"Organic" food craze

[Xon]

Whats with the popularity of "organic" foods? I'm now working as nightfill at a supermarket chain in the freshfood section(aka fruits 'n vegs & shit), and I see that the "organic food" line actually sells.

The idea I've seen used is the reduced/no use of chemical sprays is "healthier". But plants which arent chemically sprayed produced more of thier own toxins to prevent pests, so there ends up with more actual toxins in the end product.

So what the hell is the big deal about the stuff?

[KrauserKrauser]

People are dumb?

The marketing campaign has been successful?

People think that mined diamonds are somehow better than lab-grown diamonds?

[Admiral Valdemar]

People are dumb, as stated. Organic food is natural. GM food is made by Big Pharma, and like Big Oil and Big Tobacco, they only want to kill people or addict them to things and rake in the greenbacks. Anything man has tinkered with is inherently evil.

Same with alternative medicine (as Dawkins has said, it's "alternative" because it isn't simply medicine). It's all evil and using herbal remedies and homeopathy is good, has no side-effects (which isn't because of the lack of active ingredients of concentrations of the chemical are so low as to be useless) and Big Pharma wants to kill you all. It's not like modern medicine has rid the world of several diseases and more than doubled our life expectancy, geez.

[Ghost Rider]

As stated people are dumb. They equate Organic = Teh G00D, everything else is obviously laden with thousands of chemicals that'll make your balls turn into a vagina.

In reality, it's also sometimes with advertisting as well as pricing. Sadly higher price to many looks to be the better choice, or why else would they charge more?

It's mob mentality to natural things.

[Hillary]

Whats with the popularity of "organic" foods? I'm now working as nightfill at a supermarket chain in the freshfood section(aka fruits 'n vegs & shit), and I see that the "organic food" line actually sells.

I tend to eat organic food largely because it appears to have a better quality to it and a better taste. Why this should be, I can only guess at. It's worth the extra in my opinion.

The idea I've seen used is the reduced/no use of chemical sprays is "healthier". But plants which arent chemically sprayed produced more of thier own toxins to prevent pests, so there ends up with more actual toxins in the end product.

More toxins but are they as poisonous as the toxins from chemical sprays? Humans have been consuming the plant-produced toxins for centuries, perhaps they are better at dealing with them than they are the toxins from chemical sprays.

I don't know the answer to that one.

A further point in favour of organic farming is the effect on the surrounding wildlife. Pesticides can and do kill more than just the pests. My wife's cat nearly died when it went into a recently-sprayed strawberry field. The farmer was spraying twice-weekly for several weeks which caused serious problems.

[arigo]

I actually haven't heard about that, but it sounds plausible. However, I'd imagine our bodies have a certain immunity to many of the toxins that occur naturally in our foods. Infact, If I remember correctly, grapes create resveratrol in reponse to stress, which is even beneficial to us. Organically grown foods also tend to have higher levels of some beneficial nutrients like Selenium (an antioxidant). They also tend to have less lead and and aluminum in them. I still buy non-organic because I'm cheap, and I doubt it matters that much.

[Admiral Valdemar]

The threat from organic is mainly at the human level (ironic really). The faecal coliforms and various other bacterial and viral or similar microbiological organisms used instead of nasty pesticides and growth hormones etc. tend to be a far bigger threat than organic would have you think. For a start, it has been shown that listeria and E. coli O157:H7 are able to live inside the cells of organic produce. Good luck washing them out, and cooking them means destroying the nutrition of the vegetable given how hardy these can be (certain spores can easily take a couple of hundred degrees Celsius for a time).

Me? I'd prefer to have engineered crops than human and animal faeces get all over them. It's cheaper too, and I've never experienced any appreciable taste difference, but that varies from supplier to supplier I'd say like how Oakham chicken or Aberdeen Angus beef are typically better than your average stock.

