Notes from Catherine Rowett, former Green Party MEP for East of England and deputy coordinator of the Eastern Region Green Party*(UK). Biographical reflections on life as an MEP. Longer reflections and discussions on issues relating to policy, the good life, justice, equality, anti-austerity economics and the future of the planet. This is also a forum for exchanging ideas on how to tread lightly on the planet and avoid supporting exploitation and corrupt practices. Here we go...

Friday, 9 February 2007


I haven't yet explained in detail what my negative views on soya are based on. But a Guardian article from July 25th 2006 gives some sense of the nightmare. See also Annie's theories (you have to read to the end of that post to discover the bit about soya).

But now here's another thought: perhaps the soya cloud has a silver lining?

I've just noticed, on re-reading the Guardian article, that it reports that 30-40% of babies in the USA are raised on soya formula. I take it this means 30-40% of babies, not 30-40% of bottle-fed babies (though I guess the few lucky ones fed at the breast may also have their milk heavily contaminated with soya isoflavones). So, assuming the boy and girl babies are both fed on it, this should mean that approaching 40% of US males will be infertile when they grow up. So providing we can ensure monogamous partnerships, and don't allow the girls to go round until they find a fertile male, this should mean that only just over half the population can have any children next generation round. If they continue to choose soya-based milk feeds or even increase their use, the next generation will be even smaller and only half of that generation will be fertile too. So the population will decline until the US is no longer a threat to world peace and stability, because the few real men there are will have to spend all their time trying to beget children, to stave off extinction.

Good God!

No comments: