Hello fellow gamers.
I wish to draw your attention to an issue that has not been widely publicised by manufacturers because of its inherent cruelty.
The ingredient 'palm oil' found in many products is leading to the unecessary extinction of a wonderful creature, the orang-utan.
The plantations to produce the palm oil are being made at the cruel expense of huge parts of the rainforest which is the orang-utans' only home. Vast areas are being cut down at an alarming rate for this purpose. If things continue at this rate they will very soon be extinct just because of the greed of man. It is predicted they may only have 5-10 years left unless things change.
There are two types of palm oil, those from sustainable sources and those that aren't. Sustainable means rainforest is not being cut down, non-sustainable means it is. If the ingredients do not state it's from a sustainable source then I urge you all to refuse to buy the product and find something else, or contact the manufacturer and ask them directly whether the palm oil they use is from a sustainable source. Please be aware that some companies are hiding their use of palm oil by instead listing 'vegetable oil/fat'.
Please do not be a part of this. Please boycott products with palm oil in unless it's clearly stated they are from sustainable sources. It only takes a minute to check but our efforts could mean a new future for these wonderful beings.
Results of my findings so far:
PRODUCTS WITH SUSTAINABLE PALM OIL:
There is a company called 'Fry' which has a range of meat substitutes, they use only sustainable palm oil and have won an award for being a really ethical company. I highly recommend them, and the food is deliceous. They can be found in many health food shops, and here is a link to their website. Suitable for vegans. http://www.frys-special.com
Here are some links where you can buy soap and oat cakes from companies which definately use sustainable sources.
http://www.scousesoaps.co.uk/
http://www.wildaboutoats.com/news/index.html
Hovis bread has confirmed to me that the palm oil they use is only from sustainable source so I can recommend buying their loaves.
Jacob crackers have confirmed that the palm oil they use is imported from suppliers who use sustainable resources so I can recommend them also.
The Linda McCartney range of food only uses sustainable palm oil so I highly recommend them, their stuff is lovely too.
Redwood foods only use sustainable palm oil so I recommend their range of foods.
Vitaquell Organic margarine uses only sustainable palm oil.
PRODUCTS TO AVOID:
Any supermarket-own brands containing palm/vegetable oil. Many have signed up to an agreement which intends to 'look into this problem' but are currently just milking the market for profit and using non-sustainable oil. This covers a huge number of products, please check all ingredients.
PLEASE HELP THIS CAUSE BY LETTING ME KNOW OF ANY FINDINGS YOU HAVE. CHASE UP MANUFACTURERS AND DEMAND ANSWERS. I urge you to investigate the products you buy so you know that what you are buying isn't adding to this terrible problem. Do not accept companies telling you they cannot tell where their palm oil comes from or they cannot guarantee it is sustainable. It is possible to use only sustainable palm oil and know where it comes from, it may cost them more but the option is there.
Thank you for reading. For more information and other ways you can help please visit the links below. Please spread the word.
http://www.foe.co.uk/campaigns/biodiversity/case_studies/palm_oil/
http://www.orangutan.org.uk/
For more positive action, you can contact supermarkets and MPs making it clear that palm oil from non-sustainable sources is unacceptable, and that any palm oil in ingredients must be clearly labelled as sustainable or non. This deforestation must stop before it's too late.
I don't think that this is really a suitable place for your crusade.
There are loads of things like this out there that various people think that everyone else should boycott, from Starbucks to Walmart to Breast Milk. But we can't really have them all posting about it here.
I'm sure that this is very important to you, but to the rest of us it can come across as spam, and you should be careful of accidentally bringing your cause into disrepute by having it seen this way.
It's not important to me, it's important to the orangs who will all be gone in 5-10 years if this issue is ignored, it's rather more important than the other things you mention. All the other forums appreciated me posting this as almost everyone does not know about this. Delete if you wish and I won't mention it again. With the clock ticking for them I've tried to spread the word in any way I can, it's all I can do :(
I speak for myself, but it's simply impossible to have a normal, healthy life is you start to ask that every product you purchase is "green" or not. As CJ said, in this case is the orangutan, but about canned tuna it's the dolphins, about pet food is the deforestation of the Amazonas (Apparently yes... The trees are being chopped for creating grass fields to feed the cows, which are going to feed our dogs, cats...), etc... You simply can' t think of it, because then the only apparent escape is to come back to the Middle Age... And sorry... I don' t want that :)
No, it's not impossible. I do it, so does my girlfriend and many members of my family. Everything I eat is vegan and from sustainable sources. Every product I use has no animal ingredients and is not tested on animals. If anyone wants any tips I'll be happy to oblige.
