Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Discussion of Skeptic magazine and Letters to the Editor
User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Wed Apr 04, 2012 7:14 pm

Blacksamwell wrote:
ForestDweller wrote:The BPI product, is, as I claim, made up of parts of internal organs, and hoof flesh of hooves, which I referred to as "hoof scrapings".

Please provide a citation for this claim. What's your supporting evidence?

Travis Arp, a graduate student at Colorado State has personally watched the process and according to him...

So lets beset some of the fallacies here:

First: the trimmings are not those suited for pet food. They are the lean trimmings that are removed during the normal fabrication process. Beef subprimals (e.g. strip loins, top butts or sirloins, chuck rolls) have a specification to how much external fat can be present…since not all animals are created equal, some fat must be removed. And when it is, occasionally small pieces of lean are cut off with it. Those small pieces of lean is what this company wants. So they are utilizing trim that is upwards of 80% fat to start the process. This trim is put into large ‘combo’s’ of trim (just like regular highly lean trimmings used for ground beef production).

Second: from the sounds of it, you would think we are picking up scraps off the floor…CRAWLING WITH BACTERIA! Not so much. These combos of fat trimmings must be sampled for E.Coli O157:H7, and fall under USDA-FSIS (Food Safety and Inspection Service) rules for ZERO tolerance of detection (and after May, that will also include non-O157 stecs). So in actuality, those trimmings used for the process are pretty darn clean.


You can read his blog post, You put WHAT in my burger?


"(Editor note: 1/28/12 10:05 am: The process described above is only one of several different types of high temp lean rendering processes done by one beef company. There are process done similarly, but by different companies, however not all use the same processes (e.g. Ammonia gas, temps, etc). This post is used to illustrate the general concept of processes using ammonium-hydroxide to prevent pathogens in finely textured beef products)" - This caveat in itself indicates that this guy's visiting one process, is not relevant to other rendering processes. This therefore does not speak to the points that I asserted in the post that you quote.

I am unwilling to accept the blog post of one grad student with obvious legitimate bias (studying "Meat Science,") whose blog focuses on backspinning the Pink Slime debate, as legitimate evidence of anything. I will gut this guy's post at some point later, if I choose to find the time; it does contain fallacy. For now and for instance, he writes " from the sounds of it, you would think we are picking up scraps off the floor…CRAWLING WITH BACTERIA! Not so much. " In fact this material IS crawling with bacteria, when it is still in "scrap" form, which is entirely the point of the Ammonium Hydroxide treatment. He's talking about the pre-treatment and the post-treatment product as if they were not crawling with bacteria at first. What evidence does he provide to support this "not so much" statement? He does not provide it. He just states it. In this way his statements, most of them unsupported, are no different than my assertion that parts of internal organs and hoof flesh are used to make Pink Slime.

Also, I do not see where it is indicated in this article that this guy has "personally watched the process." Where did you learn this?

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:07 am

This situation could model the downfall of the meat industry. Not that I am a proponent of that. It will be interesting to see what happens down the road.

BPI says they are going to do a full disclosure. Something like a walkthrough, to prove that the material is good food - and I'm not saying that it isn't. Their equipment looked well-maintained in the small amount of video that I have seen, of what was presented to be a BPI plant. I don't eat much meat myself and sure would advise against it to others, but this is obviously edible and meat. Still, people don't want to eat it so much as they did before. A general cultural aversion toward picking the carcass, perhaps. I would do it, if I were hungry enough.

Regarding citations I have read the general statement below in various reporting; it is not well corroborated but then it is proving difficult to get yes/no answers, to define what parts of the animal are used in lean beef trimmings and what parts they use in other products. Or even if the same ingredients are used in all plants. Second is a report where I read the hoofs mentioned, I think I posted this before but possibly toward a different point. Not substantiated, I had no reason to doubt these would be potential components of lean beef trimmings. It seemed reasonable to assume that virtually any part of the cow, run through this process, would be pathogen-free - so why not use it, and profit further?

