Twitter
StumbleUpon
Facebook
Delicious
Digg
Newsvine
Google
Yahoo
TechnoratiThe Organic Monopoly and the Myth of 'Natural' Foods: How Industry Giants Are Undermining the Organic Movement
The Organic Alternative: A Matter of Survival
After four decades of hard work, the organic community has built up a $25 billion "certified organic" food, farming, and green products sector. This consumer-driven movement, under steady attack by the biotech and Big Food lobby, with little or no help from government, has managed to create a healthy and sustainable alternative to America's disastrous, chemical and energy-intensive system of industrial agriculture. Conscious of the health hazards of Big Food Inc., and the mortal threat of climate change and Peak Oil, a critical mass of organic consumers are now demanding food and other products that are certified organic, as well as locally or regionally produced, minimally processed, and packaged.
The Organic Alternative, in turn, is bolstered by an additional $50 billion in annual spending by consumers on products marketed as "natural," or "sustainable." This rapidly expanding organic/green products sector--organic (4% of total retail sales) and natural (8%)--now constitutes more than 12% of total retail grocery sales, with an annual growth rate of 10-15%. Even taking into account what appears to be a permanent economic recession and a lower rate of growth than that seen over the past 20 years, the organic and natural market will likely constitute 31-56% of grocery sales in 2020. If the Organic Alternative continues to grow, and if consumers demand that all so-called "natural" products move in a genuine, third party-certified "transition to organic" direction, the U.S. will be well on its way to solving three of the nation's most pressing problems: climate change, deteriorating public health, and Peak Oil.
Sales statistics and polls underline the positive fact that a vast army of organic consumers, more than 75 million Americans, despite an economic recession, are willing to pay a premium price for organic and green products. These consumers are willing to pay a premium because they firmly believe that organic and natural products are healthier, climate stabilizing, environmentally sustainable, humane for animals, and well as more equitable for family farmers, farmworkers, and workers throughout the supply chain.
Many of the most committed organic consumers are conscious of the fact that organic food and other products are actually "cheaper" in real terms than conventional food and other items-since industrial agriculture's so-called "cheap" products carry hidden costs, including billions of dollars in annual tax subsidies, and hundreds of billions of dollars in damage to our health, the environment, and climate. Strengthening the argument for organic food and farming, scientists now tell us that it will take a massive conversion to organic agriculture (as well as renewable energy, sustainable housing and transportation) to drastically reduce climate-destabilizing greenhouse gases in the atmosphere to 350 parts per million and to cope with the advent of "Peak Oil," the impending decline in petroleum and natural gas supplies.
Organic food and a healthy diet and lifestyle are obviously key factors in preventing chronic disease, restoring public health, and reducing out-of-control health care costs. While in 1970, U.S. health care spending appeared somewhat sustainable, totaling $75 billion, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services project that by 2016, health care spending will soar to over $4.1 trillion, or $12,782 per resident.
Millions of health-minded Americans, especially parents of young children, now understand that cheap, non-organic, industrial food is hazardous. Not only does chemical and energy-intensive factory farming destroy the environment, impoverish rural communities, exploit farm workers, inflict unnecessary cruelty on farm animals, and contaminate the water supply; but the end product itself is inevitably contaminated. Routinely contained in nearly every bite or swallow of non-organic industrial food are pesticides, antibiotics and other animal drug residues, pathogens, feces, hormone disrupting chemicals, toxic sludge, slaughterhouse waste, genetically modified organisms, chemical additives and preservatives, irradiation-derived radiolytic chemical by-products, and a host of other hazardous allergens and toxins. Eighty million cases of food poisoning every year in the US, an impending swine/bird flu pandemic (directly attributable to factory farms), and an epidemic of food-related cancers, heart attacks, and obesity make for a compelling case for the Organic Alternative.
Likewise millions of green-minded consumers understand that industrial agriculture poses a terminal threat to the environment and climate stability. A highly conscious and passionate segment of the population are beginning to understand that converting to non-chemical, energy-efficient, carbon-sequestering organic farming practices, and drastically reducing food miles by relocalizing the food chain, are essential preconditions for stabilizing our out-of-control climate and preparing our families and communities for Peak Oil and future energy shortages.
Decades of research confirm that organic agriculture produces crop yields that are comparable (under normal weather conditions) or even 50-70% superior (during droughts or excessive rain) to chemical farming. Nutritional studies show that organic crops are qualitatively higher in vitamin content and trace minerals, and that fresh unprocessed organic foods boost the immune system and reduce cancer risks. And, of course climate scientists emphasize that organic agriculture substantially reduces greenhouse pollution. Organic farms use, on the average, 50% or less petroleum inputs than chemical farms, while generating drastically less greenhouse gases such as methane and nitrous oxide. Moreover diverse, multi-crop organic farms sequester enormous amounts of CO2 in the soil. Agronomists point out that a return to traditional organic farming practices across the globe could reduce greenhouse gas pollution by 40%. In other words, America and the world desperately need an Organic Revolution in food and farming, not only to salvage public health and improve nutrition, but also in order to literally survive in the onrushing era of Peak Oil and climate change.
Scientists, as well as common sense, warn us that a public health Doomsday Clock is ticking. Within a decade, diet and environment-related diseases, including obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and cancer-heavily subsidized under our Big Pharma/chemical/genetically engineered/factory farm system-will likely bankrupt Medicare and the entire U.S. health care system.
Likewise, climate chaos and oil shortages, unless we act quickly, will soon severely disrupt industrial agriculture and long-distance food transportation, leading to massive crop failures, food shortages, famine, war, and pestilence. Even more alarming, accelerating levels of greenhouse gases (especially from cars, coal, cattle, and related rainforest and wetlands destruction) will soon push global warming to a tipping point that will melt the polar icecaps and unleash a cataclysmic discharge of climate-destabilizing methane, fragilely sequestered in the frozen arctic tundra.
If we care about our children and the future generations, we obviously must reverse global warming, stabilize the climate, and prepare for petroleum shortages and vastly higher oil prices. The only way to do this is to reduce greenhouse gas pollution by 90% by 2050, by shifting away from petroleum and coal-based energy to radical energy conservation and making a transition to renewable solar and wind power-not only in transportation, housing, and industry, but in farming, food processing, and food distribution as well.
