"Organic" food craze

[Boyish-Tigerlilly]

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?

Well, now that you bring up that point, overuse of pesticides is a serious problem, since it can suffer from the same problems of overanti-biotic use, according to my bio text. I think it gives a few examples of where the pests are now highly resistant that are left over.

[tharkûn]

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.

No. The function of the immune system has specific dietary requirements, of which all are met with nice fine GM diet. I can think of a good many quite harmful substances I can feed you which will have no effect on immune function. I can even think of a few that boost immune function while trashing something else (like say brain function)

In any event lack of infectious disease is not a sign of a healthy body, it is far superior to catch many infectious diseases in childhood and build immunity when young rather than catch the same pathogen in adulthood. Chickenpox being the most obvious example. Also early exposure to "bad stuff" appears to help prevent the development of allergies.

Please cite a clinical doubleblind showing that putting this "better stuff" from organic food into your body has quantifiably better outcomes with regards to immune function.

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.

BS. Paraffin passes through the body without noticable problem, much the same as celery. Edible does not mean digestable and if you have a peer reviewed finding showing that wax consumption is unhealthy, let's see it.

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

Organic, "natural", soy contains large doses of progesterone. I could go on to list the numerous vegetables which naturally deliver far more hormones per g to your body than beef ever could (even assuming the hormones lasted throught the cooking process), but frankly that would be overkill. It doesn't matter if a hormone is injected or produced by the organisms own endocrine system. Our stomachs, livers, etc. are all very good at protecting us from ingesting harmful substances, so please feel compelled to point to the clinical double blinds backing your claims.

BTW posting links to sources which aren't peer reviewed doubleblinds, preferably something like Science, Nature, NEJM, etc. , will be taken as a concession that you cannot back up your claims with rigorious scientific proof.

Well, now that you bring up that point, overuse of pesticides is a serious problem, since it can suffer from the same problems of overanti-biotic use, according to my bio text. I think it gives a few examples of where the pests are now highly resistant that are left over.

Pesticide overuse is not as serious as anti-biotic overuse for a few reasons:
1. Anti-biotic doses are limited to human tolerance and economics, pesticides only by economics. Many resistance mechanisms are only effective against limited doses so it is far more effective to dose heavily and ensure kills on the partially resistant bugs. With anti-biotics such high dosages can have severe consequences, with pesticides it only takes more water to wash them off.
2. Bacterial lifecycles are measurable in minutes, insects in days or months. Bacteria will mutate resistance alleles far more rapidly than higher order parasites, not to mention that lateral resistance transfer is possible among bacteria but nigh unto impossible in higher parasites.
3. Resistant bacteria kill people, resistant pests just hurt farm income (more or less). Guess which one makes more headlines?

Yes pesticides are often used in idiotic fashion, but the states are far lower than with anti-biotics and certain limitations do not apply. Couple that with a slower rate of resistence and it would be shocking if pesticide overuse wasn't perceived to be less threatening than anti-biotics.

[Broomstick]

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.

I have noted that in season organic produce, particularly that locally produced, may exceed non-organics in quality, but I suspect that has a great deal to do with freshness. It takes time to ship fruit from Chile or rice from India - locally produced food spends a lot less time in transit.

It's also quite possible that a particular organic farm puts more effort into producing a relatively small quantity of highly flavorful food as opposed to a non-organic farm concentrating on producing quantity that can survive shipping and storage. Here in the US there are several farms/firms specializing in producing gourmet fruit that really is notably better than the average - and are expensive. Usually, they're given as gifts rather than routinely consumed.

Personally, I think the use of local/fresh/"gourmet" food - including organics - as luxury items is entirely OK. And I think having varieties that can be shipped to where needed and store well are also a good thing - or should we return to the days when virtually everyone in the temperate zones were showing signs of scurvy by spring because you simply could not obtain fresh fruit and vegetables in the latter half of winter.

A Red Delicious apple isn't a great apple - very little taste. But it stores and ships well and a Red Delicious apple is still arguably healthier than no apple at all or something like apple sauce.

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.

Sometimes yes and sometimes no. Aflatoxins and ptomanine, as just two examples, are naturally occuring toxins (peanuts and potatoes, respectively) that are quite harmful. Castor beans contain ricin, which is harmful enough it's been used as a weapon. Many fruit pits - peach, plum, apricot, and so on - contain cyanide precursors. So do almonds. Eating enough raw, bitter almonds - no matter how organic - can and has killed people. Raw tapioca is deadly poisonous. Those are just the ones I remember off the top of my head.

