☀️ JOIN SPN MOBILE
Forums
New posts
Guru Granth Sahib
Composition, Arrangement & Layout
ਜਪੁ | Jup
ਸੋ ਦਰੁ | So Dar
ਸੋਹਿਲਾ | Sohilaa
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਿਰੀਰਾਗੁ | Raag Siree-Raag
Gurbani (14-53)
Ashtpadiyan (53-71)
Gurbani (71-74)
Pahre (74-78)
Chhant (78-81)
Vanjara (81-82)
Vaar Siri Raag (83-91)
Bhagat Bani (91-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਝ | Raag Maajh
Gurbani (94-109)
Ashtpadi (109)
Ashtpadiyan (110-129)
Ashtpadi (129-130)
Ashtpadiyan (130-133)
Bara Maha (133-136)
Din Raen (136-137)
Vaar Maajh Ki (137-150)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗਉੜੀ | Raag Gauree
Gurbani (151-185)
Quartets/Couplets (185-220)
Ashtpadiyan (220-234)
Karhalei (234-235)
Ashtpadiyan (235-242)
Chhant (242-249)
Baavan Akhari (250-262)
Sukhmani (262-296)
Thittee (296-300)
Gauree kii Vaar (300-323)
Gurbani (323-330)
Ashtpadiyan (330-340)
Baavan Akhari (340-343)
Thintteen (343-344)
Vaar Kabir (344-345)
Bhagat Bani (345-346)
ਰਾਗੁ ਆਸਾ | Raag Aasaa
Gurbani (347-348)
Chaupaday (348-364)
Panchpadde (364-365)
Kaafee (365-409)
Aasaavaree (409-411)
Ashtpadiyan (411-432)
Patee (432-435)
Chhant (435-462)
Vaar Aasaa (462-475)
Bhagat Bani (475-488)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੂਜਰੀ | Raag Goojaree
Gurbani (489-503)
Ashtpadiyan (503-508)
Vaar Gujari (508-517)
Vaar Gujari (517-526)
ਰਾਗੁ ਦੇਵਗੰਧਾਰੀ | Raag Dayv-Gandhaaree
Gurbani (527-536)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਹਾਗੜਾ | Raag Bihaagraa
Gurbani (537-556)
Chhant (538-548)
Vaar Bihaagraa (548-556)
ਰਾਗੁ ਵਡਹੰਸ | Raag Wadhans
Gurbani (557-564)
Ashtpadiyan (564-565)
Chhant (565-575)
Ghoriaan (575-578)
Alaahaniiaa (578-582)
Vaar Wadhans (582-594)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੋਰਠਿ | Raag Sorath
Gurbani (595-634)
Asatpadhiya (634-642)
Vaar Sorath (642-659)
ਰਾਗੁ ਧਨਾਸਰੀ | Raag Dhanasaree
Gurbani (660-685)
Astpadhiya (685-687)
Chhant (687-691)
Bhagat Bani (691-695)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਤਸਰੀ | Raag Jaitsree
Gurbani (696-703)
Chhant (703-705)
Vaar Jaitsaree (705-710)
Bhagat Bani (710)
ਰਾਗੁ ਟੋਡੀ | Raag Todee
ਰਾਗੁ ਬੈਰਾੜੀ | Raag Bairaaree
ਰਾਗੁ ਤਿਲੰਗ | Raag Tilang
Gurbani (721-727)
Bhagat Bani (727)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸੂਹੀ | Raag Suhi
Gurbani (728-750)
Ashtpadiyan (750-761)
Kaafee (761-762)
Suchajee (762)
Gunvantee (763)
Chhant (763-785)
Vaar Soohee (785-792)
Bhagat Bani (792-794)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਿਲਾਵਲੁ | Raag Bilaaval
