"Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase?

   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #21  
A related topic is sweeteners. Take an organic chemistry class and you'll definitely think twice about Splenda aka sucralose. The body can work with "sucrose" aka table sugar but "sucralose" is splenda and a whole different metabolic ballgame.

I have always felt the same way about sugar versus artificial sweeteners... at least sugar is more or less 'naturally occurring'. Also I can taste artificial sweeteners in almost everything that contains them and I don't like the taste (or after taste). More and more though I am believing sugar, in the amounts we consume it, is not at all good for us.
 
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #22  
When the current organic movement got started in the 1980's, a couple friends were considering some organic produce both because of higher prices and some of their own health concerns. One "organic consultant" they talked to claimed he could tell if the field would pass organic standards by looking at the soil through a hand lens, among other things. They just listened to him and moved on to other sources.

Of course outdoors, what if a neighbor's dog who eats processed dog food poops in the field, or a deer or crow eats GMO corn and poops in the field. Is it still organic? Lots of goofy questions can be asked. If you really want organic, to me, it needs to be grown in a greenhouse where every aspect of the product can be controlled. I think organic does have merits and we should be responsible using any pesticide, but could we really feed the world without some level of "commercial agriculture" with the production it brings. Many other countries are less environmentally friendly than the US in using and regulating pesticides. For those who have not gone through pesticide training, the word pesticides includes insecticides, rodenticides, herbicides, fungicides, and others.

Looking at internet sites on approved organic pesticides, many are almost or as toxic as those created in the lab. Some sites listed nicotine sulfate as an approved pesticide for organic. Nicotine can be pretty toxic since it affects the nervous system. Copper sulfate, sulfur and others can be pretty nasty too. They typically break down much quicker than conventional pesticides, but are still pretty nasty.

Attached is a list of approved pesticides and a write up from the Lee County Extension office in Florida. It seemed the most neutral discussion on the subject that I could find.
 

Attachments

  • 'Pesticides'_for_organic_farms.pdf
    170.6 KB · Views: 132
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #23  
If y'all want an interesting read, look up Euell Gibbons who was popular several years back. I don't think "organic" had been invented yet, but Euell just like to eat stuff that grew naturally outdoors.
 
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #26  
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #27  
The reason they don’t want to label them is that so many people have been brainwashed into thinking that GMO foods are in some way not healthy. They shouldn’t HAVE to worry about it, but people are sheep these days, and will believe anything printed on the internet.
 
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #28  
It can also be tied to search engine results, not putting organic on a product would cause them to loose customers looking for a product, (I was thinking of the organic maple syrup).
 
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #29  
If you water a plant, is that organic? Is water organic? Lol.
HS
 
   / "Organic" a Scam or Fraudulent Phrase? #30  
As part of my degree in Biology, I learned how to read a scientific study. I can tell you that many studies are crap. Either they were done wrong or they're bias to start with. You'll hear about 'meta studies' and in my opinion, those are some of the worst ways to spend tax payer money. A meta study is where a scientist goes through a stack of other people's research that have a small degree of commonality and he then tries to draw a conclusion based on the overall topic. To put it in context, Joe needs a 50HP tractor to pull his plows through his field which is very sandy. Sam needs a 50HP tractor to pull his plows through his field which is mostly clay. Thus, a 'meta study' would conclude that every soil type has the same resistance and every farmer needs a 50HP tractor. But wait, Joe is pulling 5 plows and Sam is only pulling 3 plows. A meta study usually doesn't factor that.

Well said! MANY times I will read the actual study when one hits the press. Who sponsored the study? How many people hear believe that a large corporation giving $10-20K to a grad student to perform a study will get a result that is not favorable? There is so much crap "science" out there it's sickening.
 

Tractor & Equipment Auctions

(INOP) VOLVO L70H WHEEL LOADER (A50459)
(INOP) VOLVO L70H...
2011 Ford Ranger Pickup Truck (A50323)
2011 Ford Ranger...
2000 John Deere 770CH Articulated Motor Grader (A49461)
2000 John Deere...
Toyota 6FGU25 Forklift  5,000 lb Capacity (A51039)
Toyota 6FGU25...
2019 CATERPILLAR 308 CR EXCAVATOR (A51242)
2019 CATERPILLAR...
2023 QUALITY CARGO 16 T/A ENCLOSED TRAILER (A50854)
2023 QUALITY CARGO...
 
Top