In the food sector, we cannot continue to hand over 88% of our consumer dollars to out-of-control, chemical-intensive, energy-intensive, greenhouse gas polluting corporations and "profit at any cost" retail chains such as Wal-Mart. The growth of the Organic Alternative is literally a matter of survival. The question then becomes how (and how quickly) can we move healthy, organic, and "natural" products from a 12% market share, to becoming the dominant force in American food and farming. This is a major undertaking, one that will require a major transformation in public consciousness and policy, but it is doable, and absolutely necessary.
But before we overthrow Monsanto, Wal-Mart, and Food Inc., we need to put our own house in order. Before we set our sights on making organic and "transition to organic" the norm, rather than the alternative, we need to take a closer, more critical look at the $50 billion annual natural food and products industry. How natural is the so-called natural food in our local Whole Foods Market, coop, or grocery store? Is the "natural" sector moving our nation toward an organic future, or has it degenerated into a "green washed" marketing tool, disguising unhealthy and unsustainable food and farming practices as alternatives. Is "natural" just a marketing ploy to sell conventional-unhealthy, energy-intensive, and non-sustainable food and products at a premium price?
The Myth of Natural Food, Farming, and Products
Walk down the aisles of any Whole Foods Market (WFM) or browse the wholesale catalogue of industry giant United Natural Foods (UNFI) and look closely. What do you see? Row after row of attractively displayed, but mostly non-organic "natural" (i.e. conventional) foods and products. By marketing sleight of hand, these conventional foods, vitamins, private label "365" items, and personal care products become "natural" or "almost organic" (and overpriced) in the Whole Foods setting. The overwhelming majority of WFM products, even their best-selling private label, "365" house brand, are not organic, but rather the products of chemical-intensive and energy-intensive farm and food production factories. Test these so-called natural products in a lab and what will you find: pesticide residues, Genetically Modified Organisms, and a long list of problematic and/or carcinogenic synthetic chemicals and additives. Trace these products back to the farm or factory and what will you find: climate destabilizing chemical fertilizers, pesticides, fungicides, herbicides, and sewage sludge-not to mention exploited farm workers and workers in the food processing industry. Of course there are many products in WFM (and in UNFI's catalogue} that bear the label "USDA Organic." But the overwhelming majority of their products, even their best selling private label, "365," are not.
What does certified organic or "USDA Organic" mean? This means these products are certified 95-100% organic. Certified organic means the farmer or producer has undergone a regular inspection of its farm, facilities, ingredients, and practices by an independent Third Party certifier, accredited by the USDA National Organic Program (NOP). The producer has followed strict NOP regulations and maintained detailed records. Synthetic pesticides, animal drugs, sewage sludge, GMOs, irradiation, and chemical fertilizers are prohibited. Farm animals, soil, and crops have been managed organically; food can only be processed with certain methods; only allowed ingredients can be used.
On the other hand, what does "natural" really mean, in terms of farming practices, ingredients, and its impact on the environment and climate?
To put it bluntly, "natural," in the overwhelming majority of cases is meaningless, even though most consumers do not fully understand this. Natural, in other words, means conventional, with a green veneer. Natural products are routinely produced using pesticides, chemical fertilizer, hormones, genetic engineering, and sewage sludge. Natural or conventional products-whether produce, dairy, or canned or frozen goods are typically produced on large industrial farms or in processing plants that are highly polluting, chemical-intensive and energy-intensive. "Natural," "all-natural," and "sustainable," products in most cases are neither backed up by rules and regulations, nor a Third Party certifier. Natural and sustainable are typically label claims that are neither policed nor monitored. (For an evaluation of eco-labels see the Consumers Union website). The USDA's Food Safety and Inspection Service provides loose, non-enforced guidelines for the use of the term "natural" on meat--basically the products cannot contain artificial flavors, coloring, or preservatives and cannot be more than minimally processed.
On non-meat products, the term natural is typically pure propaganda. Companies (like Whole Foods Market or UNFI) are simply telling us what we want to hear, so that we pay an organic or premium price for a conventional product. Perhaps this wouldn't matter that much if we were living in normal times, with a relatively healthy population, environment, and climate. Conventional products sold as natural or "nearly organic" would be a simple matter of chicanery or consumer fraud. But we are not living in normal times. Pressuring natural and conventional products and producers to make the transition to organic is a matter of life or death. And standing in the way of making this great transition are not only Fortune 500 food and beverage corporations, Monsanto, and corporate agribusiness, as we would expect, but the wholesale and retail giants in the organic and natural products sector, UNFI (United Natural Foods) and Whole Foods Market (WFM).
UNFI & Whole Foods: Profits at Any Cost
UNFI and Whole Foods Market are the acknowledged market and wholesale distribution leaders in the $70 billion organic and natural foods and products sector. Companies or brands that want to distribute their products on more than just a local or regional basis must deal with the near-monopoly wholesaler, UNFI, and giant retailer WFM. Meanwhile retailers in markets dominated by Whole Foods have little choice but to emulate the business practices of WFM-i.e. sell as many conventional foods, green washed as "natural," as possible. Unfortunately neither UNFI and Whole Foods are putting out the essential message to their millions of customers that expanding organics is literally a matter of life or death for public health, climate, and the environment. Neither are leading the charge to double or triple organic food and farming sales by exposing the myth of natural foods, giving preference to organic producers and products, and pressuring natural brands and companies to make the transition to organic. Neither are the industry giants lobbying the government to stop nickel and dime-ing organics and get serious about making a societal transition to organic food and farming. The reason for this is simple: it is far easier and profitable for UNFI and WFM to sell conventional or so-called natural foods at a premium price, than it is to pay a premium price for organics and educate consumers as to why "cheap" conventional/natural food is really more expensive than organic, given the astronomical hidden costs (health, pollution, climate destabilization) of conventional agriculture and food processing.
UNFI has cemented this "WFM/Conventional as Natural" paradigm by emulating conventional grocery store practices: giving WFM preferential prices over smaller stores and coops-many of whom are trying their best to sell as many certified organic and local organic products as possible. Compounding this undermining of organics is the increasing practice among large organic companies of dropping organic ingredients in favor of conventional ingredients, while maintaining their preferential shelf space in WFM or UNFI-supplied stores. In other words the most ethical and organic (often smaller) grocers and producers are being discriminated against. WFM also demands, and in most cases receives, a large quantity of free products from producers in exchange for being distributed in WFM markets.
