Silk Soymilk "natural" - VeggieBoards
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 Old 08-16-2009, 02:07 PM
Veggie Regular
 
itsveggietime!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 588
I'm sorry if this has already been discussed, but my search didn't show it.



Have you looked at your Silk milk carton lately? The word organic has been replaced by the word natural. A week after that change, I saw that my store did get in the Silk Organic in a mostly green carton, unfortunately, they only got the unsweetened, no vanilla version. Seems whitewave is buying their non-organic soybeans from China.
itsveggietime! is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 Old 08-17-2009, 01:37 PM
Veggie Regular
 
FitChick99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,339
Yeah, I noticed the switch a few months ago actually. The Organic is in a brighter green carton than the Unsweetened "Natural" and is about $0.50 more expensive.
FitChick99 is offline  
#3 Old 08-17-2009, 03:42 PM
Beginner
 
bleusman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 115
Does it really matter, though? Soy beans are pretty protected from absorbing pesticides, and then the fact that it's processed into soy milk should remove any contaminant from pure soy goodness.
bleusman is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#4 Old 08-17-2009, 07:06 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
havent seen this yet....thanx for the heads up
GhostUser is offline  
#5 Old 08-17-2009, 07:26 PM
Veggie Regular
 
itsveggietime!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 588
I've always been told that if you bought one thing organic, it should be soy, because they used the worst chemicals on it. Then there's the GMO's. I've always just took everyone's word on it, and bought organic soy milk.
itsveggietime! is offline  
#6 Old 08-17-2009, 08:12 PM
Veggie Regular
 
MikeFromSM's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 398
Drink rice milk !
MikeFromSM is offline  
#7 Old 08-17-2009, 08:41 PM
Veggie Regular
 
ripvanfish's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 1,191
Quote:
14. Soybeans.

If you are not yet a label-reader, it is time to start.

Everything you buy, from bread to cookies to crackers to margerine to dry mixes, has some sort of soy product in it. Most soybean in the USA is genetically-modified.

So, why the fuss over modified soy?

Monsanto, in an effort to increase the use (and profit potential) of Round-Up Ready, spliced the herbicide into soybean plant DNA. Two problems with this action.



1) No matter what you or I do, we can never wash RoundUp Ready herbicide off the soybean--ever. It is "permanently imbedded".



Something I found on Google..
ripvanfish is offline  
#8 Old 08-17-2009, 09:32 PM
Veggie Regular
 
itsveggietime!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 588
Yes, I knew there was something I knew originally, but overtime forgot the detail of! They put the herbicide right in the dna! That was it, thank you!
itsveggietime! is offline  
#9 Old 08-17-2009, 09:36 PM
Herbivorous Urchin
 
River's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 9,717
I don't really... drink soy milk, and I stay FAR away from ANYTHING that can be remotely close to a monsanto product =/





That being said, to the user who asked "Why bother", it's also an environmental factor.

Quote:
"You will always be fond of me. I represent to you all the sins you never had the courage to commit.”
Oscar Wilde, The Picture of Dorian Gray
River is offline  
#10 Old 08-17-2009, 09:51 PM
Veggie Regular
 
itsveggietime!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 588
While enviroment is important, it's a 'what I put in my body' that causes me to buy the organic soy milk. I have tried rice milk and HATE it. I drink soy milk, and also hemp and almond dream. I often mix them. I even tried oat lately - a lot of calories... The hemp I most recently bought was a light version, so easier on the calories. The Living Harvest Hemp is now calling it TEMPT.
itsveggietime! is offline  
#11 Old 08-17-2009, 11:12 PM
Beginner
 
bleusman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by ripvanfish View Post

Something I found on Google..



That doesn't even make sense. Herbicides work by killing other plants in the area; putting it directly into soy DNA wouldn't do that.
bleusman is offline  
#12 Old 08-17-2009, 11:18 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Vegmedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleusman View Post

That doesn't even make sense. Herbicides work by killing other plants in the area; putting it directly into soy DNA wouldn't do that.



Uh oh, don't you understand that you are (edit: not) supposed to think about these things, but just react with fear and horror?
Vegmedic is offline  
#13 Old 08-17-2009, 11:35 PM
Beginner
 
gatto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 133
genetic food modification is a brilliant tool that has helped many countries feed their people. Without genetic modification many poor countries would have a lot of trouble growing rice and wheat in their environments and most of those countries use these inexpensive grains as a major staple food.