Gurbani (795-831)
Ashtpadiyan (831-838)
Thitteen (838-840)
Vaar Sat (841-843)
Chhant (843-848)
Vaar Bilaaval (849-855)
Bhagat Bani (855-858)
ਰਾਗੁ ਗੋਂਡ | Raag Gond
Gurbani (859-869)
Ashtpadiyan (869)
Bhagat Bani (870-875)
ਰਾਗੁ ਰਾਮਕਲੀ | Raag Ramkalee
Ashtpadiyan (902-916)
Gurbani (876-902)
Anand (917-922)
Sadd (923-924)
Chhant (924-929)
Dakhnee (929-938)
Sidh Gosat (938-946)
Vaar Ramkalee (947-968)
ਰਾਗੁ ਨਟ ਨਾਰਾਇਨ | Raag Nat Narayan
Gurbani (975-980)
Ashtpadiyan (980-983)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਲੀ ਗਉੜਾ | Raag Maalee Gauraa
Gurbani (984-988)
Bhagat Bani (988)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਾਰੂ | Raag Maaroo
Gurbani (889-1008)
Ashtpadiyan (1008-1014)
Kaafee (1014-1016)
Ashtpadiyan (1016-1019)
Anjulian (1019-1020)
Solhe (1020-1033)
Dakhni (1033-1043)
ਰਾਗੁ ਤੁਖਾਰੀ | Raag Tukhaari
Bara Maha (1107-1110)
Chhant (1110-1117)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕੇਦਾਰਾ | Raag Kedara
Gurbani (1118-1123)
Bhagat Bani (1123-1124)
ਰਾਗੁ ਭੈਰਉ | Raag Bhairo
Gurbani (1125-1152)
Partaal (1153)
Ashtpadiyan (1153-1167)
ਰਾਗੁ ਬਸੰਤੁ | Raag Basant
Gurbani (1168-1187)
Ashtpadiyan (1187-1193)
Vaar Basant (1193-1196)
ਰਾਗੁ ਸਾਰਗ | Raag Saarag
Gurbani (1197-1200)
Partaal (1200-1231)
Ashtpadiyan (1232-1236)
Chhant (1236-1237)
Vaar Saarang (1237-1253)
ਰਾਗੁ ਮਲਾਰ | Raag Malaar
Gurbani (1254-1293)
Partaal (1265-1273)
Ashtpadiyan (1273-1278)
Chhant (1278)
Vaar Malaar (1278-91)
Bhagat Bani (1292-93)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਾਨੜਾ | Raag Kaanraa
Gurbani (1294-96)
Partaal (1296-1318)
Ashtpadiyan (1308-1312)
Chhant (1312)
Vaar Kaanraa
Bhagat Bani (1318)
ਰਾਗੁ ਕਲਿਆਨ | Raag Kalyaan
Gurbani (1319-23)
Ashtpadiyan (1323-26)
ਰਾਗੁ ਪ੍ਰਭਾਤੀ | Raag Prabhaatee
Gurbani (1327-1341)
Ashtpadiyan (1342-51)
ਰਾਗੁ ਜੈਜਾਵੰਤੀ | Raag Jaijaiwanti
Gurbani (1352-53)
Salok | Gatha | Phunahe | Chaubole | Swayiye
Sehskritee Mahala 1
Sehskritee Mahala 5
Gaathaa Mahala 5
Phunhay Mahala 5
Chaubolae Mahala 5
Shaloks Bhagat Kabir
Shaloks Sheikh Farid
Swaiyyae Mahala 5
Swaiyyae in Praise of Gurus
Shaloks in Addition To Vaars
Shalok Ninth Mehl
Mundavanee Mehl 5
ਰਾਗ ਮਾਲਾ, Raag Maalaa
What's new
New posts
New media
New media comments
New resources
Latest activity
Videos
New media
New comments
Library
Latest reviews
Donate
Log in
Register
What's new
New posts
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Welcome to all New Sikh Philosophy Network Forums!
Explore Sikh Sikhi Sikhism...
