Thread by @micha3lamal

5 myths about organic food- busted: a thread

myth #1: organic food is grown without the use of pesticides.
truth: organic food is grown without the use of *synthetic* pesticides!

what this doesn't mean is that organic farming requires less pesticides than conventional, in fact it could very well be the opposite. according to scientific american, there are over 20 chemicals being used in organic farming-

and little to no regulation over how much of these chemicals/ pesticides can be used, unlike conventional farming which is monitored.
blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/…

and the fact that no synthetic pesticides are permitted to be deliberately used in organic farming doesn't mean that the natural ones are better. believing that would be a logically false trap. they're not necessarily safer or less toxic either, which brings me to the next myth.

myth #2: organic farming is safer than conventional and non-toxic.
truth: organic farming can be less safe and the pesticides used in organic farming can even be more toxic than ones used in conventional farming.

the EPA actually considers some pesticides used in organic farming to be inherently toxic, albeit only slightly, including "pyrethrin, derived from chrysanthemums, and azadirachtin, [...] which was also detected on some samples of organic lettuce."
npr.org/sections/healt…

scientific american even found a pesticide that was reapproved for use in organic farming called rotenone that kills mitochondrion in the cells of rats, and we all know from high school biology that a cell cannot possibly function without its powerhouse.

of course, toxicity depends on the dose. pesticides used in organic farming can contain copper compounds, which aren't inherently toxic, but according to NPR, copper can build up in the soil "and eventually become poisonous to plants and even worms at high concentrations."

the presence of E.coli and even salmonella in organic agriculture due to manure usage is also a safety risk to consumers. according to scientific american, a study "found E. coli in produce from almost 10% of organic farms' samples, but only 2% of conventional ones."

this is due to conventional farmers being able to use anti-microbials in their production, while organic farmers cannot due to the synthetic nature of said anti-microbials.

myth #3: organic farming is better for the environment.
truth: organic farming is probably WORSE than conventional farming for the environment.

the main concern regarding organic farming is the amount of land it requires. this article suggests that organic farming requires 40% more land than conventional farming,only to produce 20% less crops than conventional agriculture.
acsh.org/news/2017/05/2…
acsh.org/news/2016/08/2…

increased land use means that more forests and natural ecosystems are destroyed, which clearly seems to support the fact that organic farming is NOT good for the environment, not to mention largely unsustainable.

more land being needed to grow crops means less people get fed. in a time where hundreds of millions of people struggle w food insecurity and over a million die from preventable starvation per year worldwide, we need to conserve land more than ever+organic does just the opposite.

that number would jump to 1 billion+ if organic was used exclusively. we could alleviate some of the food insecurity faced by many people in the world using GM, as shown in this thread, but unfortunately, organic advocates are strongly against it's use.

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @micha3lamal view original on Twitter

considering unsustainable land use is one of the environmental concerns presented for the advocacy of veganism, it would be remiss, as a vegan or otherwise, not to consider other processes that have the same effect.

however, organic farming may decrease the need for monocultures (which aren't always bad but still of concern) and increase biodiversity, which is why we need not abandon the practice.

myth #4: organic food is healthier than conventionally grown food. truth: organic and conventionally grown crops typically have the same nutrient profile, except in the case of some (conventionally grown) GM crops which are designed to have a higher nutrient content.

science-based medicine finds that "in a 2003 survey 68.9% of people who purchase organic food said they did so because they believed it to be healthier," which again shows the lack of knowledge people have surrounding food production (as in the case of GM)
sciencebasedmedicine.org/no-health-bene…

a team of stanford researchers sifted through 237 studies concluded that aside from phosphorus content which was slightly higher in organic food, organic farming has no health benefits over conventionally grown food.
med.stanford.edu/news/all-news/…

the main concern for the health of people worldwide is consuming enough fruits and vegetables, not whether they're organic or conventional! you don't have to spend more money to get produce with the same nutrients :-)

myth #5: organic is just generally a better option which scientists are trying to cover up because they're ruled by corporations.
truth: big organic is just as much of a money-making industry as the the one that governs conventionally grown food-aka not everything is a conspiracy

i mentioned this in my GMO thread but there was a seemingly "independent" researcher named charles benbrook who falsified documents in favor of big organic:

External Tweet loading...
If nothing shows, it may have been deleted
by @micha3lamal view original on Twitter

when i say big organic- think whole foods, or other huge corporations that promote organic food as being clean and superior to get people to unnecessarily spend more money on produce.

don't believe me? just check out this infographic outlining some of the food conglomerates that have vested interest in the promotion of organic food:

big organic even uses fear-mongering tactics, including the release of the infamous "dirty dozen" list, making certain PLANT FOODS out to be "dirty" at a time when what we really need is for people to simply eat *more* plant foods.

i'm sure there are many farmers who truly believe that organic is superior to conventional, but some also correctly realize that considering the current hype they could make more money if they market their food as organic.

but it costs money and careful preparation to have that USDA certification, so even though some farms use little to no pesticides, not all of them have the necessary resources to be certified meaning they cannot afford to label themselves organic.

in this video, @unnaturalvegan talks about the hypocrisy of demonizing monsanto yet promoting the purchase of organic foods, as well as the idea that the production of organic foods requires the use of animal byproducts:

don't get me wrong, i'm not saying that organic produce is never a good thing to purchase. what i am saying is that organic agriculture may be a useful tool when COMBINED with conventional agriculture and GM, but it cannot possibly be a good strategy to feed everyone.

in conclusion, no one should be pushing you to buy organic or perpetuate the notion that organic agriculture is inherently better than conventional, because that's not true and it is elitist, ignorant, and classist to think otherwise.

sources not mentioned in the thread:
citylab.com/life/2014/08/f…
forbes.com/sites/stevensa…
science.sciencemag.org/content/298/56…

i encourage discourse on this thread (with sources if you're going to challenge me).
and farmers, i would love to hear your thoughts on this! please let me know if i'm mistaken :-)