Subject: Re: Organic Food
From: Brian Baker <[email-masked]>
Date: 18 May 94 21:23 PDT
Newsgroups: alt.sustainable.agriculture

/* ---------- "Organic Food" ---------- */
In response to article <[email-masked]>, /*
[email-masked] in igc:alt.sustainabl wrote:*/

>> 
>> I've been eating organic produce for years. There's simply no comparing
>> the taste, look and overall quality of organic verses commercial.
>> You've never tasted strawberries or tomatoes unless they're out of a
>> local organic garden.
> 
>> In Santa Cruz Country we are fortunate to have numerous organic farms
>> and orchards and the community has strongly embraced the quality of
>> these products over Safeway's wares.

> Aren't we being a little pretentious here.  I'm sure most of the people in
> Rwanda and Somilia eat "organic" food and don't care about that fact at
> all.

Who's being pretentious, now? 

> "Organic" food (what kind of food isn't organic?) is a luxury for the well
> off people of Europe and America.  Most of the world has to eat organic
> food with all the attendant risks of spoilage and contamination by
> "organic" microorganisms.  

Study this one carefully, folks. It's the classic logical fallacy of the "False
Dichotomy." To answer your parenthetical question, Lowell, "organic" has come to
mean food grown without most synthetic chemical fertilizers and pesticides. You
might not agree, but this commercial usage is what most consumers and farmers
recognize, and has been recognized by truth-in-labelling laws from Maine-to-
California, and by Congress in Title 21 of the 1990 Farm Bill. 

Now, let me understand this. Either organic food is purchased by the richest of
the rich, or the poorest of the poor. Give me a break. Actually, a 1991 survey
by the Packer showed that most organic food in the U.S. is purchased by middle-
income people, but more significant than that, purchasers of organic food tended
to be better educated than the general public. 

But the real false dichotomy is the insinuation that food grown organically is
spoiled and contaminated. It just plain isn't. Consumers want food that is fresh
and wholesome. Organic farmers give them that. If it were not, consumers would
take their business elsewhere. Organic farmers don't have the luxury of taking
food and using chemicals to mask spoilage and retard decomposition. They have to
pick to order, get it to market fresher, and sometimes live with a bigger
"shrink." With food treated with chemical fungicides, fumigants and other post-
harvest chemicals, consumers get food that is not fresh, but appears to be so.
They are also getting more than what they pay for--not only pesticide residues
but also degradation of soil and water, destruction of wildlife, farm-worker
exposure to toxic chemicals. 

If food is spoiled, don't buy it or throw it out. But don't go slandering
organic food by equating it with spoilage and contamination. Don't go saying
that in Florida--I understand that libelling food is a criminal offense there.

> I assume (though maybe incorrectly) that you wash your food - or cook prior
> to consumption.  Why do you do this?  It wouldn't be for the pesticidial
> effects of these processes would it?

> Those who preach "organic" food production are uniformed and misguided, and

(Most people who practice organic don't wear uniforms, and have a pretty good
idea where they are going)

> as I've said before, if they are so found of 18th century science why not
> spend time trying to convert lead into gold. It would be much more
> profitable.

I don't know what rock you crawled out from under, but most organic farmers I
know are among the most progressive (in many senses of the word), and practice
agriculture based on sound principles of ecology tested by centuries of
experience. By building upon this experience, organic farmers are making
advances in biological and cultural practices that were abandoned during the
chemical revolution. Organic farming is the farming of the future, perhaps the
closest we'll get to a sustainable agriculture. It is conventional farmers who
are more likened to the alchemists, trying to turn various chemical potions into
gold. Not that I blame them--I grew up on a conventional farm, studied
agriculture at a Land Grant University, and understand the mindset all too well.
There's little profit these days in farming--conventional or organic. 

> (Mr London - If you want to flame me, please do it public this time so the
> rest of the internet can partake of your putative wit)

This is such a ripe piece of flamebait, I couldn't resist. Are you serious?

-- 
> Lowell

> What a long strange trip its been