[arigo]

The threat from organic is mainly at the human level (ironic really). The faecal coliforms and various other bacterial and viral or similar microbiological organisms used instead of nasty pesticides and growth hormones etc. tend to be a far bigger threat than organic would have you think. For a start, it has been shown that listeria and E. coli O157:H7 are able to live inside the cells of organic produce. Good luck washing them out, and cooking them means destroying the nutrition of the vegetable given how hardy these can be (certain spores can easily take a couple of hundred degrees Celsius for a time).

Me? I'd prefer to have engineered crops than human and animal faeces get all over them. It's cheaper too, and I've never experienced any appreciable taste difference, but that varies from supplier to supplier I'd say like how Oakham chicken or Aberdeen Angus beef are typically better than your average stock.

http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti ... anic_foods

"Contrary to Avery's claim, E. coli 0157:H7 contamination from manure is less likely to occur on organic farms than in the intensive farming system that Avery supports"

[Admiral Valdemar]

That wasn't the study my professor cited, and that's really only one microbe. So the most common form of E. coli isn't as prevalent as we think, doesn't mean the others aren't, and given some of the stuff I've seen in fertiliser samples, I certainly don't find it healthier.

As an aside, there are ways to limit microbial contamination using non-chemical means such as diatomaceous earth and the like. But I still believe GM crops get around these problems better and with less risk given the lobbying that goes against GM food is as bad as that against nuclear power. Blatant scaremongering.

[Hillary]

But I still believe GM crops get around these problems better and with less risk given the lobbying that goes against GM food is as bad as that against nuclear power. Blatant scaremongering.

And saying that you'll get food poisoning from organic food ISN'T scare-mongering?

[Cairber]

I've tried the organic baby food (Earth's Best) v the regular stuff (Gerber and Beech Nut) and the organic tastes A LOT better. We bought a bunch of the EB on sale once when we had been buying Gerber or Beech Nut; now Anna refuses to go back to the cheaper, non organic stuff! I have also noticed she will eat organic bananas but might only take a few bites of a regular one. Same with pears.

[Guardsman Bass]

Sometimes, the organic stuff does actually taste better. Not to mention that it's become a kind of novelty food.

Not always, though; as long as its fresh, it's almost always good, organic or not.

[Ryoga]

In general, I'd agree that 'organic' seems to be a ploy to double the price.

That being said, my store (Stop & Shop) actually sells things in organic varieties that they don't sell 'normal'. Like raspberry-chocolate chip cookies and unfiltered (pasteurized, but not watered-down) apple juice.

[Justforfun000]

Well a quick search brought up these reference studies which seem to be a good argument FOR organic....

http://www.ota.com/organic/benefits/nutrition.html

Of course one could use the appeal to motive fallacy to discard this information, but if it is intrinsically sound...

Nutritional Considerations

Growing crops in healthy soils results in food products that offer healthy nutrients.

There is mounting evidence that organically grown fruits, vegetables and grains may offer more of some nutrients, including vitamin C, iron, magnesium and phosphorus, and less exposure to nitrates and pesticide residues than their counterparts grown using synthetic pesticides and fertilizers.