"The "slime" consists of beef by-products: cow intestines, connective tissue and other parts that are not used in traditional beef cuts."
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2012/03/0 ... ol-Lunches


http://insidescoopsf.sfgate.com/blog/20 ... -business/


This one below careens over the line a bit with the "ammonia-laced" & "ammonia-reeking". Obviously the author has a bias. The proposed, USDA-supported new inspection method discussed (poultry), is interesting. I consider it relevant to the discussion of "organic vs. conventional".
http://motherjones.com/tom-philpott/201 ... DA-poultry

Related
http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2012/03/p ... da-design/


"According to a 2003 study financed by Beef Products, the trimmings “typically includes most of the material from the outer surfaces of the carcass” and contains “larger microbiological populations.” Beef Products said it also used trimmings from inside cuts of meat."
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/31/us/31 ... wanted=all

At what point does a cow anus become a cow intestine. Are bits of the anuses of thousands of cows, potentially present in lean beef trimmings. Not sure yet but, if there's cow anus or anything else as ridiculously unexpected as that in one's burger, one is probably eating a conventional burger; organic certified burgers don't contain the ammonia-treated meat of any part of the cow.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 1:45 am

Blacksamwell wrote:I'm not afraid of lean beef trimmings.

One huge step backwards for mankind


An evidence-free, generalist blog rant focusing on Ammonium Hydroxide treatment, and how pink slime saves on cattle while suggesting that it will also feed the future. Personally I am looking for specifics. We need to define just what cow parts have been, and what cow parts have not been included in this product, the BPI product being the case in mind. I would like to see definitive evidence as to just what this material is made up of, because it is made up of specifics, not empty blanks. There should be evidence defining yes/no as to every part that went in there, with quantity such as "every ear," "skull meat", "never spinal cords" and if there is not, well the absence of specificity in terms of the contents of pink slime, would be compelling in and of itself.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11447
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Major Malfunction » Thu Apr 05, 2012 9:28 am

I lived on that stuff when I was a poor uni student! It was sold as 'luncheon', the ingredients said 'unspecified meat product', and I called it 'dog roll'. Because it came in 1 kg plastic sausages just like pet food, and in all likelihood, was.

But at $2 a kilo, when one only has $20 a week to spend on food, it was my primary source of protein.

I came up with heaps of cheap, easy, tasty, and nutritious (enough to stave off malnutrition) recipes using dog roll. I'm considering writing a cook book for poor uni students. I'm kinda like the Bubba of dog roll.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 11:57 am

When I was in college I was so hungry one time, that I went out behind the town market at night and got into the unlocked freezer box in the dark alley in back where they put the packaged for sale meat that had become too old to sell. Presumably some other business was to have picked up that meat and then re-processed it for re-sale in some other form - or perhaps it was just periodically thrown out, not sure. I snagged a big hunk of meat and snuck it back to my place. I cooked it but, I probably should have sliced it thinner. Wow did that make me sick :) Later in life, living in SF CA on a low budget, I supplemented my diet with apples and other fruit from trees in somewhat fenced-in yards. They would have gone relatively to waste otherwise, dropping on the ground, never harvested. I ate apples nearly every day. So much easier to survive in that climate, compared to the NE.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11447
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Major Malfunction » Thu Apr 05, 2012 2:00 pm

So, you'll eat anything if you're hungry enough? Soylent Green is Thursdays.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Gord » Thu Apr 05, 2012 2:30 pm

I was so hungry in university one year, I sold my friend's blood plasma. I also sort of pimped him out for sexual favours in return for spare change -- that didn't work out so well. Selling his blood was the better business strategy. Unfortunately he was only five foot two inches tall, so he didn't have much to sell. Also, he never shared the juice and cookies with me afterward.

