Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Organic food hit piece to coincide with California proposition 37.

page: 2
71
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join

posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 01:37 AM
link   
I have been volunteering for the prop 37 campaign. It is amazing how much funding is going into fighting this, but we are working hard to get the word out. I just hope it passes.




posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 05:02 AM
link   
Organic food is bad because it doesn't add that level of protection when growing. Non-organic is bad because it has the protective chemicals. Organic serves an important purpose for certain people dieting while non-organic doesn't do this. Non-organic is more affordable and more likely to sustain people fed versus organic which is difficult to grow and maintain.

I haven't read the article but basically those are some points that have been made over the past few years and neither side is better or worse unless you would rather be frugal about it.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 07:24 AM
link   
Have any studies been done to compare the 2? An Apple is an Apple. Frankly there are differences in quality when a tomato grows in a greenhouse in the Netherlands or under the sun in southern Italy. But still neither should be outlawed.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 08:01 AM
link   
that's why i converted my closet into this....


and wrote this thread a few weeks backs...

become less dependant on the system for less than $100

go aquaponics!

edit on 10-9-2012 by OUTofSTEPwithTHEworld because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 08:41 AM
link   
Demand non GMO foods from wherever you buy and eventually the demand will win through. I'm already seeing a lot more organic alternatives in the two major supermarket chains in my area.

There's no point in bleating about the nefarious machinations of big business; it's entrenched in their DNA. Vote at the ballot box for whomever is willing to legislate for comprehensive food labelling.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 09:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Em2013
 


Hi Em
Just wanted to respond to your post

You said
Organic food is bad because it doesn't add that level of protection when growing.

My reply is
I grow organic fruits and vegetables with a friend - enough to keep us self suficient in food if needs be.
I have grown on a larger scale also - enough to keep 30 odd people in food.
Sure like with all growing you can get pests but to go down the "Kill it with chemicals route is a lazy option"
Let me give you an example or two to show a different way of thought rather than the main stream accepted view

We were plagued by rabbits raiding our crops - Rabbits have to eat too and everyhing from spores to bugs and slugs and rabbits have a natural purpose for doing what they do.
The locals dealt with the rabbit problem this way
The gassed the rabbit burros with some concoction that gave the rabbits Myxsomatosis.
If you have ever seen a rabbit with Myxsomatosis.- I have - Poor creature brain damaged and blind stubling around.
That was the accepted way of dealing with rabbits or just plain shooting them.

However we chose a different way - We simply planted the foods they liked around the borders of our crops and they obligingly just ate those and left the main crops alone.

I believe in live and let live and it works.

As for spores that can ruin crops such as Mildew we use our own natural remedy's
And though some things do not make their cycle to fruition - Nature is generous and there is plenty
With slugs - we do not kill them - we collect them and find new locations for them far from our crops
The lazy way is to kill - but in some slug killers there is Mercury that is both bad for the crop and also Humans when out of balance.

I am merely pointing out a different way of seeing - A way which is more in harmony with nature rather than see nature as the enemy - we work with it

You write
versus organic which is difficult to grow and maintain.

I reply
That is so far from the truth really - It is so easy to grow organic food and be self sufficient thus no need for money - You only know this when you actually do it.


edit on 10-9-2012 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)
edit on 10-9-2012 by artistpoet because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 10:45 AM
link   
reply to post by gladtobehere
 


What's always funny/sad is that they gloss over pesticides, they deny even possible health or environmental concerns of GMO, and they don't even delve into phytonutrients, etc. Even if I was 100% convinced the vitamin content was the same, I would still go organic for:

Better taste
Longer Lasting (probably because it gets to market quicker) - this is my repeated experience, not any official research
No pesticides
Environmental concerns

We grow about 20% of our own produce now. By next year with garden expansion, we expect to be 100% self-sustained except for when we want things which don't grow in our area (like bananas, oranges), in which case I buy organic. My cost, as a result, (besides my time, which I enjoy gardening work anyway) are far lower than those who buy their produce 100% non-organic.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 10:56 AM
link   
I have to comment on this, too, because I have first hand experience with Organic VS Non-Organic Food.

