On Thu, 14 Aug 2003 07:20:30 +0000 (UTC), "Franz Heymann"
wrote:


"sw" wrote in message
...
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.

Must I then take it that organic food == food grown with nice tasting
chemicals and ordinary food == food grown with nasty tasting chemicals?

I think folksy old fashioned names for chemicals are better than real
chemical names. :-)
--
Martin