May 4-6 Meeting Of The National Organic Standards Board Options

[alexis]

Save Organic Standards!
Tell the National Organic Standards Board to Keep Organic Standards Strong

Twice yearly, the National Organic Standards Board holds public meetings to hear from the public and make recommendations to the USDA National Organic Program. The next meeting is May 4-6, 2009, in Washington, DC. The Organic Consumers Fund, the voice for organic consumers in the Nation's Capitol, will be submitting written and oral comments to the NOSB and we would like to have your input. Please let us know what you think about the following issues that the NOSB will be discussing: PLEASE POST YOUR COMMMENTS BELOW, AND WE WILL SUBMIT THOSE TO THE NOSB. YOU WILL NEED TO REGISTER ABOVE FOR THIS WEB FORUM FIRST, IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO.

ISSUES THE NOSB WILL BE DISCUSSING & VOTING ON IN MAY:

Biodiversity
Biodiversity should be prioritized in organic system plans. Maintaining healthy, biologically diverse farms is essential for the long-term sustainability of our food system and ecosystem. Currently, the USDA National Organic Program and many organic farmers, inspectors, and certifiers biodiversity are neglecting biodiversity. Biodiversity should be considered when reviewing materials for use on organic farms, and biodiversity conservation should be more fully developed and implemented in the Organic System Plan.

Food Packaging
Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled should not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee is considering that inert atmospheric gases are not processing aids because they have no functional effect in the food, but merely modify the environment in which the food is packaged. This is an incorrect reading of the law. 7 CFR 205.301(f)(4) is quite clear. It states, “products labeled as “100 percent organic,” if processed, must be processed using organically produced processing aids.” This means that all ingredients and processing aids, including so-called “packaging aids,” must be 100% organic in order for the product to be labeled “100% organic.” Anything less does not comply with the Final Rule, and is misleading to consumers.

Personal Care Products
Personal care products labeled or marketed as organic should meet USDA standards. Unlike organic foods, many personal care products are falsely labeled as "organic." The USDA should use its enforcement power to go after shampoos, cosmetics and other personal care products that mislead consumers by improperly using the term "organic" in their name, branding and marketing claims.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board
The overwhelming majority of organic farmers, producers, and certifiers are playing by the rules, but a single example of organic fraud can crumble consumer confidence in organic certification. We need a professional, well-funded and independent NOP Peer Review Board, as required by law, so that respected members of the organic community can monitor and police violations of organic standards. National Voluntary Conformity Assessment System Evaluation, an existing government program specifically focused on auditing organic accreditation programs, is well suited to fulfill the role of Peer Review Panel.

Nanotechnology
Nanotechnology is the science of engineering and control of matter on an almost molecular scale. The technology is being used increasingly in numerous areas of agricultural production and food production and handling. The UK's Soil Association has banned the use of nano-materials in organic, the USDA NOP and NOSB should do the same to make clear that current law prevents nanotechnology from entering the organic marketplace.

Soy Lecithin
Organic processors have been allowed to use conventional soy lecithin even though organic soy lecithin is now available. Organic consumers expect the highest percentage possible of organic ingredients in their organic foods, which is why the NOSB should remove the exemption for conventional soy lecithin.

Sulfurous Acid
Sulfurous acid is derived from crude oil. Its allowance is incompatible with organic production. This recommendation should be tabled until a full and impartial TAP review is conducted.

PROPOSED RECOMMENDATION TO ADD NEW SECTION TO 205.603: (g) Formulated injectable supplements of trace minerals per 205.603 (d) (2), vitamins per 205.603 (d) (3), and electrolytes per 205.603 (a) (8), with excipients per 205.603 (f), in accordance with FDA and restricted to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.

As Jim Riddle wrote in his comments, “Whoa, Nellie! Without addressing the possible merits of this draft recommendation, it is clear that an affirmative action by the NOSB on this draft recommendation would add new substances to the National List, without the submission of petitions, and without TAP reviews being conducted. The Livestock Committee’s draft recommendation does not address the evaluation criteria for these substances, as required by statute. The draft should be tabled until petitions are submitted and full TAP reviews conducted on the petitioned substances.”

[Katherineew]

We need to keep up with Europe and demand our government protect us, as that is what we have elected for them to do! They need to do their jobs and ensure our safety comes before the profit renderings of big business!

