chubbyalaskagriz
New member
I am going to kindly pass along some comments a dear friend of mine shared on this topic. He puruses the site from time to time and shared this great helpful info w/ me in an e-mail... I will post it as he sent it to me- for you to consider or not conisider! 
Hey, Kev,
Just looked at the organic foods thread over at SpicePlace.
First off, you might pass on that cooking organic foods is no different than cooking their conventionally grown analogs. Broccoli is broccoli in that respect, and cooking methods remain a constant.
Next, just to get it out of the way, there are no standards or regulations controlling anything other than vegetables. Terms like "free range" "grass fed" "organically raised" when applied to beef, lamb, pork, and poultry mean exactly what the purveyors want them to mean, and nothing else. Virtually all such claims are marketing terms, not agricultural ones. There is no legal concept called "organic beef," for instance. So animal proteins can be left out of any organics discussion.
Now, on the question of organic vegetables. In order to bear the organics label the produce must be grown according to the federal law that controls. The grower must be certified, and is subject to inspections, has to file scheduled reports, etc. It's a complex law that was all but written by Monsanto, and which has been responsible for driving real organic growers away. They can't afford either the money nor the time it takes to achieve and maintain certification.
That aside, there is a difference between the organics you'd buy from a small, diverse grower---the kind we immediately connote with the term---and the organics you buy in the supermarket.
The small, diverse organic growers sell primarily through farmers markets, CSAs, and health-food outlets. These people tend to see themselves as stewards of the land. Their produce is more expensive because it costs more to grow. These growers also trend towards heirlooms and other open-pollinated varieties, chosen primarily because they taste good.
On the other hand, there is the organic produce sold in the supermarket. That is grown by the organics divisions of the same factory farms producing the conventional crap. By and large they use the same monocultural techniques used for the other stuff. And, unlike the small, diverse grower, they do not see themselves as stewards of the land. Their produce is more expensive because they can get away with it (and, in fact, costs them less to grow). These growers choose hybrids, always. And varieties are choosen to meet the needs of the food distribution system which, among other things, means picking when unripe (particularly tomatoes), having tough skins to withstand the abuse of truck, train, and plane transportation, ability to withstand cold storage for long periods, etc.
On net, the true organics grower tends to be local, and the stuff sold in supermarkets is the same 1,500 mile tomato we sneer at when conventionally grown.
Now, as to taste and nutrient value. This is a real can of worms, because organics proponents have made wild claims through the years that are not only unsubstantiated but patently wrong. As a result, the anti-organics people, can argue against organics with some validity. After all, if I claim A and you can demonstrate that A is not true, you can then impune my entire argument.
First a lesson in plant biology and physiology. In order to grow strong and healthy, and to reach it's full potential in terms of taste and nutrient values, a plant needs certain things. It needs water and sunlight, in full measure. And it needs nutrients of its own. There are 16 of them, with nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorous being the major needs, and minor amounts of the others. Those nutrients must be available in soluble form, so the plant can use them.
Point #1: A plant provided those nutrients, along with sunshine and water, will grow to it's potential. The plant does not care whether those nutrients come from organic matter or from synthetic fertilizers. The difference betweent the two has to do with soil health, not plant health.
Point #2: Nutrient content and flavor depend on the specific variety, along with allowing the fruit to ripen on the vine. If you take a a tomato variety, for instance, and grow one plant organically and the other synthetically, and allow them to ripen, they will taste exactly the same and contain the same nutrients.
The problems arise because factory organic farms choose varieties that generally lack flavor to begin with (taste is not a criterion selected for), harvest it when it's green, put it through cold storage, then gas it so it develops color just before shipment.
Thus, any potential flavor or nutrient value is missing because the tomato never ripened.
As to health problems, these result from the residual effects of chemicals used in conventional farming, not from the vegetables per se. The jury is still out on the long term effects of these chemicals. But given the overal state of our health, it's a good bet that many of those chemicals have contributed.
Much has been made about e-coli. But, with one exception, it can always be traced to poor sanitation. Unlike with animal protein, where e-coli colonization can be systemic, plant infection exists on the surface only. If people can't be bothered washing their produce, especially when the country of origin is suspect, well---that's certainly not the farmers' fault.
Wheweee! Didn't mean to soapbox like that. But it's a subject that really trips a trigger with me. As you know, I grow organically. Not because it's some sort of magic bullet, but because I'm concerned with the overall health of the soil, and because I don't trust chemicals. But I also beleive it's important that people understand what organics is all about, rather than sprouting nonsense as true believers on both sides of the question are prone to do.
Another e-mail... my comments are in GREEN- his are in RED...
Yo, Kev,
Yeah, sure. Cut and paste to your heart's content.
In response to the view there that was shared: "In reality frozen food is no comparison to fresh food but because of the era and lifestyle we live in we have no choice"
That fact is, I challange anybody, in a blind taste test, to differentiate between fresh and modern flash-frozen veggies! It's like FAS fish---it actually can be fresher than so-called fresh, because it's processed so quickly.
If we compare frozen veggies to the typical supermarket produce, she's right. There is no comparison. But in the oppostie direction. I mean, we're talking days-old, cold-storage veggies, given constant showers to make them look wholesome, versus in-the-field (or close to it) processing and fast freezing.
But we are heirs of the '50s and '60s, I reckon, so the legends persist.
The things that strike me funny about the whole concept of organic anything is the yuppy, ‘do-gooder”, superior, elite aspects to it all.
Boy oh boy are you right! It's like the whole vegetarian/vegan thing. It's not that their message is necessarily wrong. But their halos can be so blinding.
You’d think there’d be certain logical steps to altering a person’s habits between “I ain’t eaten 3 portions of fruit & veggie in the last month” and “I am gonna start buying a hundred pounds of organic everything at umpteen-dollars-per-pound and by Christmas I’m gonna be so hot and beautiful and healthy I won’t even be able to stand to look at my own reflection in the mirror!”
The fundemental problem is that we’ve all been socialized into believing there are magic bullets that can quickly solve any problem. Live a healthy lifestyle and you’ll look better, live longer, and be happier. But a healthy lifestyle takes both a committment and time; something most people won’t do. After all, the latest miracle diet will shed those excess pounds between now and Thanksgiving. Right?
Hey, Kev,
Just looked at the organic foods thread over at SpicePlace.
First off, you might pass on that cooking organic foods is no different than cooking their conventionally grown analogs. Broccoli is broccoli in that respect, and cooking methods remain a constant.
Next, just to get it out of the way, there are no standards or regulations controlling anything other than vegetables. Terms like "free range" "grass fed" "organically raised" when applied to beef, lamb, pork, and poultry mean exactly what the purveyors want them to mean, and nothing else. Virtually all such claims are marketing terms, not agricultural ones. There is no legal concept called "organic beef," for instance. So animal proteins can be left out of any organics discussion.
Now, on the question of organic vegetables. In order to bear the organics label the produce must be grown according to the federal law that controls. The grower must be certified, and is subject to inspections, has to file scheduled reports, etc. It's a complex law that was all but written by Monsanto, and which has been responsible for driving real organic growers away. They can't afford either the money nor the time it takes to achieve and maintain certification.
That aside, there is a difference between the organics you'd buy from a small, diverse grower---the kind we immediately connote with the term---and the organics you buy in the supermarket.
The small, diverse organic growers sell primarily through farmers markets, CSAs, and health-food outlets. These people tend to see themselves as stewards of the land. Their produce is more expensive because it costs more to grow. These growers also trend towards heirlooms and other open-pollinated varieties, chosen primarily because they taste good.
On the other hand, there is the organic produce sold in the supermarket. That is grown by the organics divisions of the same factory farms producing the conventional crap. By and large they use the same monocultural techniques used for the other stuff. And, unlike the small, diverse grower, they do not see themselves as stewards of the land. Their produce is more expensive because they can get away with it (and, in fact, costs them less to grow). These growers choose hybrids, always. And varieties are choosen to meet the needs of the food distribution system which, among other things, means picking when unripe (particularly tomatoes), having tough skins to withstand the abuse of truck, train, and plane transportation, ability to withstand cold storage for long periods, etc.
On net, the true organics grower tends to be local, and the stuff sold in supermarkets is the same 1,500 mile tomato we sneer at when conventionally grown.
Now, as to taste and nutrient value. This is a real can of worms, because organics proponents have made wild claims through the years that are not only unsubstantiated but patently wrong. As a result, the anti-organics people, can argue against organics with some validity. After all, if I claim A and you can demonstrate that A is not true, you can then impune my entire argument.
First a lesson in plant biology and physiology. In order to grow strong and healthy, and to reach it's full potential in terms of taste and nutrient values, a plant needs certain things. It needs water and sunlight, in full measure. And it needs nutrients of its own. There are 16 of them, with nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorous being the major needs, and minor amounts of the others. Those nutrients must be available in soluble form, so the plant can use them.
Point #1: A plant provided those nutrients, along with sunshine and water, will grow to it's potential. The plant does not care whether those nutrients come from organic matter or from synthetic fertilizers. The difference betweent the two has to do with soil health, not plant health.
Point #2: Nutrient content and flavor depend on the specific variety, along with allowing the fruit to ripen on the vine. If you take a a tomato variety, for instance, and grow one plant organically and the other synthetically, and allow them to ripen, they will taste exactly the same and contain the same nutrients.
The problems arise because factory organic farms choose varieties that generally lack flavor to begin with (taste is not a criterion selected for), harvest it when it's green, put it through cold storage, then gas it so it develops color just before shipment.
Thus, any potential flavor or nutrient value is missing because the tomato never ripened.
As to health problems, these result from the residual effects of chemicals used in conventional farming, not from the vegetables per se. The jury is still out on the long term effects of these chemicals. But given the overal state of our health, it's a good bet that many of those chemicals have contributed.
Much has been made about e-coli. But, with one exception, it can always be traced to poor sanitation. Unlike with animal protein, where e-coli colonization can be systemic, plant infection exists on the surface only. If people can't be bothered washing their produce, especially when the country of origin is suspect, well---that's certainly not the farmers' fault.
Wheweee! Didn't mean to soapbox like that. But it's a subject that really trips a trigger with me. As you know, I grow organically. Not because it's some sort of magic bullet, but because I'm concerned with the overall health of the soil, and because I don't trust chemicals. But I also beleive it's important that people understand what organics is all about, rather than sprouting nonsense as true believers on both sides of the question are prone to do.
Another e-mail... my comments are in GREEN- his are in RED...
Yo, Kev,
Yeah, sure. Cut and paste to your heart's content.
In response to the view there that was shared: "In reality frozen food is no comparison to fresh food but because of the era and lifestyle we live in we have no choice"
That fact is, I challange anybody, in a blind taste test, to differentiate between fresh and modern flash-frozen veggies! It's like FAS fish---it actually can be fresher than so-called fresh, because it's processed so quickly.
If we compare frozen veggies to the typical supermarket produce, she's right. There is no comparison. But in the oppostie direction. I mean, we're talking days-old, cold-storage veggies, given constant showers to make them look wholesome, versus in-the-field (or close to it) processing and fast freezing.
But we are heirs of the '50s and '60s, I reckon, so the legends persist.
The things that strike me funny about the whole concept of organic anything is the yuppy, ‘do-gooder”, superior, elite aspects to it all.
Boy oh boy are you right! It's like the whole vegetarian/vegan thing. It's not that their message is necessarily wrong. But their halos can be so blinding.
You’d think there’d be certain logical steps to altering a person’s habits between “I ain’t eaten 3 portions of fruit & veggie in the last month” and “I am gonna start buying a hundred pounds of organic everything at umpteen-dollars-per-pound and by Christmas I’m gonna be so hot and beautiful and healthy I won’t even be able to stand to look at my own reflection in the mirror!”
The fundemental problem is that we’ve all been socialized into believing there are magic bullets that can quickly solve any problem. Live a healthy lifestyle and you’ll look better, live longer, and be happier. But a healthy lifestyle takes both a committment and time; something most people won’t do. After all, the latest miracle diet will shed those excess pounds between now and Thanksgiving. Right?