them with nothing to eat. How about a vegetable? How about a fruit? And if you really want to cut the carbon footprint, eat seasonally. Most Americans don't even know what's in season anymore. Eat smaller fish like trout that reproduce more and live shorter life spans. Maybe even get outside and fish for your dinner yourself. Grow some tomatoes in your garden.
This article isn't really that radical. Movies like Food Inc., Food Matters, and the Future of Foods have been talking about this for a while.
Lucho
Jul 25 2011 at 10:10 PM
If this wasa test, I failed it. I actually think all 13 foods are wonderful! I guess I won't live long :( But wait! What am I saying! I am already 70! Maybe what it means is that i will not live another 70 years. I am sad again :( And Georgia Pacific. I'll remember your contribution to diseminating all this bllusiht next time I reach for a product and see you brand name!
Eugene
Jul 25 2011 at 5:38 PM
This article is a very broad view of the impact that "Global Food Production" has on the food supply. Living in Corpus Christi, Texas, I have access to several national food chain stores and several local food stores. We get many products from Mexico and Texas in our stores. We get produce from South America, and other states. We are paying for transportation every time we buy foods. The fresh foods are costly now because of fuel costs and the severe freezes that happened in Florida and other southern
.... More
states this past winter. So prices and quality have been affected by weather. Now we have a severe drought in Texas and the south. Food prices and quality will be a problem with this drought and heat. Many cattle producers are selling out because it is too costly to feed cattle in Texas now. Local producers have the same problems big producers have. The costs of production are high even in the best of times, in the worst of times, costs can put farmers out of business.
Everyone that is interested in eating well and staying healthy will always be looking to learn what is new. Many people manage to stay healthy because they do not abuse foods that can be harmful or habits that are harmful. Sometimes a small change can make a big difference in health.
In the book "Foods to Eat for Essential Nutrients", pictures of portion sizes for foods rich in essential nutrients are shown with calorie values and nutrients in the portions. The book has an index of all the foods so the reader can compare foods and find foods that are high in more than one or two nutrients. Almonds, avocadoes, salmon, tomatoes, corn, beef, chicken are just several of the foods in the book.
As a graduate student in college, we grew many plants including corn. None of them would grow without ALL the needed nutrients. So plants that were deficient in some nutrient did not grow and produce any crop. Therefore, people who say that crops are not as nutritious as they were are not understanding that the crops would not grow at all unless they are well nourished. The terms "organic" and "natural" should be taken with some degree of skepicism because some labels are very mimimal in meeting requirements for "organic" or "natural".
Buy foods that look green, plump, smell good, have a snap to them when they are broken, and taste good when they are prepared. Keep foods cool when transporting from the store. Use a cooler for the car trunk, if you shop in south Texas. Buy the best food, in season, and save money. Learn to choose foods that give you more for your money in value and nutrition.
audrey.weimar
Jul 25 2011 at 4:12 PM
tell me something, what is left to eat, and what if ur on a budget, then everyting on this list is going to be eaten, because its the cheapest, also, what if the local grown vegtables arent in ur are, lets say with in 15-20 miles, then u have to go and burn that much more gas to get these foods, because i know where im at there isnt any of the homegrown veggies and fruits other than oranges within that range. so if you really think about this its not really accurate when you figure in all the possibilites,
.... More
such as location of hte person, specific needs of the person, and income.
Sarah
Jul 26 2011 at 12:08 AM
The cheapest thing to do would be to grow your own veggies. Seeds are cheap, and many plants can be grown in hanging baskets or window planters. But I understand that not everyone has the time or the inclination to do it. Being on a budget can really limit access to fresh fruits and veggies, but don't you think that's kind of wrong? Why is a hamburger at McDonalds only a dollar? Why are horrible, processed foods so cheap? Because large corporations buy government subsidized foods for pennies
.... More
on the dollar. Why doesn't the government subsidize foods that are good for you? 1 in 3 kids today will develop diabetes. That number increases to 1 in 2 for lower income children whose parents can only afford to feed them foods that kill them.
Growing your own foods and raising your own animals is actually very cheap. Books like Animal, Vegetable, Miracle talk about the experience. It was very informative and I believe at the end the author stated she fed her family of four for less than a dollar a meal per person.
People need to remain informed...
Jul 25 2011 at 2:39 PM
If you don't agree with any of the information in this article, well, keep your head up there floating in the proverbial clouds.
People need to remain informed of things that pertain to their own health, and that of their families. That is what this article is trying to teach you. Get you interested in doing YOUR own research into what you put into your body, and how that affects the lives of those around you.
Would you intentionally drink ammonia??? Yet, it's used to "clean" the GM'd(genetically
.... More
modified) food that you eat. Yes, ammonia exists naturally in nature, but not the chemically processed type that is used to "clean, and sanitize" the foods you eat, against the mods that have taken place in them, or the way they were raised, grown, harvested, and such.... And the list goes on with these chemicals you would never take straight from the bottle, yet they are in our foods!!!!!
Every person should watch any documentary bout the foods we eat now. Quit being lazy, or afraid of the truth, THEN DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!
Nothing will change in the way food is produced until we voice our concerns, and do something about it ourselves! All the government is going to do is stay hand in hand with corporate America, where they get the $$$ to remain silent, look the other way, and let the companies that produce the GM'd food kill us off silently, all in the name of a $.
THE FIRST STEP IN CHANGE IS TO GET OFF YOUR BUTT AND DO SOMETHING ABOUT IT!!!!!
OMG...you mean we have to think for ourselves???
Jul 25 2011 at 2:53 PM
You make a valid point. People need to stay informed and educated, yet most would remain living with rose coloured glasses on. Fat, lazy, sick, and afraid of the truth is how many live. Yet when given an oppurtunity to change it all, they would rather whine about it, then actually doing something to implement the changes neccesary. Greed, overpopulation, laziness, have all contributed to these issues we face. Laziness because people would rather buy the stuff already made, packaged, cooked, etc,
.... More
than grow it, or cook it themselves. They think, nah, why grow a garden (for those that have the space) I would rather sit in front of a tv, on my butt, getting fat, than spend time out of doors, saving money, and living healthier is how most in our society thinks nowadays. even if you live in cramped tiny city apartments, you can grow some of your own food in container gardens in your home, year round! Get with it people, quit whining about it, and do something about it! Just because your probably out of school, does mean you shouldn't keep learning.
And in case you wonder where I get my info...
Jul 25 2011 at 2:58 PM
Here is a place to start, http://www.centerforfoodsafety.org/ for those of you that want to further your education on the matters, and stay informed.
Bobby
Jul 25 2011 at 1:40 PM
So ..... guess ill be starving now since basically everything on Earth is bad to eat! I hope people realize that this is a complete joke.
Chris
Jul 25 2011 at 1:24 PM
So this article pretty much covered everything except wheat bread and organic fruits and veggies. That sure sounds healthy and realistic (sarcasm)
Zeke199
Jul 25 2011 at 12:59 PM
This is completely bogus! There are not too many people on this planet! There are too many despotic dictators & elites who attempt to control people in anyway possible to them. There are sufficient resources to feed everyone here now and more!
Wars, forced poverty, and government rulers' greed limit food for people. As we lose our freedoms in the US & feed an increasing government, the same will happen to us unless the slide is stopped!
Articles like this play right into the hand of the
.... More
controlling dictators & elites by scaring people into thoughts & actions which limit their freedoms in life.
Yes, take care of the planet but don't worship it - worship God/Jesus who made the earth & universe. If everyone would follow Him our earth would be healed. However, that day will come only after the serious upheavals happen first. Read about it in the Bible, especially Revelation, John, & Ezekiel....
daryl
Jul 25 2011 at 12:59 PM
I do agree with you but even if 90% of consumers agree big money will not rest. look at nafta we all saw what it would do (at weast my freinds and I did). Big money is in bed with the goverment that bill or law whaterver. Was supported by both parties. I don't remember who was in to statt it seems like it was bush. So when clintion got in they proceded to push it through. It will be the same thing with what you deem bad for the planet. My thoughts for whatever there worth.