[Blasphemer]

I agree with Katherine, if someone else has a good system worked out, why reinvent the wheel? The people of the world should be taking the best ideas and the best solutions from the entire globe and incorporating those "best of the best" into their local communities.

Other than that, the concepts in the OP are excellent points to make.

[johnf]

NOSB should act quickly and decisively to protect the "organic" label from the many degrading activities that dilute the term and erode the validity of the niche market that will eventually drive consumer demand for a cleaner and more sustainable food industry.

Biodiversity must be prioritized in organic system plans. Maintaining healthy, biologically diverse farms is essential for the long-term sustainability of our food system and ecosystem. Currently, biodiversity is being neglected by the USDA National Organic Program and many organic farmers, inspectors, and certifiers.

Food Packaging with carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled must not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee should reject this loophole.

NOSB should give top priority to consumer protection in all circumstances. The Organic label is being abused in too many areas and more enforcement should be implemented.

Products labeled or marketed as organic should meet USDA standards and enforcement of this labeling should be implemented. Personal care products are falsely labeled as "organic."

National Organic Program Peer Review Board should be independent to monitor and police the organic standards.

Nanotechnology is being used increasingly in numerous areas of agricultural production and food production and handling. The USDA NOP and NOSB should ban such materials from entering the organic marketplace.

[Arnie Welber]

Save Organic Standards!
Tell the National Organic Standards Board to Keep Organic Standards Strong

Twice yearly, the National Organic Standards Board holds public meetings to hear from the public and make recommendations to the USDA National Organic Program. The next meeting is May 4-6, 2009, in Washington, DC. The Organic Consumers Fund, the voice for organic consumers in the Nation's Capitol, will be submitting written and oral comments to the NOSB and we would like to have your input. Please let us know what you think about the following issues that the NOSB will be discussing: PLEASE POST YOUR COMMMENTS BELOW, AND WE WILL SUBMIT THOSE TO THE NOSB. YOU WILL NEED TO REGISTER ABOVE FOR THIS WEB FORUM FIRST, IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO. BELOW ARE SOME TALKING POINTS:


Biodiversity--
Biodiversity should be prioritized in organic system plans. Maintaining healthy, biologically diverse farms is essential for the long-term sustainability of our food system and ecosystem. Currently, biodiversity is being neglected by the USDA National Organic Program and many organic farmers, inspectors, and certifiers.

Food Packaging--
Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled should not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee is considering that inert atmospheric gases are not processing aids because they have no functional effect in the food, but merely modify the environment in which the food is packaged.

Personal Care Products--
Personal care products labeled or marketed as organic should meet USDA standards. Unlike organic foods, many personal care products are falsely labeled as "organic." The USDA has not used its enforcement power to go after shampoos, cosmetics and other personal care products that mislead consumers by improperly using the term "organic" in their name, branding and marketing claims.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board--
The overwhelming majority of organic farmers, producers, and certifiers are playing by the rules, but a single example of organic fraud can crumble consumer confidence in organic certification. We need a professional, well-funded and independent NOP Peer Review Board, as required by law, so that respected members of the organic community can monitor and police violations of organic standards.

Nanotechnology--
Nanotechnology is the science of engineering and control of matter on an almost molecular scale. The technology is being used increasingly in numerous areas of agricultural production and food production and handling. The UK's Soil Association has banned the use of nano-materials in organic, but the USDA NOP and NOSB have not yet acted, and it is unclear whether current regulations would prevent nanotechnology from entering the organic marketplace.

[Arnie Welber]

Sort of like what our government is going through with Wall Street and Financial Bank bailouts, Ponzi schemes, etc. There are laws, policies and practices on the books. However, those government and private officials responsible for enforcing, observing, correcting and raising red flags are not even trying to do their responsibility. So now we must demand change and enforcement.

[CSJ]

Please stand by ALL of the issues listed in the newsletter: Biodiversity, Food Packaging, Personal Care Products,National Organic Program Peer Review Board, and Nanotechnology. Stand by High Quality Organic standards for all of these issues...
Thank You.
CSJ

[Peeko Sanchez]

Hello and thank your for asking for input on these issues.

