Who here eats Organic food and why ?

[rb]

AFAIK regular stuff is safe , so why bother with organic?

[deep]

The vast majority of food that I eat is organic, in that it contains carbon.

If you're referring to the overused, underregulated, often misleading, and generally useless "Organic" label on "healthy" foods, then no, I don't partake.

[birdiegirl]

we buy organic meat because it tastes way better the regular meat

[lochlan651]

we buy organic meat because it tastes way better the regular meat

I like regular meat. The antibiotics in it help keep me infection free, and the steriods they apparently use help me gain muscle tone. Why would I spend extra money on something because as the above poster said they choose to use a WAY overused catch phrase?

Like 'Lite' ot 'Diet' or 'Free-range'. There is no basis to the term.

[bionicbadger]

I try to buy stuff at the farmers market and from the hutterites, the food actually tastes like something. Supermarket fruit, lettuce, tomatoes, etc. all seem to have very little taste and are just watery. Supermarket strawberries are especially bad.

[Rehan]

When fall/winter arrives, take a look at how much of the produce is coming from central/south america. Then google around about the pesticide use problems in countries like Chile.
http://www.tcgnews.com/santiagotimes/index.php?nav=story&story_id=8384&topic_id=1
http://www.albionmonitor.com/9704a/latinpesticides.html
Most North Americans are oblivious to these issues and care only about getting the best price.

I try to stick to organic meat and dairy as well, again because of farming practices... The stuff farmers are allowed to feed their cows is disgusting; even if only a minority actually give them those things, it's not a chance I want to take.


And for kids, the exposure to pesticide in foods may also be an issue.
http://nrdc.org/media/pressreleases/060302b.asp

[Rehan]

This is an important issue in the development of the organic foods industry in North America:
Wal-Mart Eyes Organic Foods (http://www.nytimes.com/2006/05/12/business/12organic.html?ex=1305086400&en=38ee8aa84d436d72&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland&emc=rss)

The pros and cons are described in the article.

[royaljelly]

We're feeding out baby mostly organic stuff (like fruits, diary, meats). All others non-organic is ok.

I don't find much difference in taste. But knowing about the way the food is overly processed in order to produce mass quantities for our ever growing population, at least its good to know that I have a choice in what I put into my body (albeit at a cost).

There's a book my wife was reading about the production of food, really scared the heck out of us. ( I can't recall the title off the top of my head).

On a side note, just wondering where people go to buy organic meats (beef, fish etc) in the north GTA? (i.e. markham, richmond hill, north york areas)? I end up having to make a trip down to whole foods once a month.

[birdiegirl]

We're feeding out baby mostly organic stuff (like fruits, diary, meats). All others non-organic is ok.

I don't find much difference in taste. But knowing about the way the food is overly processed in order to produce mass quantities for our ever growing population, at least its good to know that I have a choice in what I put into my body (albeit at a cost).

There's a book my wife was reading about the production of food, really scared the heck out of us. ( I can't recall the title off the top of my head).

On a side note, just wondering where people go to buy organic meats (beef, fish etc) in the north GTA? (i.e. markham, richmond hill, north york areas)? I end up having to make a trip down to whole foods once a month.

i get my beef and chicken from http://www.berettaorganics.com
yeah i also can't imagine feeding my baby non organic meats and dairy

[el_diablo007]

I like regular meat. The antibiotics in it help keep me infection free, and the steriods they apparently use help me gain muscle tone. Why would I spend extra money on something because as the above poster said they choose to use a WAY overused catch phrase?

Like 'Lite' ot 'Diet' or 'Free-range'. There is no basis to the term.
while I am in agreeance with you on eating regular meat because of the fact that it's hard to justify paying extra for 'organic' meat, 'lite' or 'diet' do reflect differences in product content...these aren't just terms that companies throw around for the heck of it.

[IronMac]

There's a book my wife was reading about the production of food, really scared the heck out of us. ( I can't recall the title off the top of my head).

The Omnivore's Dilemma?

