Welcome to Motorhomefacts, we are a thriving motorhome community (Largest in Europe). Why Not JOIN NOW and get instant access to more of the website. It costs nothing to join and only takes a few minutes. We have 200,000 different people visiting our site monthly and this amount of motorhomers in one place guarantees a fast response to any questions you may have. We also have unique facilities not found elsewhere such as our Online Logbook, stopover tracker, Motorhome directory with Ebay type feedback and the largest repository of motorhome campsites reviews found anywhere
Its complicated and there are millions of different theories, food combining, raw food diets.
I, along with many others have believed the food industry to be corrupt for many years, the cocktail of chemicals is unbelievable which is used, just look on the packets for the ingredients, so many chemicals and although these are said to be safe on their own no one has really studied what happens when you mix huge quantities together and consume them.
I eat a lot of pumpkin seeds, sunflower seeds, almonds, brazils, walnuts, flax oil, hemp oil, evening primrose oil, raw garlic, sweet poato, millet, lentils, aduki beans, mung beans, seaweed, oats, avocados, mackerel, herring,salmon(not farmed), soya milk. lemons, water melon, some meat(not processed) we have a lot of venison in the freezer. If you eat well 90% of the time then you can eat a little junk for the remainder, chips etc.
Now lets stick to badgers but you did ask. ( I dont want to follow my mother, father and sister who all succumbed to cancer early)
If this is the answer Dave surely an interim measure would be to add it to the licks and trial it before spraying it all over the land?
I do not KNOW what the answer is (I barely even know what the question is )
My point is a simple one - if there is evidence that such a course has proved effective (which there is, apochryphal as it is since it is only comes from a VERY small number of possibly linked reports). then there is a duty and responsibility on "those at the top" whether they be the Chief Scientist or the Minister of whichever Government happens to be in power at the time, to investigate such reports through a scientific trial of proven quality i.e. not one that is sponsored, paid for and conducted by the company producing the mineral additions...... (such a sponsorship renders the trial invalid as it cannot be impartial)
Glandwr wrote:
I was thinking earlier that although to the satisfaction of many the link between smoking and cancer was established in the late 50s early 60s. Experts and scientists however where at hand to cast doubt on it until was it the late eighties? Dick
because of the way science works with control experiments and the like, even what we think of as such a well established fact is only a very strong correlation, it is NOT PROOF - as the tobacco manufacturers are keen to point out in the various court appearances where they have been acquitted as not guilty of causing lung cancer, emphysema, bronchitis, heart disease, vascular failure and so on.....
(Sounds daft doesn't it!)
coppo wrote:
... about cows milk not been fit for humans, it is meant for young cows, the molecules are too large for humans to digest and is the reason i have not drunk any cows milk for about 20 years.
Totally true, human babies CANNOT digest cows milk as the protein molecules are not broken down by the enzyme present in the baby's gut. Before it can be supplied for babies (as formula milk) it has to be chemically broken down into smaller proteins that human babies CAN digest - but even then not brilliantly as any Mum will tell you when they wean from breast to bottle and finds the consistency of the nappy changes considerably!
Babies and young animals only produce lactase (the enzyme that breaks down lactose in milk into simple sugars for absorption) for a limited time.....in most children in diminishes from about age 2 - 5 - about the time of weaning and in some cases stops completely. Most adults only produce about 10% of the amount that a child would have and many produce none at all. This leads to an inability to break down the sugar lactose and can lead to lactose intolerance - which can be the cause of severe gastric upset!
So yes, I very much agree with what coppo has contributed - all organisms in a habitat have a particular role, even if we cannot work out what it is at the time! (Crane flies and wasps are two that many people question as to what good they do - even though they are good food sources for other animals e.g. spiders, hover flies, dragonflies all enjoy wasps).
That is the problem when man (in his infinite wisdom) interferes with the natural environment. Culling badgers WILL have an effect on the index of diversity for that area and may well be very bad news as other animals will proliferate and may well cause other worse damage.
That is why any such trial MUST be organised and conducted by scientists NOT politicians and must be vigorously peer reviewed BEFORE they are carried out - to prevent more, man-made disasters.
If this is the answer Dave surely an interim measure would be to add it to the licks and trial it before spraying it all over the land?
