Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

permaculture - Re: [permaculture] Rebutting today's Kathmandu Post article entitled 'Myth of Organic Agriculture'

permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: permaculture

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Ernest Rando <lotusdog@hotmail.com>
  • To: permaculture <permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org>
  • Subject: Re: [permaculture] Rebutting today's Kathmandu Post article entitled 'Myth of Organic Agriculture'
  • Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2013 19:19:34 -0600

Here is an example from the UNF Climate change conference where the
research is showing that permaculture techniques (social and agricultural i
might add) are being implemented and are one of the main Mitigation
strategies in developing countries. While they don't say Permaculture
directly a permie will recognize the principals, techniques, and ethics.

http://unfccc4.meta-fusion.com/kongresse/cop19/templ/play.php?id_kongresssession=6922&theme=unfccc


On Mon, Nov 18, 2013 at 2:40 AM, Chris Wardle <cjwardle@gmail.com> wrote:

> Respected teachers,
> The following article, appeared in this morning’s edition of The Kathmandu
> Post.
> In addition to your reactions, links to evidence upon which a rebuttal
> could be made, would be greatly appreciated.
> Namaste from Kathmandu,
> Chris Wardle.
> ===
>
> Source:
>
> http://epaper.ekantipur.com/ktpost/showtext.aspx?boxid=153350234&parentid=26361&issuedate=18112013
>
> ENVIRONMENT & SUSTAINABILITY
>
> Myth of Organic Agriculture
>
> Henry I. Miller
>
>
> STANFORD — Organic products — from food to skincare nostrums to cigarettes
> — are very much in vogue, with the global market for organic food alone now
> reportedly exceeding $60 billion annually. The views of organic devotees
> seem to be shared by the European Commission, whose official view of
> organic farming and foods is, “Good for nature, good for you.” But there is
> no persuasive evidence of either.
>
> A 2012 meta-analysis of data from 240 studies concluded that organic fruits
> and vegetables were, on average, no more nutritious than their cheaper
> conventional counterparts; nor were they less likely to be contaminated by
> pathogenic bacteria like E. coli or salmonella — a finding that surprised
> even the researchers. “When we began this project,” said Dena Bravata, one
> of the researchers, “we thought that there would likely be some findings
> that would support the superiority of organics over conventional food.”
>
> Many people purchase organic foods in order to avoid exposure to harmful
> levels of pesticides. But that is a poor rationale. While nonorganic fruits
> and vegetables had more pesticide residue, the levels in more than 99% of
> cases did not cross the conservative safety thresholds set by regulators.
>
> Moreover, the vast majority of the pesticidal substances found on produce
> occur “naturally” in people’s diets, through organic and conventional
> foods. The biochemist Bruce Ames and his colleagues have found that “99.99%
> (by weight) of the pesticides in the American diet are chemicals that
> plants produce to defend themselves. Only 52 natural pesticides have been
> tested in high-dose animal cancer tests, and about half (27) are rodent
> carcinogens; these 27 are shown to be present in many common foods.”
>
> The bottom line is that natural chemicals are just as likely as synthetic
> versions to test positive in animal cancer studies, and “at the low doses
> of most human exposures, the comparative hazards of synthetic pesticide
> residues are insignificant.” In other words, consumers who buy expensive
> organic foods in order to avoid pesticide exposure are focusing their
> attention on 0.01% of the pesticides that they consume.
>
> Ironically, in both Europe and North America, the designation “organic” is
> itself a synthetic bureaucratic construct — and it makes little sense. It
> prohibits the use of synthetic chemical pesticides, with some pragmatic
> exceptions. For example, the EU’s policy notes that “foreseen flexibility
> rules” can compensate for “local climatic, cultural, or structural
> differences.” When suitable alternatives are lacking, some (strictly
> enumerated) synthetic chemicals are allowed.
>
> Similarly, in the US, there is a lengthy list of specific exceptions to the
> prohibitions. But most “natural” pesticides — as well as pathogen-laden
> animal excreta, for use as fertilizer — are permitted.
>
> Another rationale for buying organic is that it is supposedly better for
> the natural environment. But the low yields of organic agriculture in
> real-world settings—typically 20-50% below yields from conventional
> agriculture — impose various stresses on farmland and increase water
> consumption substantially. According to a recent British meta-analysis,
> ammonia emissions, nitrogen leaching, and nitrous-oxide emissions per unit
> of output were higher in organic systems than in conventional agriculture,
> as were land use and the potential for eutrophication —adverse ecosystem
> responses to the addition of fertilizers and wastes— and acidification.
>
> An anomaly of how “organic” is defined is that the designation dœs not
> actually focus on the food’s quality, composition, or safety. Rather, it
> comprises a set of acceptable practices and procedures that a farmer
> intends to use. For example, chemical pesticide or pollen from genetically
> engineered plants wafting from an adjacent field onto an organic crop dœs
> not affect the harvest’s status. EU rules are clear that food may be
> labeled as organic as long as “the ingredients containing [genetically
> modified organisms] entered the products unintentionally” and amount to
> less than 0.9% of their content.
>
> Finally, many who are seduced by the romance of organic farming ignore its
> human consequences. American farmer Blake Hurst offers this reminder:
> “Weeds continue to grow, even in polycultures with holistic farming
> methods, and, without pesticides, hand weeding is the only way to protect a
> crop.” The backbreaking drudgery of hand weeding often falls to women and
> children.
>
> Of course, organic products should be available for people who feel that
> they must have and can afford them. But the simple truth is that buying
> non-organic is far more costeffective, more humane, and more
> environmentally responsible.
> ===
> Henry I. Miller, a physician and fellow in Scientific Philosophy and Public
> Policy at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution, was the founding
> director of the Office of Biotechnology at the US Food and Drug
> Administration
> _______________________________________________
> permaculture mailing list
> permaculture@lists.ibiblio.org
> subscribe/unsubscribe|user config|list info|make a donation toward list
> maintenance:
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/permaculture
> message archives: https://lists.ibiblio.org/sympa/arc/permaculture/
> Google message archive search:
> site: lists.ibiblio.org/pipermail/permaculture [searchstring]
> Permaculture Institute USA http://permaculture.org
> How to permaculture your urban lifestyle
> http://www.ipermie.net
> Avant Geared http://www.avantgeared.com
> https://plus.google.com/+Avantgeared
>



--
Ernest Rando <https://plus.google.com/117886846121315991773>

2013 Internship in Permaculture &
Community<http://cscstelle.org/2012-internships/2013-internship-in-permaculture-community/>
Center for Sustainable Community's Permaculture
Design<http://midwestpermaculture.com/2012/08/permaculture-design-for-csc-in-stelle-il/>
The YouTube Video Series "A Case for
Permaculture<http://youtu.be/NSB8yxgCmU0>"
by Bill Wilson

Skype: Lotusdogz
Community Member of Stelle, Illinois<http://www.stellecommunity.com/Home.html>
Member of the Center for Sustainable Community <http://cscstelle.org/>
Permaculture Student and Teacher <http://midwestpermaculture.com/> and
Aquaponics Farmer!
Picasa
Album<https://plus.google.com/photos/117886846121315991773/albums?banner=pwa>of
various interesting projects.
Social Media Accounts <https://plus.google.com/117886846121315991773/about>




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page