Hugh: I think that Frank has a valid point. Obviously poorly made compost
tea can contain E.coli, the question is how do we stop it happening?
Perceptions are everything, if it can be traced that someone got ill from
compost tea then there are legions of highly paid people who will push the
perception, right or wrong, that all compost tea is bad.
This is a job for an Bio-Dynamic farmer who is also a scientist. Can anyone understand journal articles written by researchers on E. coli? Can someone start from the beginning with a skyhook--i.e., some background, then gather all the relevant scientific articles on E. coli 0 157 H:7 and on E. coli in general and pull them together to form a rebuttal to Will Brinton, et al., and publish in a prestigous journal with a bunch of references.
Then, doggone it, write a book for laypeople like Our Stolen Future which was the first book I read on endocrine disruption from dioxin, a substance never mentioned on the label of herbicides which contain 2,4-D. Then make a video.The author of Our Stolen Future was a woman who got her Ph.D. in later life and who worked for the World Wildlife Fund. She had amassed all the journal articles and put 2 and 2 together and called together all the scientists from different fields to discuss the implications. After many meetings (I have papers from those meetings.), she wrote the book for laypeople. There are hundreds of scientific articles on endocrine disruption, but the EPA still allows dioxin-containing herbicides on the market because of the same reason that the National Organic Standards are based on "NPK organic" and leave out 24-hr Compost Tea as Elaine's group of researchers are developing it and Bio-Dynamic Agriculture. No matter how impenetrable the political situation is, we have the right and responsibility to put our information out there.
No amount of huffing and puffing will change the perception once
instigated, rumour and innuendo is the way that chemical companies fight
and there's plenty of
suckers out there willing to listen to them.
When I wanted to use Pfeiffer Field Spray on our road and it wasn't registered in Idaho, that gave Randy his opportunity to scream me down when I mentioned the word "Bio-Dynamics" by saying "It contains nematodes." He didn't know whether Pfeiffer Field Spray contained root nematodes or not, but he's acted like he did. He just knew that it hadn't been tested by the state lab. What he said was irrelevant, but he made such a fuss that I never did even get a chance to speak. I think some of those present understood what I was talking about. Brad, our Weed Supervisor later told Randy that he was a jackass and Randy apologized to me at Bonner Cty Weed Meeting in his oblique way. Maybe there's hope.
We have to start somewhere to interface with these people who don't have a clue about the things that are most important to us. I heard one of the late night TV talk show hosts make a derogatory joke about something by comparing it to dowsing. It's just lack of understanding. I don't know how long it's going to take, but we have to keep working.
I think the Korrows' idea about doing a video is good. I have an excellent video on the patenting of life called "Not for Sale" from Moving Images Video Project, 2408 E. Valley Street, Seattle, WA 98112 206 323-9461, <www.movingimages.org>. Their distributor is Bulldog Films, I think. You could do worse than getting in with them. You want professional video people to make the film. There is a filmmaker here who made a video about Sandpoint which I am going to see for the first time on Sunday. You first need to decide what information you want to get across to people about Bio-Dynamics, then you need to find a filmmaker to work with to make it really good. "Not for Sale" has shots from all over the world, really exciting music and is very well put together and edited.
I bet this group could collaborate over the net and come up with something that would set the record straight.
Merla
----- Original Message -----
From: "Hugh Lovel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, 13 November 2002 12:18 PM
Subject: Re: Search for results of Elaine's testing of bd preps> Dear Frank,
>
> You're right to a point, mate. The presence of E. coli means next to
> nothing. Everyone has it. Right?
>
> The real question is the presence of E. coli 0157:H7. Can everyone agree
> tothat? It is a virulent pathogen, and it kills. But it is a very SPECIAL
> kind of E. coli. In fact it is commonly found in feedlots. Never elsewhere
> so far as I know, and I've been watching.Which should prohibit compost teas > from feedlot manures, but why prohibitany others?
>
> If we could agree on where 0157:H7 occurs, then blanket testing for E.
> coliis meaningless. We must test for E. coli 0157:H7.
>
> Forget the rest. How relevant is it? E. coli is not the problem, 0157:H7
> is.
>
> Please, give me good science, not scare propaganda a la Dennis Avery, the
> infamous scientific prostitute. And please don't endorse his arguments by
> wishy-washy agreement that we "have to beware of coliforms in compost
> tea." We all have coliforms. I don't think there are any exceptions. Compost
>.teasmay have coliforms. Sure. Will Brinton is doubtless right. Big deal.
> Coliforms are ubiquitous. Scare tactics? Why succumb to them? Please,
> let'severyone get their brains on.
