(Mercola)—Last year the Weston A. Price Foundation launched its 50% Campaign, urging consumers to purchase at least 50% of their food directly from farmers and artisan processors.

This helps build a local food system, creates food security and ensures prosperity for our farmers. But there are many other reasons to avoid industrial meat and obtain the animal products you need directly from a farmer you know.

Most Chickens Are Fed Arsenic-Containing Feed

ARSENIC: Did you know that 70% of chickens in the U.S. receive feed containing arsenic? The FDA allows an arsenic-based drug called nitarsone in chicken feed. Arsenic-containing compounds were first approved for commercial use in medicated animal feed in the 1940s in order to promote faster growth in poultry and increased feed efficiency — in other words, the chickens get fatter without eating as much.

The poultry industry claims that the arsenic fed to their birds has no adverse health effects on the consumer because the kind of arsenic used in feed additives is “organic” arsenic. However, recent studies have found that organic arsenic has the ability to convert to inorganic arsenic in animal tissue, the animal tissue that you eat.

Even if the arsenic remains in organic form, it may have the same effect on people that it has on chickens — causing them to gain weight even when eating less.¹

Diseased Chickens Approved for Slaughter and Consumption

DISEASE: In July of 2020, the USDA accepted a petition from the National Chicken Council to allow slaughterhouses to process birds infected with avian leukosis. The infection causes a condition similar to cancer, leading to malignant tumors and lesions. Whether the condition can be passed on to humans is unclear, but eating diseased chicken does not seem like a good thing to do under any circumstances.²

MYCOTOXINS: A 2019 study of one thousand conventional corn samples found that 92% were contaminated with one or more mycotoxins. These fungal poisons can cause breathing problems, lung inflammation, fever and burning sensations, and serious conditions like cancer, fibromyalgia, heart problems, and lupus — and even mental deficiencies.

If they are in the animal feed, they’ll end up in the muscles of the animals. Make sure your farmer is using organic feed or, even better, avoiding corn altogether.³

Risky Drug Allowed in Pig Farming

RACTOPAMINE: This drug, mostly given to pigs, promotes lean muscle growth (at the expense of fat). Due to safety concerns, about one hundred sixty nations ban or restrict the use of this drug, including Russia, China and all countries in the European Union. But in the U.S., an estimated 60% to 80% of pigs receive ractopamine in their feed.

Ractopamine belongs to a class of drugs called beta-agonists, which were developed to treat asthma. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved ractopamine for use on pigs after just one human health study — an evaluation of six young, healthy men, one of whom dropped out because his heart began racing and pounding abnormally.

In addition to cardiovascular effects, ractopamine has been linked behavioral changes, and nervousness in humans and pigs. Babies born to rats fed ractopamine developed cleft palates, protruding tongues, short limbs, missing digits, open eyelids and enlarged hearts. In pigs, ractopamine causes them to collapse and become “downers,” that is, animals too sick or injured to walk.⁴

Estrogenic Compounds and Antibiotics Show Up in Meat

SOY ISOFLAVONES: These estrogen-like compounds will show up in the meat, milk and eggs of animals fed soy — which means any animal raised in the industrial system. Best to find a farmer who uses no soy at all — but at least pasture feeding will reduce the amount of soy that animals like chickens, pigs and dairy cows receive. Pastured beef production requires neither corn nor soy.

ANTIBIOTICS: Livestock (cows, pigs, chicken and even fish) receive antibiotics, not only to treat or prevent illness, but also to encourage rapid growth. Of course, people ingest these drugs when they eat antibiotic-treated meat, eggs and milk, with the now well-known result of antibiotic resistance — not to mention disruption of gut flora.

Worldwide, an estimated 73% of antibiotics are consumed by farm animals; global antibiotic use is estimated to increase 67% from 2010 to 2030. Europe banned the use of antibiotics for growth promotion purposes in 2006, and the use of sub-therapeutic doses of medically important antibiotics in animal feed and water to promote growth and improve feed efficiency became illegal in the United States in 2017.⁵

However, use of antibiotics in animal feed is huge in developing countries, especially China, and since we don’t yet have Country of Origin (COO) labeling, it’s hard to avoid such antibiotic-laced products when you buy your animal foods in the supermarket. Federal law forbids the use of antibiotics in dairy cows, but the test used to detect antibiotics (called the SNAP test) only picks up about five of more than two dozen antibiotics in use.⁶

Toxic Load From Meat, Eggs and Dairy Can Be Quite High

Since in America we tend to eat animal foods every day, the load of toxins from supermarket meat, eggs and dairy products can be very high and the effects profound, especially in growing children.

The solution? Purchase your meat, eggs and dairy products directly from a local farmer, one who practices pasture feeding and who uses non-medicated feed (preferably soy-free). In the process of protecting your family, you will also be supporting independent, conscientious farmers and a robust local economy.

About the Author

Sally Fallon Morell is author of the best-selling cookbook “Nourishing Traditions” and many other books on diet and health. She is the founding president of the Weston A. Price Foundation (westonaprice.org) and a founder of A Campaign for Real Milk (realmilk.com). Visit her blog at nourishingtraditions.com.

• ¹ PBS SoCal, October 9, 2013, FDA Finally Bans Most Arsenic in Chicken Feed — Oh, By the Way, There’s Arsenic in Your Chicken
• ² Eat This, Not That! August 19, 2020, New USDA Ruling Allows for Chicken to Be Produced From Diseased Birds
• ³ Probio, Multiple Mycotoxins Detected in Corn Samples Collected From Five Continents (Archived)
• ⁴ Live Science, July 26, 2014, Banned in 160 Nations, Why is Ractopamine in U.S. Pork? (Op-Ed)
• ⁵ Wikipedia, Antibiotic use in livestock
• ⁶ afsca, Recent developments in antibiotics screening tests (Archived)

Small farmers are under attack in the state of Oregon, which has started shutting down family farms throughout the Beaver State under the pretense of water conservation and groundwater protection. (Related: ENGINEERED FAMINE: Oregon starts SHUTTING DOWN small farms “to protect the people.”)

The owner of Yanasa Ama Ranch shared a 20-minute video from Yanasa TV explaining what is happening in Oregon as bureaucrats mistakenly classify small family farms and homesteads as “concentrated animal feeding operations,” or CAFOs, to shut them down “for the environment.”

Any feeding area that has a concrete, rock or gravel floor falls into this classification, which could include small dairy or egg farms.

The rancher added that if a farmer has two or three milking cows, they are now targeted by the state for closure.

“The state of Oregon has effectively shut down small farms and market gardens on a large scale, and they’re actually sending out cease-and-desist letters to farms and they’re using satellite technology to find their victims and send them these letters that say you can’t operate,” the rancher explained in the video.

The rancher stated that there are two different laws that Oregon officials are using to carry out these shutdowns. And one of the laws includes Oregon’s widely unclear definition of a CAFO, which reads, in part, as follows:

“The State of Oregon defines CAFOs as the concentrated feeding or holding of animals or poultry, including but not limited to horse, cattle, sheep, or swine feeding areas, dairy confinement areas, and poultry and egg production facilities where the surface has been prepared with concrete, rock or fibrous material to support animals in wet weather.”

According to this definition, a few-acre homestead with pasture and let’s say two milking cows and some chickens qualifies as a CAFO if it has any area on the property where rock or gravel is used as a route to get to a small barn or coop.

“The way that they have redefined CAFOs is going to impact nearly everybody. Even on our property, we don’t have animals that are necessarily contained in one area (they’re roaming on pastures),” the rancher warned about Oregon’s “updated” CAFO definition.

Small family farms throughout Oregon have filed a lawsuit against the state’s updated CAFO law

A lawsuit was filed in January this year on behalf of small family farms throughout Oregon, claiming that the definition of a CAFO is too wide and negatively affects almost anybody who produces eggs from backyard chickens, no matter the size of their property.

According to the National Review, Oregon’s government “joined forces” with the massive dairy industry to crush and suppress Oregon’s small farmers.

