<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Truth About Organic Farming</title>
	<atom:link href="http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/</link>
	<description>An in-depth guide to the world of nutrition</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Tue, 15 May 2012 17:03:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Roxanne</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-3121</link>
		<dc:creator>Roxanne</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 06 May 2012 18:14:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-3121</guid>
		<description>Having worked on a variety of farms in Canada, Western Europe and Australia over the last 20 years or so there is still no contest for me between commercial farming and certified organic farming.  

In terms of yields Organic farming actually shows a 90% or greater yield compared with conventional farming and an even better yield during times of drought.  You can find the studies in wiki if you look under organic farming.  My own personal experience would back this up.  You may have 1/3 of your farm not producing food every year, but factory farms have widely spaces rows to allow large machinery.  Not only are you creating more open areas of bare soil (to bake and blow away, or run off during rain), large machinery is big contributor to soil compaction.  In my experience organic farms rely on more manual labor (which one could argue is a benefit to the local economy, not a liability), and therefore can farm a small area a lot more intensively.  Soil rich in organic matter resists compaction,  reduces run off and holds moister much better.  This could be why organic farms have much greater yields during drought.

I also think you would do well to talk a bit more about the secondary health concerns from factory farming.  Although there may be (my personal experience contradicts this) higher amounts of &#039;manure&#039; based pathogens in food once it gets to the consumer, the run off from feed lots, chemical fertilizers and pesticides/herbicides is tremendous health hazard.  You may not get these substances directly in the food you eat, but it will be in the air you breath and the water you drink.  You also have to take into consideration that such chemicals have to be produced, stored, shipped, handled and applied.  The factory, trucks, farm equipment all get cleaned with water and where does it end up?  And if there is a spill quite often the cost of cleaning up these messes falls directly on you the tax payer.  There is a underlying cost to modern farming that should be brought into the equation here.

One thing that I hope you look into is the health cost people pay who work in non-organically certified farms.  Quite often these are poor migrant workers with little say in how chemicals are applied.  I know for myself when I was in Australia they wanted us to apply round-up wearing only shorts and tank tops in 25 mph winds.  This isn&#039;t an islolated case, or a third world country even...  this is what farmers all over the world do all the time.  This also goes beyond food production...  Look into tobacco and cotton growing.  Neither is a food product, and tobacco isn&#039;t even necessary for human survival, yet both take huge tolls on the health of the land the the people that work it.

You try to present organic farmers as wantonly spraying all sorts of &#039;approved&#039; toxic chemicals on the crops willy nilly.  I&#039;ve never seen this...  In fact, every farm I worked for used them rarely or not at all.  I am not saying that there aren&#039;t farmers out there who do use them..  I just don&#039;t know any that use them as you suggested.  Every farm I worked on relied mostly on manual labor which meant hiking through the orchard or field and keeping a sharp eye out for pests or diseases and removing them.  

You touch on it briefly but I think the point should be driven home a little harder.  Organic farming as outlined by most first world countries requires farmers to improve the soil.  There is NO such governing body for non-certified organic farms.  Factory farms require the use of virgin land to continue to keep up production.  This is especially true in developing countries and is a huge cause of deforestation.  Organic farming practices have shown again and again that they improve soil quality over time.  The farming practices introduced with the beginning of the industrial age have shown again and again that they destroy top soil.  While initial yields can be very high from applying chemical fertilizers, the yields plateau and then drop off as the soil becomes more and more degraded.

I hope that someday everyone will spend a month or two a year on their local
 farms helping to grow the food they eat.  I can&#039;t think of a better way
 to get people informed so they can make more knowledgeable choices about the best 
place to spend their food dollars.  Food 
production is going to be one of the biggest issues in the next century with our ever expanding population.  I think every person on the planet has the ethical duty to choose wisely where and how their food is grown.

For me, the best point you make, and I hope its a point that everyone comes away with, is that a factory farm is a factory farm regardless of how its certified.  The BEST place to get your food is from a small local farmer who is more likely to care about the land, the water and his neighbors.  In an age where so much information and misinformation gets tossed around it becomes even MORE important to get out and verify for ourselves what is really happening in the world.

