Would you buy 'organic' everything if you hit the lotto?

Resverathrole

I always eat healthy. I don't go for the organic though because its too expensive. There's probably no point in going for it anyway unless you're diet is already perfect. But would it make a bit of a difference in the long run? I mean all those pesticides!!

sligojoek

If I won the lotto I'd have my own gardener to grow it all for me on site.

Fr_Dougal

Hit the lotto? Can you buy organic cocaine?

Canis Lupus

I don't see organic as intrinsically better so no, I wouldn't same way I don't buy it now.

freshpopcorn

If I knew the Organic produce was traceable I probably would buy a lot more of it!

An Ri rua

If you won the lotto, you'd just buy 'organs' to improve your health.

Cookie_Monster

No, I'd invest it in a GM company :pac:

Franz Von Peppercorn

No, but my cook would.

Most food is in fact organic. I’ve never liked the plastic food.

Most of this food snobbery is ill placed. However wild salmon is much nicer than farmed salmon and free range chicken is better than the alternative.

Organic lamb? Surely most lamb and sheep live the same life, more or less.

hatrickpatrick

I don't have the same fear of chemicals that many people do so personally it doesn't really bother me. If someone conclusively proves health risks associated with certain chemicals then I'll avoid and I'd hope for government regulation to ban their use, but other than that it doesn't bother me at all. Chemicals in this context are literally just molecules which happen to only come into existence when humans mix other molecules together. Some of them are harmful, most aren't. Molecules of entirely naturally occurring elements can also be harmful - arsenic will kill a human no problem at all, and yet because it's naturally occurring, some would probably describe it as "organic".

The panic over synthetic chemicals of any kind is just bizarre to me.

Having said all that, there are certain chemicals which have been conclusively shown to be harmful to health and they're still allowed in abundance. Something should clearly be done about that. I don't use lavender soap anymore, for example, after discovering that the phytoestrogens contained in them wreak havoc on young mens' endocrine systems if they get absorbed into the skin. Stuff like that, which is demonstrable and verifiable, will cause me to avoid certain products - but this idea that "if it's synthetic, it's bad" is in my view a ridiculous simplification and not one that's ever really bothered me at all.

Canis Lupus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't have the same fear of chemicals that many people do so personally it doesn't really bother me. If someone conclusively proves health risks associated with certain chemicals then I'll avoid and I'd hope for government regulation to ban their use, but other than that it doesn't bother me at all. Chemicals in this context are literally just molecules which happen to only come into existence when humans mix other molecules together. Some of them are harmful, most aren't. Molecules of entirely naturally occurring elements can also be harmful - arsenic will kill a human no problem at all, and yet because it's naturally occurring, some would probably describe it as "organic".

The panic over synthetic chemicals of any kind is just bizarre to me.

Having said all that, there are certain chemicals which have been conclusively shown to be harmful to health and they're still allowed in abundance. Something should clearly be done about that. I don't use lavender soap anymore, for example, after discovering that the phytoestrogens contained in them wreak havoc on young mens' endocrine systems if they get absorbed into the skin. Stuff like that, which is demonstrable and verifiable, will cause me to avoid certain products - but this idea that "if it's synthetic, it's bad" is in my view a ridiculous simplification and not one that's ever really bothered me at all.

But it makes farmers rich and it let's consumers be smug about the veg they bought that's half the size and twice the price.

Cookie_Monster

Organic is actually bad for the environment as the required space to produce the same amount of produce is much greater, around 40% more. Hence more farm land required leading to deforestation instead of efficient use of current land.

BorneTobyWilde

I've never tried orgasmic food, can you really taste the difference.

hatrickpatrick

Canis Lupus wrote: »

But it makes farmers rich and it let's consumers be smug about the veg they bought that's half the size and twice the price.

Good point - while I'm sure there are a lot of people who genuinely believe that their health is threatened by regular "chemically compromised" food, I've often wondered how much of it is a form of virtue signalling. Some "all organic" types - the kind who are more likely to make a point of letting people know - tend to have at least some other virtue signalling "causes" (veganism, gender-messing, #checkyourprivilege) that they'll regularly broadcast about, so one wonders in those cases if it's more about image than genuine belief. But personally I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and not accuse anyone of insincerity in their political beliefs without evidence.

I do think though that those who give unsolicited lectures on this are those who are more likely to be virtue signalling rather than sincere. But that's just me.

gormdubhgorm

It wouldn't be the first thought on my mind OP...
But if you won the lotto, you could afford to grow your own and have your own livestock on your own pasture.

