2 ms·
I did read it, and the intent of the article is to discourage people everywhere from using non-industrial food sources. I will take my chances with farmed eggs
by motohagiography 4y ago
I did read it, and the intent of the article is to discourage people everywhere from using non-industrial food sources. I will take my chances with farmed eggs because the balance of probabilities are that this will not be the dangerous part of my life, and the alternative is accepting the admonitions of people with insincere agendas.
Further, I like how it is on skeptics to maintain the high quality tone of a discussion, but the hegemons are somehow not accountable to conventions around civility, wit, and clarity. It's like some people have some kind of luxury-stupidity whereby someone whose opinions aren't officially protected can't afford to be that petulant.
Another commenter here observed it's a war on nitrogen with protein as a casualty, which is pretty consistent given aligned climate change initiatives.
- alexk307 4y ago
- ch4s3 4y ago> the intent of the article is to discourage people everywhere from using non-industrial food sources Not at all, It's clearly pretty straight science reporting typical of Ars Technica. That nearly half a million Australians keep backyard chickens is in and of itself interesting, and those people probably want and need to know about lead risk. It may also be worth other urban chicken owners checking their soil and eggs for lead. People who live in cities and keep chickens are likely to read Ars, so it's a natural story for them to run. No conspiracy needed. The call to action is to just get your soil tested.