Going Organic......

[N.O.R.F]

Prom, apologies for not entertaining your 'factually accurate' statements (although you're yet to provide anything factually accurate). The doltish way in which you're presenting these 'facts' deserves little if any in the way of a thoughful response. I would prefer it if you backed up your claims with these 'facts' you keep harping on about. All you've done so far i give me something from USDA who were always going to adopt a neutral stance (and don't claim non-organic food is more beneficial as you're claiming). One doesn't have time for half page essays with only a sentence of two of relevance (even then it's a case of 'take my word for it').

 

Where is the mad scientist when you need her?

 

Elpunto, agreed.

[Prometheus]

ElPunto, if your main gripe against non-organic foods is that such foods are treated with potentially dangerous pesticides, then you have to realize the same thing applies to organic foods. Organic pesticides are 'designed to kill' as well. You see, organic pesticides aren't exactly made out of glucose. Organic pesticides are not even less toxic. This is, by far, the commonest misconception amongst naive proponents of organic foods. I'm pretty sure you can find some scary-sounding, toxic organic pesticides the same way you found a 'toxic' non-organic pesticide. What's relevant is whether our food contains levels of toxicity that render it inedible or harmful. The science on this isn't fuzzy. There are no real risks to such pesticides (organic and non-organic) provided that their levels are below a certain point. Food agencies and governmental bodies monitor both organic and non-organic pesticide levels, as any pesticide can be harmful if it reaches a certain point.

[Prometheus]

Norf, awoowe, I know you are intellectually lazy. Thinking, analyzing, and synthesizing information has proven too monumental a task for you. Clearly, as NG's passing comment revealed, your newly-minted interest in organic foods is more a product of tedium and conformity than any arduous research on your part. I have a feeling that the 'mad scientist' would find the science on this subject a no-brainer.

[N.O.R.F]

^and you have provided an abundance of said information to back up your ascertion haven't you? Again, apologies for not entertaining linguistic gymnastics veiled as some sort of an intelligent reponse(s). It's really quite simple. You say non-organic foods are better for one's health. I said give me proof. You keep telling me this is the case. I ask for proof again etc etc. You have provided nothing. Ma fahantay hada?

[Alpha Blondy]

some of my pretentious friends spend all their time pretending to be all knowledgeable. its shame because they have a very limited and narrow view of the world. so basically they academise everything, often using really fancy words and expressions and have to be seen to be intelligent. surely knowledge is for ones own consumption.

 

as for the topic, i completely agree with NORF. i recently stopped eating meat and now i feel much better. i no longer feel bloated in the morning. being a pescetarian( being a veggie but eating fish) is awesome. its cheap, healthy and more organic. indeed.

[Prometheus]

I suppose nuance isn’t exactly your strong suit, Norfy? I didn't say that non-organic foods were generally better for your health. Nice straw-man. My assertion was much more circumscribed. Given certain conditions, the choice of non-organic foods is the more salubrious choice. Your willful ignorance of such a mundane fact is as remarkable as it is laughable. Perhaps you’ll inquire about an instance where non-organic foods are conspicuously better. Normally, when I am confronted with dogmatic drivel of this vein, I confessedly tend towards the caustic, not the didactic. But I’ll make a charitable exception. I think ElPunto alluded to the undeniable benefits of the modernization of food. In the West, we take it for granted that our water is fluoridated, thereby preventing dental disease; that our salt is iodized, and thereby preventing goiter and cretinism. And the list goes on. In non-Western countries, especially in developing countries, the difference between genetically-modified rice that is fortified with vitamin A and regular rice can be the difference between vision and blindness, according to the World Health Organization and National Institutes of Health. However, an organic-food cultist might still demur. They’ll say things like, well, people can get fluoride, iodine, or vitamin A from organic foods. Let’s take the example of vitamin A fortified rice. Hundreds of thousands of children become blind due a deficiency of this vitamin. If you were a public health official, what would you think is the most efficient, cost-effective, and healthy solution to this problem. Would you tell them to eat organic carrots? Now, I’m not going to spoon-feed you information. But what are some possible, practical constraints to ‘eat organic carrots’ approach?

 

As I have delineated in my previous posts, organic foods and non-organic foods are, ceteris paribus, equally healthy. The only difference is that there are conditions that demand non-organic foods. There are no conditions in which organic foods are the better, healthier, or smarter choice.

 

Finally, this whole controversy over non-organic foods (and GM foods) is manufactured out of whole-cloth. It’s similar to the manufactured controversies over evolution (and to a lesser extent, climate-change science). There’s no controversy amongst the experts. But that won’t stop an ill-informed creationist from idiotically asking about missing links. In like manner, the reality that organic foods are not healthier or better than non-organic foods is a brute fact. The evidence is not equivocal. But that won’t stop some oafish organic food cultist from touting the invisible benefits of organic foods, while declaiming against the invisible harms of non-organic foods.

 

I understand that little Norfy is probably too daft and too lazy to address the merits of the arguments. So this shall be my last post. Nomads can do their own research on this subject to assess the truth-value of these assertions.

 

P.S. Those who want to look this up, please, for Heaven's sake, don't rely on a preliminary google search. Some websites are full of so much s!tupidity it burns. Go to the websites of credible scientific agencies such as the CDC, USDA, WHO, National Institutes of Health, etc. And look up the research studies they cite in their articles.

[N.O.R.F]

Prom, for a man who insists animals are not injected with growth hormones the misapplication of your knowledge on the subject is quite obvious. Being lazy is one thing but refusing to waste time (of which there is a scarcity for me these days) debating with someone who is being deliberately disingenuous in his discourse is only sensible on my part. You’re fond of disguising fraudulent natter as some sort of intellect. I see through it saxib. Qalinkii aad jabisay baa ku kibriyay.

 

Hakuu qhadhadhaato.