For cancer, all the money is in treatment and adaptation. There is no money in prevention, and therefore all the publicity and so called "common sense" comes from that end.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/67aa6/67aa62103615ef1c5582b7406cd8381bcdcf3a9e" alt=""
Climate's the same. Farmers are well aware heat and storms are reducing their animals weight gains, crop production, and income. But rather than treat the cause with a Marshall Plan style jump to clean fuel and elimination of harmful chemicals and waste in industry and the home, we are sliding into a plan to adapt to global warming. Breeders are working on hybrid, GM and cloneed animals and crops that can take higher heat, less water, or for some areas survive longer in flooded fields. Air conditioned barns and field quipment will be altered too. Along the coasts walls are going up in some areas to turn back high water. All this, it's the cancer model, suffer treat suffer treat. It's a reactionary economy. This is like standing on tip toes with a taut taut noose around your neck, it works for a while. Compared to cancer, prevention of global warming does have money behind it, the fastest growing sector of the economy is the "green" stuff, from solar and wind projects to insulation and stingy energy appliances and lights.
Eat less meat, much less, at once you improve your health and help the planet since meat is an energy, drug and water consumer of the most severe order.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Anonymous comments might end up in the trash.