[Cas77]

Eating organic is a selfish thing to do. It's common knowledge that there's not enough land to maintain equal productivity if we went 100% organic (without N/P/K). So who would you like to kill off? Who doesn't deserve the right to live?

With the advancements in genetically modified foods, we could potentially see the day where famine would no longer be the leading cause of death on our planet...yet the brainwashed masses insist on eating 'organic' foods.

Furthermore there is no scientific evidence that organic foods changes anything...and the organic people blame this lack of evidence on the shortcomings of science (much like religion). Wait a second...organic foods might be why life expectancy 100 years ago was 49 years old...gee, these pesticides are killing me!

Food for thought: 1 cup of coffee has more carcinorigens (sp?) than 1 year's worth of regular non organic food!

[mlc2000]

If it was really bad for you,
the government agencies would stop it from coming in.

Every day, theres a report out about what can kill you.

Honestly, I can't live my life in constant fear of the boogeyman.

There are just as many doctors who can come up with studies to show that the food is fine. You need to look to see what group is funding the studies, because doctors don't do it for free or pay out of their own pockets to do these studies.

Also , not all studies are published. If I am from an 'organic food lobby' and I am funding study, I am not obligated in any way to publish a study which shows that non-organic foods are harmless. I can just shelve the study and wait until I have a study that presents our side of the story in a more positive light.

[eelfliw]

Is there a standard definition for "Organic Food"? Or is it just some marketing terminology for pricy food?

In a first world country like Canada, ppl can afford to pay extra for food that they think is good for them. So there's a market for organic food.

In poorer countries, ppl can't afford to pay extra cash for organic food. So there's no market for it.

Do you think poor country's population die earlier or get sick more often because they don't eat organic foods?

[bumbum]

If it was really bad for you,
the government agencies would stop it from coming in.

Every day, theres a report out about what can kill you.

Honestly, I can't live my life in constant fear of the boogeyman.

There are just as many doctors who can come up with studies to show that the food is fine. You need to look to see what group is funding the studies, because doctors don't do it for free or pay out of their own pockets to do these studies.

Also , not all studies are published. If I am from an 'organic food lobby' and I am funding study, I am not obligated in any way to publish a study which shows that non-organic foods are harmless. I can just shelve the study and wait until I have a study that presents our side of the story in a more positive light.


i concur

[Fragle]

Alot of people don't like organic food, but for me I just grew up eating things like liver, tongue, stomach etc.

I suppose its a cultural thing, some people stick to vegetables and beans, nuts and other things that don't moo. I like to eat the things that eat those things though, so I get all that vegtable goodness and then some!

[mlc2000]

Is there a standard definition for "Organic Food"? Or is it just some marketing terminology for pricy food?

In a first world country like Canada, ppl can afford to pay extra for food that they think is good for them. So there's a market for organic food.

In poorer countries, ppl can't afford to pay extra cash for organic food. So there's no market for it.

Do you think poor country's population die earlier or get sick more often because they don't eat organic foods?
And furthermore, if we are shipping food from our land-of-plenty to these third world countries, do we send them organic or inorganic? And do they even care?

Oh no... sorry, rather starve to death than eat rice thats been sprayed with bug spray. :(

[mlc2000]

Alot of people don't like organic food, but for me I just grew up eating things like liver, tongue, stomach etc.

I suppose its a cultural thing, some people stick to vegetables and beans, nuts and other things that don't moo. I like to eat the things that eat those things though, so I get all that vegtable goodness and then some!


Won't the poor animals starve if we eat all their food?

[gordholio]

Is there a standard definition for "Organic Food"? Or is it just some marketing terminology for pricy food?

In a first world country like Canada, ppl can afford to pay extra for food that they think is good for them. So there's a market for organic food.

In poorer countries, ppl can't afford to pay extra cash for organic food. So there's no market for it.

Do you think poor country's population die earlier or get sick more often because they don't eat organic foods?

The people in poorer countries often die from malnutrition.
You can get all your vitamins from "common" food and perhaps take a multi-vitamin in case there are areas where you're lacking.
I could never afford the price for organic food.
The quality might be slightly better, but to me the 2 or 3X price different is way too much.