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.

Organically grown foods only have more micro nutrients, like selenium, if they're grown on soil rich in such. On selenium poor soil they are no better than anything else, and possibly worse. Which is not to say nutrient-poor soils can't be enriched - that is the whole point of fertilizer, after all.

The lead and aluminum factor again, has more to do with the soil than organic vs. non-organic growing methods. Grow food on soils contaminated with heavy metals and that shit will show up in the plants, "organic" or not.

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

This year in the US the CDC issued a report that, at least in this country, more people are becoming ill with "food borne illness" from fresh vegetables and fruit rather than bad meat or improperly stored food. Which means, at least in the US, your fruits and vegees are more of a threat than that steak over there. There are various reasons for this, including careless use of sewage-derieved fertilizers and the occassional ill farm worker handling the harvest. Organic cultivation will not prevernt either occurance simply by being "organic" or "natural". You have to use organic fertilizers properly. You have to prevent ill people from handling the produce.

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.

Sometimes "organic" does taste better - and you usually pay for that. But I've seen some crappy organic foods, too, and they cost just as much.

As far as I'm concerned, if you like the taste better and you can afford the price go ahead. Food should be enjoyed.

...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

The wax is to help prevent moisture loss and if I recall correctly it also makes it a little harder for things like fruit flies and fungus to get a foothold. That's why your organics don't last as long - they have less protection from all the other things eager to eat them.

who wants to eat diseased meat?

Be sure to check your free-range meat for parasites, then.

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?

More than odd - not healthy and not economically sensible.

"Spraying the living shit out of" croplands is stupid because you have to PAY FOR that "shit". Of course, there are stupid people in agriculture, too, but over the past few decades pesticides have been developed that are more targeted and that decay rather than last nearly forever. Intelligent farmers seek ways to reduce spraying yet achieve good results because every gallon of pesticide bought is less profit

It's like most things - you can take almost anything counter-productive levels. Excessive preocupation with "organic" leads to removing all sorts of insect life from the produce prior to cooking, worries about parasites in meat, and so on. Excessive agri-business leads to chemical contamination. At least one strain of gene-manipulated crop was nixed in the development stage because it triggered nearly fatal reactions in people with nut allergies. Too much of anything is a bad thing. Poorly cultivated food is bad regardless of cultivation method.

In moderation, however, all of the above methods have merit. It's good sense both from and economic standpoit and from human health to limit toxins. It's good sense to use controls on pests that really are a threat to the food supply, or to preserve foods for a resonable amount of time. And genetic engineering does have enormous potential to improve our lives IF it is used responsibly.

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.

Plants don't need hormones injected into them - they make their own.

Soy is rather famous for that these days - it contains so many phytoestrogens that it's being considered as a treatment for the hot flashes of menopause. But soy isn't the only plant that produces chemicals resembling those in our own bodies.

[Admiral Valdemar]

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

That's an oversimplification, although it is true. You can get food poisoning from GM too. The fact of the matter is, there are inherent risks associated with using more natural ways of bringing food to the table, which is why manure is frowned upon most of the time, though may be cheaper than what industry recommends. At the end of the day, the healthy differences between organic and natural are overblown, though I do believe my Ph.D professor when he extolls the virtues of avoiding overpriced organic food that could still be full of bugs you don't want anyway. Plus, I believe organic also takes up more resources ecologically speaking because of the lower yields etc. that are down to the practice in order to feed the greedy West.

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?

As someone else mentioned, pesticide overuse, especially of the more lethal types that toxicologists find going up through the trophic levels to become lethal to humans from our own food is certainly an issue. But unlike antibiotic resistance, pesticide use usually takes care of the bugs if done well. Antibiotic resistance today is brought on, not only by overuse of the drugs, but by idiot patients helping the idiot doctors run out of drugs by not going through with their prescription. There's a reason a GP may prescribe 6 months of tetracycline. If he wanted you to quit it and save money when you felt better, he'd say so. As such, what could've been a beaten bacterial infection only gets stronger as it finds itself suddenly not getting pummelled with toxic drugs and then goes about adapting. Nitram's point about home cleaning agents is good too. I've already ranted enough about anti-bac. soap, but even overusing toilet bleach is bad. The company may enjoy advertising it kills "99.9% of household germs", but I guarantee that 0.01% left will become a pretty fucking nasty problem somewhere down the line.

