- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Organic foods. Better or scam?
Posted on 5/6/13 at 1:03 pm to bdevill
Posted on 5/6/13 at 1:03 pm to bdevill
Almost all apples are graded to size. A bigger apple just costs more if the price is by the pound. The wife tells me the bagged apples are almost always smaller and are also more likely to be older - last year's apples. They hold them refrigerated under carbon dioxide or nitrogen to keep them fresh longer.
When buying look for no bruises a stem and no mold in the bloom end.
When buying look for no bruises a stem and no mold in the bloom end.
This post was edited on 5/6/13 at 1:06 pm
Posted on 5/6/13 at 1:21 pm to mouton
quote:Depends on which food it is. Beef? Scam.
Organic foods. Better or scam?
Posted on 5/6/13 at 1:33 pm to MeridianDog
I buy mostly organic veggies just because I would prefer to avoid the pesticides for the most part. I am not naive enough to think they are perfect, but overall organic is likely better for me than non-organic. We get most of our veggies from a local CSA.
We normally spend extra on good chicken whether it is organic or free range, etc. We don't eat a ton of beef but I normally get grass fed if possible.
We normally spend extra on good chicken whether it is organic or free range, etc. We don't eat a ton of beef but I normally get grass fed if possible.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 2:08 pm to mouton
Theres a book called "The Rational Optimist" published a few years ago which tackles the subject of organic farming among other things.
The authors position in short is that organic farming ultimately does more harm than good because organic farming practices are inefficient when compared to modern farming intensification. The amount of land necessary to get similar volumes of organic crops is sometimes 10 or more times the size of comparable modern farms. That land is often found by claiming forest or other land. In addition, the use of manure based fertilization causes problems of its own.
In the end, he believes the ill effects of deforestation and methane gas from cows offsets any benefits of organic farming.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 2:32 pm to mouton
Fresh that looks good and tastes good is fine with me as far as fruits, vegetables and herbs etc...
Posted on 5/6/13 at 4:11 pm to aaronb023
quote:
I hate getting those huge 1.5 lb chicken breasts from sanderson farms unless I plan on cutting it up to put in something
From a local restaurant here in ATL, which does serve good food:
"Ashley Farms Organic Chicken
20 ounce chicken breast, goat cheese & chive whipped potatoes, Chef’s select vegetable"
How does a chicken breast get that big "organically"? A Stanford research paper from about a year ago indicated no measurable benefits from organic produce over traditional, who knows...
Posted on 5/6/13 at 4:17 pm to tirebiter
quote:
no measurable benefits from organic produce over conventional
fify
I agree with Gris Gris in that if it looks great.. I'll go with it. And I'm sticking with my assertion that Whole Foods organic apples in the Fall are better.. even than the conventional that is available at WF.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 4:22 pm to aaronb023
quote:
chicken is one thing that I eat a lot of that I don't mind paying a little more for to get organic
what exactly is organic chicken?
without googling, do you know what qualifies as organic chicken?
quote:
steroid free.
Chickens are not injected with steroids or growth hormones.
quote:
I hate getting those huge 1.5 lb chicken breasts from sanderson farms unless I plan on cutting it up to put in something
why is that?
whats wrong with their chicken?
Posted on 5/6/13 at 4:29 pm to wiltznucs
quote:
Theres a book called "The Rational Optimist" published a few years ago which tackles the subject of organic farming among other things.
The authors position in short is that organic farming ultimately does more harm than good because organic farming practices are inefficient when compared to modern farming intensification. The amount of land necessary to get similar volumes of organic crops is sometimes 10 or more times the size of comparable modern farms. That land is often found by claiming forest or other land. In addition, the use of manure based fertilization causes problems of its own.
In the end, he believes the ill effects of deforestation and methane gas from cows offsets any benefits of organic farming.
People have already made up their minds. They will think organic is better solely because of the word "organic".