And one of those hats.



I would have one of those hats on... while I look at my veg growing and my cattle eating

Canis Lupus

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

Good point - while I'm sure there are a lot of people who genuinely believe that their health is threatened by regular "chemically compromised" food, I've often wondered how much of it is a form of virtue signalling. Some "all organic" types - the kind who are more likely to make a point of letting people know - tend to have at least some other virtue signalling "causes" (veganism, gender-messing, #checkyourprivilege) that they'll regularly broadcast about, so one wonders in those cases if it's more about image than genuine belief. But personally I like to give people the benefit of the doubt and not accuse anyone of insincerity in their political beliefs without evidence.

I do think though that those who give unsolicited lectures on this are those who are more likely to be virtue signalling rather than sincere. But that's just me.

I lived with a girl once who served up lamb burgers at a bbq with the patties rare in the middle. I said I prefer my mince fully cooked and she said it should be fine, it was organic lamb. That's not how it works says I......

annascott

I buy organic wherever I can now. It is lack of availability that prevents my diet not being completely organic, not price. With the exception of some meat, most vegetables and fish aren't more than a few euro extra.

I bought a brown baguette (cuisine de France) but left it in the carrier bag and forgot about it. A week later I found it but it had not gone mouldy. I put it out for the birds but two weeks later, most of it was still there, still not mouldy. I will never buy them again. That much preservative had to be harmful.

Minderbinder

Canis Lupus wrote: »

hatrickpatrick wrote: »

I don't have the same fear of chemicals that many people do so personally it doesn't really bother me. If someone conclusively proves health risks associated with certain chemicals then I'll avoid and I'd hope for government regulation to ban their use, but other than that it doesn't bother me at all. Chemicals in this context are literally just molecules which happen to only come into existence when humans mix other molecules together. Some of them are harmful, most aren't. Molecules of entirely naturally occurring elements can also be harmful - arsenic will kill a human no problem at all, and yet because it's naturally occurring, some would probably describe it as "organic".

The panic over synthetic chemicals of any kind is just bizarre to me.

Having said all that, there are certain chemicals which have been conclusively shown to be harmful to health and they're still allowed in abundance. Something should clearly be done about that. I don't use lavender soap anymore, for example, after discovering that the phytoestrogens contained in them wreak havoc on young mens' endocrine systems if they get absorbed into the skin. Stuff like that, which is demonstrable and verifiable, will cause me to avoid certain products - but this idea that "if it's synthetic, it's bad" is in my view a ridiculous simplification and not one that's ever really bothered me at all.

But it makes farmers rich and it let's consumers be smug about the veg they bought that's half the size and twice the price.

Similar to how they got people worrying about cholesterol and now they can fill a carton of milk halfway and pour water in for the rest. I could do that at home and save 50%.

And the price of some of those butter substitutes masquerading as healthy alternatives to a natural product is hilarious. The people championing these kinds of products are the same people who usually spread layers of butter thicker than the bread itself. What a stupid waste of money.

mvl

- nothing beats the organic taste of everything I ate when I was a child...

guess there are so many tricks around what does organic mean today, even if its certified, you'd be surprised that there are chemicals involved; or can see different organic standards per country.

while now I am buying organic when there is the option... would go the path of growing my own.

Malayalam

mvl wrote: »

- nothing beats the organic taste of everything I ate when I was a child...

guess there are so many tricks around what does organic mean today, even if its certified, you'd be surprised that there are chemicals involved; or can see different organic standards per country.

while now I am buying organic when there is the option... would go the path of growing my own.

Yeah I grow most of my own veg and don't eat meat but be aware you will be on a hiding to nothing... It's an unwinnable battle against pest and weed and a good way to put you in a bad mood after 30 years of always losing I buy regular non organic mostly because of lack of availability but there are some things I can't push past. Broccoli or lettuce for example, they are drowned in chemicals and don't let go of them that easy. Berries are another. But in general I just buy what is there. Build up my chemicals tolerance. Like a ninja.

gozunda

Huexotzingo

No, I'd get my butler to buy it for me.

jester77

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Hit the lotto? Can you buy organic cocaine?

Just grow your own coca plants and you will have full control over how they are handled.

mad muffin

No.

I don't know what organic means

gozunda

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

Organic is actually bad for the environment as the required space to produce the same amount of produce is much greater, around 40% more. Hence more farm land required leading to deforestation instead of efficient use of current land.

