Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

to say Organic food is a con?

67 replies

Calvinlookingforhobbs · 15/02/2017 21:35

...

OP posts:
0nline · 16/02/2017 12:04

Oh, and much better for the environment, especially the collapsing bee population.

I'm not so sure that statement is necessarily true of all organic produce, all of the time. The article indicates use is permitted and has continued outside of the UK.

www.telegraph.co.uk/news/earth/environment/11679681/Soil-Association-approved-use-of-unauthorised-pesticide-on-organic-crops.html

There are a large number of articles from various scources saying that certain "natural" organic alternatives are/have turned out to be worse/no less harmful for bees/the environment than non-organic products. I don't have time to weed through all the sources to check for anti-organic bias, but a fair few of the critical pieces appear to come from those broadly in favour of organic farming/produce.

I think what this thread is underlining is that the "organic" label can be an article of faith that a food item is somehow "better" in all and every regard. Whereas a more cynical look indicates there is perhaps not enough evidence to support that belief when the practices and products employed in various forms of organic farming are looked at in greater detail.

That's not to say people shouldn't buy it. However perhaps there is not yet a solid enough basis to continue to place high profile, moral pressures
on people who are ill placed to afford it.

Is it ethical of a sub sector of an industry to aim to persuade people to raise their shopping bill (potentially beyond their means) "for the good of the planet, the bees, the soil, biodiversity and human health"? Particularly if there are still some not insignificant question marks over the extent to which organic claims stand up to scrutiny.

It may well be that some organic products, from some organic producers in some places offer significantly increased value that more than justifies the higher prices, even if this results in customers buying/consuming less to make the cost/value equation more achievable.

My doubt mostly rests on "organic" being a "one size fits all" label, with the belief that the perceived benefits are evenly and consistently shared by all the products, from all the producers, in all the places.

Which is a problem. Because it is unduly onerous when food shopping to have to investigate each producer and each product to ensure the additional outlay is justified, and all the claims, (or assumed claims) are valid.

What is needed from a consumer perspective is for "organic" to become a clearly defined, international, regulated and wholly transparent standard. If consumers generally want the standard for organic produce to mean only non-toxic, non harmful to humans/animal/insects/microbes products and practices are to be employed in food labled as organic..... it's going to get a lot more expensive.

As in... a lot lot.

And not just because practices and products used in production will shrink.

External events could make the holding of the label "organic producer" a considerably less permanent status that they have no control over. Which is an expensive proposition, potentially incurring not insignificant insurance costs and entire seasons of non production. Take for example my area and those affected areas to the west of it.

Organic produce is grown here, pooled with organic produce from other regions and sold domestically and internationally. If organic meant "no horrible nasties involved" in order to maintain a "no toxic nasties" pledge of a fixed, clear standard ..... all the organic farms between just east of me and all the way west to another region would need their fields testing, and potentially their status stripped until retesting gave the all clear.

Because one of Euope's largest refineries went all explody. And the wind does not give a fuck about somebody's dedication to growing organic.

Big fucking
Sky looked ever so slightly Apocolpsye-ish
Nose burny stench that was ... well stinky.

And nobody, not even the organic farmers, were out there covering their fields to protect them from the god only knows what compounds that fell to earth on them. For obvious reasons. Schools were shut, cos at ground level the pollution was considered too high and too risky for small people to be out and about. But large areas we grow exported food on were in the direct path of ground level contact with the actual Cloud Of Doom. Open. Wide open. Cos.. well anything else would have been unworkable. It's not like we get advanced warning things are about to go pop.

All the organic produce grown in the organic fields near me last year, will most likely be labelled organic when it's harvested this year. Not just these fields. All the fields along the tens and tens of kilometres that the Massive Black Cloud Of Doom travelled along, with the wind behind it.

This summer if you offer me an insecticided, mass produced tomato grown 2k to the east of me, I'll take that over an organic one grown anything between 0-90k to the west of me. For the next few years at least. Possibly without grounds, cos I don't know the extent to which all the chemicals, fine particles of metal/oil/petrol etc will actually go into the food grown in the fields in the area. Nor do I know how bad it would be for me to ingest it. Might just pass through without any impact.

But "organic" doesn't look as attractive when you've seen and smelled the aftermath of exploding refineries and watched the land get covered in the technical term known as "all sorts of nasty shit".

I'm growing veg in 2 year old hay bales this year. Cos they were in covered barns when it all went boom and Black Cloud of Doom. Although the barn door was probably wide open, Evil Stuff probably got blown in and it's likely yet another personal exercise in sentiment (but not logic) based, futile efforts to exert control where there's none to be had.

Ah well. Bale gardens look pretty and might thwart the slugs at least.

