We’ve heard the argument and supporting evidence that claims organic food is no better for a person or the environment than food grown or raised using conventional farming methods. However, the debate is far from over. Peter Melchett of the Soil Association is taking defending the points made in the original article criticizing aspects of organic food and farmer. Instead, Melchett maintains it is the eco and health-friendly option when it comes to produce and meat consumption.

Is organic farming better for the environment?
Though organic farming is still a work-in-progress, supporters claim it still has significant environmental benefits. They say organic farming is still better for wildlife on the farms, as well as producing less dangerous wastes and carbon emissions, as well as lower pollution caused by sprays. Reports suggest organic farms have 30 per cent more wild species and 50 per cent higher number of those animals.

Is organic farming more sustainable?
Not only does Melchett say prior information claiming the growing of organic tomatoes takes twice the amount of energy is wrong, he also says it left out the very important point that a major benefit of organic farming is the storing of carbon in soil. This apparently reduces the climate change impact of organic food by anywhere from 12 to 80 per cent.

The association also says that 26 per cent less energy is used during organic farming as opposed to conventional farming and says the government believes organic farming is better for the environment.

Does organic farming use pesticides?
Under the Soil Association's guidelines, organic farmers may use only four pesticides (and only with permission) compared to the more than 300 pesticides used in conventional farming. Most organic farming does not require pesticides, but when it does, those used are either one containing rotenone and soft soap or others with simple chemicals such as copper compounds and sulphur. Rotenone and soft soap contain active ingredients that break down quickly in sunlight, while copper and sulphur occur naturally in soil already.

Last year only three percent of Soil Association members and two per cent of organic crops were sprayed.

Are conventional pesticide levels in food dangerous?
Melchett points out that more than 40 pesticides once approved for use have been banned or withdrawn in the past decade. Chemical "cocktails" are also not tested before pesticides are given the safe stamp of approval. A U.S. study recently found that children who switched from regular to organic food had no traces of pesticides in urine samples after just one day, however when they switched back, pesticides were once again found in urine.

Is organic farming healthier?
The Food Standards Agency actually says there is no difference in terms of food safety of organic and non-organic foods, however the Compassion in World Farming organization feels that animals under the Soil Association guidelines are raised in better conditions. Melchett also contends that animals are not smaller, nor do they suffer from more disease than conventionally-raised animals.

Does organic food contain more nutrients?
Vitamin C, calcium, magnesium, iron and antioxidants - all things you'll find higher levels of in organic food. Plus organic milk contains more Omega 3's, vitamin E, vitamin A and antioxidants than your regular run-of-the-mill milk. By consuming organic food you may also avoid unwanted additives such as hydrogenated fat, monosodium glutomate and artificial flavors and colors.

Is there a greater demand for organic food now than ever before?
The organic industry is one that is still growing - approximately 32 percent per year in fact. Three-quarters of parents buy organic baby food and parents and school officials are working to involve organic farms in the production of school lunches. 

It also turns out, costs isn't always the most important factor; even those in lower income brackets will go organic as much as possible despite the sometimes more expensive cost.

And despite claims of smaller crop yields for organic food, Melchett says long-term trials indicate that the yields of organic crops will be comparable to non-organic crops.

In the end it seems that there won't be a resolution to the organic vs. non-organic anytime soon. Each sides makes valid points and there does seem to be conflicting research. Regardless, we hope the discussion over the past two days has got you thinking about the issue (assuming you weren't thinking about it already that is) and has you thinking about the healthy food choices you make for yourself and your family.

» The Independent

This Sexy Vegan video is admittedly cheating just a bit since it's not one of his true, full-length features. This cooking project was actually undertaken in between his first and second real episodes, however it's pretty amusing just the same. 

This time around he's making Banizzle, a creation one of his friends invented that is a nice alternative to the traditional camping favorite, s'mores. It's a pretty simple dessert you can make while barbecuing or camping this summer since the only heat required is that of a grill or campfire. All you need are some bananas with the peel intact, chocolate and peanut butter.

A couple of warnings:

- The end result may not look as appetizing as some of the Sexy Vegan's other creations, but camping food is supposed to be messy and gooey right? When was the last time a roasted marshmallow won an award for aesthetic appeal after all?

- There's one instance where some a passer-by drops the f-bomb, so if you're at work or find that offensive, you may want to skip a few seconds ahead approximately one minute and 25 seconds into the video.