It don't quite work that I'm afraid. 'Organic" certainly ain't bad for the direct environment where organic production methods are used. Benefits include increased diversity of micro-organisns and wild life in general. Better soil health and fertility especially where organic matter is added to the soils.

Organic produce is still a niche market and there is absolutly no danger of it ever completly replacing conventional production. Organic producers make up any shortfall in efficiency through somewhat higher prices for organic products.

Plus your average organic farmer in Ireland can't just rock up over to Brazil or wherever and grab a bit of land to grow his broccoli or whatever.

In Ireland and most of Europe there is no active deforestation for the purposes of creating agricultural land. If anything the opposite is true - agricultural land is increasingly being turned over to forestry.

If you won the lotto- you could buy land - then you can grow whatever you want!

Rows Grower

Franz Von Peppercorn wrote: »

No, but my cook would.

Most food is in fact organic. I’ve never liked the plastic food.

Most of this food snobbery is ill placed. However wild salmon is much nicer than farmed salmon and free range chicken is better than the alternative.

Organic lamb? Surely most lamb and sheep live the same life, more or less.

There is a massive difference between the life of intensively reared lambs/sheep and organically reared.

There is a massive taste difference too, you'd need to try a leg of slow roasted "weathered" mountain sheep to appreciate it. Most people are put off because technically it is not lamb.

Anyone fond of lamb should try and source some and you will not regret it

ellejay

Resverathrole wrote: »

I always eat healthy. I don't go for the organic because its too expensive. There's no point in going for it anyway unless you're diet is already perfect. But would it make a bit of a difference in the long run? I mean all those pesticides!!

"organic" just means that the fertiliser and pestisides used by farmer are organically approved.
No Farmer will use absolutely nothing on his crop and hope it'll be ok.

BrokenArrows

I probably would but just because it tastes better. We occasionally get organic stuff and there is no denying it tastes significantly better.

Considering the drop in quality of the meat in Ireland, (compared to, say, two/three decades ago), I'm not terribly impressed by what's available now. I've bought both the organic & the "normal" and I find neither are better than what was there before. It's so difficult to find a good beef roast or beef steak without shelling out a fortune, and even then, it's very hit & miss.

TBH I feel the organic argument is just more sales & promotion rather than any incredible difference. [Speaking as someone who eats the stuff, rather than being interested in all the research/facts]

Giraffe Box

Fr_Dougal wrote: »

Hit the lotto? Can you buy organic cocaine?

We are a team of libertarian cocaine dealers. We never buy coke from cartels! We never buy coke from police! We help farmers from Peru, Bolivia and some chemistry students in Brazil, Paraguay and Argentina. We do fair trade!
– Excerpt from seller page – Evolution, accessed December 28, 2013

http://www.factorytwofour.com/cocaine-going-organic-free-trade/

Your Face

A Ford Mustang isn't organic.

mr chips

TL;DR answer - I absolutely, definitely would eat nearly all organic if I could afford it.

First off, when we're talking about food production methods as opposed to a branch of chemistry, for something to be labelled organic the farmer/producer will have to have adhered to certain standards & criteria as laid down by the likes of the Irish Organic Farmers and Growers Association, or the Soil Association in the UK.

With a lot of food - most veg, meat, bread, milk etc I don't notice any difference whatsoever between the taste of organic or non-organic & I think the people who say they always do are bull$hitters. I definitely notice with carrots though, ditto tomatoes & one or two other fruits. Where there's a much more noticeable taste difference is between stuff I grow for myself - which is all organic anyway - and anything I buy in the shops, whether organic or not. But a lot of that will be down to being able to eat stuff straight out of the ground/off the tree etc. Organic food isn't nutritionally superior in the sense of having more vitamins/minerals, less carbs/fat or anything like that.

There are still good health reasons for eating organic food though - e.g. organic bread won't have been made with flour from wheat that was sprayed with glyphosate to "dry it off" a few days before harvesting. This is a good thing, because consuming glyphosate is very much not a good thing ... There are some permitted herbicides and pesticides in organic farming, but the frequency with which they are used will also be restricted. Neonicotinoids are a big no-no, particularly because of how badly they affect bees. We rely on bees to pollinate about a third of global food production, so if for no other reason than our own interest we really should choose food which hasn't been produced in a way that harms them.