“This law is being enforced in the state of Oregon,” the rancher said, sharing the same story as National Review about Godspeed Hollow Farm in Newburg, Oregon, which has been recategorized as a CAFO for the simple reason that it has a gravel pathway from the milking machine to the pickup station just 100 feet in distance.

“[Oregon] has already shut down some farms. There is an injunction on some of the definitions of the law until it can be heard in court. Currently, small dairy farmers … a lot of what they’re requiring is simply too much for the small farmer.”

Another issue that Oregon farmers have to contend with is the state’s rules on water.

The only water that farmers are legally permitted to collect in Oregon is rainwater while all other things, including water from rivers and streams, in addition to groundwater on private property, are deemed a public resource.

Due to this rule, Oregon farmers are not even permitted to utilize water from their private wells to water their crops and hydrate their animals without a permit.

Together with the CAFO rule, this one concerning water use is being abused in this manner as to make it restrictive, if not impossible, for farmers to manage their farms.

“This rule went into place back in 2021,” the rancher stated about how Oregon officials passed the water rule, which just so happens to have occurred at a period when everybody was being troubled and shocked by Wuhan coronavirus (COVID-19) “pandemic” tyranny.

“It has slowly rolled out to the point where market gardeners on a half-acre of land are now receiving cease-and-desist orders saying, ‘you can’t water your gardens; figure out another way,'” the rancher added.

The apparent goal of this is to centralize power and control over the food market into the hands of a moneyed elite while denying small farmers their livelihoods and incomes in addition to their God-given right to grow, produce, consume and sell the fruit of their work.

If this sort of thing can occur in Oregon, it can happen everywhere in America.

Follow FoodFreedom.news for more stories about the food war going on against farmers. Watch Dr. Jordan Peterson explain why governments are attacking farmers.

&

This video is from the GalacticStorm channel on Brighteon.com.

More related stories:

• The globalist plan to eliminate all farms: No more food, no more humans.
• Green cult destroying farmland to reduce population – that’s what going “carbon zero” actually means.
• Researcher Sandi Adams: The so-called “food transition” is just a war on farmers to control the global food supply.

Sources include:

• ClimateDepot.com
• KleanIndustries.com

(Natural News)—EU government officials recently convened with food security experts to devise a plan to handle a potential food crisis. The question no longer appears to be whether such a scenario will come to pass but rather how soon Europeans can expect it.

The possibility that Europe might experience a major food crisis has become so likely that 60 EU and government officials gathered to carry out a simulation of what could occur and work on policies that can help respond to such a crisis. With videos depicting floods, droughts and civil unrest to drive home what is at stake, experts were warned to “expect a level of chaos.”

We are seeing signs of an impending food crisis around the world, with a series of geopolitical and weather events all piling up to create the perfect storm for a major food crisis. For example, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, Israel’s war on Gaza and the coronavirus pandemic have caused disruptions to crucial shipping routes that have sent food prices through the roof and impacted supply chains. Meanwhile, extreme and unpredictable weather has been having a big effect on farming and crop yields, from droughts in the Mediterranean to weather patterns impacting soy output in Latin America.

As part of their simulations, the government officials envisioned a scenario where there are numerous harvest failures in 2025 that affect the prices of animal feed, stunting the production of livestock and fish, while ships bringing crops eschew Europe in favor of higher bidders in other parts of the world. At the same time, limits on palm oil exports in Asia could reduce the supplies of a range of daily staples, including bread.

The simulation also noted how such a scenario could sow civil unrest, particularly as hungry and fed-up Europeans push back against corporate greed. Eventually, they envisioned thieves starting to loot supermarkets later in 2025, with police struggling to keep rioters under control, livestock farmers going bankrupt and German shoppers unable to find meat or fish in grocery stores.

How do they envision getting out of such a scenario? They used role-playing activities to workshop policies related to building reserves of food, crisis management and food provision. Their activities also raised some important questions, such as how to reduce Europe’s over-reliance on crop imports such as soy for feeding the dairy and meat industry.

Europe’s food security is on a dangerous downward trend

Centre for Systems Solutions Science Director Piotr Magnuszewski pointed out that government-led exercises like this one are very uncommon, particularly when it comes to topics such as food. Indeed, Europe has long been considered one of the world’s biggest supplier of foods ranging from olive oil and pork to dairy and grains, while enjoying some of the world’s lowest levels of food insecurity.

The Global Food Security Index has long ranked European nations among the world’s most secure when it comes to food, and the percentage of household spending devoted to food is relatively low compared to other nations. For example, in 2021, only 14 percent of household spending there went to food, compared to 40 percent in Egypt and 60 percent in Nigeria.

However, its position as a relatively food-secure part of the world is now in doubt as weather and climate events cost Europe more than $54 billion in economic losses in 2022. Meanwhile, the costs associated with the energy and fertilizers needed to grow crops have been skyrocketing since Russia invaded Ukraine.

One of the workshop’s organizers, retired U.S. diplomat Chris Hegadorn, warned that few European governments are prepared to manage a future food crisis. He said: “There’s a lot more to be done on every level. Crises are only going to come faster and harder.”

Sources for this article include:

• Bloomberg.com
• Bloomberg.com

(Mercola)—The short video above features three American biodynamic farmers who supply the raw materials that go into our biodynamic product line. The first is Justin Trussoni, president of Fifth Season Cooperative in Viroqua, Wisconsin. Trussoni grows biodynamic hemp and vegetables.

The second is Cecil Wright, a biodynamic maple farmer and founder of the Maple Valley Co-op. The third is Brian Wickert, vice president of Fifth Season Cooperative. He’s been growing biodynamic vegetables and herbs since 1997. Wickert is also the primary formulator of the biodynamic soil preparations used by other biodynamic growers.

As noted by Wickert, my biodynamic brand, Solspring,¹ now has one of the largest assortments of biodynamic products of any company in the world. We offer more than 70 Demeter certified biodynamic pantry staples, from snacks and spreads, to coffees and teas, and that’s in no small part thanks to our partnership with growers like Wickert, Wright and Trussoni, who put their hearts and souls into their work.

What Is Biodynamic?

Biodynamic agriculture is a spiritual-ethical-ecological approach to agriculture, initially developed by Austrian scholar Rudolf Steiner,² Ph.D., (1861-1925). Today, it meets both organic and regenerative certification standards, and then some.

Biodynamic farming provides superior crops both in volume and increased density of nutrients. Biodynamic farms are also completely self-sustaining — something that cannot be said even for most organic farms. For example, biodynamic standards do not simply require farmers to use organic animal feed. Most of the feed must actually originate from the farm itself.

And, while an organic farmer can section off as little as 10% of the farm for the growing of certified organic goods, 100% of a biodynamic farm must be in compliance with biodynamic standards to qualify for certification.

In addition to that, 10% of the land must also be dedicated to increasing biodiversity. This could take the form of forest land, wetland or insectary, for example. Biodynamic farming also has all of the features associated with regenerative agriculture, such as crop rotation, the use of cover crops and so on.

Having animals integrated on the farm, with a focus on animal welfare, is another core principle of biodynamic farming. In short, the farm is viewed as a living, self-sustainable whole, and biodiversity of both plants and animals are integral parts of that.

In my view, this is really as good as it gets, and buying foods produced by farms certified as biodynamic through Demeter offers the greatest assurance of food quality and environmental sustainability.

If you want to take a deeper dive into the biodynamic principles pioneered by Steiner, check out Jonathan Stedall’s documentary “The Challenge of Rudolf Steiner,” below. It’s also available on Amazon Prime Video.

The Need for Regenerative Agriculture Has Never Been Greater

Modern chemical-based agriculture has resulted in the destruction of rural economies, water and air pollution, depletion of aquifers, destruction of pollinators and biodiversity, soil erosion and loss of soil fertility, climate destabilization, food contamination, nutrient degradation and the deterioration of public health.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,³ 6 in 10 American adults now have a chronic disease; 4 in 10 have two or more, and one of the primary reasons for that is poor nutrition.

