Clarified: What does "organic" mean?
September 3rd, 2012
05:00 PM ET
Share this on:

In cooking, the process of clarification entails straining out extraneous muck from liquids so that they might be pure, clear and ideal for consumption. With this series on food terminology and issues we're attempting to do the same.

Organic: it's a word that gets bandied and bashed around a lot. Plenty of folks believe it's synonymous with "healthy," while others think it's just an excuse for companies to vacuum the last of the cash from your wallet. Politics aside, what does the term actually mean?

Produce: Organic produce is grown without the use of synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering, and relies on natural or mechanical methods, rather than prohibited chemicals, for pest control. Simply put - it needs to be as natural as possible.

For food to be United States Department of Agriculture Certified Organic and bear the accompanying seal, it must be grown and processed according to specific federal guidelines that include, among others considerations, soil quality, pest and weed control, and the use of additives. The operation must be approved by a government inspector and go through a certification process. Handlers and processors that work with the food before it reaches the market must be government certified as well.

As with eggs, dairy and meat, produce can be produced organically without the farm having undergone the lengthy and fairly expensive process to be certified organic by the USDA's National Organic Program's inspectors. If a farm or business’ gross agricultural income from organic sales does not exceed $5,000 per year it doesn't need to be certified in order to sell, label, or represent products as organic, but it may not use the "Certified Organic" seal unless it's gone through the certification process.

It's certainly possible (and increasingly popular) to garden organically at home. The USDA has assembled some handy tips for small-scale farming and home gardening use.

Meat and dairy: Meat and dairy sold as "organic" must be from animals that have been raised under specific animal welfare guidelines, given no antibiotics or growth hormones, provided with access to the outdoors, and fed with 100 percent organic feed - no animal byproducts or genetically modified or "GMO" crops - produced on land that has been free from the use of toxic and persistent chemical pesticides and fertilizers for a minimum of three years. Farms must undergo USDA inspection and certification to bear the organic seal.

A veterinarian may not withhold antibiotics in the case of illness, but rules for their use are very specific and the products, if sold, may not be labeled as organic.

Eggs: For eggs to be labeled "organic," they must come from farms that meet the USDA's National Organic Standards and are routinely inspected to ensure compliance. Hens must be fed organic feed.

The hens themselves must be maintained without hormones and other intrusive drugs and antibiotics may only be used in cases in cases of outbreak or disease. They're also kept in a cage-free environment and allowed access to the outdoors.

Labeling: Meat marketed as "organic" must be 100 percent organic. Multi-ingredient products marketed with the USDA organic seal must contain 95 percent or more certified organic content.

Read - Should you buy organic? Study complicates decision at CNN Health

soundoff (413 Responses)
  1. Guitar

    There is a reason that now 1 in 3 women, and 1 in 2 men, will develop Cancer in their lifetime! Why do you think that is? Ingestion of pesticides, chemicals, polluted air/water, etc. Pay a bit more now for organic, or pay a lot more later when the inevitable cancer comes!

    September 4, 2012 at 3:18 pm |
    • Janos

      I say the same thing almost every day. The problem is with humans, most people only think of short term benefits and do not think in long term benefits.. People want NOW.. NOW... and do not want to wait.

      Fast food might be cheap short term, but in the long run the damage it causes your body will cost a lot more... People spend more money on their clothing, electronic gadgets, cars and houses, then they would ever on healthy food.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:27 pm |
    • Wake up

      More people are diagnosed with cancer not because of the food we eat now, but because medical science has advanced enough to identify it even in trace amounts. Its like the revolution the microscope spawned, the microbes were always there, but until we saw them we did nothing about it. Once we knew we found ways to treat the food and kill off the microbes.

      It sickens me to see people throw away good food when so much of the world can't get enough because it's not "100% pure nature". If you want organic food, grow it yourself, once you realize how difficult it is to grow and keep yourself feed then you can lecture farmers on how they should grow food.

      People forget that the quality of food has improved substantially. People use to live to a rip old age of 40 about 100 years ago, now not living to less than 80 is seen as tragic. We have better more nutritious food now than we have ever had in history!

      Look people I understand we now have an abundance of food in this country and you feel bad for that fact. If it makes you feel better that you are eating organic food to justify your coffee indulgence, go ahead, but you are only fooling yourself.

      From a farmer who grows their own food and cattle.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:44 pm |
    • ORChuck

      Do you have any evidence to support that charge?

      September 4, 2012 at 3:46 pm |
    • Eric

      "Wake up" points out one good reason. Besides identification, another reason more people die of cancer now is because they live longer. When life expectancy was 40 there were a lot less cases of cancer. Cancer can affect young people, but disproportionally if affects older people.

      September 4, 2012 at 4:09 pm |
      • Wake Up

        Do you know what cancer is? It is your own cells that are growing out of control. That's it, rapid cell growth. This growth is triggered by improper sequencing of the genes from cell splitting.

        It's like copying the novel "War and Peace", one character at a time. The first few times may be perfect, but a million or so times later you are bound to make a mistake or two. Once a mistake is made it just keeps getting copied, and additional mistake get made. Most of the time these mistakes do nothing, however every once in a while something really bad happens.

        Most people don't understand probability, cancer is not a random chance, it is a random permutation. With random chance your odds don't chance every time an event occurs (think dice rolls), but with permutation the odds do change (think russian roulette).

        So yes, cancer is found more in older people but not because the old are eating bad food.

        September 4, 2012 at 4:40 pm |
        • Eric

          Yes, I agree. Older means greater odds of cancer happening just because of the chance of mutation. Also, as you get older your genetic material is deteriorating in your cells.

          September 4, 2012 at 11:46 pm |
  2. Mittens Romnutts

    I was at a hippy market recently (farmers market) and saw a hippy trying to sell a woman in a wheelchair a single head of organic cauliflower for $8. I kid you not. Unfortunately, she didn't have enough food stamps to pay for it. $8 for a head of cauliflower???? GET REAL! Organic is just a license to steal from doped up hippies.

    September 4, 2012 at 3:10 pm |
    • Janos

      No one said you need to eat organic food. What people do is their business and none of yours. If you want to eat tasteless vegetables and beef that is jacked up on steroids, you have that right.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:29 pm |
      • Mittens Romnutts

        OK, Janos, spoiled rich kid...