When I finished my masters degree in poultry science, all the doctors stressed just trying to keep the people that havent jumped the fence to the organic side. There is no point in wasting time and energy convincing people that already have their mind made up about the situation.
quote:
How does a chicken breast get that big "organically"? A Stanford research paper from about a year ago indicated no measurable benefits from organic produce over traditional
My guess is that they use the same breeds that these "steroid factories" use. The birds have been bred to grow large very quickly. Their feed conversion rates are unreal.
The concept of "organic" chicken is basically laughed at in the poultry science community.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 4:59 pm to mouton
would have never dreamed about buying organic milk back in the day when the teenage boys and their friends and their friends friends went through gallons a day,,, but now the organic half gallon lasts longer in the fridge than the regular stuff.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 5:05 pm to Deactived
quote:
Organic chicken
Any duffuss knows that organic chickens are chickens with organs. I personally like a little checker liver. I am still uncommitted with gizzards.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 5:12 pm to Deactived
quote:
My guess is that they use the same breeds that these "steroid factories" use. The birds have been bred to grow large very quickly. Their feed conversion rates are unreal.
Not necessarily organic, but my one attempt at free range chicken from a local farm was all she wrote. $11 for a scrawny, tough as nails bird. They may not be ingesting hormone laden feed, but they aren't eating enough free range food to get plump, either. It was almost as tough as a grass fed steak I had recently. I do like grass fed hamburger, but that's considerably different with fat added.
Posted on 5/6/13 at 5:14 pm to DEANintheYAY
Thought this was interesting. From LINK :
"ORGANIC PESTICIDES VERSUS SYNTHETIC PESTICIDES
Clearly, the less we impact our environment, the better off we all are. Organic farming practices have greatly advanced the use of non-chemical means to control pests, as mentioned earlier.
Unfortunately, these non-chemical methods do not always provide enough protection, and it's necessary to use chemical pesticides. How do organic pesticides compare with conventional pesticides?
A recent study compared the effectiveness of a rotenone-pyrethrin mixture versus a synthetic pesticide, imidan. Rotenone and pyrethrin are two common organic pesticides; imidan is considered a "soft" synthetic pesticide (i.e., designed to have a brief lifetime after application, and other traits that minimize unwanted effects). It was found that up to 7 applications of the rotenone- pyrethrin mixture were required to obtain the level of protection provided by 2 applications of imidan.
It seems unlikely that 7 applications of rotenone and pyrethrin are really better for the environment than 2 applications of imidan, especially when rotenone is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.
It should be noted, however, that we don't know for certain which system is more harmful. This is because we do not look at organic pesticides the same way that we look at conventional pesticides. We don't know how long these organic pesticides persist in the environment, or the full extent of their effects.
When you look at lists of pesticides allowed in organic agriculture, you find warnings such as, "Use with caution. The toxicological effects of [organic pesticide X] are largely unknown," or "Its persistence in the soil is unknown." Again, researchers haven't bothered to study the effects of organic pesticides because it is assumed that "natural" chemicals are automatically safe."
"ORGANIC PESTICIDES VERSUS SYNTHETIC PESTICIDES
Clearly, the less we impact our environment, the better off we all are. Organic farming practices have greatly advanced the use of non-chemical means to control pests, as mentioned earlier.
Unfortunately, these non-chemical methods do not always provide enough protection, and it's necessary to use chemical pesticides. How do organic pesticides compare with conventional pesticides?
A recent study compared the effectiveness of a rotenone-pyrethrin mixture versus a synthetic pesticide, imidan. Rotenone and pyrethrin are two common organic pesticides; imidan is considered a "soft" synthetic pesticide (i.e., designed to have a brief lifetime after application, and other traits that minimize unwanted effects). It was found that up to 7 applications of the rotenone- pyrethrin mixture were required to obtain the level of protection provided by 2 applications of imidan.
