Organic Food

Profiles

Layfield's Energy

Organic foods are produced according to certain production standards. For crops, it means they were grown without the use of conventional pesticides, artificial fertilizers, human waste, or sewage sludge, and that they were processed without ionizing radiation or food additives. For animals, it means they were reared without the routine use of antibiotics and without the use of growth hormones. In most countries, organic produce must not be genetically modified.

Increasingly, organic food production is legally regulated. Currently, the United States, the European Union, Japan and many other countries require producers to obtain organic certification in order to market food as organic.

Historically, organic farms have been relatively small family-run farms— which is why organic food was once only available in small stores or farmers' markets. Now, organic foods are becoming much more widely available — organic food sales have grown for the past few years. This large growth is predicted to continue, and many companies are jumping into the market.

Types of organic food

Organic foods can be either fresh or processed, based on production methods.

Processed food

Often, within the same supermarket, both organic and conventional versions of products are available, although the price of the organic version is usually higher (see modern developments). Most processed organic food comes from large food conglomerates[5] producing and marketing products like canned goods, frozen vegetables, prepared dishes and other convenience foods.

Processed organic food usually contains only organic ingredients, or where there are a number of ingredients, at least a minimum percentage of the plant and animal ingredients must be organic (95% in the United States[6] and Australia). Any non-organically produced ingredients must still meet requirements. It must be free of artificial food additives, and is often processed with fewer artificial methods, materials and conditions (no chemical ripening, no food irradiation, and no genetically modified ingredients, etc.).

They may also be required to be produced using energy-saving technologies and packaged using recyclable or biodegradable materials when possible.

Identifying organic food

At first, organic food consisted mainly of fresh vegetables. Early consumers interested in organic food would look for chemical-free, fresh or minimally processed food. They mostly had to buy directly from growers: "Know your farmer, know your food" was the motto. Personal definitions of what constituted "organic" were developed through firsthand experience: by talking to farmers, seeing farm conditions, and farming activities. Small farms grew vegetables (and raised livestock) using organic farming practices, with or without certification, and the individual consumer monitored.

Consumer demand for organic foods continues to increase, and high volume sales through mass outlets, like supermarkets, are rapidly replacing the direct farmer connection. For supermarket consumers, food production is not easily observable, and product labelling, like "certified organic", is relied on. Government regulations and third-party inspectors are looked to for assurance.

A "certified organic" label is usually the only way for consumers to know that a processed product is "organic".

Environmental impact

Supporters of organic farming claim that organic farms have a smaller environmental impact than conventional farms. Several surveys and studies have attempted to examine and compare conventional and organic systems of farming. The general consensus across these surveys is that organic farming is less damaging for the following reasons:

* Organic farms do not release synthetic pesticides into the environment — some of which have the potential to harm local wildlife.
* Organic farms are better than conventional farms at sustaining diverse ecosystems, i.e., populations of plants and insects, as well as animals.
* When calculated either per unit area or per unit of yield, organic farms use less energy and produce less waste, e.g., waste such as packaging materials for chemicals.

One study found a 20% smaller yield from organic farms using 50% less fertilizer and 97% less pesticide. Studies comparing yields have had mixed results. Supporters claim that organically managed soil has a higher quality and higher water retention. This may help increase yields for organic farms in drought years. One study of two organic farming systems and one conventional found that, in one year's severe crop season drought, organic soybean yields were 52% and 96% higher than the conventional system and organic maize yields were 37% higher in one system, but 62% lower in the other. Some studies are also consistent in showing that organic farms are more energy efficient.. However, alternative views hold that this may be deceptive, based on fossil fuel usage but ignoring energy costs of plowing and other laborious practices used on organic farms to maintain yields. Furthermore, Michael Pollan, author of “The Omnivore's Dilemma”, notes that in the whole chain of food production and distribution, only one-fifth of the energy is used on the farm. Yet a report published by DEFRA, Britain's environment and farming ministry, concluded that shifts toward a local food production and distribution system, as advocated by many organic food proponents, would actually increase the amount of energy being invested in food due to the a higher level of small-scale transport systems, which suffer from inefficiencies compared to standard large-scale supermarket systems.

One study from the Danish Environmental Protection Agency found that, area-for-area, organic farms of potatoes, sugar beet and seed grass produce as little as half the output of conventional farming. Findings like these, and the dependence of organic food on manure from low-yield cattle, has prompted criticism from many scientists that organic farming is environmentally unsound and incapable of feeding the world population. Among these critics are Norman Borlaug, father of the "green revolution," and winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, who asserts that organic farming practices can at most feed 4 billion people, after expanding cropland dramatically and destroying ecosystems in the process.