The unfortunate consequence of all this is that it's very difficult for an independently-owned grocer or a coop trying to sell mostly organic products to compete with, or even survive in the same market as WFM, given the natural products "Sweetheart Deal" between UNFI and WFM. As a consequence more and more independently owned "natural" grocery stores and coops are emulating the WFM model, while a number of brand name, formerly organic, companies are moving away from organic ingredients (Silk soy milk, Horizon, Hain, and Peace Cereal for example) or organic practices (the infamous intensive confinement dairy feedlots of Horizon and Aurora) altogether, while maintaining a misleading green profile in the UNFI/WFM marketplace. Other companies, in the multi-billion dollar body care sector for example, are simply labeling their conventional/natural products as "organic" or trade-marking the word "organic" or "organics" as part of their brand name.
The bottom line is that we must put our money and our principles where our values lie. Buy Certified Organic, not so-called natural products, today and everyday. And tell your retail grocer or coop how you feel. Please join thousands of other Organic Consumers and send a message to Whole Foods and UNFI today.
73 Comments so far
Show All.
My family has a history with commercial sprays and fertilizers that has been tragic. My grandfather, while rearing my mother and aunt, lived across from a peach orchard whose sprays drifted onto their clothes on the line, onto the grass their milk cow ate, into their home. The results were near kidney failure, cancer, lethargy, and delayed development. Those chemicals are now banned in the US, but they still use them elsewhere.
My grandfather recovered from cancer and proceeded to live healthily into his eighties, in relative poverty, while living largely off of an orchard where he never, ever used any sprays whatsoever. Instead he invited species with mutualist relationships into his garden. He deliberately let his grapevines grow into the trees to help feed birds which would also consume six or seven times in insects what they took in fruit. He ate a lot of what other people would have presumed to be weeds and pulled out. I completely believe that this contributed to his surprising health and energy.
In the meantime, I can't say enough that we need to get away from these sprays. They are there for the benefit of Dupont, Dow, and Mosanto, and are poisonous to us - some of us more than others, but poisonous.
It is very difficult to describe a rant -- an non-lucid account from the severe point-of-view -- yet Ronnie has achieved this.
He's rants like a teen-ager who has lost support of his aunts-and-uncles while his parents -- still in denial -- support the rantings as 'emotional outlet'.
The essay has few definitions yet by bouncing words around like 'natural', 'organic', 'consumer' -- evidently that's enough to evoke venom from the readers.
And by the comments, few Common Dreams readers has any degree of awareness about how food is defined, or not defined.
One wonders if the storyline of Food Inc. can even be understood, as simple and straight-forward as it is -- with all these wrong-headed assumptions.
(for sake of the illiterate folks mixing up the word 'organic', as in carbon-based chemistry, from the word 'Organic' - a methodology of farming, and a defined marketing claim by the USDA)
Food Inc. tells us food has become too cheap -- subsidized by a corporate/gov-mint alliance -- and the farmer, and the farmer-as-seed-keeper -- are made into mechanistic pawns -- and the food itself created for bulk calories, with many negative health side effects -- for farm, for animals, and for humans -- the consumers.
Which is what OCA is supposed to represent. Yet Ronnie wants to become an economics expert, too, and rants 'monopoly'.
"Natural" does seem to be an elusive word: it means the absence of artificial food additives: preservatives, colors, etc.
The FTC basically says is has no reasonable definition (there are exceptions are in 'naturally-grown' beef). Yet in the trade, the trade which stats Ronnie quotes ("$50 billion annual natural food and products industry"), there are both natural and organic products. In the USA the "Organic" foods and beverages are defined by the USDA. And the 4% market share includes all the 'beyond' Organics: e.g. biodynamic (Europe and Japan have larger markets for "Organic" and higher standards than the USA). "Organic" is not supposed to have GMOs, yet soy, corn and canola crops have been contaminated. "Natural" -- its lack of definition -- may not include artificial colors or preservatives -- but can be from GMO crops -- think of your vegan friends and all that tofu they consume: non-Organic soy is about 85% GMO. Yet this article didn't help you understand that -- instead it disinforms by smearing.
The degree to which this is an extreme, and uninformed essay: let's be clear about market size, and let's be clear on the scale of the problem that Food Inc. so well elucidates. The only 'myth' exposed comes from the article making up market size, and from representing the organic and natural consumers as a whole gaggle of uniformed folks Let's take a simple look at the size of the problem -- especially when compared to the size of the 'natural' and 'Organic' markets -- where Whole Foods Markets and United Natural Foods Inc. have been part of the solution.
Let's explain. Ronnie says:
"The Organic Alternative, in turn, is bolstered by an additional $50 billion in annual spending by consumers on products marketed as "natural," or "sustainable." This rapidly expanding organic/green products sector--organic (4% of total retail sales) and natural (8%)--now constitutes more than 12% of total retail grocery sales, with an annual growth rate of 10-15%. "
and Ronnie says
"more than 75 million Americans, despite an economic recession, are willing to pay a premium price for organic and green products."
and
"the organic and natural market will likely constitute 31-56% of grocery sales in 2020"
and
"mostly non-organic "natural" (i.e. conventional) foods and products."
So which is a fact?
If natural + organic = 12%, then what is the other 88%? Then Ronnie misinforms by equating the 'other 88%' (conventional) as 'natural' (the 8%). Very slippery slope, especially when you are trying to describe a monopoly. (yet very Rovian -- taking cues from the grand-ranter Limbaugh? )
Let's call the 88% -- a more provocative term -- "crap".
So what the readers need to understand is that 88% of the food is crap, and only 12% is natural and organic. Ronnie might even be aware of this, slightly.
Whole Foods Markets do not sell any of that crap. In the meantime, Safeway's Lucerne subsidiary has the largest Organic brand in the USA: the "O" brand. And Safeway sells that 88% stuff also. And who else sells crap?: 'progressive' sounding food co-ops -- some based in the upper Midwest -- where the majority of GMO corn and soy are grown -- they stock that crap -- which they do not buy from United Natural Foods, but from the whole-Massive-conventional-88%-crap food wholesalers.
It's appears the racism is a the core of this rant, Ronnie hates Vulcans! Mr. Spock and logic, are not allowed!
And where does the growth toward Organic come from? It will come from folks eating natural and eating crap, who decide it's smart to ask: what IS this stuff and where did it come from? And Whole Foods and UNFI have, and will have, a lot of competition.
I think you missed the point of the article. Cummins is saying that consumers are willing to pay a premium price for higher quality food -- "organic (4% of total retail sales) and natural (8%) now constitutes more than 12% of total retail grocery sales" -- but that many or most foods in the "natural" foods category are no better than conventional food (88% of sales).
