Far better solution than buying into the "organic" marketing charade cooked up by environmental activists and big corporations--the same ones that push solar, wind, and battery energy that are impoverishing us all and destroying the ecosystem.
I feel the same. Would rather buy from a local farmer I know, who can't afford or doesn't believe in the labels. "Organic" fruits & veggies went mainstream a couple decades ago, and we're always hearing about outbreaks. Unfair labor & unclean practices. Eat seasonally & locally. Know your farmers!
Nothing beats local and knowing your farmer it's great for the economy too. The corp shift into Organic space is largely the last decade and BigAg is never trustworthy but USDA label is far from the only game in town.
Many invented mean nothing corp seals have been added as well as genuine groups but many do have value. Consumer Reports ranks them in an easy to search system to know if it's a marketing scam or genuine certification relating to quality of worker rights, animal care, ingredients etc. https://www.consumerreports.org/food-labels/seals-and-claims/
I see your concerns, and I even think you have a valid point. But which is worse. Taking a chance on organics or purchasing foods that are 100% loaded in chemicals?
You've presented a false choice. Organic food may be loaded with organic toxins like paraquat and pyrethrin, in the same way that conventional food may be loaded in inorganic toxins. Neither are healthy to eat. The third option is to research the stores where you shop, and the products they sell, rather than relying on an "organic" stamp that is either fraudulent or managed by the same government agencies that have been lying to us and conspiring against us for years (decades?).
The water in Mexico is filthy, contaminated by chemical and biological toxins. Most GI illness, though, is caused by bugs: viruses, amoebae, and bacterium. That's why the Mexicans soak their fruits and vegetables in bleach. Kills the bugs.
Do you believe that viruses, amoebae, and bacterium don't exist? Some people think that all disease today is caused by 5G, but I'm no in agreement with that assertion.
Viruses have never been proven to exist as pathogenic particles. Amoebae and bacteria exist, have been characterized but still never proven to cause disease. Obviously various forms of radiation can cause adverse effects on the human body (and animals, birds in particular), but there are a myriad of toxins we are subjected to each day.
What about those amoebae that swim into your brain through your ears and eat your brain, or the flesh-eating bacteria that can gnaw through your entire arm in under 24 hours?
Don't expect any fact based engagement.. after a couple of days sparring it's got me torn between thinking this is troll or shill or just pompous idiot. There's no openness or curiosity and the tactic of replying with some tangent that infers a crackpot quality to legitimate scientific questions like the 5G jab at you.
I had no idea but not surprised, since our government & fake news media & health organizations & FBI are allowed to lie to us about anything & everything, no matter how harmful or deadly, not surprised our food industry does the same thing!?!
Unless you're growing your own food, raising your own cattle, etc., you're going to have to "choose your poison." Obviously not all organic food is grown in Mexico and not every farmer's throwing his family's poop about on the farm. How is it that I've been eating organic produce (much from Mexico) for close to a decade and haven't gotten food poisoning once from it? I must be an anomaly.
Mark, you in particular might be interested to hear what she says about Mexico!
Also, if you go to thehighwire.com and search their videos for Monsanto and Glyphosate, they've reported on the harms and deception for some time now.
Look, to each his own. If you want to slurp glyphosate and avoid organic, that is your choice. But I would caution against blindly trusting that Big Ag and government regulatory agencies are making choices that are better for your health than their pocketbooks. Everyone should do their own research on both sides and make an informed decision for themselves, because in the end, YOU are responsible for your own health.
Completely agree--without full knowledge of the "chain of custody" of what you eat, you cannot ensure the integrity of your food. That is why I support the comments from readers who suggest doing your own research and buying products from stores or producers that you can trust.
The so-called organic food industry is managed by an alliance of large corporate agriculture and the US Department of Agriculture, as you point out. It does not have the consumers' best interest in mind--only its own pocketbook and accretion of power. Big Pharma and FDA are no different.
It was discovered recently a new fact about atoms: the space between the nucleus and the innermost electron shell is not empty, or a vacuum, as previously thought, but it's a space filled with propaganda, advertisement and sophistry.
When I purchase organic, I would hope to prevent pesticide contamination, and perhaps increase the nutritional value. Good to know that we cannot get around the microorganisms without the washing.
Shocking to learn poor sanitation & lax food handling affects all foods. It's as if you expect hand washing and other basic practices shouldn't apply to all foods equally. Rediculous.
The fact that toxic practices by BigAg using sludge they call biosolids condemns organic producers and somehow diminishes the nutrients because one study done in Portugal found pathogens are equal opportunity transporters of illness.
Again your intentional omission of American standards for organic labels helps you twist the conclusion to defend your idea that chemically intensive farming has no downside or impact on health.
In fact the practice is still opposed by Organic regulation but why let facts get in the way of a good story when a practice that should be outlawed for any food production can be twisted to smear organic instead. You aren't interested in food safety only in puffing up a misguided notion when you should be actively opposing the toxic practices for all food production!
Dumping Sewage Sludge On Organic Farms?
