06 Mar 2012 Science reporting on organic food is out to lunch
If the public is largely uninformed on scientific issues, as the media so often complains, is it possible that one reason is the appallingly low level of science and health reporting in the media itself?
Science is supposed to be about asking questions. Scientists have theories and hypotheses, but they are not supposed to have agendas. They are supposed to be constantly challenging their assumptions by taking what they learn and asking themselves challenging questions about it.
The most outstanding characteristic of science and health reporters, however, sometimes seems to be their unwillingness to ask obvious follow up questions if the answers might disrupt the narrative their preconceived storyline.
The examples are almost endless. But science reporting basically bottoms out when it comes to food and health, particularly the pesticides, herbicides, and other modern chemistries that allow modern agriculture to produce over 99 percent of everything we grow in this nation.
Endless articles and blogs preach the health benefits of eating organic food and the theoretical risks of the “chemicals” used in mainstream farming. But these reporters almost never ask the obvious question: how do organic farmers prevent their crops from being devastated by the same pests—insects, weeds, and fungi—that have bedeviled farmers since the invention of agriculture?
The answer is surprisingly simple: organic farmers do use pesticides. Lots of them.
It’s probable that most of the food you bought during your latest trip to the health foods store was grown with pesticides. The only difference is that the pesticides used to grow foods labeled “organic” foods have been certified by the National Organic Safety Board…..
USNews.com: Read this full opinion piece
Shock: Organic farmers use chemicals too
Despite considerable evidence that the “health halo” surrounding organic foods is just hype, many activists still claim that organic produce is healthier than conventionally grown produce. One of the reasons that organic evangelists propose to justify the cost of eating expensive “heirloom” tomatoes is that conventional products may contain chemical residue. The Environmental Working (Worrying) Group (EWG) even puts out a “Dirty Dozen” report that encourages people to substitute organic food for supposedly pesticide-laden conventional produce.
Yet a University of California-Davis study found that “consumer exposures to the ten most frequently detected pesticides on EWG’s ‘Dirty Dozen’ commodity list are at negligible levels” and that “consumption of organic produce should not be equated with consumption of pesticide-free produce.” So why might people wrongly think that organics are somehow chemical- or pesticide-free…..