Friday, June 27, 2008

Organic Food Production

It is an excellent thing that the term “organic” was legally defined by the federal government in the U.S., protecting the consumer and food industry alike. Before the term was legally defined, producers had the freedom to place their own interpretation on the term, which might have been very different from what the consumer had in mind. Producers unknowingly (or not) could be selling a product as organic, when in reality it did not meet the true spirit of organics. With the legal definition, consumers have a much better idea what to expect from their purchases, and producers have guidelines to ensure proper farming and ranching practices.

Over the past three decades, scientific facts have steadily accumulated showing organic foods are more nutritious than conventionally grown food. Science is showing that the fruits and vegetables our parents ate when they were children are more nutritious than the ones we are serving our children today. Research has been done world-wide, and these findings are consistent.

For example, Donald R. Davis is a research associate employed by the Biochemical Institute at the University of Texas. He recently analyzed data retrieved from the USDA that it had gathered in both 1950 and 1999 concerning the nutrient content of 43 fruit and vegetable crops. “He found that six out of 13 nutrients had declined in these crops over the 50-year period (the seven other nutrients showed no significant, reliable changes)” (NY Times). Phosphorous, iron, calcium, protein, riboflavin, and ascorbic acid declined 6% to 38%. "What all our data shows," says Charles Benbrook, chief scientist at the Organic Center and a former executive director of the Board on Agriculture of the National Academy of Sciences, "is that whenever there's been a valid comparison between conventional and organic, organic is virtually never lower than conventional and, in a significant number of cases, it's higher. Sometimes it's significantly higher in several important nutrients." (NY Times). Sweden and Britain have also conducted studies with similar results.

Organic farming and ranching are environmentally friendly. Organic farming is based on the philosophy that any food produced is only going to be as good as the soil it is grown in. Organic food producers work in harmony with the ecosystems on the farms and ranches, utilizing techniques such as crop rotation, soil enrichment, natural pest management, composting and companion planting.

Organic farming is much more labor intensive than conventional farming, and this accounts in part for the general increased costs associated with purchasing organic products. Also, while organic farming and ranching can be managed on a larger scale, the certification requirements that come along with being “organic” are much more time consuming than traditional farming. Much more time is devoted to gathering information, planning, scouting for pests (since traditional pesticides are not allowed), and other related duties.

The interest of big business retailers such as Whole Foods could very well apply pressure for improved technologies that will fit the organic standard but reduce time and labor costs. Big business will also lend an air of legitimacy to the organic industry for staunch disbelievers.

Work Cited

"Organic Fruits and Vegetables Work Harder for Their Nutrients", Deborah K. Rich, Special to The San Francisco Chronicle, Saturday, March 25, 2006

2 comments:

Randy Lewis said...

You are right it is labor intensive, it is good for the eco-system.
I have noticed the fruit less sweet, smaller sized, more blemish, cost more, but what are you going to do?
The other food tasts better, cheaper but has polution.
Don't ever buy any food from outside of the U.S. they are so full of chemicals the U.S. won't even test them.
And they are poluting the land and water in their enviroment.
They are allowed to use the chemicals we used 30 years ago.

Alene Cawood-Smith said...

I heard that statistic somewhere also that the generation before us and the one before that had better food nutrition wise. Totally shocking because there is the common stereotype/myth that we eat better than ever before in the history of people.