        September 4, 2012 at 4:11 pm |
        • Janos

          Mr. Mittens likes to assume things huh? The funny thing is you probably make a lot more money then me, unless your a full time student like myself. The difference between you and I is I think long term and you think short term. I spend more money on food, then I would on clothing or anything else. Go drive your expensive car, live in your nice house and I'll continue to spend more of my money on better quality food. Investing in my body and mental health is more important to me than having the newest iPhone or latest gadgets.

          The funny thing about people like yourself is your spend $200 a month on cellular bill, but complain because an organic bottle of juice costs $4.25. Keep drinking your $1.99 SUNNY'D made with 0% juice.

          September 4, 2012 at 4:34 pm |
  3. Al-Maghribi

    Eating less but healthy is the key. Less eating, less sleeping and less talking are not only beneficial for the body but also for the soul.

    People in the past didn't have this deluge of processed and unnatural foods, they lived simple lives, were content with little food and didn't have so much desire and greed for material wealth. They were healthier and happier than us for a reason.

    September 4, 2012 at 3:07 pm |
    • Luca

      So how do you explain the ever increasing longevity of humans in westernized countries?

      September 4, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
      • Al-Maghribi

        Actually ever increasing logevity is a myth. People used to live for centuries in the days of yore. We all know that Noah lived for more than 950 years! Even people during the time of Jesus used to live for over a century. We may have slightly increased longevity by a couple of years in the past century or so but the overall trend is actually a decrease in longevity.

        September 4, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
        • Luca

          Ah yes. A troll. I've heard of your kind...

          September 4, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
      • Bill

        Clean water, due to better sanitation practices and improved medical care.

        September 4, 2012 at 3:28 pm |
    • ZeN

      completely wrong

      September 4, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
    • Janos

      Eating less and less stress, yes... However, your wrong on the sleep part. The human body has to have a good amount of rest, this is how the body gets back into balance and how we re-energize ourselves.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:31 pm |
    • ORChuck

      "People in the past didn't have this deluge of processed and unnatural foods, they lived simple lives, were content with little food and didn't have so much desire and greed for material wealth."

      And they died by age 30 anyway so the rest mattered little to them.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:52 pm |
      • Al-Maghribi

        There's no proof that people died by age 30 in older days, unless due to war, famine etc. This even happens today in places like Asia and Africa, so not much has changed. Infact I'd argue that due to the havoc we've wreaked on our environment and natural resources and due to unsurmountable greed shown by the Industrialized countries, the scale of human suffering has incresed many folds. Western masses may not be aware of it or choose to remain ignorant but, famines, natural disasters, wars have killed unimaginable amount of people in the past century. I'm not saying that all technology or advancement is bad, but there has to be a moral, ethical and religious limit to human consumption and greed. You know there's something wrong when people are dying of hunger at one end of the globe while at the other end people are dying of over eating!

        September 4, 2012 at 5:24 pm |
  4. Doreen

    Here is the REAL definition of Organic. It has nothing to do with pesticides, etc. ALL fruits/vegetables are organic, whether grown with or without pesticides. Wake up people, they're charging more for nothing!
       [awr-gan-ik] Show IPA

    noting or pertaining to a class of chemical compounds that formerly comprised only those existing in or derived from plants or animals, but that now includes all other compounds of carbon.

    characteristic of, pertaining to, or derived from living organisms: organic remains found in rocks.

    of or pertaining to an organ or the organs of an animal, plant, or fungus.

    of, pertaining to, or affecting living tissue: organic pathology.

    Psychology . caused by neurochemical, neuroendocrinologic, structural, or other physical impairment or change: organic disorder. Compare functional

    September 4, 2012 at 3:06 pm |
    • Luca

      And here are the REAL requirements from the USDA to receive the expensive organic label

      September 4, 2012 at 3:13 pm |
    • rimo

      In Europe we label "organic" products as ecological. It is self explanatory.-no harmful chemicals used. Not sure where Americans came up to call eco food "organic". We are all organic

      September 4, 2012 at 3:30 pm |
      • Luca

        In Italy they label the products "Biologico" or Biological. Well even a glow in the dark cat is biological, so that's nonsensical either.

        September 4, 2012 at 3:37 pm |
    • ORChuck

      Most pesticides are, in fact, organic chemicals.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:52 pm |
  5. Eric

    Of course there are plenty of things that can be used in organic farming that are nasty. Natural doesn't necessarily mean safe. Look up rotenone.

    September 4, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
    • Janos

      Rotenone causes Parkinson's disease in lab rats...

      September 4, 2012 at 3:34 pm |
      • Eric

        And it can be used in organic food because it is readily extracted from plants.

        September 4, 2012 at 4:06 pm |
        • Janos

          post a link to where USDA allows it in organic products please. I'd like to find out what organic companies use it. Thanks!

          September 4, 2012 at 4:36 pm |
        • Eric

          CNN doesn't like direct links. But go to Wikipedia, look up Rotenone, and you'll find
          Rotenone is classified by the USDA National Organic Program as a nonsynthetic and was allowed to be used to grow organic produce until 2005, when it was added to the list of prohibited substances due to concerns about its safety. However, it has since been reapproved.[16]
          That footnote goes to a .gov site.

          September 4, 2012 at 11:49 pm |
  6. PushingBack

    I never really bought organic before but now that you've said "Organic produce is grown without the use of synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge, irradiation, and genetic engineering..." I think I will have to! Thanks a lot CNN!!

    September 4, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • Janos

      Everyone who has a computer has no excuse not to education themselves about organic food and anything else for that matter. You can learn a lot, you just need to look and research.

      September 4, 2012 at 4:14 pm |
  7. Matt

    Coming from a farming family I can positively state that organic farming method is poor use of the land. Unless a farm is large enough to properly rotate crops the method is extremely wasteful.

    September 4, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • ORChuck

      "Certified organic," is just the latest western/first-world affectation. While so much of the world goes without any food, we wring our hands about whether or not OUR food is "certified organic," or "free-range," or "sustainably produced," or "locally-produce," or "artisanal."

      People, just eat it and thank God that you have it.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:58 pm |
  8. Susan

    If 'organic' means natural, then why the high price? Are we paying manufacturers to do nothing? I compared eggs the other day in the supermarket. The brown eggs, supposedly from 'free range' chickens cost almost a dollar more a dozen. Why, when there is almost NO overhead in their production?