Luckily, he eventually found a rich ugly girlfriend, and we ate well the rest of our time there. Ate a lot of pepperoni pizza, though. A lot.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9890
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby fromthehills » Thu Apr 05, 2012 2:44 pm

Watched an episode of Doomsday Preppers. (If you haven't seen it, it's hilarious.) A family converted their suburban pool into a green house, where they fed the chickens, and the tilapia ate the chicken {!#%@}, then the water was used to grow plants. Which is all fine, I suppose, but the folks also were eating the pond algae that grew on the water. The guy scooped this right off the surface and ate it. So let's review. The chickens {!#%@} into the water, the fish eat the {!#%@}, and also {!#%@} into the water. This grows an algae that these folks eat. Talk about bottom of the food chain. It's organic, I'll give them that, but I wonder how much bacteria is floating around in that cesspool. Give me some lean beef trimmings, please.

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9890
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby fromthehills » Thu Apr 05, 2012 2:54 pm

Ammonia is natural, by the way, and used in all sorts of foods. It's also safe. If a spray of ammonia hydroxide keeps my intestines in tact, my question is: Where can I get a residential model of one of those sprayers?

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 4:06 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:So, you'll eat anything if you're hungry enough? Soylent Green is Thursdays.


Well I can't say that I haven't in the past. These days I'm ovo-lacto vegetarian apart from what little I take myself. Still, if I were hungry enough, I would definitely eat just about anything that I had a reasonable expectation of holding down. Bugs, grubs, worms, whatever it takes. Be crazy not to. I would pass on the Soylent Green for quite some time. Then, at length I would begin to seriously consider it, and if that day were also a Thursday...

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 4:10 pm

fromthehills wrote:Ammonia is natural, by the way, and used in all sorts of foods. It's also safe. If a spray of ammonia hydroxide keeps my intestines in tact, my question is: Where can I get a residential model of one of those sprayers?


Couldn't you just drink your own pee, get your ammonia and stay healthy that way? I can almost get my mind around drinking my own pee. My neighbors however, I would have to pass on that guy's pee.

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11447
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Major Malfunction » Thu Apr 05, 2012 4:35 pm

Humans are organic.

It's all good.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:04 pm

fromthehills wrote:Give me some lean beef trimmings, please.
No better time than now, to fill up your freezer.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:25 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:Humans are organic.

It's all good.


Well humans aren't organic, for the most part but I don't see that in and of itself, as a problem - it's still all good. I don't eat exclusively organic food, I am just putting forward the theory that, if it's available and one can afford it, it is the better choice over conventional. I also think that a Porsche Panamera is a better sportscar than a TR7 - but I don't actually own either. If I were hungry, having gone many days without food, then came across something that was edible, I would eat it, of course I would. At that point in survival, preference becomes distant and irrelevant, as it should for anyone who wants to continue to live. I'm sure however that I would pass on the Soylent Green and walk on. If however at some point after I dropped, it were offered - well I can't say for sure just what I would do at that point. Can you say what you would do?

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4860
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Austin Harper » Thu Apr 05, 2012 5:54 pm

ForestDweller wrote:
fromthehills wrote:Ammonia is natural, by the way, and used in all sorts of foods. It's also safe. If a spray of ammonia hydroxide keeps my intestines in tact, my question is: Where can I get a residential model of one of those sprayers?


Couldn't you just drink your own pee, get your ammonia and stay healthy that way? I can almost get my mind around drinking my own pee. My neighbors however, I would have to pass on that guy's pee.

You do realize that Ammonia (NH3) is not the same thing as Ammonium Hydroxide, right? When you mix NH3 into an aqueous solution you get NH3 + H2O ⇌ NH4+ + OH. And in urine the Ammonia has been converted into urea ((NH2)2CO).
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Thu Apr 05, 2012 8:02 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
ForestDweller wrote:
fromthehills wrote:Ammonia is natural, by the way, and used in all sorts of foods. It's also safe. If a spray of ammonia hydroxide keeps my intestines in tact, my question is: Where can I get a residential model of one of those sprayers?


Couldn't you just drink your own pee, get your ammonia and stay healthy that way? I can almost get my mind around drinking my own pee. My neighbors however, I would have to pass on that guy's pee.

