Beware Of The Marketers

[Meathead]

Today is 3/5/2019. Since I first posted this on 3/2 your feedback and links have contributed to several modifications, most notably, a complete rewrite of the section on Sustainability and GMOs. Thank you so much.

[ItsAllGoneToTheDogs]

Meathead I would think we are all invested in the success of your writings. The more successful your book, the better chance we get more active members here. Obviously this is a difficult topic because you have to fight misinformation and feelings while still getting the point across. I think the coolest thing is that we had a few folks who are very knowledgeable on the topic chime in with additional science based input instead of emotion. That this hasn't turned into a flame war and is still generating thoughtful discussion further validates my choice to take advantage of the long term membership deal. Thanks to all who have provided external links on the subject, I always like to learn things from as many sources as possible... and the few entertaining links provided a worthwhile distraction.

[perry green]

I love this article on SO MANY LEVELS. Lots of ammo for my "all natural" friends,
Last week I took a short food safety course with a registered nurse/dietician who warned us to only buy ORGANIC strawberries. And talked all about "natural foods"
I might just stroll over to see her armed with this knowledge. Thanks Meathead!

[Polarbear777]

Whole Foods has their brown sugar labeled “wholesome” in big letters. I guess because sugar is so healthy and unprocessed.

I’ve also seen the phrase “heart healthy” in products loaded with sugar.

[SmokeyGator]

Better life through chemistry! I have a jar of MSG I use (very very sparingly) in a bunch if stuff. Don’t really need much at all.

Right now I am enjoying a HIGHLY processed beverage. Tastes nothing like the raw ingredients. Because it was fermented. Unfermented (unprocessed) it would taste like crap.

[DaveP]

Wow! Wow! This is an amazing discussion. I agree with all of Meathead’s comments. I work for Monsanto now Bayer and am proud of it. I personally know the researchers who invented GMO. I know their integrity and have TALKED with them about the questions I originally had. I read the research. I know the volumes of studies that have confirmed over and over the safety of GMOs. I also know and sat on Stewardship meetings that asked “Should we?” rather than “Let’s do it because we can!” And I can attest that many things were turned down. I have worked with the regulators. Guess what? They are human and they eat food too!

No one person, company, scientific advancement is perfect. There’s risks in everything.

If someone chooses to spend $6 a pound on organic tomatoes that is great if they can afford it. Other will buy a Porsche but I will by a Dodge. My car will will get where I want to go. I do know that the science with oversight and stewardship will help feed the world.

[Willy]

I'd like to try to drive home a point I made earlier--a point that I think just goes right past most people.

There is basically no more land on which to conduct agriculture--growing plants and raising livestock, unless we tear down forests and such--think the rain forests. Nonetheless, we have more than 20% more mouths to feed in the next few decades (7+ billion vs 9.5 billion) AND, in general, these future people will be born into more affluent societies than those of today, meaning that very likely our food supply must increase by more than 20% in order to satisfy the demand. Some of these people are your grandchildren and grand-grand children...

Without advances in agricultural technology--and very likely some lifestyle changes--feeding this many more people is not feasible. We have no choice but to pursue technologies like GMOs.

Let me make one final point: To date, there have been ZERO health issues reliably blamed on GMOs. Reading through this very thread, the only real "concerns" come down to people being "creeped out". Further, the valid concerns about agriculture are completely independent of GMOs and they existed BEFORE GMOs.

This topic deserves fruitful, honest discussion and widespread understanding, especially in a forum such as AR.

[ComfortablyNumb]

"Organic rules say that organic fruits can only be fertilized with animal manure, not synthetic fertilizers." True, organic rules don't allow synthetic fertilisers. False they can only use animal manure. Blood meal, bone meal, feather meal, and fish meal are all acceptable. As are plant meals, cottonseed meal, alfalfa meal, etc. There are also mineral based fertilisers that are accepted, sodium nitrate, rock phosphate, greensand, and gypsum. Compost and 'green manure' are also approved.

[ComfortablyNumb]

"Now the manure is supposed to be pasteurized" Actually, adding raw manure is acceptable as long as it is applied 120 days prior to harvest.

[ComfortablyNumb]

"(1) They probably have been exposed to fewer pesticides, but that is no guarantee that they has fewer pesticides remaining on the final product. Many dissipate naturally or are washed off." They can be exposed to as many or more pesticides than conventional. Some organic approved pesticides require serveral applications to be as effective as one of their conventional counterpart. As for the rest of your comment, I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

[ComfortablyNumb]

Here's a couple of links I use on my website you may find useful:

http://academicsreview.org/wp-conten...ng-Report1.pdf

https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~lhom/organictext.html

http://www.tampabay.com/news/farm-to...-scene/2273052

[ComfortablyNumb]

"Organic strawberries grown on top of manure that has
hopefully been pasteurized properly, or strawberries grown with synthetic fertilizers that are pathogen free?" Organic have rules against the synthetics, however conventional has no rules at all. So those conventional strawberries could be grown in the same manure as the organic plus the bonus of Ammonia Nitrate. So you have not only pathogens, but carcinogens as well!