Ok... I don' t want that tips... Thanks anyway.
Starbucks is great. Just ask Grundislav.
And my tummy.
I only use oil made of babies.
seriously, it'd be great to help all those cuddly orangutangs, and of course I'd do everything I can for them. After all, I usually keep an eye on what I buy and then eat. But with my income, I'm not going to be albe to buy all the green +150% price products, so I'll keep buying what's there for me. It's just about how something is cheaper than other. And yeah, I can't see people really having a change of heart after a preaching rant on an internet forum, how well meant it be.
Quote from: Tuomas on Thu 30/10/2008 22:55:48
I can't see people really having a change of heart after a preaching rant on an internet forum, how well meant it be.
That is a good point. What you really need to do if you want to get your message across is make a YouTube video about the problem, preferably involving an orangutan shedding a tear at the destruction of its habitat, or looking at the viewer with puppy-dog eyes.
I don't think that the "sustainable" argument really works here. Sure, there are some existing plantations that can grow the crops, sell them, and then re-use the same land to grow more crops. They're "sustainable", but they have a fixed level of production.
As the world population grows and people in Asia start to eat more meat, there is more demand for food which the existing sustainable plantations can't supply. So more of the planet's surface area is needed to grow food. You might be buying some sustainable oil, but there isn't enough for everybody to do so, therefore some people will always have to buy the "unsustainable" version.
The only time that food production can be fully sustainable is when the world population stops growing, and people stop wanting to eat more and more meat. And realistically, the human race is likely to destroy itself with biological weapons long before that happens.
For a second, I thought this Thread was about Orange Tang..I totally misread it at first. :)
(http://stephendixon.files.wordpress.com/2008/05/tang-is-gross.jpg)
I choose to remain ignorant.
Not using any oils except vegetable oil, though.
I don't see much point in this thread neither.
Why did I post at all? To remind robvalue that there will be people who won't give a damn and treat this as pseudo-problem of someone who has too much free time. I could adopt a puppy who would be put to sleep otherwise or give all my payment to save a sick baby. Like, immediate action. But doing so remote and effectless things as taking half-hour to read every bottle at the store, no.
You cannot change 6 billion people, or fight against heavy advertisement systems. It's pointless.
If people are scum, the ones that you need to change are richest of those scum, owners of factories.
Can you take them down?
Or are you wasting simply time?
But as I said in the first sentence...
What have the Pongos done for me lately? I don't even know any. :/
I actually do know some orang-utans. A particularly beloved ambassador of my country passed away recently (and this isn't even a political joke; Ah Meng (http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/singaporelocalnews/view/327689/1/.html) was considered an icon).
Yet I'm not so keen to boycott palm oil. I have personally travelled through the plantations of Malaysia (a country which constitutes more than 50% of world palm oil exports) and seen the animals that live in them. Sure, no orang-utans, but there are many other animals that call these plantations home.
Even if we confine our attentions to orang-utans, consider that if you boycott palm oil, it's not going to stop companies from having plantations at all. All you'll basically do is destroy the livelihoods of those who work in the plantations. Could it be that these reports of the imminent extinction of orang-utans may be exaggerated?
I'll let the Malaysians make their counter-arguments:
http://www.enn.com/top_stories/article/6379
http://ceopalmoil.blogspot.com/2008_03_01_archive.html
The palm oil industry is a huge part of the Malaysian and Indonesian economies. If the palm oil industry collapses (unlikely), where will the workers go? They'll be the ones hurt the most. And unhappy people means unrest in a country. I don't think civil war would do the orang-utans much good either.
