|
You can also view the message online
|
|
Common-Sensor The CommonSensor is a computerized irrigation interface that represents an entirely innovative and revolutionary approach to irrigation: Rather than have the farmer make the watering choices, all daily irrigation decisions are made by the plant.... See: http://www.common-sensor.com/ AGRIMetaMaker… …is a tool, based on the Drupal CMS, to generate metadata as easily as possible. It does not require any installation, maintenance or updates. Simply run your browser, access the tool and start creating bibliographic references/records. Just fill in as many fields as necessary to describe your document, save the reference and your bibliographic data will be published in AGRIS. See: http://agris.fao.org/content/agrimetamaker Precision Farming Market by Technology, Components & Application Forecasts to 2020 The total precision farming market size is expected to grow at a CAGR of 12.2% from 2014 to 2020 and reach $4.55 billion by 2020. See: http://www.marketsandmarkets.com/Enquiry_Before_Buying.asp Integration-Plus Ltd We are specializing in the development of distributed information systems using modern information technologies based on remote sensing and geo-information systems, service-oriented architecture (SOA), Web services, and high performance (HPC) computing. Integration-Plus Ltd. has strong expertise in heterogeneous data processing (space-borne remote sensing data, ground measurements, modelling data), operational geoinformation products delivery, GIS, software development, training & consulting. See: http://integration-plus.kiev.ua/?page_id=2 Satellite agricultural monitoring: myths and reality, myth 2 See: http://integration-plus.kiev.ua/?p=526 With the announcement of WorldView-3, is the gap closing between commercial satellite services and UAV services in the delivery of precision agriculture services/products? See: http://earsc.org/news/worldview-3-setting-new-standards-in-earth-observation Wearable ag technology company places in funding program TekWear was chosen from more than 60 other start-up companies to take part in the three-month program and finished third among 10 finalists. TekWear develops apps for wireless wearable devices used in production agriculture and the food industry. See: http://farmindustrynews.com/precision-farming/wearable-ag-technology-company-places-funding-program
International participation looking strong for 2015 Agritechnica Farm Industry News will cover Agritechnica this November in Germany, and it looks as though an international trend has emerged from participating exhibitors. See: http://farmindustrynews.com/farm-equipment/international-participation-looking-strong-2015-agritechnica The Bee-Sting: Activist Scientists and the Abuse of Power See: http://risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2014/12/16/the-bee-sting-activist-scientists-and-the-abuse-of-power/#.VP2YvHyG8uf Proof he's the Science Guy: Bill Nye is changing his mind about GMOs from The Washington Post See: http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/energy-environment/wp/2015/03/03/proof-hes-the-science-guy-bill-nye-is-changing-his-mind-about-gmos/ EU Agriculture Briefing - All you need to know for February & March See: http://www.vieuws.eu/food-agriculture/briefing-on-agriculture-all-you-need-to-know-for-february-march-2015/ Anti-Vaccine Doctors Should Lose Their Licenses See: http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterlipson/2015/01/30/anti-vaccine-doctors-should-lose-their-licenses/ Profoundly Stupid, an apparent Side Effect of the Polio Vaccine (PSSEPV) See: http://www.alternet.org/culture/eureka-my-earthshaking-new-study-reveals-root-cause-profoundly-stupid As stupid as the previous ones: How Pain-Tolerant Are You? Look At Your Eye Color See: http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/10/how-pain-tolerant-are-you-your-eye-color-may-hold-the-answer/ Agriculture Has A Science Problem National Journal - 24-Feb-2015 - By Jerry Hagstrom Several recent findings, particularly on nutrition, have sowed confusion. Agricultural science is in trouble. Everyone in agriculture—from farmers, to agribusiness executives, to the professors who conduct agricultural research—says that decisions ranging from what to eat to settling international trade conflicts should be based on science. But developments in the past few weeks have raised questions about how much people should trust agricultural science and scientists. In January, a New York Times investigation alleged that cattle, pigs and sheep at the U.S. Meat Animal Research Center in Nebraska had been "subjected to illness, pain and premature death" as scientists attempted to increase birth rates. In early February, an Institute of Medicine panel of experts recommended that low-income people should be allowed to buy white potatoes through the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children known as WIC. That recommendation reversed an IOM panel's decision that WIC shouldn't allow purchases of white potatoes because mothers and children needed other, less starchy vegetables. Then the report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee recommended that the government tell people they no longer need to worry about how much cholesterol they consume. The recommendation reversed about 30 years of advice that people should limit their consumption of eggs and other cholesterol-dense foods. That advisory committee also said that the government should encourage people to eat "sustainable" diets, meaning that they should think about eating less meat and more plants to assure production of food for future generations. Previous advisory committees had never gone beyond nutrition and diet advice, and the recommendation raised questions about whether the 14 nationally recognized experts in nutrition, medicine, and public health were competent to reach that conclusion. How can scientists make decisions that seem so questionable? Each situation has its own explanation. Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has said that some of the practices cited at the animal research center were abandoned decades ago, but that USDA has launched a 60-day review of the treatment of animals at all federal research facilities. In the potato case, the panel appears to have concluded that the 2010 dietary guidelines recommended WIC participants eat more starchy vegetables and therefore decided that potatoes should be included. On cholesterol, the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee said the latest science showed that the previous scientific conclusion linking dietary cholesterol to human cholesterol was wrong. And in case of sustainability, the advisory committee had the authority to raise whatever issues the members decided were important. The most comprehensive answer may be, as Vilsack said in an interview, "Science, like everything else, evolves." The Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee report is advisory, Vilsack noted and in writing the actual guidelines he and Health and Human Services Secretary Sylvia Burwell will rely on advice from federal officials, the industry and the public. But Vilsack added, "I hope we would respect science" because it's difficult for policymakers to make policy without relying on science. Yes, it's impossible to imagine government policymaking without science. But these situations also demonstrate the limits that individuals and policymakers face in relying on science since it changes over time. Americans may simply have to rely on common sense and the admonition to eat and drink everything in moderation and smaller portions when making their diet decisions. Policymakers need to bring in values other than increasing agricultural productivity, as Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., and Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., have by introducing bills that would bring farm animals under the standards of the Animal Welfare Act, which governs the use of animals for nonfarm research. The National Pork Producers Council has already said, however, that the bill's temperature, housing and handling standards cannot replicate the real-world environment of farms and ranches. The difficulties that U.S. and European Union negotiators are having in dealing with genetic modification and washing chickens with chlorine in the proposed Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership also show that other approaches may be needed. Scientists say genetic modification, for example, is safe, but at a January event on T-TIP sponsored by the International Food Policy Research Institute and the Berlin-based Ecological Institute, David Orden, a FAPRI researcher and professor at Virginia Tech, observed that the problem is "science is never absolutely certain." German Federal Minister of Food and Agriculture Christian Schmidt noted during a recent trip to Washington that "You can't just meet this with science issues. You have to have cultural understanding." European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development Phil Hogan noted last week in Washington that "science is fundamental," but he added that it is up to the political process to guide science to policy. Even AGree, the U.S. foundation-financed collaborative initiative to try to reach consensus on big issues facing agriculture could not reach agreement on genetic modification. At an event last fall at the National Geographic Society to encourage more public discussion on food and agriculture, Deb Atwood, the executive director of AGree, said of genetic modification, "We do not have a dogma in that fight." But the group had agreed, Atwood said, "to have the platform for respectful exchange that includes science and values. It is 'science plus.'" After the dietary guidelines report was released, Vilsack said that scientists need to do a better job of explaining their research to the general public. That's true, but they and their advocates also need to exhibit some humility, common sense and "science-plus" values. See: http://www.nationaljournal.com/outside-influences/agriculture-has-a-science-problem-20150224
Good news / bad news The lawyer says to the wealthy art collector: "I have some good news and, I have some bad news”. The tycoon replies: "I’ve had an awful day, let's hear the good news first”. The lawyer says: “Your wife invested $5,000 in two pictures today that she figures are worth a minimum of $2 million.” The tycoon replies enthusiastically: “Well done, very good news indeed! You've just made my day; now, what’s the bad news?” The lawyer answers: “The pictures are of you screwing your secretary”. The distribution of this efita newsletter is sponsored by vitisphere.com Please, contribute to the content of your efita newsletter, and advertise your events, new publications, new products and new project in this newsletter. Without your support, it will not survive! Contact: Guy WAKSMAN E-mail: guy.waksman(a)laposte.net To read this newsletter on our web site See: http://www.informatique-agricole.org/gazette/efita/efita_150309_686.htm
|