.... More
DARYL
WTH
Jul 25 2011 at 11:53 AM
then when they ban the food what will we eat,And the whole dam economy would crash! so WTH big time
1 Badass
Jul 25 2011 at 8:33 AM
I don't know if Ms Moss is a believer in this bunk or just the collector of this fiction. For most of my adult life say 45 years all I have seen from the U.N. has been costly controversy! Perhaps the tree huggers referenced in this article to deploy to these areas of the world and take a hands on approach to addressing their concerns. This supposed United Nations needs to be dismantled and shipped to some country that has a like agenda. We've for far too long financed this pulpit for terrorists and
.... More
communist-socialists to come to our shores and bite the hand that's feeding the majority of them. Get a grip people and put the responsibilities of governing these countries on the shoulders of those with the resources under their control. For the Al Gore,Hillary Clinton and her husband,Andy Stern,Trupka and yes Obama and his Mrs that wish to redistribute the wealth of the U.S. find another place to sell all of us in the U.S.down the river. They all seem to have and use far more resources for themselves and their families than any of the recipients on the United Nation's dole. They all talk a good game but when it comes to coming up with the cash it's always somebody else's. It's way past time we tell these millionaires to stay out of our pockets and start writing their own checks to whoever they want. Bill Clinton's stolen much more from Haiti than he ever gave, truth be told. It's not in his nature to give to anybody but himself...ask Hillary! Same goes for Gore,Stern and Trupka.They're very good at spending everybody else's money. The trait of true Commie Socialists!
Speak Out
Jul 25 2011 at 7:09 PM
So why are you still here sucking up all of the Earth's resources?
Guest
Jul 25 2011 at 1:52 PM
Dear Badass,
It is clear from what you write, that you know very little, more like next to nothing, about the UN. It was created by Western Nations, after the two brutal world wars they started shattered their quality of life, and maimed and killed MILLIONS of their own citizens.
The Atlantic Charter was the birth of the UN: The Atlantic Charter was a pivotal policy statement first issued in August 1941 that early in World War II defined the Allied goals for the post-war world. It was drafted by
.... More
the Britain and the United States. The Charter stated the goals: no territorial aggrandizement; no territorial changes made against the wishes of the people; restoration of self-government to those deprived of it; free access to raw materials; reduction of trade restrictions; global cooperation to secure better economic and social conditions for all; freedom from fear and want; freedom of the seas; abandonment of the use of force, disarmament of aggressor nations. In the "Declaration by United Nations" of 1 January 1942, the Allies of World War II pledged adherence to the charter's principles. They created the UN to save future generations from the scourge of wars they waged.
But even as the UN took up its mandate, another institution that the west had also birthed (1600's) called the "limited liability corporation", was surging forward empowered by the two world wars, engorged on the spoils of war (even corporations that made mere berets for soldiers' uniforms profited from the wars). If you read the USA Nye Comission's report (1931-32), USA Marine General Smedley Butler's writings, and President Eisenhower's departing speech, you might just conclude that these corporations had a great deal at stake in the wars from which they profited mightily, and grew in size and power. Learn this history The reality check that get my just make you respect the UN.
Guest
Jul 25 2011 at 1:52 PM
Dear Badass,
It is clear from what you write, that you know very little, more like next to nothing, about the UN. It was created by Western Nations, after the two brutal world wars they started shattered their quality of life, and maimed and killed MILLIONS of their own citizens.
The Atlantic Charter was the birth of the UN: The Atlantic Charter was a pivotal policy statement first issued in August 1941 that early in World War II defined the Allied goals for the post-war world. It was drafted by
.... More
the Britain and the United States. The Charter stated the goals: no territorial aggrandizement; no territorial changes made against the wishes of the people; restoration of self-government to those deprived of it; free access to raw materials; reduction of trade restrictions; global cooperation to secure better economic and social conditions for all; freedom from fear and want; freedom of the seas; abandonment of the use of force, disarmament of aggressor nations. In the "Declaration by United Nations" of 1 January 1942, the Allies of World War II pledged adherence to the charter's principles. They created the UN to save future generations from the scourge of wars they waged.
But even as the UN took up its mandate, another institution that the west had also birthed (1600's) called the "limited liability corporation", was surging forward empowered by the two world wars, engorged on the spoils of war (even corporations that made mere berets for soldiers' uniforms profited from the wars). If you read the USA Nye Comission's report (1931-32), USA Marine General Smedley Butler's writings, and President Eisenhower's departing speech, you might just conclude that these corporations had a great deal at stake in the wars from which they profited mightily, and grew in size and power. Learn this history The reality check that get my just make you respect the UN.