In my experience, I've found that the truth usually lies between two extremes. The orang-utans may not be in as much danger as the worst-case scenario painted by the UN, but of course I will admit that they are a vulnerable species. Still, that's no reason to go on a crusade based on a gut-reaction. It's cool that you're trying to create awareness, robvalue, but be careful not to spread misinformation or one-sided information in the process, and harm those you're trying to help.
edited to add: Malaysia and Indonesia are actually in the process of making their palm oil industries sustainable, but as with all such major efforts it takes time. Again, boycotting them will not help their efforts.
I am saddened by what I read. I can only hope the other people who read this and who haven't posted will go away and actually think about this. I won't be returning to this thread.
Then I'm sad too, that you are unable to see the complexities of any environmental issue. Geography is my field and these are issues dear to my heart. Boycotting will not solve anything.
Quote from: auriond on Fri 31/10/2008 08:29:39
Even if we confine our attentions to orang-utans, consider that if you boycott palm oil, it's not going to stop companies from having plantations at all. All you'll basically do is destroy the livelihoods of those who work in the plantations.
The palm oil industry is a huge part of the Malaysian and Indonesian economies. If the palm oil industry collapses (unlikely), where will the workers go? They'll be the ones hurt the most.
This is no argument. It's like saying: Right, we have to keep all the armories and produce NBC-weapons because the jobs have to be saved. I know that this is an unequal comparison somehow but you get the point. The economy just can't be based on destructive ways of production.
I don't especially care about Orange-Utans but about the rain forest itself and
every creature livin in it. And if you take a look on what's left of the rainforest, it's quite depressing and doesn't promise a bright future. In 1950 the tropical forest was 16-17 mio. km² large, in 1985 only 8,5 mio. and I don't know what's left nowadays. Being "pro nature" isn't "not cool" or something, it's a fucking necessity for everyone or at least for everyone who has or wants to have children... or wants his children to have children themselves. The saddest point is that we all know about the climatic problems but no one is doing anything. (Regarding politics) everybody talks about it, but it's nothing more than that. It's bullshit without positive consequences. The german Bundeskanzlerin Angela Merkel (or Germany itself) is oddly enough seen as some sort of idol regarding ecologically friendly politics but it isn't more than an unfunny joke.
I predict a future with only "animals of production" like cows, sheep and chicken. But I don't want that.
Quote from: Nacho on Thu 30/10/2008 22:19:41
I speak for myself, but it's simply impossible to have a normal, healthy life is you start to ask that every product you purchase is "green" or not. As CJ said, in this case is the orangutan, but about canned tuna it's the dolphins, about pet food is the deforestation of the Amazonas (Apparently yes... The trees are being chopped for creating grass fields to feed the cows, which are going to feed our dogs, cats...), etc... You simply can' t think of it, because then the only apparent escape is to come back to the Middle Age... And sorry... I don' t want that :)
You're right in way. Of course the suffering of the rain forest has many reasons. Every chocolate-product of Nestlé will destroy some m² of the forest, every McDonald's burger will too. And we shouldn't buy any clothes made by poor rightless workers in Bangladesh, China or elsewhere. And we shouldn't buy Cola, as its factories in 3rd world nations lets necessary wells run dry plus Coca Cola is aggressively avoiding the creation of labor unions. But as Nacho points out this isn't quite possible.
But I completely disagree to the point that we would have to live like in the middleages in order to produce sustainable goods and having to eat enough. It's just a capitalistic problem (but not a pseudo-problem).
The western world is producing such exorbitant amounts of meat that we don't need at all. People are eating so much disgusting burgers, sausages, steaks etc. and therefore the rainforest is cleared in order to have agrarian areas to put cows on it. Do we need that? Not at all. We could live with less meat, especially regarding the amounts of food we're throwing away everyday.
But well, it's profit maximization. But I don't think it' possible to genuinely change the livestyle of the people, the only solution I see is in politics. Eg. the McDonalds Burgers just could be banned and forbidden and every other good that destroys the source of life shouldn't be produced either. So instead of trying not to buy 80% of the products out there one should organize and protest against corporations, capitalistic ways of production and dishonest/not caring politics..
The indian proverb:
"Only when the last tree has been cut down; Only when the last river has been poisoned; Only when the last fish has been caught; Only then will you find that money cannot be eaten."