Pesticides and farmers

For those who work on farms, there have been many studies on the health effects of pesticide exposure. Even when pesticides are used correctly, they still end up in the air and bodies of farm workers. Through these studies, organophosphate pesticides have become associated with acute health problems such as abdominal pain, dizziness, headaches, nausea, vomiting, as well as skin and eye problems. In addition, there have been many other studies that have found pesticide exposure is associated with more severe health problems such as respiratory problems, memory disorders, dermatologic conditions, cancer, depression, neurologic deficits, miscarriages, and birth defects. Summaries of peer-reviewed research have examined the link between pesticide exposure and neurological outcomes and cancer in organophosphate-exposed workers.

Certain genetic modifications can allow some non-organic food to avoid the usage of pesticides without losses in yield. However, genetically-modified crops are the subject of controversy on their own.

Pesticide residue

A study published in 2002 showed that "Organically grown foods consistently had about one-third as many residues as conventionally grown foods."

Monitoring of pesticide residues in the United States is carried out by the Pesticide Data Program (part of USDA, which was created in 1990. It has since tested over 60 different types of food for over 400 different types of pesticides - with samples collected close to the point of consumption. Their most recent results found in 2005 that:
“ These data indicate that 29.5 percent of all samples tested contained no detectable pesticides [parent compound and metabolite(s) combined], 30 percent contained 1 pesticide, and slightly over 40 percent contained more than 1 pesticide. ”

—USDA, Pesticide Data Program

Several studies corroborate this finding by having found that that while 77 percent of conventional food carries synthetic pesticide residues, only about 25 percent of organic food does.

A study published by the National Research Council in 1993 determined that for infants and children, the major source of exposure to pesticides is through diet.[43] A recent study in 2006 measured the levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure in 23 schoolchildren before and after replacing their diet with organic food. In this study it was found that levels of organophosphorus pesticide exposure dropped dramatically and immediately when the children switched to an organic diet. Food residue limits established by law are set specifically with children in mind and consider a child's lifetime ingestion of each pesticide.

There is controversial data on the health implications of certain pesticides. The herbicide Atrazine, for example, has been shown in some experiments to be a teratogen, even at concentrations as low as 0.1 part per billion, to emasculate male frogs by causing their gonads to produce eggs — effectively turning males into hermaphrodites.

Organic farming standards do not allow the use of synthetic pesticides, but they do allow the use of specific pesticides derived from plants. The most common organic pesticides, accepted for restricted use by most organic standards, include Bt, pyrethrum, and rotenone. Some organic pesticides, such as rotenone, have high toxicity to fish and aquatic creatures with some toxicity to mammals including humans.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency and state agencies periodically review the licensing of suspect pesticides, but the process of de-listing is slow. One example of this slow process is exemplified by the pesticide Dichlorvos, or DDVP, which as recently as the year 2006 the EPA proposed its continued sale. The EPA has almost banned this pesticide on several occasions since the 1970s, but it never did so despite considerable evidence that suggests DDVP is not only carcinogenic but dangerous to the human nervous system — especially in children.

Taste and nutritional value

A 2001 study by researchers at Washington State University concluded, under judgement by a panel of tasters, that organic apples were sweeter. Along with taste and sweetness, the texture as well as firmness of the apples were also rated higher than those grown conventionally. These differences are attributed to the greater soil quality resulting from organic farming techniques compared to those of conventional farming.

A small study looking at processed organic foods, found participants could not differentiate organic and conventional varieties of a rice cakes or vitabrits.

Some studies have shown higher nutrient levels in organic fruit and vegetables compared with conventionally grown products. However, due to the difficulty with designing such experiments, the evidence is not considered conclusive.

A 2002 meta-analysis, which is a review of all past studies on the subject — found no proof that organic food offers greater nutritional values, more consumer safety or any distinguishable difference in taste.

Cost

Organic food can be more expensive than conventional food and thus too highly priced to be affordable to persons on a lower income. Organic products typically cost 10 to 40% more than similar conventionally produced products. Processed organic foods vary greatly in price when compared to their conventional counterparts. An Australian study by Choice magazine in 2004 found processed organic foods in supermarkets to be 65% more expensive, but noted this was not consistent. Some products were more than twice the price (such as chocolate), others were similarly priced (jam).[citation needed] Prices may be higher because organic produce is produced on a smaller scale, and may need to be milled or processed separately.

Commercialization

Organic food began as a small movement with farmers rejecting the use of conventional farming practices. With the market share of organic food outpacing much of the food industry many big companies have moved into this market. With these large companies, and with the creation of a legal certification framework (2002 in the US), there is worry that the very definition of organic food will change from what it used to be. (Credit: Wikipedia).

Profiles

Food Media