This video will have to suffice until we get another full recipe from The Sexy Vegan, but for now enjoy some more of his alcohol-induced humor!

» YouTube

Is it better to buy organic food? The debate continues to rage. On one hand you have the proponents of organic food saying it's much better for you and for the environment because traditional pesticides aren't used in the growing and farming process, and therefore humans aren't exposed to chemicals they are in regular food. On the other hand, supporters of traditional farming methods, pesticides and all, say that pesticides protect us from potentially harmful diseases found in plants and animals. So is organic farming and production one of those gray areas with no established right or wrong?

There are two sides to every story. Today we'll examine the supposed myths surrounding organic farming that maintain it is no better for an individual or the environment.

Is organic farming better for the environment?
Not according to the UK's Department for Environment, Food and  Rural affairs who say studies show that organic dairy production is responsible for significant greenhouse gas emissions. For example, the production of organic milk requires 80 per cent more land than regular milk, releases 60 per cent more toxins into water and is 70 per cent more likely to cause acid rain.

Cows that are raised in organic conditions also release twice as much methane into the air (methane is far more potent than carbon dioxide by the way) as cows raised in a regular environment.

Is organic farming more sustainable?
Even though the growing of organic potatoes requires less energy from fertilizer production, in the end the ploughing requires more fossil fuel than other potatoes. Not to mention that one hectare of conventionally farmed land will yield two-and-a-half more times the number of potatoes than those grown organically.

Likewise, greenhouses that grow tomatoes require 100 times more energy than ones grown in a field in Africa and yield only 75 per cent of the amount grown in other conditions. The nutrient pollution and amount of water used by organic tomatoes are also significantly higher than ones imported from another country.

Does organic farming use pesticides?
Apparently they do, however they fall under the label of "natural." However it has been suggested that these "natural" pesticides are far more harmful and toxic than those used in conventional farming and are used only because of special "grandfather" provisions in current regulations. Most traditional pesticides are considered biodegradable; organic farming uses pesticides containing copper, which will remain toxic in soil forever. However, neither these nor more commonly used pesticides have been given as a reason to avoid produce or meat altogether.

Are conventional pesticide levels in food dangerous?
Some opponents of conventional pesticides claim they have a "cocktail effect," that has led to an epidemic of cancer. Interestingly enough, cancer rates among farmers - the first of people who would be exposed to cancer-causing chemicals - are among the lowest of any groups studies. Plus, other cancer rates - including stomach cancer which could be indicative of carcinogenic exposure - have been dropping for the past 50 years. Then there's the fact that life expectancy in this day and age is into the eighties, whereas 60 years ago when pesticides weren't used and cases of food poisoning were prominent, the life expectancy of an individual was only in their sixties.

Is organic food healthier?
The University of Hohenheim in Germany is a major supporter of organic food, but has said:

"No clear conclusions about the quality of organic food can be reached using the results of present literature and research results."

What is clear is that Holland, Denmark and Austria conducted large studies and determined that organically-produced meat contained more bacteria that causes food poisoning, a higher risk of Salmonella and parasites. Add to that the potential of cross-contamination with conventionally-produced meat that is processed in the same facility and the fact that instances of disease in organic meat are higher because the animals are not treated with antibiotics. Therefore disease causes organic animals to often weigh far less than non-organic animals.

Does organic food contain more nutrients?
You can increase the concentration of nutrients found in any produce by letting it air in cupboards for a few days prior to consuming. Though organic tomatoes are said to contain more flavonoids than conventionally-grown tomatoes, but this could be due to a lack of nitrogen which causes a plant to stop producing flesh and instead produce defensive chemicals. One of these chemicals would be - you guessed it - flavonoids.

Is there a greater demand for organic food now than ever before?
The high point in organic food growth occurred in 2003, with less land being devoted to it each year since. Although it is supposed to increase once more, it appears more farmers are returning to conventional methods or growing.

The Soil Association in the UK may is also allegedly misinformed in the figures they released related to the sales in the organic market. They claim 2006 had sales of £1.937 billion, whereas the TNS Worldpanel who tracks actual sales puts the number around the £1 billion mark.

Well there you have it, the myths of organic farming supposedly busted. Check back tomorrow for a rebuttal claiming organic really is the way to go.

» The Independent

Sure the news about the food situation lately has been pretty doom-and-gloom, but as one writer points out, all you need to do is gain some perspective - and some frugal eating habits.