The most recent government data⁴ back that up, showing that 45% of Americans do not meet the daily requirements for vitamin A, 46% don’t get enough vitamin C, 95% fall short of their vitamin D requirement, 84% don’t get enough vitamin E, and 15% don’t get enough zinc. Any one of these deficiencies can spell trouble. As noted by the authors:⁵

“A well-functioning immune system is essential for human health and well-being. Micronutrients such as vitamins A, C, D, E, and zinc have several functions throughout the immune system, yet inadequate nutrient intakes are pervasive in the US population.

A large body of research shows that nutrient inadequacies can impair immune function and weaken the immune response … Dietary supplements can help address nutrient inadequacy for these immune-support nutrients …

Given the long-term presence and widening of nutrient gaps in the U.S. — specifically in critical nutrients that support immune health — public health measures should adopt guidelines to ensure an adequate intake of these micronutrients.”

Sad to say, I don’t think that will happen, because even if you consume the recommended amount of fruits and vegetables, you’ll still fall short of nutritional requirements for the simple reason that today’s conventionally-grown produce contain far fewer nutrients than their counterparts 50 years ago.⁶

The reason for this is because plants get their nutrients from the soil, and if the soil is depleted of nutrients, the fruits, veggies and herbs will contain lower amounts as well.

Factory farmed, GMO grain-fed meat, eggs and dairy also typically contain lower levels of omega-3s, vitamin E, beta-carotene, antioxidants and conjugated linoleic acid (CLA) than 100% grass fed and biodynamically-raised animal products.

Research⁷ has consistently shown that organic foods contain significantly higher amounts of antioxidants, especially in no-till regenerative systems,⁸ and an antioxidant-rich diet is associated with reduced risks for chronic diseases, including heart and brain disease and certain cancers.

And again, biodynamic is organic on steroids, so it stands to reason that biodynamic foods might be even more nutritious than certified organic, primarily because so much of the focus is on optimizing the soil.

An Agricultural U-Turn Is Necessary

Food security is no longer a given, even if you have plenty of available land, and here’s why:

• Groundwater depletion is accelerating.⁹
• Water pollution is worsening — Precious water sources are also threatened by pollution from large-scale monocrop farms and concentrated animal feeding operations.¹⁰ According to a report¹¹ by Environment America, corporate agribusiness is one of the biggest threats to America’s waterways.
• Soil erosion and degradation is rapidly worsening — Twelve years ago, in 2012, University of Sydney professor John Crawford noted that 40% of agricultural soils around the globe were already classified as degraded or seriously degraded.¹² In large part due to conventional farming methods, topsoil is also being lost 10 to 40 times faster than nature can regenerate and replenish it naturally.^13,14
• Desertification is speeding up — Land is turning into desert at a rapid clip and, with it, we’re losing biodiversity of both plant and animal life.

Biodynamic Agriculture Is the Answer Everyone’s Looking For

The good news is that biodynamic farming addresses all of these problems and more. We just need to get a larger segment of agriculture to make the transition. Our decision to partner with Maple Valley Co-op and Fifth Season Cooperative is just one small part of the effort to expand and normalize that niche. Expanding the demand by buying biodynamic products is how you can help in that effort. As noted by Wickert, reasons to buy biodynamic food include:

• It’s more nutritious, so you don’t need to eat as much
• It has longer shelf-life than conventional produce
• Biodynamic supply chains engage in association economics, making sure everyone in the supply chain, from the bottom to the top, is able to make a decent living

I hope you’ve enjoyed this little “sneak peak” into the biodynamic farms that are part of our brand. Knowing who your farmers are, where your food comes from, how it’s grown and according to which principles — these are all important aspects of a truly healthy lifestyle.

So, get to know your local farmers. Talk to them. Visit their farms. Most will be happy to show you around and discuss their processes. Organic, regenerative and biodynamic farmers tend to be extremely passionate about their work and most will embrace the opportunity to educate consumers about what sets them apart.

• ¹ Solspring
• ² Biodynamic Association, Rudolf Steiner Bio
• ³ CDC Chronic Diseases in America
• ^4, 5 Nutrients June 2020; 12(6): 1735
• ⁶ Rodale Institute Nutrient Density
• ⁷ McCarrison Society. Healthy Soils, Healthy People
• ⁸ White Paper March 2015/2016
• ⁹ Nature 2024; 625: 715-721
• ¹⁰ CDC.gov, Understanding CAFOs and Their Impact on Communities (PDF)
• ¹¹ Environment America June 29, 2016
• ¹² Time Magazine December 14, 2012
• ¹³ FEWresources.org Losing Ground (Archived)
• ¹⁴ Scholar Archive, Environment, Development and Sustainability 2006; 8: 119-137 (PDF) (Archived)

The warning shots of this showdown between policymakers and farmers had already been fired on 1st October 2019, when more than 2,000 Dutch tractors caused traffic mayhem in the Netherlands in response to an announcement that livestock farms would have to be bought out and shut down to reduce nitrogen emissions. Early last year, Polish farmers blocked the border with the Ukraine demanding the re-imposition of tariffs on Ukrainean grain.

But it was not until early this year that an EU-wide protest was ignited. German and French protests and tractor blockades made international news, and the blockades were soon replicated in Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Greece, Netherlands, and Ireland. Major highways and ports were blocked and manure was poured over government buildings, as farmers across Europe expressed their frustration at rising farming costs, falling prices for their produce, and crippling environmental regulations that made their products uncompetitive in the global market.

It seems the farmers have European elites rattled, which is hardly surprising, given that EU elections are just around the corner. While the European Commission announced Tuesday it was still committed to achieving a 90% reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in Europe by 2040, it conspicuously omitted any mention of how the farming sector would contribute to that ambitious target. Even more tellingly, the Commission has backed down or fudged on key climate commitments, at least temporarily.

According to politico, EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen announced on Tuesday that “she was withdrawing an EU effort to rein in pesticide use.” The climbdown on this and other Commission proposals relating to farming was rather embarrassing for the Commission but politically inevitable, given that the protests were spreading rapidly and farmers were showing no signs of going home until their demands were met. As reported by politico,

A note on the possibility of agriculture cutting down on methane and nitrous oxides by 30 percent, which was in earlier drafts of the Commission’s 2040 proposal, was gone by the time it came out on Tuesday. Similarly excised were missives on behavioral change — possibly including eating less meat or dairy — and cutting subsidies for fossil fuels, many of which go to farmers to assist with their diesel costs. Inserted was softer language about the necessity of farming to Europe’s food security and the positive contributions it can make.

The EU Commission is playing a dangerous game. On the one hand, they are attempting to placate farmers by making expedient short-term concessions to them. On the other hand, they are holding fast to their commitment to cut greenhouse gas emissions in Europe by 90% by 2040, while fudging on the fact that a 90% emission cut in 16 years would have drastic implications for farming.

It is clearly politically expedient, especially in an election year, to put out this fire of farming discontent as soon as possible, and buy some peace ahead of June’s European elections. But there is no avoiding the fact that the Commission’s long-term environmental goals, as currently conceived, almost certainly require sacrifices that farmers are simply not willling to accept.

Independently from the merits of EU climate policy, two things are clear: first, EU leaders and environmental activists appear to have vastly underestimated the backlash their policies would spark in the farming community; and second, the apparent success of this dramatic EU-wide protest sets a spectacular precedent that will not go unnoticed among farmers and transport companies, whose operating costs are heavily impacted by environmental regulations like carbon taxes.

The Commission’s embarrassing concessions are proof that high-visibility, disruptive tactics can be effective. As such, we can expect more of this after June’s EU elections if the Commission doubles down again on its climate policy goals.

About the Author

David Thunder is a researcher and lecturer at the University of Navarra’s Institute for Culture and Society in Pamplona, Spain, and a recipient of the prestigious Ramón y Cajal research grant (2017-2021, extended through 2023), awarded by the Spanish government to support outstanding research activities. Prior to his appointment to the University of Navarra, he held several research and teaching positions in the United States, including visiting assistant professor at Bucknell and Villanova, and Postdoctoral Research Fellow in Princeton University’s James Madison Program. Dr Thunder earned his BA and MA in philosophy at University College Dublin, and his Ph.D. in political science at the University of Notre Dame.

