Over the past few weeks I have been researching the “organic movement” in the US, mainly as a way to find the truth behind the much lauded health and environmental benefits of organic farming and organic food. Some of it makes sense, while most of it flys in the face of a logical global perspective.
We live in a rich society. We have the luxury of choice. We can choose to purchase “organic” foods, which in this context are foods that do not have a production method involving: chemicals (pesticides, sewage level fertilizers, hormones, anti-biotics), genetic alteration, or preservatives. Within the context of food inside the US, I have to admit that if you can guaranteee the production methods of the food you purchase, you should choose the method with the least risk. For many consumers this involves purchasing organic food from Whole Foods. Can you trust them? Can you personally guarantee you’re getting what you pay for? According to this boycott, you can’t. My suggestion is if you are concerned with the food you take into your body then find a food co-op, farmer’s market, direct to consumer farm, or grow the food yourself. Each one of these involves knowing the grower. The alternative is trusting for-profit corporations to tell the truth or obey the spirit of organic foods rather than find loopholes to verify certification. Organic certification is not a safe method to guarantee the origin of your food. There is something to be said about truly caring about your food.
I do have a specific problem with the organic movement. It firmly ignores the dietary needs of the third world. My suggestion is googling something called the Green Revolution. This will never alleviate the socioeconomic issues of the third world but it will make it possible for the world to eat. My other suggestion is looking up information on Norman Borlaug, whose genetic research and crop production methods have been estimated to have saved the lives of a BILLION people, not a million, but a BILLION. He recieved the Nobel Peace prize in 1970 for his work. There are arguments that the food production fails to resolve the disparity in wealth that allows people to starve in the first place, but without his research socioeconomic reform would be meaningless as many third world countries wouldn’t even be able to feed those within their own borders. His research made India a food exporter rather than a food importer.
The EU can get snooty, the US organic movement can cry all they want, but at the end of the day you would have to sacrifice human lives if you wished to eliminate all Genetically Modified food from the market. There is little evidence that GM food is harmful, in and of itself, to the human body. From insect resistant corn, to dwarf wheat that doesn’t collapse under its own weight, the biggest drawbacks to genetically modified food is the pesticides used in conjunction with pesticide resistant GM crops. The additional risk of species cross contamination being the other drawback, although this has little affect on humanities health and more to do with our tastebuds.
Categories: BJ, Philosophy etc
3 Comments »
(277)