Why USDA Should Just Say No
April 30, 1998
View and Download the report here: Dumping Sewage Sludge on Organic Farms
In December, 1997, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed draft national standards for organic agriculture. As part of this proposal, the department invited the public to comment on the idea of allowing application of municipal sewage sludge on land used to grow organic foods.1 The Environmental Protection Agency’s top sludge regulator urged the department to allow “high quality biosolids” (i.e., sewage sludge) to be used in organic food production.2
The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), a federally mandated advisory body established by the 1990 National Organic Standards Act, recommended to USDA that, in general, sewage sludge should not be allowed in organic food production.
Experts within the organic food industry maintain that organic farmers extremely rarely, if ever, use sewage sludge now, and they resolutely oppose allowing its use under the final organic standards rule. The vast majority of the more than 115,000 public comments filed to date on the proposed rule explicitly object to the use of sewage sludge as a federally approved organic farming practice.
EWG Findings
Based on our analysis of the toxic constituents of sewage sludge and the likely contribution organic farmland can make to sludge disposal, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) strongly recommends that sewage sludge not be allowed in organic food production. Indeed, our review leads us to question the safety and advisability of using sewage sludge in any food production system.
An EWG analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) found that some 2 billion pounds of toxic chemicals––341 different chemicals in all––were transferred to sewage treatment plants between 1990 and 1995. Included were 33.6 million pounds of toxic heavy metals like mercury, lead, and cadmium, and more than 63 million pounds of carcinogenic substances.
An EWG analysis of the only available national data on sludge content (the 1988 National Sewage Sludge Survey of 208 treatment plants) found a total of over 100 synthetic organic compounds (not including pesticides) in U.S. sludge, including phthalates, toluene, and chlorobenzene. The average sample contained almost 9 synthetic organic contaminants. Dioxins were found in sludge from 179 out of 208 systems (80%). In addition, 42 different pesticides were found––at least one in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per survey sample. None of these chemical contaminants are regulated in sludge. The nine heavy metals that are regulated in sludge were routinely detected, often at high concentrations. No comprehensive data are available to assess if EPA regulations have reduced these toxic components of sludge since the late 1980s.
Organic agriculture constitutes about one-tenth of one percent of all farmland–– about 1 million acres out of 972 million acres. We estimate that allowing sludge to be used in organic agriculture will reduce the nation’s sewage sludge disposal burden by about 0.03 percent—a trivial contribution, particularly when weighed against the potential for severe damage to consumer acceptance of organically grown foods and to the economic integrity of the $3.5 billion organic food industry.
Use of municipal sewage sludge would be completely inconsistent with organic farming principles and practices, in light of the large number of toxic substances routinely found in sewage sludge, often at very high concentrations. Introducing synthetic pollutants through sewage sludge application into a food production system that is explicitly designed to scrupulously avoid synthetic chemicals such as pesticides and manufactured fertilizers would be the epitome of a flawed public policy.
Toxic Substances in Sewage Sludge
Sewage sludge is the thick, malodorous slurry left behind in a sewage treatment plant after its load of human and industrial chemical wastes has been treated and the wastewater discharged. The sewage treatment industry and the government often refer to sludge as “biosolids” for much the same reason that pesticide companies now call their products “crop protection chemicals.”
The large amount of human waste in sewage treatment plants means that the sludge contains high concentrations of phosphates and nitrates, desirable components of fertilizer. However, the industrial wastes that are present in sewage cause highly toxic materials such as industrial solvents, heavy metals, and even nuclear waste to be left behind in sludge. When sewage sludge is applied to the fields, both the nutrients and the toxic chemicals are released to the environment. There are many of these toxic chemicals, and they are often found at high concentrations.
An EWG analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) found that some 2 billion pounds of toxic chemicals––341 different chemicals in all––were transferred to sewage treatment plants between 1990 and 1995. This included 33.6 million pounds of toxic heavy metals like mercury, lead, and cadmium, and more than 63 million pounds of carcinogenic substances.
Sewage treatment plants report discharges of some pollutants under the Clean Water Act, but do not report their discharges to the centrally maintained TRI. Thus, no recent comprehensive, national databases are available on the toxic constituents of effluent discharged by sewage treatment plants, or on the toxic components of more than 7.5 million tons of sludge generated in the United States annually.3
EWG also analyzed EPA’s 1988 National Sewage Sludge Survey. This survey of 208 municipal sewage treatment plants was conducted prior to EPA’s enforcement of regulations requiring pretreatment of industrial waste prior to its being sent to sewage treatment plants. The survey also predated EPA’s regulatory restrictions on nine heavy metals that routinely contaminate sewage sludge––the only toxic components of sewage sludge for which monitoring is now required.4 Nevertheless, in the absence of more recent data, the survey is the only available benchmark for evaluating toxic substances in sludge.
Our analysis showed that over 100 synthetic organic compounds (not including pesticides) were detected in at least one survey sample. The average sample contained almost 9 synthetic organic contaminants. One sample had 32 compounds and 15 samples had at least 20. The most common organic contaminants in sludge were Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate, which was found in the sludge of 142 different sewage treatment plants. Toluene and 2-Propanone were found in 126 and 125 plants, respectively (Table 1).
