Debate Over Whether or Not To Extend The 'Organic' Label To Hydroponic Crops
Not everyone is happy about the possibility of hydroponic crops being able to receive the label of 'organic'. Some farming experts say that the organic classification should not extend to hydroponics because those crops are grown without any soil.
The reason that they don't believe it should receive the classification, is because they don't see hydroponically-grown crops to be on-par with those that are grown in healthy soil.
And those who are against hydroponic crops being qualified as organic, assert the notion that the hydroponic crops are going to be missing nutrients that a healthy soil would have otherwise provided to them.
Some say that the 'organic' nature in farming rests in the action of feeding the soil, rather than feeding the plant itself like with a hydroponics system. But those who are in support of the hydroponics system say that growing via this method can be just as healthy; if not superior. Hydroponic farmers can still grow their crops using organic liquid fertilizers. If every step of the process is done using organic materials, then why shouldn't the organic label extend to those crops as well? Yet there are still some who fear that the organic label will be watered down if that happens.
The National Organic Standards Board is planning on voting on this matter later this week.
Organic food sales topped $40 billion last year and there is a growing demand for innovative growing methods like hydroponics, to be able to grow a large amount of produce in a short amount of time, using a smaller amount of space than was traditionally needed.
sources:
http://www.npr.org/sections/thesalt/2016/11/16/502330731/some-growers-say-organic-label-will-be-watered-down-if-it-extends-to-hydroponic
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/16/business/organic-certification-hydroponic-aquaponic-produce.html
http://web.mit.edu/12.000/www/m2015/2015/hydro_agriculture.html
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5091364/
the label organic s already flawed and meaningless just like the "natural" label.
http://www.thehealthyhomeeconomist.com/organic-becoming-meaningless-food-label/
http://www.cbsnews.com/media/7-food-label-claims-that-are-meaningless/
http://www.consumerreports.org/cro/news/2014/04/organic-food-labels-do-not-always-mean-what-you-think/index.htm
so adding hydro under it is pointless.
It's not meaningless but you are right, it is being exploited now more than ever. I've heard reports of fracking water being used on organic crops because this was not part of the regulation standard. I know there have been some changes but the industry does need to catch up.
That said, there are still some good vendors out there and staying local also helps. Here's a study show the nutritional value of organics are higher than traditionally grown.
"Concentrations of antioxidants such as polyphenolics were between 18-69% higher in organically grown crops.
Organic crops contained, on average, 48% lower levels of the toxic heavy metal cadmium.
Concentrations of total nitrogen were 10% lower, nitrate 30% lower and nitrite 87% lower in organic compared with conventional crops.
Pesticide residues were four times more likely to be found in conventional crops than organic ones."
http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/279564.php
They should just make a 'not fucked with" label.
1 vote for lol! I like that but they'd probably throw some bastardized legal definition of the term so it could be screwed with in a multitude of ways much like "natural flavors"
http://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/cfrsearch.cfm?fr=501.22
all i can do is think back to the old days where natural ment natural, organic ment organic, male ment u had a penis and girl ment you had a vagina. I wont be surprised if they change gmo to mean "natures way" next.
I mean they have changed literal to now mean figurative, the complete oppsite of the word. Its madness
so label it hydroponic . What's the big deal?
I do so love all this labeling of things, gets you humans so very stressed out!
hydroponics is mostly chemical farming. But aquaponics can be fully organic. The big difference is much of the nutrients from fish poo is colloidal, and aquatic organisms can form symbiotic relationships with roots much the same as in soil.
But the USDA standart lets traces of nasty things much higher amounts than strictly organic. For example, gypsum is allowed, even if it comes from phosphate production, which has trace uranium and radon in it.
To me it is all the same - I consider it all poison unless I can be satisfied all inputs are free of poison. They have Know Your Customer for money, i want Know Your Farmer... a fully auditable record of their inputs.
I don't see the issue with them being labeled as organic, it will be interesting to see what happens either way.
This post has been ranked within the top 25 most undervalued posts in the first half of Dec 04. We estimate that this post is undervalued by $9.17 as compared to a scenario in which every voter had an equal say.
See the full rankings and details in The Daily Tribune: Dec 04 - Part I. You can also read about some of our methodology, data analysis and technical details in our initial post.
If you are the author and would prefer not to receive these comments, simply reply "Stop" to this comment.