This is the result of Big Ag food companies taking advantage of the fuzzy definition of "natural," and is facilitated by some retailers and wholesalers such as Whole Foods and UNFI who distribute and sell the stuff.
Since Whole Foods sells so many fake "natural" products, they are indeed selling conventional "crap" that has been green-washed with "natural" labels.
While some natural foods grocery co-ops carry some of the same items, they generally do a much better job of selecting truly natural foods. This includes many more USDA organic foods, and many more locally-sourced natural and organic foods. The grocery co-ops have no profit incentive and are doing a better job than Whole Foods, but they still have room for improvement.
Not sure what you mean by "Organic is not supposed to have GMOs, yet soy, corn and canola crops have been contaminated." Do you mean that organic soy, corn and canola food products are GM, in violation of NOP regulations? Do you have any specific information or evidence?
It really is difficult to keep responding to people like Naturally, who do not understand what they are talking about, yet desire to be opinionated -- one guesses that igorance is bliss. There is no point missed. The point Naturally makes is that there are literally millions of ill-informed people masquerading as informed. GMO contamination in Organic has nothing to do with the growing methodolgy. It has all to do with the (scary) consequences of genetic pollution through genetically engineered organisms. An Organic corn plant does not realize it has been polluted -- i.e. pollinated -- by pollen from a GMO corn plant.
But Naturally -- you're bright -- well maybe not so -- so you knew that right? Do you get the point?
Cummins does not know what he is talking about, he is ranting -- or he has become a sycophant of regressive thinking. . .well, that's makes him american as GMO-corn fed cattle.
First, you misrepresent my post. Second, you (apparently) misunderstand my question about organic food products. Third, you avoid giving a direct, unambiguous answer to it.
Finally, you complain once again that Cummins' article is misinformed and confusing, yet you are still unable to offer any kind of coherent response to it. Ironically, your writing is more of a rant than his.
But, all is not lost. You score high in the insults and arrogance categories.
It's easy to throw out non-sense on these comments;
So you say that there's not a coherent response -- and that there are insults --
perhaps those are linked -- because there was a coherent response, Cummins is not only confusing but he smears a couple of big names to create a headline -- because he is upset. . . and when your lack of intelligence is exposed, that is not an insult, just a fact. The arrogance is yours, because you ACT like you got something authentic to say but don't. if you had anything factual to say you would have. but you don't -- it's circle ignorance -- not an insult, just what you offer as a 'comment'.
Think for a moment: how often have you read a label on a food product? Read the ingredients in a Whole Foods Market,
then read ingredients at WalMart. Which one do you find words that you do not recognize? Then ask McDonald's for a ingredient statement on what they serve you . . .
Or is this Cummins making the comments knowing he's been exposed?
No.
You are full of nonsense, and you do NOT respond coherently to ANYTHING.
Babble babble babble...
Look at all of naturequest's posts - look for any single specific statement about anything - there is NO specific statement about ANYTHING. Just a lot of name-calling and insinuation.
GARBAGE.
I agree completely. Whats more, he sounds like a Whole Foods PR guy doing whatever monkey-wrenching he can to try to undercut OCA's article.
PS
Ronnie also wrote:
"we need to put our own house in order" ("WE" ?)
Ronnie, guess what? You' were invited to the homecoming, and wrote down the wrong address.
Seems like you went to the wrong house, as an uninvited guest. Mom and dad are going to be pissed.
Or will that create another rant-as-misguided-myth?! Will mom and dad even care about you?
Seems like NGOs are having hard times -- and being unethical -- or perhaps just incompetent -- has a short-term bump ?
PPS
Common Dreams readers: you'all have many misconceptions about food. Many 'good' retail names were mentioned that carry a lot of crap.
Ask a deeper question or two about quality standards before you pontificate or spew hate. What percentage of your store's items are certified Organic? and what percentage are verified non-GMO? Also: are you ready to pay for the true cost of better foods?
My tiny little neighborhood co-op has far better prices than the big chains, and they have much more local and truly organic produce and bulk items.
Example: extra virgin olive oil at the "local" big chain: $9.99/lb; at my co-op: $6.99/lb.
I printed this editorial out and placed it in the suggestion box (a jar actually) this evening at WF on Collins Street in Arlington, TX, with a note stating my concern and asking store management to post it (the editorial) prominently along with their response. They seem to do a conscientious job answering customer questions and concerns on their feedback bulletin board. We'll see what happens.
You shouldn't be going to whole foods anyway for a lot of reasons.
Surely, even in an awful sun-belt-big-box-freeway-and-mall wasteland like the Dallas area, (or Ft. Collins, CO) you should be able to find other sources of organic and local produce.
I will start searching for the alternative organic suppliers around here.
Btw, the Dallas Chamber of Commerce called -- they're trying to fill an opening for someone to write promotional literature for the DFW area. Thought you might be interested.
Indeed. I suppose it wasn't inherent in my own comment, but I don't go to Whole Foods. We have quite a few wonderful alternatives here in Fort Collins, such as Sunflower Market, Vitamin Cottage, the Food Co-op, and, during the summer months, independent farmer's markets that pop up in parking lots. I frequent those. I still plan on dropping this article in the suggestion box at Whole Paycheck.
Nicely done. Keep us posted (and pardon the pun).
I will do the same here in Fort Collins, CO.
Thanks -- I will post any response they make and will be interested to know how it goes at the WF in Fort Collins.
we Americans need to just stop buying the processed food. when there's no profit, they won't control us.
Organic food was a big export from BC Canada to California a few years ago.
Then the rules were changed to make California stuff meet the "new criteria".
It isn't the government.
It's civil servants and greed that will keep you eating poison.
OCA does a good job on these issues, and I read their weekly update Organic Bytes regularly. While it's good to call out Whole Foods and others who try to profit with green-washed products, unfortunately I think this article leaves a false impression.
Not all USDA-certified organic products are truly organic, and certainly not all "natural" labeled products are rip-offs. Unfortunately, the Consumers Union "Eco-labels" site OCA mentions does not do a good job of informing people which brands are frauds and which are not.
For example, Consumers Union says that Aurora Dairy products are authentically organic because they have the USDA seal. Yet Cornucopia Institute rates Aurora Dairy products zero (out of 1200) in their Organic Dairy Report and Scorecard. http://www.cornucopia.org/2008/01/dairy-report-and-scorecard/
Aurora Dairy is a factory farm where the cows never see pasture, are fed pesticide-laced feed and given antibiotics. The USDA certification results from lobbying and lawyering a corrupt USDA and court system.
