It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
According to the UK's Food Standards Agency, "Consumers may choose to buy organic fruit, vegetables and meat because they believe them to be more nutritious than other food. However, the balance of current scientific evidence does not support this view."[33] A 12-month systematic review commissioned by the FSA in 2009 and conducted at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine based on 50 years' worth of collected evidence concluded that "there is no good evidence that consumption of organic food is beneficial to health in relation to nutrient content.
A recent review of nutrition claims showed that organic food proponents are unreliable information sources which harm consumers, and that consumers are wasting their money if they buy organic food believing that it contains better nutrients.[39]
Originally posted by newcovenant
this is not true at all. People are not going for organics because they are more nutritious
Organic food is more expensive than conventional food, due not only to its lower crop yields and more expensive organic fertilizers and pesticides in larger quantities, but mainly because it's such a big fad right now and is in such high demand.
Organic pesticides include rotenone, which has been shown to cause the symptoms of Parkinson's Disease and is a natural poison used in hunting by some native tribes; pyrethrum, which is carcinogenic; sabadilla, which is highly toxic to honeybees; and fermented urine, which I don't want on my food whether it causes any diseases or not.
Supporters of organics claim that the much larger amounts of chemicals they use is OK because those chemicals are all-natural. But just because something is natural doesn't mean that it's safe or healthy
....just because something is natural doesn't mean that it's safe or healthy — consider the examples of hemlock, mercury, lead, toadstools, box jellyfish neurotoxin, asbestos — not to mention a nearly infinite number of toxic bacteria and viruses (E. coli, salmonella, bubonic plague, smallpox).
Originally posted by camouflaged
Does anyone notice healthy food cost's more then take away? organic may be better for the fact that your not adding poisons which they spray onto the food into your body, but overall its no more healthier then non organic.
1
All poisons used in pesticides are rated on a scale called EIQ, or Environmental Impact Quotient. They are tested for range of toxicity, or what it is they will harm or kill. Let's say the poison doesn't harm people in anything short of beer-chugging amounts; that might merit a 2. If an ounce of the stuff in a stretch of stream kills all the fish; give it a 10. The poisons are tested for how long they stay in the soil, in plants, if they kill bees, if they kill worms, etc.
Here are some interesting EIQs:
Bt (organic)
13.5
Acephate (synthetic)
17.9
Soap (organic)
19.5
Carbaryl (synthetic)
22.6
Malathion (synthetic)
23.2
Rotenone (organic)
33.0
Sabadilla (organic)
35.6
You can see that some organic poisons—and all of these are in use—have a higher Environmental Impact Quotient than some synthetics, notably the synthetic Carbaryl (Sevin), one of the most commonly used synthetic pesticides in the world.
Pesticides & Herbicides The pesticides and herbicides currently being used on many non-organic crops are exceptionally toxic to humans and can build up in the human body contributing significantly to disease. For example: The herbicide, glyphosphate (also known as Roundup from Monsanto) which is commonly-used on non-organic soy and other crops is extremely toxic and scientists have recently issued an urgent warning about its use. Chemical companies have used their influence with the FDA to increase the already high "acceptable levels" of glyphosphate in foods. Glufosinate (also known as Basta) is currently used in non-organic sugar beets and canola. It is also exceptionally toxic and is known to cause birth defects. Malathion is a pesticide that has been linked to numerous serious health effects.
Contaminated Sewage Sludge The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is now encouraging contaminated sewage sludge ("biosolids") to be use as "fertilizer" to grow non-organic crops. When authors John Stauber and Sheldon Rampton decided on a catchy title for their excellent book, Toxic Sludge is Good For You, they where not aware of the heavy push to use this toxic sludge as a fertilizer on crops. When they discovered this fact they wrote a chapter in their book about it. The fact that the EPA is pushing this stuff in non-organic crops and not telling consumers represents a prime example of a government officials completely out of touch with reality. It is a very good reason to move to organic foods.
Hormones & Antibiotics Non-organic meats, eggs and dairy usually refer to the fact that the animals may have given fed antibiotics, hormones, ground up remains of other animals, and other dangerous substances that often end up in these foods fed to humans. The growing use of chemicals is a disaster for the health of the animals (other than fatting up the animal quickly for the slaughter). Regular ingestion of traces of these chemicals is a health disaster waiting to happen. For example, regular, long-term ingestion of non-organic dairy from cows injected with Monsanto's genetically-engineered bovine growth hormone (rBGH) has recently been shown to be a high risk for prostrate and breast cancers. Constant ingestion of traces of antibiotics from dairy can be expected to damage the balance of beneficial bacteria in the intestines and create drug-resistant superbugs. Keep in mind that the "testing" for antibiotics in dairy has been shown by the U.S. Government Accounting Office (GAO) to not prevent antibiotics-laced non-organic dairy foods from being sold. This is because only a small number of antibiotics are tested.
Irradiation Another source of contaminants is food irradiation. The food industry is keen on portraying the irradiation of food as safe, but the truth is that there is experimental evidence of dangers and testimony from independent experts of these dangers.
reply to post by newcovenant
Irradiation Another source of contaminants is food irradiation. The food industry is keen on portraying the irradiation of food as safe, but the truth is that there is experimental evidence of dangers and testimony from independent experts of these dangers.
Myth: Activist groups who oppose food irradiation reflect public views and protect the public Interest.
Activist groups have their own agendas, and they differ in their reliance on science-based information. All groups, however rely on membership for fundraising. Some have demonstrated a tendency to identify and exaggerate "risks" and solicit funds in order to "protect the public interest", thus maintaining the financial solvency of the organization.
1
Myth: Irradiation will make foods radioactive.
Irradiation does not change the radioactivity of food, nor does irradiation leaves any residues.
Originally posted by dreamingawake
The regulation of organic food is sketchy at best. It's better to know the source such as local grown rather than a company from somewhere else, at least you can validate it better. One thing I found that "Organic Salmon" is a definite lie.