Some 42 different pesticides were found; at least one pesticide was detected in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per sample and 25 samples containing 4 pesticides or more. The most common pesticide in sewage sludge was 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange), which banned for use by the EPA in 1985 yet was still found in 51 samples. Acetic Acid (2,4- Dichlorophenoxy) and 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic Acid followed with 43 and 27 plants, respectively (Table 2).
Some 42 different pesticides were found; at least one pesticide was detected in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per sample and 25 samples containing 4 pesticides or more. The most common pesticide in sewage sludge was 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange), which banned for use by the EPA in 1985 yet was still found in 51 samples. Acetic Acid (2,4- Dichlorophenoxy) and 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic Acid followed with 43 and 27 plants, respectively (Table 2).
Ix
Ironically, allowing the use of sewage sludge in organic food production is probably a surefire way to ensure that organic acreage will not expand, based on the strong opposition consumers have voiced to USDA at the prospect of sewage sludge being legal for use by organic growers.
Nice way to avoid confronting your flawed assumptions about diet & health w enough cherry picking of studies to make former chemical companies Monsanto-Bayer-Astra Zeneca et al multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology factory food & drug empires happy as clams!
Over the last few years, I've seen many well-intentioned, passionate people align themselves with seemingly virtuous movements that are controlled by the very actors they promise to be fighting. The organic food industry is a cartel run by big agriculture and big government--the US Department of Agriculture, specifically--and serves no one's interests but its own, no different than the FDA, the CDC, the NIH, and every large corporation they're in bed with.
Goodie for you but my career began in Washington in Watergate era w lucrative career as a Beltway Bandit leaving due to excess corruption when Poppy Bush was elected.
Since then my skills from the dark side have been used dirtbag hunting so whatever unholy alliances you imagine taint the world of organic were old news to me decades ago.. by 1997 focused mainly on toxic chemicals and food. Your few years of observations & poor conclusions don't impress me much.
No question corp profiteers have absorbed vast numbers of small organic brands & processed food lobby chipped away at allowable limits but you're wrong about organic farming trends & essential connection between health and nutrition.
Beyond that the better option is to go local for more everything.. know your farmer.. shop at green-markets don't point at our captured regulatory system & pronounce global farming & home gardens a lost cause. Not only does NYC have cooperative farm to table our Greenmarkets give $6 fresh food for every $5 EBT card & end if day produce is donated to City Harvest food pantry network... find solutions not complaints to justify defeatism.
Aren't EBT cards simply cash transfers from taxpayers to fraudsters to cover junk food, liquor, and cigarette addictions? You aren't even allowed to cook food in NYC anymore--the Democrats there have outlawed stoves!
Wow it almost inspires sympathy to see how far reaching your smugnorance is to be so woefully uninformed on so many subjects yet still be so passionate flaunting it.
"Aren't EBT cards simply cash transfers from taxpayers to fraudsters to cover junk food, liquor, and cigarette addictions?"
Let's start with food insecure families including 1:5 American children. Who's grifting?
Nov 19, 2020 — Walmart and McDonald's are among the top employers of beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study according to a study by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday.
The question of how much taxpayers contribute to maintaining basic living standards for employees at some of the nation's largest low-wage companies has long been a flashpoint in the debate over minimum wage laws and the ongoing effort to unionize these sectors.
Looks like Corporate Welfare to me w workers on starvation wages & Walmart heirs pocketing food money of poor kids.. maybe it's just me but it stinks like week old fish when billionaires rob workers then blame the victims. Makes me hope your MD is a bogus claim.
"You aren't even allowed to cook food in NYC anymore--the Democrats there have outlawed stoves!"
Love to see your source for that but thanks I'm laughing harder than for any idiotic Qanon meme ever did.. maybe living in NYC adds more humor...
Dr. Knowlittle's News Flash The Big Apple has transformed from City that never sleeps to City that never eats.. crawl out of your hole and try a pinch of reality & heap of humility!!
I have learned quite a bit about glyphosates. I choose organic local farms and do the best I can. I avoid GMOs and receive emails from organizations that are following and sharing better ways of understanding what is being done. I have followed Jeffrey Smith - institute of Responsible Technology. Mansanto needs prison time. Organic is less dangerous. I so desire to grow my own veggies but not able to now.
Something I've noticed as I review reader comments on this subject is that many people appear to be focused on Roundup and make all their consumer purchasing decisions based on the likely presence or absence of the use of this herbicide immediately preceding crop harvesting. I would caution everyone not to become a one-issue consumer, in the same way that I cautioned everyone not to become a one-issue patient during the pandemic. Many Americans made themselves physically ill through (largely ineffectual) attempts to protect from Chinese Wuhan virus infection--masks, injections, home sequestration, elimination of all exercise, avoidance of sunlight, etc. I fear this same thing is occurring with so-called organic food. "Organic" is not a proxy for "safe and healthy." Its definition is unclear, its management falls under the purview of the USDA, and it directs billions of dollars through a shady cabal that includes the federal government, massive commercial farms, and national retail food distributors. I trust none of these actors to have our best interests at heart.
Once again, I recommend that consumers ignore the "organic" label entirely and start thinking for themselves when they evaluate the nutritional quality and safety of the food they buy rather than relying on a stamp that may or may not carry any practical value.