With regard to meat & dairy, organic eggs by default come from free range chickens. This means that they're allowed outdoors* to see actual daylight and engage in normal chicken behaviours like scratching at the ground for tasty bugs etc, and only given feed which is itself organic, i.e. grown without artificial fertilisers or pesticides ... rather than being kept 24/7 in a cage with the floor area of a sheet of A4 paper.
*Sometimes, if there's a bird flu alert relating to the risk of them catching it from wild migratory birds, organic flocks can end up being kept indoors on a temporary basis for several weeks at a time, same as all other farmed birds.

Similarly, for beef or milk to be labelled organic the cattle aren't raised permanently indoors but allowed out to graze (sometimes all year round). The fact that they poo all over the soil is a good thing, as this provides natural fertiliser and greater biodiversity. Moreover, they aren't routinely injected with antibiotics to promote artificial growth or as a preventative (rather than curative) measure against disease. This is also a good thing, as the antibiotics persist in the meat and milk products we eat and lead to antibiotic resistance in humans, which is turning into a serious health issue for us all.

For fish & seafood to be certified organic, AFAIK it can only be farmed. So whether organic fish is a good thing or a bad thing is a whole other discussion ...

Soil degradation as a result of intensive agriculture methods is another issue that's becoming more pressing, with some estimates that without a change in approach there are fewer than 100 harvests left (in the UK at least) at the current level of decline. I haven't read more deeply into that yet so can't comment more.

So yeah, eating organic food whenever we have the option is a good thing for our own health, for the critters we eat and for the land - if you can afford it, so I do when I can. However sometimes the prices are a pure pi$$take - most likely on the part of the supermarkets rather than the farmers, to be fair, but it does raise other questions about food poverty etc. Otherwise, when it comes to fruit & veg I never eat things like grapes/apples etc (i.e. stuff you don't peel first) without giving them a good wash beforehand.

Feck, I'm hungry now ...

gozunda

Alternatively if you have a bit of a garden or can borrow a bit - grow your own organic veg. You don't need to win the lottery to do so plus you know where your foods been

Outlaw Pete

With the amount of manure that's been posted this thread is organic.

Taytoland

Everything I eat is grown by myself.

Iodine1

Definitely, generally slower growing produce, both meat and veg and not always, but when you taste the difference, its fantastic.

pickarooney

annascott wrote: »

I buy organic wherever I can now. It is lack of availability that prevents my diet not being completely organic, not price. With the exception of some meat, most vegetables and fish aren't more than a few euro extra.

I bought a brown baguette (cuisine de France) but left it in the carrier bag and forgot about it. A week later I found it but it had not gone mouldy. I put it out for the birds but two weeks later, most of it was still there, still not mouldy. I will never buy them again. That much preservative had to be harmful.

Moisture in bread makes it go mouldy. Sliced pans go mouldy because they're chock full of water. Baguettes just go hard, within hours. Nothing to do with preservatives.

_Brian

Organic food is no better nutritionally than free range meats and conventionally grown veg.

I would love to have the time to grow more here in my garden and rear more meat for the table.

sbsquarepants

Modern fertilisers and pesticides are just that....modern.

Not so long ago the entire world was organic - people still got sick and died!

ellejay

mr chips wrote: »

TL;DR answer - I absolutely, definitely would eat nearly all organic if I could afford it.

Similarly, for beef or milk to be labelled organic the cattle aren't raised permanently indoors but allowed out to graze (sometimes all year round). The fact that they poo all over the soil is a good thing, as this provides natural fertiliser and greater biodiversity. Moreover, they aren't routinely injected with antibiotics to promote artificial growth or as a preventative (rather than curative) measure against disease. This is also a good thing, as the antibiotics persist in the meat and milk products we eat and lead to antibiotic resistance in humans, which is turning into a serious health issue for us all.

Feck, I'm hungry now ...

I'm more than happy and completely at ease to eat Irish non organic meat.

Large Animal herds in Ireland are very closely monitored, by so many organisations including Dept of Ag, Vets and even Bord Bia.
There's a HUGE chain of checking from the time of breeding, rearing, slaughtering, dissecting and purchase.

A farmer can't just administer antibiotics willy nilly to a sick animal. He's to get the vet in. The days of just rocking up to a vets office and buying doses are long gone. And I mean long gone.

Even horse owners, whose animals aren't in the food chain, can't just walk in and ask for X Y Z.

Between the cost of a vet call out, the time involved to administer and care, a farmer is more likely to just send that animal to the slaughter house. If that animal still dies after the administration of antibiotics, that animal is unfit for human consumption so it's a double loss for the farmer.

