To the Editor:
Thanks to Marty Primus of Fresh Air Farm and Whole Farm Co-op for acknowledging that most of what I stated in my letter about consumer confusion at the meat counter over labels such as organic, natural, grass-fed or regular corn-fed beef is true.
Primus disagrees with my statement "No science, however, proves that one is any more safe, nutritious, or healthy than the other" and claims that the science is "out there" to prove otherwise, but not well publicized.
Scientists at the London School of Hygiene & Tropical Medicine, however, are not convinced that the science is "out there." The research team recently reviewed 162 scientific papers published in the last 50 years, and concluded that there was simply no notable difference between reportedly healthier organic food and conventionally processed food products.
"There is currently no evidence to support the selection of organically over conventionally produced foods on the basis of nutritional superiority," said Alan Dangour, one of the report's authors.
While millions of shoppers continue to flock to grocery stores and farmers' markets, investing their faith (and dollars) in the promise of healthy organic foods, the debate surrounding the true value of "organic" has yet to reach a definitive conclusion. The return to a so-called "natural diet" piques shoppers' interests - enough to generate a global organic market valued at an estimated $48 billion in 2007 has been largely fueled by marketing tactics that have erroneously attempted to scare the consumer.
Honest and open discussion about food and farming is good, but consumers need to know the facts and not base their purchasing decisions on inaccurate information. The bottom line is that beef is one of the safest, most nutritious foods on the dinner table. As a conventional beef producer, I take great satisfaction in producing beef that is a great value, and also safe, wholesome and nutritious.
John Moon
Montevideo
Letters to the Editor
Letter: Research doesn't show organic foods are better
Originally published in the April 16, 2010, print edition.
- Letters to the Editor
-
-
Letter: Coveting thy neighbor's stuff
Letter: Coveting thy neighbor's stuff
-
Letter: God is love - God loves Hispanics, too
Some think we should follow Arizona's horrible example. They call undocumented immigrants "criminals."
-
Letter: Research doesn't show organic foods are better
As a conventional beef producer, I take great satisfaction in producing beef that is a great value, and also safe, wholesome and nutritious.
-
Letter: Don't put pollution blame on small livestock farms
When talking about water pollution problems caused by livestock operations, Minnesota State Representative Al Juhnke of Willmar wants to blame our state's smaller livestock operations.
-
Letter: Juhnke passing false blame to pass proposal
Family farmers and rural residents need to know that Rep. Al Juhnke of Willmar is proposing legislation that will weaken environmental standards for the largest farms in our state. As a livestock farmer and registered nurse, that concerns me and I think it is wrong.
-
Letter: Encourage the weak to give them a chance
"You cannot strengthen the weak by weakening the strong." However, we also must note that in order to encourage the weak you must give them a chance to have some opportunity to achieve a decent livelihood.
-
Letter: Scare tactics misrepresent ethanol’s impact
After watching the KSTP newscast on ethanol, I believe the newscasters seem to have torn a page from Orson Welles’ recipe on how to boost their audience numbers.
-
Letter: The rest of the organic, beef labeling story
Unlike the label “organic” — which requires you to be certified — the perception of what is “natural” has definitely been highjacked and is a totally misused and maligned at the meat counter.
-
Letter: ‘Socialism’ essential to farmers, American way of life
We farmers and our lobbyists have often made it quite clear to our legislators that socialism and its accompanying federal dollars are essential to our well-being.
-
Letter: Health care questions for Walz
Would you explain just how the bill saves money on health care when you add 50 million to the number to be taken care of. Do you ration the use of tests or procedures, expensive drugs, etc.?
- More Letters to the Editor Headlines
-
Letter: Coveting thy neighbor's stuff
