Is Organic Safer?

 
A recent review of current research says that organic meat and dairy products aren't demonstrably safer than conventional alternatives. Coverage of this, here.

This doesn't necessarily surprise me. Most organic poultry, swine, and dairy production isn't all that different from conventional production in a lot of ways. I would be much more interested in a comprehensive study asking whether management-intensive small scale production is actually safer, as we are so often told (I think Omnivore's Dilemma makes this argument). For this reason, I hope that they revisit the question for dairy after the new organic pasture rules go into effect this summer, which will require organic dairy cattle to be pastured for most of the time.

The arguments for organic are many and varied, but it's always good to remember that it isn't a cure-all for food safety. I think most American consumers are misinformed about what the organic seal actually means, and what exactly they're paying for. I buy organic for a variety of reasons, but not because I think it is all that much safer, and not because I think it is any more nutritious. For safer and more nutritious food, I go to the farmers' market.

Are Organic / Free-Range / Vegetarian / Antibiotic-Free Eggs Really Worth It?

A good piece from Change.org's sustainable food blog on eggs, and the relative merits of the more expensive supermarket varieties. Nothing super new here for anyone that's read Pollan, Nestle, etc, but a good reminder.  The key takeaway, here:

A Free Range label on an egg carton or chicken wrapper almost invariably means the chickens were raised in a crowded shed with limited outdoor access and almost certainly no fresh grass. It is often not terribly different from how their conventional counterparts are raised, and yet by meeting a few technical benchmarks, sellers can mark up their products to fetch the premium prices that more ethical food bring, effectively duping consumers. Don't be fooled; there is no substitute for real pasture.

Eggs are fascinating, because they are both a ubiquitous staple, an aggressively marketed "functional" food, and the object of much nutritional debate. Even in small grocery stores today we are forced to choose between conventional, organic, omega-3 fortified, and more. If you're lucky enough to have access to good, pastured eggs from a small farm, you get the best of all of these. If you're stuck buying your eggs from the store, let your conscience and your wallet be your guide.  There's no doubt that organic and free-range are at least a little bit better for the environment and for the chickens. The omega-3s are a bit trickier. While such fortified eggs are undoubtedly a great source of the nutrient,  they aren't necessarily the most cost-efficient way of getting it. If you are worried about both omega-3 fatty acids and your food budget, you may be better off developing a taste for sardines and (depending on  your risk factors for thinks like mercury) other seafood. At any event, budget-conscious shoppers would be wise to pass on omega-3 fortified milk, which charges a hefty premium for a very modest amount of the fatty acid.

"Pature" - And This Time They Mean It

In what is generally being regarded as a victory for small organic dairy farms and ranchers, the USDA has  issued new rules for organics that close a major loophole in the definition of "access to pasture." Under the old rules, industrial producers claimed that "access" did not necessarily mean cows had to  be out in the pasture, or eat anything that grows in the pasture, or even be aware of their supposed access to this pasture. Which means that we as consumers were paying a premium for dairy products from cows raised largely in the same manner as all the other CAFO cows out there. Not so starting in June 2010. Under the new rules, "organic dairy herds must be sent to pasture for the entire grazing season of at least 120 days and must get at least 30% of their food from pasture during that season." For the small producers who already do this, the transition will be easy. For big organic it should be a bit tougher, with the wonderful dual result of leveling the playing field for the little guys and giving the organic label even more well-defined value for the consumer.

More (with additional links) from Marion Nestle at Food Politics.

Defining "Access to Pasture" for Organic Dairy

An article over at Grist.org the other day looked at an important but obscure USDA rule regarding the definition of "access to pasture" for purposes of organic milk. Basically the USDA is in the process of rewriting the rule in a pretty commonsense way. Under the new rule, organic milk will only come from cows that: "graze on pasture for the entire growing season, or for at least 120 days in areas of inclement weather, getting 30 percent of their food from pasture."

This would basically exclude the big, industrial-organic producers that currently provide their cows a hay-covered strip of dirt outside the vast barns where the animals spend practically all of their time, and call that "access to pasture."


In my mind this is pretty simple. Ask yourself what a reasonable person would think of when you say "access to pasture." Knowing what we eat starts with making sure that the language we (and the USDA) use to describe our food is straightforward.

If you want to lend your voice in support of the new rule, you can do so here.

The Raw Milk Question: Organic Pastures vs the FDA

Over at Food Safety News they ran an article this morning about Mark McAfee, the California dairy farmer duking it out with the FDA over his right to market and sell raw (unpasteurized) milk. Raw milk seems like quite the contentious topic lately, and it's increasingly looking like a banner issue for groups advocating people's right to eat what they please, even where there are real food safety concerns.

Personally, I'm torn on the whole raw milk thing. On the one hand, I'm almost always in favor of letting people make their own choices about food, as long as those choices are well-informed (that is the point of this blog). Raw milk is a health risk, but as long as you know that, I feel like it's your call, just like it's your right to order a medium-rare steak, or to go out to a disreputable sushi place for dinner. On the other hand, I can't help feeling like Mr. McAfee is picking the wrong fight. I can be sympathetic to raw milk producers in large part because the safety issues involved in raw milk consumption are usually mitigated by the local and personal scale of raw milk production and sale. People almost always know the farmer, have been to the farm, and can thus make informed judgments about whether the stuff is safe. But this doesn't seem like a battle for raw milk in general; this is a farmer trying to preserve his right to market and sell his unpasteurized milk across state lines via the internet.

According to the article:
McAfee takes umbrage at interstate restrictions on licensed raw milk for several reasons.


"The logic for this is dubious,' he says in his recently filed legal papers, "since the borders between states do not transform healthful foods into poison."

He also points out that distance is not an issue here since milk from cows on the California side of Lake Tahoe cannot be sold on the Nevada side of the lake. Yet milk from cows in Yreka, which is in the far reaches of northern California, can be transported to and sold in San Diego.

While I agree that distance, rather than an arbitrary line at the state border, might be the more relevant consideration, I still don't find myself agreeing with Mr. McAfee. The practical and legal considerations on the FDA's regulation of this product mean that banning its sale across state lines is a sensible middle ground. Without banning raw milk entirely (this is left to the states, as I understand it), the FDA is acknowledging that raw milk presents a real food safety issue. By banning interstate sales, the FDA effectively limits the possibility that vendors will be able to sell a potentially dangerous foodstuff to out-of-state customers who don't have full information about the farm, the product, or the state regulations under which the milk was produced. 

Would a national system of regulation for raw milk, like that employed for most other foodstuffs, be a better option? I have a hard time believing the raw milk advocates would be in favor of this sort of system, and I'm not convinced it would be effective anyway. At the end of the day, raw milk is exactly the sort of product that I think we should be buying locally and directly from the farm, if we're purchasing it at all. That seems like the only reliable way to be a fully informed buyer.