[Fragle]

Won't the poor animals starve if we eat all their food?

Exactly, we can't go eating skinny animals.

[DJ_Peanuts22]

i have organic veggies all the time, mainly because of convenience.... grow eveything in our backyard. love the natural taste

[duckdown]

I could care less about food with the word "organic" stamped on it

If it's fresh, thats all I care about.

[Bullseye]

If it was really bad for you,
the government agencies would stop it from coming in.

You really trust the government to protect you? I don't, I use my own common sense. Eating food grown in counties with well known and documented pesticide abuse problems, as well as the pollution caused from having it shipped such a long distance, is just not sensible to me.

I tend to buy some things organic, the foods known to be problematic. I will often choose locally grown non-organic, though, as I can talk to the farmer and assess for myself if I think they are responsible.

[alkaseltzer01]

Here's a good example of organically produced food.

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01465.html

[Rehan]

Here's a good example of organically produced food.

http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2006/NEW01465.html On the other hand...
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2006/09/19/72520.htm
Spinach Company: E-Coli Due to Non-Organic Products

The company whose fresh spinach was linked to an E. coli outbreak that has sickened at least 109 people in several states including Indiana said its organic products had been cleared of contamination, while health officials continued working to pinpoint the bacteria source.

Natural Selection Foods LLC, the country's largest grower of organic produce, said late Sunday that manufacturing codes from packages of spinach that infected patients turned over to health officials all were from non-organic spinach. Natural Selection packages both organic and conventionally grown spinach in separate areas at its San Juan Bautista plant.

...

[RedBargainz]

Don't forget that all that 'crap' that people are so worried about in non-organic foods are already in our soil, our air and our water. Do not believe that your organic food is free of any of it. It may contain a smaller amount, but there is no scientific data on how much of these chemicals we would need to ingest for it to be harmful to us. We may all already have too much in our systems ... or we may need to ingest 1000 times more before it affects us.

Also, we were all brought up on non-organic foods. The "Organic" is relatively new...at least in any mass production form...and our life expectancy is getting longer. Yes, there are other factors involved...like better medicines. However, we are all healthier than ever. There is no proof that organic foods will make us healthier... not by any meaningful amount anyways. There are many people out there getting rich on this 'organic' phase. Think about that.

This also reminds me about the water debate...tap or bottled?

[alkaseltzer01]

On the other hand...
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news/national/2006/09/19/72520.htm

http://www.webcommentary.com/asp/ShowArticle.asp?id=averyd&date=060927

Virtually no farmers age their manure for a year as too much of the vital nitrogen gasses off into the air during that time. Instead, most conventional farmers put their manure only on feed crops such as corn or on pasture. That may be why the Minnesota researchers found organic produce three times more likely to be contaminated with E. coli (7% of samples) than conventional (2%).

[ephemera]

If it was really bad for you,
the government agencies would stop it from coming in.

Every day, theres a report out about what can kill you.

Honestly, I can't live my life in constant fear of the boogeyman.

There are just as many doctors who can come up with studies to show that the food is fine. You need to look to see what group is funding the studies, because doctors don't do it for free or pay out of their own pockets to do these studies.

Also , not all studies are published. If I am from an 'organic food lobby' and I am funding study, I am not obligated in any way to publish a study which shows that non-organic foods are harmless. I can just shelve the study and wait until I have a study that presents our side of the story in a more positive light.

Your avatar made me laugh! I loved SCTV

Anyhow Organic really is just another fad. You can expect alot of products labeled organic are NOT and just jumping on the band wagon.

I saw some Organic Maple syrup. It was $8!! Its just tree sap and they boil it and bottle it, thats it. How more 'organic' can you get.

If I go to Chinatown and ask for organic they would laugh in my face.

[Bullseye]

Your avatar made me laugh! I loved SCTV

Anyhow Organic really is just another fad. You can expect alot of products labeled organic are NOT and just jumping on the band wagon.