Biodiversity-- I wouldn't want to force this on organic farmers. For example, what if you only sell almonds from trees growing on your land. You shouldn't have to grow other crops or make significant changes to the landscape to get organic certification for the almonds. I would, however, support some type of incentive system that would grant assistance/tax breaks to help cover a farmer's expense of diversifying his crops or planting trees/plants that secure top soil, retain water, etc. Or maybe a sort of classification for biodiverse farms/ranches that places them first in line for tax breaks or government funds would provide a good incentive. A NOP facillitated partnership program for farmers and ranchers looking to expand their acreage that would join them together to create ranch/farms on shared land might work, too.

Food Packaging--I completely agree that gases should not be used during any stage of organic food processing/packaging until it is proven to be safe.

Personal Care Products--I stopped buying cosmetics completely because I gave up on trying to find truly organic products that I could trust and afford. Now I make my own and will likely never buy cosmetics again. The NOSB should create strong definitions for organic ingredient names in cosmetics so that terms like "coconut-derived surfactant" cannot be used to mislead consumers. Only internationally-recognized chemical names and scientific names for botanicals should be used, and the percentage of organic ingredients ought to be disclosed on the front label. Water should not be allowed to be an organic ingredient when calculating the percentages.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board--I think it's an embarrassment for the NOP and USDA that Dr. Bronner's is enforcing regulations through the courts. A company should not have to enforce the law due to a lack of enforcement by regulators. I think that without strong advocates within the organic business community, the entire organic program would become a joke. That needs to change and I agree that the Peer Review Board is the appropriate mechanism to keep rogue companies in check.

Nanotechnology--I agree that nanotech should be regulated by the USDA, but would prefer a ban on their use in all organic products. If several independant studies prove that a specific nanotech is safe for a specific use, then it should be reviewed by the NOSB for use in organics. If allowed to be used, it should be disclosed on the labeling.

I would also like the NOSB to consider steps it could legally take to protect organic farmers from being sued by agrochem giants like Monsanto when their crops are infected with GM plants. The situation should be reversed, meaning the NOSB should work to assist organic farmers in suing GM plant patent owners for the loss of organic crops due to GM infection and the costs of removal of invasive GM plants.

Please keep us posted on what your final recommendations to the NOSB will be. Thanks again!

[mdanseuse]

Biodiversity--
Should be a top priority for the NOSB! This diversity promotes healthy ecosystems and the long term sustainability of our food supply.

Food Packaging--
Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled should not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee is considering that inert atmospheric gases are not processing aids because they have no functional effect in the food, but merely modify the environment in which the food is packaged.

Personal Care Products--
It is embarassing that in our country any one can label a cosmetic or body care product as "organic" even if there are known cancer causing agents, toxic chemicals, or synthetic preservatives. It's bad enough that these toxins are allowed in non-organic products, but the organic label should have the same standards for body care and cosmetics that it does for food. What we put on our skin, our largest organ, is just as important as what we put in our bodies.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board--
If this is "required by law" then why isn't it in place already? This seems like a no-brainer.

Nanotechnology--
European countries have taken a strong stand against GMO's and Nanotechnology and for good reason. We don't really know all the implications of allowing these things into our food chain. Greed should not be a defense for allowing these. GMO crops take more pesticides, more water, more resources to grow and maintain and I applaud the EU for banning them. The US should as well! The EU will undoubtedly follow the UK in banning Nanotechnology in organic farming and the NOSB needs to support this and also ban it.

[nonamenm]

Save Organic Standards!
Tell the National Organic Standards Board to Keep Organic Standards Strong

Twice yearly, the National Organic Standards Board holds public meetings to hear from the public and make recommendations to the USDA National Organic Program. The next meeting is May 4-6, 2009, in Washington, DC. The Organic Consumers Fund, the voice for organic consumers in the Nation's Capitol, will be submitting written and oral comments to the NOSB and we would like to have your input. Please let us know what you think about the following issues that the NOSB will be discussing: PLEASE POST YOUR COMMMENTS BELOW, AND WE WILL SUBMIT THOSE TO THE NOSB. YOU WILL NEED TO REGISTER ABOVE FOR THIS WEB FORUM FIRST, IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO. BELOW ARE SOME TALKING POINTS:


Biodiversity--
Biodiversity should be prioritized in organic system plans. Maintaining healthy, biologically diverse farms is essential for the long-term sustainability of our food system and ecosystem. Currently, biodiversity is being neglected by the USDA National Organic Program and many organic farmers, inspectors, and certifiers.