Genetic modification can seem scary because it seems unnatural but natural evolution has shaped our world today and genetic modification is simply selective evolution. By cross breeding plants to obtain the best features of both parent plants you create something that is stronger, healthier and all around better. Most genetic crossbreeding doesn't take place in labs and test tubes like it would be easy to believe but in fields full of plants where scientists simply cross pollinate things until they get something right. Did you know even organic food is subject to cross breeding and in fact these cross breeding techniques help keep plants (and animals) alive and healthy. If one strain of a plant is susceptible to a certain bug and every plant is kept the same with no genetic variations then the entire species could be in danger. Bananas are actually a victim of this problem, almost all bananas in the world share extremely similar DNA, pineapples too.
gatto is offline  
#14 Old 08-17-2009, 11:46 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Vegmedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatto View Post

genetic food modification is a brilliant tool that has helped many countries feed their people. Without genetic modification many poor countries would have a lot of trouble growing rice and wheat in their environments and most of those countries use these inexpensive grains as a major staple food.



Genetic modification can seem scary because it seems unnatural but natural evolution has shaped our world today and genetic modification is simply selective evolution. By cross breeding plants to obtain the best features of both parent plants you create something that is stronger, healthier and all around better. Most genetic crossbreeding doesn't take place in labs and test tubes like it would be easy to believe but in fields full of plants where scientists simply cross pollinate things until they get something right. Did you know even organic food is subject to cross breeding and in fact these cross breeding techniques help keep plants (and animals) alive and healthy. If one strain of a plant is susceptible to a certain bug and every plant is kept the same with no genetic variations then the entire species could be in danger. Bananas are actually a victim of this problem, almost all bananas in the world share extremely similar DNA, pineapples too.



Hey!! Where is your fear and horror?? Wouldn't it be better for the environment to farm less efficiently and use much more land to grow the same amount of food??
Vegmedic is offline  
#15 Old 08-17-2009, 11:48 PM
Beginner
 
gatto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 133
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vegmedic View Post

Hey!! Where is your fear and horror?? Wouldn't it be better for the environment to farm less efficiently and use much more land to grow the same amount of food??

aww lets not get condescending! I don't want anybody to think I look down on anyone who doesn't understand genetics, just as I'd hope people don't look down on me for not understanding theoretical astrophysics as well as I'd like to. Everybody has their academic place and mine is biology I just think it's important that people understand genetics naturally evolve through every generation and helping them along is not dangerous to our health
gatto is offline  
#16 Old 08-18-2009, 12:04 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Vegmedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by gatto View Post

aww lets not get condescending! I don't want anybody to think I look down on anyone who doesn't understand genetics, just as I'd hope people don't look down on me for not understanding theoretical astrophysics as well as I'd like to. Everybody has their academic place and mine is biology I just think it's important that people understand genetics naturally evolve through every generation and helping them along is not dangerous to our health



Well you are better than me. It will be good to have someone around who can explain that plant breeding didn't go from throwing some seeds in a bowl and playing some Barry White to GMO overnight. We have used a lot of methods, things like radiation, to provoke mutations for decades. I will gladly take the precision of GMO over those other methods.
Vegmedic is offline  
#17 Old 08-18-2009, 06:17 AM
Beginner
 
gatto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 133
I agree, I'm glad our understanding of DNA has grown to the point where we can use safe methods of genetic engineering.
gatto is offline  
#18 Old 08-18-2009, 07:58 AM
Beginner
 
bleusman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by LyricGaia View Post


That being said, to the user who asked "Why bother", it's also an environmental factor.



Organics use more resources and more land for less output. If you're concerned about the impact of the pesticides and herbicides, be aware that organic foods still use pesticides that can be just as harmful to the environment; they just aren't manmade. Urea is a completely organic pesticide, but believe me, the earth isn't thanking us for pouring it all over it.
bleusman is offline  
#19 Old 08-18-2009, 08:08 PM
Newbie
 
akmonvb's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 32
i dont take soya milk but i think soyabean is very healthy
akmonvb is offline  
#20 Old 08-22-2009, 08:33 PM
Beginner
 
Kara_Malia's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 104
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleusman View Post

Organics use more resources and more land for less output. If you're concerned about the impact of the pesticides and herbicides, be aware that organic foods still use pesticides that can be just as harmful to the environment; they just aren't manmade. Urea is a completely organic pesticide, but believe me, the earth isn't thanking us for pouring it all over it.



Where can I read more about this (other then sifting through tons of stuff Google brought up)?
Kara_Malia is offline  
#21 Old 08-22-2009, 09:01 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
GMO's can cause health problems. People should have a choice in whether or not they want to consume them. As of now companies are not required to label whether or not their products contain GMO which I think is a shame. GMOs can also contaminate other crops with their DNA. This scared Bill Gates and Monsanto enough to build a seed vault. Monsanto also sued farmers farms when their GMO DNA contaminated surrounding farms.



Here is a link on why they are bad.

http://www.organicconsumers.org/arti...icle_11361.cfm
GhostUser is offline  
#22 Old 08-22-2009, 09:04 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Treehugger267's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,795
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleusman View Post

That doesn't even make sense. Herbicides work by killing other plants in the area; putting it directly into soy DNA wouldn't do that.