Reviewing 41 published studies comparing the nutritional value of organically grown and conventionally grown fruits, vegetables, and grains, certified nutrition specialist Virginia Worthington has concluded there are significantly more of several nutrients in organic crops. These include: 27% more vitamin C, 21.1% more iron, 29.3% more magnesium, and 13.6% more phosphorus. In addition, organic products had 15.1% less nitrates than their conventional counterparts. She also noted that five servings of organic vegetables (lettuce, spinach, carrots, potatoes and cabbage) provided the recommended daily intake of vitamin C for men and women, while their conventional counterparts did not. Worthington said the results are consistent with known soil dynamics and plant physiology.
Source: "Nutritional Quality of Organic Versus Conventional Fruits, Vegetables, and Grains," by Virginia Worthington, published in The Journal of Alternative and Complementary Medicine, Vol. 7, No. 2, 2001 (pp. 161-173), available at: www.foodisyourbestmedicine.com/organic.pdf. Worthington has her Masters of Science in Nutritional Sciences from the University of Maryland, and Doctor of Science from Johns Hopkins University School of Public Health.
Organic crops appear to be higher in vitamin C, essential minerals and phytonutrients, according to the 87-page report prepared for The Soil Association of the United Kingdom and released during 2001. Reviewing 400 published papers comparing organic and non-organic foods concerning food safety, nutritional content and observed health effects, the report noted the need for further studies.
Source: "Organic Farming, Food Quality and Human Health: A review of the evidence," written and researched by Shane Heaton, The Soil Association, United Kingdom, 2001.
A study commissioned by the Organic Retailers and Growers Association of Australia (ORGAA) found that conventionally grown fruit and vegetables purchased in supermarkets and other commercial retail outlets had ten times less mineral content than fruit and vegetables grown organically. For the study, tomatoes, beans, capsicums and silver beets grown on a certified organic farm using soil regenerative techniques were analyzed for mineral elements. A similar range of vegetables grown conventionally and purchased from a supermarket was also analyzed by the Australian Government Analytical Laboratory. A major flaw of the study, however, is that it compared fresh produce at the farm to produce in a supermarket. Thus, there could have been a difference in freshness, which could have affected the nutrients measured.
Source: Organic Retailers and Growers Association of Australia, 2000, as cited in Pesticides and You, Vol. 20, No. 1, Spring 2000, News from Beyond Pesticides/National Coalition Against the Misuse of Pesticides.
A comparative study conducted by researchers at the Research Institute of Organic Agriculture (FiBL) in Switzerland found that organically grown apples were of higher quality than conventionally grown apples with respect to parameters that relate to health and taste (taste score, sugar-acidity-firmness index, nutritional fiber content, phenolic compounds content, and "vitality index" according to picture-grading methods for holistic quality assessment).
Source: "Are organically grown apples tastier and healthier? A comparative field study using conventional and alternative methods to measure fruit quality," F.P. Weibel, R. Bickel, S. Leuthold, and T. Alföldi), Acta Hort. 517: 417-427 (2000).
A study has shown that organic soups sold commercially in the United Kingdom contain almost six times as much salicylic acid as non-organic soups. John Paterson, a biochemist at Dumfries and Galloway Royal Infirmary, and scientists at the University of Strathclyde in Scotland analyzed 11 brands of organic soup and compared their levels of salicylic acid with those in non-organic varieties. Salicylic acid, which is responsible for the anti-inflammatory action of aspirin, has been shown to help prevent hardening of the arteries and bowel cancer. The average level of salicylic acid in 11 brands of organic vegetable soup was 117 nanograms per gram, compared with 20 nanograms per gram in 24 types of non-organic soup. The highest level (1,040 nanograms per gram) was found in an organic carrot and coriander soup. Four of the conventional soups had no detectable levels of salicylic acid. [Source: New Scientist magazine, March 16, 2002, page 10; European Journal of Nutrition, Vol, 40, page 289].
Research by visiting chemistry professor Theo Clark and undergraduate students at Truman State University in Missouri found organically grown oranges contained up to 30 percent more vitamin C than those grown conventionally. Reporting the findings at the June 2 Great Lakes Regional meeting of the American Chemical Society, Clark said he had expected the conventional oranges, which were much larger than the organic oranges, to have twice as much vitamin C as the organic versions. Instead, chemical isolation combined with nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy revealed the higher level in the organic oranges. [Source: Science Daily Magazine, June 2, 2002.]
Meanwhile:

Reporting on its study examining pesticide residues in foods bought around the country, Consumer Reports, January 1998, noted: "Our side-by-side tests of organic, green-labeled, and conventional unlabeled produce found that organic foods had consistently minimal or nonexistent pesticide residue."
Source: "Greener Greens? The Truth about Organic Foods," Consumer Reports, January 1998, page 13.
Analyzing U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Pesticide Data Program data comparing the relative amounts and toxicity of pesticide residues in different foods, a Consumer Union report found that fresh peaches, frozen and fresh winter squash, apples, grapes, spinach, pears, and green beans had some of the highest Toxicity Index ratings. As a result, the Consumers Union recommended purchasing organically grown apples, peaches, pears, grapes, winter squash, spinach and green beans.
Source: "Do you know what you’re eating? An analysis of U.S. Government Data on Pesticide Residues in Foods," February 1999, Consumers Union of United States Inc., Edward Groth III, project director.
Organic fruits and vegetables have only a third as many pesticide residues as their conventionally grown counterparts, according to a study by Consumers Union (CU) and the Organic Materials Review Institute. Study findings are based on pesticide residue data collected by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, from tests conducted on foods sold in California by the California Department of Pesticide Regulation, and from tests by Consumers Union. Data covered more than 94,000 food samples from more than 20 crops, with 1,291 of the samples organically grown. USDA data showed 73 percent of conventionally grown foods sampled had residue from at least one pesticide, while only 23 percent of organically grown samples of the same crops had any residues. When residues of persistent, long-banned organochlorine insecticides such as DDT were excluded from the analysis, organic samples with residues dropped from 23 to 13 percent. More than 90 percent of USDA’s samples of conventionally grown apples, peaches, pears, strawberries and celery had residues. The California data found residues in 31 percent of the conventional food, and 6.5 percent of the organic products. Tests by the Consumers Union, meanwhile, found residues on 79 percent of conventionally grown samples and 27 percent on the organic products.
Source: Food Additives and Contaminants, May 8, 2002. Also, see www.omri.org.
Data from the Associazione Italiana per l’Agricoltura Biologica and Legambiente show consumers in Italy consume approximately two kilos of chemicals and pesticides from products grown through conventional farming practices. In 2000, 30 percent of vegetables and 40 percent of fruit in more than 5,000 fruit and vegetable samples in Italy showed evidence of pesticide residues.
Source: Associazione Italiana per l’Agricoltura Biologica and Legambiente, Oct. 2, 2001, as cited in OrganicTS.com, Oct. 5, 2001.

[Instant Sunrise]

Don't GM crops also have carbon in them, making them organic by definition.

Or do they use some other definition of organic than what I am using.

[Tokaji Kyoden]

I was brought up on organic foods, and I consider myself more healthy for it. I haven't had to go to see a doctor in over 10 years because the worst thing that's happened to me in that time was a bad head cold. It's not only the pesticides of the non-organic food that make them bad, it's other things that they add to them, like horomones to make them bigger and for a lot of fruits like apples, they spray them with wax. Now tell me, since when has wax been edible? It really does taste better than no-organic food as well. They tend to be juicier and sweeter. They may not last quite as long, for they are not as well preserved, but I've never had better apple pie then organic apple pie.

Oraganic meat is another one that tastes better, not just the fruit. In a normal chicken, they are kept in cages with tons of other chickens and they get sick and diseased, and then they get fed horomones. Then all that goes into the meat that you eat. Most organic chicken/poultry/meat is free range, allowed to eat wild grass and isnt fed horomones but instead grains. The meat is so much juicier and more flavorful. And anyway, who wants to eat diseased meat?

[General Zod]

Don't GM crops also have carbon in them, making them organic by definition.

Or do they use some other definition of organic than what I am using.

Organic's basically become a buzzword to mean "we don't use fancy chemicals!" as opposed to the standard definition that you'll find in
most dictionaries.

[tharkûn]

I was brought up on organic foods, and I consider myself more healthy for it. I haven't had to go to see a doctor in over 10 years because the worst thing that's happened to me in that time was a bad head cold.

Ancedotes are not evidence. How in hell eating organic food would protect you from infectious disease boggles the mind.

It's not only the pesticides of the non-organic food that make them bad, it's other things that they add to them, like horomones to make them bigger and for a lot of fruits like apples, they spray them with wax. Now tell me, since when has wax been edible?

Hormones are fats which tend to get shreaded in the digestive tract. Parrafin was first marketed as edible wax in the 19th century.

a normal chicken, they are kept in cages with tons of other chickens and they get sick and diseased

Evidence?

then they get fed horomones.

