2 ms·
>Local urban farming is not assured to produce healthier nor tastier food. That squarely lies in the hands of the farmer. Farming is a skill; most people are no
by bluthru 12y ago
>Local urban farming is not assured to produce healthier nor tastier food. That squarely lies in the hands of the farmer. Farming is a skill; most people are not good at it.
One word: tomato. Supermarket tomatoes are grown to survive shipping. Tomatoes that you grow yourself are always more delicious.
I'm not sure why I was downvoted without an explanation. What I've stated is 100% factual: http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2118455,00.html http://content.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,2118455,0...
- evilduck 12y agoBecause you can't generalize from a single datapoint. Tomatoes are pretty much the extreme example of this where it favors home grown plants. There's a large swath of plants where they aren't likely to be clearly better, and some where they're likely to be worse than the ones grown at scale (i.e. try growing an Apple tree from seed).
- pdabbadabba 12y agoYes but, generally speaking, urban farmers know which crops are worth growing and which ones aren't. This is why you won't find many of them attempting to grow apple trees, and a whole lot of them growing tomato and basil. Except for the occassional case of an idiot urban farmer (or, more kindly, an overly ambitious), it makes no sense to criticize urban farming on the ground that not all potential crops can be grown better in one's back yard. (Except the relatively extreme view that all agriculture can be replaced with people growing crops in their back yard -- a view that I've never heard a person espouse.)