I do not KNOW what the answer is (I barely even know what the question is )
My point is a simple one - if there is evidence that such a course has proved effective (which there is, apochryphal as it is since it is only comes from a VERY small number of possibly linked reports). then there is a duty and responsibility on "those at the top" whether they be the Chief Scientist or the Minister of whichever Government happens to be in power at the time, to investigate such reports through a scientific trial of proven quality i.e. not one that is sponsored, paid for and conducted by the company producing the mineral additions...... (such a sponsorship renders the trial invalid as it cannot be impartial)
Glandwr wrote:
I was thinking earlier that although to the satisfaction of many the link between smoking and cancer was established in the late 50s early 60s. Experts and scientists however where at hand to cast doubt on it until was it the late eighties? Dick
because of the way science works with control experiments and the like, even what we think of as such a well established fact is only a very strong correlation, it is NOT PROOF - as the tobacco manufacturers are keen to point out in the various court appearances where they have been acquitted as not guilty of causing lung cancer, emphysema, bronchitis, heart disease, vascular failure and so on.....
(Sounds daft doesn't it!)
coppo wrote:
... about cows milk not been fit for humans, it is meant for young cows, the molecules are too large for humans to digest and is the reason i have not drunk any cows milk for about 20 years.
Totally true, human babies CANNOT digest cows milk as the protein molecules are not broken down by the enzyme present in the baby's gut. Before it can be supplied for babies (as formula milk) it has to be chemically broken down into smaller proteins that human babies CAN digest - but even then not brilliantly as any Mum will tell you when they wean from breast to bottle and finds the consistency of the nappy changes considerably!
Babies and young animals only produce lactase (the enzyme that breaks down lactose in milk into simple sugars for absorption) for a limited time.....in most children in diminishes from about age 2 - 5 - about the time of weaning and in some cases stops completely. Most adults only produce about 10% of the amount that a child would have and many produce none at all. This leads to an inability to break down the sugar lactose and can lead to lactose intolerance - which can be the cause of severe gastric upset!
So yes, I very much agree with what coppo has contributed - all organisms in a habitat have a particular role, even if we cannot work out what it is at the time! (Crane flies and wasps are two that many people question as to what good they do - even though they are good food sources for other animals e.g. spiders, hover flies, dragonflies all enjoy wasps).
That is the problem when man (in his infinite wisdom) interferes with the natural environment. Culling badgers WILL have an effect on the index of diversity for that area and may well be very bad news as other animals will proliferate and may well cause other worse damage.
That is why any such trial MUST be organised and conducted by scientists NOT politicians and must be vigorously peer reviewed BEFORE they are carried out - to prevent more, man-made disasters.
Dave
Now i,m in total agreement with your thoughts Dave. BUT, can we really trust a trial to be carried out in such an independent way knowing the enormity of what could conclude from it.
...... BUT, can we really trust a trial to be carried out in such an independent way knowing the enormity of what could conclude from it. Paul.
That is the biggest challenge that must be faced. There are a VERY large number of independent scientists of proven reliability and honesty. These should be sought to design, check and run such trials to identify how TB is being spread.
The Government appoints eminent lawyers or peers to carry out reviews into e.g. the Irag War, Phone Hacking, the way the Press works and so on. It should be the same process but for some reason it is NOT.
That is not just the present Coalition but ALL Governments; science is used as a tool to give them the backing they want. If the science does not deliver what the politicians want then the scientists involved are removed from power (remember the controversy over the way that Alan Johnson sacked Professor David Nutt from being the chairman of the Advisory Committee on the Misuse of Drugs after Nutt had accused ministers of "devaluing and distorting" the scientific evidence over illicit drugs by their decision to reclassify cannabis from class C to class B against the advice of the ACMD.)
So do I have confidence that the trials will be properly run?
Sadly the answer is a resounding "NO" however essential such trials are to work out the cause.
“As a nature lover I am disgusted by the rat cull which begins in August in 2 locations.
Even some of the scientists are against it saying it will be ineffective and will not make any difference.
Rats were here long beforehumans, it makes my blood boil as a nature lover and makes it easier forhumansto blame something for Plague outbreaks. There is no justification for it.
