'Organic' label's integrity under fire

I remember a time when "Organic" meant relating to, or derived from living organisms and containing carbon as well.

If you use this true meaning of the word then you'll clearly see that even if you used pesticides on fruits and vegetables they are still organic by nature.

If you don't believe me look up the "scientific definition" of the word organic and see where the word even comes from.

I used to work for this "natural supermarket" called Healthy Pleasures. It was a chain of about 3 stores in NYC, and I was assistant manager of the whole chain. I quit because they were a bunch of unethical, unsanitary, bizarre douche-bags. A few months after I quit, the NY Post did an expose about how they were buying McDonalds-quality IBP beef, and re-wrapping it with "Organic" wrappers and re-selling it for a HUGE mark-up. They were cornering the market on organic beef sales in NYC because they were undercutting all the competition, which had no idea how Healthy Pleasures could be making a profit on their cheap organics... Then everyone learned the truth...

That was only one of a million organic offenses this so-called Natural Foods Store committed. (Don't worry - they whole chain went out of business after this incident - thankfully.)

All I'm saying is... watch out. "Organic" doesn't always mean "organic."

http://www.rawfoodinfo.com/articles/art_orgbeefscam.html

And how do we know that this is not just propaganda PR to get people to mistrust organics across the board in order to sway them to the Monsantos that will promise them more 'sustainable' practices? As I stated above, I don't trust the USDA either, but it seems like an all out campaign has begun to discredit organic across the board because sales of it are going up and Monsanto is feeling the pinch on their profit sheets.

Sad, but not surprising, which makes it even sadder.

this sucks. it seems like you cannot trust anything unless you watch it grow in front of you, which is not practical anymore. i love organic foods, but it sucks that unscrupulous vendors will add lesser products

have you heard? we're all going to die someday! i called bs on this industry and its gullible minions long ago. spend your precious $$$ suckers.

Milch, I think you are trying to lump cross breeding with GMO. GMO is done at the molecular level, cross breeding is done with adult or mature plants and animals. Cross breeding kind of has a built in safety guides, it doesn't always work, if it's wrong, nothing happens. A good example is the mule, a cross between a horse and a donkey, but they are sterile they can't reproduce on their own. That's also called a hybrid, like hybrid
vegetables, they must be cross bred for each generation.

GMO is basically creating an entirely new species, who knows where that can go. Say it's a GMO corn, if the pollen could get blown to a regular corn field it could render the new field sterile, no corn, or make a corn with out any nutritional value what so ever.

Think kudzu in the south, a great idea, stop erosion, disastrous results.

@Jan

It is within the realm of public knowledge, maybe you do not look in the right places, GMOs have to be submitted for approval... really what you are saying is that you want to be able to be lazy about it.

I would like you to show me where a group of accredited scientists state GMOs do not have the possibility to make food more organic... I will even up the anti, it can be done safely. The problem is in what proteins are being injected into these plants... genetic cross breeding has been going on for years to reach these same goals... taking the wanted genes from one plant and injecting them into another is more efficient and takes less time to achieve results... and is irrefutably safe, it happens in nature over thousands of years. I am all for the FDA actually testing GMOs, and I think using them to promote RoundUp should be illegal... RoundUp promotes cancer... and so do most artificial chemicals... and many natural ones... They currently are taking genes from viruses, amoebas and all manner of things to inject into specimens to create GMOs right now where the results are very questionable, these GMOs have incredibly radical ribosomes and are for one very susceptible to mutations because of it... they need to be stabilized first and foremost, and I think that there should be a good hard look at that and a whole lot of testing and studying of it. I also think that the few GMOs that are out there now should be pulled until they have gone through these trials... but to limit your self and continue the statuesque with all of its pesticides and the like is really stupid.

I believe that you have good intentions but are severely misguided, standing up to the man is good, but you have to have good arguments and workable solutions when you do it... besides, look at how good the organic labels are working out which is what this article was about initially anyway... these band aid solutions do not work, you have to fight from higher up. So I will continue to tell you what is best to do when I feel you are wrong because it promotes discussion and solutions.

"GMOs have the ability to help more food be organic..."

All propaganda that has already been refuted by scientists. And don't tell me what I would be best to do. Without GMOs labelled on food consumers are at the mercy of industrial agriculture to feed them untested unhealthy food. And I for one will continue to stand up against that and the companies shoving it down our throats without our knowledge or consent.

Jan, Monsanto is a horrable company, but to imply that GMOS are the issue... makes me question if you even know why there is a contraversy with Monsanto.

GMOs have the ability to help more food be organic... they are creating things that are resistant to bugs so you do not need pesticides, and plants that are able to take in large quantities of nutrients quickly so that we do not end up with tomatoes that are virtually useless red balls of water and cellulose... and still be able to produce economical foods... if anything GMOs are good for small farmers, it cuts the costs of producing foods from the more expensive areas like crop dusting and the pesticides and fertilizers as well... why do you think that they are so highly touted by a vast number of geneticists and ecologists? Monsanto uses GMOs to drive there other products like RoundUp which is despicable, the last thing we need to be doing is making it possible (and deemed necessary) to spray more chemicals (DOW and DuPont are also players in this market by the way), but not all GMOs are aimed at this target...

If you want to push for something worthy, have GMOs be required to submit products to the rigors of the FDA like we do with pharmaceuticals and maybe have GMO products limited by the EPA to only allow for ecologically friendly GMOs to be manufactured (safe inovations that eliminate things like herbicides and pesticides)... you are not going to get rid of GMOs, and it would be silly to try... having GMO foods labeled is going to help a very very small percentage of the population as well... broader solutions really are necessary, and blind hatred needs to be set aside.

Something that you may not have considered is that while GMO labeling may help you avoid them in the short term. By allowing weedkillers and pesticides, hormons etc into food we open up a whole world of genetic mutations... cancers, PCB poisoning, and any other health attrocities you can think of pale in comparisons to this. You should look into regional birth defect trends and national trends... you should look into national and local psychological trends... a lot of the psychological trends do not have to do with the "cyberage mentality," they have to do with chemical imbalances... which is effected by everything from physical health and fitness, to food (nutrient) intake... and genetics that we are mutating the hell out of. These genetic effects only take one partner to be the irresponsible or uninformed party... and you can not shield yourself from everything at that. So why not fix the problems and not just try and labeling things in the hope that it will all go away, future generations are depending on it.

IIRC Penn and Teller are apparently going to do an episode on organic foods soon. That should likely heat things up.

What is the point of calling it ORGANIC then, eh?
If its the same crap in tha package as before, a stamp on the outside of the package isn't changing anything. I agree with "queenofit".....local farmers or do it yourself. Thats the only way you know for certain.
Farming for the Future!!!!

Well consider me one of those who rant about corporations. I am against corporations making decisions based upon profit that will inevitability affect our health in negative ways.

Our laws should be representative of all of the citizens of our country, not just to satisfy profits.

I suppose articles such as this are just proof (once again) we must support local small farmers and learn to grow our own food. (how novel)

I think the USDA would love nothing better through their industrial agricultural proteges to also bring about major mistrust of organics to Americans to turn them into Monsanto drones. Standards of course must then be strenghtened, but that then also means having GMOS IN OUR FOOD LABELLED. We must become more vocal about this now, especially in light of bills aimed at putting small farmers out of business.

This is not good, organic should mean organic period.
It also ruins it for the honest hard working mom and pop companies that truly care about their products.
I don't want to sound like one of those who think a corporations are evil giants, but.... these types of things started happening when the mass producers of food and food products got into the organic business.