General Discussion

GliderGuider

(21,088 posts)

7. Organic and non-GMO sugar

Tue May 31, 2016, 10:56 AM

May 2016

The "Organic sugar" push is mainly about reducing pesticide use.

It may not affect the refined end product much or at all, but it's an attempt to help the wider environment where the sugar is produced.

The "Non-GMO" label is a consumer statement against the genetic modification of sugar-beets.

http://www.non-gmoreport.com/articles/jun08/sugar_beet_industry_converts_to_gmo.php

The US sugar beet industry coordinated an industry-wide conversion to genetically modified sugar beets, thus eliminating a non-GMO alternative for food manufacturers and consumers. Meanwhile, production of GM sugar beet seed is likely to contaminate organic and conventional vegetable seed production in Oregon’s Willamette Valley.

Both labels serve as a marketing tool, of course, which IMO is totally legitimate. Like it or loathe it, consumers are making their voices heard about the manipulation of the American food supply by Big Ag.

In case anyone is wondering, that battle has been lost, the horse has left the barn - at least partially because of Citizens United.

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

130 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

GMO free sugar makes about as much sense as organic cigarettes imo. [View all] yellowcanine May 2016 OP

It's so that you can eat unhealthy but still feel good about your diet. hughee99 May 2016 #1

Nat Sherman Angel Martin May 2016 #2

I've smoked Shermans for years REP May 2016 #19

It's all about attempting to rein in the rampant Blues Heron May 2016 #3

^^this^^ Viva_La_Revolution May 2016 #5

Wrong again. HuckleB May 2016 #17

I get that people believe that - but there is precious little evidence yellowcanine May 2016 #6

Purchasing based on these labels is largely a consumer protest statement GliderGuider May 2016 #8

Organic and non-GMO sugar GliderGuider May 2016 #7

Nah, Sugar Cane (non GMO) is as much "Big Ag" as Sugar Beets (GMO) yellowcanine May 2016 #10

perhaps you might have stated this in your op. hopemountain May 2016 #30

Bingo. U4ikLefty May 2016 #47

Of course name calling is so much more honest. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #67

Conspiracy theories are so much fun, though! HuckleB Jun 2016 #68

I just wish Monsanto would hurry up with the check! yellowcanine Jun 2016 #70

They're working on GMO checks, with more bounce! HuckleB Jun 2016 #71

You actually have to be GOOD at it....no check for you. U4ikLefty Jun 2016 #83

Nah, sanctimony & ROFL smileys are much more convincing. U4ikLefty Jun 2016 #81

Ironic. HuckleB Jun 2016 #86

If the name fits...... U4ikLefty Jun 2016 #80

Contradictory. HuckleB Jun 2016 #87

Name calling is what you do when you can't argue the facts. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #112

Discussion is not started by industry propaganda. HuckleB May 2016 #48

But yet you engaged, or at least pretended to. So the OP must not have been so bad. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #66

It did not occur to me. Do I need to consult with you on my OPs? yellowcanine Jun 2016 #72

No, it's not. It's about marketing. HuckleB May 2016 #16

thanks, glider guider nt. hopemountain May 2016 #31

His propaganda was debunked. HuckleB May 2016 #44

+ 1 Scientific May 2016 #9

You really do buy into any fiction you find, don't you? HuckleB May 2016 #12

Non-GMO sugar will increase the use of pesticides. HuckleB May 2016 #11

Organic, non-GMO sugar doesn't increase the use of pesticides or herbicides. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #33

You can say that, but it's not true. HuckleB May 2016 #35

Why? pnwmom May 2016 #36

I already showed why. HuckleB May 2016 #37

This Harvard professor disagrees with you. pnwmom May 2016 #38

Well, the professors in the links I provided actually discussed reality. HuckleB May 2016 #39

They don't use chemical pesticides on organic sugar beets. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #40

Yes, they do. HuckleB May 2016 #41

Not in the U.S. It's regulated by the Department of Agriculture here. pnwmom May 2016 #42

And they use plenty of pesticides and herbicides. HuckleB May 2016 #43

The Dept. of Agriculture doesn't allow organic food producers to use them. n/t pnwmom May 2016 #45

You keep telling yourself that. HuckleB May 2016 #46

Here, the FDA can tell you. https://www.ams.usda.gov/about-ams/programs-offices/national-organic-pro Todays_Illusion Jun 2016 #52

So you think organic pesticides are not pesticides? HuckleB Jun 2016 #62

Isn't that the same as asking me if I think water is water? Todays_Illusion Jun 2016 #76

You might want to look a little further. HuckleB Jun 2016 #77

Demonstrably wrong Major Nikon Jun 2016 #56

The alcohols listed, for example, are not comparable to the pesticides pnwmom Jun 2016 #57

Demonstrably wrong again Major Nikon Jun 2016 #58

Your link doesn't support your point. nt pnwmom Jun 2016 #59

It was your points you never supported to begin with and twice you were proven wrong Major Nikon Jun 2016 #60

Here's something showing pesticides are used in organics. You'll ignore it though. Lancero Jun 2016 #61

Organic producers can use some pesticides. All pesticides are made of chemicals. Even water is a yellowcanine Jun 2016 #73

You used a marketing site as a link? And it does not support your claim. HuckleB Jun 2016 #65

When you don't test for so called organic pesticides MattBaggins May 2016 #49

It's funny how she ignored the content of the links I offered. HuckleB May 2016 #51

Easier than shooting fish in a barrel. Really. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #74

Actually, the organic food industry is tightly regulated womanofthehills Jun 2016 #90

Tightly regulated by the USDA Marketing Service, as in they are providing a service to Big Organic® Major Nikon Jun 2016 #96

Beahahahahahahahaha!!!! HuckleB Jun 2016 #128

That article doesn't mention sugar or GMOs. It is about fruits and veggies. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #115

LOL GulfCoast66 May 2016 #22

It makes even less sense, since sugar is sugar. cpwm17 May 2016 #4

perhaps to you - but nearly every product on the hopemountain May 2016 #32

Here's formula for sugar (sucrose): cpwm17 May 2016 #34

so i guess you would not care whether your sucrose came hopemountain Jun 2016 #53

So you have a religious preference. HuckleB Jun 2016 #63

So according to you, Roundup in all our rivers & air is not a problem womanofthehills Jun 2016 #91

In other news, researchers discovered water is wet and the sky is blue Major Nikon Jun 2016 #101

When wil you worry about more toxic products? HuckleB Jun 2016 #103

You really believe that organic farmers don't use pesticides? MattBaggins May 2016 #50

not local organic farmers - perhaps mass hopemountain Jun 2016 #54

Your last statement is not true MattBaggins Jun 2016 #55

Not true at all. HuckleB Jun 2016 #64

Organic farms are government inspected every year womanofthehills Jun 2016 #93

They aren't inspected by the government Major Nikon Jun 2016 #98

FDA will begin testing of GLYPHOSATE - FOR THE FIRST TIME THIS YEAR womanofthehills Jun 2016 #119

Sure, because as we all know the "government" doesn't extend past the FDA Major Nikon Jun 2016 #123

And yeah we have been there before and you even admitted your claim was complete bullshit Major Nikon Jun 2016 #130

Organic fruits and vegetables much cleaner than conventional food womanofthehills Jun 2016 #89

what should be made clear to consumers is that 'organic' does not equal 'safe' Major Nikon Jun 2016 #99

Buy your organic food from local farmers who you know and it's safe womanofthehills Jun 2016 #121

Either they aren't huge or they use pesticides Major Nikon Jun 2016 #124

they sure don't use the most toxic ones like 2,4-d and glyphosate with polyethoxylated tallow amine womanofthehills Jun 2016 #92

