Following is PCC's response to a Dec. 19, 2007 guest column on the Opinion page of the Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
The December 18, 2007, Op Ed Organic milk production leaves big footprint, by dairy manager Jon Wheeler, appears to be part of a national campaign to discredit the benefits of organic dairy.
Industrial Ag agenda
Since 2005, the Hudson Institute's Center for Global Food Issues has been working to stop dairies from labeling their products "no added growth hormones" or "produced without antibiotics or pesticides." (See the "Milk is Milk" campaign Web site, www.milkismilk.com.) The "Milk is Milk" campaign is designed to deprive consumers of the right to know how their food is produced.
Important sources of funding for the Hudson Institute reportedly include Monsanto, the manufacturer of genetically modified, recombinant bovine growth hormones, known as rBGH/rBST, which is prohibited by organic standards.
The science supports organic
Milk is not milk. Many studies demonstrate nutritional and health differences between organic and non-organic dairy.
Milk from organic cows contains 50 to 80 percent more antioxidants and healthy fats, significantly higher levels of vitamin E, of antioxidants beta carotene, lutein and zeathanthin, more heart-healthy anti-inflammatory omega 3 fatty acids — all highest in summer when cows eat more grass and clover.
Studies confirm that an organic diet "provides a dramatic and immediate protective effect" against commonly used agricultural pesticides that can cause delays in mental and motor skills, and learning disorders.
Wheeler is right that all cows have natural growth hormones, but regularly injecting them with artificial rBGH has been shown to increase an array of ill health effects, including udder infections, infertility and birth disorders, pathological lesions, hoof problems, gastrointestinal disruptions, and is associated with higher levels of pus in the milk.
rBGH also increases levels of another growth hormone, IGF-1, which regulates cell growth and division. Hundreds of studies associate excess IGF-1 with increases in breast, prostate, colon and lung cancers in people. The Nurses Health Study at Harvard concluded that consumption of rBGH milk could influence cancer risk through a mechanism involving IGF-1.
The World Health Organization never has declared rBGH safe. rBGH is banned in Canada, Japan, Australia and all 25 countries of the European Union.
Organic is more environmentally friendly
The Op Ed says organic systems leave a larger environmental footprint because they need 80 percent more land and that more Co2 is released from producing organic milk. It cites no research.
Research does show, however, that organic agriculture may be one of the most powerful tools in the fight against environmental degradation and global warming. Organic systems use 30 to 50 less energy, reduce soil erosion and water pollution, retain moisture during drought, build soil, and better absorb and sequester greenhouse gases deeper into the soil.
Meanwhile, non-organic farms depend on fossil fuel-based pesticides, fertilizers and herbicides — all requiring energy to manufacture and ship.
Wheeler provides no backup for how organic systems double byproducts that can acidify soil. It's another unsubstantiated claim. If he's thinking of manure, organic standards require composting before being applied to soil. Non-organic farms are not prohibited from using raw, uncomposted manure in fields since there are no standards for managing manure on non-organic farms.
The true cost of food and food security
Wheeler suggests that the increased cost of organic food compromises food security.
In truth, the true cost of non-organic food is not included in the prices paid at the checkout register.
Food prices don't count the fact that soil is eroding on prime farmland many times faster than nature can rebuild it, or that marine life is being lost due to nitrogen runoff from overuse of petroleum-based fertilizers.
Conventional prices don't include the loss of plant diversity that occurs when seed is supplied by just a few companies aggressively marketing a limited selection, or the cost in human health from wells in Midwest states poisoned by synthetic, non-organic chemicals.
Eating conventional foods adds a host of additional costs, including more than 5,000 deaths each year from food-borne illnesses, even as agribusiness — especially the meat industry — has fought against adding the cost of stricter food safety procedures to the bottom line.
Unlike non-organic, industrial agriculture — which is heavily subsidized and shifts the environmental costs to the public — the cost of growing organically is paid at the register.
Numerous studies, including research from WSU, indicate that organic crop yields can be comparable or greater in some cases. The greater nutritional density in organic foods also gives the consumer more nourishment in less volume.