I saw some Organic Maple syrup. It was $8!! Its just tree sap and they boil it and bottle it, thats it. How more 'organic' can you get.

If I go to Chinatown and ask for organic they would laugh in my face.

You can't use the word organic unless you've gone through a certification process, which takes a rather long time. I have three different family members who are hobby farmers (goat milk products, garlic, and maple syrup and eggs), all going for organic certification, it's not an easy process.

FYI - Non-organic maple syrup is allowed to have up to 20% corn syrup in it, and that's the stuff that is sold as high end. If you're talking about Aunt Jemima, well that is not really even maple syrup at all.

So in short, you have no clue what you're talking about. You should stick to talking about Sunshine girls and how cheap toilet paper makes you inadvertently touch your bunghole.

[deep]

Bullseye, he's not exactly wrong....those certification processes your family members are going through must be voluntary, or specific to a particular organization, as Canada has been trying and failing to implement a nation-wide organic certification process for almost 3 years now. I believe you CAN put "Organic" on non-certified products at this time....you just can't use one of the certified logos.

There is a Dec 31st deadline from the European Union, or they will no longer allow the import of "organic" Canadian foods....so it's likely we'll see legislation, but just not yet.

[vistaliving]

There are no gov regulations for organics in Canada.

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/fssa/orgbio/20060907infoe.shtml

As of Sept 7 2006, they are still in the proposal stages.

So for those that are currently claiming they are organics, it's thru 3rd party organizations/associations which people pay to be part of and to get accredition from.

Think of it as, everyone pays to get their driver's license.... does it mean you're a good driver????? Do you follow ALL the rules of the road????

[IronMac]

Bullseye, he's not exactly wrong

What part of his post is right? :lol:

[IronMac]

Think of it as, everyone pays to get their driver's license.... does it mean you're a good driver????? Do you follow ALL the rules of the road????

Think on this...you still have to PASS the test.

[szw]

I buy organic food when i have the chance because I dont really give a **** that its mostly a scam and I have the money to spend. It makes me feel better that my packaging looks a bit better!

[mlc2000]

I buy organic food when i have the chance because I dont really give a **** that its mostly a scam and I have the money to spend. It makes me feel better that my packaging looks a bit better!
Thats the same kinda warm and fuzzies that Lexus buyers get when they buy the RX hybrid,
yes its a hybrid but our customers demand more power from our hybrids, so made the engine bigger.
But thats ok, it still says hybrid on the package and u can have that warm and fuzzy saving the planet vibe!

[vistaliving]

Think on this...you still have to PASS the test.

You pass the test ONCE.... do whatever you want after as long as you don't get caught...

[IronMac]

Why don't people do a bit of research before opening their big yaps about topics that they evidently don't know anything about? There's a lot of ignorance evident in this thread. :confused:

No product can carry that label without first being inspected. The product has to meet a comprehensive set of rules overseen by the Canadian General Standards Board. The standards are voluntary - except in Quebec, where you can expect to pay large fines if you're caught misrepresenting your products.

To be certified as an organic grower, a farmer has to pay several hundred dollars a year. Much of that money goes to the inspectors who make sure the organic standards are met. The inspectors might give a couple of days' notice of a visit - or a couple of hours.

The final aspect of the "certified organic" process is the paper trail. Organic farmers are required to keep detailed records.

The application process is lengthy. The application form from the Organic Crop Producers & Processors of Ontario (one of the companies that provides inspection services for organic farmers) is quite complex.

http://www.cbc.ca/consumers/market/files/food/organics/

Two provinces, BC and QC, regulate organic foods which means that there can be fines/punishments if foods are mislabeled as being organic when they are not.

[Bullseye]

Thanks to IronMac for posting some useful info and links.

[DarkReaper]

Isn't the only difference between organic and non-organic is that organic has Carbon and Hydrogen?

I wouldn't want to pay more when I can get a genetically modified one for less. Just because it's genetically modified doesn't mean it's inferior. It's mostly used to make the food bigger, thus costing less and to keep bugs off if it.

[lazarus]

AFAIK regular stuff is safe , so why bother with organic?

I eat organic fruit (since normal usually had lots of pesticides sprayed on it), I try to buy organic meat (since it is free range, not fed w/ meat products).

Most organic stuff is grown locally, so I help stimulate the local economy, also, you get to eat more stuff as it's in season. :)

[UrbanPoet]

If it was really bad for you,
the government agencies would stop it from coming in.

Every day, theres a report out about what can kill you.

Honestly, I can't live my life in constant fear of the boogeyman.

There are just as many doctors who can come up with studies to show that the food is fine. You need to look to see what group is funding the studies, because doctors don't do it for free or pay out of their own pockets to do these studies.

Also , not all studies are published. If I am from an 'organic food lobby' and I am funding study, I am not obligated in any way to publish a study which shows that non-organic foods are harmless. I can just shelve the study and wait until I have a study that presents our side of the story in a more positive light.

the govt. wont stop anything if they are profiting from it.
cigarettes, booze...
I dont care for organic stuff. I think its useless to eat it.
people have been eating "evil" unorganic food for years and have been living fine.

[gordholio]

People were eating "organic" food long before it was ever even called organic.It was just regular produce.
Then, the pesticides came into use.
I don't buy organic. I just wash all my vegetables off before I eat them.
Worrying about it probably causes more harm than eating a few chemicals.

[IronMac]

Thanks to IronMac for posting some useful info and links.

You're welcome. :) One thing that really gets my dander up is when people construct all sorts of arguments based on erroneous or no info.

[IronMac]

I wouldn't want to pay more when I can get a genetically modified one for less. Just because it's genetically modified doesn't mean it's inferior. It's mostly used to make the food bigger, thus costing less and to keep bugs off if it.

So, bugs fall off of big veggies and fruits? :lol:

[IronMac]

I try to buy organic meat (since it is free range, not fed w/ meat products).

Virtually all beef cattle are now fed without meat by-products but it doesn't mean that they're "organic".

[Bullseye]

people have been eating "evil" unorganic food for years and have been living fine.

Then why have cancer rates shot up to epidemic proportions since the introduction of pesticides?

[aspiringnovelist]

Then why have cancer rates shot up to epidemic proportions since the introduction of pesticides?

Because cancer is something that tends to happen to old people. Life expectancy has increased signficantly in the twentieth century for a variety of reasons. People usually don't die in their first six months of life anymore. Instead, they die at 82 of cancer. Age-adjusted rates of cancer actually decreased. In other words, an 82 year old today is less likely to die of cancer than an 82 year old a hundred years ago. It's just that there are a whole lot more of 82 year olds around than there used to be.

[Bullseye]

Because cancer is something that tends to happen to old people. Life expectancy has increased signficantly in the twentieth century for a variety of reasons. People usually don't die in their first six months of life anymore. Instead, they die at 82 of cancer. Age-adjusted rates of cancer actually decreased. In other words, an 82 year old today is less likely to die of cancer than an 82 year old a hundred years ago. It's just that there are a whole lot more of 82 year olds around than there used to be.

Cancer rates are up in younger people as well, I've lost many friends and family to it who were under 50.

I'm not saying that pesticides are the main or only cause of that, but there are scientific studies that do link the two.

[aspiringnovelist]

Cancer rates are up in younger people as well, I've lost many friends and family to it who were under 50.

I'm not saying that pesticides are the main or only cause of that, but there are scientific studies that do link the two.

Well here's a study that shows age-adjusted cancer rates declining in the last 70 years. Despite a dramatic increase in lung cancer rates that can be attributed to smoking, pretty much all other kinds of cancers declined, making for an overall decline in cancer rates.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/104535482/main.html,ftx_abs#SEC1-2

Interestingly the World Health Organization recommends eating plenty of fresh fruits and vegetables as one of the best ways to decrease your chances of cancer. Presumably they are aware that pesticides are used on these fresh fruits and vegetables in most of the world. Here's the link:
http://www.who.int/dietphysicalactivity/publications/facts/cancer/en/

[Emancipated]

The vast majority of food that I eat is organic, in that it contains carbon.