With pesticides, they tend to be used in such concentrations and often enough to produce sterile land for crops. What I advocate, however, is "natural" combating of the infections that ravage produce, that is, by using genetic engineering to produce more sturdy plants that can adapt faster than they would naturally. They'll always have diseases, that's the inherent natural predator-prey relationship, but at least they'll be using their own defences effectively rather than be tarnished by dangerous chemicals, plus, the net result may be cheaper too. Once you have a perfect tomato, you can grow more easy.

[Xon]

[quote="Hillary"][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.[.quote]
I stock the damn shelfs with the stuff(I dont deal with organic meat, wrong department). The non-organic stuff cycles through fast, you often going to get fresh non-organic food than the organic. And about 99% of the produce(aka fruit&veg) at the store I work at is Australian, so the shipping distances arent that great.

And the "better quality" & "better taste" is highly dependant on who the hell is actually selling ths store it.

[Xon]

A Red Delicious apple isn't a great apple - very little taste. But it stores and ships well and a Red Delicious apple is still arguably healthier than no apple at all or something like apple sauce

Granny Smith apples last, and last and last. They dont bruise easily too.

They are my favorite stock to handle

[Hillary]

[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.[.quote]
I stock the damn shelfs with the stuff(I dont deal with organic meat, wrong department). The non-organic stuff cycles through fast, you often going to get fresh non-organic food than the organic. And about 99% of the produce(aka fruit&veg) at the store I work at is Australian, so the shipping distances arent that great.

And the "better quality" & "better taste" is highly dependant on who the hell is actually selling ths store it.

I don't disagree. My comments are purely on my own experience, which is that for certain vegetables (French beans, brocolli and spinach among others) I've yet to find a non-organic product that is of the same quality as the organic equivalent I can buy in three separate stores. Meat products likewise. For some products, though (bananas come to mind) there is rarely any difference and I'll buy the best looking. In addition, I've failed to find a decent organic bread supplier, so I eat non-organic.

I'm not at all an organic nazi - I'll agree that much of its success is to do with marketing. There is also the question as to what constitutes 'organic'. Some bodies allow a percentage of non-organic ingredients. You also have to ask what checks are done on farms in Africa/south America and how verifiable their organic status is.

Basically, I'll buy the best tasting food.

[Admiral Valdemar]

Basically, I'll buy the best tasting food.

The debate is more than that, however. That is why the issue is often in the media, because price, impact on the environment and health all come into this other than just taste, which you'd think would be the key factor. The issue is far too complicated to just say one trumps the other, as you say, supplier also makes a big difference. Local produce will routinely be better than that which has travelled halfway across the globe. But without genetic modification or the correct climate, you won't get that local produce all year round.

[Tokaji Kyoden]

No. The function of the immune system has specific dietary requirements, of which all are met with nice fine GM diet. I can think of a good many quite harmful substances I can feed you which will have no effect on immune function. I can even think of a few that boost immune function while trashing something else (like say brain function)

So you think that chemicals that can kill bugs can't harm us in any way? I mean look at DDT and Agent Orange. My mom has extreme nervous disorders because they sprayed pesticides with those chemicals in the building where she worked for many years. And you think that your nervous system isn't necessary to your immune system?? If all parts of your body aren't working as they should, then it weakens the body as a whole.

Plants don't need hormones injected into them - they make their own.

Soy is rather famous for that these days - it contains so many phytoestrogens that it's being considered as a treatment for the hot flashes of menopause. But soy isn't the only plant that produces chemicals resembling those in our own bodies.

Yes, but there is a difference between those horomones and the growth horomones that are injected into the plants/animals.

[tharkûn]

So you think that chemicals that can kill bugs can't harm us in any way?

Don't strawman. I said I don't see the evidence that conventional food harms immunofunction. In any event the chemicals used to kill bugs that can harm us are entirely dependant on dose. In most countries there are health standards which limit the amounts, normally to within negligable concentrations. Again either show your clinical doubleblinds that eating organic improves immuno function or shut the hell up.

I mean look at DDT and Agent Orange.

What about them? DDT has no direct effects on human immunity such as I happen to be aware of. Even when human volunteers ingested 35 mg daily for years there were no reports of compromised immunity. If you have proof that DDT compromises human immunity, please cite the peer reviewed study.

Agent Orange is not even an insectiside and has never been used in that capacity.

Do you actually have some evidence backing any of your claims or do you intend to keep pulling crap out of your ass and hoping that saying charged buzzwords will cover up for your stupidity?

My mom has extreme nervous disorders because they sprayed pesticides with those chemicals in the building where she worked for many years.

You know there is this thing called dosage. All sorts of crap becomes toxic in high dosages - and that includes things like vitamins. The amount of pesticide left on retail produce in any country with decent health regulations is trivially small in comparison to direct pesticide application.

And you think that your nervous system isn't necessary to your immune system?

Only parts of it. Patients who have had portions of their brain removed, such as cancer patients, can exhibit perfectly functional immune systems.

If all parts of your body aren't working as they should, then it weakens the body as a whole.

Right which is why amputees have considerably weaker arm, brain, and heart function - oh wait this is reality where some bodily functions are indeed independent of others.

Yes, but there is a difference between those horomones and the growth horomones that are injected into the plants/animals.

Yes the injected ones have lower concentrations and are less likely to survive processing. But aside from soy and a few other veggies having higher concentrations, the truth is injected progesterone is bloody identical to natural progesterone. I can take a vial of either and every virtually every damn test will give identical results. In terms of bioactivity there is no difference.

Now, dumbass, don't ignore your burden of proof this time, cite some peer reviewed double blinds or shut the hell up. It is unacceptable to refuse to back up your arguements on this board and you aren't going to win any points by bringing up new tangetial crap to cover your lack evidence. Rest assured that if you keep trying to make up crap or drop buzzwords someone knowledgable like Broom, AV, or myself will see through your asshattery.

[Broomstick]

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.

:::Looks down:::

AaAaAaAaAaAaeeeEEEEEEEEEARGH!!!! OH MY GOD!!! IT"S TRUE! MY DICK TURNED INTO A VAGI--

Oh, wait... I've always had a vagina...

Uh, nevermind....

(sorry, couldn't resist - you know, guys, it's really not THAT horrible a fate)

[Broomstick]

So you think that chemicals that can kill bugs can't harm us in any way? I mean look at DDT and Agent Orange.

Hey, stupid, use better examples in your arguments.

DDT actually IS pretty harmless to humans - it's bugs and birds that it kills.

Agent Orange, you dumbass, is a DEFOLIANT, not a PESTICIDE. Do we need to explain the difference or can you be trusted to look it up yourself?

Moving right along - another example of bad for one group, not bad for another: chocolate. If we had had to test it on rats before allowing humans to eat it none of us would ever know about it, because it's toxic to most animals. Humans are one of the very few species that can safely eat it.

Yes, but there is a difference between those horomones and the growth horomones that are injected into the plants/animals.

Could someone else take a real stab at this one? I've had a rough week, I'm tired, and I know I'll muddle it up if I have a go at countering this one. Or I suppose we could wait until I'm a little fresher.

Tokaji Kyoden, you need to practice your debating. At present, not only am I certain you can't win this one, I'm not sure you are even capable of losing in an interesting manner. Be more sure that the examples you are giving are really what you think they are. Know that the plural of "anecdote" is not "data".

[Xon]

[Yes, but there is a difference between those horomones and the growth horomones that are injected into the plants/animals.

They are the same fucking chemicals, the difference is in the price you idiot. Natural horomones dont require buying extra stuff and then applying it.

And absorption rate of horomones from food is rediciously low due to the chemical shredding machine that is the human digestive track. It is actually a significant medical break through that allows for most medicines to work with food.

[Dahak]

There are several problems with and around the food industry.

Here in Germany, there is what we call the "avarice is cool" mentality, where customers want very cheap prices. Now prices for food are already cheap here compared to Europe, but producers feel the pressure to get cheaper still. Somewhere, they have to cut costs, and more often than not this cuts into quality (hence the occasional "food scandal"). Most customers on the other hand don't appreciate that quality can't be gotten for cheap. It also means that those small farms, and small producers have a hard time staying in business as they can't really compete with the big industrial producers.