And don't forget, apart from the stringent testing and cross checking done, the vet in the slaughter house is usually the local vet also so they'll know the farmer and herd.

I don't include poultry in the above.

_Brian

ellejay wrote: »

Between the cost of a vet call out, the time involved to administer and care, a farmer is more likely to just send that animal to the slaughter house. If that animal still dies after the administration of antibiotics, that animal is unfit for human consumption so it's a double loss for the farmer.
.

Much but not all of what you’ve said is correct.

This in particular I wanted to correct.

Firstly farmers don’t just turn to slaughtering animals who might be a bit unwell because it’s expensive to care for them.
The specifications for animals entering slaughter are fairly rigid, farmers care for sick animals and only animals within specific age ranges, weights and fat scores are sent to slaughter.

You imply that if an animal dies with no antibiotics being administered that they are still suitable for the food chain. This is absolutely incorrect. Animals need to be alive, walking and indeed showing no signs of problems to be slaughtered, even drug free animals who are injured will be identified in a slaughterhouse and separated from healthier animals, the farmer will be paid less for these.

ellejay

_Brian wrote: »

Much but not all of what you’ve said is correct.

This in particular I wanted to correct.

Firstly farmers don’t just turn to slaughtering animals who might be a bit unwell because it’s expensive to care for them.
The specifications for animals entering slaughter are fairly rigid, farmers care for sick animals and only animals within specific age ranges, weights and fat scores are sent to slaughter.

You imply that if an animal dies with no antibiotics being administered that they are still suitable for the food chain. This is absolutely incorrect. Animals need to be alive, walking and indeed showing no signs of problems to be slaughtered, even drug free animals who are injured will be identified in a slaughterhouse and separated from healthier animals, the farmer will be paid less for these.

I know, I over simplified.
I should have elaborated slaughter house criteria.
Not all animals are suitable for the foodchain at all.
Some animals can go for dog food / the "rubber house" I think I've heard it called?
.
But my understanding is, a lot of farmers won't call out the vet as it eats into their bottom line.
Good Post btw.

Irish Guitarist

I care more about buying fruit from as close to home as possible. It seems like a terrible waste of fuel to ship apples from Brazil or South Africa. I don't care about this so deeply that I refuse to buy them if that's all the supermarket has and I really want some apples but if there's a choice I'll go for Irish apples.

_Brian

ellejay wrote: »

I know, I over simplified.
I should have elaborated slaughter house criteria.
Not all animals are suitable for the foodchain at all.
Some animals can go for dog food / the "rubber house" I think I've heard it called?
.
But my understanding is, a lot of farmers won't call out the vet as it eats into their bottom line.
Good Post btw.

Farmers are very apt at diagnosis and treatment of common issues, often a call to the vets office will confirm and recommend specific treatments. However, dead animals are dead money and sick animals are a drain, in general I find that they know when it’s appropriate to call the vet and when it’s not, most will call the vet when it’s proper for treating the animal rather based on how much it costs.

Hector Bellend

"Organic" Faaaaaaack off.

railer201

Looks like the tickets have gone organic at €6.

Resverathrole

Malayalam wrote: »

Broccoli or lettuce for example, they are drowned in chemicals and don't let go of them that easy.

I must look into that

Iodine1

Organic is about a lot more than avoiding the use of chemicals, sprays, drugs etc. Animals are kept to much higher welfare standards than conventional farms. Briefly, they must have access to outdoors, be bedded, no slats, more space allowed in housing, full traceability, and more.

Resverathrole

annascott wrote: »

I buy organic wherever I can now.

You must be wealthy by now!

Resverathrole

Iodine1 wrote: »

Organic is about a lot more than avoiding the use of chemicals, sprays, drugs etc. Animals are kept to much higher welfare standards than conventional farms. Briefly, they must have access to outdoors, be bedded, no slats, more space allowed in housing, full traceability, and more.

I actually only ad veg on my mind when I wrote this post!

Franz Von Peppercorn

Rows Grower wrote: »

There is a massive difference between the life of intensively reared lambs/sheep and organically reared.

There is a massive taste difference too, you'd need to try a leg of slow roasted "weathered" mountain sheep to appreciate it. Most people are put off because technically it is not lamb.

Anyone fond of lamb should try and source some and you will not regret it

Intensively reared lamb? They carvort amongst the hills like all sheep and lamb. This is ireland.

The difference is what chemicals are used to treat them in the dips.