.  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Having worked on a variety of farms in Canada, Western Europe and Australia over the last 20 years or so there is still no contest for me between commercial farming and certified organic farming.  </p>
<p>In terms of yields Organic farming actually shows a 90% or greater yield compared with conventional farming and an even better yield during times of drought.  You can find the studies in wiki if you look under organic farming.  My own personal experience would back this up.  You may have 1/3 of your farm not producing food every year, but factory farms have widely spaces rows to allow large machinery.  Not only are you creating more open areas of bare soil (to bake and blow away, or run off during rain), large machinery is big contributor to soil compaction.  In my experience organic farms rely on more manual labor (which one could argue is a benefit to the local economy, not a liability), and therefore can farm a small area a lot more intensively.  Soil rich in organic matter resists compaction,  reduces run off and holds moister much better.  This could be why organic farms have much greater yields during drought.</p>
<p>I also think you would do well to talk a bit more about the secondary health concerns from factory farming.  Although there may be (my personal experience contradicts this) higher amounts of &#8216;manure&#8217; based pathogens in food once it gets to the consumer, the run off from feed lots, chemical fertilizers and pesticides/herbicides is tremendous health hazard.  You may not get these substances directly in the food you eat, but it will be in the air you breath and the water you drink.  You also have to take into consideration that such chemicals have to be produced, stored, shipped, handled and applied.  The factory, trucks, farm equipment all get cleaned with water and where does it end up?  And if there is a spill quite often the cost of cleaning up these messes falls directly on you the tax payer.  There is a underlying cost to modern farming that should be brought into the equation here.</p>
<p>One thing that I hope you look into is the health cost people pay who work in non-organically certified farms.  Quite often these are poor migrant workers with little say in how chemicals are applied.  I know for myself when I was in Australia they wanted us to apply round-up wearing only shorts and tank tops in 25 mph winds.  This isn&#8217;t an islolated case, or a third world country even&#8230;  this is what farmers all over the world do all the time.  This also goes beyond food production&#8230;  Look into tobacco and cotton growing.  Neither is a food product, and tobacco isn&#8217;t even necessary for human survival, yet both take huge tolls on the health of the land the the people that work it.</p>
<p>You try to present organic farmers as wantonly spraying all sorts of &#8216;approved&#8217; toxic chemicals on the crops willy nilly.  I&#8217;ve never seen this&#8230;  In fact, every farm I worked for used them rarely or not at all.  I am not saying that there aren&#8217;t farmers out there who do use them..  I just don&#8217;t know any that use them as you suggested.  Every farm I worked on relied mostly on manual labor which meant hiking through the orchard or field and keeping a sharp eye out for pests or diseases and removing them.  </p>
<p>You touch on it briefly but I think the point should be driven home a little harder.  Organic farming as outlined by most first world countries requires farmers to improve the soil.  There is NO such governing body for non-certified organic farms.  Factory farms require the use of virgin land to continue to keep up production.  This is especially true in developing countries and is a huge cause of deforestation.  Organic farming practices have shown again and again that they improve soil quality over time.  The farming practices introduced with the beginning of the industrial age have shown again and again that they destroy top soil.  While initial yields can be very high from applying chemical fertilizers, the yields plateau and then drop off as the soil becomes more and more degraded.</p>
<p>I hope that someday everyone will spend a month or two a year on their local<br />
 farms helping to grow the food they eat.  I can&#8217;t think of a better way<br />
 to get people informed so they can make more knowledgeable choices about the best<br />
place to spend their food dollars.  Food<br />
production is going to be one of the biggest issues in the next century with our ever expanding population.  I think every person on the planet has the ethical duty to choose wisely where and how their food is grown.</p>
<p>For me, the best point you make, and I hope its a point that everyone comes away with, is that a factory farm is a factory farm regardless of how its certified.  The BEST place to get your food is from a small local farmer who is more likely to care about the land, the water and his neighbors.  In an age where so much information and misinformation gets tossed around it becomes even MORE important to get out and verify for ourselves what is really happening in the world.</p>
<p>. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Bkngowda</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-3098</link>
		<dc:creator>Bkngowda</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 05 Feb 2012 13:04:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-3098</guid>
		<description>Dear sir this is an excellent potential message I have learnt from this. particurly organic and GMO croping,its nutritional value.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Dear sir this is an excellent potential message I have learnt from this. particurly organic and GMO croping,its nutritional value.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Guest</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-3088</link>
		<dc:creator>Guest</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Mon, 09 Jan 2012 00:13:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-3088</guid>
		<description>You need to learn how to spell, punctuate sentences correctly, and try using words that are ACTUAL words.  Oh, life is not fair..... Just FYI.  By the way, she says repeatedly in this article that she is not writing this to denounce organic farming but to shed some light on the myths concerning organic foods.  My family has been farming for many, many years.  They have seen first hand the truth about the organic market.  You are being duped.  Crops that are NOT organic have been purchased by organic buyers, and just have &quot;the name&quot;, but are not organic at all.  They are sold as organic in order to stack their pockets and they really could care less whether it is or not.  Just another FAD that society has bought into.  There is no REAL proven benefit to consuming organic food over non-organic.  And ultimately, there is no definitive proof as to whether or not the product you are buying has come from an organic farm or a non-organic farm.  But one thing is for certain.  Someone is reaping the rewards of all the gullible people out there, like yourself.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You need to learn how to spell, punctuate sentences correctly, and try using words that are ACTUAL words.  Oh, life is not fair&#8230;.. Just FYI.  By the way, she says repeatedly in this article that she is not writing this to denounce organic farming but to shed some light on the myths concerning organic foods.  My family has been farming for many, many years.  They have seen first hand the truth about the organic market.  You are being duped.  Crops that are NOT organic have been purchased by organic buyers, and just have &#8220;the name&#8221;, but are not organic at all.  They are sold as organic in order to stack their pockets and they really could care less whether it is or not.  Just another FAD that society has bought into.  There is no REAL proven benefit to consuming organic food over non-organic.  And ultimately, there is no definitive proof as to whether or not the product you are buying has come from an organic farm or a non-organic farm.  But one thing is for certain.  Someone is reaping the rewards of all the gullible people out there, like yourself.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Example555</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-3037</link>
		<dc:creator>Example555</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:56:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-3037</guid>
		<description>Hey!! Did you know that poop is very round and squishy and squashy??
I know you didn&#039;t because YOU&quot;VE never touched poop before!! Loser!!
I am one cool Kiddy Kat!!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hey!! Did you know that poop is very round and squishy and squashy??<br />
I know you didn&#8217;t because YOU&#8221;VE never touched poop before!! Loser!!<br />
I am one cool Kiddy Kat!!</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Example555</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-3036</link>
		<dc:creator>Example555</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 28 Apr 2011 14:54:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-3036</guid>
		<description>IT sux</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>IT sux</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mikeb</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-2985</link>
		<dc:creator>Mikeb</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Wed, 02 Feb 2011 11:11:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-2985</guid>
		<description>I&#039;ve nominated this article for the Open Laboratory 2010 award. Great writing.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I&#8217;ve nominated this article for the Open Laboratory 2010 award. Great writing.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christie</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-1639</link>
		<dc:creator>Christie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:46:20 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-1639</guid>
		<description>Blake: It&#039;s definitely understandable to be on the fence. There&#039;s a lot of spin being done by both sides, and in the end, it simply leaves the consumer not sure where they should buy their food. It sounds to me, though, that you&#039;ve got as a good a handle on it as you can!

Steffan: I&#039;m sorry you feel that this is a &quot;spun&quot; article. In part, you are sort-of right - it is not &quot;balanced,&quot; as I did not go into detail about the many benefits of organic famring that I mentioned, like the movement from monocultures. But the goal wasn&#039;t to give a complete report on all aspects of agricultural methods: it was to be complete about a select few myths that are commonly believed about organic produce. My comments on pesticides, nutrition, and sustainability are based on extensive research, and that research is cited throughout so that you can see for yourself where the information came from.

As for the EU report, the reason I did not include it is that it&#039;s not available yet. It has been talked about, but the actual paper has yet to be published. I only include findings that I can read for myself and source for others to read. Without being able to read the report, it&#039;s hard to judge exactly what the findings entail - for example, what exact methods were used to get their results? How do these compare to similar studies done by others who had different results? Before information can be trusted, questions like these have to be answered. It should also be noted that the EU report is not a &quot;larger&quot; or &quot;more complete&quot; review of the nutrition science of organics: it&#039;s an experiment into the differences between foods produced by different farming methods in Northern Europe. It&#039;s not a literature review like the FSA, nor a comparison of dietary benefits (no attempt was made to determine if eating their organically grown food made people healthier, for example). While I agree it would be nice to include it, again, I&#039;d have to read exactly what they did to feel comfortable doing so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blake: It&#8217;s definitely understandable to be on the fence. There&#8217;s a lot of spin being done by both sides, and in the end, it simply leaves the consumer not sure where they should buy their food. It sounds to me, though, that you&#8217;ve got as a good a handle on it as you can!</p>
<p>Steffan: I&#8217;m sorry you feel that this is a &#8220;spun&#8221; article. In part, you are sort-of right &#8211; it is not &#8220;balanced,&#8221; as I did not go into detail about the many benefits of organic famring that I mentioned, like the movement from monocultures. But the goal wasn&#8217;t to give a complete report on all aspects of agricultural methods: it was to be complete about a select few myths that are commonly believed about organic produce. My comments on pesticides, nutrition, and sustainability are based on extensive research, and that research is cited throughout so that you can see for yourself where the information came from.</p>
<p>As for the EU report, the reason I did not include it is that it&#8217;s not available yet. It has been talked about, but the actual paper has yet to be published. I only include findings that I can read for myself and source for others to read. Without being able to read the report, it&#8217;s hard to judge exactly what the findings entail &#8211; for example, what exact methods were used to get their results? How do these compare to similar studies done by others who had different results? Before information can be trusted, questions like these have to be answered. It should also be noted that the EU report is not a &#8220;larger&#8221; or &#8220;more complete&#8221; review of the nutrition science of organics: it&#8217;s an experiment into the differences between foods produced by different farming methods in Northern Europe. It&#8217;s not a literature review like the FSA, nor a comparison of dietary benefits (no attempt was made to determine if eating their organically grown food made people healthier, for example). While I agree it would be nice to include it, again, I&#8217;d have to read exactly what they did to feel comfortable doing so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Christie</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-2903</link>
		<dc:creator>Christie</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 23:46:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-2903</guid>
		<description>Blake: It&#039;s definitely understandable to be on the fence. There&#039;s a lot of spin being done by both sides, and in the end, it simply leaves the consumer not sure where they should buy their food. It sounds to me, though, that you&#039;ve got as a good a handle on it as you can!

Steffan: I&#039;m sorry you feel that this is a &quot;spun&quot; article. In part, you are sort-of right - it is not &quot;balanced,&quot; as I did not go into detail about the many benefits of organic famring that I mentioned, like the movement from monocultures. But the goal wasn&#039;t to give a complete report on all aspects of agricultural methods: it was to be complete about a select few myths that are commonly believed about organic produce. My comments on pesticides, nutrition, and sustainability are based on extensive research, and that research is cited throughout so that you can see for yourself where the information came from.

As for the EU report, the reason I did not include it is that it&#039;s not available yet. It has been talked about, but the actual paper has yet to be published. I only include findings that I can read for myself and source for others to read. Without being able to read the report, it&#039;s hard to judge exactly what the findings entail - for example, what exact methods were used to get their results? How do these compare to similar studies done by others who had different results? Before information can be trusted, questions like these have to be answered. It should also be noted that the EU report is not a &quot;larger&quot; or &quot;more complete&quot; review of the nutrition science of organics: it&#039;s an experiment into the differences between foods produced by different farming methods in Northern Europe. It&#039;s not a literature review like the FSA, nor a comparison of dietary benefits (no attempt was made to determine if eating their organically grown food made people healthier, for example). While I agree it would be nice to include it, again, I&#039;d have to read exactly what they did to feel comfortable doing so.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Blake: It&#8217;s definitely understandable to be on the fence. There&#8217;s a lot of spin being done by both sides, and in the end, it simply leaves the consumer not sure where they should buy their food. It sounds to me, though, that you&#8217;ve got as a good a handle on it as you can!</p>
<p>Steffan: I&#8217;m sorry you feel that this is a &#8220;spun&#8221; article. In part, you are sort-of right &#8211; it is not &#8220;balanced,&#8221; as I did not go into detail about the many benefits of organic famring that I mentioned, like the movement from monocultures. But the goal wasn&#8217;t to give a complete report on all aspects of agricultural methods: it was to be complete about a select few myths that are commonly believed about organic produce. My comments on pesticides, nutrition, and sustainability are based on extensive research, and that research is cited throughout so that you can see for yourself where the information came from.</p>
<p>As for the EU report, the reason I did not include it is that it&#8217;s not available yet. It has been talked about, but the actual paper has yet to be published. I only include findings that I can read for myself and source for others to read. Without being able to read the report, it&#8217;s hard to judge exactly what the findings entail &#8211; for example, what exact methods were used to get their results? How do these compare to similar studies done by others who had different results? Before information can be trusted, questions like these have to be answered. It should also be noted that the EU report is not a &#8220;larger&#8221; or &#8220;more complete&#8221; review of the nutrition science of organics: it&#8217;s an experiment into the differences between foods produced by different farming methods in Northern Europe. It&#8217;s not a literature review like the FSA, nor a comparison of dietary benefits (no attempt was made to determine if eating their organically grown food made people healthier, for example). While I agree it would be nice to include it, again, I&#8217;d have to read exactly what they did to feel comfortable doing so.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steffan Browning</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-1638</link>
		<dc:creator>Steffan Browning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:01:15 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-1638</guid>
		<description>Hi
your toxic article seems to be full of spin. Good bases to an argument such as the use of sulphur and copper by some, the discontinued Rotenone,the dumbing down of the proven nutritional advantages of organics by use of the equally spun UK FSA report (not independent and included distinct organic nutritional advantages) and your choice not to use the more complete and larger EU report also out at the time showing even greater nutritional advantages of an organic diet.and so you went... great word smithing with apparent balance, but definitely not. Basically toxic.
I am unsure the true motivation of this website. It looks great, has what I consider some very useful information, eg who owns organics?, and I have not trawled particularly deeply but again your article while technically well written is not balanced or fair.
I will send by email my NZ media responses to aspects of the FSA nutritional attack on organics and also an example of pesticide residues in conventional produce. Alternatively check media on www.organicnz.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi<br />
your toxic article seems to be full of spin. Good bases to an argument such as the use of sulphur and copper by some, the discontinued Rotenone,the dumbing down of the proven nutritional advantages of organics by use of the equally spun UK FSA report (not independent and included distinct organic nutritional advantages) and your choice not to use the more complete and larger EU report also out at the time showing even greater nutritional advantages of an organic diet.and so you went&#8230; great word smithing with apparent balance, but definitely not. Basically toxic.<br />
I am unsure the true motivation of this website. It looks great, has what I consider some very useful information, eg who owns organics?, and I have not trawled particularly deeply but again your article while technically well written is not balanced or fair.<br />
I will send by email my NZ media responses to aspects of the FSA nutritional attack on organics and also an example of pesticide residues in conventional produce. Alternatively check media on <a href="http://www.organicnz.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.organicnz.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Steffan Browning</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-2902</link>
		<dc:creator>Steffan Browning</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 22:01:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-2902</guid>
		<description>Hi
your toxic article seems to be full of spin. Good bases to an argument such as the use of sulphur and copper by some, the discontinued Rotenone,the dumbing down of the proven nutritional advantages of organics by use of the equally spun UK FSA report (not independent and included distinct organic nutritional advantages) and your choice not to use the more complete and larger EU report also out at the time showing even greater nutritional advantages of an organic diet.and so you went... great word smithing with apparent balance, but definitely not. Basically toxic.
I am unsure the true motivation of this website. It looks great, has what I consider some very useful information, eg who owns organics?, and I have not trawled particularly deeply but again your article while technically well written is not balanced or fair.
I will send by email my NZ media responses to aspects of the FSA nutritional attack on organics and also an example of pesticide residues in conventional produce. Alternatively check media on www.organicnz.org</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Hi<br />
your toxic article seems to be full of spin. Good bases to an argument such as the use of sulphur and copper by some, the discontinued Rotenone,the dumbing down of the proven nutritional advantages of organics by use of the equally spun UK FSA report (not independent and included distinct organic nutritional advantages) and your choice not to use the more complete and larger EU report also out at the time showing even greater nutritional advantages of an organic diet.and so you went&#8230; great word smithing with apparent balance, but definitely not. Basically toxic.<br />
I am unsure the true motivation of this website. It looks great, has what I consider some very useful information, eg who owns organics?, and I have not trawled particularly deeply but again your article while technically well written is not balanced or fair.<br />
I will send by email my NZ media responses to aspects of the FSA nutritional attack on organics and also an example of pesticide residues in conventional produce. Alternatively check media on <a href="http://www.organicnz.org" rel="nofollow">http://www.organicnz.org</a></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blake Urmos</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-1635</link>
		<dc:creator>Blake Urmos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:38:38 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-1635</guid>
		<description>Fantastic article and with references. Good work.

I am a bit on the fence with organic products precisely for the reasons outlined in your article. What I have come to realize is that you must pick your battles based upon research and guidelines. It is such a daunting task to navigate the grocery store isles and read every single ingredient. What&#039;s worse is the mysterious nature of the produce section.

Eating strictly organic is not practical and in some cases, impossible. Typically I avoid conventional fruits and vegetables in large grocery stores. I also eliminate any junk food or highly processed packaged nonsense. This has an upside and downside. The upside is that my quality of intake is higher and I can also manage weight and limit spending money on empty calorie foods. The downside is frustration and a moderately decreased intake of vegetables. Overall I consume enough vegetables and other good sources of essential nutrients. The main thing is, know which vegetables to buy and if you have the option, go local and go organic. Pick your battles, or move to California.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fantastic article and with references. Good work.</p>
<p>I am a bit on the fence with organic products precisely for the reasons outlined in your article. What I have come to realize is that you must pick your battles based upon research and guidelines. It is such a daunting task to navigate the grocery store isles and read every single ingredient. What&#8217;s worse is the mysterious nature of the produce section.</p>
<p>Eating strictly organic is not practical and in some cases, impossible. Typically I avoid conventional fruits and vegetables in large grocery stores. I also eliminate any junk food or highly processed packaged nonsense. This has an upside and downside. The upside is that my quality of intake is higher and I can also manage weight and limit spending money on empty calorie foods. The downside is frustration and a moderately decreased intake of vegetables. Overall I consume enough vegetables and other good sources of essential nutrients. The main thing is, know which vegetables to buy and if you have the option, go local and go organic. Pick your battles, or move to California.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Blake Urmos</title>
		<link>http://nutritionwonderland.com/2009/12/the-truth-about-organic-farming/comment-page-1/#comment-2901</link>
		<dc:creator>Blake Urmos</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 22 Dec 2009 19:38:00 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://nutritionwonderland.com/?p=1191#comment-2901</guid>
		<description>Fantastic article and with references. Good work.

I am a bit on the fence with organic products precisely for the reasons outlined in your article. What I have come to realize is that you must pick your battles based upon research and guidelines. It is such a daunting task to navigate the grocery store isles and read every single ingredient. What&#039;s worse is the mysterious nature of the produce section.

Eating strictly organic is not practical and in some cases, impossible. Typically I avoid conventional fruits and vegetables in large grocery stores. I also eliminate any junk food or highly processed packaged nonsense. This has an upside and downside. The upside is that my quality of intake is higher and I can also manage weight and limit spending money on empty calorie foods. The downside is frustration and a moderately decreased intake of vegetables. Overall I consume enough vegetables and other good sources of essential nutrients. The main thing is, know which vegetables to buy and if you have the option, go local and go organic. Pick your battles, or move to California.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Fantastic article and with references. Good work.</p>
<p>I am a bit on the fence with organic products precisely for the reasons outlined in your article. What I have come to realize is that you must pick your battles based upon research and guidelines. It is such a daunting task to navigate the grocery store isles and read every single ingredient. What&#8217;s worse is the mysterious nature of the produce section.</p>
<p>Eating strictly organic is not practical and in some cases, impossible. Typically I avoid conventional fruits and vegetables in large grocery stores. I also eliminate any junk food or highly processed packaged nonsense. This has an upside and downside. The upside is that my quality of intake is higher and I can also manage weight and limit spending money on empty calorie foods. The downside is frustration and a moderately decreased intake of vegetables. Overall I consume enough vegetables and other good sources of essential nutrients. The main thing is, know which vegetables to buy and if you have the option, go local and go organic. Pick your battles, or move to California.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

