Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

kansascity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 133 posts

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#81

Post by wbl »

eikenberry wrote: post #54
tasty_freeze wrote: post #38

It is obvious to everyone that due to the economic advantages of cheating, there needs to be some kind of inspection and certification program. Not that everyone is a cheater, but there will be cheaters, and it will put pressure on the non-cheaters to cheat too. The same people who bitch about big government will strangle inspection programs via budget cuts, and then when something like this story comes out, use it a…

Inspection and certification programs don't need to be government run to be effective. Kosher certification programs are the first example that comes to mind. I'm just trying to say you can argue for more, better inspections without having to argue for "big government".

Kosher certification has a bunch of complexities. There are several big national certification authorities, but they have different standards, with Tablet-K accepting some things in the realm of cheese production others don't. Some small local hechshers provide more supervision then the national chains, but piggyback for the tough halachic questions.

And then there is the whole milk thing, where kashrut organizations have largely said that the FDA is enforcing the rule better then they can, so they won't bother, but some consumers don't think this is good enough.

There is also a controversy over slaughterhouse conditions brought to light when a kosher slaughterhouse was raided by the agriculture department for health violations.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#82

Post by zaroth »

Maarten88 wrote: post #10
erikig wrote: post #9

"There’s no proof that the meat [from animals fed from fraudulently marked "organic" produce] is any better for you, but some people believe it is and others have philosophical or environmental reasons for preferring it." Makes me wonder - who is the victim of this fraud?

The animals, clearly

How do you figure? The animals were being raised for slaughter one way or another. You think the animals cared that the grain they were eating was mis-labeled as organic?

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#83

Post by throwawayjava »

ourmandave wrote: post #44
Thorrez wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The customers who paid a higher price for something because it was falsely advertised. Just because there's no proof that organic is healthier doesn't mean it isn't healthier. And people buy organic for reasons other than health, such as the idea that it's better for the environment (e.g. no pesticides seeping into the ground).

Just because there's no proof that organic is healthier doesn't mean it isn't healthier. USDA certified cringey statement.

Just because there's no proof that organic is healthier doesn't mean there's no victim.

If for some reason a lot of customers want to pay extra for milk that's hand-milked by a milk maid standing on her head, we can of course talk about how funny those "head-standing milk is better" folks are. But that doesn't make it okay to lie and defraud them.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#84

Post by noonespecial »

downrightmike wrote: post #28

He scammed out a couple dozen million dollars each year and is fined 128 million, which ruined him and he'd never be able to pay it back. This is the kind of punishment That needs to happen to a lot of industries, really any of the crimes people commit should cost them more than they gained. But he must have been too small potatoes, so he got an appropriate sentence.

If the punishment levied by the government costs less than the gain from the crime, I think its just called taxes.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#85

Post by ourmandave »

Thorrez wrote: post #61
ourmandave wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because there's no proof that organic is healthier doesn't mean it isn't healthier. USDA certified cringey statement.

It's a variation of the common phrase "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence."[1] It's a common debate, at what point, if ever, can we say something doesn't exist when there's no evidence for it. There might actually be some evidence that organic food is healthier, this study[2] found an association between organic food and reduction in non-Hodgkin lymphoma. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evidence_of_abse…

Yes, and the dragon in my garage only eats organic knights.

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/The_Dragon_in_My_Garage

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#86

Post by nyrosis »

cprayingmantis wrote: post #2

I wouldn’t be surprised if during the next few years you saw a number of stories like this come out. From my talks with folks there isn’t as much oversight in the organic sector as we’re led to believe. That’s all hearsay so take it with a grain of salt.

It's indeed likely more of this is happening due to poor government oversight. Though I suspect the demand for oversight and the desire for organic food will motivate this market to respond. If people are willing to pay money for this method they will likely pay to have it guaranteed in a rigorous inspection.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#88

Post by umvi »

loeg wrote: post #77
tasty_freeze wrote: post #38

It is obvious to everyone that due to the economic advantages of cheating, there needs to be some kind of inspection and certification program. Not that everyone is a cheater, but there will be cheaters, and it will put pressure on the non-cheaters to cheat too. The same people who bitch about big government will strangle inspection programs via budget cuts, and then when something like this story comes out, use it a…

How do you inspect grain for "organic?" The label is meaningless and honestly this is kind of an intended side effect — charging people more for the same product. This guy just got even greedier than the original creators of the term and the government agreed was acceptable.

The label means it is not genetically modified, and does not use chemical fertilizers or pesticides.

It seems to me you'd be able to inspect grain genome looking for known GMO sequences

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#89

Post by whyenot »

Jedd wrote: post #47

> ... is fed to cattle and chickens, whose meat is also sold at a premium [...] because a growing number of consumers are willing to pay more for protein that comes from animals raised on a natural, organic diet. Consumers have been misled - cattle's natural diet is grass, not grains. Chickens will opportunistically eat grains and seeds, but if given the opportunity will eagerly eat a blend of greens and insects & wo…

When I was at UC Davis I took an Animal Science class called “Ruminant Digestion and Nutrition.” We learned you can feed cows grains, hay, even sawdust. They can live and thrive on all those things as long as they also get trace minerals. That is the magic of having a rumen.

Re: One of biggest frauds in U.S. farm history

#90

Post by ceejayoz »

markdown wrote: post #35
bad_user wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, non-organic has more residue of expected pesticides . The often unspoken truth however is that many chemicals aren't tested for. For example copper sulfate, used as organic fungicide. In other words conventional agriculture uses far more substances that the USDA tests for, a vast majority of them, whereas organic agriculture uses substances that aren't covered by USDA tests. Which should be obvious. This doesn't…

> For example copper sulfate, used as organic fungicide. Why would one need to test for copper? The trace amounts of it that one would find are good for you. I mean, it's used for water piping in homes even.

That's silly, like saying breathing chlorine is safe because it's a component in table salt.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copper(II)_sulfate#Toxicologic...

Post reply on HN