Hi Mark, thanks for this piece. I dont doubt that you are correct here, mostly anyway. I buy organic, but reading this has made me question exactly where it comes from, why I am buying it and weather I am having the wool pulled over my eyes. What I would say though, with regards to bacteria, is that I dont believe that the bacteria itself causea disease. It is the matter is a state of being broken down by the bacteria that causes the disease. You should always wash your produce.
Then my objective has been achieved--to get people to think critically about how they choose the food they purchase. Not all food labeled organic is nutritious and safe to eat, and not all food without that label unhealthy and unsafe. Assuming otherwise opens us up to deception, fraud, and financial impoverishment. The kosher labeling cartels bully businesses into forking over loads of cash to gain access to a captured religious market. The organic food labeling industry has accomplished the same thing with the secular consumer market. The antidote to this bullying is for every consumer to think for himself. If we have learned one thing over the past three years, it's not to blindly trust the "experts."
You're bang on Mark. I couldn't agree more. Somehow, although I thought I questioned absolutely everything, the organic thing got lost in the mire so I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. Now I'm wondering what else has slipped through the net.
I can say that I discover a new one every day. I will continue to share them with my Substack readers, so they can continue the process of healthy questioning.
The Stanford review I cited found no difference in pesticide residue between food labeled organic and conventional food. Pesticides and herbicides are commonly used in organic food--paraquat and pyrethrin, for example. Because they're "organic" (like arsenic, mercury, and cyanide), they don't count when organic food advocates publish reports of chemical contamination. What's more, organic food contains more pathogenic bacteria than conventional food due to the use of "organic" fertilizer. Unlike pesticide residue, which can be easily washed off by rinsing fruits and vegetables, sterilization of infectious disease residue requires chemicals like chlorine bleach. Conventional farming relies on nitrogen-based fertilizers, which are far safer, less expensive, and improve crop yield and nutritional content. They also require less energy for crop production.
Glyphosate is commonly known as Roundup, and it has been shown to cause disease in humans. So have paraquat and pyrethrin. I suggest consumers avoid all foods that have been adulterated with unhealthy substances (organic or not) that cannot be easily removed from the food before eating. Organic labels do not offer a solution to this problem.
It certainly isn't now. This report was published a number of years ago before full institutional capture. Also, it is a meta-analysis, so none of the data was gathered by Stanford Medical School. Finally, it simply looks at two data points: nutritional content and presence of pesticides. Its finding was simple--food labeled "organic" shows no objective nutritional or safety benefits over conventional food, as a group. I believe that to be accurate.
Regenerative agriculture is a better system. Chemical farming destroys soil structure, kills beneficial life in the soil, leaving only pathogens. Once the soil structure and the beneficial microbial life is destroyed, the soil requires chemicals to produce anything, more and more chemicals. It is far more subject to top soil erosion. Manure is only one small component of regenerative agriculure and it must be added to the soil in a manner that is safe. Best method is to first compost it. An excellent method for neutralizing pathogens is via bokashi style composting. (Korean Natural Farming) Of course, using sewage biomass is always risky, and always loaded with harmful chemicals. "Toxic Sludge is Good for You." by Stauber is a good source. Toxic sludge is not only used on some organic farms. It's spread on children's parks, national parks, forests etc. Blame the US government for that, and for the co-opting of the once informative organic label.
Excellent point. If your goal is to avoid Roundup, picking the "organic" option may be no better than the conventional food right beside it, at half the price. How long does Roundup hang out in the soil? Who knows? And what biologic pesticide or herbicide was used in the production of that so-called organic food? You'll never know, because organic food labels don't consider those contaminants. Once again, organic does not in any way mean healthy and safe--it simply means "expensive."
I just threw out an entire bag of avocados matching your description. Now I wonder if they are an Apeel product.
Grow your own; or buy local. Farmers markets need our support and constitute food security.
Far better solution than buying into the "organic" marketing charade cooked up by environmental activists and big corporations--the same ones that push solar, wind, and battery energy that are impoverishing us all and destroying the ecosystem.
I feel the same. Would rather buy from a local farmer I know, who can't afford or doesn't believe in the labels. "Organic" fruits & veggies went mainstream a couple decades ago, and we're always hearing about outbreaks. Unfair labor & unclean practices. Eat seasonally & locally. Know your farmers!
Nothing beats local and knowing your farmer it's great for the economy too. The corp shift into Organic space is largely the last decade and BigAg is never trustworthy but USDA label is far from the only game in town.
Many invented mean nothing corp seals have been added as well as genuine groups but many do have value. Consumer Reports ranks them in an easy to search system to know if it's a marketing scam or genuine certification relating to quality of worker rights, animal care, ingredients etc. https://www.consumerreports.org/food-labels/seals-and-claims/
I see your concerns, and I even think you have a valid point. But which is worse. Taking a chance on organics or purchasing foods that are 100% loaded in chemicals?
You've presented a false choice. Organic food may be loaded with organic toxins like paraquat and pyrethrin, in the same way that conventional food may be loaded in inorganic toxins. Neither are healthy to eat. The third option is to research the stores where you shop, and the products they sell, rather than relying on an "organic" stamp that is either fraudulent or managed by the same government agencies that have been lying to us and conspiring against us for years (decades?).
