Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.
Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.
Afro-Netizen
All Spin Zone
Altercation
Americablog
And, yes, I DO take it personally
Another Iranian Online
August J. Pollak
Baghdad Burning
Barry Lando
Bloggrrrlz Gallery
Blondesense
Bob Geiger
Body and Soul
Boing Boing
Booman Tribune
BOP News
Bush Watch
BUZZFLASH
Carpetbagger
Clean Air Blog
Cool Hunting
Corrente
CrooksandLiars
Cursor
Dahr Jamail
Daily Howler
Daily Kos
DC Media Girl
DemiOrator
Direland
Echidne of the Snakes
Elayne Riggs
Eschaton
Fact-esque
Falafel Sex, and Other Things Best Left Unsaid
Farai Chideya
Feminist Peace Network
Feministe
Feministing
Frameshop
Gristmill
Huffington Post
Hullabaloo
Informed Comment
James Wolcott
Jesus General
Lady Jayne's Blog
Liberal Oasis
Mad Kane
Mahablog
Majikthise
Media Girl
Media is a Plural
MediaCitizen
Metafilter
Michael Berube
MyDD
News Dissector
News For Real
Norbizness
Oliver Willis
Pacific Views
Pandagon
Political Animal
PopPolitics.com
PR Watch
Prometheus 6
Raed in the Middle
RH Reality Check
Robert Greenwald
Roger Ailes
Rox Populi
Sadly, No!
Seeing the Forest
Shakespeares Sister
Sirotablog
Sisyphus Shrugged
skippy the bush kangaroo
Slacktivist
SpeakSpeak
Stay Free!
Steve Gilliard
Talking Points Memo
TalkLeft
TBogg
Thatcoloredfellasweblog
The Bilerico Project
The Hutchinson Political Report
The Republic of T
The Revealer
The Sideshow
The Swift Report
Think Progress
This Modern World
TikvahGirl
Trish Wilson
War and Piece
Waveflux
What She Said!
Whiskey Bar
Working Families Vote 2008
Big Ag's Big Lie About Organic Food
Got a tip for a post?:
Email us | Anonymous form
You've actually been told a lot of lies, but right now I'm going to focus on just one. It comes in many different forms:
No doubt it would be DISASTROUS if we all switched to organic and then we didn't have enough food to feed everybody! But that's only if you buy into the idea that organic cannot compete with yields from conventional farming AND the idea that hunger is caused by producing too little food (it's not). Well... here's what the largest study ever conducted to study this question found...
To me, one of the biggest clues of what a carefully guarded lie we are told, a lie that those at the highest levels of our government believe and use to make our policy, was when a biotech/pesticide lobby group came out in opposition to Michelle Obama's organic garden. Well, they didn't really come out... I kinda outed them on my blog and the story went from there to the Colbert Report (and pretty much everywhere else).
What was the biotech and pesticide industry afraid of when Michelle Obama planted an organic garden? This.
Meanwhile, Kass told the children, the teachers and the press that the garden already had produced lettuce, snap peas, beans, kale, collards and chard. Kass said he has taken 90 pounds of produce from the garden, including broccoli and green beans and "one beautiful eggplant." He also said he has harvested herbs "every night," which are not included in the 90 pounds. The garden has produced only one cucumber, which Kass saved for the children to harvest. It was supposed to be a white cucumber, but it had turned yellow.
Kass said no chemicals — fertilizer or herbicide — had been used on the garden, but that the underlying White House soil had been "amended" with crab meal from the Chesapeake Bay, green sand compost and lime powder. A White House spokeswoman also said that only organic fertilizers and insect repellants will be used and that lady bugs and praying mantises will be introduced to naturally control other insect populations. A honeybee hive has been set up nearby for pollination purposes.
Kass said that the only insect problem he had noticed is that "something is nibbling a little bit on the kale."
Pardon the metaphor, but by planting an organic garden, Michelle Obama acted like Toto, pulling back the curtain to reveal the little man pretending to be the almighty wizard. That man - or men - behind the curtain are the biotech, pesticide, and fertilizer industries, who desperately want the American people to believe that they are absolutely necessary to prevent our starvation.
They call for using "science" in agriculture, but they ignore what science actually says. According to a paper called "Organic Agriculture and the Global Food Supply" published in 2007, a study (referred to by Jack Heinemann as "the largest meta-analysis ever conducted on the relative performance of agroecological and conventional... agriculture") found that organic CAN feed the world. Specifically, on average, organic systems produce 92% as much as conventional agriculture in the developed world. However, in developing countries, organics produces 80% MORE than conventional agriculture. Therefore, the paper concludes:
With the average yield ratios, we modeled the global food supply that could be grown organically on the current agricultural land base. Model estimates indicate that organic methods could produce enough food on a global per capita basis to sustain the current human population, and potentially an even larger population, without increasing the agricultural land base.
The reason why there's such a stark difference between the developed and developing world is not because organic magically produces more in developing nations. Rather, it is because the farmers in those countries often lack the crop inputs used in the developed world to obtain such high yields. As the inputs used in the U.S. involve a LOT of oil, a resource we are running out of, this says to me that our best route to maximum yields in the future is going organic now.
Another claim by proponents of chemical agriculture is that we wouldn't have enough nitrogen to produce our food without synthetic fertilizer. The paper addressed that too, stating in its abstract:
We also evaluated the amount of nitrogen potentially available from fixation by leguminous cover crops used as fertilizer. Data from temperate and tropical agroecosystems suggest that leguminous cover crops could fix enough nitrogen to replace the amount of synthetic fertilizer currently in use. These results indicate that organic agriculture has the potential to contribute quite substantially to the global food supply, while reducing the detrimental environmental impacts of conventional agriculture.
In a press release, one of the researchers from the study summed up their findings perfectly:
Perfecto said the idea that people would go hungry if farming went organic is "ridiculous."
"Corporate interest in agriculture and the way agriculture research has been conducted in land grant institutions, with a lot of influence by the chemical companies and pesticide companies as well as fertilizer companies—all have been playing an important role in convincing the public that you need to have these inputs to produce food," she said.
There's a lot of pressure right now to pass a new bill that would "help" the world's 1 billion hungry people, focusing on those in S. Asia and Africa, by promoting chemical agriculture in those parts of the world. We are devastating our own environment with these techniques, and doing so with little benefit to our farmers. Let's not export our bad ideas.
| Also in PEEK | |||
| Has Obama Done More Than Any Other President in Their First Year? There have been plenty of painful missed opportunities, but as first years go, this isn't bad. Post by Steve Benen. November 30, 2009. |
Conservatives Can Really Be Heartless Bastards Stunning that someone could be this obtuse. Post by Joshua Holland. November 29, 2009. |
Copenhagen: Getting Past the Urgency Trap Copenhagen is the next step forward, and we’ll accept it with greater equanimity if we understand that conventional thinkers have to work their toward deeper transformation Post by Sara Robinson. November 28, 2009. |
|