Picture posting is enabled for all :)
Organic is more expensive to buy because it is grown less intensively and yields per acre are much lower. It also tends to be more labour intensive so no savings on mechanisation.
I seem to remember that about 3 years ago they tested carrots bought in Tescos asda and all the other leading supermarkets. The finds were that they contained around 400 different chemicals in them. My carrots that I`m pulling at the moment contain no chemical other that that which nature has provided. They taste mmmmmm very good unlike supermarket carrots which taste like dehydrated cardboard
The range of pesticides, which may be used in agriculture and food production, either in this country or abroad, is very wide. About 350 active substances are currently approved for use as agricultural pesticides in the UK and over 800 are approved in one or more European Union (EU) States. If account is taken of old chemicals such as DDT, which are now banned in the EU but may persist in the environment, potentially around 1,000 different chemicals might be looked for.
my manure comes from a stable that feeds organic feed to the horses,
I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.
Quote from: amphibian on August 01, 2009, 20:41:37I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.And politics of course. You forgot politics. ;DAnyway, back on topic. What trace elements are those, then?
I can see this has brought a few soap boxes out of the closet.My view and mine alone is that I grow to enjoy the food and not to get what can only be described as forced produce all year round.We eat what we produce at a given time that we harvest the stuff in the ground.If you can eat the stuff like strawberries at Christmas and melons around the same time, then I think this is imported and not fresh.I eat what is available to me and the family not what can be imported from afar.In the long run the only chemicals used on my land in FBB (fish, blood and bone), then there is the natures provider in the comfrey juices extracted from the plants grown on my land. Anything else is discarded from my shed as it takes up to much space. Predators are what comes into the garden and feasts on those who want to eat my crops. I am if you like a person who has taken on board the old style of growing veg, but also using modern methods which do not entail the chemicals.Companion planting has their benefits too.If I cant grow it then it doesn't have a place in my plot. If the family have tried this and its not to their liking then also its given a miss.If we all do what is required of us then we would only do what we are told instead of experimenting with what is available. If we can get something special to try then we will.Keep the garden for what it is meant to. Growing food for the house.
Quote from: Melbourne12 on August 02, 2009, 09:07:30Quote from: amphibian on August 01, 2009, 20:41:37I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.And politics of course. You forgot politics. ;DAnyway, back on topic. What trace elements are those, then?Magnesium and also micro nutrients such as lycopene, carotenes, flavanoids, anthrocyanines, resveratrol, manganese........
Quote from: amphibian on August 03, 2009, 20:53:21Quote from: Melbourne12 on August 02, 2009, 09:07:30Quote from: amphibian on August 01, 2009, 20:41:37I dare say companies like Dow and Monsanto have in no way whatsoever tried to influence the FSA, ever.On the other hand the organic movement is not just about nutritional benefits it is also about the lack of poisonous chemicals, it's about sustainability and about trace elements.And politics of course. You forgot politics. ;DAnyway, back on topic. What trace elements are those, then?Magnesium and also micro nutrients such as lycopene, carotenes, flavanoids, anthrocyanines, resveratrol, manganese........You haven't read it, have you? ;DMagnesium? Included in FSA study, FSA find no differenceManganese? Included in FSA study, FSA find no differenceLycopene? Included in FSA study, FSA find no differenceCarotene? Included in FSA study, FSA find no differenceFlavonoids? Included in FSA study, FSA find no differenceAnthocyanin? Included in FSA study under flavonoids, FSA find no differenceResveratrol? Included in FSA study, FSA find no differenceI must admit that I'd never heard of resveratrol. When I looked it up, it seemed typical of the sort of wild claims that are made for the benefits of organic produce.Even if the in vitro experiments on animals transfer to humans, the human ingestion studies suggest that you'd have to ingest about 50g a day to have anti-cancer properties (unless you mix the resveratrol with "chemicals" to inhibit breakdown during digestion, and perish the thought that we'd countenance that!)So by my calculations, if you stick to red grapes, which have the highest resveratrol content of edible plants, you'd need to eat over 6400kg of grapes a day.QED as far as I'm concerned.
....I know perfectly well that the FSA found no differences in the micronutrients, but the EU commissioned peer reviewed study did, and so have others. I see no reason to give this FSA study any more weight that the EU study.
I think the presence or absence of pesticides is relevant, but air miles should also be factored in. Organic food imported from Australia is probably less good for the planet than chemically-nurtured food from down the road. Then there are factors like the amount of oil used in producing an acre of a crop. We need to look at the full picture, not just parts of it.