Mexico also has toxic water supplies, which would get taken up into the produce. Stop blaming illness on microbes!
The water in Mexico is filthy, contaminated by chemical and biological toxins. Most GI illness, though, is caused by bugs: viruses, amoebae, and bacterium. That's why the Mexicans soak their fruits and vegetables in bleach. Kills the bugs.
Guess what bleach does to your gut health. Would love to see the scientific evidence that GI illness is CAUSED by microorganisms.
Do you believe that viruses, amoebae, and bacterium don't exist? Some people think that all disease today is caused by 5G, but I'm no in agreement with that assertion.
Viruses have never been proven to exist as pathogenic particles. Amoebae and bacteria exist, have been characterized but still never proven to cause disease. Obviously various forms of radiation can cause adverse effects on the human body (and animals, birds in particular), but there are a myriad of toxins we are subjected to each day.
What about those amoebae that swim into your brain through your ears and eat your brain, or the flesh-eating bacteria that can gnaw through your entire arm in under 24 hours?
Don't expect any fact based engagement.. after a couple of days sparring it's got me torn between thinking this is troll or shill or just pompous idiot. There's no openness or curiosity and the tactic of replying with some tangent that infers a crackpot quality to legitimate scientific questions like the 5G jab at you.
As a "Dissident MD" I actually think he may be more willing to ponder other lies he has been trained to believe.
Thank you for this info!
I had no idea but not surprised, since our government & fake news media & health organizations & FBI are allowed to lie to us about anything & everything, no matter how harmful or deadly, not surprised our food industry does the same thing!?!
Unless you're growing your own food, raising your own cattle, etc., you're going to have to "choose your poison." Obviously not all organic food is grown in Mexico and not every farmer's throwing his family's poop about on the farm. How is it that I've been eating organic produce (much from Mexico) for close to a decade and haven't gotten food poisoning once from it? I must be an anomaly.
Maybe you don't have time to read Toxic Legacy by Dr. Stephanie Seneff (even though Chapter 1 is worth the price of the book alone), but I would encourage all to listen to some of her interviews. She has a whole list of them on her website, but as an example, here is one that is fairly short and concise: https://drhoffman.com/podcast/glyphosate-putting-our-soils-waterways-wildlife-and-ourselves-at-risk-part-1/
https://drhoffman.com/podcast/glyphosate-putting-our-soils-waterways-wildlife-and-ourselves-at-risk-part-2/
Mark, you in particular might be interested to hear what she says about Mexico!
Also, if you go to thehighwire.com and search their videos for Monsanto and Glyphosate, they've reported on the harms and deception for some time now.
Look, to each his own. If you want to slurp glyphosate and avoid organic, that is your choice. But I would caution against blindly trusting that Big Ag and government regulatory agencies are making choices that are better for your health than their pocketbooks. Everyone should do their own research on both sides and make an informed decision for themselves, because in the end, YOU are responsible for your own health.
Completely agree--without full knowledge of the "chain of custody" of what you eat, you cannot ensure the integrity of your food. That is why I support the comments from readers who suggest doing your own research and buying products from stores or producers that you can trust.
The so-called organic food industry is managed by an alliance of large corporate agriculture and the US Department of Agriculture, as you point out. It does not have the consumers' best interest in mind--only its own pocketbook and accretion of power. Big Pharma and FDA are no different.
It was discovered recently a new fact about atoms: the space between the nucleus and the innermost electron shell is not empty, or a vacuum, as previously thought, but it's a space filled with propaganda, advertisement and sophistry.
This new fact seems to explain everything.
Lol. That idea is fun to visualize.
https://www.cooksinfo.com/peroxide-vinegar-sterilization
When I purchase organic, I would hope to prevent pesticide contamination, and perhaps increase the nutritional value. Good to know that we cannot get around the microorganisms without the washing.
Shocking to learn poor sanitation & lax food handling affects all foods. It's as if you expect hand washing and other basic practices shouldn't apply to all foods equally. Rediculous.
The fact that toxic practices by BigAg using sludge they call biosolids condemns organic producers and somehow diminishes the nutrients because one study done in Portugal found pathogens are equal opportunity transporters of illness.
Again your intentional omission of American standards for organic labels helps you twist the conclusion to defend your idea that chemically intensive farming has no downside or impact on health.
In fact the practice is still opposed by Organic regulation but why let facts get in the way of a good story when a practice that should be outlawed for any food production can be twisted to smear organic instead. You aren't interested in food safety only in puffing up a misguided notion when you should be actively opposing the toxic practices for all food production!
Dumping Sewage Sludge On Organic Farms?
Why USDA Should Just Say No
April 30, 1998
View and Download the report here: Dumping Sewage Sludge on Organic Farms
In December, 1997, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) proposed draft national standards for organic agriculture. As part of this proposal, the department invited the public to comment on the idea of allowing application of municipal sewage sludge on land used to grow organic foods.1 The Environmental Protection Agency’s top sludge regulator urged the department to allow “high quality biosolids” (i.e., sewage sludge) to be used in organic food production.2
The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), a federally mandated advisory body established by the 1990 National Organic Standards Act, recommended to USDA that, in general, sewage sludge should not be allowed in organic food production.