And if it doesn't and the bastards eat all my vegetables again... I shall buy up all the (not organic) frozen veg currently in the supermarket freezers, cos it's guaranteed that was grown pre explosion. Ditto rice. I am only eating rice that has a short BB date. Cos it's old enough to have been grown well before the explosion.

I suspect all the above is an entirely irrational response on my part . I guess even the Italian government would not want it citizens (and resident foreigns like me) potentially lurgied by post refinery explosion yucky things. But ... well you didn't see/smell it. It was very scary. I am going with irrational cos it makes me feel better and more in control.

Which in the grand scheme of things is potentially the primary offering of the organic label for a number of the people, a reasonable amount of the time. And I get it. I do a very good line in "potentially utterly irrational, but very determined nonetheless" myself.

0nline · 16/02/2017 12:11

OFFS

It's not enough that I can't tell my left from my right, I have now demonstrated that I can't tell my east from my west. For east read west and vice versa.

RachaelCatWhisperer · 16/02/2017 12:28

My husband did a research placement in Kenya and Uganda when he was doing his accountancy masters. He found that if we all expect organic food, we cannot possibly grow enough food for everyone and therefore would crate a man made famine. I love the idea of organic but it is not sustainable.

I do buy organic free range higher welfare meat, dairy and eggs because I don't want the hormones and because I feel we shouldn't eat meat from less than ethical sources, but I can't justify the politics of organic for most things. Funnily enough, they don't print the statistics on the packaging.

Lweji · 16/02/2017 12:43

If you grow your own - I guarantee you will never look back. It's often sweeter, more succulent - and it rots - which is actually a good thing.

I agree.
But when you grow your own, then you learn how difficult it is to keep some pests at bay and have decent yields.

Economics can mean that "organic" farming is not as good (for health, environment) as it could be.

Susiethetortoiseshellcat · 16/02/2017 12:46

I'm sure it's a coincidence but my dhs spermicide quality improved dramatically after switching to organic! We had been trying for over a year so were willing to try anything and got pregnant shortly afterwards!

Lweji · 16/02/2017 12:52

I'll add a defence of GM crops. :)

GM crops were intended to be able to resist pests better than non GM crops.
In that sense they could be better for the environment because they should reduce the need for pesticides, and reduce the field extents.

It turns out that they are starting to not work that well.
For example: Farmers Say GMO Corn No Longer Resistant to Pests

Because, as the great Dr. Ian Malcolm said, "Life will not be contained. Life breaks free. (...) Life, Uh, Finds a Way”

Lweji · 16/02/2017 12:53

my dhs spermicide quality improved dramatically after switching to organic! We had been trying for over a year so were willing to try anything and got pregnant shortly afterwards!

I expect you meant sperm quality. Wink

Y0uCann0tBeSer10us · 16/02/2017 12:55

It's obviously one case Susie, but that would make sense in the context of the endocrine disruption research. (Anecdotally, we also saw fertility improvements after switching to organic.)

0nline · 16/02/2017 12:56

Because, as the great Dr. Ian Malcolm said, "Life will not be contained. Life breaks free. (...) Life, Uh, Finds a Way

I suspect this a person who has experienced legions of slugs in his garden.

Forget cockroaches, these slimey bastards can survive anything. And multiply at warp speed nine. And sneer at you sneerily while they slobber on your last surviving tomato.

I'd rather have a zombie infested garden than a slug infested one. At least zombies are big enough to spot and batter into brain dead submission.

user1484226561 · 16/02/2017 17:14

yep, total con, and very bad for the environment

VestalVirgin · 16/02/2017 18:11

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

Susiethetortoiseshellcat · 16/02/2017 18:26

Haha yes meant sperm quality! Silly autocorrect!

Susiethetortoiseshellcat · 16/02/2017 18:26

Haha yes meant sperm quality! Silly autocorrect!

MongerTruffle · 16/02/2017 18:31

I don't understand why organic fruit and veg is more expensive

It's much cheaper to produce with insecticides. You don't lose as many crops and using insecticides allows for intensive farming.

user1481140239 · 16/02/2017 18:37

Considering the continued use of pesticides is wiping out whole ecosystems (which will eventually have an impact on our food chain) no it't not really. Do you know how important bees are?

KatharinaRosalie · 16/02/2017 20:51

It's a con. Organic does not mean that no pesticides are used. Organic pesticides are not necessarily better for us or the environment.
Here's a list of a few here: risk-monger.blogactiv.eu/2015/11/12/the-risk-mongers-dirty-dozen-12-highly-toxic-pesticides-approved-for-use-in-organic-farming/

Trainspotting1984 · 16/02/2017 21:00

I completely agree with nelipotter- I wouldn't buy organic in a supermarket but we get organic veg, meat and fish boxes direct from the farms. They do taste much nicer but doubt that's organic related

New posts on this thread. Refresh page