Organic Propaganda

In today’s society consumers are bombarded with Organic Propaganda.  The Organic Food Movement, who doesn’t really care what your family eats, has done a great job of marketing organic food, mostly with scare tactics.  It often times aligns itself with campaigns that create the illusion that it is healthier or safer for you, which is simply false.

Four of these choices are either associated with a health condition or simply a better way to does not fall into those categories.

Organic food is no more nutritious for you than conventionally produced food. In 2009, the UK’s Food Standard Agency commissioned a comprehensive review of articles and studies over the last 50 years comparing Organic and Conventionally produced food.  The conclusion found that there was no significant if any nutritional differences in the products and no additional health benefits from eating organic food.   Most people can agree with this because using common sense and some basic science one realizes that for example an apple is apple…you cannot alter the molecules that make an apple by using a different method of production.

A misconception that is often associated with Organic is that they do not use pesticides.  News Flash: They DO use pesticides.  Some pesticides used are the same ones used in conventional methods and others are not.  The difference in pesticides is whether they are synthetically produced or naturally occurring, not whether its safer or not.  A pesticide is meant to get rid a pest that is doing harm and are only used when necessary in any type of farming.   However Organic pesticide usage is not recorded or regulated by the government like conventional usage is.

Leaders in the Organic Food Movement acknowledge that pesticides are used when asked.  However they often to tote that Organic food has less pesticide residue.   Every year the Environmental Working Group publishes an article telling the public which produce contains the most pesticide residue also known as The Dirty Dozen. However they are not very upfront about their methods nor do they explain how pesticide residues are measured on food.  Residues are measured with the chronic reference dose, which is established by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), meaning the acceptable level intake one can have without having effects throughout their lifetime.  A study recently published in April in the Journal of Toxicology finds that “dirtiest” produce had levels of pesticides 1,000 times lower than the chronic reference dose.  That means it is very safe to eat.

If Organic food has no additional nutritional benefit and is no more safe to eat than conventional then the cultivation methods must be better for the environment.  Again a misconception with advances such as No-till, GPS, and advanced breeding techniques conventional agriculture overall impact, some argue, is less than organic methods.  Often times organic methods require more tillage, more applications of chemicals and sometimes more land.

Diversity is what makes the agriculture world go around. Organic has a place in the world.  However it is no more superior than any other method of farming.  The Organic Food Movement has marketed it as such because that’s what marketing is.  Convincing consumers that one product is better than the other.  All to increase profits, which is ironic for a movement that’s roots are based in Socialism…but I’ll save that post for another time.  I applaud them for wanting to make more money.  All consumers have freedom of choice and we must all choose what is best for our families and pocketbooks not because someone scared you into it.


Filed under Agriculture, Conventional, Environment, Environmentalists, GMOs, Green Agenda, Organic

19 Responses to Organic Propaganda

  1. Brilliantly put, Marie. I really appreciate that you lay the facts out for consumers but ultimately leave the choice up to them. That’s the great thing about our food system! I’ll be sharing this 🙂

    • Organic was never based on ..’gasp’.. socialism.. it’s based on good farming practices.. (this was actually taught in grade school back in the early 60’s) in the old days farmers understood the importance of cover crops , crop rotation as well as composting to increase the top soil.. and yes synthetic chemicals cause harm not just to humans but to microcosms ..look up how much top soil we have lost.. synthetic chemicals are not the answer

  2. Well said Marie! PS. I love the blog background.

  3. If you wish an alternate – a REAL alternative- to the “Big Business *Organic*”, I might suggest you research Certified Naturally Grown. These people have a MUCH higher standard of requirements for food production. The *organic movement* that you’re describing here is the left-overs from after Big Business got involved. As for myself (a Certified Naturally Grown farmer) I’d rather not have my apples coated with systemic pesticides, thanks. >^,,^<

    • I appreciate the information.

      However in my opinion we have the safest most secure food system in the world. And no matter which method is used to produce food I know it is safe and equally as nutritious.