Food Packaging--
Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled should not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee is considering that inert atmospheric gases are not processing aids because they have no functional effect in the food, but merely modify the environment in which the food is packaged.

Personal Care Products--
Personal care products labeled or marketed as organic should meet USDA standards. Unlike organic foods, many personal care products are falsely labeled as "organic." The USDA has not used its enforcement power to go after shampoos, cosmetics and other personal care products that mislead consumers by improperly using the term "organic" in their name, branding and marketing claims.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board--
The overwhelming majority of organic farmers, producers, and certifiers are playing by the rules, but a single example of organic fraud can crumble consumer confidence in organic certification. We need a professional, well-funded and independent NOP Peer Review Board, as required by law, so that respected members of the organic community can monitor and police violations of organic standards.

Nanotechnology--
Nanotechnology is the science of engineering and control of matter on an almost molecular scale. The technology is being used increasingly in numerous areas of agricultural production and food production and handling. The UK's Soil Association has banned the use of nano-materials in organic, but the USDA NOP and NOSB have not yet acted, and it is unclear whether current regulations would prevent nanotechnology from entering the organic marketplace.

[aharlib]

I TOTALLY SUPPORT THE BELOW STATEMENTS CONCERNING ORGANIC STANDARDS.

Save Organic Standards!
Tell the National Organic Standards Board to Keep Organic Standards Strong

Twice yearly, the National Organic Standards Board holds public meetings to hear from the public and make recommendations to the USDA National Organic Program. The next meeting is May 4-6, 2009, in Washington, DC. The Organic Consumers Fund, the voice for organic consumers in the Nation's Capitol, will be submitting written and oral comments to the NOSB and we would like to have your input. Please let us know what you think about the following issues that the NOSB will be discussing: PLEASE POST YOUR COMMMENTS BELOW, AND WE WILL SUBMIT THOSE TO THE NOSB. YOU WILL NEED TO REGISTER ABOVE FOR THIS WEB FORUM FIRST, IF YOU HAVE NOT ALREADY DONE SO. BELOW ARE SOME TALKING POINTS:


Biodiversity--
Biodiversity should be prioritized in organic system plans. Maintaining healthy, biologically diverse farms is essential for the long-term sustainability of our food system and ecosystem. Currently, biodiversity is being neglected by the USDA National Organic Program and many organic farmers, inspectors, and certifiers.

Food Packaging--
Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled should not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee is considering that inert atmospheric gases are not processing aids because they have no functional effect in the food, but merely modify the environment in which the food is packaged.

Personal Care Products--
Personal care products labeled or marketed as organic should meet USDA standards. Unlike organic foods, many personal care products are falsely labeled as "organic." The USDA has not used its enforcement power to go after shampoos, cosmetics and other personal care products that mislead consumers by improperly using the term "organic" in their name, branding and marketing claims.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board--
The overwhelming majority of organic farmers, producers, and certifiers are playing by the rules, but a single example of organic fraud can crumble consumer confidence in organic certification. We need a professional, well-funded and independent NOP Peer Review Board, as required by law, so that respected members of the organic community can monitor and police violations of organic standards.

Nanotechnology--
Nanotechnology is the science of engineering and control of matter on an almost molecular scale. The technology is being used increasingly in numerous areas of agricultural production and food production and handling. The UK's Soil Association has banned the use of nano-materials in organic, but the USDA NOP and NOSB have not yet acted, and it is unclear whether current regulations would prevent nanotechnology from entering the organic marketplace.
[/quote]

[Ginny Schneider]

Get rid of packaging of all fresh fruits, vegetables and bulk items such as beans, etc.

[Roger108]

Dear National Organics Standards Board

I urge you to protect the Organic standard in this country with your life. If that sounds too dramatic, you may not fully understand the need. Indeed most corporate interests do not. They would water down the standard for their own profits.

