"Organic" Foods:

These astute questions were raised in 1972 by Dick Beeler, editor of Animal Health and Nutrition, who was concerned about laws being adopted in California and Oregon to certify "organic" foods. Those laws signaled the beginning of efforts that culminated in 1990 with passage of the U.S. Organic Foods Production Act (OFPA), which ordered the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to set certification standards. Although USDA had opposed passage of the act, the Alar scare plus a campaign by environmental, consumer, and farm groups persuaded Congress to include it in the 1990 Farm Bill .

As directed by the law, the Secretary of Agriculture established a National Organic Standards Board to help develop a list of substances permissible in organic production and handling and to advise the Secretary on other aspects of implementing a National Organic Program.

Total retail sales of the organic industry reportedly rose from $1 billion in 1990 to $7.8 billion in 2000 . "Certified" organic cropland production expanded from about 400,000 acres in 1992 to 1,350,000 in 1999 . Despite this growth, the organic industry represents a very small percentage of total agricultural production and sales—only about 0.3% of U.S. cropland and 0.2% of U.S. pasture was certified organic in 2001 .

The term "organic foods" refers to the methods used to produce the foods rather than to characteristics of the food themselves. The most common concept of "organically grown" food was articulated in 1972 by Robert Rodale, editor of Organic Gardening and Farming magazine, at a public hearing:

Food grown without pesticides; grown without artificial fertilizers; grown in soil whose humus content is increased by the additions of organic matter, grown in soil whose mineral content is increased by the application of natural mineral fertilizers; has not been treated with preservatives, hormones, antibiotics, etc.

In 1980, a team of scientists appointed by the USDA concluded that there was no universally accepted definition of "organic farming." Their report stated:

The organic movement represents a spectrum of practices, attitudes, and philosophies. On the one hand are those organic practitioners who would not use chemical fertilizers or pesticides under any circumstances. These producers hold rigidly to their purist philosophy.

At the other end of the spectrum, organic farmers espouse a more flexible approach. While striving to avoid the use of chemical fertilizers and pesticides, these practitioners do not rule them out entirely. Instead, when absolutely necessary, some fertilizers and also herbicides are very selectively and sparingly used as a second line of defense. Nevertheless, these farmers, too, consider themselves to be organic farmers .

Passage of the Organic Foods Production Act forced the USDA to develop an official definition. On December 16, 1997, the USDA Agricultural Marketing Service proposed rules for a National Organic Program . The proposal applied to all types of agricultural products and all aspects of their production and handling, ranging from soil fertility management to the packaging and labeling of the final product. The proposal included: (a) national standards for production and handling, (b) a National List of approved synthetic substances, (c) a certification program, (d) a program for accrediting certifiers, (e) labeling requirements, (f) enforcement provisions, and (g) rules for importing equivalent products.

The proposed rule defined organic farming and handling as:

A system that is designed and managed to produce agricultural products by the use of methods and substances that maintain the integrity of organic agricultural products until they reach the consumer. This is accomplished by using, where possible, cultural, biological and mechanical methods, as opposed to using substances, to fulfill any specific function within the system so as to: maintain long-term soil fertility; increase soil biological activity; ensure effective pest management; recycle wastes to return nutrients to the land; provide attentive care for farm animals; and handle the agricultural products without the use of extraneous synthetic additives or processing in accordance with the Act and the regulations in this part.

The rules permit up to 20% of animal feed to be obtained from non-organic sources. This was done because some nutrients (such as trace minerals) are not always available organically. Irradiation, which can reduce or eliminate certain pests, kill disease-causing bacteria, and prolong food shelf-life, would be permitted during processing. Genetic engineering would also be permissible.

Health-food-industry trade and consumer publications expressed widespread dissatisfaction with the 1997 proposal. The Henry A. Wallace Institute for Alternative Agriculture, for example, called it "Fatally flawed." The Organic Farmers Marketing Association stated:

The definition of organic as written in the proposed national organic standards lacks the holistic approach central to organic practices. The proposed rules take a reductionist approach to organic food production that eliminates key concepts such as the health of the agro-ecosystem and biodiversity on the farm.

The USDA received more than 270,000 comments on the proposed rules . One distributors' association official wrote that if the rules are implemented, its members would seek to buy its agricultural products from foreign sources. Others complained that the proposed fees were too high. Other objections included permitted use of amino acids as growth promoters, antibiotics (when necessary to save the animal's life), synthetic animal drugs, food additives, and animal feed from non-organic sources.

Some poultry farmers objected to provisions enabling intermingling of range-free poultry and other poultry. However, the vast majority of the objections pertain to the provisions that permitted irradiation, genetic engineering, and the use of sewage sludge as fertilizer . The final regulations,published in December 2002, eliminated these three provisions. Canada, which in 1999 became the first country to establish a national organic standard, also excludes these methods .

The organic rules are intended to address production methods rather than the physical qualities of the products themselves.

What is organic? Generally, it is agriculture produced through a natural as opposed to synthetic process. The natural portion of the definition is fairly obvious, but process is an equally critical distinction. When we certify organic, we are certifying not just a product but the farming and handling practices that yield it. When you buy a certified organic tomato, for instance, you are buying the product of an organic farm. And, consumers are willing to fork over a little more for that tomato. They've shown that they will pay a premium for organic food. National standards are our way of ensuring that consumers get what they pay for.

...limit of 20 lines reached, additional matching lines are not shown...

Of course, this is not to imply that these supplements are safe for human consumption. The ingestion of unnecessary amounts of all trace elements should be avoided because many are not easily excreted and all can exhibit toxic effects when consumed in large quantity or for an extended period of time . More important, however, colloidal mineral promoters seem oblivious to the fact that their products may contain hazardous organic compounds. For example, a daily dose of Doc's Mineral Rocks contains 7.2 mg of unidentified total organic carbon . It is well established that groundwater can leach toxic organic compounds from sedimentary deposits such as coal, shale, and lignite. In many locations, specific geochemical conditions have led to the leaching of toxic organic compounds into potable water supplies with resulting disease.

Colloidal mineral extracts have a distinctive yellow tint, indicating the presence of dissolved organic matter. At least one manufacturer, the Rockland Corporation, prides itself on its product's dark gold color.

Although the concentrations of hazardous organic compounds may be low, long-term exposure and/or accumulation in body tissues might eventually lead to disease. Suspected and proven carcinogens such as PAHs, aromatic amines, and aminophenols result from the partial coalification of aromatic substances in woody plant tissues . Such compounds can trigger gene and/or chromosomal mutations and altered gene expression, both of which are significant factors in the development of cancer. PAHs also exhibit the ability to modulate signal transduction among cells, which can have serious negative health consequences . In addition to carcinogenicity, shale extracts possess low-order estrogenic properties. Many organic compounds can also contribute to the unwanted activation of the immune system. Since diseases can be caused by multiple factors, adverse long-term effects of colloidal mineral products may not be readily identifiable. Ironically, while the tonics themselves are unregulated, surface water runoff from the mining operations is routinely remediated because of its threat to plant and animal life.

Mr. Pontolillo is a research scientist with over ten years of experience in the fields of geology, organic petrology and organic geochemistry. An earlier version of this article was published as: Pontolillo J. Better Living through Shale Leachate? TSOP Newsletter 14(1)1:4-7, 1997.

Assorted promotional literature downloaded from the Internet (LifePlus, KareMor, New Vision, Higher Ideals, Soaring Eagle Ventures, Advanced Bio Company, Organic Planets, Thomas J. Clark & Company, The Rockland Corporation, etc.). When quoting from these materials no distinction has been made as to the exact source, since most manufacturers and distributors employ virtually identical literature.

Of those compounds of mercury that are toxic, one must usually eat them for toxicity to occur. Most that are poisonous are organic mercurials, and most are not acutely poisonous. Dose always determines whether a substance is poisonous. Mercury and mercury compounds have several useful health-care applications. When properly handled, they are safe for their intended uses.

Mercurochrome is a brand name for a product that formerly contained an organic mercurial. No study showed that its use as a simple topical antiseptic was harmful.

The term "organic" is used to describe plants grown without pesticides or synthetic fertilizers. Materials made from such plants are believed to be superior in some way to those produced by conventional agriculture. This belief is based on a complete misunderstanding of plant nutrition and physiology. Plants require inorganic nutrients such as nitrogen, phosphorus and potassium for normal growth. They obtain these elements from the soil and have no mechanism for distinguishing their original source. If adequate amounts are present, plants grow normally. If they are not, this does not occur.

Foods "certified" as "organic" are not safer or more nutritious than other foods. In fact, except for their high price, they are not significantly different.

Food quacks belittle normal foods and ridicule the food-group systems of good nutrition. They may not tell you they earn their living from such pronouncements—via public appearance fees, product endorsements, sale of publications, or financial interests in vitamin companies, health-food stores, or organic farms.

Claims that amalgam contains organic mercury or is converted to organic mercury are false.

. This allows vital energy in the body to be shifted from digestion to other body functions such as repair and rejuvenation." Of course, "organic foods" are preferable because "the corporate giants use deadly chemicals." Further:

Nor is it correct that juices can strengthen the immune system or the body as a whole. The enzymes in plants help regulate the metabolic function of plants. When ingested, they do not act as enzymes within the human body, because they are digested rather than absorbed intact into the body. "Organically grown" foods cost more but are neither safer nor more nutritious than conventionally grown foods. And sensible eating, which is not difficult to do, furnishes an adequate nutrient supply.

(7) Failed to order a urinalysis, which is a basic screening test for an organic cause of failure to thrive.