    September 4, 2012 at 2:49 pm |
    • Nicole

      Because cage fee and organic are sufficiently more costly to produce. they aren't doing less- you plant some lettuce and do nothing and, guess what? Your lettuce will be invaded by pests and weeds and won't be worth selling. So they use organic techniques, like certain bugs, using manure, etc, etc. Cage free and free range chickens need more space and you have loss because of disease and aggression and (with free range) predators.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:57 pm |
    • Ally

      In most cases there's a bit more work to produce organic food. It's just the chemical pesticides are swapped for natural ones or manual work. This is generally less efficient than the chemical version so additional time and product will usually need to be used. Then in general, there are lower yields using this method. Less fruit with more work equals a higher price.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:59 pm |
    • Eric

      Free range chicken requires more space, and thus has a real estate higher cost. A lot of other organic food has higher costs because things like paid labor are used instead of inexpensive chemicals. I pull weeds in my yard by hand. That takes some time on the weekends. RoundUp would be cheaper.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:00 pm |
    • Janos

      Susan, natural has no meaning what so ever when describing food products. Saying something is natural, is like stating animals defecate. This is something animals do. Growing green beans in the ground, is natural, apples grow from trees, is natural... but it is the process that they put these foods in is what is not natural. The USDA has no definition for natural. Anyone can put NATURAL on a product and uneducated and uninformed consumers are the ones who are suckered to believe that because a product states that it is natural, it makes it better for them. It means nothing...

      Natural eggs, so they say, come from chicken houses that house millions of chickens that live in cages for their entire life and live in masses of feces and they never see the day. They have no purpose, other than to lay eggs... They are slaves to laying eggs for consumers. Just google factory chicken farming. That is your NATURAL chicken... there is nothing natural about that... We consumers are believed to thinking chickens live on a farm like they did in the 50's, they walk around, eat worms and get to roam the plantation... Chicken farming is nothing like this... Unless, you buy chickens, eggs, etc... from local farms and you know exactly where those eggs come from and how the chickens are treated... Unless you do this, you have no idea how your eggs or chickens were produced before you serve them to your family... This is the reality. The next time your in your food store and see this beautiful picture of a FARM on the box... it means nothing.. Of course, many consumers buy it.. thinking... it came from a farm, not a factory.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:11 pm |
  9. Andy H.

    Organic products are more expensive because crop yields are lower. I've actually found that i cannot eat non organic products after a while if i switch to organic because the non organic stuff has a chemical taste to it. Raisins are a good example of that. The chemical taste are the pesticides & herbicides.

    Also, not all organic products are that much more expensive. You need to shop around. I shop 5 different places for my groceries, sometimes 6 or 7 to get the best for the lowest price.

    I don't understand why so many people trumpet complaints with no relevant facts. I guess it's easier than being a responsible shopper.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:48 pm |
    • jb

      organic consistently costs double. Cold truth. Occasionally more or less but double is average. So what. Games for the wealthy, the haves. It's unsustainable at global scale. No nutritional benefit, little evid3nce of health affects. Looots of evidence that eating processed junk food and getting fat is bad for you. When people get their weight down, we can talk about organic.

      September 5, 2012 at 1:26 am |
  10. pensimmon

    Pesticides and herbicides are poisons designed to kill living things. Are we living things? I thought so. One poison filled apple might not harm us (except if you're Snow White), but if all you food is laden with poison- well you're in trouble. We are not be any means rich people, but we choose not eat poisons. We grow our own veggies, and shop in season in a local organic farm store or local farmers' market. We eat organic eggs and wild caught fish. We eat a very liItle meat, but organically raised if we do. We try to avoid GMO junk too. The american public are being used as Guinea pigs to test their Frankenstein foods. Watch out for yourself and your family. Corporations are only interested in money- not us and our health.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:45 pm |
    • Andy

      You must be then very healthy eating organic. What is your blood pressure? Mine is 60-120, and bpm is 40-45 at rest. I buy food at Safeway, 99Ranch, Walmart, Target, Winco...

      Do you have any evidence, not words, of benefits of eating organic? One time we have tried to taste the difference between organic and generic apples. People with eyes tied tasted each type multiple times, the guess rate was ~50%, ie, random coincidence. Normal English: I can get the same 50% guess rate by simply flipping a coin and not trying those apples.

      All the claims that organic tastes differently are biased at best, it's called placebo effect.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:59 pm |
    • Nicole

      And this, ladies and gents, is why basic science education is sorely needed in this country.

      The trace amounts herbicides and pesticides are not toxic to you- you have to consume a certain amount of a toxin for it to threaten your health. We have no evidence that trace amounts of these chemicals do anything to humans. The only documented danger is to farmers and framing communities who inhale the stuff.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • Steve

      Pen, a couple of important points. All fruits and vegetables contain "natural carcinogens" (poisons) thanks to evolution, heck there are even trace amounts of "natural" radiation from the soil in your food. The vast majority of organic farming has been bought out by these giant corporations (what does that say about the original organic farmers eh?) and, unlike what you suggest, most corporations want to be viable in the long term, so their customers dying is not particularly in their self interest (there are some exceptions). In terms of GMO, it has been around since the 1980's and there is not a record of anyone dying from it unlike from some natural foods (E-coli, unpasteurized milk). In fact if you don't want pesticides in yoru food you should be supporting GMO. Keep in mind that with "poison" it is the dosage that counts.

      September 4, 2012 at 5:43 pm |
  11. 4sanity

    There is no nutritional benefit to eating organic. Infact one could reasonably argue that eating organic is more dangerous – lack of anti-fungicides to avoid spoilage in grains, enterobacterial contamination from "organic" sewage fertilizers instead of defined sterile chemical K-P-N fertilizers, or lack of irradiation to reduce overall microbial counts etc.

    The two more important considerations might be to 1) shop for locally sourced products –> overall lower transportation costs, and 2) taste since produce from small organic farms is typically harvested ripe and not coated.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
    • PushingBack

      That's the craziest thing I've read so far. Yeah, I guess they are the same nutritionally, except for some things like grass fed beef. But the avoidance of chemicals in your diet is enough for me!