You do realize that Ammonia (NH3) is not the same thing as Ammonium Hydroxide, right? When you mix NH3 into an aqueous solution you get NH3 + H2O ⇌ NH4+ + OH. And in urine the Ammonia has been converted into urea ((NH2)2CO).


If Hills actually sprayed ammonium hydroxide in his intestines, it could kill him within 24 hours. Not a serious comment. My comment was not serious either. Chemistry is something of a blind spot for me.

I do know that Ammonium Hydroxide is Ammonia gas and water. Also, it is my working understanding that urea exposed to water, gives off ammonia gas.

EDITED, was not right

User avatar
Gord
Real Skeptic
Posts: 29477
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 2:44 am
Custom Title: Silent Ork
Location: Transcona

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Gord » Fri Apr 06, 2012 6:38 am

ForestDweller wrote:...humans aren't organic....

I was raised free-range.
"Knowledge grows through infinite timelessness" -- the random fictional Deepak Chopra quote site
"You are also taking my words out of context." -- Justin
"Nullius in verba" -- The Royal Society ["take nobody's word for it"]
#ANDAMOVIE

User avatar
Major Malfunction
Has No Life
Posts: 11447
Joined: Wed May 10, 2006 6:20 am
Custom Title: Dérailleur Énigmatique

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Major Malfunction » Fri Apr 06, 2012 7:48 am

ForestDweller wrote:Can you say what you would do?

I'd wait until you fell to sleep.
This being was produced using the same process as other beings, and therefore, may contain traces of nuts.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Fri Apr 06, 2012 12:13 pm

Major Malfunction wrote:
ForestDweller wrote:Can you say what you would do?

I'd wait until you fell to sleep.


http://memegenerator.net/instance/17976994

User avatar
Blacksamwell
Frequent Poster
Posts: 1951
Joined: Tue Nov 03, 2009 3:21 am
Custom Title: Buckfutter
Location: Columbia, Missouri, U.S.A.

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Blacksamwell » Sat Apr 07, 2012 2:36 am

ForestDweller wrote:EDITED, was not right

Yeah. We know.

Do you have an ETA on complying with all the previous requests for evidence to support your claims and/or claims you cite?

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Sat Apr 07, 2012 11:17 am

Blacksamwell wrote:
ForestDweller wrote:EDITED, was not right

Yeah. We know.

Do you have an ETA on complying with all the previous requests for evidence to support your claims and/or claims you cite?


Who is we, Blacksamwell? Feel free to chime in. You looking for some ultimate proof, some irrefutable truth perhaps? I don't know any meat industry bloggers, so you will have to settle for the evidence that I've already posted. I posted the reporting that I read that led me to the thoughts that I had. Even though it is not well-substantiated, I have not seen evidence to suggest that the reporting was inaccurate - though you were and are still welcome to present that evidence if and when you get around to it.

Blacksamwell is saying that I have not presented any evidence for any claim that I have made here. Yet, I have presented evidence, certainly to the level of that last blog post he cited, from the guy studying to be a meat scientist. Are guys studying to be meat scientists, sufficiently authoritative that we can assume their pro-meat industry arguments, even without evidence, to be fact or truth? That their argument twisting the end result of a process to be the state that the material was in before it was processed, is fine and acceptable as evidence? I am skeptical of the "evidence" presented in that guy's blog post and submit that it is not evidence of anything. The reporting that I linked to as evidence of my position, is more reputable than what this 1 meat industry student wrote on his website. At least the reporting is subject to some review and accountability.

The fact that there has been no definitive presentation here or in the public arena (that I've come across) as to what cow parts are and are not in pink slime, is reason enough to be skeptical as to what cow parts are actually and specifically in that product, regardless of whether is is relatively safe to eat, or not. Where is the breakdown of what is and isn't in it?

If you've actually got evidence as to what cow matter is or isn't in pink slime Blacksamwell then present it. Otherwise your criticism of my assertions remain weak, more a personal attack than proof of f'n anything. Be that way then, but present solid contrary evidence if you have it. Without any evidence to the contrary, your debasing of my thought and posts has a hollow ring to it.

