Chad writes, ‘As with any myth that is debunked, many believers will either discount the scientific research that invalidates their superstitions or they’ll reshuffle their supposed motivations.’

And as predicted, out comes the shuffle.

Someone commented, ‘The hyped up research very conveniently claims there are no “additonal benefits” of organic food. Whatever happened to the lower cost(exactly how much is life worth?) of consuming organic food?

This got me thinking (and you will have to excuse my lack of eloquence in debate).. hyped up research??? What exactly is ‘hyped up’ about the research? How about hyped up prices of ‘organic grocers’? Shouldn’t it be acknowledged that being ‘green’ has actually increased prices in the competitive market. Lower cost you say, perhaps, but companies certainly aren’t passing it on to the customer (which is another discussion for another day). The last time I bought baby food I noticed there was a new line or Gerbers labeled ‘organic’, it was 10% higher in price. If the cost is lower to put out that ‘organic’ product, shouldn’t the price be lower. OR, is it all about making money and expanding these companies margin? This in contrast to helping us live longer (as one implied). HMMMM? Choose as you will, but I think I might have to roll the dice on the regular baby food and trust that the FDA is keeping us safe.

This becomes apparent when you examine the scare stats thrown out by agenda pushers. They’ll say something like, “a new study found that a chemical compound in ‘Pesticide X’ may increase the risk of ‘Cancer Y’ by 25%. If you want to keep your kids safe, buy organic!”

Sounds scary, right? And what kind of animal would intentionally put their kids in danger? But if the average person’s chance of developing ‘Cancer Y’ is only 1%, then the risk only goes up to 1.25% because of the added chemicals. As you can see, there’s no real risk to begin with, much less an added risk that comes from using ‘Pesticide X’ to increase crop yield. This isn’t always the case, but the cynic in me assumes this to be true whenever an article or study omits the base risk.

Now, if you wanted to argue about the improper use of synthetic pesticides and their impact on ground and well water, that’s another issue entirely. My critique had to do with erroneous nutritional claims and the exploitative nature of ‘green’ consumer products. Anyway, thanks for stopping by and offering your opinion. It’s rare that I post on controversial topics, and I value alternate viewpoints.