On Organic

I received a comment on my last post from my very smart friend Recession Cone. I thought I would share it with you because he brings up a couple of really good points.  I think it's really funny when people say products are "all natural"....because really, what ISN'T all natural?  It's not like we are somehow inventing things that aren't originally found on the earth right?  I mean, every chemical and pesticide is "all natural".  They just aren't good for human consumption.  And that's really what this is all about right?  Voting for things that ARE good...or are at least better than the worst.  Anyway, here's his comment:

I don't believe organic food is always better for the planet. For one thing, yields are 40-50% lower, which means 1.6-2x more land and water are required to grow organic food, which means more native plants and animals are crowded out and caused to go extinct. Thanks to agrotechnology, yields improved 300% from 1961 to 2000, while planted area increased only 12%. If yields had stayed the same over that time period, the equivalent of two additional South American continents would have needed to be planted in crops in order to feed us all. That would be a catastrophe for the environment.

Organic food is not always safe, either. In 2011, organic beansprouts in Germany, contaminated by organic manure fertilizer, caused the organic deaths of 53 people, and serious kidney damage for 3500 others (a human health disaster about the same size as Chernobyl). We do not need chemicals to be poisoned by food - natural means are just as effective.

To be honest, I think much of our current attention on organic food is about economic signaling rather than health or environmental concerns. We humans love to show others that we have more stuff than the next guy. Food is just today's frontier of conspicuous consumption. The more exclusive and expensive the food production method, the more virtuous. And you can brag about it because, hey, you're just trying to save the planet and be healthy.

The promise of organic food is tempting: who doesn't want health and a clean environment? But I'm not convinced the benefits are all that real, especially on a global scale. 

I choose to vote non-organic with my money, because I believe in science and progress, and I see the organic movement as reactionary and elitist. I believe the billions of people living in the developing world deserve to eat healthy food just as much as I do. Organic food production just can't make that happen; for that to occur, we need as much agrotechnology as we can invent. This is why I choose non-organic food.

So, Recession Cone, my question for you is: what do YOU buy at the grocery store?  Or do you also try to purchase locally grown food where you can know your growers and be sure that proper standards are being used?  My dilemma is this (because I agree that organic food is elitist): do I purchase it in the hopes that US/Canada grown organic food will be better for my family - purely because it lacks pesticides, not because it's more nutritional - or do I NOT purchase it because of the reasons you listed...and feed my kids pesticides?  Again, for me this issue only comes up November-April.  Definitely food for thought...