Guest
Jul 25 2011 at 1:52 PM
Dear Badass,
It is clear from what you write, that you know very little, more like next to nothing, about the UN. It was created by Western Nations, after the two brutal world wars they started shattered their quality of life, and maimed and killed MILLIONS of their own citizens.
The Atlantic Charter was the birth of the UN: The Atlantic Charter was a pivotal policy statement first issued in August 1941 that early in World War II defined the Allied goals for the post-war world. It was drafted by
.... More
the Britain and the United States. The Charter stated the goals: no territorial aggrandizement; no territorial changes made against the wishes of the people; restoration of self-government to those deprived of it; free access to raw materials; reduction of trade restrictions; global cooperation to secure better economic and social conditions for all; freedom from fear and want; freedom of the seas; abandonment of the use of force, disarmament of aggressor nations. In the "Declaration by United Nations" of 1 January 1942, the Allies of World War II pledged adherence to the charter's principles. They created the UN to save future generations from the scourge of wars they waged.
But even as the UN took up its mandate, another institution that the west had also birthed (1600's) called the "limited liability corporation", was surging forward empowered by the two world wars, engorged on the spoils of war (even corporations that made mere berets for soldiers' uniforms profited from the wars). If you read the USA Nye Comission's report (1931-32), USA Marine General Smedley Butler's writings, and President Eisenhower's departing speech, you might just conclude that these corporations had a great deal at stake in the wars from which they profited mightily, and grew in size and power. Learn this history The reality check that get my just make you respect the UN.
Dan
Jul 25 2011 at 7:44 AM
Never a shortage of "Experts" who want to tell you how to live, what to eat, and what to think..........I think "Experts" just may be bad for the planet
DubSG
Jul 25 2011 at 5:40 AM
The more I think about the human race the more that I see that we are just a plague on this planet, a nasty little infestation that has taken over and is determined to grow and grow and never be eradicated. Which leads me to my point that it doesn't matter what we do we will always undoubtedly be a hindrance to the survival of this and any other world on which we live.
Guest
Jul 25 2011 at 10:47 AM
Wow you sound like you are all about Eugenics ...Hitler was a fan of that too...people like you make me sick
Guest
Jul 25 2011 at 7:14 AM
Really? The Earth is in trouble? Not so much. This planet has has the atmosphere completely blown off multiple times. The magnetic poles switched. The entire continents have shifted. The Earth is fine and will be around long after we have faded to dust. The people are in trouble, but the planet is fine.
Guest
Jul 26 2011 at 10:29 AM
The reason they don't send contraceptives is the MEN REFUSE TO WEAR "a raincoat" because they can't "feel anything"... oh well...too darn bad, right? Then THEY should have vasectomies with doctors offering it for free to control the population and the women need to be educated as to when they are likely to get pregnant. Still, ignorance is considered bliss and they'll continue pro-creating and babies will die from starvation until Jesus comes.
Apryl
Jul 25 2011 at 1:16 AM
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the the universe." - Albert Einstein.
Truer words never spoken.
Hate this story
Jul 24 2011 at 11:53 PM
Then do we starve to death and diesel is right and I am whith him on what the writer did.And dont hippes dont even do any good to the planet whith their old vws
Enter your name
Jul 24 2011 at 11:46 PM
having read this thing, i have but one question:
is there anything that i can eat that wont harm the planet?
mysterypromise
Jul 24 2011 at 9:33 PM
The earth can handle how many people are on it, it just can't handle how people behave on it. There is sufficient land for people to live and grow food, but the elites of the planet won't allow it.
Speak Out
Jul 25 2011 at 7:06 PM
That's because of better health care. And now our government wants the U.S citizens to pay for everyone to have it! I'm really looking foward to working my butt off to pay healthcare for the person who doesn't want to work, draw welfare, and have more and more kids.
Speak Out
Jul 25 2011 at 7:05 PM
That's because of better health care. And now our government wants the U.S citizens to pay for everyone to have it! I'm really looking foward to working my butt off to pay healthcare for the person who doesn't want to work, draw welfare, and have more and more kids.
Hark Roads
Jul 24 2011 at 9:12 PM
He who knows not; and knows not that he knows not, is a fool; avoid him!
Lolo
Jul 24 2011 at 9:07 PM
Repeat...there are too many people. Why are poverty stricken people having so many children they can't feed? Why do so many educated people? Instead of food why don't caring organizations (who care about the earth and the pathetic, suffering people) send contraceptives?