The Organic standard is crucial If we want to sustain healthy life on this planet much longer.
At very least do the following because the USDA is certainly not—

1. Uphold Biodiversity. The USDA is currently ignoring it.
2. Ban Food Packaging- ie. Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids
3. Do not allow Personal Care Products to be labeled organic unless they truly are. These are readily absorbed through the skin and if they contain petroleum derivatives etc, can cause severe health problems.
4. Establish an independent and well-funded National Organic Program Peer Review Board as required by law.
5. Ban Nanotechnology completely from food products as the UK has. These materials that have never been seen on the face of the planet before and we are clueless as to what their future impact on healthy may ultimately be. Serious health problems can occur anytime you introduce substances into your body that were never meant to be there.

Thank you.

[Martha Booz]

Creating organic standards for products not currently defined one way or the other, especially nano-products and personal care products, should be a priority of the NOSB. The EU standards are a good place to start.

[A_Edmonstone]

Weakening organic standards is NOT the thing to be doing. At this point they need to be strengthened if nothing else. It is detrimental to the well-being of our planet an its inhabitants and to the whole of the world economy. Industrialized farming and pesticide use has created a whole slew of problems from cancer and other fatal health issues to environmental degradation (some of which may be beyond repair) and the threat of destruction species and ecosystems. These issue are also directly linked to economic stability. If there are millions of people suffering from health issues relating to pesticide use or other forms of pollution, this takes more spending from governments and more tax dollars from individuals, which isn't what people need (especially in a global economic crisis). So if organic standards are to be redefined they must be redefined according to the well-being of humanity and our planet's ecosystems (see perma-culture gardening or bio-dynamic gardening)and NOT to for the continued profit of multinational corporate entities disguised as healthy, environmentally friendly companies. The leaders of these companies and and our government need to re-think how things are being done and not just look at the word "organic" as a sales gimmick.

[jelbel]

Yes, create a NOP Peer Review Board, and make it biased -- biased toward maintaining and strengthening the meaning of "organic," whether food, packaging methods, or personal care items. No inert gases, no pseudo-natural chemicals should be allowed. Let's affirm what we've been believing in for years, and protect the farmers and companies who are striving to maintain high organic standards. "Organic" should again mean something, not just a marketing phrase.
Biodiversity is a no-brainer for someone raised near immigrant farmers: you rotate your crops to have food and keep the soil good. Now, years later science can explain the how and why of it, but the truth was always there. Peeko Sanchez has a good point, however, regarding not requiring biodiversity, if all you have is an almond farm. Let's not create a new loophole!

[wildcrafter]

The allowance of a rule change relating to organic hops and organic beer is wrong. This sends the absolute wrong message and has damaged organic farmers. I know,,I am one.

Now, who do I seek damages from?? Who can one trust in organic issues?

Who was the dream crusher and myth maker?

People fight the hardest to maintain ignorance.

[sycamorerd]

Dear National Organic Standards Board:

Thank you for this opportunity to comment on the important issue of Organic Standards for the United States! Please consider the following issues when reviewing our standards:

Biodiversity--
Biodiversity should be prioritized in organic system plans. Maintaining healthy, biologically diverse farms is essential for the long-term sustainability of our food system and ecosystem. Currently, biodiversity is being neglected by the USDA National Organic Program and many organic farmers, inspectors, and certifiers.

Food Packaging--
Carbon dioxide, and other inert atmospheric gases or packaging aids that create an appearance of freshness even after food has spoiled should not be allowed in organic products. The NOSB Certification, Accreditation and Compliance Committee is considering that inert atmospheric gases are not processing aids because they have no functional effect in the food, but merely modify the environment in which the food is packaged.

Personal Care Products--
Personal care products labeled or marketed as organic should meet USDA standards. Unlike organic foods, many personal care products are falsely labeled as "organic." The USDA has not used its enforcement power to go after shampoos, cosmetics and other personal care products that mislead consumers by improperly using the term "organic" in their name, branding and marketing claims.

National Organic Program Peer Review Board--
The overwhelming majority of organic farmers, producers, and certifiers are playing by the rules, but a single example of organic fraud can crumble consumer confidence in organic certification. We need a professional, well-funded and independent NOP Peer Review Board, as required by law, so that respected members of the organic community can monitor and police violations of organic standards.

Nanotechnology--
Nanotechnology is the science of engineering and control of matter on an almost molecular scale. The technology is being used increasingly in numerous areas of agricultural production and food production and handling. The UK's Soil Association has banned the use of nano-materials in organic, but the USDA NOP and NOSB have not yet acted, and it is unclear whether current regulations would prevent nanotechnology from entering the organic marketplace.

[masabi]

TOPIC 1: National Organic Program Peer Review Board.

Any Review Board for organic food products that would restore my faith in the USDA Organic label would be most welcome.

At present and in my thinking, if a product is labeled USDA certified Organic I do NOT purchase it. Why not? Prior to the Bush administration, I trusted most food products USDA certified organic as bonafide organic. During the Bush administration, USDA certified Organic products mushroomed across the food market landscape and many with lower price tags than ordinary products. One example: the Safeway brand "O". First 'O' milk, then 'O' cereals, then a whole line from canned and frozen foods to fresh veggies appeared bearing the 'O' icon whose great similarity to the 'O' on Oprah's magazine raised my antennae. The incredibly fast appearance of more and more 'O' products raised it even more. Needless to say, no way I'd trust or buy any such! But they are all labeled USDA certified organic. 'Organic' is now the IN thing, but the OUT one in my book.

In a world dominated by agribusiness, profits and factory farms, 'organic' became a challenge. If you can't beat them, join them! When it comes to 'Organic' the fastest way to join in was by re-defining terms--which the Bush administration not only excelled at but popularized and made highly successful. Don't change the product; change the product's name and/or the name's meaning.

So, what is wanted and needed is an organ beyond profits, beyond vested interests, beyond corruption and the control of agribusiness. Create that, IF YOU WISH TO REGAIN CONSUMER TRUST.

TOPIC 2: 'ORGANIC'.

Organic means free of additives, GMO's, GE, man-made ingredients and molecules, right?

Plastics are man-made. From petrochemicals. Plastics have been shown to leach into food contents dioxins and other non-food molecules and compounds bad for people and bad for animals. How then can a product be certified ORGANIC by the USDA when it is packaged in a plastic container? Examples: Trader Joe's USDA Organic Peanut Butter in plastic jars. Organic fruit and veggie juices from various manufacturers in all types of plastic containers sold everywhere.

TOPIC 3: REVOLVING DOORS. WHAT MEANING 'INTEGRITY,' VERACITY, TRUST?

Monsanto is the world's oldest and largest manufacturer of environmental poisons and toxins. From Round Up to Agent Orange. From the rBST hormone fed to dairy cattle to GMO's and GE grains the farming of which is killing both farmers and soils in India and sickening children and whole villages in Brazil. Yet Monsanto ex-employees play non-musical jobs with ex-employees on USDA payroll. The revolving doors between agribusiness, government agencies and the military are kept ever so busy!

Is it possible to ensure the safety of America's food supply while all this goes on? Is it possible to trust USDA labels and certifications while revolving doors keep revolving?

The US Government has a long ways to go, a lot of work to do and a lot of answering IF it wishes to regain the public's trust and confidence. Or its lost image of high integrity and reliable trustworthiness. Mine for one will not be granted easily now--to its labels or its promises.

TOPIC 4: TRUTH IN ADVERTISING and/or LABELING.

Nanotechnology, GMO's, GE ingredients and foods. The public has a right to know what is in the foods it buys and eats. Non-organic, non-natural non-foods do not belong in food products of any kind. If the USDA insists on letting them enter the human food chain and be used in food products, as they are already, then food labels MUST state so completely, clearly, unambigously.

Either the USDA goes straight and plays honest or it isn't straight or honest. As long as the USDA answers to agribusiness, it can be neither straight nor honest. Thus I personally regard it as neither and hold it accountable for the depredations it is allowing upon public trust and America's food supply.

A.C.

[Julie du Bois]

Dear National Organics Standards Board

I urge you to protect the Organic standard.

The Organic standard is crucial If we want to sustain healthy life on this planet much longer.


1. Uphold Biodiversity. The USDA must take it seriously.
2. We live in a wonderous world - new inventions have arrived that allow the us to pack
our food in safe, biodegradable materials. We do not have to rely on plastic, nor should
we as plastic is evil and transfers toxins.
3. Do not allow Personal Care Products to be labeled organic unless they truly are.
4. Establish an independent and well-funded National Organic Program Peer Review Board as required by law.
5. Ban Nanotechnology completely from food products as the UK has.

Thank you.