I expected more from this article and better from Breakthrough. This had the chance to critically engage with RFK Jr.’s views on food, balancing their strengths and weaknesses, but instead it leans into dismissiveness and fear-mongering. This approach doesn’t just miss the mark—it undermines credibility. The ecomodernist movement needs to confront real concerns, like the health impacts of ultra-processed foods and the growing disconnection between people and their food. By refusing to admit that RFK has valid critiques of our current food system, this article risks alienating those who might otherwise join the cause. If we want to build a stronger coalition for meaningful reform, we have to think bigger and engage thoughtfully. This kind of writing doesn’t inspire change—it pushes people away.
RFKj has few scientifically valid criticisms of food policy. He is against both pesticide use, and the use of GMOs that make reductions in pesticide use possible. He thinks seed oils and artificial dyes, which are don’t have any scientific proof that they harm health should be banned. He wants to replace all major agricultural companies with small sustainable organic farms (which would bring back hunger and high food prices), only because big is bad. He wants raw milk to be available without labeling which would sicken many.
There is no need to critically engage people whose views are ridiculous and unsupported by science or logic.
Are you serious? Seed oils have been linked to increased inflammation and, more recently, colon cancer. I am sure as we start looking we will find more issues. Correlation isn’t causation but some of our major chronic issues began to be an issue around the time of their system wide adoption.
Artificial dies have most certainly been linked to ADHD, behaviors issues and other health outcomes. Red 3 has been linked to Thyroid cancers and will shortly be removed (PER THE FDA).
I mean, fine if you want to bury your head in the sand, but to say he has no valid criticism is absurd at this point.
'Breakthrough Journal exists to modernize environmental thought for the 21st century, challenging conventional wisdom in service of crafting a relevant and powerful new ecological politics. To this end, Breakthrough Journal publishes long-form essays, commentaries, and reviews that set out to unsettle the many unexamined assumptions upon which contemporary environmental thought and action have been predicated and to reimagine what it means to build and inhabit a good Anthropocene'
RFKj doesn’t want to review modern agricultural practices, he wants to have only small sustainable farms that don’t use GMOs or pesticides, which if you consider how many people will spend more on food or go hungry, is extremely naive.
This Buzen guy is a troll. Refuses to engage with ideas that are counter to his preferred narrative of the world and just ran through the comment section poorly picking apart legitimate arguments and concerns. Best not engage with the likes of someone like them.
Take a drive across America. Industrial agriculture has ruined the land. Depletion of the soil, foreign crops, and forced food production was brought to “America” by colonial settlers and has created sickness in a multitude of ways since then. Independent farmers are the last free people on earth. This type of writing is a danger to us all.
Driving across America I see acres of corn which is a crop native to America, ( see also potatoes, tomatoes and chilies)and which produces cheap food, which would be even cheaper if it weren’t mandated to be made into ethanol.
"The vast majority of U.S. corn, soybeans, and cotton are GM—more than 90 percent for each. The global adoption of GM seeds has allowed for an increased output of 330 million tonnes of soybeans and 550 million tonnes of corn since 1996."
One of the purposes of GM (genetically modified) crops is to make them Roundup (glyphosate) resistant. Roundup is an herbicide that can by sprayed on Roundup-resistant crops to kill weeds, while the crops remain healthy. While I don't necessarily agree, lawyers have been suing the pants off the producers of Roundup, claiming it's a carcinogen.
Lawyers have been getting rich by suing Bayer and Monsanto claiming that glyphosate is harmful to humans, but there are no scientific studies that prove that for any reasonable residue of it in foods. Lawyers, whose enrichment depends on it, can skillfully convince juries otherwise.
yikes 'chalk full','environmental lawyer-turned-influence', 'We use to eat real food' proof reading is important.
'Pesticide residues, as currently allowed, pose little threat to human health' There are plenty of examples of working agriculture that use no pesticides. RFKJ has stated that he will provide studies, for example that the pesticides cause harm and then the lawyers will create the cases where damages will be decided. Those producers that use the pesticides will then make the decision to continue the usage.
An example like “My uncle has an organic farm that doesn’t use pesticides” is no reason to believe that current agricultural production can be sufficient without pesticides or GMOs
I suppose that there are nieces and nephews of the owners of the many large scale farms that use no pesticides. It does seem that you think that pesticides are required for large-scale ag production. The is an entire internet out there to search for farms that demonstrate it is possible to grow healthy food without using harmful chemicals.
Pesticides are scientifically shown, via thousands of studies, to cause a wide swath of chronic diseases in adults and kids. To deny this destroys the validity of this entire article. Glyphosate, for example, is not just an herbicide, but a bactericide (antibiotic). It is culpable for devastating soil and human microbiomes. Make no mistake: taking people (farmers) off the land in the name of higher yields of cheap (aka ‘crap’) food is only hurting human health and putting those same workers to work in call centers and other mind numbing jobs.
I expected more from this article and better from Breakthrough. This had the chance to critically engage with RFK Jr.’s views on food, balancing their strengths and weaknesses, but instead it leans into dismissiveness and fear-mongering. This approach doesn’t just miss the mark—it undermines credibility. The ecomodernist movement needs to confront real concerns, like the health impacts of ultra-processed foods and the growing disconnection between people and their food. By refusing to admit that RFK has valid critiques of our current food system, this article risks alienating those who might otherwise join the cause. If we want to build a stronger coalition for meaningful reform, we have to think bigger and engage thoughtfully. This kind of writing doesn’t inspire change—it pushes people away.
RFKj has few scientifically valid criticisms of food policy. He is against both pesticide use, and the use of GMOs that make reductions in pesticide use possible. He thinks seed oils and artificial dyes, which are don’t have any scientific proof that they harm health should be banned. He wants to replace all major agricultural companies with small sustainable organic farms (which would bring back hunger and high food prices), only because big is bad. He wants raw milk to be available without labeling which would sicken many.
There is no need to critically engage people whose views are ridiculous and unsupported by science or logic.
Are you serious? Seed oils have been linked to increased inflammation and, more recently, colon cancer. I am sure as we start looking we will find more issues. Correlation isn’t causation but some of our major chronic issues began to be an issue around the time of their system wide adoption.
Artificial dies have most certainly been linked to ADHD, behaviors issues and other health outcomes. Red 3 has been linked to Thyroid cancers and will shortly be removed (PER THE FDA).
I mean, fine if you want to bury your head in the sand, but to say he has no valid criticism is absurd at this point.
'Breakthrough Journal exists to modernize environmental thought for the 21st century, challenging conventional wisdom in service of crafting a relevant and powerful new ecological politics. To this end, Breakthrough Journal publishes long-form essays, commentaries, and reviews that set out to unsettle the many unexamined assumptions upon which contemporary environmental thought and action have been predicated and to reimagine what it means to build and inhabit a good Anthropocene'
Did you post this article to the wrong location?
Exactly! A picture of a wolf in sheep’s clothing comes to mind here.
No one denies that food needs to be plentiful and affordable.
However to suggest that modern agricultural practices do not need to be critically reviewed is to say the least, naive.
RFKj doesn’t want to review modern agricultural practices, he wants to have only small sustainable farms that don’t use GMOs or pesticides, which if you consider how many people will spend more on food or go hungry, is extremely naive.
Ok...so let's do nothing. Let's not even have a critical look at how our food is sourced. Let's just keep eating what we are given.
There is more life below our feet than above, it's called soil. If you live in a rural area then you may have some idea of how much chemical is used.
This Buzen guy is a troll. Refuses to engage with ideas that are counter to his preferred narrative of the world and just ran through the comment section poorly picking apart legitimate arguments and concerns. Best not engage with the likes of someone like them.
Take a drive across America. Industrial agriculture has ruined the land. Depletion of the soil, foreign crops, and forced food production was brought to “America” by colonial settlers and has created sickness in a multitude of ways since then. Independent farmers are the last free people on earth. This type of writing is a danger to us all.
Driving across America I see acres of corn which is a crop native to America, ( see also potatoes, tomatoes and chilies)and which produces cheap food, which would be even cheaper if it weren’t mandated to be made into ethanol.
"The vast majority of U.S. corn, soybeans, and cotton are GM—more than 90 percent for each. The global adoption of GM seeds has allowed for an increased output of 330 million tonnes of soybeans and 550 million tonnes of corn since 1996."
One of the purposes of GM (genetically modified) crops is to make them Roundup (glyphosate) resistant. Roundup is an herbicide that can by sprayed on Roundup-resistant crops to kill weeds, while the crops remain healthy. While I don't necessarily agree, lawyers have been suing the pants off the producers of Roundup, claiming it's a carcinogen.
What else did you leave out of your article?
Lawyers have been getting rich by suing Bayer and Monsanto claiming that glyphosate is harmful to humans, but there are no scientific studies that prove that for any reasonable residue of it in foods. Lawyers, whose enrichment depends on it, can skillfully convince juries otherwise.
Correct me if I’m mistaken, but glyphosate is an herbicide, not a pesticide.
Pesticide is the overarching term. Herbicides, insecticides, fungicides are all pesticides. They kill things we don't like and call "pests".
It kills weeds which are not actually herbs, but pests.
yikes 'chalk full','environmental lawyer-turned-influence', 'We use to eat real food' proof reading is important.
'Pesticide residues, as currently allowed, pose little threat to human health' There are plenty of examples of working agriculture that use no pesticides. RFKJ has stated that he will provide studies, for example that the pesticides cause harm and then the lawyers will create the cases where damages will be decided. Those producers that use the pesticides will then make the decision to continue the usage.
An example like “My uncle has an organic farm that doesn’t use pesticides” is no reason to believe that current agricultural production can be sufficient without pesticides or GMOs
I suppose that there are nieces and nephews of the owners of the many large scale farms that use no pesticides. It does seem that you think that pesticides are required for large-scale ag production. The is an entire internet out there to search for farms that demonstrate it is possible to grow healthy food without using harmful chemicals.
Pesticides are scientifically shown, via thousands of studies, to cause a wide swath of chronic diseases in adults and kids. To deny this destroys the validity of this entire article. Glyphosate, for example, is not just an herbicide, but a bactericide (antibiotic). It is culpable for devastating soil and human microbiomes. Make no mistake: taking people (farmers) off the land in the name of higher yields of cheap (aka ‘crap’) food is only hurting human health and putting those same workers to work in call centers and other mind numbing jobs.
This piece focuses on the FDA. Will you be writing about RFK Jr 's potential impact at the CDC and NIH?
While FIFRA and pesticide registrations fall under the USDA, the NIH and CDC fall directly under HHS, where he is the nominee.
Public health and standard childhood and travel vaccinations need defending.