Shopping for produce? Here's a chart with some important info!

[jillan]

[img][/img]


No more 8's coming into my house.... ever!

[4th law of robotics]

1. Really I'm more interested in where it's from

the horror over GMOs ("its gots jeans!!!!!!!!!!&quot is a bit silly.

[jillan]

3. To each their own.

[robinlynne]

4. in your opinion.

[BanzaiBonnie]

8. Gene splicing

what scientists (who don't work for the mega-corps) are finding is that the genes are not stable. This is a problem and begs further study.

Sorry sweetie. It's not silly at all.

[4th law of robotics]

15. "the genes are not stable"

You're really going to have to elaborate on that. And then explain how this represents a clear threat to human health despite decades of evidence to the contrary.

[magical thyme]

25. there was an article posted (from cbsnews.com) the other day about what happened to a GMO pasture

The pasture was planted 15 years ago. Apparently recent weather extremes caused some changes to the grass that caused it to emit cyanide gas one day. The farmer turned his 15 cows onto the pasture and went off to do chores, but came running back when he heard bellowing from the pasture. He found the cows that were still alive in convulsions. He lost 12 of the 15 cows.

I'll go look for the article. It was front page last Sunday (I saw it at work).

Edited to add link: http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57459357/gm-grass-linked-to-texas-cattle-deaths/

I have already seen articles on studies that were done on GMO produce (BP corn? I forget which food) that showed significantly higher levels of kidney disease in women and significantly higher levels of liver disease in men (or vice versa, this was a couple years ago). The company involved incorrectly merged the studies into one large group, bringing the disease numbers down to more acceptable levels, and the USDA accepted the now flawed and incorrect results.

[4th law of robotics]

27. A key element of that story is that it was a lie

it was not GM grass. Regular bermuda grass does this during periods of drought (in Texas? Perish the thought!).

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57459975/grass-tied-to-texas-cattle-deaths-hybrid-not-gm/

So I don't think that should really count against the technology since it was made up. Like you could state that GM crops were fed to holocaust prisoners by the germans to kill them. That certainly sounds bad. But it isn't true.

/hybrid =/= GM. If you ban all hybrid crops literally 90% of the world will starve to death. Optimistically.

[magical thyme]

34. you beat me to the correction which I saw while getting the 1st link

So I went back to investigate (the first thing I found was, unfortunately, a private site with an agenda). I was trying to post this when I got thrown out of DU:

http://www.examiner.com/article/gmo-food-hybrid-poison-grass-that-kills-texas-cattle-not-genetically-modified

BTW, calling the story a lie seems a bit harsh, since CBS published the correction (which I had not yet seen until now).

[4th law of robotics]

38. I think it was done deliberately

they knew that "GMO FOOD SPRAYS CYANIDE GAS!" would get people's attention.

So they either deliberately lied or deliberately did not do their homework.


Then later after the story is cemented as fact they came back and said "yeah ok well that never actually happened".

/compare the number of hits you get for the original fear mongering story to the number you get for the actual story.

[magical thyme]

46. I just googled "cows gmo pasture cyanide"

and only looked at the top few hits. I got a couple of the story, and a few corrections (not CBS', but other site corrections) and several corrections came out on top. I posted the CBS link that I was looking for and then returned to look for a more credible source for the correction (the one on top was a very slanted personal news site).

[CleanLucre]

9. why is it silly?

[4th law of robotics]

17. Not based on science

but rather a feeling.

Like the anti-vaccers.

[roody]

29. I do have a feeling that I prefer my food's

genes not to have been invaded by a virus.

[4th law of robotics]

32. Exactly, a feeling

not based on science.

And I've got some bad news for you: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/01/100107103621.htm

Prior to mankind even coming in to existence viruses made up a respectable chunk of the genome of most every organism.

[CleanLucre]

44. not by the hand of man

what gives him the feeling he knows how best to fuck with something so fundamental, including toxifying a food source?