      September 4, 2012 at 3:05 pm |
      • Steve

        It is not "chemicals" per se that are bad, it depends on the molecular structure just like Arsenic and Mercury. Just like scientists in the lab, nature also mixed elements together which can be poisonous (heck Sodium and water together can explode!). This chemicals are always evil mentality is plain silly.

        September 4, 2012 at 5:46 pm |
  12. Jaime

    I buy organic, and I don't really care about the cost. But that doesn't mean I won't buy inorganic food if there is something that I want but is unavailable from an organic producer. I didn't see "Prefers Organic, but not a Snob" as an option.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
  13. Mittens Romnutts

    The ONLY thing "organic" means is 3-5 times the price. The rest is just marketing nonsense to dupe rich hippies. And it works.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:29 pm |
    • Paulz Rianz

      No doubt to tear away money from the hard working American hippies and to disperse it to the lazy hippies with no jobs. Want a job? Vote for us and see what happens!

      September 4, 2012 at 2:32 pm |
      • Andy H.

        Organic products are more expensive because crop yields are lower. I've actually found that i cannot eat non organic products after a while if i switch to organic because the non organic stuff has a chemical taste to it. Raisins are a good example of that. The chemical taste are the pesticides & herbicides.

        September 4, 2012 at 2:44 pm |
        • Mittens Romnutts

          Guess what Andy? You're a hypochondriac!

          September 4, 2012 at 3:03 pm |
      • Mittens Romnutts

        Paulz, you smoke too much dope. Your comments are spacey and unclear as a result.

        September 4, 2012 at 3:04 pm |
    • Janos

      Keep eating your factory produced food. Enjoy!

      September 4, 2012 at 4:15 pm |
    • Ryan

      Why would you want to eat foods that are sprayed with poisons and/or genetically modified or eat meat from animals that have been fed diets so unnatural that we have to slaughter them or they'll die from what they are eating? Why would you consider people who pay more for organic foods to be "hippies" or somehow misinformed? I don't buy everything organic because I don't have access to only organic options but I would if I could. Why wouldn't I? Sure it's a little bit more expensive but the alternative should disgust you. To me it just seems idiotic to defend the people who produce food that could have negative side affects to our well-being due to the manner in which it is grown, harvested, packaged, etc. It makes me angry and frustrated that we even have to have this conversation of organic vs. non-organic. I wish I didn't have to worry about the foods I consume or the millions of other products that are mass produced by methods that are hazardous to our health and the health of the planet. It's scary to me that you don't...

      September 4, 2012 at 5:29 pm |
  14. J.

    Pity that "organic" also means expensive. A 5lb bag of organic potatoes is twice the cost of non-organic. Two organic zucchinis cost 4x the non-organic.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:26 pm |
    • Kianasmum

      My understanding regarding the price difference is that conventional farming (and GMO crops) recieve government subsidies and organic farming does not. Also, to be labelled organic, the farmers have to pay quite a bit of money just to be stamped organic.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:47 pm |
    • Luca

      Its actually mostly related to decreased crop yield (GMO crops are genetically modified to grow bigger, faster and and more prolifically) and the increased labor required to grow them. This doesn't mean that 100% of the price increase is reflected 100% by the increased cost and decreased output. Factory organic farming is gaining traction and actually making the requirements for "Certified Organic" less stringent so there is certainly an increased profit margin with organic foods.

      The best choice? Local. (Or local organic if you live in California)

      September 4, 2012 at 3:02 pm |
    • Janos

      Let me education you. Non-organic food does not last long, which is why it cost more to produce. If you were a grocery store and you sold organic apples, they went bad in 3 days after receiving them, vs non-organic apples that lasted 10 days, would you charge more for the organic apples? of course, because organic apples that you did not sell, you would have to trash...

      The reason why so many people have allergies is because of the chemicals added to food. Just another thing to think about. Why all of a sudden do we have so many people allergic to GLUTEN? it is "natural" it is a protein in wheat, rye and barley. All of a sudden, millions of people have allergies because of it. Why were people okay in the mid 1900's? but not now? Simply put, chemicals and HMO's. Why is it that if these same people eat wheat, rye and barley in European countries where they have been using the same old grains that their four-fathers used a long time ago and not have any allergic reactions to them? because they have not been modified nor are they produced with chemicals.

      Why do we continue to keep damaging our food supply and trying to create stuff another way? Profits....

      September 4, 2012 at 4:27 pm |
  15. Andy

    It's amazing how many people believe in myths about organic labels. I like that one: an organic is not a GMO. Yeah, right. Fact is, 100% of our food is GMO. Some foods didn't even existed before human, we have created them through a process called "selection".
    Have you ever seen a wild apple? I have, it's smaller than a cherry and tastes like a wood full of acid. The same story with every other domesticated fruit and vegy. Meat is either GMO or selected, 100%. Organic is just a label tag, that's it. True, some organic might have lower levels of fertilizers than generic, but none are clean, every one was grown using one of pesticides, fertilizer, drugs, etc. Most types of animal food are forbidden for sale without proper immunization, drug treatment.

    There is one type of truly organic food you can buy though – non-farm sea products.

    I work at the national lab, organic chemistry, we have probed many food samples for "organicity". Chemists don't waste money on organic label tag, ask them.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:17 pm |
    • ricardo1968

      Ah, I would say there is a big difference between selective breeding and putting frog dna into a potato plant so it turns things around and eats any bugs that land on it. There is alot to be said for growing food that tastes good versus food that is pest resistant or has a longer shelf life. There's a certain throwing the baby out with the bathwater aspect to thinking of food in terms of money.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:31 pm |
      • Lila

        It's hard to imagine someone who claims he works in a lab would need the obvious pointed out to him, that would be disturbing.

        September 4, 2012 at 2:40 pm |
      • Andy

        Actually, there is absolutely NO difference between selective breeding and putting frog dna into a potato from your stomach point of view. None of those frog or potato dna, none of any dna make it through our intestines into the blood stream. Stomach acids break apart anything breakable into amino-acids, sugar, and fats, and our body pushes out the rest. I'm not talking about vitamins and inorganic salts and micro elements.

        For example, snake poison (protein based) is not a poison if you inject it into your burger and eat it. We have verified it on rats, many many times. But it can kill a rat if simply put on skin or directly in the blood stream, bypassing great protective mechanisms of the vertebrate digestive system. Do NOT try it at home though, you may have wounds in your mouth, then the poison will work.

