A little pesticide does you good but 'organic' farming harms the world [View All]

[Walt Starr]

Our health is threatened not by chemicals and GM crops but by the eco-fundamentalists and their crusade against intensive agriculture: in an extract from his new book, Dick Taverne demolishes the myths and pseudo science of the organic movement

Nowadays "organic farming" commands such wide public support that to question its merits is to question the virtues of motherhood. Nearly every famous cookery expert takes it for granted that organic food tastes better and is more nutritious and healthier. Nearly every environmentalist is convinced that organic farming is better for the environment.

The British Government subsidises farmers to convert to organic farming, and in 2002 an official Commission on Farming and Food recommended that even more money should be spent to ensure that organic farming plays a larger role in agriculture. Of course, by definition, all food is organic and the term "organic farming" is meaningless, but to the ordinary public, the label "organic" has a reassuring ring. Eating "organic" food is like drinking "real" ale, not ersatz, imported, imitation stuff. It sounds safe because it is guaranteed to be GM-free and is assumed to be untainted by nasty, possibly carcinogenic pesticides. Supermarkets promote it, which they would not do unless there were a popular demand for it; it is also clearly to their advantage that the public are prepared to pay premium prices for it.

Evidence to justify this enthusiasm has proved elusive. The Food Standards Agency (FSA), set up to examine evidence about the safety of food and to protect the interests of consumers, has persistently refused to uphold claims for the superiority of organic food, much to the chagrin of the Soil Association, the voice of organic farming in Britain. In January 2004 the FSA stated: "On the basis of current evidence, the Agency's assessment is that organic food is not significantly different in terms of food safety and nutrition from food produced conventionally." When a complaint was made to the Advertising Standards Authority that recruiting leaflets published by the Soil Association made misleading statements, claiming that organic food tastes better, is healthier, and is better for the environment, the Authority found no convincing evidence to support the claims and the leaflets had to be withdrawn.

<snip>

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2005/03/13/do1304.xml

It's an opinion piece, but Reichwingnut assholes leave no stone unturned in their quest to disrespect anything and everything good for human existance. Citing third world farming techniques as 'organic' and assigning that as what modern organic farming is about is not just intellectually dishonest, it's an outright lie.

Modern organic farming techniques are extremely efficient. I engage in the practices on a local level with my backyard garden. I declare biological warfare on pests and diseases and utilize organic fertilizing methods for all of my plants. As a result, my garden is the best and most lush in my neighborhood. My vegetables are awesome and produce more than anybody using Miracle Grow and spray chemical pesticides.

Non-organic gardeners end up with lawns addicted to Scotts fertilizer programs and woe to the person who misses one of the five treatments per year! My lawn gets fertilzed a couple of times each year with a chicken manure based pellet and sifted compost with an occasional treatment of bat guano tea. My lawn outdoes everybody and I don't get the moles because my predatory nematode treatments combined with a single milky spore treatment last year keeps the beetle grubs down and the beetle grubs are the prey of the moles.