Get News & Views Updates
Most Popular This Week
Popular content
Today's Top News
Beyond Frankenfoods and Toxics: OCA’s Ten Reasons to Buy Organic
Organic foods and products are the fastest growing items in America's grocery carts. Thirty million households, comprising 75 million people, are now buying organic foods, clothing, body care, supplements, pet food, and other products on a regular basis. Fifty-six percent of U.S. consumers say they prefer organic foods.
Here are 10 reasons why you should buy organic foods and products:
1. Organic foods are produced without the use of Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs). Consumers worry about untested and unlabeled genetically modified food ingredients in common supermarket items. Genetically engineered ingredients are now found in 75% of all non-organic U.S. processed foods, even in many products labeled or advertised as “natural.” In addition the overwhelming majority of non-organic meat, dairy, and eggs are derived from animals reared on a steady diet of GM animal feed. Although polls indicate that 90% of Americans want labels on gene-altered foods, government and industry adamantly refuse to respect consumers’ right to know, understanding quite well that health and environmental-minded shoppers will avoid foods with a GMO label.
2. Organic foods are safe and pure. Organic farming prohibits the use of toxic pesticides, antibiotics, growth hormones, nano-particles, and climate-destabilizing chemical fertilizers. Consumers worry about pesticide and drug residues routinely found in non-organic produce, processed foods, and animal products. Consumer Reports has found that 77% of non-organic produce items in the average supermarket contain pesticide residues. The beef industry has acknowledged that 94% of all U.S. beef cattle have hormone implants, which are banned in Europe as a cancer hazard. Approximately 10% of all U.S. dairy cows are injected with Monsanto and Elanco’s controversial genetically engineered Bovine Growth Hormone, banned in most industrialized nations. Recent studies indicate that an alarming percentage of non-organic U.S. meat contains dangerous antibiotic-resistant bacteria.
3. Organic foods and farming are climate-friendly. Citizens are increasingly concerned about climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas pollution (CO2, methane, and nitrous oxide), 35-50% of which in North America comes from our energy-intensive, chemical-intensive food and farming system. Organic farms and ranches, on the other hand, use far less fossil fuel and can safely sequester large amounts of CO2 in the soil (up to 7,000 pounds of CO2 per acre per year, every year.) Twenty-four billion pounds of chemical fertilizers applied on non-organic farms in the U.S. every year not only pollute our drinking water and create enormous dead zones in the oceans; but also release enormous amounts of nitrous oxide, a super potent, climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas.
4. Organic food certification prohibits nuclear irradiation. Consumers are justifiably alarmed about irradiating food with nuclear waste or electron beams, which destroy vitamins and nutrients and produce cancer-causing chemicals such as benzene and formaldehyde. The nuclear industry, large food processors, and slaughterhouses continue to lobby Congress to remove required labels from irradiated foods and replace these with misleading labels that use the term "cold pasteurization." The USDA and large meat companies have promoted the use of irradiated meat in school lunches and senior citizen facilities. Many non-organic spices contain irradiated ingredients.
5. Consumers worry about rampant e-coli, salmonella, campylobacter, Methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus (MRSA), and fecal contamination in animal products coming out of the nation’s inhumane and filthy slaughterhouses. The Centers for Disease Control have admitted that up to 76 million Americans suffer from food poisoning every year. Very few cases of food poisoning have ever been linked to organic farms or food processors.
6. Consumers are concerned about billions of pounds of toxic municipal sewage sludge dumped as “fertilizer” on 140,000 of America’s chemical farms. Scientific evidence has confirmed that municipal sewage sludge contains hundreds of dangerous pathogens, toxic heavy metals, flame-retardants, endocrine disruptors, carcinogens, pharmaceutical drugs and other hazardous chemicals coming from residential drains, storm water runoff, hospitals, and industrial plants. Organic farming categorically prohibits the use of sewage sludge.
7. Consumers worry about the routine practice of grinding up slaughterhouse waste and feeding this offal and blood back to other animals, a practice that has given rise to a form of human mad-cow disease called CJD, often misdiagnosed as Alzheimer’s disease. Animals on organic farms cannot be fed slaughterhouse waste, manure, or blood—daily rations on America’s factory farms.
8. Consumers care about the humane treatment of animals. Organic farming prohibits intensive confinement and mutilation (debeaking, cutting off tails, etc.) of farm animals. In addition to the cruel and unhealthy confinement of animals on factory farms, scientists warn that these CAFOs (Confined Animal Feeding Operations) produce enormous volumes of manure and urine, which not only pollute surface and ground water, but also emit large quantities of methane, a powerful climate-destabilizing greenhouse gas.
