Fasly-Kam

Can you tell the difference between these two molecules of urea? Image credit The urea on the left can be isolated from cattle urine (urea is the principal nitrogenous waste product of amphibians and mammals). The urea on the right can be produced via the Wohler process. They are, of course, exactly the same molecule. Subscribers to organic farming methods, however, believe that the urea on the left is an acceptable nitrogen source, while the urea on the right is not. Once upon a time, many years ago, people who considered such things believed that there were substances that could only be synthesized by living organisms. This dichotomy between living (organic) and non-living (inorganic) is the basis of today’s chemistry sub disciplines. It was understood that life arose from and involved “life forces” that were apart from the purely physical and chemical realm. In other words, all "living organisms are fundamentally different from non-living entities because they contain some non-...

[This is from an article in the December 2013 issue of CowManagement] Albert Einstein is frequently credited with saying that “Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.” While the composer Roger Sessions appears to be the actual author of this quote, it accurately captures the sentiment of a statement that Einstein did make describing the role of true scientists as they state hypotheses for testing. “It can scarcely be denied that the supreme goal of all theory is to make the irreducible basic elements as simple and as few as possible without having to surrender the adequate representation of a single datum of experience.”   (Photo credit links Einstein and Sessions ) Peter Ballerstedt, Barenbrug USA’s Forage Product Manager, believes that the failure to observe this advice has produced the epidemic of chronic disease facing America today and has limited the use of grass in rations for today’s high-producing dairy cows. “We’ve misunderstood the role of carb...

My experience has made me skeptical. I believe that’s a requirement for scientists and “ herd quitters .” After all, the opposite of skeptical is gullible. When sustainability comes up, I’m usually left wondering who’s defined the criteria. It frequently seems that profitability isn’t part of these discussions, for example. But there’s no sustainability without profit. After all, there are easier ways than farming to not make money! A definition I am most comfortable with describes sustainability as “ … meet[ing] the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs.” ( Brundtland Report , October 1987, World Commission on Environment and Development). Human nutrition must be considered one of the present needs, but the deplorable state of our conventional wisdom regarding a “healthy diet” strongly suggests it hasn’t been accurately considered. As I’ve learned the sordid history of how we’ve gotten into the current mess regarding diet...