Jump to content

Recommended Posts

I would pay extra for meat that had been reared in a pleasant and stress free natural environment and slaughtered in as 'humane' a way as possible. I must admit I am verging on veggie as if I think about the animal that I am eating and how it has probably died my appetite disappears. I wouldn't expect others to share my views though.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605323
Share on other sites

aquarius moon Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> civilservant Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Voyageur Wrote:

> > > I wouldn't expect others to share my views

> > though.

> >

> > I seem to share your views exactly, on all

> counts!

>

>

> I share both your views!



That's good to hear. I guess part of the point is though that I don't expect others to agree or to change their own views - my partner is a confirmed carnivore and is not concerned re provenance. I am happy to live and let live.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605378
Share on other sites

To all who share Voyageur's views, take a look at this:


http://www.soilassociation.org/whatisorganic/organicanimals


I take it when most people hear the word 'organic' they think of food with less pesticides/chemicals/additives etc. The fact that organic livestock are raised with more space, more natural food, superior outdoor access, more space per animal etc. seems less commonly known!

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605457
Share on other sites

Hi James


I think it's useful to point out that the first part of the Soil Association's strap line is healthy soil. A bit obvious, perhaps, but really important given that the organic approach to food production is based on sustainability. See this link for info about the serious soil degradation problem the planet faces:


http://blogs.ei.columbia.edu/2012/04/12/why-soil-matters/


Apart from that, organic food just tastes better, in my view, anyway.


Alec

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605478
Share on other sites

"The fact that organic livestock are raised with more space, more natural food, superior outdoor access, more space per animal etc. seems less commonly known!"


....but obviously those conditions for raising livestock are not unique to farms that have gone to the trouble of being certified organic. My problem with organic food is that the process of certification implicitly draws a bright line between "good" and "bad" when the reality is less clear (for me at least). For example, the Soil Association promotes the use of homeopathic remedies for livestock, which kind of undermines their credibility.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605539
Share on other sites

Homeopathy for farm animals... whatever next, I thought? Reiki for sheep? Acupuncture for cows? Then I looked it up - and all this stuff actually already exists.


Anyway, I generally avoid organic stuff, because I don't want to pay the extra price, and I am cynical about the benefits.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605554
Share on other sites

It's much better but has limitations.


I don't beleive it is suistainable for everyone to eat organic, in the same guise however I think that over production of processed, chemically enriched, irradiated, preserved food is not the answer either.


I eat organic where I can but generally go for the in season, grow together goes together approach.


One thing is for sure summer fruits are for summer or I aint going near them.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605595
Share on other sites

Well, recent research suggests that there really aren't any significant nutritional benefits for organic produce. Regarding safety, both organic and non-organic produce have pesticide residues below current safety standards but if you believe current safety standards aren't robust enough then I can see why you'd go for organic. While organic farms are more environmentally friendly per unit of land, they actually use more energy etc per unit of production as yields are so much lower. So that organic produce you are eating on average requires more resources to cultivate and therefore creates more greenhouse gases during its cultivation.


I think the strongest arguments for buying organic concern farming practices (free range etc) and, if you think so, taste (which of course is entirely subjective). However, it?s clearly not the panacea some believe it to be.


http://med.stanford.edu/ism/2012/september/organic.html

http://www.ox.ac.uk/media/news_stories/2012/120904.html


Jeremy Wrote:

>

> Anyway, I generally avoid organic stuff, because I

> don't want to pay the extra price, and I am

> cynical about the benefits.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605632
Share on other sites

Interesting take on the purpose of standards in food production. Distinctions between good and bad are subjective, moral, views - in my view. Standards related to food production give producers objectives to meet in animal husbandry, use of chemicals etc and consumers reassurance that the produce meets their requirements, given an effective regulatory system.


There are lots of different standards systems but they are actually about ensuring commercial viability of the ethical proposition more than moral judgements about good and bad.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605648
Share on other sites

If you make a switch to organic food can I add that unless you buy it as locally grown & distributed as possible, you'll be paying some extra percentage for air miles. Many supermarkets are just flogging you fancier stuff from far far away, at maximum profit to themselves and far costlier than necessary to local economies and the environment.


The box schemes don't air freight produce. Their associate farms in Spain and France send us winter fresh stuff overland and sea.


Another point worth making, it's hard being an organic grower, & to exist free of supermarket buyers. If households order a veg box, the company will have supported the grower right the way through with extra help when needed,

e.g. to prepare the soil appropriately,

choose disease-resistant varieties,

predict within a fortnight when stuff's ready to pick,

& pay ahead of time for an entire field,- all to help this method's sustainability.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605660
Share on other sites

Sorry, but food being produced locally doesn't mean it will be cheaper to produce / sell or that it will require less fossil fuels to be cultivated (including shipping). The reason why some imported food is cheaper is because it is easier to produce in other parts of the world due to climactic conditions, labor costs etc (thus requiring less fossil fuels during the cultivation process). Neither organic food nor locally grown food is by definition more environmentally friendly than their non-organic / imported counterparts. It is just not that simple.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605679
Share on other sites

"Neither organic food nor locally grown food is by definition more environmentally friendly than their non-organic / imported counterparts."