Another problem in my opinion is this industrial approach to producing, in terms of quality. If you have that many animals stacked tightly together like many of the large companies do, it causes stress to the animals. And, like humans, stress over prolonged periods of time is not good for the animals. So they have to use drugs more frequently to keep them healthy, and the product is not the same quality as those of smaller, more "animal-friendly" producers.

I have a friend who runs a small turkey farm. The thing you can buy in the supermarkets is a world apart from that what I get there. It actually tastes... But it also is a bit more expensive. At the start of this year, they had a very bad business, and even considered closing down. Currently, there is (again) a food scandal in the news. Now people are afraid of buying cheap meat and buy at their small local farm. But, after a period of time, people will forget the latest scandal (again) and start buying cheap again, only to panic yet again when the next food scandal rears its head.

[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.

:::Looks down:::

AaAaAaAaAaAaeeeEEEEEEEEEARGH!!!! OH MY GOD!!! IT"S TRUE! MY DICK TURNED INTO A VAGI--

Oh, wait... I've always had a vagina...

Uh, nevermind....

(sorry, couldn't resist - you know, guys, it's really not THAT horrible a fate)

LOL...no I guess it wouldn't be, then again if only I would get the boobs with it.

My beef is still the same. I have tasted oragnic, locally grown, and what could, I guess be considered regular, there is differences in taste(particular locally vs not...but that's distance, as well as shipping), but I cannot stand that organic becomes a catch all for good, and standard is some label for bad.

[Knife]

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.

:::Looks down:::

AaAaAaAaAaAaeeeEEEEEEEEEARGH!!!! OH MY GOD!!! IT"S TRUE! MY DICK TURNED INTO A VAGI--

Oh, wait... I've always had a vagina...

Uh, nevermind....

(sorry, couldn't resist - you know, guys, it's really not THAT horrible a fate)

LOL...no I guess it wouldn't be, then again if only I would get the boobs with it.

My beef is still the same. I have tasted oragnic, locally grown, and what could, I guess be considered regular, there is differences in taste(particular locally vs not...but that's distance, as well as shipping), but I cannot stand that organic becomes a catch all for good, and standard is some label for bad.

I've lived my whole life listening to my grandma bitching and moaning about 'the good old days' and in particular, about the 'good old days' with food.


For this, I paid almost $5 for some eggs, grown 'organically' and you know, I just don't see the difference, minus the price of course. Brown eggs, white eggs, taste the same when fried over/easy in bacon grease. Go figre.

[Broomstick]

Ah, but did you use organic bacon grease?

[PainRack]

Frankly, isn't the only reason why organic food taste better is because usually, it much more fresher than industrial food?

[Broomstick]

No, because sometimes "organic" food are "heirloom" varieties which can be distinctively different in flavor regardless of growing method, but are not as well adapted to agribusiness as the more common varieties.

(Freshness is probably the most common reason for better flavor in organics, but not the only one)

[arigo]

Organically grown foods only have more micro nutrients, like selenium, if they're grown on soil rich in such. On selenium poor soil they are no better than anything else, and possibly worse. Which is not to say nutrient-poor soils can't be enriched - that is the whole point of fertilizer, after all.

The lead and aluminum factor again, has more to do with the soil than organic vs. non-organic growing methods. Grow food on soils contaminated with heavy metals and that shit will show up in the plants, "organic" or not.

Irregardless of the cause, it's still the case. Growing organically might force a farmer to be more conscious of his soil make-up. It might also be species type, or even the growth cycles - I won't pretend to be an expert at everything, I don't know. My initial statement is still true and backed by a handful of studies.

[Broomstick]

A "handful of studies"? What sort of studies? How were they set up? What were their quality? Did they utilize control and experiment groups? Are there any studies with different results? If so, what? And what were the quality of those studies?

[tharkûn]

Irregardless of the cause, it's still the case. Growing organically might force a farmer to be more conscious of his soil make-up. It might also be species type, or even the growth cycles - I won't pretend to be an expert at everything, I don't know. My initial statement is still true and backed by a handful of studies.

If you are buying organic for the selenium content you would be a moron. Selenium supplements are ridiciously cheaper than overpriced organic food.

Now as far as better care and the like, sure I grant organic food is a niche market where people likely care far more about quality and price is less important. However that has nothing to do with it being organic, and everything with it being "premium", "luxury", or "high end" food.

There is nothing wrong with buying organic because it is a premium brand which tends to have superior quality, but there is nothing intrinsicly superior about organic.