On Sun, 20 Jul 2003 16:09:07 GMT, "James Curts"
wrote:


Cheating can be unwitting. For instance, farmer A farms organically
(so he thinks, along with the trade regulator) farmer B applies all
the replacement nutrients to his land (synthetic nitrogen, potassium
and phosphorus salts, and any trace element salts required) and sells
organic matter to farmer A who fertilises his land with this OM.
Now he doesn't think that he is indirectly using artificial ferts to
his land, but what do you think?


The cheating to which I refer involves the deliberate circumvention of the
intent of "organic" guidelines by growers.

I understand, but I was merely trying to show that this small amount
of "cheating" is accompanied by a much larger form of unwitting
"cheating".

Sadly most of these guidelines
are very thinly veiled and of little use except to mislead the consumer.

That's the effect, I believe, but I'm not sure it is the intent of
obssessed organic growers. They are self-deluded to believe they are
doing the best for everyone concerned, in my experience.

When reading the "organic" label he would like to believe he can be
assurance the product is of more wholesome quality and free of pesticides as
is insinuated by the vagueness of the guidelines. Not true on today's store
shelves.

This sadly seems to be the case.

An instance we watched in this area was the labeling of packaged lettuce
from the Salinas California area that was one day normal lettuce and the
next day had the big bold "organic" label on it. Strange that a crop could
change it's content overnight. Not so strange is the fact that it did not
fly and is no longer stocked as organic. I believe the consumers are
starting to become even more aware of what goes on before food products hit
the shelves.

In Australia, one of the biggest beef raising areas in the World, in
Queensland, is "organic" and has been for a hundred years. Not that
they do anything out of the normal practice here, it just naturally
fits into organic guidelines. Very popular in Japan.