So? Do you honestly think plants don't contain hormones?

Organic isn't intrinsicly better, the big thing is that due to their lack of preservatives the food tends to be fresher. Not to mention that because they are already in premium pricing it makes less difference if they improve quality just a bit more. Until I see a double blind to the contrary, my bet is on fresher food, branding, and all the rather mundane differences.

[Gil Hamilton]

In my opinion, freshness matters alot more than whether something is organic or not. I don't care whether it's GM or lovingly hand grown by French Nuns, organic isn't intrinsically better than GM. However, I will say that organic growers tend to have higher quality because they tend to put more effort into their production, but you pay for that when they charge you large amounts with a smile.

[Spacebeard]

Has anyone seen the commercial for an all-natural cooking spray, where a series of moms are proudly holding out their cooking and declaring, for example, "Double chocolate brownies - with sulfur dioxide!"

I think this is basically the reason why a lot of people eat "organic" food; chemicals sound like nasty shit if you don't know what they are, and hey, there might be a study on the evening news any day now linking some chemical to slightly increased occurance of some forms of cancer. These are often the same people who will insist that margarine is far less healthy than butter or that artificial sweeteners are awful, awful poisons. Some imaginative high school student ought to go door to door informing people that grocery stores "regularly spray their produce with a chemical known as dihydrogen monoxide -- even the organic produce!" and see how they react. (I don't remember if the original "dihydrogen monoxide" gag mentioned grocery store produce aisles).

That said, I do tend to buy a lot of "organic" food that I find simply tastes better than the competition, such as Stonyfield Farms yogurt. As others have said further up in the thread, in many cases you do get what you pay for in increased quality when buying brands labelled "organic"; it's just that the reason it's better has little or nothing to do with the lack of pesticides.

[Pick]

I prefer organic, but only because it usually means the food is local. As I live in the Willamette Valley in Oregon, the crops are usually of exceptional quality compared to the shit the Californians grow.

[Elfdart]

One reason "organic" meats tend to be better is that most are raised on small farms as opposed to factory farms. For example, hams from the factory farms like Smithfield or Armour are these light pink, no flavor, salty, rubbery monstrosities. The animals are kept in small pens or stalls and are doped up with tetracycline and other antibiotics instead of running around the farm as they used to.

The ones from small farms are dark pink (almost red) and are beautifully marbled. The difference in taste is the difference between night and day. My late uncle used to feed his hogs peaches and corn and the animals ran free on the farm. Now you have to pay a fortune for that sort of thing. Free range beef and chicken also taste better.

[Darth Wong]

Let me see if I've got this straight: we're told not to overuse antibiotics on ourselves because we will breed resistant strains. But we're simultaneously told that it's good to spray the living shit out of thousands of square miles of crops with powerful pesticides day in and day out because that will kill the bacteria. This doesn't strike anyone else as a little odd?

[SirNitram]

Let me see if I've got this straight: we're told not to overuse antibiotics on ourselves because we will breed resistant strains. But we're simultaneously told that it's good to spray the living shit out of thousands of square miles of crops with powerful pesticides day in and day out because that will kill the bacteria. This doesn't strike anyone else as a little odd?

You forgot where you're supposed to spray your house and stuff your kids handle with stuff that kills almost all the bacteria.

[Tokaji Kyoden]

Ancedotes are not evidence. How in hell eating organic food would protect you from infectious disease boggles the mind.

Think about this: The better stuff you put in your body, the healthier your body is, and the healthier it is, the easier it can fend off any invaders. Make sense? Good.

Hormones are fats which tend to get shreaded in the digestive tract. Parrafin was first marketed as edible wax in the 19th century.

And do you think all of them are honestly digested? The body absorbs these kinds of things, whether you like it or not. And would eat a candle? I don't think so.

So? Do you honestly think plants don't contain hormones?

Which is why I eat organic vegetables which don't have any horomones injected into them.

Evidence: http://www.antwifarms.com/chickenhome.shtml
http://www.meetyourmeat.com/
http://www.chickenindustry.com/