        September 4, 2012 at 2:46 pm |
        • Kianasmum


          There is a difference and here it is: before GMOs, allergies in children were few and far between. I believe the number is a 270% rise in food allergies since the introduction of GMOs. These allergies are the body's way of reacting to a foreign protein that it doesn't recognize or sees as a threat. Not only have allergies rates risen but so too have cancer rates.

          Nature has made it impossible for different species of life – whether it be animal, plant, insects or fish, to interbreed. It's only by man's destructive hand that frog dna can be mixed in with the genes of a tomato plant.

          September 4, 2012 at 2:59 pm |
        • Luca

          I'm with Andy on this one, genes are genes and fact is we share 97% of ours with mice and we look nothing like them. That being said, selective breeding is similar to genetic modification because you the end result is getting desired genes (like the ones you'd find from a sweet apple) into the next generation of cultivars. Genetic modification does this by specifically targeting known genes while selective breeding does this by genetic crossing.

          I, for one, buy mostly organic because it does involve somewhat more responsible farming practices and does avoid synthetic pesticides, herbicides and other compounds (such as the overuse of ABx and hormones). I could care less if there was a salmon gene in my tomato because I often eat salmon and tomatoes. I often eat them together and my body processes both of them just fine.

          September 4, 2012 at 3:10 pm |
        • Ally

          @Kianasmum, while I agree that allergies and cancer rates are on the rise, you can't state that GMOs are to blame. All you have there is a correlation. Not cause and effect. You could also say that allergies have been on the rise since cell phones went wild. You could say cancer has been on the rise since Rams football moved back to St. Louis.

          That's why we need to continue research and isolate causes.

          September 4, 2012 at 3:13 pm |
        • Mike

          Kianasmum, care to cite your sources?

          Something from a top tier peer reviewed journal might be good.

          September 4, 2012 at 3:21 pm |
    • Kevin

      Finally, a beacon of intelligence

      September 4, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
  16. Tom

    I can answer the headline question: Organic means the company that makes it wants to sell it for more than it is worth, so they slap "organic" on the label.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:07 pm |
    • Janos

      Typical uneducated consumer who probably buys HMO food thinking its safe.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:13 pm |
  17. xeno

    Sustainable food choices aren't just about organic labeling, though. If I had to choose between organic apple juice shipped in a plastic bottle from 3000 miles away or conventional apple juice in a glass jar from the orchard an hour away, I would choose the latter. If the choice is between cheap, conventional avocados from South America at the grocery store, or more expensive avocados from the no-spray guys trying to get their start at the farmer's market, I'd choose the latter. And finally, since I personally believe that government corn subsidies are harmful to the big picture of human and economic health, I prefer to avoid unnecessary corn products, and nothing with HFCS can be labeled as organic, so in that regard, the label can simplify choices.
    I really don't understand why people get so angry about people's personal food choices.

    September 4, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
  18. deek mann

    Just a point of clarificaiton here.... .some people may think that "organic" means "natural". Not necessarily...

    "Organically grown" animals likely have been fed cord and soy feeds, not according to what they would normally eat if they were left to forage on their own. Corn and soy based animal feeds (even organic ones) do not have the nutritional value of grass, etc

    Also, "access to outdoors" means only that. Typically this "access" is a small door to an outside holding pen that, for the most part, the animals avoid using anyway. Just because the access was supplied, doesn' t mean the animal ever went outdoors!

    September 4, 2012 at 2:00 pm |
  19. jim

    Bull. "Organic" means that a substance contains carbon, the basic element of life (as we know it, anyway),nothing more, nothing less. All the crap above was created by the industry to sell something. And none of it makes the slightest bit of difference to what you are actually consuming, only what you pay for it, and how hard the people who sold it to you are laughing at your gullibility.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:59 pm |
  20. Danielle

    Well now all the chemical co.'s are trying to bash the Organic industry because proposition 37 is coming around the corner. This article was fair. The lying MSM has put such a spin on healthy organic foods in the last few day's due to the funding of the chemical food companies. No GMO's, no pesticides, no herbicides, no antibiotics. Get the word out.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:54 pm |
    • rjp34652

      Well said. This latest attack upon organic food stinks of pesticides, additives and profits for chemo-agri business. I'm NOT surprised that the media gives it attention. Should we believe columns written by those who are paid by media who are in turn sponsored by chemical firms?

      but that's just me, hollering from the choir loft...

      September 4, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
  21. Lila

    I've been buying organic fruit and veggies for years from the same people at my local farmers market. I juice so the pesticide issue is my main concern. I have never heard of anyone buying it because it's more nutritious. There is a taste difference though. For example, regular apples are larger juicier with a waxy coating, the taste is bland and the waxy coating feels gross to chew on. Organic apples are smaller but they have a better flavor and it's enjoyable to eat.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:50 pm |
    • Andy

      Organic apple don't sell on this planet. The are tiny tini green acidic cherry-like, besides your stomach is unable to digest them anyway.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:25 pm |
      • Lila

        What in the world are you blathering on about? I read your comment above. Walk in to any store in the US apples are not tiny green and cherry like. Apples like the picture above is what most people imagine when we are discussing apples. Organic means less pesticides and a more natural process. Again the article above discusses that. Consumers are trying to get away from all the chemicals.

        September 4, 2012 at 2:35 pm |
      • Janos

        So the local farm that I buy that sells organic apples, are really selling me FAKE organic apples, is that correct sir?

        You do realize it is illegal to sell products that are non-organic and to label them as being such? Also, there are over 7,000 different kinds of apples in the world. Not just the tinny ones you are referring to, also known as crab apples. Of course they are acid, which is why people rarely eat them.. they are mostly used for Jams or just to look at... nothing more, nothing less.. Mr. Andy.

        September 4, 2012 at 3:18 pm |
    • PWS

      Lila -you make a good point about the taste. I have justed harvesting my own fruit, which I call "low spray", perhaps a handful of times for the most critical issues (most commercial orchards spray 12-14 times/yr). My apples, pears, peaches, etc, have thick intensely fragrant skins pock-marked with all sorts of bizzareness. Also, as someone else mentioned, they are smaller (but chewier) that conventional. Why? When plants don't evolve to rely on so many pesticide inputs, they make thicker skins to defend themselves, which ironically, is where much of the nutrition, and consequently, flavor is. Also, most orchards today are irrigated, which makes larger, but less flavorful fruit b/c the sugars get diluted. Most people are totally ignorant of nature and how their food comes to be. IF more people did not expect unblemished fruit and accepted it for how nature happens w/o too much human intervention, we'd all be better off.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:36 pm |
      • Ally

        I completely agree on the issue of people expecting blemish free produce. It's sad how much good food is thrown away at stores because it's got some small mark on it and noone will buy it.

        September 4, 2012 at 2:43 pm |

    USDA organic and Organic are not the same. You can not have Seedless grapes and call that Organic. That is wrong wrong wrong. The grape seeds contain the anti cancer agent known as flavonoids. IT is a abomination to call that organic. A rotten shame

    September 4, 2012 at 1:49 pm |
    • Janos

      Exactly, if most people knew the difference... After all, what is natural about something that does not have a seed? Seedless fruits are engineered. Something consumers still don't seem to understand yet. Fruits are suppose to have seeds.

      September 4, 2012 at 3:20 pm |
  23. Cumulonimbus

    Organic and natural do not necessarily mean safe. Rattlesnake venom is naturally occurring. So are insecticidal toxins in some chrysanthemum plants, which make pesticides used by organic farmers (these pesticides are simply pressed from the flowers, bottled, and then sprayed on plants). The effects of these natural pesticides on humans are not tested as well as the effects of modern synthetic pesticides. "Tested" does not necessarily mean harmless, but all foods contain substances that might be considered harmful.

    I favor organic meats and diary, not because they have been proven to be more safe, but because the animals are arguably treated better.

    Many people who have never worked in agriculture wonder why chemicals are used on food crops. Many types of crops will not even produce a harvest without requiring tremendous expense if we attempt to raise them without chemicals, because disease and insects to so much damage. I'm not talking about simple caterpillar holes–the whole crop can be destroyed. Organic approaches can work to defend crops, but they can be expensive and they are not necessarily safer, in spite of what the organic foods market might tell you.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:49 pm |
  24. Sam

    The resion why indrustrialy produced food with chemicals are cheaper is due to goverment subsidies. if goverment dont give subsidies to indrustrial food, but put tax on them becasue they are making people sick and give subsidies to organic food, organic food would be way cheaper.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:44 pm |
  25. Kevin

    They can still use pesticides in organic farming, so long as they are labeled "synthetic" – which oftentimes means the pesticides they do use are even more harmful for you.

    Oh, and about the fact they taste better? It's all in your head, it's been shown time and time again. It's kinda like how a $100 bottle of wine "tastes better," but in a taste test, no one can tell the difference. It's all snake oil, I'll hold onto my money thank you.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
    • Kevin

      *NOT labeled "synthetic"

      September 4, 2012 at 1:44 pm |
  26. Major

    Yes, an organic diet is recommended unless you are a silicon-based life form!

    September 4, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
  27. adfadfd

    People are just stupid with how they abuse the word "organic". "Organic" means it was derived from carbon molecules. Just about ALL food is "organic" unless it's made out of plastic (and even many of them are carbon-derived).

    September 4, 2012 at 1:37 pm |
    • Major

      Yes, an "organic" diet is recommended unless you are a silicon-based lifeform!

      September 4, 2012 at 1:39 pm |
    • Ally

      Yes, yes....if you want to look at the first definition of 'organic' in Webster's that's what you get. But in the context of this article we're using the definition of how one achieves a label of "organically grown" produce. You might need to read down to definition 4 or 5 on this one.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:52 pm |
    • justin

      Try eating a diet of plastic and see how that goes for you....i'm an Organic chemist by the way...serioulsy... and I do eat organic food. I'm not particularly fond of eating pesticides and antibiotics in a constant low dose that is ubiquitous in the common US food supply. We just don't know enough about the long term exposure to these types of things..maybe they are fine...I don't have a peer reviewed study that proves its bad for human health but sometimes things just make sense.

      September 4, 2012 at 4:01 pm |
  28. Katie

    The Organic movement is the first step in the right direction. Ideally, the next step would be for a grass-fed, pastured movement of the same scale. Organic alone does not automatically mean, healthy, happy, grass-fed animal. It means that an animal may not be fed or housed well enough to maintain its health, and when it does get sick, it will not get treated. Then this animal will go to slaughter, and we will eat an untreated, sick animal. As a great lover of chicken, beef, and bacon, (not to mention animals in general) I am not on board.
    When you ask a preschooler what a cow eats, they will tell you grass, not grain, corn or soy. (Would you feed a tiger cereal, and expect it to stay healthy? No, hey, that would be ridiculous! Silly person. But wait, would you feed a cow tootsie rolls with the wrapper on, and eat what becomes of it? This one sounds familiar....)
    The label "vegetarian-fed" also gets tossed around more frequently now, as it reminds us of the word vegetable. These ruminants and fowl are not getting vegetables, but they also aren't eating animal parts, feces or plastics in their feed. Hooray! They are getting grains instead, and as a whole I would eat these guys over their organic counter parts, (and eat organic over conventional).
    Pastured is a word to look for instead. This means that the animals literally live on a pasture. Who knew?? In some cases, they also may have their pasture supplemented with grain, but are able to eat grass if they choose to. After all, don't animals, human included, eat what they are put in front of them? But our delicious bovine friends evolved to eat grass! Our fowl friends want to eat grass and bugs and berries and worms as well. And who are we to deprive them of that?
    Lastly, it is important to chose meats and dairy from reputable small farms. Not only does it help increase economic gain for your farming community, you are much more likely to be eating a healthy animal. Animals that are eating animal by-product, cramped in cages and sick as dogs, and on top of that are not getting treated for their diseases (ORGANIC!) are not healthy to be eating! Eat local meat, vegetables and dairy from a source (hint:farm) you KNOW (my guess is not the local Higgly Piggly) in which the animals are fed and treated humanely. Research the food you eat.
    n the end, eat the healthiest food you can. It will save you hundreds of not thousands on medical bills down the road. Insulin and statins are expensive guys! Have a delicious (healthfully raised) steak instead.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
    • PaulG

      I TOTALLY agree with you. I have been diagnosed as a diabetic for 17 years. I met my wife 7 years ago and started eating organic foods. Since then I have been off medicine and my blood sugars, cholesterol l and hemoglobin levels are normal.
      Organic foods such as meat and fruit have totally changed my life and have kept me alive. I am sure I would be dead by now!

