Subject: Re-post of 5/16 message
From: [email-masked] (Bowman, Bruce)
Date: 15 Jul 1994 13:55:32 -0000
Newsgroups: alt.sustainable.agriculture

Definition of "Organic", Natural vs Synthetic Pesticides, etc...
----------------------------------------------------------------

First, I would like to thank whoever left the last informative posting...as it
raises some very good issues. However, I would like to elaborate on them, if
I might.

Currently, in this country, the term "organic" means very little. Just about
anything can be grown with any form of chemical and non-chemical(?) input and
still be labeled "organic." However, this is changing -- there are a number
of state and federal labeling laws in some stage of implementation or another
that will give some meaning to the term eventually. Until that time, caveat
emptor -- particularly with those products that do not have an organizational
certification label. If you buy a product that is labeled "organic", insist
on seeing their certification papers and determine the agency doing the
certification.

Allusions were made that a Rotenone/Pyrethrin combination is less effective
and more toxic than a certain "soft" synthetic insecticide. This is probably
true; and unfortunately some certification organizations do allow this
combination to be used extensively. Some of the more conscientious ones,
however, have banned or restricted its use. Because of the paucity of
exhaustive studies on natural pesticides (or for that matter, the "inert"
ingredients and vehicles in the synthetic ones), most conscientious people do
not make health claims for their product -- to do so would be irresponsible
and implies a level of danger in conventional products that may not actually
exist.

"Organic" is a production method, and little more, at this time. It involves
more than just the way the product is sprayed or not sprayed -- it involves a
soil-building program with organic input (such as composting and the like) in
addition to the lack of synthetic materials. Turn over a shovelful of soil on
a good organic farm, and it is teeming with life -- earthworms, rich compost,
a level of natural aeration that allows it to retain moisture and reduce
erosion. Due to use of anhydrous ammonia and other materials with little to no
organic input, conventional agriculture essentially kills the soil, and there
is little to be found underground -- the natural controlling processes are
gone and the slightest adverse input upsets the balance between success and
failure of the crop. This does not mean the product is bad; but it does bring
up the point that there are other things to consider than just what is
healthier for the consumer.

In short, if you are really concerned about health risks, you will have to
obtain a copy of the agency's certification standards and find out what is and
is not allowed. Few people would argue that salt or diatomaceous earth aren't
fairly innocuous controls, but if their standards allow use of Rotenone and
the like, you will have to develop a relationship with the grower and find
out what (s)he actually uses in order to ascertain -- for yourself -- what is
suitable.

Those who loudly proclaim a "healthier" product may indeed just be out for a
buck, and probably have no real interest in your well-being.

None of this is to deny the fact that the less of ANYTHING you put on your
product, the more likely it is to be "safe" -- and a market exists out there
for it whether it is healthier or not. I can vouch for Larry's comment that
organic produce -- usually because it is locally-grown -- typically does taste
better because it is not picked green and the varieties are selected for taste
rather than cosmetic appeal or their ability to ship with minimal damage.

Bruce Bowman

From: BOWMAN BRUCE E                (MCVAX0::RC30906)

To:   VMS MAIL ADDRESSEE            (IN::"[email-masked]")