9. Consumers are concerned about purchasing foods with high nutritional value. Organic foods are nutritionally dense compared to foods produced with toxic chemicals, chemical fertilizers, and GMO seeds. Studies show that organic foods contain more vitamins, cancer-fighting anti-oxidants, and important trace minerals.
10. Consumers care about preserving America’s family farms, world hunger, and the plight of the world’s two billion small farmers. Just about the only small farmers who stand a chance of making decent living these days are organic farmers, who get a better price for their products. In addition study after study has shown that small organic farms in the developing world produce twice as much food per acre as chemical and GMO farms, while using far less fossil fuel and sequestering large amounts of excess CO2 in the soil. Yields on organic farms in the industrialized world are comparable to the yields on chemical and GMO farms, with the important qualification that organic farms far out-produce chemical farms under extreme weather conditions of drought or torrential rains. Of course given accelerated climate change, extreme weather is fast becoming the norm.
For all these reasons, millions of American consumers are turning to organic foods and other organic items, including clothing and body care products--part of an overall movement toward healthy living, preserving the environment, and reversing global warming.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...




9 Comments so far
Show AllThere are a lot of good points here, but I would dispute item 3. I know that some organic farmers over til their soil leaving it more prone to erosion and loss of co2. Item 6 is a confusing issue. Applying human 'manure' to the land is the best use for this product. The heavy metal and other contaminants is certainly a concern. The title of another article also caught my eye: One in 4 CA families can't afford to feed their kids. Organic products are more expensive.
Excellent article.
Good article. I do agree somewhat with GregR that organic is more expensive - in certain cases. Maybe it has to do with the fact that the big agribusinesses, who do the majority of the polluting, all receive BILLIONS in subsidies... and small organic farmers do not receive corporate welfare. (I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons) Also, for those who can buy from local farmers markets the organic stuff isn't that expensive. In fact, I save money from buying a veggie share from my local co-op garden verses buying from the supermarket, and the quality is soooooo much better. But I do realize that I am fortunate to have this co-op garden a few miles from me, and many others do not.
The part about this article that I wonder about is why Ronnie doesn't mention how many of the big food corporations have started to co-opt the 'organic' label. And beyond just buying organic, why doesn't Ronnie mention that we should (and could) start helping more people learn how to grow their own gardens?
To change focus:
Pretty soon we will see the fake persuaders come in here to muddy up the comments section. (No, GregR... I don't think you are one of them.)
http://www.monbiot.com/2002/05/14/the-fake-persuaders/
They will try to undermine the entire article and all its points WITHOUT giving evidence to prove why. They will use the well-known public relations tactic called F.U.D (spread fear, uncertainty and Doubt about this article and author). They will say stuff like, "this article just reeks of batshit" And then equate the article and the author to that of a conspiracy theory and a conspiracy nut. They will say things like, "I put the concerns of people like the author on the same level as those opposed to putting flouride in the water...Of course I might be wrong and all of this is just one big conspiracy among the FDA, Monsanto and the Illuminati to lie to you." But it's funny how they seem to ignore the very real corruption of the FDA -- a former Monsanto lobbyist was appointed as deputy commissioner by Obama in January of this year -- Nope. Nothing wrong with THAT!
They will use attack the messenger tactics. They will use straw man arguments. They will call those who support organic as "food fetishists". They will manipulate the English language to try and make their points. They will call those who don't like GMO as "anti-science", "purists", or whatever other undermining label they can think of. They will use canards to defend GMO, like "without GMO diabetics would die." They will attack any independent scientific findings and independent scientists as clueless and wrong because only their corporately funded science based findings could be right.
They will NEVER address the real motives of GMO corporations - a few corporations controlling the entire worlds seed supply - nope, they avoid that like the plague. They will NEVER address the European GMO bans - I guess because it might even be absurd to them to try and denounce entire countries, their scientists and the scientific evidence that gave them a VERY good reason to ban these products.
Anyway... just a heads up for those who are unaware of these deceitful folks. Think for yourself about this subject. Dig in deep and research. Don't let a small group of fake persuaders con you....
The way I look at it is that we are constantly bombarded by chemicals in our environment every day. Less pesticides in our food seems like a good idea. It's quite possible that the chemicals we consume in our food is trivial compared to the assault we breathe and absorb through our skin, but, anyway, why not try to improve our environment?
Let's not forget, too, that most of the toxins we ingest are natural ones. This doesn't mean there's anything to fear from natural toxins, just that the synthetic pesticides scare (see "Dirty Dozen") is much ado about next to nothing.
http://www.pnas.org/content/87/19/7777.full.pdf
Amazing how Whole Foods is always packed even though their prices are sky high.
