USDA vague on benefits of organic produce
By Peter Whoriskey, Washington Post
Are consumers right to think that organic food is safer and healthier?
It seems like a straightforward question, especially for Miles McEvoy, the chief of the National Organic Program at USDA. That’s the section of the federal government that champions organic farming practices and defines what food deserves the coveted organic label.
But in an interview Wednesday, McEvoy wouldn’t speculate about any health benefits of organic food, saying the question wasn’t “relevant” to the role of the National Organic Program. Nor would he say whether growing consumer demand for organics reflects widening public skepticism of conventional U.S. agriculture.
Maybe McEvoy is unwilling to tout organics over conventional agriculture because, after all, conventional agriculture is the larger part of the USDA’s realm. Or maybe he thinks, as some others do, that the science on organics is too tentative.
The notion that anything can be organic these days is false. What is in the air is in the soil (see GeoEngineeringWatch.org). They mirror each other. So, unless someone has figured out how to protect their food from the air, then they are ingesting the same things found in the soil and we’re not talking about plant nutrients.
Isn’t it time that we all admit that we are all experiencing the same things because we are all part of the humans vs. chemicals experiment? Young or old, East coast or West, everyone knows something is very wrong.
Thanks but ill stick with organic whenever I can. The most telling produce I buy these days is strawberries. Organic ones are dark red and sweet, not huge in size. The mass grown commercial ones are big in size but have no flavor. If you put them in your car and the car smells chemically its the fumigants used on the strawberries to keep them from rotting to quickly. They are really toxic and quite yucky.