And what sort of yields and acreage did you have and how much
labor was
involved? Less than 2% of the US is currently involved in occupations
*related*
to agriculture, and I know first hand how much more work it is to
weed fields
than to spray them (ever tried weeding 20+ acres of safflower in
midsummer, like
I did a year ago?) That percent would have to be lot higher to
provide adequate
yields, and farmers don't get their money off trees. Between
the increased
labor and the increased wages that would result, I'd expect to be
spending twice
as much on food.
When I was a kid, we had
to hoe our cotton instead of spraying it with herbicides.
Also, I'll point out that they describe "a tentative pathway" for
autism et al.
If I could get a dollar for every tentative pathway that's been
proposed, I
could buy a farm. Saying "we can see how this could cause
xyz" is not the same
as showing that it does cause xyz.
One thing that shows
some promise is maternal levels of Vitamin D that is too low during the part of
the pregnancy where the brain is being built (I think the second trimester). It
remains to be seen if it pans out. Keep in mind that there are sure to be a
number of causes so even if it does pan out, it won't cover all bases. [ Reply to This | Parent | # ]
| 
