Live data from Hacker News

Expert reaction to organic food nutrition study

sciencemediacentre.org

51–52 of 52 posts

Re: Expert reaction to organic food nutrition study

#51
post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is testing, science etc for things like pesticides and residue. The burden has been born and carried to a conclusion. Its new claims that the testing was not good enough that have a burden - its easy to call foul or claim hidden problems, then be conveniently too exhausted to do anything about it. Sometimes its not that problems are buried; sometimes they're not real.

Bee death suggests that we are not always researching everything affected by pesticides.

This excerpt is from the NRDC.. hardly a pro-chemical group, on the disappearance of bees...

"Scientists studying the disorder believe a combination of factors could be making bees sick, including pesticide exposure, invasive parasitic mites, an inadequate food supply and a new virus that targets bees' immune systems. More research is essential to determine the exact cause of the bees' distress."

Maybe it is pesticides. But stating "maybe" as fact happens all to often and muddies the issue. I would add... bees in this case are domestic bees. Maybe they can be made resistant to said pesticides. Or are all pesticides just bad because they are bad no matter what?

Re: Expert reaction to organic food nutrition study

#52
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The health benefits of Organics are often less about the process and more about the seeds. Heirloom tomatoes as an example tend to be smaller, and squishier, and more flavorful. The smaller means you can't produce as many per acre. The squishier means you lose more in shipping. The Tastier often accompanies more nutritious. The Pesticide issue is two fold. (same with herbicides) You could dust your plants with arseni…

we may end up like the places where 40% of their income goes to food, instead of 4% that we currently enjoy in the US Given the level of diet-related illness in the US, much of it a result of ultra cheap (through subsidies) sugars and grains, I can't help but wonder, "if people were paying 25% of their paychecks for food, would they make better choices?" Of course, the issue there has nothing to do with organics and…

"if people were paying 25% of their paychecks for food, would they make better choices?"

No. They will still choose the cheapest/most-convenient.

Post reply on HN