The BEST organic thread on the Internet

[Thinktank]

Since no one has a clue what organic is, I will go through the trouble of letting everyone know - on this thread.
This will be the ultimate organic thread on the internet.

Organic costs more:
- growing organic is more labour intensive.
- organic must be stored separate to sprayed crops.
- it costs money to be certified organic. That's where an inspector visits the farm to see if everything looks okay.
- Yields are less on organic farms.
- Percentage of cosmetically perfect produce is less on organic farms. Some have blemishes and can't be sold for top price.
- Organic farms usually get no subsidy from government.
- Sometimes organic demand is higher than supply - price goes way up. Middleman makes $$$profit.
(this is known as gouging)

Organic Pesticides
- Some Organic farms use no pesticides and some organic farms use pesticides that are different from chemical pesticides.
Synthetic Pesticides that 'stick around' for a long time are not used on organic farms.

In truth, some organic foods are, indeed, grown with chemical inputs, which may come as a surprise to some. But the good news is that these inputs are not the same as the inputs used on conventional produce, and do not contain any synthetic ingredients. In most cases, natural and organic pesticides are developed completely from plant and herb components, and actually promote the health of both plants and soil.

Depending on the size, scope, and focus of a particular organic farm, varying cultivations standards can be legally employed and still be considered organic. Small-scale, family-operated biodynamic organic farms, for instance, may be able to successfully grow all their produce using absolutely no chemical interventions whatsoever, while larger-scale organic farms may need to apply certain chemical solutions to their crops in accordance with the official organic standards established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA).

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/039710_organ ... z3YWuIP3ND

[Omnitheo]

Actually most of us do know what Organic is. It's chemistry relating to compounds of Carbon. Which is essentially all food we ingest. And why it's silly that "non-gmo" took the moniker of "organic"

[Mr Danksworth]

'Natural''News'
http://rationalwiki.org/wiki/NaturalNews

[Thinktank]

Strawberries are the poster child that reveals how our current methods of producing food have placed us in harm’s way.



Once strawberries are planted, a continuous regimen of insecticides and fungicides are applied. Because of special breeding to maximize yields under conventional production methods (i.e., in fumigated soil), conventional strawberries no longer have much resistance to disease and predation by insects. It all adds up, and over the course of 2009 in California, 9.86 million pounds of chemicals were applied to 39,800 acres of strawberries, a total of 248 pounds per acre. In 2008, the US Department of Agriculture found 54 different chemical residues on strawberries (WhatsOnMyFood.org). The carcinogenic fungicide captan was found on 55% of samples tested. The reproductive toxicant fungicide pyraclostrobin was found on 52.9% of samples tested. And then there are the 52 others. And then there are the numerous unknown “inert” ingredients with unknown toxicity that accompany the pesticide active ingredients. EPA legally cannot even publicly identify these chemicals because this is “confidential business information.”

a total of 248 pounds per acre - that is absolutely amazing. I wonder if Okanagan pear, apricot, plum growers use 2 lb. of pesticides per acre per yer - just to compare.

http://www.psr.org/environment-and-heal ... rries.html

[Mr Danksworth]

Sounds like strawberries are the perfect candidate for for some genetic manipulation to reduce their reliance on pesticides and fungicides. Conventional breeding techniques have left them susceptible to insects and diseases in favour of size and flavour. Don't forget to wash your produce, organic of not.

[Thinktank]

Actually that's not how it works.

the only genetic manipulation necessary is to remove 'greed' from the huge California farmers' brains.

[Mr Danksworth]

Actually that's not how it works.

the only genetic manipulation necessary is to remove 'greed' from the huge California farmers' brains.

But the farmers are using conventional breeding techniques that are approved by big organic. 'Organic' farmers use strawberries started in non-organic fumigated soils so keep them from catching and infecting their crops...then use 'organic' pesticides at the same rate as conventional farms. I can't see where your problem is? Is it plant breeding in general that you are rallying against?

For someone who rails against people who don't know about agriculture you sure don't seem to not have a sugar frosted clue about that you are talking about.

[Thinktank]

'Organic' farmers use strawberries started in non-organic fumigated soils so keep them from catching and infecting their crops...then use 'organic' pesticides at the same rate as conventional farms..

Not the ones I'm thinking about.

Where are these weird organic farmers you talk about?

Name one.

[StraitTalk]

Who cares, offer both and let people decide. You don't have to spend more to eat better - that is a myth for lazy people.

[Thinktank]

^ not sure about him but .......... it's on topic.

[Keith Duhaime]

In addition to the fact that 'organic' food is more expensive, has been shown in the literature to provide no nutritional value over 'conventional' food and may be more damaging to the environment, there is now more evidence that it may also be less safe to eat than 'conventional' food (https://www.yahoo.com/health/whole-food ... 10767.html)?

[LANDM]

'Organic' farmers use strawberries started in non-organic fumigated soils so keep them from catching and infecting their crops...then use 'organic' pesticides at the same rate as conventional farms..

Not the ones I'm thinking about.

Where are these weird organic farmers you talk about?

Name one.

Fred Garvin is a weird organic farmer that does that. He used to attend a lot of farm equipment conventions and then, upon early retirement, turned to organic farming but used the strategy described above.

There, I named one. If you don't believe me, look him up. Google is your friend.

[LordEd]

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1 ... 0801986215

In summary, this study demonstrates an increased risk of PD (parkinson's disease) associated with organic pesticides such as rotenone and certain other pesticides and environmental exposures in this population.

[Thinktank]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB6fUqmyKC8#t=69

Simple rule - of organic is on sale and is only 50% more expensive - BUY IT. No brainer.
if organic is 100% more expensive - buy less and wait for it to go on sale.
If organic is triple the price - you may be getting gouged.

[Keith Duhaime]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oB6fUqmyKC8#t=69

Simple rule - of organic is on sale and is only 50% more expensive - BUY IT. No brainer.
if organic is 100% more expensive - buy less and wait for it to go on sale.
If organic is triple the price - you may be getting gouged.

Let's see, on one hand I see Thinktank has posted an advertisement by a Big Organic company out of Sweden with a vested interest in selling organic food. An ad which anyone with more than two functioning brain cells that didn't sleep through high school chemistry can pick apart.

On the otherhand, you've got places like Stanford Med School ( http://med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/2 ... finds.html ) performing a meta-analysis on hundreds of studies and coming to the conclusion there are essentially no statistically significant health benefits to eating 'organic' food instead of 'conventional' food (something any Dietitian could tell you too). And then of course there is the matter that 'certified organic' might also be a warning label as well as a heads up to food that probably has been produced in a manner much more detrimental to the environmental than 'conventional' food products, but that's another matter. More important is the matter that the savings by purchasing 'conventional' food instead of 'organic' food can be put towards a gym membership or as I just did, a couple pairs of new runners. And for this consumer outlay, even Google Scholar seems to agree there is benefit to the tune of roughly 567,000 citations (https://scholar.google.ca/scholar?q=exe ... CBoQgQMwAA ). Duh! I guess I know where I am spending my money instead of wasting it on 'organic' food. But maybe I am totally wrong and Thinktank is going to provide evidence that this is all a conspiracy by Big Running Shoe and Big Gym.