..is something people shouldn't forget, but of course it doesn't matter to corporations. But I guess in 50 years or so this proverb will be remembered. Yes, I'm very desillusioned regarding the future.
QuoteI am saddened by what I read. I can only hope the other people who read this and who haven't posted will go away and actually think about this. I won't be returning to this thread.
You're probably missing human element here.
Look. I deny palm oil. Maybe don't eat some of my favourite foods so far, have pain in the heart for those monkeys, in general, live worse than now. For orangutans.
Same time, a heartless and greedy capitalist in his plantation eats orangutans for breakfast and lives much, much better. He doesn't give a shit.
Why should I do it for him? So he could be even less worried? Have clear conscience? "Not my problem, we have treehuggers for this"
It's his job to figure out how to justify his deeds and reduce damage. Not mine.
We all have 80-something years. In the end, he's lived well and prospered, I've been miserable and worried.
His kids inherit factories and plantations. They will kill orangutans this way or another.
Only outcome is my life being a bit worse. Only. Do I need it? Do orangutans need it?
My point is, fighting the results is pointless and has no far-reaching effect. Especially when problem is somewhere else.
God, I hate capitalism. The voluntary slavery of 21th century. That's my reason to take no more BS from it than absolutely necessary to not be expelled from human race. But I still remain rebellious. Palm Oil ban is not reason strong enough to lower living standards. It simply isn't.
Quote from: robvalue on Fri 31/10/2008 08:47:46
I am saddened by what I read. I can only hope the other people who read this and who haven't posted will go away and actually think about this. I won't be returning to this thread.
I don't really think that's a valid response. It's not really on to make a post to a discussion forum, and then storm off and refuse to discuss it as soon as a few people disagree with your opinion. Some valid opposing points have been made, and if you feel strongly about the issue then you should be prepared to defend your opinions and explain why other people are wrong.
If you just want to express your opinion and not listen to anybody's feedback, you'd may as well just make your post on a blog instead where you won't have to deal with opposing points of view.
Quote from: matti on Fri 31/10/2008 12:06:20
This is no argument. It's like saying: Right, we have to keep all the armories and produce NBC-weapons because the jobs have to be saved. I know that this is an unequal comparison somehow but you get the point. The economy just can't be based on destructive ways of production.
I agree with that. I'm saying that boycotting palm oil is not the solution because it harms the common worker more than it does the large corporations. Unlike weapons, palm oil is actually one of the basic necessities to some of us here, and the palm industry is practically a way of life. A more realistic solution is to find a way to make sustainable plantations economically attractive to businesses.
I don't think people who call for boycotts of palm oil really understand what they're asking for. Palm plantations are pretty much everything to these people who live their entire lives out there. Rainforests do them no good. Their own standards of living are being raised by these palm plantations. It's all fine and dandy to sit in a comfortable chair and call for boycotts to save orang-utans that you've never seen, but unless these people's realities are addressed, you're not saving any orang-utans OR rainforest either.
I also hate capitalism!!! Grrrrrr! Greedy way of ruling the World! Americans! Brits! Spanish, Germans... Ain' t you tired of this misery style of life you have?!? Let' s move, we have an alternative!!!
We can be as healthier as the cubans, the north Koreans, the Chinese, the Venezuelan, as the people of Myanmar or Haiti! Come on! We can do it! :D
Oh please, Nacho.
Is your narrow mind stuck somewhere in the cold-war era? If you think in good-capitalism <> evil-communism patterns then you really have a small horizon.
Capitalism as we know is indeed greedy and miserable. You're right about us living a high standard, but that's because we live at the expense of poor countries that produce the cheap stuff we consume under hardly bearable conditions. Go make our t-shirts in Bangladesh and say again what you think of such a system.
There are much poorer countries than Cuba, Venezuela or Bolivia that aren't socialistic or communistic at all.
Also, if you buy a sportshoe for a 100 Dollar, a few cents go to the worker while 80 Dollar went into advertising (and the rest to the manager). Don't you think this is a complete perversion of a way to produce things?
No... I think in "Where do people live better" terms... I won't include the "morale" term into discussion so communist/socialist lovers can still have a little chance to win the debate. :)
QuoteThere are much poorer countries than Cuba, Venezuela or Bolivia that aren't socialistic or communistic at all.
Yes, but there are no RICHER countries than those that ARE socialists... and if being as "rich" or as "welthy" as Venezuela is your goal, sorry, mine is a bit higher.
EDIT
(http://www.heritage.org/research/features/index/downloads/Index2008_EconFreedomMAP.jpg)
This... is the map of the "Economical freedom index" (Basically, the darker, the less socialist) It' s not a map of wealthy. But it's amazingly coincident. If you think that there is no pattern, ok... Then, it becomes to me a complete compliment to be called "mind narrow" by you, because you should show a perfect definition of "gullibility", then. ;)
No hard feelings, I guess... I don' t know why, but I like you, Matti! :D
Quote from: Nacho on Fri 31/10/2008 14:34:51
No... I think in "Where do people live better" terms... I won't include the "morale" term into discussion so communist/socialist lovers can still have a little chance to win the debate. :)
First of all, I'm not a communist but I'm a strong anti-capitalist and I'm against dogmatic ideologies. I just don't want to choose between two bad systems and I think it's stupid and contraproductive to say that we need this kind of capitalism because the communist systems we experience(d) are much worse. Even capitalism could be
so much better/friendlier/wealthier than it is now without having to call it something else than capitalism. But I'm not looking for some sort of "compromise", but this would go far now and I don't have much time...
Quote from: Nacho on Fri 31/10/2008 14:34:51
QuoteThere are much poorer countries than Cuba, Venezuela or Bolivia that aren't socialistic or communistic at all.
Yes, but there are no RICHER countries than those that ARE socialists... and if being as "rich" or as "welthy" as Venezuela is your goal, sorry, mine is a bit higher.
Hehe, mine is higher too. And I'm everything else than a fan of Chávez or Castro (though I like Morales a bit). But you have to compare a third world country with a third world country, not a rich western nation.
Quote from: Nacho on Fri 31/10/2008 14:34:51
No hard feelings, I guess... I don' t know why, but I like you, Matti! :D
No hard feelings at all. I like debates as long as everyone watches his mouth, isn't easily offended and doesn't suddenly get angry. So it's quite nice to discuss with you, since you fulfill these terms. ;)
I don't know if we're a bit too off-topic here but as I said before things like this palm-oil thing is directly connected to capitalisms way of the cheapest possible (over)production. If it doesn't bother anyone (and robvalue is gone anyway), I'll expand my thoughts a bit within the next days.
QuoteI also hate capitalism!!! Grrrrrr! Greedy way of ruling the World! Americans! Brits! Spanish, Germans... Ain' t you tired of this misery style of life you have?!? Let' s move, we have an alternative!!!
We do
not have an alternative.
That's the sad part.
Socialism, communism, self-providing-economy, stone age, nothing really works better than capitalism. Atleast not when you like computers, tv, central heating and all the wonders or modern era.
That's why we have capitalism.
But who says it's good? It less shitty option of shit options. Or to be more specific, more good things for more bad things. During soviet era, hunger was rarely a problem, education was totally free, and to survive (basic things like food, shelter) all you had to do was minor effort. Today, getting thrown to street, losing your job, etc is totally more possible, risks are everywhere, safety for future is daily problem. Then again, some of us can benefit from it much easier.
But I still hate it.
Good points by everybody! I wanted to read that you think that communism (Socialism, marxism, etc...) is not a good sollution either. With that, as IC says, there is no reliable alternative. Maybe capitalism is not perfect, but, atm, is the best we have. I think I never said that I think capitalism is perfect, or even good. I just think that it' s the best option.
And matti... I suspected, by your sensible posts and way of thinking, that you were not comunist, or (old fashioned) socialist, but you must recognise that the red star avatar does not help ;) Fortunatelly you have Ayrton Senna' s helmet in the signature, which compensates.
I'll do something when Farmers and/or Cows are threatened by extinction.
Hey Nacho, what is economic freedom anyway? The freedom to go set up an industry in a foreign country to produce the cheap goods for your own society? It is nothing but a shallow index of the countries with the highest possible freedom (and urge at the same time) to produce, trade and consume.
