Alt text
- buy organic food with no preservatives
- look ingredients
- salt (inorganic preservative)
Image of a cat looking down at the camera.
this post was submitted on 26 Dec 2023
828 points (97.7% liked)
Memes
45646 readers
1339 users here now
Rules:
- Be civil and nice.
- Try not to excessively repost, as a rule of thumb, wait at least 2 months to do it if you have to.
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Stupid question, what's wrong with organic?
Nothing inherently, you can go ahead and eat apples from your apple tree.
The main issue with "organic" foods is that the term is usually very badly regulated. Sometimes there is no difference between "organic" and "non organic"... besides price. Sometimes "organic" foods use very ecologically unfriendly techniques, or are grown/processed in countries where supply chains are not inspected anyway.
Then there's the fact that if something is different, it may not always be an environmental or health win. Growing your food in 30cm of water may be one organic and traditional way to avoid using pesticides (see: rice), but doing that with corn in the middle of Arizona would obviously be a terrible idea!
Anyway, overall I don't think organic foods are worse if you're well off enough that the price is not an issue. But you shouldn't feel personal guilt for buying whatever's cheaper, because quite often the alternative does not justify the price anyway. Eating truly "organic" food unfortunately requires a lot more involvement than picking the green package at a national supermarket chain.
Probably the most amusing example is strawberries: it's essentially impossible to grow them without using non-organic pesticides (and there are such things as organic pesticides despite the near-universal but incorrect belief that "organic" means "no pesticides") so the USDA allows them to be labelled "organic" if they're grown with non-organic methods but then replanted and treated organically for a few days before being harvested and shipped to market.
I imagine the USDA as a tired underpaid fast-food employee that has to deal with moronic entitled customers.
- "I want an organic strawberry!"
- "I already explained to you that strawberries cannot be grown without non-organic pesticide."
- "Are you telling me no?!"
- "I'm telling you that what you want is agriculturally impossible."
- "Do you have any idea who I am!?"
- "Ugh.... you know what? Okay."
* Takes a perfectly regular "non-organically" grown strawberry.
* Slaps an "organic" label on it.
- "Here you go. One organic strawberry. Thank you for shopping with USDA!"
- "Was that so hard?"
I thought people in the US calling food "organic" was akin to our "Agriculture biologique" in France, which is heavily regulated at an european level. Is it nit the case?
The AB label is regulated yes, which is almost equivalent to the EU green leaf. Then there are various private labels. In the US it's all up to private labels I believe.
Anyone can put "bio" and a vaguely green packaging on anything though AFAIK. And I don't think the average consumer is very knowledgeable about which label means what; I certainly am not.
Then there's the problem of fraud, and various issues with the way the EU defines "biological agriculture", but I don't really know much about either.
It's a bullshit marketing term to appeal to pseudoscience and anti-intellectuals.
It's a heavily abused and arbitrary marketing term that doesn't actually indicate anything about what the food is made of or how it's made or grown. It also doesn't indicate anything about how healthy the food is or how good it tastes. At most it's slightly better for the environment in some areas with some brands when used properly, but even then regulations are too lax and inconsistent worldwide for it to be a trustworthy label.
This is false. The reality is that USDA organic does have meaning. It's certainly less meaning than implied, but the binary thinking leads to an incorrect view like yours. I actively avoid organic if it's more expensive, but when it's about the same, it's clearly somewhat better to some degree
Not everything that is labeled organic is USDA Organic.
Right. I'm just saying that it's untrue that organic has no meaning. As usual, you gotta do your research
I did do my research. There's no evidence of any health benefit from eating organic foods and the environmental benefit is relatively minor depending on the country and ultimately no more effective (often less effective) than other dietary lifestyle changes like vegetarianism or veganism or even just reducing the amount of meat you eat. Depending on how the word organic is used on the packaging it could mean the food contains anywhere from 50-90% "organic" products. The USDA rating only accounts for the standards of one country, not the whole world, not to mention even the USDA rating doesn't exclude all fertilizers or all GMO products, but organic stuff is commonly described and marketed as being "pesticide and GMO free food". "Organic" food is constantly marketed and viewed as being healthier despite there being no actual evidence supporting that. None of that contradicts what I said in my first comment. It is an arbitrary and abused term that doesn't actually tell you anything about the food reliably. I'm not saying it's completely meaningless entirely I'm just saying it has little meaning, certainly much less than most people believe, due to a lack of consistency, constant lies in marketing, and the low level of impact it has on the environment compared to other comparable dietary options. You also don't even need to buy stuff labeled as organic in order to eat organic, since lots of organic foods aren't labelled.
By all means I would love more strict wide-spread regulation and enforcement of the term "organic" based around maximizing its environmental impact, but at the moment it's little more than a marketing tool for most companies.
Well I never said you didn't do your research, but if you're lumping all those products together like this, I think that speaks for itself.
Those products all lump themselves together under the term "organic", that's the problem.
Wasn't aware there's anything wrong. Albeit more expensive, I prefer to not eat pesticides. 🤷♂️
https://wqscert.com/usda-organic
Granted, I'm not sure there are long-term medical studies proving any harmful effect of doing so.
Organic foods can and usually do have pesticides, and those pesticides are just as harmful to you as the artificial ones. For instance, Rotenone was an organic pesticide used for decades that is strongly linked to parkinsons and has since been banned in North America.
Also quantity, most "organic" pesticides are significantly less effective and so it requires more applications of more product in order to get the same effect. Eating "organic" likely exposed you to more pesticides than the alternative.
Depends on where you live. As far as I know the term is not well protected in many countries, so it means next to nothing there.
However, I live in the EU / Germany, where we have several organic farming standards that are all fairly strict. Generally, organic actually means organically produced food here, grown without artificial pesticides, chemical fertilizers, and so on.
It's code for "same shit but more expensive" As with all the labels, the intent is to shark people's ignorance with meaningless buzzwords.
It's more expensive, and it's typically not that much better than inorganic.