HNC Home Page
News Business Arts & Life Sports Opinion Calendar Archive About Us
COLD FEET: Birds take to the ice as winter makes its appearance at Yellowstone National Park. / Photo by Nancy Williams

Today's word on journalism

Monday, November 5, 2007

On Objectivity:

"I still insist that 'objective journalism' is a contradiction in terms. But I want to draw a very hard line between the inevitable reality of 'subjective journalism' and the idea that any honestly subjective journalist might feel free to estimate a crowd at a rally for some candidates the journalist happens to like personally at 2,000 instead of 612 -- or to imply that a candidate the journalist views with gross contempt, personally, is a less effective campaigner than he actually is."

-- Hunter S. Thompson, from Fear & Loathing: CORRECTIONS, RETRACTIONS, APOLOGIES, COP-OUTS, ETC., a 1972 memo to Rolling Stone editor Jann S. Wenner, excerpted in the current (November 2007) issue of Harper’s Magazine (Thanks to alert WORDster Andy Merton)

Save your money, don't buy organic

By Michael Sharp

October 18, 2007 | There is a growing trend in the United Sates to buy organic food. Like a whirlwind of ignorant consumption, more and more Americans are taken in by false assumptions and unproven benefits.

The Organic Trade Association recently reported that organic sales have steadily increased by more than 20 percent during the past decade, and in 2006 reached more than $13 billion in sales. This steady increase in organic sales is alarming when considering the fact that there is no substantial evidence to indicate that organic food is any better than conventional food.

The difference between organic and conventional food, for the most part, is how the crops are grown. Conventional food is grown with synthetic, FDA-approved to be safe, chemicals that help to decrease loss and increase yield. Organic fruits and vegetables are grown by using animal manure as a source of nitrogen.

A survey conducted by the Whole Foods Market, indicates that nearly 70 percent of organic fanatical consumers -- or as I like to call them, organatics -- believe that their food is healthier, fresher, and has more nutrients. The problem is that this belief is not based on reality. Much like a child's belief in the tooth fairy, or my belief that ice cream cures all ailments. While I try to trick myself into thinking that eating a gallon of cookies and cream makes me feel better when I'm sick, I'm sure that there is no scientific correlation between high fat and sugary foods and the treatment of illness.

Organatics believe that organic food is healthier. Science has shown that organic food, food grown without pesticides, does indeed have a significantly less amount of pesticide residues on them. What a shocker. Science has also shown that the amount of pesticides on conventionally grown food is insignificant. The FDA did a study and showed that the highest daily average of conventionally grown food that people consume has 10,000 times less pesticide residues than was shown to cause toxicity in animals. So even though the organic claim is true, that there are more pesticides on conventionally grown food, in the most extreme case this level is way below what would make someone sick.

Another top reason that organic consumers choose to eat organic food is because of a perception of an increased amount of nutrients.

"There is no evidence to support this claim," said Bob Goldberg, a professor in the department of molecular, cellular and developmental biology at UCLA, "As a botanist I know that a plant, is a plant, is a plant. The structure, cell types, biochemistry, genetics, etc. of organically grown and conventionally grown crops are the same. The reality is that [organic foods] are no more nutritious or healthier than foods produced by conventional farming."

Sir John Krebs, a spokesman for the Food Standards Agency of the UK recently stated, "In our view the current scientific evidence does not show that organic food is any safer or more nutritious than conventionally produced food."

Although none of the claims that organatics claim for purchasing food hold water, there are plenty of reasons to be weary of organic food. Namely, organic food has a higher risk of microbial contamination, organic food is more expensive, and the expanded adoption of this practice would lead to greater world hunger.

Organic food is one of the main concerns of the Food Safety Division of the FDA. In a recent report they said, "The use of manure as a fertilizer for crops is a significant concern. Methods are needed to reduce the presence of pathogens in manure and to effectively eliminate them before they contaminate the environment and food." A study done by the University of Minnesota confirmed these fears by the Food Safety Division by showing that organically grown lettuce was 19 times more likely to have E. coli contamination than conventional methods.

So although you organatics might be eating less pesticide residues that aren't of concern anyway, you'll have to weigh out the risk of contracting bloody diarrhea from a food-borne illness. Harshavardhan Thippareddi, a food science professor at the University of Nebraska, said "Consumers may see organic food safety relating to safety from chemicals used in conventional foods. But it's important to clarify that organic claims do not refer to microbial safety,"

One of the most important reasons organatics should stop buying organic food is that they are paying more money for an equally nutritious, possibly bacterial contaminated food. Organic food is more expensive than conventional food, "typically 10 to 40 percent more than similar conventionally produced products," said Carl Winter, a food scientist at the University of California Davis. An Australian study by Choice Magazine in 2004 found processed organic foods in supermarkets to be 65 percent more expensive. It just doesn't make sense to pay more for worse quality food.

If nasty food-borne illnesses don't scare organatics, I think most people would agree that solving world hunger, instead of adding to it, would be a good idea. Bob Goldberg of UCLA also stated, "organic farming takes up much more land than conventional farming. It is naive to think that organic farming can feed the 'world.' Today there are 6.5 billion people on the face of the earth. By 2050, we may have 10 billion people. It has been estimated, that, at most, organic farming practices can feed 4 billion people."

There is no way that organic farming can yield enough food to feed the population of today, which is a main reason advances in conventional farming took place. For example today less than 2 percent of labor is devoted to farming. Yet we produce 300 percent more crops than traditional farming on less land. This means more land for forests, parks, open space, etc. that would not be there if it weren't for modern agricultural practices.

In short, don't buy organic food unless you want to pay more for an equally nutritious, possibly dangerous food, which would eventually cause greater world hunger.

For another opinion, see Organic, locally grown pesticide-free food is best.

NW
MS

Copyright 1997-2007 Utah State University Department of Journalism & Communication, Logan UT 84322, (435) 797-3292
Best viewed 800 x 600.