On 6 Jun 2004 09:20:43 -0700, (ta) wrote:

Torsten Brinch wrote in message . ..
On Sat, 5 Jun 2004 20:01:30 -0400, "ta" wrote:

rick etter wrote:
And that means also not cruelty-free. Just what I've been saying...

"...some organic pesticides have mammalian toxicities that are far
higher than many synthetic pesticides..."
http://www.cgfi.org/materials/key_pu...oxic_Tools.pdf

Wow, I can't *believe* CFGI, which is funded by the right-wing think tank
Hudson Institute, could possibly be promoting information that supports
their big agribusiness clients like Monsanto, ConAgra, and Archer Daniels
Midland, who have everything to lose by the success of organic farming.

But to be fair, I can't answer the specific charges as I'm not an expert, so
I'm expanding the thread to get a wider range of input.

The quoted statement is rather vacuous, ta, but not controversial..

Of course, you're right. I wasn't referring to the claim about the
toxicity of non-synthetic pesticides per se; everyone knows that
organic farming employs non-synthetic pesticides. I was referring to
CFGI's critique of organic farming in general, as laid out in the
referenced PDF file.

It is crude propaganda (as so much is, that come out of the Averys
at Hudson Institute.) Nancy Creamer has an article on it in OFRF
Information Bulletin, summer 2001, which you may be interested in
reading.

http://www.ofrf.org/publications/news/IB10.pdf