Organic Food No Better Than Regular Food?

[Devils'Advocate]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

I think intesive livestock operations have a much larger impact on water quality than pesticides in Alberta.

Aye. And I became a vegetarian for environmental reasons.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by DOK

I kind of expected that view. People buy organic because it doesn't have pesticides and chemicals on it, not because it's better for you. At least, that's what I think anyways.

Wrong, wrong, absolutely wrong.

"Organic" farmers are allowed to use "organic" pesticides. This includes but is not limited to pyrethrin, caffeine, nicotine, copper, sulphur, oils and soap. Pyrethrin is an especially powerful nerve agent. Know those wasp sprays you buy? That's what's in them.

In addition, they can use synthetic pesticides if they have a particularly bad infestation. And the product can still be labelled "organic".

More alarming to me is their indiscriminate use of improperly aged compost, including cow, pig, sheep, etc dung, and the resulting compost teas that are used as ineffective fungicidal measures.

Taste differences are almost always due to cultivar differences and leaving fruit on the plant for longer periods of time.

Any fertilizer, improperly applied, whether "organic" or whatever the hell, can pollute. Compost and other organic fertilizers still contain nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. These macronutrients are vital for plants. Organic fertilizers provide these nutritives.

[kermitology]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Uh... What? Gluten is formed when gliadin and glutenin join together in the presence of water (kneading speeds up the process).

Don't want gluten? Don't leaven your bread, and don't knead.

Gluten is made up of gliadin and glutenin, yes, but it is present in the endosperm of wheat, rye, barely, and some other grass related grains.

That's why celiac's can't have anything made from any of those grains. Not just flour.. or flour and water..

Gluten is the common name for the proteins in specific grains that are harmful to persons with celiac disease. These proteins are found in ALL forms of wheat (including durum, semolina, spelt, kamut, einkorn and faro) and related grains rye, barley and triticale and MUST be eliminated. [1]

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by kermitology

Gluten is made up of gliadin and glutenin, yes, but it is present in the endosperm of wheat, rye, barely, and some other grass related grains.

That's why celiac's can't have anything made from any of those grains. Not just flour.. or flour and water..

Gluten is the common name for the proteins in specific grains that are harmful to persons with celiac disease. These proteins are found in ALL forms of wheat (including durum, semolina, spelt, kamut, einkorn and faro) and related grains rye, barley and triticale and MUST be eliminated. [1]

There is very little natural gluten in grain.

Note that even just having flour and water mixed together and sitting in a bowl eventually forms gluten.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

The only time I have come across a farmer using way to much chemical was a Hutterite colony using a granular insecticide on potatoes. I can't remember the product, the active ingredient or the insect that they were targeting. I just remember that they were applying 5 o 6 times more insecticide than the label recommended. Since that day I will never buy potatoes or any other vegetables from the Hutterites at a farmers market.

Guess where McCain's in Taber gets a lot of their potatoes from? And guess where they ship those 200 million pounds of potatoes once they're processed?

[Shazam]

I'm also going to list rotenone as another "organic" pesticide that's often used. This one is actually extremely toxic to fish and even to us.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Shazam

I'm also going to list rotenone as another "organic" pesticide that's often used. This one is actually extremely toxic to fish and even to us.

It is extremely toxic for fish, snakes and pigs. Not so with people, although of course, if in large doses over a long period of time, yes it is toxic to people as well.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Azure

Guess where McCain's in Taber gets a lot of their potatoes from? And guess where they ship those 200 million pounds of potatoes once they're processed?

To get more specific, the plot that they were protecting was 40 acres that they used for growing specifically for farmers markets. If a colony used 5 times the recommended rate of granular insecticide on a few circles of potatoes. They would go broke pretty quick. I think the spuds shipped to McCain's would be tested as well. The stuff taken to farmers markets are not tested.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by redforever

It is extremely toxic for fish, snakes and pigs. Not so with people, although of course, if in large doses over a long period of time, yes it is toxic to people as well.

You mean, like the conditions that workers on the field would experience?

So you're saying that you're okay with rotenone because it's organic, toxicity be damned?

[DOK]

Originally Posted by Shazam

Wrong, wrong, absolutely wrong.

"Organic" farmers are allowed to use "organic" pesticides. This includes but is not limited to pyrethrin, caffeine, nicotine, copper, sulphur, oils and soap. Pyrethrin is an especially powerful nerve agent. Know those wasp sprays you buy? That's what's in them.

In addition, they can use synthetic pesticides if they have a particularly bad infestation. And the product can still be labelled "organic".

More alarming to me is their indiscriminate use of improperly aged compost, including cow, pig, sheep, etc dung, and the resulting compost teas that are used as ineffective fungicidal measures.

Taste differences are almost always due to cultivar differences and leaving fruit on the plant for longer periods of time.

Any fertilizer, improperly applied, whether "organic" or whatever the hell, can pollute. Compost and other organic fertilizers still contain nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium. These macronutrients are vital for plants. Organic fertilizers provide these nutritives.

Holy right-sayer here. Sorry if you don't agree with what I've said. Fine by me.

If we take it back another step, lets talk about the government regulations, that should stop both of us in our tracks. Some places say that the soil must be chemical free (and I mean all chemicals) for 8 seasons before being considered organic. But they can also be down stream and down wind from the neighbour who produces non-organic foods. Other places require nothing from the soil itself, but will not allow any neighbours to produce anything but organic as well. The regulations are skewed and we're arguing a definition that isn't defined, which is really pointless.

My comment was based on the peoples perception of buying organic because they are chemical and pesticide free foods. The sad thing is that no one will ever really know the truth about their foods unless they go to the farm and grow it themselves.

[Ashartus]

Personally, I find that improvements in taste come from fruit/vegetables that are harvested when ripe, not necessarily organic (many organic foods are mass-produced and harvested early, just like the other stuff at Safeway). Some of the requirements for organic certification are more based on ideology than anything else anyhow. Some organic food is really high quality, but it's no guarantee.

I'm all for minimizing pesticide/herbicide use, but I'm not opposed to responsible use. Pesticide residues on commercial foods are very minimal, and the toxicity of these pesticides at those doses is usually much less than the toxicity of chemicals naturally present in most foods. Plants produce their own pesticides in addition to those that we apply - something that doesn't get much attention because a lot of people (wrongly) assume that natural substances are always safe and synthetic substances are always dangerous. Naturally occurring chemicals are just as likely to be toxic as synthetic chemicals, including the most toxic substance known (botulinum toxin). Also, if organic farmers are using copper sulphate, it is going to persist in the environment instead of degrading, unlike most modern herbicides. So for the most part I don't think organic foods are necessarily "safer" than other foods.

[redforever]

Originally Posted by Shazam

You mean, like the conditions that workers on the field would experience?

So you're saying that you're okay with rotenone because it's organic, toxicity be damned?

I am saying there is a lot of fear mongering going on out there and your way or wording things falls into that category.

No, I do not like the use of a lot of pesticides and herbicides, I try to avoid as much of that as possible. But I also do not believe I am going to die tomorrow if I eat food from the shelves in Canadian supermarkets. Anything can be skewed so people get scared and confused. You can also poison yourself if you take too many vitamin supplements etc. There are many risks in life, you do what you can to minimize them. You can also skew information about foods themselves, not just how they were produced. So people get hung up on for instance the type of fats they use in their food. I mean, all fats have pretty well the same calories per Tbsp, but not all have the same amount of saturated fats for that same amount.

So you make choices based upon your knowledge, based upon your income too of course.

I also know that it is almost impossible to get away from all of the chemicals. So I do what I can to minimize the impact. I have my own veggie garden, that is indeed 100% organic, unless something has come in from the air. I make most of my own foods from scratch, I read labels very carefully, I buy some organic, some not.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

To get more specific, the plot that they were protecting was 40 acres that they used for growing specifically for farmers markets. If a colony used 5 times the recommended rate of granular insecticide on a few circles of potatoes. They would go broke pretty quick. I think the spuds shipped to McCain's would be tested as well. The stuff taken to farmers markets are not tested.

Ah, but McCain's buys a lot of their potatoes from the Hutterite spud farmers in Washington.

So if you eat fries, chances are those potatoes came from a Hutterite Colony. Especially here in Alberta.

[burn_baby_burn]

Originally Posted by Azure

Ah, but McCain's buys a lot of their potatoes from the Hutterite spud farmers in Washington.

So if you eat fries, chances are those potatoes came from a Hutterite Colony. Especially here in Alberta.

Really! Food on my plate may have come from a Hutterite Colony?

[Azure]

Originally Posted by burn_baby_burn

Really! Food on my plate may have come from a Hutterite Colony?

Yeah, its a good thing.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by DOK

Holy right-sayer here. Sorry if you don't agree with what I've said. Fine by me.

If we take it back another step, lets talk about the government regulations, that should stop both of us in our tracks. Some places say that the soil must be chemical free (and I mean all chemicals) for 8 seasons before being considered organic. But they can also be down stream and down wind from the neighbour who produces non-organic foods. Other places require nothing from the soil itself, but will not allow any neighbours to produce anything but organic as well. The regulations are skewed and we're arguing a definition that isn't defined, which is really pointless.

I am very familiar with the government regulations. Which is why the label of "organic" food has very little impression on me. I also grow a lot of my own food, so I am quite familiar with what food items need more pesticide applications (brassicas being the big one, which is why I don't grow them).

My comment was based on the peoples perception of buying organic because they are chemical and pesticide free foods. The sad thing is that no one will ever really know the truth about their foods unless they go to the farm and grow it themselves.

Well, unfortunately that's true.

