"Emma Thackery" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>
>> "Emma Thackery" > wrote in message
>> ...
>> > In article >,
>> > "JoeSpareBedroom" > wrote:
>> >
>> >> And, no matter what the wholesalers say, it's not related in any
>> >> way to what Emma said, which was that if the produce is locally
>> >> grown, it's less likely to be hosed with nasty chemicals.
>> >
>> > Hold on there, Bedroom. Those were neither my words nor context. What
>> > I said was:
>> >
>> > "The more local a food is, the more likely it is to be fresher and the
>> > less likely it's been over-handled, bruised, repeatedly sprayed, etc."
>> >
>> > Note that the key word there is "repeatedly". And, while I was
>> > thinking
>> > mainly of substances used during shipping to retard ripening and the
>> > like, I would also posit that the consumer will have a far easier time
>> > finding out how locally grown foods are raised.
>
>> I'm focusing on "local" and "less likely to be repeatedly sprayed". The
>> chemicals used to retard ripening are the least of your worries.
>
> I'm aware of that and I never indicated otherwise. But the focus of my
> original comment was the shipping cycle. You can't argue that I know
> nothing about or was wrong about oranges simply because I only discussed
> apples.
>


I *could* argue that, but it would just **** you off, which isn't my goal.
Maybe later. :-)