If you're referring to the overused, underregulated, often misleading, and generally useless "Organic" label on "healthy" foods, then no, I don't partake.

Care to add a rejoinder to what Rehan had to say (a few posts down) about so-called "organics" ? You seem to think it's all rubbish and clever marketing designed to decieve the masses. Sure one could try to discredit his information as biased researched, but that would be too easy. I'd like to see and hear what an astute person like yourself has to say about it.

[Bullseye]

Well here's a study that shows age-adjusted cancer rates declining in the last 70 years. Despite a dramatic increase in lung cancer rates that can be attributed to smoking, pretty much all other kinds of cancers declined, making for an overall decline in cancer rates.
http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/fulltext/104535482/main.html,ftx_abs#SEC1-2

You've misread that study, it shows a decline in cancer DEATHS, not in incidents of cancer. Death rates due to cancer have fallen because of advances on medical technology, despite a higher rate of cases of cancer.

As for the WHO, I wouldn't assume that their recommendation to eat fresh fruit and veg contradicts their concerns about pesticides. The issue isn't eat/not eat fruit and veg, it's spray or not spray.

[aspiringnovelist]

You've misread that study, it shows a decline in cancer DEATHS, not in incidents of cancer. Death rates due to cancer have fallen because of advances on medical technology, despite a higher rate of cases of cancer.

As for the WHO, I wouldn't assume that their recommendation to eat fresh fruit and veg contradicts their concerns about pesticides. The issue isn't eat/not eat fruit and veg, it's spray or not spray.

Well, a decline in cancer mortality sounds like a good thing to me. So, can you show me the studies that show that we now have a higher (age-adjusted) rate of incidents of cancer? Also, I'm interested to see the studies that you mentioned before that link cancer and pesticides. The studies I am aware of were done on rats, and the level of pesticides that they exposed those rats to were far higher in proportion to their body size, than what humans would get by eating fresh produce.

And, as far as I know, the WHO doesn't condemn pesticides. Their website seems to indicate that they are advocates of pesticide use.
http://www.who.int/whopes/question1/en/

[Bullseye]

'Pesticides Serious Health Threat to Children in Developing World, September 24, 2004 '
http://usunrome.usmission.gov/UNIssues/FoodSecurity/docs/a4092902.htm

The WHO looks at pesticides from a cost/benefit point of view. For example, DDT can be harmful, but malaria is a much worse health threat, and nothing else works as good as DDT to control it.

We're mainly discussing pesticides sprayed on foods here, though, so I'll stick to that.

'Pesticide pollution is linked to cancer'
http://www.pmac.net/pesticide_pollution.html

This link addresses your points about studies on rats, cancer rates, and it also has links to studies at the bottom.

http://www.ewg.org/reports/Myths/Industry_myths.html

[aspiringnovelist]

This link addresses your points about studies on rats, cancer rates, and it also has links to studies at the bottom.

http://www.ewg.org/reports/Myths/Industry_myths.html

Interesting evidence here Bullseye. Although in many places they seem to be dancing around the issues, and wording things carefully, and being ambiguous. I don't have the time or desire to track down their references either, so I can't say for sure...well, anything. I am not an expert, enough that I can separate the truth from the fiction.

However, if you manage, by eating organic foods, to reduce the amount of pesticides used, while at the same time not decreasing the production or availability of food, then all the more power to you.

[Rehan]

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20061005.wxpesticide05/BNStory/National/home
Canada's pesticide screening of food criticized

MARTIN MITTELSTAEDT
From Thursday's Globe and Mail

According to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, fresh fruits and vegetables on Canadian store shelves are remarkably free of pesticides, with bug- and weed-killer residues on only 10 per cent of the thousands of samples it checks every year.

But a new report from an environmental think tank contends the federal food safety watchdog is seriously underestimating these residues because U.S. regulators, checking the same types of fresh foods, find pesticides on 76 per cent of them. British food safety regulators find them on 40 per cent.