It seems unlikely that 7 applications of rotenone and pyrethrin are really better for the environment than 2 applications of imidan, especially when rotenone is extremely toxic to fish and other aquatic life.
It should be noted, however, that we don't know for certain which system is more harmful. This is because we do not look at organic pesticides the same way that we look at conventional pesticides. We don't know how long these organic pesticides persist in the environment, or the full extent of their effects.
When you look at lists of pesticides allowed in organic agriculture, you find warnings such as, "Use with caution. The toxicological effects of [organic pesticide X] are largely unknown," or "Its persistence in the soil is unknown." Again, researchers haven't bothered to study the effects of organic pesticides because it is assumed that "natural" chemicals are automatically safe."
Posted on 5/6/13 at 9:45 pm to Deactived
Yea, I majored in animal science with a minor in food science at LSU and had to take some poultry classes. The organic fad is based on marketing, not health.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 6:30 am to Blue Velvet
Re animal husbandry.....I buy non industrial meat and poultry whenever possible. I'm not so concerned with organic, but rather with humane animal treatment. Would rather have grassed beef from a pastured cow not stuffed with antibiotics than a steak from a CAFO steer. Ditto for pork and poultry. I daresay if they average America visited a poultry farm or feedlot or pig operation, they'd eat far less meat.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 8:06 am to mouton
Grow your own. Much better for you
Posted on 5/7/13 at 11:13 am to mouton
I'm not so sure it's worth the price difference. I did buy for the first time HEB's organic version of Cheerios. I never realized that even plain Cheerios are sweetened ever so slightly. I don't care for sweet cereals for the most part any way. One small box of Honey Nut Cheerios cures any craving for a few months.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 11:24 am to inadaze
So is Bittman a hack or merely serving his own agenda?
"Because the study narrowly defines “nutritious” as containing more vitamins. Dr. Dena Bravata, the study’s senior author, conceded that there are other reasons why people opt for organic (the aforementioned pesticides and bacteria chief among them) but said that if the decision between buying organic or conventional food were based on nutrients, “there is not robust evidence to choose one or the other.” By which standard you can claim that, based on nutrients, Frosted Flakes are a better choice than an apple.
But they’re not. And overlooking these key factors allows the authors to imply that there isn’t “robust” evidence to choose organic food over conventional. (Which for many people there is.) Under the convenient cover of helping consumers make informed choices, the study constructed a set of criteria that would easily allow them to cut “organic” down to size."
Seriously, FF > apple, organic or otherwise? Yeah, that is great logic. I just recalled skimming the Stanford meta study last year, didn't peer review nor tout it as gospel. Regardless, how much of the current food demand can be met by organic supply? I will say I have seen locally produced organic vegetables that I would not buy for various reasons, much like I have seen conventionally grown items I would not buy.
"Because the study narrowly defines “nutritious” as containing more vitamins. Dr. Dena Bravata, the study’s senior author, conceded that there are other reasons why people opt for organic (the aforementioned pesticides and bacteria chief among them) but said that if the decision between buying organic or conventional food were based on nutrients, “there is not robust evidence to choose one or the other.” By which standard you can claim that, based on nutrients, Frosted Flakes are a better choice than an apple.
But they’re not. And overlooking these key factors allows the authors to imply that there isn’t “robust” evidence to choose organic food over conventional. (Which for many people there is.) Under the convenient cover of helping consumers make informed choices, the study constructed a set of criteria that would easily allow them to cut “organic” down to size."
Seriously, FF > apple, organic or otherwise? Yeah, that is great logic. I just recalled skimming the Stanford meta study last year, didn't peer review nor tout it as gospel. Regardless, how much of the current food demand can be met by organic supply? I will say I have seen locally produced organic vegetables that I would not buy for various reasons, much like I have seen conventionally grown items I would not buy.
Posted on 5/7/13 at 12:24 pm to tirebiter
Another thing I thought of, is does a product have to be non GMO to be able to be labeled organic?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News