Five Elements (Five Phases): Earth, Metal, Water, Wood, and Fire as manifestations ("phases" or "transformations") of chi. The expression "five elements" derives from two Chinese words: wu ("five") and xing ("move" or "walk"). Its implicit meaning is "five processes." According to ancient Chinese cosmology, the Five Elements compose everything. In Chinese medicine, each of the Five Elements symbolizes a group of physiologic functions: "Earth" (soil) represents balance or neutrality; Metal (coal, fossils, and inorganic matter), decay; Water (moisture), a state of maximum rest leading to a change of functional direction; Wood (organic matter), a growth phase; and Fire (gases), maximum activity.

The Weston A. Price Foundation, of Washington, D.C., is another membership organization founded to promote Price's principles. Founded in 1999, it advocates holistic dentistry, organic farming, raw (unpasteurized) milk, and many questionable dietary strategies. It also opposes fluoridation.

Thus, as far as I am concerned, there is no reason to believe that faith healing has ever cured anyone of an organic disease. What about functional ailments—in which the symptoms are bodily reactions to tension? Some people who visit "healers" may feel better because the experience causes them to relax or because of a placebo effect. But any benefit of this type should be weighed against the fact that people who are not relieved may conclude that they are "unworthy" and become depressed as a result. Money spent for a fruitless experience with a healer is another negative factor.

3. Diet: Kelley initially proposed a strict vegetarian diet, but later advocated that diet must be tailored to each patient's need. He developed ten basic diets with 95 variations. These ranged from pure vegetarian to exclusively meat. The diets forbade processed foods, pesticide residues, milk, soy beans, peanuts, food concentrates, white sugar, and white rice. It allowed almonds, low protein grains and nuts, yogurt, "organic" raw vegetable and fruit juices, salads, and whole grain cereals.

MCS patients typically portray themselves as immunologic cripples in a hostile world of dangerous foods and chemicals. In many cases, their life becomes centered around their illness. Various companies cater to these beliefs by offering such items as "organic" foods; odor-free personal products; special clothing, household products, and building materials; and even specially outfitted travel trailers. A recent article in Reason described how one woman wore a protective mask while shopping and another woman hung her mail on a clothesline for weeks before reading it, to allow the "toxins" in the ink to dissipate.

Fears of dread diseases hold high priority on the list of our citizens' worries. They have, moreover, become skeptical of gigantic institutions, including big science, and many look askance at reason as a way for seeking truth. Whatever merit may lie in suspecting reason's inadequacies, the reaction has often gone to an extreme of deliberate flirtation, if not open liaison, with wild varieties of unreason. The acceptance of astrology has soared, not merely as a pastime but as a legitimate "science," even in high places. Publishing houses have made millions from it. During the 1960s, almost every college campus had a peripheral course in "reading the stars." Spiritualism made a comeback, with "spiritual churches" blossoming in almost every city. Tarot cards, palmistry, and numerology flourished. Witchcraft and devil worship made an appearance. Paperbacks on these themes were among the hottest items in university bookstores. Many among the young turned their backs on civilization and its discontents, displaying a new primitivism, sometimes retreating into communes remotely located, sometimes merely buying "organic" foods at the nearest health-food store.

apple diet (apple-cleansing regimen, apple-diet cleansing routine, apple-diet regimen, apple-diet therapy): Alleged purificatory "reducing aid" inspired by the "readings" of "religious seer" Edgar Cayce (see "The Cayce Approach to Health and Healing"). The three-day regimen includes enemas and restricts food intake to raw apples (especially Delicious and Jonathan, and peeled unless they are organic), black coffee, and olive oil. Cayce recommended the diet for numerous ailments, including anemia, debilitation, and "subluxations."

A continual problem for SDAs who espouse the "back to Eden" ideology is the absence of a non-animal food source of vitamin B12. A Registered Dietitian, a vegetarian who wrote a column for a church periodical, asked me if I thought vegans could derive vitamin B12 from organic vegetables that were unwashed before ingestion. I opined that it would be better to eat animal foods than fecal residues. She agreed

The method by which Pau D'Arco tea or powder is produced is not publicly known. However, efforts to study the effects of Pau D'Arco have focused largely on one its chemical constituents, lapachol, a biologically active organic compound. Lapachol is said to be present, to varying degrees, in commercial preparations of Pau D'Arco, although a recent analysis found only trace amounts or no measurable amounts of lapachol in the bark of specimens of Tabebuia impetiginosa and other species collected for commercial purposes (61). Less attention has been paid to the biological properties of other constituents of Pau D'Arco, e.g., several naphthoquinone compounds (340), or to crude extracts of the whole product.

Food safety and environmental protection are important issues in our society. But rather than approach them logically, the food quacks exaggerate and oversimplify. To promote "organic" foods, they lump all additives into one class and attack them as "poisonous." They never mention that natural toxicantsare prevented or destroyed by modern food technology. Nor do they let on that many additives are naturally occurring substances.