I like living in a political system like that, because it gives me the opportunity to think disrespectfully of it; that said, I enjoy the western world paradox quite a lot, and I don't think in categories. There are no communists or socialists anymore, these ideals or political stereotypes just don't work anymore.
And of course I'll be cutting down on my palm oil consumption. From maybe 0,1 liters in the last 15 years to 0,05 the next 15.
Palm oil (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palm_oil) - "Previously the second-most widely produced edible oil, after soybean oil, 28 million tonnes were produced worldwide in 2004."
It's almost a lost cause in a little community like this. I agree that Youtube is your best bet, if any.
Kaputtnik, no... It' s the level of statal interventionism, measured by different statistic aspects... I don' t think it has much to see in how easy is to set foreign industries in the contry (Well, yes, but it' s not the main aspect of the study...)
Anyway, I WISH that everybody would think like you about the communism and (old fashioned) socialism, but I am not that optimistic.
Ah, I missed the whole thing. Oh well.
I boycotted Nestle myself, personally.
If I boycotted everything that had hurt/harmed/annoyed nature/animals/people in any way whatsoever either now or in the past, I'd probably have to sit in a cardboard box on the street. Oh wait.. sit naked on the street with no cardboard box. Am I right people? Oh wait, hover in the air, naked on the street with no box. There we go.
My university, amongst others, boycotted nestle. It changed things. Or so we were told. We have kitkats back anyway.
This community is too small, geeks are too partisan.
Then maybe we should start an online petition.
I have just the right place: http://www.petitiononline.com/
There you go. I saved the day for one more time!
Oh, man! Are they going to cancel Pushing Daisies? I signed the petition...
Completely off-topic, but something I've noticed for a while:
The more easily accessible something becomes, the harder it is to shine through in that thing. I know it sounds logical in words, but it is odd to see it in practice. Like that petitiononline thing. It is so easy to start a petition on that site, so easy to get hundreds of signatures, and as a result, nobody takes that stuff seriously, and it is very unlikely you could sway the opinion of some private company by showing them a petition on that site.
Another example would be like blogging. If (for example) Maddox had started his site a few years later, I get the feeling it would be completely lost in the sea of boring, average blogs, and nobody would really bother with it. Same with bands...now you just mess around with a few tunes, upload it on myspace- just like all the other hundreds of thousands of people- and have absolutely nobody notice it or listen to it.
PS: I don't use palm oil for any of my foods, but then I do buy snacks that most probably use palm oil somewhere in their production process. I like my snacks on occasion, and I really don't care to give them up, but I can't find (or there is no indication of) any non-palm oil snacks. What does vegetable oil mean, anyhow? Most of the crisps/chips I eat have that written on the back.
Quote from: Nacho on Fri 31/10/2008 17:33:10
And matti... I suspected, by your sensible posts and way of thinking, that you were not comunist, or (old fashioned) socialist, but you must recognise that the red star avatar does not help ;)
You're right, but the red star is also a symbol for the EZLN (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ezln), who earned my respect by being revolutionary anticapitalistic, yet undogmatic and democratic.
Also I find the star aesthetically appealing.. ;)
I'm rather surprised by some of the negativity in this thread, honestly. I think humanity as a whole needs to reassess its place in this world if we want to continue. Many scholars have already established that our trend for demanding surpluses instead of just what we need (this applies to birth rate as well) is going to exhaust our resources in the foreseeable future.
I realize that his post is rather preachy and that there are no easy answers, but is that any reason to dismiss him or his points entirely? I think this is an actual cause for concern, as are many others with regards to how we treat the environment.
Life isn't just a bubble where what we do doesn't ever have far-reaching consequences, and turning your back on it doesn't make it go away.
The problem is that robvalue just preaches but doesn't discuss his points.
The problem is that he expects from us to "see the light" und agree with him without questioning.
And you have to ask yourself how much sense it makes for the small community of ours to boycott palm oil? Such a boycott must be bigger and better organised, and maybe it's smarter to intervene on production level than on consumer level, and there we have barely any might.
QuoteI'm rather surprised by some of the negativity in this thread, honestly. I think humanity as a whole needs to reassess its place in this world if we want to continue. Many scholars have already established that our trend for demanding surpluses instead of just what we need (this applies to birth rate as well) is going to exhaust our resources in the foreseeable future.
