>
>
>Sal asks why he should have to be certified and not the conventional
>farmer. It is a good question. I have a view on this but I could not
>prove this but it makes sense to me if you look at power, money and
>politics and that is how the game is played in this country. Conventional
>industrial agriculture produces the majority of the food in this
>country-lets say 99-98%. It has all the input suppliers and the marketers
>and the farmers and this system is the dominant system now and has been
>for the last 50 years. Agribusiness has consolidated, merged and become
>bigger and more powerful politically. As this has happened farmers by the
>millions have been flushed out of the system and told to get big or get
>out. They have marched to that tune for a long time. The product that they
>put on the market is produced with chemicals, antibiotics and now GE
>crops, sewage sludge, and irradiation. As technology and business have
>merged problem have been created. They are polluted water, air, soil,
>food and people but we have the agencies that do risk assessment and tell
>us that these practices are safe within the limits of risk assessment
>which often cannot be defended scientifically or they make assumptions so
>so called sound science can be used. This is the dominate paradigm and
>the power, money and political system wants to keep the status quo. So
>along come the organic growers and they produce their food without
>pesticides, antibiotics, fertilzers, irraidition, and GE crops. They may
>also use more humane practices with their animals. So your food is
>obviously different and the effect on the environment and the people is
>different. I do not think we need statistics to see this-common sense
>will be sufficient for most. But the industrial model has the regulations
>behind it to convince the consumer that all is ok. But as a scientist I
>know science has limits-something that many who practice the religion of
>science would not acknowledge. As an example think of the mad cow disease
>in England-all the things I just mentioned played out in that one.
>
>So back to your question-Sal-in my opinion the reason you have to be
>labeled is that your are so called clean and green and the powers to be do
>not want to label food as being produced with pesticides, irradiation,
>antibiotics, sewage sludge, and GE crops, and animal concentration camps.
>It would in some way be like the label on cigarettes. It would not
>be good marketing and market share and growth is what the game is.
>
>For example-why did Monsanto resist labeling milk with rbst? I think they
>knew that such a label would kill that product in the market and so they
>and the gov't found a way to get around it. No one would drink the milk
>on their own because there is no benefit to doing that and their maybe
>risks. But FDA and Monsanto together got it through in the USA and other
>countries have said no. Draw your own conclusions.
>
>So when the Secretary of Ag announced the new organic rules he went out of
>his way to say that organic food in no better and no safer than other
>food-read my lips-all food produced in the US is the safest in the
>world. Politically he could not say anything different because the big
>money that supports the politicians that we have voted into office are
>supported by those with money and power and they like things the way they
>are.
>
>So Sal you and the organic growers a burr that continues to irritate and
>grow in spite of all. I would not expect a level playing field soon
>because it will not happen with the present power and political landscape.
>
>In the long term the consumer will vote with their food dollars and that
>will be the strongest signal, but expect the dominant powers to continue
>their present behavior until it hurts in the pocket book.
>
>Bill Liebhardt
>
>
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 11 2000 - 22:02:12 EDT