Wouldn’t it be nice if there was nothing wrong with our industrial agriculture and chemical food system? Wouldn’t it be a relief to learn that it doesn’t matter whether we buy organic or conventional food, because there isn’t really any difference in their nutritional value? Last week, the corporate media, responding to a biased article in the British press, slandered the now mass-based organic food and farming movement with headlines reading: "Organic Food No Better Than Conventional".

Unfortunately, the articles are in reference to a new study which actually did show some nutritional benefits to organics. In addition, chemical and energy intensive industrial farming degrades the soil, pollutes the environment, and destabilizes the climate with CO2, methane and nitrous oxide greenhouse gas pollution. Food produced with agri-toxic chemicals loses its nutritional value, while organic farming replenishes the soil, sequesters climate destructive greenhouse gases, and produces food which is safer and far more nutritious. Forty years of field trials and research have clearly demonstrated the superiority of organics, but no doubt your local media outlets probably missed this point when reporting on the bogus "organics are no better" story which was planted in the UK media.

Learn more and take action

The US House of Representatives passed the Food Safety Enhancement Act, H.R. 2749, late last week. This was the second attempt to pass the bill. Representative Dingell’s willingness to address the concerns of organic and small producers was one of the factors that eased passage the second time around. It’s now up to the Senate to move similar legislation. The Organic Consumers Association will be organizing its members to contact the Senate to ensure that their version has stronger language to protect small producers from a regressive fee structure and burdensome tracking requirements, and organic producers from conflict with National Organic Program regulations designed conserve wildlife habitat.

Learn more

This is one of those situations where OCA supporters, like you, make us proud. There’s been a lot of debate online about the good and bad aspects of the Food Safety Enhancement Act, and it appears members of OCA’s web forum have made up their minds to sort out the issue themselves. One of the more recent hot topics in the forum is in regards to that very issue, and here is what one web forum participant had to say about it.

The following is posted by OCA web forum member, Kevin, a Horticultural Scientist from the University of Georgia:

"Who is the government trying to protect? Not us! This is all just another way to assure the big trade corporations can continue to import poisoned produce. Think about it, this is just going to make it tougher for American farmers to make a living. The majority of our produce is imported as it is, about 60%, why should we have to put out more money to make even less profit?… Go out and tell everyone you know to buy local or at least American grown crops. Eventually, these trade companies will go out of business and we will regain a foothold on our food market…"

Read more and join the discussion

Last week, the FDA issued a controversial final regulation stating dental amalgam is safe, including the elemental mercury component. Elemental mercury has been linked to adverse health effects, and one of the leading forms of exposure is through dental fillings. The new regulation classifies the dental amalgam into a moderate risk category. Despite the news, OCA’s analysis suggests if you have the option to choose an alternative filling, a plethora of scientific research suggests it would be in your best interest.

Learn more