No they use ones that are more toxic like copper sulfate and a lot more of it Major Nikon Jun 2016 #97

It's about feeling better about something, even though it harms the environment. HuckleB May 2016 #13

Then... sendero May 2016 #14

But why would anyone buy something that pretends to be better when it's worse? HuckleB May 2016 #15

GM Crops Now Banned in 38 Countries Worldwide – Sustainable Pulse Research womanofthehills Jun 2016 #94

And there is no logical justification for that. HuckleB Jun 2016 #104

I don't make the distinction. But anti gmo activists are pushing it. yellowcanine May 2016 #20

Got news got you GulfCoast66 May 2016 #23

The way I see it is I help pay for price supports also. yellowcanine May 2016 #24

I am dense at times GulfCoast66 May 2016 #27

There is, chemically, no difference, both are heavily processed and bad for you. N/t Humanist_Activist May 2016 #18

I might on average, eat about a teaspoon of sugar a week. And I eat organic. Luminous Animal May 2016 #21

So you know lots of people who have been conned ... HuckleB May 2016 #29

It is worth paying more money for chickens raised humanly than for tortured chickens womanofthehills Jun 2016 #95

That has nothing to do with GMOs. HuckleB Jun 2016 #105

YOU MUST BE KIDDING - ALL THE ANIMAL FOOD HAS HIGH LEVELS OF GLYPHOSATE & GMO'S womanofthehills Jun 2016 #120

Meh. Putin's mouthpiece RT Major Nikon Jun 2016 #125

Which is BS, and has nothing to do with animal welfare. HuckleB Jun 2016 #127

I only eat salt that's GMO free. NobodyHere May 2016 #25

I usually pour some GMO on my salt that I pour on my HFCS that I pour on my Rex May 2016 #28

Added bonus is that it is gluten free also. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #75

I thought cigs were organic? Rex May 2016 #26

Yeah I have tried to make that point before but it is wasted effort. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #69

GMO is a superior form of plant breeding Major Nikon Jun 2016 #102

Here is a list of Additives that are allowed to be put in cigarettes. Jesus Malverde Jun 2016 #78

I dunno, Mr. Esler would disagree. Rex Jun 2016 #79

It makes as much sense as Gluten Free, Organic, Fat Free Sugar Thor_MN Jun 2016 #82

That makes more sense than gluten free water. And yeah, that IS a thing. Lancero Jun 2016 #84

Leaving the health issue out of the debate, the GMO movement has turned natural plant life into Vote2016 Jun 2016 #85

Read the links in post 16 and get back to us. HuckleB Jun 2016 #88

Unless you're being paid to promote GMOs on the internet, I doubt you have read as much research on Vote2016 Jun 2016 #106

You are ignoring science, and your "research" is just industry propaganda. HuckleB Jun 2016 #108

It actually looks more like a google search Major Nikon Jun 2016 #114

Oh, I'm sure of that. HuckleB Jun 2016 #126

Here's some even more interesting research Major Nikon Jun 2016 #111

Is that because you're being paid to hawk organics on the interwebs? Act_of_Reparation Jun 2016 #113

It gets even funnier Major Nikon Jun 2016 #117

And funnier still Act_of_Reparation Jun 2016 #129

Plant patent laws have been around for almost 100 years Major Nikon Jun 2016 #100

If you are really interested in this topic, here is some real research on GMOs and intellectual Vote2016 Jun 2016 #107

And what am I supposed to derive from any of this? Major Nikon Jun 2016 #109

"Then the GMO cross pollinates ... and now the neighbouring farmer has a crop dependent..." yellowcanine Jun 2016 #110

It's just repetition of anti-GMO talking points which have been debunked a million times Major Nikon Jun 2016 #116

"Power lines cause cancer" would have more of a potential scientific basis though. yellowcanine Jun 2016 #118

Que the Monsatan skull and crossbones then Major Nikon Jun 2016 #122