Experts within the organic food industry maintain that organic farmers extremely rarely, if ever, use sewage sludge now, and they resolutely oppose allowing its use under the final organic standards rule. The vast majority of the more than 115,000 public comments filed to date on the proposed rule explicitly object to the use of sewage sludge as a federally approved organic farming practice.
EWG Findings
Based on our analysis of the toxic constituents of sewage sludge and the likely contribution organic farmland can make to sludge disposal, the Environmental Working Group (EWG) strongly recommends that sewage sludge not be allowed in organic food production. Indeed, our review leads us to question the safety and advisability of using sewage sludge in any food production system.
An EWG analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) found that some 2 billion pounds of toxic chemicals––341 different chemicals in all––were transferred to sewage treatment plants between 1990 and 1995. Included were 33.6 million pounds of toxic heavy metals like mercury, lead, and cadmium, and more than 63 million pounds of carcinogenic substances.
An EWG analysis of the only available national data on sludge content (the 1988 National Sewage Sludge Survey of 208 treatment plants) found a total of over 100 synthetic organic compounds (not including pesticides) in U.S. sludge, including phthalates, toluene, and chlorobenzene. The average sample contained almost 9 synthetic organic contaminants. Dioxins were found in sludge from 179 out of 208 systems (80%). In addition, 42 different pesticides were found––at least one in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per survey sample. None of these chemical contaminants are regulated in sludge. The nine heavy metals that are regulated in sludge were routinely detected, often at high concentrations. No comprehensive data are available to assess if EPA regulations have reduced these toxic components of sludge since the late 1980s.
Organic agriculture constitutes about one-tenth of one percent of all farmland–– about 1 million acres out of 972 million acres. We estimate that allowing sludge to be used in organic agriculture will reduce the nation’s sewage sludge disposal burden by about 0.03 percent—a trivial contribution, particularly when weighed against the potential for severe damage to consumer acceptance of organically grown foods and to the economic integrity of the $3.5 billion organic food industry.
Use of municipal sewage sludge would be completely inconsistent with organic farming principles and practices, in light of the large number of toxic substances routinely found in sewage sludge, often at very high concentrations. Introducing synthetic pollutants through sewage sludge application into a food production system that is explicitly designed to scrupulously avoid synthetic chemicals such as pesticides and manufactured fertilizers would be the epitome of a flawed public policy.
Toxic Substances in Sewage Sludge
Sewage sludge is the thick, malodorous slurry left behind in a sewage treatment plant after its load of human and industrial chemical wastes has been treated and the wastewater discharged. The sewage treatment industry and the government often refer to sludge as “biosolids” for much the same reason that pesticide companies now call their products “crop protection chemicals.”
The large amount of human waste in sewage treatment plants means that the sludge contains high concentrations of phosphates and nitrates, desirable components of fertilizer. However, the industrial wastes that are present in sewage cause highly toxic materials such as industrial solvents, heavy metals, and even nuclear waste to be left behind in sludge. When sewage sludge is applied to the fields, both the nutrients and the toxic chemicals are released to the environment. There are many of these toxic chemicals, and they are often found at high concentrations.
An EWG analysis of the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) found that some 2 billion pounds of toxic chemicals––341 different chemicals in all––were transferred to sewage treatment plants between 1990 and 1995. This included 33.6 million pounds of toxic heavy metals like mercury, lead, and cadmium, and more than 63 million pounds of carcinogenic substances.
Sewage treatment plants report discharges of some pollutants under the Clean Water Act, but do not report their discharges to the centrally maintained TRI. Thus, no recent comprehensive, national databases are available on the toxic constituents of effluent discharged by sewage treatment plants, or on the toxic components of more than 7.5 million tons of sludge generated in the United States annually.3
EWG also analyzed EPA’s 1988 National Sewage Sludge Survey. This survey of 208 municipal sewage treatment plants was conducted prior to EPA’s enforcement of regulations requiring pretreatment of industrial waste prior to its being sent to sewage treatment plants. The survey also predated EPA’s regulatory restrictions on nine heavy metals that routinely contaminate sewage sludge––the only toxic components of sewage sludge for which monitoring is now required.4 Nevertheless, in the absence of more recent data, the survey is the only available benchmark for evaluating toxic substances in sludge.
Our analysis showed that over 100 synthetic organic compounds (not including pesticides) were detected in at least one survey sample. The average sample contained almost 9 synthetic organic contaminants. One sample had 32 compounds and 15 samples had at least 20. The most common organic contaminants in sludge were Bis(2-Ethylhexyl) Phthalate, which was found in the sludge of 142 different sewage treatment plants. Toluene and 2-Propanone were found in 126 and 125 plants, respectively (Table 1).
Some 42 different pesticides were found; at least one pesticide was detected in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per sample and 25 samples containing 4 pesticides or more. The most common pesticide in sewage sludge was 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange), which banned for use by the EPA in 1985 yet was still found in 51 samples. Acetic Acid (2,4- Dichlorophenoxy) and 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic Acid followed with 43 and 27 plants, respectively (Table 2).