. . . and even though they sell remarkably little organically produced food.
One wonders what to make of Mr. Cummins. He is certainly not stupid. We may have to conclude that he is being studiously dishonest.
Just one example:
"Organic foods are safe and pure. Organic farming prohibits the use of toxic pesticides, antibiotics, growth hormones, nano-particles, and climate-destabilizing chemical fertilizers. Consumers worry about pesticide and drug residues routinely found in non-organic produce, processed foods, and animal products. Consumer Reports has found that 77% of non-organic produce items in the average supermarket contain pesticide residues."
Organic farming rules ALLOW the use of toxic pesticides. They just come from "natural" sources. See "pyrethrum." See "copper sulfate." I worked at an organic farm and had to be trained in proper pesticides application. Mr. Cummins is not telling the truth.
A study measuring the environmental effects of organic, traditional, and Integrated Pest Management strategies in orcharding showed the the "organic" regime was by far the worst:
http://ecommons.cornell.edu/bitstream/1813/5203/1/FLS-139.pdf
As for worries about "pesticides residues": Cummins is pretending not to know about dose response. However, I have a feeling Cummins knows exactly what dose response is. "Pesticides residues" means absolutely nothing unless you know the doses.
It turns out the doses are orders of magnitude below those necessary for health effects.
http://growingproduce.com/news/?storyid=5875
Why do "organics" advocates have to resort to such lousy arguments?
The fake persuader in action - using his all too predictable F.U.D. tactics. Are you trying to undermine the argument that 90% of people in this country want labels put on GMO products? Because that is one of the arguments that Ronnie makes in this article - which is far from being 'lousy'. And polls indicate that 90% of the people in this country would agree with Ronnie, and would disagree with your lousy attempts to undermine this argument. Are you trying to undermine the argument that toxic sewage sludge and the scientific evidence that proves that it is bad for our landbase and our bodies? Are you really saying that dumping these types of toxic chemicals is good for us and the environment? Are you trying to defend corporate factory farms who produce the biggest waste and pollution out of all types of farms? Are you trying to defend that it is good to dump massive amounts gas and oil by-products into our land base and bodies? Are you trying to undermine the FACT that many European countries have banned Bovine Growth Hormones and some GMO stuff? These are a few of the other arguments that Ronnie makes in this article - which are far from being 'lousy.'
Are you trying to undermine the argument that people are seeking more nutritional food too? And in this search people are seeking the best alternatives, which happen to be labeled organic. Would you try to undermine the fact that hydrogenated oil (found in nearly 70% of non-organic processed food) is scientifically proven to be linked to a myriad of health problems ranging from coronary heart disease, to diabetes type II, to cancer, autism, food allergies and autoimmune diseases? Would you try to undermine the argument that most organic foods don't contain hydrogenated oil? If the Mayo clinic and The New England Journal of Health have publicly denounced it as bad, and the many Europeans countries who banned hydrogenated oil in their food products think it is bad... then it would seem prudent to say that buying organic products is a perfectly logical thing to do because organics don't contain this ingredient. Are you going to try to undermine this concept too?
What are you trying to do here, Mike? WHAT IS THE POINT OF YOUR CONTINUOUS ATTEMPTS TO UNDERMINE ANY PERSON OR ORGANIZATION WHO SEEKS TO ESTABLISH A HEALTHIER FOOD SYSTEM? What is your solution? Do you even have one? Or do you just come here to undermine everything that doesn't match the corporate status quo?
"We may have to conclude that he is being studiously dishonest."
-- The only 'We' you are speaking about is you and your corporate ilk (your sentence is a perfect example of using fake persuasion!) After witnessing your continuous attempts, from over months and months of articles, it is safe to conclude that it is YOU who is a totally dishonest piece of shit. A quick look at your past comments is all that is needed to prove this: Here are a few links to make it easier for anybody who wants to read through all of "Mike Bendzela's" bullshit... formerly posting here as Christ on a Crust.
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/08/12-1
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/08/05
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/07/28-0
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/06/24-4
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/05/08-2
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2011/04/14-0
http://www.commondreams.org/video/2011/03/25-0
http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2011/02/25-3
One does have to wonder why you continually come here to vigilantly protect the status quo of the corporate food system... unless Ronnie fucked your momma, your continuous personal attacks of him and anybody else who challenges the corporate status quo would seem highly out of place.
Btw- At least this time you didn't try to use your bullshit canard about GMO and diabetics. I guess after being called out twice on this you will wait for another month or so to drop this bullshit PR canard into the mix again.