What's so special about organic food?

[Castor Troy]

Like the title says. What's so special about organic food? Why do so many people seem to be into it?

[Castor Troy]

Whoops. I mean the 100% all natural food. Just to clarify.

[BlkbrryTheGreat]

What's so special about it? Why it's more expensive, of course.

[General Zod]

people are into it because it claims to be natural. regardless of whether it actually has any health benefits or not. or regardless if it's more expensive than regular food or not.

[Jalinth]

people are into it because it claims to be natural. regardless of whether it actually has any health benefits or not. or regardless if it's more expensive than regular food or not.

I always like the "all natural" designation as if natural can't kill you. I could offer a nice, organic, glass of hemlock for sale - any takers?

[Chmee]

Depends on your definition of organic and the food group ....

For me, with dairy and meats, it's mostly a lack of hormones and steroids in the animal. In vegetables, it's a lack of strong pesticides.

The advantage is ... well, putting less shit in my body.

[aerius]

Mis-guided health nuts in most cases. I tried organic free range chicken once, it was the toughest, driest, most stringy chicken I've ever had. I'm sure it was hormone free and raised & slaughtered humanely, but it was the worst chicken I've ever eaten.

With organic vegetables I can understand why people would want them. With certain vegetable such as broccoli, cabbage, or cauliflower, if they've been sprayed with pesticides or other chemicals it's damn near impossible to wash it out. If chemical contamination is a concern, it makes sense to buy vegetables that were never sprayed in the first place.

[Chmee]

Mis-guided health nuts in most cases. I tried organic free range chicken once, it was the toughest, driest, most stringy chicken I've ever had. I'm sure it was hormone free and raised & slaughtered humanely, but it was the worst chicken I've ever eaten.

With organic vegetables I can understand why people would want them. With certain vegetable such as broccoli, cabbage, or cauliflower, if they've been sprayed with pesticides or other chemicals it's damn near impossible to wash it out. If chemical contamination is a concern, it makes sense to buy vegetables that were never sprayed in the first place.

You got a bad chicken ... gee, that never happens with mass-produced meat.

All I can tell you is that generally the organic/freerange chicken I get at the local market is great meat ... but yeah, it costs a little more, you're not gonna find that shit for $.89 a pound at Wal-Mart.

[Wicked Pilot]

It's just the hippies attempts to revolt against argicultural progress. If it were up to them billions would starve in an attempt to rid the world of evil pesticides, fertilizers, hormones, genetic engineering, etc.

[aerius]

You got a bad chicken ... gee, that never happens with mass-produced meat.

All I can tell you is that generally the organic/freerange chicken I get at the local market is great meat ... but yeah, it costs a little more, you're not gonna find that shit for $.89 a pound at Wal-Mart.

I admit it had better taste, but goddamn was it ever tough. If I didn't know better I would've sworn it was turkey.

[Big Phil]

Organic is a legal definition, while natural is not. Go to the FDA website for more information. This quote is from the page linked below. There are other links you can follow.

"It details the methods, practices and substances that can be used in producing and handling organic crops and livestock, as well as processed products. It establishes clear organic labeling criteria, and specifically prohibits the use of genetic engineering methods, ionizing radiation, and sewage sludge for fertilization."


http://www.usda.gov/news/releases/2000/12/0425.htm


In order to be labeled "organic," the product has to meet this criteria. "Natural" products are those made with "natural" ingredients; meaning that the ingredients in "natural" products are not artificial. "Natural" is more of a marketing ploy, while "organic" is actual an FDA recognized category of food.

[Chmee]

It's just the hippies attempts to revolt against argicultural progress. If it were up to them billions would starve in an attempt to rid the world of evil pesticides, fertilizers, hormones, genetic engineering, etc.

lol ... that's like saying that people who buy BMW's are trying to rid the world of automobiles .... some of us are just willing to pay a little more for something that's safer and of higher quality.

[tharkûn]

What's so special about organic food?

According to clinical trials? Not a damn thing - except that shoddy organic farmers are more likely to cause outbreaks of infection and food poisoning.

Oh and that it takes up to an order of magnitude more resources to farm "organicly".

Why do so many people seem to be into it?

Brand marketing.

People are willing to automaticly assume that assume that you an appreciable amount of the hormones given to cows ends up in your meat and that those hormones then cause problems in your body. People forget that some of those hormones are produced in cabbages naturally and in higher doses than make it into your medium well steak and into your gut. The fact that the Joint Expert Committee on Food Additives at the WHO, the Codex Committe on Residues of Vetrinary Drugs, and literally dozens of bodies (both ad hoc and persistent) have ruled that there is no evidence of harm, even though billions of people have been eating beef grown with hormones for decades.

So along comes an "organic" marketer and totes the virtues of hormoneless beef and people ignore thousands of pages of scientific consensus to the contrary.