      September 4, 2012 at 1:45 pm |
      • jim

        PUH-RAISE THE LORD!!! And did you throw away your crutches, too?

        September 4, 2012 at 2:04 pm |
    • jim

      Really. And your evidence, based on peer-reviewed scientific studies of the issue is...?

      September 4, 2012 at 2:02 pm |
  29. judeamorris

    I was really disturbed to hear the evening news give a spin of the Stanford report with the focus that organic has the same nutrition as nonorganic. That's not the point, folks! Obviously, big agriculture is behind this news story, and it's everywhere today. Organic, according to the report, DOES have less pesticides. THAT'S the point! Organic meat is raised sustainably. THAT'S the point! Organic foods are not genetically modified. THAT'S the point! But we all know what the average consumer is going to hear and take away. Food is food. WRONG! As long as big ag keeps pushing irresponsible animal husbandry (including antibiotic use; feeding of foreign substances; denial of fresh air and exercise and thus increased exposure to human-harmful bacteria; and inhumane treatment of animals), genetically modified (corporate patten owned) foods, and fresh products exposed to pesticides, then Americans are going to continue to suffer from food-related health problems. And that's not even mentioning HFCS and food processing.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:31 pm |
    • xeno

      Yeah, I do not understand the "no more nutritious than..." spin. Anyone that eats organic knows this already. I also find it interesting that it is never mentioned that some heirloom produce does have higher concentrations of nutrients.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:35 pm |
    • Ally

      To be fair, the point of that study was specifically nutrition. That's the variable they were looking at. A study looking at the different effects of organic vs non-organic foods on humans is a completely different thing.

      You need to blame the media for presenting it inaccurately. Not the farmers who don't grow organic.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:56 pm |
  30. Daves Not Here

    Start with an organ.......

    September 4, 2012 at 1:30 pm |
  31. curious

    Further down on this same webpage... an article on the aforementioned Stanford study.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:23 pm |
  32. mary

    Given that the primary health issue of organic IS avoiding toxic pesticides , I was a bit saddened to see that Stanford of all places did a nutrition study saying "No Nutritional Benefit" And then treating the Toxic Pesticides as an ancillary insignificant issue . . .

    " Eating organic food will not make you healthier, according to researchers at Stanford University, although it could cut your exposure to pesticides "

    ALTHO ? Geeeez , spend a ton of $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ to send your kid to go to an upscale school and they MISS the simple primary point ?

    Guess the prof's are Not all they are cooked up to be either , letting This pass !


    September 4, 2012 at 1:15 pm |
    • Tanya

      I think you misread the article because that's not exactly what it said. It didn't note the exposure to pesticides as an ancillary issue. It qualified its statement about the equivalent level of nutrition in conventional vs. organic food by stating that eating organic foods reduces your exposure to pesticides. The correct quote is as follows:

      "They did not find strong evidence that organic foods are more nutritious or carry fewer health risks than conventional alternatives, though consumption of organic foods can reduce the risk of pesticide exposure."

      September 4, 2012 at 1:52 pm |
    • Ally

      Mary, the researchers didn't miss the point. They were studying the nutrition levels in organic vs non-organic produce. This study found that the nutrient levels were relatively unchanged.

      I'm sure ingesting the trace pesticides in conventionally grown produce has some negative effect, but it apparently doesn't change the nutrients in the food. Studying the effects of pesticides from consumed food in humans is a whole different study.

      September 4, 2012 at 2:05 pm |
  33. Bill

    You don't have to have uppity taste buds to notice that organic fruits and veggies taste significantly better.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:14 pm |
    • TheSchmaltz

      Many taste tests prove otherwise.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:26 pm |
  34. jltamo

    For smaller farms to make it organic all they need is print that it is on a piece of paper/plastic

    September 4, 2012 at 1:11 pm |
  35. Jason

    If they want to stay competitive with the conventional farms, organic farmers must raise and grow a bunch of, special, genetically modified breeds that's more resistant to pests and diseases and can also maintain a good yield. In other words, if you want to stay away from the wonders of science and labs, you're better off foraging for next meal. But if you want to be more environmentally friendly, go with organics.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:09 pm |
  36. Greg W

    The heart of organic is all about sustainability and elimination of harmful pesticides and fertilizers. Unfortunately there's always loopholes and people taking advantage of it. Is all organic truly organic, of course not, but it's a step in the right direction.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:05 pm |
    • GMOs are organic

      What's better than "organic" is the use of GMO crops that don't need fertilizer or pesticides and use less water. The principle is exactly the same: leave the land and water intact and use no poisons but GMO crops are gigantically higher yielding and can be more drought tolerant. In a world with an ever-increasing population of humans and an increasing taste for meat, GMOs are the only way to feed everyone and avoid poisoning ourselves, the land and the water.

      GMO crops contain one or more extra proteins from nature that have been knocked into their genome. This is what allows GMO corn to fix its own nitrogen, repel the corn borer pest and be drought tolerant. GMO crops are a NO BRAINER but once again, a few people have successfully used scare tactics so effective, people won't even read up and educate themselves on what GMOs really are. GMOs are the answer to the rising human population and sustainable farming methods. High yield + low environmental impact = sustainable farming. Look it up.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:19 pm |
      • xeno

        GMOs and the companies that create them are also creating monocultures in our fields. GMOs might be resistant to pest and disease, but as nature goes, they are by no means immune. What happens when something comes along that wipes out the monoculture?

        September 4, 2012 at 1:32 pm |
      • alex

        you are way off the mark, my friend.

        September 4, 2012 at 3:14 pm |
    • Don Parsons

      I love the sustainability argument. For the life of me, I do not know how scientist can find one molecule of DDT in a glass of milk and can not honestly tell you whether organic is more nutritious. Something smell kind of funny.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:25 pm |
  37. Rooster

    Look, here is how it goes for good eating and general health...

