Go Back  The Hull Truth - Boating and Fishing Forum > BOATING FORUMS > Dockside Chat
Reload this Page >

Buying Organic foods from the grocery

Notices
Like Tree112Likes

Buying Organic foods from the grocery

Old 02-13-2019, 10:48 AM
  #61  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Carolinas
Posts: 151
Default

Originally Posted by junepoon View Post
from a cage free bull.

So you have tried it and found it to be bs?
Capt Grady 23 Gulfstream is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 10:49 AM
  #62  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: See screen name
Posts: 5,222
Default

is there any peer reviewed science that shows a consensus that organic is more nutritious?
Well there is, actually, but mostly to the contrary, including a very large one conducted by those Commies out at Stanford. Which means, of course that many members of the THT Brain Trust will now contend that it must be much more nutritious since science says it's not.
coores14 likes this.
caltexflanc is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 10:51 AM
  #63  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Key West
Posts: 11,615
Default

Originally Posted by caltexflanc View Post
Well there is, actually, but mostly to the contrary, including a very large one conducted by those Commies out at Stanford. Which means, of course that many members of the THT Brain Trust will now contend that it must be much more nutritious since science says it's not.
yup. exactly.
coores14 is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 10:58 AM
  #64  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Carolinas
Posts: 151
Default

Originally Posted by caltexflanc View Post
Well there is, actually, but mostly to the contrary, including a very large one conducted by those Commies out at Stanford. Which means, of course that many members of the THT Brain Trust will now contend that it must be much more nutritious since science says it's not.

As previously stated, what agenda did Stanford have? Who PAID for the research, and what is Stanford's relatiornship with the ag or gmo industry? How did you interpret the results, etc.? More questions than we can imagine to say definitely either way.

Soooooo people making general statement s with absolutely no concrete proof is what happens with this topic.

Also, very few have tried it.
Capt Grady 23 Gulfstream is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 11:19 AM
  #65  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Carolinas
Posts: 151
Default

Originally Posted by saltwaters View Post
Have you ever noticed that every food borne illness caused by bacterial infection comes from organic products?

So that PROVES they don't use pesticides, or spray the food even after it is harvested to prevent the bacterial infections like conventional farmers do. So, inhale lots of chemicals or risk an infection occasionally, your choice.

That is why I say try it or don't knock it. 25 years for me, no infection yet, what about u?

Typical scares that are a result of EXTRA tough inspections for the organic industry.

Your conventional products could NEVER stand the rigours of the govt. Inspection biased on organics.

They would have many more recalls under the same scrutiny, because of the lobbyists for GMO and conventional farmers. Organic producers have a very small lobby.
Capt Grady 23 Gulfstream is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 11:28 AM
  #66  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 267
Default

I grew growing organic. It's just how it was done. Sprays and such were expensive. Tended garden with horse and plow. Used manure for fertilizer.

Now here is my opinion on organic. If you don't see bug bites and worms it is not likely organic. Unless it was hard graded which would mean only marketing half down to 10 percent for quality blemish free produce. That on it self dictates double to 10x price increase over non organic.

Last I read up on organic standards it was nothing like how we grew back when. I kind of like nice blemish/worm free vegetables and fruit. Hec, I am not getting out of here alive anyway.

Imo the key to a good heart for a long time is more about being smart enough not to do daily strenuous work, stay in the shade. Get your exercise playing, than it is about diet. Not slighting a responsible diet though. I have noticed the hardest workers die younger than the ones that relax more. So, I definitely feel your can overwork your heart and joints, thereby shortening life or at least reducing lifestyle quality.
Finsinchessy is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 11:33 AM
  #67  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Posts: 355
Default

Here, some data: a list of "synthetic substances allowed for use in organic crop production": https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/text-id...7.354.2&idno=7

Also, what "organic" means is "jumped through the hoops required by the certifying agency". You have some semi-wild raspberries in your backyard that you don't do anything to, just eat what grows on them? They are not organic. Found a blueberry patch in the forest? Nope, not organic either.
Drako is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 11:35 AM
  #68  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Key West
Posts: 11,615
Default

Originally Posted by Capt Grady 23 Gulfstream View Post
As previously stated, what agenda did Stanford have? Who PAID for the research, and what is Stanford's relatiornship with the ag or gmo industry? How did you interpret the results, etc.? More questions than we can imagine to say definitely either way.

Soooooo people making general statement s with absolutely no concrete proof is what happens with this topic.

Also, very few have tried it.
so this is precisely where you lose credibility and is the downfall for all of the chest thumping pro-organic non-gmo cheerleaders.
What you're saying is that your purely anecdotal evidence PROVES to you that you know more and have better "facts" than anyone in the science community that happens to have contradictory evidence. And if you continuously are shown more facts that don't fit your little anecdotal box, then surely the science is tainted by agendas, money, and insider relationships.

that's absolutely absurd.