Other victories are starting to appear regarding diesel subsidies and other changes that would destroy farmers’ ability to produce and sell food. But the farmers aren’t backing down. They’re still suffering from previous “green” initiatives as the globalists continue reimagining how to take full control of the food supply.

Similar pushes are being made by the federal and state governments in the United States. Will farmers and other citizens follow the lead of their European brothers and sisters? We will see. Here’s the news from Discern Reporter generated from corporate media reports…

The European Commission has decided to shelve its plans to cut pesticide use in agriculture as farmers across Europe continue to protest for higher product prices and relaxed environmental regulations.

The original proposal aimed to halve chemical pesticide use in the EU by the end of the decade as part of the bloc’s green transition. However, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said on Tuesday that the proposal had “become a symbol of polarization” and would be withdrawn.

Farmers in Spain and Italy have joined the protests, with Spanish farmers using WhatsApp groups to stage informal protests and block major roads. Italian farmers, too, have begun converging on Rome from various agricultural regions, with their tractors displaying the Italian flag and banners with slogans such as “No farmer, no food.”

The protests have led individual member states to take steps to appease angry farmers, with Germany watering down plans to cut diesel subsidies and France scrapping a planned diesel tax increase.

With little progress made in the European parliament or the European Council, the task of drafting new proposals on pesticide legislation will likely fall to the next commission. Von der Leyen acknowledged that farmers “deserve to be listened to” but stressed that Europe’s agriculture “needs to move to a more sustainable model of production” that is more eco-friendly.

Unions in Spain have announced more widespread protests to begin on Thursday and last until 22 February, while Italian farmers are demanding the reinstatement of an income tax exemption that was scrapped in the government’s 2024 budget.

In the Netherlands, hundreds of Dutch farmers blocked motorways and started fires in protests that began late on Monday and continued on Tuesday, resulting in several traffic accidents and injuries.

As the European Commission prepares to announce more measures on how to reach its ambitious targets to counter climate change, it remains to be seen how the new commission, formed after the June European parliament elections, will address the concerns of farmers while balancing the need for a more sustainable agricultural model.

(Mercola)—Are green policies around the world, targeting everything from too much nitrogen to protection of endangered species, all part of a plan to get small farmers off the land, paving the way for totalitarian control of the food supply — and insects as part of your daily diet?

These and other tough questions are posed by Roman Balmakov, Epoch Times reporter and host of Facts Matter, in “No Farmers, No Food: Will You Eat the Bugs?”¹ Balmakov says:²

“The people in charge of some of the most powerful organizations on the planet have determined that agriculture, specifically animal agriculture is to blame for global warming, and global warming is to blame for the high prices of food as well as food shortages.

And so by switching our diets from beef, chicken and pork, to crickets and mealworms, we’ll be able to stop temperatures from rising, lower the price of food and possibly to even save the planet.”

But in interviews with farmers around the world, including in Holland and Sri Lanka, a very different story is told, one that began with a decades-old environmental policy.

Agenda 2030 Threatens Farmers

In 1972, a United Nations meeting about climate change was held to come up with a plan to manage the planet in a sustainable manner. This led to the creation of Agenda 21 (Agenda for the 21st Century)³ — the inventory and control plan for all land, water, minerals, plants, animals, construction, means of production, food, energy, information, education and all human beings in the world.

Agenda 21 is now more commonly referred to as Agenda 2030, the year the plan’s goals are slated to be met. In 2019, the World Economic Forum (WEF) entered into a strategic alliance with the United Nations, which called for the U.N. to “use public-private partnerships as the model for nearly all policies that it implements, most specifically the implementation of the 17 sustainable development goals.”⁴

Agenda 2030 is composed of these 17 sustainable development goals with 169 specific targets, including ending poverty and achieving gender equality, to be imposed across the globe, in every country, by 2030.

“Very comprehensive document if you read it,” says international journalist Alex Newman. “We’re talking hundreds of pages governing really every facet of life, everything from education to land use policy to economics to law. Every area of life was found there.” But hidden underneath these green-sounding initiatives, Newman says, may be a more sinister motive:⁵

“There is absolutely no way for the sustainable development goals to be implemented, to be tracked, to be monitored, without the total obliteration of individual freedom. Some of the goals sound nice — ending hunger, who could possibly be against ending hunger? The problem is, when you set a nebulous goal like that, it requires total power from the state to be able to accomplish that.

And of course, they will never accomplish that, right? There is no way to literally eradicate all poverty from the face of the Earth, but it gives government and global institutions, like the U.N., an easy excuse to basically do whatever they want under the guise of meeting these goals.”

Is the Nitrogen Crisis Real?

Dutch farmers are in crisis as their government has stepped up plans to move them off the land. You can hear about this in-depth via Dutch investigative journalist Elze van Hamelen’s report and podcast for The Solari Report — Dutch Farmers and Fishermen: The People Who Feed Us.⁶

“In 2021, the European Union’s Natura 2000 network released a map of areas in the Netherlands that are now protected against nitrogen emissions. Any Dutch farmer who operates their farm within 5 kilometers of a Natura 2000 protected area would now need to severely curtail their nitrogen output, which in turn would limit their production,” Balmakov explains.⁷

Dutch dairy farmer Nynke Koopmans with the Forum for Democracy believes the nitrogen problem is made up. “It’s one big lie,” she says. “The nitrogen has nothing to do with environmental. It’s just getting rid of farmers.” Another farmer said if new nitrogen rules go into effect, he’d have to reduce his herd of 58 milking cows down to six.

Nitrogen scientist Jaap C. Hanekamp was working for a government committee to study nitrogen, tasked with analyzing the government’s nitrogen model. He told Balmakov:⁸

“The whole policy is based on the deposition model about how to deal with nitrogen emissions on nature areas. And I looked at the validation studies and show that the model is actually crap. It doesn’t work. And doesn’t matter. They still continue using it, which is, in a sense, unsettling. I mean, really, can we do such a thing in terms of policy? Use a model which doesn’t work? It’s never about innovation, it’s always about getting rid of farmers.”

The Ultimate Agenda: No Land Ownership for the People

As farmers shut down, the government can swoop in and take the land, which may be what the agenda is really about. According to Eva Vlaardingerbroek, former member of Forum for Democracy and a political commentator:⁹

“I’ve always said that the nitrogen crisis is, first of all, a made-up crisis. It’s manufactured, and the only solution that has ever been proposed is forced expropriation. So, it is the government that will take hold of their land … We have a housing crisis in the Netherlands, as you know, this is a very tiny country. We have a lot of people, and we have a growing population because of immigration. And we need places to house those immigrants.

And I think that that’s partly why the government wants that land. They need houses, and they need to build houses, which is funny, because apparently building houses is also what emits nitrogen. But that’s not the people they’re coming after. They’re coming, specifically, after the farmers because they want the land. So that is the ultimate goal.”

But it’s not only farmers in the Netherlands who are being affected. In 2020, California became the first U.S. state to commit to a 30 by 30 goal, pledging to put 30% of its land and water under government control by 2030. But as Margaret Byfield, executive director of American Stewards of Liberty, says, this paves the way for private land ownership to disappear:¹⁰

“The concept in America is self-rule. We the People will rule our government and our Founding Fathers understood that the small landholder is the most important part of the state. The idea was that the land would be distributed among the people so they could always control their government. California has developed a 30 by 30 plan. They’re pushing 30 by 30 in the state …

The ultimate agenda is that there is no ownership of land so that we don’t own anything. We either own property, or we are property. That’s really what we’re fighting from the global governance perspective. They have to eliminate our ability to control our government, which means they have to take our land.”

Other seemingly sustainable government regulations may also be wrapped up in this plan. Rep. Doug LaMalfa, farmer and California representative, explains:¹¹

“A lot of this came about in the early ‘70s Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, which were good things, you know, the Endangered Species Act, but it’s been abused from what the original intent was. Congress did not intend for it to be abused the way it is and manipulated. The way it is these days, when they wrote those bills, they would have never passed them.”

The Globalists Have It All Planned Out

Much of the new world order’s plans are based on crisis management, and the idea that a great crisis will occur that will lead to the great transition, where globalists will swoop in to save the day, transforming society into the promised paradise. “At some point down the line, the narrative changed to be around climate,” Balmakov says.

Prior to this, it was the Cold War, but this changed after a 1991 Club of Rome meeting. Both the Rockefellers and early WEF affiliations can be tied back to the Club of Rome, a think tank that aligned with neo-Malthusianism — the idea that an overly large population would decimate resources — and was intending to implement a global depopulation agenda.

“They came up with this incredible document where they actually said, We need a new justification for this all-powerful state,” Newman says. “So, the new excuse is going to be because the environment is going to be harmed and because climate is going to hurt us.”¹² Balmakov continues:

“I could not believe what I just heard, that world leaders really laid out this globalist plan in plain English in a physical book, way back in 1991.

I went on Amazon. And there it was. ‘The First Global Revolution,’ which states, and I quote, ‘In searching for a common enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine, and the like, would fit the bill. And therefore, the real enemy is humanity itself.’”

Reading between the lines, the key players in this globalist agenda become clear. Newman says:¹³

“The World Economic Forum was actually a critical part of implementing this U.N. agenda. Some years ago, they became a strategic partner of the U.N. in the implementation of agenda 2030. And then you start looking at the connections between the World Economic Forum and China. Klaus Schwab and Xi Jinping, they’re like old buddies.

They put out press releases about how much they love each other. So, you’ve got the super capitalists, represented by the World Economic Forum, and then on the government side, you have communists. after Agenda 2030 was adopted, become the Party of China, put out through all their propaganda organs.

… you had Javier Solana, the head of NATO, saying this was going to be the next great leap forward, right? The last great leap forward in China killed millions of people. Why would we want another one of those? That’s crazy.

So, you have communists and super capitalists all coming together and working on this one, sustainable development agenda. And that should make us all pause and say, ‘Wait a minute, that doesn’t make sense on the surface. What’s going on here?’”

Bring On the Bugs

Globalists suggest eating bugs will protect the planet by eliminating the need for livestock, cutting down on agricultural land use and protecting the environment.¹⁴ The U.N.’s Food and Agriculture Organization also encourages the consumption of insects and insect-based foods.¹⁵

In June 2021, WEF also published an article, categorized under “food security,” in which they promote the use of insects, writing we “need to give insects the role they deserve in our food systems.”¹⁶ They justify this proposal by saying it will address an impending food crisis.

In 2021, the European Commission authorized mealworms as food, releasing a news release touting “the growing role that insects will play as part of a healthier, more sustainable diet, as well as the benefits for the environment for years to come.”¹⁷ Victor Davis Hanson, a military historian and almond farmer, notes:¹⁸

“There’s this top-down globalist idea that certain Western countries have diets that they do not approve of. In other words, they’re more meat-based. And they feel that humans don’t need meat-based protein. And they want to either force people to follow their paradigms, or they want to buy or accumulate farmland. And that’s how they’re going to farm it. It’s sort of like the Soviet Union or Mao’s Cultural Revolution. It’s top down. And it results in disasters.”

Without Farmers, There’s No Food

If government and corporate entities are able to take control of the land, they can control the food supply and, with it, the people.

“Everywhere you look small and medium sized farms being gobbled up by these corporate mega farms, because they can’t keep up anymore. They can’t comply with these endless streams of regulations that are coming down,” Newman says.

“We’re seeing that in China now where these giant mechanized corporate, big government-controlled mega farms are displacing all these little small family farms that families have been farming for hundreds of years — in some cases longer.”¹⁹ Without land, people lose their autonomy, freedom and independence. Hanson says:²⁰

“When the American nation was founded, 95% of the people were homestead citizens. They had their own land, and they were completely independent, autonomous. They raised their own food. They were outspoken, they were economically viable. Farming serves two purposes. It doesn’t just produce food, but it produces citizens.”

Ultimately, the war against farmers is a war on the whole of humanity, one that threatens what it means to be free. “We are headed into, I think, a time of very significant food shortages. Can we expect to see massive increases in food prices next year? Oh, no question about it,” Newman says, adding:²¹

“I think the end goal of the war on farmers that we’re seeing, which is guided at every step by the sustainable development goals and Agenda 2030, is going to be a total consolidation of agriculture, a total consolidation of the food supply. And as every communist tyrant of the last 100 years understood, if you control the food, you control the people. That’s ultimately the end goal.”

• ¹ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food
• ^2, 10 The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:19
• ³ YouTube, Ivor Cummins, The Greatest History Never Told June 24, 2023, 57:31
• ⁴ YouTube, MintPress News, Whitney Webb, What Is the World Economic Forum? February 8, 2023, 4:30
• ⁵ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:05
• ⁶ The Solari Report August 17, 2023
• ⁷ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:09
• ⁸ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:16
• ⁹ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:17
• ¹¹ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:21
• ¹² The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:40
• ¹³ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:43
• ^14, 16 World Economic Forum, June 12, 2021
• ¹⁵ BI.edu January 4, 2022
• ¹⁷ European Commission June 2, 2021
• ¹⁸ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:50
• ¹⁹ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:54
• ²⁰ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:56
• ²¹ The Epoch Times, No Farmers, No Food, 1:58

Alex DeSmet, a meteorologist, told the Salt Lake Tribune that the unusual radar detection of the grasshoppers was associated with their distinctive non-uniform movement. Unlike weather events such as rain or snow, grasshopper swarms exhibit irregular patterns.

“This is not a common thing,” said Kris Watson, the state entomologist managing Utah’s insect and pest program at the Utah Department of Agriculture and Food (UDAF). “Grasshoppers themselves are common, but for them to show up on a radar detection — to my understanding, it’s not very common.”

This infestation coincided with a widespread drought that has affected several states in the region. The grasshopper invasion mainly affected farmers and ranchers, who rely on forage availability for their livestock. Experts believe the prolonged drought created favorable conditions for grasshopper eggs to hatch and develop into adult insects.

In response, the UDAF offers a grasshopper and Mormon cricket suppression program to assist affected producers. Farmers can apply for free pesticides through a government cost-sharing program.

However, the effectiveness of these measures has been questioned by farmers, especially considering the challenging conditions posed by the ongoing heatwave and drought.

Although grasshoppers are native to the western United States, their populations have traditionally been controlled by weather conditions, natural predators and diseases over millions of years.

However, the warmer and drier winters experienced since the spring of 2020 have led to a surge in grasshopper populations. The few rains that promoted the growth of grass – a primary food source for young grasshoppers – further contributed to the population explosion. (Related: Light pollution lured more than 45 million grasshoppers into Las Vegas in 2019, new study finds.)

Farmers devastated as grasshoppers devoured their crops

Farmers in the region have been left devastated as the grasshoppers devoured their crops, leaving behind barren fields.

Michael Dow, a rancher in Tooele, shared his dismay. “Every bit of alfalfa that’s in my fields is gone. It was bare dirt within a matter of hours,” he said. Reports of insect-related troubles have been emerging from the area over the past few weeks.

Swarms of grasshoppers are notorious for their ability to quickly destroy crops, consuming vast quantities of wheat, spinach, corn and other plants in a short period. While grasshoppers are known to bite, their bites typically cause mild discomfort and are more of an irritation than a serious concern.

Royce Larsen, a farmer from Box Elder County, Utah, expressed concerns about the impact of pests on an already struggling agricultural industry. “Between the hoppers and the drought, it’s bad,” he said, noting that the pesticide spray provided by the U.S. Department of Agriculture might not save crops at this point in the season. Farmers still have to cover the application costs.

These excessive grasshopper populations have wreaked havoc not only in Utah but also in various parts of the United States. In addition to consuming forage crucial for livestock and wild animals like antelope, grasshoppers strip the leaves of fruit trees and gradually devour crops by infiltrating the dry areas surrounding farmlands. These insects can travel long distances and form swarms, perpetuating their destructive cycle in different locations.