You have posted compelling logic and evidence in other areas and toward other points, but I am not seeing it in this instance. It remains as likely as not, that hoof meat and bits of intestine are present in the pink slime product.

turingtape
Poster
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:31 pm

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby turingtape » Mon Jun 11, 2012 12:10 pm

Ugly food made by a company is gross. In other news how cool were the native americans for using every part of the animal?

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Fri Aug 31, 2012 2:54 pm

Food is good. Good food, is better. Generally speaking however, Organic food, is the best! :mrgreen:

Learn more about Organic Farming here, download the PDF!:

http://ofrf.org/news/organic-farming-he ... ity-indeed

p.s. requests to re-cite previously cited evidence, will be ignored.

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4860
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Austin Harper » Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:09 pm

The New York Times wrote:Stanford Scientists Cast Doubt on Advantages of Organic Meat and Produce

Does an organic strawberry contain more vitamin C than a conventional one?

Maybe — or maybe not.

Stanford University scientists have weighed in on the “maybe not” side of the debate after an extensive examination of four decades of research comparing organic and conventional foods.

They concluded that fruits and vegetables labeled organic were, on average, no more nutritious than their conventional counterparts, which tend to be far less expensive. Nor were they any less likely to be contaminated by dangerous bacteria like E. coli.

The researchers also found no obvious health advantages to organic meats.


See also: BBC News: Organic food 'not any healthier'
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
fromthehills
Has More Than 9K Posts
Posts: 9890
Joined: Wed Aug 19, 2009 2:01 am
Location: Woostone

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby fromthehills » Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:27 pm

turingtape wrote: In other news how cool were the native americans for using every part of the animal?


I highly suspect that that is a myth, unless it was during the times of year when they were starving. I doubt it was any kind of "honoring the animal" thing, as it's made out to be.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Tue Sep 04, 2012 2:35 pm

Austin Harper wrote:
The New York Times wrote:Stanford Scientists Cast Doubt on Advantages of Organic Meat and Produce

Does an organic strawberry contain more vitamin C than a conventional one?

Maybe — or maybe not.

Stanford University scientists have weighed in on the “maybe not” side of the debate after an extensive examination of four decades of research comparing organic and conventional foods.

They concluded that fruits and vegetables labeled organic were, on average, no more nutritious than their conventional counterparts, which tend to be far less expensive. Nor were they any less likely to be contaminated by dangerous bacteria like E. coli.

The researchers also found no obvious health advantages to organic meats.


See also: BBC News: Organic food 'not any healthier'


Yes I wondered how long it would take for that study to surface here, not long ;)

Actually, the study somehow unbelievably failed to include the strawberries study in its' analysis, so bringing that into it, is misleading.

http://in.reuters.com/article/2012/09/0 ... HS20120904

From the link above:

"More than one third of conventional produce had detectable pesticide residues, compared with 7 percent of organic produce samples. Organic pork and chicken were 33 percent less likely to carry bacteria resistant to three or more antibiotics than conventionally produced meat."

So, we see that bacteria in the conventionally produced meat, is 33% more likely to be resistant to 3 or more antibiotics than organic. I don't see how this could be considered a plus for consumers of conventionally produced meat.

I suggest that readers look at several interpretations of the study to get the entirety of the findings of this study, or read the study itself. Also, don't miss my recent post and the excellent .pdf available there.

From Austin's link:

"Dr. Crystal Smith-Spangler, another member of the Stanford team, said that the strawberry study was erroneously left out but that she doubted it would have changed the conclusions when combined with 31 other studies that also measured vitamin C."

She did not include the smoking gun evidence, and "doubted" that it would matter??? She casts a pallor on the study, this scientist with a propensity for unfounded conjecture. Statistically it might not be that significant - but it is a known instance of evidence that an Organic fruit is actually more nutritious than its' conventional counterpart, and that is a precedent which cannot be dismissed so easily. If one Organic fruit evidently has more vitamin C content than its' conventional counterpart, does this not imply that other fruits with similar characteristics likely exist as well? Is it to be accepted that this is the sole fruit on the planet that has more C, or that the strawberries study must be flawed in that it does not synch with other research evidence? Of course not; more study is needed.