[evirus]

47. Chemistry is chemistry, how a gene acts in a bacteria cell is the same as it will act in other cells

how exactly does GMO "toxify a food source?" do you have any specific examples?

[CleanLucre]

48. sorry

this is a bullshit discussion. not playing

you want to deliberately not get the point? why?

[evirus]

53. Seriously? do you seriously respond with that tone?

what gives him the feeling he knows how best to fuck with something so fundamental, including toxifying a food source?

You make the claim, or at least imply, that those engaged in genetic engineering are "toxifying a food source" now I'd like to see some premises or examples of what your talking about. does that really warrant you calling it a bullshit discussion?

[4th law of robotics]

58. It's exactly what I was saying

one side is coming at it from the scientific angle the other from their gut feelings.

There is really no way to have a meaningful debate.

Which is unfortunate as I *do* have some real problems with GM crops (almost exclusively in the laws surrounding them and how some companies have been behaving). But the "franken corn is poison!" people drown out the sensible opposition and get all the attention.

[CleanLucre]

66. People want the right

to be informed and have choices. Do you have a problem with that?

[4th law of robotics]

68. They have that right

and you aren't arguing for informed choices as you are pushing falsehoods.

I have no issue with labeling GM foods. I do have an issue with the industry that has built up around lying about them.

For instance: do you believe the latest lie about GM crops murdering cattle with their cyanide gas (that of course was made possible by human scientists) is appropriate or should they instead have told the truth?

[CleanLucre]

73. you are making false

accusations, not worthy of replies.

[4th law of robotics]

74. No, I'm not

you claimed genetic modifications were "toxifying" to food.

That is a falsehood that you pushed.

You are not interested in the truth.

[CleanLucre]

65. I think you know what I'm referring to

and don't respond well to YOUR tone. Sorry

[4th law of robotics]

57. You guys keep repeating my point

I thank you but that isn't necessary.

including toxifying a food source

Step one: make claim (GM food is poison!)
Step two: take position (GM food is bad for you!)
Step three: argue step two based on your assumption from step one (GM food is bad for you because it is poison!)

Repeat ad infinitum.

Also if you could A) show me why human interference is inherently evil but nature doing the same thing is not and B) point out which foods we commonly consume that haven't been altered by the hand of man.

/go find some wild broccoli or sheep.

[CleanLucre]

72. who are you talking to?

keep your assumptions to yourself. YOUre the one going on "feeling" here and hijacking the thread.

[4th law of robotics]

75. You're new so maybe you don't realize this but . . .

everything you post stays around.

So this is who I was talking to and what I was responding to:


CleanLucre (68 posts)
44. not by the hand of man

what gives him the feeling he knows how best to fuck with something so fundamental, including toxifying a food source?



/literally everything I referenced in the comment that seemingly baffled you.

[yellowcanine]

103. Nature toxifies food sources all the time.

One person's food is another person's poison. The idea that "natural" = "safe" is incorrect.
Furthermore, all crop plants have been manipulated by man. It is called plant breeding. And one is actually more likely to get an unwanted gene through conventional plant breeding than through gene splicing. That is a fact. Ask any plant breeder or geneticist.

[CleanLucre]

107. Really?

You have some good points. Myself, info and choice is good, as is questioning the point at which humans think they know better when messing with this level of nature.

[yellowcanine]

108. Yes, really. Information and choice is good, if it is correct information.

In this case, it is a bit fuzzy. The PLU codes are for the convenience of the retailer, not the customer. While GMO could be designated by the PLU code, it is not mandatory. Same with organic. Look for an "organic" label if you want to buy organic. Don't depend on the PLU code.

And yes, with conventional plant breeding it is harder to keep out unwanted genes than with GMO breeding. People had food allergies long before GMO crops were produced. That is a clue right there.

[CleanLucre]

110. Agreed

What do you think of plants being bred to contain pesticide or not produce viable seeds?