Environ.news has more articles about swarms of insects such as grasshoppers and gypsy moth caterpillars invading different parts of the United States.

Watch this news clip of a grasshopper invasion that adds to the plight of Utah farmers.

This video is from the InfoWarSSideBand channel on Brighteon.com. 

More related stories:

• Grasshoppers invade western US – the largest swarm in 35 years.
• The grasshoppers are swarming mad that you are prepared for the crash, by Brandon Smith.
• Western crops being ravaged by “truly biblical” swarm of cannibalistic insects.

Sources include: 

• DailyMail.co.uk
• KSLTV.com
• DessertNews.com
• TheGuardian.com
• Brighteon.com
• NATURAL NEWS

Citizens will pay for the transition by increasing prices for energy, food, healthcare services, and insurance.

A U-turn of these EU-driven policies is highly needed. Health and wealth have been decreasing in the past years due to pandemic measures, inflation, and recently implemented policies. The Netherlands, famous for farming and innovations, can best win this challenge to re-establish healthcare driven by traditional farmers producing nutritious whole food that prevents famine, improves the soil and the immune system for healthy lives.

Dutch Farmers will no longer accept harmful policies

The Netherlands, a small country conveniently situated within the EU, has been economically growing by generations of farming and fishing. In July 2022 the Dutch policies on farming led to the article No farmers No Food No Life.

Large demonstrations initiated by farmers and fishermen took place in July 2022, November 2022, and March 2023 in The Hague and Brussels respectively, which received much attention worldwide. Now, half a year later an even bigger demonstration initiated by Dutch farmers took place on June 29,2023 in The Hague. Farmers and citizens have drawn the line.

The new policies pushed forward by politicians in Rutte IV could be disastrous for farmers and humanity. This will not only affect the Netherlands. Changes in farming in the Netherlands, being the second largest export country for food, will affect many people worldwide.

Last week the negotiations with farmers and agricultural society on the Agriculture Agreement IN MOVEMENT to meet the governmental goals for climate change on CO2 and Nitrogen reduction in 2040 collapsed. In the draft Agreement a 25-30 percent reduction of farmers and cattle and loss of agricultural fields is foreseen in 2035.

It could even be a reduction of 55-70 percent of farmers to transform the Netherlands together with Flanders and North-Rhine Westphalia in one region ‘Tristate city’ “a large green world city with 30 million inhabitants.” This is a concept that was introduced in 2016 as a marketing strategy, established as a place brand, and initiated by the private sector. The concept was found by visiting emerging markets in China. The opinion of thought leaders is that it will be a success, but there is no way of knowing this would be the case.

When the new agreement is signed farmers need to fulfill 122 measures; most of them will not be able to meet them. Farmers are warning that if the eighth EU Nitrogen rule will be forced for the ability to grow vegetables and fruit, it will be impossible to continue farming. This year the use of certain crop protection spreads has become restricted in the Netherlands while other countries are allowed to use it. A 40 percent reduction in yield is expected.

The only way out for farmers seems to be to accept the offer by the government to sell their ownings for 120 percent of the value with a restriction not to be allowed to start another farm within the EU area. Many farmers still refuse the offers made. ‘Even when they pay 400 percent of the value I won’t leave, my son is going to be the next generation farmer.’

The draft agreement does not present information on effects on farmers’ income and consumers’ behavior. The advisory report from Wageningen University and Research (WUR) writes that they cannot advise on this topic as they do not have the information. With the reduction of cattle, farming land and a transition to regenerative farming they will be able to meet the goals on climate change. However, 30,000 jobs will be lost and €6.5 billion of added value.

Remarkably, the role of Rabobank (originally derived from Boerenleenbank, a cooperative owned and run by farmers) which has been pushing investments by farmers for large-scale farming, while knowing for 30 years this strategy could harm the environment, has been kept out of the N2 debate in the Netherlands. A report published by Greenpeace explores the role of Rabobank. The minimum Rabobank (a bank for actively accelerating transitions for food, climate and finance) can do says Greenpeace is to contribute €3.1 billion in the N2 Fund.

A catastrophic power by a Culture of Climate Hysteria

Recently Rob Jetten, the Dutch minister for Climate and Energy Policy presented in parliament the net zero CO2 and nitrogen plan, which will cost €28 billion and would result in a 0.000036 degree Celsius reduction in temperature in 2050. A harmful and unrealistic plan for a problem that even does not exist.

There is no climate emergency, over 500 eminent experts wrote in 2019 in an open letter to the United Nations. A research paper by Skrable et al, in Health Physics in 2022 concludes the increase in total CO2 due to the use of fossil fuels was much too low to be the cause of global warming. Another group of researchers found ice around Antarctica Thwaites Doomsday was eight times thinner around 8,000 years ago.

Furthermore, the Nobel Prize winner in Physics in 2022, John F Clauser, says it is clear; there is no climate crisis. Climate crisis is based on scientific corruption, pseudo-science. Similarly, Greenpeace co-founder Dr Patrick Moore explains in his speeches ‘Carbon dioxide is the currency of life and the most important building block for all life on earth. It is not responsible for global warming. The whole debate on climate change is a fabrication.’

The European Court of Auditors stated in a recent report, ‘It is not clear if the suggested measures will be supportive to meet the climate goals.’ Probably the EU will not be able to meet their sustainability goals to reduce CO2 emission in 2030 by 55 percent. Unfortunately, the EU committed that they will be the first worldwide to be climate neutral. In the near future every EU citizen will have to pay for CO2 emissions via house, car, and company.

Gripped in a culture of climate catastrophism, society seems to allow to rip the work of generations of farmers and thousands of cattle being slaughtered while the real consequences are unknown and threatens us all.

What is also conveniently overlooked in the climate debate against cows is the carbon cycle. CO2 is absorbed by grass during photosynthesis. Cows eat the grass produce methane-which is released into the atmosphere and breaks down into CO2 and H2O. And the cycle repeats itself. Basic biological knowledge that is learned at school and everybody knows. Livestock are highly needed for fertile lands. A healthy soil, the underpinning of cultivation throughout history is created in interaction between grazing animals and soil microbiology. Regenerative agriculture can sequester more carbon than humans are inventing.

A net zero CO2 policy in Sri Lanka has proven to be a disaster and ruined many farmers’ lives. The policy resulted in complete chaos and a setback in health, environment, and economy.

In the Netherlands an increasing number of farmers a year commit suicide; the exact numbers are unknown. According to a recent investigation there was a 37 percent increase in 2020. Families are crying at the kitchen table daily.

Dutch citizens will be financing the €28 billion climate plan by extra taxes on food prices for example on milk products, meat, compounds for vegetation protection, and fertilizers while inflation is high and purchases are expensive.

Also, a prepared law for zero taxes on vegetables and fruits to promote healthy foods supposed to pass for January 2024 seems to make a U-turn. According to a report from SEO Economic Research it will be too complex and too expensive and it is not sure the introduction of this law will promote health. However, keeping taxes on vegetables and fruit will generate €550-950 million in income for government.

Overlooked risks of expensive food transitions

A transition to ‘Food is Medicine’ initiatives is a strong promotion for the necessity to eat fully plant-based (vegan), bio-engineered food, lab-grown meat, and novel foods like edible insects. Fresh whole foods from farmers will be replaced by products derived from vertical farming, food grown in laboratories, and innovative Food Hubs.

According to the many start-ups and initiatives, it is necessary to solve diminishing resources and an insecurity for healthy nutritious and sustainable food for a fast-growing human population to 9 billion people in 2050. A future of food with low-footprint ingredients and technology that will bring a beautiful nature back into balance. A Global Food Forum of young people is accelerating the transition.

The Netherlands is leading this worldwide food transition funded by the private sector-run FoodvalleyNL, the World Economic Forum and Rockefeller Foundation, the EU, and the Dutch government. The secretariat and coordinating centre for various Food Hubs in the world is based at Wageningen University and Research (WUR). In 2050 we will eat less meat, eggs and dairy products and more chickpeas, crickets and chlorella; a movement for everyone, the WUR states.