There are myriad reasons that Organic, generally speaking and if one can afford it, is better food than non-organic and this thread is full of examples of that. Rather that re-iterate what readers can identify by looking at this study, I'll simply concede that this study, and the current scientific research as well, does suggest that nutritional value is roughly equivalent between these two "classes" of food. That similarity does not of course hold true across all variables that must be considered when comparing the two, and is of minor consequence overall. I expect that this will change as we continue to study the nutritional value of the two classes of food.

i am super-rushed in trying to get this post out, at work - the study actually has a lot more good to say about Organic food, in comparison to conventional. Glomming onto the "nutrition" piece is just distraction.
Last edited by ForestDweller on Wed Sep 05, 2012 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
tecpaocelotl
Poster
Posts: 135
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2011 3:02 am
Custom Title: That One Guy
Location: Cali
Contact:

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby tecpaocelotl » Tue Sep 04, 2012 10:43 pm

fromthehills wrote:I highly suspect that that is a myth, unless it was during the times of year when they were starving. I doubt it was any kind of "honoring the animal" thing, as it's made out to be.


It's more of a surviving thing.

Just smoke/dry meat to help you survive the winters plus meat can last longer before spoiling so you don't have to hunt a buffalo every other day especially with a good size population.
"Don't Demonstrate, Infiltrate! From within you can help those without." -Jorge Le Rand

"Tehan tohtocazqueh to tamatcayotl can cachi chicahuac." -David Vazquez
We continue our culture with more strength.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Wed Sep 05, 2012 12:41 pm

tecpaocelotl wrote:
fromthehills wrote:I highly suspect that that is a myth, unless it was during the times of year when they were starving. I doubt it was any kind of "honoring the animal" thing, as it's made out to be.


It's more of a surviving thing.

Just smoke/dry meat to help you survive the winters plus meat can last longer before spoiling so you don't have to hunt a buffalo every other day especially with a good size population.


Practically speaking, most parts of an animal are useful, so why would they not use them. Unless forcibly prevented from doing so, someone or other would take advantage of any part of the resource that was left behind. As I understand it, the elderly were often left behind...

The conventional meat industry, though I take issue with many aspects of it, seems to be doing a commendable job of using all of the animal these days.

User avatar
Austin Harper
Perpetual Poster
Posts: 4860
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 2:22 pm
Custom Title: Rock Chalk Astrohawk
Location: Detroit
Contact:

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby Austin Harper » Wed Sep 05, 2012 9:55 pm

Except when people get grossed out by "pink slime" and then get mad when beef prices go up after insisting they stop mixing it in with ground beef.
Dum ratio nos ducet, valebimus et multa bene geremus.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Wed Sep 05, 2012 11:42 pm

This is true.

turingtape
Poster
Posts: 59
Joined: Sun Jun 10, 2012 9:31 pm

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby turingtape » Fri Sep 07, 2012 4:41 pm

fromthehills wrote:
turingtape wrote: In other news how cool were the native americans for using every part of the animal?


I highly suspect that that is a myth, unless it was during the times of year when they were starving. I doubt it was any kind of "honoring the animal" thing, as it's made out to be.



I meant to be sarcastic. I agree with you.

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Sat Sep 08, 2012 10:37 pm

A few links for you "skeptics" to enjoy. Just so that you all know what a bona fide skeptical analysis of that Stanford report, really looks like...

http://www.organicconsumers.org/benbroo ... se2012.pdf

http://www.commondreams.org/view/2012/09/06-12 "

User avatar
ForestDweller
Poster
Posts: 231
Joined: Wed Feb 01, 2012 1:17 pm
Location: Rockshore, New Hampshire

Re: Organic food makes Harriet Hall's top 10 - Really?

Postby ForestDweller » Fri Sep 21, 2012 4:30 pm



Return to “SKEPTIC Magazine: Letters & Discussions”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest