What Do You Think About the Purity of the "Organic" Label?

There is a debate brewing around the integrity of the term "organic." Much of the controversy is focused on the 5 percent of a USDA-certified organic product that can consist of non-organic substances, provided they are approved by the National Organic Standards Board. That list has grown from 77 to 245 substances since it was created in 2002.

Companies must appeal to the board every five years to keep a substance on the list, explaining why an organic alternative has not been found. The goal was to shrink the list over time, but only one item has been removed so far.

From the outset, farmers and consumer advocates have been concerned about safeguarding the integrity of the organic label, and have for the most part opposed additions to the list. But others argue that broadening the law has allowed the industry to meet growing demand by multiplying the number of organic products and greatly increasing the amount of agricultural land that is being managed organically.

The argument is not over whether the non-organic ingredients pose a health threat, but whether they weaken the integrity of the federal organic label. A fundamental philosophy shared by many in the organic community is that whole foods are more nourishing than over-processed foods into which nutrients are added to make them better. It's an ongoing debate and one primarily fought well out of sight from most consumers. But we thought it might be something for you to consider.

What's your view? Read more and let us know what you think.

Comments

[OrganicTrade]

It is important to understand that there is a very specific process that materials must go through before they are permitted for inclusion in organic products. The National Organic Standards Board (NOSB), a citizen advisory board consisting of four farmer/growers, two handlers/p­rocessors, one retailer, one scientist, three consumer/public interest advocates, three environmentalists, and one USDA-accredited certifying agent, conducts an extensive review of materials that are petitioned for inclusion in organic, solicits public comment, and makes a recommendation to the National Organic Program (NOP) as to whether a material should be allowed. The NOP implements NOSB’s
recommendation. As you point out, if within 5 years a material is not successfully appealed to remain on the National List, it will be removed and therefore no longer be permitted for use in organic products.

This process ensures that materials are not haphazardly permitted for use in organic production and reinforces the principles of transparency and integrity around which the organic system was built.

It is also important to realize that the organic label remains the gold standard of all eco-labels. Backed by a system of strict regulations requiring third-party inspections of farm fields and processing facilities, detailed-record keeping, and periodic testing of soil and water, as well as compliance with local, state and federal health standards, the organic label provides consumers assurance that they organic products they buy are indeed, organic, and are governed by consistent, enforceable standards.

[dsws]

Organic should mean that the food was grown in live soil, fertilized with compost rather than inorganic chemicals, and protected from pests only with specified techniques and materials. It shouldn't mean that it was grown locally, harvested by union workers, made without genetically modified ingredients, or whatever.