Healthy soil and sustainable growing

["TradingPostPaul" <tradingpost@riseup.net>]

GM push vilifies organics
14 July 2007
http://www.greenleft.org.au/2007/717/37243


Recent attacks on the organic food industry are about discrediting it to
soften up the public to accept genetically modified (GM) crops, Dr Maggie
Lilith of the Conservation Council of WA and the Say No to GMO campaign
told Green Left Weekly.

“The spate of recent claims that organic food is riskier and linked to
health scares seems to have come from proponents of GM and those with a
vested interest”, said Lilith, who is also a member of the Fremantle
Organic Growers Association. “The claims about the safety of organic
foods are unfounded and aim to spread misinformation to the public.”

On April 12, a syndicated piece by Bettina Arndt entitled “Organic myths
pose real risks to health” appeared in newspapers across Australia. The
article is a savage attack on the organic food industry and consumers who
choose its products.

“The organic food industry is booming with ever more people deluded into
thinking that paying two or three times more for organic food products will
provide them with healthier, safer food”, stated Arndt.

In an attempt to portray organics as backward and unscientific, Arndt
quotes British Lord Dick Taverne as saying, “What is most worrying about
the whole organic product movement is the underlying notion that scientific
progress is inevitably bad and we are all better off reverting to
primitive, ‘natural’ ways of doing things.”

Lilith disputes this unscientific claim. “Organic systems rely on modern
scientific understanding of ecology and soil science as well as traditional
methods of crop rotations to ensure fertility and weed and pest control”,
she said.

“Moreover, organic production aims to be sustainable and reduce
dependence on non-renewable resources. The soil is not depleted as under
conventional agribusiness practices. Organic produce is not covered in
toxic chemicals as no pesticides or artificial chemicals are used. Animals
are not treated with synthetic growth hormones or drugs.”

Arndt also quotes Taverne glorifying GM crops: “If people were really
worried about the effects of pesticides in farming on wildlife or human
health, they should promote pest-resistant GM crops, which reduce pesticide
use … The solid scientific support for the safety and efficiency of GM
crops means nothing to blinkered souls who trust instincts over science.”

Janet Grogan, a leading activist with the Say No to GMO campaign, described
Arndt’s article as “a thinly veiled pro-GM rant against organic
foods”.

“It was misinformed and biased. Arndt cites two cases to prove the
dangers of eating organic foods, neither actually linked to
organically-derived produce.”

“What’s more, her list of experts comes from pro-GM groups. Lord
Taverne is the chairman of the pro-GM lobby group the Association of Sense
in Science. His book was lambasted in the Guardian newspaper as …
mingling myth with fact.”

A month later, on May 16, an article appeared in the West Australian,
promoting the idea of growing GM cotton in the Ord River district of
northern WA and attacking organic growers.

A key GM scientist, Dr Jim Peacock, claimed opponents of the scheme were
largely “self-serving organic farmers and ill-informed environmental
activists”. Peacock was instrumental in developing GM cotton while
working at the CSIRO. Some 100 hectare trials of GM cotton along the Ord
have already been approved by the WA government.

Lilith is scathing about Peacock’s criticism. “It’s the pro-GM groups
who are self-serving, interested only in making profits at the expense of
farmers and community health. Moreover, GM cotton should be considered a
Trojan horse as it leaves the door open for other unwanted GM crops.”

Another attack on organics followed soon after. The May 22 edition of the
Bulletin contained an exclusive titled “The Truth About Organic Food”.
Two large photos of shopping baskets graphically illustrate the expense of
organic food over conventional.

Lilith contests the claim that organic food is expensive, saying, “A lot
of supermarket pre-packaged food costs far more than organic staples. The
typical household spends far more on junk food, or alcohol, or take-aways
than on fruit and vegetables.”

“The Bulletin article also ignores the nutritional benefits of organic
produce”, Lilith told GLW.

“Scientific evidence shows that fresh organic produce is more nutritious
than non-organic food, containing higher nutrient levels, more vitamins,
minerals, cancer-fighting antioxidants and enzymes.”

But the Bulletin article does concede “consumption of organics is growing
at 25% to 44% per year, outstripping the rise in organic food production at
6% to 15% … in 2000, there were 7.6 million hectares under organic
management, with a value of $19m. By 2006, that had grown to 12.3 million
hectares valued at $400 million.”

According to Annie Kavanagh, president of the Organic Growers Association
WA, suppliers are finding it difficult to keep up with the demand from
consumers.

Across Australia, in addition to the 12.3 million hectares under organic
cultivation, a further 1.1 million hectares land is being prepared for
organic certification. In 2006, there were 176 listed organic processors
and producers in WA, compared to 58 in 2002. This shows a 300% increase in
four years, which reflects the increasing demand for organic produce.

Perhaps this trend explains why the GM lobby is so keen to demolish the
credibility of organic agriculture.

Annolies Truman
14 July 2007