For over a decade food prices have remained fairly stable, which is why the sudden rise in costs seems so dramatic. The Department of Agriculture actually claims that Americans spend less of their annual income on food than any other country, coming in at approximately six per cent. With some careful planning and flexibility regarding your food choices, it's still entirely possible to maintain a healthy diet without going broke in the process.

Coupons, coupons and more coupons
Start reading online flyers and clipping from the hard copies of store flyers that arrive in your mailbox every week. By purchasing sale items, you can sometimes cut your grocery bill in half. Check Hot Coupon World online for more coupon-related information. Also be sure to check the flyers are multiple stores to see who is offering the best deals on the products you're likely to buy. Just because you usually shop at one store doesn't mean you can't cheat and shop somewhere else occasionally if the sales and coupons are better. But don't be sucked in completely; if you won't likely use the product, don't buy it just because you're getting a good deal. On that note, be sure to stockpile non-perishable items that you'll use if you've got a really good coupon or a store is having a good sale. That way you won't have to pay full price for it a week or two down the road when the sale on that item is over.

Invest in your own packaging
Sure, those kid-size snacks and 100-calorie packs are convenient because a product manufacturer takes care of the measuring for you, but you're paying for it in the end. Those companies charge for all of the smaller packages contained in the outer box or bag. Buying products in bulk and making your own individual servings will save you money in the long run, not to mention you'll be saving excess waste from ending up in landfills. If you're busy during the week, pre-pack snacks such as cookies, crackers, nuts and fruit on Sunday night and store them in your pantry. It may take a small investment of time but you'll save big in the end.

Think about how you use meat
If you combine meat with beans and spread it over pasta or potatoes, you'll still be getting your meat fix without eating an excess amount of it. Food such as beans and lentils give add protein, not to mention fiber, so they should satisfy your appetite just as much, if not more, than a big hunk of standalone meat on your plate.

Focus on nutrition
Avoid junk food and add healthier items to your cart. Cereal is getting ridiculously expensive so try buying a bag of oats and making hot cereal with fruit or a little bit of brown sugar instead. Pick up fresh and dried fruit instead of candy and get out that old abandoned popcorn maker for a healthy alternative to chips.

Frozen, not fresh
Frozen fish is typically less expensive than so-called fresh fish, which is usually thawed from a frozen state itself. Fish in your freezer section was likely just frozen on the boat so there isn't any difference in the quality, just the price.

Family activity
It's tempting to buy food that is pretty much ready to go out of the package: pre-seasoned, sliced or washed. Buying the plain or whole versions is often less expensive (again you're paying for convenience!) so get your family involved in meal preparation by having them cut, wash and season the food. Not only can you have some quality family time, you'll be equipping children with the ability to cook when they're older so hopefully when they are on their own, they won't live solely on boxed and packaged food.

Eat in, not out
Restaurant prices are still more exorbitant than eating in. If you value going out for dinner, have a couple of appetizers and drinks (but not for the driver!) before heading out to dinner or buy dessert to enjoy at home afterward. Often times you can get an entire dessert that will feed the family for the cost of a single serving in a restaurant.

Develop a green thumb
Yesterday we posted a video introduction to growing a vegetable garden. Many herbs and vegetables take an investment of time, but are inexpensive and simple to grow yourself. Buying them at the supermarket each week may be easier, but it's definitely not cost-efficient.

Budget and reward
Make a shopping list according to your weekly grocery budget and make it a competition to see how much money you can save each week. At the end of the month, marvel at your savings and treat yourselves to a fun activity for all of your scrimping efforts!

» Reuters

There has been a lot of media attention focused around the world food crisis. For me, an average middle class citizen living in a Canadian city, it is difficult to get perspective on how serious this problem really is. My local grocery store has all the fruits, vegetables, grains and protein I could ask for. I have trouble imagining my life without proper nutrition. I wanted to try and understand what exactly was happening and I came across this well written article at the Monthly Review by Fred Magdoff. He goes into some detail about the reasons and solutions to this world food crisis.

Here are some highlights:

“Of the more than 6 billion people living in the world today, the United Nations estimates that close to 1 billion suffer from chronic hunger. But this number, which is only a crude estimate, leaves out those suffering from vitamin and nutrient deficiencies and other forms of malnutrition. The total number of food insecure people who are malnourished or lacking critical nutrients is probably closer to 3 billion—about half of humanity.