"It is difficult to believe that fruits and vegetables in Canada are so much cleaner than produce in the U.S. or the U.K, especially when a substantial proportion of Canadian produce is imported from the U.S.," said the report by the Vancouver-based David Suzuki Foundation.

The report, being released today, called on the federal government to investigate these "glaring inconsistencies" to find out why the Canadian tests are so out of line.

The foundation's report, one of the most comprehensive comparisons among advanced countries on the regulations covering pesticides, concluded that Canadian safety standards are some of the weakest, in part because they allow the continued use of dozens of weed, bug and fungus killers banned elsewhere.

"Canada is really light years behind other industrialized nations in addressing the health threats posed by pesticides," said report author David Boyd, an adjunct professor of environmental management at Simon Fraser University.

The CFIA couldn't immediately explain why its pesticide spot checks were so different from those in the other two countries.

But Robert Charlebois, the agency's director of food safety, said the results might not be comparable because of differences in the way the products were sampled and tested in the countries.

Among its other findings, the report said Canada generally allows higher pesticide residues on food than in Europe or Australia. In one case, for the insecticide methoxychlor, Health Canada considers safe residues a staggering 1,400 times the European limit.

In a comparison between Canada and Europe of residue standards on 40 food and pesticide combinations, the report said Canadian limits were weaker in 30 cases, and stronger in none. In a comparison with Australia, Canadian standards were weaker in 21 cases, and stronger in four.

Health Canada's chief of pesticide registration, Richard Aucoin, defended Canadian residue limits because more than 90 per cent are either the same as in the United States or stricter. He said Canada has a "very, very rigorous risk assessment for pesticides."

According to the report, Canadian regulations frequently label as safe food with pesticide residues of around one part per million, but it said new research has found some of these chemicals are biologically active at far lower concentrations, raising concerns that the amounts to which Canadians are exposed could be a health risk.

The report also said that Health Canada allows Canadian farmers to use 60 pesticides no longer permitted in other countries because of bans or product withdrawals from the market.

Mr. Aucoin said Health Canada is currently looking at the accuracy of the list compiled by the foundation.

However, he said "virtually all" of the chemicals identified by the foundation will be re-evaluated by Health Canada under a previously announced program of looking at the safety of pesticides in long-term commercial use.

[alkaseltzer01]

http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/a-bad-time-for-organic-believers

Centre for Global Food Issues.

A Bad Time For Organic Believers
Tuesday October 3, 2006

It’s a bad moment for believers in the mystical wonders of organic and natural foods. Deadly E. coli bacteria, lurking in spinach from one of the biggest organic farms in America, just killed one woman and hospitalized at least 29 other people with kidney failure. In all, the contaminated spinach sickened nearly 200, in at least 23 states and Canada.



Meanwhile, several California kids are on kidney dialysis with permanent organ damage from the same virulent strain of E. coli O157: H7 after consuming raw, un-pasteurized milk or colostrum from the Organic Pastures Dairy of Fresno.



Tragically, the victims were all seeking greater food safety and the promised health benefits of vegetables and milk produced the “old-fashioned way.”



Earthbound Farms, which grew the contaminated spinach, is being sued by a shocked family of organic believers in Ohio. Three family members were sickened, and one daughter has permanent kidney damage.



Earthbound Farms advertises that it sells “Food for Life,” and says “It’s just plain healthy to include lots of organic vegetables in your diet.” That certainly rings hollow today.



Now the farm’s parent company has recalled huge batches of spinach sold all over the country under a variety of labels. “We will do whatever is necessary to help protect the health and safety of the consumers,” said an Earthbound spokesperson.



Does that mean Earthbound will stop fertilizing its leafy vegetables with cow manure? Most conventional farmers fertilize their food crops with “chemical” fertilizer, and put their livestock manure on feed crops like corn. Organic farmers reject chemical fertilizer. Instead, they compost raw cattle manure for some weeks, hoping that will kill any dangerous organisms that could contaminate the food. Sometimes it doesn’t.