Likewise despite numerous FDA measures to deal with pesticide residue, people beleive that "organic" is healthier - even though improper organic farming results in fecal matter consumption far more harmful than pesticide residue.

Somebody invents a need and then markets organic food to fill it. The only reason it can possibly survive is because the "organic" brand is much more valuable than the "non-organic" brand.

[Wicked Pilot]

lol ... that's like saying that people who buy BMW's are trying to rid the world of automobiles .... some of us are just willing to pay a little more for something that's safer and of higher quality.

No, it just means people like you are gullible. Believe what you want but you are wasting your money if you buy into this bullshit.

[Wicked Pilot]

Many consumers who "fork over a little more" believe that the foods themselves are more nutritious, safer, and tastier. But the USDA proposal itself noted that, "No distinctions should be made between organically and non-organically produced products in terms of quality, appearance, or safety." In other words, no claim should be made that the foods themselves are better -- or even different! Some consumers believe that buying "organic" foster agricultural practices that are better for the environment.

...

Organic foods are certainly not more nutritious. The nutrient content of plants is determined primarily by heredity. Mineral content may be affected by the mineral content of the soil, but this has no significance in the overall diet.

...

Many "organic" proponents suggest that their foods are safer because they have lower levels of pesticide residues. However, the pesticide levels in our food supply are not high. In some situations, pesticides even reduce health risks by preventing the growth of harmful organisms, including molds that produce toxic substances.

...

"Organically grown" foods are not inherently tastier than conventionally grown foods. Taste is influenced by freshness, which may depend on how far the products must be shipped from farmer to consumer. What kinds of locally grown fruits and vegetables are available varies from community to community. Whether they are organically or conventionally produced is unlikely to make any difference.

...

Many buyers of "organic" foods believe that the extra money they pay will ultimately benefit the environment by encouraging more farmers to use "organic" methods. But doing this cannot have much effect because "organic" agriculture is too inefficient to meet the world's food needs.

...

Foods certified as "organic" will neither be safer nor more nutritious than "regular" foods. They will just cost more and may lessen public confidence in the safety of "ordinary" foods.

[Chmee]

To claim that all scientific studies have found that consuming synthetic hormones and steroids over the long-term is safe would be ... well, either a fabrication or ignorance.

So the only question would be, how much do you want to participate involuntarily in agri-business's longterm studies on human health? What level of risk will you accept on the health of the only body you're ever going to have? I know for a fact that my species didn't evolve eating synthetic hormones ... so should I fuel my body with what its systems naturally evolved to consume, or just roll the dice on whatever additives Archer-Daniels-Midland wants to use to improve their profit margin?

I'm not saying 'ban non-organic foods', that's as ridiculous as saying 'ban all foods but vegetables' .... people have to eat. But just as I choose to avoid fast food whenever possible because it's basically crap, I do exercise my options to cut down the unknown risks of ingesting synthetic additives when I have the opportunity to do so.

[Chmee]

Many consumers who "fork over a little more" believe that the foods themselves are more nutritious, safer, and tastier. But the USDA proposal itself noted that

The USDA? Please ... they might as well call themselves the Agribusiness Marketing Association these days .... if I relied on those guys to protect my health I might as well just hand my pistol to random junkies on the street and see what happens.

[Master of Ossus]

To claim that all scientific studies have found that consuming synthetic hormones and steroids over the long-term is safe would be ... well, either a fabrication or ignorance.

So the only question would be, how much do you want to participate involuntarily in agri-business's longterm studies on human health? What level of risk will you accept on the health of the only body you're ever going to have? I know for a fact that my species didn't evolve eating synthetic hormones ... so should I fuel my body with what its systems naturally evolved to consume, or just roll the dice on whatever additives Archer-Daniels-Midland wants to use to improve their profit margin?

I'm not saying 'ban non-organic foods', that's as ridiculous as saying 'ban all foods but vegetables' .... people have to eat. But just as I choose to avoid fast food whenever possible because it's basically crap, I do exercise my options to cut down the unknown risks of ingesting synthetic additives when I have the opportunity to do so.

Uh... the FDA requires fairly extensive testing of all pesticides, herbicides, and fertilizers that are used on foods which will be labelled and sold for human consumption. This is hardly an involuntary experiment with human health.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Organic is less safe for the very reason that pesticides etc. aren't used on them and a lot of manure is. The manure is inherently worse than the fertilisers normally used and can infect the vegetables with all sorts of lovely microbes.

But wait, you say. Washing and cooking will always work! Wrong again. A lot of these bugs, like Listeria actually grow inside the cells of the vegetables. Short of incinerating your salad, there's fuck all you can do and this problem is far worse in manure smeared organic veggies that also cost you an arm and a leg money-wise.

Avoid like the plague, literally.