The reasons for these soaring food prices are fairly clear. First, there are a number of issues related directly or indirectly to the increase in petroleum prices. In the United States, Europe, and many other countries this has brought a new emphasis on growing crops that can be used for fuel—called biofuels (or agrofuels). Thus, producing corn to make ethanol or soybean and palm oil to make diesel fuel is in direct competition with the use of these crops for food.

A second cause of the increase in prices of corn and soybeans and soy cooking oil is that the increasing demand for meat among the middle class in Latin America and Asia, especially China. The use of maize and soy to feed cattle, pigs, and poultry has risen sharply to satisfy this demand. The world’s total meat supply was 71 million tons in 1961. In 2007, it was estimated to be 284 million tons.

A third reason for the big jump in world food prices is that a few key countries that were self-sufficient—that is, did not import foods, although plenty of people suffered from hunger—are now importing large quantities of food. As a farm analyst in New Delhi says “When countries like India start importing food, then the world prices zoom....If India and China are both turning into bigger importers, shifting from food self-sufficiency as recently we have seen in India, then the global prices are definitely going to rise still further, which will mean the era of cheaper food has now definitely gone away” (VOA News, February 21, 2008).

Although not a cause for the increase in prices of other foods, the higher prices for ocean fish have created an added burden for the poor and near poor. Overfishing of many ocean species is removing this important protein source from the diet of a large percentage of the world’s population.

Almost every country in the world has the soil, water, and climate resources to grow enough food so that all their people can eat a healthy diet. In addition, the knowledge and crop varieties already exist in most countries so that if farmers are given adequate assistance they will be able to grow reasonably high yields of crops.”

He goes on to explain how some of these issues could be solved and the difficulties they represent. If you have a bit of free time this is a very good read.

» Monthly Review

A couple of weeks ago we introduced you to La Cense organic beef. Just to refresh your memory, La Cense beef is pesticide-free and comes from cows that graze on grass as opposed to being grain-fed. This makes it organic, lean and also healthier than your average store-bought meat.

Now La Cense is giving you the chance to win big - literally. The company is holding an ad slogan- writing contest and the grand prize winner will walk away with (or lift with a crane) a grass-fed cow. No, you won't have to find a spot in your backyard to raise a new pet. However, you will need to clear some room in your home for your new freezer, stuffed full with approximately 50 pounds of meat.

That's a whole lot of beef. Just think, you could have your family - heck, the entire neighborhood - and Ecollo staff (FYI, Pinky Bean likes her meat cooked medium-rare) over for a week-long, meat-fueled celebration. Or you know, you could just store it and enjoy it over the course of barbecue season.

Whatever you choose to do with it is up to you, but you will have to hit the jump to visit the official contest website to learn how to enter, and read all of the rules. While you're there, don't forget to vote for your favorite slogans!

» WinAGrassFedCow.com (La Cense)

The number of honey bee deaths in the U.S. is getting worse, according to a study by the Apiary Inspectors of America. Since last year, slightly more than 36 per cent of commercially managed hives in the country have collapsed for reasons such as disease, pesticide drift and the parasitic varroa mite. Colony Collapse Disorder (CCD), a disease that causes bees to abandon their hives, is blamed for approximately 29 per cent of bee deaths.

According to Dennis vanEngelsdorp, the president of  the organization who conducted the survey, it is next to impossible to find a trend since the colony deaths have only been measured for two years, however he warned that the rate at which bees are dying are at unsustainable levels and not showing improvement.

"For two years in a row, we've sustained a substantial loss," he said. "That's an astonishing number. Imagine if one out of every three cows, or one out of every three chickens, were dying. That would raise a lot of alarm."

"What's frightening about CCD is that it's not predictable or understood," vanEngelsdorp said.

So far $86,000 has been directed toward to the study of CCD, with federal grants and companies like Haagen-Daazs, who rely on honey bees, contributing to emergency research funds.

Considering that over half the world's population could starve to death if bees were to cease to exist, $86,000 sure doesn't seem like very much money to devote to research of CCD. If the government is too distracted by the current global food crisis due to biofuels and population growth, they might want to pay attention for a few minutes and acknowledge the seriousness of a disappearing bee population. If bees continue to die off and official are worried about the state of the food supply now, they ain't seen nothing yet.

