Discounting organic/local foods

[rockycrop]

Lately I feel like I have been reading a lot of articles where "experts" are trying to discount the organic, local foods movement.
Here is one I read yesterday from a food safety professor:
http://www.kcfreepress.com/news/2010...-make-me-barf/

I wish I could remember the other ones I've been coming across lately, maybe they will come to me later. Other arguments I have seen are that there is no way everyone could survive off locally grown foods, people would starve without big agriculture. Huge monoculture farms are way more efficient thus more "green", etc. etc.
I guess I just want others opinions on this topic. Obviously everyone in America/the world could not continue to eat as we are eating now and rely solely on local, organic farmers to provide us with this food. But I bet A LOT more people could eat a lot more food that is locally and sustainably grown.
Our family is lucky enough to get the majority of our food (dairy, meat, veggies and some prepared foods) all from one local farm. I know until there are more farms offering this service, most people have no choice but to go to the grocery store.
I think part of the problem is the upper-class, liberal, do-goody reputation of many the locavore/100 mile diet movement and farmer's market browers (I totally think these are worthwhile things by the way). I know it can come off to some as a hobby for those that can afford the time and money of searching out the good stuff. I think eventually food from local farmers will need to be institutionalized to give everyone the benefit and to get rid of the bourgeois stigma.

[Jaxinator]

I've been seeing that a lot lately too.

My main reason for eating (as much as possible, I won't buy $8 a lb grapes, I can't afford it) organic is purely selfish. I don't want to eat pesticides. Plain and simple. They can discount the practice all they want, but it won't change my buying habits. The thought of eating pesticides weirds me out as much as the thought of eating without washing my hands.

Another argument I've seen is that organic produce is no healthier than conventional, meaning it doesn't have any more nutrients. And one more I've seen is that organic doesn't actually taste better in blind taste tests. I can believe the latter more than the former. I don't have links or anything, but I think that Penn and Teller made the taste test argument in their show. Not that they're organic farming experts.

[mama1803]

I have been noticing this alot lately as well. Like the pp, I chose organic because I like it and feel good about eating it.

I've read alot of Joel Salatin's (the Polyface farm guy who was featured in Food, Inc.) works--his books and he also writes articles for a local magazine. He addresses many of the arguments concerning food safety, sustainability, etc. that you brought up.

[mamadelbosque]

Yup, its the whole 'anti-green movement' trying to puff up steam along with the tea party and the anti-liberal thing, IMO. If they want to eat chemical/pesticide laden food from China, more power to them. I'm not buying it. Literally.

Whether or not we could feed the world on a 100% organic diet is up for debate. But I for one think we should bloody well *try* and not just say 'oh, it can never be done, so why bother!'. You know? I mean, lots of people have thought lots of stuff wasn't possible before, untill others proved it was possible. So lets try, shall we?

[AJP]

Here's a recent article by Joel Salatin about this exact thing: Ecological Agriculture: Can We Feed The World?

It also addresses some of the reasons that organic agriculture got the reputation for not being able to compete with chemical-dependent/toxic agriculture in terms of yield.

I think the main reason more articles are showing up trying to discount the local and organic movement is that it has gained enough momentum and market share that it's no longer just a curiosity or freak show. More and more consumers want food grown without poisons and closer to home. That threatens a whole paradigm that has been dominant in the recent past, and so that fraternity of thought is fighting back.

[Chamomile Girl]

Y'know the agribusiness is necessary to feed the world arguement makes me angry. Because its complete BS. Most of the "food" that agribusiness grows, ie. corn and soy, go to support nasty factory feedlots. In other words it takes more energy to "grow" a cow than the cow is worth (kind of like corn-based biofuel ). If people stopped eating so much meat than organic farming could support the world's projected population without issue.

[mama1803]

Originally Posted by AJP

URL]

I think the main reason more articles are showing up trying to discount the local and organic movement is that it has gained enough momentum and market share that it's no longer just a curiosity or freak show. More and more consumers want food grown without poisons and closer to home. That threatens a whole paradigm that has been dominant in the recent past, and so that fraternity of thought is fighting back.

I totally agree with this!

As to the pp regarding the "antil-liberal" thing--I wouldn't say that the liberals have the lock on wanting fresh, safe, affordable food to feed their families. I am politically and socially conservative, as is the majority of people in the community in which I live, and there has been a growing movement here over the course of the last several years in favor of local, sustainable farming. There are a number of farmers markets, pick your own farms, a volunteer community farm that benefits the local food bank, a movement by a neighboring county to have local farmers supply all the food consumed in the public schools (and giving the kids the opportunity to work the farm to see where their food comes from), montessori schools that offer sustainable and organic planting/harvesting as part of the curriculm, numerous restaurants that offer locally grown food, a number of local magazines with the sole purpose of extoling the virtues of locally produced food, etc. The buy local/buy organic sentiment is really high here and I'd be hard pressed to identify anyone, conservative or liberal, who hasn't in some way been a part of that movement in some way.

[Shantimama]

Another argument I've seen is that organic produce is no healthier than conventional, meaning it doesn't have any more nutrients. And one more I've seen is that organic doesn't actually taste better in blind taste tests.

That may be true but I choose organic foods as often as I can not because of what they have in them but because of what they don't have in them. If two apples are nutritionally identical and taste the same why would I choose to eat the one with pesticide residue?

[catnip]

I've actually read that long term studies are coming back showing higher yields from organic methods than conventional ones.

[Jayray]

I think it's difficult to get real, unbiased information on this issue. I recently had a debate with a friend about organic produce not being pesticide-free (like many people think). And this is true--organic farmers can use pesticides from "natural" sources, which aren't necessarily safer than synthetic pesticides.

But there certainly are places in the world that have benefited from hybrid or genetically modified varieties of produce (if you include omitted them in order to be "organic"). I am all for drought resistant crops in drought prone areas of the world.

I think it is a very difficult issue and that info that comes from both sides of the issue is liable to be not 100% trustworthy.

(That said, I do buy organic and local when it's affordable. I don't understand why local food is more expensive.)