[Wicked Pilot]

The USDA? Please ... they might as well call themselves the Agribusiness Marketing Association these days .... if I relied on those guys to protect my health I might as well just hand my pistol to random junkies on the street and see what happens.

Oh please, another bullshit assertion of no substance. Are you going to be contributing to this thread or not?

[Master of Ossus]

The USDA? Please ... they might as well call themselves the Agribusiness Marketing Association these days .... if I relied on those guys to protect my health I might as well just hand my pistol to random junkies on the street and see what happens.

Whether you buy organic foods or not, you are indirectly relying on the USDA to protect your health since they SET THE STANDARDS FOR WHAT IS CONSIDERED TO BE ORGANIC. Moreover, they are ultimately responsible for monitoring the kind of after-growth contamination which can damage produce and agricultural products before they are consumed.

Incidentally, if you don't accept USDA studies then whose studies would you accept? Claims made by profit-hungry farmers?

[Chmee]

The USDA? Please ... they might as well call themselves the Agribusiness Marketing Association these days .... if I relied on those guys to protect my health I might as well just hand my pistol to random junkies on the street and see what happens.

Oh please, another bullshit assertion of no substance. Are you going to be contributing to this thread or not?

You brought 'em up, not me. Under this administration, we have less oversight of industry than ever ... I mean, that's the mandate of this administration from their financial backers -- 'Don't get in the way' ... I guess I could as blithely ignore that as some people would have me ignore my diet, but I was raised to think critically, not to take everything on faith from people who have *their* interests in mind, not mine.

Disclosure time: my dad died of prostate cancer. We have an epidemic of this condition in America at the moment and what does the scientific community tell me about why: we don't know. Well ok, I find that unsettling, because as ways of dieing go, that is about the last way I want to go, it's horrifying. If I had to guess, he probably got cancer from working for 35 years in a paper mill exposed to all sorts of environmental hazards before anybody cared much about environmental hazards. But most Americans with cancer didn't work in paper mills, so all these cancers that people didn't used to get at this rate are coming from *somewhere*.

So yeah, I do what I can to take a little extra precaution, because I can. If other people do that, that's their business. The OP asked why some people choose organic, I'm happy to explain my personal choices ... you make a different choice, that's up to you.

[Civil War Man]

It's just the hippies attempts to revolt against argicultural progress. If it were up to them billions would starve in an attempt to rid the world of evil pesticides, fertilizers, hormones, genetic engineering, etc.

lol ... that's like saying that people who buy BMW's are trying to rid the world of automobiles .... some of us are just willing to pay a little more for something that's safer and of higher quality.

That analogy only fits if people who buy BMWs advocate that ONLY BMWs should be available for purchase, ignoring that a) BMW manufacturing can not produce enough cars to make sure that everyone can get one, and b) not everyone can afford to buy a BMW, resulting in a lot people being SOL.

[Wicked Pilot]

You brought 'em up, not me. Under this administration, we have less oversight of industry than ever ... I mean, that's the mandate of this administration from their financial backers -- 'Don't get in the way' ... I guess I could as blithely ignore that as some people would have me ignore my diet, but I was raised to think critically, not to take everything on faith from people who have *their* interests in mind, not mine.

Blame Bush, how origional. Did you even bother to look at the dates from a large portion of the studies cited, or are you suggesting that Bush corrupted the USDA while governor of Texas?

And people have been getting cancer for thousands of years now. If you are so concerned about this 'new' phantom menace then perhaps you should stay home hiding behind your tin foil hat.

And I'm still waiting for you to post some kind of reputable study saying how nonorganic foods are evil. I'm two hours ahead of you and I have an early wakeup tommorow, by bedtime grows near.

[Chmee]

It's just the hippies attempts to revolt against argicultural progress. If it were up to them billions would starve in an attempt to rid the world of evil pesticides, fertilizers, hormones, genetic engineering, etc.

lol ... that's like saying that people who buy BMW's are trying to rid the world of automobiles .... some of us are just willing to pay a little more for something that's safer and of higher quality.

That analogy only fits if people who buy BMWs advocate that ONLY BMWs should be available for purchase, ignoring that a) BMW manufacturing can not produce enough cars to make sure that everyone can get one, and b) not everyone can afford to buy a BMW, resulting in a lot people being SOL.

And are all people who buy organic produce saying that everyone should be required to? Not in my 'hood. Personal choice, the free market, I'm all for 'em. That's why there's 3 markets within a mile of where I live that have a wide availability of organics, because there's enough demand for it here. Does that require a certain level of affluence? Sure, but so does buying meat at all ... if you wanted only the cheapest & most efficient means of delivering calories to humans you wouldn't feed millions of tons of feed grain to cows, you'd feed it to people. But people like meat, so we use some rather inefficient processes to produce it ... that's okay with me, it's the free market at work.