[yellowcanine]

111. We have been growing hybrid crops since the 1920s. The world hasn't ended.

Even though you can't save hybrid seed and replant it.

If you want to save seed, don't buy hybrid seed to plant or seed of plants which have been bred to produce non viable seeds.

As for the pesticide, Bt crops are used widely and have been proven very safe. Chances are if you have eaten sweet corn lately you might have eaten Bt sweet corn. The toxin is mostly in the leaves of the plant and it kills caterpillars only. Not being a caterpillar and not eating corn leaves, I am not worried.

[CleanLucre]

112. "the world hasn't ended"

nice talkin to ya

[yellowcanine]

113. Wow.

[CleanLucre]

114. .

[roody]

93. Who was injecting viruses into DNA then?

[4th law of robotics]

96. The viruses did a pretty good job of it themselves

we use them for genetic modifications because they were already so well suited to inserting their own DNA in to the DNA of other organisms.

That's pretty much all they do.

[mckara]

42. Carl Jung Said it Best:

"We should not pretend to understand the world only by the intellect; we apprehend it just as much by feeling. Therefore the judgment of the intellect is, at best, only the half of truth, and must, if it be honest, also come to an understanding of its inadequacy."

[CleanLucre]

43. that's not true

[4th law of robotics]

56. No it is

trust me on this.

[CleanLucre]

70. LOL

[4th law of robotics]

71. L

[LanternWaste]

59. I imagine most of the decisions we make, the things we do, and the people we acquaint ourselves with

I imagine most of the decisions we make, the things we do, and the people we acquaint ourselves with are based more on feelings than science... at least that's my experience-- but then I also have a good feeling about vaccinations, and received them as per my doctor's schedules, despite not having any real knowledge of disease or biology...

However, I imagine there are a handful of people who like to believe their decisions are all rational and predicated on peer-reviewed journals-- but in my experience, they're the one at a get-together who are simply looking to argue anything with anyone, and more often that getting into conversations, merely get the look from those around them.

[4th law of robotics]

60. Nothing wrong with going with your gut feeling

just don't A) present it as fact (GM is poison! Genes are toxic! Get your viral DNA out of my tomato!) and B) base public policy on it.

It's kinda like a kid who knows he hates a new food he's never tried and as proof that it will be bad he has . . .the fact that he said he hates it.

That's cool for him I guess just don't let him start banning or regulating that food item based on his notion that it will be "gross".

Just say that you don't want GM. Don't pretend it's poison. Don't make up stories about it spraying cyanide.

[LanternWaste]

99. People may or may not pretend anything they wish

People may or may not pretend anything they wish. Some people even pretend thier own brand of politics, their own brand of philosophy, or their own favorite genre of literature is the best.

(BTW-- I see many more calls for transparency that simple banning re: GMO-- but I suppose we fixate on those bits of the dramatic that do better service to our opnions)

Ofttimes, a person presenting me with "just don't pretend" does much more of that than they themselves realize.

[4th law of robotics]

101. The "just don't pretend" bit

was referring to the lie (still being spread!) that GM bermuda grass sprayed cyanide at a bunch of cows.

That's not cool.

[A Simple Game]

11. I'm sure the cattle that died when the grass they were eating

decided to gas them to death with cyanide would agree with you.

[Brickbat]

16. That happens with non-GMO grass, too.

[4th law of robotics]

20. As it was in the case

the grass was not genetically modified.

Let's see if the retraction makes as big of headlines as the original.

[Brickbat]

22. Not holding my breath.

Dude made a shitty mistake, but ZOMG MUST BE GMO!!11!!1111!

[4th law of robotics]

23. One time I got food poisoning

it was from mussels which were wild caught.

Now I know that we don't genetically engineer wild shelfish but I can't help but assume that it was in fact because of genetically modified genes.

Even though that could not be the case it must be because natural food is always safe and no one ever got food poisoning before GMOs came on the market.

[magical thyme]

35. now that's totally unfair

Retractions and corrections never get the big headlines. Why should GMO get special treatment?