>
> As you can tell, my Scotch blood rises and my gorge swells in anticipation
> of a truly non-scientific debate (battle) in which significance pales into
> nothingness and mass is the persuading factor. I feel like I'm putting on
> my breastplate and bucklers and flexing my arms, shoulders, torso and
> legs, preparing to confront the unscientific bastards promoting this
> agenda. I think they know better, the SBs.
>
> Thank God I can laugh.
>
> Best,
> Hugh Lovel
>
>
>
>
> >Dear Hugh,
> >
> >The fact that we all carry benign strains of E. coli in our guts, and are
> >colonized therewith shortly after birth, does not mean that there are not
> >virulent strains of E. coli from animal sources that we need to be
> >concernedabout.
> >
> >The E. coli 0157:H7 issue is covered in a number of places; one recent
> >paperthat is interesting is:
> >
> >http://www.fass.org/fass01/pdfs/Callaway.pdf
> >
> >"The infectious dose is indicative of the virulence
> >of pathogenic bacteria, and E. coli O157:H7
> >has an extremely low infectious dose. In
> >one outbreak the contamination level of E.
> >coli O157:H7 in uncooked hamburger meat
> >was less than 700 cells/patty and some
> >victims ingested very little of the
> >(improperly) cooked meat (Griffin, 1998)."
> >
> >The Walkerton water outbreak here in Canada underscored the manure
> >problemassociated with 0157:H7:
> >
>
>http://www.med.uwo.ca/ecosystemhealth/education/casestudies/walkertonmed.ht
m
> >
> >Now, Hugh, I am willing to accept that BD folks as a group are at low
> >risk of having and spreading 0157 around. But, the NOSB has to deal with a
> >largeruniverse of people than that, with composts coming from feedlot > >animals,andwith an influx of newbies who may or may not know their > >excrement fromtheirwaxy shoe protectant, if you catch my reference...
> >
> >Compost tea is new. By that I mean compost tea as Elaine defines it,
> >aerobically amplified and nutrient added. Whatever we should say about
the
> >Bess study, she showed that you can grow E. coli in a compost tea
> >environment. For the most part E. coli is simply an indicator for the
fate
> >of other pathogens, chosen for its ease of monitoring, but in its 0157
form
> >(and a few others) it is a potent pathogen in its own right, and at very
low
> >infective doses.
> >
> >The majority of 0157 outbreaks have been meat related, but several have
also
> >occured in salad materials, fruit juices, and sprouts.
> >
> >So, concern that 0157 might pass into compost tea through compost and
into
> >the food supply through application of tea and retention on produce
surfaces
> >is not absurd. It is reasonable, and a small amount of precautionary
> >activity can ensure that we develop this exciting new tool in agriculture
> >safely and responsibly.
> >
> >This is not a bad thing, nor the end of the world; it just echoes the age
> >old truth that along with greater power ( the ability to quickly multiply
> >the bacterial count of a watery extract of compost a thousand fold) comes
> >greater responsibility ( the need to be even more careful to avoid
> >multiplying a pathogen).
> >
> >I guess this also means, that yes Virginia, it does so matter where your
cow
> >pattie comes from....;-)
> >
> >I suppose I could say something about stampeding, fear, ignorance,
sticking
> >your head in the sand, and really doing your homework on the science of
the
> >matter, but I already have enough bad karma for being unpleasant with
Jane,
> >so I won't go there....
> >
> >But Hugh, there are an awful lot of people out there who think there
really
> >is a pathogen problem, including Dr Brinton, and even Elaine herself.
> >Pretending it doesn't exist is not the answer.
> >
> >Frank Teuton
> >
> >
> >----- Original Message -----
> >From: "Hugh Lovel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Sent: Monday, November 11, 2002 3:43 PM
> >Subject: Re: Search for results of Elaine's testing of bd preps
> >
> >
> >> Dear Frank,
> >>
> >> The E. coli scare is absurd. I question whether there is a single human
on
> >> this continent that doesn't have E. coli in their intestines. On the
other
> >> hand, the HR 157:H7 strain that is so pathogenic is a feed lot breed.
It
> >> isn't cattle herds on pasture that have it, it is herds in confinement
> >> being fed on grain by-products. This produces a chronic diarhea
condition
> >> in the cattle and hence they get HR157:H7. My local slaughter house
that
> >> only slaughters local pastured beef gets tested twice a week and has
never
> >> had any HR157:H7 show up.
> >>
> >> It is pathetic when fear stampedes people and they ignore the science
of
> >> the subject.
> >>
> >> Best,
> >> Hugh Lovel
> >> Visit our website at: www.unionag.org
> >>
>
> Visit our website at: www.unionag.org
>
>