A McKinsey report ‘Alternative proteins, the market share is on’ states leading alternative protein resources will be plant protein, insect protein, mycoprotein and cultured meat.

It is not a surprise that the world’s largest and leading insect company Protix, producing protein and fats from insects for feed and food for animals and humans, is based in the Netherlands.

The company was founded in 2009 by two consultants from McKinsey and attracted huge amounts of funding. Protix uses high-track control systems, artificial intelligence, genetic improvement programs, and robotics. The company received many awards, among them from the WEF. A circular frontrunner in the greenfield of insect-based foods.

In the EU in the past few years Protix, Fair Insects, and CricketOne, a Vietnam-based company, gained approval for use of insects in human consumption. The growing number of insects authorized in the EU for sale in food including dietary supplements will not be required to carry special labels to distinguish them from other products the EU has confirmed despite protests from MEPs.

Insect protein and fat can be found in products like paste, bread, ice creams, cakes, and more. The argument is that before insects can become a large-scale food product for humans in the Western world, insects should be turned into an appealing product. For several years start-ups in food transition products like hamburgers from cultivated crickets have been supported by the EU and government in the Netherlands.

According to the Dutch Platform De Krekerij is the most sustainable fast food on the planet. One kg of cricket meat uses 85 percent less food, 90 percent less land and 95 percent less water than one kg of beef.

Green gas emission from farming insects would be 100 times lower than those from pigs and cattle. However, a position paper of the Eurogroup for animals says insect farming is a false solution for the EU’s food system. Industrial animal farming for food should be replaced rather than having insect protein as another form of industrial farming.

Although more than 2,000 edible insects caught in the forests or agricultural fields have been consumed for thousands of years all over the world, there is hardly any knowledge on consuming insects cultivated in plastic boxes in fabrics. Impacts on various aspects, governing the cultivating and production methods of insects and issues on upscaling, on health, and the environment have not been investigated in the short and long term. ‘Little is known about the food chain leading edible insects from farm to plate and on their role in human and planet wellbeing says the editorial Edible Insects: From Farm to Fork.

In a report in 2022 the FAO documented possible food safety issues with edible insects. Among them are allergen cross-reactivity, biological safety hazards as bacteria, viruses, fungi as well as chemical contaminants (toxins (myco), PFAS, pesticides, antibiotics, toxic metals, flame retardation, cyanogenic glycosides). Especially for undernourished children and people with a weakened immune system, eating insects might be a risk factor. The EFSA report for CricketOne is warning of a possible negative impact on both the innate and adaptive immune system.

A research paper on edible insects versus meat shows that the content of individual nutrients in both insects and meat varies significantly. Both are rich in nutrients for development and functioning of the human body. Some foods might exacerbate diet-related health problems while others may be effective in treatments. However, studies on eating insect products versus meat on health are still lacking.

Around the myth of cultured meat It remains to be seen whether the production of artificial meat will be enough to be competitive in comparison with conventional meat. It is still in its infancy. Analysis found that lab-grown meat made from cultivated stem cells could be 25 times worse for the climate than beef if current production methods are scaled up because they are still highly energy-intensive.

Another threat for traditional farming in the EU conversation is the industrial lobby owning 10,000 patents boosting the use of gene-edited crops (CRISPR-Cas) as a solution to climate change and biodiversity. Recent research by the EU and the Global Biodiversity Framework are likely to foster the use of CRISPR-Cas as a solution to not only climate change but also biodiversity conversion. Also WUR scientists expect the EU will change the rules this year with smarter governance for the benefits of society and environment.

The debate on gene-editing for crops instead of classical natural crossings for crops is not new and has been used by Monsanto. The use of the gene-edited seeds has been expensive for many farmers. Biological farmers are concerned that farmers will become dependent on multinationals and natural classical solutions will no longer be effective. The balance with nature will be destroyed. Plants are interconnected with soil, animals and humans. The long-term effects of combining various gene-edited plants and foods are not known. Moreover human gene-editing is still controversial and the effects of eating the gene-edited plants and fruits on animals and humans is not known.

It is clear that when evaluating the food transition to veganism, gene-edited plants, soil fertilizers converting biodiversity, increased irrigation technologies, and edible insects, the intended transition has many risks in the short and long term for humans, animals, plants, and the planet.

A ‘rich’ country in famine and lack of care

The Healthcare system in the Netherlands has been ranking for years as the best in Europe. In 2020 the Dutch healthcare system was ranked as the number three most innovative in the world.

Unfortunately, in a country with 17.8 million people, approximately 2 million people do not get the care they need, and 1.2 million people are living below poverty. Around 148,000 citizens visit a food bank. Poverty is expected to rise to 5.8 percent.

In 2021 30.9 percent of men and 35.9 percent of women (age > 16 years) experienced one or more chronic diseases. This is expected to increase to around 7 million in 2030. During the last few years a strong increase in heart problems has taken place, and one in ten persons in the Netherlands experiences heart problems.

After three years of pandemic measures and limited care, healthcare is confronted with a population with an increasing number of elderly people, people with more chronic diseases, rising mental problems, increased feelings of stress, fear, and loneliness, more people dying as expected, shortness of nurses, increased sickness leaves, low salaries, inflation, high prices for energy and food, and more people being undernourished. People are leaving the healthcare system, and 37 percent experience moral conflicts. Doctor visits are replaced by telemedicine or done by people with less professional education.

The number of people on waiting lists for urgent care in nursing homes is increasing and surgeries have been postponed. CEO’s of healthcare organisations have started to hire nurses from Indonesia and India as sufficient Dutch nurses are not available or prefer to work as an independent nurse. In 2032 a shortness of 137,000 nurses is expected. Furthermore, shortness of family doctors (35 -45 percent ) is on the rise. Telemedicine and efforts on the implemention of technological support for big data and AI are pushed forward by the minister of Healthcare.

Large academic hospitals have started AI labs. Personal medical information files will become more easily available among different care organisations and within the EU. Special acute care will be concentrated in fewer hospitals.

CEO’s of healthcare organizations with nursing homes and homes for the disabled have written an open letter to the minister that the current situation will drive organisations into bankruptcy. The risk for Dutch women to become burnt out or lose their paid work to replace with unpaid voluntary care is near.

Prices for mandated private health insurance increase due to inflation. During the pandemic billions have been thrown away for unsafe and ineffective and even harmful measures. But, politicians in the Netherlands don’t see it as a priority to evaluate the policies as they have postponed the pandemic inquiry. Trust in politics in the Netherlands is at an all-time low.

Preventing Famine

It is the UN report that appeared in April 2023 that needs to be on the front page of all media worldwide. “Globally the consumption of animal source foods including, meat, eggs and milk can help to reduce stunting, wasting and overweight amongst children.”

“This is a significant gap given the co-existence of micronutrient deficiencies with overweight, obesity and Non-Communicable Disease.”

At least one in ten people and one in three children worldwide is malnourished. This is presumably much more when various grades of deficiencies are considered. While it is known that most non-communicable diseases can be prevented and restored, it is unacceptable given the co-existence with deficiencies that malnutrition and even hunger and famine may increase when EU policies will be forced into the agriculture and healthcare system in the Netherlands.

The Netherlands owes generations of hard-working farmers and fishermen a solution to the problem of famine and a restoration of lower cost of healthcare. A cooperation between farmers, fishermen, and medical doctors for good nutritious whole food and loving care will be a strategy less costly, safe, better for soil and the immune system, and more successful. This will be the way that needs to be followed to regain trust and wealth.

About the Author

Carla Peeters is founder and managing director of COBALA Good Care Feels Better. She obtained a PhD in Immunology from the Medical Faculty of Utrecht, studied Molecular Sciences at Wageningen University and Research, and followed a four-year course in Higher Nature Scientific Education with a specialization in medical laboratory diagnostics and research. She studied at various business schools including London Business School, INSEAD and Nyenrode Business School. She worked for 15 years as an interim manager of change in healthcare of which several years as an interim CEO guiding to less sick leaves, improved quality of care and income

Article cross-posted from Brownstone Institute.