As to "natural" food labels, there are literally hundreds of conscientious farmers and food producers who are truly producing healthy foods without chemicals, growth hormones, antibiotics, rendered-animal-protein feed, etc. Many are local and regional brands. Some are transitioning to organic certification. Others are not following all the organic regulations, but their food is far from factory-farmed conventional food with a fake label.
You need to do your homework to know which are which. Cornucopia Institute's "Who Owns Organic" report is a good starting place. http://www.cornucopia.org/who-owns-organic/
Robert Kenner's film, "Food Inc." is a must see.
As is Michael Pollan's book "An Omnivore's Dilemma" a must read.
As is the book "Fast Food Nation" by Eric Schlosser.
Interesting article. I had a similar inkling when I once visited a Whole Foods Market when visiting the US. Too much was not really organic but fake. And their bread was as horrible and sponge-like as in most other run-of-the-mill US bakeries.
BTW, this is the list of the stuff that may be used in certified organic products in America: http://extension.ag.uidaho.edu/bonner/images/NewOrganicPesticides.pdf
It's always surprised me how many copper and sulfur compounds are generally permitted in organic farming, BTW.
Years ago I made the mistake of going to Disney World. They had one stand there touting "natural" food. Unfortunately, it looked not much different from your typical fast food restaurant with their McDonald's style shake machines. They had dark sandwich bread there that had the consistency of Wonder bread so I innocently asked what the ingredients were in the bread. I had suspected that one of the ingredients in this "natural" product was food coloring.
Well, no they could not tell me the ingredients, but if I went to "Main Street", they could tell me. So I went to "Main Street" and asked them for the list of ingredients for the bread at the "natural" food stand. After much hemming and hawing and saying that there was no legal definition for "natural", they told me that they did not have the information there but that they would mail to me the list of ingredients.
A few months later I received a letter from them informing me that they were sorry, but they could not release the "recipe" for their bread as it was a trade secret. And they were so happy that I had enjoyed the bread so much!
What would a person do that had food allergies? I guess just die. It was a pretty simple request and the only valid reason I could see that they did not want to tell me what was in their food was that the "natural" ingredients must have been pretty bad.
Note that one of their strict rules is that you absolutely cannot bring any of your own food into the park. You really need to get your minimum daily requirement of toxins. Needless to say, I learned my lesson and have never been back.
When I saw the title I was getting ready to email this to everybody but I think the author took too long and kept repeating the same points over and over. I just can't do that to anyone, too bad, it is an issue I am concerned about and would like to help get the word out.
Grow your own organic food, then you'll know for sure what you are getting. I've been doing it for years and I still think it's so cool to be able to go to your backyard for food instead of going to the store for it.
I want to go to "the store", pick up products, and be assured that I'm not eating Roundup, heart attack grease or somewhat diluted nuclear waste. On top of this I'm against exploiting child labor in Africa, keeping Guatemalans inside "the store" at night as slaves (an actual Wal-Mart story), or supporting swastika production.
I want impartial third party certification, not just of pesticides, but of all the other crazy and offensive things that people do as giant businesses. What good is "organic" heart attack grease?
If I can't get this certification from my local store, then I want, in this order:
1. I want an impartial third party certification process. The organization's certification targets should be voter-driven, and they should include political goals.
We need certification for non-food items too, like safer baby bottle nipples that won't grow C-cup breasts on two year old girls or shrink boys' genitals.
2. I want a list of cool products and companies, something I can print out and take to the store. I want the cool companies to put some kind of a commonly shared third party certification bug on the cool products. Bogus certification isn't good enough, sorry.
3. If I can't get a real store, I want a place where I can mail-order cases of certain third party certified products.
4. Then I want a somewhat local outlet so that I can pick up a freezer full of frozen third party certified food products, a few bags of each favorite, with a 50 mile drive.
5. Then I want "the store", at least one of my local stores or co-ops, to feel the competitive heat enough so that they completely cave and switch to third party certification of their business. I'd be glad to buy into the store's buying club so that I'd want to get everything there.
For more reasons than just the food, notably it's anti-worker, anti-union policies, Whole Foods should be avoided. A typical Whole Foods store produce hardly a single living-wage job - it's all low-wage and part time.
Chain-stores should be avoided, but then again, the big supermarket chains like Safeway or Kroger are at least unionized and pay living wages.
Unfortunately, some food co-ops, like my local one, or small family-run grocers, don't do well in the living wage department either.
The other alternative is getting a vegatable "subscription" from a local CSA farm.
At any rate, buying local produce is more important than seeing a "certified organic" label.
Send this article to everyone you know.
"Organic food and a healthy diet and lifestyle are obviously key factors in preventing chronic disease..." Ah, no, I don't 'buy' that at all. While organic food is fine, so is much other food. For instance, I might occasionally add a bit of commercial fertilizer to one of my veggie patches or spray my apple trees with something that's a bit nasty (trying to do the organic thing with apples is kinda tough). Do remember even natural organic foods will contain traces of nasty stuff like arsenic. The human body can handle parts per billion of nasty stuff, maybe even do better by adapting various bacterias and unusual things. It's far more important to avoid heavy doses of hamburgers, fries, chips, pop...I think you know what I'm talking about...
Now that's just plain false. It is not "tough" to do organics with apples. I've done apples, figs and cherry trees, all organic for 12 years. I've never had a problem with bugs. Occasionally birds were my biggest problem. Until the cats camped out in the trees.
What a load.
Please, arsenic?
Your defence of the use of industrial fertiliser would be more believable if you didn't make such assertions. Yes, it is POSSIBLE that organic foods can contain arsenic. It is not bloody damn PROBABLE.
And there is increasing scientific evidence that while the human body can tolerate those chemicals that you like using, it is also affected in various ways by them.
I'm not altogether sure that you know what you're "talking about."
The benefits of contaminant-free foods have been well established, so much so that defensive reactions among non-organic growers such as yourself are not uncommon.
Trace levels of arsenic occur naturally. Much of the garbage in synthetic fertilizers and pesticides does not.
You can put what ever you want on the foods that you grow but please stop demeaning those who take the time and trouble to produce clean crops. Also, I hope that you're honest about the way your food is grown if you share it with someone else.
q
I said, "organic food is fine." How is that 'demeaning?' It might surprise you to know that no one has ever asked me if the food I grow is 'organic' or not. My friends and neighbors could give a shit less. Out here in the country we just grow good food (and some of it this year has been incredibly delicious).
