organic refers to the type of pesticide used. there's no difference.
well, except price....
TheAsianPlaysGames
Why did they call non-organic fruit regular?
deathtokoalas
the distinction is not between gmo and non-gmo. none of these fruits have commercially available gmo strains, so you can't buy gmo bananas. the distinction is between the types of pesticides that are used. "conventional" means oil-based pesticides, "organic" means pesticides made from organic compounds.
Rani Hanna
I'm lost, by organic, do you mean authentically grown, or the fake label?
deathtokoalas
organic means that the pesticides they use are made of organic chemicals, which is stuff that's present in naturally occurring biology.
Icyfire
they can't use pesticides of any kind....
deathtokoalas
that's incorrect.
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/science-sushi/2011/07/18/mythbusting-101-organic-farming-conventional-agriculture/
Moon Man
Sup Dra'nakyuek, Destroyer of worlds. Congrats on stompiing that village yesterday
deathtokoalas
i'm sorry. i'm not privy to your dungeons and dragons lingo, and haven't the slightest clue which virgin-playing board or card game you're referencing.
theunkownviolinist
Did you know that most of the bananas in the world are clones of clones? So even if they were "organic" they're still genetically modified bananas.
Waldo
I thought it meant that they used bullshit instead of artificial fertilizers
T Dog
+Rani Hanna pretty sad how everyone is calling you stupid, they seem to forget that everyone who is ever born isnt automatically programmed with all knowledge on all subjects and has to learn over time, probably because they are retards that dont know much about anything, i wonder if projecting they're stupidity onto you helped them feel smart for a second, on second thought i couldnt give a shit
Rani Hanna
+T dog Honestly, I don't take offense, as people have the right to judge me on the internet. They can call me dumb if they want, but they don't know who I am
T Dog
+Rani Hanna noone has the right to judge anyone, i know i judged them in the last post but im as much an idiot as they are
Rani Hanna
+T dog They are ignorant, as they are from Europe, where fake organic labels don't exist, and didn't know America has them. I am fine with that, as it is their choice to judge
T Dog
+Rani Hanna oh its been a problem here in the UK since the early 2000's, dont know about the rest of the EU though
Rani Hanna
+T Dog Really? Dat sux
T Dog
+Rani Hanna yeh, not just supermarkets but farmers markets would regularly miss label there stuff as freerange or organic just to make more money
deathtokoalas
+T Dog i've read un reports that suggest growing organic food in africa for export to developed economies, specifically for economic reasons - it fetches a higher price. of course, they don't address the issue of whether the higher prices end up back with the producers or not. and, ironically, given the transportation costs of transporting produce out of africa, these were actually in "adaptations to climate change" documents.
correct labelling or not, it's really mostly a scam.
now, if you want to talk locally grown indoor produce that doesn't need pesticides because it's inside, and preferably with hydroponics, then i'm listening...
JustSiouxMe
organic=grown using the same methods they used 200 years ago conventional=crops that have been made better with science
GMO's produce higher yeilds, larger fruits and vegetables and are able to grow in much harsher environments than organic crops. Also modern synthetic pesticides used on GMO crops are completely harmess to humans. Organic farming still uses natrual poisons that are harmful to humans.
deathtokoalas
+JustSiouxMe completely harmless is a tad bit of an exaggeration. organic farming actually tends to use pesticides in higher concentrations, because the ones they're allowed to use are less effective. but, there's been studies done on round-up's effect, and it's pretty disastrous to frogs, at the least. i'd advise against drinking the stuff.
as i've pointed out a few times, the only way to get to pesticide-free growing is to move production indoors. there's a lot of other benefits to this, including year-long growing cycles, automation and the possibility of dramatically reducing transportation. it also opens up the possibility of using genetic modification to more productive purposes, like increasing nutritional yield. if we're serious about health, yields and sustainability then it's the only real answer, in the long run.
EddyBearr
Growing food indoors could be disastrous for the bees, which in turn would be disastrous for basically everything. Alongside that, it's not very reasonable -- you're not going to have a corn-soybean rotation indoors, huge disruption of soils, and etc. It's decent at a local level for specific crops, but not as a plan for agriculture overall.
With that said, I looked into a few of the studies regarding glyphosate (and other round-up ingredients) and frogs. "Pretty disastrous to frogs, at the least" is a huge overstatement for what happens to frogs. It has a negative affect, but it's not creating some kind of amphibian disaster.
deathtokoalas
well, bees were fine before we came along, i'm sure they'll figure it out. i could deal with less stinging potential. pesticides are a far greater concern to them. but, you need to realize that bees are only an issue insofar as certain outdoor crops require them. moving production inside would largely null our reliance on them; for a handful of crops that require them, we can always bring them inside with us.
there's no reason we can't grow corn or soy indoors, we just need a big enough space.
round-up's benefit is that it's "less bad" than some of the other alternatives. all of things you want - half-life, toxicity - are demonstrably better than most of the other options. but, at the end of the day you're spraying something that seems to be both a carcinogen and an endocrine disruptor on your food. it's easy to point to studies that say that low doses do not increase the background risk. but, it's the kind of thing that you can't really do an experiment on, except in real time. we won't really know the effects of this stuff for decades. another problem is that it does breed resistance, which has a host of problems.
again: the ideal is to get rid of the pesticides and fungicides altogether by controlling the environment that crops are grown in. there's nothing really preventing us from doing this, besides political will and startup capital.
up in canada, one of the few positive things that our extreme right-wing government is doing is funding indoor grow sites for crops like tomatoes that we have a historical industry in, but can only operate a part of the year. i'm hoping that we can build on this. the potential is much greater than that.