Organic farming has nothing to do with Miracle Grow, that soluble, synthetic chemical fertilizer that dominates the TV airwaves every spring and makes your lawns and gardens grow and glow. Many of those water-soluble chemicals, filled with phosphates and nitrates, find their way into streams, brooks and lakes, creating algae bloom and suffocating fish and other aquatic life.
The USDA Organic Standards Act specifies that for food to be certified organic, current national standards prohibit the use of synthetic/chemical fertilizers like anhydrous ammonia, pesticides like Sevin and herbicides like Roundup or Atrazine. It prohibits the use of antibiotics, genetically engineered seeds, genetically produced hormones (rBGH) for milk production, sewage sludge, artificial ingredients in its production and irradiation.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
More on Food Irradiation: The basic premise is that consumers can be protected from outbreaks of food poisoning with the use of irradiated foods. Irradiating food is a method of killing harmful bacteria -- the goal being to destroy microscopic organisms that cause spoilage and human disease. Corporate food processors want to douse a growing portion of the food supply with potentially hazardous radiation. What the food industry doesn't tell consumers is that if you eat too much irradiated food, it may cause genetic damage, cancer, and other serious illnesses.
Despite many studies showing the potential danger of irradiated food, the food processing industry is pressuring the government to expand its application. Food irradiation uses high-energy gamma rays, electron beams, or X-rays (all of which are millions of times more powerful than standard medical X-rays) to break apart harmful microbes, bacteria and insects than can hide in meat, grains, and other food.
If radiation is powerful enough to kill living organisms, it is also powerful enough to alter the food itself. Scientific studies bear this out. Radiation exposure does strange things to food, creating substances called "unique radiolytic products." This category of irradiation byproducts can cause gene mutations and chromosome alterations. Some mutations can cause cancer. The main problem with high-energy irradiation is that it can break apart molecular bonds and create mutagens within otherwise safe food.
The FDA has approved the use of irradiation on portions of our food supply. We might therefore assume that the scientific studies of these foods reveal no mutagenic effects. Not so! More than one-third of the studies showed mutagenic effects.
Source:
For more information on food irradiation, check out Gary Gibbs book, The Food That Would Last Forever: Understanding the Dangers of Food Irradiation (Avery Publishing) 1993.
Nearly 80 percent of consumers in a CBS News Poll said they would not eat irradiated food; yet FDA officials seem poised to approve expanded use of irradiation in our food supply.
• The FDA requires that irradiated foods include labeling.
.• Since the early 1990, a limited number of foods have been irradiated, like fruits and vegetables by a few stores.
• Irradiated poultry is available in some grocery stores - mostly small independent markets.
• If you see the label Radura on a plastic container of strawberries, its been irradiated. Radura is the official irradiation label.
• Spices don't need to be labeled as irradiated.
• Strawberries and other fruits from Florida are irradiated on a limited basis.
• Countries such as Israel and France irradiate food.
Source: Publication No. (FDA) 00-2329.
History of Organic Standards: Organic farming began as a pledge by farmers to consumers to grow food without synthetic chemicals. What began as a simple concept in the 1970s grew quickly into serious business requiring certification to verify the pledge. However, standards were not consistent in all regions of the country, making it hard to know what "organic" meant.
In 1990, Congress passed the first Organic Food Production Act. This marked the beginning of federal recognition of organic agriculture. That legislation instructed the USDA, which historically had not treated organics with respect, to establish uniform national standards for organic farming and food. The legislation also aimed to define organic, which for many years had meant different things to different people. This was a grueling task, which took close to a decade to work out. Forces within and outside the organic movement fought many battles. There was considerable input from the organic community and broad public support for strict standards.
Agribusiness wanted to define the term "organic" in very general terms, allowing the use of genetic modification, irradiation and sewage sludge. This was met with outrage by the organic movement. There followed an unprecedented flood of public comment from organic farmers and consumers. The USDA was forced to go back to the drawing board.
Questions continued to arise about the use of the "Big Three" - sewage sludge, irradiation and genetic engineering, which were not allowed in the standards of 1990. New organic standards were set in 1997 incorporating the "Big Three." There was a huge public outcry. The USDA received more than 300,000 letters of protest and the USDA responded by dropping the "Big Three."
The USDA created the National Organic Program (NOP) to implement the Organic Food Production Act. The program has two parts: first, to establish standards and second, to oversee and regulate the standards. The organic label requires certification by independent, government-accredited organizations.
In October of 2002, the USDA implemented NOP. However, since that time, tension has arisen again between agribusiness, organic farmers and others in the organic movement. There is concern that the purity of organic foods would be weakened, and that control by the organic community would be lost.
John Cleary, formerly of NOFA-VT, the Vermont chapter of the Northeast Organic Farming Association, believes that Vermont farm products are trustworthy, but says that the organic movement must be vigilant that the national standards are not compromised. Cleary, now of Organic Valley Dairy Cooperative with offices in Vermont, said, "In order to maintain integrity we need to insure adequate public input and expertise, with organic growers informing the USDA."
Cleary went on to say that this can done through the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) that was formed by the USDA.
NOSB includes a group of consultants who advise the Secretary of Agriculture. This group has mechanisms for grower and public input. However, the USDA, according to Cleary, has not used the NOSB as intended. Because of this, it is critical for organizations such as NOFA-VT to play a larger role in maintaining a strong farmer and consumer voice.
