organic or not - that is the question....

[Allo Allo]

I know little about chemistry - (by next year I'll know more ) but surely a tomato, is a tomato, is a tomato - however you grow it? Enlighten me please!

I just read this which sounded pretty balanced - is it?

[Araneus]

I always imagined that "organic" food was more about supporting small-scale local producers, rather than the substance of the food itself (a bit like "fair trade" goods for which you pay a premium not for quality but for the ethical feel-good factor).

[bindeweede]

I know little about chemistry - (by next year I'll know more ) but surely a tomato, is a tomato, is a tomato - however you grow it? Enlighten me please!

I just read this which sounded pretty balanced - is it?

Well, Prince Charles' farm runs on organic principles, I believe. But he also believes in homeopathy.??? Now, there's a non-sequitur!

As Araneus suggested, I think a lot of it has to do with the "everso-slightly holier than thou" syndrome. Organic stuff is at least 25% more expensive than non-organic. As far as I know, it is not nutritionally superior. Whether it tastes better is subjective, although I DO think organic carrots taste much better than the non sort.

OK totally off-topic here, but a friend of mine used to work for Nestle, makers of Branston pickle. She told me they specifically got farmers in Norfolk to come up with tasteless carrots to go in the pickle - they wanted texture rather than flavour.

Count the logical fallacies in that lot.

[Cuddles]

There are a few points most people don't seem to know about organic farming. Firstly, organic doesn't mean that no pesticides or fertilisers are used. It doesn't even mean that the chemicals used are biodegradable or less toxic. If you spray a field with something to kill bugs, the bugs don't care what you label it, you still have a field with no bugs in it. Similarly, if you cover a field in fertiliser, it doesn't matter if the nitrates are from cows or made in a lab, the runoff will still contaminate nearby water. One of the more common chemicals used is in fact copper sulphate, which is in no way bio-anything, but is still classed as organic for agriculture purposes. That said, I believe organic farming has been shown to use less chemicals overall, although this is more likely to be due to the style of farming rather than the organic status, which comes to the next point.

Organic farms tend to be smaller, local, less intense farms. This, of course, means less chemicals sprayed on fields, smaller machinery, shorter transport and usually more care taken of the ecosystem such as leaving hedges in place. When organic farming is compared with farming in general it looks much better because it is a comparison between mainly small, local farms with mainly large,
intense farms. However, if you compare small, local organic farms with small, local inorganic farms, there is pretty much no difference at all. Choosing local produce over mass-produced stuff is almost certainly much better for the environment and generally nicer food, but the organic status matters very little, if at all.

Finally, to answer the actual question, a tomato is just a tomato of that particular variety. Large farms that transport stuff all over the world have always focussed on choosing and breeding varieties that store well for a long time and don't bruise or damage easily in transit. Actual taste, and even nutrients, are secondary because if it's a choice between a boring, watery tomato or a furry, green, squashed one, it's not hard to guess which one people will choose. This means that a Tesco value tomato that's travelled halfway around the world really won't taste as nice as an organic one that's travelled 5 miles down the road. However, if you can find a local organic one of the same variety as the Tesco value one, they will both taste pretty much the same. Again, it comes down to local versus global, mass-production, but the actual organic is pretty much irrelevant.

What really underlines some of the silliness around organicness is that a huge farm pumping all sorts of stuff into its land and generally digging up and messing up the area can be classed as organic, and therefore supposedly good for the environment, but my parent's garden can't be because they occasionally put down a handful of slug pellets to protect the lettuces.

[bindeweede]

Cuddles,

Thanks for another well-thoughtout post.

A couple of years ago I was listening to a radio programme about organic chicken farms. The organic farmer admitted that if necessary, and to protect his flock (herd? whatever) of chickens, he would give them anti-biotics. And the non-organic farmer said, as anti-biotics are expensive, he only administers them if it is absolutely essential.

So, there is actually no guarantee that organic chickens have not been given anti-biotics. OK, this is all anecdotal, and has nothing to do with tomatoes. But, I think people are concerned about the use of anti-biotics and growth-promoters in the meat they eat.

Personally, I will pay for free-range, but not organic. Sorry Allo, I've rambled off the point.

[Cuddles]

Cuddles,

Thanks for another well-thoughtout post.

You need to stop saying things like that or my head will get too big to fit through doors.

A couple of years ago I was listening to a radio programme about organic chicken farms. The organic farmer admitted that if necessary, and to protect his flock (herd? whatever) of chickens, he would give them anti-biotics. And the non-organic farmer said, as anti-biotics are expensive, he only administers them if it is absolutely essential.

So, there is actually no guarantee that organic chickens have not been given anti-biotics. OK, this is all anecdotal, and has nothing to do with tomatoes. But, I think people are concerned about the use of anti-biotics and growth-promoters in the meat they eat.

There can't be anything against antibiotics in organic, or any other kind of farming, because sometimes animals really do need them. In Britain, however, antibiotics aren't really much of an issue because they aren't allowed as growth promoters in any kind of farming. That's not to say there's no problem at all, and there are likely many outbreaks requiring dosing herds with antibiotics that never entirely happened, but the antibiotics issue is really an American one more than a British one. I should note that while this definitely used to be the case, I can't guarantee it is now. If anyone knows more about current antibiotic use, feel free to correct me.

[bindeweede]

Cuddles,

If anyone knows more about current antibiotic use, feel free to correct me.

Ok, not serious, and meant in a respectful and admirational way, but..

"Who would bloody dare..?"

[Allo Allo]

You need to stop saying things like that or my head will get too big to fit through doors.

Well you just have the ability to be succinct - no waffle - makes a good read!

[tkingdoll]

If you buy organic veg from a local farmer, you may find it tastes nicer. That's most likely because it's fresher. Supermarket veg sits on hot shelves for a long long time.

However, if you buy non-organic veg from a local farmer...guess what! That tastes better too! Cause it's fresher. Beans picked yesterday taste better than beans picked two weeks ago. Being organic has nothing to do with it.

If you buy supermarket organic food, you are paying for no advantage whatsoever.

[Mojo]

If you buy organic veg from a local farmer, you may find it tastes nicer. That's most likely because it's fresher. Supermarket veg sits on hot shelves for a long long time.

Someone I know went to a "nutritionist" for treatment for an allergic reaction. Using something that sounded from the description like a Vega device of some sort, the "nutritionist" was rapidly able to diagnose allergies to almost everything...

He recommended a very restricted diet (plus supplements - he helpfully provided a price list from a member of his family ).

What makes this (perhaps) relevant here is that he said that all vegetables had to be eaten within three days of purchase, or two days if they were organic.

His treatment didn't work, BTW.

[Mojo]

There can't be anything against antibiotics in organic, or any other kind of farming, because sometimes animals really do need them. In Britain, however, antibiotics aren't really much of an issue because they aren't allowed as growth promoters in any kind of farming. That's not to say there's no problem at all, and there are likely many outbreaks requiring dosing herds with antibiotics that never entirely happened, but the antibiotics issue is really an American one more than a British one. I should note that while this definitely used to be the case, I can't guarantee it is now. If anyone knows more about current antibiotic use, feel free to correct me.

I think that under some organic regimes animals that have been treated using antibiotics have to be taken out of production (for example dairy cows) or in some cases removed from the herd altogether. This provides something of a disincentive for organic farmers to use them. I can't find a reference for this at present though. Organic farming is usually quite big on use of homoeopathy (no residues, doncha know!).

ETA: This page mentions a call for "withdrawal periods after drug use to be extended, in line with organic standards".

[Mojo]

From here:

Organic farming is an holistic method of agriculture. Through a positive management approach to health and welfare, farmers always aim to prevent disease from occurring on the farm. However, if a disease did occur then organic farmers are encouraged to use natural and complementary therapies. But if these are not appropriate then conventional medicines, including antibiotics, must be used.

See also here:

Soil Association standards prohibit the routine use of drugs. However, if an animal on a Soil Association certified farm falls ill then it may be given a course of antibiotics. If this occurs, the withdrawal period (the time between the animal getting the drugs and their meat or milk going on sale) is at least three times longer than the statutory non-organic period. This ensures drug-free meat and milk. In addition, the EU regulation defining organic production states that an organic animal can only receive a maximum of three complete courses of antibiotics in one year before losing its organic status.

...

It is argued by some that organic producers could be tempted to withhold veterinary treatment because of the extended withdrawal period after treatment before the animal can be sold as organic, or because of the EU limit on three courses of antibiotics in a year. This has not generally been the experience of Soil Association Certification Ltd, for three fundamental reasons:

* Firstly, most organic stock farmers care passionately about the welfare of their animals.
* Secondly, it makes little long-term agronomic sense, as an organic farmer needs to maintain the positive health status of all his or her animals.
* Finally, if Soil Association Certification detects that a producer has withheld treatment the consequences are much more serious (and could even lead to decertification) than would be the case for a non-organic farmer withholding treatment.


If certification were withdrawn the costs could be higher still, including the possible repayment of government organic conversion payments. Consequently, there is a real financial incentive for organic farmers to ensure that all livestock are treated promptly and appropriately.