In the old days, when organic produce came from a few little farms, an occasional sick customer was no big deal. Often, the victim refused to believe organic food could cause the illness. But so many people now believe the organic hype that organic farms have gotten big and corporate and the manure-related consumer epidemics make national news.



Organic Pastures ironically boasts that raw dairy foods are an outstanding source of nutrients and “beneficial bacteria.” Unfortunately, it’s also a source of dangerous bacteria.



The organic dairy claims “Raw milk strengthens the immune system.” And that organic raw milk has “many enzyme-based pathogen-killing systems.” Apparently not enough of them.



“It has been theorized,” says the organic company, “that the combination of grass feeding, no antibiotics used, no hormones, and low levels of grain used in the diet cause a change in the cow’s immune system and rumen. This change in physiology inhibits pathogen development in the [organic] milk.”



That isn’t even a theory. It’s a marketing lie, designed to wring a higher price from the consumer for a product that’s condemned by health authorities because of its inherent dangers. The FDA says drinking raw milk is playing Russian roulette with your health. Such milk-borne diseases as tuberculosis and undulant fever were epidemic in the days before pasteurized milk. Now the E. coli pathogens revealed the lie again.



The Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council are trying to blame “factory livestock farms” for the O157 in the cattle manure. But a recent Swiss study found organic cows have as much O157 as other cows. The U.S. Department of Agriculture says it’s found the deadly O157 in every cattle herd it’s tested.



Our objective should be to get the manure away from our food crops. Organic and natural aren’t safer, or more nutritious: Just more expensive, and far more dangerous.

[Rehan]

http://www.cgfi.org/cgficommentary/a-bad-time-for-organic-believers

Centre for Global Food Issues. Do you mean Centre for Grossly Fabricated Information? :lol: CGFI is a wing of the Hudson Institute.
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hudson_Institute (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Hudson_Institute)
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Trashing_organic_foods (http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Trashing_organic_foods)

There's no real evidence that organic produce was involved in these e.coli cases , and the manufacturer has said all of the identified packages were non-organic spinach.
http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/california/la-me-ecoli29sep29,1,62428.story?coll=la-headlines-pe-california&ctrack=1&cset=true

[aspiringnovelist]

In a comparison between Canada and Europe of residue standards on 40 food and pesticide combinations, the report said Canadian limits were weaker in 30 cases, and stronger in none. In a comparison with Australia, Canadian standards were weaker in 21 cases, and stronger in four.



Right, but how are those European standards set compared to how the Canadian standards are set? Why would we mindlessly copy the Europeans? Are they that much smarter than us?

[alkaseltzer01]

sigh.....

http://www.ift.org/cms/?pid=1000363

Martin said the California spinach outbreak appears to have been caused by contaminated cow manure used by organic producers

I guess cause the manufacturer (Earthbound Farms) said something, we should believe it. Especially when they have another product recalled.

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/english/corpaffr/recarapp/2006/20060930e.shtml

I'm not trying to say Organic is good or bad. I want people to be aware that there are associated risks with eating organic. There are risks with eating anything. No government, no organization, no associations will eliminate the risks. Especially when in Canada, the industry is self regulated... The watchdogs are the same people that want to see the industry succeed.

[alkaseltzer01]

Actually, here's a good article to show the better balance of organics/conventional.

http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/food/organic-products-206/overview/index.htm

Organic labelling is not only used to promote health, but promote their sales.

[Rehan]

I don't disagree that there are certain risks with eating organic foods as well as questionable marketing practices, but that doesn't mean you're right about the spinach recall. Manure is used for both organic and non-organic spinach production, and I still haven't seen any evidence from source closely involved with the issue that organic practices were the cause of the problem. It's funny that non-organic produce caused the recall, and yet organic farming gets bashed... I can imagine how certain lobby groups would've been celebrating if the E. Coli really was in organic broccoli. :|

[IronMac]

True, it may turn out that the contaminant is from outside sources.