Organic food and pesticide use facts

by Benjamin Martin*

Alex Berry's column, "Organic a healthier alternative" is rife with misinformation. A previous article by Jennifer Jackson ("Locally grown options make for good eatin',") rightly advocated sustainable produce, but also presented misinformation on organic agriculture. As a graduate student studying biotechnology and agriculture, I feel ethically obligated to point out the errors in the article and column.

First, looking on the National Organic Program's Web site, one quickly finds the "USDA makes no claims that organically produced food is safer or more nutritious than conventionally produced food."

Secondly, in Jackson's article, she wrote that "organic food means less chemicals are used." Wrong. Nowhere in the guidelines for organic agriculture written in the USDA's National Organic Program (www.ams.usda.gov/nop) does it imply organic agriculture uses less chemicals than modern agriculture. Organic agriculture is not pesticide-free by any means. It is limited to using naturally occurring pesticides, rather than synthetic ones.

Furthermore, organic agriculture may use synthetic chemicals when a natural version is not available. Approved chemicals to be used in organics can be found at www.ams.usda.gov/nop/NOP/standards/ListReg.html.

This list includes such chemicals as sulfur dioxide gas commonly used to kill rats by blocking nerve receptors and copper sulfate, which is toxic to aquatic life and has long term persistence in the environment, making it potentially more dangerous in comparison to many of the commonly used pesticides in modern agriculture that readily breakdown in the environment and pose low toxicity to non-target pests.

Basically, as the list states, if "the substance cannot be produced from a natural source and there are no organic substitutes," it will often be approved for organic production.

Berry's column provided more blatant fallacies such as, "use of pesticides ... significantly contributes to male infertility, breast and prostate cancer and miscarriages in women." Where is the data to support these assertions of significant increases? Testimonials do not count as scientific data, and we are in college to learn the difference.

Finally, both Jackson and Berry focus on the idea that "local" somehow means non-industrial, fresher and organic, while these terms have nothing to do with being locally grown and can apply to food from anywhere. Jackson alludes to industrial farms being primarily concerned with profits. I would be shocked to find any local farmers not concerned with profit margins, just as any other farmer.

Likewise, even industrial farms must mind the environment, as the adoption of practices that damage the environment lead to loss of soil fertility and increased costs of production.

Ultimately, Berry is right in that agricultural pesticides have been abused at times, which is why all farmers - organic or otherwise, are striving to reduce pesticide use.

That is why today's agriculture is going high-tech - precision delivery techniques apply pesticides only when and where needed. Integrated Pest Management uses advanced communication networks to monitor pests and diseases, and avoiding control measures unless an economic threshold is reached.

Finally, biotechnology is making the use of pesticides unnecessary, while promoting the use of agricultural practices that save soil, water and fuel. As a result, food does not need to be expensive to be environmentally friendly or healthy. As Dwight D. Eisenhower said, "Farming looks easy when your plow is a pencil ..."


*Benjamin Martin is a graduate student studying agronomy at the University of Georgia.

Red and Black