Sign up
Log in
Social Lounge
Health & Nutrition
Organic’ Does Not Mean Healthier
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Vikram singh" data-source="post: 107991" data-attributes="member: 1078"><p><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">There are Three additional information rebutting the conclusions of the FSA-sponsored article that claims that organic is not more nutritious.</span></span></span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="color: Red">Below are three of these:</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">The first is short comments by a person in the UK who is very knowledgeable about the politics of food in the UK, as well as about organic agriculture. She explains that the FSA-sponsored article was written to counteract research that came out earlier this year showing that organic foods are genuinely more nutritious.</span></span></span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="color: DarkRed">The second is a good article from the Daily Mail, a major UK newspaper.</span></span></span></span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Calibri'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="font-family: 'Calibri'">The third is a critique of the FSA-sponsored article by the top scientist in the Organic Center, a leading organic agriculture research institution in the US. </span></span></span></span></span></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">There's lots of support for organic food and farming published in UK national newspapers today in response to yesterday's findings by the pro-GM, anti-organic Food Standards Agency (FSA).</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The FSA review dismisses health benefits of eating organic food but admits to a lack of research on which to base findings, while completely ignoring other benefits (eg to the environment and animal welfare) and the risks and damage that arise from intensive agriculture.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The Ecologist reports that researchers could only identify 11 studies relating to the health content of organic food and admitted the current evidence base was, "extremely limited both in terms of the number of studies and the quality of studies found".</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The Ecologist online (30 July)</span></span></span></p><p><a href="http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/295416/organic_food_fsa_study_leaves_bad_taste_in_the_mouth.html" target="_blank">Organic food: FSA study leaves bad taste in the mouth - The Ecologist</a></p><p></p><p><span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">See also</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Editor's blog: FSA organic study: read it closely The Ecologist online (30 July)</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><a href="http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/bloggers/the_editors_blog/294" target="_blank">http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/bloggers/the_editors_blog/294</a></span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">396/fsa_organics_study_read_it_closely.html</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The FSA has been on a pro-GM anti-organic crusade since it was first launched under the chairmanship of John Krebs. From the beginning there was a total failure to re-examine the safety of GM foods, despite the high level of consumer concern. Indeed, Krebs declared all approved GM foods safe on his first day in the job before he had even had time to look at the evidence!</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Instead, he quickly ordered a safety enquiry into organic food, which has a high level of consumer confidence. Krebs then made a high profile attack on organic food that lead Dr Patrick Wall, then chief executive of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, to describe Krebs' views on organic food as "extreme".</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Krebs, of course, has been far from alone at the FSA in terms of close links to the GM lobby. The first director of the Scottish arm of the FSA was Dr George Paterson -- the former director general of Health Canada's Food Directorate. Paterson has been linked to major food safety scandals in Canada involving both fast track approval for a Monsanto GM crop and the overriding of internal government scientists' health warnings on a GM product.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Krebs and the FSA's aggressive pro-GM anti-organic stance triggered to GMWatch's very first PANTS ON FIRE AWARD.</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><a href="http://ngin.tripod.com/pants1.htm" target="_blank">ngin : pants on fire award for Sir John Krebs and the Food Standards Agency</a></span></span></span></p><p></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">(2)</span></span></span><span style="font-size: 15px"><span style="color: Blue"><strong>DAILY MAIL ARTICLE</strong></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">A cancerous conspiracy to poison your faith in organic food Joanna Blythman The Daily Mail, 31 July 2009 <a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1203343/JOANNA-BLYTHMAN-A-cancerou" target="_blank">Debate | Mail Online</a></span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">s-conspiracy-poison-faith-organic-food.html</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Despite its obvious benefits for our health and for the environment, organic food continues to be denigrated by the political and corporate establishment in Britain.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The food industry, in alliance with pharmaceutical and big biotechnology companies, has waged a long, often cynical campaign to convince the public that mass-produced, chemically-assisted and intensively-farmed products are just as good as organic foods, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The latest assault in this propaganda exercise comes from the Food Standards Agency, the government's so-called independent watchdog, which has just published a report claiming that there is no nutritional benefit to be gained from eating organic produce.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Those forces bent on promoting GM crops and industrialised production, would have been delighted by the widespread media coverage of the Agency's report, portraying enthusiasm for organic foods as little more than a fad among neurotic consumers that would pass once the public is given the correct information.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">But what is truly misguided is not the increasing popularity of organic goods, but the Food Standards Agency's determination to halt this trend and instead promote genetic modification.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The new report from the FSA highlights this. For all the publicity it has attracted, the document does not contain any new material.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">In fact, it is just an analysis of existing research carried out by other bodies. Moreover, the organisation that conducted this second-hand study, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is not renowned as a leading centre in this field.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Indeed, there is far more significant work currently being done on organic foods by several other bodies, some of it funded by the European Union, though the FSA has chosen to ignore it.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the FSA has decided to give such loud backing to this report because it can bend the findings to suit its political, pro-GM, anti-organic agenda.</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">GM crops</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><span style="color: Red">What is truly misguided is not the increasing popularity of organic goods, but the Food Standards Agency's determination to instead promote genetic modification</span></span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Ever since its creation in 2000, the Food Standards Agency has been biased against organic farming. The first chairman, Sir John Krebs, was supportive of the biotechnology lobby and only too keen to promote GM as the future of farming.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">In fact, one early review of the FSA's work, by the Labour peer Baroness Brenda Dean, warned there was a risk of the Agency losing its 'objectivity'</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">and 'rigour' in its support for GM crops and its opposition to organic production.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The departure of Sir John Krebs has not brought any change in policy, since the Agency is now largely run by plodding bureaucrats all too keen to follow the correct official corporate line.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Yet even in the context of the latest report from the FSA, the spin does not match the reality. For, contrary to all the hype this week, the Agency's own published research shows that organic foods are clearly far better for the consumer even just in nutritional terms.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Happy hen vs jail bird: Organic poultry, eggs and [bacon not only taste much better, but they have also not been pumped full of growth hormones and antibiotics]</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">According to the FSA's findings, organic vegetables contain 53.6 per cent more betacarotene - which helps combat cancer and heart disease - than non-organic ones.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Similarly, organic food has 11.3 per cent more zinc, 38.4 per cent more flavonoids and 12.7 per cent more proteins.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">In addition, an in-depth study by Newcastle University, far deeper than the one conducted by the FSA, has shown that organic produce contains 40 per cent more antioxidants than non-organic foods, research the FSA appears to have overlooked.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">But the concentration solely on nutrition is to play into the hands of the anti-organic, pro-industrial lobby.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">As most of the British public understands, but the FSA fails to acknowledge, the benefits of organic food go far beyond this narrow point.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The fact is that organic production is much better for personal health, food quality, the environment and the welfare of livestock.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Organic farming works in tune with the rhythms of the earth, gently harnessing the changing seasons, the natural cultivation of crops or the rearing of animals for our benefit.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">In contrast, the vast biotech, processed food industry is at permanent war with nature, continually trying to manipulate, overwhelm and conquer.</span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Organic farming is all about harmony, non-organic about chemicalised ascendancy.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">The most obvious way this difference is manifested is in the use of pesticides on crops, banned from organic farming but eagerly promoted by big industry.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Fifty years ago, agro-chemicals hardly existed in British farming, but today they dominate this sector. But their rise has not been without justifiable concerns about the side-effects.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">There is now a wealth of evidence to show that pesticides not only poison the soil and harm wildlife, but also promote cancer and a host of other diseases because of their toxicity.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">This is, after all, only common sense. Anything that can kill insects is bound to have an impact when consumed by humans.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">It has been shown that ordinary pears are sprayed with pesticides no fewer than 17 to 18 times during one seasonal growing cycle. A third of all the food we eat, and no less than half of all our fruit and vegetables, contains such chemicals.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">The Government airily dismisses any worries about the risks, but this kind of complacency is based on old, outdated science.