[Willy]

ComfortablyNumb I took a look at the Academics Review article you linked to. Thanks very much for the link; it basically says that the organic folks are scamming us, which is something I believe. From the conclusion on page 12:

"...This use of the USDA Organic Seal to convey superior food nutrition, safety or quality attributes of organic over conventional foods contradicts both the stated USDA intention for the National Organic Standards Program and the extensive body of published academic research which show conventional foods to be as safe and nutritious as higher priced organic products.

As a result, the American taxpayer funded national organic program is playing an ongoing role in misleading consumers into spending billions of dollars in organic purchasing decisions based on false and misleading health, safety and quality claims..."

Gotta bvgo now, but I will check out the other links you provided.

[ComfortablyNumb]

ComfortablyNumb I took a look at the Academics Review article you linked to. Thanks very much for the link; it basically says that the organic folks are scamming us, which is something I believe. From the conclusion on page 12:

"...This use of the USDA Organic Seal to convey superior food nutrition, safety or quality attributes of organic over conventional foods contradicts both the stated USDA intention for the National Organic Standards Program and the extensive body of published academic research which show conventional foods to be as safe and nutritious as higher priced organic products.

As a result, the American taxpayer funded national organic program is playing an ongoing role in misleading consumers into spending billions of dollars in organic purchasing decisions based on false and misleading health, safety and quality claims..."

Gotta bvgo now, but I will check out the other links you provided.

So you believe organic certification is a scam, eh? You are indeed a wise one, grasshopper! Before I was kicked out of the farmers market I was constantly being encouraged to get certified organic. The two biggest reasons were, "You'll make more money." and "You don't have to explain your practices." My response to the first was that it costs more money, first there are the fees, which at a minimum cost hundreds and can run into the thousands. Then there is the extra time and work involved, farm inspections and recordkeeping. As to the second, I believe a farmer should explain his/her practices. Organic farmers hide behind the veil of "our products are safer, more nutritious, and better for the environment." Conventional farmers don't even want to discuss it out of fear the consumer won't want their product because it has been treated with this or that and GMO seed was used. The end result is the public is being lied to and mislead by both sides and constantly bombarded with marketing terms such as 'natural', 'organic', 'local', and 'free-range' to name a few. Some of the terms have rules, obviously your product cannot be labeled 'organic' unless you have completed the certification programme, no matter what the dictionary definition of 'organic' is. 'Free-range' has rules, the chickens must have access to the outdoors. So you can raise thousands of chickens in a large building and a long as it has a door to a small yard outside the building, they are legally 'free-range'. 'Natural' has no definition at all, anything from bubblegum to McDonald's hamburgers can be labeled 'natural'. What I find most repugnant about the Organic Certification Programme is the 'us or them' mentality. It's 'our way' or you are one of those who dumps synthetic fertiliser like it is going out of style and spraying chemicals on your crop daily, while using deceptive terms to explain their practices. Conventional farmers use 'chemical pesticides' whereas Organic farmers use 'natural sprays'. Excuse me, but a pesticide is a pesticide, it is designed to kill and will leave residue. I could go on and on, the bottom line is Organic Certification can only thrive on fear marketing and as long as they can successfully convince people that conventional is unsafe to eat and theirs is, they will be a thriving enterprise.

[Willy]

ComfortablyNumb To be clear, no, I don't believe the certification itself is a scam per se. I do believe organic supporters claiming organic produce is superior to conventional produce is a scam. The article you linked to says that as well. Like you, if I was a grower, I would not try to get OG certified.

We are in full agreement on the expense and often silly, non-results oriented regulations for organic ag, as well as the emptiness of the word "natural". I too chuckle at the term "free range". Because of the poor treatment of chickens, we used to buy eggs at the FM. In a few years the price has gone from $3--$3.50 a dozen to $6 a dozen. I now buy eggs at the grocery store.

I also agree with, and admire you for, your first sentences regarding treatment of and discussions with customers. I worked a FM for several years, sitting under a canopy and offering advice as a Master Gardener associated with the local County Extension Office. A couple of vendors confided in me over the years about some of their practices that weren't "kosher"--LOL. The fellow who used cotton defoliant as an herbicide topped the list. Not sure how even got hold of it. BTW, the use of the word "master" in the title Master Gardener is pretty much just blowing smoke up the skirts of unpaid volunteers. That said, I did enjoy the program and I learned a lot.

A final FM irony. One local FM vendor grows his lettuces and greens hydroponically, which means, of course, not organically, yet he does a good business at our FM. I'm fine with hydroponics; it just seems odd that a generally organic crowd accepts it.

If you don't mind my asking, what led to your departure from the FM?