Your opinion that eating toxic chemicals on your food has no negative health effects is pure speculation, and is not supported by the evidence. Such chemicals accumulate in your body and numerous scientific studies have linked them to cancer, neurological diseases and birth defects, even in tiny amounts.
Most humans can easily handle a few parts per billion of lots of crap, luckily. Of course it's good to hold down on the total load of toxins we are bombarded with. It's also very important to realized that some toxins are far, far worse than others. It's not easy to get a good handle on the total picture. It is good to be informed and to try to make logical choices.
Again, opinion based on thin air. If you were honest you would change your "most humans can handle it" comment to "I guess it's OK, but I really don't know." The truth is, you don't know. You're guessing and posturing your guess as knowledge. The scientific evidence contradicting your uninformed opinion is monumental.
Oh, I guess the mortality rates are turning horrendous and I didn't even notice. Golly, I must have my head up my ass, sorry. Seriously, we are today bombarded by thousands of chemicals, microbes, microwaves, etc, in myriad combinations that are extremely difficult to make sense of in a scientific manner. Anyway, ain't it great that we live in a free country where we are free to worry about, oh, everything!
Your use of the phrase "mortality rates" is a give away. I see now that you aren't naive; you intend to misinform.
Sure, cancer "mortality rates" have stabilized due to drug and surgical interventions. But the incidence rates have increased . . . I believe for all cancers except lung cancer (which is down due to reduced smoking and exposure to second-hand smoke). A hundred years ago only 1 in 100 people got cancer. Today it's more like 1 in 2.
Incidence rates for neurological diseases and birth defects are also increasing. Exposure to toxic chemicals (and pesticides in particular) is linked to all of these diseases. For most people, food is the primary source of such exposures.
The we're-all-going-to-die-anyway rhetoric is not persuasive. I choose not to smoke, I choose to look both ways before crossing the street, and I choose not to eat pesticides in my food. You can make your own choices. I only object to you misinforming others.
Right, because the affects of all those pesticides, all those antibiotics, all those hormones, are ONLY acute. Because they do not have any chronic long term effects that do not result in immediate mortality.
You are either extremely naive or being disingenuous.
You are free to worry about a few smidges of pesticide residue. Have fun. The million other toxins that you are exposed to are mostly nothing to worry about though (yeah, right).
And you continue to avoid the issue of hormones and antibiotics.
You are disingenuous.
There are plenty of chemicals we are exposed to every day and there is nothing we can do about it. However, you have a choice if you want to be exposed to more of them in your work or home environment, food, furniture, cleaning supplies, etc. My choice is to avoid them as much as I can. You enjoy yours, Greg. You can have my share too, if you want to. And keep deceiving yourself that they don’t have any effect on you. You might never find out anyway, and it will make you feel better.
You still haven't addresses Greg R. point, If pesticides and fertilizers in agriculture (and nuclear power generation - but that's another topic) were as bad for the health as it's opponents claim, then surely we would be seeing statistically obvious health effects - such as declining life expectancy. But instead, we are seeing the opposite.
I buy organic as much as I can, but mostly for it's global ecology and anti-monopoly-capital benefits. If the choice is buying some certified organic product grown thousands of miles away or local produce where some fertilizer or pesticide may have been used, I will choose the latter.
"You still haven't addresses Greg R. point, If pesticides and fertilizers in agriculture (and nuclear power generation - but that's another topic) were as bad for the health as it's opponents claim, then surely we would be seeing statistically obvious health effects - such as declining life expectancy. But instead, we are seeing the opposite."
Heard of the statistical concept of "correlation is not causation"? Do you understand the concept of "statistical noise"?
You are arguing that increasing life expectancy is a RESULT of industrial pesticides and industrial fertilisers in agriculture, and nuclear power generation?
And why you and Greg R, repeatedly ignoring the use of antibiotics, hormones that is de rigeur among non organic farmers? Antiobiotics and hormones that have been shown to be present in industrially raised meats, in downstream water sources from farms. I am vegetarian, so that doesn't affect me, but many people are not.
AND you are doing the same thing as Greg R, except on a lesser scale. Greg R assumes the effects are acute. You assume that the effects have serious consequences on life expectancy, if on a more chronic scale. Why? Just because a substance does not kill you immediately, or over a longer period of time, does NOT mean that it does not have either negative or positive effects. You and Greg R are focusing exclusively on life expectancy, and ignoring quality of life. Chemicals that alter your hormonal profile are unlikely to kill you, short or long term; you don't have a problem with such chemicals then?
Using your logic, you could say that . . . pesticides extend life! Maybe we should start taking them, like vitamins?
You forget there are a lot of diverse factors that contribute to longer life expectancy in the modern world, like higher standard of living, improvements in public health, medicine, and nutrition, eradication of some infectious diseases like smallpox, etc. I’m afraid that your claim that pesticides don’t affect your health and consequently shorten your life is unsubstantiated.
One simple thing that all of can do is to boycott Whole Foods, UNF, and other "natural food" fakes. On nedlud's behalf, we can put Organic Valley goods on that list.
I've noticed on local lifestyle sites in Atlanta that Whole Foods trolls are slandering local coops and other true organic foods stores. I respond when I can but I only have so much time.
Look around your own community for such disinformation tactics and don't ever assume that local consumers are too smart to fall for for them. Above all, lead by example.
q
I've been a subscriber of Organic Consumers Association for many years, and they've actually supported Organic Valley in several articles.
NOW, as far as "nedlud", I believe he is the same person who back on June 26th under the article "Slowdown in Once-Booming Organics Troubles Farmers", berated ALL organics... if I may quote:
"....I can assure people, organics is just another benefit to industry and big corporations. Another crock of shit. Y'all like eating shit?"....
THAT is the voice of experience you seem to want to support. Your choice, I'll go with what seems to be a much saner and objective source.