I realize that his post is rather preachy and that there are no easy answers, but is that any reason to dismiss him or his points entirely? I think this is an actual cause for concern, as are many others with regards to how we treat the environment.
Em. Nobody's really against his cause. Or better, safer world. And I guess most people care (except me, I hate monkeys). But the petition here, it's based on idea that starting a passive cell here, would ultimately change whole world.
It's the idea that generates negativity: it really doesn't work. 10- or even 1000 AGSers boycotting palm oil won't give even an extra month to orangutans. Yet, choosing your products because of some ingredient for rest of your life will be a chore. Chore that won't do any good really. Many posts reflect same thought here.
And how dramatically robvalue reacts to this, eliminates even last tiny bits of reason in this thread.
To really make a change, robvalue has several WORKING options...
* bring the "light" to the owners and pushers of palm oil industry, make em' see!
* kill them. And anyone after them.
* learn hard, become scientist, invent synthetical palm oil, make it cheaper to produce
* start a seriously-taken fight group against palm oil usage. Something that's in real media, not a small internet community
I'm not really for everyone boycotting palm oil or any other form of mass boycott, but howcome no-one uses olive oil or sunflower oil?
That's all we use. I'd never even heard of palm oil before this thread.
The only reason I've heard of it before is because it was what my father used to warn and threaten me with when I wanted to eat at some random fish 'n chips stall, or some fried roadside snack- "They use palm oil in it! The unhealthiest type of oil! They re-use the same oil the whole day!".
I generally use canola, or olive oil for special occasions :D.
I see where you're coming from, Ozzie and InCreator, but I guess I didn't read his post and get the same 'oh no, it's a crusader who thinks our action on this forum will make all the difference!' vibe you guys seemed to get. It seemed more like a general call to action (and he did state that he's spread the word elsewhere) than an appeal to us alone for support -- and again -- I just see nothing wrong with this. Some people in this thread have proven that not everyone was aware of this situation (myself included), so by bringing this matter to our attention he has given us new information to act (or not act) upon.
Why do you hate monkeys, anyway, InCreator? :=
(http://www.nychoke.com/images/monkey%20finger.jpg)
Look at the picture you posted, what to like here?
I wouldn't want to touch or get anywhere near this creature.
It's like heavily retarded version of human being... a monster!
I wonder if apes have ever been used in horror movie - they would do a perfect job.
Quote from: InCreator on Sun 02/11/2008 22:03:44
It's like heavily retarded version of human being... a monster!
So now heavily retarded people are monsters?
InCreator, protector of political incorrectness
As someone said... I didn' t know that palm oil existed till this thread :)
Palm oil is the cheapest oil available, I think, so basically everything's that's ready-cooked or half manifactured or fried and cheap contains palm oil.
It's very unhealthy too.
Quote from: Andail on Mon 03/11/2008 08:39:45
So now heavily retarded people are monsters?
And heavily retarded monsters are human beings.
But, I like monkeys myself, just not the Pongos. I'm sorry, I'm an Ape-ist. ;]
But seriously, the Last Stand of the Orangutan states that consumer awareness and general education is actually low on the list of solutions in terms of impact in the short-term, and low to possibly moderate in the long-term. It's nice that we're all becoming aware, but if they don't keep these people out of the forests, it's not going to change much of anything. Now that's not to say you shouldn't avoid buying the products if you want to help out, but don't fool yourself into thinking that you're solving the problem either.
Also it's good to point out that the top consumer of palm oil is China, followed by other Asian countries. You'll have to get your boycott going there to make any kind of impact.
Quote from: Andail on Mon 03/11/2008 08:39:45
Quote from: InCreator on Sun 02/11/2008 22:03:44
It's like heavily retarded version of human being... a monster!
So now heavily retarded people are monsters?
Damnit, I did not say that!!! There's no equal-sign here. Nor a comma.
Monkeys look like monsters. And they resemble retarded human beings. I seriously didn't put equal-sign here even in my head.
But even though you misunderstood, you misunderstood in hostile manner, so screw you anyway.
Quote
InCreator, protector of political incorrectness
I like that.
And I have no problems with that.
This is true.