Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

GreatGazoo

(4,524 posts)
8. The study in the OP looked only at the impact of an acre of USDA organic practices versus an acre of
Thu Jul 16, 2015, 01:13 PM
Jul 2015

conventional. Impact was defined strictly as CO2 emissions per acre. USDA organic is now used by businesses like Perdue for example to certify their chickens sold under the "Coleman Organic" label. So most of the product sold as USDA organic is now coming from the same supply chains as conventional. In this example, factory farmed chickens with the male chicks culled live into grinders that make them into dog food and all that. Same chickens, same warehouses full of ammonia laden chicken waste, just without hormones and antibiotics.

Many consumers have moved on to "local" foods, seeking more transparency, fresher product and less carbon release per calories.

The more the food industry hollows out "organic" the more they send customers to other sources. The age of big brands is closing and the age of transparency is dawning. The big brands are panicking because "big" is out and their efforts to stop GMO labeling or rename HFCS just makes it worse. Big brands were about trust and they blew it:

http://fortune.com/2015/05/21/the-war-on-big-food/?src=longreads

Recommendations

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

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Study suggests organic fa...»Reply #8