Some 42 different pesticides were found; at least one pesticide was detected in almost every sample, with an average of almost 2 pesticides per sample and 25 samples containing 4 pesticides or more. The most common pesticide in sewage sludge was 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic Acid (one of the active ingredients in Agent Orange), which banned for use by the EPA in 1985 yet was still found in 51 samples. Acetic Acid (2,4- Dichlorophenoxy) and 2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxypropionic Acid followed with 43 and 27 plants, respectively (Table 2).
Ix
Ironically, allowing the use of sewage sludge in organic food production is probably a surefire way to ensure that organic acreage will not expand, based on the strong opposition consumers have voiced to USDA at the prospect of sewage sludge being legal for use by organic growers.
https://web.archive.org/web/20140518040243/https://www.ewg.org/research/dumping-sewage-sludge-organic-farms
Another happy customer!
Nice way to avoid confronting your flawed assumptions about diet & health w enough cherry picking of studies to make former chemical companies Monsanto-Bayer-Astra Zeneca et al multinational pharmaceutical and biotechnology factory food & drug empires happy as clams!
Over the last few years, I've seen many well-intentioned, passionate people align themselves with seemingly virtuous movements that are controlled by the very actors they promise to be fighting. The organic food industry is a cartel run by big agriculture and big government--the US Department of Agriculture, specifically--and serves no one's interests but its own, no different than the FDA, the CDC, the NIH, and every large corporation they're in bed with.
Goodie for you but my career began in Washington in Watergate era w lucrative career as a Beltway Bandit leaving due to excess corruption when Poppy Bush was elected.
Since then my skills from the dark side have been used dirtbag hunting so whatever unholy alliances you imagine taint the world of organic were old news to me decades ago.. by 1997 focused mainly on toxic chemicals and food. Your few years of observations & poor conclusions don't impress me much.
No question corp profiteers have absorbed vast numbers of small organic brands & processed food lobby chipped away at allowable limits but you're wrong about organic farming trends & essential connection between health and nutrition.
Beyond that the better option is to go local for more everything.. know your farmer.. shop at green-markets don't point at our captured regulatory system & pronounce global farming & home gardens a lost cause. Not only does NYC have cooperative farm to table our Greenmarkets give $6 fresh food for every $5 EBT card & end if day produce is donated to City Harvest food pantry network... find solutions not complaints to justify defeatism.
https://www.grownyc.org/greenmarket
Aren't EBT cards simply cash transfers from taxpayers to fraudsters to cover junk food, liquor, and cigarette addictions? You aren't even allowed to cook food in NYC anymore--the Democrats there have outlawed stoves!
Wow it almost inspires sympathy to see how far reaching your smugnorance is to be so woefully uninformed on so many subjects yet still be so passionate flaunting it.
"Aren't EBT cards simply cash transfers from taxpayers to fraudsters to cover junk food, liquor, and cigarette addictions?"
Let's start with food insecure families including 1:5 American children. Who's grifting?
Apr 29, 2021 · “Basically, what happens is right now, we know that there are many military families that have to rely on food stamps, that are food insecure, and many more that would qualify" https://www.militarytimes.com/news/your-military/2021/04/29/bill-would-expand-number-of-military-families-who-qualify-for-food-assistance/
Last I checked the Pentagon, Lockheed et al were swimming in cash in perpetuity!
https://www.fedspending.org/fpds/tables.php?tabtype=t2&subtype=t&year=2015
https://www.usaspending.gov/explorer/budget_function
but there's more grifters to find...
Nov 19, 2020 — Walmart and McDonald's are among the top employers of beneficiaries of federal aid programs like Medicaid and food stamps, according to a study according to a study by the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office released Wednesday.
The question of how much taxpayers contribute to maintaining basic living standards for employees at some of the nation's largest low-wage companies has long been a flashpoint in the debate over minimum wage laws and the ongoing effort to unionize these sectors.
https://web.archive.org/web/20201119182832/https://www.cnbc.com/2020/11/19/walmart-and-mcdonalds-among-top-employers-of-medicaid-and-food-stamp-beneficiaries.html
Looks like Corporate Welfare to me w workers on starvation wages & Walmart heirs pocketing food money of poor kids.. maybe it's just me but it stinks like week old fish when billionaires rob workers then blame the victims. Makes me hope your MD is a bogus claim.
"You aren't even allowed to cook food in NYC anymore--the Democrats there have outlawed stoves!"
Love to see your source for that but thanks I'm laughing harder than for any idiotic Qanon meme ever did.. maybe living in NYC adds more humor...
Dr. Knowlittle's News Flash The Big Apple has transformed from City that never sleeps to City that never eats.. crawl out of your hole and try a pinch of reality & heap of humility!!
I have learned quite a bit about glyphosates. I choose organic local farms and do the best I can. I avoid GMOs and receive emails from organizations that are following and sharing better ways of understanding what is being done. I have followed Jeffrey Smith - institute of Responsible Technology. Mansanto needs prison time. Organic is less dangerous. I so desire to grow my own veggies but not able to now.
