Seven myths about organic food of
what adherents of organic chemistry trust in and why it is not necessary to follow their example
Ya I do not love organic food. I am afflicted by the ghost of a post and exhaustion, cannot present a cheerful feast on which the hostess convokes friends so:“ You come, expensive, all will be tasty, organic“. The modest nimbus of a vyrashchivatel of worm-eaten apples and the tutor of the hens who are freely running on a meadow who were in time to taste happiness and “at the cellular level absorbed advantage and pleasure“ does not cause affection in me to transfer her to us, cheerful eaters. The public relations - an image of these Free Herds go back to Kampanella`s utopias and Tomasa Mora.
Ya I test weakness to science and decided to find serious reasons for the dislike for organic chemistry. I turned the Network, and to me the world opened.
From “New - York Tayms“ from Mark Bittman I learned that most of Americans is sure as if “the organic food“ is safer, better for health and for environment. As if it is magically healthier, purer and even ethically is more faultless though actually nothing of that kind is guaranteed. Actually bad food of the average American (as well as the average Russian) according to Bittman looks so: drinks give it more calories, than vegetables, and sweet - has more, than all other combined. At such picture of the world he eats organic chemistry or not - a minor matter.
From Elisabeth Finkel in Cosmos I learned that mass insanity on organic food scientifically is proved by nothing. No facts also confirm that the organic food is more useful to us or to the planet, but inhabitants are firm in opinion that organic agriculture means environment protection and reduction of greenhouse gases. The difficult text is farther, you monitor words: the most useful to the earth - when in it is a lot of earthworms. It is considered that organic farmers on such lands grow up the harvests. On the contrary:“ organic chemistry“ proclaimed an old kind plow the icon, and plow as if Lions Tolstoy, that plow, destroying a precious top layer of earth. Free life of worms and other backs and short moustaches happens only at a modern besplugovy herbicidal method. It is not necessary to be afraid: now make soft pesticides of short action. One of the last, Spinosad, is successfully used, by the way, and organic farmers: it is made from natural bacteria. For this reason “for last decade in the Australian agriculture there was a revolution“, Mark Piplz from CSIRO agency says.found out
Ya: adherents of organic chemistry, including Scott Kinner, the president of Organic federation of farmers of Australia, are sure that organic agriculture can feed the planet. And here his opponents - that there will not be enough food even if to cut down all woods on fertilizers. (The terrible ghost of a maltuzianstvo appears from - for the horizon.) Norman Ernest Borlog, the American geneticist who got the Nobel Prize for wheat, highly productive, resistant to diseases, and caused “green revolution“ in agriculture speaks:“ Even if you could use all organic material - remains of animals, plants, human waste and would return them to the soil, all of you equally could not feed more than four billion people“. It is boring, but plants need fertilizers - nitrogen in the form of nitrate and ammonia: the majority of them is not able to receive it directly from the atmosphere.found
Ya in the Network many articles with the facts demonstrating that organic products are not simply useless but also are dangerous. For example, for pest control organic farmers use only “a natural origin“ products, such as rotenon, sulfur and copper, however they are toxic. Sulfur irritates lungs, and rotenon causes Parkinson`s illness in experimental rats.to
It is clear that pesticides in high doses are dangerous. It is important to know what dose is harmless to the person. That to define it, scientists find a dose, completely safe for rats, and divide it on 100. And so, tests showed that or the level of pesticides in usual products is much lower than that a dose, divided into hundred, or they are not found at all. However, people live for about 80 years longer, than rats, and can longer accumulate pesticides. But even in this case consumption during life of synthetic pesticides - a drop in the ocean in comparison with natural pesticides which are inherent in some vegetables - fruit, so to speak, from the birth. Caffeine in coffee, solanin in potatoes and psolaren in a celery - only three examples. Even the freshest organic apples contain substances which can cause a tumor if to enter them to already mentioned sufferers - rats in high doses. The toxicologist Bruce Ames famous for the whole world from University of California even in the work of 1990 reported that people daily consume approximately in 10 000 times more of natural cancerogenic substances, than synthetic. According to Ames, one cup of coffee supports them more, than all pesticides eaten together with fruit and vegetables in a year.
is more graceful than many Rob Johnston article “The great myth about organic chemistry made in the Independent newspaper: why organic food - a temptation which we are not able to afford“. Johnston collected all organic legends and myths in the list and disproved them.
Myth the first: the organic farming is good for environment. Denial: production of liter of organic milk demands more earth, than usual, influences warming of climate stronger, pollutes reservoirs stronger and brings a big contribution in creation of acid rains. Besides “organic“ cows make twice more methane which is 20 times more harmful than carbon dioxide in creation of greenhouse effect.
Myth of the second: organic farming more eco-friendly. Denial: organic potatoes need more energy for landing, and a harvest it is all the same 2,5 times less than usual. And on tomatoes in the warmed British greenhouses it is required to energy in 100 times more, than on same from the African fields. Greenhouses against the usual field pollute the environment three times stronger and demand one quarter more water. To be fair, well: wheat from farmer fields demands less energy; but here the ill luck, content of harmful substances to it is three times higher, than in inorganic.
Myth the third: organic farms do not use pesticides. Actually use, only very harmful which were forbidden to application in immemorial times and will not pass any of modern tests for safety. For example, fungal diseases of plants are treated by the substances containing copper. Unlike the modern pesticides decaying in the soil, copper remains in the soil forever and is unhealthy.
Myth the fourth: the level of pesticides in usual products is dangerously high. Prodvizhentsa of organic chemistry like Gwyneth Paltrow shout that in usual food - “cocktail of pesticides“. Some shout of “cancer epidemic“. In - the first, epidemic of cancer does not happen. In - the second, the incidence of it falls already 50 years. According to the logic of fighters for organic chemistry, “traditional“ farmers would have to have cancer, but they surely get to group with the smallest risk. The cancerogenic effect of pesticides, it seems, has to provoke a stomach cancer, but indicators on this disease, as ill luck would have it, decrease quicker than the others.
Myth the fifth: the organic food is more useful to health. First of all, with health of organic animals everything is not really good. Large researches in Holland, Denmark and Austria showed existence of a poisonous bacterium of Campylobacter and a salmonella in 100% of organic chickens and only in a third of usual. Besides 72% of organic chickens are infected by parasites. It also is clear: organic farmers are praised that do not feed chickens with antibiotics and antivermicular preparations. The Austrian and Dutch studies of 2006 showed that pneumonia at organic pigs occurs six times more often than at usual. And their pigs die twice more often.
Myth of the sixth: in organic food have more than nutrients. Here even the Soil association, is more than others interested in confirmation, refers only to modest results of tests: from nutrients flavonoids of which it is more in organic tomatoes, and an omega - 3 fatty acids - in organic milk are identified. But in the same research it is written that flavonoids are developed not from surplus of organic forces, and as protective reaction to shortage of nitrogen.
Myth of the seventh: demand for organic chemistry grows. Actually organic food in Great Britain less than 1%, but from mass media you never learn about it. The soil association calls itself the first and main fighter for idea, however we will not forget that it is the big trading company very successful in lobbying of the interests. But lands under organic chemistry decrease: the majority comes back to traditional farms.Still I remembered
poor mother of the great American Abraham Lincoln who died, having drunk milk from the cow who was freely grazed on a meadow with a poisonous grass a snake root and understood that I naturally do not love organic food.