Lolo
Jul 24 2011 at 9:07 PM
Repeat...there are too many people. Why are poverty stricken people having so many children they can't feed? Why do so many educated people? Instead of food why don't caring organizations (who care about the earth and the pathetic, suffering people) send contraceptives?
mike brooks
Jul 24 2011 at 7:39 PM
This caught my attention...I would not even comment if it was not the dumbest thing I have I have ever read...Believe me I have read some stupid material
djhnm
Jul 24 2011 at 6:51 PM
I agree with most of the list, but the main 'problem'(s) with rice, sugar and meat isn't the amount of water used, acreage used, grain used (to feed cattle)... it's that there are far too many people now, which causes way more demand for every one of these products, which in turn uses far more water/acreage/grain/etc. than it used to. (For those of you who don't know, we've gone from 2 billion to 7 billion in only about 90 years!).
Guest
Jul 24 2011 at 7:10 PM
You are correct the problem is people keep breeding like rats. It's time to stop all tax breaks for kids and charge the parents more for having the kids. No foreign aide to any country that's population is growing it's let them starve now or destroy the planet.
Diesel
Jul 24 2011 at 6:21 PM
WTH! You just listed ALL the foods that we eat everyday. Realistically if all these foods were to be banned, what will we eat, im not even gonna go on to the HUGE amount of people that will lose their jobs because they work in that field. The rice section alone is probably close to billions. Im sure after writing this at work, you go right across the street to burger king and order a triple stack with the largest drink n fries.
Tom Rinaldi
Jul 25 2011 at 8:35 AM
After writing what? It's just a bunch of pictures and no story. The so called experts don't even try to give you facts as to why they are bad. Sounds like writers who have run out of things to talk about.
tomcat9
Jul 24 2011 at 5:44 PM
The real fact is that HUMANS and their shenanigans are bad for the earth and the earth will be just fine once they destroy each other!
Flipper
Jul 24 2011 at 6:18 PM
Another predictable talking point from the radical environmentalists. Hey Tomcat, I assume that since you believe that humans are bad for everything, I take it that you won't have kids, right?
Foody
Jul 24 2011 at 5:41 PM
Its not the food that is bad. its the fact that there are too many people wanting to eat it.
Speak Out
Jul 25 2011 at 7:00 PM
And they want to criticize the people who are trying to produce enough to feed them on the land they are using up with subdivisions.
Enter your name
Jul 24 2011 at 5:24 PM
Why can't we see this on one page instead of going through many, many, pages to see some really dumb stuff to see one or two ideas worth considering. This is totally stupid.
eus
Jul 24 2011 at 5:14 PM
It's amazing there are so many experts yet little improves with these so called experts. No two experts agree on what is good for us let alone Mother Earth. I think if we use common since with what we put in the ground and in our bodies both would benefit. We are experimental rats and if you don't believe that, then look what is allowed in our food and medicines. Look at some of the Eurpean countries that have banned artificial sweetners etc., The FDA is not our friend!
Col. Hogan
Jul 24 2011 at 5:01 PM
The Earth is not your mother. It's just a big rock. Well before we use it up, we'll find others.
Patti Lou
Jul 24 2011 at 4:59 PM
Laughing at Gregg's comment
because I agreee the planet could care less
tony
Jul 24 2011 at 4:59 PM
sounds like we should eat the same things wild animals eat - locally growing grass, roots, berries, nuts, and the occasional raw, freshly killed rabbit or squirrel. yum!
Sustainable Urban Development
Jul 20 2011 at 10:54 AM
This is a great article. I had no idea that things such as rice and sugar were a problem for the environment. Thanks for the info.
kenf
Jun 25 2011 at 5:58 PM
Rice, Palm Oil, Meat... that's covering a lot of ground. throw in there no local foods and we're pretty much screwed. Any suggestions of what we can eat?
Eat a planet-friendly diet
You know what foods are bad for you, and you know you should eat them in moderation to stay healthy. However, there are also many foods that are bad for the Earth's health. Check out these 12 foods that are hurting the environment and learn how you can eat a more planet-friendly diet. (Text: Laura Moss)
Advertisement
Advertisement
From our sponsor
Email
Join the conversation