The US and the Netherlands are two of the largest agricultural producers in the world. It seems certain Western countries are waging war against farmers in the name of climate change. What is really going on here?

Doug Casey: I hate to say that things like COVID or a rabid belief in anthropogenic climate change are parts of a conspiracy—although it often seems that way. I tend to discount conspiracies for a number of reasons. It seems more likely they’re mass hysterias—the type of thing that happened in Salem at the end of the 17th century, except on a gigantic scale. Versions of the kind of “group think” that captured a number of countries in the 20th century, as well.

In any event, what appears to be a war against agriculture on the part of “the elite” is both real and serious. People in power are anxious to control every aspect of the plebs’ lives, usually either for the supposed good of humanity or the planet itself. They believe there should be rules governing where the plebs live, what they can say and think, and even what they eat. The “elite” like to say farm animals are partly responsible for global warming by emitting methane.

But maybe it’s more than that. Maybe it’s a general belief, even among the plebs themselves, that the world’s population, composed mostly of useless eaters, is too high. The powers that be have said on any number of occasions that eight billion people is “too many” and that an optimal level would be less than a billion.

Here’s an outlandish thought: They can’t put people in gas chambers anymore and hope to get away with it. But perhaps reducing the quantity and quality of their food consumption, among other measures, can have the same effect. A crazy thought? Don’t forget that governments have sponsored wars, famines, and persecutions that have killed hundreds of millions. There’s no reason to think that today’s “elite” are any less nefarious than their antecedents. Rather the contrary…

There’s plenty of evidence that the kind of people who control the world and run governments have evil intentions toward their fellow humans. Even while they masquerade as philanthropists and humanitarians, they typically treat them either as a means to their ends or a nuisance.

International Man: Government central planning of agriculture can be catastrophic. For example, millions of people perished in famines in the Soviet Union due to disastrous policies forced upon farmers. Do you see any parallels today?

Doug Casey: Government, as an institution, is congenitally incapable of creating anything.

It can only control what others create, and it’s mainly destructive. There are lots of examples. The perpetual famine that the USSR experienced while it still existed, including Stalin’s Holodomor in the Ukraine. Mao was famous for creating perpetual famine in China during his Great Leap Forward and again during the Cultural Revolution.

Farmers always fare poorly when “the elite” capture the apparatus of the State. One reason is that, as a group, farmers are basically entrepreneurs. They don’t work a 9:00 to 5:00 day. They don’t take orders from supervisors working in cubicles. They’re necessarily independent.

Farmers have to buy and sell like merchants. They have to be practical field-level biologists, botanists, and zoologists. They have to be businessmen, mechanics, meteorologists, and a dozen other things.

A successful farmer is naturally multi-faceted and multi-talented—not the type of person prone to taking orders from high up. He’s a person that owns property and values it.

As a class, farmers are natural enemies of socialist governments. It’s true that they can be corrupted, much as many farmers have been in the US with subsidies since the 1930s. But farmers tend to be independent freethinkers.

Governments, therefore, hold them in suspicion and are inclined to pay special attention to farmers.

International Man: With inflation making meat unaffordable for many, the elite want to keep the plebs happy by gaslighting them into thinking that meat is bad for the environment.

That’s a big reason why there’s been a flurry of articles in the mainstream media condemning meat consumption and promoting cheap alternatives.

Bill Gates recently said: “I think all rich countries should move to 100% synthetic beef. You can’t have cows anymore,” and governments can “use regulation to totally shift the demand.” What is your take on this?

Doug Casey: The US Department of Agriculture has about 100,000 employees. It’s one of the many US government departments that should be abolished. If any of those 100,000 employees actually know anything about agriculture or farming—most of them don’t—they should go out and do it, as opposed to making the lives of farmers miserable.

Interestingly, the #1 mission of the USDA, stated on its website, is to combat climate change. Not to improve food production.

The USDA, the EPA, and many others create regulations on everything and anything that farmers do today. I’d point out that according to USDA rules, a “farm” is any piece of land that produces over or can produce over $1000 worth of product. That’s an unbelievably low amount. A garden in your backyard can be deemed a farm if it suits the authorities.

No matter what a farmer produces, he can rely on lots of oversight from a regulator who is intent on justifying his existence.

All production has to go through a bureaucratized, centralized, and highly regulated process. It’s almost like anything that’s produced might as well be sent to a central processing facility in Kansas before it’s shipped back to the very place that it came from after being homogenized, pasteurized, sterilized, packaged, and denatured.

This is a bad thing because it leads to less independence on the part of both producers and consumers and more dependence on bureaucracies that bring nothing to the party but taxes and regulations.

International Man: As part of this trend we’ve been discussing, the media, the World Economic Forum, and certain politicians promote eating bugs as a solution. An article in The Economist notes: “We’re not going to convince Europeans and Americans to go out in big numbers and start eating insects… The trick might be to slip them into the food chain on the quiet.”

What do you make of the push to feed people bugs?

Doug Casey: Especially in the Orient, certain types of insects and grubs are sold in grocery stores. I’ve sampled some, and after overcoming a cultural reluctance, they can be quite tasty snacks.

In fact, for decades, there have been things like chocolate-covered ants sold in the US in specialty stores as edible novelties. Having some insects or grubs as an occasional diversion to amuse your friends at a cocktail party is one thing, but changing the entire nature of people’s diets because you think it’s a moral imperative to eat bugs? The idea is insane. Manipulating the food supply, and the eating habits of the plebs, is worse than unnecessary; it’s degrading.

The movement to radically change the nature of agriculture, and feed the masses, goes way beyond insects, though. A Finnish company called Solar Foods has developed an obscure bacteria that can be vat-grown, lives largely on hydrogen and sunlight, is very high in protein, and, they say, very eco-friendly. It can be dried into a powder and manipulated into edible form. I’m all for innovation. And suppose Wokesters and the starving masses might go for it. But my view is that it should be promoted as cattle fodder, not a Soylent Green substitute. But that won’t work when cattle are eliminated.

Speaking of cattle, the Irish parliament has mandated a severe reduction in the Irish cattle herd. About 65,000 cows will be culled over each of the next three years to reduce the herd by about 10% in order to meet the EU’s carbon dictates. This is the shape of things to come everywhere, I suspect.

The problem is that the people on top, who see themselves as a distinct class and have huge amounts of both power and money, figure that they have the right to give orders to the plebs. They’re only marginally affected by the laws they pass. Meanwhile, the plebs have been inculcated with notions making them think it’s morally wrong to eat animals, the way animals have always eaten other animals.

I understand an esthetic inclination to be a vegetarian. And I appreciate the moral sentiment not to slaughter other beings. But this is a choice that—like all choices—that should be left to individuals, not imposed on them by those who fancy themselves as their betters.

International Man: What can the average person do as the war on farmers and meat accelerates?

Doug Casey: What you may be asking is: Is it possible to fight the State?

If you don’t follow the law and do what you’re told, you run a risk of being jailed or having your property confiscated. It’s dangerous to run counter to the law, especially when the average person thinks he’s in a “democracy” and shares control over what’s happening. That’s an illusion. Our nomenklatura have control of the apparatus of the State.

Can you take any kind of political action to change the people that are in control? I think the election of 2020 showed that that’s probably pointless this far down the road. Can you reason with these people? Probably not.

We’re dealing with a psychological problem, not an intellectual problem. Therefore, the situation is not really open to solution from reason and factual arguments. Recognize that the only reason to try to change things is not because you will succeed—that’s unlikely—but because it’s right.

The direction of society has a life of its own. You should work to reverse bad trends simply because it’s good karma and, personally, psychologically gratifying.

Recognize, however, that the downtrend has been in motion for decades. It’s still accelerating and likely to keep accelerating until it reaches a real crisis, which will be very unpleasant. We don’t know what’s going to happen after we go through the crisis. What’s happening with farmers and the food supply is just one aspect of it.

Article cross-posted from International Man.