And sorry, I wasn't trying to say that you were wrong. I was referring to the part about "People buy organic because it doesn't have pesticides and chemicals on it", since we both seem to know that organic stuff does have pesticides on/in them. And of course all food items have "chemicals" in them.

[Shazam]

Originally Posted by redforever

I am saying there is a lot of fear mongering going on out there and your way or wording things falls into that category.

Please. What you need to understand is that organic farmers also need to make money, so they're going to protect their crops just as much as a "conventional" farmer.

No, I do not like the use of a lot of pesticides and herbicides, I try to avoid as much of that as possible. But I also do not believe I am going to die tomorrow if I eat food from the shelves in Canadian supermarkets.

Of course you're not.

Anything can be skewed so people get scared and confused. You can also poison yourself if you take too many vitamin supplements etc. There are many risks in life, you do what you can to minimize them.

Eating organic does not minimize any sort of risk. If anything, it raises your chances of food poisoning.

I also know that it is almost impossible to get away from all of the chemicals. So I do what I can to minimize the impact. I have my own veggie garden, that is indeed 100% organic, unless something has come in from the air. I make most of my own foods from scratch, I read labels very carefully, I buy some organic, some not.

The only way you're going to get away from all the "chemicals" is to not eat.

http://www.acsh.org/publications/pub...pub_detail.asp

The focus of the ACSH holiday menu is on "carcinogens," defined here as chemicals, either natural or synthetic, that cause cancer in rodents when consumed in large amounts. A related topic, however, is that of "poisons," technically known as toxicants. Just as it is scientifically unwarranted to believe that the food supply is free of natural rodent carcinogens and mutagens, it is equally unrealistic to equate "natural" with safe. Foods abound in natural chemicals that are toxic or potentially toxic—because all chemicals will be toxic at some dose.

Toxicologists have confirmed that food naturally contains a myriad of chemicals traditionally thought of as "poisons." Potatoes contain solanine, arsenic, and chaconine. Lima beans contain hydrogen cyanide, a classic suicide substance. Carrots contain carototoxin, a nerve poison. And nutmeg, black pepper, and carrots all contain the hallucinogenic compound myristicin.

Moreover, all chemicals, whether natural or synthetic, are potential toxicants at high doses but are perfectly safe when consumed in low doses. Take common table salt, for example: This everyday chemical, when consumed in excess, can cause elevations in blood pressure in sensitive individuals; a couple of tablespoonsful can kill a small child. Selenium, a mineral essential in the human diet, can cause nausea and nerve changes when chronically consumed in excess. The familiar stimulant caffeine is also a toxicant if consumed in high doses (say, 50 to 100 cups of coffee per day). Supplements of the essential mineral iron all too often cause poisoning in children.

When it comes to toxicants in the diet—natural or synthetic—the dose makes the poison.

The presumption that natural chemicals are not hazardous but synthetic ones are has no scientific support. Substances should be evaluated according to their human carcinogenic potential, not according to their origin—and to do so requires more biological information than can be provided by a rodent cancer test.
Naturally occurring rodent carcinogens are present in far greater amounts in our food supply than are pesticide and other chemical residues (the much-publicized rodent carcinogens).

[NuclearFart]

Originally Posted by Phanuthier

In the USA, obesity rates %-wise are super high, and talking to a pretty knowledgeable friend, he said it has a lot to do with the growing and preservation of food and how the food isn't digested properly or whatever that causes % of obese Americans to be so much higher then Canada (for example). Since I'm trying to work a little on my fitness and diet, I'm told I should go towards organics for food with more protein per, or carbs per or whatever, so the actual nutrients and whatnot in regular foods is lower, and thus harder to build muscle and whatnot.

Any comments would be welcome

Ignoring the fact that people who are obese, also don't eat alot of vegetables (so the distinction of non-organic/organic is moot), the obesity epidemic has everything to do with cost.

For the same price, I can get a meal from Macdonalds with 5x the calories of a similar volume of produce/health alternatives. I'm saving money and high fat food is very satieating. Plus a box of french fries tastes a hell of alot better than some stupid half rotten mangosteen.

[Phanuthier]

Is there any particular food that is worth buying organic? (Milk, meats, veg/fruit...)

And I'm under the assumption that, at least in the USA, organic foods are higher in protein and whatnot after being told about studies word-of-mouth, that seem pretty credible. Is that false?

I've been really trying to up my protein intake lately

[flip]

I'm a huge fan of Penn and Teller's Bulls*** and although they tend to really slant some issues for the purpose of their show last night was definitely a great episode. Obviously since I'm posting in this thread it was about organic food.

Says lots of the same things said here. Organic food is no better for you than regular food. They even said that the organic pesticides are more dangerous than synthetic ones because organic farmers are basically using super old technology that is way more unhealthy. Had a great taste test with self proclaimed "only organic" people. Almost every single one identified the non-organic as tasting better.