Quickstepper,
Take your own advice and don’t fall for the trap you are warning others against. Before adding Organic Valley to your list of bad guys, ask nedlud what exactly his problem with OV is. I understand, (and correct me if I’m wrong, nedlund) that an OV heavy truck broke an underground pipe on his property, and the company refused to fix it. I don’t think they were obliged to, and I think it was nedlud’s responsibility to make sure that any equipment he allowed on his property is safe and won’t do any damage. Methinks that nedlud doesn’t have a case, and I would really appreciate it if nedlud stopped maligning OV - apparently it is working. I think that OV is one of the best organic companies on the market. It’s a farmer-owned co-op, it’s not a corporation, and as far as I know they treat the farmers and the land well. Not only that, but they have the best organic products on the market.You don’t have to believe me. Do your own research, and then please let us know what you found. But don’t repeat lies, just because you read them on CD. Thanks.
OK. I'll start with you. Can you substantiate your claim about ned's experience with Organic Valley?
Also, what exactly is your relationship with Organic Valley? Are you truly a disinterested party?
q
BTW, is this the same Organic Valley that Cornucopia caught buying milk from a factory farm in Texas?
nedlud has written about it here on CD, he has a PERSONAL history with OV, if the archives are still functioning you can look it up.
webwalk
Cornucopia Institute rates Organic Valley Dairy products 1115 (out of a possible 1200 points), and that is considered "excellent." See their ratings at the link below. Some other "organic" brands, such as Horizon and Aurora (Aurora makes private-label "organic" dairy products for Walmart, Target, Costco, Safeway and others) rate a 0.
http://www.cornucopia.org/dairysurvey/index.html
nedlud is apparently a liar.
Please give us one specific example of a lie that ned has posted.
You failed to mention that the survey is more than 3 years old.
You also failed to mention that 29 dairies rated higher than OV.
q
Everything nedlud said in his July 9th, 2009 8:26 am post is a lie. He said Organic Valley farmers are not "real farmers." In fact, Organic Valley is a co-op made up of about 1000 family farms, each one milking an average of about 60 cows.
He also said Organic Valley wants to "fool you," and can't be trusted. In fact, not only does Organic Valley meet the USDA organic certification standards (the subject of the OCA article above), it far exceeds them. Cornucopia Institute's Organic Dairy Report, as I said, scores Organic Valley at 1115 out of a possible 1200 points. Remember, this report scores only USDA-certified organic dairies. The scores range from perfect (1200) to zero. Those scoring zero include Aurora and Horizon, the largest (fake) organic dairies in the country. Organic Valley's score is not perfect, but is is considered "excellent" by Cornucopia.
In a previous thread (I believe following the NYT article a few weeks ago), nedlud compared Organic Valley to Horizon Dairy (which scores a zero in the Cornucopia report) and Smithfield Farms, the nation's largest and probably most disease-ridden hog factory-farm operation (not organic, and the worst example of conventional farming). nedlud's posts are lies, and worse than that they are smears. I've asked him for specifics several times and he never responds.
By the way, Cornucopia's Organic Dairy Report was completed in 2006, but it was updated in 2008. See:
http://www.cornucopia.org/2008/01/dairy-report-and-scorecard/
It's not that nedlud "lied" by saying a specific fact about OV that is not true. It's that nedlud did not say anything specific about OV, but maligned their name as if they were evil corporate monsters.
As noted by the poster above, OV is a farmer co-op, and when they contracted with a too-big dairy farm in Texas, the farmers got together and stopped it.
OV is not "perfect" - neither are you or me or any of us, but OV is one if the best brands in the USA, and if nedlud wants to trash them, he needs to give FACTS.
Who am i? i work at Central Co-op in Seattle for six years, i know a few things about organic certification and organic producers.
webwalk
Quickstepper,
You need to ask nedlud about his experience with OV, not me. If nedlud makes (any) statements, he needs to substantiate them, and everybody else should do the same thing. I remember reading his comments on the subject a while ago, and I wrote what I remembered - I don’t really feel like searching archives, so maybe you should ask nedlud instead.
Who am I ? Nobody. There is absolutely no reason why should you trust me, and that’s why I said do your own research. I like to know who and what I support with my money, I did my research, and concluded that Organic Valley deserves my support.
I personally buy milk and eggs from a local farmer who sells milk to OV. He has about 50 cows on 125 acres, and I thought other OV farmers run small farms. I’ve never discussed the company with him in any detail, but overall it seems that he is happy with them.
Now, I was surprised by your last statement about OV buying milk from a factory farm. Disappointing, to be sure. But I googled it immediately, and here is the first thing that came up:
http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/foodlaw/2008/06/what-is-organic.html
Excerpts:
“We have held Organic Valley in high regard,” said Kastel. “But once we discovered that Organic Valley was cutting some of the same corners as Dean Foods, we have the ethical responsibility to treat both organizations the same way," Kastel added.
Cornucopia initially sought to negotiate with Organic Valley management, trying to persuade them that their “family farm” and “farmer-owned” cooperative brand, advertised widely to consumers, was at risk due to their association with milk from the Natural Prairie industrial-scale dairy. But the negotiations failed until Cornucopia brought the situation to the attention of key farmer-owners with management oversight.
“The difference between Dean Foods, the nation’s largest dairy processor with over $12 billion in annual sales, and Organic Valley is that Organic Valley is democratically controlled by the farmers themselves who actually own the outfit,” noted Kastel. “Once the farmers got involved things started to change.”
During an emotionally charged meeting in May, Organic Valley CEO George Siemon announced to the Dairy Executive Committee, representatives elected by the co-op's approximately over 900 dairy farmers, that the Cooperative would cease buying milk from the Texas dairy effective June 1.
“The good news is that, because of their decision to cease buying milk from this factory farm, Organic Valley will remain one of the highly rated dairies in the organic industry,” Kastel stated. Cornucopia’s national analysis of all industry participants indicated that over 90% of all namebrand organic dairy products were produced with milk from family farms of high integrity.”
Now, that’s encouraging. I guess I’ll keep buying their products.
It's high time to Roundup corporate 'personhood'
The classic predatory business model taught in Harvard Business School is alive and well in the supermarket retail chain Whole Foods and wholesale middleman United Natural Foods.
Harvard and its peers teach their privileged students how to game the society, the culture, the people. Whatever is in demand (e.g. organic food) becomes a facade behind which the "big-time" "All-American" entrepreneur shall push whatever garbage turns the highest profit.
Everyone knows this, and most everyone shrugs, smiles, and accepts it. It is exactly this acceptance that is the real dysfunction in the "good ol USA". Why is it that 300 million USans are willing to swallow it? Cultural norms have been deliberately imposed in the mass media, from entertainment to news, directing the people to go along to get along, to preserve one's own shot at the "big time". Sounds like psychopaths are running the country. Somehow we need to break their grip. Many of us are simply growing our own food.
rtdrury,
Thanks again for your great posts. I read every one. You have a keen mind and uncommon sense.
Thomas Jefferson disliked Yale Harvard and Andover. He called them: "seminaries of despotism."
Out here in the islands, we don't eat anything from the hand of man. We pick tropical fruit from our own trees (of course we have great competition from the bats, birds and insects since we do not spray anything but the mango blossoms.) Or we grow, unknown to Monsanto, unusual squash and lentils etc, that would never be for sale in a commercial market. They are strong in taste and have massive seeds or unusual bitternesss, sourness etc. But when you sink you teeth into a native ripe Guava, for example, you know immediately that all the food at (Butt-)Hole Foods is crap. In fact, if there weren't bugs all over them, we wouldn't eat them. Bugs are good indicators that no GMO pesticides are present. Ants indicate the ripest items at the local co-op. You just eat around the bad spots. Sweetest most succulent food I've ever eaten. Since I changed my diet to island fruits and veggies, my health has greatly improved.
But be careful before you pick an island. Many have been fouled by industry, some in the pacific have been near nuke test grounds (e.g, tahiti=200 tests). Check Google Earth before you pick one. Type nuke test in the search/fly to window. Britain, France, The US and others have wrecked a lot of islands and atolls.
But there are still places in this world to escape the nightmare on elm street.
Cheers,
TJ
"All tyranny needs to gain a foothold is for people of good conscience to remain silent." - Thomas Jefferson
This comment nails it. It is all about managing the people and their perceptions for maximum profit for the privileged few. People who go along with the charade are given better bones to chew on, and those who resist get whatever they can find on their own, which isn't very much...
Round-Up, the synthetic herbicide, is allowable in the "Certified Organic" paradigm. Now that's not very "organic" is it?
Actually it is under the real definition of the word. It's about as organic as you can get.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glyphosate
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Organic_compound
;)
I am shocked to hear this.
Do you have a reference?
Thanks for your time.
Unfortunately it is true. I copied this from the USDA website, in case you'd like to bone up on the regulations.
"Section 2109. [7 U.S. C. 6508] Prohibited Crop Production Practices and Materials.
...
(c) Crop Management. - For a farm to be certified under this title, producers on such farm shall not -
(1) use natural poisons such as arsenic or lead salts that have long-term effects and persist in the environment, as determined by the applicable governing State official or the Secretary;..."
NO it is NOT TRUE - Round-Up / glysophate is a SYNTHETIC HERBICIDE and is BANNED in organic agriculture. Your "citation" says absolutely nothing about glysophate. Yes, arsenic and lead are banned. So? Show us a citation that allows synthetic herbicides such as glysophate. THEY ARE NOT ALLOWED.
Call your "local" certification agency. It is allowable simply by the OMISSION of the words GLYCOPHOSPHATE and SYNTHETIC. You really need to learn to read legal language before you hop in front of a keyboard there webbie.
By the way, can you show me where Round-Up is specifically BANNED in the code? I don't believe that you can. And, of course, if you cannot, then my friend, it is perfectly legal. Get it?
spag-monster,
i have to say at this point, you are a dope.
According to your "logic" - the ONLY herbicides that are banned in organic ag are lead and arsenic, since the hundreds of synthetic herbicides are not named one by one?
Here's language from Vermont Organic Farmers about certification standards:
"The following guidelines are based on the USDA National Organic Standards. Farmers planning to become certified should consider all of the following areas required for compliance with the certification standards.
Transitioning fields to organic production
The NOP Standards state: Any field or farm parcel from which harvested crops are intended to be sold as organic, have had no prohibited substances applied to it for a period of three years immediately preceding the harvest of the crop. Prohibited substances include synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides and seeds treated with synthetic fungicides. In general, non-synthetic materials are allowed including manure, compost, limestone (not hydrated lime), and other mineral amendments, provided they do not contain any synthetic additives. The VOF office has a list of materials that are approved as inputs on organic crops. If you are unsure if a material is allowed, call the office for confirmation before applying it. Use of a prohibited material would disqualify a field from organic production for three years."
Did you catch that, dope? "Prohibited substances include synthetic fertilizers, herbicides and insecticides..."
Or do you think the Vermont Organic Farmers are just stupid about the organic standards of the National Organic Program?
OMG, it doesn't specifically say "Prohibited substances include glyphosate"!
Please, stop making a fool of yourself. ROUND-UP IS BANNED IN ORGANICS!
Oh, and by the way, with a two-minute Google search, here is the citation for the "National List of synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production":
www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/getfile?dDocName=STELPRDC5068682&acct=nopgeninfo
The word "glyphosate" does not appear on the list, nor any chemical or trade name for such. ROUND-UP is BANNED in organic farming.
And if anyone is freaking out about there being a "list of synthetic substances allowed", it is stuff like alcohols and oils and soaps, or newspaper (with no glossy ink) in compost piles, etc. It is NOT a list of complex synthetic molecules that have been snuck into the standards. Please read it yourself.
Considering the information in the OCA article about ongoing efforts to undercut and destroy organic agriculture/food, it should come as no surprise that Big Ag employs weasels to engage in disinformation campaigns through radio show call-ins, letters to the editor, web forums and the like.
Thanks for countering this attack.
btw, here's another source that specifies that Glyphosate (Roundup) is not allowed in organic agriculture. See Table 1.
http://attra.ncat.org/attra-pub/bindweed.html
No, this is FALSE, Roundup is not allowed in certified organic farming.
webwalk
nedlud is a drive-by smear artist who never provides specifics; much less evidence or documentation. His posts are trash.
I believe ZOOM was asking SPAGHETTI_MONSTER.
Trust the real farmers that you can go visit. Buy direct. Don't trust the perception managers. Organic Valley is a manager of YOUR perception. They want, to fool you. And this is the funny part: Many people think of Organic Valley as a leader in trustworthy organic products. If they're considered 'trustworthy', well, that demonsttates the overall state of regulated, 'certified', organics.
A farce.
And the joke is on you, consumer.
Education is the key here. As all the noise in the system blows our brains towards industrial agriculture - the "free" consumers must hunt for facts that have been intentionally hidden from them.
But never before has information been so easy to find - orgs like IFOAM have spent decades collecting some real good studies on Organic food for those who need to deep think this -
Bad food and bad medicine - kept in place by bad pol's, can be circumvented, even if we cant get rid of them.