Something I've noticed as I review reader comments on this subject is that many people appear to be focused on Roundup and make all their consumer purchasing decisions based on the likely presence or absence of the use of this herbicide immediately preceding crop harvesting. I would caution everyone not to become a one-issue consumer, in the same way that I cautioned everyone not to become a one-issue patient during the pandemic. Many Americans made themselves physically ill through (largely ineffectual) attempts to protect from Chinese Wuhan virus infection--masks, injections, home sequestration, elimination of all exercise, avoidance of sunlight, etc. I fear this same thing is occurring with so-called organic food. "Organic" is not a proxy for "safe and healthy." Its definition is unclear, its management falls under the purview of the USDA, and it directs billions of dollars through a shady cabal that includes the federal government, massive commercial farms, and national retail food distributors. I trust none of these actors to have our best interests at heart.
Once again, I recommend that consumers ignore the "organic" label entirely and start thinking for themselves when they evaluate the nutritional quality and safety of the food they buy rather than relying on a stamp that may or may not carry any practical value.
Hi Mark, thanks for this piece. I dont doubt that you are correct here, mostly anyway. I buy organic, but reading this has made me question exactly where it comes from, why I am buying it and weather I am having the wool pulled over my eyes. What I would say though, with regards to bacteria, is that I dont believe that the bacteria itself causea disease. It is the matter is a state of being broken down by the bacteria that causes the disease. You should always wash your produce.
Then my objective has been achieved--to get people to think critically about how they choose the food they purchase. Not all food labeled organic is nutritious and safe to eat, and not all food without that label unhealthy and unsafe. Assuming otherwise opens us up to deception, fraud, and financial impoverishment. The kosher labeling cartels bully businesses into forking over loads of cash to gain access to a captured religious market. The organic food labeling industry has accomplished the same thing with the secular consumer market. The antidote to this bullying is for every consumer to think for himself. If we have learned one thing over the past three years, it's not to blindly trust the "experts."
You're bang on Mark. I couldn't agree more. Somehow, although I thought I questioned absolutely everything, the organic thing got lost in the mire so I appreciate you bringing it to my attention. Now I'm wondering what else has slipped through the net.
I can say that I discover a new one every day. I will continue to share them with my Substack readers, so they can continue the process of healthy questioning.
Check Consumer Reports for label ranks.. many frauds & many valuable
https://www.consumerreports.org/food-labels/seals-and-claims/
What about the supposedly higher levels of pesticides on non-organic crops? The truth about organic produce and pesticides - The Washington Post https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/food/the-truth-about-organic-produce-and-pesticides/2018/05/18/8294296e-5940-11e8-858f-12becb4d6067_story.html
Glyphosate and other good stuff. Does conventional agriculture also use fecal material to any degree? Thanks.
The Stanford review I cited found no difference in pesticide residue between food labeled organic and conventional food. Pesticides and herbicides are commonly used in organic food--paraquat and pyrethrin, for example. Because they're "organic" (like arsenic, mercury, and cyanide), they don't count when organic food advocates publish reports of chemical contamination. What's more, organic food contains more pathogenic bacteria than conventional food due to the use of "organic" fertilizer. Unlike pesticide residue, which can be easily washed off by rinsing fruits and vegetables, sterilization of infectious disease residue requires chemicals like chlorine bleach. Conventional farming relies on nitrogen-based fertilizers, which are far safer, less expensive, and improve crop yield and nutritional content. They also require less energy for crop production.
Glyphosate is commonly known as Roundup, and it has been shown to cause disease in humans. So have paraquat and pyrethrin. I suggest consumers avoid all foods that have been adulterated with unhealthy substances (organic or not) that cannot be easily removed from the food before eating. Organic labels do not offer a solution to this problem.
Thank you for the detailed answer. I greatly appreciate it.
Stanford isn't even trustworthy
It certainly isn't now. This report was published a number of years ago before full institutional capture. Also, it is a meta-analysis, so none of the data was gathered by Stanford Medical School. Finally, it simply looks at two data points: nutritional content and presence of pesticides. Its finding was simple--food labeled "organic" shows no objective nutritional or safety benefits over conventional food, as a group. I believe that to be accurate.
Regenerative agriculture is a better system. Chemical farming destroys soil structure, kills beneficial life in the soil, leaving only pathogens. Once the soil structure and the beneficial microbial life is destroyed, the soil requires chemicals to produce anything, more and more chemicals. It is far more subject to top soil erosion. Manure is only one small component of regenerative agriculure and it must be added to the soil in a manner that is safe. Best method is to first compost it. An excellent method for neutralizing pathogens is via bokashi style composting. (Korean Natural Farming) Of course, using sewage biomass is always risky, and always loaded with harmful chemicals. "Toxic Sludge is Good for You." by Stauber is a good source. Toxic sludge is not only used on some organic farms. It's spread on children's parks, national parks, forests etc. Blame the US government for that, and for the co-opting of the once informative organic label.
Excellent point. If your goal is to avoid Roundup, picking the "organic" option may be no better than the conventional food right beside it, at half the price. How long does Roundup hang out in the soil? Who knows? And what biologic pesticide or herbicide was used in the production of that so-called organic food? You'll never know, because organic food labels don't consider those contaminants. Once again, organic does not in any way mean healthy and safe--it simply means "expensive."
I just threw out an entire bag of avocados matching your description. Now I wonder if they are an Apeel product.