That statement is not quite clear. One part is about whether organic growing is less environmentally costly, and the other is about whether local growing is less environmetally costly. Then you have included another point about imports and this again falls into two aspects, one which concerns non-organic production (I think). All parts of your post merit support with references, please LondonMix.

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605686
Share on other sites

I'm not sure what's not clear. Food being produced organically or locally doesn't mean it is less damaging to the environment. Regarding organic food's environmental impact you can read the link to a recent Oxford university study in my earlier post. Regarding locally grown food there have been a few articles on this over the last few years. I'm on my phone but will try to find a link this evening.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605691
Share on other sites

Regarding why locally grown food is not always 'greener' please see the link below. Production techniques / natural resources have a significant impact on the amount of fossil fuels required to cultivate produce. These differences can wipe out transport miles differences (you can search for the case study of Swedish local tomatoes vs imported Spanish ones).


http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6064

Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605699
Share on other sites

If you are saying it's complex, LM, then we would all have to agree on that. There's lots of potential for cherry picking - pun intended - your favourite bit of the system to make your point. I noted from my skim of the World Watch article that eating lower down the food chain would make a difference - something I pointed out in my earlier post. The article ends on a brief examination of transportation systems which could be made more carbon neutral but for a truly local to us example of how this can work you only need to look at the electric van used by Local Greens, the local veg bag scheme.
Link to comment
https://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/topic/27757-organic-food/#findComment-605716
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Direct link to joint statement : https://thehaguegroup.org/meetings-bogota-en/?link_id=2&can_id=2d0a0048aad3d4915e3e761ac87ffe47&source=email-pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogota-breakthrough&email_referrer=email_2819587&email_subject=pi-briefing-no-26-the-bogot_-breakthrough&&   No. 26 | The Bogotá Breakthrough “The era of impunity is over.” That was the message from Bogotá, Colombia, where governments from across the Global South and beyond took the most ambitious coordinated action since Israel’s genocidal assault on Gaza began 21 months ago. Convened by The Hague Group and co-chaired by the governments of Colombia and South Africa, the Emergency Conference on Palestine brought together 30 states for two days of intensive deliberation — and emerged with a concrete, coordinated six-point plan to restrain Israel’s war machine and uphold international law. States took up the call from their host, Colombian President and Progressive International Council Member Gustavo Petro, who had urged them to be “protagonists together.” Twelve governments signed onto the measures immediately. The rest now have a deadline: 20 September 2025, on the eve of the United Nations General Assembly. The unprecedented six measures commit states to:     Prevent military and dual use exports to Israel.     Refuse Israeli weapons transfers at their ports.     Prevent vessels carrying weapons to Israel under their national flags.     Review all public contracts to prevent public institutions and funds from supporting Israel’s illegal occupation.     Pursue justice for international crimes.     Support universal jurisdiction to hold perpetrators accountable. “We came to Bogotá to make history — and we did,” said Colombian President Gustavo Petro. “Together, we have begun the work of ending the era of impunity. These measures show that we will no longer allow international law to be treated as optional, or Palestinian life as disposable.” The measures are not symbolic. They are grounded in binding obligations under international law — including the International Court of Justice’s July 2024 advisory opinion declaring Israel’s occupation unlawful, and September 2024’s UN General Assembly Resolution ES-10/24, which gave states a 12-month deadline to act. UN Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the occupied Palestinian territory Francesca Albanese called them “a momentous step forward.” “The Hague Group was born to advance international law in an era of impunity,” said South Africa’s Foreign Minister, Ronald Lamola. “The measures adopted in Bogotá show that we are serious — and that coordinated state action is possible.” The response from Washington was swift — and revealing. In a threatening statement to journalists, a US State Department spokesperson accused The Hague Group of “seeking to isolate Israel” and warned that the US would “aggressively defend our interests, our military, and our allies, including Israel, from such coordinated legal and diplomatic” actions. But instead of deterring action, the threats have only clarified the stakes. In Bogotá, states did not flinch. They acted — and they invite the world to join them. The deadline for further states to take up the measures is now two months away. And with it, the pressure is mounting for governments across the world — from Brazil to Ireland, Chile to Spain — to match words with action. As Albanese said, “the clock is now ticking for states — from Europe to the Arab world and beyond — to join them.” This is not a moment to observe. It is a moment to act. Share the Joint Statement from Bogotá and popularise the six measures. Write to your elected representative and your government and demand they sign on before 20 September. History was made in Bogotá. Now, it’s up to all of us to ensure it becomes reality, that Palestinian life is not disposable and international law is not optional. The era of impunity is coming to an end. Palestine is not alone. In solidarity, The Progressive International Secretariat  
    • Most countries charge for entry to museums and galleries, often a different rate for locals (tax payers) and foreign nationals. The National Gallery could do this, also places like the Museums in South Kensington, the British Library and other tax-funded institutions. Many cities abroad add a tourist tax to hotel bills. It means tourists help pay for public services.
    • Having just been to Co-op to redeem a 50p off Co-op members' card voucher on an item that is now 50p more than it was last week, Tesco can't come soon enough
    • Surely that depends on the amount.  It can be quite piffling.  
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...