On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 21:39:59 +0100, (sw) wrote:

martin wrote:

On Wed, 13 Aug 2003 20:20:10 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:

Gardeners should realise that they frequently get their knickers in a twist
through the misuse of terms which have prior definitions differing from
those they *think* are correct. It has, for instance, occurred in this very
thread. "Organic" itself is a case in point. There is a great tendency to
call "beneficient" chemicals "organic" and others "inorganic".

It helps to sell organic food at vast prices to the naive, who think
that they are getting something clean and natural, rather than just
more stuff sprayed with approved "organic" chemicals.

Possibly. But some of us are capable of distinguishing between the
chemicals used on conventional crops and those used on Organic crops.

The customers who buy "organic" products in supermarkets have no way
of knowing.

Many of the "organic" alternatives are now on the EU banned list of
chemicals. Many of the alternative chemicals being used were far more
dangerous than the current stuff used by normal commercial growers,
according to the BBC. There's a lot of pseudo science about. I blame
rotten education.

My wife grows vegetables on an allotment organically. She and other
members use no chemicals. To me that's what organic is all about.
--
Martin