It stops the herbicide from killing that plant itself, then you eat the plant and the herbicide. GMO is NOT a good thing. Monsanto can try to spin it anyway they want to.
Treehugger267 is offline  
#23 Old 08-22-2009, 09:41 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Vegmedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lydiah View Post

GMO's can cause health problems.



Zero evidence of this. None.



Quote:
People should have a choice in whether or not they want to consume them. As of now companies are not required to label whether or not their products contain GMO which I think is a shame.



Political issue. Don't care.



Quote:
GMOs can also contaminate other crops with their DNA.



Non GMO crops can contaminate other crops with their DNA. It has been happening since the beginning of time and has been a very good thing.



Quote:
This scared Bill Gates and Monsanto enough to build a seed vault.



Pure baloney. The seed vault was constructed using funds entirely from the Norwegian government. Seed vaults are not new.



Quote:
Monsanto also sued farmers farms when their GMO DNA contaminated surrounding farms.



Again pure baloney. Read the court transcripts (Federal Court of Canada, Federal Court of Appeal, Supreme Court of Canada). Had Percy Schmeiser's fields been contaminated with GMO seeds then Monsanto would have been wholely responsible. Schmeiser purposefully isolated, collected, stored and planted GMO seeds. Schmeiser's fields were "contaminated" by GMO seed because he had done everything in his power to ensure that such was the case. This was no secret around his community. In fact Monsanto warned him before he planted his fields in 1998 that they knew what he was up to and that he would either have to pay for the use of those seeds or face legal action. That Schmeiser has become a hero to anti-gmo activists beyond sad.



Quote:



I know a fun game you can play with Jeffrey M. Smith's writings. Go to the library and get one of his books: "Seeds of Deception" or "Genetic Roulette." Then start at the beginning and trace back every endnote to the source. If that source makes absolutely no sense in comparison to what JMS says - like for instance says the exact opposite then take a drink. If the initial source is other writing by JMS which can't be traced back any further and he just made it up then take a drink. Plan on passing out before you finish the first chapter. It might be wise to have someone around to call emergency services as alcohol poisoning is likely. Smith is a pure nut. He has no relevant education, no scientific training or education and makes statements so scientifically impossible that it would make the most delusional young-earth creationist blush.
Vegmedic is offline  
#24 Old 08-22-2009, 09:48 PM
Veggie Regular
 
Vegmedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treehugger267 View Post

It stops the herbicide from killing that plant itself, then you eat the plant and the herbicide. GMO is NOT a good thing. Monsanto can try to spin it anyway they want to.



Bluesman was 100% right. The google link on page one is completely wrong and nonsensical.
Vegmedic is offline  
#25 Old 08-23-2009, 05:27 AM
Beginner
 
bleusman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treehugger267 View Post

It stops the herbicide from killing that plant itself, then you eat the plant and the herbicide. GMO is NOT a good thing. Monsanto can try to spin it anyway they want to.



Can you please explain how having a herbicide inside a plant can kill other plants in the vicinity? I'm pretty interested in this.



And for the person who wanted to see sources about organic pesticides: here's one on Rotenone, a highly toxic organic pesticide. And here's an article about the energy inefficiencies of organic farming.
bleusman is offline  
#26 Old 08-23-2009, 05:53 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Vegmedic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 1,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by bleusman View Post

And here's an article about the energy inefficiencies of organic farming.





To expand on bleusman's link - A study writen for the UK Ministry of Environment which concluded that: Organic Farming "No Better For the Environment." It says that some crops were better others were worse, particularly: "Organic vine tomatoes require almost 10 times the amount of land needed for conventional tomatoes and nearly double the amount of energy."



Then there is this report by Anthony Trewavas which appeared in the journal "Crop Protection." Other writing by the same author: GM is the Best Option We Have and a presentation on Organic Food and Farming.



Also, here is a short piece by Dennis Avery asking Would Organic Farming Unleash A Billion Cattle On U.S. Wildlands?

As a vegetarian I find the possibility of increased cattle raising beyond concerning.



The Skeptic's Dictionary entry on organic food and farming (which also talks about GMO)



One of the books that the Skeptic's Dictionary mentions is The March of Unreason by Dick Taverne which includes chapters on "The Myth of Organic Farming," "The Case For GM Crops," and "The Case Against GM Crops."





On the pro-organic side is this report: Soil Fertility and Biodiversity in Organic Farming which was the 21 year study that is most commonly cited as the proof that organic farming can feed the world. I had some issues with it when I read it shortly after it came out. First, the study actually showed that the organic agriculture had about 20 - 30% less yield. The difference in favour of of organic was that it used about 50% less energy per acre (because of the energy to create synthetic fertilizers and pesticides). However, if you take into account the decreased yield of the organics then the conventional crops only required less than 20% more energy per yield. So conventional requires more energy, organic more land. Also, the nutrients in the organic soil had decreased significantly (up to a 1/3 or even 1/2) for nitrogen potassium and phosphorus which means that soil was actually being depleted and eventually will require inputs outside of organic farming methods. This was one of the "miracles" of synthetic fertilizer in the first place. Before their inputs soil qualities in europe and parts of north america had decreased significantly over the preceding centuries.



So organic farming required less energy, but needed more land. To me that means that organic loses. However, when you add in the organic farm land was being depleted of nutrients it means that at some point in time they are going to need to use a lot of energy to replenish that land, probably meaning that in the long run organic farming needs far more land for no benefit what-so-ever.



Other studies have managed comparable yields, but don't make clear that they were using cover crops like legumes which means that about every 3rd growing season no crop was grown and essentially means that even if they were achieving the same yields they would need 50% more land to do so as 1/3 of the land was growing legumes (which pull nitrogen out of the air) which would be ploughed under to enrich the soil with nitrogen.



There are two excellent books outlining how the projected peak human population of about 10 billion late in the 21st century can be fed. The first is Vaclav Smil's (I would recommend all of his books they are eye opening scholarly works on energy and food) Feeding the World: A Challenge for the 21st Century and the second is Gordon Conway's The Doubly Green Revolution: Food For All in The Twenty-First Century. Both of those books are reviewed here (along with two other books I haven't read). There are no books on how organic farming could do the same, for the simple reason that it couldn't, at best, support more than about 55-70% of the current world population.
Vegmedic is offline  
#27 Old 08-23-2009, 06:41 AM
Veggie Regular
 
Treehugger267's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 3,795
Quote:
Can you please explain how having a herbicide inside a plant can kill other plants in the vicinity? I'm pretty interested in this.





It doesn't kill the plant, it makes it resistant to the herbicide itself.
Treehugger267 is offline  
#28 Old 08-23-2009, 08:34 AM
Veggie Regular
 
vegbunny83's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 933
I posted this link in a separate thread a while back, but since it is pertinent to the original discussion, I will post it again. This article highlights that economic impact that Silk is having on American soybean farmers.



http://www.alternet.org/environment/...he_bus/?page=1



~ Julie

"I remember the days when we talked for hours/And we were young, we thought we had superpowers/We weren't our problems, our age or our paychecks/And we weren't taking anybody's $h*t."
vegbunny83 is offline  
#29 Old 08-23-2009, 06:23 PM
Beginner
 
bleusman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 115
Quote:
Originally Posted by Treehugger267 View Post

It doesn't kill the plant, it makes it resistant to the herbicide itself.



Cool. Now back that up with an article on how that specific gene is going to damage my health.
bleusman is offline  
#30 Old 08-23-2009, 07:00 PM
Newbie
 
GhostUser's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 0
The site has references, believe whatever you want. The Gates Foundation invested 30 million.



Quote:
GMOs and liver problems



Rats fed GM potatoes had smaller, partially atrophied livers.[22]



The livers of rats fed GM canola were 12-16% heavier.[23]



GM soy altered mouse liver cells in ways that suggest a toxic insult.[24] The changes reversed after their diet switched to non-GM soy.[25]



GM soy, reproductive problems, and infant mortality



More than half the offspring of mother rats fed GM soy died within three weeks.[26] Male rats[27] and mice[28] fed GM soy showed changes in their testicles; the mice had altered young sperm cells.



The DNA of mouse embryos whose parents ate GM soy functioned differently than those whose parents ate non-GM soy.[29]



Many offspring of female rats fed GM soy were considerably smaller,and more than half died within three weeks (compared to 10% of the non-GM soy controls). [30]



Bt crops linked to sterility, disease, and death



When sheep grazed on Bt cotton plants after harvest, within a week 1 in 4 died. Shepherds estimate 10,000 sheep deaths in one region of India.[31] Farmers in Europe and Asia say that cows, water buffaloes, chickens, and horses died from eating Bt corn varieties.[32]



About two dozen US farmers report that Bt corn varieties caused widespread sterility in pigs or cows.[33]



Filipinos in at least five villages fell sick when a nearby Bt corn variety was pollinating.[34]



The stomach lining of rats fed GM potatoes showed excessive cell growth, a condition that may be a precursor to cancer. Rats also had damaged organs and immune systems.[35]



The numbers link references. Thats enough to make me have a preference for the real deal.



You may not care if GMO is in your food but imagine if there was animal products in your food and they didnt tell you about that. An omni would not care but that doesnt mean all of us dont care. I want to know if I am eating frankenfood and I have a right to know that.
GhostUser is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the VeggieBoards forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in


Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off