Just imagine if the Plague rate goes down in the 2 cull areas, what next, a nationwide cull?
It makes you want to join an animal rights group and protest, is there any point writing to someone?
Poor, beautiful, innocent animal (rat) gets the blame again.”
By simple changing the animal I am sure you will see that all of this depends on an individual’s perception of the creatures involved.
Consider this. When you have nurtured your baby (calf) into an adult only to have it destroyed due to an illness that someone may be able to eradicate perhaps a different perspective can be seen?
Think on this…
My neighbour complains when the bird of prey takes the blackbird but never complains when the blackbird takes the worm!
Sorry if this upsets anyone, it’s just how I see nature and survival of the fittest.
“As a nature lover I am disgusted by the rat cull which begins in August in 2 locations.
Even some of the scientists are against it saying it will be ineffective and will not make any difference.
Rats were here long beforehumans, it makes my blood boil as a nature lover and makes it easier forhumansto blame something for Plague outbreaks. There is no justification for it.
Just imagine if the Plague rate goes down in the 2 cull areas, what next, a nationwide cull?
It makes you want to join an animal rights group and protest, is there any point writing to someone?
Poor, beautiful, innocent animal (rat) gets the blame again.”
By simple changing the animal I am sure you will see that all of this depends on an individual’s perception of the creatures involved.
Consider this. When you have nurtured your baby (calf) into an adult only to have it destroyed due to an illness that someone may be able to eradicate perhaps a different perspective can be seen?
Think on this…
My neighbour complains when the bird of prey takes the blackbird but never complains when the blackbird takes the worm!
Sorry if this upsets anyone, it’s just how I see nature and survival of the fittest.
I,ve never read so much rubbish, have you not read the whole thread
I/We/Some are talking about mans interference with the delicate balance of nature and how it will not work longterm, you have got to understand how the eco system works and obviously you and your neighbour do not.
I/We/Some are talking about mans interference with the delicate balance of nature and how it will not work longterm, you have got to understand how the eco system works and obviously you and your neighbour do not.
What delicate balance of nature is that then? For 1000s of years badgers have been hunted by man and beast. The predator beasts have now been extinct for centuries and man no longer takes badgers in anything like the numbers he used to. That was the delicate balance of nature. The eco system is currently out of line.
______________________________________________________________ Satisfied now I´ve gotten rid of my Marquis supplied Autocruise- both were rubbish!
Fully agree with rod vw, none of us would live the lives we do (or even exist) if man had not interfered with nature. Man is also part of nature.
I think many posters are suffering from the 'fluffy bunny' syndrome, there was a very good article in last Thursday's Independent about the very real correlation between the large increase in the number of badgers to the huge decline in the hedgehog population. 30 million in the 1950's down to 1 million today. Of course there are other factors involved mostly involving man but I for one would like to see more hedgehogs even at the expense of badgers that cause damage in other ways besides being carriers of bovine TB.
Man has always and always will interfere in nature, what we have now is a product of man's interfrerence in the past and not usually to the benefit of everyone.
only came on here to reply to the poster who said we should have a cull of farmers .... well there was , over the last 10 years.... !!!!! .... i am a farmer in dorset were there is a terrible problem with tb ,,, i have been shut down for the last 10 months ,, and am a great lover of nature , so i am in the middle , the goverment are to blame here for putting the protected act on the badgers in the 70s , a controlled population is all ways going to be better than an over exploded 1 , and now we have ended up in this situation .... i see badgers most months mooching about, i have never seen or spoke to any 1 who has seen an infected badger , but i am told the males walk for miles when breeding , and cld be the possible carriers, who knows,,,, no tests or anything are carried out on the badgers, that are near to the farm , which i find strange ,..... but hey ho , its a shitty old world at times ..... just for the record , i dont want to see a cull , but we do need something done , its a complete nitemare being shut down ..... all my cows are reared from calves and are like pets , its a very sad situation......soz for all the waffle , just needed, wanted, to say something from reading all above .
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum You cannot attach files in this forum You cannot download files in this forum
All times are GMT + 1 Hour Page 10 of 11Goto page : Previous1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11Next
UK
but you did ask. ( I dont want to follow my mother, father and sister who all succumbed to cancer early)
)