The Latest Salvo: Many critics see an erosion of organic standards as well as the organic movement's ideals of localism and sustainability being compromised. A rider on the 2006 Agricultural Appropriations Bill legalized, for the first time, the use of synthetic substances in the processing and post-harvest handling of organic foods.
What worries many is that the rider was supported by the Organic Trade Association, a lobbying group that represents the interests of large corporations. Caren Wilcox of the Organic Trade Association said that there has always been a place for synthetics. For example, he said it would be impossible to produce organics without synthetics, i.e., ozone to resist bacteria or chlorine as a disinfectant.
Currently, 38 synthetics like baking soda are being used and are considered harmless. However, there is a real fear that the door will be open up to other synthetics - some which may be harmful to humans or the environment. Another concern was that the rider was passed in a secretive manner, as an amendment to the 1990 Organic Foods Production Act and inserted after the appropriation conference committee had adjourned.
Arthur Harvey, a producer of organic blueberry jams in Maine and a strong advocate for the organic movement, won a victory in a federal lawsuit against the USDA on the tightening up of organic standards on synthetic ingredients. Harvey found an alternative to synthetic pectin he'd been experimenting with as a thickening agent. It took some time, but eventually he discovered that apple pomace worked. Harvey said "manufacturers of organic products are terrified they won't be able to use synthetics." Two question come to mind. Can Harvey's natural pectin be produced in large enough quantities to meet the industries needs? And is the cost prohibitive for the food processors?
The National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture would create 7 categories of allowed synthetics in organic manufacturing: leavening agents, pH control, nutrient supplements, filter aids, clarifying agents, or a cleaner, and a sanitizer used in direct food contact.
How this will all play out is uncertain. As it stands, organic foods with the USDA seal must contain all natural ingredients, and be at least 95 percent organic. The other 5 percent still need to be examined to make sure there are no substances that poise a health danger to the consumer or to the environment. I bought a can of organic soup the other day that said all the vegetables were organic except for the corn. It's best to check the labels on the organic items you buy.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Two Questions: Folks have to be vigilant about spices - many of which are not regulated when it comes to irradiation. When you purchase that bottle of organic salsa with all those spices, can you be assured none of them have been irradiated? Today, you can buy Salsa's which are 95 percent organic. What's in the other 5 percent? Or take the example of orange coloring that's used in organic products that can be derived from carrots. It's difficult to extract the orange coloring from carrots. So what's one to do? How is the industry dealing with it?
Source:
The information on synthetics came from Jake Whitney, "Agribusiness: Organic Erosion," San Francisco Chronicle, January 28, 2007.
P.S. According to Arthur Harvey, organic eggs are dipped in bleach before packaging and whole chickens are sealed in plastic bags containing up to 10 percent by weight of water containing up to 200 parts per million (ppm) of chlorine. These same chickens have never been outdoors or exposed to direct sunlight.
Organic Livestock Production and Dairying: Besides processing, the other most challenging issue with organic standards has to with livestock and milk production.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Rules for Organic Certification of Animal Products:
1- The meat must not be irradiated and must come from animals that have been fed no genetically-modified feed.
2- The meat must come from animals that have been not been treated with antibiotics.
3- The meat must come from animals that have been raised according to a national list of allowed synthetic and prohibited natural substances. This list is lengthy and not easy to understand.
4. The meat must come from animals that have access to the outdoors and have been fed 100 percent organic grain or kept in pasture for the entirety of their lifetime.
* This last rule regarding ruminants having access to pasture has never really been worked out to the satisfaction of many folks in the organic movement. There are lots of loopholes. For example, how do you deal with a feedlot of 10,000 beef animals that are pastured on irrigated fields in the west - or a dairy herd of 2,000 dairy cows? How large are the irrigated fields? How long do the animals have to stay on the irrigated pasture.
The rule was intended to make sure that 30 percent of the feed (dry matter intake) came from open pasture during the summer growing months. This problem has never been flushed out. Today, a good portion of organic milk comes from western dairy's where the cows are fed on organic grain with little pasture. A lot of that milk is ultra-pasteurized and being shipped across the country. Check out the labels. You'll be surprised.
-----------------------------------------------------------------
Side Notes:
Most of the rules on livestock and dairying are not a concern for Vermont organic dairy and beef producers as the animals are out on grass in summer and receive hay in winter. I buy all my milk and beef from local sources or go directly to the farm for raw milk. But it's a serious issue for the organic movement as a whole.
When you look at all the rules described above, they are quite a change from the days when I was an organic vegetable and fruit grower back in the 1970s. The system was built on trust. It was simple then and it's complicated now. That's why we have to be vigilant to the corporate forces working to weaken organic standards.
There are other issues. Can a thousand acre factory farm be considered organic? Can a Twinkie be Certified Organic? Do additives and synthetic chemicals have a place in organic processed food? Should organic food mirror the existing food supply, which is salty, sugary, and highly processed? Apparently, the answer is yes to the above questions, much to the disbelief of many in the organic movement.
When I shop at various natural food co-ops, I notice more and more processed foods including those expensive organic TV dinners. I just bet you many of the folks that buy them take them home and use their microwave ovens for a quick-supper fix. What ever happened to the days when food preparation from whole foods was the norm -- or was it? I don't know any more.
* To receive e-mail public alerts on organic standards, contact the NOFA-VT office, (802) 434-4122, or send an e-mail to info@nofavt.org, or visit the website at www.nofavt.org.
No comments:
Post a Comment