» MSNBC Environment

You can blame too many pieces piece of fried chicken or that all those slices of chocolate cake for those extra pounds you're carrying around, but according to new research a hormone may be contributing to obesity. Simply put, ghrelin, a naturally-occurring molecule found in humans makes that piece of cake look better than it actually is and increases perception and memory with regards to food.

Ghrelin levels flucuate between meals and may cause you to feel hungry and consume more food; scientists were already aware of this fact. But when they studied 20 individuals, some who were injected with ghrelin and some not, they found the ones who received the injections showed stronger reactions to pictures of food they were shown than the participants who had not been injected. Scientists involved in the new study believe this indicates the effect ghrelin has on hunger and obesity.

"When you go to the supermarket hungry, every food looks better," said researcher Alain Dagher, a neurologist at McGill University in Montreal. "Now, we've found that it is ghrelin that acts on the brain to make food more appealing."

"Obesity must be understood as a brain disease," Dagher told LiveScience. "Obese people eat too much, and this is likely due largely to excess hunger."

Unfortunately the treatments developed to supress the effects of ghrelin could have negative side effects such as depression since the hormone is involved in the area of the brain that affects emotion, motivation and addiction to substances such as drugs. Dana Small, a neuroscientists and psychologist from the John B. Pierce Laboratory who was not involved with the ghrelin study, says this new research indicates the facts known about drug addiction could be used in understanding and treating obesity.

It may be reasonable to think "of high-calorie food as having addictive potential," he added. "If food can be thought of as 'addictive,' this supports doing things like banning fast food shops from schools, or advertising junk food to children. Note that public policy aimed at tobacco was really spurred by the science showing that nicotine was addictive."

» MSNBC Health

Two German ministers are contesting the widespread theory that the production of biofuels is causing the cost of food to rise substantially. The ministers believe that Germany should continue toward their goal of using 20 per cent renewable energy by 2020 and that the only way to reach this target is to meet it using 10 per cent biofuels.

Horst Seehofer, Germany's agriculture minister instead believes rising food prices are due to the increase in both the global population and spending power in developing countries. Seehofer maintains that only two per cent of farmland worldwide is dedicated to growing crops for the use of biofuels.

Sigmar Gabriel, the environment minister also reiterated that poor harvests, as well as increased spending power and growing financial investment in commodities were to blame, saying financial speculators were driving up the cost of food in poor countries, labeling them "the real locusts."

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has requested Seehofer work with other ministries to develop a new German biofuel policy that will take into account what they say are falling food prices in sectors such as milk and pig farming. They claim attention needs to be given to long-term food production as a means to counter the effects of rising food prices.

» Reuters Environment

Scientists are saying if we think the global food situation is bad now, it's copmletely possible factors like climate change and pollution will make things worse - much worse.

The intensity of floods and droughts is expected to increase as temperatures rise, which would mean a major transition for farmers who will have to adjust the crops they grow and the way they grow them. Add that to the increasing population and it seems to spell potential disaster because natural as the demand for food increases, the prices will follow suit.

Somes areas such as Northeastern China are expected to fare better in these circumstances, as warmer temperatures could actually improve growing conditions in their cooler climates, providing an adequate water supply was available. However in southern regions, global warming would likely equal crop losses.

Manwhile, high ozone levels at ground level can also damage crops as the combination of sunlight and pollution from burning fossil fuels decrease yields.

Low-latitude areas could be hit hard if the temperature increases even one to two degrees Celsius, whereas higher carbon dioxide levels and an increased temperature of up to three degrees Celsius could benefit mid to high-latitude areas. However a U.N. climate panel report advises anything higher than three degrees would be harmful to crop development.

At any rate, scientists advise that farmers will be forced to adapt to the changes, such as growing very different crops than those that are common today. A representative from the International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines says even though the country develops a variety of rice crops, they are still worried about the effects climate change will have on the industry.

"There is still a lot of uncertainty in the climate modeling when it comes to the regional level," said Reiner Wassmann of IRRI. But it was clear temperatures would rise.

"The other mega trend we see is that we will have more climate extremes. In some places there might be more drought, in others it may be submergence, from floods, in some places it might be both," said Wassmann, coordinator of the Rice and Climate Change Consortium at IRRI.

"That is really a new challenge for development of cropping systems and I don't want to limit it to only plant breeding. We have to be clear that this is no silver bullet and that if we speed-up plant breeding everything will be fine. Certainly not.

"We also have to improve crop management and water saving techniques have come into the picture to cope with drought," he said.

» Reuters Environment