[4th law of robotics]

39. "Why should GMO get special treatment?"

Why indeed?

Why should this grass have been assumed to be GMO in the first place? Because it was *evil*?

That is special treatment. Not so?

I'd be ecstatic if GMOs did not get special treatment.

[4th law of robotics]

18. A) the grass was a hybrid, not GMO

B) it had to do with drought conditions causing and increase in hydrocyanic, a common response in bermuda grass to drought.

http://www.examiner.com/article/gmo-food-hybrid-poison-grass-that-kills-texas-cattle-not-genetically-modified

This is exactly why people have such a negative view of GMOs: false reporting and a willingness to believe the hysteria.

[A Simple Game]

51. It does get confusing.

These links are to stories two days newer than yours.

http://www.examiner.com/article/15-year-old-field-of-gm-tifton-85-grass-suddenly-produces-cyanide-kills-cattle
This site suggests the grass is at best of questionable heritage.

http://dfw.cbslocal.com/2012/06/25/modified-grass-linked-to-texas-cattle-deaths/
This story just states it is GM. Poor reporting?

The articles I read were the newest articles I could find, got anything better?

[4th law of robotics]

55. This one was yesterday:

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57459975/grass-tied-to-texas-cattle-deaths-hybrid-not-gm/

And here is a link describing exactly what the grass in question is (and is not): http://www.tifton.uga.edu/fat/tifton85.htm

[yellowcanine]

105. Tifton 85 is a clue - The number roughly translates to the year of release.

There were no GMO crops in 1985. Tifton 85 hybrid Bermuda grass was actually released in 1983 from a conventional plant breeding program. So the bulk of the breeding work leading up to the hybrid release would have taken place in the 70s. If the site suggests that the grass is "at best of questionable heritage" than the site is run by scientific illiterates.

Yes, poor reporting by scientific illiterates.

[yellowcanine]

106. Any good science reporter would know the difference between GMO and a hybrid variety.

Hybrid varieties have been around since the 1920s. GMO crops have been around less than 20 years - and then just a few crops.

[yellowcanine]

104. We had HCN poisoning of cattle decades before the first GMO plant showed up.

[4th law of robotics]

19. I have a fan

I've gotten a couple of those now (with overwhelming votes in support of leaving it).

I'm assuming it's the same person since it always follows the same pattern.

[zappaman]

62. Juror #2 is awesome. n/t

[snooper2]

63. well thank you :)

[jillan]

82. I'm just curious because I have not been a juror yet, but as a juror

is it okay for you to post that someone alerted on a post, and then make fun of it?

Just curious.

[Blanks]

85. It should be mandatory.

[MattBaggins]

86. No it is not

We need a second tier Jury system of former mods who can subtract points from people so they are less likely to serve on juries or not allowed to serve at all.

[snooper2]

87. I think so...

Only on Tuesday's, Fridays and every other Sunday morning though...

And on Holidays observed by the post office I believe but I should check the handbook on that one again

[The Doctor.]

89. Can you believe some tool alerted on your post

about some tool alerting on a post?

Can you believe some tool alerted on your post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=858493

REASON FOR ALERT:

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate. (See <a href="http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=aboutus#communitystandards" target="_blank">Community Standards</a>.)

ALERTER'S COMMENTS:

Posting results of Juries in threads is not allowed. It only acts as flame bait

JURY RESULTS

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Tue Jun 26, 2012, 06:23 PM, and the Jury voted 4-2 to HIDE IT.

Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT and said: I agree. Bad form.
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: If people who alert don't want to be called 'tools', then they should alert on silly crap.
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT and said: No need to belittle others
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE and said: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT and said: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.


FUN!

[uppityperson]

90. marking to check back later for jury results from the tool alerting on the post about the tool alert

alerting on the post about the tool alerting on a post.

[4th law of robotics]

97. Is it ok to post an alert about a post on an alert?

Or is it . . . oh hell I'm getting flagged.

[siligut]

2. Good to know, thanks. nt

[tridim]

5. Or, just look at the price.

[BanzaiBonnie]

6. Please check Snopes

http://search.atomz.com/search/?sp-q=PLU+code+identify+produce&x=15&y=16&sp-a=00062d45-sp00000000&sp-advanced=1&sp-p=all&sp-w-control=1&sp-w=alike&sp-date-range=-1&sp-x=any&sp-c=100&sp-m=1&sp-s=0

[KurtNYC]

12. Snopes says it is true

[rhett o rick]

24. Snopes says what's true? That some produce has stickers? Sure.

Snopes says "Consumers should be aware, however, that PLU codes are an option which is used for the convenience of suppliers and grocers and not customers, so not all produce (particularly genetically modified varieties) are so labeled, ..."

Suppliers are happy to include a 9 to indicate organic which is popular with customers while not apt to include an 8 to indicate genetically modified, which is not popular.

[KurtNYC]

30. I do see the part about suppliers getting a choice on whether to include an 8

Where is that from?

[rhett o rick]

33. I included a quote from snopes.

and the last sentence is my opinion.

[hobbit709]

7. Except there's no law making them do this here.

The five digit starting with 9 is used, the producers won't use the 8 code because they know most people wouldn't buy it if labeled.

[Brickbat]

10. 8 means GMO, but not all GMOs are labeled 8. Just FYI.

[kestrel91316]

13. I dunno about those wonderful raspberries I just got a Von's

on sale for 3 boxes for $4, but they are about the nicest, most delicious raspberries I've ever had. They are from up north here in CA. I guess the local-ish ones from Ventura and Santa Barbara counties aren't ready yet.

[slackmaster]

21. I did not know that

[rhett o rick]

26. Sounds good but a false sense of security.

I doubt you will find any 8's. Doesnt mean you are free of GMO's.

Snopes says, "Consumers should be aware, however, that PLU codes are an option which is used for the convenience of suppliers and grocers and not customers, so not all produce (particularly genetically modified varieties) are so labeled, ..."

[MicaelS]

28. The furor over GMO foods will last only as long..

As people in the developed world aren't going hungry. If it ever comes down to a choice between going hungry and eating GMO food. the GMO opposition will cease.

[roody]

31. That is a great argument to eat

genetically modified foods!! Better than death!

[yellowcanine]

109. Easy for people in US and Europe to choose to eat non GMO food.

We can afford to pay for imported food it even if the crops fail in our country.

Not so easy for someone in a developing country who may not have enough to eat because of a drought.

Yes, GMO food is a lot better than starving.

[rhett o rick]

37. Maybe if it comes down to that choice. If we work hard we may

be able to resist Big Brother Monsanto and getting to continue eating non-GMO.

[CleanLucre]

50. when people are going hungry

they grow their own food. Unless Monsanto prevents them. Opposition to Frankenfood will continue.

[evirus]

54. Monsanto's actions are the result of patant law when applied to biology

It's not something that the entire area of genetic engineering should be held responsible for.

[4th law of robotics]

61. +1000

saying the technology is evil because one company sells it using less than scrupulous means is no different than saying that due to the actions of the pharmaceutical companies all modern medicine is worthless.

[CleanLucre]

67. who said anything

about "the entire area of genetic engineering"?

People want to grow there own food, have options, including non-GMO and/or organic.

[4th law of robotics]

76. "People want to grow there own food, have options, including non-GMO and/or organic."

They do.

[AlecBGreen]

52. food insecurity is not caused by underproduction

the WHO determined that close to 50% (H A L F) of all food is never eaten - it is wasted, rotten, eaten by vermin, etc. We have a distribution problem, not a production problem. Furthermore economic policies favoring monocropping (read: GM crops) more often than not lead to a net decrease in the food calories produced on a given acre of land by 3rd world farmers. Sure you can grow a ton of rice/corn/etc but you can no longer interplant and raise grass carp for example when you are dousing your magical GM rice with herbicides.

Being saved by GM foods is a false promise and it is unnecessary.

p.s. http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1082559/The-GM-genocide-Thousands-Indian-farmers-committing-suicide-using-genetically-modified-crops.html

[mathematic]

80. This is an interesting topic

Your link says nothing about the WHO so I did some searching. The FAO released a study last year that says 33% of food is lost or wasted. That's probably the study you're thinking of. http://www.fao.org/docrep/014/mb060e/mb060e00.pdf

It's a simplification to say that it's a "distribution" problem. The report breaks down the different stages: agricultural production, postharvest handling and storage, processing, distribution, and consumption.

In wealthy countries consumption is the largest single source of food loss (called "waste" when its done by the consumer).

Distribution is generally small and similar in absolute value everywhere, though fruits and vegetables and animal products see much larger distribution losses than other types of ag products. This has a lot to do with lack of cooling, a problem exacerbated by the hot climates of developing nations.

Unsurprisingly, processing losses are lower in wealthier/industrialized countries as this is improved by factories/processing plant efficiency (which depends on technology and industrialization). Processing losses are losses from making juice from fruit or bread from grains, etc.

Postharvest handling and storage is probably something you intended to include under "distribution". The size of its losses are generally between distribution and processing though it does depend on the ag product. It's also much higher in developing countries, due to lack of transportation, storage, and cooling infrastructure.

The report calls for more study on the topic and I hope there is. I'm curious about how this 33% figure changes over time. While historical data probably doesn't exist, I'm also interested in whether this 33% is an improvement from the past. Industrialization/wealth seems to reduce the transport, processing, and distribution losses but increases the agricultural and consumer losses.

[HopeHoops]

36. Almost right. 3&4 mean traditional, no 5. 9 DOES mean organic and 8 does mean GMO.

As for country of origin...
http://www.pma.com/resources/issues-monitoring/country-origin-labeling

[MineralMan]

40. Evolution is nature's way of producing genetically-modified food.

Humans have multiple ways of doing so. There is almost certainly nothing in the produce department of your supermarket, or even your farmer's market that is not genetically modified. Humans have been practicing selective breeding and cross-pollination for milennia. Just about everything we eat today has been manipulated by humans, genetically, through these practices. And it's a good thing that's so, since most of that type of modification has been done to increase production and improve appearance and flavor of foods. Modern corn, for example, that has never been in a laboratory, is still the product of centuries of development using traditional genetic modification strategies.

Today, we can speed up that process in the laboratory. We can do more that way to crops than has been done in the past, using traditional techniques, and we can do it much faster. But, everything grown for food is a product of human-caused genetic modification, in one way or another.

[BanzaiBonnie]

78. Hybridizing is not what is being discussed.

Splicing a glowing fish gene into a tomato is an entirely different kettle of fish, so to speak.

The biggest issue with GMO foods is the reason they are being modified. They are moodified so they won't die when sprayed with weed killer. It's my understanding that the current problem is with spraying of Round-Up. There are mahor questions that need some answers.


http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=weed-whacking-herbicide-p

Until now, most health studies have focused on the safety of glyphosate, rather than the mixture of ingredients found in Roundup. But in the new study, scientists found that Roundup’s inert ingredients amplified the toxic effect on human cells—even at concentrations much more diluted than those used on farms and lawns.

One specific inert ingredient, polyethoxylated tallowamine, or POEA, was more deadly to human embryonic, placental and umbilical cord cells than the herbicide itself – a finding the researchers call “astonishing.”

“This clearly confirms that the [inert ingredients] in Roundup formulations are not inert,” wrote the study authors from France’s University of Caen. “Moreover, the proprietary mixtures available on the market could cause cell damage and even death [at the] residual levels” found on Roundup-treated crops, such as soybeans, alfalfa and corn, or lawns and gardens.

The research team suspects that Roundup might cause pregnancy problems by interfering with hormone production, possibly leading to abnormal fetal development, low birth weights or miscarriages.

[jeff47]

94. Ok, I won't put Round-up in the baby's bottle.

Now if only the scary story included a mechanism by which Round-up remained in the plant....

[blackspade]

41. Thanks for the info

Even if it is not full proof, it still provides another tool for those of us that want to avoid problematic GMOs.

[Bigredhunk]

45. ?

Why are GMO food producers against their products being labeled as GMO foods? I don't understand that one.

ADM got shot down on trying to change "High Fructose Corn Syrup" to "Corn Sugar" recently. Loved it!

[evirus]

49. Public paranoia, which is not supported by evidence, can destroy your ability to sell.

I'd be all for truth in labeling, if it wasn't for the fact that most of the people who oppose genetic engineering demonstrate a failing understanding of genetics.

[roody]

98. Does that mean that you are not for

truth in labeling?

[jeff47]

95. Because the claims of danger travel much better than the retraction of those claims

The story that GMO grass killed a herd of cattle got a lot of coverage.

The retraction stating that the grass was not genetically modified did not get much coverage.

If you only hear the claims of danger, you are going to assume it's dangerous.

[wandy]

64. I'm just tired of having to peal those blasted stickers off of every piece of fruit and veggy....

On the up side in a month or so I'll have my own sticker free tomatos.
Soon, verry soon, I'll have all the sticker free Apricots any human could possably want.

If anyone out their can figure out how to attach Apricots to a DU post, I'll send you some.
Gosh that tree is loaded!

[jillan]

77. I'm so jealous!! Here in Az our gardening season is over for a few months.

Nothing more satisfying than growing your own

And I wish I could take some of the apricots off of your hands.

[Retrograde]

81. Especially thin-skinned fruits

bits of the skin always come off along with the danged stickers. They don't compost, either. At least the stuff I get at the farmers' market is sticker-free.

[wandy]

83. Farmers markets are a good thing. n/t

[MattBaggins]

88. Dry and mail me some

[wandy]

92. Be carefull what you wish for.....

The last time that tree was that full I did dry some.
OK I cheated and keep the dried fruit in the freser.
Here's a secret.
Let the dried apricots rehydrate in apricot brandy.
Pie filling you wouldn't believe!
Should you have a farmers market, you can also do that with peaches.
Peach brandy of coruse.
One heck of a treat in the cold dark of winter.

[cwydro]

69. glad to know this. nt

[Mika]

79. I think that Snopes.com debunked some of this.

You can use this database to look up plu codes.

http://plucodes.com/search_wizard.aspx?s=1

[hr]

| | | | |

[Jake2413]

84. FYI

Poland has banned GM seeds in the country. Just might be something to it.

[Honeycombe8]

91. Very informative. K&R. nt

[LanternWaste]

100. I think Upton Sinclair would get a smile out of this. Thanks!

I have printed that out and placed it on my refrigerator for gradual memorization. Nice to know that despite the branding, the marketing, and the packaging, there is still an effective, efficient, and convenient way to know what we are purchasing. I think Upton Sinclair would get a smile out of this.

[benld74]

102. My Fuji apple PLU sticker has 4131 on it, with a Chile Frusan wording

stamped on it as well.
Chile Frusan is international and based in South America. There is a processing plant in San Franando, California

PLU Codes do not necassarily mean locally grown! See the PLU information below from the plucode.com site itself!

More Information on...
APPLES (4131)
Variety: Fuji
Additional
Variety Info:
Type: Global
Category: FR
Size: Large
Restrictions:
Botanical: Malus pumila
North American Size: 88 size and larger
Rest of World Size: AFW = 205g and above
Date Added/Revised:
Notes:
Also known as:
[x] Close
RegionsEMEA = Europe/Middle East/Africa
AP = Asia/Pacific/Australia/NZ
LA = Latin America
NA = North America