Suppose we return to the premise of the OP?
The OP refers us to a short, poorly-written, and inadequately sourced article that claims:
... there is very substantial evidence that the very same chemicals and artificial substances that make produce less attractive to insects and
pests protects the human body by making it less fertile for the growth of cancers and viruses ... cites the obvious and well publicised decline in
cancer rates in countries like the U.S and Germany where highly modified foods are a big part of the diet. ... the ironic fact that these very
ingredients are somewhat ‘disliked’ by the various viral and cancerous growth that attack our organs’.
So ....
1) As their source for these claims they are using the decline in cancer rates in the USA and Germany, and making the (huge IMO) assumption that this
decline is due to "highly modified foods" being a part of the diet. I don't find this theory to be very plausible. Did they consider other possible
reasons for the decline in cancer rates? They don't appear to have any actual studies showing that people who eat Twinkies or Big Macs have a lower
incidence of cancerous tumors (or viruses).
2) They are blatantly
admitting (albeit trying to twist it into being a good thing) that chemicals, artificial substances, flavorings, and
preservatives make their way into the human body and
stay there (otherwise they wouldn't have the claimed "protective" effect.) Stop and
think for yourself for a moment .. do you REALLY believe that having your body full of artificial chemicals and preservatives is a good thing?
3) While it may be that viruses prefer regular human tissue to grow in over tissue contaminated with preservatives and chemicals, I've never heard of
anyone becoming immune to colds and flus by eating junk food and fast food. Have you? So apparently it doesn't deter them sufficiently to prevent
them from making preservative and chemical laden humans sick.
4) Applying this logic to cancer is completely fallacious. Cancer is not an attack of an organism from outside the body; cancer is the body's own
cells going crazy and not self-destructing as they should when they become abnormal. Cancer does not grow on or in existing cells, it is reproduction
of cells gone wild and creates its own new cells and tissue as it grows. The only thing it requires is a blood supply. Furthermore, since the very
definition of "carcinogen" includes mention that it operates either by changing the DNA of the cell or by increasing the rate of cell division, it
becomes obvious that toxic chemicals and preservatives which take up residence in the body's cells are more likely to BE carcinogenic than to prevent
tumors from growing.
This is Chinese propaganda. What is purpose may be, other than to convince people not to produce organic foods, I can't guess since I know very
little about China.
The OP asks:
Does the Organic industry lie to the public
I see no evidence anywhere in this article to substiantiate such a claim.
all the bad things said about Macdonalds ingore the fact that Its super-clean and cheap-the sort of things people craved for centuries if not
millenia, is organics a luddite 'good old days' lie??
Many of the "bad things" said about McDonalds have nothing to do with "organics." McDonalds is reported to do many things that you wouldn't do in
your own kitchen, such as use food which has fallen on the floor or is out of date, add fillers to their meat and not provide full disclosure about
said fillers, etc. By the way, if you'd ever worked in a McDonald's (or any other fast food joint) you wouldn't call it "super-clean." Remember
that the cleaning crew is mostly a bunch of teenagers who couldn't get a better job....
The simplest fact remains that an average McDonald's combo meal has over 1200 calories and about 80 grams of fat while providing little in the way of
real nutrition. Whether or not the ingredients are organic hasn't a thing to do with the most important reasons it's an unhealthy diet.
) 