This might be disgusting what I say, but it shows really what's going on in your body!

My wife is very much "organic-only" and when our son was born, we naturally started to feed him "organic"-only. He is 2 years old now and we visit different places (Beach, Legoland, Seaworld, Disneyland, etc) with him almost every weekend. We try to avoid to eat at these places, but sometimes it is not possible. These places don't serve organic of course and most of the time we end up with diarrhea in the evening or a day later - really really bad. It's like his body rejects the "non-organic" food. Well, now you might say that it's because it is different type of food (like Fries, etc) but we got a couple Organic Restaurants here and when we eat there, no issue at all. If we feed him non-organic at home, we get the same "issue" :-)

Anyway, I am not judging if Organic is better than non-organic, but definitely it's different! I am not a health junky either but it's something that I observed and really stands-out.

edit on 10-9-2012 by flyandi because: Grammar



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 11:22 AM
link   
reply to post by InfamousRebel
 


Actually it has less to do with money than you may think. Independent studies has shown that laboratory mice that eat GMO foods lose fertility within a few generations. This is more about population control than anything else.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 11:31 AM
link   
reply to post by flyandi
 


Your body is reacting as it should. The body is trying to vacate the food that it senses is bad. If the bacteria in your gut sense powerful harmful invaders they will cause you to get the runs to rid you of them. We are creating something we cannot fight, the only defense is a good flora in the gut to help us. These bacteria can sense the presence of the excretions of the stronger bacteria and take evasive action. Sometimes the bacteria is already gone but the aflotoxins still are in the product. Those aflotoxins may even be a part of the plant in GMO food. The BT gene may cause a new aflotoxin to form which can slowly poison us, who knows. Is getting use to this BT food really good for us? Is BT in any organic food?



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 11:33 AM
link   
reply to post by luccadeo
 


I believe that it can effect our fertility. Being that there is a lack of official longterm testing done on things it wouldn't surprise me one bit.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 11:40 AM
link   
If people don't want to eat organic, they can do as they want. They have no right to deny people who want to eat organically their right to choose their foods though. People who eat organically have to understand something also. The organic forms of pesticides/miticides are sometimes as bad for the body, and sometimes worse, than the conventual pesticides/miticides. Just because the government allows them as certified organic chemicals doesn't mean they are safe. The government certifies many things as safe that no long term testing is done on. I see big commercial organic farmers spraying these things on their plants and wonder if they have personally researched them. The best way is to work with nature when you are growing things.
edit on 10-9-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 12:51 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
If people don't want to eat organic, they can do as they want. They have no right to deny people who want to eat organically their right to choose their foods though. People who eat organically have to understand something also. The organic forms of pesticides/miticides are sometimes as bad for the body, and sometimes worse, than the conventual pesticides/miticides. Just because the government allows them as certified organic chemicals doesn't mean they are safe. The government certifies many things as safe that no long term testing is done on. I see big commercial organic farmers spraying these things on their plants and wonder if they have personally researched them. The best way is to work with nature when you are growing things.
edit on 10-9-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)


I would like an example of an organic pesticide that is commonly used which is more harmful than it's conventional equivalent, please. If your going to make the claim, back it up. Also, just FYI, a miticide is a pesticide so when you say "pesticide/miticide" it doesn't make you look exceptionally informed.

The whole issue here is labeling. We just want our damn food labeled!!! I want to look at the package and know if it contains GMO or not, pretty simple. There should also be label disclosure as to what pesticides were used with organic food, but we better not get over zealous.

One need only look at the amount of money big agribusiness is spending to fight labeling to realize that it needs to be done, and fast. We have the RIGHT to know what is in our food and the RIGHT to choose whether or not we want to eat it!

