Bananas.org - View Single Post

mikevan · 12-09-2006, 12:47 PM

That is a problem with a lax certifying agency and unscrupulous growers looking to make more money with a label and hoping not to get caught. As with everything else in this world, it's buyer beware, unfortunately, in this world of greed, and there are members in any industry that are willing to use dishonesty to make a quick buck - not just farmers seeking to sell for more with the Organic label. I for one would like to see Organic sold for less than non-Organic - that would eliminate that kind of fraud for the most part and, after all, Organic is less costly to produce in the first place. That won't happen until supply catches up with demand and production becomes more local rather than distantly distributed. In the meantime, the safest way to have Organic with complete assurance is to grow it yourself. Nevertheless, even with a bit of salt, you'll still hopefully be more lucky buying organic than not - widespread industry-wide fraud cannot be hidden for long. And it helps if the buyer is alert and more than willing to be heard by the right people, organic or not.

Now, if they'd just stop feeding cattle corn and eliminate this e-coli problem - that interestingly seems to be plaguing non-Organic farms in California almost exclusively.

Mike

Quote:

Originally Posted by bigdog

Thought you might be interested in this article I found today, Mitchell:

Pesticides found in 'organic' food
November 6, 2004
Stuff
Leanne Bell
http://www.stuff.co.nz/stuff/0,2106,3087903a10,00.html
Pesticide residues found in "organic" produce have, according to this story, prompted fresh concerns that New Zealand shoppers are being misled.
The Food Safety Authority was cited as saying shoppers should be aware that some food sold as "organic" might not be produced organically, after taking 41 samples of "organic" fruit, vegetables and wine from shops and found nine of them – 22 per cent – had pesticide residues.
Residues were found in lettuce, tomatoes and grapes. There was so much residue that they had probably been deliberately sprayed, the food safety watchdog said.
Executive director Andrew McKenzie was cited as saying the food was not unsafe but it did not comply with the organic standard, adding, "The sample size is quite small – it's not like a real good scientific study – but it points that there's a bit of a problem." Consumers could have confidence in food that was certified organic, "but if it's not certified, you're not quite sure what's going on. We never differentiated between certified and non-certified, we just went into shops where the consumer would logically think these things were organic."
A spokeswoman was cited as saying that the Commerce Commission, the enforcement agency for the Fair Trading Act, is assessing the information before it decides if it should investigate.
Technical director Seager Mason of organic certifier BioGro New Zealand was cited as criticizing the authority's test because it did not distinguish between certified and self-proclaimed organic foods and that BioGro did more than 250 pesticide residue tests a year on produce and had not found any residues for five years, adding, "I'm sure that test is correct but it means nothing about organics if they have selected a product which has an invalid claim of organic on it."

From:http://archives.foodsafetynetwork.ca...v_8.htm#story1

Seems that the organic industry has its own problems as well. Sounds like some companies are being a bit misleading, trying to pass their product along as "organic," when in fact it isn't.

Both industries have their own, separate problems to deal with, and to overcome. There is room for both.