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">As the agro-chemical industry tightens its grip, the worse the dangers become. Organic farming, however, offers the opportunity to eat without these dangers. All organic food is free from chemical residues and thus the health threats are much lower.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Even the most die-hard GM enthusiast would have to admit that organic meat, fruit and vegetables taste much better than the mass-produced fare turned out by major suppliers.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Non-organic produce is not just grown with chemicals, it is also filled with additives, colourings, flavourings, salt and water simply so it has an acceptable appearance to the consumer once it reaches the shelves.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Again, this battery of synthetic additives which appears in many processed foods, ready meals and take-aways has a detrimental effect on our health, something that is avoided with organic produce.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Intensive farming also has a brutal impact on the well-being of animals, which in turn undermines both the quality of meat and our own health.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Organic poultry, eggs and bacon not only taste much better, but they have also not been pumped full of growth hormones and antibiotics, like industrialised produce.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Putting pigs and hens in battery cages inside vast hangars is a sure recipe for the spread of disease, akin to locking up a large group of children in an overheated, overcrowded nursery.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">In this environment, the only way to combat germs is to dish out the antibiotics, but there are now scientific concerns that the overuse of such chemicals is weakening resistance in animals and also reducing the effectiveness of antibiotics among humans.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">Giving animals a decent life through organic, traditional husbandry is better for them - and for us. All the cheerleading for the agro-chemical giants cannot hide the fact that industrialised farming represents a cul-de-sac for mankind.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">We cannot go on as we are, pumping chemicals into our livestock and into the earth. The future has to be organic.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">If it has any genuine interest in nutrition, the Food Standards Agency would be supporting a shift away from intensification, not pushing for more of it.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: Red">The FSA was meant to be an organisation for improving our food. Now it is just getting in the way.</span></span></span></p><p> </p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">Read more: </span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d"><a href="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1203343/JOANNA-BLYTHMAN-A-cancerou" target="_blank">Debate | Mail Online</a></span></span></span></p><p> <span style="font-family: 'Cambria'"><span style="font-size: 18px"><span style="color: #1f497d">s-conspiracy-poison-faith-organic-food.html#ixzz0Mpq6ABLq</span></span></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Vikram singh, post: 107991, member: 1078"] [FONT=Calibri][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][COLOR=#1f497d][FONT=Calibri]There are Three additional information rebutting the conclusions of the FSA-sponsored article that claims that organic is not more nutritious.[/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Calibri][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][COLOR=#1f497d][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=Red]Below are three of these:[/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Calibri][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][COLOR=#1f497d][FONT=Calibri]The first is short comments by a person in the UK who is very knowledgeable about the politics of food in the UK, as well as about organic agriculture. She explains that the FSA-sponsored article was written to counteract research that came out earlier this year showing that organic foods are genuinely more nutritious.[/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Calibri][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][COLOR=#1f497d][FONT=Calibri][COLOR=DarkRed]The second is a good article from the Daily Mail, a major UK newspaper.[/COLOR][/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Calibri][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][COLOR=#1f497d][FONT=Calibri]The third is a critique of the FSA-sponsored article by the top scientist in the Organic Center, a leading organic agriculture research institution in the US. [/FONT][/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]There's lots of support for organic food and farming published in UK national newspapers today in response to yesterday's findings by the pro-GM, anti-organic Food Standards Agency (FSA).[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The FSA review dismisses health benefits of eating organic food but admits to a lack of research on which to base findings, while completely ignoring other benefits (eg to the environment and animal welfare) and the risks and damage that arise from intensive agriculture.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The Ecologist reports that researchers could only identify 11 studies relating to the health content of organic food and admitted the current evidence base was, "extremely limited both in terms of the number of studies and the quality of studies found".