S&F for you OP! I was absolutely annoyed when I saw the headlines on EVERY major news org I went to. I immediately started mocking the articles to my coworkers, who are scientists and immediately see through such drivel as total marketing brainwashing BS.

My analogy is this:

On plate one you have a cup of steamed broccoli, containing some amount of calcium, niacin, vitamin A, vitamin C, some B vitamins, potassium, sugar, etc.

On plate two you have a cup of steaming horsedookie, due to creative feeding of the horse, the plate contains the same nutrient profile as the steamed broccoli on plate one!

Which one do you want to eat? The scientists who conducted the stupid ass study mentioned above would have you believe the plates are equivalent.

Hoaxers and shills, the lot of them.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 01:44 PM
link   
I thought the same thing. The timing with this story across the media is very suspect. Does anyone know where the funding for the research came from? Is that the sketchy part or is it just the fact the media picked it up? Definitely something fishy here (genetically modified salmon pun intended).



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 01:45 PM
link   

Originally posted by Em2013
Organic food is bad because it doesn't add that level of protection when growing. Non-organic is bad because it has the protective chemicals. Organic serves an important purpose for certain people dieting while non-organic doesn't do this. Non-organic is more affordable and more likely to sustain people fed versus organic which is difficult to grow and maintain.

I haven't read the article but basically those are some points that have been made over the past few years and neither side is better or worse unless you would rather be frugal about it.


I have to disagree with pretty much all points here: From a macro-farming perspective, yes, GMO and pesticide / herbicide toxins help to enable cheaper farming methods, but good (meaning well-done) organic farming has been shown to produce equal or better yields, albeit at a higher monetary cost.

Organic doesn't serve an important purpose for certain people dieting - it doesn't produce lower-calorie food options. You can be dieting and replace your Big Macs with broccoli, and whether you do so organic or conventional, your coloric intake is the same. You might have the wrong idea about what "organic" means.

Organic is not difficult to grow or maintain. I've had organic gardens for 3 years now. We've never had any problems with pests, and in fact, need to do very little weeding. I bought my seeds once, my fertilizer is free compost, my soil is incredibly fetile as a result of the work I put into it.

As far as "neither side is better or worse"- you're ignoring a lot of things. Organic doesn't have pesticides in it, and doesn't cause toxic run-off into the water supply. There are countless other reasons, but they're not ne essarily universally accepted.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 01:56 PM
link   
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Of course the GM strawberries! Don't you listen to the government?


But strawberries we grow in my backyard are always x1000 better than anything you can buy in the store. When you grow your own food, then eat it. You really notice a difference in your health, especially in the long term.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 02:36 PM
link   
reply to post by UdonNiedtuno
 

Neem oil
www.livestrong.com...

Bt used as insecticide. Although it exists naturally in soils and on plants, concentrating it can cause a problem. the presence of it when used as an organic pesticide can cause the same reactions in some people as having Bt corn.
www.i-sis.org.uk...

Pyrethrin allergy
www.anapsid.org...

Here is an article to show organic insecticides
gardening.about.com...

I consider most of these safer than chemical pesticides but in essence they are still pesticides. I personally do not have allergies to most of these organic pesticides, but some people do. Just type allergy behind any organic pesticide and you can find something. Look at more than one example of everyone, we aren't limited by what is in a book when surfing the net. There are many cross reactivities to consider also.

As far as the government is concerned, miticides are different than pesticides. Which they are technically. Miticides do not have all the regulations as pesticides do including exclosure. Miticides are sprayed on food after it is picked, it keeps them from oxidizing and turning ugly. These miticides can be more dangerous than pesticides. I don' t think they are allowed on organic foods, with the exception of some fluoride miticides that are termed organic. The EPA is supposed to have banned the use of these fluoride miticides now, organic and regular.