    1 – Avoid the big 3...Sugar, Salt and Bread (including pastas, whole wheat..whatever might be bread)
    2 – Eat many smaller meals during the day and include veggies and fruits as much as possible.
    3 – Lots of water...bears saying again, lots of water.
    4 – Get off your butt, away from the TV and computer, and get SOME kind of exercise.

    It's pretty simple and we all know this is true. There are other stuff but if you are RESPONSIBLE and honest with yourself it just doesn't matter if organic or not, just use your stinkin common sense.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:02 pm |
    • child of midian

      Yes, those are good tips but has NOTHING to do with Organics. None of those things will prevent the ingestion of Growth Hormones, Antibiotics, Pesticides, Herbicides, or food grown from land that allows sewer sludge.

      A healthy diet and exercise are good but how healthy is the diet?

      September 4, 2012 at 1:22 pm |
    • Don Parsons

      Now, there is one heck of a start. We kind of know all of those suggestion work.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:26 pm |
    • AbbieM

      And cheese. Avoid cheese like the plague. Cheese is the enemy!

      September 4, 2012 at 2:05 pm |
  38. Anonymous

    We need to remember what "organic" means for the farmers who do not have to come in contact with toxic chemicals on daily basis, for the environment that does not get contaminated by chemical runoffs and for the pollinators that do not get killed or mutated by pesticides. We all pay for our food one way or another; as the cost of the food itself, as health care costs for farm workers, the cost to clean up water supply, to fund scientific programs to help the pollinators stay healthy, etc. Everything is connected on this planet. We can't just pursue the "cheapest" or most profitable options without understand the impact on everything else because it will come back to harm us, our children and their children.

    September 4, 2012 at 1:01 pm |
  39. Discombobulated in Cleveland

    Organic fields suffer an abnormally high crop failure rate. They produce significantly lower crop yields. We are living in a world with 7 billion people. Sure, organic is good, and it is a wonderful privilege. But it is only a privilege. The moment that famine hits, it will be taken away. We'd love to live ina world where everything is organic. But we have to feed the species. Thank your liver for it's wonderful cleansing abilities. And don't be too let down when you wake up in 20 years and find that organic production outside of your yard has become illegal in commercial operations in the age of famine.

    September 4, 2012 at 12:57 pm |
  40. meg

    Growing your own veggies is the best thing anyone can do. It will save you so much money and you don't have to worry about ingesting any poision. Why waste money on organic food when you can grow it yourself? Makes no sense to me.

    September 4, 2012 at 12:56 pm |
    • GMOs are organic

      Meg, you don't keep a garden. People with gardens in the 'burbs or rural areas are constantly at war with deer, skunks, oppossums, racoons and loads of nematode pests that also think your organic produce is tasty. Giant, sturdy fences can keep out the larger critters but the nematodes and other insect pests are beastly to keep down without pesticides. Sure, you can try spraying down your plants with diluted soap and such but you will have to apply nearly every day and what's that doing to your soil?

      The human population exploded at about the time synthetic fertilizer, pesticides and high-yielding variety crops came on the scene. Look up India as an excellent case study because that was recent (1970s) and good data exist. India is now poisoned and many wells have run dry trying to keep up this kind of production. GMOs are also India's answer to feeding a high population with the need to stop using poisons.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:29 pm |
      • AbbieM

        Once you get that fence up around your garden to keep out the deer, put three or four chickens in there. (Bring them in at night, of course, and make sure there's water for them.) There go your creepy-crawlies, with no fuss, no muss. Heck, my chickens even eat black widow spiders and turn them into eggs and fertilizer. Quite a magic trick.

        September 4, 2012 at 2:08 pm |

    Organic means not using pesticides and chemicals while growing food products, interesting that the reporter used a picture of a bright red apple, the greatest recipient of pesticides and chemicals. The theory is consumers will not buy apples that look natural ( blemishes, dark spots, and not bright red). Sorry for being helpful

    September 4, 2012 at 12:55 pm |
  42. Seansa

    Look I washed my apple. OK now its organic and cost 1/3 of the whole foods apple. A fool born every minute..

    September 4, 2012 at 12:52 pm |
    • jeffision

      You're the fool if you think the pesticides are only on the skin of the apple.

      September 4, 2012 at 12:59 pm |
      • Jason

        They design those cides to be lethal to those tiny invertebrates that attack the crops so you and I could inject small amounts of it and come out alive. Though I'm not suggesting that stomach pain and diarrhea are all that pleasant so next time, just peel the skin off of fruits and cook your vegetables.

        September 4, 2012 at 1:14 pm |
    • RM

      Not necessarily true. I can wash a an Apple non organic and feel itchy in my throat and gums when eating the skin or even if pealing it. I noticed this to be true with other fruits and veggies after washing. I also notice that I do not have this reaction from "Organic" or home grown veggies/fruits... food for thought.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:03 pm |
    • Ian

      1/3 of the cost... How much are you saving, 20 cents? You're the fool ingesting pesticides to save a few cents.

      September 4, 2012 at 1:13 pm |
  43. Allie

    This is rather inaccurate: "Organic produce is grown without the use of synthetic fertilizers, sewage sludge" etc. In the United States, there is a list of chemicals that are cannot be used on certified organic foods. If the chemical is not on the prohibited list, it may be used and still be called organic. You just need to trust that the farmer follows the spirit of the regulations instead of 'to the letter' rules.

    September 4, 2012 at 12:51 pm |
  44. sillybonobo

    There is something to be said about fewer preservatives and chemicals in food, but I don't go out of my way to buy organic produce or foods. People think that organic foods are necessarily healthier, which is just plain wrong.

    September 4, 2012 at 12:50 pm |
  45. bfpiercelk

    It means "Overpay for this sucker"

    September 4, 2012 at 12:45 pm |
  46. brad1001

    Archer – Daniels and Cargill will one day bring you organic Soylent Green ... nom nom

    September 4, 2012 at 12:44 pm |
  47. Plain Truth

    It's an excuse to charge more. Nothing more.

    September 4, 2012 at 12:42 pm |
  48. SoundCk2MyLife

    Reblogged this on and commented:
    Thank you for breaking it down...

    September 4, 2012 at 11:00 am |
  49. AleeD®

    It's that long-awaited release after ... oh, my bad. Carry on.

    September 4, 2012 at 6:55 am |
1 2 3 4
| Part of