[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The Ecologist online (30 July)[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [URL="http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/295416/organic_food_fsa_study_leaves_bad_taste_in_the_mouth.html"]Organic food: FSA study leaves bad taste in the mouth - The Ecologist[/URL] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]See also[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Editor's blog: FSA organic study: read it closely The Ecologist online (30 July)[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][URL]http://www.theecologist.org/blogs_and_comments/bloggers/the_editors_blog/294[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]396/fsa_organics_study_read_it_closely.html[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The FSA has been on a pro-GM anti-organic crusade since it was first launched under the chairmanship of John Krebs. From the beginning there was a total failure to re-examine the safety of GM foods, despite the high level of consumer concern. Indeed, Krebs declared all approved GM foods safe on his first day in the job before he had even had time to look at the evidence![/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Instead, he quickly ordered a safety enquiry into organic food, which has a high level of consumer confidence. Krebs then made a high profile attack on organic food that lead Dr Patrick Wall, then chief executive of the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, to describe Krebs' views on organic food as "extreme".[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Krebs, of course, has been far from alone at the FSA in terms of close links to the GM lobby. The first director of the Scottish arm of the FSA was Dr George Paterson -- the former director general of Health Canada's Food Directorate. Paterson has been linked to major food safety scandals in Canada involving both fast track approval for a Monsanto GM crop and the overriding of internal government scientists' health warnings on a GM product.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Krebs and the FSA's aggressive pro-GM anti-organic stance triggered to GMWatch's very first PANTS ON FIRE AWARD.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][URL="http://ngin.tripod.com/pants1.htm"]ngin : pants on fire award for Sir John Krebs and the Food Standards Agency[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d](2)[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT][SIZE=4][COLOR=Blue][B]DAILY MAIL ARTICLE[/B][/COLOR][/SIZE] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]A cancerous conspiracy to poison your faith in organic food Joanna Blythman The Daily Mail, 31 July 2009 [URL="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1203343/JOANNA-BLYTHMAN-A-cancerou"]Debate | Mail Online[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]s-conspiracy-poison-faith-organic-food.html[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Despite its obvious benefits for our health and for the environment, organic food continues to be denigrated by the political and corporate establishment in Britain.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The food industry, in alliance with pharmaceutical and big biotechnology companies, has waged a long, often cynical campaign to convince the public that mass-produced, chemically-assisted and intensively-farmed products are just as good as organic foods, despite mounting evidence to the contrary.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The latest assault in this propaganda exercise comes from the Food Standards Agency, the government's so-called independent watchdog, which has just published a report claiming that there is no nutritional benefit to be gained from eating organic produce.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Those forces bent on promoting GM crops and industrialised production, would have been delighted by the widespread media coverage of the Agency's report, portraying enthusiasm for organic foods as little more than a fad among neurotic consumers that would pass once the public is given the correct information.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]But what is truly misguided is not the increasing popularity of organic goods, but the Food Standards Agency's determination to halt this trend and instead promote genetic modification.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The new report from the FSA highlights this. For all the publicity it has attracted, the document does not contain any new material.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]In fact, it is just an analysis of existing research carried out by other bodies. Moreover, the organisation that conducted this second-hand study, the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, is not renowned as a leading centre in this field.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Indeed, there is far more significant work currently being done on organic foods by several other bodies, some of it funded by the European Union, though the FSA has chosen to ignore it.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that the FSA has decided to give such loud backing to this report because it can bend the findings to suit its political, pro-GM, anti-organic agenda.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]GM crops[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][COLOR=Red]What is truly misguided is not the increasing popularity of organic goods, but the Food Standards Agency's determination to instead promote genetic modification[/COLOR][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Ever since its creation in 2000, the Food Standards Agency has been biased against organic farming. The first chairman, Sir John Krebs, was supportive of the biotechnology lobby and only too keen to promote GM as the future of farming.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]In fact, one early review of the FSA's work, by the Labour peer Baroness Brenda Dean, warned there was a risk of the Agency losing its 'objectivity'[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]and 'rigour' in its support for GM crops and its opposition to organic production.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The departure of Sir John Krebs has not brought any change in policy, since the Agency is now largely run by plodding bureaucrats all too keen to follow the correct official corporate line.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Yet even in the context of the latest report from the FSA, the spin does not match the reality. For, contrary to all the hype this week, the Agency's own published research shows that organic foods are clearly far better for the consumer even just in nutritional terms.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Happy hen vs jail bird: Organic poultry, eggs and [bacon not only taste much better, but they have also not been pumped full of growth hormones and antibiotics][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]According to the FSA's findings, organic vegetables contain 53.6 per cent more betacarotene - which helps combat cancer and heart disease - than non-organic ones.