      • I lived in Portland Or and visited Eugene countless times..there are more plants, forest etc which act as filters before it gets into the streams and rivers..
        but if the study were from the midwest it would tell a different story..Once upon a time agricultural advancement meant increased crop rotations. In 1950 U.S. farms produced 5 crops per farm per year (livestock, vegetables, grains, etc). Now farms produce only 1.2 crops per farm per year, resulting in topsoil loss, increased fertilizer and pesticide use….A modern rotation includes only corn, soybeans, fertilizer and pesticides. As for genetically modified crops, the switch to those varieties has driven the rush to the two-crop system. Those crops are designed to tolerate the presence of chemicals such as contained in Round Up. The result is that farmland has been inundated with glyphosate…and we have the giant chemical company Monsanto pushing farmers into more glyphosate which is what is killing our amphibians.. it’s also bad for humans… as for “restricting ‘tools’ for farmers” as your basis for “socialism’ how then do you define Monsanto trying to forbid farmers from collecting their own seeds even those who do not purchase seeds from Monsanto are being threatened.. controlling the seed supply and filing lawsuits against farmers..who in their right mind thinks this is o.k..? the important aspect to this is that we keep finding solutions .. it’s not for nothing that our bees are endangered.. you will find that there are also small scale organic farmers that are growing their topsoil with good farming practices.. giving their chickens more space.. treating animals better.. look into the dead zones .. we have one the size of New Jersey in the Gulf of Mexico.. I can find many studies that find organic is better for us’s just a matter of what negatives and positives you choose.. consider rBGH in milk..another Monsanto push that caused painful mastitis in cows.. their udders became so badly infected that pus was getting into the milk..antibiotics were given which really didn’t help.. so which do you choose.. organic milk that is free of rBGH and antibiotics .. or do you think children should drink non-organic infected milk.. and condone the cruel treatment of cows ?

    • Green Lies Hypnotize

      “The *organic movement* that you’re describing here is the left-overs from after Big Business got involved. ”

      No it isn’t. Stop projecting the failings of your In Group on Capitalism.

      • How easy to dismiss’s the ‘new trend’…. Reality is that people are being herded towards the propaganda being spread by the chemical industries ..they want you to accept GMO products.. Synthetic chemicals are causing Serious problems for people’s health as well as running off into our streams/rivers and killing amphibians..frogs and small fish, etc…our top soil is being depleted .. with organic farming there are strict regulations in order to get certification.. the land has to be synthetic chemical free for 3 years .. no artificial flavors or coloring in the food..
        it’s been a huge plus as it’s making the big commercial companies pay attention.. so please stop being so ‘clever’ with promoting anti -organic superficial fault finding.. look deeper and you will find that yes big business looks for ways to increase profit..who doesn’t ? but organic is not the bad guy

        • Interesting enough a study was completed about two years ago. on the McKenzie River about runoff and pollutants. What they found any run off from forestry or farms was barely detectable, to the trillionth. While the pollutants that were more detectable came from urban/home owners run off.

          So I am not sure what area you are referring to about run off and killing fish. And organic chemicals do not mean safer chemicals. In fact often times they are harsher than synthetic. I would suggest your read this post:

          My real beef with the organic food movement is they try to market their product unfounded fears and scare tactics, with no real evidence of superiority.

  4. Well stated! Love the last paragraph!

  5. Very nice post! It drives me crazy talking to some of my family and friends (city-folk, God bless ’em) on this topic. The advertising and scare tactics that are used have them convinced that if is says does not say “organic” then it is “bad”.
    We do have the safest food system in the world and we help safely feed other parts of the world as well.
    I was happy to stumble upon your blog, well done.

  6. Pingback: World Food Day & Blog Action Day Through the Farm Lens

  7. Pingback: Organic Farm Foods Tokens « Recipes for Health

Thanks for following my blog! Hope you enjoy!