Weather | Sports | Forums | Comics | Classifieds | Calendar | Movies
That "organic" food you're buying may not have been produced using the responsible techniques once required of organic farmers.
The "organic" label on meat, milk and other food products has been a great success, maybe to its own detriment. While small, dedicated farmers have turned the complex task of raising food without antibiotics, synthetic fertilizers or pesticides into a flourishing enterprise - with double-digit growth year after year - the giants of agribusiness have begun to take notice. The problem is, the big guys don't want to play by the rules.
Consumers might take comfort in the fact that federal law makes farmers follow certain rules to earn the stamp "USDA Organic" on their products. Except, the U.S. Department of Agriculture is the agency that interprets those rules, and it is headed by Ann Veneman, who is making a career of undermining the regulatory process that protects consumers.
The USDA issued several interpretations of the organic rules recently, and they all weaken the law, Grist magazine reported. For example, organic milk comes from cows that are free from antibiotics (which can end up in the milk). After a USDA ruling in April, however, sick cows can be shot up with antibiotics and other drugs and still have their milk labeled organic as long as they are off the drugs for 12 months prior to the milk's being sold as such. That could forever alter organic farming practices, which put less stress on cows so they don't need antibiotics. Under the new directive, factory farms where animals are crammed into close quarters would also be able to sell their product as organic.
Another directive will allow ranchers to feed their cattle nonorganic fishmeal that could contain preservatives, mercury and other pollutants, and still earn the organic label. Also, for the first time, the USDA will allow the use of pesticides that contain toxic ingredients if those substances are not listed on the label. "This takes all the pressure off of pesticide manufacturers to reveal their ingredients and develop nontoxic products," said Liana Hoodes of the National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture.
Finally, the USDA has decided not to extend the organic certification program beyond crops and livestock, so rules will not be developed to cover fish, nutritional supplements, cosmetics and other personal-care products. "Consumers beware," said Hoodes. "This basically allows any opportunistic company to put fraudulent organic labels on products outside of the regulated domain without any liability concerns."
The USDA calls these changes "clarifications" of the rules. Sure enough, it has become abundantly clear that Veneman is allowing agribusiness to cash in on the organic boom without adhering to the responsible but costly practices of organic farming. Of course that puts the whole organic movement at risk.
If Veneman won't rescind those new directives, and there is no reason to believe she will, then Congress should come to the rescue of the organic label, one of the few positive stories in the increasingly shameful business of food production.