I've studied this extensively looking at all angles, Maybe you should research it more. I try to eat at least seventy five percent organic. I know where my beef is grown and I know they have researched the chemicals available and that they know there are bad certified chemicals out there. Remember that the rules made for organic vegetables are also made to protect big growers and extend shelf life so products get to market safe.
edit on 10-9-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 02:55 PM
link   

Originally posted by Thinair1
reply to post by VoidHawk
 


Of course the GM strawberries! Don't you listen to the government?


But strawberries we grow in my backyard are always x1000 better than anything you can buy in the store. When you grow your own food, then eat it. You really notice a difference in your health, especially in the long term.


Homegrown anything is better than what you can buy in the store. Take tomatoes, for example. Homegrown tomatoes are so far superior in taste, that to call a store bought tomato a tomato is akin to blasphemy.



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 02:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by rickymouse
reply to post by UdonNiedtuno
 

Neem oil
www.livestrong.com...

Bt used as insecticide. Although it exists naturally in soils and on plants, concentrating it can cause a problem. the presence of it when used as an organic pesticide can cause the same reactions in some people as having Bt corn.
www.i-sis.org.uk...

Pyrethrin allergy
www.anapsid.org...

Here is an article to show organic insecticides
gardening.about.com...

I consider most of these safer than chemical pesticides but in essence they are still pesticides. I personally do not have allergies to most of these organic pesticides, but some people do. Just type allergy behind any organic pesticide and you can find something. Look at more than one example of everyone, we aren't limited by what is in a book when surfing the net. There are many cross reactivities to consider also.

As far as the government is concerned, miticides are different than pesticides. Which they are technically. Miticides do not have all the regulations as pesticides do including exclosure. Miticides are sprayed on food after it is picked, it keeps them from oxidizing and turning ugly. These miticides can be more dangerous than pesticides. I don' t think they are allowed on organic foods, with the exception of some fluoride miticides that are termed organic. The EPA is supposed to have banned the use of these fluoride miticides now, organic and regular.

I've studied this extensively looking at all angles, Maybe you should research it more. I try to eat at least seventy five percent organic. I know where my beef is grown and I know they have researched the chemicals available and that they know there are bad certified chemicals out there. Remember that the rules made for organic vegetables are also made to protect big growers and extend shelf life so products get to market safe.
edit on 10-9-2012 by rickymouse because: (no reason given)


Miticides are pesticides, if you want to use regulatory decisions the government makes to rebut me than that's your cup of tea, but it is what it is.

Your Bt example is the closest you came to providing a common organic pesticide that may be 'worse than' or 'more harmful' than it's conventional counterpart. But that is a really, really big stretch, given that Bt Corn is Bt Corn due to genetic manipulation and using the bacteria itself on plants (as it would be used with organic methods) requires no modifications at all. Though yes, from the perspective of an individual who is allergic or reacts negatively to ingestion of Bt than the health effects would be the same in theory, but even then just the same and not worse.

We all need to research it more, but the way you present it suggests that I have not researched enough or more accurately that 'you have researched more'. Mine is bigger, neeener neeener. Utterly ridiculous. My knowledge is real, and sufficient enough for me to make the claims I've made.

LABEL GMO's!
edit on 10-9-2012 by UdonNiedtuno because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 10 2012 @ 03:10 PM
link   
I have a friend who used to run a 50 acre organic farm. He actually made some good money at it and was very strict with how the farm was run. No pesticides no herbicides and only natural fertilizer.

Then the FDA changed the rules for organic farming. Why you may ask? Because the corporate farms were losing money due to people starting to want organic food and being willing to pay more for it. So the good old FDA changed the rules for how an organic farm could be run. It put my friend out of business and he had to find another way to use his farm.

Here is a link to a google search on the changes. there are PDF's on the changes avalible here and some very interesting articles. If you buy organic at a store who buys from a corporate run "organic farm" you may not be getting the food that you thought you were. search

The only way to get truely organic food any more is to know your grower and buy locally.





new topics




 
71
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join