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Similarly, organic food has 11.3 per cent more zinc, 38.4 per cent more flavonoids and 12.7 per cent more proteins.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]In addition, an in-depth study by Newcastle University, far deeper than the one conducted by the FSA, has shown that organic produce contains 40 per cent more antioxidants than non-organic foods, research the FSA appears to have overlooked.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]But the concentration solely on nutrition is to play into the hands of the anti-organic, pro-industrial lobby.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]As most of the British public understands, but the FSA fails to acknowledge, the benefits of organic food go far beyond this narrow point.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The fact is that organic production is much better for personal health, food quality, the environment and the welfare of livestock.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Organic farming works in tune with the rhythms of the earth, gently harnessing the changing seasons, the natural cultivation of crops or the rearing of animals for our benefit.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]In contrast, the vast biotech, processed food industry is at permanent war with nature, continually trying to manipulate, overwhelm and conquer.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Organic farming is all about harmony, non-organic about chemicalised ascendancy.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]The most obvious way this difference is manifested is in the use of pesticides on crops, banned from organic farming but eagerly promoted by big industry.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Fifty years ago, agro-chemicals hardly existed in British farming, but today they dominate this sector. But their rise has not been without justifiable concerns about the side-effects.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]There is now a wealth of evidence to show that pesticides not only poison the soil and harm wildlife, but also promote cancer and a host of other diseases because of their toxicity.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]This is, after all, only common sense. Anything that can kill insects is bound to have an impact when consumed by humans.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]It has been shown that ordinary pears are sprayed with pesticides no fewer than 17 to 18 times during one seasonal growing cycle. A third of all the food we eat, and no less than half of all our fruit and vegetables, contains such chemicals.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]The Government airily dismisses any worries about the risks, but this kind of complacency is based on old, outdated science.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]As the agro-chemical industry tightens its grip, the worse the dangers become. Organic farming, however, offers the opportunity to eat without these dangers. All organic food is free from chemical residues and thus the health threats are much lower.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Even the most die-hard GM enthusiast would have to admit that organic meat, fruit and vegetables taste much better than the mass-produced fare turned out by major suppliers.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Non-organic produce is not just grown with chemicals, it is also filled with additives, colourings, flavourings, salt and water simply so it has an acceptable appearance to the consumer once it reaches the shelves.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Again, this battery of synthetic additives which appears in many processed foods, ready meals and take-aways has a detrimental effect on our health, something that is avoided with organic produce.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Intensive farming also has a brutal impact on the well-being of animals, which in turn undermines both the quality of meat and our own health.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Organic poultry, eggs and bacon not only taste much better, but they have also not been pumped full of growth hormones and antibiotics, like industrialised produce.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Putting pigs and hens in battery cages inside vast hangars is a sure recipe for the spread of disease, akin to locking up a large group of children in an overheated, overcrowded nursery.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]In this environment, the only way to combat germs is to dish out the antibiotics, but there are now scientific concerns that the overuse of such chemicals is weakening resistance in animals and also reducing the effectiveness of antibiotics among humans.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]Giving animals a decent life through organic, traditional husbandry is better for them - and for us. All the cheerleading for the agro-chemical giants cannot hide the fact that industrialised farming represents a cul-de-sac for mankind.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]We cannot go on as we are, pumping chemicals into our livestock and into the earth. The future has to be organic.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]If it has any genuine interest in nutrition, the Food Standards Agency would be supporting a shift away from intensification, not pushing for more of it.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=Red]The FSA was meant to be an organisation for improving our food. Now it is just getting in the way.[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]Read more: [/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d][URL="http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1203343/JOANNA-BLYTHMAN-A-cancerou"]Debate | Mail Online[/URL][/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [FONT=Cambria][SIZE=5][COLOR=#1f497d]s-conspiracy-poison-faith-organic-food.html#ixzz0Mpq6ABLq[/COLOR][/SIZE][/FONT] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Social Lounge
Health & Nutrition
Organic’ Does Not Mean Healthier
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top