- "well I smoked cigarettes for 75 years and never got cancer, therefore I KNOW that cigarettes don't cause cancer"
--- "you mean despite the overwhelming fact based evidence provided by scientific research that has run the gauntlet of scrutiny and still has the same conclusions?"
- "yes, despite all of that I know more than them because I never got cancer. Plus, I'm sure all of that research is funded by the medical industry who only want to sell us more radiation machines."
--- "can you provide any proof of that?"
- "look, i'm right and you're wrong. Plus the cigarette lobbyists are tiny compare to radiation machine lobbyists. Duh. Wake up!"
coores14 is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 11:36 AM
  #69  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,892
Default

Originally Posted by saltwaters View Post
Have you ever noticed that every food borne illness caused by bacterial infection comes from organic products?
Have you ever noticed that is an incorrect statement!
Aliboy is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 11:37 AM
  #70  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Key West
Posts: 11,615
Default

Originally Posted by Capt Grady 23 Gulfstream View Post
So that PROVES they don't use pesticides, or spray the food even after it is harvested to prevent the bacterial infections like conventional farmers do. So, inhale lots of chemicals or risk an infection occasionally, your choice.

That is why I say try it or don't knock it. 25 years for me, no infection yet, what about u?

Typical scares that are a result of EXTRA tough inspections for the organic industry.

Your conventional products could NEVER stand the rigours of the govt. Inspection biased on organics.

They would have many more recalls under the same scrutiny, because of the lobbyists for GMO and conventional farmers. Organic producers have a very small lobby.
not only is there proof that organics use pesticides, evidence already provided in this thread by the Organic industry themselves, but I wanted to quote and highlight your Freudian slip for posterity.
coores14 is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 12:10 PM
  #71  
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Location: Blue Ridge Mtns, VA
Posts: 97
Default

Originally Posted by saltwaters View Post
Have you ever noticed that every food borne illness caused by bacterial infection comes from organic products?
No. I haven't noticed that. Quite the opposite. Far more recalls for non-organically labeled products.

I subscribe to FDA recalls. From April 3 to Dec 26, 2018, there were 278 market withdrawals or safety alerts. Of those, 59 were due to bacterial contamination (Salmonella., E. coli, Listeria, Cyclospora, Burkholderia, Pseudomonas, or multiple).

Of those 59, two were labeled organic: Inspired Organics sunflower butter and Bob's Red Mill organic amaranth flour. The rest were not organic. If you recall the big romaine lettuce contaminated w/ E. coli recall sold by Giant Eagle. None were labeled organic.

https://www.fda.gov/Safety/Recalls/A...ult.htm?Page=1

Historically, the number of recalls for organic products has been ~ 2% with spikes up to 4%. Just a tad lower than EVERY.
stimpson.j.cat is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 01:35 PM
  #72  
Member
 
Join Date: May 2016
Posts: 46
Default

Originally Posted by saltwaters View Post
Have you ever noticed that every food borne illness caused by bacterial infection comes from organic products?
You've never had food poisoning from eating at Hooters?
SilverGraphite is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 02:48 PM
  #73  
Member
 
Join Date: May 2012
Location: fl
Posts: 98
Default

Originally Posted by SilverGraphite View Post
You've never had food poisoning from eating at Hooters?
Or eating donuts for breakfast. like the meme says no-one ever got Salmonella., E. coli or Listeria, from eating chocolate cake.
yakmatt is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:03 PM
  #74  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Florida Panhandle
Posts: 3,900
Default

Originally Posted by coores14 View Post
not only is there proof that organics use pesticides, evidence already provided in this thread by the Organic industry themselves, but I wanted to quote and highlight your Freudian slip for posterity.
Organic is valuable depending on what a person's preference is and how they wish to care for their body. One of the biggest benefits is a little complicated to understand but critical to our bodies. Most won't understand it so there's no need to go in depth. Buy anyway, there are good, better and best engine oils, boats, cars. There's a whole host of threads on this site arguing about all sorts of things, one being better than another. So why not read a little rather than criticize with no knowledge?? No crop can survive growing in mass without some sort of pesticides which everyone understands. But there are lesser ways to do it as described in many sources. Here's a link to explain some of it:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-l...d/art-20043880
GulfC is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:14 PM
  #75  
Senior MemberCaptains Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Key West
Posts: 11,615
Default

Originally Posted by GulfC View Post
Organic is valuable depending on what a person's preference is and how they wish to care for their body. One of the biggest benefits is a little complicated to understand but critical to our bodies. Most won't understand it so there's no need to go in depth. Buy anyway, there are good, better and best engine oils, boats, cars. There's a whole host of threads on this site arguing about all sorts of things, one being better than another. So why not read a little rather than criticize with no knowledge?? No crop can survive growing in mass without some sort of pesticides which everyone understands. But there are lesser ways to do it as described in many sources. Here's a link to explain some of it:

https://www.mayoclinic.org/healthy-l...d/art-20043880
i'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make, particularly with reference to what you quoted from me.

Organic is valuable if people choose to buy it? Yeah, never argued that point. But marketing does do a great job at creating perceived value. Some people fall victim, some don't.
The biggest benefit it has you won't bother explaining. Got it.
Read a little? I've done plenty of reading. Both sides of the coin. I'll stick with scientific consensus rather than feelings and opinions.
Everyone doesn't understand that no crop can be grown in mass quantities without pesticides. But again, not really a point that I've argued.
coores14 is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:24 PM
  #76  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: See screen name
Posts: 5,222
Default

Originally Posted by Capt Grady 23 Gulfstream View Post
As previously stated, what agenda did Stanford have? Who PAID for the research, and what is Stanford's relatiornship with the ag or gmo industry? How did you interpret the results, etc.? More questions than we can imagine to say definitely either way.

Soooooo people making general statement s with absolutely no concrete proof is what happens with this topic.

Also, very few have tried it.
Why don't you look it up if you are so interested? Hmmm?
caltexflanc is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:30 PM
  #77  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,892
Default

Have friends with an organic dairy farm. The whole thing is 100% self contained. They import no external fertilizers or pesticides etc. Been like that for decades and their production is climbing year on year as their management techniques improve, and they improve the soil by following proven organic methods. Helped them making hay this year and they made more hay and silage than they know what to do with, while neighboring properties are throwing fertilizer at their pasture to try and get more growth. Have relatives with conventional dairy farms. Been dairy farms for 100 years+. They need to add more fertilizers and mineral supplements now than they did 50 years ago. The soils are gradually being depleted and they can only improve production by applying more external inputs. Well managed farms, but conventional farming practices aren't as long term sustainable as organic farming practices,
Aliboy is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 03:50 PM
  #78  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 4,892
Default

Originally Posted by coores14 View Post

Everyone doesn't understand that no crop can be grown in mass quantities without pesticides. But again, not really a point that I've argued.
They can be, but it's more work and production is lower. It is more an economic than technical argument.

The other side of that is when you apply pesticides in bulk you need to think about what else is happening beyond killing the target pests. What is happening to the essential soil bacteria's and microbes? What is happening to the non-target insects etc. Anyone advocating the mass use of pesticides should have a read about what is happening to the worlds bee population. If you think people are scared about climate change, read what would happen if we continue to destroy the worlds bee population much further. Like climate change, no one has the definite answer, but a lot of research is suggesting a strong link between the massive drop in bee numbers and mass increase in pesticide use over the past couple of decades. All the big chemical producers of course spend $millions on 'denial research'. Have a read about what happens to the worlds food supply if bees disappear. Yet we keep throwing millions of tonnes of nasty chemicals on our crops every year because it makes them cheaper and more profitable. As a species, man has become very short term in it's thinking. A new car or boat or TV today is more valuable than slowing down the messing of the planet. Why spend more on truly sustainable living if it means I can't have new toys when I want them? The planet is huge so this won't affect me in my lifetime is pretty much standard thinking for far too many people.
Aliboy is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 04:10 PM
  #79  
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2018
Posts: 267
Default

Originally Posted by Aliboy View Post
They can be, but it's more work and production is lower. It is more an economic than technical argument.

The other side of that is when you apply pesticides in bulk you need to think about what else is happening beyond killing the target pests. What is happening to the essential soil bacteria's and microbes? What is happening to the non-target insects etc. Anyone advocating the mass use of pesticides should have a read about what is happening to the worlds bee population. If you think people are scared about climate change, read what would happen if we continue to destroy the worlds bee population much further. Like climate change, no one has the definite answer, but a lot of research is suggesting a strong link between the massive drop in bee numbers and mass increase in pesticide use over the past couple of decades. All the big chemical producers of course spend $millions on 'denial research'. Have a read about what happens to the worlds food supply if bees disappear. Yet we keep throwing millions of tonnes of nasty chemicals on our crops every year because it makes them cheaper and more profitable. As a species, man has become very short term in it's thinking. A new car or boat or TV today is more valuable than slowing down the messing of the planet. Why spend more on truly sustainable living if it means I can't have new toys when I want them? The planet is huge so this won't affect me in my lifetime is pretty much standard thinking for far too many people.
As much as i hate creation of new regulation. I have read on this and have my thoughts.

Which is if all bulk pesticide user kept viable bee colonies in order to use the pesticide we might more easily understand how or if the pesticides are truly the issue. Maybe we could learn how much is too much. There are relatively few bee operations in farm country around here.

There is no doubt there is a problem with the bees.
Finsinchessy is offline  
Old 02-13-2019, 04:26 PM
  #80  
Admirals Club Admiral's Club Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: Florida Panhandle
Posts: 3,900
Default

Originally Posted by coores14 View Post
i'm not quite sure what point you're trying to make, particularly with reference to what you quoted from me.

Organic is valuable if people choose to buy it? Yeah, never argued that point. But marketing does do a great job at creating perceived value. Some people fall victim, some don't.
The biggest benefit it has you won't bother explaining. Got it.
Read a little? I've done plenty of reading. Both sides of the coin. I'll stick with scientific consensus rather than feelings and opinions.
Everyone doesn't understand that no crop can be grown in mass quantities without pesticides. But again, not really a point that I've argued.
You're way too smart for me, enjoy the argument.
GulfC is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread